![]() ![]() Thus Javanese music obeys laws of counterpoint that make Palestrina seem like child's play. ![]() Their traditions are preserved only in ancient songs, sometimes involving dance, to which each individual adds his own contribution century by century. Their school consists of the eternal rhythm of the sea, the wind in the leaves, and a thousand other tiny noises, which they listen to with great care, without ever having consulted any. "There used to be-indeed, despite the troubles that civilization has brought, there still are-some wonderful peoples who learn music as easily as one learns to breathe. ![]() Here is an important quote from Debussy written in 1913, where he summarizes his thoughts about gamelan music & why and how it changed his musical aesthetic-i.e., by being more closely tied to the "eternal" rhythms of nature and to the cosmos than music that dryly observed any set of formal rules found in western treatises, However, I should point out that Ravel was also indirectly influenced by gamelan music through his admiration of Debussy's music and the rebellious example that it set. With Ravel it was more of a superficial influence, by comparison, but the results were no less brilliant. It was Erik Satie that first insisted Debussy go hear a Javanese gamelan orchestra concert in Paris, & the experience ended up changing Debussy's aesthetic & western music forever. (I'll give you two other prime examples below.) While you don't need to listen to gamelan music prior to hearing the quartet to enjoy it, you might want to familiarize yourself with this exotic, non-western music at some point, & then try to pick out where & how it influenced both Ravel and Debussy. Yes, you should know that Javanese gamelan music influenced both Debussy & Ravel, & here we find its influence in the pizzicato 2nd movement of Ravel's Quartet. Are there things that I should know before listening? Maybe a certain detail that is worth knowing to increase my enjoyment of listening to the piece?" But fortunately Debussy disagreed with Fauré and wrote Ravel a letter in 1905, saying “In the name of the gods of music and in my own, do not touch a single note you have written in your Quartet.” This letter encouraged Ravel not to change the work & to trust his own musical instincts, despite that they had gotten him expelled from the Paris Conservatory & prevented him from ever winning the Prix de Rome prize (as unbelievable as that may sound to us today, but conservatory students back then were expected to rigidly follow the 'academic' rules of composition, & while Debussy had previously conformed just enough to win the Rome prize, Ravel did not). We perhaps owe the final state of Ravel's Quartet to Debussy because Ravel's teacher, Gabriel Fauré-to whom Ravel dedicated his quartet-didn't like the 4th movement, telling his pupil that it was "stunted, badly balanced, in fact a failure." Which caused Ravel to seriously consider changing the 4th movement, etc. But Ravel's Quartet is a masterpiece in its own right. Though granted, Ravel's Quartet was unquestionably modeled after Debussy's, which was composed 10 years earlier (as they have the same formal lay out). So, for me, it's pointless to try to rank one above the other. I think they are two of the most extraordinary string quartets that anyone has composed. How do you rate this compared to it’s disc buddy, Debussy’s quartet?" There's more than one way to play this one so if you have a streaming service do some comparisons. I found a lot of under-the-radar recordings of this one so if you're prepared to step out of the safety zone of the recordings constantly recommended by certain critics, Trout's Amazon-based reviews, etc there is a lot to find. There are so many recordings of this quartet that finding one that resonates is not difficult but, as much as I love the Itallianos in this one, I'd definitely also recommend hearing some of the more recent quartets who breathe new life into this old warhorse (Hermes, Jerusalem, Modigliani, etc). Regulars will know I'm a sucker for pizzicato so the 2nd movement is very important for me personally (I dislike inaudible / tame pizzicato) but sharp accents and propulsive rhythms go a long way for me in this quartet. It's one I may have to revisit as I have acess to a few more accounts that I didn't at the time and I have altered it several times, demoting and upgrading performances quite often. Obviously the OP has read my review (thank you). I prefer the Ravel quartet to its usual discmate, the Debussy, but both are key SQ works.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |