Talk:Post-romanticism

message: I've updated the page to replace the supposed example of Johannes Brahms as a post-romantic composer with an actual famous post-romantic composer; Giacamo Puccini. Alright, so there's probably a fine line between late-Romanticism and post-Romanticism in music, but Brahms (born in 1833) is undoubtedly a mid-Romantic composer in most people's eyes. Hope others agree with this. Noldorin (talk) 11:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johannes Brahms, really? 

message: Anyone with any information about this movement please contribute.  There is a website listed with an article written by Claudia Moscovici: http://www.postromanticism.com/philosophy/main_philo.html.  Can someone please research and contribute to the article.  Specifics on how this movement is different than Romanticism would especially be useful. Thanks. --Nikitchenko 03:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophy 

message: The last two paragraphs added by Dooywopwopbanjio345 are simply a C&P of the entire contents of the introductory page on http://www.postromanticism.com/. The text in its original location functions only as an introduction to the website and is so nebulous as to be useless as a description of Post-Romanticism in itself. It makes little sense when clumsily tacked onto the end of this stub, and could be construed as plagiarism (albeit minor). If no-one objects, I will remove this text tomorrow. Peter Barber (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy-and-pasting 

message: Shouldn't this be Postromanticism, a la Neoromanticism (music), Postmodern music, Neoclassicism (music), etc? --Jubilee♫clipman 08:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: Brahms composed at the height of the Romantic era and I wouldn't consider him a Post-romantic at all-- I'm wondering where this information came from. Thoughts??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.148.83.110 (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, Brahms sits right in the middle of the Romantic era. He is not even in the slightest to be considered a post-Romantic. Noldorin (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable info 

message: I don't know much about post-romantic philosophy, but this article is way off-base as applied to music. Musically, the term "post-romantic" is generally associated with Mahler, Bruckner, R. Strauss, Sibelius, Vaughan Williams, Shostakovich, Neilsen etc. Brahms, Wagner, Liszt, Puccini and Rachmaninov are really late romantic, though Liszt is pretty adventurous late in his career. In English literature, scholars generally characterize work after the great romantic writers as "Victorian." I don't think there is really a consensus about what "post-romantic" would mean in literature. I don't think this article is ready for publication.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killersax (talk • contribs) 02:22, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this article is in very poor shape. However, unless the article is re-named, it will not do to restrict it to the English-speaking world, as you clearly are doing if you think that "post-romantic" is used in music the way you describe it. In musicology, for example, German thinkers are at least as important as English ones, even in the English-speaking world. Fortunately, most of the pertinent writings of Carl Dahlhaus have been published in English translation, and it is he who is largely responsible for the use of this term (after about 1975) to refer to composers of the late 19th century, starting with Wagner. I couldn't say what German literary theory calls literature after about 1840, but in French literature "realism" is a term used to describe the output of many writers of this period, I believe. However, the main thing here is that reliable sources are needed to support all such claims.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 02:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is so wrong, I don't know where to start