Pierre Boulez, Composer and Conductor Who Pushed Modernism’s Boundaries, Dies at 90
He was number 122 on the list.
Pierre Boulez, the French composer and conductor who helped
blaze a radical new path for classical music in the 20th century, becoming one
of its dominant figures in the decades after World War II, died on Tuesday at
his home in Baden-Baden, Germany. He was 90.
His family confirmed his death in a statement to the
Philharmonie de Paris. Prime Minister Manuel Valls, also in a statement, said,
“Audacity, innovation, creativity — that is what Pierre Boulez was for French
music, which he helped shine everywhere in the world.”
Mr. Boulez belonged to an extraordinary generation of
European composers who emerged in the postwar years while still in their 20s.
They started a revolution in music, and Mr. Boulez was in the front ranks.
As a young composer — and throughout his life as an
insistently private man — he matched restless intelligence with great force of
mind: He knew what had to be done, by his reading of history, and he did it, in
defiance of all the norms of French musical culture at the time. His “Marteau
Sans Maître” (“Hammer Without a Master”) was one of this pioneering group’s
first major achievements, and it remains a landmark of modern music.
But his influence was equally large on the podium. In time
he began giving ever more attention to conducting, where his keen ear and
rhythmic incisiveness could produce a startling clarity. (There are countless
stories of him detecting faulty intonation, say, from the third oboe in a
complex piece.)
He reached his peak as a conductor in the 1960s, when he
began to appear with some of the world’s great orchestras, like the
Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, the Berlin Philharmonic and the Cleveland Orchestra.
By the early ’70s, he had succeeded Leonard Bernstein as music director of the
New York Philharmonic, an appointment that startled the music world and led to
a fitful tenure.
His conducting style was unique. He never used the baton,
preferring to manipulate the orchestra by means of his two hands
simultaneously, the left indicating phrasing or, in much contemporary music,
counterrhythm.
His characteristic sound — unemotional on the surface but
with undercurrents of intemperateness, at once brilliant in color and
rhythmically disciplined — depended on his famously acute ear and suited his
core repertoire: Stravinsky (several of whose works he introduced to Europe),
Debussy, Webern, Bartok and Messiaen. It was refreshing as well in his many
excursions into earlier music.
To be a conductor, though, meant working with the existing
machinery, and that was not something a revolutionary like Mr. Boulez was
willing to do. So he tried to remake the machinery. After becoming music
director of both the New York Philharmonic and the BBC Symphony Orchestra in
London in 1971, he explored unconventional repertoire, unconventional concert
formats and unconventional locations.
But he also accepted that he had to rethink some of his own
preconceptions, and as his musical outlook broadened, his output as a composer
dwindled.
It was his reputation as an avant-garde composer and as a
champion of new music that prompted his unexpected appointment in New York.
After the initial shock at his arrival, there was hope that he might bring the
orchestra into the 20th century and appeal to younger audiences. But his
programming often met with hostility in New York, and he left quietly six years
later.
His destination was Paris. Dismissive of the French musical
establishment, he had spent most of the previous two decades abroad, but President
Georges Pompidou, keen to reclaim a native son, had agreed to found a
contemporary-music center for him in the capital: the Institute for the
Research and Coordination of Acoustics and Music, known as Ircam. It had its
own 31-piece orchestra, the Ensemble Intercontemporain.
Mr. Boulez gained further government support in the ’80s,
when he achieved his grandest project, the City of Music complex in Paris,
housing the Paris Conservatoire, a concert hall and an instrument museum.
Pierre Boulez (the Z is not silent) was born on March 26,
1925, in Montbrison, a town near Lyon, the son of an industrialist, Léon
Boulez, and the former Marcelle Calabre. He studied the piano and began to
compose in his teens.
A defining moment came when he heard a broadcast of
Stravinsky’s “Song of the Nightingale” conducted by Ernest Ansermet; it was a
work to which he often returned throughout his conducting career. Rejecting the
wishes of his father, who wanted him to study engineering, he went to Paris in
1942 and enrolled at the Conservatoire.
In 1944-45, he took a harmony class taught by Olivier
Messiaen, whose impact on him was decisive. Messiaen’s teaching went far beyond
traditional harmony to embrace new music that was outlawed both by the stagnant
Conservatoire and by the German occupying forces: the music of Schoenberg,
Stravinsky, Bartok and Webern.
Messiaen also introduced his students to medieval music and
the music of Asia and Africa. Mr. Boulez felt his course was set; but he also
knew he needed to go further into the 12-tone method that Schoenberg had
introduced a generation before.
“I had to learn about that music, to find out how it was
made,” he once told Opera News. “It was a revelation — a music for our time, a
language with unlimited possibilities. No other language was possible. It was
the most radical revolution since Monteverdi. Suddenly, all our familiar
notions were abolished. Music moved out of the world of Newton and into the
world of Einstein.”
To start on this route, he took lessons in 1945-46 with René
Leibowitz, a Schoenbergian who had settled in Paris. Soon, in works like his
mighty Second Piano Sonata (1947-48), he was integrating what had been separate
paths of development in the music of the previous 40 years: Schoenberg’s
serialism, Stravinsky’s rhythmic innovations and Messiaen’s enlarged notion of
mode.
As Mr. Boulez saw it, all these composers had failed to
pursue their most radical impulses, and it fell to a new generation —
specifically, to him — to pick up the torch.
Though he was outspoken about his historical role, he was
much warier of talking about what his music expressed. There was the odd
reference in his early writings to the poet and playwright Antonin Artaud;
there was also an admitted kinship with the poetry of René Char, which he set
to music in “Le Marteau Sans Maître” and other works. But he was also capable
of ferocious abstraction, as in the first section of his “Structures” (1951)
for two pianos, a test case in applying serial principles to rhythm, volume and
color.
About his private life, he remained tightly guarded. Jeanne,
his older sister, was important to him; few others were able to break through
his reserve.
At the beginning of his career, he was hired as music
director of a theater company in Paris run by Jean-Louis Barrault and Madeleine
Renaud. His 10-year appointment with them was crowned in 1955 by a production
of “The Oresteia” of Aeschylus, for which he wrote an ambitious score; they
also helped him set up the Domaine Musical concerts in 1953.
The Domaine Musical, intended as a platform for new music,
20th-century classics and early music that was little performed, proved Mr.
Boulez’s abilities as an administrator and, later, as a conductor. It also
provided a model of the contemporary ensemble that was widely imitated and has
remained central to the propagation of new music.
Mr. Boulez made his debut as a concert conductor on March
21, 1956, at a Domaine Musical concert. (The organization was still known then
as the Concerts du Petit Marigny, after the theater in Paris in which the
concerts took place.) The program included “Le Marteau Sans Maître,” which had
received its first performance the previous summer in Baden-Baden.
At once delectable and stringent, this work united
traditions of Austrian-German discipline and French finesse with the sounds of
Africa, East Asia and South America, made available by its variegated ensemble;
besides contralto voice, it included alto flute, viola, guitar and percussion.
“Le Marteau Sans Maître” was widely admired, not least by
Stravinsky, who heard it when Mr. Boulez made his North American debut in Los
Angeles in March 1957.
Mr. Boulez gave his first concert with a symphony orchestra
in June 1956, when he conducted the Orquesta Sinfonica Venezuela on one of his
last tours with the Renaud-Barrault company. During the 1957-58 season, he
appeared with the West German Radio Symphony in Cologne in his own “Visage
Nuptial” and Stockhausen’s “Gruppen.”
He then forged a lasting connection with the Southwest
German Radio Symphony Orchestra of Baden-Baden, where he made his home. In
1960, he conducted the orchestra in the first performance of his “Pli Selon
Pli,” an hourlong setting of poems by Stéphane Mallarmé for soprano, with an
orchestra rich in percussion.
That lustrous score allowed the conductor certain
flexibilities in assembling its fragments. A musical work should be a
labyrinth, with no fixed route, Mr. Boulez often said. It might also never have
a fixed ending. From then on, he began starting more works than he ever brought
to completion, while at the same time submitting older pieces to rounds of
revision.
As a conductor, he showed much less hesitation. Where his
first concerts had been devoted entirely to 20th-century works, he began, in
the early 1960s, to explore earlier repertoires — Haydn, Bach, Schubert, Mozart,
Beethoven — with the Concertgebouw and the Southwest German Radio Symphony
Orchestra. He made his debut with an American orchestra, the Cleveland
Orchestra, in March 1965. The program, a typical one for him, comprised Rameau,
his own music (“Figures-Doubles-Prismes”), Debussy and Stravinsky (“The Song of
the Nightingale”).
The next year, he conducted his first operas, “Wozzeck” in
Frankfurt and Paris, and “Parsifal” at Bayreuth in Germany, and he started
recording for Columbia Masterworks. His first releases for the label included
“Wozzeck” and albums of Debussy and Messiaen.
His appointment to the New York Philharmonic in 1971
presented great challenges. As music director, he had to enlarge his repertoire
rapidly. Until then, he had conducted very little Romantic music other than
Berlioz’s; now Schubert, Brahms, Dvorak and Borodin joined his programs, not
always convincingly. Though he refused to compromise on Tchaikovsky, he was
becoming much more like a regular conductor.
Part of his individuality was lost in the colossal task of
maintaining important positions on both sides of the Atlantic, his post with
the BBC Symphony demanding much of his time as well. Added to the load was his
commitment to prepare the Bayreuth centenary “Ring” in 1976.
Both his programming and his handling of an older repertoire
met with some resistance from audiences, critics and, it was said, even some of
his musicians. Harold C. Schonberg of The New York Times called Mr. Boulez “a
brainy orchestral technician” whose “scientific approach” lacked heart.
Reviewing a 1972 concert that included Edgard Varèse’s 1927 composition
“Arcana,” Donal Henahan of The Times reported that “perhaps a quarter of the
downstairs audience” at Philharmonic Hall “fled as if from the Black Death”
before the piece was performed.
Mr. Boulez wanted to make the orchestra a more flexible
institution, and a more modern one. Performances might begin with short
programs of chamber music, played by members of the orchestra. More of the
repertoire would be explored. During his first season as the music director,
there was an emphasis on Liszt. Then concerts consisting entirely of new and
recent works were given at downtown sites. There were also “informal evenings”
of talk, rehearsal and performance featuring 20th-century composers. And there
were summer seasons of “rug concerts,” with a different program every night for
a week, played to audiences seated on the floor of Philharmonic Hall.
The rug concerts lasted only two years, and none of his
other innovations survived his departure. He had given up his post with the BBC
Symphony in 1975, leaving as a parting gift his somber “Rituel.” His last
concerts with the Philharmonic were in May 1977; on the program was Berlioz’s
“Damnation of Faust.” He went back regularly to conduct in London, but he did
not return to the Philharmonic podium until 1986.
His priority after the Philharmonic was Ircam, the Paris
research institute, and he cut back on his conducting commitments; among the
few he kept was the first full performance of Berg’s “Lulu” in 1979, at the
Paris Opera.
Believing that music’s development since 1945 had been
frustrated by a lack of research into electronic possibilities, Mr. Boulez set
to work at Ircam on “Répons,” for a small orchestra with six percussion
soloists whose sounds are digitally transformed and regenerated. It was first
performed in October 1981.
The paradox was that the man who had such an extraordinary
orchestral imagination — and such extraordinary powers to realize the fruits of
that imagination in performance — should have been so convinced of his need for
electronic resources. “Répons” is in most respects inferior to
“Éclat/Multiples,” a work for a similar percussion-based orchestra that he had
begun and abandoned a decade before. Nor does it begin to rival the orchestral
virtuosity displayed in the arrangements of his early piano cycle “Notations.”
He continued to add to “Répons” during the early 1980s,
though much of his creative energy was going into new versions of old scores.
In the early 1990s, he emerged from his tumult of rewriting to produce at Ircam
the greatest of his late works, a new version of “explosante-fixe” initially
conceived as a memorial to Stravinsky — for electronic flute and small
orchestra.
He also began to appear more widely again as a conductor,
with orchestras in the United States (Los Angeles, Cleveland, Chicago) and
Europe. (The concerts were often associated with recording sessions for
Deutsche Grammophon.) He returned to what had always been his main repertoire,
while also developing enthusiasm for Mahler and making occasional visits to
territory he had not touched before: Richard Strauss, Bruckner, Scriabin,
Janacek.
At his death, he was conductor emeritus of the Chicago
Symphony Orchestra. Among the honors Mr. Boulez received in his later years
were the Kyoto Prize in 2009 and the BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge
Award in 2013. He was named a professor at the Collège de France. He won dozens
of Grammy Awards.
“He never ceased to think about subjects in relation to one
another; he made painting, poetry, architecture, cinema and music communicate
with each other, always in the service of a more humane society,” the office of
President François Hollande said in a statement.
In 1995, his 70th-birthday year, Mr. Boulez conducted his
own and other 20th-century music in London, Paris, Vienna, New York, Tokyo,
Amsterdam, Brussels and Chicago. In 2005, he spent his 80th birthday in Berlin
at a retrospective of his music. A few pieces were completed in this period,
notably “Dérive 2,” a 45-minute score for 11 instruments that took almost two
decades to reach its end point, in 2006.
Many more projects remained unfinished, while others were
never begun, like the opera on which he was to have collaborated first with
Jean Genet and later with Heiner Müller.
Even so, the achievements embodied in his published works
and recordings are formidable, and his influence was incalculable. The tasks he
took on were heroic: to continue the great adventure of musical modernism, and
to carry with him the great musical institutions and the widest possible
audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment