Pierre Boulez (1925-2016)

[San Antone]

Interview with Boulez (seems fairly recent, maybe within the last five years); talks about his works, about 20 min.

https://www.youtube.com/v/ie5Ore2rjhk

[Cato]

Does calling someone autistic count as nice Cato? No need to answer; it's clear Boulezian standards apply here. I have thoughtfully provided three quotes from the man himself.

Artistic, yes, autistic, no.  0:)

Many thanks to San Antonio for digging into YouTube for those links!

An interesting comment from an "Ivor Morgan" on YouTube about Ephemeride:

I wonder if this is not a 'rescue' of the Trois Psalmedies that he composed in 1945 when he came to Paris. It is claimed that a recording exists in the archives of RTF but Boulez forbad its being broadcast.

[CRCulver]

I believe the 1970's saw no publications of a new work.

Messagesquisse, cummings est der Dichter and Rituel all date from the 1970s. The original version of "...explosante-fixe... too.

[CRCulver]

Why would he have such behaviour now, when he managed (with the help of all the people who wanted a place at the king's court) to crush politicaly, economicaly and socially any dissident voice in France.

Considering that Dutilleux and Xenakis managed to go on working just fine, often with state support, in spite of their opposition to Boulez's aesthetic, the claim that Boulez crushed all opposition rings hollow. Within a decade of the opening of IRCAM, an institution that was supposedly a sign of Boulez's grip on French music, the majority of composers working there were largely opposed to Boulez. Some "crushing".

There are a few French neo-Romantic populist composers who like to blame Boulez's eminence for their lack of success, but I daresay they would have saw little success in those decades regardless of the power held by a few high modernists: think about how most American composers of that kind of music fail to gain any following even when they are working in a society that is an aesthetic free-for-all.

[not edward]

Not compulsory, but it would be nice!   

Essentially, a sense that it's retreading ground already covered in Repons and sur Incises, with diminishing returns.

More subjective view: I think that Repons and sur Incises, though they have many memorable passages, could possibly have been better works if they had been a bit shorter. For me, the 45-minute Derive II is distinctly lighter on memorable writing and heavier on note-spinning than those other two, and is simply far too long for its material.

[Cato]

Messagesquisse, cummings est der Dichter and Rituel all date from the 1970s. The original version of "...explosante-fixe... too.

Aha!  I thought the claim was a little odd, but found no contradiction after checking a few sites.

[Ken B]

"Some crushing."

Not for want of trying. In any case probably no single person did more, and tried more, to marginalize and punish other composers, or damage classical music in the broader culture, than Boulez.

[Mr Bloom]

Considering that Dutilleux and Xenakis managed to go on working just fine

The case of Xenakis is interesting, because in his case this is plain wrong : for example, IRCAM was supposed to be a collaboration between Boulez and Xenakis, but Xenakis left the projet very fast, sickened by the whole thing. He created CEMAMu as a result, but didn't get the public founding he needed - most of the state money for contemporary music went to Boulez's projects, and little was left for others (Boulez was great politician, something Xenakis wasn't). CEMAMu was a failure in Xenakis' eyes, and Xenakis did have many difficulties in his career because of the rivalry between him and Boulez - not necessarily from Boulez himself, but from people around him. At the end of his life, Xenakis was bitter and tired by the state of things he had to fight against in France.
As stupid as it sounds, Xenakis is still these days a name you shouldn't talk about at the IRCAM if you want to be taken seriously as a composer.

Within a decade of the opening of IRCAM, an institution that was supposedly a sign of Boulez's grip on French music, the majority of composers working there were largely opposed to Boulez.

People working at IRCAM opposed to Boulez? Are you joking? Who are you thinking about?

[San Antone]

Pierre Boulez on John Cage

https://www.youtube.com/v/qKbPgUTgZXM

Pierre Boulez - message vis a vis receiving the 2009 Kyoto Prize

https://www.youtube.com/v/ul6ytPknslA

[CRCulver]

People working at IRCAM opposed to Boulez? Are you joking? Who are you thinking about?

Early IRCAM participants like Dalbavie, Benjamin and Saariaho were always quick to emphasize in interviews that they wanted to pursue different directions than Boulez's (post-)serialist aesthetic. If anything, Boulez adopted more from that new generation than they adopted from him; the rapid success of the spectralist approach within IRCAM (with rare exceptions like Manoury) must have taken him by surprise.

[Mr Bloom]

Early IRCAM participants like Dalbavie, Benjamin and Saariaho were always quick to emphasize in interviews that they wanted to pursue different directions than Boulez's (post-)serialist aesthetic.

IRCAM was created in 1969. Saariaho was there after 1982, Dalbavie after 1985, Benjamin after 1987. They were not early participants.
Anyway, they did pursue different directions, but they were not opposed to Boulez at all. It's obvious composers are not going to copy Boulez's music (even if some forgotten composers did that). It's more complex than that. It deals with philosophical, social and political matters more than strictly musical ones. It deals with the representation of the music, the image of it. The post-serialist tradition and the spectral tradition are linked, and since that time they have merged.

[NorthNYMark]

IRCAM was created in 1969. Saariaho was there after 1982, Dalbavie after 1985, Benjamin after 1987. They were not early participants.
Anyway, they did pursue different directions, but they were not opposed to Boulez at all. It's obvious composers are not going to copy Boulez's music (even if some forgotten composers did that). It's more complex than that. It deals with philosophical, social and political matters more than strictly musical ones. It deals with the representation of the music, the image of it. The post-serialist tradition and the spectral tradition are linked, and since that time they have merged.

Being very much a novice in this area (but reasonably well-informed about the cultural histories of modernism and postmodernism in the visual arts), I'm especially interested in hearing more about this bolded part.  Would you (or anyone else) care to elaborate?

[CRCulver]

IRCAM was created in 1969.

While the political initiative may date from that time, IRCAM did not open until 1977. The composers I mentioned were all active there within a decade from that.

Anyway, they did pursue different directions, but they were not opposed to Boulez at all.

That they pursued different directions is clear proof that Boulez's influence on French music did not simply perpetuate his own concerns. His role in administration has encouraged a diversity of styles. About the only thing that did not flourish in France under his "watch" was Connesson-like neo-Romanticism, and it's unreasonable to expect any administrator to encourage every style. After all, don't even the more broad-minded among us get frustrated when classical institutions start giving time and resources to, say, crossover or video game soundtracks?

[Mr Bloom]

That they pursued different directions is clear proof that Boulez's influence on French music did not simply perpetuate his own concerns. His role in administration has encouraged a diversity of styles.

A diversity of styles, really ? Ircam has always defended the same range of aesthetics, they have not hidden that fact. Under Boulez's administration, French music has been polarised between "avant-garde" and "neo-tonality". Between the polarities, nothing could exist. But the tradition of French music before 1945 wasn't built on that polarity. Avant-garde was a german importation, mixed with a certain view of Debussy's music, modernised by Messiaen - which is totally what Boulez's music was about from the beginning. It's a make-believe, a construction. Spectralism belongs to that German/Debussy mix of avant-garde, and can't be considered an anomaly in that context. It's a logical evolution of the idea of what french music should sound like, and not what it is. These composers just put more Debussy than serialism in their music.
As a consequence, true successors of the french tradition were forgotten (cf. Landowski, who was one of the main adversary of Boulez), and nowadays, a french composer has only two choices : neo-romantism or german/Debussy avant-garde, which isn't an aesthetic as much as a generic style, a bunch of technics and ideas about music.
I've heard that "diversity of styles" argument. It's a fake view of the institution to justify itself, but it's a blatant lie, that can be proven if you take any "cursus" concert, or any concert of the now late Agora festival. IRCAM is an institution : its goal is not to evolve but to reproduce itself.

[snyprrr]

The case of Xenakis is interesting, because in his case this is plain wrong : for example, IRCAM was supposed to be a collaboration between Boulez and Xenakis, but Xenakis left the projet very fast, sickened by the whole thing. He created CEMAMu as a result, but didn't get the public founding he needed - most of the state money for contemporary music went to Boulez's projects, and little was left for others (Boulez was great politician, something Xenakis wasn't). CEMAMu was a failure in Xenakis' eyes, and Xenakis did have many difficulties in his career because of the rivalry between him and Boulez - not necessarily from Boulez himself, but from people around him. At the end of his life, Xenakis was bitter and tired by the state of things he had to fight against in France.
As stupid as it sounds, Xenakis is still these days a name you shouldn't talk about at the IRCAM if you want to be taken seriously as a composer.
People working at IRCAM opposed to Boulez? Are you joking? Who are you thinking about?

Xenakis really is The French Composer combining Varese and Ravel. He's a Composer of colour: French. He feels French. Boulez- how is that really French Music? I mean, his early works, sure. The First Sonata for Piano is very French and colourful. The Flute Sonata. But the 'Livre pour Quatuor' is like Webern-cotton-candy, so dense and thorny the work is. And from there...

Poor Xenakis

[ritter]

Boulez's music sounds very French to me, perfectly fits in line with Debussy, Messiaen and bringing in other exotic & classical influences .. very colorful, refined, sensuous, decorative, subversive and following that rich harmonic tradition and bringing a fresh rhythmic vocabulary. And the later pieces get more beautiful. Xenakis's music is the opposite of this overall .. externally constructed .. rugged, crude, noisy, in-your-face and harsh.

Hear, hear! Your description of Boulez's soundworld appears to me very fitting, James! I always get the impression that many listeners (perhaps taken aback by the composer's public persona of many years ago) don't realize how beautiful much of his output is...

I cannot comment so much on Xenakis, a composer I have never warmed to (but your description does reflect a bit the impression he makes on me  ).

[snyprrr]

AAAAHHHHHm the acid... it buuurns it buuurns!!

[Ken B]

I just listened to Derive 1. Sounded pretty French to me. Ornamental shavings Ravel would have discarded as he carved, but *French*.

[NorthNYMark]

I'm surprised at how often the notion of "Frenchness" seems to come up in this discussion.  Perhaps there is similar concern over the "Americanness" of Carter or Feldman, or the "Germanness" of Stockhousen in their respective threads, but I certainly haven't noticed it to this extent.  For those who have brought it up, could you perhaps discuss why it is important to you?

[Pessoa]

Much of a muchness?