Talk:Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56

Meaning of Kreuzstab
The German word Kreuzstab is traditionally translated as "cross" (as in Gladly the Cross I'd Bear), identified with the cross carried by Christ in the Passion. This has also found its way into our text. There is a problem with this: Kreuzstab does not mean "cross". A Kreuzstab is a staff with a cross as its head, as in these images. In the context of the text, it is obviously a walking staff, supporting the traveller on his pilgrimage to the promised land. I'd gladly change this cross-eyed translation, but I have no reliable source stating that the traditional translation is incorrect. --Lambiam 22:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't call it "incorrect". The difference between a cross and a cross at the top of a staff is often minimal – what's a summit cross? Yes, a closer translation would be "cross staff" and that is used in the article's 1st sentence, but that term seems so obscure and possibly misleading (it seems to be more common in its astronomical meaning) that it would, in my opinion, confuse the reader. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * But don't you think there is an essential difference between the metaphors of an infirm person carrying a pilgrim's staff that supports him in walking, and his carrying the burden of a cross (or cross-beam) meant for crucifixion? From our article Crucifixion: "A whole cross would weigh well over 300 pounds (135 kg), but the crossbeam would not be quite as burdensome, weighing around 75–125 pounds (35–60 kg)." A pilgrim's staff would weigh, say, 2 pounds (1 kg). --Lambiam 08:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You are correct about the subtlety in the meaning of this cantata's title, although I'm not sure where the infirm person comes from or how your literal references to an actual crucifixion cross relate to this work. The Naxos website offers "suffering cross", which in my opinion misses the mark widely.
 * My remark above about a reader being potential mislead when using "cross staff" (Jacob's staff) is also probably wrong: I've now learned that Kreuzstab is also used in German for that predecessor of the sextant; thus the English title, as given in the article, perfectly mirrors the possibly intended double meaning.
 * Anyway, it is not clear to me where in the article an improved translation is needed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The current text in the article has the following passage: "The text by an unknown poet but of exceptional quality, refers indirectly to the Gospel [of Matthew, Healing the paralytic at Capernaum]. Although there is no explicit reference to the sick man in the text, he is customarily represented as the follower of Christ who bears his cross ...". Here the Ich bearing the Kreuzstab of the cantata's text is equated with "the follower of Christ" who bears Christ's cross, an equation that is based, I think, on a mistaken interpretation of Kreuzstab as meaning cross (or cross-beam, as it is translated in Richard D. P. Jones' "translation and revision" of Dürr). --Lambiam 22:00, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * So what do you think the text in the article should be? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I come to this late, and have not yet looked at this cantata closely. - There is no doubt that the term "Kreuzstab" is closer to "cross-staff" than to "cross". But I think, BOTH would be understood not literally, but "im übertragenen Sinne" ("figurative sense" doesn't imply "carry"). I believe that "-stab" is there because a syllable would be missing in the rhythm of the poetry without it, - the idea is the same as the St Matthew Passion's "Komm, süßes Kreuz". It alludes to Simon carrying a piece of wood (historically not "the cross", but one beam), but it means "the follower of Christ who bears Christ's cross" in a broader sense, - I would not change the translation, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Infobox?
I plan to expand the article to GA and suggest something like this (no image for simplicity) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Translation
Regarding the translation of the chorale stanza: the present translation is out of copyright but very free, - I think no translation would be less misleading than making people think now they know what the text means. "you can delight me", speaking to Death (which is key to the whole stanza), is quite different from "eager joy", and speaking of death in the third person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

It is exactly the same WP:COPYVIO problem: there is a copyright notice on Ambrose's translations. There is no copyright of the libretto of translation by Henry S. Drinker (now used also by Carus-Verlag). If you want to use literal translations, they can be found in Dürr & Jones. There is also the Harnoncourt-Leonhardt commentary, written by Alfred Dürr, with literal translations. On page 373 of Whittaker's book, there is a translation (slightly old-fashioned). Whittaker points out how hard it is to translate "Jesulein" into English. The Leonhardt-Dürr translation is:


 * Come, O death, and end my voyage,
 * Make my journey smooth and short,
 * Furl my sails and drop my anchor,
 * Bring me safely into port.
 * Others shun and dread to meet Thee,
 * I with eager joy will meet Thee;
 * 'Tis through death that I may be
 * Ever, Jesus mine, with Thee.

I have not yet looked at Gardiner's translation but it is online:


 * Come, O death, brother of sleep,
 * come now and lead me away;
 * loosen now my small bark’s rudder,
 * bring me safely into port.
 * Let them who wish to, shun you;
 * you can all the more delight me.
 * For it is through you that I shall enter,
 * to be with my sweetest Jesus.

The one of Dürr & Jones and others are available.


 * Come, O Death, you brother of sleep,
 * Come and lead me forth;
 * Loosen my little ship’s rudder,
 * Bring me to a secure harbour!
 * Let whoever so wishes shun you:
 * You can rather delight me;
 * For through you I come therein
 * To the most lovely Jesus.

With only 8 lines to translate, it is not hard with the available English vocabulary to produce a non-metrical translation, e.g.


 * Come, O Death, slumber's brother,
 * Come Thou and lead me away;
 * Loosen my little ship's rudder.
 * Bring me to a sheltered haven.
 * Let those who wish to, shun Thee,
 * As Thou can more delight me;
 * For through Thee I will abide
 * Close to the dearest Christ Child.

This is just one example. Mathsci (talk) 13:56, 29 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Fine, thank you. Copyright problem understood, but better no translation than misleading, - that's all I wanted to point out. "Jesulein" will remain untranslatable anyway. If these translations are also under copy-right, we could still compare single lines, with a ref. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Gerda, you made the edits that were copy-vios. "Jesulein" is a form of hypocorism, but "Jesus-child" is not really. It's certainly metrical. But where individual German words are described in the chorale, the text is far away from the English translation. So possibly having a literal modern non-metrical translation is preferable. In that case, when individual words from the German lines occur—"Denn durch dich komm ich herein/ Zu dem schönsten Jesulein"—they can be explained in English, using the German diminutive forms of endearment for [the baby] Jesus. A very Christmassy note. Mathsci (talk) 15:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for having caused a copyvio problem. Do what you like just not what I commented as too free, - or at least mark as free, for the sake of metre and rhyme. "endearment" is fine! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The version above (tweaking as I look at other translations) is my latest attempt. It has quasi-rhymes and, in English, I have used "Christ Child" as a substitute for "Jesulein". In that sense I have slightly borrowed Ambrose's neologism "Jesus-child". But I'm not sure whether "Child" is appropriate ... Mathsci (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

It is the Carus-Verlag libretto with English title "His cross of suff'ring will I carry". English translations for the 19th century edition of Breitkopf & Härtel were made by Constance Bache, who died in 1903. There is a 1929 Radio Times copy of her libretto here. The English title of the cantata is "I with my cross-staff gladly wander" (identical to the current Breitkopf vocal score from Wiesbaden). The closing chorale is:
 * Re-reading Henry S. Drinker's translation, it is actually very good. (Drinker was from a famous Quaker family so probably was tee total, despite his name.) Mathsci (talk) 17:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The translations of Drinker were published in 1942 with explicit instructions that there was no copyright. There were two volumes of librettos of Bach cantatas, along with a lengthy and interesting preface on Drinker's method of translation. This is Volume One with Cantatas 1–100 from IMSLP.


 * Come O death, thou twin of slumber.
 * Come and cut my sorrows short;
 * Loose my ship from ropes that lumber,
 * Bring me safely into port.
 * Let who will seek to evade thee,
 * Thou dost not need to persuade me,
 * For I gain through thee alone
 * Access to my Saviour's throne.


 * That metrical translation is not under copyright. I have not yet checked the editions of Bärenreiter, Schirmer or Novello/Kalmus. Mathsci (talk) 21:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The Bärenreiter and Eulenburg editions use Bache's lranslation. Mathsci (talk) 21:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Bach BWV 56 bass oboe aria Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
 * Bach BWV 56 closing chorale Cantata SIngers Orchestra of St Cecilia Dublin.mp3
 * Bach BWV 56 first recitative Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
 * Bach BWV 56 opening aria Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
 * Bach BWV 56 second recitative Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3

Some thoughts
Hello Gerda, here are a few thoughts on the lead.
 * Thank you and I'll reply as if in the FAC.


 * 1)	I would invert the second and third paragraphs. In the first, you talk about Bach, in the second Birkmann and the lyrics, in the third, you’re back to Bach and the music. Also, if you put the first and third in succession, you’ll notice that you talk about the bass voice in both. This seems repetitive.
 * No, the first para - as usual in FAs - is a summary of it all, and Bach comes first, as the reason to know this piece. When the article was written, we didn't even know the name of the librettist. --GA
 * I'm not following here. My point is that you have paragrah 1=Bach, paragraph 2=Birkman, paragraph 3=Bach again. Wouldn't it make more sense to have Bach, Bach, Birkmann, rather than Bach, Birkmann, Bach?
 * You don't follow that what you name first para is not in chronology but a summary for the very hasty reader who will not get to the second para. It's sort of standard for Bach cantatas, FA (compare BWV 1) or not, and was there before we even had an infobox. Basics first, - I see that in many FAs, - look at Messiah today, a 2012 creation. It doesn't begin with Jennens, or the Bible, although every word in it is from the Bible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)	In the second you mention that the lyrics talk about a desire for death. But is this a desire for death as an end or as a gateway to a new life? As it is written, it doesn’t come across with a sense of Christian hope. But maybe that’s faithful to the text.
 * good point, added united with Jesus --GA
 * 3)	The poet compares their life… I realize that he/she are now out-of-date. But I’m old-fashioned, and a singular noun with a plural pronoun sounds really odd. There are ways to avoid this. In this case, you could simply delete the pronoun.
 * deleted pronoun, but a bit unsure if we should rather repeat "a Christian's" --GA
 * It depends on whether the invidual is talking about his own Christian life or Christian life in general. It could also be just Christian life.
 * But how would we ever know? It's written in the first person singular, but could be both, individual experience and the view on Christian life in general. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)	It was composed for the 19th Sunday after Trinity. Was this for a specific church?
 * All these Bach cantatas were for the two main churches in Leipzig, which is elaborated in Thomaskantor --GA
 * 5)	Can you work in Bach’s nationality in the first paragraph?
 * no. the later Germany was split in hundreds little entities at the time, - Leipzig has the details (and nationality plays no role in music) --GA
 * 6)	Bach rarely used the word cantata to refer to a composition: the autograph score of BWV 56 is one of a few cases where he did. This seems to dangle at the end.
 * do you think we should repeat "use the word Cantata for a composition" - which shows on the image? Better wording welcome. --GA
 * I'll take a look and get back.
 * 7)	It was first performed in Leipzig on 27 October 1726, and is part of Bach's third cantata cycle. No comma. It’s a simple sentence with a compound verb.
 * no, we have "was" here and "is" there, and it doesn't hurt ;) --GA
 * See here. In a simple sentence (as opposed to a compound sentence), the second verb, in this case is, should not be cut off from its subject. You could also try: Part of Bach's third cantata cycle, it was first performed in Leipzig on 27 October 1726.
 * Sigh, English is just too hard for me. The proposal doesn't work, because only much later - end of 20th century - was it counted as Third cycle. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If the second solution isn't an option, I'm afraid the comma should go. Venicescapes (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I split the two things entirely. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)	The cantata was recorded early and often. Unless you can specify often in a certain period, there is a verb problem. Recorded early needs the simple past, but often needs the present perfect.
 * English is complicated. tried something --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Why 1939? What happened, or who did what?Venicescapes (talk) 12:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This will tell some "early", and other should go to the dedicated article about the recordings. There's so much we don't say in the lead, - why mention which exact live broadcast by whom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It's just that such a specific date, 1939, begs the question "what happened in that year". At least that was my reaction. So I was left wondering. Venicescapes (talk) 14:32, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * mentioning "live broadcast" now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)	Can you link or define timbres?
 * yes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 10) The closing chorale features in Robert Schneider's 1992 novel, Schlafes Bruder, and its film adaption Brother of Sleep. This comes across as trivia at the end. Could you work it in better?Venicescapes (talk) 09:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't know how. That one stanza from an otherwise forgotten hymn inspired a novel, quoted in its title, and the film based on it, with new music composed for it inspired by Bach's music, seems anything but trivial. To give more detail in the lead seems undue weight. What do think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 11) …and the training and education of boys… I have a few questions. Does education involve basic and religious education or just musical education? Is this even necessary? In its present location, it breaks up two thoughts that naturally follow one another. Before, you mention the four churches; then you mention training and education of boys; then you go back to the churches and explain what the four were. If you want to keep training and education of boys, consider moving it. Also, you should have parallelism (see here); i.e. training and educating of boys.  This, however, creates a problem with singing, which could be resolved as: and the training and educating of boys who sang in the Thomanerchor.
 * 12) The sentence In Leipzig, cantata music was expected on Sundays and feast days except for the "silent periods" (tempus clausum) of Advent and Lent seems to interrupt a logical flow. Both before and after you talk about time periods. Consider integrating it as: Bach took office in the middle of the liturgical year, on the first Sunday after Trinity. Since in Leipzig cantata music was expected on Sundays and feast days except for the "silent periods" (tempus clausum) of Advent and Lent, he decided to compose new works for almost all liturgical events. The works of the first year became known as his first cantata cycle. There are also other solutions.
 * 13) I assume that the cycle of chorale cantatas is considered the second cantata cycle. But this is not specified. You specifically mention first and third. I felt like I had missed something and then reasoned that the second must be the cycle of chorale cantatas.
 * 14) Under Movements, the subheadings are lost. Consider lengthening them: e.g. First movement. Also, some text afterwards helps (as after 1, 3, 4). Consider shifting the paragraphs after 2 and 5 to achieve the same effect.
 * 15) Why is the music after 1 so much bigger?
 * 16) I personally find the numerous image sizes disturbing. As you scroll down, they get wider, narrower, even narrower, wider again, etc.. I realize that some are vertical and some are horizontal, but I would try to find a happy medium so that they all have a common width. Alternatively, I would choose two, maximum three, standard widths. In this case, consider increasing by harmonic proportions: 1/4, 1/3, or 1/2.Venicescapes (talk) 06:44, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

ENGVAR
Per this early version, I think the article was originally written in British English ("saviour"). Therefore, per MOS:RETAIN, it should continue in this spelling unless there is good reason to change it. John (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking at the first non-stubby revision here I see recognizable in use. Which in combination with saviour, actually suggests Oxford British/Commonwealth, Canadian, or (less likely) Nigerian orthography is the variety to be retained. Ordinarily I'd say this is a WP:BIKESHED issue not worth wasting time investigating (i.e. just pick one), however as it so happens the author,, is still active and can just tell us if they remember. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I created the original as a stub because I came across the redlink and saw the German Wikipedia had a good article. Then I put in a request for translation and it went from there.   I speak American English and dislike superfluous 'u's.  &mdash;dgies tc 04:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * European topics are normally covered in UK English. We make mistakes, though. Thanks for the creation, Dgies! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)