Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 10:56, 12 June 2018 [1].

---

Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56

Nominator(s): Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

This article is about another cantata by J. S. Bach. In the last years, I tried one that was 300 years old (BWV 165 in 2015, BWV 161 in 2016), but no cantata is certain for 1718. I chose Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56, for personal reasons. It is the first FAC about a solo cantata, and the first for a cantata from Bach's third cantata cycle when he didn't write a cantata or more per week (as in the first and second), but much more selectively. It is a beloved piece, and one of few that Bach called a cantata. - The article was began by Dgies and expanded by Mathsci in 2009. It received a GA review by sadly missed Yash! in 2015. I added a bit about the third cycle, and more references to the recordings table. - Enjoy yearning for death, - Bach did! Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Comments Edwininlondon

I remember reading the previous cantate FA. I still am neither an expert in Bach nor music. A few comments nevertheless:

• why is "Komm, o Tod, du Schlafes Bruder" in the lead bold?

Because it's a redirect --GA

• Thomaskantor in the lead could benefit from a brief explanation, as you have in the body

The idea of the lead is a summary, no? --GA

But also an accessible introduction. MOS:INTRO "Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined" --EIL

Yes, but there are so many things NOT mentioned, - do we really have to explain what most readers of a Bach cantata article will know? -----GA

• Who is Albert Schweitzer? Perhaps add something like "music historian" (I made that up)

This is not about him, theologian, organist, writer, humanitarian, philosopher, and physician, - founder of the Hôpital Albert Schweitzer in Lambarene, Nobel peace prize laureate (1952), - people should know him ;) --GA

• The year after --> is there a reason why this isn't explicitly called 'second cantata cycle'?

Yes, because it could have happened ten years after the first. --GA

Sorry, let me rephrase: Is there a reason why you do not use the phrase 'second cantata cycle'? --EIL

For two reasons: avoid repetition, and get the chorales in, - how would you do that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

For me repetition is not an issue here. But I just read that the second cycle is not identical to the chorale cycle, so it's just too complicated. Maybe leave it. --EIL

The second cycle IS somewhat identical, only that Bach wasn't successful making them all chorale cantatas that year, and added later. -----GA

• Leipzig Cycle III --> this term doesn't get mentioned elsewhere, just the section header and Jones' sentence. Do we need it? Maybe better to put Jones' label in a footnote?

changed the header --GA

• A third cantata --> how about something like this:

Bach's third cantata cycle, of which fewer works are extant, is different. It spans works from his third and fourth year in Leipzig, including Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen. It also includes more performances of works by other composers....

I tried differently. The cantatas by others are not part of his third cycle, but performed during the time. --GA

I still find this sentence odd: 'A third cantata is of a different quality.' Should that not be: 'The third cantata cycle is of a different quality.' The following sentences talk about the cycle, not cantatas. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:16, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, fixed. -----GA

• performed works by other - I thought the definition of a cycle was composed, not performed?

see above, - and for Bach, composed meant performed, he composed for specific occasions.

• Bach shows --> showed?

agree, changed --GA

• What is the BWV of Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen? Looks as if it doesn't have one.

We established it on top, and in this case there's no hymn or other same title which could be meant. - The template lang changed, making every combination hard to code. --GA

• which has been discovered in 2015 -> just checking the discovery in 2015 was finding out the name of the author? Maybe "The author's identity was long unknown until in 2015 ...

tried something like that --GA

• A boat on the Sea of Galilee -> a bit more context, why is this relevant?

Sea voyage - do you think we need to explain more? - Several disciples were fishermen on that lake, sea voyage was every day for them. --GA

Hmm. Difficult. Best I could do is: A boat on the Sea of Galilee (mentioned in Matthew 9:1, which the text has several references to). But it gets a bit clumsy. Maybe just leave it. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:16, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

• whom he regarded -> who is he referring to?

whom he regarded as a 'profound composer' refers to the one mentioned immediately before. Can't say: "a composer whom he regarded as a 'profound composer'" as repetitive, - what do you suggest? --GA

Just realised there are actually 5 men in this sentence. Is it important that Gardiner is mentioned at all? Is the exact relationship father's cousin important? If not, maybe something like this:

This is Bach's only setting of Crüger's tune, recalling the style of his relative Johann Christoph Bach whom he regarded as a 'profound composer'.

In former reviews, I have been requested to attribute quotations, which means Gardiner should stay. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

So it is Gardiner who called JCB a profound composer? Now I'm getting confused. I thought it was JSB. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:16, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

What Bach said exactly (if he did, and in German), we don't know. We know that Gardiner summarized: "... J. C. Bach, organist in Eisenach, possibly his first keyboard teacher and mentor - the one he called a "profound composer." -----GA

As always, nice work! Edwininlondon (talk) 12:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for helpful questions, - please check the changes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. Always a pleasure, Gerda! Edwininlondon (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for more, always helpful! -----Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Support on prose. Edwininlondon (talk) 20:07, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Image review

• File:BWV56-autograph-manuscript-first-page-Bach-1726.jpg needs a US PD tag
• File:Brooklyn_Museum_1997.168.3_Cross_and_Staff_(2).jpg needs a copyright tag for the original work. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Support Comments by Usernameunique

Lead

• Footnote [a] is pretty basic, but how about a citation?

It only explains what the 3 letters stand for, - was the solution found for the conflict that we can't link to BWV and have it bold as the redirect. --GA

• Suggested first sentence : "Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen ("I will the cross-staff gladly carry"[1] or "I will gladly carry the Cross"[2]), BWV 56,[a] is a church cantata composed by Johann Sebastian Bach in Leipzig for the 19th Sunday after Trinity Sunday, and first performed on 27 October 1726."

It was like that formerly, but is a lot of German + translations + catalogue + footnote, before a reader (who doesn't look at the infobox) would know if they are at the right article. --GA

• "The text by Christoph Birkmann reflects" — suggest "depicts" instead of "reflects"

I would use "depicts" when it comes to images, such as tone painting. Give me another ;) --GA

How about "portrays"? Or characterizes/expresses.

Perhaps my limited English. He doesn't add portrayal, character or expression, but the result of reflection. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• "the prescribed gospel reading" — what prescribed gospel reading?

A reader who doesn't know that the Lutheran liturgical year at the time was organized by specific readings for each occasion will know from the link Church cantata, and the others would be bored if we repeat that in every cantata article. --GA

Is it worth adding to the lead that the reading was from Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians and the Gospel of Matthew?

Not sure. I'd be sure if at least one of the two readings was heavily used, but instead, the relation to both rather marginal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• What is the significance of the 19th Sunday after Trinity Sunday? I.e., why is it not just another random Sunday? --GA

same answer, - Bach (and his colleagues) wrote his cantatas to go with the specific readings for a specific occasion, Christmas (3 days with different readings) or 19th Sunday after Trinity. --GA

• "Komm, o Tod, du Schlafes Bruder" — why is this in bold? To be consistent, should it not be in italics, and should the translation not be between quotation marks?

It's a redirect. Readers who type the title should arrive here. Schlafes Bruder is a novel, a film. The quotation marks frame what is quoted, not its translation. --GA

Understood re: bold. But why is it not in italics when Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen is? And where are "I will the cross-staff gladly carry" or "I will gladly carry the Cross" in quotation marks while Come, o death, you brother of sleep is not?

The former bolded thing is a title, italic, the latter a catalogue number, not italic. I would not have quotation marks for only one translation, but with two, each one needs them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• "Du, o schönes Weltgebäude" — how about a translation, and a comma at the end.

The title of the hymn has nothing to do with the content of the cantata, I believe it wouldn't add for someone who doesn't already know it. ("You, oh beautiful building of the world", seems a detour.) --GA

• "(two oboes and taille) ... "(two violins and viola) and continuo" — taille and continuo should be linked (they are below), and suggest "a taille", "a viola", and "a continuo"

Sorry, no. Whoever doesn't know what these are (like you) can look up Baroque instruments, while for the others it's a sea of blue, and why not link violin? They are all linked in the specific section about scoring. - It's never "a continuo" which is a group of instruments. Saying "two violins" is short for "two parts for violins" which may be played by several players each, depending on the size of the orchestra. --GA

I think they should be linked because they're far more obscure than, e.g., violins and violas. See, e.g., taille (instrument): "Today, the instrument is rare outside period ensembles".

We are in a series of articles (see introduction), and the solution is as described: link none in the lead, and all in the scoring section. We will have readers for whom violin is obscure ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Infobox

• "Church cantata by J. S. Bach" — any particular reason for the abbreviation here?

Clarity, and brevity. --GA

• "opening Bass aria" — Why is "Bass" capitalized?

Mathsci wrote that who contributed the image, - it's a bit like a title. --GA

But it's just a random adjective, right? I don't see how it would be part of a title.

Adjective? Compare Piano Concerto, - piano is not an adjective. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• Why does "Chorale" have a "by" ("by Johann Franck"), but "Cantata text" doesn't ("Christoph Birkmann")?

Good catch! The reason is that chorale often has the title of a chorale (when it has an article), and "Cantata text author" would seem too clumsy, - has to be differentiated from chorale author. Adding "by". --GA

Background

• "Thomaskantor (director of church music) ... Thomanerchor" — you describe one, how about describing the other?

I think one explains the other, no? --GA

• "Cantata music had to be provided for two major churches, ... simpler church music for two others" — it's unclear if all four churches are major, or only the first two. Also, suggest "and simpler..."

"and" added. If it says "two", how would a reader think "four"?

Because "and simpler church music for two others" could mean either "simpler church music had to be provided for two other major churches" (i.e., two major churches got complex music, and two major churches got simpler music), or "and simpler church music had to be provided for two other churches" (i.e., the big churches got complex music, the small churches got simpler music). You could clear this up by saying "and simpler church music for two smaller churches".

Seems a repetition of "church", but done, trying to please ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• "The year after," — can you note somewhere in this sentence that this was his second cycle, to bridge the gap between first (mentioned in the previous sentence) and third (mentioned in the following section)?

seems redundant to me that the cycle after the first is the second ;) --GA

Third Leipzig cantata cycle

• "Richard D. P. Jones calls this cycle Leipzig Cycle III." — Richard D. P. Jones should be linked. But is there any relevance to this, i.e., is it just another name for "Third Leipzig cantata cycle", or is he the one who coined the concept of the third Leipzig cycle in general?

Linked, thank you! It's only his phrase (here), which was the section title (see above). We might drop the sentence, but it explains the wording in the reference. --GA

Perhaps placing it in a footnote [b] would be better.

Dropped it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• "third and fourth year in Leipzig" — suggest adding the actual years as well.

Too tricky, because they all begin mid-year, - he took office First Sunday after Trinity, which was in May 1723. --GA

• "During the third cycle" — I'm a bit confused by this sentence. Are you saying he again performed three things: 1) Lehms, 2) BWV 199, and 3) BWV 54?

Would it be clearer to add to the first sentence in that section? added: "... that Bach performed more works by other composers during this time, in addition to repeating his own earlier works." --GA

How about adding a few "of"s, to make it "he repeated performances of solo cantatas from his Weimar period on texts by Georg Christian Lehms, of Mein Herze schwimmt im Blut, BWV 199, and of Widerstehe doch der Sünde, BWV 54"? That also has the benefit of breaking up some of the blue.

done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• "he performed again" — suggest "he again performed"

taken --GA

• "Like the models, even church cantatas" — do you need the "even"?

yes, because he wrote many secular cantatas for which it's no surprise that they don't contain biblical text. --GA

• "The writing for the solo voice is demanding" — in what way?

It's what the source says. --GA

• "Jones assumes that they" — who does "they" refer to? Structurally it invokes the "trained singers" of the preceding sentence, but this doesn't seem right.

should have been "it", changed to "Bach" --GA

• "The only chorale cantata of the third cycle," — bit of a run-on, suggest splitting in two.

How? Seems one thought. --GA

Occasion and words

• "For the same occasion ... in his first cantata cycle for 3 October 1723" — suggest "For the same occasion in his first cantata cycle for 3 October 1723, Bach had composed ..." Also, suggest splitting this long sentence in two, one sentence dealing with the first cycle, and another with the second.

done --GA

Poet and theme

• "whose identity was unknown until 2015" — pretty interesting, would it be easy to give a few words about how he was identified?

The source has it, and his article, but seems not the place to repeat in all cantatas he wrote. --GA

• "University of Leipzig" — is this the University of Leipzig, or Leipzig University? Regardless, it should be linked.

Both names mean the same thing, - linked. --GA

• "Sabbath's Tithe devoted to God" — for consistency again, should this not be between quotation marks?

It's only a translation, no title itself. --GA

• "Ich will den Kreuzweg gerne gehen" — shouldn't this be italicized without quotation marks?

Titles of minor works (poems, hymns, songs) are straight and in quotation marks. --GA

• "Life is likened to both" — suggest "In the cantata life is likened to both,"

We'd need to say "in the cantata text" then, no? --GA

That works.

done --GA

• "until the end of the work" — meaning the theme ends slightly before the end of the work? If it's instead present in the entire work, suggest "throughout the work."

excellent! --GA

• "The hymn in eight stanzas was published" — do you need "in eight stanzas", considering that's mentioned in the next sentence?

no ;) --GA

• "Bach led the first performance of the cantata on 27 October 1726." — where?

Sometimes we know if Thomaskirche or Nikolaikirche, - for this one we don't. --GA

• "One week before, he had also concluded a solo cantata by a chorale" — same place?

No, certainly the other, but we don't know, see above. They had performances in both churches on one day only for high holidays (one in the morning, the other in the afternoon), otherwise only one, switching churches. It doesn't matter, no? --GA

Structure and scoring

• "taille (Ot), two violins (Vl), viola (Va), cello (Vc), and basso continuo." — suggest "a taille (Ot), two violins (Vl), a viola (Va), a cello (Vc), and a basso continuo." Also, why does basso continuo have no abbreviation?

for the numbers, see lead. BC is not used in the table, so no abbr needs to be introduced. --GA

• "J.J.Dominica 19 post trinitatis. Cantata à Voce sola. è stromenti" — how about a translation?

It's explained by what follows, but done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

• "Neue Bach-Ausgabe" — maybe just "New Bach Edition", which via "Edition" indicates that it is a book and is thus a bit more clarifying.

The translation was made only later, not when it was published, seems a bit not historic ;) - There's a link to an article I created as Neue Bach-Ausgabe (NBA). I added the translation, + italics. ---GA

Movements of Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56

• SATB — clarify what this is above at "four-part choir", by saying "four-part choir (SATB)".

copied abbreviation from infobox ---GA

Movements

• "Wolff notes" — "Wolff" has not yet been introduced, so should be "Christoph Wolff notes".

good catch (he usually gets mentioned further up ... ---GA

• What does "scoring even" mean?

You didn't ask in the lead ;) - It's the specification in the score which instrument (group) plays what. We can link to score but the question didn't come up in 7 years. ---GA

1

• Is there a reason movements 1–5 don't show up in the table on contents?

It's the movement numbers from the table. An Alternative would be the long German lines they begin with (which you'll find in cantata articles not by me). Most articles have it like this, which provides a convenient link to a specific movement without having to know how it begins. ---GA

Misunderstood the question. Reason is that it seems not helpful to have the numbers in the TOC, before explaining what they mean. ----GA

• "describes the upward part as..." — this sentence has some problems. The most obvious is that there are five quotation marks, leaving two clearly demarcated quotations plus a stray mark (is there a third quotation somewhere?). The other problem (that fixing the first might resolve) is that "as a musical pun on the word Kreuzstab" is dangling a bit; is this another description of Gardiner for the upward part (in which case it should probably be "and as a musical pun...")?

Excellent counting. I had the whole thing as one quotation, and left a mark when breaking it up. All reworded, please check if it makes more sense. ---GA

• "with its long and expressive melismatic lines" — "its" refers to the soloist.

no, refers to "entry" (after the instrumental opening), would be "his" if soloist ---GA

You might be right, not fully sure here. Not sure you need the "its", could just be "After the entry of the soloist, with long and expressive melismatic lines", but it's not a big issue.

done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

• "accompany in counterpoint and echoing responses" — not sure I understand what this sentence is trying to say, but (if I'm reading it correctly), I think it would be better phrased as "accompany in counterpoint, echoing responses"

I added one more "in", to clarify that it's both, counterpoint, and responses. If I remember right that paragraph is by Mathsci, - I didn't write the article from scratch. ---GA

2

• Is there a reason that this (not to mention 3), is so much shorter than 1? The final sentences of each (Gardiner's analyses) seem a bit perfunctory, without much analysis of the movements.

yes, giant opening aria, short recitative, which is added now ----GA

adding: Gardiner writes from the point of view of a performer who conducted all Bach's church cantatas, so knows their sounds, not only construction. ----GA

What about an opening sentence such as "The second and third movements are much shorter than the giant opening aria."?

Not really because it's not specific to this cantata, see Bach Cantata, - most have a substantial opening movement and a closing choral, and recitatives tend to be shorter also in opera, - nothing unusual which needs to be mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

• "depicted in the" — should probably be "depicted by the".

yes (would be "in" in German, sorry) ---GA

3

• "the passage from Isaiah" — what passage from Isaiah?

It was specified and quoted in the "Poet and theme" section. ---GA

4

• I don't understand the first sentence. Is the German the title of the movement? Also, grammatically speaking, the periods should be removed.

I added "recitative", - can't help then having it twice then, split the sentence. Better? ---GA

Looks good, though still don't think the periods are needed.

• "string accompaniment which after" — suggest a comma between "accompaniment" and "which".

I split that sentence also. ---GA

• "It begins ... in triplets." — bit of a run-on, consider splitting in two.

just did that ;) ---GA

• "Gardiner describes: ..." — grammatically the sentence is missing a subject, and stylistically, not a big fan of starting off with "Gardner describes:".

added "this change" ---GA

5

• "an inspired masterpiece" — whose masterpiece: Bach's, or Franck's? I would assume Bach (the article is about his work, after all), but the following sentence and quotation deal entirely with the Franck's text.

Sure, Bach's, or it would be handled further up. The text could go there, but I think it makes more sense to see it close to where the music is described. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• "BWV 301" — does this have a title?

yes and no, it was without words - as so many of the 4-part settings, so we can take the first line (O, du schönes Weltgebäude), as the ref does, or any other first line from that hymn, - it doesn't matter, as he set the tune. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• 'profound composer' — why the single marks (') instead of double (")?

for a quote within a quote ---GA

So it's Gardiner quoting Bach? You could really just have double quotation marks (why quote Gardiner quoting Bach when you could just quote Bach?), although as I assume Bach wrote "profound composer" in German, you might then want to add the German phrase parenthetically. Not a big issue.

Why not take the Gardiner quote for which I have a source? I'd have a hard time to find where Bach said that ;) - We could drop the quote in the quote, for the reason that it - in English - is not what Bach said, but now we have a quote which we shouldn't change. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

need to interrupt once more ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Manuscripts and publication

• "and the part" — what is the part?

part, the bass has his part, the violins have their part, - like score a rather commonly known term. ----GA

• "Preußischer Kulturbesitz as D-B Mus.ms. Bach P 118 and ST 58." — what does this mean? It's really hard to understand.

The museums code numbers, P for Partitur=score, ST for Stimmen=parts. We could drop that. It's not so common that we have score and parts extant. ----GA

How about: "The autograph score and the part are held by the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, where they are registered as Preußischer Kulturbesitz as D-B Mus.ms. Bach P 118[18] and ST 58.[29]"?

"as ... as"? - trying something. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

• How long has the score/part been in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin? How was it acquired? Any other provenance?

I would need to search. ----GA

• "its complete edition Stuttgarter Bach-Ausgaben" — what year?

took several years, not finished afaik ----GA

Was there a specific year in which this cantata was published?

yes, added --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Recordings

• "marked by green background" — should be "marked with a green background".

you are the first to say so, but why not? ----GA

The main thing was the missing "a". It could have also been "marked by a green background."

learning --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

• There are 8 recordings in the chart, but apparently these are taken from a list of 81. What's the criteria for inclusion?

The selection was made so long ago that I don't even remember, sorry ;) - I'll probably add at least those within a set of the complete cantatas. ----GA

Sure, might be worth curating a bit. Also, suggest: "The entries of the table are selected" rather than "The entries of the table are taken".

"selected" would be saying too much ;) - I am quite busy today, want to expand a DYK article which is way too short, + got problems on BWV 60. Patience please regarding additions here and a bit of context. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Usernameunique, I now added all who recorded a complete cycle, and a bit of summary, please look again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Legacy

• "his 1908 book about Bach that the" — how about "his 1908 book about Bach, name of book, that the"?

name is Bach-Buch - I thought that's German, and the translation, literally Bach Book, repetitive. Will try to find how it's called in English. ----GA

I don't think an English translation is necessary, considering you've described what it is (his 1908 book about Bach). Suggest "his 1908 book about Bach, Bach-Buch, that the cantata".

I expanded there a bit, and based on a new source, there could be much more, especially on the novel. The book was first French in 1905, but it's not sure that the quote is from the book. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

• This section feels a bit underdeveloped, and doesn't even have a topic sentence. Can you turn this into a paragraph that explains where the work fits in to Bach's oeuvre, and how it is considered to compare to his others?

Hopefully! Flight is called now. Until later. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Good work on the article, Gerda Arendt. Full comments/suggestions are above. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:47, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the thorough and helpful review! I replied to the first half, and need to interrupt. Going to travel for a week, responses may come delayed, but as this is planned for the 19th Sunday after Trinity, we still have time ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to take so long in getting back to this, Gerda Arendt. I've finished up the second set of comments (i.e., my responses to your responses). Once you take a look at those (take your time), I'll respond to the everything in full. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Replied, with thanks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, I've gone through and done a final read and copy edit. Since I'm on my phone (left my laptop behind for the long weekend) it was much easier to make edits individually rather than posting here, but I've tried to provide detailed edit summaries, and please revert what you don't like. There's one sentence ("The improvisation is described by the first-person narrator in, with references to the text of the chorale.") that has a problem I couldn't figure out (what's the "in" doing there?), and you'll have my support and soon as it's fixed. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, fixed --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Looks good, you've got my support. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:21, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Coordinator note: Hi Gerda, this has been open for at least 6 weeks without any declaration of support. If it doesn't attract some more review and support soon, we will have to archive it. --Laser brain (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Do you know how often I get accused of canvassing? - I will try to get attention, but so far intentionally avoided it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Laser brain, will be taking a look over next 2-3 days. Ceoil (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Laser_brain, I'm pretty close to supporting---will give it another read tonight or tomorrow. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments Oppose by Ceoil

• Gerda,I'll mostly edit directly rather engaging in a back and forth, if thats ok. You can revert at will. Note from a first read through, needs work on prose here and there, but expect to support.

I could not figure out:

• "After the entry of the soloist, with long and expressive melismatic lines" - should this be "who sings in long..."

taken --GA

• The words refer indirectly to the prescribed gospel reading - "allude" rather than "refer indirectly"?, and can you link the "prescribed gospel reading", and why "prescribed" ? Ceoil (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

• wording taken
• the prescribed readings for the liturgical year are explained in other linked articles, especially church cantata. The best link would be a (second) repetition. More replies later, - busy weekend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review and copy-edits! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:59, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• Albert Schweitzer wrote that it belongs to the most wonderful of Bach's legacy - this is a little cute without quotes; can we say something like "places among Bach's strongest works", though I realise "strongest" with Bach is almost meaningless, its still better than "wonderful".

The issue is attribution. I assumed good faith in that the superlative wonderful was taken from sources and added quotes. You reverted and added splendid without quotes[2]. A bit concerning. Either its described by sources as "wonderful" or "splendid" or its not. Ceoil (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

He wrote the book more than 100 years ago, and it shows in German. It's an important book, and was translated to English, but I couldn't find the wording in that translation. Help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• Maybe add "a typical performance lasts 18-19 minutes (or whatever)" in the lead, to give the reader an approximation of length (surprised this isnt an infobox parameter)

It's an infobox parameter, but I try to keep it concise. Adding it, as you ask, also "cycle", but not to the lead, because I think it's so close to the average 20 minutes that it's no lead material. I don't recall any duration in the lead of other Bach cantata FAs and GAs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:32, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• The Bibliography sections should be split between "Sources" and "Further reading" for two reasons. Combining may give a misleading impression that all of the cites works are used, and secondly putting all in one place may obscure the level of the article's comprehensiveness. Ceoil (talk) 19:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

  It reads much better now; Usernameunique did a great copy edit. On last read through, but noting the "Sources" and "Further reading" are not split if you want to comment. Ceoil (talk) 11:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I renamed the section "Sources", - they are all cited. - In other articles, they were further split in books, journals etc., but here I started with so few that it looked strange. It grew ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• Cantata music had to be provided - is there a better way of saying this. Ceoil (talk) 11:47, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't know, - do you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• One characteristic of the third cycle is that Bach performed more works by other composers during this time, in addition to repeating his own earlier works.(ref) The new works that he composed show no common theme like the chorale cantatas. - Get the gist but dont know what this means, exactly; needs tightening. The word cantata appears twice.

These are two unrelated things, and perhaps you can help me word it better.

1. While during cycles 1 and 2, he practically only performed his own new compositions, he began the third year with performing the works of others, for the first time while he was in that office, and kept doing it.
2. While cycle 2 had one theme, chorales, and every cantata was on a chorale (until his librettist died), there is no such strong common theme in cycle 3.

All these things are said in the cycle articles (all linked), and I wonder how much repetition is good or needed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• Solo cantatas are modeled after secular Italian works such as the cantatas by Alessandro Scarlatti. This seems like a random statment, divorced from the article.

Where would you put a general idea where solo cantatas (the only things Bach considered cantatas) come from, that they have secular background in text and style? I think it needs to be said, in an article about a solo cantata. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

All that is need here is "Bach's Solo cantatas are modeled" - and it becomes clearer. Is this ok?

If it helps. (I still think the same is true for Telemann's, for example, but it doesn't matter.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• One week before, he had concluded a solo cantata by a chorale, the cantata for alto Gott soll allein mein Herze haben, BWV 169 - A week earlier, "a solo cantata by a chorale" is hard to unpack, and there is some repetition: the article uses the word "cantata" 118 times by my count. You really need to bring this number down as it makes reading tough work at times. Ceoil (talk) 11:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Not only Bach's, all solo cantatas (and the name cantata) come from these Italian models. - In German, if you speak in past tense, and then mention something before, you can't use the same past tense. I will never learn that it seems to be different in English. Will check. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Again, better wording always welcome. So, most solo cantatas have no chorale at the end, but this one, and the one composed a week earlier, have one. - There are not so many ways to say cantata in a different way, - "piece" is too small, "work" is too general. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok - pls check if meaning is changed! Ceoil (talk) 12:53, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• church cantatas contain no - alliteration. "do not" would be better. Ceoil (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I am not yet convinced, because I believe that "do not" is a rather weak construction. What do others think? Is alliteration a problem? - Thank you for thought-provoking questions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Replies to copy-edits:

• All grouping is later, Bach didn't make numbers for cycles, nor works, - all numbers are those of musicologists, unless it's 19th Sunday after Trinity ;) - Referring to the cantata, we can repeat the title. - I read "Kreuzstab Cantata, but don't know if that is common in English or just the specific writer's short name. Kreuzstabkantate IS common in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

  Ok thanks, v interesting. Will incorporate. Ceoil (talk) 13:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• Is this a fair summation of the novel: The protagonist, Elias, improvises on the chorale and decides to end his life.[14] The improvisation is described by... Ceoil (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Moving to oppose on a few basis. There is a significant lack of clarity and muddled reasoning in areas, as well as overuse of superlatives, which are sometimes mixed into technical descriptions. These issues seem related; the author is an enthusiast and assumes the reader has the same knowledge level, as has become clear while I was trying to tease out the issues above. I have really tried here, but cant in good faith support this, and frankly don't think it was properly prepared for FAC. I do think the foundations of the page are solid, but it needs significant polish. Ceoil (talk) 15:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

This is very general, I'd much prefer if you said saying which superlatives you find unsupported by sources, and what reasoning muddled and why. I can't help that many - not I - love this piece most of all his compositions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Well I'm as guilty as anybody of using superlatives, but the one that got me was the treatment of the word "wonderful", which had to have come from a source, so i put in quotes, but then got [3]. Trimming others ("expressive", etc) now. Ceoil (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in. Schweitzer's book is in the public domain, here if either of you can see it. The quote might be found there. Victoriaearle (tk) 21:34, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the find. I searched for "Kreuzstabkantate" and found two matches in the green edition (bottom left), but not the one we are looking for. ("Limited preview") - In the article, it's in the "Legacy" section in German, saying "zum Herrlichsten", which was translated (by Moonraker, if I remember right) to "most splendid". I wonder what Schweizer wrote in the original French. - Have to interrupt again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sigh, (and sorry Ceoil for writing in your section) - I supplied a link to all instances of Kreuzstab. On page 108 he writes - "Further examples of Bach's way of depicting elevated grief may be seen in the opening of the cantata Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen (No. 56) and the sinfonia for the cantata for the third Sunday after Easter - Weinen klagon (No. 12). In the cantata Himmelskönig, sei willkommen (No. 82), with its wonderful passion atmosphere .... " and so on. It would be incorrect to say in Wikipedia's voice, in the lead, that Schweitzer considered Kreutzstab wonderful. Link to the page is here. Victoriaearle (tk) 23:04, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, and I was reverted on this no less, and it now reads "splendid". I might disengage from the review at this point. Ceoil (talk) 23:09, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry, but feel that we can't say that Schweitzer wrote "wonderful" when he didn't. (He wrote "herrlich", not "wundervoll", and it's translated as "splendid".) Better not mention him at all, I'd say. (Although I believe that he shaped what others think about the work.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

• I dont think this was a very good restoration. Ceoil (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry that I was on way out then and had no time to explain better than in an edit summary.

You wrote: "While Bach lead works by other composers during the period in which he composed the first and second cycles, by the time of the works now grouped in the third cycle, he lead only his own compositions." - and that's pretty much the opposite of what I had tried to explain. Trying again: For two years, from June 1723 to May 1725, he treated his Leipzig audience rather relentlessly to a diet of ONLY his new compositions. He gave them a break in the third cycle, performing the works of others first, and repeating some of his older ones, and his new ones only every now and then. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I think the confusion here goes back to Victoria's urge below for clearer, plain writing. The reader shouldn't have to read, re-read, and consult the author twice to figure out. Ceoil (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• The third cantata cycle encompass works composed during Bach's third and fourth year in Leipzig, and include Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen.[5][6] It is of a different quality than the first two cycles, with fewer extant compositions.[5] - of a different quality is very vague and opens questions. Better? Worse? Or what. Can you clarify please. Ceoil (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

What's different is said in the following, - and if the word "quality" is disturbing, what else can we say? Just "different"?

• cycles 1 + 2: new composition for all occasions, cycle 3: few extant new works
• cycles 1 + 2: focus on chorus in opening movements, cycle 3: focus on solo cantatas, some without any chorus.
• cycles 1 + 2: many biblical quotations and chorales, cycle 3: few biblical quotations and some without chorale
• cycle 2: 40 chorale cantata follow a certain scheme, with a librettist writing arias and recitatives for the middle movements, cycle 3: the only chorale cantata relies on the chorale text without change.

How woud you write that in prose? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

• A lot of the article assumes the reader is a Christian with knowledge of early modern era Lutheran doctrine. I just removed the phrasing "expresses readiness for the final journey" which was neither blue linked nor reffed. Ceoil (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Context: the translation of the text, with a ref, is "I stand ready and prepared to receive the inheritance of my divinity with desire and longing from Jesus' hands", summarized as "expresses readiness for the final journey". "journey" not even Christian, but in the image that life is a sea voyage. What would you say? Or would you leave the reader alone with the Baroque wording? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose at this time. Too many issues. Ceoil (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Response to Victoria

Victoria, thank you for making an effort to trim, arriving at this:

In 1723 Johann Sebastian Bach became director of church music (Thomaskantor) in Leipzig. He supervised church music and trained choir boys for the Thomanerchor. Neue Kirche (New Church) and Peterskirche (St. Peter) were smaller churches and required simple music. He had to provide weekly cantata music for the larger churches, Thomaskirche (St. Thomas) and Nikolaikirche (St. Nicholas), on Sundays and on feast days, except during the "silent periods" ("tempus clausum") of Advent and Lent. In his first year on the job, Bach decided to compose new works for almost all liturgical events. These became known as his first cantata cycle. The next year he composed a cycle of chorale cantatas with each based on a Lutheran hymn.

It's missing a few things that I think are important:

• He was hired by the town of Leipzig, not by a church body.
• He trained the boys of the Thomanerchor, and not only in singing, but also in general education.
• Mentioning the choir before the churches (St. Thomas is one of the four) makes it harder to understand, imho.
• I think we have to say that all cycles begin in the middle of a liturgical, not New Year's Day, or First Sunday of Advent when the church year begins.
• "job" seems a term not quite matching Baroque thinking ;)

Can you insert that in your wording? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

• Hi Gerda, trimming out words tends to make it easier for your reader. To answer your questions:

• Does the casual reader need to know exactly who hired him?
• Does the casual reader need to know exactly what his duties were in respect to the Thomanerchor for this article?
• I placed the choir first because it's less important, so as to focus on the more important aspect for this article - supplying music for churches = this cantata.
• I don't think the casual reader of this article cares that he started work in the middle of the liturgical year and all cycles follow that pattern - it is relevant to another article, I suspect.
• Yes, job is very much plain English. Yet, what was it to him, if not a job? Shakespeare wasn't writing for prosperity but simply fulfilling jobs as they came in. We tend to deify geniuses to some extent, imo. Anyway, I had started to read this a week or so ago and decided to not to review. As a layperson it's difficult for me to understand, but I saw the activity here today and decided to give a template of a simplified version of that one paragraph, [4]. Good luck! Victoriaearle (tk) 21:11, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. It's in the article now, as you will know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I only noticed later as I was about to log out. I've reinstated, but the section is lacking a citation in the first paragraph. I searched history back beyond March and can't find it in any version.

Also, I read a little about the position - "post" might be a good word to use - in this book. Rather than saying providing education for the Thomanerchor students, it was, in fact an academic post. Maybe mention that? Plus, the Thomaskantor was expected to compose - this has never been clear to me. Maybe not relevant here, but it might be teased out elsewhere.

I also spent some time reading Schweitzer, instances of Kreuzstabe here, which is fascinating. The sections about the wave, taking a concept from nature and setting it to art/music, is very good. There were other fascinating sections, too, to do with this cantata, but I didn't take notes or screen prints and now google books won't let me see those pages again. Regardless, have you considered using Schweitzer as a source? Victoriaearle (tk) 13:55, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Link to Schweitzer, vol. 2, on archive.org [5]. Victoriaearle (tk) 14:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Victoria, thank you for looking into this in such detail! - Quick responses (a bit tired after an extended hike):

The whole background section is sort of optional, - more or less saving people the links to Thomaskantor and the cantata cycles. Someone who knows all that will skip the section regardless how long it is, so a bit more doesn't hurt, - my pov. I more or less copied it from the last cantata FA. - I can follow that it still needs to be sourced even if a summary of other articles, and suggest to use Wolff for the post in Leipzig (I like that term, thank you!), [6], p. 237ff, and Dürr/Jones for the cycles, [7], p. 22ff. Both refs are already used, it just takes adding the pages. - There was relation to the university, but "academic" seems a bit misleading.

The Thomaskantor was expected to compose some, but what Bach did was beyond these expectations.

You now probably read more by Schweitzer than I in a long time. It's quite his personal view, of course, and dated, so to be used with care. I think the quote in legacy is worth mentioning, because it gets quoted in program notes again and again, and possibly opened the eyes of others for this cantata being something extraordinary. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Oppose for the following reasons per the following criteria, 1. a; possibly 1.c. & d; 2. b; and 4.

• 1. a - as a lay reader without any knowledge of the topic, the prose is difficult to parse and I think it can benefit from a copyedit throughout. A single example only: I'm confused as to whether the sea and water imagery, somehow combined with imagery of symbolism of the Christian life, is the result of Bach's composition or whether he built on what Birkmann wrote. I tried reading the source about Birkmann and couldn't find those passages so I think that page numbers need to be supplied, but the point is that the reader & reviewer shouldn't have to try to find what they seek in the sources.
• 1. c. - has a complete literature survey been completed and is the full literature about this particular work reflected here? I understand that it's more simple to copy a reference than to create a new one, but that misses the point. The first paragraph in the "Background" section still lacks a reference. Perhaps easily fixed but it was mentioned a number of days ago & is apparently a copy of the same para elsewhere on Wikipedia? Nonetheless, our criteria require sourcing throughout. The Schweitzer quote is another example: it's best to find the quote in an English translation, which I linked some days ago. It's here on page 254. This involved finding it in the original [8], determining which chapter, finding the English translation, and then using that particular translation. The quote in the lead and the "Legacy" section both need fixing, and honestly, it's not the reviewer's job to track down statements in the article. Also, the source about Birkmann seems to hypothesize that he wrote the lyrics, but it's impossible to tell without page numbers. If that's true, then more research is required.
• 1. d. - I'm not convinced it's neutral. There's a fair amount of language that eludes me and seems to assume a Christian pov. These could be eliminated through a copyedit, I suspect.
• 2. b - The "Legacy" section is lacking. A legacy should be presentation of how the piece of music influenced others, how music critics today see it, etc.
• 4 - using summary style might help with some of the issues mentioned above.

A quick note: when I was reviewing the bottom of the queue last month I noticed this article, put the article and review on watch, considered whether to review. I did not create this section, but after wrestling with myself over what to do, it seems to me I've followed a double standard. So, here I am in the oppose column, and this is an independent view. Victoriaearle (tk) 16:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the sources, - I am sorry that I had other priorities and need to ask you for patience. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I added references to the Background section. Basically, Dürr, translated and revised by Jones, is The Bible for Bach's cantatas, - he knows them all and was one of the key people and the second edition of all Bach's works. I also rely highly on Wolff, recommended by Tony1, and on Gardiner who conducted all cantatas and thus adds the performer's perspective, combined with understandable language.

1. a. The images are in the text already, and I wonder how there can be doubt about it, as they are mentioned in the Text section, before Music begins. Things have been written about the text before it became known that Birkmann wrote it. The complete text with translation is in ref "Dellal", another person I trust because she - a mezzo-soprano - translated all texted works by Bach.

1. c. You are much better in finding sources, and thank you for those you retrieved. I'd never say that anything I did was complete, - always room for improvement. However, the four sources just listed are a good basis.

1. d. It would be difficult to write about a piece of music intended to be performed in a Lutheran service without using some Christian terminology. Please point out details of where you think it's too much. As pointed out a bit higher up: I don't think "last voyage" is a particularly Christian image.

2. b. No Bach cantata article so far has such a section. I can expand, if needed, there's plenty of material in reviews, however always with some personal colour/pov. For example, Schweitzer's view is clearly expressed in the language of a bygone time, so can't be just taken. I am quite ready to say nothing from him in the lead. - Need to interrupt, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Back. I now added the ref with the brief description of the Thomaskantor post, used Schweitzer more often, including the full English quote in the lead. Should we somehow point out the Grove thinks that "Schweitzer has probably been more quoted than any authority since Spitta."? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

You have the wrong volume and the wrong page number for Schweitzer. That particular quote isn't in the passage on page 75. Please take the time to look at the books I linked from Archive.org. Victoriaearle (tk) 13:29, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I changed now, from one link to the first of the pages, and page numbers for the higher ones, - to a link to the book, and individual links to the pages. Never did that, but saw Francis Schonken doing it. - I looked at the archive.org but find it much harder to read. Also: when I turn a page up there, I arrive much higher, and have to turn backwards to get to the right spot. - I added vol. and translator. Thank you for pointing it out. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it takes some getting used to, but it's a good resource. So, right now you have Schweitzer's quotation in German sourced to Keuchen. Is the German quote necessary? Personally, I think since you now have an English translation, it's best to use only that for en.wp. Also, the Newman translation was published in 1923, so that field should be added to the ref template. If you decide to keep the German quote then indicate that it's quoted in Keuchen. Victoriaearle (tk) 13:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I moved the German to a footnote. With more time, I may find the book in German, as a more immediate source. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, that's fine. Yes, it's best to use the original, I linked it above but here's the link again in case you want it for another project. The little icon with arrows going in all directions will give you a full page view and once in full page view you get a zoom icon. The quote begins on the bottom of the right page. But, what you've done is acceptable and a good workaround.

The next thing is to supply page numbers for Blanken. Thanks. Victoriaearle (tk) 15:49, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Done, good idea as that's in English. The summary in the German articles is shorter, but Blanken has more detail. - You misunderstood Schweitzer, - I meant a ref to his book in German, for the footnote. It's very colourful and high-level German, which (sadly) gets lost in the translation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:07, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the link goes to Schweitzer's original text, I can read that script, though it does bring back schooldays memories. Thanks for supplying page numbers for Blanken; seems like interesting scholarship. I'll take a look and post a bit later. Victoriaearle (tk) 17:12, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about misreading Schweitzer's Book, - J. S. looks un-German ;) - Thank you for the link to Gospel readings, however, prescribed readings are two, the other called epistle (letter), and I don't know if we have a link for both. The best background section about the 19th Sunday after Trinity (readings, hymns, cantatas) is Church cantata#19th Sunday after Trinity (Trinity XIX), linked in the previous sentence. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I do not understand how this page is not German. Perhaps I've lost my mind?

Regarding Blanken, she writes on p. 25 about Birkmann: "... I would now like to substantiate the hypothesis that this student of Bach's was indeed an author of cantata texts. If we can show that the text for Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen (BWV 56), points clearly to Birkmann as author ... " That seems to suggest that her research is not complete and as such it would be best not to claim in Wikipedia's voice that he is indeed the author. When there's an inconsistency in the sources, as there is here, it's best to mention. Try something like, "Until recently the librettist was unknown but recent research by Christine Blanken suggests Birkmann" (that's a short version). Victoriaearle (tk) 20:06, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry that I was to sloppy explaining that just because J. S. Bach looks not German I failed to look closer.

I understand Blanken differently, accent on substantiate and show. I took your suggested wording anyway. Bach Digital - the most scientific database on the Bach works - has Birkmann without any questionmark. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. New research is always difficult until it makes its way fully into the scholarly literature. Unless the sources are unanimous, and I haven't looked to see what Dürr says, then the discrepancy has to be explained. I've struck a few. Sorry you thought I would have led you astray re Schweitzer. Victoriaearle (tk) 23:34, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

When I wrote "sea and water imagery", I meant the motif or theme, not the actual pictures in the article. What I'm curious about is whether Bach used the existing imagery, symbolism, motif, (use whichever word works best for you) of sea/water/waves and from there built a composition to reflect sea/water/waves. My ignorance is showing: perhaps the best way I can express this is to ask whether we know if Bach decided to use that sea/water/waves imagery and requested Birkmann to provide the text, or whether the text came first? We may not know of course and I might be asking the impossible, but I did get very confused in those passages. Victoriaearle (tk) 23:44, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

A very good question - and thank you for good edits, and I requested GOCE - but I don't know how far the collaboration went. We do know for his work with Christiana Mariana von Ziegler: she wrote, and he changed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• "and is part of Bach's third cycle of cantatas for all occasions of the liturgical year." I might say "the" rather than "all".

taken --GA

• Why is "cantata" italicized in the final word of the first lede paragraph?

probably changed in a copy-edit, changed back, yes it's Italian but became a word of English --GA

• You do the same thing in the body, when you discuss the same thing.
• "to the prescribed gospel reading which tells that Jesus traveled by boat." I might clarify by saying, "to the prescribed reading from the Gospels for that Sunday, which relates that Jesus traveled by boat".

"prescribed readings" was mentioned before. --GA

• "He was employed by the town of Leipzig to this position, " I might say "in" rather than "to".

I believe you. --GA

• " Fewer works are extant from his third cantata cycle,[5] and it spans works" I might avoid the double use of "works"

replacing one by "composition" --GA

• Could the cross staff be described as a crozier?

never heard that, will have to check, - checked, yes, crosier, very helpful! --GA

• "(I stand ready and prepared to receive the inheritance of my divinity with desire and longing from Jesus' hands.),[2]" having a period and a comma at the end may be a little much.

(dropped full stop, although it's a complete sentence

• "Only at the end of the penultimate line, torment and dissonance are transformed into glory and harmony, illuminating the words "Denn durch dich komm ich herein / zu dem schönsten Jesulein" (for through you I will come to my loveliest little Jesus).[2] " I'm not sure what the "Only" is saying. You might want to check to ensure it is as clear as it can be.

It means that for quite a while into that movement, the mood is different. Perhaps you can help? --GA

Maybe "Not until the end of the penultimate line are torment and dissonance transformed into glory and harmony ..."

• "whom he regarded as a 'profound composer'.[25] Andreas Kruse notes that the chorale conveys the transformation and transition from earthly life to an eternal harbour.[31] " Two things. First, I'm not seeing why you are using single quotes here. Second, "harbour" is inconsistent with "harbor", earlier.

The single quotes are for quote within a quote. Spelling fixed (which had been copied from the American site). --GA

• It might be worth mentioning, at some point, how it was that Birkmann was identified as the librettist in 2015.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the Brinkmann article, and in the sources. Of course I keep forgetting that others can't simply read the German sources. - Thank you for the review, very helpful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• Support seems good to me.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:57, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments by Chetsford

I think I'm late to the party so may not be able to offer much in the way of commentary beyond what has previously been said. Ergo, this will be short.

• Per MOS:LEADLENGTH an article under 30,000 characters should have a 2-3 paragraph lead. While this is only an advisory guideline, I think it's a good one and the current lead may be a very small bit verbose. However, I think this is probably just a atter of personal preference.

Yes, but I looked more at what should be said, comparing to similar articles. --GA

• I feel like "taille" should have a wikilink to Taille (instrument) as it's not an instrument with which many people are likely to be familiar.

To avoid a sea of blue in lead and infobox, no instrument is linked there (but all in "Baroque instruments"). Every single one is linked in the Scoring section, because some readers will not know what a violin is. --GA

• The author of the text is Christoph Birkmann, whose identity was unknown until 2015. ... I don't believe there should be a comma after "Birkmann". While "the author of the text is Christoph Birkmann" is an independent clause, the second part of the sentence does not start with a coordinating conjunction. Please ignore this comment if you understand it differently.

Commas in English are difficult for me, - I go simply by: should there be a little pause when reading ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• One week before, he had also concluded a solo cantata by a chorale, the cantata for alto Gott soll allein mein Herze haben, BWV 169. ... The two commas here turn "he had also concluded a solo cantata by a chorle" into a paranthetical expression which it isn't. I believe the first comma should be removed. Please ignore this comment if you understand it differently.

as above, - some insist that we have to have a comma after "In 1726", - I wonder how to please them and you. --GA

• You generally use the WP:SERIALCOMMA but here - Bach structured the cantata in five movements, alternating arias and recitatives and a four-part chorale. - you do not. I think the serial comma just needs to be standardized throughout.

taken --GA

Overall, this is a beautifully composed and comprehensive article. This is probably my favorite Bach cantata and it was a joy to read.
I SUPPORT. Chetsford (talk) 00:32, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, good points! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Source review

The sources mainly seem to be of a high standard. I had some concerns about the use of discogs and of sales sites like the Challenge (44) and Schott (54) references, but in practice the content was uncontroversial. Nevertheless, if these sources could be replaced with references that don't feature prices, that would be better. Personally I wouldn't use such pages, but I can see it's more difficult to avoid in the creative arts than it is in natural history topics. I checked the content of about seven of the English language sources; each confirmed the relevant text, and there was no evidence of improper use. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at the sources! All recordings are sourced to the Bach Cantatas Website (BCW), where they are displayed in great detail (cover photos, days of recordings, individual orchestra players and choir members, liner notes, you name it), example pictured, 1980s. However, one user thinks we should not use the site, therefore I added at least one supporting additional ref for each recording.

Do you think I should add the decade listing of BCW to the individual recordings, instead of the summary with the links, as it is now? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Coord note

Sorry but two outstanding opposes after more than two months is not a good sign, despite several supporting reviews earlier. Let's complete the work resolving issues away from the FAC process and bring it back after the usual two-week waiting period -- Gerda, pls feel free to ping the reviewers from this round when you renominate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 10:56, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.