Talk:Un flambeau, Jeannette, Isabelle (Nicolas Saboly)

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


  • Posted by: Vaarky 23:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I support merging under a score page name that lists the composer as anonymous. Just because I arrange Silent Night does not make me it's composer (I wish!). Silent Night (by my name) implies a different song rather than yet another arrangement of a traditional Xmas carol. The score page can then list the individual arranger in the edition notes so searches can still find it.

This brings up a broader question--should it also be merged with the score page for [Bring_a_Torch,_Jeanette_Isabella_(Traditional) the English version] of the score? I think yes. The score page should be based on the original language if known, with redirects for the title in the other pages, and indications on the score page about what language the setting is in.

What do others think?

I disagree, but only in principle ;-) 'Nun Danket (JSB)' doesnt imply that Bach did without Crüger's tune.

To take op the broader question, though, it's clear these settings belong together. Folk songs seem to go under (Traditional) rather than (Anonymous) (why is that capitalized, anyway?), so I'd vote for Un flambeau, Jeannette, Isabelle (Traditional) (New Oxford BoC insists on an exclamation point, but I dont). Another way to go would be a common textpage.

There are a lot of spellings and punctuations: Un flambeau, Jeannette, Isabelle (J. Ashley Hall), Bring a torch, Jeanette, Isabella (J. Ashley Hall), Un flambeau, Jeanette, Isabelle! (David Cameron) & possibly Latvian versions if I knew how to search for them. Richard Mix 21:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Gabriel’s message (J. Ashley Hall) is a similar case, and I guess there are others. Can we take it as a general principle (except where the arranger is of the magnitude of JSB) that the bracketed name should be that of the composer (including 'Traditional' or 'Anonymous' as composers) rather than of the arranger? Cydonia 22:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 03:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


This is a thorny issue in many instances. In the present case, my impression is that the "Un flambeau" tune is traditional Provençal, and the setting of the tune by Saboly has itself become a standard (if not traditional) carol harmonization. The other settings at CPDL seem to me to be more like settings of the tune (you can call them arrangements if you wish), but with the tune itself being traditional (and presumably anonymous), I don't see a big problem with arrangements being published under the arranger's name "Title (Arranger)".

It becomes more difficult to assess the situation if the source music for an arrangement is from a known composer. If there is substantial recomposition and/or harmonization variance from the original, then again it seems to me that the work can be published in the form "Title (Arranger)" and the source of the tune acknowledged – for the Arranger is, in fact, really functioning as a Composer who utilizes another work. On the other hand, if there is little variance from the original (for instance providing a hymn descant to an existing hymn setting), then the work should probably be published in the form "Title (Composer)" with the Arranger credited in the edition notes. And I suppose there might be instances when knowing or deciding what to do is not so clear.

I was contacted by Andris Solims on a very related topic; could you all please check it on my talk page? Thanks! —Carlos Email.gif 16:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately or not, the Merge templates for the J. Ashley Hall editions point here. The two editions differ only in the text underlay: one is in English, the other is in French. They should be merged under the French title (original language) following Vaarky's suggestions above.

Sorry, Chuck: that is indeed a separate question, and it's unfortunate I only correctly linked from Bring a torch, Jeanette, Isabella (J. Ashley Hall). Richard Mix 23:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

(outdenting) Stille Nacht (Franz Xaver Gruber) is a reminder that the problem isnt confined to unknown composers (that page would benefit from separating 'editions'-of I think 3 Gruber versions- from rearrangements in a separate section). There is some precedent in the ubiquitous "Bach-Gounod" attribution, but (again) I dont think Nun danket BWV 192 (Crüger-Bach) is any solution. I agree that common sense has to trump one-size-fits-all 'correctness', and see no problem with Title (Arranger): as in oratorio subpages, what's important to me is that various versions are well-linked. Richard Mix 23:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)