# From B to Shining B



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Here is an interesting quote I came across:

‘The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. All else is irrelevant.’ (Boulez)


Personally I feel Messiaen was way more influential than Boulez just in that department alone.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

No Mozart, but Boulez conducted some Mozart pieces.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I read somewhere Boulez considered Mozart "trivial".


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Much as I like Boulez and the guys he mentioned this is, of course, ridiculous. I'd like to know the context of the quote. I'm also surprised he didn't mention Debussy, a composer who he worshiped.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

If there is one type of people I can't stand, it's people who think history occurred for the specific purpose of producing....THEM. I certainly hope he was just being facetious.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an interesting quote I came across:
> 
> 'The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. _All else is irrelevant._' (Boulez)


Boulez is perfectly correct! All after the first period in his statement _is_ irrelevant!


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I just got around to reading an analysis of Le Marteau Sans Maitre, and relistening. I am not impressed by the arbitrary serial technique, or the music. Coming from a mathematical background, I feel the art skeptics views on the value of much contemporary is justified. Boulez and Cage is the deconstruction of music that Bach spent his life building up on.

I came upon another interesting quote, this one from Lerdahl:

that much of contemporary music "pursues complicatedness as compensation for a lack of complexity"


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

.

My advice to you, Phil, is to stop looking at the score and trying to make sense of it, and just kick back, relax and let the music work it’s magic on you. In fact just over this past couple of weeks I’ve listened to a couple things by Boulez - Pli selon Pli and Repons, I thought the music was very enjoyable, poetic even. These would be good pieces for you to start with. Great composer, Boulez, I think.

That quote about complicatedness and complexity is hard for me to get my head round, but in fact it made me think of music which has cabalistic ideas built in, like Dufay motets, the Josquin Stabat Mater or even the Bach partitas.


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> 'The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. All else is irrelevant.' (Boulez)


Exactly the kind of statement that is taken as insightful comment by complete strangers on the internet everyday. B was surely joking, in which case he just assembled a line of composers without much care or thought.

I wouldn't take it for serious history (except B's own, of course!)


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2018)

I’d be interested to know Messiaen’s impact on musicians and the classical music industry in comparison to Boulez who:
- always supported the world of younger composers
- set up IRCAM which now provides software and facilities to musicians, scientists, composers and arrangers worldwide
- ran conducting workshops and masterclasses for young conductors
- edited a bunch of Debussy scores for a critical edition of his works that are in use today
- established Ensemble InterContemporain, who are now probably the best ensemble for New Music in the world
- attempted to dismantle elitist concert hall attitudes through inventive programming in music festivals and especially the Rug Concerts at NY Phil, also bringing more public awareness to compositions outside of ‘mainstream concert hall repertoire’ 
- supported and conducted the music of local composers in the countries where he worked as a conductor, giving greater opportunities to composers who were otherwise ignored by the establishment


Also, pretty sure that Boulez really enjoyed the music of Mozart. He had plans to conduct Don Giovanni in a production directed by Wieland Wagner but that never came to be due to Wagner’s untimely death. 

Over the course of his life, Boulez said some strange things, but whenever I’ve looked deeper I’ve ultimately found that his statements when contextualised make a lot of sense. He disliked the view that music could be considered ‘scientific’ or ‘mathematical’ (especially by people like Milton Babbitt), he had a huge appreciation for music history and non-western music, he believed that the culture of pop/rock/hip-hop etc. was more progressive and accepting of change than the culture of classical music in the 20th Century, he believed in making contemporary classical music something that anyone could appreciate through learning and exposure to it, he resented the stuffy ‘academic’ preoccupation with music theory and analysis....and generally he was well loved by basically all the musicians and composers he met at worked with.


----------



## Schoenberg (Oct 15, 2018)

That is but a single pathway that one could consider musical history to go by. (Even still more information could likely be put into that pathway, as an example Buxtehude before Bach.)

But rather, there are many different pathways music history takes.

For example:

All previous mentioned -> Beethoven -> Liszt -> Bartok -> other styles

OR

All previous mentioned -> Mozart -> Beethoven -> Glinka -> Balakirev + Rest of Russian Five -> Tchaikovsky -> Shostakovich/Kabalebvsky/Stravinsky/Rachmaninoff and other russian composers.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an interesting quote I came across:
> 
> 'The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. All else is irrelevant.' (Boulez)
> 
> Personally I feel Messiaen was way more influential than Boulez just in that department alone.


some of these modern composers seem to have suffered from some form of messianic delusions of grandeur. Boulez with his mediocre talent had the ego to compare himself to Bach


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Jacck said:


> some of these modern composers seem to have suffered from some form of messianic delusions of grandeur. Boulez with his mediocre talent had the ego to compare himself to Bach


You may not like his music, but Boulez a mediocre talent? 

Also, he didn't necessarily compare himself to Bach.


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2018)

In terms of 'talent' I think Boulez was somewhat slow to develop as a composer, but very _very_ quick to rise up as a highly respected conductor internationally. I believe that he considered a few of his early works, even published ones, as ineffective musically or in the orchestration and his rather extreme habit of revising and expanding his works shows the wisdom of a very experienced composer-conductor combined with the fresh naivety of a young composer, especially in works like _Le Visage nuptial_.

Boulez didn't have much (or any?) formal training as a conductor but in his twenties he conducted in the pit of a theatre conducting arrangements he made of popular classical tunes as incidental music for plays (not to mention his earlier Ondes Martenot improvisations for radio plays and some experience in the pit of a cabaret music hall in Paris). I'm pretty sure it must have been this experience which led him to conduct works at Domaine Musical before finding himself in a conducting career. At any rate, it's a unique pathway into becoming an internationally renowned conductor, and I wouldn't be too quick to say he lacks the talent to rise to that level through limited experience and unusual circumstances.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

shirime said:


> I'd be interested to know Messiaen's impact on musicians and the classical music industry in comparison to Boulez who:
> - always supported the world of younger composers
> - set up IRCAM which now provides software and facilities to musicians, scientists, composers and arrangers worldwide
> - ran conducting workshops and masterclasses for young conductors
> ...


Messiaen had way more impact in harmony with his modes of transposition, and his symmetric permutations for rhythm was what Boulez himself worked off of for Structures. His Mode de valeurs et d'intensités was what started the whole total serialism in essence.


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> Messiaen had way more impact in harmony with his modes of transposition, and his symmetric permutations for rhythm was what Boulez himself worked off of for Structures. His Mode de valeurs et d'intensités was what started the whole total serialism in essence.


So, was impacting the development of serialism more influential than the things I listed Boulez impacted? Also, how much of Messiaen's approach to harmony really taken on board by later generations of composers and have they also impacted the wider world of music in the way Boulez has?


----------



## pianoville (Jul 19, 2018)

Schoenberg said:


> That is but a single pathway that one could consider musical history to go by. (Even still more information could likely be put into that pathway, as an example Buxtehude before Bach.)
> 
> But rather, there are many different pathways music history takes.
> 
> ...


You must have forgotten Wagner


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

shirime said:


> So, was impacting the development of serialism more influential than the things I listed Boulez impacted? Also, how much of Messiaen's approach to harmony really taken on board by later generations of composers and have they also impacted the wider world of music in the way Boulez has?


It's admirable what Boulez has done in terms of supporting other composers and stuff, but I think we were talking about actual impact in music theory and history. But other composers did adopt the modes of transposition, and the rhythms. I'd like to hear what innovations Boulez came up with.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an interesting quote I came across:
> 
> 'The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. All else is irrelevant.' (Boulez)


Let's see. Bach synthesized the advances which came from before his time and Webern was inspired by the Netherlands polyphonists. Beethoven in his last works even dipped into the past with its modes and an old edition of the Britannica analyzed the Tristan chord as a modified modal cadence.

I'm sure, as others said, he was being facitious. But if you mention those composers, you do mention the past which they drew from also, so it is a compact way of describing the course of music. I don't think necessarily that's what he was doing, but it might throw up enough reasonable doubt to get him off the chopping block.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> It's admirable what Boulez has done in terms of supporting other composers and stuff, but I think we were talking about actual impact in music theory and history. But other composers did adopt the modes of transposition, and the rhythms. I'd like to hear what innovations Boulez came up with.


Boulez's influence has been more technological, based on the developments that happened through the founding of IRCAM and subsequent developments there. The technology and software that has resulted from Boulez's influence has found its use in and outside of classical music.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

shirime said:


> Boulez's influence has been more technological, based on the developments that happened through the founding of IRCAM and subsequent developments there. The technology and software that has resulted from Boulez's influence has found its use in and outside of classical music.


Can somebody post names and pieces that have been influenced by the music and ideas of Boulez?


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Can somebody post names and pieces that have been influenced by the music and ideas of Boulez?


Programmes like MAX are industry standard and are used worldwide. He was influential in its development.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

shirime said:


> Programmes like MAX are industry standard and are used worldwide. He was influential in its development.


Eh...names and pieces?


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Eh...names and pieces?


The list would be too long.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

shirime said:


> The list would be too long.


Well then, the lack of specifics can certainly be forgiven! :lol:


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Well then, the lack of specifics can certainly be forgiven! :lol:


I'll add that it was the establishment of IRCAM by Boulez that led to the development of software under his guidance, and this software is used by musicians, composers and producers worldwide. It's not so much that Boulez has had a _direct_ influence on precisely compositional terms, but his leadership at IRCAM had directly influenced the direction it took and the software that was developed there. There's a lot of further information on the internet I just can't be bothered retrieving it all because I'm not a search engine.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Can somebody post names and pieces that have been influenced by the music and ideas of Boulez?


Have a listen to some Birtwistle and earlier Stockhausen.

Has anyone explored the connections between Bouez and Barraqué? It just occurred to me to ask because I've been exploring the vibraphone concerto and Le temps restitué.

It would be interesting to just compile a list of music which show some inspiration from Marteau sans maître, the instruments in the ensemble for example.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

shirime said:


> I'll add that it was the establishment of IRCAM by Boulez that led to the development of software under his guidance, and this software is used by musicians, composers and producers worldwide. It's not so much that Boulez has had a _direct_ influence on precisely compositional terms, but his leadership at IRCAM had directly influenced the direction it took and the software that was developed there. There's a lot of further information on the internet I just can't be bothered retrieving it all because I'm not a search engine.


"Development of software"? I will bow out of this exchange since it's becoming (or so it seems to me) a bit silly.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> "Development of software"? I will bow out of this exchange since it's becoming (or so it seems to me) a bit silly.


I don't see why it's silly.

Look, in early music, when people developed notations to show rhythms and durations for the first time, it had a huge influence on the sort of music people composed. I guess the same could happen with software, because it gives you the possiblity to see what's going on in a sound more clearly, and to explore new ways of structuring sounds.

If you look at some of Xenakis's papers, he was clearly interested in algebraic geometry and he used concepts from there to structure the music, just as, I guess Josquin used cabalistic structures. Ircam software must have been a great help to Xenakis here.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

KenOC said:


> "Development of software"? I will bow out of this exchange since it's becoming (or so it seems to me) a bit silly.


I agree with Mandryka that it is not silly at all, but I respect your decision to bow out of this exchange. I recognise that our interests in music are different, but I'd not be so quick to judge our exchanges as 'silly' just because we give importance to different things. I understand that in today's world a lot of music is being made on computers using software that was developed at IRCAM because of Pierre Boulez. More recently they've developed plugins for existing software used by producers in non-classical music.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Doesn't every composer in their influences construct a particular history of music which ends with themselves? Anyway, this doesn't make top 20 in the list of most (deliberately) outrageous Boulez quotations.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

Gallus said:


> Doesn't every composer in their influences construct a particular history of music which ends with themselves? Anyway, this doesn't make top 20 in the list of most (deliberately) outrageous Boulez quotations.


Yes, there are no composers who work in a vacuum or place themselves in an ivory tower. There's a better explanation from
Boulez where he explains that one can understand where his style comes from with an understanding of music by Debussy, Ravel, Schoenberg and Webern particularly. I think... I might need to double check!


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Can somebody post names and pieces that have been influenced by the music and ideas of Boulez?


Stravinsky's entire late period including Agon and Threni was a direct result of encountering the young Boulez in Paris.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

George Benjamin is another figure influenced by Boulez and God knows how much influence trickled down in Boulez supporting say Adamek or Mundry.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

Since we all know that the only composers worth bothering with are Bach, Beethoven and Mozart, how can Boulez credentials as a significant influence on a composer of significance be established?


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2018)

The difficulty in making a 'list' of people and compositions Boulez has influenced is that the vast majority of composers influenced by him are _younger_ than him, living and working in a world where the old fashioned concept of canonical repertoire is perpetuated by the marketing strategies of major recording labels and the hype over mass-conservatory-produced winners of international piano competitions. These composers are not as famous as Boulez is, but Boulez has had a different kind of influence in the way music is made digitally. It won't be an audible influence when we listen to music, not in the same way we can hear the influence of Bach in Mozart's contrapuntal style or the influence of Jazz on Gershwin.


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

Gallus said:


> Stravinsky's entire late period including Agon and Threni was a direct result of encountering the young Boulez in Paris.


I've always heard that was a product of Stravinsky's close friendship with his young protégé, Robert Craft.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> some of these modern composers seem to have suffered from some form of messianic delusions of grandeur. Boulez with his mediocre talent had the ego to compare himself to Bach


Perhaps the grandiloquence is yours?

Much of this thread is concerned with taking a throwaway line - a quote from the 80s reported by Norman Lebrecht - out of context and more seriously than it deserves. We all know that Boulez was given to say surprising things, including "against" those who he respected and even revered, and even ended up on a terrorist list for suggesting that opera houses should be burned down. Nor was he alone in sometimes being opinionated - take Glenn Gould, for example. But with Boulez you need to square his throwaway lines with his customary warmth and geniality (as Lebrecht goes on to suggest).

And as for his "mediocre talent" - well, we all have different tastes but can you really not recognise that he towers above all be a few as a conductor of genius? For example, his recordings of Mozart, Bruckner, Mahler and Messiaen are among the very best. You are not alone in failing to recognise what will soon enough be common knowledge - his greatness as a composer - but to suggest that he had no talent is astonishingly ignorant. You should be ashamed.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an interesting quote I came across:
> 
> 'The history of music proceeds from Bach, through Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Mahler, and then via Schoenberg and Webern to Stockhausen and me. All else is irrelevant.' (Boulez)
> 
> Personally I feel Messiaen was way more influential than Boulez just in that department alone.


Boulez is basically attaching himself to a lineage, one which is similar to what Schoenberg said about his own inheritance.

Whether or not Boulez said this with tongue firmly in cheek, he was continuing the same line of thought which sees the need for composers to fit into some continuum of history. In the here and now, composers do as they please, which includes drawing upon many influences. When looking back, causes and effects are analysed, values and judgements applied, hierarchies made.

I won't comment too much on comparing Boulez with Messiaen. They started off as student and teacher, but as regards the post WWII music scene, they where quite different beasts do to speak. Messiaen combined composition with parallel careers as teacher, researcher into birdsong and organist. He's comparable to the previous generation, especially Bartok.

Boulez was a leading composer of the postwar avant-garde, and his contributions and areas of interest have been summarised well enough by others on this thread. He was a theorist and proselytiser for new music, eventually becoming part of the establishment. His legacy is still controversial, similar to others of the avant-garde, but also to the other major composer-conductor of that generation - Bernstein.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I can't comment much about his music, but I have always thought that the NYP following up Bernstein with Boulez was the gutsiest thing any major league orchestra has done in my lifetime.


----------

