Talk:The Nutcracker (ballet), Op.71 (Tchaikovsky, Pyotr)
Is this PD? The copyright is dated '51.
- Publication-wise it is PD in Canada yes. --Feldmahler 15:13, 28 January 2007 (EST)
Broude Brothers score
I seriously doubt their claim of copyright would hold up in any US court. It's basically a scarecrow notice. This score is a merely a reprint of the one issued by Jurgenson in 1892, which has also been reprinted by Dover and Kalmus. Even so, it would be best to remove the title page and get rid of the Broude logo and copyright notice on the first page of music. --Carolus, 28 Jan. 2007
Let's Talk Music
I'm going to be controversial. The Nutcracker is the best piece of music ever written, period. This may surprise some, because many would argue that something like Bach's St. Matthew Passion or Beethoven's 9th would hold that title, though I believe that the Nutcracker deserves this credit, for a few reasons.
First, the fame of the work is unparalled, save Beethoven's 9th, 5th, Carmen, and a few others. Everyone knows the tunes of the Nutcracker (March, Waltz of the Flowers), and even the less famous ones are just as good.
The Nutcracker is also the most accesable large scale piece of music around. It was the first show/concert my parents took me to when I was young, as is the case for many others. A good piece of music must be accessable, or else the masses can't appreciate it.
Finally, the theme of the Nutcracker and music lend perfectly to the feelings of the holiday season. Listening to it always makes me feel better, regardless of the time of year.
Please dispute me! I want to hear what everyone who reads this has to say.
--nerd011235, 11 June 2007
- AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA chris 14:19, 13 September 2007 (EDT)
- I believe that while Tchaikovsky is much better than most Baroque composers, that's not a very high bar to reach. Also, just because it's popular doesn't mean it's good - I use that same argument on stupid teenage girls who like the Jonas Brothers. Don't get me wrong, Tchaikovsky is definitely in my top 10. But I think all of Mahler's symphonies can beat this. --Clorox (diskussion) 23:11, 16 January 2009 (EST)
- While I think your comments are valid, you are simply mistaken when you say it is the best piece of music ever written. I agree that a majority of people probably know the tune, but in what way does that make a piece "good"? Everybody also knows Twinkle Twinkle, Little Star, but that's a far cry from a masterpiece. Furthermore, while it may make you 'feel good' (and that's perfectly valid), that - by no means - makes it one of the great pieces ever written. Tchaikovsky was along the same harmonic realm as Mozart, and I'm going to use similar arguments to what I use against his music. While melodically brilliant (especially for analysis), and perfectly symmetrical, he relied on the faculty of improvisation! This means he relied on common musical formulas to create his works. I urge you to listen to his C minor piano sonata and see if you can hear anything other than an appalling collection of cliches with no greater potency than inter-office memos or something. Same applies to Tchaikovsky. I'm being a bit harsh for the sake of controversy and interesting conversation, so there :) BKhon 06:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
English title of the finale...
Is this English title standardised by long tradition? "Waltz Finale and Apotheosis"
It seems to me to be a mistranslation: the French title "Valse finale et apothéose" means "final/last waltz and apotheosis", but in English the word 'finale' can only be read as the Italian word, which has become a noun in English meaning "the last piece". So the result has a curious double-barrelled ring to it, rather like "March Introduction". I can only pretend to read Russian, but I guess the ending on the first word (Финальный) means this is definitely a Russian adjective, not an Italian loan word.
So it seems to me it would be much better as "Final waltz and Apotheosis"...
Imaginatorium 07:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)