Talk:Brantinghame Hall

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

Sullivan[edit]

How did the play hurt Gilbert's partnership with Sullivan? The connection is still not clear. -- Ssilvers 00:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, Stedman speculates that at this time Sullivan was feeling a push towards more serious works, but Gilbert after this play's failure, had swore them off, wanting to concentrate solely on comic librettos. She also mentions earlier that Gilbert at one point had volunteered to write the libretto for a serious opera for Sullivan, but, as we know, he ended up recommending Sturgis, and - well, Stedman's orginisation isn't very good, but I think she means to imply that lack of confidence in his ability to write successful serious scripts may have played a role in this. Adam Cuerden talk 00:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've rechecked the section of Stedman, added details. (Adam)

Too much detail. This speculation is already being given too much emphasis here. I think Stedman is wrong anyhow: Gilbert was very gracious about recommending other librettists for Sullivan, and G&S's relationship was reasonably good at this time (except for the momentary difficulty in agreeing on a new opera to follow Yeomen). Yes, in *general*, Sullivan would have liked Gilbert to write a libretto for his serious stuff, but I don't think Stedman has any evidence that Sullivan held it against G. that he wanted to concentrate on comedy. Sullivan would have said so in his diary: "Saw G. today and implored him to set opera. He refused, the stinker! I hate that guy." -- Ssilvers 02:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we just cut the speculation? Adam Cuerden talk 02:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since we don't have much else, I don't mind it for now, but if we get a better background section, then it can go. More urgent is a synopsis. Hope you're feeling better. -- Ssilvers 03:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, a bit. I'm told it's vaccination after-effects, which is annoying, as you can imagine Adam Cuerden talk 04:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The published article[edit]

Finished! At last, finished! Have Britished the text where necessary (notably with the Rev). Don't say I said so but is it any wonder that this play bankrupted poor old Barrington? - Tim riley 00:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How cruel! I rather liked reading it. However, it apparently had a very good cast, and if they couldn't make a go of it, I guess the judgment of the theatregoing public must prevail. -- Ssilvers 00:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brantinghame Hall. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:23, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brantinghame Hall. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brantinghame_Hall&oldid=1200328100"