The greatest single composition of the 20th century

Posted by: mikeeschman on 28 February 2009

i would like to nominate Messiaen's "Quartet for the End of Time" as the most profound, complete and musically satisfying work written in the 20th century.

here are some program notes for this work, courtesy of University of Southern California :

MESSIAEN: Quartet for the End of Time

Program Notes

In 1940, Olivier Messiaen (1908-92) was interned in a German prison camp, where he discovered among his fellow prisoners a clarinettist, a violinist and a violoncellist. The success of a short trio which he wrote for them led him to add seven more movements to this Interlude, and a piano to the ensemble, to create the Quartet for the End of Time. Messiaen and his friends first performed it for their 5000 fellow prisoners on January 15, 1941.

If the plain facts of the work's origins are simple, the spiritual facts are far more complex. Messiaen's religious mysticism found a point of departure for the Quartet in the passage in the Book of Revelation (chapter 10) about the descent of the seventh angel, at the sound of whose trumpet the mystery of God will be consummated, and who announces "that there should be time no longer."

According to the composer, the Quartet was intended not to be a commentary on the Apocalypse, nor to refer to his own captivity, but to be a kind of musical extension of the Biblical account, and of the concept of the end of Time as the end of past and future and the beginning of eternity. For Messiaen there was also a musical sense to the angel's announcement. His development of a varied and flexible rhythmic system, based in part on ancient Hindu rhythms, came to fruition in the Quartet, where more or less literally Messiaen put an end to the equally measured "time" of western classical music.

The architecture of the Quartet is both musical and mystical. There are eight movements because God rested on the seventh day after creation, a day which extended into the eighth day of timeless eternity. There are intricate thematic relationships, as for example between movements two and seven, both of which are about the angel; and stylistic and theological relationships, as between movements five and eight.

In a preface to the score, Messiaen commented on each of the movements:

1.

Liturgy of crystal. Between three and four o'clock in the morning, the awakening of the birds: a blackbird or a solo nightingale improvises, surrounded by efflorescent sound, by a halo of trills lost high in the trees...

2.

Vocalise, for the Angel who announces the end of Time. The first and third parts (very short) evoke the power of this mighty angel, a rainbow upon his head and clothed with a cloud, who sets one foot on the sea and one foot on the earth. In the middle section are the impalpable harmonies of heaven. In the piano, sweet cascades of blue-orange chords, enclosing in their distant chimes the almost plainchant song of the violin and violoncello.

3.

Abyss of the birds. Clarinet alone. The abyss is Time with its sadness, its weariness. The birds are the opposite to Time; they are our desire for light, for stars, for rainbows, and for jubilant songs.

4.

Interlude. Scherzo, of a more individual character than the other movements, but linked to them nevertheless by certain melodic recollections.

5.

Praise to the Eternity of Jesus. Jesus is considered here as the Word. A broad phrase, infinitely slow, on the violoncello, magnifies with love and reverence the eternity of the Word, powerful and gentle, ... "In the beginning was the Word, and Word was with God, and the Word was God."

6.

Dance of fury, for the seven trumpets. Rhythmically, the most characteristic piece in the series. The four instruments in unison take on the aspect of gongs and trumpets (the first six trumpets of the Apocalypse were followed by various catastrophes, the trumpet of the seventh angel announced the consummation of the mystery of God). Use of added [rhythmic] values, rhythms augmented or diminished... Music of stone, of formidable, sonorous granite...

7.

A mingling of rainbows for the Angel who announces the end of Time. Certain passages from the second movement recur here. The powerful angel appears, above all the rainbow that covers him... In my dreams I hear and see a catalogue of chords and melodies, familiar colours and forms... The swords of fire, these outpourings of blue-orange lava, these turbulent stars...

8.

Praise to the Immortality of Jesus. Expansive solo violin, counterpart to the violoncello solo of the fifth movement. Why this second encomium? It addresses more specifically the second aspect of Jesus, Jesus the Man, the Word made flesh... Its slow ascent toward the most extreme point of tension is the ascension of man toward his God, of the child of God toward his Father, of the being made divine toward Paradise.

i hope there are other nominations on this thread.
Posted on: 28 February 2009 by stephenjohn
How do you define greatest?
bw
SJ
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by stephenjohn:
How do you define greatest?
bw
SJ

"the most profound, complete and musically satisfying work written in the 20th century."
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by munch:
This work has to be up there with the great classical guys.


munch, i can't read the title on this one.
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by u5227470736789439
Tubular Bells - Mike Oldfield.

I cannot read it either, but I think this guess is about right ...

ATB from George

PS: I cannot think of any twentieth century music that seems the equal of the best from the nineteenth, or even much music from the nineteenth that is the equal of the best from the eighteenth!
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:
I cannot think of any twentieth century music that seems the equal of the best from the nineteenth, or even much music from the nineteenth that is the equal of the best from the eighteenth!


george, i knew you were hot for those wax cylinders of bach playing organ! do you know messiaen's "Quartet for the End of Time"?
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by 555
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by BigH47
Karn Evil 9 by ELP.
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by Mat Cork
Coltrane - Love Supreme, Mingus 'Black Saint' bringing up the rear.
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by Whizzkid
First House music tune that I fell in love with.







Dean..
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by Mat Cork
Can't see it W, what is it?
Posted on: 01 March 2009 by fred simon


Well, Quartet for the End of Time is surely one of the greatest, but how can there be a single greatest? How can such a thing even be assessed?

More importantly, why should there even be a single greatest?

All best,
Fred


Posted on: 01 March 2009 by fred simon
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:

I cannot think of any twentieth century music that seems the equal of the best from the nineteenth, or even much music from the nineteenth that is the equal of the best from the eighteenth!


More accurately, you can't think of any 20th century music that you like as much as your favorite music of the 19th century, and so forth.

But I assume you allow that your own taste (or mine) is a separate issue, and that regardless of whether a particular 20th century composition floats your boat, it can nevertheless be assessed to be equal in compositional quality to the best of previous centuries.

All best,
Fred


Posted on: 01 March 2009 by BigH47
Well said Fred. On the other thread too BTW.
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by fred simon:
but how can there be a single greatest? How can such a thing even be assessed?


this will change over time. meanwhile, if 100 people think about it and post a nomination, well that's a great shopping list to take to amazon.com :-)

second thing is that i regretted saying greatest almost immediately, but don't know how to edit thread title. i was really thinking "most remarkable". i think the circumstances surrounding the quartet for the end of time, the text, and the setting of a biblical text to hindu rythms, as well as the remarkable things accomplished with those rhythms, make the quartet a prime candidate for "most remarkable".
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by Martin D
God save the queen - sex pistols
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by u5227470736789439
quote:
Originally posted by fred simon:
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:

I cannot think of any twentieth century music that seems the equal of the best from the nineteenth, or even much music from the nineteenth that is the equal of the best from the eighteenth!


More accurately, you can't think of any 20th century music that you like as much as your favorite music of the 19th century, and so forth.

But I assume you allow that your own taste (or mine) is a separate issue, and that regardless of whether a particular 20th century composition floats your boat, it can nevertheless be assessed to be equal in compositional quality to the best of previous centuries.

All best, Fred


First point.

Obviously when I express an opinion it is my opinion and no one else's. It is entirely conceivable that others may hold different opinions!

Second point.

I do not really believe it is possible even for the greatest experts to assess the relative greatness of two pieces of music!

I will posit the thought that there is no piece of music from Westlife that time will serve so well as time has served the great music of JS Bach - I suspect that may not be wrong, though time will tell!

ATB from George
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:
Originally posted by Martin D:
God save the queen - sex pistols

Good call...I nearly went for this. For me at least, it sums of everything that's great about music as art. Robert Johnsons collection equally, changed the world.
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by fred simon
quote:
Originally posted by mikeeschman:
quote:
Originally posted by fred simon:
but how can there be a single greatest? How can such a thing even be assessed?


this will change over time. meanwhile, if 100 people think about it and post a nomination, well that's a great shopping list to take to amazon.com :-)

second thing is that i regretted saying greatest almost immediately, but don't know how to edit thread title. i was really thinking "most remarkable".


Mike, it wasn't the word "greatest" I questioned, it was the word "single."

And, yes, of course we'd get many different answers and possibly some inspiration to check out unfamiliar works. But why not just start with that? That is, "What are some of the greatest compositions of the 20th century?" No problem whatsoever in that.

Best,
Fred


Posted on: 02 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by fred simon:
Mike, it wasn't the word "greatest" I questioned, it was the word "single."

"What are some of the greatest compositions of the 20th century?" No problem whatsoever in that.

Best,
Fred


fred, you made it toothless.

the excercise of whittling down your stash to just one composition is both useful and entertaing.

anyway, exactly who is going to hold you to it?

single is the twist that puts the fun in the excercise.

and i think "Quartet for the End of Time" is a strong contender in any case.

you've burned up 3-4 e-mails with me without nominating any work (or works), engaging in a dialog that would be so much more fun if we were discussing works.

it is for entertainment, no cash awards will be given out, and the results won't be reported in any national news.

so, fred, why not play?
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by fred simon
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:
quote:
Originally posted by fred simon:
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:

I cannot think of any twentieth century music that seems the equal of the best from the nineteenth, or even much music from the nineteenth that is the equal of the best from the eighteenth!


More accurately, you can't think of any 20th century music that you like as much as your favorite music of the 19th century, and so forth.

But I assume you allow that your own taste (or mine) is a separate issue, and that regardless of whether a particular 20th century composition floats your boat, it can nevertheless be assessed to be equal in compositional quality to the best of previous centuries.

All best, Fred


First point.

Obviously when I express an opinion it is my opinion and no one else's. It is entirely conceivable that others may hold different opinions!

Second point.

I do not really believe it is possiblre even for the greatest experts to assess the relative greatness of two pieces of music!

I will posit the thought that there is no piece of music from Westlife that time will serve so well as time has served the great music of JS Bach - I suspect that may not be wrong, though time will tell!


George, you've missed my point, which is that personal taste and historic assessment by widespread consensus are two very separate things which must be kept strictly separate, especially when they don't intersect.

As I always say, of course we all have an opinion and the right to hold it. But the right to hold an opinion doesn't therefore mean that the opinion has validity, ipso facto.

For instance, if someone were to say to you and me, "The music of J.S. Bach is not good music," beyond the fact that they have the right to hold that opinion, the opinion itself is virtually meaningless ... historic assessment by nearly unanimous consensus is that the music of J.S. Bach is very great, indeed, and in fact is among the greatest ever composed.

But if that same person had said, "I don't care for the music of Bach, it doesn't move me, but I can tell that it's really well composed and significant music" then there would be no argument.

There most definitely is music from the 19th century that is the equal of the best of the 18th century. That it doesn't move you quite as much is strictly your "problem."

And as we are now in the 21st century, there has been enough distance in time for a proper historical consensus to determine that works by, for instance, Ravel, Debussy, Bartok, Stravinsky, Shostakovich, just to name a few in the Western classical tradition, are indeed among the greatest musical works ever composed. That they may not move you as much as the greatest works of the 18th century is an entirely separate issue. Do you see my point?

Best,
Fred


Posted on: 02 March 2009 by Timbo
Doesn't matter which is the best, points of view are useful.

Personally I like threads like these and also the whole music room as there is so much music out there and I consider myself a novice, I appreciate guidance and suggestions through this forum that I wouldn't have known of or considered. I don't mind buying the odd CD or record blindly just for the hell of it, but these discussions and opinions help guide what I think I would like to hear.

So keep it coming :-)

Tim
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Fred,

Now I see what exactly was your point, I can only say that I agree with every word of it!

I tend to avoid making value judgements even for music well and truly cemented in reputation by time! Quite simply it is pointless!

So it follows that if I ever express an opinion on music it is entirely personal, and not a value judgement. It would be reasonable to criticise my comment that there is little nineteenth century music as great as the greatest from the eighteenth. You are right, it is entirely a question of personal preference - nothing more! I shall be more careful in future to be much clearer in expressing the meaning intended!

As regards the music of the early twentieth century, I suspect that you are right and that time has done its threshing job in extracting the wheat from the chaff in musical terms.

Perhaps I simply prefer eighteenth and nineteenth century musical wheat to most twentieth century's ...

In my defence, I enjoy Sibelius as much as Haydn or Bach, so it is possible for me to like - even love - some music from the twentieth century!

Best wishes from George
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by stephenjohn
I agree, when people commit themselves to a recommendation it ignites interest. The whole subjective objective debate is sterile and meaningless..
I am struggling with the idea of just one.
Bartok
Beatles
Bob Dylan
B...
...sorry still trying to choose. It has to begin with B though

SJ
Posted on: 02 March 2009 by fred simon
quote:
Originally posted by mikeeschman:

you've burned up 3-4 e-mails with me without nominating any work (or works), engaging in a dialog that would be so much more fun if we were discussing works.


Mike, I am having fun. See? Big Grin

And the emails are not burned up, they're roasted to a deep golden brown!

And believe it or not, I don't find it fun at all to pick a single best, or most favorite, anything.

But to name a few musical works of the 20th century which I consider among the best, keeping it strictly to the classical genre for the sake of efficiency (someone else mentioned John Coltrane's A Love Supreme, which I would definitely include if I were considering other genres at this time), I'd suggest these:

Prokofiev - Piano Concerto G minor
Shostakovich - Symphony #11
Ravel - Piano Concerto in G major
Ravel - String Quartet
Debussy - String Quartet
Berg - Concerto for Violin
Steve Reich - Music for Eighteen Musicians
Stravinsky - The Rite of Spring
Bartok - Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celeste

Just a few off the top of my head.

Best,
Fred


Posted on: 02 March 2009 by u5227470736789439
Possible candidate?

The Rite Of Spring.

As Sir Adrian Boult observed, "Great music, but I am not sure it celebrates the very nicest aspects of the Spring."

ATB from George

Edit: Fred. Rite. Snap!