Sequenza21/The Contemporary Classical Music Weekly

On Ligeti: Stephen Ferguson Responds

Dear Jerry, dear Galen,

I would like to thank you for your letter and your concern that justice is done to one of the great composers of the twentieth century, György Ligeti, as well as his compositional forebears.

Ligeti's music was the subject of both my masters (on Atmosphères) and doctoral thesis. Ligeti said in writing that my PhD, which was published in Germany by Schneider in Tützing, was the best analysis of his music he had ever read. That was the starting point of our official collaboration, when I edited his works for Schott between 92 and 96 and assisted in many productions, for example the Violin Concerto recording with Boulez.

Ligeti was unhappy with the way his music was used in Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. In fact, as I am sure you are aware, the film company had stated in its registration to the performing rights society that only 3'30 of the music had been used, when in fact the real figure would have been nearer 33'. This caused Ligeti great upset. Nevertheless, Ligeti admitted that most people had got to know his music through Kubrick's film, and that was a mitigating circumstance. Had you seen the obituary broadcast last night on German TV news you would have been doubly dismayed. German television said virtually nothing about his art, but simply again trotted out the link to Kubrick. To explain to the world, though, the true circumstances of the 2001 soundtrack goes far beyond what press and TV wish to achieve in an obit.

The association of Kubrick with Ligeti was of course emphasised through Kubrick's use of musica ricercata (in an edition I also edited) in Eyes Wide Shut. The Ligeti-Kubrick connection serves as an unfortunate example of what happens when art music and popular art interact, and how one is seen as a servant of the other. The fact that Ligeti masterpieces such as the Requiem are known as "film music" is abhorent. It shows what can happen to music of greatest integrity and substance when it achieves that most evasive of accolades, fame, but fame of the wrong kind.

I did not say that Ligeti had invented clusters, but rather that he invented a new form of cluster sound, which is a different matter. The AP did not state that I said “Ligeti invented clusters”. I think that we can all agree that clusters are a natural technique of pianism. What Ligeti did in his use of sustained cluster sound in Atmospheres was to go beyond the coloristic device and to make clusters the result of true polyphonic Satzkunst (e.g. in the 48 voice canon). To associate his international breakthrough with his cluster music is not misleading, when one considers that Ligeti's international prizes and renown, as well as Kubrick’s interest in his compositions, were based on works from his cluster period, much more than on later works such as the Drei Stücke für zwei Klaviere, the Horn Trio or the Piano Concerto.

The problem with saying anything short and significant to a general audience about Ligeti's art is that his techniques were so complex and individualistic, his music so rich in content and innovation, that it would require detailed and highly technical explanation. Add to this the general speed and confusion that surrounds a telephone interview, the fact that journalists are overstretched when writing about new music, the fact that the person who wrote the obituary was not the interviewer, and the way that misconceptions arose when the writer connected the various parts of the puzzle as best he could, and you have a less than perfect piece. But as you correctly point out, the recognition was there for a leading representative of "elite art", as Ligeti once wryly called his own music on Austrian radio. That is recognition that comes all too seldom to our branch of music.

The problem surrounding any eulogy for Ligeti is a problem which applies generally to New Music. When the New Music community unites in calling a composer one of the great composers of our age, the general public is often entirely unaware of what his or her music sounds like, and beyond that, why the music is deserving of such praise. One of the prices we pay for the resplendent freedoms of abstraction is that audiences do not have a well-known work to hang a name on. That is unfortunately why obits all over the globe have stressed the link to Kubrick, and why Ligeti will never entirely be free of the label of a film composer. That label, of course, is quite absurd when one thinks of his approach to art, his personality and his music – and the fact that he never wrote music for films.

To be fair to the AP, I think they did a good job of succinctly outlining Ligeti's life in such a way as to make it comprehensible to an American audience, stressing the persecution and tragedy that Ligeti's family was subjected to. The ability of the news wires to go into the details of artistic technique is limited. They are only putting out a short notice. Speed is of the essence. Had I had an opportunity to back-read the AP obit, I – or you – could have sorted out the bits that upset you, but that is not an opportunity afforded to an interviewee by a news service. The news service and its editors have to decide what the piece is going to be. To accuse the AP of misinformation in this case would be grossly exaggerated. The main misconception is that when music appears in a film, people think the composer and the director are working in tandem. The fact that the opposite was the case is highly unusual, a fact masked by Kubrick’s use of Ligeti’s music in his last movie.

Thank-you for your obvious passion, respect and love for Ligeti's music, which I share with you, and for your desire to see accuracy and justice done to his name. I share that desire, too, with you entirely, as I do a respect for Cowell, Ives and the other great innovators of American music.

Yours Stephen Ferguson

www.amplify.at

posted by Jerry Bowles 6/13/2006