Boulez in L.A.
Boulez Meets Gehry
LACMA
West
The artists are introduced by the Los
Angeles Philharmonic’s Executive Director. Walt Disney Concert Hall is
the outcome, she says, of “a 16-year quest.” She speaks of an
“intersection between two iconic figures,” of rendezvous in a
“darkened space,” a midnight party with champagne and whatnot.
Gehry’s Hall is, in reality, “a metaphor of transformation.”
There’s more: “the curves and surprises of this building invite
us,” invite us, reader, “to think thoughts we’ve never thunk
before.” She didn’t really say thunk, I thunk it up and wrote it
for her.
The Ex.D. is evidently a seminarian.
F.O.G.’s plan was to build “a living room for the city.” It
will open with “a community concert” for “young
people.” This is all the expression of “such a magnificent
statement.”
We are waiting, but she isn’t finished
with her magnificent statements. Passing on to the other featured guest
speaker, she quotes Goethe as saying “architecture is frozen
music.” F.O.G.’s idea was to have a sonic progression from one note
to whatever. F.O.G. “didn’t like the Haydn symphony we chose, but
that’s Frank.”
“He will influence the way we listen
to music in Los Angeles,” and the nation will follow. With this, she
subsides.
The self-described “instigator”
of “rigorous and playful debates” is the Director of the Institute
for Art and Cultures, Paul Holdengräber. He speaks of joyously anticipating
Disney Hall and the glorious opening season, in those words. He thanks all
those who made all this possible at such great length it sounds like Oscar
night. “And now,” thirty minutes into the program, “I think it’s
time to begin this event.”
Holdengräber rather resembles Tim Curry with
a Germanic accent. F.O.G. looks like Steven Spielberg’s father, and
Boulez is looking Belmondoish.
F.O.G.: Where’s Ernest?
This is Ernest Fleischmann, the former
Executive Director who first brought F.O.G. in to put balls on the Hollywood
Bowl shell, ostensibly to improve the acoustics, thirty years before.
FLEISCHMANN: (In the audience.) Where
I belong.
Holdengräber puts it to F.O.G.: why music?
F.O.G. has just gotten off a plane from Zurich, so he’s a little dazed
(Boulez has been conducting the Philharmonic downtown, and preparing for the
Ojai Festival).
Why music? Why has F.O.G. taken up the
concert hall, at all, at all?
F.O.G.: Walter Mitty... remember Danny
Kaye... thinking he was... something?
HOLDENGRÄBER: I don’t remember.
F.O.G.: At Notre-Dame I heard Gregorian chants... those sounds defined the
building for me forever.
His mother took him to concerts. Sir Ernest
MacMillan was the conductor. Does Boulez remember him? “No.” (Laughter
in audience.) A student of the violin was F.O.G.’s mum.
Why, Holdengräber persists, build for music?
F.O.G.: I’ve been hanging around with
Ernest Fleischmann and the Philharmonic for ages, and I’ve sort of
related to that.
He first heard Boulez conduct at one of the
New York Philharmonic Rug Concerts. I see that someone two rows ahead has dozed
off under his chair. No, it’s a jacket. Holdengräber is saying,
“the precision and the passion.”
F.O.G.: My idea was to make architecture not
imposing and overpowering. There should be a casual character to it, which
requires an enormous amount of careful planning and precision.
He discovered that “a conductor
doesn’t just wave his hands.” He once dreamed that Ernest called
him up to conduct. He awoke in a cold sweat.
HOLDENGRÄBER: Do you ever have such dreams
about architecture, Pierre?
BOULEZ: In my worst nightmares I was not dreaming I became an architect.
Boulez talks about the Rug Concerts,
preparing the floor, putting out cushions (“we were worried a little bit
there might be cushion fights, but everyone behaved very well”), etc. He
describes the Proms at Albert Hall (“That’s a very big
hall.”), and the Arena emptied of its seats, with people just standing
there for the whole concert. Bad acoustics, he says, mean no contact. The
solution is to move the orchestra in front of the stage, have the audience on
the stage, and thus “the orchestra is taken within the hall.” It
sounds like Répons.
F.O.G.: Disney Hall is a fixed hall. Have we
created an anachronism?
Meaning its interior structure is determined
and cannot be varied. Boulez answers with a discussion of the spatial apparatus
in Berlioz’s Requiem, you want “something more
interactive.” He speaks of “a moment of music coming from a moment
of the architecture.” He describes conditions at La Cité de la Musique,
and briefly discusses two architects he’s had dealings with, the builders
of IRCAM and La Cité, respectively.
F.O.G. mentions a problem Boulez has with his
pieces, they always must be overtures or first after the intermission, because
of all the percussion instruments that must be moved onto the stage. He hopes
his solution, which apparently involves raising the back wall when needed, will
be found helpful.
BOULEZ: You did it here! Beautiful!
Holdengräber persists with his idea
(introducing Boulez, he said he considered it a coup to have found a photograph
of Boulez smiling for the program, but that he felt disappointed not to have
one of Boulez in a convertible), which is that if Boulez had a nightmare in
which he was somehow an architect, what sort of concert hall would he build?
BOULEZ: Well, it is possible to have not
nightmares but dreams.
He then presents himself as a sort of
Goldilocks (without saying so), with a Big Hall like at La Cité capable of
different configurations, a Medium Hall of 1000-1200 seats, and a Small Hall of
500-600. He goes on at some length with his description, until Holdengräber
temerariously interrupts him.
HOLDENGRÄBER: I was talking about acoustics.
Without missing a beat, Boulez continues.
“Well, therefore...” Holdengräber interrupts him again to say that
he once spoke to a régisseur at La Cité who told him that everything is
important for the sound, even what people are wearing.
BOULEZ: That’s a little bit overdone.
Some say the sound at La Cité is too dry,
but... They have mobile elements to alter the sound. Amplified music (jazz or
pop) requires absorbing material. La Cité began five years ago.
BOULEZ: Do we do only quote unquote
classical music? No.
Four general types of music are performed at
La Cité de la Musique:
Classical—“baroque to extremely
contemporary”
Ethnic—“from the corners of the planet”
Jazz, and
Pop—“if it’s very elaborate, not only commercial”
“The mobility of the hall
helps.” Gagaku is not treated like classical music.
Holdengräber asks F.O.G. about his
“living room for the city.”
F.O.G.: I was misquoted, actually.
Holdengräber then quotes Hockney rather
extensively on private vs. public life in Los Angeles.
In answer, F.O.G. describes going to
Berlin’s Philharmonic Hall. “Ernest and the Philharmonic set that
as a model.” It “stimulates interaction of people both in the foyer
and hall.” Not, he says, like the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. He uses the
term “Modernist” to describe Berlin’s hall. He ponders the
goal: if you can engage people to listen... Is it a voyeuristic thing, to watch
people listening? (perhaps he’s thinking of Bergman’s The Magic
Flute). “Anybody do that?”, he asks
the audience. There is a murmur between assent and laughter.
F.O.G. went to a museum once and saw four
Breughels. He pronounces them “extraordinary.” Later, he went back
and the museum was remodeling, so the Breughels were in a small room and
“didn’t look the same,” so that it took twenty minutes
“to get into it.”
Boulez says that at La Cité, a large hall is
not so large, and a small one is not so small.
Holdengräber and F.O.G. discuss
Boston’s Symphony Hall, which the Los Angeles Philharmonic presented to
F.O.G. as ideal, acoustically. “Copy it,” they said. That was a
great hall because great musicians had played there.
BOULEZ: You mean that they are missed!
In the course of a colloquy with
Holdengräber, Boulez concedes “a bad hall does not help,
certainly.” He adds, “you are dependent on these kinds of stupid
impressions.” At the Musikverein, the finale of Mahler’s Sixth has
a certain sound. The size of the hall is a factor. One built in the nineteenth
century will have 1700-1900 seats. “After 2000 seats, problems are happening,
because of the space.” At Philharmonic Hall in New York, “which is
one-and-a-half times the size of the Musikverein, the sound does not carry to
the end,” i.e., the back of the hall. The problem is
“psychological,” there is “no contact with the
musicians.” Problems increase as musicians cannot hear themselves or each
other properly.
F.O.G.: Maybe that’s why acousticians
are so conservative. They’re scared.
He introduces Dr. Toyota, Walt Disney
Concert Hall’s acoustician, who is seated in the audience. There is a
question of guest conductors having different requirements, of stagehands
configuring the stage for Mozart “or whatever.”
BOULEZ: You cannot please everybody.
A dry sound, Boulez says, is OK for Haydn,
but for Bruckner it’s terrible. A bad hall makes musicians force their
playing, whereas a good hall is like...
HOLDENGRÄBER: A good interlocutor.
BOULEZ: Too flattering a hall is also
extremely dangerous.
F.O.G.: That guy, Ernest, he was my guide.
FLEISCHMANN:
(In audience.) Blame me.
Ernest took F.O.G. to concerts, showed him
backstage, the apparatus behind the scenes, what goes on, stagehands, etc.
F.O.G. saw Esa-Pekka (Salonen) rearrange the orchestra on risers to reduce its
sloppiness. There had been “a gradual denigration of the organization of
the orchestra till someone says ‘what a mess!’” What was the
reason? “Musicians,” says F.O.G., “are rugged
individualists.”
F.O.G. is apparently describing a tendency I
have only observed in amateur orchestras, and rarely, where the players load
the stage with personal articles. This, he justly observes, is reflected in
their playing.
But lest his remark be misconstrued, I would
point out how odd it is to sometimes see players in a classical orchestra
looking like lackeys, or in a romantic one like employees. Only when Boulez
came to Los Angeles to conduct Pli Selon Pli with its vast apparatus did
Los Angeles see its Philharmonic as the versatile
professionals they are, with all their “gear and tackle and trim.”
F.O.G. wonders how two-hundred-year-old
paintings still look fresh. He “relies on natural light” to
“caress” his works, it’s “romantic.”
BOULEZ: You are always puzzled, really, by a
masterpiece. It seems obvious, but you don’t understand how it came to be
so.
He tells a story of Diderot in the dark
before a new masterpiece, then seeing the light, and then in darkness again. In
response to F.O.G. he says “there are problems I don’t want to be
explained.” (Audience laughter.)
Holdengräber brings up computers.
F.O.G.: Inevitably we become obsolete, and
there’s a lot of stuff you’re not going to be able to do. The
younger generation free-associate and use the
technology instinctively, though they haven’t built much.
From idea to construction, F.O.G. explains,
“several thousand hands” are involved in his projects. There is a
bureaucracy of construction, so the problem is to bring “the whole thing
to the end with this immediacy... with feeling.”
BOULEZ: I have no trouble with computers.
The computer helps you find material, that’s all. It doesn’t invent
thoughts.
He is “interested in the
process” but “independent” of it, because he can
“create music without it.” But the technology is there, “why
not use it?” He speaks of being practically forced to invent “something
different. Not a Greek temple, which doesn’t have curves,
certainly.”
F.O.G. says Pheidias “thought of
curves, movement in sculpture,” etc.
Boulez “visited” F.O.G.’s
“Cleveland building.” He was interested that they no longer measure
the ground but from other buildings. F.O.G. explains the use of laser pointers
for this.
F.O.G.: (To Boulez.) When you
compose, how do you think about space?
He’s thinking of Pli Selon Pli,
he says, which is “very spatial.”
HOLDENGRÄBER: That’s a good question. (Laughter
in audience.)
Perhaps F.O.G. is thinking about the
disposition of notes in a good performance, which seem to occupy their own
space, filling the hall.
Boulez discusses the distribution of the
ensemble in Répons, where the players are surrounded by the audience,
who are ringed by computer loudspeakers. F.O.G. brings up Berlioz, who was
(according to Boulez) “disappointed” by the large orchestra he
tried, as it “could only do slow movements, because of the mass of
musicians.” In the open air, cohesion was impossible, etc.
Holdengräber is now ready to spring. In view
of Boulez’s requirements for a hall in Paris, “F.O.G. is
here.”
F.O.G.: I’ve volunteered for it.
BOULEZ: Who have you volunteered to pay for it?
This hall “is like the monster of Loch
Ness, you speak about it always, but...”
“Brahms did this before that, it’s boring to be told that all the time, by a
learning process...” It’s important to have “tapes available
of new music,” which often suffers from infrequent performance. This
should be part of the concertgoing experience. He imagines proceeding
“from one hall to another in a promenade, with all this
documentation.”
HOLDENGRÄBER: (To F.O.G.) What are
your hopes for Walt Disney Concert Hall?
F.O.G. responds by pointing out Dr. Toyota
again. “I call him every day and ask him if he’s feeling
good.”
“It if makes the musical experience
better, great.”
“If the hall is wonderful, then
hopefully the response will be wonderful.” (Applause.)
The public is invited to ask questions. What
kind of music does F.O.G listen to? He likes things “all over the
place.”
F.O.G.: I sometimes listen to Pierre.
Why has he given up the
“cheapskate” architecture he used to champion? He hasn’t. The
Bilbao Guggenheim only cost “$300/sq. ft.”
La Scala has great acoustics, even in the last
row, how come? Boulez explains the hall’s “not long but high, so
you don’t lose the energy of the sound.”
This discussion of acoustics finally begun
ends there. F.O.G. “can’t announce Disney Hall’s cost
publicly yet, you’ll eventually hear it, they packed a lot of stuff into
it.”
“Form follows function,
I don’t think that’s very important. I don’t... I don’t
know... I think... you have to see it for yourself... figure it out.”
The following questions were not asked:
“F.O.G., you once said ‘Every
architect who’s any good, no matter what they say, is trying to make some
kind of personal mud pie.’ Would you care to dilate on that?”
“M. Boulez, did Xenakis really say you
represented ‘something not far from absolute evil’?”
An Ojai Concert
Even before you enter Libbey Park,
you’re faced with a maze of trivialities masquerading as an art show,
which seems to put the musicians off their mettle.
The concert turned out to have a theme.
There’s a motivic idea in many of Boulez’s pieces, or rather a sort
of technique which comes out as motoric staccato notes played “with
xylophonic precision,” sometimes developed at great length. None of the
performers knew how to play this sequence, and the effects were more or less
evident, culminating in something of a débâcle.
The Sonatine is a charming work,
fitted exactly to its demands for the soloist and the piano. An easy
interchange between the accompanist, sustaining the metrical dialogue while
relieved of the total effect, and the flute carrying the tune but not obliged
to play Bach in ripieno. It stands bold in brisk conclusions, lively
themes, alert phrasing and vivid harmonies. Put it in every flutist’s
repertoire like the Franck sonata in the fiddle case, irreplaceably.
One had not been forewarned by Los
Angeles Times interviews with the musicians belaboring their parts, but it
did rather seem that Anthèmes I was played for the gesture rather than
the notes, as if the syncopations of the Eroica were not exact
dispensations of both. Nevertheless, it’s a new kind of writing for the
violin, a very skilled and agile thing that shows off the instrument in all its
colors. Perlman should be playing it. Even in an inadequate performance, its
strength and richness are incomparable.
Boulez was wrong to withhold Notations
from the public for decades. It’s Boulez on a smaller scale, speaking the
same language as the First Piano Sonata in brief, and probably the best way for
the pianist to grasp the situation at once, if not entirely. Mitsuko Uchida was
replaced because of illness by the répétiteur of the Los Angeles Opera, who was
a dab hand with it until that sequence left him with no plan of attack.
The only sure success of the whole program,
as a performance, was achieved by the Los Angeles Philharmonic’s
co-principal clarinetist, Lorin Levee, in Dialogue de l’Ombre Double
with recorded tape. Afterward, as he took his bows in several curtain calls, he
finally patted the music on his stand to signify modestly that he had learned
the piece and played it.
So well did he play it that its dramatic
consequence became manifest. Rapid figurations and trills suddenly breathed a
nuance of Stravinsky’s pieces, answered by the clarinet on tape with a
whiff of The Miraculous Mandarin. Back and forth, all expressed in
warblings and chirps, until the loudspeakers began to divide under the trees,
and again the sound flickered around the park in answer to the soloist, and
finally a penetrating scream (or rather a sustained tone) subsumed all the
dialogue into a transcendence, and you could understand why someone said once
that Boulez should write an opera.
At the intermission, I strolled out the side
path over to the playhouse and back, and passed someone saying that Saturday
nights were for musicologists, that’s when they play the avant-garde
stuff. The same sort of nonsense I heard at Royce Hall one night, after
Ginastera’s Harp Concerto.
Sur Incises has the barbaric yawp of steel drums in single notes
at various points, with pianos, harps, vibraphones, marimba, bells and timpani.
It requires the ability to play that motoric rhythm at double speed all
together (it briefly evoked something as seemingly antithetic as Danses
Concertantes), and needed about 42 more rehearsals, even with professors of
piano on their benches (it was written in 1998). Suddenly, you could understand
Robert Craft saying Pli Selon Pli was “monotonously pretty and
pretty monotonous.” Is this what he heard, a resonant muddle?
That’s not what’s written (amplifying the whole concert
didn’t help—Boulez conducting Webern is enough sound), surely.
This was not the first time Boulez has had
to muddle through at Ojai. There was the time all the horn players fizzled out
in the Four Russian Peasant Songs, or the Rossignol was so out of tune I
would have walked out on it whether it was raining or not (it was).
Still, the frogs and crickets heard all
night responded to the pool of sound Sur Incises made with a little up
and down figure that was pleasing.
Stravinsky is one of the foundations of
Boulez’s music, and if you know Schoenberg and Messiaen, you’re
home free. Otherwise, it’s rather likely to leave you in the lurch, but
where have you been?
It turned out that Berio had died on the
Tuesday before (that very night Boulez met Gehry). Berio understood raw sound as
the essence of the art. Heifetz’s tremolos in a cadenza express precisely
the same discovery as the Chemins.
Boulez opened the concert with an
unscheduled performance of O King. Because “there was no
possibility” of finding a singer on such short notice, a muted trumpet
was substituted. Berio was rather keen on “transcriptions,” said
Boulez.
The Executive Director of the Philharmonic
left an example of her prose in the program booklet. The Artistic Director of
the Ojai Festival, Ernest Fleischmann, had announced his departure, and praises
were forthcoming.
“We often speak of seminal
events,” said the Ex.D., “but do we ever speak of seminal leaders?
In Ernest’s case, such a definition rings clarion. His vision, his
energy, his taste have helped to shape a vibrant musical landscape that extends
well beyond the borders of our state. Many stand on the shoulders of his
achievements.”
Fleischmann has his own note in the booklet,
hoping to see contributions for a new orchestra shell in Libbey Park, to
replace the one conducted in by Stravinsky, Boulez, Copland, and Craft.
Doubtless, he has an architect in mind.
Reading the program notes, you wonder why
Ojai can’t obtain the services of writers equal to the occasion, until
you find Joshua Fineberg’s adequate remarks.