Wikipedia:Peer review/Jules Massenet/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jules Massenet[edit]

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've been beavering away overhauling this article, and having pretty much finished I should now be grateful for colleagues' comments. In addition to the usual comments on prose, coverage, balance etc I'd be particularly glad of people's thoughts on whether the article has FAC potential, or should be aimed at GAN or indeed should be quietly shunted into a corner and forgotten. Tim riley talk 17:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cg2p0B0u8m[edit]

[First two sub-sections, on Opening sentence and List of singers, copied by Tim riley from the article talk page for convenience during this peer review]

  • Opening sentence
    • I suggest that he is not "best known for his thirty-five operas", but best known for his operas. No one, surely could know all 35. The total should however, be mentioned somewhere.
  • List of singers
    • Although lists can get out of hand, I would suggest that Gabriel Bacquier deserves a place in the list of singers; as he took part in five commercial recordings of Massenet operas, and I believe his Sancho and Athanaël were much praised. (Also a belated 90th birthday gift for him.) Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 16:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Added with pleasure. Bacquier is one of my favourite opera singers. Tim riley talk 19:49, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A lot has happened here over the last week - I will have to re-read!

  • I will look at whether role creators left recordings of excerpts at all: To be a little more wide-ranging, you could say that role creators such as van Dyck (Werther), Calvé (Sapho), Dufranne (Grisélidis), Vanni-Marcoux (Panurge) recorded excerpts from his operas, while in the 1930s Elie Cohen conducted classic accounts of Manon and Werther should be mentioned (a CD reissue won a Gramophone award), unfortunately I cannot locate a single reference where both 30s recordings are noted together.
    • If there are any recordings of Massenet by singers who sang for him – role creators or not – it would certainly be well worth a sentence immediately after the bit about Massenet accompanying Georgette Leblanc. Over to you. Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • The four I mention are definite. I can find refs for all if you wish. The one I cannot find yet is something on Cohen's two 30s sets. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 16:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I place the matter entirely in your safe hands. If you add facts and refs I'll tidy the latter up if needed. Tim riley talk 16:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Your new para is precisely what was wanted: thank you! I've tidied the refs and links and added a sentence about the complete 1930s recordings. Tim riley talk 08:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The other thing is the Méditation, which is probably his most famous 'bleeding chunk', and possibly should be elegantly mentioned, just to avoid a possible clumsy addition later.
    • An exceptionally good point. I've added a bit at the Orchestral sub-section of Works. I've also mentioned Le dernier sommeil de la vierge (a Beecham favourite), which reminds me that I'd be glad if you would consider whether "vierge" should or shouldn't be capitalised in the title of the opera. The practice seems to vary even on French sites. Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The youtube link ought to be changed to a violin version...
    • I never link to youtube, being nervous about copyright. There may be some youtube videos that meet WP's strict copyright criteria but I am so inexpert in that arcane theology that I steer well clear. Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The individual opera links in External Links should perhaps be in their article pages. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 10:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fair point. I don't feel strongly about it, but logic is on your side. Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although he was an important professor at the Conservatoire there is only brief mention of his methods; p 8 of Koechlin's book on Fauré he has quite a nice sentence on Massenent the teacher "After Massenet, whose volubility dispensed a teaching active, living, vibrant, and moreover comprehensive, Fauré seemed to read the works of his pupils in silence."
    • Somewhere else in the sources, though I can't now lay hands on it, I have seen someone saying that though Massenet and Fauré were chalk and cheese they both successfully brought out the individuality of their students and did not impose their views. I've added the Koechlin quote – thank you very much. Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • you may be thinking of Koechlin a couple of paragraphs down, where he says "But after all, in spite of the fact that his method seemed so different, Fauré continued in his own way the work of Massenet, directing his pupils towards a musicianship based on a serious technique" (I think Orrey could have been a bit more elegant in his translation) Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 16:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 14:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It most certainly does! I am in your debt, not for the first, or I hope the last, time. Best wishes, Tim riley talk 15:59, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only two other things I would mention are how he became the foremost French opera composer in the 1880s and 1890s through the premature death of Bizet, Chabrier's bad luck and the younger generation chasing after Wagner; I think it is Martin Cooper who offers this. Also why he offered all his final premieres to Monte Carlo – a slightly odd development which Harding or Irvine may explain. But I don't think these are major omissions.Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • if it would be remotely of interest, his grandson was this man: http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82-157892/ Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have just seen that in 1992 Éditions Plume of Paris published a new edition of the Souvenirs annotated by the eminent musicologist Gérard Condé. The complimentary review in L’Avant-Scène Opéra 148 (Sep/Oct 1992) considered it the foundation stone of reference for Massenet. I have not seen this book, but it may answer some of the outstanding questions. It also mentions work in progress by Patrick Gillis on a catalogue of works and correspondence by the composer. Or maybe it should be added as Other reading. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 15:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I say! We certainly ought to mention this new(ish) edition, but M. Condé will need to have annotated very heavily to turn Massenet's endearing but wildly unreliable Souvenirs into a work of reference. As neither you nor I have seen it, I think all we can do for now is, as you say, list it under Further Reading, though that seems sadly dismissive if it is, as L'Avant-Scène Opéra says, so important as a work of reference. The British Library hasn't got a copy (though Condé is represented there by four commentaires on Massenet operas). I am delighted to see that the BL has "Mein Leben: Autobiographie – Jules Massenet; aus dem Französischen übertragen von Eva Zimmermann", but that doesn't help us much. Is there the slightest chance that you might lay hands on the Condé edition in the foreseeable future? Grateful for your thoughts on this. – Tim riley talk 19:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • To be honest I have never bothered to read the Souvenirs (because of their reputation) but I am tempted to track down this modern edition. It might be amusing. But I don't think the foreseeable future is possible, so probably Further Reading is all that can done for now. (PS I wonder if the British Library has Condé's 1974 article 'Faut-il brûler Massenet?', which sounds more like something by Boulez.) Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • It does, but see also the caricature I have lately added to the article with Massenet in the Four Nationale de Musique, so crème Massenet brûlée would be on that menu. I am about to close this PR and I – and I hope you (see your talk page) – shall be at FAC later this week. Permit me to say that working with you is a very great pleasure. Tim riley talk 21:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Alfietucker[edit]

I know next to nothing about Massenet, but since you so kindly PR'd Noye's Fludde, I thought I would pop by and see if I could make any useful comments here. I really enjoyed the article - very engagingly written. Just a very few points:

  • Early years
    • "He gained some work as a piano accompanist, in the course of which he met Wagner" – this is interesting: do we know which year this happened?
      • We do. I have added a footnote. My opinion of Massenet rose considerably when I read his comment that Wagner played the piano "like a musician, not at all like a pianist". Give me Kempff, Curzon and Brendel rather than Horowitz, Cziffra or Cliburn! Tim riley talk 22:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Excellent - and as you say, nice to read Massenet's comment. I recently came across what might be called a highly complimentary comment on Wagner's piano playing by Auguste Villiers de l'Isle-Adam, who reports that it was so overpowering his listeners finally had to beg him to stop: "at the end of two hours we are really ill. It's no longer a piano, or a voice, but a vision…" Alfietucker (talk) 22:14, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Later years, 1896–1912
    • "a statement repeated by his biographers Macdonald and Irvine" – this is the first time Hugh Macdonald is mentioned in the main text (Irvine having been mentioned earlier with his full name): might we have his first name?
      • Thanks for that. Have added. I've repeated Irvine's too at that point, as it looked odd with two surnames and only one given name. Tim riley talk 22:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • "His last major success was Don Quichotte" – perhaps worth mentioning that this was written with Feodor Chaliapin specifically in mind for the title role (though not one of Massenet's favourite singers, according to Opera Grove)?
      • Interesting. I'll ponder on that. As Donkey Shot has turned out to be one of Massenet's more revivable works (Van Allan brought a tear to the eye at the ENO) I am not sure I want to shift the focus from work to original star. I'll return to this after ruminating. Tim riley talk 22:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I was thinking maybe just a parenthetical note that it was originally written for Chaliapin; I find that quite interesting given how big a star Chaliapin was at the beginning of the 20th century and Massenet (I believe) tends to be thought of as a late 19th century figure. Still, it's only a small point and it's your baby - and a fine creation it is. Alfietucker (talk) 22:22, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Later: I've pondered, and I don't think we want to mention Chaliapin here. But what with WP:OWN and Roland Barthes' La mort de l'auteur it doesn't much matter what I think. Come one, come all! Tim riley talk 22:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Tim, of course it matters what you think, as I'm sure you realise. Even if we don't always agree, I do think you are one of the most perceptive and intelligent, not to mention, one of the most collegial and sympathetic editors on WP. (Oh, and to hell with Barthes - he may have claimed to have liberated the text from its author, but his own approach to analysing narrative was itself restrictive and lacking in certain subtleties.) And of course it's possible that another editor *may* come up with the same point about Chaliapin; but until they do (and I certainly don't intend to "drum up support" for this really small point) I've no intention of pursuing this. :-) All best, Alfietucker (talk) 12:39, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
              • I'm off to my hatter (Bates in Jermyn Street) first thing tomorrow to be measured for a larger size after those very kind words. Bless you, young Alfie! Tim riley talk 16:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's it from me. All best, Alfietucker (talk) 20:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Alfie, for these points. All very much ad rem. Tim riley talk 22:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jack of Oz[edit]

Two comments:

  • ... she gave him his first piano lesson on ... the day on which the last French king, Louis-Philippe, abdicated. Why is this coincidence worthy of note? Was he in any way connected to Louis-Philippe?
    • Good point. This is how Massenet begins his memoirs, but there is no reason to believe it is true, or even very relevant. So blitzed.
  • "According to his memoirs" is twice used as a qualification. Is this meant to downplay his testimony as not being independent and therefore somewhat questionable? If that's the issue, can we not find independent sources for these items of information?
    • I think it important to say what he tells us in his wonderfully readable but highly imaginative memoirs: any statement of his purporting to be fact is, I hope, verified or balanced by other sources quoted at each point, cf. how long he was in Chambéry, reason for rejection of Hérodiade, why he left the Conservatoire in 1896 and so forth. I've added a bit in the text explaining that his memoirs are by no means gospel. Tim riley talk 09:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, a lovely article. I made some small sp/pu/gr tweaks. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 00:26, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions above, and eagle-eyed tweaks most gratefully received. Thank you, Jack! Tim riley talk 09:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Crisco[edit]

  • Massenet was a popular and respected professor at the Paris Conservatoire from 1878 until 1896, when he resigned after the death of its director, Ambroise Thomas. Among his students were Gustave Charpentier, Ernest Chausson, Reynaldo Hahn and Gabriel Pierné. - This doesn't quite flow with the previous paragraph, in my opinion. Almost all of the lead (including the paragraph after this) is related to his composing career. The way his teaching is presented is rather jarring.
    • Redrawn. It needs to go in the lead – it is definitely an important part of his biog – but I've segued into it a bit more smoothly. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You seem to be to overuse the semi-colon a wee bit; I count fifty four in the article.
    • I'll have a ponder; I hate short, staccato sentences. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • 54? Ha! That's in the amateur league, compared to my overuse: BB counted up a monumental 67 in George Formby. - SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • A lot of the semicolons are in bundled citations. In the main text and footnotes there are 34, of which four are the separators in the list of opera houses mentioned below, and four more are within quotations. I think 26 semicolons as against 249 full stops and 496 commas will probably pass muster. I've just gone through all 26, and I can't see any that I think would be better replaced by a full stop or a conjunction. – Tim riley talk 17:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The prize brought a well-subsidised three-year period of study, with two of the years spent at the French Academy in Rome, based at the Villa Medici. - any way to avoid year - year? Perhaps "two of which were to be spent..."?
  • In October 1866 Massenet and Ninon were married; their only child, Juliette, was born in 1868. - what changed? Was he richer? Or did Ninon not care?
    • The sources don't say. He was no longer a student, and was earning a decent, if modest, living, so I suppose he seemed a likely enough breadwinner for her to say Yes. But this is speculation. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, In October 1866 Massenet and Ninon were married; their only child, Juliette, was born in 1868. His ... - Might be confusing with Juliette as the most recently mentioned individual and the couple being the second most recent subject
    • I wondered this as I wrote, but reckoned, and on the whole still do, that Massenet is the last noun to which the "his" could possibly be attached. But I can switch pronoun for noun if you feel strongly on the point. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, on further reflection I think you're right. I've changed it. Tim riley talk 18:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Hungarian State Opera House, the Bavarian State Opera, the Semperoper, Dresden, the Teatro Real, Madrid, and the Royal Opera House, London. - I'd standardise the linking and (I see the irony) separate with semi-colons and commas, rather than simply commas
  • Standardize whether your periods go before or after your quotation marks.
  • Other writers on French music have written - write / written
    • I know, and I saw this as I was writing, here and elsewhere, but somehow the perfect tense feels right in some places and the historic present seems to fit better in others. I think I'll chance my arm and change if absolutely obliged to at FAC. If, that is, I go to FAC – but please see my request in the preamble at the top of this page. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Tweaked a bit, ironing out the inconsistencies of tense. Tim riley talk 09:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ah! That's what I get for missing two letters! I meant the repetition of the "write" form. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Bless my soul! Small wars have been sparked by such mutual misunderstandings. Redrawn to accommodate your original point. Tim riley talk 16:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other writers on French music have written that Massenet, intensely ambitious to succeed Thomas, resigned in pique, after three months of manoeuvring, once the authorities finally rejected his insistence on being appointed director for life, as Thomas had been. - perhaps we could reduce the number of commas/clauses?
  • Although the composer had been suffering from abdominal cancer for some months, his symptoms did not seem imminently life-threatening, but within a few days his condition deteriorated sharply. - Perhaps "Although the composer had been suffering from abdominal cancer for some months, his symptoms did not seem imminently life-threatening. However, within a few days his condition deteriorated sharply."
    • That seems neither better nor worse than what's there, and I am always chary about "However"s. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Still not wholly persuaded, but have redrawn somewhat. Tim riley talk 22:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although, when he chose, Massenet could write noisy and dissonant scenes - do we need the commas?
  • Un érotisme discret et quasi-réligieux - why does "quasi" become "semi"? My French is quite rusty, but I don't think quasi is a false friend.
    • The phrase is quoted several times in the various English sources I have consulted. "Semi" is more frequent, though there is the odd "quasi". I too prefer "semi" which seems more at home in English than "quasi", which people never know how to pronounce. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • A contemporary critic, not unsympathetic to Massenet, commented that Marie-Magdeleine and the later oratorio Ève (1875) were "the Bible doctored up in a manner suitable to the taste of impressionable Parisian ladies – utterly inadequate for the theme, at the same time very charming and effective." - worth naming him/her here?
    • Not sure. I've added the name, but he isn't blue-link-worthy, and he's named in the citation, of course. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alfred de Musset, Guy de Maupassant, Victor Hugo, Théophile Gautier - Why do these gentlemen get their full names mentioned when the other authors you've named are last-name only? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • A cowardly evasion, using full names to camouflage the fact that I have never understood why when using just surnames, e.g. Charles de Gaulle is "de Gaulle", but Guy de Maupassant is plain "Maupassant". But I've broken cover and piped the four poets. – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thaïs was linked to the individual and not opera (I've fixed that). May want to double check your other links, especially the ones to Massenet's works. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good grief! I had no idea there was a real Thaïs. Thank you for picking that up. Thank you, too, for all the excellent points, above, almost all of which I agree with. The one change you have made to the page that slightly bothers me is the increase in image size for the quadruple mug-shot in the Recordings section. It's fine in itself, but doesn't it make the picture of the elderly Massenet just below it look a bit cramped? – Tim riley talk 16:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • What screen resolution are you at? There's a good two lines of white space under the quadruple image on my laptop (1366*768) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • No, they're not bumping into each other on either of my screens: I just mean that with the four-way mug-shot now that bit wider than it was, the pic of the elderly Massenet, originally the same width as the four-faces one, now looks a bit mean in size by comparison. Tim riley talk 16:17, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Partial image review by Adam Cuerden[edit]

I love Massenet. I think anyone of taste does. Hence why I have so many featured content credits related to him. Now, I don't think it's necessary to stuff every one in, but I'll list the ones not in the article, for consideration: Images

Sounds

It's probably worth at least considering a sound file or two. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Very pleased to see some such additions. You can probably slot them in more expertly than I can – pray go ahead. Tim riley talk 17:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Later: I've added two of the sound files: the Manon and Le Cid ones. Tim riley talk 13:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt[edit]

Excellently done, not much to suggest:

Lede
  • "Showing early signs of musical talent, while still a schoolboy Massenet was admitted to France's principal music college, the Paris Conservatoire." is it unusual for a schoolboy to be admitted there? I'm wondering if the opening phrase is really needed as of course he would not have been admitted if tone deaf.
    • Concedo. Shall prune. (The libel laws make it imprudent for me to mention Sir Xxx Yyyy and Sir Zzz Aaaa from a certain British music college in the 1950s by way of disproving your concluding proposition.). Later: done. Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Early
  • "south western France" should this be "southwestern"?
    • I'm ashamed to say I have no idea. I'll change it to the single word. If anyone objects to that I'll review forensically. Tim riley talk 17:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Legion of Honour" you are so liberal with the French, I wonder why this in English?
    • I've tried to follow the titles of WP articles and (after a hell of a punch-up I seem to recall, to which I was not party) the Legion's title in our English WP is in English. For instance, I'd have put Berlioz's masterpiece in English, but (wrongly I feel) our WP article is Les troyens and so on... Tim riley talk 17:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Operas
  • "Moreover, his versatility means that there is no plot or locale that can be regarded as typical Massenet." possibly this would be better suited (maybe without "plot or") in the last paragraph of the preceding section.
    • I'll need to come back to this after a careful ponder. Tim riley talk
      • I've had a go at making this work, but I couldn't get it to flow properly, and unless you feel strongly on the point I think I'll leave it as drawn. Tim riley talk 14:17, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As well as his lyrical and passionate music," Is this bridge really necessary?
  • The word "popular" is used to excess in the final paragraph of this section.
Reputation
  • "Massenet was never without some supporters." I would omit "some"
  • I'm not sure I find Cooper's comment helpful. Requiring a critic to have equal musical credentials to the composer he is criticising would place some above criticism for lack of qualified critics Some might say not a bad thing but I don't know.
    • I see what you mean. The detractors included some major practitioners, and I need to look again and possibly expand this bit. Tim riley talk 17:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Now done, to make it clear that fellow composers are involved. Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's about it. Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Wehwalt, for these points – very much to the point. Some really rather careful reviewing is prompted, so if you'll be so kind as to look in a day or so hence I hope you'll find all adjusted to your satisfaction. Tim riley talk 17:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments[edit]

With so great a cloud of witnesses on your behalf, you barely need my mutterings, but here they are for what they are worth. An excellent composer biography with which I can find little to criticise, but in nit-picking mode:

Lead
  • "Showing early signs of musical talent" is probably superfluous – he would not otherwise have been admitted.
  • "(not including his many suites of incidental music)" – this is indeed redundant, as you have previously specified stage works
  • Ambroise Thomas full-named twice in the lead?
    • Yes. I've also Ambroised him more than once in the text, too. I originally had him as just plain "Thomas", but whenever I reread, I kept fnding myself thinking "Thomas who" for a nanosecond, even though I wrote it. I think Ambroiseing him now and then is probably the lesser of two evils. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "By the time of his death" → "At the time of his death"?
    • Well, the view had gained some ground a few years before, so I think "by" is safer. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "old fashioned": normally hyphenated
    • You're right. The OED concurs. Now hyphenated. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Early years
  • Would it be appropriate to mention his early musical abilities before relating his interview at the Conservatoire?
    • Not a lot to recount. For want of anything more reliable we are left with his memoirs, which pretty much date his interest in music from 1848. Irvine speculates that he might have heard the music at Saint-Sulpice, but there's nothing substantive to go on. He was certainly no infant prodigy. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He continued his studies..." → "He pursued his studies" (to avoid a very slight ambiguity)
  • "with some modest distinction" → "with modest distinction"?
  • "private piano students of his own" – last three words redundant in view of "private"
Early works
  • A minor pinprick: "He generally worked fluently..." – the double adverb slightly jars
  • "highly prestigious" – "prestigious" does not need the qualifying adverb
Operatic successes and failures, 1879–96
  • Unless I've missed an earlier mention, Paris Opéra should have a link
  • "After the intimate elegance of Manon..." Is this editorialising?
    • Possibly. I've made it "the intimate drama of Manon", which I don't think anyone will boggle at. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Later years, 1896–1912
  • "He followed it with Cendrillon..." reads oddly when the paragraph begins: "With Grisélidis and Cendrillon complete..."
  • "two serious pieces" – I think I'd say "operas", as earlier in this para you wre discussing a non-operatic work
  • "terse drama" – once again, a suspicion of the editorial voice
    • Grove calls it "abrupt and forceful", but I'm not keen on adding "what Grove describes as…" here for such a peripheral work. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Music
  • There is inconsistency in the article between "the conservatoire" and "the Conservatoire", the former being the most generally used, (as in this section, but lapses elsewhere).
    • Now all lower case when used without "Paris" in front of it. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph of the "Opera" section seems somewhat assertive ("as many other composers do" and "Moreover...") It is not clear whose view is being summarised here.
    • I can't recall whom I was thinking of when I wrote this. Beethoven and Verdi are, I suppose, the two composers whom commentators most regularly chop into early, middle and late, but the same has been done to Brahms, Fauré, Elgar, Debussy, RVW, Walton, Britten and Cobbleigh. I've even seen the same distinction drawn in the excellent WP article on Mahler, here. But I've watered it down. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the roll of the Huntingdonshire cabmen in the Recording section really necessary? A lot of names, a lot of blue.
    • I know, but if I don't include a few you can bet your chemise that fans of Mme X and Signor Y will be shovelling names in by the cart-load. This way I can at least say "we've got enough already, and they were agreed at PR/FAC". There is the additional point that listing these A-list performers shows that Massenet attracts the top conductors and singers. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reputation
  • I am slightly concerned about the two lengthy verbatim quotes, of 177 and 99 words respectively. Why should these anti-Massenet viewpoints be given such prominence, and at such length? The impression could be given that these judgements carry special authority, yet they are 100+ years old and, as you say later, there has been substantial reassessment of Massenet's work since that time. I think you should try to reduce these quotations considerably, retaining the saltier wording but otherwise relying on paraphrase.
    • I have boiled the odious Fuller Maitland's comments down hugely, leaving a few of his ipsissima verba for him to hang himself on. I've left more of the MT quote intact, after a few new cuts: I think it is now as condensed as it can usefully be, and I'd rather blitz it than try and prune any more. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was of course Strauss's comment on himself that he was a first-class second-rate composer, a piece of modesty or self-deprecation that Michael Steen calls "a pathetic understatement". I don't think Milnes understood this, and seems to accept it as a critical judgement. It still makes me smile, though.
    • I didn't know it was Strauss who said that of Strauss, and I shouldn't be in the least astonished to learn that Rodders missed the joke. The Strauss WP article is a dog's breakfast, and one of these days I'll do something about it, if I live long enough. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of nothing else to say, except a caveat on semicolons – 37 on my count, probably too many (I'll have to watch the same point on Noye's Fludde). I leave it to your judgement as to how many of my comments you take on board, and look forward to seeing it again further down the pipeline.

As this is the second time a reviewer has complained about the number of semicolons I have done something about it, though I don't think any of the changes is an improvement – quite the contrary.
Many thanks for this excellent review. Some splendid points, and except where I have fought back, above, all now effected. – Tim riley talk 13:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reading your entertaining responses is one of the things that makes reviewing worth while. One final sally: I don't think the "List of works" should be shown as the "Main article" in the Music Section hatnote – this is the main article, to which the list is an addendum. I would change this to "Further information". Brianboulton (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Sally. Now changed. Your kind comments on the backchat are heartily reciprocated. Tim riley talk 16:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to all the contributors, above. I have greatly enjoyed and benefited from this peer review. I am now off to FAC in company with User:Cg2p0B0u8m Tim riley talk 21:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Jules_Massenet/archive1&oldid=1136085111"