Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-22T21:59:12Z

Daffodil:

This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Great article!--[[User:HPalmer|HPalmer]] 19:01, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

The information in this article is woefully incorrect. A few examples
of the many errors are shown below:<br>
<ol>
<li>Prokoviev, not Shostakovich, wrote "The Love for Three Oranges".</li>
<li>The author correctly notes that some of Shostakovich's music was
written to protest government oppression, but unaccountably fails to
mention such well-known examples as the final movement of the 5th
Symphony ("A Soviet Artist’s Reply to Just Criticism") and the 2nd
movement of the 10th Symphony (an unflattering musical portrait of
Stalin).</li>
<li>Although Shostakovich did make a short trip to the United
States, he did not emigrate from the Soviet Union and later return as
claimed by the author of this article - rather, it was Prokoviev who
emigrated and later returned.</li>
<li>Shostakovich did not write "Mars,
the Bringer of War" - this is a movement from "The Planets" by Gustav
Holst. Neither did he write a Piano Concerto in D Minor or the "Rituals
of Springtime" - the author may be thinking of Sergei Rachmaninoff's
Piano Concerto No. 3 in D Minor, and "Rites of Spring" was written by
Igor Stravinsky.</li>
<li>Although the author claims that Shostakovich
wrote less serious music toward the end of his life, some of his most
enduring symphonies (13, 14, and 15) and string quartets (12, 13, 14,
and 15) date from the late 1960s and early 1970s. In addition,
significant vocal works such as "Six Poems by Marina Tsvetayeva", a
suite for contralto and piano, were written toward the end of his life.
This is not mentioned in the article.</li>
</ol>
If the article is an
attempted hoax, it's not funny - at any rate, it's wildly inaccurate,
and needs to be taken down and completely rewritten. A good starting point for
accurate information about Dmitri Shostakovich is Laurel Fay's 1999
book "Shostakovich: A Life", Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-513438-9. --An3206 02:12, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

The article is indeed an attempted hoax. As I said in my previous discussion contribution, which I note has been deleted, Shostakovich did NOT write a famous prelude in C-sharp Minor Op 2 No 3 (sic) - the author must have known that it was Rachmaninov that wrote a famous prelude in C-sharp Minor Op 3 No 2 (sic). It's clearly deliberate misinformation. If kids are going to use this as a resource, the it is criminal to feed them with deliberate mis-information like this. [[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 17:21, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

I have made a fairly major edit to the article at least to remove some of the falsehoods and trying to replace them with some reasonably accurate information. It is a long way from being up to the standard of an encyclopedia article, I'm aware - it wants citations, and could do with a lot more detail. But hopefully it's a start. I'm afraid the entire sections on emigration (he didn't) and the Tchaikovsky competition have had to be removed - I couldn't think of anything real to replace them with. Shostakovich visited America ''after'' the war, not before it. [[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 17:59, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-22T21:54:27Z

Daffodil:

'''Dmitri Shostakovich''' (1906-1975) was a Russian composer who worked in many different styles and forms. While he is primarily known for his symphonies and string quartets, he also composed several operas, orchestral suites, concertos, and much piano music. Shostakovich actually began his musical career as a pianist in a silent movie theater; these influences can be seen in his first Trumpet Concerto (Op. 35), which features piano obbligato.

Shostakovich has been criticized for composing "banal" music due to the restrictions placed on him by the Communist Party. However, most critics feel that he was able to successfully transcend these restrictions and create great works of art. In addition, many of his works have been interpreted by critics as being ''intentionally'' banal as a way of satirising the Soviet regime. A well-known example of this [needs a citation] is the conclusion of the Fifth Symphony, viewed by the authorities as a triumphant conclusion. However, later, in his alleged memoirs "Testimony", Shostakovich was supposed to have said that the end of the Fifth symphony is about enforced rejoicing. The authenticity of "Testimony", however, is disputed, and hence this, and much else that has been surmised about Shostakovich's intentions, has to be taken as a matter of conjecture.

==Wartime years==

During the siege of Leningrad, Shostakovich lived in the city and wrote his seventh symphony in C major (subtitled "Leningrad"). The work is notable for an extended march section in the first movement, building up an intentionally banal tune in a manner reminiscent of Ravel's "Bolero". The symphony was premiered in Leningrad in 1942, and flown out of Russia in microfilm score, and was premiered in the USA under the baton of Toscanini very shortly afterwards. The symphony, which ends with a triumphant conclusion, described by the composer as "victory - a beautiful life in the future" , was a significant propaganda coup.

However, the composers next two symphonies were not well received by the authorities - the Eighth symphony in C minor also depicted the war, and ended in a pessimistic, exhausted fashion. The Ninth symphony was completed just after the war. The authorities expected a massive paean of triumph at the end of the war, on the scale of Beethoven's Ninth symphony. What Shostakovich delivered was a small scale, lightweight work with considerable humor and irony. This led to the composer being severely criticised as "formalist" in the notorious "Zhdanov decree" of 1948.

His large scale work for piano, the 24 Preludes and Fugues, Op 87, (1951) was also criticized at the Composer's union for being too abstract and "formalist".

==Latter years==

In his later years, Shostakovich's music became increasingly personal, and often involving the theme of death. Notably, the Fourteenth Symphony (1968) is a series of eleven songs on the theme of death. In contrast to many classical works dealing with death, the Fourteenth symphony does not seek to offer religious consolation. The late String Quartets, notably the Thirteenth (Op 138) and the Fifteenth (Op 144) are similarly bleak and death-obsessed. Shostakovich's final work is a sonata for viola and piano (Op 147) which was completed a few days before his death from lung cancer in 1975.

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-22T21:21:51Z

Daffodil:

This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Great article!--[[User:HPalmer|HPalmer]] 19:01, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

The information in this article is woefully incorrect. A few examples
of the many errors are shown below:<br>
<ol>
<li>Prokoviev, not Shostakovich, wrote "The Love for Three Oranges".</li>
<li>The author correctly notes that some of Shostakovich's music was
written to protest government oppression, but unaccountably fails to
mention such well-known examples as the final movement of the 5th
Symphony ("A Soviet Artist’s Reply to Just Criticism") and the 2nd
movement of the 10th Symphony (an unflattering musical portrait of
Stalin).</li>
<li>Although Shostakovich did make a short trip to the United
States, he did not emigrate from the Soviet Union and later return as
claimed by the author of this article - rather, it was Prokoviev who
emigrated and later returned.</li>
<li>Shostakovich did not write "Mars,
the Bringer of War" - this is a movement from "The Planets" by Gustav
Holst. Neither did he write a Piano Concerto in D Minor or the "Rituals
of Springtime" - the author may be thinking of Sergei Rachmaninoff's
Piano Concerto No. 3 in D Minor, and "Rites of Spring" was written by
Igor Stravinsky.</li>
<li>Although the author claims that Shostakovich
wrote less serious music toward the end of his life, some of his most
enduring symphonies (13, 14, and 15) and string quartets (12, 13, 14,
and 15) date from the late 1960s and early 1970s. In addition,
significant vocal works such as "Six Poems by Marina Tsvetayeva", a
suite for contralto and piano, were written toward the end of his life.
This is not mentioned in the article.</li>
</ol>
If the article is an
attempted hoax, it's not funny - at any rate, it's wildly inaccurate,
and needs to be taken down and completely rewritten. A good starting point for
accurate information about Dmitri Shostakovich is Laurel Fay's 1999
book "Shostakovich: A Life", Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-513438-9. --An3206 02:12, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

The article is indeed an attempted hoax. As I said in my previous discussion contribution, which I note has been deleted, Shostakovich did NOT write a famous prelude in C-sharp Minor Op 2 No 3 (sic) - the author must have known that it was Rachmaninov that wrote a famous prelude in C-sharp Minor Op 3 No 2 (sic). It's clearly deliberate misinformation. However, if you examine a number of articles about composers (Beethoven comes to mind), you will find similar silly distortions in all of them that were contributed by the same author. (Incidentally it's the Love OF Three Oranges, not the Love FOR three oranges - a similar pattern of even giving the wrong name e.g. "Rituals of Spring"). Someone should check all the articles contributed by the same author as this one, and take them all down. If kids are going to use this as a resource, the it is criminal to feed them with deliberate mis-information like this. [[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 17:21, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-16T00:40:27Z

Daffodil:

I propose this article should be deleted and that the user Scriabin should be banned.

While it is tempting to ridicule Conservapedia for some of the ludicrous articles that are apparently serious, it is very clear the posts I've seen from Scriabin are all deliberately wrong and just put there to make a mockery of the whole thing. This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense. I would challenge Scriabin that in writing deliberate falsehood like this s/he is doing just the same thing! How can that possibly be a constructive thing to do??

The article under consideration is a disgrace to the memory of Shostakovich, surely one of the greatest composers and humanitarians of the 20th century. There are clear factual errors and I suggest that Scriabin knows this perfectly well, for example Shostakovich did not write "The love of three Oranges" (it was Prokofiev), or the prelude in C-sharp minor Op 3 No 2 (everyone who knows Op 3 No 2 knows it was Rachmaninov). You're writing deliberate lies, Scriabin ... you're no better than the creationists you evidently seek to ridicule.

It looks like Scriabin is deliberately trying to mislead in a web-site that is used by minors. Now, I also think it's criminal to indoctrinate minors with creationist lies as well - in doing so, Conservapedia is sowing the seeds of future atheists, when they come to realise what a lot of nonsense so-called "creation science" is. But I guess I'm not going to persuade the Conservapedia editors about this. But if any sysadmin reads this, they would be well advised to go to Scriabin's contribs page and note that in the last few days s/he has contributed a large number of articles and (from the two or three I've sampled so far) it seems they are all as deliberately misleading as the Shostakovich article.

Of course, I could be wrong, and maybe Scriabin is completely genuine ... but I can't make up my mind whether it's more judgemental to accuse someone of being a liar or being stupid. I think I'll give Scriabin the benefit of the doubt - I believe s/he is actually pretty smart.

I don't agree with the views of Conservapedia at all and I'm also British and proud of it. But if it was considered appropriate, I'd be willing to contribute an article on Shostakovich that attempts to give a more factual picture of the composer - if only because impressionable youngsters are going to be reading this stuff and quoting it in their essays.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-16T00:39:20Z

Daffodil:

I propose this article should be deleted and that the user Scriabin should be banned.

While it is tempting to ridicule Conservapedia for some of the ludicrous articles that are apparently serious, it is very clear the posts I've seen from Scriabin are all deliberately wrong and just put there to make a mockery of the whole thing. This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense. I would challenge Scriabin that in writing deliberate falsehood like this he is doing just the same thing! How can that possibly be a constructive thing to do??

The article under consideration is a disgrace to the memory of Shostakovich, surely one of the greatest composers and humanitarians of the 20th century. There are clear factual errors and I suggest that Scriabin knows this perfectly well, for example Shostakovich did not write "The love of three Oranges" (it was Prokofiev), or the prelude in C-sharp minor Op 3 No 2 (everyone who knows Op 3 No 2 knows it was Rachmaninov). You're writing deliberate lies, Scriabin ... you're no better than the creationists you evidently seek to ridicule.

It looks like Scriabin is deliberately trying to mislead in a web-site that is used by minors. Now, I also think it's criminal to indoctrinate minors with creationist lies as well - in doing so, Conservapedia is sowing the seeds of future atheists, when they come to realise what a lot of nonsense so-called "creation science" is. But I guess I'm not going to persuade the Conservapedia editors about this. But if any sysadmin reads this, they would be well advised to go to Scriabin's contribs page and note that in the last few days s/he has contributed a large number of articles and (from the two or three I've sampled so far) it seems they are all as deliberately misleading as the Shostakovich article.

Of course, I could be wrong, and maybe Scriabin is completely genuine ... but I can't make up my mind whether it's more judgemental to accuse someone of being a liar or being stupid. I think I'll give Scriabin the benefit of the doubt - I believe Scriabin is actually pretty smart.

I don't agree with the views of Conservapedia at all and I'm also British and proud of it. But if it was considered appropriate, I'd be willing to contribute an article on Shostakovich that attempts to give a more factual picture of the composer - if only because impressionable youngsters are going to be reading this stuff and quoting it in their essays.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-16T00:11:48Z

Daffodil:

I propose this article should be deleted and that the user Scriabin should be banned.

While it is tempting to ridicule Conservapedia for some of the ludicrous articles that are apparently serious, it is very clear the posts I've seen from Scriabin are all deliberately wrong and just put there to make a mockery of the whole thing. This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense. I would challenge Scriabin that in writing deliberate falsehood like this he is doing just the same thing! How can that possibly be a constructive thing to do??

The article under consideration is a disgrace to the memory of Shostakovich, surely one of the greatest composers and humanitarians of the 20th century. There are clear factual errors and I suggest that Scriabin knows this perfectly well, for example Shostakovich did not write "The love of three Oranges" (it was Prokofiev), or the prelude in C-sharp minor Op 3 No 2 (everyone who knows Op 3 No 2 knows it was Rachmaninov). You're writing deliberate lies, Scriabin ... you're no better than the creationists you evidently seek to ridicule.

It looks like Scriabin is deliberately trying to mislead in a web-site that is used by minors. Now, I also think it's criminal to indoctrinate minors with creationist lies as well - in doing so, Conservapedia is sowing the seeds of future atheists, when they come to realise what a lot of nonsense so-called "creation science" is. But I guess I'm not going to persuade the Conservapedia editors about this. But if any sysadmin reads this, they would be well advised to go to Scriabin's contribs page and note that in the last few days s/he has contributed a large number of articles and (from the two or three I've sampled so far) it seems they are all as deliberately misleading as the Shostakovich article.

Of course, I could be wrong, and maybe Scriabin is completely genuine ...

I don't agree with the views of Conservapedia at all and I'm also British and proud of it. But if it was considered appropriate, I'd be willing to contribute an article on Shostakovich that attempts to give a more factual picture of the composer - if only because impressionable youngsters are going to be reading this stuff and quoting it in their essays.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

2007-03-16T00:09:37Z

Daffodil:

I propose this article should be deleted and that the user Scriabin should be banned.

While it is tempting to ridicule Conservapedia for some of the ludicrous articles that are apparently serious, it is very clear the posts I've seen from Scriabin are all deliberately wrong and just put there to make a mockery of the whole thing. This is completely imbecilic. The horrendous thing about Conservapedia is that young people are being indoctrinated with creationist nonsense. I would challenge Scriabin that in writing deliberate falsehood like this he is doing just the same thing! How can that possibly be a constructive thing to do??

The article under consideration is a disgrace to the memory of Shostakovich, surely one of the greatest composers and humanitarians of the 20th century. There are clear factual errors and I suggest that Scriabin knows this perfectly well, for example Shostakovich did not write "The love of three Oranges" (it was Prokofiev), or the prelude in C-sharp minor Op 3 No 2 (everyone who knows Op 3 No 2 knows it was Rachmaninov). You're writing deliberate lies, Scriabin ... you're no better than the creationists you evidently seek to ridicule.

It looks like Scriabin is deliberately trying to mislead in a web-site that is used by minors. Now, I also think it's criminal to indoctrinate minors with creationist lies as well - in doing so, Conservapedia is sowing the seeds of future atheists, when they come to realise what a lot of nonsense so-called "creation science" is. But I guess I'm not going to persuade the Conservapedia editors about this. But if any sysadmin reads this, they would be well advised to go to Scriabin's contribs page and note that in the last few days s/he has contributed a large number of articles and (from the two or three I've sampled so far) it seems they are all as deliberately misleading as the Shostakovich article.

Of course, I could be wrong, and maybe Scriabin is completely genuine ...

I don't agree with the views of Conservapedia at all and I'm also British and proud of it. But if it was considered, I'd be willing to contribute an article on Shostakovich that attempts to give a more factual picture of the composer - if only because impressionable youngsters are going to be reading this stuff and quoting it in their essays.

[[User:Daffodil|Daffodil]] 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)