Talk:By Footpath and Stile

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Remarkably[edit]

I am loth to just pile in and start editing this when it is brand new and all NB's work, but I would quite like to remove the word "remarkably" as I don't think the encyclopaedia should comment in its own voice on what is remarkable, happy, sad, unfortunate, ironical etc etc – we should just state the facts and let people draw their own conclusion – and yes of course it is remarkable! I just don't think we can say so without an RS who does. "Not in my name" and all that. MOS:OPED and MOS:NOTED I think apply. Happy Boxing Day! Cheers DBaK (talk) 10:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That "Remarkably" struck me too. I agree with you, DBaK. The article would be improved by removing it. Voceditenore (talk) 12:16, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered and Voceditenore: "Remarkably" was my toned-down version of "amazingly" in the Clements citation – which I felt somewhat OTT, even for a good source. With the early history filled in, no such adverb is needed. Narky Blert (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, thank you Narky Blert. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion[edit]

I have expanded the "History" section per this request at WikiProject Classical Music. The new references I've added can be used to expand the "Critical reception" section, if anyone wants to. Additionally, the McVeagh source (Gerald Finzi: His Life and Music) has quotes from press reviews of the work's premiere in 1923. There is also a review of the published score in The Musical Times from 1926:

G. G. (1 June 1926). "New Music". The Musical Times, Vol. 67, No. 1000, p. 523 (subscription required)

Voceditenore (talk) 18:31, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Voceditenore: Many thanks for your help!

Rather than rearrange the text, I have simply added "recent" in front of "critical reception" in the heading. With the 80-year gap, the earliest and the recent critical reactions are basically unconnected; there was no process of change or reassessment, it was effectively a rediscovery.

The early performance history fills what I knew was a major gap. I was surprised to learn that it was a vanity publication. The story of Finzi's withdrawal of approval (another surprise) explains the years in the wilderness.

IMO this article can now be put to bed. Narky Blert (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]