The Greatest Timbral Qualities in Music History: Messiaen and Shostakovich

I am saying that in Italian, "timbrico" is an adjective, not a noun.

I would add that part of what you said, such as

Gagaku wrote:

his music is a case apart: it is unique, it has a character all its own, it is inimitable.

are depressingly banal...

You talk to us about the subject instead; make an introduction.

thallo wrote:

I am saying that in Italian, “timbrico” is an adjective, not a noun.

Thank you, prof.

thallo wrote:

I will add that part of the things you said, like

are depressingly banal...

But they are true ... so what?

thallo wrote:

You should talk to us about the subject instead; make an introduction.

Like, do you want to know who Messiaen and Shostakovich are? Or do you prefer to go further, perhaps by listening to something?

Perhaps Giacomo Manzoni's "Guide to Listening to Symphonic Music" could be interesting. It might be useful to see how he treats the subject

Gagaku wrote:

Thank you, prof.

Well, "thank you, prof.", but you are right: saying a composer is a great "timbralist" does not leave much hope for the tenor of the discussion.

Gagaku wrote:

But they are true ... so therefore?

So what interest can there be in the discussion if, for you, "they are true"?

You ask "what do you say?", but it's all "they are true, so therefore". Not very interesting, frankly.

Gagaku wrote:

Like, do you want to know who Messiaen and Shostakovich are? Or would you prefer to go further, perhaps by listening to something?

Do you know your interlocutor well enough to tell them to listen to something? I don't think so. You wouldn't have said that to them.

When they asked you to talk about the subject, they meant addressing it in a slightly more complete manner: saying "So-and-so is the greatest timbralist in history and his music is unique" is not much to start a discussion on two of the most important composers of the 20th century. For example, in your opinion, which scores of each of them convinced you of what you have stated?

You're right Carlos, it's just that forums are increasingly full of little masters... so Thallo had annoyed me a bit.

Gagaku, as I have said other times, the first message of a discussion is fundamental to direct the responses, to introduce the viewpoint of the writer or the subject. Shostakovich's music is complex and not yet fully widespread (let's see how many of his compositions you don't know... http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_delle_composizioni_di_Dmitrij_Dmitrievi%C4%8D_%C5%A0ostakovi%C4%8D ), Messiaen's music and TREATISE writing are largely dedicated to timbral research (his first treatise is titled, precisely, Treatise on Rhythm, Color, and Ornithology), in a very complex "holistic" perspective.

Now, I am not an expert, just as I don't believe I am one in almost anything. But I know "something" about these subjects, and when I read your first message I feel frustrated by the fact that such a complex subject doesn't even have an introduction! Why do you combine Shostakovich with Messiaen (which is what leaves me with the most doubts) ?! Considering that both had very long and articulated creative trajectories, which works are you referring to? Why don't you immediately provide some musical examples, even introductory ones (like, for now I am putting this, but obviously the subject is not concluded)? Dedicating an entire specialization path to their music... in universities all over the world, Messiaen's music and treatises are among the most studied. Olivier Messiaen, Darius Milhaud, and Nadia Boulanger are probably among the three most influential teachers of the twentieth century; they were all three French and spread timbral and rhythmic research throughout the world, continuing a tradition that began much earlier in France, at least with Saint-Saëns, who was the teacher of Fauré, who was the teacher of Ravel and Boulanger... Messiaen's work is as unique as the works of all these people were. Furthermore, when you speak of Messiaen's students (without even naming one...), you could say that the most famous ones completely detached themselves from his teaching, speaking primarily of Boulez but also of all the composers affiliated with the "L'itinéraire" group, from Grisey to Murail.

If you take the trouble to start a discussion on Messiaen and Shostakovich, you really should provide some starting indications, given that the subject is SO vast...

In my opinion, Messiaen is a solitary, misunderstood figure, or rather one that the academic world does not want to accept; for this reason, Messiaen remains ignored today and no school is carrying his ideas forward, nor is it "academicizing" him, nor making him a starting point..

Even when he went to Darmstadt, they missed the opportunity to profit from his experience... and in the name of what?

To get back to the topic, it would be nice to delve deeper into the relationships between colors and modes of Messiaen ... regarding Shostakovich, perhaps one needs to understand what you are referring to with Gagaku

I personally consider the arguments put forward by Thallo and Carlos to be irreproachable, but pretending to be a new user approaching this forum, I would define them as being stated in an arrogant manner... Please do not take offense because you know well my esteem for both of them. First of all, I believe it is not appropriate for people whom I feel I have actually known for a year now, and I believe you do not even need to impose yourselves in this way; and secondly, I think that certain responses do not encourage passing readers (guests) to take part in the forum discussions by signing up, but rather, they drive them away, and for this reason, I am compelled to give my opinion.

There are 6 billion brains thinking something quite different in unison; if one must be arrogant towards someone (who might even say something trivial to you), I think it is simpler and more sensible not to respond.

I would be interested to observe (interest, so to speak) if comments like the ones above (especially Thallo's) were directed at you in another discussion, what could have happened—good heavens!! Imposing oneself is fine, and even doing so strongly is fine, but without ever trampling on the susceptibility of others; something that, from Gagaku's reactions, it seems has happened...

...And I know it well because it has already happened to me a couple of times...

But yes TheSimon, I know I was a bit of a "generalist" ... I thought I had sorted it out and Thallo had then tried to make a contribution... obviously given the vastness of the subject (in this sense "tried")

Frank wrote:

In my opinion, Messiaen is a solitary, misunderstood figure, or rather one that the academic world does not want to accept; for this reason, Messiaen remains ignored today and no school is carrying his ideas forward, nor is it "academicizing" them, nor making them a starting point..

Even when he went to Darmstadt, they missed the opportunity to profit from his experience... and in the name of what?

Why wouldn't it have happened?

Frank wrote:

...it would be nice to delve deeper into the relationships between colors and modes in Messiaen.

By colors, do you mean colors... colors? Or is it a metaphor? Forgive my ignorance ...

Frank, excuse me but I am a bit confused

thallo wrote:

in academies all over the world, Messiaen's music and treatises are among the most studied.

...is it being studied or are they ignoring it?

PS

Thanks to everyone for the inspiration, I am listening to several things (also thanks to other topics) that I didn't even know about this composer

Ray1 wrote:

..do they study it or do they ignore it?

Perhaps it depends on the point of view, surely at a musicological level it is a very well-trodden path ... composition schools focus on something else...

Started by mistake

I will strive to be less intrusive, at least in the first messages...

To Gerardo and Ray1, I confirm that it is mainly the point of view that changes. Musicologists have long studied Messiaen's treatises, as well as his compositions (though, my gut tells me, more so the treatises...). But Messiaen's music never truly had success among composers in the compositional academy. Darmstadt has, for better or worse, caused more of a stir. And there are probably many other reasons behind the late success of Messiaen's music... but I am waiting for Frank to give his opinion

thallo wrote:

Messiaen's music has never truly been successful among composers in the compositional academy.

[...]

Darmstadt has, for better or worse, caused more of a stir.

[...]

And there are probably many other reasons behind the late success of Messiaen's music... but I am waiting for Frank to give his opinion.

How much this work has been loved by musicians and musicologists is recounted by Enzo Rostagno in his preface to one of the few existing books in Italian on Messiaen, a text that is absolutely essential:

HILL, P. (2008a) (ed.) Olivier Messiaen. From Canyons to the Stars, Trans. by F. Cilluffo and D. Torelli, Milan, Il Saggiatore

Coming to Gerardo and Ray1, hear Messiaen's words regarding serialism as reported by Rostagno:

"I was very vexed by the disproportionate importance attributed to a small work of only three pages entitled Mode de valeur et d’intensité, based on the pretext that this composition would have been at the origin of the application of the serial principle within the scope of attacks, durations, intensities and timbres—in short, of all musical parameters. It may be that this music was prophetic, perhaps even historically important, but musically it is worth nothing three times over."

Messiaen essentially rejected the concept of formalistic self-referentiality in music.

Do you know what this means for the academic world?

Ergo, no school that has taken it as a starting point ... is left to individuals to equip themselves once the post-structuralist measles has passed."

TheSimon wrote:

I arguments brought forth by Thallo and Carlos I personally consider irreproachable, but pretending to be a new user approaching this forum, I would define them as being stated in an arrogant manner... Don't take offense [...]

[...] if comments like the ones above (especially from Thallo) were directed at you in another discussion, what could have happened, heavens above!! Asserting oneself is fine, and even doing so strongly is fine, but without ever trampling on the sensibilities of others; something that, judging by Gagaku's reactions, seems to have happened...

OT declared. I didn't even remember this discussion and went back to reread it. I am not offended at all, but it bothers me greatly, I say honestly, that one says "without ever trampling on the sensibilities of others" and then defines my message as arrogant while failing to stigmatize that of the user I responded to, who in his own turn made fun of another user. If messages like mine "drive guests away," messages like yours are to say the least unhelpful and make one lose the desire to interact. Here we are talking about music, and I am a professional: therefore, if I read a message from an amateur saying "go further and listen to something" to another professional, I intervene. This is my way of expressing my esteem for someone else. But it is a habit I've had since I was a child: if someone said something stupid to one of my friends, I would respond and they would call me the "little lawyer." I need to stop. Now as then, it is not appreciated, and if I even have to be reprimanded, it's not worth it... the next step is "watch out, I'll show you!" and frankly...

PS: as for being the subject of comments like mine, I respond calmly by saying that if I were talking about things I don't know and making fun of the person responding to me, taking it for granted that they are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about, well, I would say I would have little to complain about. But I believe that is unlikely to happen, since if I don't know something, I ask; I don't talk about it.

PPS: to you too, Simone, all my esteem. We speak openly precisely for that reason, but frankness for frankness, I felt the need to tell you.

Guys, as I was saying, I messed up... it seems to me that the topic is taking a good turn. I apologize for the bad start, I don't know what else to do.. sometimes beatings are necessary.

It's clear that you have extraordinary preparation, let's move forward

And let's correct this damn title

I agree; as I was saying, I had even forgotten about the matter, imagine that... Let's move on...

Frank wrote:

Ergo, no school that has taken it as a starting point ... leaves it to individuals to equip themselves once the post-structuralist measles has passed.

Ok, but Messiaen won't be the only way... right?