Сегодня увидел в какой-то музыкальной прессе свою “проходную заметку” из ФБ. Да, актуально.
“Isms” do not work In great music.
I was always confused by the fact of “attributing” Debussy and Ravel to the “Impressionists”. Even in the fine arts, where everything is subject to “currents” and “manners,” “packaging” on the shelves takes place in hindsight and with great deal of “generalization”.
It seems that one of the critics pejoratively called Monet “imressionist”, and then the word caught on and marked the “current”. Great music is not a “current”, and even if “Current” is the “current of life”. Great music is a great individuality, expressed in sounds.
My tongue does not turn to call Bach a “baroque” composer. He is the founder of the musical “Renaissance” for me. Or “Naissance.” His individuality in scale corresponds only to Leonardo. Forget about “Baroque”.The fact that he lived in the Baroque era does not make him belonging to this era, this era was lucky that it coincided with Bach. It was not Bach who lived in the Baroque era, but the Baroque era “occurred” during Bach’s life.
Beethoven is the king of romance for me. More than Chopin and Liszt. Because the wild Ludwig was easily ready to give his life for the happiness of people, freedom and democracy (and gave, incidentally) and others, those who are called romantic by definition, according to the “classification of style” – I’m not sure. And, in spite of the more strict style of Beethoven’s works, he is as romantic in content as, say, Byron.
So, the stylistic temporary classification with great music does not work. It is the inertia of people with dry intellect, who do not understand the meanings inherent in music talking only about superficial form.
So Debussy, who expressed only the music of the soul of the Frenchman of his (almost our) time, got into the Impressionists shelf. Because he added the Asian pentatonic to his composer tools? So, then every French chef who adds Chinese and Japanese ingredients to Nouvelle Cousin is an impressionist?Debussy is a great Frenchman. And his music is the soul of a modern sensual subtle Frenchman.
And how did Ravel “hit the French Impressionists”? Just because he spoke French? His music does not have anything to do with France, do they want this or not. His music is the music of a slightly “frenchized” Basque. Neoclassical and, to a greater extent, diabolically expressionistic. Explosions, with protuberances of romantic expression, with jazz mind, way of thinking and neoclassicism in form.
Music is a person who succeeded and managed to record himself in sounds.
A person does not happen to end with “ism”.