Messiaen vs. Dutilleux

[bhodges]

I love both, and would never want to have to choose. Some works from each are favorites, e.g., Messiaen Turangalîla and the Quartet for the End of Time, and Dutilleux's Symphony No. 2 and his cello concerto, Tout un Monde lointain.

The two composers are radically different from each other: Messiaen revels in enormous blocks of sound, whereas Dutilleux is more concerned with exquisite details. Again, love both.

--Bruce 

[San Antone]

Brewski, I agree, choosing between two composers is a silly thing - but that was the purpose of the thread.  I think it was Bartok who said that "music is not a horse race,"  but all too often on this forum people set up competitions between composers.  I usually don't join these discussions.  But today the forum was slow and I was otherwise unoccupied.

[bhodges]

Brewski, I agree, choosing between two composers is a silly thing - but that was the purpose of the thread.  I think it was Bartok who said that "music is not a horse race,"  but all too often on this forum people set up competitions between composers.  I usually don't join these discussions.  But today the forum was slow and I was otherwise unoccupied.

These competitions are fine, I don't mind. Don't usually do them, either, but the comments here were interesting.

--Bruce

[Mirror Image]

Brewski, I agree, choosing between two composers is a silly thing - but that was the purpose of the thread.  I think it was Bartok who said that "music is not a horse race,"  but all too often on this forum people set up competitions between composers.  I usually don't join these discussions.  But today the forum was slow and I was otherwise unoccupied.

I don't really look at these polls as competitions. I look at them as expressing our opinion about who we prefer and that's it. There's nothing wrong with that and remember you didn't have to participate despite there not being much going on today. There are hundreds of other threads you could've contributed to instead of this one.

[The new erato]

I don't really look at these polls as competitions. I look at them as expressing our opinion about who we prefer and that's it. There's nothing wrong with that and remember you didn't have to participate despite there not being much going on today. There are hundreds of other threads you could've contributed to instead of this one.

+1

I voted Dutilleux which I love. Messiaens chromaticism and modulations makes me seasick and disoriented.

[Iota]

Messiaen seems to make the world a bigger place when I listen, whereas Dutilleux, though certainly conjuring up some beautiful textures, doesn't have this effect. I like them both, but the reach of Messiaen's imagination and his expansion of the boundaries of musical possibility, puts him in a different realm of 'importance' to Dutilleux for me.

[vers la flamme]

Messiaen seems to make the world a bigger place when I listen, whereas Dutilleux, though certainly conjuring up some beautiful textures, doesn't have this effect. I like them both, but the reach of Messiaen's imagination and his expansion of the boundaries of musical possibility, puts him in a different realm of 'importance' to Dutilleux for me.

Very well said! I would agree that Messiaen at his best has created some of the most towering works of all time. Look no further than the famous Quatuor pour la fin du temps. I listened to it in full last night, and it was as devastating as ever. This music is just massive. When you're in the middle of it, you can't see out the other side, as I'm sure the composer couldn't see himself ever making it out of that POW camp alive—but the beauty of the Quatuor is that it's about so much more than that. It's about time itself coming to a standstill. I will NOT get into this debate here, as I've seen it get ugly in the past, but I think there is something deeply spiritual about Messiaen's music, and I wonder whether people who cannot tap into that on a personal level will ever really appreciate his music. Of course, beyond the spiritual aspect, the Quatuor is brilliant from a purely technical perspective; it's a sheer numbers game, albeit in a totally unique way.

However, having gotten all that out of the way—beyond the Quatuor, the equally abyssal organ work (ALL of it), and some of the piano music, I don't think much else in Messiaen's catalog reaches these divine heights. As for Dutilleux, almost everything he wrote was a masterpiece. Sure, he never wrote a work to rival Messiaen's Quatuor, but everything he has written is deeply enjoyable, and he was the kind of master craftsman composer who, like Ravel or Bach, never wrote a note out of place. I don't think I would say this about Messiaen—perhaps I'm wrong—but it is for this reason  that I stand by my earlier choice of Dutilleux, but really, it's just by a hair.

[Uhor]

Dutillleux, if only for the String Quartet and the Trois Strophes sur le nom de Sacher for Cello; most of his pieces I find dull but at least never jarring.

[T. D.]

Dutillleux, if only for the String Quartet and the Trois Strophes sur le nom de Sacher for Cello; most of his pieces I find dull but at least never jarring.

I voted for Dutilleux, prefer the same works, more or less the same reasons.
I enjoy Quatuor pour la fin du temps, but once attended a live performance of Turangalîla-Symphonie which almost completely put me off Messiaen. Have seen quotes from Morton Feldman and Pierre Boulez indicating that the piece affected them in the same way.

[Total Rafa]

There's no question that Dutilleux's music is more organized and, yes, accessible, too. I always wanted to try to connect with Messiaen and I've tried on numerous occasions and, at the end of each listening session, I came away frustrated because the music just doesn't go anywhere or develop in any way --- it's like it is in idle the entire time. But, also, Messiaen's harmonic language didn't really appeal to me and, for me, this is something that's incredibly important. I do value melody, rhythm, and structure, but if there's not some kind of interesting harmonies happening, then usually I'm not completely drawn into the music. I thought Messiaen was too caught up in concepts, but doesn't follow-through with the execution. He's like John Cage in a way. Fascinating philosophy about music, but when it comes to the actual compositions, I'm left unmoved.

I would disagree. I imagine the reference to music feeling "idle" relates to pieces such as Regard du Père from Vingt Regards and Louange à l'Immortalité de Jésus from Quatour. I find those pieces to be immensely beautiful in large part due to the extreme slowness of how the music unfolds over time. I can't really equate slow with idle. While Messiaen is often described as a successor to Debussy, I think some of his music is actually more an expansion on Satie's aesthetic - the ultra-slow and ultra-quiet, cast and immersed on a grand scale.

Not sure about the comparison to Cage either. There is not much that is conceptual about Messiaen's music. I think it is merely music that aims to be evocative - of his faith, religious scenes, birds, colours, nature, etc.