# Pierre Henry. Am I missing something ?



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

Hello,

I watched the documentary "The Art of Sounds" about Pierre Henry that I had borrowed at the library :






That's my exposure to his music, this plus a 25 minutes long piece there was on the DVD on the top of the documentary (Orphée dévoilé, 2005, a recorded live at La cité de la musique)

Am I the only one to be heavily disappointed in his music ? I expected great, groundbreaking, profound things, and I've found that in some of the "noise music" (in the broad sense) I already tried to listen. It really can be a gogeous music, so I expected one of the great fingure of this kind of music to be a great artist.
And what do I hear ?
Bips, zips, crashs, and other sounds that could be from a kitsh science fiction show from the 70's stick on the top of some (rather cool but it's just one riff) rock music (Psyché rock)
An appealing remix of Beethoven symphonies. (his Beethoven thing)
A piece that starts ok and interesting but then loses itself in cheap effect : a guy who's talking mysteriously in a mysterious language with mysterious sounds here and there (Orphée dévoilé)

In a word, what sounds like cheap and vulgar music to my hear. Sometimes it sounds more like the music of some amusement park. What I heard of his_ Remix de la dixième symphonie_ de Beethoven was *truly appaling*.

*But* then in some of his works I'm currently trying I do hear deeper things, interesting sounds, and I don't feel like he's cheating on the listener.

Example :






Great piece IMHO !

Is it me who is misunderstanding some of his works ? Is he an highly uneven artist ? How come the piece _Lévitation_ is so great and the _Remix de la dixième symphonie de Beethoven_ so bad ?
I notice that the works I like were made earlier in his career than those I can't bear. Has he been declining ?
I actually can't find much of his recent works on YT. Maybe he's admired and considered a great composer because of his earler works.

Opinions ? Advices ? Insults ? Listening recommendations ?


----------



## Oreb (Aug 8, 2013)

There was an extensive reissue program of some of his stuff around ten years ago and I picked up the 'Apocalypse of St. John' and the 'Egyptian Book of the Dead' (sorry - I can't remember the exact titles).

They may not have been good examples, but I heard nothing of much substance in those.


----------



## Guest (Aug 16, 2013)

He is a highly uneven artist.

We (all of us) might disagree about which pieces are which, though. I think the _Apocalypse_ is one of his better pieces. I too find the fake rock stuff to be unlistenable. But at a concert recently in France where Henry was diffusing his works, the crowd went wild for it.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

"Maybe he's admired and considered a great composer because of his earlier works."

Not intending to sound disrespectful, but this pretty well sums it up. He has enjoyed a renewed notoriety with the younger generation that is just beginning to discover electronic classical music.


----------



## Guest (Aug 16, 2013)

I don't think it's chronological. The other piece he diffused at the concert I attended was a recent piece, and it was quite good I thought.


----------



## Guest (Aug 16, 2013)

I have to agree that on the whole Pierre Henry is rather _décevant_. Much prefer his contemporary *Bernard Parmegiani*.


----------



## Guest (Aug 16, 2013)

Bernard is indeed much more consistently good than Pierre, it's true.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Another crappy fart noise composer.

Edit: composer is too generous a term. More like a noise maker.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I was actually talking to TC member Pantheon very recently on Skype and it was she who mentioned the composer Pierre Henry and recommended I check some out. Great that a thread about him has sprung up on TC!


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

TalkingHead said:


> I have to agree that on the whole Pierre Henry is rather _décevant_. Much prefer his contemporary *Bernard Parmegiani*.


Thanks for the name !
I heard_ Rouge-Mort: Thanatos_ once, but I couldn't remember the name, I kept mixing it up with Mantovani or some other guy lol

And thanks for all the replies on this thread ! Glad to see that I'm not crazy and that my ears are still working.

Rapide, I don't understand, you're a Boulez fan but hate a good part of the XXth century avant-guarde _apart from_ Boulez (who's supposed to be one of the most controversial). Or am I misunderstanding something ?


----------



## Pantheon (Jun 9, 2013)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I was actually talking to TC member Pantheon very recently on Skype and it was she who mentioned the composer Pierre Henry and recommended I check some out. Great that a thread about him has sprung up on TC!


How did I manage to predict that ? 

Anyway, to come back to the topic _Psyché Rock_ is part of a bigger work called _Messe pour un temps présent_ (Mass for a present time) that I find quite refreshing, although slightly cliché. This hit, if I may call it, does not represent his work (especially since the fact that it has become Futurama's opening theme tune).

I recommend you listen to Le Voyage and see what you think. In my library there is only one CD of Pierre Henry available, which was an association between Pierre Henry and Béjart.

The fact that his work sounds more like noise than sound is somewhat voluntary and Pierre Henry has often assisted authors with manifestos on the art of sound (ex. L'Art des Bruits by Luigi Russolo).


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Rapide said:


> Another crappy fart noise composer.
> 
> Edit: composer is too generous a term. More like a noise maker.


Or otherwise a decomposer, perhaps?


----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2013)

The urge to say rude and offensive things about modern music is a powerful urge.

The right to say those things is a precious right, more precious than intelligence or civility or commonsense.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

If a noise maker makes offensive noises and takes the listener for granted by debasing the art form most cherished by the listener, then I see the noise maker deserves no artistic respect, especially given the centuries and other current developments in place from truely dedicated composers. It's about having standards versus none (or pretending to be polite about it).


----------



## Guest (Aug 19, 2013)

Rapide said:


> If a noise maker makes offensive noises and takes the listener for granted by debasing the art form most cherished by the listener, then I see the noise maker deserves no artistic respect, especially given the centuries and other current developments in place from truely dedicated composers. It's about having standards versus none (or pretending to be polite about it).


So far as I know, no one is forcing you to listen to any of Pierre Henry's music.

But clearly you have forced yourself upon a heretofore civil discussion of one of the pioneers of electroacoustic music with a blatantly rude and offensive comment. If that's having standards then I don't want to have them, myself! But of course, it's not. It's about having prejudices and biasses and having a complete lack of respect yourself for your fellow travellers, especially for the ones who have the temerity to like things that you do not.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

some guy said:


> So far as I know, no one is forcing you to listen to any of Pierre Henry's music.
> 
> But clearly you have forced yourself upon a heretofore civil discussion of one of the pioneers of electroacoustic music with a blatantly rude and offensive comment. If that's having standards then I don't want to have them, myself! But of course, it's not. It's about having prejudices and biasses and having a complete lack of respect yourself for your fellow travellers, especially for the ones who have the temerity to like things that you do not.


It's not about forcing me to listen to it. I can damn well choose to listen and critique it if I wish to, as much as Henry may wish to exert this "creativity" in noise making. But don't expect all listeners to discard musical history and current developments for the sake of cheap "temerity" to degrade fine music. I don't have a problem with folks enjoying noise. That's their preference - noise. Fine but don't pretend noise making deserves the same artistic plane of respect as contemporary composition in many other advances that don't make the same loud levels of "temerity".


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Yeah, right.


----------



## Guest (Aug 19, 2013)

Praeludium said:


> Thanks for the name !
> I heard_ Rouge-Mort: Thanatos_ once, but I couldn't remember the name, I kept mixing it up with Mantovani or some other guy lol [...]


My pleasure, Praeludium!
Other works by *Parmegiani* worth checking out (I have no idea if they are on YouTube) are:
a) *De natura sonorum* (one of the 'key texts' in electroacoustic music)
b) _*La Création du Monde*_.

Hope you enjoy these as much as I do.


----------



## Garlic (May 3, 2013)

Rapide said:


> Yeah, right.


Thanks for that, I enjoyed it.

Please explain exactly how the existence of this music degrades art or whatever your argument is


----------



## Guest (Aug 19, 2013)

Rapide said:


> I can... critique it if I wish to...


Make a nice change if you would.



Rapide said:


> don't expect all listeners to discard musical history and current developments for the sake of cheap "temerity" to degrade fine music.


Wow. One, I have no such expectation nor have ever had. Two, can you not look up the word temerity to see what it means? Three, how does any particular piece, however palatable to you or not, degrade any other particular piece? This sounds very much like the argument that allowing gays to marry degrades marriage.



Rapide said:


> I don't have a problem with folks enjoying noise.


Clearly you do, though.



Rapide said:


> don't pretend noise making deserves the same artistic plane of respect as contemporary composition in many other advances that don't make the same loud levels of "temerity".


More wow. One, I don't pretend anything of the sort. Two, look up the word temerity. Really. It's not that difficult. You type in temerity in the google prompt and voila! (Once you do, you won't have to use those annoying little scare quotes any more, either.)


----------



## Guest (Aug 19, 2013)

some guy said:


> Bernard is indeed much more consistently good than Pierre, it's true.


Well, quite. I'm none to happy (in terms of consistent quality) with another of this French bunch, namely Luc Ferrari.
Switching continents, I am a big fan of French-trained 'Kiwi' *Denis Smalley*. That is another name for Praeludium to check out. You may also find some of his writings on the aesthetics of electroacoustic music (morphology) worth the effort. I believe a healthy portion of his stuff is available on the internet


----------



## Guest (Aug 20, 2013)

Well, Ferrari's music is pretty amazing, though. And I have come round to the idea that he is inconsistent because he's always taking risks.

Taking risks is something I value very highly in a composer.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

some guy said:


> Make a nice change if you would.
> 
> Wow. One, I have no such expectation nor have ever had. Two, can you not look up the word temerity to see what it means? Three, how does any particular piece, however palatable to you or not, degrade any other particular piece? This sounds very much like the argument that allowing gays to marry degrades marriage.
> 
> ...


Temerity of Henry (or generalising, those "Henry-type" noise mkers) making noises and calling it music. That's about as laughable as it gets, and I have no need to use inverted-commas for the word "temerity" in this post.

Bottom line is simple. The "Henry's" can make whatever noise they like. Listeners can also respond in whatever noisy complaint levels we like. It's all noise after all, and my noisy complaints might even be enjoyed by the "Henry's" as noise!


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

I think you'll have to step up the quality of your complaining before it can be regarded as passable noise.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Rapide said:


> Yeah, right.


lol, I really liked that piece. Please, which other piece do you think is crap?.

I was listening to this piece earlier (that's why I searched for this thread): 



Simple but charming.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2013)

Delightful, aleazk. Thanks for reminding me of this old favorite.

On the youtube sidebar are some other things. I'd note particularly the Dhomont (Dhomont's another consistently good composer) and the Fausto Romitelli, who died way too young.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I generally like electronic music (not sure about these specific pieces), but I'm curious: When is electronic music "just" electronic music and when is it electronic classical music? Where is the connection to the tradition of western art music? Does it speak for itself from the quality of the music? Or does a composer of this type of music have to have an academic background and/or also have composed some non-electronic classical music to be considered a classical composer? I'm just wondering where do people draw the line.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Rapide said:


> Another crappy fart noise composer.
> 
> Edit: composer is too generous a term. More like a noise maker.


Too already aware of your highly articulate opinion about any music outside of your listening spectrum, thanks.

An early Philip Glass piece is slightly less repetitive....


----------

