Pierre Boulez (1925-2016)

[San Antone]

Furthermore, if we look back a little we see that talented composers and musicians have all through history said dumb stuff that shouldn't be taken seriously, out of envy, personal interests and other motives having little or nothing to do with music. Even if I'm not a member of Pierre's fan club (except for his conducting), I don't think he should be judged by things he said in the 50s.

And yet, many more very accomplished composers do not exhibit this behavior. 

[Ken B]

It was very much the milieu of that time. I don't see anything wrong with being outspoken and critical. I actually agree with most of his pronouncements.

The mileu at the time? It was a mindset he helped create and enforce.

[(poco) Sforzando]

And yet, many more very accomplished composers do not exhibit this behavior.

And some do. Try reading the prose writings of Richard Wagner, for one.

That said, I have no doubt Boulez was sincere in some of his pronouncements, while also deliberately exaggerative in others. Do you really believe he literally meant to blow up all the opera houses, a kind of Osama bin Laden of the classical music world? The statement was obviously metaphoric and hyperbolic. But I have equally no doubt that Boulez enjoyed tweaking the buttons of those Very Solemn People who are easily aggrieved when aim is taken at their sacred cows.

Charles Rosen was similarly both serious and blisteringly witty in his comment on Schoenberg's statement that there is still much good music to be written in C major. Yes, said the Chuckster; the only problem is that nobody has written any of it yet.

[San Antone]

...and the catalogue of the Boulez exhibition in Paris (and not paying  much attention to all that absurdity and impertinence being flung around in the "Composer Discussion" forum on this towering figure in music  ):

Thanks for that sideways snipe.      What struck you as "absurdity and impertinence" I view as a thoughtful and objective appraisal of a composer/conductor by some folks whose views are not clouded by hero worship of this complicated personality. 

[kishnevi]

Thanks for that sideways snipe.      What struck you as "absurdity and impertinence" I view as a thoughtful and objective appraisal of a composer/conductor by some folks whose views are not clouded by hero worship of this complicated personality.

And note that part of the criticism centers on the idea that he should have/ought to compose more than he actually has.

[Mirror Image]

(and not paying much attention to all that absurdity and impertinence being flung around in the "Composer Discussion" forum on this towering figure in music  )

This is exactly what I do when someone feels the need to badmouth a composer I admire. I pay them no mind. Opinions are like warts on a toad's back, we all have them. There are plenty of people who admire Boulez just as there are plenty of people who admire my numero uno composer, Delius. Visionary composers will always have their group of naysayers. I just wish people would talk more about the music they enjoy rather than feeling the need to dump on composers they don't enjoy. I've certainly been guilty of it, but I've learned to just keep my mouth shut and leave people to the music they love.

[Mirror Image]

And note that part of the criticism centers on the idea that he should have/ought to compose more than he actually has.

But do we criticize a composer who didn't write enough or do we criticize the actual music that is available for all to hear? If composing too little or not enough is a valid critique, then Dukas', Berg's, Webern's entire oeuvre should open them up for some vicious attacks.

[San Antone]

But do we criticize a composer who didn't write enough or do we criticize the actual music that is available for all to hear? If composing too little or not enough is a valid critique, then Dukas', Berg's, Webern's entire oeuvre should open them up for some vicious attacks.

The point of my posts was to point out that it was precisely the nature of Boulez's writings about destroying the past and creating a new music from the ground up, so to speak, that led to his silence.

[Karl Henning]

The point of my posts was to point out that it was precisely the nature of Boulez's writings about destroying the past and creating a new music from the ground up, so to speak, that led to his silence.

Also, there is the useful distinction between "badmouthing a composer" (which we none of us are doing), and considering the relation between what a composer has said about the art, and his actual practice of the art.

[Mirror Image]

Also, there is the useful distinction between "badmouthing a composer" (which we none of us are doing), and considering the relation between what a composer has said about the art, and his actual practice of the art.

That's a fair point.

[Mirror Image]

The point of my posts was to point out that it was precisely the nature of Boulez's writings about destroying the past and creating a new music from the ground up, so to speak, that led to his silence.

I don't care about Boulez's thoughts on music, but I admire his conducting. That's about it, though.

[Karl Henning]

I don't care about Boulez's thoughts on music, but I admire his conducting. That's about it, though.

And nothing wrong with that approach, either.  (One of my points being, that his legacy as a conductor is substantial.)

[San Antone]

Regarding Boulez's conducting, IMO his Debussy was especially good.  Debussy is a composer for whom some conductors might underscore the lush, sensual, aspects.  However, at heart, I think Debussy, as do most French composers, prioritized a transparent texture and a cool but color saturated aesthetic, and this is how Boulez treated the music. 

His recordings of Debussy are among the best, IMO.

[Mirror Image]

And nothing wrong with that approach, either.  (One of my points Over There being, that his legacy as a conductor is substantial.)

Fully agreed.

[Mirror Image]

His recordings of Debussy are among the best, IMO.

+1 I especially love his earlier recordings on Debussy on Columbia (Sony).

[chadfeldheimer]

The point of my posts was to point out that it was precisely the nature of Boulez's writings about destroying the past and creating a new music from the ground up, so to speak, that led to his silence.

What about his conducting career and in later years his age?

[Karl Henning]

What about his conducting career and in later years his age?

I don't think the conducting career works effectively as mitigation.  If he had wished to compose instead (or in addition to) he would have managed it (few personalities in the musical world are as effectively managerial as he).  Or, he gave himself to the conducting to the degree that he did, precisely because (semi-)involuntarily, the composing mojo eluded him.

As for age, I sat very nearly next to Elliott Carter in Boston's Symphony Hall for the première of his Horn Concerto; he required assistance walking about.  If Boulez were motivated to compose, his age is not the problem.

[CRCulver]

As for age, I sat very nearly next to Elliott Carter in Boston's Symphony Hall for the première of his Horn Concerto; he required assistance walking about.  If Boulez were motivated to compose, his age is not the problem.

Carter admitted that after the Symphonia, he had to give up large orchestral scores because it was uncomfortable to work with such large paper. While he managed to compose, it was only at the cost of limiting the kind of scoring he could create. Plus, I'm not sure Carter is representative of elderly composers. Look at Kurtág, who has gone from being fairly prolific to only being able to write a few bars of his Endgame opera a day, only because of the ravages of age.

Perhaps the same holds for Boulez – while he could compose something, his schedule and now the limitations of his eyesight may mean that the specific sort of music he wanted to compose was now beyond him.

[kishnevi]

Carter admitted that after the Symphonia, he had to give up large orchestral scores because it was uncomfortable to work with such large paper. While he managed to compose, it was only at the cost of limiting the kind of scoring he could create. Plus, I'm not sure Carter is representative of elderly composers. Look at Kurtág, who has gone from being fairly prolific to only being able to write a few bars of his Endgame opera a day, only because of the ravages of age.

Perhaps the same holds for Boulez – while he could compose something, his schedule and now the limitations of his eyesight may mean that the specific sort of music he wanted to compose was now beyond him.

The perennial retort to eyesight problems is of course Delius.  Even if you don't like his music.
And I am sure that if Maitre Pierre wanted a scribe for his dictation,  more than a few Conservatoire students would be glad to assist him.
It is true that conducting and performing can get in the way, as they did for Mahler and Rachmaninov, but it does not require a full stop to composing, as those two gentlemen could attest.

[Mirror Image]

Sibelius stopped composing after Tapiola and was silent for the last 30 years of his life and this doesn't seem to be an issue whenever we're listening to his music. I think the whole idea of Boulez not composing enough doesn't really make much sense as an argument, otherwise, we'd be arguing this fact about a lot of composers with smaller oeuvres. Has anyone ever seen Durufle's or Duparc's oeuvres?