Talk:Charles Ives

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BU RoBOT (talk | contribs) at 17:00, 4 September 2016 (Adding WP:WikiProject College football template; genfixes (task 27)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleCharles Ives is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 2, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 18, 2003Featured article candidatePromoted
April 4, 2006Featured article reviewKept
October 13, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Possessive's rule

According to MOS:POSS, it should be done the way it's pronounced. I've never heard it pronounced Ives's (Ivezez) but rather simply Ives' (Ivez). If I'm mistaken, please undo the two changes I've made. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:11, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

"All these effects are combined to create one of the towering masterworks of 20th century piano literature—an unprecedented masterpiece of American music."

"Perhaps the most remarkable piece of orchestral music Ives completed was his Fourth Symphony (1910–16). The list of forces required to perform the work alone is extraordinary."

Sounds like this article was pulled from the back of Charles Ives CDs. The whole thing should probably be scrubbed of disgustingly adulatory prose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.225.241 (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Vonbontee (talk) 07:19, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not in line with modern scholarship on Ives!!

In the archive, some anon dismissed Maynard Solomon's tract on Ives - which is ridiculous. There now have been at least two recent biographies that mostly support his findings. The newest book is just now being issued and definitely needs to have some of the authors' (plural) material incorporated. Ives took the beginning dates of his compositions as the date of the final work rather than the many revisions that took place over the years, well after some European composers had issued their modernist works. This doesn't denigrate the quality of the work, but it does show that the Ives-the-American-who-got-there-first is just a fiction. Ives is not one of my favorite composers so my interest in this is just passing, but the article needs work. HammerFilmFan (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Ives Reconsidered, by Gayle Sherwood Magee. U. of Illinois Press, 2008., Elliot Carter's views on Ives, and of course, the Maynard Solomon piece all need to be worked in.HammerFilmFan (talk) 21:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence about Ives's chamber music contains a non sequitur

This sentence --

"He composed two string quartets and other works of chamber music, though he is now best known for his instrumental music."

-- doesn't make sense, because chamber music is by definition instrumental music. Does the sentence mean to say "orchestral music" instead? That would make both more semantic and critical sense.

Tdavey (talk) 00:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]