Refine
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (5)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (7) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (7) (remove)
Keywords
Institute
- Extern (1)
[I]n its present form, the bibliography contains approximately 1100 entries. Bibliographical work is never complete, and the present one is still modest in a number of respects. It is not annotated, and it still contains a lot of mistakes and inconsistencies. It has nevertheless reached a stage which justifies considering the possibility of making it available to the public. The first step towards this is its pre-publication in the form of this working paper. […]
The bibliography is less complete for earlier years. For works before 1970, the bibliographies of Firbas and Golkova 1975 and Tyl 1970 may be consulted, which have not been included here.
Film festivals have been the blank spot of cinema scholarship throughout most of the twentieth century. Although individual festival histories and anniversary books have been published for many years and the topic of film festivals has occasionally been addressed in academic studies – focusing for example on art or national cinemas – the phenomenon of film festivals was, until recently, rarely the main focus of study. In the last few years, academics have turned to study the broad range of film festival constituencies. These works aim to explain, theorize, and historicize film festivals and, in doing so, point to the emergence of a new field of academic study, film festival research, in which knowledge of festivals is considered essential for our understanding of cinema cultures.
As editor of the next iteration of the Köchel Catalogue, I have to deal with the current (sixth) edition’s Appendix C, devoted to "Doubtful and Misattributed Works." My goal is to reduce the potentially vast dimensions of that appendix to only those works for which some connection to Mozart cannot be ruled out. In the decades since 1964, when the current edition of Köchel was published, many of the works listed in Appendix C have been convincingly attributed to other composers. Other works therein can confidently be dismissed as never having had any meaningful connection to Mozart. Yet even after removing the reattributed and trivially misattributed works from the appendix, we are left with a handful of works that may possibly have had something to do with Mozart, even if clear evidence one way or the other remains elusive. One must, of course, be cautious in removing questionable and doubtful works from the catalogue, as the present case-study will illustrate. The work under consideration, catalogued as K6 Anh. C 9.07, is an unaccompanied piece for three or four voices with the text "Venerabilis barba capucinorum." ...