Wikipedia:Peer review/Appalachian Spring/archive1

Appalachian Spring


This is one of my favorite works; sweet, bouncy, energetic, and rhythmically complicated- it has all of the best parts of 20th century music, without devolving into atonality (at least, in the suites...). Excited for everyone's comments! Also, I've added this to the FAC sidebar. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think there should be more on the dance side, like the choreography, Graham's process and its legacy in dance, since it's one of her most famous works. I also suggest changing the first sentence of the article to "Appalachian Spring is a ballet and orchestral work by the American composer Aaron Copland and American choreographer Martha Graham." – you don't have a ballet without a choreographer. Corachow (talk) 12:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Couple more thing, the "created for" parameter of infobox ballet is for dancers who originated lead roles, not the person who commissioned the ballet. Also, in the "Performances and reception" section, there's a quote that mentioned several of the dancers, but the list of original dancers appears in the next paragraph, so I suggest rearranging the order there. Corachow (talk) 12:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Corachow, I tried adding some more where it discusses the premiere, but I can't find that much information (even in graham's biographies!). My searches on the Wikipedia Library and in other books have come up blank; they all seem to be about the music. Would you happen to know any good resources for dance info? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * On the making of side, the following biographies may be helpful:
 * Deep Song: The Dance Story of Martha Graham by Ernestine Stodelle
 * Martha Graham: A Biography by Don McDonagh
 * There's also an article at the Library of Congress on the making of the ballet . (And a side note: Agnes de Mille, who wrote a Graham biography, was also a great choreographer in her own right, and the two were friends)
 * For analysis of the choreography and the ballet in general, the reviews at the New York Times over the years provide great insight, and the following are more academic analysis that may also be helpful:
 * Dance, Modernity and Culture : Explorations in the Sociology of Dance by Helen Thomas, which has a chapter on Appalachian Spring
 * Martha Graham in Love and War: The Life in the Work by Mark Franko
 * "Musical and Choreographic Integration in Copland's and Graham's "Appalachian Spring"" by Marta Robertson. link
 * "Appalachian Spring: A Collaboration and a Transition" by Peter M. Rutkoff and William B. Scott
 * I also think it's a good idea to look at newspaper archives throughout the years for performance history. Graham's company regularly performs the ballet but I believe some other dance troupes had also acquired the work.
 * I know this is a lot and I'm happy to help. Corachow (talk) 14:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the sources! I'll get to work soon. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * One more source: The International Encyclopedia of Dance has an entry of the ballet. Corachow (talk) 15:51, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Corachow, I've added a number of sources and citations with them. The main difficulty I'm having is including the information about the dance- one could argue it'd be relevant under the respective "Music and plot" subsection, but it might also fit under "Creation"? Thoughts on what's been done so far? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It's great so far! I do have one note on a statement recording section. "The release of the 1976 video recording made the ballet one of few ballets to have multiple complete dance recordings." I don't think that's the case. It's probably unusual for an American ballet made in that time period but that's not really the case for the big classics like Swan Lake or Nutcracker.
 * As for where information go, it's very tough to explain in a straightforward way. The simplest way I can explain is that information about the ballet itself (e.g. the steps, characterisation) in "music and plot", and Graham's process (e.g. decisions she made, the dancers' experience working with Graham) in "creation". If that makes sense. And honestly if I encounter information that can fit into multiple subsections, I just move it around until it sticks. Corachow (talk) 23:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, got it. As for the video, I was just repeating what the source said, but I do realize its triviality- cut. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Corachow, I've expanded quite a bit on the choreo. I'm still having the trouble finding detailed descriptions of Graham's choreo- most of the books provide info about the productions conception (which I've already put there) and that one Marta Robertson journal article proved unhelpful. It kept referring to the work in numbered "sections" and using obscure rehearsal numbers that, when I looked at the ballet score and the suite score, did not line up with what was being discussed. It was quite difficult to make out what Robertson was actually discussing. But, I digress.
 * Also, I added a bit about the subsequent productions and concert premieres, but I couldn't find too much other than "They were in New York. Now they're back again. Oh, look, same production again!" I'm not entirely sure what more to add, since specific productions not done by the Graham company seem (as far as I can tell) rather sparse. Would you mind taking another look at the article and updating me on what's next? Thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It's late in the day for me here so I'll comment on your addition tomorrow, and don't worry about the Robertson article.
 * For the description of the choreography, how detail do you want it to be? Some may not agree with me, but I don't like to be very detailed about it. I think the most detailed I ever got is section by section, using a few quotes from dancers, biographers and/or critics to set the scene for the section overall. I was gonna tell you how I researched the choreography of a Graham work, which took forever and broke my spirit, but I won't bore you with that since the situation is quite different compared to this and won't be helpful to you.
 * As for the performance history, I believe only the Graham company has regularly perform it. The company did recently announce that it will be a part of its upcoming 100th anniversary celebration but that's unsurprising. I did find a few other dance companies that had done it. Colorado Ballet acquired it in 1998. There's a New York Times article on that production. I believe the company hasn't done it in years though. Nashville Ballet and Sarasota Ballet both acquired the ballet in the past few years but I'm not sure about the exact dates. Corachow (talk) 03:00, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Added a bit more on recent ballet productions- thanks for finding those! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Corachow, mind giving it a reread? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I was unexpectedly occupied with something else over the weekend. The following are my comments on the dance side of things. Someone more qualified should comment on the music side. I hope these comments help, and apologies if some of them seem a bit too nitpicky. Corachow (talk) 20:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * Consider mentioning the ballet is also one of Graham's most important/successful work.
 * Commission and composition
 * The first few sentences introducing who Graham is should be moved to Background.
 * The image of Graham features another dancer unaffiliated with the creation of the ballet. There are several other options for images with just Graham on Commons.
 * "The following year, Erick Hawkins, the chief male dancer in Graham's ballet company.": Though Appalachian Spring is referred as a "ballet", Graham's company is a modern dance company, not ballet, but just saying "Graham's dance company" is enough.
 * Creation
 * "played the Revivalist's followers.": the term "played" is not used in dance. "Portrayed, "performed" or "danced" are more suitable.
 * Point out Agnes de Mille was also a choreographer and a close friend of Graham?
 * Performances and reception
 * The third paragraph: consider splitting it into two, one on orchestral performances and one on dance.
 * "Appalachian Spring has been performed by numerous companies since": specify dance companies, not just companies.
 * Music and plot
 * Despite my advice earlier, I find the placement of the paragraph on choreography odd. One possible solution is to combine it with the last paragraph in Creation for a separate subsection called "Choreography".


 * @Corachow, thank you very much for the comments, I appreciate the thoroughness! The image comment is quite tricky- while there are numerous photos of her on Commons, most don't have her as the main subject or have questionable copyright statuses (the latter of which is the case for the photo on her own article). Nonetheless, I replaced it with a different photo that's both visually good and under a proper copyright tag. Many thanks- I'll let you know when I take it to FAC! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:40%;">(still no) 21:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Gerda
I took a first look, and am impressed with detail and referencing! Too tired for serious reading, just two questions:
 * Copland's image is from a different period, and we seem to have none of him when younger, - how about using Graham's for the infobox?
 * The plot in the lead is too detailed for my taste, - a summary of themes wold help me more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Excellent ideas- implemented both! Also, not sure if you still review at DYK, but the DYK nom for this article has been pending for ten days now- mind giving it a review while you're at the PR? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 13:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Gerda Arendt, just checking in, no rush :) MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 16:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm back, finally, - too many subjects died, with stubs for articles. I read the new lead, and am pleased with the changes. I wonder if the other works are lead-worthy, - I could imagine them in a background section. When entering the article, I'd be interested more in a summary of what happened to the piece the article is about, in terms of reception and later performances. I'll return to the lead after reading the rest.

Background
 * I like the writing, but would like a few years being added, not pedantically, but for example letting us know when other mentioned pieces were composed, or when he turned more American.
 * can we avoid "feminism" twice in fast succession?

Commission
 * "Copland revised the scenario before beginning work on the music, though his occupation with The North Star caused it to be delayed." - not absolutely clear to me what "it" means.
 * "decided ... "decision" rather close
 * Sorry, not sure what you mean here- which one are you referring to? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 21:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * "but later decided to add a double bass, flute, clarinet, and bassoon; this decision was partly due to the fact that these additional musicians would be present for Chávez's work." - Do we get from that that the two pieces would be performed together, or one was modelled after the other. - "but later decided to add a double bass, flute, clarinet, and bassoon, a scoring also used in Chávez's work", for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Now I see, fixed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 22:27, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * "Much of the work was composed" - why passive?
 * I'm also confused here- the whole section is in past tense, do you think it should be different? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 21:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Not tense but voice, - could be "Copland wrote much of the composition ..." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed now MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 22:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * "As a result, he relied greatly on the various scenarios sent to him." - I see him needing them the same way if living in the East, - what do I miss? - And why "various", and then "three" the next sentence?

Production
 * I suggest - as you can't see faces in the image anyway - to leave the names of the performers with their links for the prose, without repetition in the caption.
 * "The choreography was praised for being simple and precise." - that sounds already like reception.
 * The next sentence repeats what the preceeding para had already, - seems too much of a good thing (about not really a wedding shown).
 * Followed by more reception.
 * This para is meant to describe the choreography, but I can see how jumping to reception is unhelpful (even though most descriptions of the choreo are from reviews). Do you think this para would belong better elsewhere? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 21:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * No, just the wording changed, to description with a review as reference, and perhaps move single sentences that are more reception. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Cleaned up a bit. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 22:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Reception
 * "took place ... took place"
 * "massively successful ... even more successful" ;) - how about saying that the Pulitzer Prize raise interest?

Later performances
 * "under the baton" - I prefer "conducted by"
 * "Other orchestras that took up performances included" - I bet that can be said more elegantly.
 * What do you think of having an extra section "Suites"? ... to avoid having read about 21st-century ballet production, and then return to the movements of the Suites.

That's it for now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! I have some questions above, nothing major! Otherwise, I implemented the change with no question. I shuffled some sections around to be similar to The Firebird; thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 21:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Gerda Arendt, thank you so much! I'll let you know when it's off to FAC! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:45%;">(still no) 22:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)