Talk:La donna è mobile

Tito Gobbi
Tito Gobbi was removed as a tenor that has recorded this song as he is not a tenor (he is a baritone), and there is no reference found stating that he has ever recorded this song. If anyone finds such a reference, feel free to link it here, and restore his name. JeffyP 19:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

About the translation into English
Hi. I see a source is named for the translation. I don't know this database, and I have no idea about its reputation for translations from arcaic forms of Italian. But I speak Italian, and can understand several regional languages, and to my eyes this translation seems very poorly done. I can fix it, but then the "source" would be me, which is not the ideal. Anyone care to comment? Regards, Redux 22:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Speaking of the translations, is it really necessary to have so many different versions of the libretto/lyrics on this page? There should really be only one version in the original Italian, and another version in English; and, ideally, these should be set in columns, with the Italian on the left and the English translation on the right. Otherwise, the page just looks like a jumble of words. -- Todeswalzer | Talk 22:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, absolutely. But go to it.wiki, copy the correct lines I have taken from the original libretto, add the English traslation, and delete all these wrong texts. --Al Pereira(talk) 22:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've merged all of the translations formerly included in this article into one section. However, and although I don't speak Italian (just musical terminology!), the translation currently there doesn't seem to be the best possible one. (It sounds to me to be too literal.) In any event, if a new English translation could be found, it might add a lot more to the article.


 * Additionally, I added a small section on the music, which consists of the actual written musical theme along with some brief comments explaining it. -- Todeswalzer | Talk 01:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

But these are not the lyrics, these are just the words sung by the tenor (repeating and repeating). At this point, don't divide them in verses. The lyrics are:


 * La donna è mobile

Qual piuma al vento,

Muta d'accento - e di pensiero.


 * Sempre un amabile,

Leggiadro viso,

In pianto o in riso, - è menzognero.


 * È sempre misero

Chi a lei s'affida,

Chi le confida - mal cauto il core!


 * Pur mai non sentesi

Felice appieno

Chi su quel seno - non liba amore!

I realize that Piave isn't Shakespeare, but when one quotes some verses - who ever the poet is - it needs to respect the metrics. --Al Pereira(talk) 03:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Al Pereira, I obviously agree that anything written in verse should be reproduced in verse -- Shakespeare or not. However, two points here. First, I'm confused about the lyrics now: If these aren't the lyrics, why were they even on the page to begin with? Second, we'll need an English translation of the verses you included above before they can properly be put into the article. Have you got any? -- Todeswalzer | Talk 18:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * As regards the verses, please, copy and past the ones I have taken from my article on it.wiki (and, obviously, the Ricordi libretto I own). If you prefer, I can make this, too. As regards the translation, you can easily adapt the old one. The translation is a problem anyway, I mean: even without modifying the verses. Note that "unpredictable" isn't correct (see the above section). --Al Pereira(talk) 21:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

As an Italian-speaker myself, I note that the translation seems a bit unidiomatic in places: "muta ... di pensiero" is indeed, literally, "changes ... her thoughts", but no one says this in English. "Changes ... her mind" would be much more appropriate, surely? Also, "chi" is translated in one place as "he who" and another as "who", where "he who" would be appropriate. I'll change these - any objections?

In "È sempre misero/Chi a lei s'affida", "È" ("He is") was absent from the translation; this needed to be moved to the second line to make sense in English: "Always miserable/Is he who trusts her"; I've changed this too.

As someone else has pointed out, "mobile" is a pun in Italian, meaning both "fickle" or "changeable" and "in motion" (constantly moving one way and another, like a feather in the wind). "Fickle" loses this pun; translations that retain it to some degree might be "volatile" (although this can mean "quick-tempered", so is not a good choice) or "flighty", which has the "moving through the air" sense. I think "flighty" would therefore be a translation that best preserves the original meanings. &mdash; Paul G 10:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that the "Alternate Translation" bit is misaligned and I don't have the wiki editing skill to fix it. If someone could, that'd be great. Thanks in advance. Tonjevic (talk) 20:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, the poetic 'translation' isn't a translation at all. It looks as though someone wrote a poem to somewhat mirror the lyrics, but they are not a translation, poetic or otherwise, as stanza by stanza comparisons do not match. I mean, if the original author of the libretto included this, fine, but otherwise this is both superfluous and akin to original research, as it is just original poetry with a similar theme.Sheriffjt (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article clearly sources that translation to a notable author, George Alexander Macfarren. I assume, it has been, and might still be, performed using those lyrics. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I don't see the name "George Alexander Macfarren" anywhere in the article or source. Furthermore, the source it references is just music, with no reference of author or date. Am I just missing it? Not trying to be argumentative, but words appearing on a sheet of music doesn't necessarily qualify as a "translation", though perhaps "re-imagining"?Sheriffjt (talk) 21:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake above regarding Macfarren: as the article says, it was George Alexander's wife, Natalia, who provided the poetic translation in Schirmer's 1930 edition. Her name is mentioned on the score's title page and in its bibliographic record. As there is no Wikipedia article about her, her name here is linked to her husband's article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Canzone not Aria!
It isn't an aria! See it:La donna è mobile (canzone)
 * Done and done. And next time, remember to sign your comments with 4 ~ JeffyP 00:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot to sign. Now, there is another problem: these are not the lines! Once again, see it:La donna è mobile (canzone). Many thanks --Al Pereira(talk) 00:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. The italian version of this article includes (what seems to be) the original lyrics, whereas this article has a more popularized version.  Is it possible that the other lyrics are his original, and these were altered when sung in Rigoletto? JeffyP 19:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * After looking at the italian version of the article, it's apparent that's there's much more useful information there than there is here. I'm going to try and brush up on my italian and translate some of that information into here.  As for the differing lyrics, I still need clarification on that, because I don't think I came across an explanation. JeffyP 19:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The lyrics on the it.wiki article are from the original libretto. Usually, the lyrics in an opera libretto have no repetitions (with some exceptions). Obviously, the composer may repeat "e di pensier e di pensier e di pensier" or even a whole strofa but these are just "words", not "lyrics". One can also copy all the words, exactly as they appear in the music score, but in this case without separating them in lines. I prefer to copy the text from the origianal libretto and add a note if the composer changes some words, which is not the case of "La donna è mobile". Thanks --Al Pereira(talk) 19:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll do some editing later on tonight to fix things up properly. Do you know the proper translation for La donna è mobile though.  "Woman is unpredictable" sounds sort of like what the meaning is, but "Woman is fickle" sounds really off.  Can you think of a better alternative to those two (if not, I'll stick with unpredictable)? JeffyP 01:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the meaning of the single line "La donna è mobile" isn't that much clear in Italian neither! In order to understand it, one must add the second line "qual piuma al vento". The expression "La donna è mobile qual piuma al vento" in good Italian should be written as "La donna si muove come una piuma al vento", literally in English: "Woman moves herself like a feather in the wind" i.e. "woman is fickle". --Al Pereira(talk) 10:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Pardon, but it's not supposed to be "good Italian," it's supposed to be archaic(now) dialect.JBDay 03:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Misogyny
The Canzone was described as "casually misogynistic", this judgment requires a reference. I am removing it untill refernce is found--Hq3473 01:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not misogynistic, just libertine. You did well. Actually, it isn't a matter of reference. --Al Pereira(talk) 06:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

See below section "Translation and meaning" for brief discussion on misogyny topic.

Gaetano.mancuso 06:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

elephants
Unless this is one of those super-popular memes, I don't think this bit is notable and should be deleted:

The phrase 'e di pensier' can be misheard as the English phrase 'elephants, yeah!'. Joel Veitch used this fact and a recording of Luciano Pavarotti singing La donna è mobile to produce an Adobe Flash movie of Pavarotti showing his love for elephants.

Deepak 04:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Elephants
Yes. Please delete it.

How do the author of this major piece of flash explain the r-sound at the end of "yeah"r...?

And where would Wikipedia end if this was allowed into articles, with even lesser similarity between the words and the song, e.g. Beatles "ticket" being transformed to "chicken" here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.157.228.236 (talk) 20:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC).


 * Try as I might, I can't seem to shape "e di pensier" into "elephants, yeah". Furthermore, it's just plain ridiculous and whoever added it has had ample time to explain its addition on this page. Thus, I've removed the reference. -- Todeswalzer | Talk 01:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Media
I've put the sample of Enrico Caruso singing the song back on the page - I'm not sure if there was a reason for removing it, but it seemed odd to have it on Enrico Caruso and not here as well! --- Richard CHSTalk 14:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Translate the bite of this canzone, not the words!
As someone who is bilingual in River Plate Spanish (that is spoken in an Italian Accent)(Buenos Aires slang, 'lunfardo', being little more than Italian)(Most of the lyrics of the Tangos are written in Lunfardo, ie, Italian) I am somewhat, if not entirely, qualified to get gyst of the lyrics.

The question is not so much to translate the words or their meaning, but their bite:

A woman will shift and flutter,

Like a feather on the wind

Changing her quiet tones,

As soon as her mind.

Always a sweet,

Pretty little face,

That in tears or in laughter,

Tells nothing but lies.

He will always be miserable

Whosoever relies on her,

He who entrusts her

His ill cautioned heart.

And yet he will never feel

The plenty of real happiness

If from her bosom

He does not drink Love to his fill

In other words, love her to your fill, just don't be such an idiot as to believe her.

Sound advice.

Awrigley 16:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Andrew Wrigley

Translation and meaning
I agree, especially about translating the meaning - rather than the words literally - but a balance is required to convey the way those words are used in Italian, without necessarily changing the words too much.

Having an Italian background, with reasonable fluency in the language, the following is my translation of the meaning while trying to keep the words the same:

Woman is flighty, (or fickle or erratic)

That feather in the wind,

Silent in her manner of speaking - and her thought.

Always a loveable,

Graceful visage, (or beautiful face)

That in tears or in laughter - is lying.

Is always miserable, (or wretched)

He who trusts her,

He who confides in her - incautious is his heart!

Though not ever feeling,

Fully happy,

Who on that bosom, - does not taste love?

Now a brief explanation of what I think the meaning of this song is:

Verdi was intending to celebrate woman, in a playful, funny way.

Not to criticise, but to playfully highlight a woman's imperfections, and show how we love her all the same.

This is not misogynistic, as some people like to think.

Gaetano.mancuso 06:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Could be translated “woman is furniture” 2601:646:4300:CBC0:9C04:E882:83A8:5938 (talk) 23:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry but, being 100% Italian and not an uncultivated one, I had to correct a couple of parts of your alternative translation:

- 'That feather' -> 'like a feather'. You probably confused 'qual(e)' ('like', 'as') with 'quella' ('that').

- 'Though not ever feeling' -> 'Yet one never feels'. I really don't understand where 'though not ever feeling' could come from. 'Pur mai non sentesi' = 'Eppure non si sente mai' = 'and yet one never feels'. It can't be the continuative participle 'feeling' because that would be the imperfetto tense 'sentendosi' in Italian, not 'sentesi'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.109.20 (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Popularity in football (soccer)
Not sure if it's relevant (and I'm not familiar with WP:Music or any other applicable policies) but I note the melody is very popular today in European soccer as the basis for many supporters' songs. Is there any way to reference it here? Dick G (talk) 04:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. There was once a section "In Popular Culture" (see history). I'm tempted to put it back in. The opera buffs may consider it to be lowbrow, but it is factual information and therefore relevant. Carmody (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Re: "it is factual information and therefore relevant".
 * I don't think the one follows the other. It is also "factual information", for example, that the earth is 93 million miles from the sun. Should this be in the article? How about the fact that my friend A. sang the piece to me (in part) in the park by the lake back in 2008? Should that be in the article? As for the original question--"Is there any way to reference [European soccer fans singing] it here?" Yes, if you think it belongs, just stick it in directly. TheScotch (talk) 06:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure. Many, many pages about books, operas, famous people, and so on have a "Popular culture" section that lists (very brief) uses of the topic item in popular culture, and this certainly counts. But "factual, therefore relevant" is not a good criterion; see "In popular culture" content for really good advice. --Thnidu (talk) 21:54, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Yet another operatic mix-up
While the "In popular culture" section is hardly relevant anyway, it says that in Aristocats, the elederly Georges sings and dances to La donna, when its clear in the film that the song he dances to is Habanera from Bizet's Carmen.

Darth Faber 1 April 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 09:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC).


 * I take your first clause above to mean you agree with me that the entire section should not be here. I'm going to delete it, and if anyone wants to preserve anything in it, he can find a place for it in the article proper. TheScotch (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * See my comment in § . --Thnidu (talk) 21:58, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Minor mistake
Just to let you know, Jon Pertwee sings la donna e mobile in the start of "Inferno" whilst driving Bessie. He recites jabberwocky whilst repairing Bessie in "Doctor Who and the Silurians". 220.244.162.100 (talk) 01:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

In popular culture
Since 24 January 2014, Alexrybak has spent six edits in an attempt to restore a section that was removed on 18 February 2012 by TheScotch (see also above ); these edits have been reverted by User:BilCat and me, while Anthony Appleyard's attempt to add a reduced version was also reverted by Alexrybak. In one of my edits, I rewrote the section on the aria's music and made some other improvements, all of which I mentioned in the edit summary, and they were reverted, too.

The section that Alexrybak proposes for inclusion suffers from several deficiencies: 1) it is wholly unsourced; 2) every item on the list, except the footbal chants, fail all three tests at WP:IPCEXAMPLES (and the football chants are unsourced and poorly written; there was a much better version present until it was removed on 4 January 2014 by 94.189.146.138); 3) the list is poorly written: there are several links to disambiguation pages in it while other link-worthy items remain unlinked.

I suggest that this list be removed again as it was in February 2012 and that be reinstated. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The Horrid Adaptation
Can I ask why in God's name we have this awful so-called "adapation" of the aria by Natalia MacFarren? It is Vogon poetry, and does not correctly represent the meaning of the song. Plus, it's probably still in copyright. Honestly: "falsehood assoiling"???!!! Just because something exists does not mean it belongs on a Wikipedia page. Is there any evidence that this monstrosity was ever performed? David.thompson.esq (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:38, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Please place new entries at the bottom of the talk page; see Help:Talk.
 * You were bold and spent 4 edits to remove a sourced version that was singable, in metre and rhymed. Following WP:BRD, I reverted the last 2 of your edits. I also added a link to Olin Downes and corrected the URL for his citation, and corrected citation format errors in the Schirmer citation. I mentioned those improvements in my edit summary. Disregarding WP:BRD, you then reverted my edit wholesale, including the undisputed citation improvements, one of which (the URL) was crucial. The only reason you gave was that you don't like the text you removed. You don't seem to have made an effort to find an alternative singable version. Here's one from Singer's Library of Arias by Patrick M. Liebergen, pp. 33–40:

Woman is changeable she's like a feather, her thoughts when speaking turn like the weather.

She is adorable, her face is lovely; in tears and laughter, she's quite deceitful.

Woman is flighty, she's like a feather, her thoughts when speaking change often too.

He'll always feel pain, that's if he trusts her, confiding to her, not thinking clearly!

Yet he will never be happy, contented without her loving heart all embracing!
 * There's another version starting with "Women abandon us", which may have been used at the ENO, but I think the MacFarren version has more poetic merit and is unlikely to be under copyright (she died in 1916) and I'm going to restore it until a wider consensus emerges for its removal. I will also remove the citation of the Aria Database because the text there is not the one used here as "prosaic" translation. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)


 * If you think this version has poetic merit, I really don't know what to tell you. If you think it's singable, you evidently haven't tried to sing it -- all those lines ending "eth" and "ing" are the opposite of singable.


 * In any case, Wikipedia is not a music library. However singable this adaptation may be, it requires sheet music to have any use in that regard, and the sheet music is not part of this article (nor can it be).  WIkipedia's obligation is not to present allegedly singable adaptations of a work (this is an adaptation, not a translation).  Its obligation is to present an encyclopedic article about this work. This thing is not a translation and is not faithful to the original in content or meaning. It left the original behind when it changed the meaning of the song in order to get those fabulous ing-ing and eth-eth rhymes.  The fact that both this adaptation and the original use rhyme and meter means they have as much in common with one another as "To an Athlete Dying Young," and "Someone to Watch Over Me."  The fact that this adaptation is a new work that has only slight resemblance to the original is why it does not belong in this article. There doesn't need to be a "singable' adaptation of the text in the article.  If you want people to be able to find this adaptation, just link to it from the article.  David.thompson.esq (talk) 19:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Vocal range
In this article, the full vocal range of the piece claims to be from F#3 to A#4, ignoring the famous high B (B4) at the ending, is this intentional? Is the ending B a later adaption of the piece? Seems like a very odd mistake to ignore the highest note in the canzone. I think this should be edited. CatTiger123 (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As written, it ends on a B$3$; see the piano-vocal score at IMSLP mentioned in the article's external links. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:33, 1 February 2021 (UTC)