Talk:Symphonic Studies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

On 4 June 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Symphonic Studies (Schumann) to Symphonic Studies. The result of the discussion was moved.

Title[edit]

In August 2008, Smerus changed the title from "Symphonic Etudes" to "Études symphoniques", the rationale being "This is what Schumann called them". That's OK as far as it goes, and it did at least correct the Etudes to Études.

I'd like to move it again, to the English title "Symphonic Studies". It is routinely referred to as "Symphonic Studies", although "Études symphoniques" is also used when necessary to refer to the title as originally published. German and Russian composers frequently published their works with French titles, but that has never stopped anyone from using an English title. The French wasn't meant as an epithet, such as Tchaikovsky's or Beethoven's Pathétiques. If Schumann had chosen a German title, we would naturally translate it into English. We refer to Beethoven's 5th Symphony as such, not as "Fünfte Symphonie" or whatever the German is. We call Brahms' Ein deutsches Requem - "A German Requiem". So how about it? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No objections after almost 5 months, so I've moved it. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French Title[edit]

"French: Études Symphoniques" - in French, wouldn't the adjectival second word (or second words generally, if not a proper noun) usually be lower-case, most-cases? Schissel | Sound the Note! 01:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC) (I refer to the first line, first paragiraffe, not to the page-naming debate of some years agone.)[reply]

" Johannes Brahms restored the five variations that had been cut by Schumann."[edit]

There is still another that has never been published, so far as I know. (This is confirmed by the first external link here.) Anyone know whether that one is still extant or has ever been published? Kostaki mou (talk) 20:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 June 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Unnecessary disambiguation, the possibility of confusion with Prokofiev and Strauss' work is very slim, and even if it could happen, a hatnote would suffice in disambiguating the articles. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 12:50, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Symphonic Studies (Schumann) → Symphonic Studies – No other work entitled "Symphonic Studies" or "Symphonic Etudes" could conceivably meet Wikipedia's standards for notability. Schumann's name serves no disambiguating purpose here and so there is no need for it to figure in the article's title. SaryaniPaschtorr (talk) 12:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the name (Schumann) is there because not only because of Rawsthorne but also the Symphonic Etudes of both Prokofiev and Strauss. This is a classical music article. We don't have to make like difficult for readers. In GBooks I see the hits for Schumann and Prokofiev are about equal. The fact that wikipedia hasn't got a standalone article for Prokofiev does not make removing (Schumann) helpful to readers. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi I am not familiar with the work by Prokofiev which you cite, and have not found it by searching — can you link a recording?

Stauss's Panathenaeic Parade has the effectively lower-case subtitle 'symphonic studies', but this is not the work's name, and it is never referred to as such. Maybe the most important work I know of actually sharing the name is not Rawsthorne's but Ireland's, but neither one is a suitable candidate for a Wikipedia article or likely to be confused with the Schumann work.

For me this is a situation very much like that of the Arpeggione Sonata: there are quite a few other sonate for arpeggione, both solo and with piano accompaniment, mostly contemporary or the product of the C20. But none of those works is notable enough to justify the annoyance that appending '(Schubert)' to that article's title would entail.

SaryaniPaschtorr (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:PRECISE, especially considering no other titles beginning with "Symphonic Studies" currently exist, meaning the title Symphonic Studies (Schumann) de facto contains unnecessary disambiguation. Steel1943 (talk) 19:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.