Talk:William Byrd
From Academic Kids
I'm not trying to be funny, clever, rude, dismissive of others' efforts etc etc etc. BUT, I'm just thinking, is this article better than nothing? I mean, I suppose it is, and you can fillet out of it quite a lot of useful info, but really, the style, the irrelevant content (e.g. Byrd's problems with property ownership ...) I just don't know. Obviously it must have worked for a 1911 audience but I do have serious doubts about how useful it is now. And yes I know the obvious Wikipedian answer is that I ought to rewrite it, thank you very much, but I don't have time and I know NOTHING about Byrd except he wrote TITROJ and that's about it, so it's not me! (Maybe it's you, dear reader!) But I do like a good moan. So what do you think - better than nothing??? Nevilley 10:32 Nov 30, 2002 (UTC)
Byrd revisions
As noted in the revision history, I've (foolishly?) decided to flush the 1911 encyclopedia article on Byrd and replace it with something else. This is a potted biography I wrote for some recent concert notes, which I'm happy to see go into the public domain. The main focus of the concert was B's Latin sacred music, so the bio dwells on that more than on his equally worthy English and instrumental music. Please bring your additions, deletions, merciless edits, etc.
Camembert: I was skeptical at first about the revised birthdate, but it's genuine. See John Harley, William Byrd: Gentleman of the Chapel Royal (1997), and the newest edition of the Grove Dictionary of Music.
Nevilley: Isn't TITROJ by Gibbons? Still good fun for us altos though.
Any input is appreciated. Kerry <kmccarth@duke.edu>
- Wow! Major major MAJOR improvement! Well done!
- And yes it is by Gibbons, I can't believe I wrote that, I shall plead drunkenness if it ever goes to court. It's particularly sad when you note the context: I know NOTHING about Byrd except he wrote TITROJ - well, DUH, as my children say, and indeed DUH again. (Actually I think I may have been thinking of Ne Irascaris which is my other favourite peice of music of that time, but it does show you how badly misfiled things can get. Oh and now I suppose someone will tell me that actually NI is by, I don't know, Hildergard or Ligeti or someone, and on it goes ... ) But back to Byrd - this is a great article and congrats on it. --Nevilley 11:21, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, a great improvement, and thanks for the note on his birthdate. --Camembert
- Best composer article I've read on Wikipedia. And I've found quite a few which could do with similarly drastic treatment... Wilus 09:08, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
