Talk:Ludwig Wenzel Lachnith

Translation of quotation from Otto Jahn’s Mozart biography
Otto Jahn's magisterial work on Mozart is the longest and most extensive biography of Mozart. It was a groundbreaking work in the 19th century and is still in use today. There exists a (partial) English translation, but this edition is rare and not easy to get hold of. I therefore supplied my own translation of an important passage in Jahn’s book concerning the Parisian performances of the Magic Flute. In accordance with Wikipedia Guideline: No original research I hereby supply both, original and translation, for a critical peer review:

German Original
"Das tollste Kapitel in ihrer Geschichte bildet die Pariser Aufführung von 1801 durch Lachnith unter dem Titel "Les mystères d'Isis". Dieser geborene Böhme hatte die Geschmacklosigkeit, alles Wunderbare und Komische auszumerzen und z.B. Papageno in einen weisen Schäfer namens Bochoris zu verwandeln. Pietätloser ist wohl noch nie mit einem Kunstwerk verfahren worden. Ganze Nummern (12, 17, 18, 19) blieben weg, dafür wurden Stücke aus andern Mozartschen Opern eingelegt, wie z.B. die Champagnerarie aus Don Giovanni und eine Arie aus Titus (beide zu Duetten verarbeitet!). Auch die Musikstücke selbst wurden durch Umstellung und Abänderung mißhandelt. So begann die Oper mit dem Schlußchor und Sarastros Rezitativ. Dann folgte, von sechs Priesterinnen gesungen, das Terzett Nr. 16, hierauf ein Chor aus »Titus« (15) und nun erst die ursprüngliche Introduktion. Monostatos' Arie fiel Papagena (Mona) zu, die erste Arie der Königin der Pamina, das Duett (7) wurde zum Terzett. Das war auch den Parisern zu arg, man sprach von misères d'ici und von der opération des dérangeur Lachnith. Aber trotz allen Einsprüchen hatte dieser den französischen Geschmack nach einer anderen Seite hin ausgezeichnet getroffen. Denn allgemein lobte man die glänzenden Ballette und Dekorationen, überhaupt die ganze äußere Ausstattung und die treffliche Aufführung durch Orchester und Chor, und so erlebte dieses Zerrbild bis 1827 volle 130 Aufführungen. Erst am 21. Febr. 1865 ging das Werk in seiner Urgestalt, bearbeitet von Nuitter und Beaumont, auf dem Théatre lyrique in Szene und hatte einen glänzenden Erfolg."

Translation
"The maddest chapter in the history of the Magic Flute, however, was the Parisian performance in 1801 through Lachnith under the title Les Mystères d’Isis. This native Bohemian had the tastelessness to extirpate all that was wonderful and comic, thereby transforming Papageno into a shepherd named Bochoris. No work of art has ever been treated more impiously. Whole scenes ( 12, 17, 18, 19) were omitted and in their stead pieces from other Operas by Mozart inserted such as the Champagne Aria from Don Juan and an aria from Titus (both rendered into duets!). Also the music itself was through readjustment and changes mistreated. Thus, the opera started with the final chorus and Sarastro’s recitative. This was followed by trio Nr. 16 sung by six priestesses which in turn was followed by a chorus from Titus, and only then came the original introduction. Monostato’s aria was sung by Papagena (renamed Mona), the first aria of the Queen of the Night was sung by Pamina, and the duet (7) became a trio." "Even the Parisians thought this too much and spoke of Les Misères d'ici and of the opération des dérangeur (sic) Lachnith. Yet in spite of all this criticism, Lachnith had managed to hit the French taste exquisitely well; the splendid ballets and decoration and the decor in general received unanimous praise as did orchestra and choir. In this way this distortion saw a full 130 performances until 1827. Only in the year 1865 was The Magic Flute finally performed in its original form at the Théâtre Lyrique."Thomas W. Jefferson (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent edits by user Franamax
Dear user Franamax,

Thank you for reviewing the Lachnith page created by me. I do concur with most of your edits, but not with all of them. Permit me to be specific:

You deleted “Mozart was killed by Lachnith” and replaced it by: Berlioz`s critique. This wording is certainly a lot less spectacular, but it is also much more boring. I think that even a Wikipedia article can be writing in a fascinating way without being less scholarly. Would you agree? Furthermore, this - admittedly stark - expression came straight from Berlioz’s autobiography. You also deleted a large part of the quote from Otto Jahn’s Mozart biography. Now, this was clearly set in quotation marks, so I am a bit puzzled by your action. You also deleted the footnote leaving the entire paragraph hanging in the air without a source. I restored the quotation and the footnote.

Finally, you remarked, permit me to quote: You can paraphrase the source, but you can't make your own translation and quote it to the source. Well, I took your comment very serious, and so I checked again. This is what I found on the same Wiki page you linked: ''Where English translations of non-English material are unavailable, Wikipedia editors may supply their own, with the original provided alongside or in a footnote. If such translations are challenged, editors should cooperate in producing one they can agree on. Copyright restrictions permitting, translations published by reliable sources are preferred over those provided by Wikipedia editors.''

You were right insofar, as I had not supplied the German original until yesterday. But I have done so now. In accordance with this guideline, I have now also supplied the German original and my English translation (for convenience next to each other), which I gladly submit for peer review. Please feel free to challenge my translation.

You certainly are a much more experienced user than I am, and thus I am looking forward to learning from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas W. Jefferson (talk • contribs) 21:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC) Sorry, forgot to sign, but now I do.Thomas W. Jefferson (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)