Talk:Peter Schickele

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article falls within the scope of the WikiProject contemporary music, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of contemporary music subjects. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents

[edit] Genius

Peter Schickele (1935-present) is a composer, musician, and musical parodist. - is it POV to add "and genius"? I only asked ... :) Nevilley

"where he serves as a professor of both musicology" -- actually, the word Schickele uses in the context of the U.S.N.D.H. is "musicolology".

Quite quite. I've tweaked the article. Doug A Scott (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Badagnani and I have engaged in some background exchanges on PS which have in turn led to some changes here. The main thrust of these is to amply demonstrate the serious musical contributions of the composer, without letting them be smothered, as often is the case, by his egregious and hilarious PDQ Bach hijinks. You can find them on my Talk page if interested. ericbritton 11:56, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Distinguishing fact and parody

I've just gone in and made some stylistic changes, including consistently putting periods in "P. D. Q.", which is Schickele's own usage, and added a bibliographic entry for the "Definitive Biography." There are clearly some changes that need to be made to make it clear that P. D. Q. Bach and USNDH are both fictional, but I'm a newbie at Wikipedia editing, so I've avoided making substantive changes to any existing text so far.

I started to add an explanation of the S. numbers, but that probably belongs in the P. D. Q. Bach page rather than here.

Is there any particular reason to think Oedipus Tex is especially well known in the P. D. Q. corpus? GMcGath 13:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Good edits! I suggested pointing out the fictional quality of P.D.Q. Bach earlier but another editor here knows Schickele and says to leave the text as is, so as not to spoil the gag for readers who may not know that P.D.Q. Bach isn't real. Oedipus Tex is known just because it's on a fairly recent CD, not due to many performances of it. Badagnani 18:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I really have to disagree with that rationale. This isn't the place for "gags," especially for people who aren't aware that he's fictional. GMcGath 01:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I admit this is tricky, but how to do? The fact is the P.D.Q. is himself a "gag", but nonetheless one that is sufficiently well known, appreciated and musically important to merit good coverage in this fine WP source. If anyone can get beyond his life dates: 1807-1742, never mind the titles of his many and well known main works, and still have their eyes closed to his entirely fictional background (“clever parodies of classical music”), well I for one am at a bit of a loss. Of course you can cold turkey the whole thing, but in that case I will just look on in wonder. (In fact why not? That may be funny in itself so not entirely a waste of time.) ericbritton 12:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Seems to me that just adding one word in parentheses would do what's necessary: "Schickele has, as part of his life long attempt to draw attention to the work of the deservedly forgotten (fictional) Baroque-ish composer P. D. Q. Bach..." Does anyone think that constitutes a spoiler? GMcGath 01:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes indeed! ;=) ericbritton 05:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm very glad someone besides me decided that it isn't any kind of secret that P. D. Q. Bach is a pseudonym for Schickele and finally made appropriate changes. The notion that saying so is some kind of "spoiler" is, frankly, absurd. GMcGath 16:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U. S. D. H.

Doesn't at least a mention of and link to this ficitional place belong somewhere in the article> 160.254.108.24 18:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

It is there. Badagnani 18:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with P.D.Q. Bach?

Should we merge this article with P.D.Q Bach's? It seems to me it'd be better to have one definitive article than two that are both relatively about the same person; one article that contains a section addressing Schikele's persona might be better. MG 18:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

There are distinct areas of interest. There are many people who are interested only in Schickele's P. D. Q. Bach work, and there are some (probably not nearly as many) who are interested in all aspects of his musical career. Some of the overlap could be trimmed, but I think readers are best served by having both articles. GMcGath 21:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Schickele's own compositions, arranging, work in broadcasting, etc. are quite distinct from the P. D. Q. Bach work. If you've had a chance to hear his compositions (I'd start with the Quartet for violin, clarinet, cello, and piano) you'll see what a fine composer of "serious" music he is. Badagnani 00:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)