Talk:Jean-Baptiste Lully

Untitled

I just changed the info about the pitch of the French Baroque being 'exceptional'. It wasn't. Rome and England and some other places had very low pitch and Quantz talks about liking playing down there in 18th C Germany.

Also, re: the opera manager controversy; The point should be that Lully eventually took control of the productions in a way that has no parallel. Any head of music in a European court would probably be involved in negotiations for the hire of singers but Lully was definitely a control freak.

Differences with french version

There's a subtle difference regarding Lully's death between this and the french version. I'm of course not able to tell which version is right or not, but the french one do have a reference: "↑ The New Grove French Baroque Masters (1986) W. W. Norton & Company, page 16."

On the french page, it's stated that "despite of the amputation, the gangrene took over and reached his brain", whereas here it's said he refused to be amputated (leading to think it was somehow his fault if he died...)

Another detail: it's precised it was a "rehearsal for a Te Deum he was supposed to play" (it's not clear wether he actually played it or not in the end)

And yet another precision: "N'arrivant pas à obtenir ce qu'il voulait des musiciens, Lully, d'un tempérament explosif, s'emporta et se frappa violemment un orteil avec..." -> here's a rough translation attempt: "As he couldn't get what he expected out of his musicians/performers, Lully who had an explosive temperament got on his nerves/got irritated and struck his toe violently with..." (a baton) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.169.40.187 (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Lully as an 'opera manager'

Surely listing an 18th century court composer as an 'opera manager' - in the company of Bing, Volpe and Co. - is anachronistic? Can we remove the category? What do other people think?--Kleinzach 01:03, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

In the spirit of avoiding anachronisms, let's refer to Lully as a '17th century court composer'--MadameDeMerteuil (talk) 12:10, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I have now removed the category.--Kleinzach 00:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I have replaced the category. Lully purchased the monopoly of opera from the King and had to manage it - he was every bit as much a manager as Bing and the rest.--Smerus 14:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not an expert on Lully but I have read the article by Rosow in the New Grove Dictionary of Opera and as far as I can tell Lully never managed any operas other than those by Lully, Am I wrong? - Kleinzach 20:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have Rosow's article in front of me, but I do have James Anthony's article in Stanley Sadie's edition of Grove.The royal privilege of 1672 gave Lully ('and his heirs') a perpetual monopoly of opera via the Academie Royale de Musique. The artciel goes on to describe in great detail how Lully not only wrote music but negotiated with singers, librettists, architects, stage-designers, musicians etc. over subsequent years. In fact, undertaking all the activities that an opera manager does. Increasingly indeed he left the job of filling in the harmonies and different parts of the music to his pupils. It may well be that most, or even all, of the operas were written (fully or nominally) by him; but as he worked like an opera manager, looked like an opera manager, acted like an opera manager and bore financial liaiblity like an opera manager, I think it has to be conceded that he was indeed an opera manager.--Smerus 21:22, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. So I suppose I am right then - he only ever managed his own operas - but if we regard every composer who negotiated with librettists, singers and stage designers as an opera manager, just how many of them would qualify as opera managers? Half of them? Three-quarters?

I have the strong impression that Lully considered himself a musician. So what is the point of awarding him this anachronistic title of opera manager? I believe he also studied the guitar, taught Italian and knew something about ballet. Are you going to list him as a guitarist, an Italian teacher and a choreographer? - Kleinzach 22:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

if we regard every composer who negotiated with librettists, singers and stage designers as an opera manager........ but I don't, and nor would anyone else I think. If Lully spent a substantial part of his life teaching Italian, etc, and you can demonstrate this, then by all means list him accordingly. What I think is demonstrable is that Lully had full responsibility (including financial responsibility) for managing an opera company, and that he was therefore an opera manager. The only other composer I can think of who qualifies in this way was Richard Wagner (who also managed his own operas). The actual managing was probably the second-most time occupying activity of Lully's life (probably even more than his pederasty, which seems to me certainly an irrelevant category, but is up there anyway), and eventually seems indeed to have taken up more time than composition. He was an composer and an opera manager just as much as Howard Hughes was an aviator and a film producer. The fact that he managed his own compositions is neither here nor there.--Smerus 06:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The fact that he managed his own compositions is neither here nor there. Hmm. Actually it is the point. Bing was not at the Met with an American monopoly to produce his own works, while being bankrolled by an American President providing free scenery.

The popular idea of a composer may well that be of a starving artist in a garret who sends off a manuscript to a publisher who then arranges for an opera house to produce the work. It has almost never worked like that. Opera composers have been intimately and directly involved in the work of opera companies. Look at Mozart, look at Verdi, look at Wagner, look at Richard Strauss, look at Ben Britten. Of necessity, they all had an intimate involvement in the workings of opera companies.

Category proliferation is a Wikipedia vice. Using multiple categories as a means of promoting your favourite composer leads to confusion and misunderstanding. Common sense should rule here. Lully is important as a composer, not as an Italian who changed his name, or as a pederast, or as a businessman. Kleinzach 08:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding opera management, I find Smerus' argument persuasive. As for pederasty, first we should consider the needs of a reader researching the topic - he needs to have the various historical instances of pederasty (all too few in light of their probable frequency) brought together in a single category, or group of categories. Secondly, for a man's pederasty to have come to light in those days signifies that it had reached such dimensions that it could not be hidden. To use a modern example, it is like modern Americans cheating on their taxes. Most who can probably do a little. Some do a lot and get caught. Haiduc 10:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Haiduc, we have been here, or hereabouts, before. I was careful to say that pederasty seems to me an irrelevant category; I appreciate that this is a POV and I don't suggest or support taking any action arising from it. Thanks for your comments on Lully's management. --Smerus 15:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The person who may have edited this article did not understand the exact definitions of 'opera manager', and because he (Lully) wrote the music, and arranged for the choreography and costumes; and the numerous amount of his operas, could be classified as an opera manager. Also, due to his monopoly over the french opera, he would be one of the few people in France to decide how the opera came out. Another argument would be that he conducted the operas in his early years. I have no citation, but logic can be used to deduce that this is likely due to the fact he worked directly with his ballets.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8:b6c0:31c:8d96:e5b0:3b25:c943 (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme audio files

I think the audio files at the bottom of the page have been given the wrong names. I don't know Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme so I won't edit the names in case I get it wrong, but I know for sure that a Bouree is not in 3-time and I think that one is called "Canarie" when the next file is called "Gaillarde Canarie". Are they in the wrong order, or is it just me? --Ehm1883 (talk) 23:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is B-class; I found the musicology section to be disappointing. My full review is on the comments page; questions or comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 16:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

clemence.troussard@hotmail.fr

c trop con ce que vous marquer sur lui et puis ici cest la france svp respecter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.222.15.74 (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Translation (spelling and grammar are my rendering of the original): its too dumb what you writing on him and also its france here pls respect

Asked them to clarify what they think is wrong with the entry on their user talk page

The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 18:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

LGBT/Bisexual categories?

I can't see anything in the article content that would explain its inclusion in those categories, except one (unsourced as far as I can tell) passing mention of "Lully's dissolute life and homosexual encounters". I added a source request, but if that statement is removed, the categories should be removed as well unless there's another reason to keep them. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Source provided, you can disregard the above. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Listening Examples

Hi I was listening to some of the listening examples and I suspect that some of the tracks maybe listed in the wrong order. The Canaries for example sounds suspiciously like a Gavotte. Maybe someone could check these out? - Random Wikiuser — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.62.177.58 (talk) 03:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Bisexual Answers

I do have a source of the Bisexual Encounter. In the movie Le Roi Danse, one of the scenes was in a brothell, which lead to Lully's expirience of a murdered valet laying on him. In the backround outside, a cardinal (or a spy) witnessed the event, and telling the king Louis XIV of the evidence (Suggesting the displeasure and not appearing at the first performance of Armide). I don't know where the producer got his results, but it is the best I can think of.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8:b6c0:31c:8d96:e5b0:3b25:c943 (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

King's Revolt

Was the king really revolted by Lully's homosexual encounters themselves, since he (the king) was tolerant to the fact that his own brother was known homosexual? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.17.28.124 (talk) 17:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

In 1646, dressed as Harlequin during Mardi Gras...

"In 1646, dressed as Harlequin during Mardi Gras and amusing bystanders with his clowning and his violin, the boy attracted the attention of Roger de Lorraine, chevalier de Guise..." According to Philippe Beaussant (Lully ou le Musicien du soleil, Gallimard, [Paris] 1992) the stay of Roger de Lorraine in Florence fell in the Lent. So he could not see Lully "clowning". ----130.83.197.103 (talk) 08:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

As mardi gras is the day before lent, I suggest that the description is entirely probable. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Roger de Lorraine spent three days in Florence and left on the 2nd March 1646. In this year Easter fell on 24th March. So Shrove Tuesday was on 5th February and he arrived more than three weeks after it – in the midst of the period of Lent. De Lorraine did have relations to Florence and most probably Lully was recommended to him and not met by chance. "...dressed as Harlequin during Mardi Gras and amusing bystanders with his clowning..." seems to be one of the legends which surround Lully in a great number. ----130.83.197.103 (talk) 07:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I bow to your superior marshalling of the facts. If it is indeed a wide-spread legend, any rewriting of that section should take account of that, properly sourced either way, of course. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately it looks like there are more flaws in the article: "... nicknames ′Baptiste′, and ′le grand baladin′ (great street-artist)..." I'm not sure whether it can be translated this way, what la duchesse de Montpensier wrote about him: "C'est und grand balladin..." I suppose there is meant a dancer at the court. ----130.83.197.103 (talk) 13:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

In Le Robert (1966) you may find about BALADIN, INE:

1° Anciennt. (jusqu'au XVIIe s.) Danseur des ballets.

2° Bouffon de comédie,[...], histrion, [...]

In Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme you will find this in act V, scene 1:

"Monsieur Jourdain: Mamamouchi, c’est à dire en nostre Langue, Paladin.

Madame Jourdain: Baladin! Estes vous en âge de danser des Ballets?"

Perhaps the "street-artist" is a wrong translation. ----130.83.197.103 (talk) 13:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Category: Conductors (music) who died while conducting

He did not die while conducting. He died as a result of an accident that happened while conducting. A bit different, I think. Double sharp (talk) 05:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

The head text for the category says: "This category is for musical conductors who died while conducting. As with Category:Musicians who died on stage, it should not be interpreted over-literally. It can include conductors who left or were taken from the podium after becoming ill, and died shortly afterwards, either backstage or in a hospital. It can also include those who died backstage during a scheduled interval (e.g. between acts of an opera)." So it would depend on what is meant by "shortly afterward", as the entry doesn't say how long he took to die following his injury. Also, Kirill Kondrashin is also in that category, and his death is written up as: "Kondrashin died in Amsterdam from a heart attack in early 1981, on the same day he conducted Mahler's First Symphony with the North German Radio Symphony Orchestra." which implies he didn't have that heart attack during the performance. Altogether, I'm inclined to leave the category as is. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 16:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

The German article says that the accident happened on 8 January 1687, and he died on 22 March the same year. So it took two and a half months – surely not "shortly afterward". Double sharp (talk) 11:34, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

 Done The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Double sharp (talk) 16:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"The Story of A" by Bruce Haynes

Anyone has a copy of that book? seems like a good place, IIRC, to find the ref. requested in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jean-Baptiste_Lully&diff=691771448&oldid=688525876 The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 02:27, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jean-Baptiste Lully/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Composers Project Assessment of Jean-Baptiste Lully: 2009-01-6== This is an assessment of article Jean-Baptiste Lully by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? ok ===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. ok ===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? Historical appreciation lacking; also, see summary. ===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) ok. Article could use more imagery, especially to offset the long media set. (Imagery of Louis XIV and productions of his works would add value.) ===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article is referenced; no inline citations. Article contains WP:PEACOCK terminology that needs justification. ===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) Lead is short. ===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review=== Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD) Article needs (more) images and/or other media (MOS:IMAGE) Article prose needs work (WP:PEACOCK language) ===Summary=== This article struck me as somewhat brief for an subject of such alleged importance. I find that his life is reasonably well-described; the musicological section seems short, given the nature and importance of his innovations. Things that I might expect that seem to be missing: A better indication of how his music (and/or staging of opera and ballet) differs from earlier forms Inclusion of composers who were fairly directly influenced by his innovations Comedie-ballet is mentioned, but not a single example of it is given A historical appreciation of his music (since his death) I am not well-versed in the history of opera (and presumably most readers of this article are not either). I find some of the language to be peacock-ish. For example Lully can be considered the founder of French opera ... is considered a work of genius.[citation needed] Equally acclaimed are his minor sacred compositions. These things may or may not be true; without citations, these are (to me) merely the opinions of the article's authors. The first could be demonstrated, by more robustly (than the one sentence given) describing differences between his operas and those preceding, and then also describing how the operas of succeeding composers followed his lead (giving suitable examples would go far here). The second item has already been tagged; if his works are acclaimed and or marks of genius, tell us more, please; who, why, etc. Article is B-class; the musicology section needs the most work. Magic♪piano 15:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 19:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Difference with French article

<<comment moved from top>> There are a lot of differences with the French version which seems more precise, for instance the detail of Lully being sent to the kitchen by Mademoiselle for being ugly, which seems highly probable when you look at his pictures. Also it gives the name of his music teacher in France -- it's highly unlikely he was educated and knew music theory and how to play the violin before he came to France. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.10.128 (talk • contribs)

The French version is not more precise. For example there is missing information about Jacques Cordier dit Bocan who was probably his teacher. The kitchen story might be a legend. He might have pleased the kitchen staff with playing viol for receiving some delicacies in exchange. And he could already play the viol when he left Italy.----130.83.197.103 (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to requested move

Please see Talk:Lully#Requested move 18 January 2021. Aza24 (talk) 22:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)