Debussy as Critic Author(s): John G. Palache Reviewed work(s): Source: The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Jul., 1924), pp. 361-368 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/738484 . Accessed: 28/10/2012 15:52 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Musical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

DEBUSSY AS CRITIC By JOHN G. PALACHE the articles EVOLUTIONARY, personal,impressionistic,

published twenty years ago by Debussy in the "Revue Blanche"' and in "Gil Blas"2 are interesting, if not always reliable,and one sees in them a reflectionof the special sensitiveness of Debussy's music,the new impetusand directionwhichhe gave to so much of moderncomposition. These articles have been published recentlyin French, but have not been translated into English. The volume is called "Monsieur Croche, anti-dilettante"3and the editor asserts that the book had been corrected,in proofform,by Debussy, whenthe war broke out. It was furtherreportedin the "Temps," at the time of publication,that the city in whichthe book was to have been printed became a part of the "occupied" area, hence the delay in publication,resultingin the presentposthumousvolume, forDebussy died duringthe war. When Debussy wrote for "Gil Blas" and the "Revue Blanche," he was young,unsuccessfuland bitter. When he collected these articles for reprinting,he felt that some of them were too violent, and he omitted, notably, his account of a performanceof the "Ring" in London." But, in general, "M. Croche" gives the tone and the criticalstandpointof the reviews. It is simply a question of occasional omission, rather than of alteration. Debussy laid weight upon the intended impressionism,the freedomforpersonalexpressionwhichwas not to be embarrassed, no matterhow loudlythe oppositecrymight"authoritatively"be. "I shall try," he wrote,5"to see, in various compositions,the various forceswhichhave contributedto theircreation,and that which they contain of the innerlife. A curious mania seems to incitethe moderncriticof music to explain,to analyze, in fact to coldly kill the mysteryor the emotion of a composition." But Debussy does not propose to do anythingso impossible as to 11901. 2Jan.-June,1903. 3"Les Bibliophiles Fantaisistes" (Dorbon-Atne; Nouvelle Revue Frangaise, Paris,

1921).

'June, 1903. 6"Gil Bias," Jan. 12, 1903. 361

CLAUDE

DEBUSSY

From "Die Musik"

362

The Musical Quarterly

demonstrateexactly wherein lies the secret of musical effect, especially when the composer does not appeal to him. "I shall not be concerned with certain consecrated works of traditional recognition and success. Once for all, Meyerbeer, Thalberg, Reyer, were men of genius. They are otherwiseof no importance." But Debussy refersagain to Meyerbeer,forthe pleasure of damning"Les Huguenots,"whichhe calls insufferably fatiguing, not only to listen to, but to produce; and he protestsagainst the shootingof guns as a legitimateorchestraleffect. Darius Milhaud, in an article on "the evolution of modern music in Paris and Vienna,"' refersto Debussy's "possession of a wonderfulsense of criticism,"but he traces the line of influence which was partly responsiblefor his own music, around, rather than through,the work of Debussy as composer-a surprising "curve," forDebussy wouldseem to have been muchmoredirectly in the path of the latest modernmusical developmentsthan any other element of source. "Melody is our aim and our greatest ambition.... For the line of French composersof whichI am a memberor a disciple (I mean Rameau, Berlioz, Bizet, Chabrier, Satie)-who representthe purer heart of our national modern tradition-melody is the element which binds these names together." Yet one feels that in many points of musical criticism,Milhaud and Debussy would have agreed. "The sonatas of Beethoven," wrote Debussy,2 "are very badly writtenforthe piano; theyare, moreexactly,especiallythe last ones, orchestral pieces arranged for piano. . ...

On the other

Beethand, Chopin and Schumann really wrote for piano.... hoven loved music proudly; music was, forhim, the joy so painfullylackingin his actual life." Debussy ridiculesthose who pretend to know exactly how Beethoven should be played-"have they talked with the All-Highest?" Elsewhere3he explains the spiritof his remarks. "It would be absurd to assume that I am lackingin respectforBeethoven; I simplyassert that even a musician of his geniusmay make mistakesas blindlyas another." Of Mendelssohn's"ReformationSymphony"Debussy wrote4 that it was too thicklycoated with vaseline to please him, and refersto Mendelssohnas an "elegant and easy notary"; he mentioned an obscure composer "who did not appear to be cruel, x"North American Review," April, 1923. 2"M. Croche," pp. 15-16. 3Ibid., p. 84. 4"Gil Bias," March 23, 1903.

Debussy as Critic

363

but whose concerto was without pity." Debussy refersto the "prix de Rome," than whichhe questions' the existenceof a more "ridiculous institution. . . .

It continues to be awarded with that

deplorable obstinacywhich is characteristicof absurd ideas"; he remarksthat Liszt's symphonicpoem "Mazeppa" is full of the worstfaults,but its undeniablebeauty springsfromthe fact that "Liszt loved music more than anything else." This point is repeatedly made, in Debussy's criticisms;-the love of music being rare not only in the vast majorityof audiences,but also in the work of the composers to which these audiences listen with frequentlysuperficialinterest-an interestby no means always proportionalto the value of the music. "Is there no one," asks Debussy,2 "who loves Saint-Sa'dns enough to tell him that he has writtenenough music, and would do betterto devote himselfto his propervocation, and go on an exploringexpedition? Saint-Saeinswritesoperas with the soul of an impenitentold composerof symphonies." Debussy wondered, at an interruptedperformanceof Schubert's "UnfinishedSymphony,"ifit would neverbe agreedto let that compositionremain unfinishedforever,in concert-hallsas in text.3 He wrote of Schubert'ssongs:-"They are inoffensive, but they remindone of the bureau-drawersof sentimental,provincialold maids."4 He called Weber5the "fatherof that school of romanticism to which we owe the music of Berlioz, who sometimesneglected romanticmusic in his devotion to romanticcolor"; and it is not to less importantcomposers. surprisingto read' of his indifference "It seems that music was never,for M. Massenet, the 'universal voice' that was heard by Bach and Beethoven,but rathera charmingspecialty." Debussy furtherwroteof Bach7 that "it is not the characterof the melody,but its construction,its 'curve,' which moves one; still more oftenit is the parallel progressionof two or more melodies,the minglingof which arouses the emotion of the listener." "At the 'Opera,' " wroteDebussy,s in a protestthat has been made not only in his time, "thereis a continuationof the making of sounds which are called music by those who have paid to "'M. Croche," p. 20. 2This criticismis omitted in "M. Croche." 3"M. Croche," p. 59. 4This is omitted in "M. Croche." 5"M. Croche," p. 75. Ibid., p. 62. 'Ibid., p. 47. 8"M. Croche," p. 51.

364

The Musical Quarterly

hear it. It is not altogethernecessaryto agree withthese people. There are at the 'Opera' comfortableplaces called 'loges a salons,' so called because one is convenientlyseated therewithout any necessitywhatsoeveroflisteningto the music." There seemed1to Debussy no desire,on the part of the public, to hear new music, and "if a composerof genius attemptsto break the bars of convention,it is agreed to drownhim in ridicule. Probably the poor composerdies prematurely;it is the only thingthat he is encouraged to do." Debussy cannot help wonderingwhy the 'Opera' persistsin playing Gounod's "Faust," to which it can only be repliedthat that opera is one of the most popular in Paris. Of Cesar Franck2 Debussy wrote: "He had the soul of a child, so absolutelypure that he could contemplate,withoutbitterness,the wickednessofman and the contradictionsoffate. He thoughtno evil; he never so much as suspected ennui. He was, in his attitude toward music, devotion itself. The difference betweenthe art of Wagner,strange,beautiful,unholy and alluring, and the art of Cesar Franck, is that Cesar Franck served the spiritof music almost without asking for glory in return." Debussy found,in Cesar Franck, a musicianof the very highest rank. Of Gluck:3 "For what reason has Gluck's traditionsurvived? The pompous and false use of recitative,and his impolitemanner the action, as in the case of Orpheus,who, having of interrupting lost Eurydice,singsa romancewhichdoes not exactlyexpressthe requisite lamentable condition of spirit-these things may be partlyresponsible. We have, however,a purelyFrenchtradition in the music of Rameau, a workof charmingand delicate tenderness, of properemphasis,of distinctionin declamatoryutterance, withoutthat conwithoutthat Germanaffectationof profundity, stant underlining,that endless propensityfor repetition and explanation. It is to be regrettedthat Frenchmusichas followed, forso long a time,a coursewhichhas lessenedits clarityof expression, its beauty of form-qualities which are characteristicof French genius." One wonders how Debussy, who could be so deeply moved by the gloriesof Bach, could hear no echo of his greatness,if only an echo, in Gluck. As for the French musical tradition,Debussy, like all French writers,has a tendency to exaggerateits importancein musical history,not only in Europe, but in France itself. 1Ibid., p. 49. 2Ibid., pp. 108-9. a"M. Croche," pp. 79-80.

Debussy as Critic

365

Debussy deprecatedthe modernattemptto revive the symphony, as a form. "It is apparent, that, since Beethoven, the symphonyhas declined,and thoughcertain young Russian composers have tried to rejuvenate the formby the interweavingof popular airs, it is as if one dressed an old peasant woman in elaborate laces in which she would feel ill at ease."' It was a radically "new" music that Debussy craved, and there is a paragraph2concerningDukas whichwould be applicable to much of Debussy's own music: "One may say that this emotional evocation is constructive,that it builds up a beauty like that of perfectarchitecturallines set in the colored spaces of the air and sky,minglingin a total, definiteharmony." Of Richard Strauss: "This musichas not the rigidarchitecture of a Bach or a Beethoven,but its progressionis a developmentof rhythmiccolors; it is a minglingof the most utterlydissimilar tones and harmonies;-yet there is no escaping the conquering forceof this composer." Debussy's earlyadmirationof Wagner'smusicwas to undergo a certain modification,in the history of his critical theories. Before3his own music had reached maturity,Debussy found, by chance, the score of Moussorgsky's"Boris Godunov," then practically unknown in France. He studied this original and masterlycomposition,and, at once, the charm of Wagner was weakened forhim, and when,not long after,he heard a seriesof Wagner's operas at Bayreuth,he turnedforeverfromthe "idol," as such, whichhad exercisedsuch a deplorableinfluenceon French music. Debussy turnednot only to Russia, but to Java, formusical inspiration-he objected far less to these influencesthan to that of Germany and Italy, on "French" music. He wrote of Moussorgsky:4"No one has addressed that whichis best in us with an accent more tender,more profound. He is unique, and he willremainso,on accountofthefreedomofhis artfromaccepted formulaeand conventional methods. Never has a more refined sensibilitybeen expressedby a simplermeans. It is a primitive art, Moussorgsky'smusic, discoveredstep by step, in emotional experience-an art made up of a multitudeof parts held together by some mysteriouslink, and by a gift of luminous clearness. J"M. Croche," pp. 33-4. 2"M. Croche," p. 43. Ibid., p. 94. Of Puccini, who is not mentioned in "M. Croche," Debussy complains that he chose "Bohbme" fora subject, for his music is so utterlyItalian. He wrote of Verdi ("Gil Blas," Feb. 16, 1903-not in "M. Croche"): 'the esthetictheoryof this art is not true-one cannot translate lifeinto termsof song." 3See D. Chenneviere's "C. Debussy et son oeuvre" (Paris, 1913), p. 10. *"M. Croche," pp. 37-8.

366

The Musical Quarterly

Sometimes Moussorgsky gives the effectof dark and terrible shadows; he can cause the deepest emotionalreaction." The most extraordinaryof Debussy's criticismsare the expressionsof his later opinionsof Wagner. In listeningto "Tristan," he heard the charmingspiritof Chopin "dominatingcertain parts of the music, and breathing the fire of passion."' Of "Parsifal":2". ... Amfortas,sad knightof the Grail, complains and moans like a child. Sapristi! When one is a knightof the Grail, the son of a king,one stabs himself,one does not groan

through three acts! . . .

The most admirable character in 'Parsi-

fal' is that of Klingsor (a formerknightof the Grail, driven out for opinions upon the subject of chastitywhich wereconsidered too personalforgeneral toleration). Klingsor's malicious hatred is marvellous. He is the only human being, the only 'moral' personof this drama in whichthe most false ideas of religionand moralityare expressed-ideas of which the chief supporteris the 'heroic,' foolishParsifal.... Kundry is the real victim,in the story; the victim of Klingsor's intrigues,and of the holybadhumor of the Knight of the Grail." But Debussy adds: "In 'Parsifal' there are orchestralsonorities,noble, strong,rising in the formof monumentsmore beautiful than any others,to the immutablegloryof music,"and it is to be assumed that Debussy frequentlymeant,elsewhere,to say the funny,unpedantic thing about Wagner; he did not fail to appreciate the genius of the of the libretto'in comparison. music,thoughhe saw the inferiority There is no good reasonwhyDebussy's accountof the "Ring," as performedin London,4 should have been left out of "M. Croche," since his criticismof "Parsifal" is included, for the formeris still more amusing,and no moreimpressionistic. to imaginethe conditionof the strongestmind "It is difficult after the four evenings of the 'Ring.' There are the dances of the 'leit-motif,' of the theme of Wotan, and of 'Damnation,' and others,in terpsichoreanensemble. This is more than an obsession-it is a total seizure. You no longerbelongto yourself, you becomea 'leit-motif,'marchingin a tetralogicalatmosphere. No daily custom of politenesswill, thereafter,preventyou from addressingyourfriendsin the clamorousmannerofthe Walkyries. 'Hoyotoho!'-(What a gay sound!)--'Hoyohei !'-like a newsboy

1"M. Croche," p. 54. 2Ibid., pp. 100-2. 31twould be absurd to take Debussy too seriouslyon the subject of Wagner,just -as it would be to regard Shaw's criticismsof Shakespeare as intended for absolutely Aiteralexpressions. 4"Gil Bias," June 1, 1905.

Debussy as Critic

367

-'Heiaho !'-Ah! my lord! how insupportabledo these furredand helmetedpersons become afterthe fourthevening! They never appear unaccompanied by their damnable motifs. Imagine the gentlefollyof presentingone's calling-cardand, at the same time, chantingits printedmessage. The orchestraimposes upon us its innumerablecommentson the storyofthe ringlost and foundand lost again, passingfromhand to hand, as in a game. And thereis no end to the stupidityof Wotan, his lack of comprehensionof everythingthat goes on around him. This masterof the gods is surely the dullest of them all. He passes the time in endlessly of the dwarfswould narratinga storywhichthe most unintelligent easily understand. Wotan can but brandishhis lance, call forth fire,or commitinnumerablefolliesfromwhichhe is powerlessto rescuehimself. You will answerme by sayingthat therewas the necessityof fillingthe hoursof fourentireevenings-that it is 'the workof a giant.'-'A work of superhumanenergy-the vanity of wanting quantity and quality together,'is the reply. There is ever the Germanobsessionforpoundingthe same intellectualnail, again, and again, and again; the fear of not being understood which results in endless repetition. The people of the 'Ring' followeach otherinto a bottomlesssea of pride. They nevertake the trouble to justifytheir actions. They come in, go out, talk withoutthe least fidelityto what is likelyor probable. Brunhilde allows herselfto be fooled by Hagen and Gunther,like an ignorant girl. Really, it is not worththe troubleto be the daughter of a god! And she falls in love with Siegfried,the militaryhero, so proud of his glisteningarmor. He is her brother,more or less (forWotan's inconstancyhas made this state of things generally unavoidable-all the tetralogical persons are closely akin), and finallyshe is responsiblefor Siegfried'sdeath. But in the midst of heracts of mostimpenetrabledullness,she can always sound her boastfulbattle-cry:-'Hoyotoho!' well done!-One is not expected to wonder at dragons that sing,at birds that give wise council, at bears and horses and crows and two black sheep and other creaturesthat entercharminglyinto the generalschemeof things. "The greatplan is so immensethat its proportionsare lost in infinity;its too presumptuousgrandeurmakes it impossible to graspas a whole,and yet one feelsthat the least stone pulled from the mightypile would cause the rest to crumbleand destroythe world,whilethe gods looked down withimmutableamusementat the vain effortsof a modernPrometheus." But Debussy admits the existence of memorablybeautiful momentsin the long hours of the "Ring," in spite of "leit-motifs"

368

The Musical Quarterly

and interminably tedious,conventionaland unprofitable"lessons" and proverbialadmonitions. On the occasion of the erectionin Germanyof a memorialto Wagner as the greatest of German composers,Debussy wrote:1 -"Well, then, who was Bach? A man who had many children? And did Beethoven become deaf out of spite, so that, without annoyanceto himself,he mightdistressthe worldwithhis music? And was Mozart a voluptuous little person who composed 'Don Juan' to shock Germany? ...

One sees in the work of Wagner a

strikingcomparisonto be drawn with othercomposers. Bach is the Holy Grail. Wagner is Klingsor, wishing to destroy the Grail and to take its place.... But Bach reigns supreme in in his he served the spiritof music in and for music,for, goodness, with disinterested love." itself, This last sentenceis the altogethertrue,the altogetherserious expressionof Debussy's criticismof musical composition. In his least convincingopinions,Debussy is always an amusingimpressionist-and thereis a certain,individualtruthin any impression. But in his tribute to Bach, he is profound. In many of his tingedly,at least, facetiousjudgmentsthereis more than a slight elementofjustice,and his demonstration ofthe popularityofmuch in music that is mediocre,or worse,is always timely. And he is to be taken altogetherseriouslywhen he damns the tendencyto damn that whichis new,irrespectiveof merit;-forthereis always this tendency. Debussy's musichas becomean acceptedformand expression, and the difficulties whichhe had, at first,to encounter,are now in the way of the later compositionsof Scriabine,of Schiinbergand others whose work makes that of Debussy seem classical and orthodox,by comparison. But the spirit of Debussy's musical criticisms,the open-mindednessof his attitude,should prove suggestive and helpfulto criticsof the latest musical developments. Questions of traditionalform,of establishedrules,in all art, may be as misleadingas questionsof personalimpression. l"Gil Bias," January 10, 1903-not in "M. Croche."