Debussy Preludes Bk 2

[Joe_Campbell]

I just wanted to start an appreciation thread for this set of preludes. While overall the total quality isn't up to that of the first book, there are several pieces, which in my opinion, eclipse anything the first book had to offer.

Brouillards - this music is incredibly eerie...the opening few bars really set the tone for the rest of the music.

Feuilles mortes (dead leaves)- what a wonderfully melancholic piece; it apparently comes from the Peter Pan painting Arthur Rackham which had the caption "There is probably nothing that encourages the joy of playing more than a dead leaf." Cool.

La Puerta del vino - a much stronger spanishy-flavoured tune than 'la serenade etc...' with some great chordal melodies. (mm 36-41 if you have score)

La terrasse des audiences dy claur de lune - this music haunts my thoughts. There's something so incredibly enticing about the opening cascade of notes. I particularly love mm 20 and on...although the whole piece is strong.

These are great pieces, but I still think that overall, the first book is the better, simply because there isn't a weak piece among them. In the second book, I found 'fireworks' to be lacking in material, although it was flamboyant.

What does everyone else think?

[facehugger]

i like fireworks most of all, especially with michelangeli playing

[Joe_Campbell]

Really? I have Zimerman's prelude set (which is awesome). I've only heard Michelangeli play the first set. Perhaps I should try and get a hold of the second.

[facehugger]

zimerman is cool, but i find his sound a tad metallic for debussy.

[facehuggerie]

...i find his sound a tad metallic for debussy.

synaesthesia alarm

[m_gigena]

I foresee O Mensch apparition here. Soon.

[Joe_Campbell]

a what?

[MishaK]

I foresee O Mensch apparition here. Soon.

Only to unhesitatingly second the recommendation for Michelangeli.

[Joe_Campbell]

So no one has any comments on the actual music besides 'facehuggers' one liners? The first book seemed more popular. Maybe that's a reflection of how the second set is generally received.

[MishaK]

So no one has any comments on the actual music besides 'facehuggers' one liners? The first book seemed more popular. Maybe that's a reflection of how the second set is generally received.

I do. I just don't have time right now. Patience, my friend.

[oyasumi]

There was an awesome poll on the old board about your favorite Debussy piano work. Book 1 outnumbered Book 2 by a large margin.

The first book is probably the most accessible, and has maybe the most popular prelude, La fille aux cheveux de lin. It begins with a piece that's more accessible (I can't think of another word), as opposed to Brouillards, which is atonal(?) and just more difficult.

If you look at the parallels between the two books you can see how Debussy had improved, since Book 2 was written a few years later. Bruyeres is very similar to La fille, but it is just more refined, and Debussy does more with that sweet melody than before.

I don't know about "total quality" compared to the first book, since, again, I think this is the more mature work.

[MishaK]

It begins with a piece that's more accessible (I can't think of another word), as opposed to Brouillards, which is atonal(?) and just more difficult.

I don't know if "Danseuse de Delphes" is really accessible. It just happens to have a few nice effects that draw the listener in. But it's not that simple. There is little straightforwardly tonal in either of the two books. All of it is harmonically ambiguous at least.

[karlhenning]

Well, but isn't a few nice effects that draw the listener in a means of access?

[MishaK]

Well, but isn't a few nice effects that draw the listener in a means of access?

I like to distinguish between pieces that are upfront accessible because of the familiar musical language they use, and pieces that in a way dupe the unfamiliar listener into following along even though the musical language used is in fact something very unfamiliar.

[karlhenning]

I like to distinguish between pieces that are upfront accessible because of the familiar musical language they use, and pieces that in a way dupe the unfamiliar listener into following along even though the musical language used is in fact something very unfamiliar.

Could you spell that out in this case, then?  For as I hear Danseuses de Delphes, I'm not sure on which side of that divide it lies.

[MishaK]

Could you spell that out in this case, then?  For as I hear Danseuses de Delphes, I'm not sure on which side of that divide it lies.

I guess that depends more on your estimation of the audience we are talking about. 

[oyasumi]

I don't know if "Danseuse de Delphes" is really accessible. It just happens to have a few nice effects that draw the listener in. But it's not that simple. There is little straightforwardly tonal in either of the two books. All of it is harmonically ambiguous at least.

Debussy can be amiguous all he wants and still be accessible. The point was to open the set with a piece with that can grab the listener with something they can be comfortable with, "a few nice effects" or whatever, but at the same time preparing them for what's to come.

With Book 2 he just throws you straight into the mist from the beginning.

[Joe_Campbell]

I would have to say that "the hills of anacapri" and "the girl with the flaxen hair" are the most accessible pieces from the first book. There's still a bit of strain on the ears with "Dancers of Delphi."

I don't think Brouillards is that 'misty' either...probably a bit more ominous sounding. I'm not sure if I'm correct, but I would hardly classify it as 'atonal' music. Maybe someone else can enlighten me in that respect.

[oyasumi]

I don't think Brouillards is that 'misty' either...

Do you know what "brouillards" means?

[Joe_Campbell]

Do you know what "brouillards" means?

Whoops! hehe...do now!

Still, from a purely music perspective, I stand by my original statement.