Pierre Boulez (1925-2016)

[knight66]

As a huge Boulez fan, reading those quotes are stomach-churningly enjoyable!

I have yet to crack his compositions: I probably have about 25 years or so left to me....I will wait a while yet. The shortest quote was the best, A Napoleon complex with a comb-over.

Mike

[Sergeant Rock]

Here's a compilation of lovely quotes http://ronsen.org/boulez/boulez5.html

"I thought he wrote too fast, too carelessly, that he threw in too many notes."

So he was a 20th century Mozart? 

Sarge

[SimonNZ]

The only architectural flair I see is in Boulez's nostrils.

There's nothing "functional" about blowing up existing opera houses and museums, unless of course one's a partisan of lost causes like Italian Futurism and Fascism.

This, which has just been moved from a seriously off-topic discussion in the Lemmy thread , is part of replies to my response to the "Boulez wanted to burn down opera houses" stuff from this member.

I'd like to repost my reply with the full quote in context, as it will undoubtedly come up again - and as others here may wish to comment:


As has been pointed out to you before it comes as a willful distortion of this:

SPIEGEL: M. Boulez, do you think you would be able to realize your modern musical theatre in our highly conventional opera houses?
BOULEZ: Quite certainly not. That brings us to another reason why there is no modern opera today. The new German opera houses certainly look very modern — from outside ; inside they have remained extremely oldfashioned. Only with the greatest difficulty can one present modern operas in a theatre in which, predominantly, repertory pieces are played. It is really unthinkable. The most expensive solution would be to blow the opera houses up. But don't you think that would also be the most elegant?
SPIEGEL: But, since no administrator is going to follow your suggestion ...
BOULEZ: Then one can play the usual repertory in the existing opera houses, Mozart, Verdi, Wagner, up to about Berg. For new operas, experimental stages absolutely need to be incorporated. This apparently senseless demand has already been widely realized in other branches of the theatre.
SPIEGEL: This would also diminish the financial risk which every opera administrator has to run when he puts on a contemporary opera.
BOULEZ: Yes, the burden of having to present a 'successful' opera in every case — one which attracts the public — would happily be removed. And on a small stage of that kind one could risk all kinds of things, whilst the big opera houses continue to exist as museums.

http://opera.archive.netcopy.co.uk/article/june-1968/10/opera-houses-blow-them-up-

[Daverz]

This, which has just been moved from a seriously off-topic discussion in the Lemmy thread , is part of my response to the "Boulez wanted to burn down opera houses" stuff from this member.

I'd like to repost my reply with the full quote in context, as it will undoubtedly come up again - and as others here may wish to comment:


As has been pointed out to you before it comes as a willful distortion of this:

SPIEGEL: M. Boulez, do you think you would be able to realize your modern musical theatre in our highly conventional opera houses?
BOULEZ: Quite certainly not. That brings us to another reason why there is no modern opera today. The new German opera houses certainly look very modern — from outside ; inside they have remained extremely oldfashioned. Only with the greatest difficulty can one present modern operas in a theatre in which, predominantly, repertory pieces are played. It is really unthinkable. The most expensive solution would be to blow the opera houses up. But don't you think that would also be the most elegant?
SPIEGEL: But, since no administrator is going to follow your suggestion ...
BOULEZ: Then one can play the usual repertory in the existing opera houses, Mozart, Verdi, Wagner, up to about Berg. For new operas, experimental stages absolutely need to be incorporated. This apparently senseless demand has already been widely realized in other branches of the theatre.
SPIEGEL: This would also diminish the financial risk which every opera administrator has to run when he puts on a contemporary opera.
BOULEZ: Yes, the burden of having to present a 'successful' opera in every case — one which attracts the public — would happily be removed. And on a small stage of that kind one could risk all kinds of things, whilst the big opera houses continue to exist as museums.

http://opera.archive.netcopy.co.uk/article/june-1968/10/opera-houses-blow-them-up-

Thanks for the context.  But even if he'd said that, it's ridiculous to never give up the outrage about something someone said 60 years ago despite what they've done in the intervening years.

[Karl Henning]

Thanks for the context.  But even if he'd said that, it's ridiculous to never give up the outrage about something someone said 60 years ago despite what they've done in the intervening years.

Perfectly fair.  I do still like my "Ebenezer Scrooge of New Music" simile . . . .

[knight66]

I for one don't feel outrage, I think it just makes him look somewhat absurd. It was one amonst many extreme comments that he threw out there possibly for effect. Whether serious or not; he worked very hard in traditional opera houses and with traditional orchestras in their concert halls and he accepted awards galore and a good deal of money for seemingly dancing with the devil.

Mike

[Karl Henning]

I for one don't feel outrage, I think it just makes him look somewhat absurd. It was one amonst many extreme comments that he threw out there possibly for effect. Whether serious or not; he worked very hard in traditional opera houses and with traditional orchestras in their concert halls and he accepted awards galore and a good deal of money for seemingly dancing with the devil.

Mike

Yes;  I think as well that it's no good pointing to the earlier "love-darts" as smoking guns.  But the sight of him in the photo album, with his finger on the trigger, doesn't reflect all that well on him.

[James]

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

[Cato]

I for one don't feel outrage, I think it just makes him look somewhat absurd. It was one amonst many extreme comments that he threw out there possibly for effect. Whether serious or not; he worked very hard in traditional opera houses and with traditional orchestras in their concert halls and he accepted awards galore and a good deal of money for seemingly dancing with the devil.

Mike

Boulez was not wrong that a concert hall today is a museum of sorts: like a general art museum without a specific genre or era, one expects to hear a majority of the works come from earlier eras, while a smaller section of the repertoire is dedicated to contemporary musicians.

Boulez seemingly would have preferred that arrangement to be reversed, and obviously wanted - as happens in the art world - concert halls dedicated to and designed specifically for the contemporary composers.  While pictorial art has a fairly good number of "Museums of Modern Art," there are not many concert halls or orchestras dedicated to music specifically of the last 50 or 100 years.

[Karl Henning]

Boulez was not wrong that a concert hall today is a museum of sorts: like a general art museum without a specific genre or era, one expects to hear a majority of the works come from earlier eras, while a smaller section of the repertoire is dedicated to contemporary musicians.

Boulez seemingly would have preferred that arrangement to be reversed, and obviously wanted - as happens in the art world - concert halls dedicated to and designed specifically for the contemporary composers.  While pictorial art has a fairly good number of "Museums of Modern Art," there are not many concert halls or orchestras dedicated to music specifically of the last 50 or 100 years.

Indeed.

[zamyrabyrd]

Boulez seemingly would have preferred that arrangement to be reversed, and obviously wanted - as happens in the art world - concert halls dedicated to and designed specifically for the contemporary composers.  While pictorial art has a fairly good number of "Museums of Modern Art," there are not many concert halls or orchestras dedicated to music specifically of the last 50 or 100 years.

What would be the cutoff point? Some of Ives' works would have to be excluded even if the past 100 years.
Rachmaninoff would fit in fine as well as Puccini, however.

ZB

[ritter]

[ While pictorial art has a fairly good number of "Museums of Modern Art," there are not many concert halls or orchestras dedicated to music specifically of the last 50 or 100 years.

The exceptions that first come to mind, of course, are the Ensemble Intercontemporain and, prior to that, the Domaine Musical, both founded by Boulez. So he did put his money where his mouth was, so to speak (even if that money came from the French state for the EIC, and from private patrons--mainly Mme. Tézéeas--for the Domaine).

[Karl Henning]

He put others' money where his mouth was:  that cannot be denied 

[ritter]

He put others' money where his mouth was:  that cannot be denied 

And lovers of contemporary music should be very grateful to him for having done so...  

[Karl Henning]

And lovers of contemporary music should be very grateful to him for having done so...  

Oh, indeed  0:)

The exceptions that first come to mind, of course, are the Ensemble Intercontemporain and, prior to that, the Domaine Musical, both founded by Boulez.

Well, they aren't full-on exceptions, I don't think.  The Ensemble InterContemporain is, let's call it, a chamber orchestra (30-ish paid soloists);  and the Domaine a "concert society."  Even here in the States, we have chamber groups dedicated to new music in most of the big cities.

[Cato]

What would be the cutoff point? Some of Ives' works would have to be excluded even if the past 100 years.
Rachmaninoff would fit in fine as well as Puccini, however.

ZB

Heh-heh! Ives therefore belongs in the regular concert halls, does he not?   

Oh, indeed  0:)

Well, they aren't full-on exceptions, I don't think.  The Ensemble InterContemporain is, let's call it, a chamber orchestra (30-ish paid soloists);  and the Domaine a "concert society."  Even here in the States, we have chamber groups dedicated to new music in most of the big cities.

Like Triad in Boston!   0:)

[Karl Henning]

Like Triad in Boston!   0:)

The difference, I suppose, being that Boulez found OPM to underwrite the new music endeavors.  That's a challenge here.

[ritter]

Well, they aren't full-on exceptions, I don't think.  The Ensemble InterContemporain is, let's call it, a chamber orchestra (30-ish paid soloists);  and the Domaine a "concert society."  Even here in the States, we have chamber groups dedicated to new music in most of the big cities.

Indeed, all those groups in Europe and the US, AFAIK, are chamber ensembles (those pre-EIC--like the ASKO or the London Sinfonietta--, or those that came later). Only the Ensemble Modern expands into a full symphony orchestra, methinks. But still, better to have these prmamnent outlets for contemporary creation, even if with reduced forces, than nothing at all...

[Karl Henning]

Indeed, all those groups in Europe and the US, AFAIK, are chamber ensembles (those pre-EIC--like the ASKO or the London Sinfonietta--, or those that came later). Only the Ensemble Modern expands into a full symphony orchestra, methinks. But still, better to have these prmamnent outlets for contemporary creation, even if with reduced forces, than nothing at all...

Bien sûr!

[zamyrabyrd]

Boulez fandom is a mixed bag, innit? 

One shouldn't dare make a poll. It would be too incendiary...