Talk:Die Entführung aus dem Serail

Naming Conventions

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) this is where the article must be, and not at Die Entführung aus dem Serail. -- Paddu 06:19, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

According to Naming conventions on classical music - this should not be the case. I, an English speaker, more often hear the German form of the name anyway. I am moving it to it's correct place. --Oldak Quill 15:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas) is should be in German! Paul B 14:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

According to that convention, it should be in German unless commonly known by its English title. I think most English-speakers, if they have heard of the opera at all, first heard of it by the English title as I did, not the German, and they still hear of it more often in English unless perhaps they move in opera circles. Indeed, the current production at the Lyric Opera of Chicago refers to it by the English title. Furthermore, the Google statistics quoted later on this page are wrong: A Google search of English pages shows that the English title outnumbers the German title by something like 92,000 to 51,000. Because of Wikipedia differences on this point, The Marriage of Figaro appears under its English form, even though Le nozze di Figaro is no more obscure to English-speakers than Die Entführung aus dem Serail. Wbkelley (talk) 02:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

It's also known as Il Seraglio. Paul B 00:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Unverifiable Point

A well-known tale concerning the musical difficulty of the work is often told: After hearing a performance, the Emperor said to the composer "Too many notes, dear Mozart," to which Mozart is said to have replied "Exactly the right number, Your Majesty." (The authenticity of this tale is doubted, however, by some contemporary musicologists.)

I have removed this from the article as it is unsourced, anecdotal, as well as adding nothing to the article. It also appears to be taken verbatim from Amadeus, an admittedly fictionalised account of the Mozart/Salieri rivalry. --Alexs letterbox 06:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello -

Consulting Google Books, I quickly found two references sources, one for the tale itself, the other with skeptical commentary. I'm pretty sure that his tale is part of the academic folklore about Mozart; it was prevalent long before Amadeus was made.

The reference sources I found are not perfect, since they are tertiary. When I get a chance I will go to the library and see what source the Bartlett book was using, and thus obtain the original version.

As far as whether the tale useful - well, the fact is, it's there, permanently part of the lore of the opera. Our readers deserve to know what evidence there is to support tales like this.

Opus33 16:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Konstanze?

Should it be mentioned in the page that the character may have been named for Mozart's wife?

Certainly not if there is no published reference source that says so; see Wikipedia:Verifiability. I've never seen this myself, and it seems unlikely, given that the original author of the libretto did not collaborate with Mozart. Opus33 17:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay :) I thought I had read this somewhere, but I just checked the mozartproject.org and the libretto was originally named Belmonte und Constanze.

Libretto link

The text of the article correctly notes that the action in a singspiel mostly happens in the dialogue sections between the set pieces. Unfortunately the libretto link contains only the set pieces and none of the dialogue, so not much help for someone wanting to follow the action.... I wonder if we can find a better libretto on the web somewhere? 206.174.64.52 07:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Michael Bednarek 02:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was PAGE NOT MOVED -- as there was no consensus for the move per discussion below. --Philip Baird Shearer 13:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Die Entführung aus dem Serail → The Abduction from the Seraglio — Per WP:UE and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas), this title should be in English as it is commonly referred to by an English title in English-speaking countries. Heimstern Läufer 03:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

1. Support as nom. Heimstern Läufer 03:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
2. Support. Good to follow a general practice, and in this case I think the English is more reader-friendly. Opus33 18:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey - in opposition to the move

1. 1 Oppose The use of "Abduction" is much less common than the use of "The Marriage of Figaro" or "The Magic Flute", and I suspect that it is used more in the USA than in Britain, since I've only rarely heard it over here in England. I and most people that I know refer to it as "Entführung". --GuillaumeTell 12:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
2. Oppose. The original language title seems to be more common. Even a Google search for English language websites only gives more hits with "Die Entführung aus dem Serail". Prolog 20:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose -- This has been discussed here before (see above); nothing has changed: the work's original title is Die Entführung aus dem Serail and that's how it is mostly referred to in English. Sidenote: The Abduction from the Seraglio only barely qualifies as an English title, so the whole discussion seems rather pointless. Michael Bednarek 00:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose. As per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas) and Groves, which refers to it in German. Its not like entering "The Abduction from the Seraglio" into Wikipedia's search box is going to give no results. --Alexs letterbox 03:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
5. Oppose per Prolog. Grasping at my reference books to hand all of them seem to use the current title. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 08:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose The German title has become by far the more common one. (I imagine this is partly because of record companies marketing their opera recordings internationally). --Folantin 09:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
7. Oppose Per Folantin, I think the German title is more widely known throughout the English-speaking world. --Kyoko 10:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

• "Barely qualifies as an English title"? How so? Heimstern Läufer 00:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of Catarina Cavalieri

This is a minor matter and the sky won't fall in if nothing is done about it — still:

There are three spelling variants of Catarina Cavalieri's name in this article:

1. Catarina Cavalieri (correct in my opinion)
2. Cavallieri (double L)
3. Katherina Cavalieri (semi-German variant)

In Der Schauspieldirektor it's Caterina Cavalieri, in Don Giovanni it's Cavalieri without first name. The article de:Catarina Cavalieri uses Catarina Cavalieri which I believe is the most frequently used one; Grove concurs. The web page http://mugi.hfmt-hamburg.de/grundseite/grundseite.php?id=cava1755 lists any number of variants, but predominantly also Catarina Cavalieri. Should it be consistent in this article (and in Der Schauspieldirektor)? If so, what should it be? I suggest to use Catarina Cavalieri consistently. Michael Bednarek 11:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC) (hoping madly that he didn't introduce more confusion by inadvertent spelling variants in this section)

Hello MB, I agree with your suggestion; Grove is usually a good model to follow. Cheers, Opus33 15:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree also. I found one remaining instance of Caterina (in the Roles section of this article) and corrected it to Catarina--but of course the linked English-language Wikipedia article still spells it Caterina, and I can't change that article's title. Wbkelley (talk) 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

All these musings are completely moot, because Cavalieri always signed her name "Catharina Cavalieri".--62.47.135.177 (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Querying removal

Eusebeus, I'm puzzled by your removal of:

Musicologist Conrad Wilson suggests that this is a mistranslation from the German: "what he really said (if he said it at all) was 'an extraordinary number of notes', which was not quite the same thing."

People very often go to encyclopedias to see if famous anecdotes really are true. So I think we rather owe it to our readers to provide what we can re. this one.

Yours truly, Opus33 (talk) 18:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

As you can see I was getting some better sources and "meating" this article up a bit (oof sorry for that phrase). The removal was tentative per sourcing issues. Can you find a textual cite for this? I couldn't and - more important - let's find the original German since the question of the actual meaning suggests we should be examining the issue ad fontes. Eusebeus (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Still working on this, but for now I can at least cite the original German from Nissen's early biography: "Gewaltig viel noten, lieber Mozart!" "Gerade so viel, Ew. Majestät, als nötig ist." Web source for the Nissen: http://books.google.com/books?id=ODjGyobktlQC&pg=PA464-IA1&dq=Gewaltig+viel+Noten,+lieber+Mozart&lr=#PPA464-IA1,M1.

Conrad Wilson is actually cited, but not (yet) footnoted. More to come... Opus33 (talk) 00:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Hmmm, do you agree with that interpretation? Here's Grimm on the word, which is basically contemporary (18th c) usage. link (you have to scroll down to get to the different uses.)

And Mozart's response makes no sense on that reading of "gewaltig." (Although it could perhaps be read in the sense of "impressively"). I'd like to see an authoritative reading before we privilege it in the wiki. Eusebeus (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, Mozart may not have had the benefit of Grimm's :-)

It seems not very productive to me to speculate whether Mozart's response made sense or not — he said it. And indeed, as you suspect, the closest translation of "gewaltig" in this context would be: "impressively", or even closer: "mighty" as in: "A mighty bunch/lot of notes, dear Mozart." "Just as many, Honourable Majesty, as necessary."

More generally: the episode is so well known, that not mentioning it in the article would leave the reader short-changed. Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

no, no, no - I left the original quotation in - no question! I removed the suggestion that the original anecdote was inaccurate based on an unusual reading of "gewaltig" (hence my Grimms citation for its 18th century meaning) due to a capricious sourcing. Eusebeus (talk) 06:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, a bit of web browsing indicates that the anecdote first appeared in Niemetschek's biography (not Nissen, as I had thought). I've inserted the German text, along with an indication of source, in a footnote.

I have no qualified opinion on how to translate "gewaltig" and hope to find more references on this point. For now, I removed the reference to Conrad Walter's remarks, since there's no point in citing him if his opinion has been deleted from the article. Yours truly, Opus33 (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• Nicely done. Eusebeus (talk) 05:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
• Native German stalking Eusebeus says: "gewaltig" is a (nice) brawn word to express nearly unbelievable hugeness, and I'd translate it as "tremendously". "Mighty" would work also, but "impressively" is a little too passively-rational-nice. The translation of the whole sentences, as they currently appear in the article, is alright. – sgeureka ^t•c 23:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The character of the opera cleanup

Just made some minor corrections in the reference to Osmin and the Act III aria. First, the title of the aria is "O, wie will ich triumphieren". ('O' is necessary, and triumphieren needs the 'ie' near then end) [all from the Barenreiter score] Second, while the low D is in fact one of the lowest notes demanded of a bass, it is not the lowest. While several operas have 'ossia' passages (alternate) that go to C or even B or Bb in the case of Les Huguenots, I can think of one example in particular where the required note is lower: In Act II of Rosenkavalier, Baron Ochs has a low C# on the text 'Wär nicht [mein Gusto hier]'.

Blonde/Blondchen?

In the Roles list, the character is Blonde, but in the Synopsis she is Blondchen. The current production at the Lyric Opera of Chicago names the role Blonde. In combination with Serail or Seraglio, Blonde outnumbers Blondchen 10-1 on English-language Google, and 40-1 on German-language Google. Why the diminutive form Blondchen? Should it be Blonde? Wbkelley (talk) 03:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I just changed it to Blonde. In the libretto, the other characters most often call her "Blondchen" (the German diminutive form), but the dramatis personae and stage directions call her "Blonde". It seems reasonable to use "Blonde" here. Opus33 (talk) 01:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Enlightened Despotism

Hey - I saw this opera last night and my thought was that it's an homage to enlightened despotism, with Selim Pasha in the role of enlightened despot. Which seems particularly plausible because it was commissioned by Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor, one of the quintessential "enlightened despots". I would like to add this to the article but don't actually have any sources. Does anyone know of any published source that makes this connection? (It's so obvious I'm sure I'm not the first one to have thought of it.) Adam_sk (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

This seems plausible but I can't think of any reference sources that would help. Opus33 (talk) 15:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I added in a ref a while back (Osterhammel. Die Entzauberung Asiens: Europa und die asiatischen Reiche im 18. Jahrhundert) that raises this point. It is a common enough interpretative theme. Eusebeus (talk) 19:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The quartet "Ach, Belmonte, ach mein liebe!"

I have expanded the synopsis a little to include the action in this quartet--first they reunite, then the men question the women's fidelity, then they forgive. It's worth mentioning explicitly because this is the only place where Mozart reminds the audience that there is no such thing as love without anxiety, even in a puff-piece like this one.

Also identified Belmonte's father and explained Pasha's reason for letting everyone go. SingingZombie (talk) 03:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

"Ach, Belmonte, ach mein liebe!"?? There's is no quartet with such a title.--62.47.135.177 (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

"Notable" arias

Initial ditty "Hier soll ich dich denn sehen" is too short to be an "aria" and in any event is not notable. Also, Pedrillo's arias are not particularly notable; they're short, simple, easy. Hence, removed. SingingZombie (talk) 17:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Belmonte's sortita is called an aria in the score, as are Pedrillo's "Frisch zum Kampfe!" and Blonde's "Welche Wonne, welche Lust", which you also removed. Pedrillo's "Im Mohrenland gefangen war" is described as a Romance, but conventionally they are all listed under "Arias", including cavatinas and whatnot.

Whether an aria is short or easy does not diminish its notability – and the term "notable" in these articles refers to notability within the work, not among an imagined top-100 list of all arias.

The only reason not to have a list of notable arias at the bottom of an opera article is when all the arias have been mentioned in the synopsis, which is indeed the preferred option. Until that happens, I'm going to revert your removal. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't "notable" mean that the aria is often performed on its own in vocal recitals? If so, these short ditties do not qualify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.243.185 (talk) 23:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Set Piece title language

I noticed that the synopsis contains the first lines of several set pieces in English. Especially since several of them,such as "Martern aller arten" are better known by the original, proper German text, would it not be better to have these in German instead of English?--134.69.39.113 (talk) 22:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

The synopsis is derived from the dreaded Opera Goer's Complete Guide of 1921 by Leo Melitz (listed in the References section at the bottom) and is written in the stilted English of that period. You could move the German first lines up from the "noted arias" section to the appropriate places in the synopsis and provide better English translations of the words (and a better synopsis, if you have the time). ("Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit"). --GuillaumeTell 23:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Spelling of names

Dauer's first name was just Ernst and it's Dominik Jauz, not "Jautz".--Suessmayr (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Care to provide sources for that? The article currently follows Grove, Opera Stanford, and others. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The "too many notes" story

Although it has been repeatedly discussed: the translation of "gewaltig viele Noten" with "too many notes" is simply wrong and distorting. "Too many notes" would be "Zu viele Noten". Maybe the "too many notes" gives a nicer anecdote but it is simply not true. Immensely many notes or enormously many notes would be more appropriate and this statement has a different undertone than the critical "too many notes". --Furfur (talk) 16:58, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

As a native speaker I too have to admit it's a little tricky to translate well, although I am no expert on the words subtleties in those days. I would translate the whole statement to: Too nice for our ears, and mighty many notes, my dear Mozart! as this reflects the apparent attitude (and position) of the Emperor while also being rather literal. For the most part it is mock-criticism, but this does not mean it was no criticism at all. 87.164.74.98 (talk) 23:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Die Entführung aus dem Serail. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101224154541/http://staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/nc/ueber-uns/presse/detail/article/2006-10-16-362.html to http://staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/nc/ueber-uns/presse/detail/article/2006-10-16-362.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

About the instruments

The "Instrumentation" chapter needed some corrections, so I made two changes that I explain in more detail below.

1.) The article originally stated that Mozart uses a "bass drum" in this opera, linking the term to an article that discusses the modern bass drum. However, Mozart calls for a so-called "tamburo grande" or "tamburo turco"; according to the New Mozart Edition (hereafter abbreviated NME), this is a roller-shaped drum. The right hand beats it with a (not damped) mallet, the left hand beats it with a rod. This instrument has nothing to do with the modern bass drum, therefore the simple indication "bass drum" is completely wrong and misleading. In the book Le percussioni by Guido Facchin such a tamburo turco is illustrated and explained on page 442. Here is a precise reference to it, which can also be cited in the "Sources" if necessary, so that the interested reader can get a picture of it:

Facchin, Guido (2000). Le percussioni. EDT. ISBN 88-7063-251-2

Perhaps this instrument could be explained in the notes with reference to the NME and to the book mentioned?

2.) I have replaced the term "triangle" by "triangles". It should be mentioned (perhaps in the "References") that according to the NME there is no doubt that Mozart wanted the triangle part to be played by more than one instrument. Mozart uses the German word "triangel", which can mean both singular and plural, and the unambiguous indication Triangoli.

3.) As far as the "cymbals" are concerned, one could perhaps mention with a reference to the NME that Mozart notated the piatti in different pitches, and consequently apparently wanted to have differently sized (and thus differently sounding) cymbals.

Unfortunately, I am not very technically savvy, otherwise I would enter this sources or these comments myself. --DerFigaro (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Mozart;- The Abduction From The Seraglio- Overture.ogg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:07, 30 March 2022 (UTC)