Talk:Herman Klein

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Garcia's address[edit]

I boggle at 'Bentwinck Street'. 'Bentinck' surely? I assume the one referred to is in London? Bentinck Street, W1, is just round the corner from the Wigmore Hall - very suitable for a singing teacher. But does including the address add anything? I'd be inclined to say "That year Klein began studying with Manuel Garcia; he remained Garcia's student for 3 years and was closely associated with him for another 7 years. Tim riley (talk) 09:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. Thanks! -- kosboot (talk) 16:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When did Klein begin teaching at Guildhall School of Music? Please add a date. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, are we sure that there was a brother named Philip AND a nephew named Philip? If Philip was the youngest brother, he would be approximately the same age as his nephew of the same name.... -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On Philips I have no information. And, alas, the documents I have been able to unearth don't give a date for the start of his work at the Guildhall. Tim riley (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the 1881 census: It lists Hermann, Philip, Charles, Manuel. But in the 1871 census it lists: Hermann, Maximilian, Adelaide B. (listed as "daug[hter]" that we don't know about), Philip, and Charles. So this daughter presumably died as a child, and there really was a brother named Philip. Perhaps he died, so that Charles named his son after him. -- kosboot (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that Max and Adelaide were simply grown and out of the house by 1881? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, because Max and Adelaide were still around in 1901. I do see there is an infant Philip who was born and died in 1867. Interestingly, the 1861 census indicate parents Hermann and Adelaide along with Hermann (son), Maximilian, and the daughter whose name looks like Adabertha. I'll go with Adelaide B. -- kosboot (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now stop it you two! Bentinck Street is ten minutes from my office; I'll stroll round tomorrow and knock on the door and demand details. Tim riley (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you can convince the residents of No. 1 to get a plaque for Garcia & Klein? It might raise the price of property. Thanks to a similar effort, you can pass apartment buildings in NYC and discovered that Rachmaninoff composed X here, that Tereresa Carreno died there, and....etc. -- kosboot (talk) 22:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New book – worth mentioning?[edit]

In the list of Klein's books, an editor mistakenly added this external link supposedly to the text of Klein's 1909 The Hermann Klein Phono-vocal Method, but actually to an advertisement for a modern publication not by Klein, but to do with his method. I've removed the link, but I wonder if it might be good to mention the new book, as showing Klein's continued impact. If there is a reliable source such as a review of the new book in a respected journal we could perhaps include it in the article. – Tim riley talk 15:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the new title, the book is actually a reprint of Klein's 1909 book with a new introduction by the editor. -- kosboot (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, blow me down, so it is! Thank you, Kosboot. The new chap has just added an introduction. Well, now. Do we mention this or not? Faites vos jeux, garçons, fillettes! Tim riley talk 19:12, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say no, we don't need to list reprintings of his publications, unless the new introduction is of encyclopedic interest. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I shall shut up forthwith. Delightful to see the trio above assembling for a coven meeting after all these years. Warmest greetings to both! Tim riley talk 19:58, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Herman or Hermann; Infobox[edit]

I see many authority records of many countries (https://viaf.org/viaf/51775354/) spell his first name as Hermann. That's how he spelled it prior to World War I. Afterwards, he spelled it with one N. kosboot (talk) 13:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The recent addition sent me to the archives, and there is certainly some circumstantial evidence that HK was usually Hermann before the Great War and Herman during and after it. But it isn't entirely simple. I have found the shorter form in a by-line in the Musical Times as early as 1887. I haven't seen any WP:RS that says either that he was named Hermann when born or that he formally changed his name at any point. If the editor making the recent change (now prudently reverted for lack of WP:RS) likes to do some investigation and find useable proof of what his name officially was at any point we shall be in his/her debt.
In passing, does the rather apologetic info-box serve a useful function for this article? I think we could usefully blitz it. What do others think?
(Kosboot: I have taken the liberty of altering what I'm sure is a typo in your note above, but please revert if I've got it wrong.) Tim riley talk 13:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know many on the opera project are opposed to infoboxes for aesthetic reasons--which I believe are absolutely the wrong reasons. Infoboxes are crucial items for creating more structured data on Wikipedia and then having it integrated with Wikidata. Aesthetic appeal of the inbox is irrelevant (like saying you won't use electricity because wall outlets are unappealing). As far as the spelling, I think most library catalogs go on his book-length publications, nearly all of which appeared before WWI. I would think most of the articles in the Gramophone book, written mostly after 1918, would have the later spelling. I'll go through it later today. kosboot (talk) 14:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's the aesthetics – it's that info-boxes are useful for some types of article and a pointless waste of space for others. I know boxomaniacs use the Wikidata argument, but among those who know more about it than I do (which is practically everybody) I have heard strong rebuttal of it, which I'd pass on here if I understood it. I don't think it's anything to do with disliking electric plugs. Tim riley talk 15:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly agree that the infobox here is pointless repetition, and, worse than that, it implies that the most important information about this person is when and where he was born and died. The box focuses editorial effort on technical issues and repetition, instead of writing good content. In fact, this box is a great example of why infoboxes are so often worse than useless: One of the three items of information in it is the spelling of the subject's name at birth, which will likely turn out to be wrong, and requires us to make an additional correction, or to risk having the box be inconsistent with the text, which is so often the case. I agree that the box can be helpful in bios for, say, athletes and politicians, but here, it is not. See WP:DISINFOBOX. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
IBs are a long way short of crucial for WD, and I've found that a manual editing of the Wikidata page for an item is the best way to go to ensure the "facts" are correct. With the dissemination of base gobbets of information, ripped from context and understanding, appearing in things like the boxes on the right hand of a google search, it means that sadly some people looking for knowledge stop at the Google search page and don't bother to visit us, and thus they don't ever actually learn anything, outside the banalest of drops of data. Wikidata is a huge problem for me: it mistakes data for knowledge and facts for understanding, without ever understanding the difference. It is the triumph of factoids over understanding, and a horrible, horrible concept. On the few occasions I have ever visited the alien pages of Wikidata, I've found the pages there to carry serious errors, but that's the problem of trying to get computers to rip "facts" from anything: they always get the wrong end of the stick! (And if you like to serve "structured data", Wikidata also picks up information from the hidden PersonData field (or similar) at the foot of the page). - SchroCat (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems somewhat imprudent to revert to a statement that Herman is a birth name, when the obituary reference already in the article suggests otherwise and the signature in the info box appears to have two n's. I've no objection to a finely nuanced account being included in the article, but my edit was based not on RS but on MOS:LEAD and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#Names: one shouldn't have to wonder if one has found the right page if following up on a double nn . Sparafucil (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Admirable, Sparafucil. May we look to you to research further? Tim riley talk 22:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Sparafucil, we would like to add information about the name change as soon as the reliable sources can be found. You said that "lots of pre-1914 refs" give the two n's. Would you please list the most authoritative ones for us to cite? Have you found a RS that states when he changed the name? If not, can you try to locate one? Thanks! All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, you'd really better not ;-) There's no Baker's or NG article, though Oxford Music Online mentions Hermann is passing. To what's already in the bibliography I can only add IMSLP. I will add the alternate spelling back to the lede, with "or" if that's more acceptable than "later". Sparafucil (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that what you have done is correct, and I see nothing in WP:LEAD that supports interrupting the first and last names with (or x) as you have done. Since we are currently discussing this, please revert your change until we have reached a consensus. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a preferred way of your own? Arnold Schoenberg seems a pretty typical approach. Sparafucil (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind the layout, but we really must get our facts sorted and cited in the main text before changing the lead: we don't want a {{citation needed (lead)}} template slapped on telling us "not verified in body". 09:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
On second thought the Times obit reference is adequate cover for mentioning the matter of the alternative spelling in the lead, but we need better info in the main text about whether he was always or usually Hermann before the Great War and never or rarely after it. As I have indicated above, I can find pre-war Herman Kleins and post-war Hermanns. I'll keep rummaging. Tim riley talk 10:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the format slightly so that the alternate first name is not dropped in the ugliest possible fashion into the middle of the name. I just noticed that we already had this sentence in the article: Although his forename was frequently spelled as "Hermann" until World War I, he "deprecated any foreign pronunciation of it and was proud of his British citizenship and upbringing". TIm, is this clear enough, or are you chasing down a further ref? It seems to me that it would be helpful for us to explain that it was common for Brits with German names to respell them at this time. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the Times obit quote I mentioned above. But it's not much on its own, and doesn't establish that he was given the name Hermann at birth, hence the need for further enquiry, as promised. Your changed layout is easier on the eye: clear and clean. I just hope we can prove that it's right, too. Tim riley talk 19:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a bit of hunting on Ancestry.com. "Hermann" (2 Ns) appears pretty consistently up through the beginning of the 2nd decade - he made plenty of transatlantic crossings until about 1911 and is almost always listed with two Ns. Similarly the UK census: 1861, 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901, 1911 all list him with two Ns. Then something happens after 1911 and thereafter he's usually listed with a single N. They do have the database "England & Wales, FreeBMD Birth Index, 1837-1915" -- a handwritten list of all births, and there he is listed with a single N. Ancestry has phone directories for nearly every year beginning with 1915 and he's always listed with one N there. They also have lists of voting directories as far back as the 1870s, and he's also listed there usually with one N. In the "England & Wales, Death Index, 1916-2007" he's also listed with one N. kosboot (talk) 22:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC) 22:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The censuses – of course! I should have thought of that. But once again, the evidence is conflicting. He may have been censused and GPO'd with one n after 1911, but in February 1914 he wrote to The Times (about G&S) signing himself, "I am, Sir, yours faithfully, Hermann Klein". I really must block out a few hours for rummaging at the British Library in the very near future. (His 1914 letter was to the effect that Carte and Sullivan were wrong that the posh operas needed to be segregated at Cambridge Circus, whereas in HK's view they could have prospered if put into rep with the Savoy Operas in a single theatre.) Tim riley talk 23:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think the evidence is conflicting, although I think it suggests on N primarily after the teens. kosboot (talk) 04:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Herman Klein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Herman_Klein&oldid=1207999226"