Talk:P. D. Q. Bach

Let's kill the Infobox

I suggest we just kill the infobox, which is designed to portray information about real people, not characters. (Do we have an infobox for Captain Kangaroo? I don't think so!) This will have the added advantage of ending the ridiculously endless tussle over the birth/death date order, which is pretty absurb for a fictional character. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

A reasonable request. Binksternet (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I have tried reducing it to relevant information (labels, instruments) - not sure it works, to be honest. Maybe just killing it would be best. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 15:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello again from the future. There is now a Template:Infobox character. (It actually existed since 2006.) This is tailor-made for fictional personna. JustinTime55 (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

A divergent voice

I believe the infobox should stay or be reinstated, but only because Peter Schickele has worked to develop most of the characteristics of a P.D.Q. Bach biography.

Specifically to the argument that User:DavidWBrooks makes, which compares the treatment of fictional characters' infoboxes, in which he cites Captain Kangaroo as compared to P.D.Q. Bach. The two characters are different enough that such a comparison is not fruitful. Theories of comedy understand that several gradations exist for the comedic personna adopted by an actor-comedian.

• Some personna are merely one role of many possible characters that an actor performs (for example, Lucy Ricardo played by Lucille Ball or Nicole Kidman).
• Some personna are an opportunity to maintain the character for public appearances (such as the earliest version of Stephen Colbert).
• A few personna become a character that the actor subsumes himself to (such as Pee-wee Herman as played by by Paul Reubens, at least until a career-changing event in 1991).
• Quite distinct from these comedic personnae is the fictional character, which defines P. D. Q. Bach.

Here in Wikipedia, the Captain Kangaroo article speaks only of the broadcast series, and not of the character; however, Captain Kangaroo (Host) links automatically to the actor profile of Bob Keeshan. I do find, in this example, an inconsistency in the treatment of the character Clarabell the Clown. That character, played by several actors and never provided a background story, is indeed the one role of many that a given actor can play. The same could be true of Captain Kangaroo, although Bob Keeshan is (as far as I know) the only actor who played the role. I believe that, if Keeshan was interviewed or seen outside the children's show, he would drop any characteristics of Captain Kangaroo. Thus, Captain Kangaroo belongs to the first identified comedic personna. Similar performed characters are those of Lily Tomlin: Edith Ann, Ernestine, and Tommy Velour.

Stephen Colbert (charcter) is an example of the second comedic personna. The actor Stephen Colbert assumed the personna for all television appearances (I believe) between 1997 and 2014, when he announced the end of The Colbert Report. Colbert created a confusing mixture of his personal back story and a back story for this "Stephen Colbert character." Though most of this period, the public saw few, if any appearances of Colbert the actor. Nonetheless, those who worked with him saw a comedy writer and developer very distinct from the "Stephen Colbert character." The guitarist and singer Charo may also be considered this type of personna.

Of the third comedic personna is Pee-wee Herman. I cite rumors here: during the part of the career that Paul Reubens had before his arrest for public exposure in 1991, he never broke character while in public. I would love to know whether he broke character while on sexual trysts, for example, and wonder how strange it might be to experience a "date" with Pee-wee Herman instead of Paul Reubens.

That said, P.D.Q. Bach is indeed a fictionalized character. Perhaps Peter Schickele donned 18th-Century garb for a performance or several, but his monologues never include a performance as though Schickele were Bach. So the appropriate comparison for the P.D.Q. Bach page is whether (first) such a page exists for, say, the personages of Jesus Christ, Anna Karenina, or Don Quixote de la Mancha and (second) whether the page includes an infobox. Tgkohn (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are proposing. The article has an infobox since January 2020. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Tromboon?

Can somebody tell me why a reduced version of the Tromboon page is stuck in the middle of this article? 74.192.200.169 (talk) 00:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tromboon. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I won't address your primary question, but the presence of that subheading for the "Tromboon" begs for similar discussions of the other modified appliances that are part of the instrumentation. I suggest that there might be a heading of "Unusual Instruments" with a table of Instrument | Construction | Works that use the instrument.

Because none (?) of these instruments are used by other composers, their importance is too limited to require a heading for one, or for any. Tgkohn (talk) 23:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

No other unusual instrument had an article. When that article was deleted, it needed to be merged here. You are welcome to improve on that. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The Seasonings

A reference is needed to say that "The Seasonings" alludes to The Seasons (Haydn), but not needed to say that it alludes to The Seasons (Vivaldi)? We may observe in passing that two of the three use voices. —Tamfang (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2023 (UTC)