![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 12, 2018. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article may be B-class, but it is so just barely. Some elements typical of composer biographies are lacking, and the article is entirely unsourced. My full review is on the comments page; it's not pretty. Questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 14:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
There is an excellent book by Tia DeNora that compares and contrasts the careers of Dussek and Beethoven. Dussek was a far more important than this terribly biased article would have you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baron D. Z. (talk • contribs) 19:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The simple fact of the inclusion of many Dussek works in standard piano anthologies from G. Schirmer and probably Theodore Presser is a valid measure of their lasting impact and value. If they had not been consistently used throughout the 19th century, they would not have been included alongside Clementi and Kuhlau and the like. And their inclusion ensured their continued use throughout the 20th century. The comments on his being unknown sounded quite baseless and founded in dare I assume a British assumption about the continent, or the other way around? The fact that you did not discover his music sooner is about you, not Dussek. Harold Schonberg was the distinguished editor of the Arts & Leisure section of the New York Times, and his comments on Dussek's importance can't be disregarded. Tia DeNora's book, correctly identified (I could not recall the exact title), is highly informative and eye-opening. Beethoven did not come from nowhere. Dussek's Sonatinas for harp, the sixth in particular has moments that can be found in Beethoven's Pathetique Sonata slow movement. Music is full of people like Dussek. The over-emphasis on Beethoven and promotion of only his music simply drowned out too many others. I think what is more controversial, far more, than my comments on attribution of his music is the feministic assertion that Sophia could have written his music. Now that her music can be downloaded from imslp.org, it is simple to compare their work. I don't appreciate threatening remarks. I do not have any more time to spend on this than I have done. If you don't like my sourcing, well that is exactly what Wikipedia is really worth: nothing. It is stupid to assume this will ever be any kind of reliable source. Not that I am trying to ruin it. For this, Encyclopedia Britannica was ruined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baron D. Z. (talk • contribs) 04:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
In the "Style" section, it says "The evolution of style found in Dussek's piano writing suggests he pursued an independent line of development, one that anticipated but did not influence early Romanticism (somewhat in the manner of Gesualdo)." Fair enough, but...Gesualdo? This is either independent research or it tries to make a point too obscure for all but the most expert reader. I'll remove the final parenthetical phrase... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opus131 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jan Ladislav Dussek/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
==Composers Project Assessment of Jan Ladislav Dussek: 2009-01-8==
This is an assessment of article Jan Ladislav Dussek by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described?
===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?
===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?
===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article.
===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)?
===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.)
===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references?
===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.)
===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review===
===Summary=== I admit to not having ever heard of Dussek. That said, this article is an interesting read. However, it is entirely unsourced -- the one inline citation points to a dead link (at the time I write this). This is a particularly severe problem in this article, as it contains much peacock language, asserting the importance of its subject. Some of the biographical elements are also sufficiently colorful that they should really be properly sourced. The biography should contain more on his composing history; when he wrote his first works, and how his style developed. An article this long should be divided with heading, and contain more images. Its lead should be lengthened, and its footer material arranged per WP:LAYOUT. The works list should be placed in a separate article, and the "Craw" catalog described. This article is B-class, but it needs a lot of work. Magic♪piano 14:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC) |
Last edited at 14:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 19:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
With a theme that triadic, it strikes me that this is not impressive at all. To be somewhat frank, it smacks of the writing that tends to be given to support the greatness of unsung composers (somehow always in relation to some established composer of the classical canon): I wonder when we will hear not only that Beethoven got the idea from Dussek, but that Dussek also got it from the slow movement of Mozart's KV 467. (After all, we're already changing the meter; why not fiddle with the tempo too?) Mind you, this sort of thing is common enough in published writing about these composers that I am more relieved than anything else that this resemblance is uncited. Double sharp (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)