Talk:War Requiem

message: I challenge the link from "diabolus in musica" to the "diabolical nature of war". It is expressed in weasel words, and I doubt that Britten would choose such a fundamental part of the requiem on such a flimsy basis. --Hugh7 09:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I am concerned that much of this article appears to be original research: musical analysis performed by Wikipedia editors.  If that is not the case, then it fails to cite its sources.  --Dfeuer 23:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research?  Missing Citations? 

message: "War Requiem, Opus 66 is a non-liturgical requiem..." seems to convey the wrong impression, even if it is technically correct. The Brahms and Delius are non-liturgical. War Requiem is liturgical-plus, so to speak. Is there a better way of putting it? David Brooks 00:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: essentially yes, or perhaps more accurately a "liturgical" setting could be used in an actual requiem service.  Hence the Brahms and Delies Requiems mentioned above do not use much (if any) of the traditional liturgy, although their composers chose to title them as such and the idea was to produce a work with a similar intent.  The War Requiem does contain much of the text traditionally set for liturgical purposes, but since it also contains the interpolated war poetry (which could not be omitted) it also could not be used in a liturgical context.  See the article requiem for more info.  David Underdown 12:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The rededication of a cathedral certainly sounds like a liturgical act, making the liturgy link unhelpful if not indeed getting ahead of what sources say. What makes an 'official' liturgy depends a lot on time and place, and of course on whose liturgy. From the few books I've looked at I can't make out how the first performance was regarded at the time, but the original commission would seem to have been for a liturgy: Britten's irritation at being asked to provide it for free (Carpenter1992 p397) suggests that the church at least originally thought of it that way. I think in any case there's a more informative way to word things. Sparafucil (talk) 21:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-liturgical? 

message: The article states in the discussion regarding the technicalities of the music that a section "...include(s) the tritone as part of a dominant 7th chord."  I may be reading it incorrectly, but the dom 7th chord wouldn't include a tone that's a tritone from the tonic -- it would be a perfect 4th.  The major 7th would include the tritone.  I don't know if the chord in the music is a dom 7th or maj 7th, so I don't know if it's an incorrect chord name or if the tritone doesn't really show up... or if something else is happening entirely.  Can anyone attend to this?  —  MusicMaker5376 22:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perhaps I'm not reading this correctly.... 

message: It is mentioned that the tenor soloist transitions to the Latin Requiem text once. This is almost true, except that the text "Dona nobis pacem" is actually the only section of this piece where the composer himself departs from the tradional Requiem. 198.62.73.67 (talk) 13:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  other Latin 

message: This sentence sounds highly POV and over-the-top:
:It was a triumph, achieving an impact matched by few works in the twentieth century.
93.96.236.8 (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The War Requiem clearly did have an extraordinary initial impact on both audiences and critics, much to the discomfort of the ever-jealous Stravinsky, no less. I've substantiated this claim a bit in the article with a reference. Alfietucker (talk) 16:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: The composition draft is dated 1961 (http://www.brittenpears.org/?id=307&page=research/catalogue/detail.html ) and it was commissioned in 1958 - it may have been finished in 1962 and not 1961 (unclear from that source!) but what is meant? Schissel | Sound the Note! 09:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Philip Reed's chapter 'The War Requiem in Progress' in Mervyn Cooke's Britten: War Requiem, the composition draft was completed on 20 December 1961, and the manuscript full score completed 'during a working holiday in Greece' in January 1962. I'll slightly amend the opening of the article accordingly. Alfietucker (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  1962? 

message: I just read, for the first time, the "Doomed Youth" words (as published in the Oxford archive, and shown in manuscript in its own article). It seems to me that Britten ignored the Sassoon penciled changes, except for the title, and used Owen originals ("from prayers or bells"; "silent" not "patient"). His notebook at the B-P Foundation site doesn't show any ambivalence. Any insights? David Brooks (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anthem for Doomed Youth words 

message: It would be worth the research to complete this article by including a description of the Washington premiere of the War Requiem (1978?) with Rostropovich and the NSO, Galina Vishnevskaya, Peter Pears, John Shirley-Quirk, and the Choral Arts Society of Washington.  It was performed at the Kennedy Center, and the next evening (after a five-hour train ride) at Carnegie Hall.  96.231.226.73 (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Washington premiere

message: A "clarify" tag has been put against "Vishnevskaya threw a tantrum". I understand why that may have been put there, but I rather think this may appear undue. As John Culshaw described it, Vishnevskaya, when told she was not to be placed with the male soloists for the recording at Kingsway Hall, "then lost her head, and lay on the floor of the vestry (which served as a sort of unisex changing room for everyone, since there was nowhere else) and shrieked at the top of her voice. You would really have been excused for thinking that an extremely painful process of torture was in progress. Britten did his best, but he never could stand scenes. He was also hurt, for he had written the soprano part with her voice specifically in mind. By the end of the first session we had recorded nothing, for even when we attempted some passages in which she was not involved her screams easily penetrated the hall and were probably audible on the other side of the main road." (Putting the Record Straight, pp. 312-13). 
I'm not at all sure this should be included in the main text: should we even be considering this as a footnote? FWIW, I will give Culshaw's account as a citation. Alfietucker (talk) 20:27, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vishnevskaya's tantrum 

message: The usual Requiem context of "Quam olim Abrahae" is "Save my soul, God, as according to the promise you once made to Abraham".
However, Britten uses the sandwich of "Quam olim Abrahae / "The Parable of the Old Man and the Young" / "Quam olim Abrahae" in a way which seems ironic and accusatory: "God, you promised Abraham, but you lied, and let this slaughter of WW II happen".
The QOA reprise is more forceful and desperate than the first instance: it could express a desperate desire for salvation, or it could express a feeling of betrayal. 
Is Britten making an impassioned plea for salvation, or is he angrily accusing God of breaking the Covenant?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardNeill (talk • contribs) 01:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quam olim Abrahae: irony? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on War Requiem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120304170918/http://www.cbso.co.uk/?page=concerts%2FviewConcert.html&cid=2386&m=05&y=2012 to http://www.cbso.co.uk/?page=concerts%2FviewConcert.html&cid=2386&m=05&y=2012
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Britten wrote the score originally for three specific singers and their nationality was part of his design: he wanted to express reconciliation and shared tragedies across different nations involved in the war. Interestingly, it seems that when the Requiem is performed, conductors have often tried to continue this matching of the three solo parts to these different nationalities or at least languages - even though no part of the work is sung in German or Russian. In the 1970s the soprano part was sung by Elisabeth Söderström, a famous Swedish soprano who spoke/sang Russian fluently due to her mother and her singing teacher being refugees from old Russia, and tomorrow there will be a live broadcast of the work on the Mezzo channel with Mark Padmore, Elena Stikhina and Michael Volle. This matching of soloists to different language areas seems to have become part of the performance tradition for the work, and I think it should be noted in the article. 83.254.140.37 (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  English, German and Russian 

message: Can it be clarified just what role the grand organ plays in the Libera Me. I get that it only plays in that final movement, and I am able to spot it on the score when it first appears, but after that I am lost. Does it replace the positive organ/harmonium in the climax following the "let us sleep now" part or do both organs play? Captain Spyro (talk) 20:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role of the "Grand Organ"