Talk:Otello

Two for one

Yo Baron! What do you think about creating two articles out of this one?? Maybe Otello and Otello(Rossini). I think maintain only one page will be difficult. --DrG 06:33, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

I wouldn't think that would be a great thing to do...they're two separate operas with no relationship.

Selected recordings

I edited the "selected recordings" section and now I'm having trouble getting the list of recordings under the right heading. I can't figure out how this happened.AlbertSM (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I have fixed it earlier but then u changed the }} sign. I will fix it again and I would be very much appreciate if you stop changing the syntax. Thanks. - Jay (talk) 04:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

"Musical analysis" section

I'm concerned about this edit, which added a "musical analysis" section. I would feel inclined to delete all of it, I doubt there is a way to copyedit that content to un-essay it in a satisfactory way. Anyway, I thought I would raise the issue here first, so as not to be rude to the editor, who evidently paid a substantial amount of effort in creating that section. –w2bh _{talk•contribs} 15:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I was right behind you with editing this, though mostly for grammar, capitalization, etc. Agree with what you say. It needs substantial revision to remove its essay-like qualities.... Viva-Verdi (talk) 15:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I just read this article for the first time and find that the Musical Analysis section is the most useful of all to me. Thank you for not deleting it. I can see that the editor has produced a musicological commentary without citing any sources so perhaps the objection is really to original research, but the style is not exactly essay-like, since it does not appear to be expressing a unique personal view, but merely taking the musical material of the opera chronologically and describing it. Some may object to its use of emotive language without musicological specificity, and of course it would be ideal to have descriptions such as "this bit of sarcasm is sung in a staccato ascending D-major line which breaks off, modulating into a ritardando descending B-minor cry of loss," but if you describe that same passage without the emotive terms ("bit of sarcasm" and "cry of loss"), the entire point is lost, even to a musically sophisticated reader who is not intimately familiar with the opera. I would think few would object to using "extra-musical" references to emotions when the genre to describe is opera of the romantic era, so the task before us would seem to be to justify the emotive references with more specific references to tempos, rhythms, keys, harmonies and melodic lines. Can anyone point us to examples in Wikipedia where musical analysis is both descriptively accessible to the non-expert and at the same time musicologically detailed and referenced to reliable sources? —Blanchette (talk) 08:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

History of Verdi?

I notice that much of this page, which should be concentrating on the Otello play, is actually telling a history of Verdi in the beginning stages. I don't think that should be there. Nontitle (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, as I read it now, it looks fine. It looks as though someone moved quite a bit elsewhere. Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

'Iago' vs 'Jago'

Is there a consensus on how we should spell the name here? I changed the Jagos to Iagos in the synopsis, but now I see there are Jagos in the analysis section, too. The original score does say "Jago", but that's because it was published in 1887. Initial (and intervocalic) consonantal "I" was generally spelled as "J" back then, but modern Italian orthography prefers "I" except in a few specific exceptions. Most sources about the opera spell it "Iago". Seems to me the article should be consistent throughout, and if a choice must be made I think "Iago" is the better choice. Any dissenting opinion? Iglew (talk) 08:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Fully concur. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I fully support this change. Viva-Verdi (talk) 16:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. All Jagos changed to Iagos. Iglew (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I disagree; the while it may be customary in modern times to use the letter "I" to denote this particular sound at the beginning of a word, it is necessary to remember that this opera does not come from modern times. The original libretto text by Boito utilizes the spelling with "J" as do most copies scores of the opera (including the Dover edition). Thus, as the opera was createda during a time when the letter "J" was used instead of "I" to refer to this sound and this was how it was written, it would be more accurate to utilize the spelling "Jago" instead of "Iago". Also, in response to the claim about most sources using the spelling with an "I", it is important to remember that the article is about the opera, not about what has been written about it (sources merely provide information).--71.116.163.139 (talk) 05:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, in Italian, the villain's name is Jago. Not "Iago". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.243.185 (talk) 16:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I have reverted the changes by the above anon IP. This is English Wikipedia, not Italian Wikipedia, and all Reliable English-Language Sources known to me (example: The New Grove Dictionary of Opera), spell the name as "Iago". --GuillaumeTell 16:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

If you're going to spell Jago's name "Iago" because it's an english encyclopedia, then you should spell Otello's name "Othello" as in english. It's an italian opera and the characters have italianized names. I have seen maybe TEN Italian librettos (I own a lot of recordings) and they ALL, without exception, use "Jago". Revert if you like, but to spell the name "Iago" in an article about the opera is, IMHO, an embarrassing error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.243.185 (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Firmly put, but note that modern Italian spelling is "Iago" whereas "Otello" is still "Otello"; the comparison is not as forcefully compelling as might appear almost-instinct 18:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I checked all my sources at home: Headington et al. Opera: a History, ENO Opera Guide, Eno programme 98/99, WNO programme 1990, EMI/Maazel/Domingo recording all go for "Iago". Lyrica/Toscanini/Vinay recording goes for "Jago". It's clear where the majority lies.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You mean the majority IN YOUR HOME. The majority in published libretti and inserts in CD packages is still "Jago". Also, Verdi hiself used "Jago". Shouldn't the composer have the final say? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.243.185 (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Karajan's recording with Jon Vickers says "Jago". Also, Tulio Serafin's recording, also with Vickers. The VHS video performance with Domingo and Cappucilli also says "Jago". Also, the online piano-vocal score at http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/variations/scores/bhr3363/large/index.html uses "Jago".207.237.243.185 (talk) 09:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

• I have to point out, to whoever consulted the ENO and WNO, that the ENO puts on operas only in English translation, not in the original language; the same is often true of the WNO. A better source would be the Metropolitan Opera: [1], which uses the spelling "Iago." I think arguments that even in Italian this is the current spelling, and that use of the J in English Wikipedia would be tremendously confusing, also weigh in favor of keeping the I rather than the J. Softlavender (talk) 06:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Useful source

In Domingo's entertaining book My First Forty Years there's some discussion about whether he was "right" for Otello - he points out that each major interpreter of the role has been criticised in relation to the previous one. I no longer have the book, but as I recall there's a useful quote that mentions several of the singers and their qualities (or perceived lack of them) Does anyone have a copy? almost-instinct 19:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I've managed to piece it all together from Google Books: almost-instinct 20:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

"As to the other question—that of singing roles that, according to self-proclaimed experts, we ought not to be singing—I have a little story to tell. When I decided to sing Otello, many people told me that I was crazy. Mario Del Monaco, they said, had had the proper kind of voice for the role, and my voice was nothing like his. Twenty years earlier, Del Monaco had been warned not to sing Otello because his voice was nothing like that of Ramon Vinay, who was then performing the opera all over the world. Vinay, of course, had heard that only a tenor with a piercing sound like Giovanni Martinelli's ought to sing the part. Some years earlier, Martinelli had had Antonin Trantoul, who had sung Otello at La Scala in the twenties, held up to him as a shining example; but at La Scala, those who still remembered the very first Otello, Francesco Tamagno, had found Trantoul completely unsatisfactory. But there exists a letter from Verdi to his publisher in the composer in which the composer makes it quite clear that Tamagno left a great deal to be desired."

Please fix this sentence

In the section "Ricordi and the plot to end Verdi's retirement": "Consequently, it was known that in order for Verdi possibly to agree to create another opera after a decade of retirement, the libretto would need to be such to capture his interest." The word "such" is worse than meaningless there. It implies that some adjective was used previously which would explain the word, but that is not true, either. Please replace "such" with something that makes sense. (I would myself, but I can't read the mind of the editor who wrote it.) Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 06:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, "Please fix this article" would be a better idea. The Composition section isn't referenced (nor is most of the rest of the article), Performance history is weak and gives Domingo too much space, the synopsis needs reducing and rewriting (typical quote: "God keep you merry, husband"), the "Critical evaluation" is tendentious and over the top, and so on. However, I've rewritten the section and added one reference. Feel free to improve it further, and n.b there's no need to try to read any editor's mind - if something doesn't make sense, you can Be Bold and fix it. --GuillaumeTell 17:46, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

The section on critical evaluation badly needs references

In particular, it starts with the phrase "Most commentators and musicologists consider Otello to be Verdi's greatest, most mature opera." This may or may not be true, but you certainly can't tell from the article, since no evidence whatsoever is provided to support the statement. The rest of the paragraph reads like a series of personal opinions.

Can the original author of this (or someone else) possibly find some backup for this?

Xgretsch (talk) 13:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Lyrics?

Wrong word for the section, but there used to be an external link to an excellent site that had the non-scored Italian alongside an English translation. The link disappeared and I can't find it in the history of the revisions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.48.207 (talk) 09:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I think the link was this one. It was removed as it's now dead. For now, I've added a link to an 1888 Italian and English libretto. But note that while the English translation is side-by-side with the Italian, it is a "poetic" translation of the gist of each line, not word for word. If anyone can find a better source please add it. Voceditenore (talk) 09:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Desdemona

". As for Desdemona, too many top-class lyric sopranos to list here have undertaken the role since 1887"

I'm sorry, what? Is this an encyclopaedia or an old-ladies' high tea? PROVIDE SOME NAMES! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.190.121.50 (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

'Recent' (2015) controversy regarding the use of blackface and/or the use of white singers in the production

Hello all,

I haven't read anything about this subject in the article itself or on the talk page so I thought it might be worth to bring this up. Do you think this is worth mentioning under "performance history"?

This issue became publicized after the September 2015 decision of the Met artistic director not to use a white singer in blackface anymore for the title role, in stead having Aleksandrs Antonenko sing the role without such makeup.

http://www.npr.org/sections/deceptivecadence/2015/09/21/442279816/farewell-to-blackfaced-otellos-at-the-met

Decision to scrap blackface from Otello not complicated, says Met director

Bartlett Sher says the cultural implications in the US made its use ‘completely unthinkable’ despite its persistence in performances of Verdi’s opera

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/sep/22/otello-metropolitan-opera-scraps-blackface

Of course, the decision led to the question where, as is often argued in non-musical theatre (rarer) black parts should be given to artists of colour, and that refusing to do so would be considered "whitewashing".

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/mets-otello-casting-begs-the-question-is-whitewash-better-than-blackface/article25879634/

This point of view is of course of particular interest in the situation where a part such as Otello can only be sung - at Met level - by about 3-5 singers at any given time (see first article), none of which currently are black.

Any thoughts whether this discussion should be addressed on the main page? I think it should.

I've added a section on this topic. --Editor B (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion: differences between opera and play, esp. Iago's character

A suggestion: should the article include a section on ways in which the libretto differs from the play? One important difference is Iago's motivations for destroying the Moor: in the play, he says he's motivated by anger at being passed over for promotion; also, numerous critics have suggested that he may have a frustrated same-sex desire for the Moor and is jealous of Desdemona. But in the opera, he's just a pure evil-for-its-own-sake sadist who believes in a malevolent Creator and prays to Satan for assistance in carrying out his destructive plan.

Of course, it would all have to be sourced. HandsomeMrToad (talk) 09:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)