# Fauré - how to define his music ?



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

Is it romantic music to you ?

I just listened to Fauré's Violin Sonata op 109 and I really don't hear much romantism in this music, but it's not impressionistic nor modernist either. I'm curious about what are you thoughts about this.

To me, his language is very "modern", often (in the late works) almost breatking the tonal feel but not completely, contrapuntical but in a free and organic way, and with some kind of emotional distance. But this doesn't define his music at all. 
What is missing ? 
Maybe the long, sinuous and floating phrases ? This kind of continuity, fluidity in his writing - there's rarely anything abrupt from what I've heard, even though there are often a lot of harmonic and contrapuntic changes-, without anything theatrical but rather a personal, inner point of view ?

Why does it sound so special ?

Is there an other composer with the same kind of aesthetic ?


Thanks


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Refined elegance.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Janacek might be kind of like this as well sometimes, really hard to place. Those Faure Nocturnes for solo piano are the strangest, I want to go nuts with enthusiasm for how unique they are but they somehow slip past my comprehension sometimes.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Salut! 

Je suis plutôt étonné à la question en ce qui concerne l'un de plus formidables compositeurs français, demandé par un français même ...lol

My first experience of Fauré was performing his Requiem Mass in school. He didn't strike me as romantic, but then most requiems tend less towards romanticism than requiem music. His piano quintets are very lilting and melodious; sinuously threaded by a lyrical quality with a kind of organic wholesomeness which I had not encountered in earlier or later composers. 

By the time I returned to listening to his cello sonatas and works, I had decided that his works were majestically cohered into the living entity which his string quartet defines at the peak of his career: that organic form of music which pulsates and extends its heart beat into my own, at times confusing me for where I begin, and where I end, and where his music begins, and the part or all of it which envelopes me. Structurally, analysing his work is of little interest to me. The experience as a listener of Fauré's music is akin to Dutilleux's Ainsi La Nuit for me: the music simply 'forebodes' a happening. It continuously, sinuously forebodes, as it unwinds with a fin de siècle elegance without passing into becoming démodée or out of fashion....and this novel organic experience of music fusing into being, is a strange one which seems beyond me; in me, and connecting with all that is disconnected in me. 

The critic in me however asks: all this anticipation and foreboding in his music. So what the hell is he waiting for? Why doesn't he get on with it, and make something happen in his music?

It's those tensions: between the patient discovery of the otherworldliness within, and that impatience of wanting romantic music to happen NOW! which he leaves me with. So perhaps for years, I've sat in admiration of his works, enjoying the connection which I can grasp, and at the same time, feeling displaced and distant from his works.

If there was another composer with the same aesthetic, I guess either Fauré would not be original, or the other, would not be original. None of his star pupils followed in his path: indeed, his was a difficult path to tread. It's hard to think of such a stylistically formal and precise composer - particularly in his chamber music form. This is where I personally find Fauré excels. There is so little of his chamber music which I don't like.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Composers with the same kind of aesthetic - maybe Faure's fellow countryman Dukas despite his limited output?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I should listen to more Faure...I don't have extensive knowledge of his output, but his famous "Pavane for Choir and Orchestra" and parts of his Requim are the type of music that makes me melt.


----------



## Guest (Dec 24, 2012)

Aaron Copland wrote an essay about Faure titled "Faure: A Neglected Master" which you can find on the internet on jstor. He calls Faure the "French Brahms" and says he's the link between Brahmsian romanticism and Debussyian impressionism. So if we go by Copland then we can pretty confidently say that Faure has elements of romanticism and impressionism, although he is probably more firmly rooted in the romantic style. Some of his later work, however, are definitely hard to categorize because of their uniqueness. Regardless, Faure was a great composer (my second favorite, in fact).


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Fauré sounds _ultra-_Romantic to me. I would describe it as lyrical, flowery, sweet, mawkish, cloying, sugary, mushy, weepy, gooey, drippy, cutesy, lovey-dovey, soppy, tearjerking, three-hankie, almost to the point of saccharine.

But when I'm in that kind of mood, it's perfect.

-------------------•


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

clavichorder said:


> Janacek might be kind of like this as well sometimes, really hard to place. Those Faure Nocturnes for solo piano are the strangest, I want to go nuts with enthusiasm for how unique they are but they somehow slip past my comprehension sometimes.


Unless you are analyzing the music, there is no need for 'comprehension'. Listen, let the music 'flow through you'. Wait a few minutes after it ends before trying to figure it out, or picking apart your reaction to it.

My personal take is that Faure's music is a natural progression from Franck's, with the angst turned down, life viewed through lightly smoked lenses.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

millionrainbows;395721.... sounds [I said:


> ultra-[/I]Romantic to me. I would describe it as lyrical, flowery, sweet, mawkish, cloying, sugary, mushy, weepy, gooey, drippy, cutesy, lovey-dovey, soppy, tearjerking, three-hankie, almost to the point of saccharine.


Oh no! 

You're describing the Brit New Romantics! Wet Wet Wet - Love is all around.






Don't say you don't love it. It's going to glue in your head with its irritatingly catchy hooks. It'll plague for over Christmas Day and that synthetic drum machine will still be playing in your dreams by boxing day.

:cheers:

-------------------•


> View attachment 11172


I used to have this, until a friend asked for it. A great introduction to Faure.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

violadude said:


> I should listen to more Faure...I don't have extensive knowledge of his output, but his famous "Pavane for Choir and Orchestra" and parts of his Requim are the type of music that makes me melt.


Go, go! Go buy all the works or ask someone to buy them for you for Christmas. Nothing is of more importance at this moment in your life! I want sponge cake.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

oops, wrong window.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Head_case said:


> Oh no!  You're describing the Brit New Romantics! Wet Wet Wet - Love is all around. Don't say you don't love it. It's going to glue in your head with its irritatingly catchy hooks. It'll plague for over Christmas Day and that synthetic drum machine will still be playing in your dreams by boxing day. :cheers:


No, an old-timer like me won't "imprint" on this, because it's an old Troggs hit, which I imprinted on way back in 1968.

-------------------•


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Praeludium said:


> Is it romantic music to you ?
> 
> I just listened to Fauré's Violin Sonata op 109 and I really don't hear much romantism in this music, but it's not impressionistic nor modernist either. I'm curious about what are you thoughts about this.
> 
> ...


_By 'category' Fauré is clinically and firmly 'a romantic' in the Romantic period_, with most / many of the musical traits and the sensibility of that era. (That is _the only correct answer to the, 'what period is Fauré? Q on a music history exam_ 

Directing it all is the composer's extreme innate preference / temperament for classicism, his aesthetic constant: diligent and flawless craftsmanship, the music, even at its 'peak of emotional runny-ness,' (i.e. cry, drip, pine, long, sigh, snivel, etc.) a model of classical restraint.

That classicism, and the composer's ultra developed high craftsmanship (the fact he was a master modal contrapuntist -- which is highly disciplined 'old school' -- and not being 'tonal' also allows venturing into 'modern' harmony a bit smoother), are what hold the simplest of pieces together: that masterly use of counterpoint is why nothing is abrupt, unless only completely by the composer's choice and will.

This adds up to degrees of near reflexive ultra-refinement, giving much of what he wrote a quality such that it prompts the comment from others here to say how 'organic' and 'whole' the music seems. You hear it and, "it just is."

Like all great composers, he used the working principles but didn't 'follow the rules;' rather than setting up an academic or theoretic premise for a piece, 'he just wrote,' and used all the tools he had to craft what he wanted.

I don't particularly care for much of it (personal taste) while at the same time am seriously impressed with how damned fine the writing is, and I suppose the classicism, being the approach I much prefer over the romantic, also appeals a great deal.

If you did not know better, the opening of the first piano quintet could be mistaken for Brahms.

The second piano quintet has all his hallmarks (and being later has more a clear taste of 'modern' in the harmonies): often the texture of the writing is pretty dense (somewhat a mare's nest of notes), heavily populated with modulations, yet it all sounds wonderfully 'balanced and clear,' as 'all of a piece' with nothing extra or unnecessary, making it very 'straightforward' sounding - and (seemingly) effortless music which is directly communicative.

There is a quietness to the craft, a 'dislocation' of the artists' ego, which puts the music first, and does not scream for attention. No 'big noise' like Beethoven or Wagner to grab the plebes or push the composer or the work into the public arena. (The best performances of his Requiem are the quiet and 'matter of fact' ones - a number of recorded performances try to make it 'big sounding.') That has a lot to do with why he quietly sits in the panoply of composers, often waiting to be discovered rather than 'announced....

The music is, altogether, all those things you mentioned.

A near but later generation of Fauré's would leave romanticism and those few 'Germanic' sounding approaches to how music is shaped (which is a part of Fauré) behind, while very much sharing a near identical aesthetic and and other technical compositional traits.

Debussy (the first 'modern' composer) and Ravel (modern but staunchly classicist and much more 'conservative' than Debussy) show the same classical restraint, have the same tool of the modal counterpoint at their disposal (listen to the final chorus of Ravel's "l'enfant et les sortileges" !) Debussy to me is more in the realm of music which sounds like 'it just is.' Ravel is more clearly 'constructed.' but in such a way that 'most of us' do not at all mind


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

violadude said:


> I should listen to more Faure...I don't have extensive knowledge of his output, but his famous "Pavane for Choir and Orchestra" and parts of his Requiem are the type of music that makes me melt.


The chorus was tacked on after the fact, Fauré picking up a check for some cheesy commission request, "add this text with a choir" after the piece had been written.

Listen to the piece 'straight,' in its originally intended instrumental version.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

millionrainbows said:


> Fauré sounds _ultra-_Romantic to me. I would describe it as lyrical, flowery, sweet, mawkish, cloying, sugary, mushy, weepy, gooey, drippy, cutesy, lovey-dovey, soppy, tearjerking, three-hankie, almost to the point of saccharine.
> 
> But when I'm in that kind of mood, it's perfect.


You left out 'runny,' like Brie _cheese_ is 'runny.'


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Uh...flaccid?


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I think Clavichorder's Janacek comparison was insightful, and Petrb's post #14 was bang on the money.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

French Romanticism/Impressionism. Somewhere inbetween Chopin and Debussy.


----------



## Marsden (Nov 25, 2011)

PetrB said:


> You left out 'runny,' like Brie _cheese_ is 'runny.'


Or Camembert. "Fetch hither la fromage de la belle France!"


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Uh...flaccid?


Uh, I think you'd have to know Gaby personally to answer that question.


----------



## Ravndal (Jun 8, 2012)

clavichorder said:


> Janacek might be kind of like this as well sometimes, really hard to place. * Those Faure Nocturnes for solo piano are the strangest*, I want to go nuts with enthusiasm for how unique they are but they somehow slip past my comprehension sometimes.


Havent heard them before now. Strange indeed. And i felt that i had to be in a special mood to like it.


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

I love the n°6 !






Here by Perlemuter. There's a more viril (yes, viril) interpretation by Yvonne Lefébure on YT.

Thanks for the great replies.

I had almost forgotten many of his other works (like the Ballad) and was thinking about the Requiem, late chmaber works, etc. when I wrote that, so that's maybe why it didn't seem romantic to me ! 
Still, I think that PetrB's idea of classical restraint explains quite well what I couldn't understand.
Maybe also the modality and very fluctuent harmonic language is a part of what makes his music so mysterious and different to me.

I thought about associating what Fauré did with Pre-Raphaelism, but this isn't necessarily accurate to associate paintings and music. Still, it makes me think that.


----------



## xuantu (Jul 23, 2009)

(I am in no place to define Faure's music.) My description of his music is that it is enigmatic and has a peculiar lightness of touch. It lifts you up and does not put you down -- quite like what Head_case felt about it . It tickles your senses but does not answer to them.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Fluffy music no doubt. Very relaxing.


----------



## xuantu (Jul 23, 2009)

Let's also not forget that Faure has outlived Debussy and composed to a grand old age. His idiom changed along the course. For example,


> Fauré sounds ultra-Romantic to me. I would describe it as lyrical, flowery, sweet, mawkish, cloying, sugary, mushy, weepy, gooey, drippy, cutesy, lovey-dovey, soppy, tearjerking, three-hankie, almost to the point of saccharine.


 this would perhaps be a perfect description for his early songs "le papillon et la fleur", "apres un reve", "les berceaux", etc. But even the early "au bord de l'eau" (1875) already sounds impressionistic. His later songs and song cycles ("la bonne chanson", "la chanson d'Eve") -- I'm not sure if singers and their accompanists would want to describe them as anything but being "modern", for they challenge and elude even the listeners of today.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Fauré? I think the cat's eaten it. It was getting quite runny.

That's better than cat-food breath, however.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> Fauré? I think the cat's eaten it. It was getting quite runny.
> 
> That's better than cat-food breath, however.


Well, I love Fauré. Maybe he's not modernist enough to meet with approval in elite quarters, but I'm a rebel.


----------

