Talk:Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Moonlight?

The sonata seems like walking in the quiet "moonlight" in the first movement, but the third movement is aggressive and fast-paced. "Quasi una fantasia" is a more accurate description (describes whole movement as a fantasy), because "Moonlight" only applies to one movement. — Stevey7788 (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Trivia

without wishing to sound curmudgeonly, is there really any need to catalog all the videogames in which moonlight sonata has featured? What possible use or interest does that have? ElectricRay 15:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, I have decided to be bold and delete it. Good riddance to old rubbish. ElectricRay 00:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I must say, in general, trivia sections in WP articles seem to work but this one was truly boring, dreksome, unhelpful cruft. Trust me, I would have restored the information if I thought it was helpful. Wyss 00:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

By the bye, I shudder to think of the WP article/list, Video games featuring the Moonlight Sonata :) Wyss 00:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello Electric Ray and Wyss,

I share your feelings, but motivated by practical concerns I've resurrected the material, relocated to a separate article. The problem is that if you just delete the popular culture material, people will just add it back in--the flow is endless. With a separate article, you can accommodate the flow without harming the main article. Also, I think that the pop culture lists have a certain anthropological value; i.e. for what they tell us about our times.

I hope this arrangement is ok with you.

Yours truly,
Opus33 16:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Eminently sensible. I did the same for the Marduk article - the reason I didn't here was that the actual information was so stupid I really couldn't bring myself to do it. But I agree with your reasoning. ElectricRay 21:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

The MIDI Piece

This piece NEEDS to be re-recorded by an experienced pianist, as both the novice pianist and the midi recording will not work. The Novice pianist has problems which have been outlined before in this talk page, but the Midi piece has not had any critical review. As a MIDI piece, it doesn't exactly have any dynamics. If anyone on here can play this piece with a human touch, PLEASE, do it. The piece is nothing without emotion and dynamics. --Tony (Talk), Vandalism Ninja 02:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I concur with a similar deep feeling Benjaminstewart05 16:38 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Doctor Girl

There is an anecdote about how this sonata was christened "Moonlight" when Beethoven played it for a doctor girl. Is there any credibility for this story?

No. See article. Opus33 16:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Mystery reference

An anonymous editor added this citation:

• BanYa (2006). Moonlight. Pump it up ZERO / Andamiro.

without saying what it is or referring to it in the text. Until (s)he identifies it, I think we're probably safer not including it in the article. Opus33 16:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Photo

Can someone post a photo of moonlight shinning on Lake Lucern? Thank you. Cigsandalcohol 02:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I have one but I think it's copyrighted --Rake 14:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The novice pianist

68.54.132.201 added the remark that the ogg file of the first movement is "performed by a novice pianist". I downloaded the file to check up on this, and it seems that 68.54.132.201's remark might actually be a bit generous. There are many wrong notes, and also places where the performer hesitates, apparently trying to remember what come next. I feel that this performance is introduction to the work for people who have never heard it before, and does us no credit as an encyclopedia.

Therefore I ask: would anyone complain if I deleted the link to this sound file? And might it be possible to find something to take its place? Ideally, we should have all three movements in any event. Opus33 16:12, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

I try not to be critical of others' audio contributions as my own such contributions have their failings. However, I did listen to the file in question and I do understand the various concerns that have been raised.

I would be happy to provide a new recording of the first two movements, which are familiar to me and easily within my skill. The third would take some time to work up as it is more difficult, mainly because of the tempo. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 19:41, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Uninvited,

Sorry, I didn't want to sound mean to anybody--though I guess it turned out that way! I am equally humble about my own pianistic contributions to the Wikipedia--I've tried not to do anything above my level.

An Uninvited recording would be very welcome. Perhaps sticking just to the first movement, if the third seems daunting? It would be odd to have just #1 and #2.

Concerning the current version of the sound file: since no one said "please keep it", and as I still feel we are better off without it, I hereby move the link to this talk page:

==Media==

Opus33 17:51, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't mind doing a recording of it too sometime in the near future. (I've played the entire sonata.) TheProject 00:05, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, I didn't even notice this was removed until just now. I admit the file isn't perfect, but until someone provides a better one, having an imperfect rendition is better than none-at-all. As such, I have restored it. →Raul654 05:11, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, dear. Raul654, please listen to the file carefully and ponder before you revert again. Classical music listeners generally expect pretty high-quality performances, and the performance we are discussing seems not just bad, but underprepared. Given the audience, and our wish to be taken seriously by our readers, a bad performance really is worse than none at all.

Sincerely, Opus33 16:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I came across this web page by way of altavista which has a recording of the moonlight sonata. Sound quality isn't great, and I'm not sure about copyright and all, but it's there if you want to give it a listen. Just pointing it out.. Platypus01 23:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Novice Pianist's first Movement

Not to be mean, but after listening to the first movement provided by novice pianist I really only got 3 letters to put: CMI - Cannot Make it. I must say I as a beginner pianist who only have training less than a year can play better for this piece. Just that I don't know now should I play pp or p because I think pp too soft.

Anyone can contribute a replacement, please do so.

Classification

this piece is in the classical period (1750-1820). Is its with romantic style or classical style? (romantic period: 1820-1900) Jackzhp 03:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello Jack, this is a hopeless question because nobody agrees on the answer, or even what it means. The only work I've ever read that seemed to shed light on the issue was Charles Rosen's The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, widely available in bookstores and libraries. Opus33 05:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Is This Necessary?

"Beethoven was known to break hammers and strings when he played, and it is easy to imagine this happening when he performed this movement."

I think not. The rest of the paragraph already conveys the sense that "flamboyant" playing is needed for the performance of this movement. Spartan

Hello!!! Whoever added back the above line did not explain why it's necessary to the paragraph. I specifically doubt the importance of "it is easy to imagine this happening when he performed this movement."

Senza sordino, senza sordini?

Hello, I agree that "senza sordini", "without dampers" sounds more sensible, and some editions of the sonata put it this way. But my Urtext edition uses the singular "sordino", and Charles Rosen, in his book about the Beethoven sonatas, uses the singular too (and he's obsessed with using original editions, so I tend to trust him here). Perhaps Beethoven's Italian wasn't perfect? Or perhaps it's ok in Italian to say it either way?

In any event, the phrase in question is a quotation, and so I don't think it's legit for us Wikipedia editors to change it. Opus33 21:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

My Harold Craxton/Donald Francis Tovey edition reads "senza sordini", and I thought that that would how they all were. If it's just this one edition of mine (Tovey may have corrected the Italian himself), then we should say "sordino". —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  22:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

'Quasi una fantasia' vs 'Quasi una Fantasia'

Is this capitalization / spelling really correct? Why no capital on the third word? ELLIOTTCABLE 23:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

You'd want to consult an Urtext edition. Alas, my Urtext (Schirmer) refers the reader to a book I don't have. Other sources I own suggest, not conclusively, that cap F is correct. Opus33 01:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Dead Link(s)

Under "Score", the "imslp.org" link is dead(October 19th 2007), any related or relocated sites?-70.74.122.87 07:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Cut & Paste without reference?

The "Form" section is identical to an article on About.com, which is supposedly written by Aaron Green (http://classicalmusic.about.com/od/onestopbeethoven/a/moonlightsonata.htm). Who copied whom? If this is in fact an excerpt from his article (and not the other way around), there should at least be a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.63.5 (talk) 23:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

{{unclear}}

I added the tag next to the respective word because I wasn't sure if that was an actual piano term. Remove it and bluelink it if it is.68.148.164.166 (talk) 08:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It isn't so much a piano term as an English one: how else do you want to describe letting up on the pedal? -- Tmassey (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Opinion?

"The modern piano has a much longer sustain time than the instruments of Beethoven's day. Therefore, his instruction cannot be followed by pianists playing modern instruments without creating an unpleasantly dissonant sound."

I couldn't disagree more. First of all, we have no reliable source for this information at all. On top of that, if you play it Pianissimo properly it will counteract that "unpleasantly dissonant sound." Additionally, leaving the sustain on causes the octive strings to resonate, and as long as you don't play it too fast (unlike most recordings I've heard on the net) the reverb created by that effect is quite nice and in my opinion, intentional.

I don't usually play on $70,000.00 pianos, but "My piano is nicer than Beethoven's" is a very poor excuse to make if you can't get the song to sound good the way it was written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.193.251.130 (talk) 21:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Andras Schiff has mentioned in his Guardian series of lectures that the pedal marks http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/audio/2006/nov/22/culture1414 he has mentioned that the pedal marks are to be followed. However, this is only his personal opinion, so I'm not too sure about that. chinzh —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC).

Ungarbling the Italian

I've removed "Its original title, Quasi una Fantasia, was in keeping with that dedication" ("that dedication" being the one to Giulietta Guicciardi) - I'm pretty sure that the "quasi una fantasia" is there because of the rather free form of the sonata. It has nothing to do with the Countess. --Camembert

Might be both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.131.16.193 (talk) 03:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The moonlight sonata was not intended to be dedicated to Giulietta Guicciardi, as Beethoven was supposed to dedicate a Rondo to her, but later dedicated to Count Lichnowsky instead. The 'moonlight sonata' was a makeshift gift for Guiccardi, and it has nothing to do with the countess. chinzh —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC).

All About Beethoven Page to the References Section

all-about-beethoven Readded all about beethoven page has some good pdf content in it sourced from gutenberg and mutopia which includes piano scores for moonlight sonata and letters of Beethoven. Kasaalan (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Adding painting of Moonlight on Lake Lucerne?

I found a painting titled Moonlight on Lake Lucerne with the Rigi in the Distance,Switzerland by Joseph Mallord William Turner, painted in 1841 http://www.whitworth.manchester.ac.uk/collection/advsearch/objdisphigh/index.html?irn=16&Where=TitObjectRating%3D'highlight'+and+exists+(TitCollectionGroup_tab+Where+TitCollectionGroup+Contains+'historic-drawings')&StartAt=1. Since the sonata is nicknamed "Moonlight" because of a comment by a critic on how it reminded him of Lake Lucerne, it seems like this would be a nice picture to have in the article. Would there be a way to get this picture onto Wikimedia Commons in a way that suits copyright? Then it could be linked to the article.PianoMelody (talk) 04:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

• Accompanying images need to be specifically related to the encyclopedic content. Earlier images of moonlight have been removed and will probably be again. Eusebeus (talk) 07:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

"Because" by John Lennon

Is this quote/story of Lennon's worth adding to this page too? I think so but enough others may not. Kansaikiwi (talk) 01:03, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

3rd Movement

Could someone talk more about the 3rd Movement? Every time I hear this movement, it always strikes me how fresh and modern it still sounds. Why is this? Is it because there are timeless qualities to the music, or is it that modern music today owes a great debt to this style? Viriditas (talk) 12:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Moonlight Sonata in Popular Culture

This information has been deleted [1]. Although this information does not belong in the main article, I am listing some here as useful. ♫ Cricket02 18:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ludwig van Beethoven's Piano Sonata opus 27 no. 2 in C sharp minor, often called the Moonlight Sonata, is one of the composer's most popular works. The first movement is particularly well known and often learned for amateur performances. The work, and particularly its first movement, frequently appear in works of popular culture. The following is a list of notable appearances.

Figure Skating Ekaterina Gordeeva and Sergei Grinkov, 1988 and 1994 Olympic champions in pairs figure skating, performed their long program in the 1993-1994 season to Beethoven. This program is known as their "Moonlight Sonata" program, although only two-thirds of the skate are performed to the Piano Sonata No. 14; it begins with the first movement of Piano Sonata No. 8 (Beethoven) Pathétique (Grave: allegro di molto e con brio), continues with the first movement of the Moonlight Sonata (Adagio Sostenuto), and ends with the third movement (Presto Agitato). Gordeeva and Grinkov won the 1994 Olympic gold medal in Lillehammer with their free skate to this program.

Literature

• A young Albert Einstein is found to be humming the Moonlight Sonata melody as he ponders completing his paper on Specific Relativity in Alan Lightman's novel, Einstein's Dreams.
• The sonata and in particular one "little phrase" figure extensively in the Mapp and Lucia novels by E.F. Benson.
• The sonata is played at one point by the piano player of Cathy's brothel in John Steinbeck's East of Eden.
• In Family Happiness by Leo Tolstoy, Mashechka plays the sonata several times for Sergey Mikhaylych, often evoking intense emotion. Furthermore, Beethoven, who was in his early thirties when he wrote the piece, had dedicated the sonata to a seventeen-year-old girl with whom he was in love; in Tolstoy's story, Sergey Mikhaylych, a man of thirty-six, falls in love with young Mashechka, who, like Beethoven's love, is seventeen.
• Jostein Gaarder, through his character Georg, compares the three movements of the Moonlight Sonata to life in his novel The Orange Girl
• Yannis Ritsos has written a poem called Moonlight Sonata.

Music

• The Beatles song "Because" from the Abbey Road album, was written based upon a reversal of the "Moonlight" Sonata's chord progression; John Lennon had heard Yoko Ono playing the Beethoven piece on piano.
• Brazilian heavy metal band Viper made a version of the "Moonlight" Sonata with lyrics in their 1989 album Theatre of Fate.
• A rendition of the Sonata, performed by Alan Wilder, is included as a B-side on Depeche Mode's single Little 15.
• A variation of this song is also on the first track of Trans-Siberian Orchestra's Beethoven's Last Night album.
• Bass player Stuart Hamm made a version of the "Moonlight" Sonata in his album Radio Free Albemuth using a two-hand tapping technique. He performed his rendition of the Sonata at a live concert with guitarist Joe Satriani in 2001 ("Joe Satriani - Live In San Francisco").
• Alicia Keys begins the first song of her debut album Songs in A Minor with the opening of the "Moonlight" Sonata -- just as Beethoven's melody begins, she blends it into her own song as the "Moonlight" fades out.
• Iranian classical guitar composer Behzad Mirkhani performed a version of the "Moonlight" Sonata by solo nylon guitar in his 2004 album 70 Minutes with Guitar Romances.
• The classical guitarist Francisco Tárrega made an arrangement of the first movement of the "Moonlight Sonata", as well as other works by Beethoven, including the Allegretto from his Symphony No. 7.
• Neneh Cherry use the opening sequence of the Moonlight Sonata as a sampling background for her song "Somedays" on the album "Homebrew" (1992).
• Pianist Bradley Joseph performs his rendition of Moonlight Sonata on his 2006 album Piano Love Songs.
• The unplugged Die Toten Hosen album entitled "Nur Zu Besuch: Unplugged im Wiener Burgtheater" features a toned-down version of the popular German rock song "Hier Kommt Alex," in which an introduction consisting of the first movement of The Moonlight Sonata is added.
• Korean Pop artist Ivy (singer) recently sampled the first movement in her 2007 album's song "Sonata of Temptation."
• Brutal Death Metal/Deathgrind band Cattle Decapitation use several lines of this song as the piano part of the intro to their Humanure album in the song "Scatology Domine". The title track, "Humanure", also uses the same notes, but in a more rapid riff form.
• Ochre incorporated parts of the Moonlight Sonata in a track with the same name on his album "Audiomicrodevice" (2001).
• The sixties' girl-group The Shangri-Las had a minor hit in 1966 with a spoken word piece entitled "Past, Present, and Future," set entirely to the melody of the first movement of the Moonlight Sonata.
• Marcus Miller covered the song in his 2005 album Silver Rain.
• The song is used as a sample in the song 'The River' by Atmosphere (band) on the 'Sad Clowd Bad Dub II' album.
• The Czech black metal band Root used the beginning of the sonata's first movement on the first track of their 1992 album The Temple in the Underworld.
• French RnB singer Vitaa used the melody of the sonata for her popular song A fleur de toi.

Film

• The song is featured in several key scenes from the Japanese live action film Casshern. Most notably, the music is played during a final battle sequence, in which the deaths of soldiers and robots is hauntingly set to the first movement's eerie sound.
• Moonlight Sonata is the name of a 1937 movie starring pianist Paderewski as himself and Charles Farrell. The plot involves plane crash survivors staying in a Countess's house overnight, and the film features Paderewski, the former Prime Minister of Poland, performing at the piano.
• In the film Misery it is used in the famous "hobbling" sequence.
• The musical You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown features a song, Schroeder, that uses the sonata (albeit transposed a whole step lower) as its music; Schroeder plays the first movement as Lucy awkwardly adds her own words.
• In the movie The Pianist Adrien Brody's character hears a German officer play the first movement of the sonata while hiding out in an abandoned building.
• Jamie Foxx plays the first movement of the "Moonlight" Sonata in the 2004 Ray Charles biopic Ray.
• In Guy Ritchie's movie Revolver first movement of the Sonata is used in the bullet-time assassination scene in restaurant.
• In the film Elephant, the first movement of the Sonata is used on many occasions, including a scene where Alex practices piano.
• Gary Oldman, as Beethoven, plays "Moonlight Sonata" on the piano in the movie Immortal Beloved.
• The main musical piece in the Korean hit horror film, Phone, or "Pon", based on a popular South Korean urban legend about a high school student who commits suicide and haunts her school, playing piano when nobody is around. The piece is played multiple times throughout the film, used to symbolise the essence of love, lost. The main character learns to play the 1st movement of the Moonlight Sonata, for her lover.
• In the movie Far & Away, Nicole Kidman's character is playing the Moonlight Sonata for company and suddenly switches to lively ragtime music, much to the disappointment of her mother.
• Parts of the first movement are used throughout the film Being John Malkovich.
• In the film Psycho II Anthony Perkins's character plays the first movement of the piece on his piano.
• In the film The Man Who Wasn't There, part of the first movement is played as Billy Bob Thornton's character is walking down the street.
• In the 2005 film The Quiet which features numerous facts about Beethoven, the song is played by Dot during a scene in the end where moonlight shines through a window and onto the piano.
• Moonshine Sonata can be heard in various scenes of the film Confessions of a dangerous mind
• In the direct-to-video film Cruel Intentions 2 Kathryn Merteuil is practicing the first part of the movement when she is being introduced to her step-brother Sebastian Valmont. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.197.85.173 (talk) 03:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Category:Piano sonatas by Ludwig van Beethoven Category:Classical music in popular culture Category:Ludwig van Beethoven

This song deserves a longer page, it is the ultimate song

It's not a 'song', you cretin. Pfistermeister (talk) 23:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Italics in title?

I have sampled a number of Beethoven and Mozart articles and none of them use italics for the title. This seems inconsistent. Can anyone enlighten me on the correct use? Ndufva (talk) 02:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

3rd paragraph needs editing - but there's no "Edit" link

Trivial: In third paragraph, the parenthetical should read (Italian for Almost a Fantasy). As it stands, with the colon, it seems to be saying the English phrase is Italian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicagoLarry (talk • contribs) 22:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Third Movement Audio File

Has a lot of mistakes. Should be changed Midi file would be better

at least the midi file doesnt make mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.88.176.161 (talk) 04:56, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree. What ever happened to the original third movement that was here a few months ago? I found that version particularly good, but now I've come back it's been replaced by, in my opinion, by a version played by someone with a lot less skill. 91.85.67.245 (talk) 13:21, 23 June 2011 (UTC) J

Requested move: Moonlight Sonata

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: Moved Danger (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC) Danger (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

---

Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven) → Moonlight Sonata – The proposed name is vastly common on Google Books than "Sonata No. 14", as you can see from this ngram. "Moonlight Sonata" gets 9,530 post-1990 hits, compared to 632 for "Sonata No. 14." Beethoven's sonatas currently all have article titles in this format, i.e. No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. IMO, this is a most unfortunate convention since it makes all the names confusingly similar. It would be like using Zip codes instead of city names. After all, the point of names is to allow us to easily distinguish among similar items. Kauffner (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Support. "Moonlight Sonata" is preferred by performers, scholars, and the general public. The article will still inform readers that it was Beethoven's 14th piano sonata, so no information is lost, and article navigation is improved. Dohn joe (talk) 23:05, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose. There is a redirect which is found. No need to give up consistency. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

To my understanding, one oppose, one support is no consensus. The article should be moved back, as the Appassionata, the work deserves better than a nick name in a language its creator would not have used, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I somehow missed that discussion. Fwiw now, I would have supported it, and accordingly I oppose the move back. The nick name, for better or worse, has become the way the work is referenced in all but the most rigidly formal of contexts. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

You mean, announcing the work in a concert, mentioning it in a program, you would use Moonlight Sonata? Learning, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:44, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

It would depend on the formality of the occasion, but that might be one of those rigidly formal contexts. Even then, they'd never leave it as "Piano Sonata No. 14 in C-sharp minor, Op. 27/2". They'd add "Moonlight Sonata" in brackets or quotes, to acknowledge this is the name many people know it by. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Call it rigid, but I personally can't imagine a reputable (German) concert poster or program just saying "Ludwig van Beethoven: Mondscheinsonate". Perhaps this is different, speaking English? I agree that some would add the nick name in brackets in print, but this is an online wiki, the stuff in brackets can be the redirect. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Gerda, as we've discussed in other contexts, the way things are done in the German-speaking world is sometimes different from the way things are done in the English-speaking world. I think this is one of those things. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 11:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I understand, that's why I was ASKING. But now let me understand: may it be different, or is it different? (But this is only for understanding. I would still like all Beethoven piano sonatas treated the same way. - And the "first name" of Mahler's 2nd is not Resurrection, nor Dvořák's 9th "New World", right?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

@JackofOz: Would the same treatment (nickname in parentheses) be given to the Waldstein, Appassionata, Les Adieux or Hammerklavier? If so, these and the Moonlight should either all be moved to their nicknames, or all stay at "Piano Sonata No. X" titles. Double sharp (talk) 13:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

You count the nominator, so the math for the RM is 2-1. Isn't "Piano Sonata" also in a language Beethoven wouldn't understand? The title "Piano Sonata No. 14" is a short form as well. The formal name is absurdly long. Kauffner (talk) 00:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I was not clear, it's not 2:1 what I don't like, it's a participation of just 3 people. I don't see why Moonlight Sonata (which seems not even to translate the German nickname Mondscheinsonate well, sounds more like Mondlicht), which was a working redirect, should take the place of the official name in one case out of 32. I would treat them all the same. If that should be shortened for all 32 is a different discussion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Piano Sonata No. 1 (Beethoven) - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 11:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The lede

currently:

The Piano Sonata No. 14 in C♯ minor "Quasi una fantasia", Op. 27, No. 2, by Ludwig van Beethoven, popularly known as the Moonlight Sonata (Mondscheinsonate in German), was completed in 1801. The sonata was dedicated in 1802 to his pupil, the then 20-year-old Countess Julie Guicciardi, with whom Beethoven was, or had briefly been, in love, and who was also first suspected to have been the composer's Immortal Beloved.

It is one of Beethoven's most popular piano sonatas, as well as one of his most famous compositions for the piano. The name "Moonlight" Sonata was coined in 1832 (five years after Beethoven's death) by the music critic Ludwig Rellstab, who likened the effect of the first movement to that of real moonlight shining upon Lake Lucerne.

Beethoven included the phrase "Quasi una fantasia" (Italian: Almost a fantasy) in the title partly because the sonata does not follow the traditional movement arrangement of fast-slow-[fast]-fast. Instead, the Moonlight sonata possesses an end-weighted trajectory; with the rapid music held off until the third movement. To be sure, the deviation from traditional sonata form is intentional. In his analysis of the Moonlight sonata, German critic Paul Bekker states that “The opening sonata-allegro movement gave the work a definite character from the beginning... which succeeding movements could supplement but not change. Beethoven rebelled against this determinative quality in the first movement. He wanted a prelude, an introduction, not a proposition.”

I propose, reducing details and writing for the general public (details and the references should go to the body, the links from the tempo markings should be improved):

The Piano Sonata No. 14 in C-sharp minor, Sonata quasi una fantasia", Op. 27, No. 2, by Ludwig van Beethoven, popularly known as the Moonlight Sonata (Mondscheinsonate in German), was completed in 1801. The sonata was dedicated in 1802 to his pupil Giulietta Guicciardi.

Beethoven included the phrase "quasi una fantasia" (Italian: "like a fantasy") in the title because the sonata does not follow the traditional movement arrangement of fast-slow-[fast]-fast. Instead, the three movements build in tempo from a slow and extremely soft Adagio sostenuto to Allegretto and finally Presto.

The sonata is one of the most popular piano sonatas, as well as one of Beethoven's most famous compositions for the piano. The name Mondscheinsonate (Moonlight Sonata) was coined in 1832, five years after Beethoven's death, by the music critic Ludwig Rellstab, who likened the effect of the first movement to that of real moonlight shining upon Lake Lucerne. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 03 January 2012 (UTC)

I second that. MistyMorn (talk) 13:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I "third" it - Gerda's version is by far the best. Milkunderwood (talk) 10:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

See my Comment in the preceding section. As soon as the article lede was brought up by MistyMorn, Kauffner went in and rewrote the lede, giving the exact opposite from what is being proposed here. See article History for his version, now reverted. (I've respelled "lead" to "lede".) Milkunderwood (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I noticed both, your comment and the attempt to ignore the move discussion. Guess why I cemented the "current" status. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Unless my brain was entirely boggled last night, I'm sure that I noticed somewhere that Beethoven himself had intended the first movement to be "mournful" - but today I'm not finding that reference at all. Does it ring a bell with anyone? Also, I've argued in the preceding section that in popular culture it's only the first movement at most that is "popular" and well-known among the general public, with only the opening bars introducing the theme that have become a cliched musical meme. Milkunderwood (talk) 15:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, there's this from Oxford, but a different phrasing: a misleading approach to a movement with almost the character of a funeral march. (I forgot to sign this, some 12 or so hours ago. Milkunderwood (talk) 10:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC))

There's this quote from Czerny from Beethoven, the Moonlight and other sonatas, op. 27 and op. 31 (notice the title of that book, btw): he called the opening "a nocturnal scene, in which a mournful ghostly voice sounds from the distance". Was that what you were thinking of? Dohn joe (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but no, I saw it here at WP. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, I give up. Dohn joe has been rewriting the article lede, and somehow I'm not being able to "undo" all of his changes. Someone else, please? Milkunderwood (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand you're suspicious of me, but what in the world was wrong with this edit? By the way - did you see my quote from Czerny directly above re: mournfulness?Never mind - I see you did. I'm trying to help out the article here. Dohn joe (talk) 21:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Somehow I don't think changing the lede in the middle of this unresolved discussion is being "helpful". Milkunderwood (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Would you rather that no one improve the article in the meantime? Say, if I wanted to add that Czerny quote, you'd revert it? Dohn joe (talk) 22:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely. Please put it back the way it had been, and then leave the article alone until something is resolved here. Please. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Really. What does the title of the article have to do with improving the content of the article? Anyone else think that's a little harsh? Dohn joe (talk) 22:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Why the state of emergency? On responding to the request to participate in the great moonshine title debate, I noticed that the lede could do with some tlc, and acted accordingly. Apparently, I'm not the only one. Just a couple of gf edits, MistyMorn (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Emergency? I suggested a simplified lede/lead above and suggest we improve it here, rather than going into edit wars in the article, which should be improved, I think we agree about that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree that simplification/shortening is good. In particular, I think the entire third paragraph "Beethoven included the phrase "Quasi una fantasia"..." could be moved as part of a new section on "History" or "Composition" or something of the like. I'd also like to see a section on "Critical reception" or "Legacy" where things like the Lizst and Czerny quotes could be consolidated - especially the non-movement related quotes. Thoughts? Dohn joe (talk) 22:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I feel such considerations are pertinent. Perhaps more so than the title debate, though I know others would disagree. And my moonlit mattress calls... MistyMorn (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Facts and myths

Facts

The Henle edition from which I play says:

SONATE

SONATA QUASI UNA FANTASIA

Der Gräfin Giulietta Guicciardi gewidmet

Komponiert 1801

Adagio sostenuto ... Opus 27 Nr. 2

14.

End of facts. no C-sharp minor (that is deduced from the markings), the name of the lady as Beethoven wrote it (not a family name)

Myths

The article tells us (told us, that was improved since, thank you!): "The name "Moonlight" Sonata was coined in 1832 (five years after Beethoven's death) by the music critic Ludwig Rellstab, who likened the effect of the first movement to that of real moonlight shining upon Lake Lucerne." That is wrong, the source just says: "Writing in 1832 he likened the sonata to the wild scenery bordering Lake Lucerne, seen from a boat by moonlight." I wonder when the term "Mondscheinsonate" was actually "coined" in print and when it was translated to English, both much later than when the piece was written.

The same source also informs: "The Moonlight Sonata is more properly described by its title Sonata quasi una fantasia, Opus 27 No.1, in the key of C Sharp Minor."

My conclusion

A good common name for the facts is Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven), a good name for the myths is Moonlight Sonata, and perhaps we should really have two articles. As long as we have only one I vote for the facts. If policy is against that, I question the policy, it's not holy scriptures, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

All I can tell you is that "Moonlight" was in print within ten years of Rellstab's initial 1832 comment. See this 1837 book in German, and this 1841 book in English as the earliest examples I could find. Dohn joe (talk) 22:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, good to know, it supports what I wrote above about a Romantic bias of a Classical period piece. Very personal remark: I don't think an imagery of nothing but nature does justice to the music, I feel it's about emotions, one more reason to keep the title factual, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Not to mention this quote from the Oxford Dictionary: "[Rellstab] wrote that the first movement reminded him of moonlight on Lake Lucerne--a misleading approach to a movement with almost the character of a funeral march." And I know I've somewhere else seen the movement described as "mournful", where "moonlight on Lake Lucerne" sounds "peaceful" instead. This next observation may be POV, but it seems clear to me that any such description prejudices the listener to hear this movement from a certain emotional standpoint, instead of hearing it as pure non-programmatic music, and experiencing an unguided emotional response. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you both - but it's not really the issue. The name "Moonlight" has been called misleading, inapt, absurd, and worse - by critics, musicians, and others. It has also been called apt, evocative, and otherwise approved of - by critics, musicians, and others. But the point is not whether "Moonlight" is a good, accurate, or "authentic" name. That debate can (and should) be explained in the article itself. The point of the Oxford cite is that, even when a publication denigrates the name, it uses it, because that's how people know the piece. Our job at WP is not to rewrite history, but to reflect it - with all its flaws. People refer to this work as the "Moonlight Sonata", whether it's a good thing or not. So should we. Does that make any sense? Dohn joe (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it makes perfect sense to me, as far as the article itself goes. Gerda was speaking in the context of "Facts and myths", and that was the intent of my post, simply to give some added weight to her separate argument. But I'm afraid I still disagree with your thinking that the article should be titled "Moonlight Sonata", or that this should be emphasized in the lede in a way that seems to justify that misleading potentially prejudicial title. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Die Beterin

Have a look at this edit of mine, which connects Beethoven to the writer Johann Gottfried Seume, via a supposed association between the Moonlight and Seume's poem Die Beterin. I must say I had never heard of Seume or his poem before now, but I checked out the Moonlight Sonata entry in the 1954 Grove's Dictionary on my shelves, and there the association was debunked, although it was described as "a picture", not a poem. So, since we're talking about exploding myths ... -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Very interesting and helpful. I don't much care for that "picture", though, in place of poem. Grove is authoritative but not necessarily error-free. I'm working with another editor on Hovhaness, and NG has some howlers. Milkunderwood (talk) 10:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Indubitably. Any collaborative undertaking of sufficient size will inevitably contain material that cannot possibly survive scrutiny, but there it is anyway. If you think that Wikipedia is free of howlers, think again. We do what we can, but other editors do their worst too (and I mean their worst). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Will the real dedicatee please show a leg?

Two atrocious doubts:

• Was the noble young lady's given name Giulietta or Julie? At the moment, we've gone for Giulietta. Given that she hailed from Trieste, both names would appear superficially plausible.
• Despite her tenuous claim to immortality, she doesn't yet seem to have inspired a dedicated article on en.wp. Could the German page (linked above) perhaps make suitable material for an English revamp? MistyMorn (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

  As to doubt one: sources seem to prefer Giulietta. A Google Books search shows about 300 for "Julie", about 720 for "Julia", and about 9,900 for "Giulietta". That seems pretty good evidence for staying with Giulietta, no? Dohn joe (talk) 00:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Julie Countess Guicciardi was named (after her birth in 1782, which is also two - significant - years earlier than usually reported) "Julie", more importantly, she was also almost always called (in letters and other references) "Julie". The italianised version "Giulietta" was occasionally used as a nickname (perhaps also more in Italy than in Austria); she moved south after her marriage to Count Gallenberg, among others because she was obviously not interested in Beethoven (who incidentally was also called "Luigi" or "Louis" on occasion - esp. by the Brunsviks). The latter dedicated the [in?]famous so-called (not by him!!!) "Moonlight" Sonata to her as a revenge for an unwanted gift by her mother (as documented in a letter), on which he wrote her name as "Giulietta" (perhaps, even mockingly?).

All these details (and more) can be found in Steblin (2009) (a work based exclusively on documents, e.g., birth and marriage certificates, or other archival research - as opposed to armchair speculation; see also Beethoven's Only Beloved: Josephine!, [2]). The fact that overwhelmingly a falsehood is to be found in various "sources" (?) only documents how rumors, myths, legends, anecdotes (and forgeries - see Schindler) rule the "Web" world. Or can anyone correct these 9,900 wrong references???

And "Giulietta" being the "Immortal Beloved" has long since been discredited: It was the first conjecture, brought up by Schindler, after talking to Franz von Brunsvik who was keen to distract any suspicion from his sister Josephine (for good reason). Schindler has later been exposed as a fraud (as already suspected by Thayer). John E Klapproth (talk) 01:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I've reinstated "Julie" in the lede. MistyMorn (talk) 01:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I added back "Giulietta" in quotes. Whether it was her "real" name or not, thousands of sources use it, so it should at least appear alongside "Julie". If someone wants to explain it further, that's fine (although better suited to an article of her own)... Dohn joe (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

John, can you please give a cite for Steblin 2009? I'm not finding it yet, in either English or German. (I notice you yourself are the author of Beethoven's Only Beloved: Josephine!, which got excellent reviews.) Thanks for your help. Milkunderwood (talk) 01:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we can add that Beethoven referred to her as "Giulietta" in his dedication. Would that resolve the issue raised above by Dohn joe? But perhaps too much detail for an already overburdened lede. Perhaps better in the main article, IMO, once the lede can be trimmed to an appropriate size/style. MistyMorn (talk) 01:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I come here late, but support that. In an article about her she should be called Julie, as the German article does, but it should be clarified that Beethoven dedicated the sonata to Giulietta. I would just mention that name only in the lead and perhaps add an explanation in the article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Gerda. I would have left a note on your Talk page if you hadn't arrived of your own accord. I see the German article has now been 'corrected' by John E Klapproth (talk). I feel Julie deserves an analogous article of her own on en.wp. If no-one else wants to start it, I might be tempted to take the de.wp article as a starting template, so to speak. However, my knowledge of German is largely dependent on Google Translate and an unruly bunch of synapses. Regards, MistyMorn (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

That she should have an article of her own was suggested already, smile, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

That's good to know. MistyMorn (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I certainly welcome the expert input we have received from John E Klapproth, but I do feel that he is not entirely disinterested, as a glance at his userpage will show. I'm also hoping he will respond to my request for a cite to Steblin 2009. Milkunderwood (talk) 18:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The key primary source must surely be the birth certificate. If the 2009 article by Steblin indeed reproduces or cites it as John says (and I can see absolutely no reason to doubt his gf on this), I think Steblin's article can reasonably be taken as a suitably authoritative secondary source, as currently referenced. MistyMorn (talk) 20:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I agree - I have no reason whatever to doubt John's scholarship, and had not intended to give that impression. I merely pointed out that his is not an entirely disinterested contribution. In any case, a cite to Steblin as a source would be helpful, and possibly of interest to us all. Who knows what else Steblin may have to say on the matter? Milkunderwood (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Hope I've understood correctly what your saying: I don't see the problem. The article is cited here. It isn't easily accessible, but there's no reason I can see, in the circumstances, to doubt the reliability of the source. Of course, it would be nice to have something more readily accessible in English. Perhaps John's own book, as he suggests above. All that's needed, IMO, is a reliable secondary source citing the birth certificate. Presumably, no great conflict of interest issue there, I would have thought. MistyMorn (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks very much - that entirely clears it up for me. I hadn't thought to search "Steblin" in the article's footnotes. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Of course, it's also true that not everyone chooses to go through life using the name on the birth certificate (Bill Clinton, for instance). But it would appear that "Giulietta" really was a nickname, rather than the other way round, as previously stated on de.wp. OK, I have no way at present of examining the sources/documentation, but I can't see any reason to doubt them either. If they contained information that could help determine the most effective treatment for a life-threatening disease, there would certainly be more cause for concern. MistyMorn (talk) 21:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Giulietta in English

I added Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Giulietta Guicciardi as a new article, still to be vetted. John E Klapproth (talk) 02:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, great start! I think we could almost drop the section on her in the sonata article, because her article is more precise, more opinions please, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this raises the wider question of how to structure the sonata article to incorporate material not yet discussed outside the lede. (Perhaps this needs a new Talk section.) MistyMorn (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd go ahead and drop the section from this article. Putting the dedicatee in the lede is pretty standard for classical music articles. Unless there is a longer story about how/why/when the sonata was written and why it was dedicated to her then there's no need have an entire section just for repeating "Beethoven dedicated the sonata in 1802 to his pupil..". Details about how she was considered (or is still considered) to be a candidate for the Immortal Beloved are best left for her article. My two cents.DavidRF (talk) 22:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thumbs up (ie down) from me. MistyMorn (talk) 23:20, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Liszt quote ref

Misty Morn added this ref from Amazon.co.uk for the Liszt quote re: "flower between two chasms". I replaced it with this Google Books cite, because, for me at least, the relevant pages in the Amazon cite were blocked. Could someone else try out the link to see if it works for them? If not, could we replace the link with the Google Books link? I realize that snippets are less preferable, but if navigation is an issue at the Amazon link, a snippet is better than nothing.... Dohn joe (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Searching "flower between two chasms" takes me to the edge. If that doesn't work for others, let's go for the snippet—no big deal. I just thought the context was nice. MistyMorn (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Sonata quasi una fantasia — ambiguous redirect?

I see "Sonata quasi una fantasia" redirects here. But how about its fellow sonata quasi una fantasia? MistyMorn (talk) 10:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

In this case I really see No. 2 as THE ONE, not many references to No. 1 under that name I would think. I use the redirect at present for instances before 1837 when Moonlight was not yet concieved, and I am willing to change the redirect to a proper direct once the issue is resolved, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

With respect, the redirect to me seems highly ambiguous (and, imo, unnecessary). To my knowledge, the only 'nickname' No. 1 has is Quasi una fantasia. Why eclipse it? MistyMorn (talk) 10:53, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

To my knowledge, Beethoven wrote "Sonata quasi una fantasia". Did he? - The redirect is indeed unnecessary if we have a good direct link. "Moonlight Sonata" is not, as it doesn't cover the time in history from composition until coining of that term, for example: not the dedication, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The point I was trying to make is that he used exactly the same phrase for both the Op.27 sonatas. So, IMO, a correct Beethoven redirect for "quasi una fantasia" would be Piano Sonatas Nos. 13 – 14, Opus 27. Whereas redirecting to the so-called "Moonlight" just further obscures (that's what I meant by "eclipse") the considerably less famous but comparably deserving Op.27 no.2. MistyMorn (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I am aware of the fact that Beethoven wrote the same words on top of both sonatas of Op.27, but think the less famous one will not need a redirect of that sort. Until recently there was only one Marktkirche with an article, although several exist. There is only one Piccolo Quintet with an article. But see below. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I seem to have a problem, because to my knowledge Op. 27 No. 2 is the famous one (#14), Op. 27 No 1 the less famous one (#13). The less famous one will never need a redirect like that. But if it seems a problem I will stop using it and stick to the common name Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but I can't see why no.1 will never need the redirect. Also, it concerns me that the redirect could give the impression that no.2 is the definitive quasi una fantasia. Which it isn't, imo. Best, MistyMorn (talk) 00:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Many composers have applied the term "quasi una fantasia" to some of their works, including Beethoven for two of his piano sonatas. I'm not aware that this sobriquet is ever used seriously on its own to refer to LvB's Piano Sonata No. 14. That's why I think this is indeed an ambiguous and somewhat misleading redirect. A better target would be, as MistyMorn pointed out, Piano Sonatas Nos. 13 – 14, Opus 27. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Michael and MistyMorn here, but I'd go even farther. If you look at the first editions of the scores for both Sonatas 13 and 14, both clearly say "Sonata quasi una fantasia". But really this is just a description of the genre, not a serious title. Are either of those sonatas ever listed in concert programs or recordings by that title alone? I seriously doubt it. Note also that Górecki and Sibelius amongst others, have composed works titled or subtitled as "Quasi una fantasia" and it's also the title of an influential (and oft-cited) book on modern music by Theodor Adorno. I don't think it should be used as a redirect to either of the Beethoven sonatas, nor to Piano Sonatas Nos. 13 – 14, Opus 27. If anything, make Quasi una fantasia a dismbiguation page and leave it at that. Voceditenore (talk) 11:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I even thought of the possibility of proposing a short article titled "Quasi una fantasia". But I really wouldn't know whether it should expand / take the place of the Piano Sonatas Nos. 13 – 14, Opus 27 disambiguation page, or also take in subsequent use of the soubriquet by others. IMO, the Beethoven aspect, at least, might deserve such treatment. However, the usage is already succinctly addressed in the two individual sonata articles. I think there could be a case for it. MistyMorn (talk) 12:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

There's an interesting chapter devoted to the topic, "Quasi una fantasia?" in Timothy Jones (1999). Beethoven, the Moonlight and other sonatas, op. 27 and op. 31. Cambridge University Press, pp. 55-65

Yes, good material. I feel the article has potential. And the title intrigues... MistyMorn (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The redirect is an orphan now, can be used as proposed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I think the redirect page is a keeper even if it's currently orphaned.If we do develop an article titled "Quasi una fantasia", maybe the redirect page could be retitled "Sonata quasi una fantasia" and expanded slightly. Just a thought, MistyMorn (talk) 15:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Useless redirect: Adiago sostenuto

Do we need this redirect: Adiago sostenuto? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope! MistyMorn (talk) 00:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Maybe that came via someone who didn't know how to pipe (|)? MistyMorn (talk) 00:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

'tis gone with a touchpad tap. Antandrus (talk) 01:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

And you sure do tip-tap! MistyMorn (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Name section

I added a new section about the name. Feel free to add/subtract as you see fit. Dohn joe (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I placed the "fantasia" part there as well, and I wonder if a really uninitiated reader shouldn't get the Form section first, then Name, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda - I tweaked your language a bit, but nice addition. As far as placement of the sections, it seems to me fairly typical across WP that when there's an issue with naming or etymology, it goes first, but I'd be fine with it either way. Dohn joe (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Instead of a ref for the typical movements of a classical sonata I tried a link. - As for the arrangement, I think some remarks in the name section would make more sense to someone who read about the form already. The same is true for lines such as "possesses an end-weighted trajectory, with the rapid music held off until the third movement", before a word is said about the music. Actually I don't know what it's supposed to mean even afterwards, "possesses an end-weighted trajectory"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I tried to have the discussion (if the name is appropriate or not) AFTER the section about the music itself. Imagine readers who are not familiar with the piece. What should they understand, before they are even told that there is a slow movement in the beginning? - Yes, musical reception is missing, but I still think the reception/criticism of the name should not precede the facts about the music, because a certain understanding of the facts helps to understand reception/criticism, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I could not agree more. Facts must precede reception and criticism. Otherwise the framing of the article is prejudicial. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I would point to other articles, such as Symphony No. 5 (Beethoven) or Symphony No. 8 (Schubert), where the story of composition and/or reception precedes the exposition of the form. This seems to be standard across WP, or certainly at least a valid option. I don't see any prejudice in adopting that format. Dohn joe (talk) 19:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I think if the standard is "first write about reactions to something, then say what it is" that standard should be questioned. In this particular case it's worse, the "name" (moonlight?) was coined decades after the "thing" (sonata). To discuss pro and cons to "moonlight" before even clarifying the "sonata" seems wrong to me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

History

By now we have a slim and factual intro in chronological order. There were at least the years between 1801 and 1837 when no "Moonlight Sonata" existed. All facts during that time are wrong if "Moonlight Sonata" is used. One more reason to move it back, imo. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for making that point so clearly, Gerda. In the meantime I have put Kennedy's comment in context with the expanded quotation instead of simply saying "misleading". I know I have seen the first movement described as "mournful", but haven't been able to locate it since. In any event, both the Rellstab (if that's who it actually was) impression, and the contrary impressions, refer only to the opening bars, or at most to the first movement alone. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm also anxious to find something suitable to counterbalance the view of Compton MacKenzie—never one to decline a strong POV.