Talk:The Barber of Seville

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article falls within the scope of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome!
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

The Beaumarchais and the Rossini works should be separated and put on two different pages. This is mainly about the Rossini.

Kleinzach 20:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Kleinzach; I was redirected to the Rossini opera page after typing in the original French title of the Beaumarchais play. Sobekneferu 09:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I disentangled the play from the opera last month but seem to have missed the redirect from Barbier de Séville and Le Barbier de Seville to here (both now fixed). If you'd typed Le Barbier de Séville, you'd have got to the right place. --GuillaumeTell 10:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Factotum

I've usually seen factotum translated into English as "Man Friday."

"During a performance of The Barber of Seville in Cincinnati in 1952, four audience members died suddenly during Act II. Rossini was held for questioning and subsequently released." This makes no sense. Can anyone find a source on this? Roscelese 14:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the comment from the article page. As you say, it's nonsense. Figaro 15:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marriage of Figaro

Why isn't Mozart's opera mentioned in this article as the sequel? Barber of Seville is mentioned in the Figaro article.. just thought I would ask first before putting it in somewhere.

No need to ask - be bold! --GuillaumeTell 13:19, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noted Arias and Duets

Does anyone else think this section is redundant? Markhh 08:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recordings

As Kathleen Battle was born in 1948, a recording with Domingo in 1959 or 1960 hardly seems likely

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.108.238.60 (talk) 04:21, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1 Jan 08: Removal of refs to cartoons

I suppport the removal of what is only trivia. 19:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

As do I. Viva-Verdi (talk) 02:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
It's not necessarily "trivia". In some form or fashion, the impact of The Barber of Seville in popular culture should be discussed if this article is to give an accurate overview of its subject matter. Surely, it could stand to be revised and probably sourced (better than deleted), but is there any good reason other than snobbish opinion why an article on The Barber of Seville wouldn't mention - even in passing - the opera's perpetual usage in cinema - animated or otherwise? Me personally, I don't give a care what is or isn't included; but if your aim is to write a decent, balanced encyclopedia article, then... --FuriousFreddy (talk) 02:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Keep. With respect — Viva-Verdi (talk · contribs)'s support for removal from 27 January is unsurprising as he made the original proposal on 1 January.
Given the sheer amount of references to the work in popular culture, the section –correctly not named Trivia– seems very worthy of inclusion. Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I support the removal of cartoons reference. I don’t see how cartoon references fit an encyclopedia. It is just so not right! - Jay (talk) 04:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Given that there are opposing views regarding the section "In popular culture", I think its (repeated) removal seems inappropriate to me — at least, until we get a consensus on this page, as Viva-Verdi suggested on FuriousFreddy's talk page. Unitl then, I suggest Jay revert this edit: Undo. Notwithstanding the cautions in WP:IPC, I can't see anything in that essay that would preclude such a section here.
FYI, Wikipedia has thousands of articles on cartoons. This is not the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition. Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Keep (I'm pasting here in slightly abbreviated form what I wrote at the Opera Project talk page earlier today) I totally agree with Michael Bednarek. The resonance of artistic works beyond their original context and audience is an important cultural phenomenon. Opera cartoons (especially classics like the ones mentioned in this article), parodies, and even Seinfeld are often referenced in 'serious' opera reviews, and by opera houses and other cultural organizations themselves. I know of at least one American opera house administrator who says that The Rabbit of Seville was his introduction to opera when he was 7 years old and he's never looked back. Here are just a few examples:
In my view the existence of parody and/or use in popular culture is an indication of a work's importance, not demeaning or an insult to some kind of 'sacred' art form. I've written in a similar vein here. These kinds of sections just have to be watched to ensure that the other genres and works making the reference are in themselves reasonably high profile. It's true that monitoring to remove tangential and/or spurious references makes for more work, but a blanket ban and summary removal of outside cultural references can be a net loss to the article. It helps to discourage inane listcruft if the section is written as prose not a simple list. And giving it a section title like "Cultural resonance outside opera" or "The Barber of Seville elsewhere" rather than using the terms 'trivia' or 'pop culture' also helps. When unsure of the cultural notability or relevance of some additions, or if the list becomes too long, it should not be summarily removed but transferred to the talk page (apart from obviously uninformative/silly mentions) where future editors can be requested to integrate the material into the text of the article. The trivia-adders tend to back off when you do that. Here's how I handled it in Cavalleria rusticana. There's been no 'trouble' with that article since then. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] mezzo soprano, later soprano ?

I find this a bit weird... I've always thought this part was an archetypical mezzo-soprano part... any source on this ? Xav71176 (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Rosina has been performed quite frequently by sopranos over the years (note the names of Maria Callas, Roberta Peters and Kathleen Battle in the rather strange "Selected Recordings" section), and in the nineteenth and early twentieth century sopranos such as Adelina Patti, Nellie Melba and Marcella Sembrich used to sing all sorts of coloratura stuff during the lesson scene in Act 2. It's only relatively recently that opera companies started to pay attention to what the composer actually wrote. Nevertheless, the New York Met alternated a soprano and mezzo in the role within the last year.
I think the problem is the word "later". "sometimes" might be better. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)