# Talk:Rupert D'Oyly Carte

I've changed 'London' to 'West End' as the touring companies played lots of London suburban theatres in e.g. - at a random dip into Rollins & Witts - Camden, Fulham, Kennington, Notting Hill, Crystal Palace, Holloway, Hammersmith &c &c. (And, of course, Sadler's Wells, scene of so many wonderful D'Oyly Carte London seasons is miles away from the West End.)
Do we, incidentally, need any consideration of the various central London venues at which the D'Oyly Carte company regularly played? Willing to have a pop, sine die, if so. Tim riley 21:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

If you think it's notable info, then add it.  I don't have enough info to have an opinion.  Best regards, and happy New Year!  -- Ssilvers 00:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I’d like to know legal thoughts on using D’Oyly Carte Family and Savoy as subject for new musical theatre production and/or novel.  Where/how to get permission and possible support? RichardadicksonJaffa (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

We have deleted this sentence: During World War II, Carte served as a King's Messenger, a person who carried important papers of state between heads of other governments and the UK government.(See Duffey, David. "The D'Oyly Carte Family", The Gilbert and Sullivan Archive, 20 September 2003, accessed 12 November 2009).  Are we certain that it is wrong?  -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:48, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we are. Checking the G&S Archive article, I see that it refers to WWI not WWII as the war in which Carte served in that capacity. Corroborative detail: Leslie Baily, who interviewed Carte for his book in 1947, says: "During the 1914-18 war Mr D'Oyly Carte was on special duties in the Navy: he would be sent off on secret journeys to distant parts of the world, and he would mysteriously reappear in London for a few weeks, and when he did so he would put in a few touches to the preparatory work for the rebirth of the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company." (Baily, p. 431). This sounds remarkably like the pattern of work of a King's Messenger. Given these two references, I think we can safely conclude that WWI is the war in question. Besides, quite apart from the absence of any reference to Carte's serving in this capacity in WWII, by 1939 he was in his sixties and past the age limit for government (or naval) service. - Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Ah!  This is entirely my fault, not Duffey's.  I was confused because the information comes immediately after his discussion of events of 1941.  I have now added a footnote, but feel free to modify.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't find a suitable place to add this, but it is symptomatic of Carte's modern modus operandi that when a train strike in 1919 threatened to leave his company stranded in Bristol, unable to get to London for his much-publicised season at the Prince's, he hired aeroplanes to transport them, and had the scenery etc sent by road. See The Observer, "The strike and the theatres; 'Gondoliers' company to travel by aeroplane", 28 September 1919, p. 9. Can we make use of this somewhere without shoe-horning it in too gratuitously? - Tim riley (talk) 20:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm.  Maybe a footnote to the 1919 season description?  -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

At Ssilvers's request, I went through and made various copy-edits and corrections.  I have just two remaining suggestions that I am unable to act upon. I think the section on PSmith should be integrated properly into the discussion, rather than the current lay-out, which makes it look like an afterthought.  Also, there is a reference to Charles Rickets, RA. The initials RA should be linked to whatever it is the title stands for. I am not sure if it is Registered Architect, Royal Academician, or something else. Marc Shepherd (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It's Royal Academician, but on further enquiry I find Ricketts wasn't elected a full member of the Royal Academy until 1928. He was elected an Associate Member in 1922, which entitled him to the post-nominal letters ARA until his full membership in 1928, after which RA applied. Perhaps we should just leave the letters out altogether? I don't think it would damage the present article. - Tim riley (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Marc.  These edits are super.  I'll take out the RA.  I'd rather leave in the reference to J.M. Gordon, but I'll move it to the next section.   Tim, what do you think about Marc's suggestion re: PSmith?  I'll leave this matter to you.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

In its revised form, the J. M. Gordon reference seems to me less problematic than before.  There is one other point worth looking into. The article says that the 1947 U.S. tour was so successful that the company began to visit America with more frequency. But the American tours had already been fairly frequent in the years leading up to 1939. It seems to me that the company merely resumed the touring pattern that the war had forced it to interrupt. Marc Shepherd (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I've deleted the reference to frequency.  It wasn't really relevant to Rupert.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I've rolled the Psmith para in with the personal details. - Tim riley (talk) 07:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The article previously stated that "Carte mounted tours of Canada (1927) and the United States (1934–35, 1936–37, 1939 and 1947–48)." It was missing the 1928–29 tour. Moreover, the 28–29 and 34–35 tours included Canadian cities as well. I added 28–29 and described all of them as simply North American tours. If anyone wishes to specify which tours included Canada, and which did not, feel free. Marc Shepherd (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I think this is a good solution, Marc, thanks.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rupert D'Oyly Carte/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: María (habla conmigo) 21:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I'll be reviewing this article for GA-status over the next couple days.  Most of the article is quite good, as I've come to expect from the main contributors.  I don't think it will have any issues passing, as I only have minor comments and concerns, mainly dealing with the prose.  See below for specifics.

Lead
The new productions generally retained the original text and music of the operas, and Carte required all licensees of the works to present them in approved productions that closely followed the libretto, score and D'Oyly Carte production stagings. -- I'm not too knowledgeable in these matters, but this summary of the new productions seems overly detailed; I got lost somewhere around his requiring the licensees to yadda yadda.  Would it be simpler to say that Carte valued presenting them in approved productions that closely followed, etc, etc?
Good point.  I moved the detailed info down to the body of the article and rephrased.  What I mean is that he did not allow any changes to the words or music, and pretty much retained the staging unchanged, except in two cases that are discussed below. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Carte launched international tours, as well as the London seasons and provincial tours, and he released complete recordings of the operas. He also rebuilt the Savoy Theatre in 1929. These sentences could flow better: "tours... tours" is repetitive, and the correlation/importance of the recordings in relation to the tours isn't made clear.  How were these two notable?  Also, I had to refresh my memory as to why the Savoy had to be rebuilt, because no context is given here.  Could a little more detail be given?
OK. Clearer now?  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
P. G. Wodehouse based the character Psmith on a Wykehamist schoolboy whom he identified as Rupert D'Oyly Carte, although it may have been based on Rupert's elder brother, Lucas. Although this is mentioned in more detail later in the article, it seems random in the lead.  Shouldn't there be more in the lead about his personal life, death and legacy?  Especially in regards to G&S?
OK, I added something about his death and legacy.  I don't think we should mention his marriage/divorce in the lead.  His wife was not famous, or even interesting, even though she was the daughter of an Earl.  The PSmith character is pretty famous, and anyone who is a Wodehouse fan would definitely find it of interest.  Let me know if you think more changes should be made, or if you can figure out a better order for the info in the last paragraph.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Sure, looks good, and I totally understand your reasoning.  The "English-speaking world and beyond" is a little too theatrical for my tastes, but considering the subject matter, it makes sense. ;) María (habla conmigo) 17:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Early life
Rupert's older brother, Lucas (1872–1907), a barrister, was not involved in the family businesses and died of tuberculosis, aged 34. -- Since Lucas is mentioned in the previous paragraph, his name and dates should be mentioned earlier.
OK, done!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Taking over the family businesses
Between 1906 and 1909, Helen Carte,[3] Rupert's stepmother, staged two repertory seasons at the Savoy Theatre, directed by Gilbert, with much success, revitalising the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company, which had been in decline after his father's death. -- Pretty heavy on the commas, eh?  Maybe break the sentence in two: "staged two successful repertory seasons at the Savoy Theatre. Directed by Gilbert, these shows (?) revitalized the D'Oyly... etc."?
OK, good idea.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
In 1912, when theatre censorship was under discussion in Britain, Carte was strongly in favour of retaining it, because it gave managements complete certainty about what they could or could not stage without fear of interference by the police or others. -- The "it" here, although I'm guess it refers to the censorship, is slightly ambiguous.
OK, done!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
TBC... María (habla conmigo) 21:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Picking back up, sorry for the wait!

Revitalising the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company
According to H. M. Walbrook... -- Could a short intro be given on Walbrook, for context?  According to G&S biographer/expert, what have you?
I added "theatre writer".  In addition to G&S, Walbrook wrote books on J. M. Barrie and other playwrights.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Carte's first London season, at the Prince's Theatre, 1919–20, featured ten of the Gilbert and Sullivan operas (all except Ruddigore, Utopia, Limited and The Grand Duke) -- This could use a little clean-up, as it's a bit jarring to read with the commas and parentheses.
I moved the three names to a footnote. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
"It did not by any means imply any hidebound stage 'business' or an attempt to standardize the performances... -- is this the continuation of Carte's opinion, in his own words?  If so, perhaps introduce it with "He continued/further stated" or something similar?
No, The Times does not seem to be directly quoting him, it's the writer's paraphrase or summary of what he said, I guess.  I can only quote the paper accurately.  I made a change for your review, but I don't like it and would rather go back to how it was.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Eh, I agree it doesn't quite work, either, but neither does an unattributed quote.  It's certainly not crucial, but something to consider, I suppose. María (habla conmigo) 22:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
"He made several alternative suggestions, one of which we adopted in America, and it seems well to go on doing so in the British Empire." -- I'm just curious, but what was the alternative use adopted?
In The Mikado, where the title character lists "punishments that fit the crime", he sings that someone will be punished by being "blacked like a n...", the suggested change is "painted with vigour".   Where another character lists people who "never would be missed" if they were executed (for example, people who eat peppermint and puff it in your face), he refers to a "n... serenader", they changed it to "banjo serenader".  But that song is now often significantly rewritten to include topical jokes.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Fascinating!  I've actually never seen The Mikado, so thanks for indulging me. :) María (habla conmigo) 22:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Rebuilding the Savoy Theatre and later years
This section seems to take a step backwards, as it doubles back to the 1920s.  While here it's not as confusing (see comment below), I think this is where the break is first noticeable.
I made some changes to simplify the chronology in the previous paragraphs.  IMO, we have not really left the 1920s yet. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Carte was deeply affected by the death of his son Michael in 1932. -- This is confusing; Michael is first "introduced" several paragraphs below, in the "Personal life" section, and yet here he is dead.  Shouldn't Carte's marriage and family be mentioned prior to this?
I think it makes sense to keep the personal life section together the way we have it.  I really think it would be a serious problem to try to move it higher and break up the main "career" section.  I added "discussed below".  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Cool, that helps. María (habla conmigo) 22:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
"The heart dropped right out of him. His interest in both the operas and the hotel seemed to fade away." -- Who is this quote from?
Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Savoy Hotel group
Similar to my comments above, this section splits an awful lot with the established chronology; to go from 1947 back to 1919 is very confusing and jarring -- for me.  I'm not sure if dividing Carte's successes by venture, and then putting each section into separate chronological order, is quite working here -- the article begins with his birth and ends with his death, but in between some things become mixed up and muddled.  Again, this might just be me talking, so please feel free to disagree; I'm open to being won over!  As long as some things are made clearer, I see no huge issue here.
Sorry, but I really disagree.  Carte is best known for the opera company, although the hotel group was very profitable.  I really think it makes much more sense to keep all the information about the hotel group together in this way.  It would be very messy to keep saying, "meanwhile, carte built a new restaurant in the Hotel" along the way.  At the end of the "Rebuilding the Savoy Theatre" section, we have finished with Carte as the proprietor of the opera company.  Then we describe his hotel interests and his personal life.  It seems very simple and sensible to me.  This structure was designed by User:Tim riley, and I really think it's just right.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I totally understand, and won't push the issue at this point.  Upon re-reading some of the article, I still think it's a little too disjointed for me, but I can see now how most of it fits together, separately. María (habla conmigo) 22:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
The Savoy Orpheans and the Savoy Havana Band were described as "probably the best-known bands in Europe". -- Described by whom?
Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
"We are endeavouring by intensive propaganda work to get more customers; this work is going on in the U.S.A., in Canada, in the Argentine and in Europe." -- Was this Carte or George Reeves-Smith speaking/writing?
Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I believe that about does it.  The only thing I take issue with is the chronological discrepancies between several sections, but as I said above, it's not too big a deal.  And, again, I just may be too set in my ways. :)  Everything else is great: the article is short but entirely comprehensive it seems, the sources are well formatted, the images are fine, and of course a majority of it is very well written.  Address the above concerns, and I'll be happy to promote. María (habla conmigo) 17:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Most of my concerns have been addressed, or else explained away, so I'm happy to promote this article to GA-status.  Great job, guys! 22:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for all your hard work and excellent comments, Maria!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The source cited is just plain wrong: many an opera had been "broadcast in its entirety" before 1932 – e.g. in early 1927 the BBC broadcast what it called a "Wireless Opera Season", with complete broadcasts of Rigoletto, The Bohemian Girl, Faust, The Barber of Seville,  Martha, Orpheus (Gluck), Fidelio, Romeo and Juliet, The Magic Flute, Philemon and Baucis, Geoffrey Toye's The Red Pen, and Les Cloches de Corneville. (The Observer, 19 May 1927, p. 12, and spot checked against contemporary radio listings, e.g. Fidelio from 20.00 to 22.15 on 22 March 1927). I wonder if the source meant to say the first complete broadcast of any G&S opera? As to the 1932 YoG's being the first full length relay of any stage work from a theatre, I don't know if that's true or not, but as the source is so horribly wrong on the first of the two statements I think it wise to err on the side of caution and remove that too, unless confirmation is forthcoming from a reliable source. – Tim riley (talk) 08:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it should say that this was the first complete broadcast of a G&S opera.  I have revised this.  Thanks for the correction! -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
For the avoidance of doubt, as the lawyers say, the source is usually impeccable. But even Homer nods. I have had cause just this morning to point out a very similar (though not identical) error in no less an authority than Grove, here. Tim riley (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

In the summers of the 1930s the D'Oyly Carte family rented Soval Estate on the Isle of Lewis. This is a salmon fishing rather than a shooting estate. So Rupert was a keen fisherman, perhaps someone might like to add that to his interests. I still possess one of Rupert's ebony opera sticks which he gave to one of the gamekeepers. The family was fondly remembered by an older generation of Lewis folk right up till the late 1970s.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.221.172 (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC) 

In the last paragraph of the introduction, it says Psmith went to Winchester College. While this may be true of D'Oyly Carte, in the Psmith I've read his most certainly went to Eton. And indeed on the Wikipedia page Psmith he is described as an old Etonian.--86.148.19.92 (talk) 19:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

If you re-read the lead section carefully you will see that we don't say that Psmith was at Winchester, only that the character was supposedly based on a Wykehamist (one of the Carte brothers). PGW's Psmith was indeed at Eton before being booted out and joining Mike Jackson (ex-Wrykin aka Dulwich) at Sedleigh. Tim riley talk  20:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Psmith appears for the first time in print in 1908, where his first name is also given as "Rupert". In a later Preface to Mike and Psmith (published 1953, but composed of the 1908 text), this is what Wodehouse actually said:
Psmith has the distinction of being the only one of my numerous characters to be drawn from a living model.  A cousin of mine was at Eton with the son of D’Oyly Carte, the man who produced the Gilbert and Sullivan operettas, and one night he told me about this peculiar schoolboy who dressed fastidiously and wore a monocle and who, when one of the masters inquired after his health, replied “Sir, I grow thinnah and thinnah.”  It was all the information I required in order to start building him in a star part.
This was not just a passing comment, as he confirmed it on other occasions: Wodehouse said that he based Psmith on the hotelier and impresario Rupert D'Oyly Carte—"the only thing in my literary career which was handed to me on a silver plate with watercress around it". It may be worth noting that Wodehouse's cousin is here said to have been at Eton with D'Oyly Carte, rather than Winchester, so it is Wodehouse himself who is responsible for the confusion over the schools concerned. Thomas Peardew (talk) 08:49, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
That's right. Wodehouse simply got it wrong when he said that the young Carte on whom he based Psmith was at Eton. Both Rupert and Lucas were Wykehamists. Wodehouse didn't make the same mistake about the school – one is always mixing these educational establishments up, after all – when he wrote the introduction to The World of Psmith, but his informant really seems to have mentioned the wrong brother, or else Wodehouse misunderstood. Lucas was evidently a flamboyant character (when at Winchester he had a raging affair with Lord Alfred Douglas, which I bet Wodehouse didn't know). The shy and taciturn Rupert was quite other, but Lucas died young, poor lamb, and Rupert was the only Carte son around by the time PGW was writing – hence the confusion, I imagine. – Tim riley talk 22:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Major-General's Song.ogg
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Since we created this article, it has not had an infobox, consistent with the style guidelines of Wikiproject G&S. The Manual of Style says: "Whether to include an infobox ... is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." While sports and politician bios can benefit from infoboxes, most articles in liberal arts fields, as here, do not. See arbitration report: "Infoboxes may be particularly unsuited to liberal arts fields when they repeat information already available in the lead section of the article, are misleading or oversimplify the topic for the reader". I disagree with including an infobox in this article because: (1) The box would emphasize unimportant factoids stripped of context and lacking nuance, in competition with the WP:LEAD section, which emphasizes and contextualizes the most important facts. (2) Since the most important points in the article are already discussed in the Lead, or adequately discussed in the body of the article, the box would be redundant. (3) It would take up valuable space at the top of the article and hamper the layout and impact of the Lead. (4) Frequent errors creep into infoboxes, as updates are made to the articles but not reflected in the redundant info in the box, and they tend to draw vandalism, fancruft and repeated arguments among editors about what to include. (5) The boilerplate infobox templates create a block of code at the top of the edit screen that discourages new editors from editing the article. (6) It would discourage readers from reading the text of the article. (7) IBs distract editors from focusing on the content of the article. Instead of improving the article, they spend time working on this repetitive feature and its coding and formatting. See also WP:DISINFOBOX. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Entirely concur. Some articles benefit from i-boxes, and others don't. This is one of the latter - very clearly so, in my view. Tim riley talk 16:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ssilvers removed the infobox Gaelicbow added, stating that there "is no consensus" to add one. But equally, apart from said user, there is (probably) no one else who would protest the addition of an infobox. I don't really mind, but think the issue should be discussed and editors can express their views whether they want / don't want an infobox. Thanks, Gaelicbow (talk) 17:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

It was just discussed above.  Look at prev. section.  No one who did substantial work on this article has ever supported adding one. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)