Diskussion:Patrick Süskind/Archiv

aus Wikipedia, der freien Enzyklopädie

Das Geheimnis des Fahrradhändlers

Dieses Werk fehlt in der Auflistung. --Yoshiii 22:05, 26. Nov. 2006‎

Es handelt sich dabei auch nur um eine Übersetzung und deshalb ist es kein Werk im eigentlichen Sinne (nicht signierter Beitrag von 79.242.176.209 (Diskussion) 20:17, 15. Okt. 2010 (CEST))
Ist in der Liste der Übersetzungen verzeichnet. --Lektor w (Diskussion) 23:56, 31. Dez. 2016 (CET) erledigtErledigt
Archivierung dieses Abschnittes wurde gewünscht von: Lektor w (Diskussion) 00:37, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)

Eng: Wikification, typography etc.

Entschuldigung, aber nicht spreche Deutsch gut. Therefore, in English. I have several comments and questions, regarding this article.

By the way: TheUg, please sign your discussion page contributions with four tildes, see WP:SIG. Gestumblindi 00:46, 12. Jan. 2007 (CET)
Yea, sometimes I forget to sign, fixed now. theUg 11:40, 13. Jan. 2007 (CET)

I renamed it and restructured it a bit, so we wouldn’t produce more and more walls of text. :) theUg 20:26, 14. Jan. 2007 (CET)

Wikification

Firstly, seems like the article needs to be wikified. I don’t know German well, but I can read it and sometimes understand general meaning of the text. Here it looks awfully daunting to dig through that Great Wall of text. Lack of structure, images. theUg

You are right, this article is quite a wall of text and should be structured better. I'll give it a try. Gestumblindi 00:46, 12. Jan. 2007 (CET)

Typography

Second, I believe the names of the author’s works need to be edited as they written without proper charachters, like “ß” or “ü”. For instance, “Kontrabaß” or “Parfüm”. theUg

Regarding spelling of the book titles: "Das Parfum" is actually spelt this way, it's an accepted spelling variant and listed in the Duden dictionary alongside "Parfüm". "Der Kontrabaß"/Kontrabass is a more difficult case because the German spelling reform of 1996 changed the rules of when to use "ß", affecting the word in question (see in the English Wikipedia: en:German spelling reform of 1996). The play was originally published as "Der Kontrabaß" in accordance to then-current spelling rules. The official spelling nowadays would be "Der Kontrabass". It seems, however, that the play is still called "Der Kontrabaß" in current impressions by its publisher, Diogenes Verlag. I do not know whether Süskind feels strongly about the spelling reform (some authors insist on using the "old" spelling) - maybe Diogenes is just reprinting its old edition and doesn't see a pressing need to reset it just to use the new spelling (because changing the title would logically also mean changing "Kontrabaß" to "Kontrabass" in the text, I think) without being opposed to changing the title as a matter of principle; or maybe Süskind and/or the publisher *are* "old-spelling fundamentalists", I really don't know. I will ask on the talk page of Der Kontrabass whether the article should be renamed. Gestumblindi 00:46, 12. Jan. 2007 (CET)
So, the information in Deutschen Nationalbibliothek is official? Just trying to make sure, cause when I was formalizing the text of the novel for onscreen typography, I checked it in the dictionary, and it returned me “Parfüm”. But seems like it should be without umlaut. theUg 11:40, 13. Jan. 2007 (CET)
Yes, Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (German National Library) data is as official as it gets for German-language books. For post-1945 publications, it is a reliable source. You can rest assured: the title of Süskind's novel is indeed spelt "Das Parfum". I do not know why the author or the publisher chose this spelling and not "Parfüm" - maybe they think that the spelling with the German umlaut looks just "too German" for this novel set in France; and as I said above, the authoritative Duden dictionary allows it. Regarding the Eszett question, let's see what happens on the Der Kontrabass discussion page.Gestumblindi 02:55, 14. Jan. 2007 (CET)
As for spelling reform, that comes as a complete news to me. I took German in school one or two years before the start of the reform, so I’ve never heard of it. I am surprised, that such a big issue never made news there (not as much for me to niotice, that is). Nonetheless, I’ll withold my opinion for now. Eszett seems like proper choice, since that’s how it was written in writer’s manuscript. On the other hand, you have to conform with the rules as well. It looks like the whole reform is highly controversial, and I don’t know German enough to make informed conclusion. theUg 11:40, 13. Jan. 2007 (CET)

Names and Numbers

Third, I have question about dates. In Russian version of the article, “Three Stories” (“Drei Geschichten”) dated as 1995, here it is dated 2005. Also in Russian version, the names of those three stories were given as sub-list, which I thought was neat. Also what is relation between “Three Stories” and “Amnesie in Litteris”? theUg 01:06, 10. Jan. 2007‎

"Drei Geschichten" is, according to the catalogue of the German National Library, correctly dated in the Russian article: the first edition was in 1995. There is a 2005 edition, but we should list the year of the first edition here. I will correct this. "Amnesie in litteris" is an essay included in the "Drei Geschichten" volume, in addition to the three stories. Gestumblindi 00:46, 12. Jan. 2007 (CET)
More on “Three Stories”. Was “Amnesie in Litteris” an intended part of the main book, or was it just a bonus in certain volume, as you’ve said? I ask, cause I’ve found “Amnesie in Litteris” as separate book in the Nationalbibliothek catalogue. Also, what “reflection” (Betrachtung) applies to (full title: “Drei Geschichten und eine Betrachtung”)? theUg 11:40, 13. Jan. 2007 (CET)
"Amnesie in Litteris" is the "Betrachtung" in "Drei Geschichten und eine Betrachtung". So, I think it is always included although a separate entity; maybe my wording above was not very good. The separate "Amnesie in Litteris" book seems to be a special edition for bibliophiles (look at the price: EUR 213 or EUR 360 depending on binding), with etchings as illustrations. Gestumblindi 02:55, 14. Jan. 2007 (CET)

Images

The lack of images in the article will not be easy to fix. Maybe you already noticed that there are far less images in many articles of the German Wikipedia than in the English one, or none at all - this is because in German-speaking countries there are no Fair use provisions, we can't use copyrighted images as liberally as the English Wikipedia does. It could be hard to find a picture of Süskind or related material with the free licences needed here. Gestumblindi 02:55, 14. Jan. 2007 (CET)

Hmm, that’s curious. Is there English version of German copyright law anywhere?
Another peculiar thing to consider — I assume, that the photographs taken by me in public circumstance (as in on the public street, not on private land or, say, as a member of accredited press, when event organizer controls copyright), are the property of the author (me, in this example). However, when I was in Phoenix, Arizona over New Year’s, I wanted to take a pictures of the old Catholic mission in township of Guadalupe (Phoenix’s southern suburb, here’s the link with picture: [1]), but the whole block and the square in front of it had signs, prohibiting photographing the mission. I assume that is because municipality wants to profit from copyright and what not, but I think it is ridiculous that public land being restricted like that. theUg 20:26, 14. Jan. 2007 (CET)
Wikimedia Commons also doesn't allow "fair use" images, because fair use laws vary from country to country; maybe you'll find their English-language policy page Commons:Licensing interesting. Regarding an English translation of the copyright law of Germany (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte), I found this one: [2] - it's not up to date, however. The last revision was in 2003, this English text reflects the law as of the 1998 revision. I couldn't find translations of the Swiss and Austrian law with a quick search, but maybe you can find them (see for the full titles of the respective laws Urheberrechtsgesetz). In the German-language Wikipedia, we strive to adhere to the law of these three countries (the main German-language countries). Everything you could wish for regarding the German-language's Wikipedia copyright policy can be found under Wikipedia:Urheberrecht - though it's in German, of course ;-).
Your other question is alluding to what is called Freedom of panorama. The laws regarding this also vary noticeably from country to country. Commons:Freedom_of_panorama might answer your questions. In this area, e.g. the Swiss law is more liberal than the one in the US. But all this is leading away from the topic of the Patrick Süskind article. Please use my discussion page if you would like to discuss such more general issues further. I'm not a copyright expert myself, but if I can be of assistance to you in explaining German-language Wikipedia policies, I will be happy to help :-). Gestumblindi 00:57, 15. Jan. 2007 (CET)
Archivierung dieses Abschnittes wurde gewünscht von: Lektor w (Diskussion) 00:37, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)

Studienfächer

"Süskind studierte Geschichte, Französisch, Englisch, Spanisch, Lateinisch, Griechisch, Politik, Kunst und Theologie in München und Aix-en-Provence." Mir erscheinen die hier erwähnten Studien als zu viel. Kann eine einzige Person neun verschiedene Studien erarbeiten? Ich habe nirgends etwas gelesen was das bestätigen könnte. --193.247.250.1 08:23, 3. Okt. 2007‎

Die Formulierung wurde verbessert: nur noch zwei Studienfächer. Ergänzend heißt es: „Er belegte ebenso Kurse in Englisch, Spanisch, Latein, Griechisch, Politik, Kunst und Theologie.“ --Lektor w (Diskussion) 23:56, 31. Dez. 2016 (CET) erledigtErledigt
Archivierung dieses Abschnittes wurde gewünscht von: Lektor w (Diskussion) 00:37, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)

Veränderungen

Habe im Zuge meiner Recherchen einiges hinzugefügt. Bitte bei noch bestehenden Fehlern verändern! Grüße --HansenSchimpansen 18:34, 9. Mai 2008 (CEST) erledigtErledigt

Archivierung dieses Abschnittes wurde gewünscht von: Lektor w (Diskussion) 00:37, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)

Zur Werkgeschichte "Kontrabaß"

Einem Fernsehinterwiew (Sendereihe:alpha-FORUM,Sender:BAYERN-ALPHA,Sendezeit 18./19.11.09. 0.15 h) mit dem Schauspieler und Regisseur Nikolaus PARYLA zu dessen 70.Geburtstag entnehme ich, aus dem Munde des Interwiewten, folgende mir bisher unbekannte Details zum Werk KONTRABASS von P. Süskind:

  • Süskind hatte das Stück zunächst als HÖRSPIEL geschrieben
  • als solches war es auch im Hörfunk gesendet worden
  • PARYLA hatte VOR der URAUFFÜHRUNG (Ohne MITWIRKUNG, OHNE vorherige Kenntnisnahne, folglich auch OHNE Autorisierung durch den Autor) gegen ausdrückliche Vorbehalte des Hörspielautors Süskind den Text für die Bühnenaufführung gekürzt und umgeschrieben;nach Aussage PARYLAS hat seine Theaterfassung dem Hörspieltext eine "optimischere" Wende gegeben
  • Etliche Zeit später hat Süskind die Bühnenfassung Parylas selbst als Zuschauer erlebt und sein Plazet und sein Wohlgefallen an der Theaterfassung zum Ausdruck gebracht
  • Der Kontrabaß ist also mit dem Stichwort MONOLOG nur verkürzt beschrieben;nach der Münchner Uraufführung der Theaterfassung hat diese eine beispiellose,jahrzehntelange Erfolgsgeschichte gehabt

Die Hörspiel-Vorgeschichte war mir bisher unbekannt; der Anteil Nikolaus PARYLAS an dem grandiosen Bühnenerfolg sollte -bei allen Verdiensten Süskinds - jedenfalls für die Nachwelt festgehalten bleiben. PARYLA ist als Schauspieler,Regisseur und offenbar auch als Theaterautor eine Ausnahmeeerscheinung. --Carl chevalier 01:54, 19. Nov. 2009 (CET)

Solche Details gehören in den Hauptartikel Der Kontrabass. --Lektor w (Diskussion) 23:56, 31. Dez. 2016 (CET)
Ich habe deshalb den ersten Beitrag zu Diskussion:Der Kontrabass verschoben und dort geantwortet. --Lektor w (Diskussion) 12:06, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)
Archivierung dieses Abschnittes wurde gewünscht von: Lektor w (Diskussion) 00:37, 1. Jan. 2017 (CET)
Abgerufen von „https://de.wikiup.org/index.php?title=Diskussion:Patrick_Süskind/Archiv&oldid=161412591“