Talk:Ein deutsches Requiem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ein deutsches Requiem is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, cleanup, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that aren't covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
This article is supported by the Compositions task force.

The second movement was used in a famous documentary about Nazi Germany, which hasn't been mentioned on the page. The Documentary was called "The Nazis: A warning from history", and was done by Lawrence reese.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaanic (talk • contribs) 06:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this the correct capitalisation for this? The English is German Requiem, both because German is derived from a proper noun and because titles always get a capital, but I'm uncertain enough about German capitalisation not to move it myself. DJ Clayworth 19:49, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is the correct German capitalization. Nouns are capitalised, adjectives are not, not even "proper" adjectives like deutsch. Angr (talk • contribs) 19:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Karajan - a conductor that rarely participates of my favorite hall of interpreters - has a superb recording of this work with the Berliner Philharmonic, Hans Hotter and Elizabeth Schwarzkopf. Do anybody know it?

That is his first account but not with Berliner Philharmoniker but Wiener Philharmoniker.I guess he made three recordings of it.

I do not have the skills to write a formatted article. But I would suggest to mention the performance 9/20/01 in NYC by Masur and the Pulizter price won for the criticism (http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2002/criticism/works/092201.html)

It's an interesting link, but I'm not sure how or where it should be mentioned in the article; I know not many classical music articles discuss specific performances, but this one seems to be very notable. However, it's already mentioned in September 11, 2001 attack memorials and services. Graham talk 04:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] 1 feb

last one was a restore edit from 1 feb 2007. Mion 08:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes but it's a dead link and dead links are not useful to Wikipedia. I've therefore reverted your revert. Graham87 03:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English vs German title

Quote from lead para:

  • Ein deutsches Requiem, nach Worten der heiligen Schrift, Op. 45 (English: A German Requiem, to words of the Holy Scriptures) is a large-scale work for chorus, orchestra, and soloists, composed by Johannes Brahms between 1865 and 1868. Ein deutsches Requiem is sacred but non-liturgical. It comprises seven movements, which together last 70-80 minutes, making Ein deutsches Requiem Brahms's longest composition.

Then the article goes on to consistently refer to the work as Ein deutsches Requiem. This troubles me. It's almost never known as this in English, but rather as "A German Requiem" or "Brahms's German Requiem" or similar. I'm not even convinced it's fine to have its German title for the name of the article. We don't have an article on Beethoven's Wellingtons Sieg oder die Schlacht bei Vittoria, but on its English name, Wellington's Victory. I'm inclined to make some changes, but will wait for others to comment. -- JackofOz 03:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, um, perhaps it should (*) depend which language it is sung in :-). (Alas, it scans much better in the German original)
To develop the point - the text was, we understand, of considerable importance to Brahms, and his title carefully chosen - the English equivalent does not fully capture that it is a requiem IN German (so accessible), not FOR Germans. Bob aka Linuxlad 09:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
  • and does - my Previn/RPO/Ambrosian Singers recording is sung in German and uses the German title (confounding your confident statement on usage). Whilst the recording I have of my missus' (amateur) choir singing it in English is English titled. There are other examples (eg Kindertotenlieder) where choral works are titled in the language they are sung in. Leave well alone I says. You can always redirect anyway Bob aka Linuxlad 10:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Linuxlad. The language in which the Requiem is sung was not really my point. (I've never known it to be sung in anything other than German - and, indeed, with all due respect to your missus's choir, it would be somewhat oxymoronic to sing "a requiem in German" in some other language. Was the choir's performance billed as "Brahms's Requiem in German in English", or "Brahms's English Requiem", or "Ein anglisches Requiem", or misleadingly as "Brahms's German Requiem"?) My point was the title by which the work is generally known in English-speaking countries. I know that it sometimes gets an airing as "Ein deutsches Requiem", but that is probably the exception rather than the rule. (And I appreciate that the titling of musical works is a minefield. Sometimes they keep their original-language title, sometimes they're translated, and there's not a great deal of rhyme or reason as to why this is so. I must write a book on this subject some day.)
Side comment, not to be taken (I hope) as undermining my above argument: Whenever it's performed or broadcast nowadays, the point has to be made that the word “German” in the title refers to the German language in which it is sung, as opposed to the Latin in which requiems are mostly sung. This is because the usual English rendering “A German Requiem” is not a very true translation of the meaning of the original title. It translates the words literally, word for word, whereas the meaning of the whole phrase is what a translation should be about. Maybe “A Requiem in German” would have been closer to the true meaning, but I guess we’re stuck with the one we have. I would even go so far as to say that Brahms over-stated his point with his title. The fact that he set it to German words rather than the more usual Latin words has always been sufficient indication that it's a German requiem. Maybe he was being a little theo-political, who knows. -- JackofOz 05:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
we're in danger of going on a bit here, given that we can set a redirect from the other title. We've both discussed the meaning of 'German' adequately. However, I'm surprised you think it very unusual to sing the work in English; I would think that many English choirs, especially in the 'the provinces' do that. (The scansion of English and German aren't _that_ different, except alas in the two outer movements, where 'Blessed' is no substitute for 'Selig Sind'). But, since facts are also sacred, I'll check with the choir secretary :-) Bob aka Linuxlad 09:03, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I bow to your greater knowledge of the practice in your country, but when it's sung in English I'd still be curious to know how they reconcile that with the (now misleading) title. -- JackofOz 08:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Requiems

I see the note in the text instructing me not to add the requiem category because it would be misleading. But this article has requiem in the title, isn't it misleading *not* to put it there? Wouldn't it be best to add it to the requiem cat and then add a note near the top stating how this is called a requiem although it is not "technically" a requiem? My two cents. DavidRF 03:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I see that other non-liturgical "requiems" (e.g. Britten) are listed in that category, fwiw. Eusebeus 15:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Karl Martin Rheinthaler

Searching through the web for "Karl Martin Rheinthaler", I found several different spellings, with combinations of: 1)"Carl" rather than "Karl" 2)without his middle name "Martin" 3)"Reintaler" rather than "Rheintaler". He appears to have been also a composer of church music and a conductor.--Atavi (talk) 11:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)