Template talk:Impressionist music

This template is misinformative and ought to be removed

Who designed this template? More importantly, how did they come to the very arbitrary choices of composers and works represented in it? That Debussy is there, although he himself rejected the term "Impressionist" in reference to his music, makes enough sense. But why Ravel? Or Erik Satie, of all people? He was an influence on both of the aforementioned composers, but his clear-cut, absurdist, and sometimes austere music shares little with musical Impressionism as we know it. Let's not forget that Satie had a bad falling out with both Debussy and Ravel; that his musical ideals ran counter to theirs. Why not include Gabriel Pierné? Or Roger-Ducasse? Or Federico Mompou?

Then there's the selection of representative works. How is Boléro of all things "Impressionist"? Or La valse? Or especially Satie's Parade (ballet)? Why only Clair de lune, but not the entire Suite bergamasque? What about the Préludes (Debussy)?

Really, this ought to be removed, or significantly altered. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 03:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Some of the mistakes you pointed out, admittedly, were placed there by me about two years ago (a first year music student at the time) in an attempt to beef up what I perceived as a desperately lacking template. While I still feel the template serves a purpose, the mistakes certainly need to be corrected by someone with a more robust knowledge of the genre and its characteristics (though I have to disagree with you on Ravel; if Daphnis or Jeux d'eau aren't enough to warrant his inclusion, then I've been reading the wrong musicologists). Regardless, to delete the template entirely seems a waste.

But hell, you seem to know the genre fairly well; why not fix the template yourself? It's puzzling that you instead went on a rant that required more typed characters than the very changes you recommended. Either way, I'll try to make some of the corrections you noted myself. But if you find the time, please make that knowledge into some productivity. Jg2904 (talk) 11:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Other names

Is there any room for including names like Szymanowski, Koechlin, Sorabji and a couple others in this template? Not sure how compositional prominence factors into this, but if John Ireland made the cut, then at least Szymanowski belongs on the list. Toccata quarta (talk) 16:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

There's Category:Impressionist composers; maybe the "People" (shouldn't that be "Composers"?) section could be replaced altogether with that. I notice that the three you mention are not shown in that category. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Noted. I've added the cat to the Szymanowski article, which itself mentions the label. I'm not sure how high the threshold for inclusion should be: described as such by reliable sources (that would be logical), wrote some (notable) pieces in an impressionist style, or wrote in an impressionist style for at least one period of his/her creative career. Toccata quarta (talk) 09:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)