Jump to content

Talk:Edmund Chipp: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Bvrly (talk | contribs)
removed "contributions welcomed" as it seems to procure deletions and unwelcome interference rather than substantiated, positive contribution.
Bvrly (talk | contribs)
note on work in progress and refs
Line 3: Line 3:
This page is young and still evolving.[[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
This page is young and still evolving.[[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


I have references and much more content to insert as soon as time allows. I can fill in where someone has added <citation needed> but it is my way to write a section and then fillin the refs later. Sometimes I miss one, but I do have them. You might even know it yourself and be able to fill it in for me. [[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 10:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


==Chipp and Mendelssohn==
==Chipp and Mendelssohn==

Revision as of 10:28, 10 March 2010

WikiProject iconClassical music
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.

This page is young and still evolving.Bvrly (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have references and much more content to insert as soon as time allows. I can fill in where someone has added <citation needed> but it is my way to write a section and then fillin the refs later. Sometimes I miss one, but I do have them. You might even know it yourself and be able to fill it in for me. Bvrly (talk) 10:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chipp and Mendelssohn

Dear Bvrly, Please don't take my edits of this article as an attack on you personally. What you have written about Mendelssohn's untoward reception in the UK before 1844 is completely unsubstantiated by any biography of the composer - please look for example at R. Larry Todd's 2003 biography, Werner's biography or indeed any other. Nor was there any hint of anti-Semitism attached to M. in the press or elsewhere. There is no evidence that Chipp introduced M.'s music to the Royal Family. And it is just not true that Chipp was the first to play M.'s compositions in the UK before he became famous (or even I think that he was the first to give M's organ sonatas in public, as the composer himself played them frequently, but I am open to correction on this if you can provide citations). The Musical Times obituary which you cite does not say that Mendelssohn heard Chipp play the six sonatas from memory, only that the obituarist heard him do so - your citation as it stood was misleading. (Of course if you can find well-researched publications which you can cite backing such statements, I will gladly withdraw these comments). The Oxford DNB article on Chipp does not even mention Mendlessohn.I do not mean in any way to demean Chipp, but if you make unreasonable claims for him you yourself are devaluing him. With best regards, --Smerus (talk) 21:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I would recommend that you rename the article as Edmund Chipp (according to standard Wikipedia practice) and add some categories - that way the article will get more readers. If you want help on this (it is a bit complex for new editors) I will be glad to do it on your behalf.--Smerus (talk) 21:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now found a reference which indicate that Chipp may have been the first to play the organ sonatas in public, and have cited this. This comment doesn't extend to Mendelssohn's other works of course.--Smerus (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Smerus, you are too quick to judge, and in particular to delete. As you admit in your last sentence, sometimes there ARE sources for information that you do not find yourself till later. Only a fool will come out with blanket statements like "There is no evidence" unless you know what I have in front of me and have read everything ever written in the history of the world. You do not know everything, and whilst some things may not feature in the biography of one man they may appear in reputable publications or biographies of another. Suffice to say that I have been greatly upset by your rapid deletions of my previous contributions and did as you said and did not put anything else on the Mendelssohn page, but now you pursue me to this. I do feel that this is a personal attack and as I have not interfered with your own postings and pages, I would be grateful if you can now leave me alone unless you are actually contributing new information. Enough sabotage and sarcasm. If you want to make comment restrict it to the talk page and I will look at it, but please stop tampering with my posts.In view of the tone of your previous communications however I would much prefer it if you actually did not bother to comment either. Give the pages a chance to develop and come back and look in one year or something. Thanks. Bvrly (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]