Talk:Thomas Beecham

Top pic

I pressed the wrong button and reversed the latest contributor's swap of the 1910 photo and the Emu caricature, and then hastily reverted to the status quo ante. But on reflection I think the Emu pic is better at the top. Views gratefully received. - Tim riley (talk) 23:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, let's have the Emu one at the top. Rothorpe (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly, but I thought an actual photo should be first, with drawings, etc. later. Maybe there's a guideline on it. I'm not sure. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes, larger picture better. Rothorpe (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I concur. - Tim riley (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Quinlan and tour

Removed para as peripheral, but, naturally happy to withdraw if a majority of others demur. - Tim riley (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Error in template

The template at the top of this page has 'cleanup' as a verb. This is incorrect and needs to be changed. But I don't know how. Rothorpe (talk) 22:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

American recordings

This section threatened to expand disproportionately. Beecham's recorded legacy was principally with the LPO and RPO. I have pruned accordingly, but further trimming of the still rather lengthy American recording para would be advantageous, I think. Views invited on this. - Tim riley (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if this question is stale, considering your recent improvements to the article, Tim, but I trimmed this paragraph a little bit more, just now. Feel free to revert if you think I have over-trimmed it. All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Tim riley (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Last sentence of 1910-1920

I simplified the sentence and added the "sol" cite. Please check this and make sure you agree - if not, please amend. The sentence previously implied that Beecham stopped conducting because his personal financial affairs had deteriorated, but the next section seems clear that it was because he had to deal with his father's estate. A case could be made that you do not need this sentence at all, as the facts will be entirely repeated in the next section. We don't usually have this type of "transition" sentence that pre-views the next section, even though other types of expository writing prefer them... In any case, kindly review. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I think we need a segue here, because I think the Bedford Estate section needs to remain intact, and therefore from 1920 we have got to go back to 1914 to begin the Bedford section. I've tightened up the segue sentence. Tim riley (talk) 19:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks good. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Sons

There seems to be some uncertainty about how many sons he had by Utica and who was the heir - the Baronetcy is currently in abeyance. 89.168.80.36 (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC) See the Wikipedia entry 'Beecham Baronets' Talk page item 'Clopton House' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Beecham_baronets 86.187.160.105 (talk) 20:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Rite of Spring

Beecham shared Monteux's private dislike of the piece, much preferring Petrushka.[39]
Although this was true at the end of Monteux's life (or rather he tired of the piece), I don't think his 'dislike' started right after the premiere... Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll look up the reference, but I don't think I misremember Monteux's remark in his old age apropos of the Rite, "I did not like it then, and I do not like it now." Tim riley (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Don’t worry: I am not planning to change anything. I was querying whether there is a citation of Monteux saying this at the time that Beecham was involved in the ballet seasons, or if it was later. It seems as if this is ’hindsight’ as recounted to Doris 50 years on. I don't blame him. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a good point. I wrote most of the article several years ago, and I'll need to check my sources. I have Monteux on my to-do list. He is, IMO, the most neglected great conductor of his, or perhaps any, generation. Does anyone assert that Beecham, Toscanini, Klemperer, Furtwängler was finer? I have him, as I say, on my to-do list, and hope to get him up to GA or FA. Tim riley (talk) 23:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

thank you for mentioning your intention to expand the article on Monteux. I was already thinking the same and have collected quite a few references. He is a very important musician. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I have tracked down the Monteux quote about The Rite. It is from Reid's 1961 biography of Beecham, p. 145: "I did not like Le Sacre then. I have conducted it fifty times since. I do not like it now." Tim riley (talk) 13:33, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for bothering to find the exact quote - as I say, I don't dispute it but it sounds like hindsight. If you read Doris you will find other 'comments' which may raise your eyebrows. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Odeon Recordings

In 1912, between Beecham's Gramophone Company sessions and his start with the UK Columbia he recorded six sides in a single session with Odeon Records. Not sure if this is worth mentioning in the article or not. Source: Beecham: A Centenary Discography by Michael Gray, pg 3. ThemFromSpace 17:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a separate article on Beecham's recordings, which is in need of a good deal of work to bring it up to the standard of similar articles for other conductors, e.g. Georg Solti discography. I think adding the Odeon details, and anything else of which you have details, to the discography article would be a valuable addition. Mention of the Odeon recordings in the main Beecham article might perhaps be a bit too specialised for the reader. Tim riley (talk) 07:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thought it might be too trivial for a FA, which is why I brought it to the talkpage. I might work on the discography article if I ever get to steady editing again (this place can be too stressful for my well being, hence longterm wikibreaks). ThemFromSpace 23:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Did he never study an instrument?

The article says nothing about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I came here to make the exact same point.

I've just read Charles Reid's Thomas Beecham: An Independent Biography, 1961, in which quite a lot of space is given to his early piano studies, his ambition to become a concert pianist, his natural facility with the instrument, and his phenomenal memory which enabled him to play anything asked of him, and beautifully. His career was foiled when he sprained and permanently injured his wrist by lifting heavy bags onto a train during his honeymoon in 1903. (Apparently, in A Mingled Chime, Beecham attributes the injury to "overstrain in piano practice or a blow from a cricket ball".) Afterwards he could never play for more than 20 minutes before "an incapacitating cramp or partial paralysis of the lower arm" set in. From this, he "drifted into conducting". It seems as important a matter to mention as Robert Schumann's aborted career as a concert pianist, likewise put to an end by an injury to his hand. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:31, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I've added a sentence. Tim riley talk 06:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Image of Beecham c. 1930s?

A wonderful article indeed, but would it be possible to upload an image of Beecham from the 1930s (one that would survive copyright concerns over at FLC/FAC)? I ask because I'm at work on Draft: Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles and am writing about Beecham's important connection to Jean Sibelius (e.g., saving Legge's butt after the Georg Schnéevoigt debacle on Symphonies Nos. 4 and 6). I don't dabble in image uploads (copyright is a beautiful mystery to me) and so would very much appreciate the assist! EDIT 1: I'm noticing that Yousuf Karsh has a Beecham portrait at National Portrait Gallery, as well as the fact that on his Wikipedia page, there are a number of other portraits from the same period that are considered in the public domain in Canada. EDIT 2: This image by Gordon Anthony from 1935 would be ideal, but it doesn't seem like his images have been uploaded on Commons before, I imagine do to copyright concerns. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 01:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)