Talk:The Nutcracker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nutcracker 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.
Russia Portal
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the assessment scale.
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.7
 This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Nutcracker article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Tchaikovsky template or Petipa template?

Who cares about Petipa? Why not have a box with ballets and/or compositions by Tchaikovsky? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.220.2.188 (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Tchaikovksy wrote only three ballets. A box-list for them would be far less important than a box-list for the operas. Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Tchaikovksy for one cared a great deal about Petipa, and in the real world Tchaikovksy is best know for one of his ballets (certainly at this time of year!) Robert Greer (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • The Tchaikovsky template should take priority over the Petipa template because the one constant in performances of Tchaikovsky's three ballets is his music. Choreographic trends may come and go, but the music remains the same. Just as opera librettists are subordinate to composers, so choreographers take the back seat to composers. Ivan Velikii (talk) 01:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • There's nothing to prevent the presence of both templates, I assume, or is wiki not capable of that? Why not do that, and put the Tchaikovsky template ahead of the Petipa. Another possibility for Tchaikovsky would be to make a single template combining the ballets and the operas as Tchaikovsky's stage works in general (omitting incidental music, etc.). Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Nutcracker or The Nutcracker?

Although it comes from a German book with quite different name, and a musical score with a different name, this article refers to the BALLET of The Nutcracker which is always referred to with "The" in front of the name when used in the ballet world. All performances big and small will have their print media with The Nutcracker rather then just 'Nutcracker'. user:pathaugen

[edit] Nutcracker or The Nutcracker? That is the question!

Although Hoffmann story tittle is 'The Nutcracker and the Mouse King', most sources of Tchaikovsky work refer it as "Nutcracker". Scores don't contribute to clarify the confusion, but it seems that the most present tittle is "Nutcracker Suite".

Clarified: After writing this, amazon.de shows that Hoffman's story is titled "Nussknacker und Mäusekönig" without the article "Der". Also Tchaikovsky work is uniformly named "Nussknacker Suite Op 71a." So, in my opinion all translations should not add the article, "Nutcracker", "Cascanueces", ...

What puzzles me is that I've just seen that the German Wikipedia page ads the article. Perhaps a mistake?

Amazon.de Hoffman's Nussknacker From this page select Musiknoten in the top search box and click LOS to see German Nussknacker scores.

esqüeze (a reader) 17:30, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The problem is compounded by the fact that the Russian language has no definite article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.19.48.83 (talk) 20:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Stahlbaum or Silberhaus?

This confusion is actually simple to resolve. In Hoffmann's 1814 original, the family was named Stahlbaum. In Dumas' 1844 adaptation, the name changed to Silberhaus. Lupo 15:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

In the annual National Ballet of Canada (Toronto) production, the children's names have been changed to Marie and Micha. This was done in 1995 and according to the Ballet, reflects the "original" production.

[edit] Premiere Date

Is the date given Old Style?

Just added double dating of Dec. 6/18, 1892. Mademoiselle Fifi 13:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trepak

What does everyone think of the Russian dance..should it be kept or omitted in performances?

There's no need to omit, rearrange, or add anything in a performance of this ballet or of the suite. Mademoiselle Fifi 13:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blonde?

The article specifically states that Clara is blonde. While this is the case in many illustrations and stagings, is it ever difinitively stated anywhere in the text of the original German story or the play? If not, that tidbit should be removed from the article. -Toptomcat 18:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duke Ellington

There's no mention of Duke Ellington's rendition of the music. Shouldn't this be mentioned?Rokor 19:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revisions to article

If an entire section of the article that we contributed to has been deleted, can we get it back without having to type it all over again?

More than half of this article is gone - the history of the ballet, the musical numbers in it, the notable productions of it (including variations in the staging), even the photos. (Many of the items removed are items that I did not post, so I'm not engaging in any special pleading.)

I suppose we have to expect this kind of stuff when we edit an online site ourselves, but the wholesale surgery performed on this article is rather aggravating. Why should other articles go such into detail about a subject, while this one is reduced to a mere synopsis of the plot? AlbertSM

I was just now browsing the article, and I noticed that too. I think you can go back into the History and restore from an earlier time. Though I'm not that good with article editing, so I'm not sure. MasterXiam 03:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I think I found it. 19:24, November 30, 2006, IP address 69.226.255.69 - That's weird, because I saw the article from before then... today. Just wish I knew what to with this information, now. MasterXiam 03:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I restored the text. Can we restore photos, and if so, how? I did not post them originally, but I liked them, and now they are gone from the page. AlbertSM

The article is properly restored to its PROPER form. (Guys, learn to sign with four tildes that look like this: ~~~~ It automatically changes to your user name.) -- A. Wang (talk/contrb.) 23:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Characters

The most recent change was the removal of the list of characters, the justfication being that "the cast varies too much inbetween companies, it could never be fully correct." This is example of an unjustified, arbitrary deletion. There is at least one "correct" source for the characters: the stage directions in the score itself. Whatever changes are made to the cast is one thing, but to dismiss the published intentions of the original creators is uncalled-for. Although I'm not sure whether the deleted list was based on the original score, a cast list should be restored based on that source (with a citation of it), including, if possible the names of the known original dancers in the roles (as is done with the singers in many of the opera articles on Wikipedia) in a chart. I have access to the score myself, so I might try to supply that basic information in a few days. Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 23:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Dec 2006

I tagged this article because I felt that a lot of the article is not linked properly. This is due to a large blanking of the page and the helpful, but painful restoration of the article. Sections remain without links; that should be fixed. Also, the summary needs revision. Sections are not arranged properly, or in chronological order (example: history section). These are a few points I bring up. This cleanup is actually very minor, but the article needs it. -- A. Wang (talk/contrb.) 01:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Castilian?

Why is the Castilian translation of the name included here, as opposed to any other (e.g. French or Polish)? --SigPig |SEND - OVER 07:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The suite in popular culture

Various extracts from the suite have taken on a life of their own. Many UK residents will sing "Ev'ryone's a Fruit and Nut Case!" to Dance of the Reed Flutes, courtesy of a Cadbury commercial for their Fruit'n'Nut chocolate bar; this was also reused in the popular video game Lemmings (IIRC, Oh No! added Trepak). Surely there must be more examples?! Add them here, then when we've got a few I'll create a subsection in the main article. Mittfh 19:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] date consistency

Is the original work 1814 or 1816? It's written as both in this article (see beginning and ending). Perhaps one refers to an original draft and the second is a more final version by the author?--SidP 20:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mirlitons or Merlitons?

It is not spelled consistently in the article

[edit] List of characters

There are two mentioned as having "speaking" roles. Nobody speaks in this ballet, at least not in any production I've seen - except for the 1993 Macaulay Culkin movie, where the children actually chant "Ma - gic!" out loud to Drosselmeyer. (It's a film of the Balanchine staging.) AlbertSM (talk) 19:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

  • The characters listed do speak, according to the original score -- but only with brief utterances during the battle scene. See the score cited (Soviet ed. of Tchaikovsky's piano-solo version) or Taneev's transcription for piano solo, reprinted by Elibron.com. Whether these utterances were actually employed in the original production is another matter, but they are included in the published material. Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 00:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nutcracker Suite No. 2 op 71b

There is another Nutcracker suite created by the composer. It's Nutcracker Suite No. 2 op 71b. Although in performance today, I doubt that it has ever been recorded. (Instead, the entire ballet score has been recorded countless times.) Imagine a "World premeire recording of Nutcracker Suite No. 2", which has yet to happen! This is certainly worth a mention in the article. Scetpfe (talk) 03:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

  • You would need to cite a source that proves that the composer wrote or authorized a suite from this ballet other than Op. 71a. According to the list of the composer's orchestral works at Grove Music Online (accessed today, 2007-12-28), only the Op. 71a orchestral suite is listed. I have heard at least one "other" suite from this ballet on recordings, but I never assumed that it stemmed from the composer. Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 22:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
There are indeed a few suites cobbled together that aren't the pubished one. I've even seen one or two recordings with 'selections' that lack some of the familiar movements. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reference list

It looks like the references are missing, and using the reflist template doesn't wanna work...so anyone able to fix it? There's also one or two direct refs that should be changed into footnotes, probably. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)