Talk:Franz Liszt/Archive 2

message: My friends, it appears the dispute is not yet over. Since our last exchange on this topic, I have thought a bit about it and realized the crux of the matter, and what sets this debate apart from others over Liszt's nationality, is this: all others are willing to at least grant that Liszt considered himself Hungarian, even as they expend much hot air or paper and ink trying to prove that he was wrong in his own assessment of his own nationality. In this debate, on the other hand, the question has become whether or not Liszt even considered himself Hungarian at all! I have to admit, throughout this battle I have often felt as if I were confronting someone who vehemently asserted that the earth was flat, dismissing the reams of evidence that it is not, and making it incumbent on me to pull out every single piece of information I can find that the world is, in fact, round.
As regards that information, I just this morning came across two nice little tidbits from Liszt's own letters, which all you good Lisztians may kind quite illuminating.
:A brief quote from his response to one Kalman Simonffy, who loudly criticized his book on the Gypsies in the Budapest press (without ever reading the book): "As far as my patriotism is concerned, no one can reasonably bring me to task for that, and if you will read my book sometime, you will see that it was prompted by the feeling of devotion which I have particularly nurtured towards my native land." (printed in the Pesti Naplo, September 6, 1859.)
:And a complaint to a friend, again regarding the whole brouhaha over his mistakes in the Gypsy book: "The fuss made about my book on the Gypsies has made me feel that I was much more Hungarian that the "Magyarmaniacs," my antagonists..."
:And since the issue of Liszt's involvement (or more precisely, his lack thereof) was persistently cited by our nameless scholar as evidence of Liszt's lack of national feeling, again let us let Mr. Liszt himself illuminate the situation: "(Szechenyi) was a man of great good sense, of prodigous activity, and of practical genius, aware of the requirements of his time and his country. He gave immense support to Hungary, where he deservedly enjoyed unparalleled popularity until the time when Kossuth gained the upper hand through his glib talk, and dragged the whole nation on a false path. Unfortunately, at the present moment, we have still not abandoned it, and I can see hardly any prospect of favorable outcome from that ardent passion for clannish patriotism, which sows the wind only to reap the whirlwind! If they had followed Szechenyi's example and method consistently and faithfully, Hungary would certainly be strong and prosperous today: I fear that it is too late now to go back. This state of affairs may certainly suit others--but those of us who sincerely love their country are grieved over this to the depths of their souls!" (LLB, vol. 3, pg. 126.)
My friends, Liszt was clearly a Hungarian, and ever since his national awakening in the winter of 1839-1840, on his first return trip to Hungary after sixteen years abroad, he was a proud and patriotic Hungarian in every way. His "neglect" to fight in the war of 1848 is clearly explained by the fact that he thought the war would be nothing but disaster for Hungary, and he preferred the reformist path of Szechenyi to the warlike revolutionary fulminations of Kossuth. Can we please put this issue to rest, and admit that the world is indeed round?
PS, Springeragh--if our nameless "friend" replies, don't revert it as you said you would; I want to see how he replies. :)  K. Lásztocska 18:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am confused. The article states Liszt was Hungarian, so what exactly is your issue?CyrilleDunant 18:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We had a heated debate (to quote a template I left around here somewhere) about whether he was Hungarian, Austrian, French, German, English, Polish, Italian, Spanish, American—well not all those but it may have gotten to that eventually. And obviously just because an article with almost countless references to other encyclopædias says something doesn't mean it's true. Kudos, Lastochka. :) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  19:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Bravo! M A Mason 20:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Works fine for me. K. Lásztocska 15:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, OK--"ethnic German Hungarian" works too. K. Lásztocska 13:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or maybe "Hungarian of German extraction" or "German of Hungarian extraction"? Whichever makes him more Hungarian than anything else… —  $PЯINGrαgђ  14:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He was ethnically German, and that is not in dispute (except by those Slovaks who were giving us trouble a while back trying to claim him as one of their own, LOL). Like I've been saying, there are lots of Hungarians of foreign ethnicity. "Hungarian of German extraction" would work, just sounds a little clumsy. K. Lásztocska 14:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We had "Hungarian of German descent" a while ago but it seems to have gone now. I suppose I'm in favour of that hehe :P M A Mason 16:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well actually, Lastochka, you have a lot of Russians "of German extraction" (to name one), so I guess Hungarians of German extraction couldn't be that much different. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  16:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, as Cyrille pointed it, Litsz's nationality is mainly an admnistrative problem. In that sense, he was born in the Hungarian parts of Habsbourg's empire, and therefore he stands as an "Hungarian, sublect of the Habsbourg empire". Alexander Doria 17:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  a brief return to the legendary war over nationality 

message: In view of the controversy over nationality, I am wondering if it would help if the infobox is removed (replaced by the picture). In any case there is a Composers Project policy against using them on composers' pages. Regards. --Kleinzach 01:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As there have been no objections, I have gone ahead and removed the infobox. The page looks better I think, and the absence of flags may help avoid further nationality disputes. Best. --Kleinzach 02:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it was better with the infobox: liszt wasn't only a pianist, he was an conductor to, some info that is necessary which doesn't seems to appear in the article. the infobox was very compact and summarized and it did sincerely give an overall picture (particulary "dates active", which by the way wasn't correct.. 1822-86 would be). --Funper 15:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, I wasn't actually all that against the infobox in this particular article. It succinctly pointed out that he was hungarian but born in the Habsburg empire. Not sure about the flags though, they could go I feel. M A Mason 16:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I want the infobox back per above, flags could go. --Funper 19:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BIO-infobox

message: http://imslp.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Franz_Liszt_%28S.1_-_S.350%29
http://imslp.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Franz_Liszt_%28S.351_-_S.999%29
moving to wikipedia...
:Moved. "See also" in main article. --Funper 14:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worklist 

message: The image should be a better one, certainly the image software to (MS Paint) --Funper 02:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Everytime I see that pic of Liszt I think Boris Johnson in 30 years! Not a bad thing though :) I also made one myself a while ago, has a different feel to it, see my userpage. M A Mason 09:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template 

message: "Live" is probably not the best word here. Saying "Live" is a confusing message, while we all know that Liszt could not possibly have a live recording in his lifetime. Someone with a better command of English (better than mine) may be able to improve this. Thanks,Steveshelokhonov 22:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recordings