Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Fauré's Requiem re-examined: a study of the work's genesis, influences, and influence
(USC Thesis Other)
Fauré's Requiem re-examined: a study of the work's genesis, influences, and influence
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
FAURÉ’S REQUIEM RE-EXAMINED: A STUDY OF THE WORK’S GENESIS, INFLUENCES, AND INFLUENCE by Karen Cooksey A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE THORNTON SCHOOL OF MUSIC UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS (CHORAL MUSIC) May 2009 Copyright 2009 Karen Cooksey ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated in loving memory of my grandmothers Edna Lou Cooksey (1929-1995) and Chan Sun Kim (1922-2008). et lux perpetua luceat eis iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is the most recent and very incredible milestone of my journey with music. I owe much to the countless number of people who have helped me grow as a person and musician and to those who assisted me with the challenging process of writing this work. Throughout my doctoral studies, I received assistance from many members of the faculty and staff of the University of Southern California. I am very thankful to my dissertation committee: Dr. Magen Solomon, chair, for her constant attention to detail which certainly strengthened the end result; Dr. Nick Strimple, for his contextual insights and broad knowledge of the repertoire; and Dr. Bryan Simms, for his musicological perspective. I also would like to thank the department chairs whose tenure spanned my time at USC: Dr. William Dehning, Emeritus Professor of Choral Music, for his musical mentorship; and Dr. Jo-Michael Scheibe, Chair of the Department of Choral and Sacred Music. Thanks to Dr. Debora Huffman as my academic advisor. Thanks to Dr. Guilio Ongaro for guidance throughout my time at USC. Thanks to Prof. Larry Livingston, for his unflagging support and encouragement. I also appreciate the research information iv provided by Dr. Ladd Thomas, Chair of the Organ Department, and Marek Zebrowksi and Krysta Close of the USC Polish Music Center. I am very grateful to the staff of the USC Libraries, particularly the staff of the Music Library, the Edward L. Doheny Jr. Library, and the Interlibrary Loan Department, whose efforts to fulfill my numerous requests might best be described as Herculean. Thanks also to the Reprographic Department at the Bibliothèque nationale de France. Several people contributed to this study with their time and the information they included in their correspondence. Thanks to Robert Chase; Nathan Carter (layout for Figure 2.1); Korre Foster; Christopher Gravis; Jutta Tagger of the International Federation for Choral Music; Dr. Johannes Graulich, Hans Ryschawy, and Earl Rosenbaum of Carus Verlag; Stephen Bock of Fred Bock Music Company; Ella Winfield of G. Schirmer; Clinton Nieweg of the Major Orchestra Librarians’ Association; and Eleanor Dragonetti of The Sixteen. I consider myself very blessed to have wonderful, gifted, and generous friends (more than I could list here). Thanks to Ross Parker for his very beneficial review of my translations. Thanks to Linda Brown for her perspective as an organist and talented musician. Special thanks to Phillip Cheah, who, aside from being a close friend originating from our Indiana University days, serves as the Assistant Manager to the Choral and Performance Promotions Department for the Oxford University Press Music Department. Deepest thanks to Andrew Maz, who endeavored to assist in every possible way, particularly with the technology side of my work. Thanks to Michael Nowicki, for his enduring support and friendship, which began during our undergraduate studies at Butler University. v Undoubtedly, conducting Fauré’s Requiem for the first time in spring 2007 sparked the questions that led to this dissertation. I was very honored to share this experience with the very capable Chancel Choir of Red Hill Lutheran Church and my talented colleagues and friends there, Dr. Dennis Siebenaler, Organist, and James Martin Schaefer, Director of Liturgical Arts. Many of my USC schoolmates drove from Los Angeles to Orange County to participate, which is but one of many demonstrations of the support and generosity they have provided in my time here. I am very thankful to staff of the Los Angeles Opera, particularly Grant Gershon, Chorus Master, for supporting and understanding my “double” life as dissertation writer and Assistant Chorus Master. Special thanks to my mentor Dr. Eric Stark. You were a “freshman” faculty member in my freshman year at Butler University and for years have shown me what it is to be an invested, professional, and musical artist. Thank you for nurturing me and for our continued friendship. Finally, I extend the biggest “thank you” to my parents and sister—Kennon, Kim, and Kathy Cooksey. My parents have always been my models for working hard for one’s dreams and have worked hard for mine too. Kathy assisted with my figures (I wish I could have offered more tangible assistance with your astrophysics dissertation than my love and my strong faith in your abilities and dedication). I realize I have not named all those who have positively influenced me, or this study, but I remember you and am grateful. All errors found here are mine. All fruits to be gathered from this study are clearly the product of a community. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication ii Acknowledgments iii List of Tables ix List of Figures x Abbreviations xi Abstract xiv Preface xvi Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Fauré the neglected master 1 The Fauré Requiem 4 Scholarship Review 13 Biographical overview 19 The École Niedermeyer and First Period 22 The Second Period 27 The Third Period 29 A place for Fauré 30 Chapter 2 The Fauré “Requiems” 34 The Evolution of Fauré’s Requiem 34 The five-movement 1888 version and the “missing” movements 35 From sketches to manuscripts to performances 40 The 1893 (Chamber) and 1900 (Symphonic) versions 48 Requiem’s performing materials: past and present 50 The 1900/1901 Hamelle print and modern reprints 50 Errata, discrepancies, and the role of Roger-Ducasse 53 vii The “real” Fauré Requiem: the search for authenticity 60 Performing the 1888 version 63 Finding an authentic “middle” ground: the 1893 version 65 The viability of the 1900 version 75 Publishing and performing excerpts from Opus 48 78 Chapter 3 The co-existence of tradition and innovation in Opus 48 81 A singular Requiem 81 Two requiem “traditions”: liturgical and musical 85 The renewal of sacred music in nineteenth-century France 89 Fauré the church musician: the École and la Madeleine 92 The liturgy in France 94 A “Gallican” requiem: Fauré’s text choices 98 The absence of “Dies irae” 99 “Pie Jesu” and the missing “Benedictus” 101 “Libera me” and “In paradisum”: texts from the Office for the Dead 105 A requiem as a “museum piece” 109 Fauré’s religious views and their value in understanding Opus 48 122 Innovation with influence 130 Chapter 4 After Fauré’s Requiem 134 Fauré the progressive 134 Fauré’s influence within and beyond the walls of the Conservatoire 140 Professor of Composition 141 Director of the Conservatoire 143 Société Nationale de Musique and Société Musicale Indépendente 146 Editor and Critic 147 The influence of Opus 48 upon future requiem composers 150 Britten’s War Requiem 151 Twentieth-century French requiems by Duruflé and others 152 John Rutter, requiem editor and composer 157 The genre’s popularization: works by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Kurt Vonnegut 159 A Pie Jesu genre 160 Fauré’s legacy 161 Chapter 5 Conclusion 165 Fauré in the “long nineteenth century” 165 Opus 48 in the “long nineteenth century” and beyond 169 The evolution of the work 170 Opus 48 in context 172 Looking forward 175 Conservative and progressive 177 References 180 Scores of Requiem, op. 48 by Gabriel Fauré 180 viii Other scores 181 Recordings of Fauré’s Requiem 184 Other recordings 185 Dissertations and theses 186 Books 187 Articles and Shorter Works 193 Internet websites 200 Bibliography 202 Appendix 223 ix LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Fauré’s Three Periods as Outlined by Orledge and Nectoux 21 2.1 Evolution of the Orchestration of Requiem Movements by Performance 39 2.2 Primary and Secondary Sources of Fauré’s Requiem 41 2.3 1900/1901 Hamelle Print and Modern Reprints 54 2.4 Modern Performing Editions of Fauré’s Requiem 67 2.5 Excerpts from Fauré’s Requiem Published by Hamelle 80 3.1 Requiem’s Text Discrepancies from the Roman Rite 84 x LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 Evolution of the Movements of Fauré’s Requiem from Sketches to Performance 38 2.2 Page from the In Paradisum Manuscript (Source A4), mm. 42-45 45 2.3 Page from Introït et Kyrie Manuscript (Source A1), mm. 79-82 55 2.4 Final Page from In Paradisum Manuscript (Source A4), mm. 58-61 56 xi ABBREVIATIONS In citing works in the notes, short titles have generally been used. Works frequently cited have been identified by the following abbreviations: BnF Bibliothèque nationale de France c circa CAI Jane Fulcher. The Composer as Intellectual: Music and Ideology in France, 1914-1940. New York, 2005. Corr. Gabriel Fauré. Correspondance (1862-1920). Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Paris, 1980. CSS/GF Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré. Correspondance (1862-1920). Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Paris, 1994. DI Robert Chase. Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music. Lanham, MD, 2003. FCP Jane Fulcher. French Cultural Politics and Music: From the Dreyfus Affair to the First World War. New York, 1999. FFA Carlo Caballero. Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics. Cambridge, 2001. GF-LV Jean-Michel Nectoux. Gabriel Fauré: Les voix du clair-obscur. Paris, 1990. xii GF-ML Jean-Michel Nectoux. Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life. Translated by Roger Nichols. Cambridge, 1991. GMO Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online Li Gabriel Fauré. Lettres intimes. Edited by Philippe Fauré-Fremiet. Paris, 1951. JMN Jean-Michel Nectoux MS(S) manuscript(s) n.d. no date Orl. Robert Orledge, Gabriel Fauré. Rev. ed. London, 1983. rev. revised R-F/I Gabriel Fauré. Requiem, Op. 48. Edited by Roger Fiske and Paul Inwood. London, 1978. R-JMN1 Gabriel Fauré. Requiem, Op. 48 (Version 1893). Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux and Roger Delage. Paris, 2000. R-JMN2 Gabriel Fauré. Requiem, Op. 48 (Concert Version, 1900). Edited by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Paris, 1998. R-JMN/Z Gabriel Fauré. Messe de Requiem. Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux and Reiner Zimmermann. Frankfurt, 1995. R-JR Gabriel Fauré. Requiem, Op. 48 with Fauré’s original chamber instrumentation. Edited by John Rutter. Chapel Hill, NC, 1984. R-PL Gabriel Fauré. Requiem in D Minor, Opus 48 (1888/1893 Version). Edited by Philip Legge. Self-published, 2005. RF Tom Gordon, ed. and trans. Regarding Fauré. Amsterdam, 1999. xiii Solf.-1972 Jean-Michel Nectoux. Fauré. Solfèges. Paris, 1972. Solf.-1995 Jean-Michel Nectoux. Fauré. Solfèges. Rev. ed. Paris, 1995. Note on instrumentation: Abbreviations of instruments conform to those given in David Daniels, Orchestral Music: A Handbook, 4 th ed. (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2005), vii-xiii. Note on translations: Published translations have been used wherever possible. For quotations drawn from sources that have also been translated and published in their entirety, e.g. GF-LV and GF-ML, the page number(s) given in the citation denotes the page number(s) from the French source followed by the page number(s) from the English source in parentheses. xiv ABSTRACT Gabriel Fauré’s Requiem, op. 48 is the most famous work of his oeuvre and the most frequently performed French requiem. Although it has become a much beloved member of the canon of requiem settings, our understanding of this work has been often oversimplified by taking the 1900/1901 Hamelle publication of Requiem at face value and by our lack of knowledge of the influence Fauré’s church music background had upon the work. The first chapter lays the foundation for this study including a brief biography of the composer and a scholarship overview. Chapter 2 builds on the work of other scholars and outlines the evolution of the work from its sketches (dating as early as 1877) and early performances to the “official” premiere in 1900. It condenses information on major performing editions in one place, including reconstructions of a “Chamber” or “1893” version. Chapter 3 defines two requiem “traditions”—the conservative one within the church and the progressive one developing later in the concert hall. It discusses the co-existence of tradition and innovation within Opus 48, describing the influences of Fauré’s education and employment in church music and the influences of the growing canon of requiem settings upon his Requiem. Chapter 4 examines the influence of Fauré and his Requiem upon future composers. Although Fauré xv may not seem progressive today, his work opened the door for future composers, and his choice of texts for the Requiem in particular influenced future settings. The final chapter will summarize the major points of this study. xvi PREFACE Attempting to contribute new insights to such a familiar and highly regarded work as this one is a daunting challenge. This study results from a tenuous chain of opportunities that led me to re-examine what I thought about Fauré and his Requiem. In 2007, I conducted Requiem as the major part of an evening Lenten service at Red Hill Lutheran Church (Tustin, CA), where I served as Director of Music. (The performance also fulfilled my first doctoral recital requirement for the University of Southern California.) Years earlier, in 1999, I had obtained the full score of the 1984 Rutter edition “with Fauré’s original chamber instrumentation,” redeeming a gift certificate I received as a finalist of the American Choral Director’s Association Student Conducting Awards. (It was an exciting purchase: my second full score, following the Dover reprint of Brahms’s Requiem.) The church music library had the FitzSimons vocal scores, which had been used there for decades. For reasons of practicality and interest in authenticity, I chose to use the Rutter score and parts and the FitzSimons vocal scores, which appeared to be compatible (with the addition of measure numbers to the vocal scores). Early in the rehearsal process I began to notice discrepancies in the vocal lines, but these received no comment in Rutter’s score, which clearly disagreed with the xvii original full orchestra score (I had purchased the Dover reprint). Eventually, with the performance imminent, I made decisions on a case-by-case basis without necessarily a sound rationale. Regardless of the questions of authenticity, the result was powerful. I had asked all the choir members, including my colleagues from USC who joined us for this special occasion, to dedicate their performance to a loved one as I had, remembering my grandfather, Otis Eugene Cooksey (1908-2005); it was the first requiem I conducted. Fauré’s self-described “lullaby of death” [berceuse de la mort] provided an ideal setting for reflection and remembrance that night and easily proved itself a masterpiece capable of enduring our naturally imperfect performance buoyed by our best intentions. Fortunately, my curiosity and search for more answers did not end with that church service; I discovered the 1989 recording conducted by Herreweghe and the amazing research and editorial work of Jean-Michel Nectoux, who had crafted the chamber orchestra edition (published in 1994) Herreweghe used. Throughout the dissertation process, I have hesitated to answer the obvious and frequently posed question about the nature of my topic. What more can there be to say about Fauré’s Requiem? However, after a few sentences of explanation, I have been surprised that many choral aficionados are not aware of the work’s long gestation process, the three versions identified by scholars, and the existence of alternate performing editions; but I should not be surprised—I had also not known any of this until recently. I believe our ignorance is bred by our sense of familiarity. This work typically has been relegated to a category of choral masterworks more suited to church choirs and amateurs than academics or top-tier professionals. In the common comparison of Fauré’s xviii and Duruflé’s settings, I had considered the latter to be the uncharted territory, and this perception swayed me to perform a detailed study of that work for an undergraduate thesis (inspired by the recommendation of my then-conductor Henry Leck) and to barely open my Fauré score for years. In discovering the origins of this work, I also became interested in exploring its context. Quickly I learned that my concept of “requiem,” which was based in an understanding of a select collection of very unique works, was incomplete. Though they are masses for the dead, musical requiems are not necessarily treated as such and are celebrated for their art as much as for their perceived statements (whether intended or not) about the human condition. These famous requiem settings are so distinct from each other that it can be difficult to find the connections tying them together. Initially Berlioz’s grandiose Requiem was the only French setting that preceded Fauré’s of which I knew, but any comparison between them seems almost a classic “apples and oranges” situation. Many of these canonical requiems do not belong in a liturgical setting and are more inspired by a desire to contribute to a musical “museum.” However, Fauré’s Requiem, which successfully crosses over from its initial arena of the church into the concert hall, bears the influences of earlier sacred music. Understanding the work’s origins then requires a better understanding of French liturgical traditions and other requiem settings, especially those that did not join the canon, and facilitates an appreciation of the co- existence of tradition and innovation within Requiem. I also thought it important to trace the influence Fauré had upon music since 1900. I was surprised to discover the composer’s other musical occupations, particularly as Director of the renowned Conservatoire. Many of the educational reforms he instituted xix during his tenure may seem commonplace now, but they were controversial for their time. Though our perceptions may be colored by more recent advancements, Fauré was progressive, and the popularity of his Requiem introduced innovations to future composers. The one dissertation I could find on Fauré’s Requiem by an American choral conductor was written in 1980, years before the publication of the editions by Rutter and Nectoux and the discovery of additional sources. In the past three decades, the field has certainly been enriched by new editions, recordings, and literature. By collecting information about this work in one place, I hope to have built upon more recent scholarship and offered some new points to consider to performers of this work. I also hope to have smoothed the way for further research on this work and composer as there still is much fertile ground for exploration. 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Fauré the neglected master Gabriel Fauré’s life (1845-1924) encompassed the last half of the romantic nineteenth century and the beginning of the modern twentieth. Within his lifetime, the reception of his work was very mixed. His success in the salons and his interest in smaller forms caused some to underestimate his compositional abilities and hindered his being known to the general public. A variety of influences, including his lack of a traditional music education at the Paris Conservatoire, gave him an “outsider” status that moved some to consider him a radical. However, despite setbacks to his career, he was supported and promoted by ever-widening circles of former students, colleagues, and friends, which helped him achieve more recognition later in life. Today one is hard pressed to perceive Fauré as a modernist in light of musical developments since 1900 or even as a major player in music’s history. His reputation has been overshadowed by the achievements of fellow countrymen Hector Berlioz, whose music is renowned for its large scale and dramatic heft, and Claude Debussy, who, along 2 with Maurice Ravel, became identified with the evocative Impressionist movement. Fauré worked predominantly in miniature forms such as the solo song and short piano solo, and the prevalent descriptions of his compositions as “charming” and “restrained,” even if fitting, often diminish expectations of their value and need for closer readings. While the general public may admire Requiem, op. 48, many would be hard pressed to name another of his works. Casual appreciation for this masterpiece has not necessarily led to an understanding of the context of the work itself or to an awareness of the unique place Fauré occupied within the musical world of his day. Fauré and his music merit reexamination. From his lifetime to the present day, Gabriel Fauré has generally been overlooked as a serious composer (though vocalists may know some of his songs). Aaron Copland clearly felt compelled to promote Fauré in his article “Fauré, a Neglected Master,” published in October 1924, a month before Fauré’s death: The position of Gabriel Fauré in the contemporary musical movement is, in several respects, curious and unique. Perhaps no other composer has ever been so generally ignored outside his own country, while at the same time enjoying an unquestionably eminent reputation at home. It is no exaggeration to say that in France, the enlightened musical public considers him their greatest living composer… Yet, in America, and one might add, in all other countries except France, his work is practically unknown. Certainly such a situation can be justly termed “curious.” … For many, many years he was the center of a small admiring group which has gradually widened so as to include all Parisian concert-going circles. It is this fact which makes one hopeful that what was true of Paris may be true of the world at large. And the world at large has particular need of Gabriel Fauré to-day; need of his calm, his naturalness, his restraint, his optimism; need, above all, of the musician and his great art: 3 “Là, où tout n’est qu’ordre et beauté, Luxe, calme, et volupté.” (italics mine) 1 On the surface, Copland would seem an unlikely advocate for Fauré, yet this article is a potent demonstration of Fauré’s wide-ranging influence. Fauré taught composition to Nadia Boulanger at the Conservatoire. A devoted pupil, Boulanger, in turn, taught composition to Copland from 1921 to 1924; and her admiration along with his immersion in Paris for those years likely fueled his regard of Fauré. This article, written by an American composer and published in a British magazine, demonstrates the broadening of Fauré’s influence, encouraged by a passionate group of close friends and disciples. The recent revitalization of Fauré scholarship facilitates an inspection of long held beliefs about Fauré and, for the purposes of this study, his Requiem. In many ways Copland’s article is still relevant today; in it he called for acknowledgement of Fauré’s originality apart from the Impressionists: Undoubtedly, a more serious reason for Fauré’s neglect lies in the peculiar nature of his slow development, which made of him a lesser figure until he had passed the half-century mark. People naturally look to the younger men to break new paths. When a composer has reached the age of fifty without having produced anything of prime importance, he is generally safely shelved. In 1895 Fauré was fifty, and—as everyone thought—“safely shelved.” All those creations which date from before 1895—even such individual works as “La Bonne Chanson” or the “Requiem”—were passed over in silence at the time of their publication even in France, due to the fact that Faure's originality was never one of the obtrusive sort. 2 Only now do they take on a great importance in the light of his later work. Who could have foreseen that in the twenty-five years which followed (from, that is, 1898 to 1923) Fauré would most truly find himself? Yet it was in just that 1 Aaron Copland, “Gabriel Fauré, a Neglected Master,” The Musical Quarterly 10 (October 1924): 573, 586. Copland quotes Charles Baudelaire’s L’invitation au voyage—“There, where all is nothing but order and beauty | luxury, calm, and pleasure.” (my translation) 2 By locating Fauré’s Requiem among works written before 1895, Copland reveals an awareness of earlier versions of the work. 4 interval that the music critics, particularly those outside of France, were most beautifully unaware of his very existence. The explanation is simple. The older critics thought they had Fauré nicely pigeon-holed as a composer of a sort of super-salon music, and the younger ones, naturally enough, were all taken up with the utterly new manner and startling innovations of Debussy and his followers. But now that the clouds and mists of Impressionism have cleared away, now that no one dreams of denying the towering genius of Debussy, it is time to give Fauré his rightful place in contemporary music. France has already done so, and sooner or later, other nations, we believe, will do likewise… (italics mine) 3 Copland might also have been paving the way for himself, as a composer who was not overtly modern and whose style perhaps lends itself more to being appreciated within his own country than without. For whatever reason, Copland clearly wanted to establish that Fauré possessed an original voice, one worthy of worldwide recognition. The Fauré Requiem Without doubt, Requiem, op. 48, is the most well known work in Fauré’s oeuvre. After an evolutionary process lasting more than two decades, the version of Opus 48 intended for publication received its official premiere in 1900 and has been frequently performed ever since. It is generally characterized as a consoling work with a very approachable musical style and continues to be popular today. Requiem regularly appears in concerts; its movements are often excerpted, particularly for church services and funerals; it has been recorded many times, starting as early as 1931; and many performing ensembles adopt it for their purposes whether they are amateur or professional, sacred or secular, academic or community-based. 4 3 Copland, 574. 4 Gustave Bret conducted the first complete recording for the Gramophone Company in April 1931. Jean-Michel Nectoux, Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life, translated by Roger Nichols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 587 n. 10 (hereafter cited as GF-ML). For a 5 Even with this recognition, however, the work has often been misread. The simplicity initially perceived on the surface level has led some to conclude the work and its genesis are similarly simple. In fact, this work has a very intricate history, one that prompts many questions about both the quality of the publication and the composer’s intentions. Like the neglect of Fauré the composer observed by Copland, there has also been a neglect of his Requiem despite its popularity. A lack of appreciation for the work’s complexity has led to the perpetuation of often-unsubstantiated ideas about Requiem, ideas that warrant closer scrutiny. In several significant ways, Opus 48 differs from its famous precursors. Many writers have suggested that Fauré’s personal religious views account for his treatment of its texts: their selection and organization as well as the manner in which he set them. Though Fauré had a long career as a church musician and composed sacred music, his personal writings indeed suggest his religious views were not consistent with a strict interpretation of Catholicism. The sequence “Dies irae,” which is typical of most requiem settings and known for its descriptions of judgment and damnation, does not appear in this work. Of all textual concerns, this omission receives the greatest comment, and writers present it as evidence of the composer’s rejection of traditional Catholic views of death and the afterlife as well as his personalization and humanization of death and consolation. However, several of these textual alterations have precedent in the French Catholic Church. Of the many requiems ever written, a few have entered the canon while discography of Requiem recordings from 1900 to 1977, see Jean-Michel Nectoux, Phonographies Gabriel Fauré 1900-1977 (Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1979), 187-194, 240-241. 6 many have not. This point seems obvious, but it is an essential one to account for the seeming lack of precedent to Fauré’s Requiem. The work appears to have no precursors only because we are not familiar with most requiem settings. In naming French requiems, the settings of Berlioz and Fauré easily come to mind; those of Duruflé and Cherubini 5 may come next; but further settings, many of which were intended for practical use within funeral services, tend to be unknown, especially outside of France. With his education in church music and older music, Fauré would have understood the alternatives available within the local liturgical practice. From its earliest hearings to its use in his own funeral, Requiem would be used in church services without receiving criticism of its liturgical appropriateness. It is also important to differentiate functional church music from canonical sacred music. As music evolved to include polyphony, more sophisticated instruments and techniques, and ever expanding performing ensembles, this second kind of music became more interesting for composers to write while also being rejected at times by church purists. In the nineteenth century, many requiems that entered the canon were celebrated for their grandiose gestures and spectacular effects. Even if they were performed as a 5 While Italian-born, Luigi Cherubini lived in France for most of his career. Both of Cherubini’s requiem settings, Requiem in C Minor (1816) and Requiem in D Minor (1836), were intended for use in memorials and masses in France. Between the two, his first requiem is the more well known, and Beethoven purportedly stated he would have used it as model had he written a requiem himself (according to Chase, the work was performed at Beethoven’s funeral; DI, 192). In 1834, the work was rejected for use in the funeral of composer François-Adrien Boieldieu (1775-1834) by the Archbishop of Paris as it employed women’s voices, prohibited at the time. Cherubini then composed a second requiem with only men’s voices two years later. Michael Fend, “Cherubini, Luigi,” in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online (hereafter cited as GMO); and Robert Chase, Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2003), 191-194 (hereafter cited as DI). For further discussion of Cherubini’s church music, particularly his first requiem setting, see Gary Gerber, “A Conductor’s Analysis of the Sacred Choral Music of Luigi Cherubini” (doctoral diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary), 1993. 7 memorial inside a church building, they had outgrown the confines of a church service. This musical tradition progressed on the desire of composers to contribute to the canon. Fauré’s Requiem is unique in that it holds a place in both traditions. Though he drew upon his understanding of church music tradition to create a liturgically functional work, he had a strong interest in writing something original, and, in this desire to be different, he composed a work for the canon. This unassuming work stands apart from the typical nineteenth-century canonical requiems, and consequently it has generally been ignored as a work worthy of serious examination. In the “Requiem Mass” article in Grove Music Online, Basil Smallman claims that the Berlioz and Verdi requiems are the most important of the century: The two most important and still frequently performed requiem settings from the 19th century, Berlioz’s Grande messe des morts (1837) and Verdi’s Messa da Requiem (1874, in memory of Alessandro Manzoni), clearly overstep liturgical bounds, Berlioz’s by the grand scale of its forces, Verdi’s by its rearrangement of the text. In both works the sequence (no doubt more with theatrical than with theological intent) provides a memento mori of chilling intensity; solace is also evident in keenly felt music for the more meditative texts, notably the Sanctus in Berlioz’s and the Agnus Dei in Verdi’s. 6 Smallman draws attention to the Sequence of both works; characteristically, he treats a requiem’s setting of the “Dies irae” as the composer’s signature on the work. His comments regarding the text of Verdi’s Requiem are particularly debatable since Fauré’s setting clearly possesses more “rearrangements” of the traditional text than Verdi’s. 7 By adding the responsory “Libera me” to his setting, Verdi did make famous the inclusion of a text from the Office for the Dead in a Mass for the Dead. However, in addition to more 6 Basil Smallman, “Requiem Mass: 3. 1600 to 1900,” in GMO. 7 Of course by setting selections from the Lutheran Bible in his Ein deutsches Requiem (1868), Johannes Brahms would surpass any of these other nineteenth-century requiems in textual rearrangements. 8 subtle text changes, Fauré included two texts from the Office, “Libera me” and “In paradisum” in his setting. Fauré’s Requiem, as it has no Dies irae movement, as it lacks Berlioz’s “grand scale,” and, in this case, as its textual “rearrangements” are not acknowledged, is mentioned only after descriptions of the less successful requiems of French composers Louis Théodore Gouvy and Alfred Bruneau: “both large-scale and technically accomplished, but insufficiently characterful to have survived the repertory.” 8 In light of these pieces, Smallman characterizes Fauré’s setting as restrained and backward-looking: “[a]ltogether more refined in style” with “imprints of the composer’s early training in plainchant and 16 th -century polyphony.” 9 The work’s influence upon later composers merits more recognition than offered here. Though there were precursors to some of Requiem’s textual alterations, this setting inspired others to incorporate these alterations and introduce more in later settings. The consoling requiem contrasted those engineered to trigger awe and opened the door to similar settings. In light of these factors, Fauré’s Requiem has a more complex and nuanced place in the genre than has been typically acknowledged. Chapter 2 of this study will build upon recent research and examine primary and secondary sources to outline the problematic genesis of Requiem, which began with a draft of Libera me written in 1877 and concluded with the publication of a revised vocal score in 1901. John Rutter’s efforts to reconsider this staple of the repertoire culminated in his 1984 edition of Fauré’s Requiem “with Fauré’s original chamber 8 Smallman, unnumbered. 9 Ibid. 9 instrumentation.” 10 In its preface, he noted a prevailing ignorance of both the work’s convoluted history and the many questions surrounding the performing materials published in 1900/1901: Rather few of the countless performers and listeners who have taken Fauré’s Requiem to their hearts can be aware of the long and complex history of its composition; probably still fewer know that the published version with full orchestra is far removed from Fauré’s original, more intimate concept of the work, and was very possibly not even prepared by Fauré. 11 At the time of the work’s first hearing in January 1888, Requiem consisted of five movements—Introït et Kyrie, Sanctus, Pie Jesu, Agnus Dei, and In paradisum—and employed a soprano soloist, mixed chorus, harp, timpani, organ, a solo violin, divided viola and cello sections, and contrabasses. For the official premiere in July 1900, it had been expanded to the seven movements known today (adding Offertoire and Libera me) and required a much larger ensemble: soprano and bass soloists, mixed chorus, pairs of flutes, clarinets, and bassoons, four horns, two trumpets, and three trombones, timpani, harp, and organ, and a full string orchestra (with a single violin section). 10 Gabriel Fauré, Requiem, Op. 48 with Fauré’s original chamber instrumentation, edited by John Rutter (Chapel Hill, NC: Hinshaw Music, 1984) (hereafter cited as R-JR). Though Rutter is known primarily as a composer, as he explains, “Editing is another string to my bow. I was a trained as a paleographer at Cambridge, and in recent years I’ve taken to doing this more and more.” James Reel, “A Conversation with John Rutter,” Fanfare 22/2 (November-December 1998): 135. 11 Rutter, preface to R-JR, unnumbered. 10 In between these landmark hearings, the work received several additional performances and was changed in stages. From this evolutionary process, modern scholars have isolated three different Requiem versions that are identified by year and/or size: 1888—the five-movement version; 1893, the “Church” or “Chamber Orchestra” version—a seven-movement version with an orchestration smaller than the published version; and 1900, the “Concert” or “Symphonic/Full Orchestra” version—the seven- movement version with the more standard orchestration, solidified by the publication of performing materials by Julian Hamelle in 1900 and 1901. The original edition of the 1900 version has been reprinted many times, and since the middle of the twentieth century, new performing editions have also been published. To those acquainted with the seven-movement Requiem, the five-movement 1888 version is less attractive, but recently there has been a large amount of interest in the intermediate version. Scholars typically offer three reasons for preferring the 1893 version: the “Chamber Orchestra” version has all seven movements; with its more modest resources, it is perceived to better suit the restrained atmosphere Fauré wanted; and due to questions regarding the quality and origins of the 1900 version score, it is uncertain that Fauré actually wrote the published score. John Rutter’s edition of the 1893 version has become the most widely known. As recently as 2005, one primer for beginning choral conductors asserted, “In my opinion, 11 Rutter’s edition of the Fauré Requiem is the best one available today…” 12 Unfortunately, most of the great body of Fauré scholarship (an overview is located later in this chapter), which both precedes and follows Rutter’s work, has by and large not reached conductors, performers, and consequently audiences today. The opinion of Fauré held by some of his contemporaries, as too modern to be admitted into their country’s most prestigious musical institutions, may surprise us. Our appreciation of the innovations he introduced with his compositions, particularly in harmony and form, tends to be overwhelmed by the emphasis on the developments in later works by his successors. Identifying the context for Fauré’s works would enhance our understanding of their relevance and contributions to the repertoire. Chapters 3 and 4 locate Requiem on a continuum. Chapter 3 will examine the influence of earlier requiem settings upon Opus 48, and Chapter 4 examines Fauré’s influence on the musical world after the premiere of this work in 1900. As indicated earlier, often the originality of Requiem has been attributed to its lack of forebears with similar traits. For example, when asked to discuss the influence of Fauré’s setting upon his own Requiem, John Rutter stated: …I think his work was profoundly original as a matter of fact, and mine can’t be by definition, because it owes so much to his and to others. We tend to take the Fauré Requiem for granted, but how many requiems can you think of before 1888, that were written just the way that his was. [sic] 13 12 Bruce Chamberlain, Matthew W. Mehaffey, and Anthony Reeves, “Masterwork: Requiem, Op. 48 by Gabriel Fauré,” in Teaching Music through Performance in Choir: Volume 1, edited by Heather J. Buchanan and Matthew W. Mehaffey (Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc., 2005), 508. 13 John Rutter, interview by Marvin L. Crawford, in Marvin L. Crawford, “The Requiem Settings of Gabriel Fauré and John Rutter: Comparisons and Influences” (master’s thesis, Boise State University, 1993), 72. 12 Rutter’s recognition of Fauré’s originality does raise an aesthetic quandary. It is next to impossible to find a work without precedent, and yet works are still considered original (albeit not always universally). Therefore, identification of outside influences should not necessarily suggest a lack of originality. Rather originality should be determined by the manner and extent to which one has made a work distinct from one’s predecessors. This requires an understanding of a work’s environment. Chapter 3 finds a context for Fauré’s setting among earlier requiems. It is first important to understand the history of the French Catholic Church and its departures from strict observance of Roman liturgy, broadly known as Gallicanism. While many contemporary requiems are not widely available for examination today, examples do exist to demonstrate the alternatives presented in “Gallican” requiems. However, it was the spectacular requiems being performed in France that shaped the French musical world’s expectations. Both kinds of requiems, those intended for use in the French Church and the musically avant-garde ones that joined the canon, influenced Fauré either subtly, through his immersion from continuous exposure to the liturgical music during his education and church career, or overtly, even if by avoiding them as models. Though Fauré tends not to be perceived as progressive, Chapter 4 looks at Fauré’s influence upon the future of music particularly in his roles as Professor of Composition and Director of the Paris Conservatoire. As a new member of the requiem canon, Opus 48 also exerts a powerful influence upon future requiem composers, and this chapter will cite examples. 13 Scholarship Review As might be expected, the number of primary and secondary sources about this composer and his celebrated work can be overwhelming; a few of the most important deserve mention here. Any modern researcher of Gabriel Fauré must acknowledge the invaluable work of Jean-Michel Nectoux, of greatest importance to this study are: his biographies, compilations of Fauré’s correspondence, and two performing editions of Opus 48. 14 Though Nectoux published his first Fauré biography as early as 1972, his tome Gabriel Fauré: Les voix du clair-obscur and Roger Nichol’s English translation Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life, which appeared in 1990 and 1991 respectively, provide a wealth of insights into Fauré’s personal life and quotations from primary sources. 15 To celebrate the centenary of Requiem’s premiere, Mutien-Omer Houziaux published his extraordinarily useful À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré ou l’Authenticité Musicale en Questions. 16 This book, which also features an extensive preface by Nectoux, lays out the different “Requiems” of Gabriel Fauré and includes many detailed charts and timelines as well as comparative musical examples. Of the primary source material of Requiem, the extant sketches, manuscripts, and original Hamelle print are discussed in Chapter 2. For Fauré’s correspondence, this study primarily used four sources: Lettres intimes, a collection of letters between Fauré and his 14 Nectoux is also the author of the article on Fauré in GMO. 15 Jean-Michel Nectoux, Fauré, Solfèges (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1972) (hereafter cited as Solf.-1972). Jean-Michel Nectoux, Gabriel Fauré: Les voix du clair-obscur (Paris: Flammarion, 1990) (hereafter cited as GF-LV). Translated by Roger Nichols under the title Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991) (hereafter cited as GF-ML). 16 Mutien-Omer Houziaux, À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré ou l’Authenticité Musicale en Questions (Liège: Société Liégeoise de Musicologie, 2000). 14 wife compiled by his son, and three sources written/edited by Nectoux—Voix/Musical Life, Correspondance, and a selection of letters included in Nectoux’s preface to Houziaux’s À la recherche. 17 A selection of Fauré’s reviews, first published in Le Figaro, were later reprinted in Opinions musicales. 18 Selected contemporary accounts of the composer will be included in related discussions later in this study. In recent decades, Fauré scholarship has experienced a major revival. Along with Nectoux’s work, Edward R. Phillips’s Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research 19 (2000) is an indispensable resource; it includes information on the composer’s musical and literary works and descriptions of primary and secondary sources. Two collections of essays appeared as a result of conferences at the end of the twentieth century: Regarding Fauré (1999), from a sesquicentennial conference entitled “Gabriel Fauré: His Poets and His Critics,” and Gabriel Fauré: Werk und Rezeption (1996), the first comprehensive examination of Fauré’s life, work, and reception in German. 20 While there are many other biographies, the ones most worth noting here are: the first hand accounts by his son Philippe Fauré-Fremiet and his students Charles Kœchlin, Fauré’s first biographer, and Émile Vuillermoz; the first English Fauré biography by Norman Suckling; and the detailed musical study of Robert Orledge, which also includes 17 Gabriel Fauré, Lettres intimes, edited by Philippe Fauré-Fremiet (Paris: La Colombe, 1951) (hereafter cited as Li); Gabriel Fauré, Correspondance, edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux (Paris: Flammarion, 1980) (hereafter cited as Corr.); and Houziaux, xvi-xxiii. Translations of a selection of Fauré’s letters also appear in Gabriel Fauré: A Life in Letters, translated and edited by J. Barrie Jones (London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1988). 18 Gabriel Fauré, Opinions musicales (Paris: Éditions Rieder, 1930). 19 Edward R. Phillips, Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research (New York: Garland Publishing, 2000). 20 Tom Gordon, ed. and trans., Regarding Fauré (Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Publishers, 1999) (hereafter cited as RF); Peter Jost, ed., Gabriel Fauré, Werk und Rezeption: mit Werkverzeichnis und Bibliographie (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996). 15 a biographical sketch. 21 While not strictly a biographer, the work of theorist/philosopher Vladimir Jankélévitch is also an important source. 22 More recently Carlo Caballero has explored aesthetic questions raised by Fauré’s music. His dissertation was later developed into his book Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics in 2001. 23 The book includes one of the few discussions of the differences between contemporary French liturgical tradition and that prescribed by Rome, and the influence of these differences upon Opus 48. Caballero explores in great detail the significance of terms such as “sincerity,” “innovation,” and “originality” in nineteenth- century France. His chapter for Regarding Fauré discusses Fauré’s religious views in some detail. 24 In terms of the requiem genre itself, the two most comprehensive studies available in the English language are Alec Robertson’s Requiem: Music of Mourning and 21 Philippe Fauré-Fremiet, Gabriel Fauré (Paris: les Éditions Rieder, 1929, revised and expanded edition, Paris: Albin Michel, 1957); Charles Kœchlin, Gabriel Fauré (Paris: F. Alcan, 1927, revised edition, Paris: Plon, 1949), translated by Leslie Orrey under the title Gabriel Fauré (London: Dennis Dobson Limited, 1946); Émile Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Flammarion, 1960), translated by Kenneth Schapin under the title Gabriel Fauré (Philadelphia: Chilton Book Company, 1969); Norman Suckling, Fauré (London: J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd., 1951); and Robert Orledge, Gabriel Fauré (London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1979, revised edition, London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1983) (hereafter cited as Orl.). According to Suckling, “To the best of my knowledge this [his biography] is the first full-length study of Gabriel Fauré to be written in English.” Suckling, 1. 22 Nectoux dedicates GF-LV to the memory of Jankélévitch. Vladimir Jankélévitch, Gabriel Fauré et ses melodies (Paris: Librairie Plon, 1938; second and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré: ses melodies et son esthétique, Paris: Librairie Plon, 1951; third and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré et l’inexprimable, Paris: Librairie Plon, 1974). 23 Carlo Caballero, “Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1996); and Carlo Caballero, Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001) (hereafter cited as FMA). 24 Carlo Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF. 16 Consolation and Robert Chase’s Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music. 25 Originally published in 1968, Robertson’s book is perhaps too dated to be of much use, but it does discuss in some detail the major contributions to the canon through Duruflé’s 1947 setting. Chase presents a survey of hundreds of works including information on published editions, recordings, movements (and texts), and basic background. Like Caballero, he also identifies traditional elements of the French liturgy as distinct from Roman use, which is very relevant to this study. Three dissertations specifically explore Fauré’s requiem setting: Earl Scott, Jr.’s “The Requiem by Gabriel Fauré: A Conductor’s Analysis for Performance,” Jane Snyder’s “Ritual and Drama in the Nineteenth-Century French Requiem,” and Charles Joseph Matonti’s “Discovering Principles for the Composition and Use of Contemporary Liturgical Music through the Study of Selected Requiem Masses.” 26 Scott’s study is a substantial overview of the work and includes chapters on the requiem genre, Fauré’s reception, background on Opus 48, and a thorough structural/harmonic analysis of the work movement-by-movement. More sources have become available since the nearly three decades from the time when this dissertation was written, particularly primary sources and new performing editions (especially editions of the 1893 or “Chamber 25 Alec Robertson, Requiem: Music of Mourning and Consolation (New York: Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1968, reprint, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1976); and Robert Chase, Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2003) (hereafter cited as DI). Chase has also recently written a book focused on modern memorial music. Robert Chase, Memento Mori: A Guide to Contemporary Memorial Music (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007). 26 Earl K. Scott, Jr., “The Requiem by Gabriel Fauré: A Conductor’s Analysis for Performance” (Doctoral diss., Indiana University, 1980); Jane Snyder, “Ritual and Drama in the Nineteenth- Century French Requiem” (Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 2005); and Rev. Charles Joseph Matonti, “Discovering Principles for the Composition and Use of Contemporary Liturgical Music through the Study of Selected Requiem Masses” (Ed.D. diss., Columbia University, 1972). 17 Orchestra” version like Rutter’s). 27 Snyder selects the Berlioz and Fauré Requiems as “the major monuments of religious music in this period [the nineteenth century]”—polar opposites but yet “the two nineteenth-century French requiem masses to have achieved canonical status.” 28 She specifically explores the introduction of secular and principally dramatic elements into the church with a strong emphasis on the role of music criticism. Matonti contextualizes requiems within their geographical and chronological context in order to discover principles for “contemporary liturgical music” (meaning liturgical music suited to the modern era rather than contemporary Christian music). He devotes separate chapters to nine requiems including “The Requiem Mass (1887) of Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924) and Its Relevance to Early Nineteenth Century France.” Written in 1972, this study predates the modern research on Fauré and Requiem, which would update some of the ideas presented here. William Hall’s dissertation on the requiem genre is limited to four settings: Gilles, Mozart, Verdi, and Britten. 29 In his dissertation, Harold Luce explores the origins of the requiem through 1600 and includes a second volume of his own editions of select settings. 30 Ursula Adamski-Störmer’s dissertation concentrates on nineteenth-century 27 For a detailed list of Scott’s sources, see Appendix III “Source material used in this study,” in Scott, 176-183. 28 Snyder, v, 191. 29 William Dawson Hall, “The Requiem Mass: A Study of Performance Practices from the Baroque Era to the Present Day as Related to Four Requiem Settings by Gilles, Mozart, Verdi, and Britten” (doctoral diss., University of Southern California, 1970). 30 Harold T. Luce, “The Requiem Mass from Its Plainsong Beginnings to 1600” (Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, 1958). 18 Requiems but largely focuses on Germanic works. 31 With its focus on the twentieth century requiem, Susan Chaffins Kovalenko’s dissertation traces the secularization of the genre and concentrates on nine large-scale non-liturgical memorial works written since World War I; Fauré’s Requiem is only mentioned as an example of a liturgical requiem. 32 Other dissertations germane to this study are James Kidd’s study of the influence of Fauré’s education at the École Niedermeyer upon the composer’s future writings, Gail Hilson Woldu’s research on Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire, and Françoise Gervais’s comparative study of the harmonic languages of Fauré and Debussy. 33 Marvin Crawford’s thesis is of particular interest for its transcription of John Rutter answering questions regarding Fauré’s Requiem and its influence upon Rutter’s Requiem (1986). 34 Robert Huntington’s article “The ‘Real’ Fauré Requiem? The search continues” provides a quick overview of question’s regarding the work’s authenticity. 35 31 Ursula Adamski-Störmer, “Requiem aeternam: Tod und Trauer im 19. Jahrhundert im Spiegel einer musikalischen Gattung” (diss., Münster University, 1991, reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1991). 32 Susan Chaffins Kovalenko, “The Twentieth Century Requiem: An Emerging Concept” (Ph.D. diss., Washington University, 1971). 33 James C. Kidd, “Louis Niedermeyer’s System for Gregorian Chant Accompaniment as a Compositional Source for Gabriel Fauré” (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1974); Gail Hilson Woldu, “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905-1920” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983); and Françoise Gervais, “Étude Comparée des Langages harmoniques de Fauré et Debussy” (diss., Sorbonne, 1954, reprint in la Revue Musicale 272-273 (1971): 3-152, 7-131). 34 Marvin L. Crawford, “The Requiem Settings of Gabriel Fauré and John Rutter: Comparisons and Influences” (master’s thesis, Boise State University, 1993). 35 Robert R. Huntington, “The ‘Real’ Fauré Requiem? The Search Continues,” Choral Journal 37/3 (October 1996): 9-15. 19 Biographical overview 36 Though, according to Jean-Michel Nectoux, “…[Fauré] always tried to keep his work and his life wholly distinct,” historical-cultural events at this time and the personal events of his life certainly influenced Fauré’s music making. 37 Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924) lived in unstable times; his world was shaped by the Revolutions of 1789 (French Revolution), 1830 (July Revolution), and 1848 (February Revolution); he lived through the Franco-Prussian War (The War of 1870), in which he served, and World War I (1914- 1918). Following the Age of Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, new cultural movements appeared to create an era of many “ism”s—Romanticism, Realism, Impressionism, Symbolism, and Exoticism. Fauré was a versatile musician who worked as a composer, pianist/accompanist, church musician/organist, conductor, music critic, and teacher/academic administrator at different periods of his lifetime. His oeuvre consists of: Solo songs—over 100 chansons including the song cycles La bonne chanson, La chanson d’Eve, and Le jardin clos; Choral music—including two masses (Messe basse and Requiem), motets, and sacred and secular partsongs; Stage works—including his tragédie lyrique Promethée and incidental music to plays such as Shylock and Pelléas et Mélisande; 36 Extensive biographical information can be found in Orl. and GF-ML. For a chronology of the events in Fauré’s life, see GF-ML, 501-524; Jost, Werk, 12-20; and Vuillermoz, Fauré, ix-xiv. For a chronology of the nineteenth century, see Jim Samson, ed., The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-Century Music (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 621-658. 37 GF-ML, 88. 20 Numerous chamber and solo piano works; and Orchestral works—many of which are derived from his earlier works and became more known in the later version (such as suites of his aforementioned incidental music) and two symphonies. 38 As with most composers, his work has generally been divided into three periods that are based on changes in his life and musical style. 39 Table 1.1 shows the divisions outlined by Fauré scholars Robert Orledge (who includes sub-periods in his system) and Jean-Michel Nectoux (who offers strongly-worded descriptions of these periods with relevant musical compositions). Gabriel-Urbain Fauré was born on May 12, 1845 in Pamiers (located about 465 miles south of Paris), the sixth, and unexpected, child of Toussaint-Honoré Fauré (1810- 1885) and Marie-Antoinette Hélène de Lalène-Laprade (1809-1887). They named him after his paternal grandfather and a maternal uncle. As typical for the time and as was the practice for all of his siblings, Gabriel Fauré was sent to a wet nurse in Verniolle a few miles away for the first four years of his life and was returned to his family when they relocated to Montgauzy in 1849 for Toussaint’s career in education. The school building there had been built on the ruins of an old convent, and the harmonium in the neighboring chapel drew young Fauré’s interest. He learned to improvise and later recalled receiving basic musical instruction from “an old blind lady.” 40 When he returned to his nurse for 38 Unfortunately the symphonies do not exist in their original forms today. 39 Jankélévitch was one of the first to use the three-period system. He published his divisions— “Avant 1890,” 1890-1905, and 1906-1924—in 1938. See Jankélévitch, Ses Mélodies, 347-348. 40 GF-ML, 4. 21 summers, he spent much time at the church with the local curé, and it was supposed that Gabriel might become a priest. Table 1.1 Fauré’s Three Periods as Outlined by Orledge and Nectoux Period Orledge Nectoux I 1860-1885 1861-1865, “École Niedermeyer” 1866-1870, “Rennes” 1870-1885, “The rest” 1860-1886 “his search for a style and the absorption of his Romantic inheritance (‘L’Absent’, ‘Chanson du pêcheurs’, Élegie)” II 1885-1906, “Maturity” 1886-1905 “a period of maturation… chromaticism and experiments in counterpoint and harmony which were sometimes overdone (Seventh Nocturne, La bonne Chanson, the Prélude to Pelléas et Mélisande)” III 1906-1924 1906-1914 1915-1918 1919-1924 1906-24 “radical self-renewal, involving a lightening of instrumental textures, a stiffening of melodic lines and a still greater harmonic audacity resulting from a more consistent emphasis on counterpoint.” Sources: Orl., v-vi; GF-ML, 294-295. However, his musical talent did not go unnoticed. When Fauré was eight, his father asked him to play at the keyboard to entertain a distinguished houseguest, the higher-ranking civil servant Simon-Lucien Dufaur de Saubiac. The visitor recommended that Gabriel attend a new school for religious music directed by Louis Niedermeyer 22 (1802-1861), but his pragmatic father was reluctant to allow his son to become a musician. As recounted by Fauré in 1922: My father was surprised to discover my leanings towards music as there was no musician in my family. My talent showed itself before I was ten, and at such an early stage no one worried about any possible effect on my future. A little later on there were perhaps doubts about my adopting music as a career. Anyway my father was undecided—I was the sixth child in the family and he couldn’t afford to take risks. 41 Toussaint considered the proposition for a year, and finally the offer of a three-quarters boarding scholarship swayed him to send his son there in 1854; Fauré was nine. The École Niedermeyer and First Period Niedermeyer founded this school, the Conservatoire royal de musique classique de France [French royal conservatory of classical music], in 1853. Later it would become better known as the École Niedermeyer to distinguish it from the more famous Conservatoire de Paris, and it specialized in the instruction of sacred music. The fact that Fauré did not attend the famed Paris Conservatoire may have had some negative consequences to garnering recognition in certain musical circles, but in retrospect, the École provided many opportunities that shaped his career. When Niedermeyer died unexpectedly on March 14, 1861, Louis Dietsch became the school’s director, and Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-1921) the new piano instructor. 42 41 “Mon père… fut surpris de me voir des dispositions pour la musique, car il n’y avait pas de musiciens dans ma famille. Comme ce don se révéla avant que j’aie atteint l’âge de dix ans, on ne s’inquiéta pas de l’influence qu’il pourrait avoir sur mon avenir. Un peu plus tard, on estima peut- être que cet art ne pouvait se developer en carrière; mon pére, en tout cas, hésitait. J’étais le sixième enfant de la famille et son devoir était de se montrer prudent.” Roger Valbelle, “Entretien avec M. Gabriel Fauré,” Association des amis de Gabriel Fauré: Bulletin 12 (1975): 9. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 4. 42 Fauré had studied piano with Niedermeyer and organ with Xavier Wackenthaler and Clément Loret, excelling at the former and receiving only passing grades at the latter. Saint-Saëns would 23 Saint-Saëns became a pivotal influence and Fauré’s mentor for life; this established composer not only introduced him to modern music (forbidden by the conservative Niedermeyer) but, later, to influential families and composers. 43 For example, with introduction by Saint-Saëns, Fauré entered the salon of opera singer and composer Pauline Viardot in 1872 and made his first of many visits to the wealthy Clerc family in the summer of 1873. 44 Later, in December 1887, he accompanied Saint-Saëns to Germany, for his first visit to that country and his first meeting with Franz Liszt. Fauré’s compositions from his time at the École include his first setting of a Victor Hugo poem, “Le Papillon et la fleur,” op. 1, no. 1 (1861) and the prize-winning sacred work for chorus, Cantique de Jean Racine, op. 11 (1865). 45 He completed his schooling in July 1865 at the age of twenty. In January of the following year he left Paris for Rennes, the capital of Brittany to begin his career in sacred music as the organist at St-Sauveur. He languished in this later write that, although Fauré favored the piano (enjoying the works of Schumann), he was “a first-class organist when he wanted to be” but instead preferred to improvise. [quand il le veut, un organiste de premier ordre] Saint-Saëns, “Les Hommes du jour. Gabriel Fauré,” L’Éclair, 23 January 1893, 2. Quoted in GF-LV, 66 (41). Fauré never wrote an organ solo, even after Saint- Saëns offered him a commission. GF-ML, 43. 43 For more information, see Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré, Correspondance (1862- 1920), edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux (Paris: Éditions Klincksieck, 1994), translated by J. Barrie Jones, under the title The Correspondence of Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré: Sixty Years of Friendship (Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004) (hereafter cited as CSS/GF).; and Sabina Teller Ratner, “Camille Saint-Saëns: Fauré’s Mentor” in RF, 119-144; particularly the section “Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré,” 130-132. 44 It was during one of these visits that Fauré collaborated with his student and friend André Messager to create the Messe des pêcheurs de Villerville, premiered on September 4, 1881. By replacing elements composed by Messager with his own work, Fauré would transform this work into his Messe basse in 1910. 45 Papillon was published in 1869, but Cantique would not be published until 1876. GF-ML, 503, 505. 24 remote city, and his conduct did not suit his position, particularly for the clergy of his conservative Catholic Church. According to his friend Alfred Bruneau: In vain did the vicar preach the virtues of austerity, admonishing him for going out into the church porch for a smoke during the sermon. One morning the organist came straight from the municipal ball and entered the organ loft in white tie and tails. He was discreetly dismissed. 46 Fauré describes the result: “The vicar found in me an incorrigible religious defaulter. When his hostility came out into the open it was once again Saint-Saëns who rescued me and found me something in Paris.” 47 So in 1870, Fauré returned to Paris and became the choir organist at Notre-Dame-de-Clignancourt. 48 Unfortunately for Fauré, historical events abruptly ended his work at Clignancourt. On July 19, 1870, the Franco-Prussian War began, and on August 16 Fauré enlisted. Armistice was declared on January 28, 1871, and Fauré was demobilized on March 9. Ten days later the Church of St-Honoré d’Eylau hired him as their organist, but finding himself in the midst of the political upheaval resulting from the war, Fauré left Paris and taught composition for a few months at the École Niedemeyer, which had also temporarily relocated (from Paris to Cours-sous-Lausanne). Fauré returned to Paris in 46 “Son curé lui recommandait vainement l’austérité… il lui reprochait d’aller fumer des cigarettes sous le porche de l’église pendant les sermons. Un matin, l’organiste ayant passé la nuit au bal de la prefecture vint remplir ses fonctions en habit noir et en cravate blanche. Il fut congédié doucement.” Alfred Bruneau, La Vie et les Œuvres de Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Librairie Charpentier et Fasquelle, 1925), 19. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 16. 47 “Puis lorsque l’hostilité d’un curé qui ne me trouvait guère pratiquant se fut tout à fait déclaré, ce fut encore Saint-Saëns qui se débrouilla et me trouva quelque chose à Paris.” François Crucy, “Les grands figures contemporaines: Gabriel Fauré,” Le petit parisien, 28 April 1922, 1. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 16. 48 Depending on the available size and resources, a French church at this time might have two organs and organists: the grand orgue played by the organiste titulaire and the orgue de chœur played by the organiste accompagnateur, who would also serve as the assistant to the titulaire. See Orpha Ochse, Organists and Organ Playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium, (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2000): 9. 25 October and became the choir organist of St-Sulpice; serving second to Charles-Marie Widor (1844-1937), who held the most prominent organ position in France and taught organ at the Conservatoire to students such as Vierne, Tournemiere, Milhaud, and Varèse. Saint-Saëns continued to help Fauré’s career. In January 1874, André Messager (1853-1929), Fauré’s first composition student and lifelong friend, assumed Fauré’s position at St-Sulpice so that Fauré could serve as deputy to Saint-Saëns at the main organ of the Madeleine. After Notre Dame, the Madeleine was one of the most important churches in Paris; it was the site of many state-subsidized ceremonies and services and was also supported by its wealthy congregants. Fauré would be employed there for the remainder of his church music career. In 1871, co-presidents Camille Saint-Saëns and Romain Bussine, the Conservatoire’s singing teacher, established the Société Nationale de Musique, an organization dedicated to performing new French music. 49 Fauré was a founding member and became secretary on November 22. 50 This society adopted the motto “Ars Gallica” [French Art] and, building upon the nationalism and anti-German sentiments that followed the war, promoted French music; the group advocated the composition of new French instrumental music to counter the popularity of German symphonic music and the perceived weaknesses of contemporary French operatic music. The concerts they 49 For more information, see the “Société Nationale” section in Ratner, “Camille Saint-Saëns: Fauré’s Mentor” in RF, 132-133. 50 As evidenced by his departure from St-Saveur, Fauré did not always conduct himself responsibly and was censured on March 1 of the next year for his “deplorable unpunctuality.” GF-ML, 21. Nectoux cites the “Archives of the Société nationale de musique in the Music Department of the Bibliothèque Nationale.” GF-ML, 561 n. 23. 26 organized became a platform for young composers such as Fauré to have their works heard alongside those by more acclaimed composers. Unfortunately, the appearance, in 1874, of his first major work, the Symphony in F, on one of these programs did not garner much approbation. On the other hand, the year 1877 was a very positive one for Fauré’s career. On January 27, his First Violin Sonata, op. 13 (dedicated to violinist Paul Viardot, Pauline’s son) received a successful first public performance at a Société Nationale concert. It was brought to further prominence by being published by Breitkopf und Härtel, beginning Fauré’s international profile. 51 Then, a few months later, Fauré was officially hired as the Madeleine’s maître de chapelle, serving as the director of the men and boys choir for the next nineteen years. In this position, Fauré would conduct a lot of choral music, and his approach seems to have been colored by his education at the École. Fauré initially conceived the Requiem for this ensemble. Earning nothing from the Breitkopf publication and only a modest salary (3,000F per year) in this new post, he had to supplement his income by teaching private piano lessons and group theory lessons, and by accompanying singing classes. The third significant event of 1877 was Fauré’s engagement (after a four- year courtship) to Marianne Viardot, Pauline Viardot’s youngest daughter, and Fauré’s junior by nine years. However, the July engagement was abruptly broken off in October, 51 For this honor, Fauré had to agree to accept no fee; as, according to the firm, “Fauré’s name is not known in Germany and the musical market is saturated with works of this kind, though in many cases inferior to this one.” […le nom de M. Fauré n’est pas connu en Allemagne et le marché musical renflue [sic] des œuvres de ce genre, quoique souvant inférieures à la présente.] Breitkopf und Härtel to Camille Clerc, Leipzig, 1 November 1876, in Corr., 43 (41). For more information on Fauré’s relationships with his publishers, see Lisa Feurzeig, “The Business Affairs of Gabriel Fauré,” in The Dissemination of Music: Studies in the History of Music Publishing, edited by Hans Lenneberg (Lausanne, Switzerland: Gordon and Breach, 1994). 27 as Marianne realized she had succumbed to pressure from Fauré and her parents rather than being guided by personal feeling for Fauré. It took Fauré a long time to recover; in his biography of his father, Philippe Fauré-Fremiet wrote: “It took him months, perhaps years, to get over it.” 52 Fauré made no further commitments to women for the next six years until March 1883 when he married Marie Fremiet after drawing her name from three placed in a hat. The result was a rather distant marriage but did result in two children—Emmanuel (December 29, 1883-1971) and Philippe (1889-1954) Fauré-Fremiet. The sons guarded their father’s legacy by writing books and preserving the many materials now stored in the Fauré-Fremiet archive in the Bibliothèque nationale. The Second Period In this middle period, Fauré matured as a composer; he introduced more chromaticism and experimented with formal structures in his works. He also forged connections with other significant composers: meeting Tchaikovsky in Paris (March 1887) and both Wagner and Debussy during his first visit to Bayreuth (July 1887). Requiem, Fauré’s most recognized composition, is the result of a protracted period of development. Some have associated Fauré’s initial work on his Requiem, begun around 1887, with the death of his parents—Toussaint on July 25, 1884 and Hélène on December 31, 1887 though the composer never acknowledged any influence of these 52 “…fut tel qui’il lui fallut des mois, des annés peut-être, pour le dominer.” Fauré-Fremiet, Fauré, 2 nd ed., 58. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 31. According to Nectoux, this event affected Fauré’s work: “We should not be too insistent in involving his private with his creative life, but the influence of his psychological disturbance [after this event] is fairly plain.” GF-ML, 31. He cites specifically “Après un rêve” and other minor key pieces including “Automne,” “Les Berceaux,” “Le Voyageur,” and even the instrumental Elégie. 28 events. Regardless of his motivation, the first significant hearings of Requiem occurred at the Madeleine in 1888, on January 16 and May 4. He continuously revised the work until its “official” premiere in 1900 at the Exposition Universal in Paris. In 1900 and 1901, the Parisian publisher Julien Hamelle issued the scores and parts for Requiem, and the work received many performances in and outside of France. A performance at the Conservatoire in May 1901 even suggests a rise in his stature among the Parisian musical elite. Fauré’s career held a mix of accolades and challenges. The complexity of his first song cycle La bonne Chanson (written between 1892 and 1894), which writer Marcel Proust loved, motivated Saint-Saëns to consider Fauré “completely mad.” 53 In June 1892, Fauré was appointed Inspecteur de l’enseignement de la musique et de declamation, les écoles nationales de musique et les maîtrises [Inspector of musical education in the branches of the Conservatoire nationale, in the national schools of music and choir schools], a position he would hold until 1905. 54 Though Fauré was entrusted with the responsibility of inspecting the provincial schools, conservative musicians such as Ambroise Thomas, Director of the Conservatoire, still did not accept him or his perceived modernism. This was forcefully demonstrated in the same summer when Thomas blocked Fauré’s application to teach composition at the Conservatoire. In the last third of his life, Fauré’s influence extended over ever-widening circles. In 1898, his opera Prométhée was premiered in front of an audience of 15,000 in Béziers and was successfully revived in the summer of 1901. In 1896, Fauré not only became the 53 As quoted in GF-ML, 187. 54 GF-LV, 229 (225). 29 organist at the Madeleine but also was finally appointed professor at the Conservatoire, the position vacated by Massenet. (Thomas had died in 1896 and was succeeded by Théodore Dubois. For a select list of the Conservatoire’s Directors and Professors of Composition, see the Appendix.) In 1905, he was appointed Director of the Conservatoire; with the added duties and an annual salary of 12,000F, he resigned from the Madeleine. At the Conservatoire, he was able to extend great influence as the teacher of significant musicians such as composer Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), who began studies with him in January 1898, pedagogue Nadia Boulanger (1887-1979), music critic Émile Vuillermoz (1878-1960), and composer/musicologist Charles Kœchlin (1867- 1950). As Director, Fauré caused much controversy by instituting changes to the composition instruction that significantly influenced future generations of students. In 1903, Fauré extended his influence to print by writing music reviews for Le Figaro. The Third Period In 1909, a group of Fauré’s students, led by Ravel, split from the Société nationale de musique to found the Société musicale indépendante and elected Fauré their president. There were yet other public honors. On December 29, 1910, he was made Commandeur de la Légion d’honneur and received the Grand croix de la Légion d’honneur on January 31, 1921. On June 20, 1922, Fauré was recognized with a National Act of Homage at Sorbonne and with the appearance of a special Fauré issue of la Revue musicale that included a supplement of seven piano pieces composed “sur le nom de 30 Fauré (fa, la, sol, ré, mi) par ses anciens élèves” [by his former students on the name “Fauré”]. 55 However, these successes were tempered by worsening hearing loss that Fauré experienced as early as 1902. After struggles with illness, including a serious case of pneumonia in September of 1923, Gabriel Fauré died on November 2, 1924 in his Paris home, almost five months after his eightieth birthday. He had composed until the end; his String Quintet in E Minor, op. 121 (1924) was published posthumously in 1925. On November 8, a state funeral was held at the Madeleine and included speeches by Vincent d’Indy, the Arts minister François Albert, and Nadia Boulanger on behalf of his students. 56 The mass also included the performance of some of his works, among them his own Requiem. A place for Fauré Perhaps it is the fault of humanity’s Aristotelian urge to create categories and then to fit items into them, but musical scholars struggle to identify stylistic periods and the 55 See la Revue musicale 4, 1 October 1922. La Revue musicale first began the tradition of publishing commemorative issues with a Tombeau for the death of Claude Debussy (1862-1918). Fauré, who had been let in on the preparations for his issue, “suggested a theme made up of two leitmotifs from [his opéra lyrique] Prométhée: ‘Pandora’ and ‘Punishment of Prometheus’…” These themes were adapted to resemble his name [G-A-B-D[=ré]-B[=si]-E-E | F-A-G-D[=ré]-E]. GF-ML, 427. This was similar to the theme used twenty years earlier by Ladmirault, Raoul Bardac, Ravel, and Roger-Ducasse for a string quartet based on the theme, F-A-G-D. For more information on the quartet, see Jean-Michel Nectoux, “Fauré, Henry Prunières et la Revue musicale,” Etudes fauréennes 17 (1980): 17-24. The issue’s contributing students—Louis Aubert, Georges Enesco, Charles Kœchlin, P. Ladmirault, Maurice Ravel, Roger-Ducasse, and Florent Schmitt—performed their works at a special concert on December 13, 1922. 56 As a sign perhaps of the inconsistent regard in which Fauré was held, Albert had to ask who Fauré was when he was enlisted to help with the funeral. Kœchlin, Fauré, rev. ed., 33. Paul Léon describes the obsequies in Paul Léon, Du Palais-Royal au Palais Bourbon: Souvenirs (Paris: Albin Michel, 1947), 253-254. 31 transitions between them. In The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-century Music, editor Jim Samson notes, “At almost every stage, a history of music engages in rationalisations. In trying to make sense of the sense of the past we tidy it up.” 57 How does Fauré fit into the periods of music history? Scott offers several options when he asks: “What is Fauré’s place in music history? Is he the first of the moderns? The last of the traditionalists? A transitional figure, bridging the two eras?” 58 Paradoxically, Fauré has been perceived as conservative and progressive, traditional and modern. A claim for either end of the spectrum has some validity, but at the same time it must be tempered with an understanding of the biases of the source. In the chapter entitled “The Peripheries of Nineteenth-Century Music and Its Practice” of his 1941 survey text Music in Western Civilization, Paul Henry Lang claimed, “Although many of the leaders of twentieth-century French music were Fauré’s devoted pupils, he himself has nothing in common with even moderately modern tendencies.” 59 It is difficult for those who have studied the dramatic changes introduced by the avant-garde to not become desensitized to anything but extremes. However, Fauré’s music was imbued with innovation, innovation that is more pronounced in his later and more unfamiliar works. On the centenary of Fauré’s birth, Leslie Orrey wrote: Many will ask whether a composer can be modern in the year of his centenary. Yet it is true of Fauré… An active life of sixty years in an art which develops so swiftly as music can be something of an embarrassment to the critic and historian; it is apt to present problems of classification which no facile catchwords such as ‘modern’ or ‘Victorian’ or ‘second Empire’ can solve. Fauré, in fact, does not fit easily into any niche we may have prepared for him… What of Fauré’s ultimate 57 Samson, Cambridge History, 17. 58 Scott, 32. 59 Paul Henry Lang, Music in Western Civilization (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1941), 929. 32 place in music? It is difficult to say. But at present, twenty years after his death, there is no sign that his music is dead. On the contrary, interest in him is quickening, his popularity is increasing; his art is very much alive. 60 Though Requiem is generally well known, its complex genesis and the ongoing debate surrounding its authenticity are not. A work belonging to Fauré’s middle period, particularly one conceived for liturgical use, is not as overtly modern as works by some of his countrymen. Its uniqueness comes from the voice Fauré found in bringing elements of early music, tempered with contemporary liturgical practices, forward, and his interest in creating something different. In his book Modern French Music (1971), Rollo Myers stated that Fauré, along with his contemporary Vincent d’Indy (1851-1931), were: the two most important ‘transitional’ composers who were still, in the new century… very much the representatives of French music in the eyes of the world right up to and even after the 1914 war. The reputation and importance of Gabriel Fauré… are so firmly established… that he has come to be considered as perhaps in some ways the most representative French composer of his generation. He was also, in his own unobtrusive way a pioneer, enriching and enlarging, in a way that points to the meaning of the saying about art concealing art, the harmonic language of his day and, like a musical John the Baptist, preparing the way, in the words of one of his younger contemporaries, ‘for the great revolution brought about by Debussy’. 61 (italics mine) The integration of these two paths makes Fauré a difficult composer to pinpoint. Though it is difficult to categorize this composer, equipped with an appreciation of the Fauré’s surroundings and the split in musical developments in the church and concert hall, one can value the significance of the work, recognize the influence Fauré 60 Leslie Orrey, “Gabriel Fauré, 1845-1924,” The Musical Times 86/1227 (May 1945): 137-139. 61 Rollo H. Myers, Modern French Music from Fauré to Boulez (New York: Praeger Publications, 1971), 23. 33 had upon future composers, and particularly detect the great influence Opus 48 exerted upon the requiem settings which followed. 34 CHAPTER 2 THE FAURÉ “REQUIEMS” The Evolution of Fauré’s Requiem 1 In the period between its initial performances in 1888 and its “official” premiere in 1900, Fauré’s Requiem, op. 48, underwent significant changes. The final version, published in full score in 1901, is most familiar to the general public, but, considering the many hearings the work received in its various states, a discussion of the work should include the question, “which Fauré Requiem?” Like symphonies of the time by Bruckner or Mahler, the revisions of Opus 48 can be associated with a version of the work, and recent scholarship tends to identify three distinct versions of Requiem, labeled by the associated year of performance: 1888, 1893, and 1900. 2 1 The information for this section has largely been drawn from Houziaux, 100-13; GF-ML, 116- 124; Orl., 112-116, 206-209, 296-297; and Nectoux, foreword and critical notes to Gabriel Fauré, Requiem, Op. 48 (Version 1893), edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux and Roger Delage (Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1994, 2 nd ed., Paris: Hamelle/Leduc, 2000) (hereafter cited as R-JMN1). The discussion included in Scott’s dissertation briefly outlines this information and includes excerpts from a correspondence with Nectoux but was written prior to more recent discoveries and performing editions. See “The history of Fauré’s setting of the requiem” in Scott, 37-39. 2 See Huntington and the Requiem editions by Rutter and Nectoux. 35 The five-movement 1888 version and the “missing” movements Requiem was first performed on January 16, 1888 at the Madeleine, where Fauré served as the maître de chapelle. 3 This “premiere” was not a concert but part of a memorial service in honor of architect Joseph-Michel Le Soufaché (1804-1887). At this stage, the work had five of the seven movements we know today—Introït et Kyrie, Sanctus, Pie Jesu, Agnus Dei, and In paradisum (see Figure 2.1). It appears at this stage Fauré considered this five-movement setting as a totality. He listed only these five movements on the cover page of first movement’s manuscript; among the four movements extant, the only aspect he noted as incomplete was the orchestration. 4 For the next significant presentation of the Requiem, just four months later, on May 4, 1888, he made changes only to the orchestration. 5 Though still held at the Madeleine, this hearing 3 For more information on the Church of the Madeleine and Fauré’s employment there, see the biographical overview in Chapter 1. 4 Some claim that the manuscripts of the two “missing” movements (aside from the Pie Jesu, which clearly has been lost) were written at this time but have been lost. However, there is no evidence Fauré drafted these performing materials or intended these movements to be included in the 1888 performances. 5 It is very likely additional performances of Requiem were held at the Madeleine between January and May. Fauré refers to a second, smaller-scale performance in a letter: “J’ai l’occasion de faire executer de nouveau ma messe des Morts demain à midi, à la Madeleine. Malheureusement mes moyens d’exécution seront beaucoup plus restreints qu’il y a quinze jours.” [I shall have another opportunity of performing my Requiem mass at the Madeleine at noon tomorrow. Unfortunately my means for execution will be much more restricted than a fortnight ago.] Gabriel Fauré to Eugène d’Eichthal, [Paris], [31 January 1888?], in Corr., letter 68, 140 (138). In a footnote to this letter, Nectoux proposed the performance occurred on February 1 based on the Madeleine’s records indicating a funeral was held that day, approximately a fortnight from the January 16 premiere. Based on a letter included in his preface to Houziaux’s book, Nectoux concludes that another performance was held on either February 29 or March 7, 1888. In this letter, Fauré invites his friends to come to a performance at the Madeleine although Requiem is not specified: “Je t'envoie 6 invitations à offrir à ceux de mes camarades qui voudraient venir mercredi (un peu avant midi, car il y aura beaucoup de monde). Je recommande à ceux qui auraient la bonté de venir de ne pas se placer trop bas dans l'Église.” [I am sending you six invitations to give to those of my friends who would like to come Wednesday (a little before noon, because there will be many people). I advise those who would have the 36 was not a part of the liturgy. Fauré invited his friends, but in a letter to his friend Paul Poujaud, Fauré requested that everyone sit apart from each other to not draw attention: “Ask my friends not to sit together in case it begins to look like a PERFORMANCE!!! You must look as if you’re there by chance.” 6 The concert did receive one review, written by Camille Benoît. 7 The five-movement Requiem forms the “1888 version” as it is called today, though it can be unclear which 1888 performance is meant. The January 1888 scoring includes harp, timpani (used only in Kyrie), and organ with an unconventionally organized string section (see Table 2.1). Instead of the standard symphonic string sections (violin 1, violin 2, viola, cello, bass), Requiem uses a five-voiced ensemble of divided viola and cello sections and contrabasses. This unusual emphasis on the low voices of the string family is offset only in the Sanctus, with the addition of a solo violin playing in its upper register. For the May concert, Fauré added pairs of horns and trumpets, established by Benoît who referred to the “short fanfare for horn and trumpet” in the Hosanna. 8 kindness to come not to sit too far back in the Church.] Gabriel Fauré to Pierre de Bréville?, [location unknown], [27 February or 5 March 1888?], in Houziaux, xvi (my translation). 6 “Priez les camarades de ne pas se grouper pour que cela ne ressemble pas a une AUDITION!!! Il faudra avoir l'air d'être là par hasard.” Gabriel Fauré to Paul Poujaud, Paris, May 3, 1888 (postmark), Corr., letter 71, 141 (140). Andrew Ford incorrectly associates this letter with the January premiere. Andrew Ford, “Fauré’s Requiem: The Mystery and the Marketing,” in Undue Noise: Words about Music (Sydney: ABC Books, 2002), 301. 7 Camille Benoît, “La Messe de Requiem de Gabriel Fauré,” Le guide musical 34, nos. 32-33 (9/16 August 1888): 195-97. 8 “Détail à noter: pas de violins, pas de cuivres, dans l’accompagnement des voix (sauf, dans le Sanctus, un violon solo, et à l’Hosannah, une courte fanfare de cor et trompette).” [Detail to note: no violins, nor woodwinds, in the accompaniment of the voices (except in the Sanctus, a solo violin, and in the Hosanna, a short fanfare for horn and trumpet).] Benoît, 196 (my translation). Though he correctly identifies it as the Sanctus in the foreword of R-JMN1, Nectoux incorrectly identifies this movement as the Agnus Dei in his biography. GF-ML, 117; and Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, xi. 37 By the time of these 1888 performances, Fauré had already conceived the core material for the two “missing” movements: Offertoire and Libera me. Without an extant score manuscript or sketch of Libera me, it is difficult to precisely state the stages of this movement, but it appears the origins of Libera me date to a decade before any other part of his Requiem. 9 Romain Bussine, Paris Conservatoire’s singing teacher and co-founder of the Société nationale de musique, mentions hearing Fauré’s Libera me in a June 1877 letter to their mutual friend Marie Clerc: He [Fauré] came to see me yesterday evening and played me a Libera me for a Mass for the Dead. It’s extremely charming, not profound enough maybe, but full of hope and tenderness and with some delicious melodic surprises. 10 At this point Libera me was a solo song, without chorus and with only organ accompaniment. Unfortunately, as this manuscript is missing, not much else is known about the genesis of this movement. Nectoux conjectures the solo was resurrected for Louis Ballard, a singer with the Paris Opéra who joined the choir at the Madeleine in January 1890. 11 Perhaps Fauré forgot about this setting; for whatever reason, it did not become part of the Requiem until after the 1888 performances. At least a year before these hearings, Fauré wrote ideas for the “Hostias” in his sketchbooks; this was also initially conceived as a solo. 9 GF-ML, 117. Using Nectoux’s research, Houziaux ties the origins of the movement to 1877: “ca VI/77 Esquisse (ou composition?) de la première partie du solo de baryton du Libera me. (NHP et JMN, Voix, p. 138, n. 31).” [circa June 1877: draft (or composition?) of the first part of the baritone solo of Libera me. (Preface to R-JMN1 and GF-LV, 138 n. 31)” (my translation)] Houziaux, 10. 10 “[Fauré] J’ai entendu hier au soir, car il est venu me voir, un “Libera me” pour messe des morts qui est tout à fait charmant, peut-être pas assez profond, mais plein d’un espoir tender avec des déplacements mélodiques tout à fait succulents.” Romaine Bussine to Marie Clerc, Paris, June 1877, as quoted in GF-LV, 138 n (567 n. 32). 11 GF-ML, 117. 38 Figure 2.1 Evolution of the Movements of Fauré’s Requiem from Sketches to Performance Sources: Houziaux, 10-12, 15; GF-ML, 116-118; Orl., 206. 39 Table 2.1 Evolution of the Orchestration of Requiem Movements by Performance. . A plus sign [+] denotes added instruments; these continue to be employed in future performances until indicated otherwise (by enclosure in parentheses). In instances where a movement’s orchestration is not certain, instruments used in a performance and used in the movement in question in a later performance are added in italics (this system is also applied to the 1894 performance although the specific movements performed are unknown). Sources: Data from Houziaux, xiii-xv, 10-13, 68-76; R-JMN1; R-JMN2; and Legge, 115. Movement Core 1/16/1888 5/4/1888 1/28/1892 1/21/1893 5/17/1894 7/12/1900 Introït et Kyrie +tmp +hn 1/2 +tp 1/2 not performed +hn 1/2 +tp 1/2 +bn 1/2 +bn 1/2 +hn 3/4 (tmp) Offertoire (hn 1/2) (hp) same as previous “Hostias” - - - +hn 1/2 +hp Sanctus +hp +vn solo +hn 1/2 +tp 1/2 not performed same as 5/4/1888 same as previous +hn 3/4 (vn solo) +vn section Pie Jesu +hp same as previous not performed same as 5/4/1888 +bn 1/2 +fl 1/2 +cl 1/2 +bn 1/2 Agnus Dei +hp +hn 1/2 not performed +hn 1/2 +bn 1/2 +bn 1/2 +hn 3/4 +vn section Libera me - - +hn 1/2 +tp 1/2 +tbn 1/2/3 +tmp same as previous same as previous (hn 1/2) +vn section In paradisum organ viola 1/2 cello 1/2 bass +hp +hn 1/2 not performed +hn 1/2 same as previous (hn 1/2) +vn section 40 From sketches to manuscripts to performances After Libera me, Fauré’s next known efforts to set texts from the mass for the dead appear in three of seven sketchbooks, which date from the summer/autumn of 1887 (Source G, see Table 2.2). Alongside preliminary drafts for other works, these books include sketches for Introït et Kyrie, Pie Jesu, and the “Hostias” solo, the centerpiece of the Offertoire. 1 Like Libera me, Fauré had conceived of the “Hostias” before the 1888 performances, but he did not include it in the “1888 version” of Requiem. At this time there is no conclusive information to explain why this music was “omitted,” but again the lack of mention of these movements on the manuscript’s title page suggests Fauré did not wish to include them in these performances. Though Fauré’s earlier Libera me did not inspire him to the composition of a requiem mass immediately, his sketches of several requiem texts suggest a creative momentum toward a complete requiem setting. In all versions of Opus 48, Pie Jesu is the heart of Fauré’s symmetrically-structured mass for the dead and becomes the calling card of the work. There are also thematic ideas that tie the work together. 2 The “Te decet” (found on the third and fourth pages of the second book) becomes a recurring idea that helps unify the work in its reappearances in the “Hostias”/Offertoire and Sanctus. 1 Nectoux discredits Orledge’s finding of a sketch of the “Sanctus? in g” in the sixth book as the text of this sketch is in French. See Orl., 206; and GF-ML, 485. 2 For more discussion of the work’s thematic unity, see GF-ML, 121; Orl., Fauré, 114; and Scott, 53. 41 Table 2.2 Primary and Secondary Sources of Fauré’s Requiem. Sources with MS numbers are stored at BnF (in the Department de musique unless noted otherwise). Where applicable, Jean-Michel Nectoux’s categorizations of the sources, primary (1) versus secondary (2), follow the abbreviations provided in his editions (R-JMN1/R-JMN2). [Note: for the slight variants, the abbreviations provided here conform to R-JMN1.] Missing sources are shaded in grey. Ref Source Date Description JMN A 1 Introït et Kyrie (MS 410) c1887- c1894 full score autograph manuscript A 1/2 2 Sanctus (MS 411) 9 Jan 1888- c1894 full score autograph manuscript 3 Agnus Dei (MS 412) 6 Jan 1888- c1894 full score autograph manuscript 4 In paradisum (MS 413) c1887- c1894 full score autograph manuscript B 1 Hamelle score (plate: 4650) Sep 1901 first published full score E 1/1 2 Hamelle instrumental parts Sep 1901 first published instrumental parts ME 2/2 3 Hamelle choral part (plate: 4531) Feb 1900 first published choral part R1 - 4 revised Hamelle choral part Feb 1901 second and revised published choral part R2 1/1 C 1 Madeleine instrumental parts (Rés.Vma. MS 891) 1888/c1893 /c1930 orchestral parts copied in several hands (primarily prepared by Manier for c1888 performances) MCA 1/2 2 Copied instrumental and vocal parts (Rés. Vma. MS 892) 1888/ c1895/ c1930 parts of Libera me and In paradisum copied in several hands D autograph parts fragments (MS 17717) c1892 parts for horns 1 and 2, trumpets, harp (In paradisum) and the choral alto part for In paradisum found at the Madeleine MA 1/2 E corrected Hamelle choral part (Fauré- Fremiet archive, Rés.Vmb. 49) 1900 first published choral score (B3), marked by Fauré for preparation of revised published choral score (B4) R1A 2/1 42 Table 2.2 (continued) Ref Source Date Description JMN F Hamelle score, with markings by Nadia Boulanger (Nadia Boulanger archive, Vma. 1938a) 1901/c1920 full score (B1), marked by Nadia Boulanger for performance, signed by Fauré EAB 2/1 G 1 Carnet 1 (MS 17787, 1) c1887 sketchbook containing sketch of Pie Jesu ES 2/- 2 Carnet 2 (MS 17787, 2) c1887 sketchbook containing sketches of Introït et Kyrie and Pie Jesu 3 Carnet 3 (MS 17787, 3) c1886-1887 sketchbook containing sketches of “Hostias” M 1 Libera me 1877/1892 missing: any manuscript, either the early solo version mentioned by Romaine Bussine or the score prepared for performance - - 2 Pie Jesu c1887 missing: full score manuscript in the composer’s hand - - 3 Offertoire 1893/1894 missing: any manuscript, either the “Hostias” or with the choral sections - - 4 Roger-Ducasse manuscript of piano- vocal score c1900 missing Rms - 5 full score manuscript of 1900 version c1900 missing Oms - Sources: Data from R-JMN1, 120-123; R-JMN2, 122; Orl., 206-209; and Philipps, 70-74, 99-102. The very beginning of the Introït returns at the end of the Agnus Dei. 3 In Sanctus, the rising fourth of the soprano line for phrase “Pleni sunt coeli” is similar to the rising fourth used throughout Pie Jesu. Fauré’s contemporaries describe his ability to set down long passages without writing anything beforehand 4 —“He always preferred to work on a new piece in his head, 3 It is interesting to note that the rising soprano notes (A, C, F) of the “Dies irae” section of Libera me follow closely the same soprano line in the Introït (A, C, D, F). 43 and merely to back this up by writing out passages to confirm his judgment.” 5 Some of these early Requiem sketches closely resemble the finished product but reveal a little vacillation in his choice of key signatures. At this time, Fauré considered C minor for the overall key of Requiem rather than his final choice of D minor, and he wrote two drafts of Pie Jesu in A Minor. 6 Though intermediary sketches may simply be lost, it is also possible that this ability of Fauré’s explains the jump to the next extant manuscripts—the full scores to four of the five movements (the Pie Jesu manuscript has been lost) from the January 1888 performance (Sources A and M2, see Table 2.2). 7 These are the only manuscripts of Requiem, any version of Requiem, that exist in Fauré’s hand. It is clear Fauré did not consider the materials for the January service to be complete. Fauré wrote a note to his copyist on the cover of the Agnus Dei manuscript: “Vocal and organ parts for 8 a.m. Monday morning [9 January 1888] at the Choir School. 4 According to Nadia Boulanger, they would have lunch together “during which sometimes he would not speak a word, then would disappear at the end of the meal and come back in some embarrassment, saying, ‘Forgive me, I’ve just been writing down what I composed during lunch.’” […durant ces déjeuners où parfois il ne disait mot, disparaissait à la fin du repas et revenait confus: «Pardonnez-moi, je viens d’écrire ce que j’ai composé pendant le déjeuner.»] As quoted in GF-ML, 482. 5 GF-ML, 486. 6 GF-ML, 486. For diplomatic transcriptions of the Pie Jesu sketches, see Orl,, 208. 7 It is interesting to note that all of the manuscripts for any of the three solo movements have been lost (Sources M1-3). Nectoux suggests the possibility that Fauré might have given them to some of their early interpreters as thanks. Nectoux, preface to Houziaux, iii n. Any modern research interested in primary sources will also be discouraged to note that Fauré provided instructions to his wife to destroy his drafts in a letter: “When I get back to Paris I shall spend a little time each day giving you all my sketches and drafts and everything else of which I want nothing to survive after me, so that you can burn them.” [A Paris, je me mettrai un peu chaque jour à te donner, pour les livrer aux flammes, toutes mes esquisses, tous mes brouillons, tout ce dont je veux que rien ne subsiste après moi.] Gabrie Fauré to Marie Fauré, Annecy-le-Vieux, 14 October 1925, in Li, 295. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 481. 44 The orchestration is not complete.” 8 These manuscripts show later editing made by Fauré as he inserted the brass parts in pencil and made other more significant changes. In fact it is quite difficult to sort through the edits Fauré made upon these manuscripts, which he used for several performances. The manuscripts also include changes made in preparation for the final version, such as the addition of a section of violins playing in Agnus Dei and In paradisum, which some scholars have incorrectly interpreted to belong to earlier performances. For example, Huntington asserts, “Examination of the ‘Sanctus’ manuscript confirms that the movement is scored for multiple violins,” but the use of a violin section was added well after the manuscript was created in 1888. 9 The added instruments were simply placed upon empty staves after the manuscripts had already been drafted; pinpointing the dates of these changes is not always easy. In fact, Nectoux believes the manuscripts contain at least four layers of overwriting from 1889 to 1899. 10 In In paradisum, for example, parts have been added for violins, horns, and bassoons clearly out of score order (see Figure 2.2). Though he had already crafted material for these “missing” movements by 1888, Fauré included neither of the bass solos, Libera me or “Hostias,” in the 1888 version, and there is no explanation from primary sources to explain why. Some possible explanations include: 8 “Parties de chant et d’orgue pour lundi matin [9 janvier 1888] à la Maîtrise. L’orchestration n’est pas terminée.” Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, vi (French), xi (English translation by Jeremy Drake). Nectoux was able to discern the note although it has been erased. 9 Huntington, 12. 10 Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, xii. 45 Figure 2.2 Page from the In Paradisum Manuscript (Source A4), mm. 42-45 Bibliothèque nationale de France 46 Fauré may have been under some requirement to keep the music short for the initial funeral service. As Libera me is part of the Office of the Dead, it would technically not belong to a liturgical Mass for the Dead. As discussed earlier, Fauré also wrote Libera me long before the movements in the 1888 version and may not have initially considered adding it to his more recent compositions. Adding the “Hostias” alone without its complementary solo movement would have disturbed the symmetry of the five- or seven-movement work. Perhaps the Madeleine did not have a soloist Fauré preferred at this time, and he chose to omit the movements for the time being rather than have them performed poorly. Rutter claims there is no symmetrical form in the work: There’s no arch-like structure in the Fauré Requiem and it would be surprising if there was, because of course the second movement and the sixth movement came later. They weren’t in his original 1888 version and so any kind of architecture that you find through the whole work would be slightly accidental I think, because it wasn’t all conceived at one time. 11 However, the addition of movements with a baritone soloist as the second and sixth movement of a seven-movement piece actually enhances the work’s symmetry while also creating an alternating pattern of choral and solo movements (including the central Pie 11 Rutter in Crawford, 66. 47 Jesu). It seems hard to believe that Fauré, who knew of composers who created similar arched structures, like Bach, would write the Requiem in this manner by accident. 12 For whatever reason, these “missing” movements would not be included until later versions of the Requiem. Nearly two decades after the version Bussine heard, Libera me was scored with chorus and orchestra (including three trombones not originally in the 1888 ensemble) and heard separately in a concert at St-Gervais on January 28, 1892. Though indicated as a premiere on the program, Libera me was likely performed earlier at the Madeleine as the parts were copied there. 13 Offertoire was the last movement to be finalized. Fauré first conceived of the central section, the solo “Hostias,” in his 1887 sketches in C Minor and B Minor. 14 The solo was likely developed and orchestrated in the spring of 1889. It was later added to the Requiem as a solo, without chorus. 15 Fauré mentions the missing second movement in a letter to Comtesse Élisabeth Greffulhe dated June 24, 1889: “I have started work again and have added a piece to my Requiem, an Offertory, that it lacked. Now it’s for my 12 The arch structure of Brahms Requiem was also achieved after its first performance with only six movements in April 1868. After the now-famous fourth movement, the work was paused for the presentation of other works before concluding with the final two movements. The fifth movement, with the soprano solo, was completed in May of the same year and added to create the seven-movement work known today. Michael Musgrave, Brahms: A German Requiem, Cambridge Handbooks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 4-13. 13 GF-ML, 117. 14 Nectoux, notes critiques to R-JMN1, 122. For a facsimile of the sketch in B Minor, see R- JMN1, 126. 15 GF-ML, 117. Saint-Saëns set only the “Hostias” section of the Offertory in his Requiem which suggests a precedent to Fauré’s first version of the Offertoire. Saint-Saëns’s setting resembles Fauré’s Pie Jesu in its alternation between the soloist and the orchestra. GF-ML, 123. 48 publisher to do his part of the job!” 16 Though he refers to Offertoire, this version only contains part of the Offertory text. The outer sections for the chorus were written later; Nectoux infers that the chromaticism of these passages dates them around the same period as his seventh Nocturne (1898) and his song cycle La bonne Chanson (1892-1894). 17 He further proposes that Fauré composed these sections for performance of excerpts from Requiem held on May 17, 1894. 18 The 1893 (Chamber) and 1900 (Symphonic) versions Fauré added Libera me and “Hostias” to Requiem for a performance at the Madeleine on January 21, 1893. 19 Scholars use the state of the Requiem heard at this concert to isolate an Opus 48 with seven movements, but one with a smaller orchestration than the 1900/1901 published version (see Figure 2.1). This version is known as the 1893 or Chamber version. 20 However, in using the January performance as the standard, this intermediary version would not contain the choral sections of the Offertoire. As 16 “Je me suis remis au travail et j'ai ajouté à mon Requiem un morceau, l’Offertoire, qui manquait. C’est à mon éditeur, maintenant, de travailler!” Gabriel Fauré to Comtesse Greffulhe, Paris, 24 June 1889, in Corr., letter 75, 146 (144). 17 Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, x. 18 Nectoux presumes that these new sections are the “corrections” cited by Fauré: “J’ai encore des rapiéçages à faire au Requiem, et… le copiste me talonne!” [I’ve still got corrections to make to the Requiem, and… the copyist is bullying me!] Gabriel Fauré to Mme. de Saint-Marceaux, Paris, 3 May 1894. As quoted in GF-LV, 138 n. 33 (568 n. 34). This letter is not included in Corr. 19 Saint-Saëns included only the Hostias from the Offertoire in his Messe de Requiem, op. 54 (1878). 20 Citing a concert at St-Gervais on January 28, 1892, Roger Fiske and Paul Inwood identify 1892 as the year of the middle version rather than 1893. However, the only part of Requiem performed on this concert was Libera me. See Fiske and Inwood, preface to Gabriel Fauré, Requiem, Op. 48, edited by Roger Fiske and Paul Inwood (London: Eulenburg, 1978), unnumbered (hereafter cited as R-F/I); and Houziaux, xiv-xv, 11. 49 previously stated, though performed separately earlier, the full Offertoire would likely be performed within Requiem (though an excerpted version of Opus 48) in 1894. 21 The 1900, or Symphonic, version is the “Fauré Requiem” known best; it was established by the publication of the Hamelle prints in 1900 and 1901 and by the two premiere performances in 1900: the April 6 concert at Lille and the July 12 official “premiere” of the work at the World Exhibition at the Trocadéro in Paris. 22 This seven- movement requiem had now grown in length and orchestration—with the addition of the choral sections to complete Offertoire and with the addition of wind instruments, two more horns, and a full section of violins and additional harp(s) (serving only to double the existing part). Though Julien Hamelle published Requiem in 1900 and 1901, he had agreed to publish the work ten years earlier (the contract between Fauré and Hamelle is dated September 16, 1890). Nectoux attributes this delay partly to Fauré, who did not have a clean copy of the score to offer the publisher, and partly to the lack of an existing piano- vocal score (Requiem was composed in full score). 23 Composer and organist Léon Boëllmann (1862-1897) had been entrusted with the task of crafting a piano-vocal score, 21 The actual list of movements performed at this concert is unknown. In his chronology of Fauré’s life, Nectoux notes only that “extracts from Requiem” were conducted by Eugène d’Harcourt on May 17, 1894. In the preface to Houziaux’s book he suggests that this performance may have included the complete version of the second movement and parts for two bassoons: “‘fragments’ (2 complet?)… + 2 bassons (?).” GF-ML, 511; Houziaux, xiv-xv. 22 See editions by Nectoux and Rigaudière. According to Nectoux, “This published version of the Requiem,… we may call the ‘symphonic’ version…” GF-ML, 118. This version is also less commonly referred to as the “Concert” or “Full Orchestra” version. 23 GF-ML, 117. 50 but his sudden death created further delay until Fauré’s pupil, Jean Roger-Ducasse (1873- 1954), could complete the work. 24 Requiem’s performing materials: past and present There are a great number of options for Requiem performing materials today. It is still possible to obtain performing materials made from the same plates of the originals, the materials Fauré used for his own performances. It is also possible to use more streamlined reconstructions of the earlier versions, based upon the research and decisions of the editors, and certainly there are newer editions that attempt to correct errors of the original, which require their own varying degrees of research and judgment. When selecting one edition from this wide assortment, those interested in an “authentic” rendition of the work must prioritize their concerns in light of the multiple stages of the work outlined above. The 1900/1901 Hamelle print and modern reprints J. Hamelle et Cie. published the only performing materials of the Requiem available during Fauré’s lifetime (see Table 2.3). 25 The full score and parts were printed in September 1901, and the vocal score in February 1900. The latter contained many errors, noted by Fauré in a letter to Ysaÿe in October 1900: “I’ve also asked him [Hamelle] to send you another two scores [of Requiem] reduced for piano, in addition. 24 Nectoux notes that during Fauré’s lifetime, his pupil was known as Roger Ducasse and was only later identified as Roger-Ducasse later to avoid confusion with Paul Dukas. Nectoux, foreword to Gabriel Fauré, Requiem, Op. 48 (Concert Version, 1900), edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux (Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1998), viii n (hereafter cited as R-JMN2). 25 Alphonse Leduc has since acquired Hamelle. 51 Unfortunately those little scores are full of mistakes!” 26 The mistakes were considered sufficiently significant to require a corrected score to be published in February 1901 (Fauré’s vocal score with corrections has been preserved; Sources B4 and E, see Figure 2.2). 27 When Fauré offered Requiem for publication in 1890, Julien Hamelle apparently accepted it on the condition Fauré would make the unusually-scored work more marketable, that is, more appropriate for the concert hall. In a letter to Hamelle on August 2, 1898, Fauré wrote: As regards the second half of our account for last year (2,500 francs), would you like to settle this on December 1 next? I promise you that by then I shall have the Requiem in a fit state for publication, but I should very much like to have your permission to look for someone to do the piano reduction, which you were going to commission from poor Boëllmann. 28 The result utilizes a more traditional nineteenth-century orchestra: woodwind pairs (except for oboes), four horns, two trumpets, three trombones, timpani, harps, organ, and a full string complement including a full violin section (notated on one staff labeled “Violons”). 29 However, the re-orchestration itself is not very conventional; there is not one tutti passage in the entire work. The woodwinds, with the exception of the bassoons, are almost unnecessary; most of the instruments only double pre-existing 26 “Je l’ai prié également de t’envoyer encore deux partitions réduites au piano, en plus. Hélas, ces petites partitions sont bourrées de fautes!” Gabriel Fauré to Eugène Ysaÿe, [location unknown], [October 1900] in Corr., letter 132, 245 (249). 27 For a reproduction of the first page of the Offertoire from the vocal score with corrections in Fauré’s hand, see the vocal score of Fauré, R-JMN2, unnumbered (xi). 28 “Pour la seconde moitié de notre compte de l’année dernière (2.500f.) vous plaîrait-il de le régler le 1er décembre prochain? Je vous promets, d’ici là, de mettre le Requiem en état de publication mais j’aimerais bien que vous m’autorisiez à chercher quelqu’un pour la réduction au piano que vous vous proposiez de demander à ce pauvre Boëllmann.” Gabriel Fauré to Julian Hamelle, Paris, 2 August 1898, in Corr., letter 121, 232 (235-236). 29 The plural designation has been questioned. See Houziaux, 84. Nectoux only includes a single harp in his R-JMN2 without comment. 52 material rather than offering new melodic, rhythmic, or harmonic ideas. The flutes and clarinets only appear in Pie Jesu; the second clarinet only has four measures, the second flute only seven. Though the solo violin has been expanded into a single section of violins; the section is not used idiomatically, playing very rarely and with little divisi. The section now plays the solo in the Sanctus of the “1888 version” (an octave lower than previously notated), and new violin parts have been added in Agnus Dei, Libera me, and In paradisum. In the United States, vocal scores with English singing translations appeared as early as the FitzSimons 1953 edition by Mack Evans, followed by the 1956 Schirmer edition. These are all based on the Roger-Ducasse vocal score and are performed with reprints of the Hamelle score. These works were reprinted at the time with the blessings of Hamelle: During World War II the printed materials and copyrights of our allies were stored in the United States for safe-keeping. Among them was the REQUIEM… Through the Copyright Offices, we negotiated and made arrangements for publication with J. Hamelle consent. At the close of the war, our contracts were re-negotiated. The orchestration was never altered and the Full Score remained intact except that the English translation was added for the convenience of the Conductors who wanted it. All of this material was microfilmed and later engraved for printing. The vocal score was not changed, but it was engraved with all voices contained in one book… 30 Though Hamelle now publishes their new editions of Fauré’s Requiem, Kalmus/Master’s Music, Dover, International, G. Schirmer and Lucks have reprinted the original Hamelle score; these reprints are still available today though not in France (see Table 2.3). 30 R.E. FitzSimons to Earl Scott, Jr., 5 December 1975 in Scott, 181. Felix Aprahamian describes his role in bringing Requiem to England in Felix Aprahamian, “Crossing the Channel,” Choir and Organ 8/3 (May-June 2000): 13-15. 53 Errata, discrepancies, and the role of Roger-Ducasse The many errata in the performing materials seem incongruent with a work that had been developed over such a long period and that had received this many performances. Most of the obvious errors are mistakes with the Latin text, especially the unsightly misspelling of the fourth movement title as “Pie Jesus,” and many note errors (in reprinting from the original plates, Dover Publications corrected the Pie Jesu typo and added measure numbers but could not change the errata). 31 There are also discrepancies between the performing materials; for example, in Pie Jesu, the vocal score indicates the soprano’s text for the return to the A section is “Pie, pie Jesu” while the full score reads “Pie Jesu, Jesu.” 32 The errata have been attributed to Fauré’s laziness in checking the printer’s proofs, but errata aside, there are other discrepancies between the 1888 manuscripts and Hamelle’s print that are less conspicuous but significant. 33 Though he has been criticized for some of these discrepancies, they are not likely changes Fauré made deliberately. 31 For a discussion of errata, see “Textual Commentary” in Scott, 184-214. An errata list by Kees Wisse, librarian of the Rotterdam Philharmonic, is currently stored in the database of the Modern Orchestra Librarians’ Association. Other modern editions of the “1900 version” include errata in their notes. See the editions by Fiske and Inwood, Rigaudière, and Nectoux. Errata are also corrected in Nadia Boulanger’s marked full score (Source F, Table 2.2). 32 R-JMN2, 130. 33 “Furthermore there are numerous printing mistakes and signs of carelessness in the handling of the Latin text, faults for which Fauré’s antipathy to correcting proofs must be held largely responsible.” GF-ML, 118. 54 Table 2.3 1900/1901 Hamelle Print and Modern Reprints Publisher Type (Year): Catalog No. Comments J. Hamelle Full score (1901): 4650 Vocal (1900, rev. 1901): 4531 - first publication of Requiem (Source B) - contains a high number of errors (including a misspelling of the fourth movement title as “Pie Jesus”) - vocal score attribution: “Réduction pour Piano et Chant par Roger Ducasse” - Fauré prepared the vocal score revision (Source E). The revision does not mention the corrections or have an altered copyright. a H.T. FitzSimons b Full score (1944): F8007 Parts (1953): F8009 Vocal (1954): F8001 - reprint of Hamelle edition with newly engraved trumpet and trombone parts (transposed from F to B-flat and from tenor clef to bass clef respectively) c - with English added below the Latin in the vocal score - available only in the US and Canada G. Schirmer d Full score/parts (n.d.): for hire Vocal (1956, rev. 1975): 2243 - reprint of Hamelle score and parts with newly engraved vocal score with Latin and English texts - vocal score: first edition with “Piano Reduction by Roger Ducasse” e and second edition with “Piano Reduction by Bruce Howden” (same English text) International Study (1960): 1451 - reprint of Hamelle edition with newly engraved titles (preserving “Pie Jesus” error) Kalmus Full score/parts (1965): A2598 f Vocal: Z2598 - reprint of Hamelle edition without alterations Dover Publications Full score (1992): 27155-2 Study (2000): 41172-9 - reprint of Hamelle edition with measure numbers added and Pie Jesu title corrected Lucks Music Library Full/parts (1992): 09176 - reprint of the Hamelle materials with newly engraved transposed parts available a R-JMN2, viii. b Fred Bock Music Company is the sole distributor for FitzSimons and also publishes a vocal score, arranged by Fred Bock, for SAB choir (1990) compatible with the FitzSimons performing materials and an organ arrangement (1988) by John Brock. c Scott, 179-180. d G. Schirmer also publishes an organ arrangement (1965) by Norris L. Stephens. e This is not, as Scott claims, a reprint of Hamelle with English added. Scott, 180. f The study score is published by Ludwig Masters/Masters Music (a division of Kalmus), MSS-0037, in 2000. They also distribute the Serenissima vocal score, a reprint of the 1901 Hamelle choral score with measure numbers and correction of some errors. 55 Figure 2.3 Page from Introït et Kyrie Manuscript (Source A1), mm. 79-82 Bibliothèque nationale de France 56 Figure 2.4 Final Page from In Paradisum Manuscript (Source A4), mm. 58-61 Bibliothèque nationale de France 57 The two most significant changes involve adherence to the liturgy and following standard harmonic practice. In the Hamelle print, the first movement ends on repetitions of the word “eleison” and does not include the complete final line “Kyrie eleison,” as the liturgy dictates. However, the return to “Kyrie” was in the manuscript (see Figure 2.3). 34 In the published version, the entire work ends on a second inversion chord, with the contrabasses playing a D pizzicato on the final measure while the choral basses sustain an A. 35 In the manuscript the contrabasses sustain the final D (see Figure 2.4). Other changes may not be as significant but, in light of the previously mentioned discrepancies, may also be called into question. The timpani part in the first movement, which emphasized the “Christe” section and underscored the end with a sustained roll, was eliminated. It is difficult to know whether this was intended or accidental, unlike the elimination of the first seventeen measures for the organ, which, considering the enlarged size of the orchestra is more justifiable. The printed version also contains rhythmic, dynamic, phrasing, tempo, and textual underlay changes from the original: for example, the “et lux perpetua” tenor line from Introït changes to more closely follow the upper line in the organ part (mm. 24-25). 36 34 GF-ML, 568. In his edition, John Rutter opts to return the final “Kyrie” without comment. 35 Roger Nichols criticized Marc Rigaudière’s edition for preserving this ending: “The only fault I can find in this Carus version is over the final chord of all, where Rigaudière ignores sources giving a dotted minim low D for cellos, basses and organ, so that, after bass pizzicatos have died away, the score ends effectively on a second inversion.” Roger Nichols, “A Must-Buy Volume,” review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Marc Rigaudière, and Musique Religieuse by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Jean-Michel Nectoux, Choir and Organ 15/2 (March-April 2007): 71. 36 Houziaux, 23-75. For Rutter’s discussion of this discrepancy, see John Rutter, “In Search of the Real Fauré Requiem?” The American Organist 18/11 (November 1984): 59. However, Nectoux takes a different reading of the manuscript in his edition (noting what appears to be overwriting and returning to the original): “mm. 24-26,… we restore the prosody of source A [the 1888 manuscript]: deleting the first beat, m. 24, and lengthening “perpetua” in mm. 25-26; at a later date, Fauré corrected source A to adopt the prosody of the symphonic version…” [mes. 24 à 58 The changes suggest that this version was prepared without referring to the 1888 manuscripts with its layers of revisions. If the preparer of the fair copy manuscript, the version Fauré claimed would be in a “state fit for publication,” did not use the manuscripts and changes in Fauré’s hand, it would seem unlikely that the preparer was Fauré. Unfortunately the fair copy manuscript, which could perhaps provide some answers, is missing (see Source M5, Table 2.2). In his “Reappraisal” of Requiem, Malcolm Boyd criticized the orchestration and also questioned the authorship of the Hamelle print: The only serious criticism of Fauré’s Requiem which might be raised on technical grounds is of the orchestration, and it is all the more curious that adverse critics have allowed the work to escape their strictures in this matter. Norman Suckling, in his book on Fauré, has compared the composer’s methods here with those of Bach, while many programme notes draw the listener’s attention to the comparable instrumentation of Stravinsky’s Symphony of Psalms. Both comparisons seem to me quite irrelevant, and I cannot listen to a performance of the Requiem without aching to put a blue pencil through much of the organ part (surely ‘continuous’ rather than ‘continuo’) so that the strings may be heard on their own. And while I might hesitate at providing extra notes for the trombones and kettle-drums, I should certainly not allow my four flute and clarinet players the embarrassment of having to sit still for forty minutes in order to play a mere eleven bars of unimportant music. Certainly no one would wish to alter the scoring in any way which would diminish the effect of passages such as the brass entry in the Sanctus, but there are many places where Faure’s expressive intentions could be better served by a rearrangement of the instrumentation. Notwithstanding its many felicities Faure's orchestration of the Requiem betrays the indifference of the composer towards this branch of his art, and to those who would frown on any tampering with the master's work I would only offer the defence that Fauré himself, neither by training nor by inclination an orchestral writer, often delegated the scoring of his larger works to fellow musicians or his 26,… nous rétablissons la prosodie de A: suppression du premier temps, mes. 24, et allongement de «perpetua» sur les mes. 25-26; à une date postérieure, Fauré a corrigé sur A pour adopter la prosodie de la version symphonique…] R-JMN1, 127 (my translation). 59 own pupils. Was he, indeed, solely responsible for the full score of the Requiem? 37 Fauré’s pupil Jean Roger-Ducasse did arrange the original piano-vocal score. The Requiem’s vocal score parallels many of the dynamic and other changes present in full score, and it would be reasonable to assume that all the work’s performing materials were prepared at the same time for the premieres (even though the full score would not be publicly available until 1901). By deductive reasoning it seems more and more likely that the full score was also prepared by Roger-Ducasse. Nectoux writes: After some fifteen years of researching the question, I can still not state with any grounds for confidence that Fauré is the sole author of the symphonic version in the form in which it has been played since its publication… A new manuscript version must have been completed in 1898-9 for use by the printer. Unfortunately, despite my researches, no trace of this manuscript has been found… It is not unwarrantably daring to suppose that Fauré might have taken his publisher’s advice and got a collaborator to prepare a new score… One might, with due caution, put forward the name of Roger-Ducasse whose name appears on the vocal score. 38 Fauré entrusted his students with major orchestration projects—Charles Kœchlin orchestrated his Pelléas et Mélisande (1898), and Kœchlin’s classmate, the same Roger- Ducasse, reorchestrated Fauré’s Promethée for concert performance in 1903. 39 In an article written in 1945, Leslie Orrey discusses this practice as if it were common 37 Malcolm Boyd, “Fauré’s Requiem: A Reappraisal.” The Musical Times 104/1444 (June 1963): 409. 38 GF-ML, 119. 39 Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN2, ix. In an earlier assessment of Fauré’s orchestrations, Nectoux considers Fauré’s authorship of the orchestration of the 1900 version as “très probablement… mais en l’absence de tout manuscript d’orchestre l’authenticité ne peut être affirmée.” [very probable… but, in the absence of the full score manuscript, its authenticity cannot be affirmed (my translation)] See Jean-Michel Nectoux, “Les Orchestrations de Gabriel Fauré: Légende et vérité,” Schweizerische Musikzeitung/Revue musicale suisse 15 (1975): 248. 60 knowledge: “What shall we say of a composer who… for all his French fastidiousness (so abundantly illustrated in his songs) allowed others freely to orchestrate his work?” 40 Considering that Roger-Ducasse had been entrusted with the vocal-score, it does not seem far-fetched to consider him the arranger of the 1900 version especially as Fauré was also occupied with several other major projects at the same time. The “real” Fauré Requiem: the search for authenticity With these considerations, Fauré scholars have sought to uncover the “real” Fauré Requiem, writing studies with titles such as “In search of the real Fauré Requiem?” and the response “The ‘Real’ Fauré Requiem? The search continues,” or the book À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré with its Première partie, “‘Les’ Requiem de Fauré.” 41 While it may seem excessive to discuss the “Requiems” by Gabriel Fauré, the idea of rejecting the Hamelle version as inaccurate and untrue to Fauré’s original concept has become a popular topic of recent scholarship. Jean-Michel Nectoux’s comprehensive research has encouraged the idea of performing an “original” version of Fauré’s Requiem, since 1972 when he published his first Fauré biography: “A return to the version played at the Madeleine in Fauré’s time seems not only possible but desirable.” 42 His writings, especially the English translation of his second and more substantial biography, have become the source most often cited 40 Orrey, “Gabriel Fauré,” 137. 41 See the writings of Rutter, Huntington, and Houziaux respectively. 42 “Un retour à la version jouée à la Madeleine au temps de Fauré nous semble, non seulement possible, mais souhaitable.” Solf.-1972, 50 (my translation). In his expanded biography from 1990/1991, Nectoux wrote, “It is therefore high time the original orchestration was restored, especially since it is the only one that in the present state of our knowledge can be considered as entirely authentic.” GF-ML, 119. 61 by other scholars in revealing the evolution of the work. 43 As early as 1978, Nectoux attempted to publish an earlier version of Requiem but was thwarted by the copyright on Fauré’s music in France until the publication of his “1893 version” in 1994. 44 In 1978, Robert Orledge perhaps most famously introduced the concept to the English-speaking world: “Hearing Fauré’s Requiem as he originally intended it to be performed would be a revelation to most people.” 45 Most of the argument against the Hamelle score, however, runs not against its obvious flaws but against the enlarged scale and lost intimacy of the work. Intimacy, and a related tone of consolation, is strongly identified with this work’s unique place in the repertoire: …it is certain that the current orchestration does not correspond with the initial intention of the musician who had wanted to give his Requiem softened colors, a reserved and intimate expression. 46 He intended his Requiem to be intimate, peaceful and loving, with none of the horrors of death he so detested in Berlioz’s 1837 Requiem. 47 To a man of such exquisitely refined sensibility as Fauré, Berlioz could only appear as vulgar and Verdi over-emotional. He did not, as his music shows, wish to astonish or dramatize; the key-note of his work lies in the emphasis he puts on the first word of the liturgy, ‘requiem’, which he makes its last. 48 The new picture of the Requiem that emerged from my study of the manuscripts—small-scale, restrained and gentle, with an organ accompaniment 43 GF-ML. See Rutter, preface to R-JR, unnumbered; Orl., xii; and R-F/I, preface, vii. 44 Richard Langham Smith, review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter, Music and Letters 71/1 (February 1990): 143. 45 Orl., 112. Rutter uses this quote to open his “In search” article and the preface to R-JR. For a reprint of the preface, see John Rutter, “Fauré: Requiem in Original Orchestration,” International Choral Bulletin 12/2 (January 1993): 41. 46 “…il est certain que l'orchestration actuelle ne correspond pas au dessein initial du musicien qui avait voulu donner à son Requiem des couleurs adoucies, une expression recueillie et intime.” Solf.-1972, 50 (my translation). 47 Orl., 113. 48 Robertson, 117. 62 amplified and colored by an instrumental ensemble—was as exciting to me as the stripping of varnish from an old master painting. 49 …the published version with full orchestra is far removed from Fauré’s original, more intimate concept of the work… 50 Often scholars quote Fauré himself: “…it [my Requiem] is as GENTLE as myself!!” 51 In the quest for restoring the intimacy of the work and of returning to Fauré’s original conception, some scholars have sought a more authentic version of Requiem. While a full discussion of performance practice as it relates to this work does not fall within the scope of this study, it is important to note the influence this quest for authenticity has had upon performers and scholars alike. 52 A practice to be more recently introduced into Requiem performances is the revival of French Latin pronunciation, which was most prominently employed in the second recording conducted by Philippe Herreweghe in 2002. 53 The Catholic Church’s call for a unified Italianate pronunciation occurred in 1903, and one can further argue that, as the decree was slow to be adopted, especially considering France’s history of disunity, all French choirs performing in Fauré’s lifetime likely would have used French Latin pronunciation to a greater degree than Italian Latin pronunciation. 54 The aforementioned recording led by Herreweghe is 49 Rutter, “In search,” 59. 50 Rutter, preface to R-JR, unnumbered. 51 “…elle [mon Requiem] est d’un caractère DOUX comme moi-même!!” Gabriel Fauré to Eugène Ysaÿe, Paris, 4 August 1900 in Corr., letter 128, 240 (244). 52 For Nectoux’s “Performance Notes,” see R-JMN1, xxii-xxiii; and R-JMN2, xviii. 53 Philippe Herreweghe, dir., Fauré Requiem (Version pour grand orchestre) [R-JMN2] and Frank Symphony in D Minor, La Chapelle Royale, Orchestre des Champs Élysées (Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 901771, 2002). Nectoux includes a brief description of French Latin pronunciation in his scores. See R-JMN1, xxiii; and R-JMN2, xviii. For a more extensive description including an International Phonetic Alphabet transcription of the entire text of Requiem and a bibliography, see Chamberlain, Mehaffey, and Reeves, 556-562. 54 In a response to this decree, Camille Saint-Saëns argued for retaining French Latin pronunciation. See Camille Saint-Saëns, “La Prononciation du latin dans l’Église de France” in 63 also exceptional for its use of a harmonium, with its distinctive color, instead of an organ as mentioned in a letter by Fauré: “An organ would be necessary because it accompanies the whole way through, but a loud harmonium would do instead.” 55 This statement underscores Fauré’s desire to have an organ of any kind, even when performing the 1900 version with full orchestra. Conductors and vocalists are likely to have particular concerns about the vocal timbre required. In other parts of this letter, Fauré also describes some of the characteristics he desired and detested in his soloists. One could make a case for two different kinds of treble sections: boy’s (or children’s) voices, which would resemble the Madeleine choir, or women’s voices, which were used for all performances outside of the Madeleine, even for the solo. Nectoux suggests a mixed section of adult and child trebles to create the “vocal colour sought by the composer,” which undoubtedly would be affected by the choice of Latin diction. 56 Performing the 1888 version In a 1996 article in the Choral Journal, Robert Huntington suggests: “One historically authentic performance option, generally not considered by conductors, is the 1888 version of the five original movements.” 57 Little further discussion has been made in support of performing an 1888 version though a strong case can be made that it would École Buissonnière (Paris: Lafitte, 1913): 177-186. Translated by Rollin Smith in Rollin Smith, Saint-Saëns and the Organ (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1992), 210-216. 55 “Un orgue serait nécessaire car il accompagne tout le temps, mais à son défaut un fort harmonium.” Gabriel Fauré to Eugène Ysaÿe, [Paris], [4 August 1900], in Corr., letter 128, 240 (244). 56 R-JMN2, xxii. 57 Huntington, 9. 64 be the easiest to uncover, as the earliest performed and considering the only extant manuscripts in the composer’s hand are for this version (minus Pie Jesu). The added woodwind and brass parts in the manuscripts would need to be omitted to correspond with the known performing forces in 1888, though there would be a question of how many layers to eliminate in recreating one of the 1888 performances. 58 Without a manuscript for Pie Jesu, one could reduce the orchestration of the printed 1900 version to match the other movements. It is most likely this idea is rejected out of an attachment to the baritone solo movements and the sense of incompleteness generated by performed five-sevenths of such a well-known and beloved work. Early in his research, Nectoux also argued that the 1888 version is itself incomplete, a preliminary to the 1893 version: I have studied with great care the very complicated genesis of Fauré’s work and I am sure that the work and his first orchestration were not really finished until 1893. The first version is dated 1888-93 and the second 1899-1900. 59 In his 1978 biography, Orledge refers to a publication “planned (London, 1983; ed. Jean-Michel Nectoux)” of the 1888 version. 60 In 1990, Richard Langham Smith 58 This is the solution recommend by Phillip Legge in his self-published edition. See Legge, table of contents in Gabriel Fauré, Requiem in D Minor, Opus 48 (1888/1893 Version), edited by Philip Legge, self-published, 2005 (hereafter cited as R-PL). 59 Nectoux to Scott, [location unknown], 1 June 1979, in Scott, 37. Using language similar to Rutter’s edition: the recording of R-JMN1 conducted by Herreweghe was initially called the “original version.” The statement from this letter is a modification of the dates Nectoux and Zimmermann offer in the “Concluding Remarks” of their 1977/1978 edition: “… there are two instrumentations of the Requiem: the first from 1887/1888 and the second in the form known today, which the composer had prepared for printing in 1900.” Gabriel Fauré, Messe de Requiem, edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux and Reiner Zimmermann (Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1978, 2 nd ed., Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1995), 105 (hereafter cited as R-JMNZ). 60 Orl., 296. 65 mentions an edition of the 1888 version by Nectoux available for rent by Durand, but this does not appear to have been widely used or is not currently available. 61 Finding an authentic “middle” ground: the 1893 version A modern performer interested in authenticity must find a seven-movement version that does not seem as impersonal as the 1900 version. In 1888, Fauré referred to his work as “le petit Requiem” [the little Requiem]. 62 Not only is it brief compared to other canonical settings (performing all seven movements takes approximately 35 minutes), but it also requires smaller performing forces. In 1903, the Maîtrise of the Madeleine, the first chorus to perform the Requiem, was said to consist of thirty boys, 63 and payroll records for the Madeleine in January 1888 provides the number of regular men—five basses and four tenors—which could be supplemented for special occasions. 64 The relatively small size of the Madeleine choir, even when augmented for performances of a choral-orchestral work, would call for a smaller instrumental ensemble to balance it. Counting the chorus and the accompaniment of “some twenty strings, one or two harps, timpani and assorted brass (horns, trumpets 61 This edition could not be located for this study. 62 Gabriel Fauré to Paul Poujaud, Paris, 15 January 1888, in Corr., letter 66, 138. 63 Fauré sometimes deplored his daily rehearsals with the Maîtrise; on at least one occasion he referred to them as his “geese.” “A la Madeleine je perds la tête avec la musique de Bréville (trop difficile pour mes oies) pour le marriage de son frère samedi.” [At the Madeleine I am going out of my mind with Bréville’s music (too difficult for my gaggle of geese) for his brother’s wedding on Saturday.] Gabriel Fauré to Marguerite Baugnies, location unknown, c. 20 February 1895, in Corr., letter 116, 228 (230). 64 GF-ML, 26. 66 and trombones)” occasionally used for the Madeleine’s major musical events, Nectoux finds Requiem was “conceived for around sixty performers.” 65 Scholars have isolated what is now known as the 1893 version. Drawing the boundaries around this middle version is one of the greatest challenges in the “search for the ‘real’ Fauré Requiem.” In his book, Houziaux refers to the later Requiem versions as “une découverte” [a discovery] (1893) and “une énigme” [an enigma] (1900). 66 In fact, creating editions of this “middle ground” is more a process of reconstruction with a greater need for deductive reasoning than simply a close reading of the source materials on the part of the editor. Published in 1984/5 by Hinshaw in the United States and Oxford for the rest of the world (excluding a few countries, most notably France), John Rutter’s edition “with Fauré’s original chamber instrumentation” was the first widely available attempt at a reduced orchestration of the seven movements (see Table 2.4). 67 Rutter first outlined some of the problems in his article for The American Organist, “In search of the real Fauré Requiem.” 68 He based this edition primarily upon the 1888 manuscript, but he also referred to the Hamelle score, particularly for the movements missing from the manuscript: Pie Jesu, Offertoire, and Libera me. 65 GF-ML, 26; Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, xi. 66 Houziaux, 17, 37. 67 This edition has been used for recordings on several occasions. For a performance conducted by John Rutter, see John Rutter, dir., Fauré Requiem and Other Choral Music, The Cambridge Singers, Members of the City of London Sinfonia (Collegium compact disk COLCD109, 1984). For a brief discussion of this edition’s popularity and the copyright restriction in France, Richard Langham Smith, Review of À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré, ou l’Authenticité musicale en questions by Mutien-Omer Houziaux. Music and Letters 86/4 (November 2005): 649. 68 This article includes side-by-side musical examples from the Hamelle print and his edition. Rutter, “In search.” 67 Figure 2.4 Modern Performing Editions of Fauré’s Requiem. Instrumentation abbreviations follow the system: woodwinds [fl-ob-cl-bn]/brass [hn-tp-tbn-tuba]/percussion/harp/organ/strings (“violin solo” indicates the use of a single violin in the place of a full violin section). Except for the Hamelle publications, these scores are not available in France. Publisher Type: catalog no. Year Editor Comments Novello Full score/parts: for hire Vocal-SATB: 20110 Vocal-SSA: 20136 1975 Desmond Ratcliffe (editor and arranger) - instrumentation: 2022/4230/tmp/hp/org/str - sources: A, B - In addition to the Latin text, the SSA vocal score contains an adaptation from the English Missal, which is not included in the SATB score. Edition Peters Full score: EP 9563 Study: EP 9563A Vocal: EP 9562 1977/ 1978 (rev. 1995) Jean-Michel Nectoux and Reiner Zimmerman - instrumentation: 2022/4230/tmp/2hp/org/str - sources: A, B - The only apparent differences of the second edition (copyright 1995) are the addition of the word “Urtext” to the cover and the omission of the signature date (1977) from the “Nachwort/Postface/Concluding Remarks.” Eulenburg Study: 1096 1978 Roger Fiske and Paul Inwood - instrumentation: 2022/4230/tmp/hp/org/str - source: B Hinshaw Music Full score: 147A Parts: 147B Vocal: 147 1984 John Rutter - instrumentation: 0002/4200/tmp/hp/org/str (violin solo) - sources: A, B - All scores contain Latin and English texts. The English text is a free translation by Rutter. - In the Preface, Rutter denotes instruments as “essential” and “dispensable.” With this system, it is possible to reduce the orchestra to a minimum of 2 horns, harp, organ, and strings. - The organ part is in vocal score, which can also be used for a reduced accompaniment of organ and piano. 68 Table 2.4 (continued) Publisher Type: catalog no. Year Editor Comments Oxford University Press Full score (1985): 336102-7 Vocal (1989): 336103-5 1985 John Rutter - reprint of the Hinshaw edition (see above) - The Oxford publication is available worldwide, except in France and the United States. The Hinshaw publication is available in the United States only. Hamelle-Leduc [Version 1893] Full score: AL 28 941 Study: AL 28 959 Vocal: AL 28 943 1994 (rev. 2000) Jean-Michel Nectoux and Roger Delage - instrumentation: 0000/2230/tmp/hp/org/str (violin solo) - sources: see Table 2.2 - It is interesting to note the personnel list includes a “Chœur d’enfants” [children’s chorus] and a “Chœur d’hommes” [men’s chorus]. - The second edition contains musical corrections. Hamelle-Leduc [Version de concert, 1900] Full score: AL 28 944 Study: AL 28 961 Vocal: AL 28 946 1998 Jean-Michel Nectoux - instrumentation: 2022/4230/tmp/hp/org/str - sources: see Table 2.2 - It is interesting to note the change from R-JMN1’s personnel list to a unified “Chœur mixte.” Bärenreiter Vocal: BA 7513 2002 Ingo Bredenbach - instrumentation: This is solely an arrangement for organ. - sources: not specified Carus-Verlag Full score: 27.312/00 Study: 27.312/07 Vocal: 27.312/03 2005 Marc Rigaudière - instrumentation: 2022/4230/tmp/hp/org/str - primary sources (“Quellen”): B, E, F - secondary sources (“Weitere Quellen”): A, C, D, G - identified as the “version symphonique, 1900” Self-published, distributed by the Choral Public Domain Library Full score: 11117 Vocal: 13611 2005 Philipp Legge - instrumentation: 0002/4230/tmp/hp.org/str (violin solo) - sources: B1 and Rutter edition - “essential” and “dispensible” [sic] instrumentation marked with lists for 1888- and 1893-style orchestrations (with no adjustment of the number of movements, etc.). 69 The orchestra of this edition consists of four horns, two trumpets, three trombones, timpani, harp, violin solo, the low-voice string ensemble, and organ. Regarding the orchestration, Rutter makes some significant editorial decisions: In the case of Offertoire, instruments available for the 1888 version could have played the orchestration of the published version, and so Rutter leaves this unchanged. For Libera me, Rutter omits the violin section of the 1900 version and considers the remaining orchestration suitable to the orchestra available for the 1893 version. He includes a violin solo in In paradisum without comment (this is the violin section part from the 1900 version). 1 A few of Rutter’s other editorial decisions perhaps reveal a concern similar to Hamelle’s regarding performability and marketability: He includes a singing English translation/adaptation in both the full and vocal scores. The vocal score (which includes the organ part for performance) also can serve as an arrangement for keyboard accompaniment: piano and organ or two pianos. 2 Rutter also suggests further ways in which to reduce the orchestration (and therefore cut expenses) designating the bassoons, two of the horns, trumpets, and timpani as dispensable and offering other solutions to reducing instrumentation in particular movements or eliminating the bass divisi. Based on Rutter’s edition in combination with his own scholarship, Phillip Legge created a self-published edition of Fauré’s Requiem distributed through the Choral Public Domain Library website. At the time, Legge did not consult the 1888 manuscripts, choosing to reconstruct this edition from the 1900 version and the work of other scholars: 1 For the most part, this violin solo would then be doubled by a viola solo that had been eliminated in the 1900 version. 2 For more information about this reduction, see Rutter, “The Organ Part,” in the vocal score of R-JR, unnumbered. 70 I would like to acknowledge an obvious debt to the work of John Rutter in studying aspects of the Requiem; however this edition is completely independent of it, aside from one or two hints on re-voicing the string parts, as I have preferred to work backwards from the 1900 version towards finding the elusive goal of an equally satisfying alternate solution. 3 However, it is hard to argue the independence of this edition considering the extreme similarity of significant choices such as the use of the combined violin and viola solos in In paradisum, a decision previously unique to Rutter. Upon the publication of Rutter’s edition, Nectoux openly criticized the effort in the International Choral Bulletin: [Presenting Rutter’s edition as the original form of the Requiem] reveals a charming imagination, but can in no way be considered as a reference version for Fauré’s original… I am all the more keen to dissociate [sic] myself from his work as he seems to want to use my name, quoted twice in his preface, as a scientific guarantee of which I would like to withdraw herewith most categorically. 4 While acknowledging the difficulty in tracing the evolution of this work, here Nectoux expresses his concerns regarding Rutter’s suggestions for flexibility in orchestration, the composition of the orchestra in this edition, and Rutter’s reading of the editorial markings in the manuscripts (Source A). According to Nectoux, the third and fourth horn parts of Libera me, inserted after the manuscript had been drafted, were intended for the 1900 version. He makes the same case for In paradisum, rejecting all four horn parts and the violin part (the s of “violons” is clear in the 1888 manuscript, 3 Legge, editorial notes to R-PL, 117. 4 “Une telle conception fair prevue d’une charmante fantaisie, mais ne saurait constituer une version de reference de la version originale de Fauré… Je tiens d’autant plus à me désolidariser de son travail que mon nom, cite par deux fois dans sa preface, semble vouloir être utilize comme une caution scientifique que je tiens ici à retirer de la manière la plus catégorique.” Jean-Michel Nectoux, “Letter by Jean-Michel Nectoux,” International Choral Bulletin 12/4 (July 1993): 13-14 (French original on page 39, translator unknown). 71 signifying it was a later addition and meant for a section rather than a soloist; see Figure 2.2). In his score preface, Rutter acknowledges the questions still left in creating such an edition—“What, then, is the ‘ideal version’ of the Requiem? There can be no final answer unless new sources come to light…”—and in his open response to Nectoux, he says: I respectfully doubt whether we can be categorically sure that Fauré intended on definite scoring for the work (though I shall be happy to be proved wrong), and it seemed to me right in the preface to my essentially practical edition to point out that some instrumentation may not be inadmissible in performance or necessarily at variance with Fauré’s wishes or practice during the years he performed the work at the Madeleine. 5 Houziaux carries Nectoux’s torch in his book (which contains an extensive preface by Nectoux) in a discussion of the two editions. 6 He completely disagrees with the use of an English singing translation: The justification of the translation [by Rutter] is based on the argument of a necessary comprehension of the texts by the singers and by the public. For Rutter, the principle of translation is even less a rejection of the Latin language; comprising an important part of Catholic France in the nineteenth century, it is much less important for Protestant Americans (and also post-Conciliar Catholics) of the twentieth century. 7 5 Rutter, preface to R-JR, unnumbered; John Rutter, “Reply to Jean Nectoux’s Letter on the Fauré Requiem,” International Choral Bulletin 13/1 (October 1993): 34. 6 Houziaux, 17-68. 7 “La justification de la traduction s’appuie sur l’argument d’une nécessaire comprehension des texts par les chanteurs et chanteuses comme par le public. Pour Rutter, le principe de la traduction est d’autant moins à rejeter que la langue latine, comprise par une partie importante de la France catholique du XIX e siècle, l’est beaucoup moins par l’Amérique protestante (et meme catholique post-conciliaire) du XXe siècle.” Houziaux, 21 (my translation). 72 Richard Langham Smith also expressed concerns regarding this edition in his review for Music and Letters. 8 This “Nectoux-Rutter” controversy is short lived; Rutter does not appear to have responded any further after his letter in the International Choral Bulletin. However, this controversy helps shed light on authenticity issues surrounding an 1893 version and Rutter’s edition in particular. Most performers are better acquainted with the Rutter edition than Nectoux’s, and Rutter’s has received many more performances. Rutter’s edition is geared to increase the options for performance, providing keyboard reductions and singable English texts. The edition purports to fulfill the spirit of Fauré’s different versions as opposed to the letter of any one of them. Since the 1970s, Nectoux had been reviewing source material (some not available to Rutter) for his own edition. As Fauré’s compositions were, and continue to be, protected by copyright in France, Hamelle frustrated Nectoux’s attempts for publication for decades, and the appearance of Rutter’s edition preempted Nectoux’s labours, Nectoux describes this process: The work of restoring the original score was long and delicate… completed in 1977, it was subjected to the heat of performance at the time of a private hearing given on February 18, 1978… in the presence of Mrs. Emmanuel Fauré-Fremiet, daughter-in-law of the musician… After having in 1972, considered favorably the idea of publishing the first version of the Requiem, the publisher [Hamelle] alas gave a formal refusal to the Fauré heirs three years later. Various attempts to publish the score in the United States and in Great Britain could not succeed… Durand Editions expressed their interest, but Hamelle remained inflexible in their 8 Richard Langham Smith, Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter, Music and Letters 71/1 (February 1990): 143-44. 73 position: there existed in their eyes only one version, that which they had published in 1900/1901. 9 In 1994, Nectoux succeeded in getting his chamber score published, with Roger Delage listed as co-editor, by Hamelle-Leduc, which had been recorded by Herreweghe seven years earlier (it has since been republished with corrections in 2000). 10 Nectoux consulted an amazing variety of sources for his edition beginning with the two used by John Rutter, the 1888 manuscript and the 1900/1901 Hamelle publication (Sources A and B, see Table 2.2), and furthermore using original choral and orchestral parts copied by the Madeleine’s copyist, autograph parts fragments found at the Madeleine, a Hamelle vocal score edited by Gabriel Fauré, a Hamelle full score edited by Nadia Boulanger, and the sketchbooks (Sources C-G, see Table 2.2; this figure also includes Nectoux’s categorization of primary and secondary sources for both of his editions). With one exception, the list of instruments used in Nectoux’s edition matches that in Rutter’s (Nectoux includes only two horns). Despite this resemblance, these editors chose to employ the instruments differently at several notable moments (see Nectoux’s concerns regarding Rutter’s edition above). A noticeable change in Nectoux’s edition is 9 “Le travail de restitution de la partition originale fut long et délicat… achevé en 1977, il fut soumis au feu de l’exécution lors d’une audition privée, donnée le 18 février 1978… en presence de M me Emanuel Fauré-Fremiet, belle-fille du musicien… Après avoir, en 1972, envisage favorablement l’idée de publier la première version du Requiem, l’éditeur [Hamelle] opposait hélas un refus formel aux héritiers Fauré, trios années plus tard. Diverses tentatives de publier la partition aux États-Unis et en Grande-Bretagne ne purent aboutir… Les editions Durand manifestèrent leur intérêt, mais les editions Hamelle restaient inflexibles sur leur position: il n’existait à leurs yeux qu’une seule version, celle qu’elles avaient publiée en 1900-1901.” Nectoux, preface to Houziaux, vii-ix (my translation). 10 For the purposes of this study, Nectoux is considered the primary editor of this edition as well as the Peters edition, though both are attributed to two editors. Nectoux receives the sole credit for the R-JMN1 prefatory material; its date stamp, 1970-1994, clearly takes into account the period of Nectoux’s work and the complications surrounding the edition’s publication. R-JMN1, xiv. Philippe Herreweghe, dir., Fauré: Messe de Requiem (Version 1893), Le Chapelle Royale, Ensemble Musique Oblique (Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 801292, 1988). 74 the alteration of the rhythm of the horn parts in Libera me during the short transition to the “Dies irae” section (m. 53). All other editions use a hemiola rhythm (three half notes in a six-four meter). Nectoux’s has repeated quarter notes with a crescendo. This alteration receives no comments in the critical notes at the end of the full score. In order to match the instrumental parts, Nectoux significantly alters the baritone’s text underlay and rhythm in the “Hostias” (mm. 58-61) making the return of the “Te decet” theme more obvious through the use of sustained quarter notes: We adopt the prosody appearing in the harp and viola parts (in MCA) and give the earlier version here (preferable): [giving a musical example of the original version]. 11 The edition also includes “Performance Notes” in which Nectoux comments on the preferences for soloists, the size and nature of the chorus and orchestra, and the use of French Latin pronunciation. 12 It is particularly interesting to note a subtle reference to the flexibility of Rutter’s edition; Nectoux states directly, “The brass parts cannot be omitted or modified.” 13 A larger question should be asked: “what is the real ‘1893 version’?”—or better still “why draw the boundary around 1893?” In this year, though the Requiem consisted of seven movements, the “O Domine” sections of Offertoire were not yet appended to the “Hostias” in full performances of the Requiem (see Figure 2.1). Technically an 1893 version would not contain the same amount of music as the 1900 version though all 11 “Nous adoptons la prosodie apparaissant sur les parties de harpe et d’alto (dans MCA [Source C, Table 2.2]) et donnons ici la version postérieure (preferable).” Nectoux, corrections in R- JMN1, 128 (my translation). 12 Nectoux, performance notes to R-JMN1, xxii-xxiii. Some of these suggestions can be observed in Nectoux’s collaboration with Philippe Herreweghe in his recording. 13 Nectoux, performance notes to R-JMN1, xxiii. 75 editions of the 1893 version to date contain the “O Domine” sections with the justification that Fauré completed the movement in 1893, and the year 1894 is not used due to the more substantial changes in orchestration brought about by this time. The afore-mentioned May 1894 performance at the Théâtre de la Bodinière, directed by Eugène d’Harcourt, involved 170 performers, including three trombonists. Jean-Michel Nectoux is more interested in returning to the performance directed by Fauré on January 21, 1893 with “the original orchestration [of] the Madeleine.” 14 The viability of the 1900 version Even considering the argument of authenticity, the 1900 version cannot be fully discredited or discarded. Fauré accepted this version (aside from the errors in the first piano-vocal score). He conducted several of the performances using these materials (as did his famous student, Nadia Boulanger) and heard or advised other performances. 15 This is most documented in his letters to Eugène Ysaÿe, conductor of the October 28, 1900 performance at the Alhambra Theatre in Brussels. 16 He celebrated the sound of the violin section: “You’ll see, after all those violas, how angelic the violins sound in the Sanctus!!!” 17 14 See Houziaux, 11; GF-ML, 540. 15 However, Nadia Boulanger did make corrections in her full score in preparation for a performance she conducted (Source F). 16 See Corr., letters 128, 129, and 132. 17 “Tu verras combien, après tous ces altos, les violons sont angéliques dans le Sanctus!!!” Fauré to Ysaÿe, [October 1900] in Corr., letter 132, 246 (249). 76 As the chorus of the Madeleine was comprised of men and boys, the 1900 version also standardized the inclusion of the women in the chorus and a female treble soloist, certainly Fauré’s preference for all possible performances. 18 In terms of practicability, while the 1893 version may be useful to smaller choral organizations like church choirs, “[t]his published version of the Requiem, which we may call the ‘symphonic’ version, is extremely practicable for performances in large concert halls with large choirs.” 19 Aside from questions of accuracy, one must appreciate the nearly immediate popularity this version generated. This success and the international exposure given him by this work surprised him—“My Requiem’s being played in Brussels, Nancy, Marseilles and at the Paris Conservatoire! You wait, I’ll soon be a celebrated composer!” 20 Hamelle’s business sense may have altered Fauré’s musical one, but Hamelle may have been right to ask for something more marketable. However, the inconsistencies and errors of the 1900/1901 performing materials need to be addressed. Desmond Ratcliffe edited and arranged the first modern edition, published by Novello in 1975. This includes a singing translation and has the unique option of a treble (SSA) choir arrangement (the mixed and treble choir versions use the same full score and parts). Harry Christopher used the Novello SATB vocal score for his 18 According to Nectoux, “[t]he Choir of the Madeleine, for which Fauré was responsible, did not possess any female voices, in accordance with the long respected Roman tradition…” Nectoux, foreword to R-JMN1, xi. The reluctance to employ female musicians in the Church was apparently also the impetus for Cherubini to compose a second requiem setting for men’s voices. DI, 193. 19 GF-ML, 118. 20 “On joue mon Requiem à Bruxelles, et à Nancy, et à Marseille, et à Paris, au Conservatoire! Vous verrez que je vais devenir un musician connu!” Gabriel Fauré to Willy, October 1900, as quoted in GF-LV, 140 (119). This letter is not included in Corr. 77 recording with The Sixteen. 21 Fiske and Inwood’s edition from 1978 lists their corrections in the textual notes, but it is only available in a study score with no corresponding instrumental parts. 22 Peters, Hamelle-Leduc and Carus publish the three most substantive modern editions of the 1900 version. Jean-Michel Nectoux has led Fauré scholarship for decades, and Peters first published the 1900 version co-edited by Nectoux and Reiner Zimmerman in 1977/1978, which was republished with a new copyright date of 1995 without comment. 23 In 1998, Hamelle, now acquired by Alphonse Leduc, published a similar edition without the attribution to Zimmerman. As stated earlier, Nectoux draws his information from a wide swath of sources, and though he cites the 1888 manuscript as a secondary source for his 1900 edition it is clear that it has a strong impact, overriding some the changes in the Hamelle print: for example, here In paradisum ends with a sustained D in the organ (and an arco marking for the final quarter note in the second cellos and basses). Intriguingly Nectoux returns to the 1900 version text underlay for the Hostias, and he does not restore the timpani part to the first movement. The Carus edition is not available for sale in France but may offer a more inexpensive alternative for performers. French musicologist Marc Rigaudière primarily 21 Eleanor Dragonetti, email to author, 21 November 2008. Harry Christopher, dir., Mozart: Vespers and Fauré: Requiem, The Sixteen, Academy of St. Martin in the Fields (Coro compact disc COR16057, 2008). 22 Fiske and Inwood, textual notes to R-F/I, viii-xi. 23 The piano-vocal score bears the copyright date of 1977 (the year also provided in the “Concluding Remarks” of the first edition), while the first edition full score was copyrighted in 1978. Scott was not able to integrate this score into his dissertation: “Only the full score of this edition was available for examination, and it did not arrive in the United States until after most of the final copy of this paper had been typed… The first version [of Requiem]… is still not available.” Scott, 182. 78 based his scholarship on the 1900 and 1901 Hamelle prints though he consulted many of the sources Nectoux did for his 1983 edition (see Table 2.4). As Hans Ryschawy from Carus, explains: We decided to edit the symphonic version of 1900 because this is the only version which could be regarded as a definite and accepted version by Fauré because it was published during his lifetime (Paris, 1901)… [Nectoux] has made some editorial decisions which I regard as doubtful with regard to practices followed in modern scolarely [sic] editions. Our edition makes a clear distinction between the readings of the sources and but a very few editorial additions. Essentially Rigaudière provides a diplomatic transcription of the Hamelle 1901 print fixing errata and providing materials more in accord with modern editorial practice without undertaking any sense of restoration to a conceptual “original version.” Publishing and performing excerpts from Opus 48 Among a discussion of Requiem performing editions, it seems appropriate to include a discussion of the common practice of performing excerpts from the work. Almost forty years ago, church music scholar Arthur Hutchings strongly criticized excerpting while defending Fauré’s Requiem against an earlier published unfavorable comparison to Brahms’s setting: Let us notice, however, that certain items from Brahms’s Requiem are used effectively as part-songs and anthems, whereas such a treatment of the Fauré Requiem is unthinkable. Is it heinous to vary the number of singers or players employed for certain works not originally intended for large forces? We have good reason to complain if what purports to be a professional London or BBC performance uses a larger choir than the style of a work demands in the chosen building, and therefore includes others than the best singers. 24 24 Arthur Hutchings, “A Grand Noise,” The Musical Times 102/1425 (November 1961): 695. It is intriguing to note that Brahms himself promoted the idea of excerpting movements from his Requiem to publisher Rieter-Biedermann—“Above all the work [Ein deutsches Requiem] is 79 When Peter Wishart replied in the Musical Times he cited Nadia Boulanger: The Latin text of the Requiem is simply not so suitable for such use in the country as the biblical texts chosen by Brahms…I confess to having programmed Pie Jesu from Fauré’s Requiem as a separate item of a concert on at least two occasions. In this I merely follow the example of my teacher Nadia Boulanger, herself a Roman Catholic and a pupil of Fauré to boot. 25 Hamelle published several excerpts during and around Fauré’s lifetime (see Table 2.5). 26 Though performing individual movements was and still is often practiced, Fauré did not approve of excerpting. In a letter to Edgard Hamelle on March 30, 1924 he wrote about the excerpting of Pie Jesu: It had its place and effect in the total execution of the Requiem. As a result of being be heard separately and, more often than not, badly interpreted, it loses all its significance. It is vulgarized, and soon one would not want to hear it any more!! 27 The various editions and arrangements of excerpts, particularly of Sanctus and Pie Jesu, published today are too numerous to account for in this study. 28 Even if they are used heavily, it is important to keep in mind Fauré’s concept of a totality, of the place of each movement within a whole. The genesis of this work stretched across decades but resulted in an opus imbued with meaning. practical, in that every movement can be done alone.” As quoted in Jan Swafford, Johannes Brahms: A Biography (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997), 331. 25 Peter Wishart, “Fauré and Brahms Requiems, ” The Musical Times 103/1427 (January 1962): 33. 26 After paying an initial fee, Hamelle retained all the rights for publication. It would be profitable for him to create new publications from popular works, which would be of interest to amateurs but over which Fauré had no control. 27 “Il avait sa place et son effect dans l'exécution totale du Requiem. A force d'être entendu à part et, le plus souvent, mal interprété, il perd toute sa signification. Il se vulgarise, bientôt on ne voudra plus l'entendre!!” Gabriel Fauré to Edgard Hamelle, [location unknown], 30 March 1924, as quoted in Nectoux, preface to Houziaux, xxii (my translation). 28 However, an arrangement worth mentioning, striking for its hearkening back to the nineteenth-century transcription, is one for piano by Emile Naoumoff, which he has also recorded for Sony. Gabriel Fauré, Requiem, Op. 48 (1887/1888), transcribed by Emile Naoumoff (Mainz: Schott Musik International, 2001). 80 Table 2.5 Excerpts from Fauré’s Requiem Published by Hamelle Movement Year Key (Voice) Comments Pie Jesu 1900 B-flat (soprano or tenor) plate number: 4531 arranged for voice and organ (in the original key) 1901 A-flat (mezzo-soprano) plate number: 4675 arranged for voice and piano (coincidentally in the key of the original sketches) 1911 C (tenor) 1927 G-flat (contralto) commemorative print for the death of the composer 1929 unknown (mezzo) arranged for piano and violin or cello accompaniment 1932 B-flat (baritone or mezzo) arranged with French words by A. L. Hettich and entitled “Pitié!” Libera me 1931 unknown (baritone or mezzo) arranged for solo voice and organ by Omer Letorey with Latin and French texts Source: Houziaux, xxii, n. 21. However, Nectoux appears to have inadvertently switched the keys of the first two publications. The remaining publications could not be located for this study. 81 CHAPTER 3 THE CO-EXISTENCE OF TRADITION AND INNOVATION IN OPUS 48 A singular Requiem While the various versions and editions of Fauré’s Requiem cause problems for authentic performance practice, the work as an entity holds a unique place in the genre. Most writers focus on the influence Fauré’s unconventional religious beliefs had upon his composition; this approach implies that, through his choice of texts, he created a personal message through the music, one countering that of his predecessors. Here are four examples: Nadia Boulanger, former student of Fauré, in 1922: The Church may judge and condemn; the master [Fauré] has never expounded this view, any more than he has striven to follow the dogmatism of the text. It might be said that he understood religion more after the fashion of the tender passages in the Gospel according to St. John, following St. Francis of Assisi rather than St. Bernard or Bossuet. His voice seems to interpose itself between heaven and men; usually peaceful, quiet and fervent, sometimes grave and sad, but never menacing or dramatic. 1 1 “…l’Église nous peut juger, condamner. Cela, le Maître ne l’a jamais exprimé, pas plus qu’il ne s’est attaché à suivre l’esprit dogmatique du texte. La religion, on dirait qu’il la comprend plutôt à la manière des plus doux episodes de l'Évangile selon S t Jean – plutôt selon S t François d’Assise que selon S t Bernard, ou selon Bossuet… Ses voix semblent s’interposer ente le ciel et les homes; generalement paisibles, quiètes et ferventes, elles sot graves parfois, et tristes – 82 Émile Vuillermoz, former student of Fauré, in 1962: This Requiem is, if I dare say so, the work of a disbeliever who respects the belief of others… A requiem’s purpose is to assuage the grief of a family or a crowd in prayer, while reminding them of the vistas their religious beliefs can open to them when they enjoy eternal rest… [Verdi’s and Berlioz’s] view of divine justice evidently did not suit Fauré. His music played a more compassionate role. Fauré thus begins by abandoning the nightmarish representation of the Dies irae… He makes only a fleeting allusion to the reassuring promises God made to Abraham and his descendants in his Offertory. Of the liturgical texts, he only retains those which have the character of a prayer, of supplication, of a look toward heaven and not toward hell. 2 Jean-Michel Nectoux, Fauré biographer, in 1990/1991: Fauré’s attitude towards the Missa pro defunctis, as presented in the Roman Catholic rite, was not neutral; his views about how to treat it came not only from the composer in him but also, more profoundly, from his feelings as a man. To begin with he permitted himself to make several changes in the liturgical text. 3 Jessica Duchen, Fauré biographer, in 2000: Critics accused the Requiem of various musical and liturgical sins – most of all, that the emphasis did not fall on the Day of Judgement [sic] and the horrors of hell. But Fauré’s Requiem, at its deepest level, takes it cue not from outside but from deep within, from Fauré’s own attitude to death and an afterlife. 4 However, we need to exercise caution in explaining everything away so quickly; regarding Fauré’s text choices and personal intentions, Jean-Michel Nectoux hints that more needs to be considered: manaçantes, jamais – ni dramatiques.” Nadia Boulanger, “La Musique religieuse,” la Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 299. Translated by Orrey in Kœchlin, Fauré, 27-28. 2 “Ce Requiem est, si l’on ose dire, l’œuvre d’un incroyant respectueux des croyances d’autrui… Un Requiem a pour mission de bercer la douleur d’une famille ou d’une foule en prière, tout en leur rappelant les perspectives que peuvent leur ouvrir leurs croyances religieuses lorsque’elles goûteront l’éternel repos… Cet aspect un peu trop medieval de la justice divine ne convient évidemment pas à Fauré. Il confie à sa musique un role beaucoup plus compatissant… Fauré commence donc par abandoner le film de cauchemar du Dies iræ… In ne fera qu’une fugitive allusion dans son Offertoire aux rassurantes promesses que Dieu fit jadis à Abraham et sa descendance. Des texts liturgiques, il ne retiendra que ceux qui ont le caractère d’une prière, d’une imploration, d’un regard tourné vers le ciel, et non vers l’enfer.” Vuillermoz, Fauré, 93-94 (74-75). 3 GF-ML, 123. 4 Jessica Duchen, Gabriel Fauré (London: Phaidon Press Limited, 2000), 81. 83 His omission of the Dies irae has been explained as a function of the gentle aesthetic propounded by the work as a whole, which, as it were, forbade the inclusion of the famous sequence describing the anger of the God of Abraham and Jacob. This is a somewhat simplistic view. The composer’s real attitude, it seems to me, is rather more complex. 5 This requiem’s text clearly does not conform to the standard the Council of Trent established in the sixteenth century. There are many text changes, ranging from barely noticeable alterations of certain lines of text—the addition of the accentuating “O” before “Domine Jesu Christe” in the second movement, for example—to large-scale cuts, most evident in the omission of the sequence “Dies irae” (see Figure 3.1). 6 At the Council of Trent this sequence was officially included in the Mass for the Dead. 7 This lengthy poem emphasizes the terrors of the Day of Judgment. 8 Writers tend to overemphasize Fauré’s alterations of the requiem texts, particularly the omission of “Dies irae,” to explain the singularity of this work. Not all of these text changes are the byproduct of the personal message typically assigned to Fauré’s Requiem. Instead diverse forces intersected to shape the composer and his work. Although Fiske and Inwood have difficulty finding Requiem’s place in the nineteenth century, they find hints of ancient and contemporary influences in Requiem: 5 GF-ML, 123. 6 To differentiate between a text and musical settings of the text, the following format has been used within the body of this paper: a title enclosed in quotation marks denotes the text itself; an italicized title denotes a musical setting of the text. For quoted material, the format of its source has been preserved. 7 The Council of Trent reduced the number of sequences permitted to four: “Veni sancte spiritus” for Pentecost, “Lauda Sion” for Corpus Christi, and “Dies irae” for the Requiem. A fifth, “Stabat Mater,” for Good Friday and for the Feast of the Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was added in 1727. 8 In fact the final six lines (including the concluding “Pie Jesu”) are considered a late addition not only because of the change of rhyme scheme but also the change of voice (from first person to third person) and tone, particularly in the final couplet. Ron Jeffers, Translations and Annotations of Choral Repertoire, Volume I: Sacred Latin Texts (Corvallis, OR: earthsongs, 1988), 71; Robertson, 20. 84 Table 3.1 Requiem’s Text Discrepancies from the Roman Rite. The most significant discrepancies have been italicized. This figure does not include obvious misspellings of the Latin text in the original Hamelle print (e.g. hymnus for hymnes, gloriae for gloria, obscuro for obscurum). Movement Description I. Introït et Kyrie Omission: final “Kyrie eleison” [Sequence: Dies irae] Omission: entire text II. Offertoire Addition: “O” before all iterations of “Domine Jesu Christe” Omission: “omnium fidelium” after “libera animas” Omission: “Sed signifer sanctus Michael repraesentet eas in lucem sanctam, quam olim Abrahae promisisti, et semini ejus.” III. Sanctus [Benedictus] Omission: entire text (“Benedictus… Hosanna in excelsis”) IV. Pie Jesu Addition: “Pie Jesu” (akin to the final two lines of the Sequence but ending with “sempiternam”) Word order: reverse the order of the final two words (“sempiternam requiem”) V. Agnus Dei Combination: “Agnus Dei” with communion text “Lux aeterna” VI. Libera me Addition: entire text from the Office for the Dead Omission: “quando coeli movendi sunt et terra” Addition: “Dies illa” before “dies magna et amara valde” VII. In paradisum Addition: entire text from the Office for the Dead Omission: “te” in the phrase “deducant [te] angeli” Source: Data from Jeffers, 62-85. 85 A small degree of Renaissance modality is sometimes apparent, notably in the Offertoire, and there are some Wagnerian progressions in the Agnus Dei, but in general Fauré’s Requiem seems to have surprisingly little contact with nineteenth- century developments. 9 It is important to trace the interplay of tradition and innovation within Opus 48 and recognize the complexity not only present in the genesis of the musical material of the work, but also in Fauré’s interest in, and approach to, a requiem setting. Two requiem “traditions”: liturgical and musical The Mass for the Dead [Missa pro defunctis], or Requiem as it is more commonly known, has origins in the early Christian Church, becoming a part of the Church’s written record in the second century. 10 Its texts were finally formalized during the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, yet musical requiem settings had been composed, starting with chants, since the Middle Ages. In his survey of memorial music Dies Irae, Robert Chase writes, “The requiem’s musical history parallels the majority of significant trends and styles in that of Western music.” 11 By the fifteenth century, polyphonic settings appeared, and musical requiems continued to adopt the stylistic characteristics of their time. 12 New musical developments typically appear outside the church before being introduced to sacred music, and throughout the church’s history, there has been a 9 Fiske and Inwood, preface to R-F/I, v. 10 The name “Requiem” comes from the first word’s of the Introit, “Requiem aeternam.” In France common names for requiem settings also include Messe des morts and Messe funèbre. 11 DI, xv. 12 Though lost, Guillaume Dufay’s setting (dating sometime before 1470) is generally considered the first polyphonic requiem. Johannes Ockeghem’s requiem setting (c1461), the earliest one extant, employs cantus firmus techniques with paraphrases of Gregorian paraphrases. See Luce, 66-70, 145-151; Scott, 17-18; and DI, 13-14. 86 pendulum course of introducing innovations into its music (i.e., polyphony, instruments, operatic elements, expanded textures and length) and a reactionary call for a return to the “old ways.” The Council of Trent admonished composers to halt the introduction of secular sources in sacred music and to prioritize the clarity of text over the use of new musical procedures. 13 In the nineteenth century, the Caecilians and similar societies attempted to bring church music back to plainchant and Palestrina. Despite these movements, composers began to detach sacred music from its liturgical function, writing works for performance outside of mass. Over time the requiem became a vehicle for composers to employ the most extravagant musical effects: By the nineteenth century, musical settings of the Latin Requiem Mass had developed out of all recognition from their modest polyphonic origins in the Renaissance… With Mozart and the subsequent rise of romanticism… restraint yielded to a new desire for musical innovation and the communication of strong emotions, and the Requiem became a vehicle for subjectivity and musical dramatization just as much as any other genre in the nineteenth century. The ‘Dies irae’ (the text of the Requiem’s Sequence, often omitted by earlier composers) now became the focal point of musical settings, its vivid imagery inspiring Berlioz and others to unprecedented heights of orchestrational virtuosity and ferocity. 14 Most often when we think of requiems, we are thinking of a subset of famous requiem settings such as those by Mozart, Berlioz, Verdi, and Fauré. However, our perceptions of these works are filtered through our modern understanding. In the 13 For more information on the legislation resulting from the Council of Trent, see Robert F. Hayburn, Papal Legislation on Sacred Music, 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1979), 25-33; and Raymond F. Bulman and Frederick J. Parrella, ed., From Trent to Vatican II: Historical and Theological Investigations (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), 19-38. 14 Mervyn Cooke, Britten: War Requiem, Cambridge Music Handbooks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 49. 87 beginning of The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-Century Music, Jim Samson discusses the challenge in approaching famous compositions: How, we may ask, are we to do historical justice to canonised works, given that these are still a vital, living part of our present? The greater our aesthetic appreciation of the work, the more it is drawn into our ‘now’, and the harder it is to consign it to ‘then’ – to give it the status of a past event. In this sense the past constantly invades the present in music history (much more than in political or intellectual histories, for example), so that notions of historical ‘becoming’ are inevitably compromised by the atemporal ‘being’ represented by individual works. This interference between history and aesthetics has not of course remained constant. It really only became a significant issue at all in the late eighteenth century; it grew increasingly marked in the nineteenth century (Mozart as part of a nineteenth-century present); and it has reached a culminating point, arguably resulting in a major reformulation, in the new kinds of objectification of musical works made possible by today’s technology. 15 A member of the canon, Fauré’s Requiem has been subject to misunderstandings that continue to flourish. For example, some writers have attempted to tie Fauré’s interest in writing a requiem to some tragedy in his personal life. The most unusual and far- fetched theory brings up his broken engagement to Marianne Viardot in 1877; the most common is the death of his parents: Camille Bellaigue, 1928: [Requiem] is from 1888, eleven years after the loving and sad adventure… this Requiem is not for all funerals, for all griefs… Is it for a dead woman who prays a tender prayer? Rather perhaps [it is] for an unfaithful woman, forgiven a long time ago. Thus the Requiem appeared to us, in the work of Fauré, as a calm memory of the young, the deceased, and always dear loves. 16 15 Samson, 17. 16 “[Requiem] est de 1888, onze années après l’amoureuse et triste aventure… ce Requiem n’est pas fait pour toutes les funérailles, pour toutes les douleurs… Est-ce même pour une morte que prie la tendre oraison? Plutôt peut-être pour une infidèle, et depuis longtemps pardonnée. Ainsi le Requiem nous est apparu, dans l'oeuvre de Fauré, comme le souvenir apaisé de ses jeunes, défuntes et toujours chères amours.” Camille Bellaigue, “Lettres a une Fiancée: Août-Septembre 1877,” Revue des deux mondes 328 (15 July 1928): 912-913 (my translation). Norman Suckling rejected this idea in 1951: “Neither can I accept the romantic rather than convincing theory of Camille Bellaigue that he was singing a dirge in it upon his lost love for Marianne Viardot.” Suckling, 176. However, a decade later, Edward Lockspeiser wrote, “Musically this theory is entirely acceptable…” Edward Lockspeiser, “Gabriel Fauré and Marcel Proust,” The Listener, 1 88 Arthur Hutchings, 1977: Rarely did Fauré use his talents more wonderfully than in the exquisite Requiem begun in 1886 and finished two years later… It was prompted partly by a request from the Societé nationale (founded to encourage French art under the Third Republic) and partly by his own bereavement of beloved parents. It was first used for an All Souls Day at the Madeleine. 17 Earl K. Scott, Jr., 1980: Fauré apparently composed the Requiem as a memorial to his parents. 18 Jane Snyder, 2005: Fauré began work on the Requiem with the death of his father in 1885, and completed it with the death or his mother on December 1887; suggesting its commemoration of both of his parents. 19 His father passed away in 1884, his mother in 1887, but Fauré never made mention of these events as inspiration for the work. 20 Though first performed as part of the funeral for architect Le Soufaché, Requiem was started well before his death and was clearly not written for him either. Fauré claimed to have had no particular reason for writing a requiem: “My Requiem wasn’t written for anything… for pleasure, if I may call it that!” 21 Instead the genre itself inspired Fauré to compose his own setting, and his original intention was to make it function with a funeral service: “…Fauré created his June 1961, reprinted in Essays on Music: an Anthology from “The Listener,” edited by Felix Aprahamian (London: Cassell, 1967), 114. 17 It is interesting to note that Arthur Hutchings considers Requiem “finished” in 1888. No other source has been located which discusses the influence of the Societé nationale upon the work’s creation or an All Souls Day performance in 1887 or 1888. Hutchings, Church Music, 40. 18 Scott, 49. 19 Snyder, 220. 20 This theory is also less credible in light of the work’s timeline: the original draft of the Libera me was written much earlier in 1877, and Fauré began his other sketches before his mother’s death on December 31, 1887. No other source has been located to verify Ford’s claim: “certainly Fauré himself claimed as much [about commemorating his father’s death with Requiem] on one occasion.” Andrew Ford, “Fauré’s Requiem: The Mystery and the Marketing,” in Undue Noise: Words about music (Sydney: ABC Books, 2002), 300. 21 “Mon Requiem a été composé pour rien… pour le plaisir, si j’ose dire!” Gabriel Fauré to Maurice Emmanuel, Paris, c. March 1910, Corr., letter 67, 139 (137-138). 89 Requiem as a religious work, and however individual, it was also liturgically functional.” 22 The renewal of sacred music in nineteenth-century France As stated earlier, throughout its history, the Church has been a conservator of tradition, and when new developments appear in church music, restorative counter- movements arise to reinforce older values or at least the current interpretation of them. Snyder identifies a period of volatility in church music between the French Revolution and World War I: Secular music has always had a destabilizing influence on church music, but in this period, because of cultural changes brought about by enlightened philosophy, ecclesiastical degradation, and the French Revolution, this influence became a veritable crisis of identify for religious composers. 23 The counter to this instability was a revival of church music education in nineteenth-century France first led by Alexandre-Étienne Choron (1771-1834); assumed by Louis Niedermeyer (1802-1861), who later became Fauré’s teacher; and broadened by Charles Bordes (1863-1909), Alexandre Guilmant (1837-1911), and Vincent d’Indy (1851-1931), founders of the Schola Cantorum. In 1811, Choron became France’s Director of Music of Religious Ceremonies and reorganized the choir schools. He helped reopen the Paris Conservatoire in 1816 and founded the Institution royale de musique classique et religieuse [School of Classical and Religious Music] in 1817. This school promoted the performance of chant and older 22 Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion” in RF, 301. 23 Snyder, iv. The fact that “identity crisis” is a twentieth-century concept has not precluded its application to earlier historical figures. For an exploration of Hector Berlioz’s identity crisis, see Rosa E. Lewis, “Hector Berlioz’s Religious Ambivalence and Its Impact on His Music” (master’s thesis, University of Hawaii, 2000). 90 choral music by Palestrina, Bach, and Handel. Choron himself wrote method books such as Méthode élémentaire de musique et de plain-chant (1811) and Méthode de chant (1820), and he was one of the first to use tonalité as a theoretical term, citing Monteverdi as the dividing line between tonalité antique and tonalité moderne. 24 Unfortunately the upheaval of the July Revolution in 1830 dried up the school’s government subsidies forcing it to close. Niedermeyer revived the school in 1853 under the name Conservatoire royal de musique classique de France [French royal conservatory of classical music]. It later known became known as the École Niedermeyer, or simply École, to distinguish it from its more famous counterpart, the Paris Conservatoire (Conservatoire national supérieur de musique), and Napoleon III, who became Emperor of the Second Republic in 1852, formally recognized it. As Nectoux explains, “…the name ‘Niedermeyer’ is indissolubly linked with the renaissance of religious music in France. Church choirs had almost entirely disappeared during the 1789 Revolution.” 25 The school’s students received thorough instruction in harmony, choral singing, and music pedagogy as well as a general education including lessons in French, Latin, arithmetic, geography, history, literature, and religion. 26 Three times each week Louis Dietsch (1808-1865), the Madeleine’s maître de chapelle and a conductor for the Opéra, directed the student body in singing sacred works by such composers as Josquin, Palestrina, Victoria, and Bach as well as contemporary works by composers like Niedermeyer. Niedermeyer also wrote Traité 24 Thomas Christensen, “Fétis and Emerging Tonal Consciousness,” in Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism, edited by Ian Bent (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 38. 25 GF-ML, 5. 26 According to a report by Niedermeyer, as cited in GF-ML, 7. 91 théorique et pratique de l’accompagnement du plainchant [Theoretical and practical treatise on plainchant accompaniment] (1857) with a preface by Joseph d’Ortique. The treatise outlined his approach to harmonization and was heavily used by his students. 27 In 1892, Charles Bordes, the maître de chapelle of St-Gervais, founded the Chanteurs de St-Gervais with a mission of performing older sacred music. The success of this ensemble further inspired him to found, with the help of Alexandre Guilmant and Vincent d’Indy, the Schola Cantorum two years later. D’Indy was particularly interested in educational reforms; and the Schola, originally a society for sacred music, soon became the foundation for a new music school in 1896. 28 Its curriculum, which was weighted more to older music than the Paris Conservatoire’s, consisted of the study of music fundamentals (which d’Indy called “le métier” [the trade]), harmony, counterpoint, and Gregorian chant, and also required students to sing choral works ranging from organum to the works of Palestrina in the first year, followed by five years of courses in music history, analysis, and aesthetics. Over the course of the nineteenth century, these schools reintroduced older music into the mainstream, redirected and professionalized sacred music making, and trained generations of church musicians like Fauré. Eventually this renewal would alter the course of French secular music, a reverse of the norm, and introduce changes to music education at the Conservatoire. 29 27 For more information on the influence of this treatise upon Fauré’s compositional style, see Kidd, “Louis Niedermeyer’s System.” 28 Ochse, 220. 29 For more information regarding the Schola and its influence upon the Conservatoire, see Jane Fulcher, French Cultural Politics and Music: From the Dreyfus Affair to the First World War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999): 24-35 (hereafter cited as FCP). 92 Fauré the church musician: the École and la Madeleine Fauré studied at the École rather than at the more prestigious Conservatoire. In some ways, this would hinder Fauré’s success, but his knowledge of earlier music would inform Fauré’s work in church music, shape his musical sensibilities and compositions, and situate him as a scholar of early music to his contemporaries. 30 The school was quite conservative; Niedermeyer only allowed secular music during physical exercise and deemed certain types of new music, like that by Schumann and Wagner, as unsuitable for the young. Fauré and his classmates would later recount stories of sneaking out of the school to attend operas and concerts. 31 It was under the tutelage of Camille Saint-Saëns that Fauré became formally acquainted with new music. James Kidd identifies three major areas of relevance this education had to Fauré: 1. Niedermeyer’s concentration on the musical past, emphasizing the study of plainchant and its accompaniment, study and performance of the “classics,” which prominently included Palestrina, a cappella vocal music of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and the organ music of J. S. Bach. 2. The role of Camille Saint-Saëns as teacher of piano and composition (after the death of Niedermeyer), friend, and source of encouragement, introducing his students to both his classical and uncompromising ideals of composition as well as exposing them to the works of composers forbidden at the school, which they might not have otherwise studied: Schumann, Liszt and Wagner. 3. Harmony taught according to the system of Pierre Maleden, whose principles were derived from Gottfried Weber, an eighteenth century theorist. Maleden’s system was unusual at that time for its lack of dogma and its open acceptance of the relativity of harmonic function in differing contexts. 32 30 Durand would publish Fauré’s editions of Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier, with fingerings by Marguerite Long, in 1915 and his editions of Bach’s organ works, co-edited with Joseph Bonnet and Eugene Gigout, from 1916 to 1920. 31 Duchen, 19. 32 Kidd, 22. 93 After his studies, Fauré went on to begin his career in church music; the culmination of which was his lengthy tenure at the prestigious l’Église Sainte-Marie- Madeleine [the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene], also known as “la Madeleine,” in Paris (1877-1905). The Madeleine, parish church of the Elysée, was one of the most important in Paris. With the support of Napoleon III, as Richard Benefield noted: The Church of the Madeleine became the exemplar of church music in France… During the Second Empire, the Church of the Madeleine had the finest organ in France, the finest organists in the world, a sizable orchestra for the principal service of the week, and a chorus whose members and directors were closely associated with the finest opera houses in the world. 33 It received subsidies from the state for ceremonial occasions and was attended by the wealthy of Paris who favored lighter, more popular fare, even in religious settings, and who were not particularly interested in early music: “the congregation was appalled by any sort of innovation; the kind of music they preferred was nearer to opéra-comique than to Palestrina.” 34 Saint-Saëns recalled this encounter at the Madeleine: One day one of the parish vicars undertook to instruct me on this point. He told me that the Madeleine audiences were composed in the main of wealthy people who attended the Opéra-Comique frequently, and formed musical tastes which ought to be respected. “Monsieur l’abbé,” I replied, “when I hear from the pulpit the language of opéra- comique [sic], I will play music appropriate to it, and not before!” 35 33 Richard Benefield, introduction to Motets for One Voice: The Organ-Accompanied Solo Motet in Nineteenth-Century France, edited by Richard Benefield (Middleton, WI: A-R Editions, 2003), xiii. 34 GF-ML, 26. Unfortunately for Fauré, on top of this lack of appreciation for non-operatic music, “the [Madeleine’s] acoustics are wretched.” GF-ML, 25. 35 “Un jour, un des vicaires de la paroisse se mit à m’endoctriner sur ce point. Le public de la Madeleine, me dit-il, est compose en grande majorité de personnes riches, qui vont souvent à l’Opéra-Comique; elles y ont contracté des habitudes musicales qui’il convient de respecte. – Monsieur l’abbé, lui répondis-je, quand j’entendrai dire en chairre le dialogue de l’Opéra- Comique, je ferai de la musique appropriée; mais pas avant.” Camille Saint-Saëns, “L’Orgue” in École Buissonnière, 176 (108). 94 In 1844, by playing Bach fugues at St-Eustache, Adolf Friedrich Hesse reportedly “upset the Parisians.” 36 Although more musicians were being trained in older music in nineteenth-century France, its inclusion in mass was not yet the norm for churches. This had the effect of making music like Palestrina’s seem more foreign to congregants than works written more recently. The liturgy in France 37 Decrees from the sixteenth-century Council of Trent resulted in a revised Roman rite, the publication of a new Breviary and Missal, and guidelines for the use of music in service. Though the Tridentine reforms were technically preserved through the Second Vatican Council, held in the middle of the twentieth century, the desire by the Madeleine’s congregants to adjust liturgical practice to their interests was not unusual. As is usually the case, though rules exist they are not always upheld. Liturgical scholar Paul F. Bradshaw lists three common but flawed assumptions made by liturgical historians: That Authoritative-sounding Statements are Always Genuinely Authoritative That Liturgical Legislation is Evidence of Actual Practice That Even When a Variety of Explanations Exist for the Origin of a Practice, One of Them Must be Genuine 38 Evidence of this inconsistency between liturgical law and its practice can be found in Fauré’s prediction for the acceptance of Pope Pius X’s 1903 motu proprio (a 36 GF-ML, 42. 37 The information for this section was largely drawn from Part Two “Diversity or Disunity: The local liturgies of the Church in France and the «Liturgical Controversy»” in Cuthbert Johnson, Prosper Guéranger (1805-1875): A Liturgical Theologian (Rome: Edizioni Abbazia, 1984); and Benefield, introduction to Motets for One Voice, ix-xvi. 38 Paul F. Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy, 2 nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 17. 95 papal decree written to remove secular influences and restore the primacy of chant and Renaissance polyphony in mass): The edict you mention will do nothing to change established habits, at least not in the churches of Paris. Firstly because, with the best will and the worst taste in the world, the clergy is convinced it was doing the right thing even before this edict was published. And secondly because there’s an unconscious understanding between the congregation and the clergy which leads them to see everything as being just as it should be. And also because it’s really rather difficult to demarcate between what is a truly religious style and what isn’t; it’s purely a matter of personal judgment. 39 Some modern scholars incautiously assume churches in France practiced the liturgy established by the Roman Church. One Council of Trent decision permitted churches practicing a permitted liturgy for over two hundred years to preserve it; the Bull Quo primum of Pope Pius V stated it was forbidden “…henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than that of this [Tridentine] missal… saving only those [churches] in which the practice of saying Mass differently was granted over 200 years ago…” (italics mine). 40 This applied to Spain as well as to parts of France. In the many years of liturgical disunity,”[w]hile Rome never condemned the liturgical situation in France no effort was 39 “Les instructions dont vous me parlez ne modifieront en rien les habitudes prises, du moins pour ce qui concerne les églises de Paris. D’abord parce que, avec la meilleure foi et le plus mauvais gout de monde, le clergé est convaince qui’l se tenait dans la note, meme avant la publication desdites instructions. En second lieu, par ce qu’il existe une inconsciente complicité entre les fidèles et le clergé pour trouver que tout est pour le mieux. Et aussi, par ce qui’il est bien difficile d’établir une demarcation entre ce qui est du style vraiment religieux et ce qui a en est pas. Cela peut différer suivant le jugement de chacun.” Gabriel Fauré in Camille Saint-Saëns, Gabriel Fauré, and others, “La Réforme de la Musique Religieuse: Opinions de MM. C. Saint- Saëns, Gabriel Fauré, G. Houdard, A. Guilmant,” Le Monde Musical xvi (15 February 1904): 35. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 110. For an English translation of the motu proprio, see Paul M. Ferretti, O.S.B., Papal Documents on Sacred Music: From the Fourteenth to the Twentieth Century, edited by the Music Committee of the Society of St. Gregory of America (New York: Society of St. Gregory of America, 1947), 7-10. 40 As cited in Alcuin Reid, The Organic Development of the Liturgy, 2 nd ed. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 41-42. 96 made to coerce the French Church into conformity [until the nineteenth century],” and according to Reid, “[t]he French recoiled from the prospect of Roman liturgical uniformity in varying degrees for a further three centuries.” 41 While French Church leaders initially attempted to abide by the Tridentine reforms, by the end of the seventeenth century, the country’s diocese showed their dissatisfaction with and disregard for the hymns of the Tridentine breviary by creating new breviaries and liturgical books. These alternate books “continued to be published throughout most of the dioceses of France until the middle of the nineteenth century.” 42 One outcome of the French Revolution was the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, a law passed on July 12, 1790 that placed the State’s interests above the Church’s. The redrawing of diocesan boundaries that resulted from this law forced dioceses with different liturgical books to sort out the differences. The Concordat of 1801, made by Napoleon Bonaparte and Pope Pius VII, restored to some degree the primacy of the Church. Church leaders recognized the need for liturgical unity throughout the country though there was no easy solution. In his encyclical Inter Multiplices Pope Pius IX addressed the Church in France “pleading for unity of spirit”: “in fulfilling all the other episcopal duties of your ministry, your greatest aim should be unity among yourselves.” 43 Even at the urging of the Pope, the Church in France did not unify, and recalling both the encyclical and the later motu proprio of Pius X, Saint-Saëns both acknowledged the ineffectiveness of, and his disagreement with, the efforts toward liturgical unity: 41 Johnson, 189; Reid, 49. 42 Johnson, 160. 43 Pope Pius IX, Inter Multiplices, 21 March 1853, Papal Encyclicals Online http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9interm.htm (accessed 13 January 2009). 97 Liturgical unity—we are told—has always been the desire of the Church… Unity and uniformity are not the same as was seen when Pope Pius IX imposed the Roman rite on the Church of France. I can still see the pastor of the Madeleine, the illustrious and much-lamented Deguerry, going up to the pulpit [on 1 May 1856, when Saint-Saëns was still organist at Saint-Merry] and proclaiming in his beautiful thundering voice that the Roman rite would be adopted from then on, en principe. In reality, nothing changed and after two years the Pope’s orders were issued anew in order to exact obedience—but only reluctantly and incompletely. If uniformity is so difficult to achieve, it is because it is apparently contrary to human nature. People’s temperaments vary and, on the whole, require different customs. 44 While Johnson notes that the Church of France officially unified their liturgy with the Rome in 1875, it is clear that this unification was more theory than practice. 45 Up until this time, the Church in France was sometimes called the “Gallican” church: A certain spirit of independence can almost be considered as characteristic of the Church in France, so much so, that wherever this spirit has manifested itself it has simply been called «Gallican»… the spirit of Gallicanism was to remain a force within the church in France until the eve of the first Vatican Council [1868]. 46 Furthermore, Caballero notes that Paris, the city of the Madeleine, retained its own practices the longest: In the capital, which was last to adopt the Roman rite, elements of the superseded ‘Parisian’ uses persisted to the end of the nineteenth century, and Saint-Saëns 44 “L’unité liturgique – nous dit-on – a toujours été le vœu de l’Église… L’unité et l’uniformité ne sont pas identiques; on s’en est aperçu quand le pape Pie IX a imposé à l’Église de France le rite romain. Je vois encore le curé de la Madeleine, l’illustre et infortuné Deguerry, montant en chaire et proclamant, de sa belle voix tonnante, que le Rite romain était dès lors adopté en principe. En fait, on ne changea rien et il fallut qu’au bout de deux ans des ordres du pape se fissent entendre de nouveau pour que l’on se décidât à obéir. On le fit de mauvaise grâce et incomplètement. Si l’uniformité est si difficile `obtenir, c’est qu’apparemment elle répugne à la nature humaine; es tempéraments des peuples diffèrent et exigent, en tout, des habitudes différentes.” Camille Saint-Saëns, “La Prononciation” in École, 178-179. Translated by Smith, Saint-Saëns, 210-211. 45 Johnson, 148. 46 Ibid., 172-173. 98 recalled that La Madeleine adopted the new rite only ‘unwillingly and incompletely.’ 47 A “Gallican” requiem: Fauré’s text choices Therefore, in this long period of disunity with Rome, a period in which Opus 48 resides, a requiem conducted in France would not always conform to the Tridentine model. In fact there are certain elements shared by some French requiems that point to a French tradition of requiem composition; however, due to the limited circulation of other French requiems, Fauré’s setting seems like the only one of its kind. It is a challenge for modern scholars to find the schema that includes the liturgical traditions of alternate text selections and musical precedents for primarily two reasons: first, many of his predecessors and contemporaries’ requiems have not been not widely distributed (having been created for a particular use inside the Church), did not become part of the canon, and consequently are not well known today; and second, though Fauré and his contemporaries left behind an extraordinary written record, as a part of this tradition they would not necessarily feel compelled to discuss its particulars. Only two text discrepancies appeared to garner much notice from his contemporaries: the lack of the “Dies irae” and the addition of the “In paradisum.” This focus is demonstrated by this representative review by Louis Laloy: M. Fauré has conceived and handled his work in a completely personal way: the “Dies irae” does not appear, divine wrath has no place, and the antiphon “In paradisum,” serving as conclusion, offers a glimpse of eternal blisses… Is the religious tone missing? No, no more than tenderness and compassion are excluded 47 FMA, 186. A longer quotation of the source has been reprinted earlier in this chapter. Saint- Saëns, “La Prononciation” in École, 179. 99 from the Gospel. But here we find only one of the faces of religion, the gentlest, the most human. 48 Caballero notes that recent scholars center their comments on five “choices” Fauré made regarding the text (italicized in Figure 3.1): Requiem lacks the Sequence and “Benedictus” and includes the “Pie Jesu,” “Libera me,” and “In paradisum.” 49 These changes have been interpreted as the means for Fauré to deliver a particular message. However, three of Opus 48’s text discrepancies have precedents in earlier works and could be considered part of a “Gallican” requiem setting: the omissions of “Dies irae” and “Benedictus” and the inclusion of “Pie Jesu.” 50 These discrepancies from the Roman rite will be further explored below. The absence of “Dies irae” Even though the sequence “Dies irae” had been introduced into the French liturgy as early as the fifteenth century, settings of it within requiems were rare at first, and the text continued to be omitted for centuries. 51 According to Chase, “[Antoine] Brumel’s setting [c1516] is the first and only Franco-Flemish model to include a polyphonic setting of the sequence, Dies irae.” 52 Eustache Du Caurroy’s Missa pro defunctis (c1606) does 48 “M. Fauré a conçu & traité son œuvre d’une manière toute personnelle: le Dies iræ n’y figure pas, la colère divine en est absente; & l’antienne In paradisum, qui lui sert de conclusion, laisse entrevoir les félicités éternelles… L’accent religieux est-il absent? Non, certes, pas plus que la tendress & la compassion ne sont bannies de l’Évangile; mais on ne trouve ici que l’un des aspects de la religion, le plus doux, le plus humain…” Louis Laloy, “Concerts du Conservatoire,” Revue d’histoire et de critique musicales 1/4 (April 1901): 162. Translated by Caballero in FMA, 187. 49 FMA, 186. 50 Though not stated in other sources, Scott states that “[the] Sequence is sometimes omitted in musical settings composed as memorials.” Scott, 5. 51 French Baroque composers, such as Lully and Charpentier, did set the “Dies irae” text as a separate grand motet. For more information, see DI, 510, 514-515, 519-521. 52 “It appears that Brumel, with his connections to the Papal Court, was the first composer to introduce it [Dies irae] into the Franco-Flemish polyphonic requiem. At this time, the Dies irae 100 not include the “Dies irae” text and further varies from the Tridentine model by substituting the Roman Gradual text with verses from Psalm 23 and using a variant from the standard Offertory text. Robert Chase, author of the memorial music survey text entitled Dies Irae, declares that these departures “can by explained by the Parisian usage.” 53 In the Baroque period, some French composers, such as Jean Gilles for his Messe des morts (c1696), did not include the Sequence in their requiem settings. Marc- Antoine Charpentier did include a full setting of the Sequence in his Messe des morts à quatre voix et simphonie, H 10 (1697-1698) but omitted it entirely in his Messe des morts à quatre voix, H 7 (c. early 1690s) and his Messe pour les trépasses, H 2 (c. late 1690s). 54 A contemporary of Fauré, Charles Gounod did not include the Sequence in two of his four requiem settings, Messe brève pour les Morts (1873) and Messe funèbre à quatre voix (1883). 55 These settings establish a precedent for requiems not containing the Sequence. However, the omission of the Sequence in a musical requiem setting did not mean it was necessarily excluded from the funeral mass just as the omission of the “Credo” in a mass cycle or missa brevis would not signify the text’s absence within a mass service. 56 At this time it was possible to perform mass movements by different composers within a was peculiar to the Roman, not the French, liturgy and it is the first known polyphonic arrangement of the text.” DI, 19. See also Luce, 166-171. 53 DI, 54. 54 Chase suggests that Charpentier’s grand motet Dies irae “might have been performed along with the Messe pour les trépasses.” DI, 114. 55 His first, Requiem à grand orchestre (1842), was not published. His fourth, Messe funèbre (1893), was his final work. Fauré conducted its second performance at the Madeleine in October 1894 to mark the first anniversary of Gounod’s death. GF-ML, 25, 512; R-JMN1, xi. 56 See, for example, Messe à trois voix (1925) by André Caplet. This work omits the Creed and includes the Communion motet, O salutaris. 101 single service. 57 More likely, in the absence of a polyphonic setting, the “Dies irae” would be sung in plainchant, as a musical setting of such a lengthy text would naturally increase the length of service. 58 One method of chant treatment was alternation. In listing the “order of music for a typical Sunday high Mass,” Smith writes that for the Sequence “[t]he organist alternated [verses] with the choir—the choir always beginning.” 59 According to Chase, Louis Homet’s (1700-1777) four-part, chordal setting of the even- numbered verses of the Sequence was “used for several centuries in French parishes alternating with the odd-numbered verses sung in chant.” 60 This simple arrangement would have suited less elaborate occasions and smaller churches. “Pie Jesu” and the missing “Benedictus” “Dies irae” is the likely source for the text of the “Pie Jesu” text, which contains the same words as in the Sequence’s final two lines with the addition of the concluding word “sempiternam” [eternal]. In the final six lines of “Dies irae,” which were later additions to the Sequence, the point of view switches from first person to third, and the character changes from fearful to empathetic. Along with the omission of “Dies irae,” this addition to Requiem has been suggestive to many writers of a deliberate attempt by Fauré to reject the judgmental aspects of the Sequence in favor of the more consoling “Pie Jesu” text. 57 For the musical program for Christmas Day 1867 at the Madeleine, which includes mass movements by Cherubini, Haydn, Le Sueur, and Dietsch, see Smith, Saint-Saëns, 54. 58 DI, 97. 59 For the many verses in a Sequence, the choir would sing the first verse, the organist would play for the second (while the priest recited the text), and so on. Smith, Saint-Saëns, 55-56. 60 DI, 510. He transcribes this arrangement in Appendix A, example 2, 646. 102 John Rutter describes the inclusion of a Pie Jesu movement in a requiem as Fauré’s invention: “the ‘Pie Jesu,’ which has almost become an obligatory feature of later requiems, was Fauré’s own idea…” 61 However, “Pie Jesu” settings appear to be a French practice; Chase characterizes its use as “[t]ypical of the French rite…” 62 Though it appears as though the international success of Fauré’s setting encouraged others to set this text, by the time of Requiem individual solo Pie Jesu settings, such as Fr. Bazin’s for bass (1858-59), A. Hénon’s for soprano (1859-60), Charles Gounod’s for soprano or tenor (1877), and Camille Saint-Saëns’ for baritone (1885), were already common, and Pie Jesu movements had already become a feature of French requiem settings. 63 In fact, the practice of setting “Pie Jesu” as a solo may have swayed Fauré to set this movement for a solo soprano, which, following the premiere of the entire work, quickly became popular as a published excerpt. 64 Frequently “Pie Jesu” is identified as merely a reduction of the longer text, but it does not function as a sequence nor is it an exact excerpt. 65 As other Mass for the Dead 61 Rutter interview by Crawford, in Crawford, 57. 62 Spaniard Cristóbal de Morales’s second requiem setting, Missa pro defunctis for five voices, published for the Papal choir in 1544, contains a polyphonic Pie Jesu. This is not intended as a stand-alone movement but would have served as the conclusion to the Sequence sung in chant; DI, 266. 63 The first two settings were published in the contemporary sacred music journal La Maîtrise, in volumes 2 and 3 respectively. For more information on these four settings as well as performing editions of the latter two, see Benefield, xii, 39-41, 75-78. 64 Part of Pope Pius X’s 1903 motu proprio discouraged solo singing in church; Camille Saint- Saëns publicly disagreed: “So, the exquisite ‘Pie Jesu’ from the Fauré Requiem, and many other pieces that I could mention which are gems of sacred art, would be forbidden.” [Ainsi, l’exquis Pie Jesu du Requiem de M. Fauré, et bien d’autres morceaux que je pourrais citer et qui sont des perles de l’art religieux, devraient être proscrits.] Saint-Saëns, “La Prononciation” in École, 184. Translated by Smith, in Smith, Saint-Saëns, 214. For publication information for Requiem excerpts, see “Publishing and performing excerpts from Opus 48” and Figure 2.9 in Chapter 2. 65 Saint-Saëns does attribute the origins of “Pie Jesu” to “Dies irae” though it is difficult to verify the accuracy of his claim, especially when taking the proposed chronology into account: 103 texts retain their distinct identity even when sections of these texts are repeated elsewhere (e.g. the return of the Introit’s “Requiem aeternam” in “Lux aeterna”); so “Pie Jesu” should be recognized as distinct from “Dies irae.” If not, the parallel between “Pie Jesu” and the final iteration of the “Agnus Dei,” which concludes with the phrase “dona eis requiem sempiternam,” should be equally recognized. Some requiems, such as Francois- Joseph Gossec’s massive Grande Messe des Morts (1760) and Cherubini’s two requiem settings, Requiem in C Minor (1816) and Requiem in D Minor (1836), even contain the Sequence (with its “Pie Jesu”) and a Pie Jesu movement; this combination further suggests the individuality of these two texts. 66 Within requiem settings, the Pie Jesu movement does not occupy the standard place of the Sequence, following the Introit and Kyrie, and preceding the Offertory; instead it is placed after the Sanctus. This later placement allows this movement to be used liturgically as an Elevation motet, the music that would accompany the Elevation of the Host during the sacrament of communion: A solemn piece was either played or sung while the priest consecrated the bread and wine and raised the host and chalice. The practice of singing an “O Salutaris” at this point in the Mass dated from the end of the reign of Louis XII (1514) but other motets in honor of the Blessed Sacrament were also appropriate and it was to fulfill this liturgical lacuna that Saint-Saëns included an “O Salutaris” in his “One fine day the order came from Rome to replace the Parisian Rite with the Roman Rite. This disposition suppressed the ‘Dies irae’ from the requiem mass… The words of the ‘Pie Jesu’ began to be set to the melody of the ‘Dies irae’ and it was introduced surreptitiously as a motet. Then a verse of the forbidden poem was slipped in—then two—then three. Finally, the ‘Dies irae,” reestablished little by little in its entirety, was sung as before.” [L’ordre arriva de Rome, un beau jour, de remplacer le rite parisien par le rite romain. Cette disposition supprimait le Dies iræ de l’office funèbre… One commença par mettre les paroles du Pie Jesu sur l’air du Dies iræ et l’introduire subrepticement comme motet: puis on glissa une strophe de la prose interdite, puis deux, puis trois; et enfin le Dies iræ, rétabli peu à peu dans son intégrité, fut chanté comme auparavant.] Saint-Saëns, “Musique religieuse” in École, 164-165. Translated by Smith in Smith, Saint-Saëns, 203. 66 Cherubini also wrote a separate setting of Pie Jesu for bass solo in 1885. 104 Mass, Op. 4, Gabriel Fauré a “Pie Jesu” in his Requiem, and César Franck a “Panis angelicus” in his Mass. 67 Of the five text discrepancies mentioned earlier, modern writers tend to minimize or ignore the missing Benedictus text as it does not support their interpretation that Fauré was interested in emphasizing heavenly elements and suppressing damning ones. However, with Pie Jesu occupying the place of the Elevation motet, the need for a Benedictus setting was eliminated. Pie Jesu could serve as a Benedictus substitute, be located between Sanctus and Benedictus or follow Benedictus. 68 In the case of Gossec’s Requiem, Pie Jesu follows an extraordinarily brief Sanctus without the first “Hosanna in excelsis,” and there is no Benedictus. Charpentier included a separate Pie Jesu setting between Sanctus and Benedictus in all three of his requiems. Luigi Cherubini placed Pie Jesu after the combined Sanctus-Benedictus movement in both of his requiem settings: Requiem in C Minor (1816) and Requiem in D Minor (1834-1836). Considering Pie Jesu a Benedictus substitute would also resolve Norman Suckling’s confusion over Nadia Boulanger’s mention of a Benedictus in Requiem: “Mlle. Nadia Boulanger made a curious error here; she wrote (in the Revue musicale for October 1922) of ‘un doux Benedictus’, and could only have been referring to the Pie Jesu.” 69 Understanding the movement’s liturgical use transforms Boulanger’s “error” into a generic label based on function. 67 Smith, Saint-Saëns, 56. See Cesar Franck, Messe in A-Dur, Op. 12, edited by Armin Landgraf (Stuttgart: Carus, 1982). 68 Intriguingly, Berlioz’s Requiem omits the “Benedictus” text but does not include a separate Pie Jesu. In Louis Chein’s Requiem (1690), Pie Jesu is incorporated into a larger movement in which the five sections are: Sanctus, Pleni sunt coeli, Osanna, Pie Jesu, Benedictus, Osanna (repeated). DI, 146. 69 Suckling, 174 n; Boulanger, “La Musique religieuse,” 302. 105 “Libera me” and “In paradisum”: texts from the Office for the Dead Technically the “Libera me” and “In paradisum” texts belong to the liturgy of the Office for the Dead and were, therefore, not intended for use within a Mass for the Dead. As the Office was held at graveside, it would not normally include elaborate music. These two elements do not have extensive precedent in “Gallican” requiems, but their use can also be traced to earlier works. Etienne Moulinié’s Missa pro defunctis, which was first published in Paris in 1636, contains two Graduale (including Si ambulem), no Sequence, and the responsory Libera me (which incorporates the Dies irae plainchant). Though earlier settings had included a Libera me movement, Verdi’s Requiem per Manzoni (1874) most famously introduced the text into a requiem. 70 Fauré, however, appears to be the first to include the “In paradisum” text in a requiem setting, and when Snyder claims that “[t]he French have a tradition of including these two movements [Libera me and In paradisum],” it must be understood that this “tradition” formally began with Fauré. 71 However, the publication of organ solos entitled In paradisum at the end of 70 According to Robert Chase, “Only a handful of seventeenth-century composers, including Cavalli, Cererols, Moulinié, Pitoni, and Casciolini, set the Responsory Libera me in polyphonic style… The romantics, for the most part, did not set the Responsory, Libera me, to music, although several composers, including Donizetti, Botessini, Liszt, Von Suppé, Verdi, and Fauré, did create musical accompaniment for that particular text.” DI, 97, 242. In fact, Verdi’s Libera me was written in 1868 and was originally intended for the Messa per Rossini, a collaborative memorial to commemorate the composer’s death. However, the project did not succeed, and Verdi later inserted the text into his Requiem per Manzoni. The use of this text may be a more Italianate feature as it is also included in Bartolomeo Cordans’s Messa da requiem a tre voci virili e organo (1738) and Claudio Casciolini’s (1697-1760) Missa pro defunctis (n.d.). See DI, 149- 151. However, Louis Chein’s Requiem (1690) is one example of a Parisian requiem with a responsory, but he selected an alternate text, “Ne recorderis.” 71 Snyder, 251. Only two earlier choral settings of this text were located in the course of this study. Polish composer Grzegorz Gerwazy Gorczycki (c1665/7-1734) composed a separate In paradisum, for four voices, strings, two clarini, and organ, in the collection Conductus funebris, which also includes a setting of “Libera me.” This manuscript was not discovered until after 106 the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth suggest a contemporary use in funeral masses, perhaps as a recessional; for example, organ solos by Théodore Dubois, In paradisum (1893), and Pierre Kunc, Poème funèbre [Libera—In paradisum] (1911). 72 As the addition of In paradisum to Requiem did not cause enough alarm to the Madeleine’s clergy or reviewers for there to be a written contemporary criticism to this particular movement, it implies: first, that there had already been some kind of introduction to the use of an In paradisum for funerals in France, even if through wordless organ works, and second, that its inclusion in a requiem setting was at least not offensive but, as mentioned earlier, perceived as a “glimpse of eternal blisses.” Biographer Norman Suckling, the first to have made this distinction in print, finds a universal emphasis on the word “requiem” to be the most unique attribute of Fauré’s setting. Adding the “In paradisum” text to a Mass for the Dead provides a further opportunity to set the word, and it also allows the work to end as the Introit began, with “requiem”: Its outstanding distinction from many other Masses for the Dead is perhaps the prominence it gives to the word requiem itself, which appears in all but two of the seven movements, is thrown into strong relief wherever it occurs, and forms not only the first but also the last word in the work—the fact that it enabled Fauré to end with the word requiem may have been one reason for his choosing the Antiphon In Paradisum to set as a concluding section, and it is moreover noteworthy that the only lines (Pie Jesu) which he used from the Sequence (Dies irae) centre upon the same word, to which Fauré even added the extra-liturgical ‘sempiternam’ by way of underlining his meaning. 73 World War II and would not have been known to Fauré. Spaniard Juan Esquivel (c1563-after 1612) composed a six-voice polyphonic “In paradisum” setting, which was published in 1608. 72 Later organ works entitled In Paradisum include those composed by Guy Weitz, student of Vierne (who was also Duruflé’s teacher), published in 1930; and Daniel-Lesur in 1935. 73 Suckling, 178-179. 107 It is not possible to prove the full extent of Fauré’s knowledge of earlier requiem settings nevertheless some idea of it can be drawn from his education and his interactions in influential professional and social circles. As a student of the École Niedermeyer with its emphasis on chant, Renaissance, and Baroque polyphony, Fauré was very familiar with earlier church music. Although we do not have a complete list of earlier requiem settings known by Fauré, the aforementioned requiems are examples of the works distributed in Paris before and during his lifetime. For example, though composed around 1696 as previously mentioned, Jean Gilles’ requiem setting, thoroughly established by its inclusion in royal funeral services for decades, was published in 1764 in Paris. 74 As a well-connected musician located in his country’s capital, Fauré had the opportunity to become acquainted with new trends; Fauré socialized in very influential and informed circles. He was active as a church musician and would have been aware of new works and church music activities led by his friends and colleagues; on October 17, 1894, Fauré conducted the second performance of Gounod’s fourth requiem setting (posthumous) at the Madeleine. 75 Fauré would also likely have known his mentor Saint- Saëns’s Requiem, op. 54 (1878) from which he may have adopted, in the 1893 version of Opus 48, Saint-Saëns’ practice to set only the “Hostias” text of the Offertory text. 76 His 74 Abbé Jean Prim, Jean Gilles, biography in “Restitution of the Messe des Morts” (Paris: Edition Costallat, 1956), 8-9. For more information on Gilles’s Requiem, see Hall, 43-60; DI, 118-120; and Matonti, 63-75. 75 On September 27, 1983, he played the organ at Gounod’s funeral at the Madeleine, improvising on the theme from Gounod’s Rédemption. Fauré conducted the second performance of Gounod’s Requiem to commemorate the anniversary of the composer’s death. GF-ML, 25, 511-512. 76 Belgian Joseph Jongen (1873-1953) also composed solo settings on the “Hostias” and “Pie Jesu” texts in 1898 and 1895 respectively. See Joseph Jongen, Three Sacred Songs [O quam 108 associations in musical societies and salons would also have shown him avenues of musical thought developing outside of the French church. Mozart’s Requiem was extremely well known in Paris ever since the Parisian premiere in 1804 conducted by Cherubini. 77 In 1875, Verdi would conduct seven performances of his Requiem for audiences at the Opéra-comique. 78 While Fauré may not have been in attendance, it can be presumed that he at least heard about the work. Fauré’s musical career was, in part, the product of his education at the École Niedermeyer. He admired the canon of older sacred music he learned there; he rejected the current practice of using operatic or sentimental music in church. However, Fauré did not completely agree with the more extreme “neo-Palestrinian” movement led by the Schola: “unlike the Schola he emphasized French understatement and did not advocate stylistic or formal ‘molds.’” 79 This is underscored by Fauré’s description of some of his sacred music: I have also composed four short pieces of religious music, but (I’m very afraid) not in the spirit of the new Religious Music Society! I have invested them, trivial suavis est, Hostias et preces, Pie Jesu], edited by Tom Cunningham (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998). 77 Fend states the premiere was held in 1804 while Gerber and Deane provide the year 1805. See Michael Fend, “Cherubini, Luigi,” in GMO; Gerber 61; and Basil Deane, Cherubini, Oxford Studies of Composers (London: Oxford University Press, 1965), 25. Another famous Parisian performance of the work was for Chopin’s funeral; the mass was conducted at the Madeleine on October 30, 1849. Fauré’s sponsor Marianne Viardot was the mezzo-soprano soloist. 78 These performances overshadowed the unsuccessful and concurrent first run of Bizet’s Carmen: “[t]hat spring the public chose instead to embrace Verdi’s Requiem, which the composer himself conducted…” Lesley A Wright, introduction to Carmen: A Performing Guide by Mary Dibbern (Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2000), ix. 79 Jane Fulcher, The Composer as Intellectual: Music and Ideology in France, 1914-1940 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 40 (hereafter cited as CAI). 109 though they may be, with the human expression that I felt like investing them with! 80 His Requiem would be shaped both by his understanding of liturgical tradition and by his need for personal expression. A requiem as a “museum piece” The history of the requiem genre could be viewed as split into two directions, one remaining inside the church and the other moving into the concert hall. This division occurred as the church attempted to preserve tradition (or at least to retard innovation) while the outside musical world favored innovation. In other words, innovation has been the “tradition” of music, leading to ever-increasing forces performing longer works to the greatest exploitation of dramatic possibilities. Jane Snyder specifically identifies the requiem as “the only genre within nineteenth-century French sacred repertoire to enter the performing canon.” 81 As the requiem became appropriated for social rather than church events, the dramatic effects became more and more heightened. 82 Applying Harold Bloom’s theory of the “anxiety of influence,” a literary theory that considers modern authors to be stalled in their writing due to the influence of earlier writers, to the realm of music, Peter Burkholder suggested that with their familiarity with their predecessors’ works, modern composers desire to create compositions worthy of being immortalized in the “museum”: 80 “J’ai compose aussi quatre petits morceaux de musique religieuse, mais (j’en suis désolé) pas dans l’esprit de la nouvelle Société de musique sacrée! J’y aim is, si peu importants qu’ils soient, l’expression humaine qu’il m’a plu d’y mettre!” Gabriel Fauré to Princess E. de Polignac, [location unknown], c. 11 June 1894, in Corr., letter 113, 224 (227-228). 81 Snyder, 3. 82 For further discussion of the secularization of the requiem genre, see Kovalenko. 110 …there is a mainstream of 20 th -century music, one which held sway from the closing decades of the 19 th century through the Second World War and has continued to have great influence. It is a mainstream in the sense not of a shared style but of shared concerns, an intellectual tradition in the widest sense rather than a stylistic tradition. The mainstream of the past one hundred years consists of music written… by composers who… wrote or write music with a concern both for continuing the tradition of European art music… and for distinguishing their own work stylistically from other composers, both predecessors and contemporaries. In a word, the mainstream is historicist: these composers are writing music for a museum, for that is what the concert hall has become. 83 Requiems have found a special place in music’s “museum.” 84 With some notable exceptions, most composers only write one requiem setting, and few of these requiems enter the canon. 85 Robert Chase notes that: We find that there are only a handful [of requiems] performed with notable regularity, and as it turns out, almost to a point of redundancy. Among those are the compositions of Mozart, Britten, Fauré, Duruflé, Verdi, Brahms, and occasionally Cherubini… yet hundreds of other resplendent settings continue to languish in undue obscurity. 86 Regardless of their quality, it is important to recognize that other, less well-known works did influence the requiems performed today, even if, as composers strived to shape works that were distinct from earlier settings, the influence of these works was a negative one. A work like Fauré’s setting resides in both requiem “traditions”: as a work for the 83 Harold Bloom, The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry, 2 nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996); J. Peter Burkholder, “Museum Pieces: The Historicist Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years,” The Journal of Musicology 2/2 (spring 1983): 115-116. 84 Carlo Caballero argues, “Bloom’s views, so frequently cited and adopted over the past twenty-five years, are impossible to reconcile with the début-de-siècle aesthetics of sincerity and sensibility… for in the Bloomian universe there is no ‘true self,’ only an anxiously related one.” I am not suggesting that Fauré or any other composer was writing out of anxiety as much as out of an awareness of musical predecessors and an interest in creating works that would be notable enough to add to the canon. FMA, 87. 85 Cherubini is likely the only composer to have written more than one requiem setting and have one of them join the canon to date. 86 DI, xiv. 111 church and for the concert hall (the musical tradition). 87 In its lengthy gestation process, Requiem was intended for and received performances in both locations and satisfied the aims of Fauré the composer and Fauré the church musician. As he composed this work, Fauré was influenced, whether explicitly or implicitly, positively or negatively, by many requiems. Several influential settings, including some that are not residents of the “museum,” merit closer examination. Mozart’s Requiem (1791) established the requiem as a stand-alone musical genre and inaugurated the canon of requiem settings. Even though Mozart did not complete his work, it has received great recognition and countless performances between its premiere and the present. Today it would be difficult for many to identify an earlier requiem setting, but Messe des morts (1760) of François-Joseph Gossec (1734-1829) was a “model known to Mozart” and to many of his contemporaries as well as later requiem composers like Hector Berlioz. 88 87 This is despite Suckling’s dismissal of Opus 48 as a concert work: “The Requiem [by Fauré] is what hardly any of the great composers’ masses had been in the century elapsing since Mozart—it is suited to the liturgical use, and does not ask to be a concert work.” Suckling, 172. 88 DI, xxi. For more information on the influences of Gossec’s Messe des morts upon Mozart’s Requiem, see Hartmut Krones, “Ein französisches Vorbild für Mozarts ‘Requiem’: Die ‘Messe des Morts’ von François-Joseph Gossec,” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 42 (1987): 2-17. For a counter to Krones’s view, see Christoph Wolff, Mozart’s Requiem (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1994), 81. Interestingly enough, though they may share a common influence, Berlioz did not have a high opinion of Mozart’s Requiem. After hearing the work performed as part of Chopin’s funeral, he wrote: “…some notes from the organ, and the De profundis sung in fauxbourdon moved the listener more than the so celebrated and so incomplete score of the great master. Fortunately I did my article on Chopin last Saturday and I will not be obliged to return to it; I would be too bothered to speak of Mozart’s Requiem. I do not feel any more the courage to continue, as it would have to be, that eternal comedy of a forced admiration.” […quelques notes de l’orgue, et le De profundis chanté en faux bourdon ont plus touché l’auditoire que la tant célèbre et tant incomplete partition du grand maître. Heureusement j’ai fait mon article sur Chopin Samedi dernier et je ne serai pas oblige d’y revenir; je serais trop gene pour parler du Requiem de Mozart. Je ne me sens plus le courage de continuer, ainsi qu’il le faudrait, cette éternelle comedie d’une admiration de commande.] Hector Berlioz to Nanci Pal, Paris, 29-30 112 Divided into twenty-five movements (twelve of which comprised the Sequence, requiring about seventy-five minutes in total), Gossec’s work, a commission, emulates the grandiose public performances held during the Revolution and was an early example of requiem settings being detached from their liturgical use. Its spectacular setting of the Sequence was a particular inspiration to Hector Berlioz. For example, its “Tuba mirum” required two clarinets, two trumpets, and three trombones to play “ex distantia” [in the distance]. 89 Berlioz’s Grand messe des morts (1837) is the first major French requiem to join the canon. 90 Snyder considers the requiems of Berlioz and Fauré “representative” of “nineteenth-century French requiems” justifying her choices by the “canonical status” both achieved. 91 Berlioz was a master of orchestration, skillfully and famously deploying his Requiem’s formidable performing forces: four flutes, two oboes, two English horns, four clarinets, four cornets, twelve horns, eight bassoons, four tubas, eight pairs of timpani (with two players per pair), a large battery of percussion, thirty-eight brass players distributed in four ensembles located at the four corners of the performance venue October 1849, in Jeffrey Kallberg, “Chopin’s March, Chopin’s Death,” Nineteenth-Century Music 25/1 (summer 2001): 26 n (Kallberg provides the entire letter and his translation). According to legend, Berlioz specifically did not approve Mozart’s use of a solo trombone for the Tuba mirum: “One trombone… when a hundred would be none too many!” [Un seul trombone, a- t-il dit, alors que des centaines de trombones ne seraient pas de trop!” Saint-Saëns, “Le Requiem de Berlioz” in École, 212 (137). 89 François Joseph Gossec, Grande messe des morts, edited by Wolfgang Kiess (Vienna: Musikverlag Mersich & Kiess, 1999), 72. 90 As discussed in Chapter 1, Cherubini’s first requiem, composed in France, achieved marked success quickly but today is not performed as often or is as recognized as Mozart’s and Berlioz’s settings. 91 Snyder, 190, 101. 113 (used solely in Tuba mirum), and a minimum of 108 strings and 210 singers. 92 These large requiems suited Franz Liszt’s call for “humanitarian church music” in 1834: It is necessary to invoke a new church music which for lack of another epithet we may call humanitarian… It should combine the theatre with the church and be at the same time holy and dramatic, simple and splendid, earnest and ceremonious, restful and stormy… It will be the fiat lux of art. 93 The work, about ninety minutes long, can hardly be imagined incorporated into a church service, yet despite lying well outside the norm, it is this work that scholars use when comparing French requiems. For many composers, a requiem is a unique part of their oeuvre. Their many symphonies or masses offer many opportunities to contribute to the “museum,” but writing a requiem setting provides a rare challenge. While some have written multiple requiem settings, composers who have contributed to the canon are only known for one. Perhaps these facts are unrelated, but there are also aspects of these memorial texts that make them difficult to set more than once in a striking way. In writing his requiem setting, Fauré set out, not to commemorate a tragic personal event, but to approach the composition of a requiem in his own manner. According to Nectoux, “The desire to write 92 The final two numbers are specified by the composer in the score as a minimum; he actually makes provisions should they be significantly increased: “The numbers indicated are only relative. If space permit [sic], the Chorus may be doubled or tripled and the orchestra be proportionately increased.” [Ces indications de nombre ne sont que relatives, et l’on peut, si le local le permet, doubler ou tripler toute la masse vocale, et augmenter un peu la masse instrumentale dans les meme proportions.] Hector Berlioz, Requiem [Grande messe des morts] (New York: Dover Publications, 2006), 9. 93 Franz Liszt, Gesammelte Schriften von Franz Liszt (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1881), 2: 55-57. Translated by Hutchings in Hutchings, Church Music, 32. 114 things that were new was one of [Fauré’s] main preoccupations” 94 ; as Fauré himself describes, this desire can be applied to Requiem: Perhaps my instinct led me to stray from the established path after all those years accompanying funerals! I’d had them up to here. I wanted to do something different. 95 Though this quote specifically refers to works he played in church, one can also find the contrast to work of gargantuan proportions such as Berlioz’s Requiem. As the music critic for Le Figaro, Fauré aired his feelings about this work in a review of a performance in 1904: a work in which a taste for grand dramatic effects and an indifference to religious music – or to any music – may find equal satisfaction. 96 His criticism focuses on the orchestral effects and the lack of propriety required for secular music. Fauré’s mentor Saint-Saëns also found fault with the orchestration of Tuba mirum in his chapter “Le Requiem de Berlioz” in École Buissonniere: However, it must be confessed that this effect [of the offstage brass ensembles in Tuba mirum] does not come up to expectations. In a church or a concert hall we hear a confused and terrifying mingling of sounds, and from time to time we note a change in the depth of tone but we are unable to distinguish the pitch of the chords… Faith and Hope should not be looked for here… No one would dare to describe this work as profane, but whether it is religious or not is a question. As Boschot has said, what is expressed above all is terror in the presence of annihilation… When the Requiem was played at the Trocadéro [the same site as the official premiere of Fauré’s Requiem], the audience was greatly impressed and 94 GF-ML, 489. 95 “Quant à mon Requiem, peut-être ai-je aussi, d’instinct, cherché à sortir du convenu. Voilà si longtemps que j’accompagne à l’orgue, des services d’enterrement! J’en ai par-dessus la tête... J’ai voulu faire autre chose.” Gabriel Fauré, interview with Louis Aguettant, “Rencontres avec Gabriel Fauré [letter to André Lambinet],” edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux, Études fauréennes 19 (1982), excerpts first published as “Gabriel Fauré: Mon Requiem est une Aspiration au Bonheur.” Paris-Comœdia, 3-9 March 1954, 4. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 116. 96 “…cette œuvre où le gout des gros effets dramatiques et l’indifférence en matière de musique religieuse – ou de musique tout court – peuvent trouver une égale satisfaction.” Fauré, Opinions, 21. I have adapted the translation by Nichols in GF-ML, 259. 115 filed out slowly. They did not say, “What a masterpiece!” but “What an orchestra leader!” … 97 Here Fauré and Saint-Saëns are particularly concerned about a composer’s reliance on orchestral/timbral effects to execute a vision. In attending requiem performances, audiences have come to expect special orchestral effects and in some fashion gauge a work’s success by its treatment of texts like “Dies irae,” which had usually been heightened by elaborate orchestration. As Suckling indicates: “…[Fauré’s] work provides no opportunity for comparison with the eschatological eloquence of the Dies irae and Tuba mirum in other Requiem Masses.” 98 Jane Snyder writes: …over time the nineteenth-century French requiem got ‘smaller.’ This is especially true of requiems composed after the founding of the Société Nationale de Musique [in 1871], and the phenomenon of the Verdi Requiem [premiered in France in 1875]. 99 However, these two events occurred near the end of the nineteenth century, and it is difficult to find a link between an organization devoted primarily to instrumental music or Verdi’s masterpiece and a distinct change in French requiem orchestration. It is more 97 “Il faut l’avouer, l’effet ne répond pas à l’attente. A l’Église, comme au concert, on entend un murmure confus, terrifiant, où l’on perçoit bien, de temps en temps, quelque changement dans la sonorité, mais on ne distingue pas la tonalité des accords… car ce n’est pas la Foi et l’Espérance qu’il faut chercher ici… Cette œuvre, qu’on n’oserait traiter de profane, est-elle vraiment religieuse? Comme l’a fort bien dit M. Boschot, ce qu’elle exprime sur tout, c’est l’épouvante devant le néant… Ce soir-là, au Trocadéro, le public, très impressionné, s’écoulait lentement après l’exécution. Il ne disait pas «quel chef-d’œuvre!» mais «quel chef d’orchestre!»” Saint- Saëns, “Le Requiem de Berlioz” in École, 211-214 (136, 139). 98 Suckling, 174. 99 Snyder, 239. 116 likely later requiems like Fauré’s had a wider distribution, making it appear as though more smaller-scaled requiems had been written toward the end of the century. 100 Nectoux considers orchestration to be generally not important to Fauré—“[i]t would in any case be more accurate to speak, not of orchestration, but of instrumentation, since it is obvious that the idea of timbre was not a determining one in Fauré’s musical thinking.” 101 However, Fauré did show care for some of the orchestration of Requiem in the near absence of violins in his orchestra (regardless of the version). This makes any use of the violin particularly striking, and Fauré wrote of the effect with great satisfaction: “You’ll see, after all those violas, how angelic the violins sound in the Sanctus!!!” 102 This emphasis on low-voiced string accompaniment does have precedent in earlier sacred works. Rutter cites two from the Baroque era: The instruments Fauré used in the 1888 version (solo violin), divided violas and cellos, basses, timpani, harp and organ) seem an eccentric collection viewed from the standpoint of the nineteenth-century symphony orchestra; but, with the exception of the harp, they recall precisely the sort of accompanying ensemble used by, for instance, Schütz in his Symphoniae Sacrae or by Bach in such of his “archaic” cantatas as Gottes Zeit ist der [sic] allerbeste Zeit with its divided violas da gamba or Christ lag in Todesbanden (Fauré’s horns of the 1893 version are comparable to Bach’s three trombones in the latter cantata). 103 100 Snyder supports her argument by pointing to the founding of Société Nationale, the École Niedermeyer, and the Cecilian Society in France, and the contemporary reforms of chant as well as the First Vatican Council. Snyder, 242. 101 GF-ML, 259. For an overview of Fauré’s approach to orchestration, see GF-ML, 255-262; and Nectoux, “Les Orchestrations de Gabriel Fauré: Légende et vérité.” 102 “Tu verras combien, après tous ces altos, les violons sont angéliques dans le Sanctus!!!” Fauré, Corr., letter 132, 246 (249). 103 Rutter, “In Search,” 60. 117 The work most usually cited when discussing the lack of violins is Brahms’s Ein deutsches Requiem (1868), which omits the violins in the first movement. 104 These two works have many other parallels as well—the influence of earlier church music, the theme of consolation as opposed to judgment, the use of soprano and baritone soloists with a similar distribution within the overall work (though in this work, the soprano sings in the fifth movement instead of the fourth), and the symmetrical seven-movement structure (when considering the later version of Opus 48 and Brahms’s addition of the fourth movement to his work). This many parallels cannot but raise the question whether Fauré was familiar with this earlier requiem. 105 Though there is no direct link, according to Brahms biographer Jan Swafford, “[Ein deutsches Requiem] spread to Russia and England and Paris and to choral groups around the West, in an age when there were able and enthusiastic amateur groups everywhere.” 106 According to Michael Musgrave: Reception [to Brahms’s Requiem] in Catholic countries was inevitably less immediate, though its religious content seems to have interested some French 104 Suckling looks forward and compares this orchestration that of Stravinsky’s Symphony of Psalms: “…the distribution of the string parts half-anticipating that of Stravinsky’s Psalm- Symphony. But whereas Stravinsky’s motive in dispensing with both violins and violas was presumably an austere avoidance of the caressing tone which he could not hope otherwise to eliminate, the effect of Fauré’s scoring is to match the funerary purpose of his work with the restrained though not gloomy expressiveness that comes of a sparing use of upper frequencies.” Suckling, 172. 105 Rutter perhaps shows a bias toward his edition in his comparison of the works: “… I am convinced [the Fauré Requiem] is not a concert work to be compared with Berlioz’s or Verdi’s essentially dramatic Requiems. Like the Brahms, it is fundamentally contemplative and consoling – interestingly, Brahms was, of all Fauré’s contemporaries, the one probably most influenced by the music of the past and, like Fauré, he made a personal rather than liturgical selection of texts. The comparison ends there, though, because the Brahms Requiem is indisputably intended for concert performance with full symphony orchestra whereas the Fauré seems to me to belong best in a church setting, with the modest accompanying ensemble of the composer’s original version.” However, these comments overlook the piano four-hand arrangement Brahms created for performance or the composer’s aforementioned suggestion for using movements of this work for church anthems. Rutter, “In Search,” 61. 106 Jan Swafford, Johannes Brahms: a Biography (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997), 331. 118 musicians; Franck may well have had it in mind, both for its text as an example of modern religious music, when composing Les Béatitudes. It was given by the pioneering J. E. Pasdeloup in his Concerts populaires on Good Friday 1875, though this was a feeble performance and the work was not properly presented until 24 March 1891 in the chapel of the Palace of Versailles by the Société l’Euterpe. 107 Without more information it is hard to trace a precise influence on Fauré, but it is possible to perceive an influence on audience members. Hugues Imbert, who presented a lecture at the performance of Fauré’s Requiem at Lilles in April 1900, clearly expected the attendees to know Brahms’s and compared these requiems to each other. 108 An orchestra’s size and constitution were flexible within France in the nineteenth century. For example, although Cherubini’s first requiem setting uses a larger orchestra, which was standard for concert works in the Romantic period, for the Introit, Graduale, and Pie Jesu, he altered the normal string divisions—no violins, divided violas, cellos, and contrabasses—a configuration strongly resembling that found in Fauré’s orchestra. A reviewer complimented French composer Charles Poisot for the use of smaller performing forces for his unfamiliar Requiem (c1878), a work little known today: [T]he means employed this time were notably restrained, the orchestra was reduced to only five stringed instruments with the addition of an organ and harp, and the effect produced was excellent. 109 107 Musgrave, 68. 108 Hugues Imbert, “Le Requiem de Gabriel Fauré à Lille,” notes for a lecture presented in conjunction with a performance of Fauré’s Requiem on 6 April 1900, Rés. Vmb. MS 42, Département de la Musique, Bibliothèque nationale de France. 109 “Quoique les moyens employés cette fois fussent notabilment restraints, l’orchestre étant réduit au seul quintet d’instruments a cordes avec adjonction d’orgue et de harpe, l’effet produit a été excellent.” Anonymous, “Vendredi, 8 novembre,” Revue et Gazette musicale de Paris (11 November 1878): 375. As quoted in Snyder, 242. This work is not mentioned in Chase’s Dies irae, either in the body of the text or its appendix of over 1,700 requiems. See Appendix B “More Liturgical Requiems” in DI, 649-687. A score could not be obtained for this study. 119 Those hearing Fauré’s Requiem respond to the work based on their expectations of the genre, an expectation shaped by their familiarity with other works. Most of the perception that Fauré’s “strayed” from tradition was based upon Requiem’s lack of spectacular instrumental effects and omission of the text that inspired them, the sequence “Dies irae.” Though omitting the Sequence was possible, by Fauré’s time the Dies irae movement(s) had become a “calling card” for requiem settings. The dramatic nature of the text offered composers great musical possibilities; the ability to overwhelm audiences with larger and louder performing forces gave composers the means to exploit those possibilities with ever-greater measures. Some writers argue Fauré’s omission of this text was based upon his lack of ability to approach it: 110 Incidentally, the treatment of the ‘Dies illa’ section of the Libera Me surely provides the perfect answer to those who would deplore the omission of the Dies Irae proper, for it is undoubtedly the weakest part of the work. 111 Faure had the wisdom to recognize his limitations. 112 In a negative application of the “anxiety of influence,” Nectoux surmises Fauré could have avoided the Sequence to avoid being compared to his predecessors: The Dies Irae is a kind of resumé [sic] of the traditional Requiem. Ever since Lully’s version composers have treated it as a set piece in the grand manner, demanding mass effects. Fauré may have felt with good reason, that it was 110 Wienandt takes exactly the opposite approach: “Gabriel Fauré… was the only French composer to produce an outstanding piece of religious choral music in the second half of the nineteenth century. His Messe de Requiem… recaptures the calm that was a feature of Renaissance music. Fauré’s dynamics run the entire range of possibilities, but in no other way does he deviate from a reflective and simple presentation…. The style remains consistently one of refinement and cultivated taste. Fauré’s restrained expression may not suit some listeners, but it is difficult to find fault with a piece that is limited only by the composer’s self-imposed concept, and not by any lack of musical skill.” (italics mine) Elwyn A. Wienandt, Choral Music of the Church (New York: The Free Press, 1965), 382. 111 See also Romain Bussine’s comments on an early draft of Libera me in Chapter 2. 112 Boyd, 408. 120 impossible to outdo Berlioz and Verdi. In any case he had little affinity for large musical gestures and the very length of the text might well have caused him problems. 113 However, if Fauré had truly wished to avoid setting the “Dies irae,” he would not have set the “Libera me,” with its “Dies illa, dies irae” section. However, he did recognize the many layers of one-upmanship played out for centuries in sacred music. When discussing the 1903 motu proprio issued by Pope Pius X, Fauré called for the elimination of all forms of church music but chant: The truth is, this edict isn’t radical enough. The only music we should have in church is plainsong and it should be sung in unison, given that it dates back to a time when polyphony hadn’t been discovered. To set up religious music of the sixteenth century as an unalterable model is an impossibility. At the period when it was written this music represented an art of extreme luxury and if it [Renaissance polyphony] seems simple to us today that’s only because of what’s happened to music in the meantime. 114 (italics mine) Clearly this call was hyperbolized, but it indicates Fauré’s appreciation of the continuous evolution of a society’s perception of tradition. Any criticism of the omission of a Dies irae movement made by Fauré’s contemporaries regarding Requiem was not a liturgically based one, but one stemming from musical expectations as established by earlier canonical settings. In fact, while Fauré satisfied liturgical requirements with the composition of Requiem, there was a least one clergyman critical of its musical appropriateness for the expectation of the Madeleine’s parishioners: 113 GF-ML, 124. 114 “La verité c’est que la mesure n’est pas sullisament radicale. On ne devraît chanter dans les églises que le plain-chant et le chanter à l’unisson, attendu qu’il date d’une époque où on nu prévoyait pas le polyphonic. Donner la musique religieuse du XVI e siècle comme un type immuable est chose impossible. A l’époque oú elle ut composée, cette musique représentait un art absolument luxueux que nous parait, actuellement, un art simple en raison de tout ce que la musique a gagué depuis.” Gabriel Fauré in Camille Saint-Saëns, Gabriel Fauré, and others, “La Réforme,” 35. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 110. 121 Immediately the ceremony was over, the vicar called Fauré into the sacristy and questions him as follows: “What was that mass for the dead you’ve just conducted?” “It was a Requiem of my own composition.” “Monsieur Fauré, we don’t need all these novelties; the Madeleine’s repertoire is quite rich enough, just content yourself with that.” 115 Considering how much attention the Sequence received from composers and their audiences, the very omission of the Sequence became a statement. Fauré admired his contemporaries who would not be swayed by current trends just for the sake of innovation: “in other words the ones who came along at a time when it is more difficult than ever to be an original musician [composer].” 116 Fauré did not need to find his originality in rejecting the past; instead, by the incorporation of aspects of earlier sacred music, Requiem has both traditional and innovative elements. He acknowledged the importance of the past: All who in the immense realm of the human mind have seemed to bring something new, to transmit thoughts in a language till then unknown, have but translated, through their personal sensibility, what others had already thought and said before them, and likewise the form of their language, brilliant or daring as it might be, only sums up the efforts, the gains, the successive advances, the past has bequeathed us. 117 By omitting the Sequence, Fauré’s Requiem stands apart from canonical requiems, even though the practice had precursors in the Gallican liturgy. By paring 115 “Or, il advint ceci, qu’aussitôt terminée la cérémonie, M. le curé fit appeler son maître de chapelle à la sacristie pour l’interpeller en ces termes: «Qu’est-ce donc que cette messe des morts que vous venez de fairer chanter? – Mais, Monsieur le Curé, répondit le Maître, c’est un Requiem de ma composition. – Voyons, Monsieur Fauré, rétorque le curé, nous n’avons pas besoin de toutes ces nouveautés; le repertoire de la Madeleine est bien assez riche, contentez-vous-en.»” Armand Vivet, “La Musique sacrée en France depuis la Révolution,” in Congrès de musique sacrée (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1937), 152-153. 116 “…ceux, enfin, qui sont venus à l’heure où il est plus difficile que jamais d’être musicien original.” Gabriel Fauré to Hugues Imbert, Le Vésinet, [second fortnight of August 1887], in Corr., letter 57, 128 (127). 117 Gabriel Fauré, preface to Œuvres classiques pour piano (Paris: Ricordi: 1910). As quoted in FMA, 74. 122 down his orchestral forces, Fauré did not need to “outdo Berlioz and Verdi” by employing large gestures; he instead showed innovation through restraint. Fauré’s religious views and their value in understanding Opus 48 Summarizing an individual’s religious views is very problematic, particularly when the individual was raised in France after the Enlightenment. As Caballero asserts, “French Catholicism faced grave challenges from scientific thought and from changes in social and political conditions during the second half of the nineteenth century.” 118 It is beyond the scope of this study to present more than an overview. 119 However, a lot of discussion about Requiem focuses on the composer’s intent and the nature of the belief that would inspire this kind of work. Suckling, in considering the text discussions outlined earlier in this chapter, asks about the work’s religious identity: Which raises the question, frequently debated since the appearance of the Requiem—is it rather pagan than Christian in tone? Certainly, Fauré's choice of sections of the text is a little unusual, though not unprecedented. 120 The attribution of Fauré’s work as “pagan” in print began with Camille Benoît’s review of Requiem’s second performance in May 1888, the first review of the work; he labeled it, not unadmiringly, as “half-pagan, half-Christian,” “a work in the spirit of ‘Antiquity.’” 121 After repeatedly being confronted with these claims, Fauré replied, “But 118 Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF, 297. 119 For more thorough discussions of Fauré’s religious beliefs and their impact on his music, see Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF, 297-331; Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion: Ideas and Music” in FMA, 170-218; and GF-ML, 109-112. 120 Suckling, 175. In terms of precedents to the text discrepancies found in Fauré’s Requiem, Suckling is referring to Verdi’s addition of Libera me and Victoria’s Requiem, which does not include the Sequence and does include a Libera me. 121 “Si l’on trouve que le mot de «païen» jure avec l’idée évoquée par le texte liturgique et le lieu où la musique s’exécute, je dirai que cette œuvre est d’un esprit «antique»…” Camille Benoît, “La Messe de requiem,” 195. Translated by Caballero in “Fauré’s Religion” in RF, 300. 123 pagan doesn’t necessarily mean irreligious! In any case I can’t deny, pagan antiquity has always held an enormous attraction for me.” 122 Though, as stated earlier, Fauré held and expressed strong views regarding church music, he did not always resemble an ideal Catholic. Alfred Bruneau recounts the story of his friend’s early departure from his appointment at the organ of St-Saveur: In vain did the vicar preach the virtues of austerity, admonishing him for going out into the church porch for a smoke during the sermon. One morning the organist came straight from the municipal ball and entered the organ loft in white tie and tails. He was discreetly dismissed. 123 Nectoux explains: Like so many church musicians faced with the routine and the petty observances of the liturgy, Fauré very soon ceased to be a practicing Catholic. Already at St- Sauveur in Rennes the clergy were casting aspersions on his lack of piety. But it would, even so, be quite wrong to regard him as an atheist. His letters to his wife show him to have been appreciative of natural beauty and especially of the various effects of light. 124 The above comments made by Nectoux, who had also become close with the Fauré- Fremiet family, about light do not support an adequate argument against Fauré’s atheism Building on this association with antiquity, “Attic” and “Hellenic” are additional words which have been used to describe Fauré’s music. See Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” 130; Carter, 108; M. D. Calvocoressi, “Obituary: Gabriel Fauré,” The Musical Times 65/982 (1 December 1924): 1134; Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 186; and James C. Kidd, Review of Gabriel Fauré by Robert Orledge, Nineteenth-Century Music 4/3 (spring 1981): 278. 122 François Crucy, “Les grands figures contemporaines: Gabriel Fauré,” Le petit parisien, 28 April 1922, 1-2. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 112. 123 “Son curé lui recommandait vainement l’austérité… il lui reprochait d’aller fumer des cigarettes sous le porche de l’église pendant les sermons. Un matin, l’organiste ayant passé la nuit au bal de la prefecture vint remplir ses fonctions en habit noir et en cravate blache. Il fut congédié doucement.” Alfred Bruneau, La Vie et les œuvres de Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Librairie Charpentier et Fasquelle, 1925), 19. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 16. 124 GF-ML, 111. 124 as, Caballero points out, “… atheism and a profound love of nature are not mutually exclusive.” 125 Caballero, as many do today, makes a distinction between religion and spirituality: “[t]he destination of his [Fauré’s] music, whether or not it is religious, is often spiritual. But is it possible to separate these two terms? Can a work of art satisfy some of the same human needs as a religion?” 126 Caballero characterizes Fauré’s religious beliefs as evolving throughout the composer’s life to the extent that Fauré would eventually become a libre penseur [free thinker] 127 in a manner resembling pantheism. 128 According to Caballero, “[s]incerity was essential to Fauré’s conception of musical expression, and, among his contemporaries, he was consistently identified as ‘sincere.’” 129 This raises the question of Fauré’s sincerity in writing a Catholic Mass for the Dead. Of his Requiem, Fauré wrote: Everything I managed to entertain in the way of religious illusion I put into my Requiem, which moreover is dominated from beginning to end by a very human feeling of faith in eternal rest. 130 Fauré’s beliefs were not traditional, and it is most interesting to note one text change that does not receive much comment, the omission of the qualifying phrase 125 Cabellero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF, 304. 126 Ibid., 299. 127 Ibid., 300. 128 Caballero justifies this classification with Fauré’s comment to Eugène Berteux, “the word ‘God’ [is] merely an immense synonym for thte word ‘Love.’” “Pour lui – et je le tiens de sa bouche – le mot ‘Dieu’ n’était que le giganteque synonyme du mot ‘Amour’.” Eugène Berteaux, En ce temps-là (Paris: Le Bateau ivre, 1946), 238. As quoted and translated by Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF, 302. 129 FMA, 4. 130 “Tout ce que j’ai pu posséder d’illusion religieuse, je l’ai mise dans mon Requiem lequel d’ailleurs est dominé d’un bout à l’autre par ce sentiment bien humain: la confiance dans le repos eternel.” Gabriel Fauré to René Fauchois, Paris, 13 April 1921, in Corr., letter 187, 312 (314). This was part of Fauré’s response to Fauchois suggestion to write an opera on Jérusalem délivrée. Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion and La Chanson d’Ève” in RF, 303-304. 125 “omnium fidelium” [all faithful] in Offertoire. This alteration changes the plea on behalf of all the faithful departed to simply the departed. Fauré wrote: You were speaking in one of your last letters of your admiration for the Creation and of your distrust of created humanity. Is that fair? The universe is order, man is disorder. But is that his fault? He’s been thrown on to this earth, where everything appears to be in harmony, and he walks about on it staggering and stumbling from the day of his birth to the day of his death, weighed down with such a burden of physical and spiritual infirmities (so much so that someone had to invent ‘original sin’ to explain the situation!)…And the clearest indication of the misery in which we find ourselves is this promise, the best that man can be offered: the obliteration of everything, the Hindu nirvana, or the Catholic Requiem aeternam. 131 The restraint present within Opus 48 gave some of his contemporaries the motivation to identify it as feminine and particularly appropriate to the funeral of a young girl, 132 but Fauré identified the work with his own nature—“…it [my Requiem] is as GENTLE as myself!!” 133 —and his view of death: People have said my Requiem did not express the terror of death; someone called it a lullaby of death. But that’s the way I perceive death: as a happy release, an aspiration to the happiness of beyond rather than a grievous passage. 134 131 “Tu me parlays dans l’une de tes dernières lettres de ton admiration pour la Création et de ton mépris pour la créature. Es-tu juste? L’univers c’est de l’ordre, l’homme c’est du désorder. Mais est-ce sa faute? On l’a jeté sur cette terre où tout nous apparaît harmonieux, et où il va, lui, titubant, trébuchant depuis le jour de sa naissance jusqu’au jour de sa mort; on l’a jeté sur cette terre chargé d’un poids d’infirmités physiques et morales, (à ce point qu’on a dû inventer le péché original pour expliquer ce phénomène!) il y garde toute sa vie une mentalité d’enfant qui veut bien essayer d’être sage, quoique ce soit difficile et embêtant, mais à la condition qu’il en sers récompensé! Et quelle récompense promet-on à cette promesse, la meilleure qu’on ait pu lui faire: l’oubli de tout, le Nirvâna des Hindous, ou bien notre Requiem aeternam.” Gabriel Fauré to Marie Fauré, Nice, 6 April 1922, in Li, 280. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 111. 132 See Camille Bellaigue, “Le Requiem de M. Gabriel Fauré,” in Études musicales, 3 rd series (Paris: Delagrave, 1907), 217-220; Benoît, “La Messe de requiem”; and Pierre Lalo, “La musique,” Le temps, 27 January 1906, 3. 133 “…elle [mon Requiem] est d’un caractère DOUX comme moi-même!!” Gabriel Fauré to Eugène Ysaÿe, [Paris], 4 August 1900, in Corr., letter 128, 240 (244). 134 “Mon Requiem... on a dit qu’il n’exprimait pas l’effroi de la mort; quelqu'un l'a appelé une berceuse de la mort. Mais c’est ainsi que je sens la mort: comme une délivrance heureuse, une aspiration au bonheur d’au-delà, plutôt que comme un passage douloureux.” Aguettant, 126 It is striking that Fauré uses the word “aspiration” in regard to death. According to his son, Philippe Fauré-Fremiet, “For Fauré the appearance of the choir of angels coming to greet the tormented soul is no more than probable.” 135 Death was all Fauré apparently regarded as certain—“You are categorical about everything. Not me. I will die as I have lived, with my mind not made up.” 136 According to Nadia Boulanger, Fauré, in his setting, was offering a truly “restful” requiem: One feels that he regarded death in much the same way as Bach regarded it, as a natural goal and not a danger, as a state to be desired rather than feared. Here the great Protestant cantor and Fauré, the Catholic, have “ascended to meet”. Works, for instance, like Bach’s Choral Prelude for Organ, “O Man, Bewail thy Grievous Sin”, and Fauré’s “Requiem” are both inspired by a similar, mystical view of religion and death, a view so high and serene that, in its presence, differences of creed and dogma fade into insignificance. The Church can absolve and sustain, but also judge and condemn us. Unlike Bach, Fauré has never given expression to this latter and menacing aspect of his faith. Religion, he understands more in the manner of the Gospel according to St. John, in the manner of Saint Francis and Fra Angelico, than of Bossuet or Saint Bernard. He finds in it a source of love, not of fear. If, as in the “Requiem”, he sings of the grief which death inspires, it is a grief so near to God as to be wholly free from vain revolt or lamentation. What dominates the quite impersonal tenderness of the music, is the sense of certain pardon, the serene expectation of eternal rest. 137 Other nineteenth-century requiem composers have been subjected to similar scrutiny. Rosa Lewis’s thesis is devoted to “Hector Berlioz’s religious ambivalence and “Rencontres,” 4. Fauré composed three actual berceuses (this word is often translated as “lullaby”): Berceuse op. 16; Berceuse op, 56, no. 1; and in the Elegie, op. 24. 135 “…pour Fauré, l’apparition du Chœur des Anges venant au-devant de lame désolée est seulement probable…” Philippe Fauré-Fremiet, “La pensée Fauréenne,” in Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946), 11. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 112. 136 “Toi, tu es catégorique en tout. Moi, non. Je mourrai avec l’esprit flottant comme j’ai vécu.” Gabriel Fauré to Marie Fauré, Nice, 24 March 1921, Li, 270. Translated by Carlo Caballero in Caballero, “Fauré’s Religion,” 297. 137 Nadia Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” Rice Institute Pamphlet 13/2 (April 1926): 128-129. 127 its impact on his music.” She diagnoses Berlioz with a Moratorium identity. Moratorium is a kind of identity crisis first defined by psychologist Erik Erikson 138 and later developed in 1994 by psychologist James Marcia: Moratoriums impress one as intense, sometimes active and lively—sometimes internally preoccupied, struggling, engaging, and occasionally exhausting… In studies, we have found them to be the most highly morally sensitive of the statuses, as well as being the most anxious… They vacillate between rebellion and conformity… The family relationships of Moratoriums are marked by ambivalence. They, and their families, alternate between exasperation and appreciation… Moratoriums’ relationships with others are, as one would expect, intense and relatively brief; while they hold values consistent with intimacy, they are in motion, and it is difficult for them to maintain a constant commitment to another person. 139 In this use of the word, ambivalence is an active struggle, and it is very attractive to apply this kind of study to an individual with such a dramatic personal life. However, the bottom line remains: regardless of his relationship to the Church, Berlioz was plainly not concerned with the religious functionality of Requiem. He had no background in church music, and he had neither the need to create, nor the interest in, a liturgically appropriate work. Apart from the composer’s personal beliefs, the music resulting from his aesthetic objective, which artfully employs large-scale forces to achieve dramatic effects, reinforces the need to delineate two sacred music traditions: one based in the church and the other in the concert hall. Once the function of the work is understood the details are left up to the individual nature of the composer. After many criticisms of her father’s music, Giuseppina Verdi wrote: 138 Erik H. Erikson, Identity: Youth and Crisis (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1963), 157. 139 James E. Marcia, “The Empirical Study of Ego Identity,” in Identity and Development, ed. Harde A. Bosma (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 1994), 73. As quoted in Lewis, 9. 128 They have spoken much about whether the spirit of this sacred music is more or less religious, about not having followed the idea [idea tipo] of Mozart, of Cherubini, etc. etc. I say that a man like Verdi must write like Verdi, that is, according to his way of feeling and interpreting the texts. Then too, if the religions have a beginning, a development, modifications or transformations, etc. according to the times and according to the people, clearly the religious spirit and the works that express it must carry the imprint of the time, and, if you will, of the individual. I would have, so to speak, rejected a Messa of Verdi, that was made according to the model of A, B, or C. 140 Even Gounod was subjected to such questioning, and a reviewer makes a distinction of purpose demonstrating the concept of two kinds of requiem settings: One could ask… what is the general character of the Requiem of M. Gounod: is it truly a piece of religious music, or in fact has the composer yielded to the tendency – taken by many modern masters – towards the dramatization of sacred music? Before responding to this question, it would be necessary to begin by determining precisely the limits of the two genres. This question has never really been made completely clear… 141 (italics mine) Fauré’s defense of Gounod was, by extension, a defense of himself: Gounod too has been criticised for making his religious music too human and sympathetic. But it was in his nature to feel that way; that’s how his religious impulses manifested themselves. Surely an artist’s nature is something that just has to be accepted? 142 In his review of Verdi’s Requiem, Eduard Hanslick also argued from a different angle, that a strong faith does not guarantee quality: “The subjective religiousness of the artist must be left out of the question; criticism is not inquisition. At the same time, a composer’s faith is no guarantee for the religious dignity of the work, and vice versa.” 143 Likewise Fauré questioned our ability to identify a sacred work: 140 Giuseppina Verdi as quoted in David Rosen, Verdi: Requiem, Cambridge Music Handbooks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 91. 141 H. Marcello, “Gounod Requiem,” La Chronique musical (1 May 1876): 123-125. As quoted in Snyder, 4. 142 GF-ML, 110. 143 Eduard Hanslick, “Verdi’s Requiem,” in Music Criticisms 1846-99, trans. and ed. Henry Pleasants (Baltimore, MD: Dover Publications, 1963: 160-6), 161. For an exploration of 129 What music is sacred? What music is not? The attempt to settle the question is hazardous, considering that however profoundly sincere a musician's religious feeling may be, he will express it through his personal impressionability, and not according to laws that cannot be precisely formulated. Any classification in this sphere of ideas has always struck me as arbitrary. Would it be affirmed, for example, that certain sacred works of Cesar Franck's, among those of loftiest inspiration wherein one feels the wafting of seraphic wings, are (precisely because of their suavity) absolutely free from sensuality? Conversely, in Gounod's Messe Solennelle, has not the child-voice soaring upward alone in the chant “Gloria in excelsis Deo” an effect of wondrous purity? And because, in this same Mass, the text of the Agnus Dei inspired him to accents of ineffable tenderness, shall it be said that Gounod profaned that text?—If I have cited the example of these two great musicians, it is because the religious style of either has so often been contrasted with that of the other, and also in an endeavor to demonstrate that when we have to do with works truly musical and beautiful, it is fairly impossible to point out the distinction between those that are sacred and those that “smell of brimstone.” 144 Fauré’s view can also be summarized by a few words of Saint-Saëns’s: “there is no religious art... absolutely to be distinguished from secular art. There is good music, and subjectivity and nationalism in nineteenth-century requiem settings, particularly those by Brahms, Verdi, Dvořàk, see Michael Steinberg, “The Voice of the People at the Moment of the Nation” in Listening to Reason: Culture, Subjectivity, and Nineteenth-Century Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004. 144 “Quelle musique est religieuse? Quelle musique ne l’est pas? Essayer de résoudre la question est bien hasardeux, attendu que si profondément sincere que soit chez un musicien le sentment religieux, c’est à travers sa sensibilitee personnelle qu’il l’exprimera et non d’après des lois qu’on ne saurait fixer. Toute classicification dans cet ordre d’idée m’a toujours paru arbitraire. Affirmerait-on, par exemple, que telles compositions religieuses de César Franck parmi celles qu’s’épanouissent le plus haut, jusque dans le frissonnement des ailes séraphiques, soient, en raison de leur suavité meme, absolument expemtes de sensualité? D’autre par, dans la Messe Solennelle de Gounod, l’effect de cette voix d’enfant qui s’élève, seule, pour chanter: «Gloria in excelsis Deo» n’est-il pas d’une admirable pureté? Et parce que dans cette meme Messe, le texte de l’Agnus Dei lui a inspire des accents d’ineffable tendresse, dira-t-on que Gounod a profane ce texte? Si je prends en exemple ces deux grands musiciens, c’est parce que l’on a souvent oppose le style religieux de l’un au style religieux de l’autre et pour essayer d’établier que lorsqui’il s’agit d’œuvres vraiment musicales et belles, le depart entre celles qui sont religieuses et celles qui «sentient le fagot» est à peu près impossible.” Gabriel Fauré, “Souvenirs,” La Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 197. Translated by Theodore Baker in Cœuroy, “Present Tendencies,” 582. 130 there is bad music; for the rest, it is a matter of fashion, of convention, and nothing else.” 145 It is clear Fauré possessed a sort of religion, and though he was not a conventional Catholic, an understanding of his beliefs harms neither the work nor its listeners. In fact, Fauré could be considered ahead of his time, for the Sequence was removed from the requiem mass in Vatican II for its perceived archaic focus on the negative. 146 Innovation with influence Scholars consider Fauré’s Requiem as ground breaking in its originality: …the fact remains that there is nothing quite like Fauré’s Requiem either in the rest of his output or in the religious choral music by which he was surrounded. Maurice Duruflé modelled [sic] his own Requiem on Fauré’s as late as the 1940s, but it is much more difficult to find a forerunner. Fauré was, to some extent, deliberately avoiding the styles then current in most church music, whether prettified or over-academic. 147 (italics mine) As mentioned earlier, Fauré acknowledged his desire to write something different when he approached his Requiem, and elsewhere he acknowledged the difficulty in such an approach: How difficult it is to write good music which doesn’t owe anything to anybody and which some people may find interesting. And, as Saint-Saëns says, the 145 Camille Saint-Saëns, “Music in the Church,” trans. Theodore Baker, The Musical Quarterly 2/1 (January 1916): 1. 146 Archbishop Annibale Bugnini explains the mind of the members of the Consilium: “They got rid of texts that smacked of a negative spirituality inherited from the Middle Ages. Thus they removed such familiar and even beloved texts as the Libera me, Domine, the Dies Iræ, and others that overemphasized judgment, fear, and despair. These they replaced with texts urging Christian hope and arguably giving more effective expression to faith in the resurrection.” Annibale Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy: 1948–1975 (The Liturgical Press, 1990): 773. 147 Duchen, 80-81. 131 difficulty recurs with each new composition. And it is quite natural that one should always want a work to show some progress over its predecessors. 148 The vision Fauré accomplished through moderation was tempered by the influence of his musical, social, and liturgical environment but was more than a product of these factors. James Kidd aptly finds a distinction between originality and “rootlessness”: If it were true that Fauré’s musical style had no “roots,” that it was some sort of pure emanation of soul removed from “education” and “milieu,” an examination of it would prove futile and any appreciation of it would be beyond our grasp. The mind cannot understand the absolutely unique. 149 As a part of the composer, these roots could not always be perceived objectively, though Fauré certainly noticed the influence of the past on his present: Perhaps it might raise a few eyebrows if I said how much a musical constitution can enrich itself through frequent contact with the masters of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and indeed what resources may spring from the study and practice of Gregorian chant. Indeed, would anyone dare affirm that certain melodic lines and harmonic discoveries of recent vintage haven’t any of their roots in this past from which we think ourselves so distant and detached? 150 Kidd’s dissertation explores the influence Niedermeyer, and particularly his system of Gregorian chant study as explained in his 1853 treatise, had upon Fauré and which Fauré credited years later in a book about the École: 148 “Mais comme c’est donc difficile de faire de la bonne musique qui ne doive rien à personne, et qui puisse intéresser quell-ques-uns. Et, comme dit Saint-Saëns, la difficulté se renouvelle pour chaque nouvelle composition. El is est tout naturel qu’on veuille toujours faire des œuvres en progress sur les précédentes.” Gabriel Fauré to Marie Fauré, Zurich, 23 August 1904, in Li, 85. As translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 489. For further discussion of originality and influence in nineteenth-century France, see FMA, 76-97. 149 Kidd, “Louis Niedermeyer’s System,” 1. 150 “Peut-être étonnerais-je si je disais combien peut s’enrichir une nature musicale au contact fréquent des maîtres des XVI e et XVII e siècles et quelles ressources peuvent même naître de l’étude et de la pratique du chant grégorien. Oserait-on affirmer que telles lignes mélodiques, telles trouvailles harmoniques d’apparition récente n’ont point leurs racines dans un passee dont nous nous croyons si éloignés et si dégagés?” Gabriel Fauré, “Souvenirs, 199. Translated by Caballero in FMA, 71. 132 In teaching the art of harmonization according to the true character of the chant modes without the alterations borrowed from the harmonic minor, Niedermeyer offered new harmonic procedures; though he himself did not think they could be used outside of accompanying liturgical songs. 151 Fauré’s eleven years of study at the École would encourage him toward enriching his harmonies with the church modes, freer use of enharmonic modulation (especially when softened by smooth voice leading), and particularly “digressive” modulation (constant modulation which easily returns to the tonic). All of these features have been discussed in published analyses. 152 Not all Niedermeyer students would leave his school with the same compositional voice; these elements intersected with Fauré’s own sensibilities to create a distinctive style. 153 The Gallican Church’s differences from the Roman liturgy opened up more possibilities for a requiem setting that defeated the expectations established by canonical requiem settings. As a trained church musician, Fauré was able to chose among these differences and then went further by adding In paradisum; he also made subtle text changes that would not necessarily be noticed in live performance but have the potential to alter the meaning of the whole. The environment of religious exploration surrounding Fauré certainly influenced his approach to the integral concepts: death, judgment, and the afterlife. Surrounded by a wide range of influences, Fauré struck his own path. His 151 “Niedermeyer, en enseignant l’art d’harmoniser selon leurs vrais caractères les modes du plain-chant sans les altérations empruntées au mode mineur avec sensible, donna des procédes harmoniques nouveaux; ne songeant pas qu’ils pourraient être utilisés hors de l'accompagnement des chants liturgiques.” Maurice Galerne, L’École Niedermeyer: Sa creation, son but, son développement (Paris: Éditions Margueritat, 1928), 24 (my translation). 152 See Scott, Chamberlain, and Robert J. Summer, “Gabriel Fauré: Requiem, Op. 48,” in Choral Masterworks from Bach to Britten: Reflections of a Conductor (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007). 153 Kidd discusses the “extremes” in comparing two of Niedermeyer’s students: André Messager, as the more traditional opera composer, and Eugene Gigout, as the more rule-abiding chant accompanist. See Kidd, “Louis Niedermeyer’s System,” 28-29. 133 Requiem would join the canon and as such be a guiding force to future requiem composers. 134 CHAPTER 4 AFTER FAURÉ’S REQUIEM Fauré the progressive Fauré’s reception has been, and continues to be, mixed. Since the conclusion of the nineteenth century and continuing several decades after his death, some of Fauré contemporaries strongly advocated for him and his work, some dismissed him as a salon artist or an unknown, and still others, those primarily inside the elite musical communities, rejected him as a radical and outsider. Accustomed as we are now to more recent and more extreme innovations in modern music, it may be difficult to understand the rationale of those in the last category, but it is important to recognize the progressive elements in Fauré’s music, his influence upon French music, and Requiem’s influence upon future requiem composers. Fauré’s “outsider” status is evidenced in the rejections three French cultural institutions returned for his applications to significant music positions. In anticipation of the effect Fauré could have upon the conventional Conservatoire, Director Ambroise Thomas rebuffed Fauré’s application for the composition professorship in 1892, 135 purportedly saying, “Fauré? Never; if he is appointed, I resign.” 1 Théodore Dubois (1837- 1924), often promoted ahead of Fauré within the musical community, 2 beat him in the election for a seat in the Académie des Beaux Arts of the Institut de France 3 in May 1894 (twenty votes to four), 4 as did Charles Lenepveu in May 1896 (nineteen votes to four). 5 In the summer of 1895, conservatoire graduate Alfred Bruneau (1857-1934) was appointed over Fauré as the music critic for Le Figaro, a Parisian daily. Anticipating the argument that the rejection of Fauré’s Conservatoire application could be attributed to his lack of political connections instead of to his musical identity, Carlo Caballero points out that even with Fauré’s two allies on the Académie des Beaux- Arts (his father-in-law sculptor Emmanuel Fremiet and Camille Saint-Saëns) “the modernity of Fauré’s work does appear to have played a significant role in his exclusion.” 6 In August 1896 Fauré asked Dubois to tell him “[i]f you know of any bias against me which promotes my exclusion from the official musical world…” 7 Dubois replied, “…your music was found to be too vague, too modulatory, too recondite.” 8 1 “Fauré? jamais; [sic] s’il est nommé, je démissionne.” Corr., 221 (224). The earliest appearance of this quotation in print, though unattributed here, may be in Kœchlin, Fauré. 2 Before Fauré held these posts, Dubois was titular organist at the Madeleine (replacing Saint- Saëns), Professor of Composition and then Director at the Conservatoire, as well as a member of the Institut. 3 There were only six seats available to musicians. The six elected members would be responsible for electing the Prix de Rome laureate. 4 CSS/GF, 61 n. 1 (54 n. 81). 5 GF-ML, 512-513. 6 FMA, 63. 7 “Si vous savez qu’un parti pris contre moi tend à me tenir écarté du monde musical official…” Gabriel Fauré to Théodore Dubois, [location unknown], [end of August 1896], quoted in GF-LV, 489 (493). This letter is not included in Corr. [Nectoux labels these letters “Lettres inédites”/“Unpublished letters, private collection.”]. 8 “…j’ai eu le sentiment qu’on trouvait votre musique trop vague, trop module, trop cherchée.” Théodore Dubois to Gabriel Fauré, [location unknown], 3 September 1896, in GF-LV, 489 (493). This letter is not included in Corr. 136 Yet ironically, his years of socializing in salons and writing songs also caused many to overlook Fauré’s legitimacy as a composer; some dismissed him as merely a salon artist. 9 As late as 1922, an interviewer understated Fauré’s achievements: “You’ve had a lot of success in the salons.” To which Fauré replied, “I was very involved in making a living. I had some good friends, and when you’re an unknown to the musical public at large it’s nice to find people who understand you.” 10 As Fauré himself acknowledged, he was largely unknown in his time. According to Charles Kœchlin, when Francois Albert, the Minister of Education and Fine Arts in France, was approached about Fauré’s state funeral, he had to ask who Fauré was. 11 Though Fauré is more universally known today, he is not typically regarded as influential or progressive, especially when compared to his more celebrated and younger countrymen Claude Debussy (1862-1918) and Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), or to more avant-garde composers, such as Satie and the members of Les Six. 12 However, looking forward to his first and ultimately unsuccessful election for the Institut, Fauré wrote of his certainty, confirmed by Saint-Saëns, that he was the most original candidate, even if he was not the likely choice: 9 For more information on Fauré’s activities in the salons, see Cécile Tardif’s chapter, “Fauré and the Salons” in RF, 1-14. 10 “Vous avez eu beaucoup de succès dans les salons? – J’étais très pris par la vie matérielle. J’ai eu de bons amis, et quand on est ignoré du grand public, on est heureux d’être compris de quelques-uns.” Valbelle, 10. Translated by Nichols, in GF-ML, 35. 11 The earliest mention of this incident in print may be in the Fauré biography by Charles Kœchlin. See Kœchlin, 15-16; and GF-ML, 467. 12 Les Six consisted of Louis Durey (1888-1979), Germaine Tailleferre (1892-1983), Georges Auric (1899-1983), Francis Poulenc (1899-1963), Darius Milhaud (1892-1974), and Arthur Honegger (1892-1955). For more information, see Robert Orledge, “Satie and Les Six,” in French Music since Berlioz, edited by Richard Langham Smith and Caroline Potter (Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing, 2006): 223-248. 137 Of all my probable rivals there is not one who is an obvious choice for the Academy, and if you will allow me, under the seal of secrecy, to pass on the opinion of Saint-Saëns it is that in the company of men like Widor, Dubois, Joncières, Salvayre, and Godard I am the only one to have brought or to have added something new to music! 13 According to Nectoux, Fauré’s self-doubt, “the most faithful companion of Fauré’s creative endeavours”: was compounded by his feeling of his own singularity, his status of outsider by comparison with those French composers of his vintage whom he had to regard as colleagues. Modest he may have been, but at least he knew that his work was as good as that of some people whose meteoric and over-publicised success prompted him to temper his self-doubt with jealousy. 14 As a composer and educator, Fauré exerted a great deal of influence on successive generations of composers in and outside France. Compensating for their friend and teacher’s modesty, Fauré’s many supporters, known as “fauréennes,” staunchly defended and promoted his work both during and after his lifetime. Nadia Boulanger, who was appointed to speak on behalf of all Fauré’s students at her teacher’s funeral, became a celebrated pedagogue, and with the success of students such as Boulanger, Fauré’s influence expanded to ever-widening geographic and temporal spheres. For example, Boulanger sufficiently communicated her zeal for her teacher to American composers Aaron Copland and Elliott Carter that both wrote articles on Gabriel Fauré in 1924 and 13 “Parmi tous mes concurrents probables il n’en est aucun qui s’impose au choix de l’Académie, et si vous me permettez de vous transmettre, sous le sceau de secret, l’opinion de Saint-Saëns elle est que je suis le seul par rapport aux Widor, aux Dubois, aux Joncières, aux Salvayre, aux Godard qui ait apporté, ajouté quelque chose de nouveau à la musique!” Gabriel Fauré to Countess Greffulhe, [location unknown], [late October 1893], Corr., letter 102, 192 (191-192). The variants in emphasis are the editor’s. 14 GF-ML, 492-493. 138 1945 respectively. 15 Carter, with what traces remain of his teacher’s influence, is still composing today. Fauré also had significant links to his younger contemporaries. Ravel was Fauré’s composition student at the Conservatoire, and he clearly valued his teacher enough to ask him to serve as president of the Société musicale indépendante, the society Ravel founded with his classmates in 1903. Although Debussy attended the Conservatoire before Fauré’s tenure, he corresponded with Fauré and addressed him as his “cher maître et ami” [dear teacher and friend]. 16 Upon hearing of Fauré’s appointment as Director of the Conservatoire in 1905, Debussy wrote in expectation of the feathers Fauré would ruffle: But if they’re going to put “the right man for the job” in charge of the Conservatoire, who knows what will happen? And how much dust of old traditions there is to shake off! Anyway you’re there, which is splendid, and the artistic world should rejoice (even those members who are hypocritical or jealous). 17 When Fauré became Director, he indeed was labeled a reformer and a revolutionary; his critics called him “Robespierre.” 18 Acknowledging his father’s 15 Aaron Copland, “Gabriel Faure, a Neglected Master,” The Musical Quarterly 10 (October 1924): 573-86; Elliott Carter, “Gabriel Fauré,” originally published in Listen 6/1 (May 1945): pages unknown, reprinted in The Writings of Elliott Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern Music, edited by Else Stone and Kurt Stone (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1977), 107-110. For excerpts from and discussions of the articles by Copland and Carter, see Chapters 1 and 5 respectively. 16 For example, see Claude Debussy, Correspondance (1884-1918), edited by François Lesure (Paris: Hermann, 1993), 250, 267, and 375. This is not to suggest Debussy’s view of his colleague was without flaw. For instance, Debussy did not approve of Fauré’s incidental music to an English version of Maeterlinck’s play Pelléas et Mélisande, op. 80 (1898), orchestrated by Kœchlin, in light of Debussy’s earlier opera composed on the same subject in 1895. 17 “Mais si on se décide à mettre ‘l’homme qu’il faut’ à la tête de notre Conservatoire, que va-t- il arriver? Et que de vieille poussière traditionnelle à secouer! Enfin vous êtes là, c’est très bien et il faut que les artistes en soient heureux (même les hypocrites et les jaloux).” Claude Debussy to Gabriel Fauré, [location unknown], 28 June 1905, in Debussy, Correspondance, 200 (153). 139 struggles to enact institutional changes, Philippe Fauré-Fremiet wrote: “The ‘gentle Fauré’ surprises everyone, he is called Robespierre: ‘He needs his daily fight,’ they groan. In the evening, when he returns home, he basks in the joy of victory.” Delineating “Fauré the progressive” is as subtle an endeavor as Schoenberg’s was in establishing Brahms as a forerunner to his own work. 19 Fauré was not a composer who incorporated current trends indiscriminately or who innovated solely to garner attention; his work was his means of self-expression. At its heart, “[s]incerity was essential to Fauré’s conception of musical expression, and, among his contemporaries, he was consistently identified as ‘sincere.’” 20 As Caballero qualifies it, Fauré “was modern by ‘inner necessity.’” 21 This modernity is not as obvious as the trends associated with the avant-garde. According to Scott, “He did not create a new musical language, but he did discover a new musical syntax that joined familiar sounds in unfamiliar combinations.” 22 His education at the École Niedermeyer influenced his sense of melody and harmonic writing and offered him intimate knowledge of earlier music. The compositional style resulting from these influences was a rare ability, as he himself realized—“I’ve come to 18 “Le «doux Fauré» surprend tout le monde, on l'appelle Robespierre: «Il lui faut sa charrette quotidienne» gémit-on. Le soir, quand il rentre chez lui, il rayonne de la joie du vainqueur.” Fauré-Fremiet, Gabriel Fauré, 93 (my translation). 19 Brahms is not typically identified as an innovator, but Schoenberg justifies his position by highlighting Brahms’s individual approach to form. Arnold Schoenberg, “Brahms the Progressive,” in Arnold Schoenberg, Style and Idea, edited by Dika Newlin (New York: Philosophical Library, 1950), reprinted in Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg, edited by Leonard Stein, translated by Leo Black (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 398-441. According to Schoenberg, “This essay was originally a lecture delivered in February, 1933, on the occasion of Brahms’s 100 th birthday. This year, 1933, was also the 50 th anniversary of Wagner’s death. This is a fully reformulated version of my original lecture. Many things and some of my opinions have changed during that time, and now 1947 is again an anniversary of Brahms; he died fifty years ago.” Schoenberg, 532. 20 FMA, 4. 21 FMA, 27. 22 Scott, 35. 140 the firm conclusion that the way I write music is not within the capabilities of everybody!” 23 Requiem does not reflect the furthest extent of Fauré’s innovations with harmony and form, but due to its wide distribution, it became very influential—quickly joining the canon of requiem settings and serving as a model for future composers. Its fame brought it to the attention of the general public and widened the expectations for what a requiem should be, consist of, and mean. The popularity of this setting encouraged wider choices regarding requiem texts, liturgically functional settings suitable to the concert hall, and a new and more restrained course for concert requiems. Fauré’s influence within and beyond the walls of the Conservatoire 24 Though Fauré’s entrance into Paris’s elite musical institutions, most notably the Conservatoire, was initially met with great resistance, his work as an educator, academic administrator, music editor, and critic did have a lasting effect upon the musical scene in France at the beginning of the twentieth century. His efforts further broadcast the ideals valued in his own compositions, individual musical artistry balanced with an understanding of older music. 23 “J’ai bien au fond de moi-même le sentiment que mes procédés ne sont pas à la portée de tout le monde!” Gabriel Fauré to Marie Fremiet, Bruxelles, 23 March 1906, in Li, 118. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 98. 24 For more information, see Gail Hilson Woldu, “Fauré at the Conservatoire: Critical Assessments of the Years 1896-1920” in RF, 97-118; Gail Hilson Woldu, “Gabriel Fauré, directeur du Conservatoire: les réformes de 1905” Revue de musicology 70/2 (1984): 199-228; and Gail Hilson Woldu, “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905-1920” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983). For first-hand accounts, see [Jean] Roger-Ducasse, “L’enseignement de Gabriel Fauré,” in Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946); and the Fauré biographies by Vuillermoz and Kœchlin. 141 Professor of Composition When Ambroise Thomas passed away in 1896, Théodore Dubois became Director of the Conservatoire to fill the vacancy. Without Thomas to object to Fauré’s application, Fauré was finally appointed Professor of Composition in the same year, filling the opening left by Massenet’s resignation (see Appendix). Fauré’s résumé lacked many of the attributes of his predecessors: he was not a Prix de Rome laureate or even a Conservatoire graduate, he was not a member of the prestigious Institut de France, and he did not principally compose music for the theatre/opera. Fauré’s education at the École Niedemeyer gave him the appearance of being an outsider; in his Fauré biography, Émile Vuillermoz, for example, undervalued his teacher’s education by saying Fauré had “no degree from any official course of study.” 25 In his teaching, Fauré broke with tradition by using no formal approach or method and for this reason initially resisted the idea of applying for the Conservatoire professorship: I have taken a good look at myself too and apart from basic fundamentals, I have not discovered a method within myself. I have already had some young people through my hands, and I can remember that my teaching has varied according to the ability of each one of them: a system which is not possible when there are numerous people in the class, where one needs to let fall from one’s lips only such words as are not open to dispute! 26 25 “Il ne possédait aucun grade dans la scolarité officielle.” Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 22. Translated by Schapin in Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 19. 26 “Je me suis scruté aussi et je ne me suis pas trouvee, en dehors des vérités fondamentales, une méthode. J’ai d´éjà fait travailler quelques jeunes gens et je me souviens que mon enseignement a varié suivant la nature de chacun d’eux, ce qui est un système inapplicable dans une nombreuse classe où il ne faut laisser tomber des lèvrres que des paroles indiscutables!” CSS/GF, 57-58 (50- 51). 142 His teaching involved “far more style than pedagogy” as “[h]e was more likely to suggest a variety of approaches to composition than insist on a set of immutable rules.” 27 This evokes the approach of his teacher, Camille Saint-Saëns, who introduced a broad array of new music to his composition class at the École. Saint-Saëns’s approach was a refreshing change of pace for his students as Niedermeyer considered most new music to be inappropriate for the young. Rather than requiring his students to employ a particular technique, Fauré stressed the need for a composer to be sincere—“I do not belong to any school and I reject no way of thinking, provided it derives from a well-conceived and sincere doctrine.” 28 His student Louis Aubert described his teacher as “not, strictly speaking, a professor. He was more a guide, an advisor. He gave us complete license and never imposed on us any one particular manner or particular style.” 29 Nadia Boulanger also described Fauré’s chameleon-like approach, which could change to suit his students: As a teacher, he seemed to have but one principle: to understand his pupils, to adapt himself to their individual personalities and help them to find their own particular road to artistic self-realization. Distinguished musicians of opposing temperament and talents—Ravel, Schmitt, Roger-Ducasse, Aubert, Enesco, Koechlin, etc. lived in the shadow of his personality without ever feeling the slightest sense of constraint. It was he who understood them and not they who had to understand him. 30 27 Woldu, “Fauré at the Conservatoire” in RF, 98, 99. 28 “Je n’ai pas de parti pris d’école et je n’excommunie aucum genre pourvu qu’il provienne d’une doctrine réfléchie et sincere.” Gabriel Fauré in André Nede, “Le Nouveau directeur du Conservatoire,” Le Figaro, 14 June 1905. Translated by Woldu in Woldu, “Fauré at the Conservatoire,” 99. 29 “Faure n’était pas, à proprement parler, un professeur. C'était plutôt un guide, un conseiller. Il nous laissait une liberté absolue, ne nous imposait jamais une manière, un style particuliers.” As quoted in Bruneau, La vie, 26. Translated by Woldu in “Fauré at the Conservatoire,” 99-100. 30 Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” 124. 143 A free hand regarding individual style did not mean that Fauré did not have standards for a student’s technique. According to Roger-Ducasse, Fauré began teaching “music grammar” [l’écriture, d’abord] with chorales: accompanied, ornamented, and studied within Bach’s choral and organ works. 31 In order to augment the students’ understanding of the basics, Fauré would enlist the help of André Gedalge to help teach counterpoint and fugue and his students Kœchlin and Paul Dukas to teach orchestration. 32 According to Vuillermoz: Fauré required that student composers who were assigned to him already possess a basic technique. He was particularly insistent on this point. He did not consider it his duty to teach them the rules of the road at the moment when he gave them control of the wheel. 33 However, Fauré did not make a show of his disapproval; when he reviewed his students’ works and found one he did not like “[he] would become vacant, distant; and, the audition over, would turn nonchalently [sic], and ask softly, with an air of detachment, ‘Was there nothing else?’” 34 Director of the Conservatoire Dubois’s resignation in 1905 created an opening for the Conservatoire’s directorship, and a decree was issued on June 15, 1905 naming Fauré as his successor. 35 31 Roger-Ducasse, “L’enseignement de Gabriel Fauré,” 19-20. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 264-265. 32 Kœchlin, Gabriel Fauré, 8; and Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 31 (Schapin, 26-27). 33 “Fauré estimait que les apprentis-compositeurs qu’on lui confiait étaient déjà en possession d’une technique de base. Et il était particulièrement exigeant sur ce point. Il ne lui incombait pas de leur apprendre le code de la route au moment de les mettre au volant.” Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 30. Translated by Schapin in Vuillermoz, Gabriel Fauré, 26. 34 Kœchlin, 8. 35 Though Dubois had announced his resignation well beforehand, it has been typically blamed on a scandal (known as “l’affaire Ravel”) involving Maurice Ravel, a student of Fauré’s since Ravel resumed studies at the Conservatoire in 1897. Ravel lost the Prix de Rome competition five 144 Although he officially began on October 1, 1905, the first set of Fauré’s reforms was announced in advance (on August 3) in an address by Dujardin-Beaumetz, Under- Secretary of State for Fine Arts, to the students and faculty. 36 Fauré’s student Marguerite Long describes Fauré’s reforms, which were not positively received by those wishing to uphold the Conservatoire’s traditions: His influence breathed a new, transforming spirit into the old institution, and his reforms were so radical that they earned him the nickname of “Robespierre”. “Monsieur,” Théodore Dubois told him on leaving office, “do not forget that, as its name implies, the Conservatoire is intended to conserve tradition.” But for Fauré tradition had quite a different meaning. It was rooted in his knowledge of those great classical masters on which he himself had been reared, and not in the arbitrary study of a restrictive technique. In his search for the pure source of music he rejected all conventional effects… 37 This perception of tradition belonging to music’s history rather than the institution’s guided many of Fauré’s reforms. He believed an understanding of pre- nineteenth century music was essential for musicians: If the Conservatoire is to preserve the solid traditions that are the foundation on which innovators’ explorations are based, let us not forget that the artist needs from that past support and not regrets. The old masters who gave art such an incomparable splendor were for their contemporaries the advanced and the moderns …at the root of [long-lasting works], whatever the newness of expression or boldness of form, one is always certain to see in it elements of a times from 1900 to 1905; for the fifth attempt, he, though considered deserving of recognition, was eliminated in the first round, and all who progressed had been a student of Charles Lenepveu, one of the committee members. For more information, see GF-ML, 267-270; and Jane Fulcher, The Composer as Intellectual: Music and ideology in France, 1914-1940 [Composer], 136. Though accounts of these events outline a causal relationship between this scandal and Dubois resignation, Woldu presents evidence that the resignation was planned well before these events. See Woldu, “Gabriel Fauré as Director,” 2-6. 36 For the full text of this address, see Appendix A in Woldu, “Gabriel Fauré as Director,” 191- 192, and the translation, 59-61. For a summary of these reforms see GF-ML, 268. For a discussion of these reforms as the Conservatoire’s response to the Schola Cantorum, see Fulcher, French Cultural Politics, 143-147. 37 Long, At the Piano, 24-25. 145 sound classical instruction, and, in general, this can come only from a frequent and thorough knowledge of the masters. 38 Before Fauré’s tenure, music history was not a required subject for Conservatoire students; and the music history course, a standard part of music curriculum’s today, was ill attended. Under his direction, composition and harmony students were now required to attend the class, and Conservatoire students would perform the selections discussed. Fauré also attempted, with limited success, to improve the voice program. The requirement for students to focus on exercises and vocalises in their first year was not heeded, but one could find a broader repertoire of music performed for Conservatoire concerts and exams after the 1905 reforms. 39 While the composition classes had previously been “training grounds for the sacrosanct Prix de Rome cantata,” the genre required by the competition, Fauré widened the purview. 40 He did not emphasize the Prix de Rome cantata in his teaching and reduced overall the earlier concentration on the composition of dramatic works. Before the reforms, composition instruction centered on harmony, and counterpoint was treated as a subordinate aspect of chord progressions rather than its own compositional procedure. Fauré’s reforms required composition students to take extra classes in 38 “Si le Conservatoire doit garder les traditions solides qui sont la base sur laquelle s’appuient les recherches des novateurs, n’oublions pas que l’artiste doit demander au passé, non des regrets, mais des appuis. Les vieux maîtres qui ont donné à l’art un si incomparable éclat furent eux aussi pour leurs contemporains des avancés et des moderns… Mais la base de celle’ci, quelles que soient la nouveauté de leur expression ou la hardiesse de leur forme, on est assuré de retrouver toujours un fort enseignement classique, et dans l’ordonnance générale, cette sûreté que peurvent seules donner la fréquentation et las connaissance profonde des maîtres.” Dujardin-Beaumetz, “Partie non officielle,” Journal Officiel de la République Française, 4 August 1905, 4799-4800. As quoted in Woldu, “Fauré at the Conservatoire,” 114-115 [French], 105-106 [English]. 39 One milestone was the introduction of a lied, Schubert’s Gretchen am Spinnrade, into the women’s vocal competition in 1906; the performance was awarded first prize. See Woldu, “Fauré at the Conservatoire” in RF, 109-110. 40 GF-ML, 268. 146 counterpoint and fugue, separate from their composition class; this change required the addition of two professors to the faculty. As Director, he also made many changes to the administrative structure, diversifying several of the committees. Though it took him fifteen years to admit it to Fauré, Saint-Saëns, his close friend and mentor, resigned from the administrative committee in disapproval of these changes: I left the Conseil supérieur because they opened it up, because they stuffed it full of journalists, of theatre directors, of women, because it was no longer just made up of people with ability and became susceptible to all kinds of intrigues from outside. 41 Fauré held the position of Director until 1920, when he resigned due to illness and the deterioration of his hearing. Société Nationale de Musique and Société Musicale Indépendente Fauré’s students and his reforms would influence generations of composers, and he truly served as a bridge between the old and the new. Nowhere could this be demonstrated more symbolically than by his dual presidencies of the competing musical societies of his time: the conservative Société Nationale de Musique, founded by his teacher Camille Saint-Saëns in 1871, and the innovative Société Musicale Indépendente, founded by his student Maurice Ravel in 1909. 42 41 “J’ai quitté le Conseil Supérieur parce qu’on la élargi, parce qu’on y a fourré des journalistes, des directeurs de théâtre, des femmes, parce qu’il n’est plus composé seulement de gens compétents et qu’il se trouvait livré à toutes les intrigues de dehors.” Camille Saint-Saëns to Gabriel Fauré, [location unknown], 31 July 1920, in CSS/GF, letter 136, 134 (127). 42 Charles Kœchlin, Louis Laloy, and Émile Vuillermoz were also founding members. For more information on the Société Musicale Indépendante, see Michel Duchesneau, L’avant-garde musicale et ses sociétés à Paris de 1871 à 1939 (Liège, Belgium: Pierre Mardaga, 1997), 65-122; Jane Fulcher, French Cultural Politics and Music: From the Dreyfus Affair to the First World War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 161-162; and Jean-Michel Nectoux, 147 Though he had been in leadership under the honorary presidency of César Franck, upon Franck’s death in 1890 Vincent d’Indy officially became president of the Société Nationale. The society was heavily influenced by the ideals of his Schola Cantorum, and Fauré’s pupils, believing their works had been unduly rejected from the Société’s concert programs, created this new faction and appointed their beloved teacher as president. In an attempt to reunite the two groups in 1916, d’Indy stepped down so Fauré could become president. 43 In his public “appeal to French composers,” printed in 1917, Fauré encouraged composers to join together and support the Société nationale “which one can no longer suspect of being, as once seemed the case, the property of an individual and in which all shades of musical thought will be fully represented.” 44 Editor and Critic Late in his life, Fauré became known as an authority on music and was therefore given opportunities to exercise that authority: revising opinions of old works through his editions while, at the same time, by shaping opinions of new works through his reviews. At the end of his life he was called upon by Durand to help with editions of early music including the two volumes of Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier and all of Bach’s organ works. As an editor, Fauré encouraged performers to avoid the nineteenth-century “Ravel/Fauré et les débuts de la Société Musicale Indépendante,” Revue de musicologie 61/2 (1975): 295-318. 43 For more information on the reintegration of these two groups, see Michel Duchesneau, “La musique française pendant la Guerre 1914-1918: Autour de la tentative de fusion de la Société Nationale de Musique et de la Société Musicale Indépendante” Revue de musicologie 82/1 (1996): 123-153. 44 Gabriel Fauré, “Appel aux musiciens français,” Le Courrier musical 15 March 1917, 133. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 403. 148 revisions of these works 45 while at the same time he stressed that one should “bring these works alive again, instead of emphasising [sic] what is dated about them” since “the main problem with masterpieces is that they are surrounded by excessive respect and this ends up by making them boring.” 46 In 1903, Fauré succeeded in acquiring the position of music critic for Le Figaro. 47 This platform offered him the opportunity to articulate his incomprehension of the Parisian public’s refusal to embrace innovation, for example with Georges Bizet’s Carmen—“it had been necessary for this music to go abroad to achieve the extraordinary popularity which it had acquired.” 48 Fauré even publicly defended Berlioz work even though he did not necessarily agree with all elements of his colleague’s style: Born from a mind and heart where everything took an excessive form, the oeuvre of Berlioz in its entirety to me must be considered – proportions preserved – in the way that Georges Clémenceau said the French Revolution had to be considered: as a unit… One can be resistant to the music of Berlioz; one can not love it in part… In each of the two parts which comprise Troyens is found most of the elements characteristic of the genius of Berlioz… everything there, from the first note until the last, is pure music… 49 (my translation) 45 Gabriel Fauré, preface to Johann Sebastian Bach, Preludes et fugues, edited by Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Durand, 1915), unnumbered. 46 “…l’étendre à tout ce qui peut revivifier l’intérêt de ces œuvres, au lieu d’exagérer ce qu’elles présentent parfois d'un peu suranné? Le mal dont souffrent les chefs-d’œuvre, c’est le respect excessif dont on les entoure et qui finit par les rendre ennuyeux.” Gabriel Fauré, preface to Johann Sebastian Bach, Œuvres completes pour orgue de J.S. Bach, edited by Gabriel Fauré (Paris: Durand, 1917), unnumbered. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 43. 47 For a selection of Fauré’s reviews, see Gabriel Fauré, Opinions musicales (Paris: Éditions Rieder, 1930). For more information on Fauré as a critic including an index of his criticisms listed both chronologically and alphabetically by composer, see Nicole Labelle’s chapter “Gabriel Fauré: Music Critic for Le Figaro” in RF, 15-42. 48 “…il a fallu que cette musique ait été conquérir, à l’étranger, l’extraordinaire renommée qu’elle en a rapportée…” Gabriel Fauré, “Bizet,” in Opinions musicales, 24-25. Translated by Labelle in Labelle, “Music Critic” in RF, 19. 49 “Issue d’un cerveau et d’un cœur où toute chose prenait une forme excessive, l’œuvre de Berlioz dans sa totalité me semble devoir être considérée – proportions gardées – de la façon dont Georges Clemenceau a dit qu’il fallait considerer la Révolution française: comme un bloc… On 149 Having been subjected to heavy public criticism himself, Fauré avoided airing his negative opinions publicly, though at times he did dislike certain new works. According to his son: All his life he had attacked and been attacked. Should he attack the young because of what seemed to him ‘excesses’? Was he perhaps lacking in perspicacity and foresight? These qualities had been so sorely lacking in his own critics! He held his peace; he did not want to lend his name to judgments, still less to condemnations, and he had work to do… Of certain very modern works he used to say simple: “I find that ugly.” The things he did unambiguously condemn were lack of passion, imaginative poverty and a taste for artifice… He considered Honegger the only one of the young composers who had a truly great composing temperament. 50 He did use the public platform of writing the preface to the contemporary survey La Musique française d’aujourd’hui [French Music of Today] to exhort composers to avoid big effects for the sole purpose of drama and predict French music would again return to the ideal of sincerity: The terrible storm that we are experiencing will return us to ourselves and give us back our common sense, that is, the taste for clear thought, sober and pure form, sincerity, the disdain of big effects, in a word, all the virtues that can contribute to allowing our art to find again, completely, its admirable character. 51 peut être réfractaire à la musique de Berlioz: on ne peut pas l’aimer à demi… Dans chacune des deux parties que réunit la représentation des Troyens se retrouvent la plupart des traits caractéristiques du génie de Berlioz… tout, de la première note jusqu’à la dernière, y est pure musique…” Gabriel Fauré, “Berlioz,” in Opinions musicales, 22-23. 50 “Toute sa vie il avait combattu et il avait été combattu. Devait-il combattre les jeunes pour ce qui lui semblait des «excès»? Ne manquait-il pas de perspicacité, de divination? On en avait tellement manqué à son égard! Il se récusait; il ne voulait plus juger ni surtour condmaner au nom de son prestige, et il travaillait. Ce qui limite, dans l’art, les libertés permises c’est l’obscurité et la laideur. De certaines œuvres très modernes, il disait simplement: «Je trouve ça laid.» Ce qu’il cœur, la pauvreté de l’imagination, le goût de l’artifice… il considérait Homegger comme le seul parmi les jeunes qui eût vraiment un grand tempérament de musician.” Fauré-Fremiet, Gabriel Fauré, 114, 123. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 437. 51 “…l’effroyable tempête que nous traversons [World War I] nous rendra notre sens commun, c’est-à-dire le gout de la Claire pensée, de la forme sobre et pure, la sincérité, le dédain du gros effets, en un mot, toutes les vertus qui peuvent contribuer à ce que notre art tout entire retrouve son admirable caractère…” Gabriel Fauré, preface to George Jean-Aubry, La Musique française 150 The influence of Opus 48 upon future requiem composers Requiem was a striking new addition to the canon; it departed from other widely known settings in its ostensibly unusual text and in the restrained manner of Fauré’s setting. Within decades of its publication, it became increasingly better known and more frequently performed. For instance, on May 21, 1924, the great conductor Willem Mengelberg led the Amsterdam Concertgebouw in a performance of the work, which was likely recommended to him after it had been included in a French festival held in Amsterdam in 1922, in Paris’s Théâtre des Champs-Elysées. 52 Gustave Bret, who had conducted Requiem in Paris in March 1920, made the first complete recording of the work in April 1931. 53 Fauré’s familiarity with sacred music’s history as well as contemporary musical trends informed his approach to his own mass for the dead and fueled his intention to create a unique work, one worthy of entering music history’s “museum.” He embraced aspects of earlier works and rejected others, and critics, while not typically conversant in French sacred music, have not resisted making comparisons, particularly to canonical requiems. Similarly, later requiems must contend their predecessors, now including Fauré’s setting; composers who approach the genre experience a kind of “anxiety of influence” either in the writing process or by musical community’s reception of their work. d’aujourd’hui (Paris: Librarie Académique Perrin, 1916), xii-xiii. Translated by Fulcher in CAI, 39-40. 52 GF-ML, 428-429. 53 This recording was distributed by the Gramophone Company. GF-ML, 587 n. 10. 151 Britten’s War Requiem Eminent British critic William Mann described this “anxiety of influence” in his preview of the premiere of perhaps the most famous requiem setting of the twentieth century, Benjamin Britten’s War Requiem, op. 66 (1962): “Any new Requiem setting has to compete with Verdi’s and Fauré’s and Mozart’s treatment of the same words.” 54 After many comparisons of his work to canonical settings, Britten himself acknowledged their influence upon his setting: I think that I would be a fool if I didn’t take notice of how Mozart, Verdi, Dvořak – whoever you like to name – had written their Masses. I mean, many people have pointed out the similarities between the Verdi Requiem and bits of my own War Requiem, and they may be there. If I have not absorbed that, that’s too bad. But that’s because I’m not a good enough composer, it’s not because I’m wrong. 55 Though Britten’s Requiem is more akin to large-scale requiems like Berlioz’s or Verdi’s, it owes the freedom to reshape a requiem’s text and structure to developments within the musical requiem tradition in which Fauré’s setting played a part. From his study of Fauré’s setting John Rutter concludes, “the liturgical text [of a requiem] can be treated very selectively”; however, the manipulation of liturgical texts was not exclusively a technique of Fauré’s. 56 While most of Britten’s text alterations do not reveal a direct influence of Fauré’s Requiem, it is interesting to note War Requiem contains the 54 William Mann, “Britten’s Masterpiece Denounces Way,” The Times (London), 25 May 1962, 15. 55 Mitchell, Donald. “Map Reading: Benjamin Britten in Conversation with Donald Mitchell” in The Britten Companion, edited by Christopher Palmer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 87-96. For a discussion of the influence of Verdi’s Requiem upon Britten’s, see Cooke, 49- 52. 56 Rutter in Crawford, 57. In another interview, Rutter acknowledges the influence of another canonical requiem upon future composers: “…of course selecting an à la carte Requiem is something composers have felt free to do since Brahms. They feel free to call anything a Requiem if it deals with life and death.” Reel, 133. For further discussion, see Chapter 3. 152 “In paradisum” text, which is one of the most unique features of Fauré’s setting among canonical requiems. Part of the development of the musical requiem tradition was the increasingly personalized significance composers attached to their requiem settings. As Britten was more interested in making a socio-political statement than a liturgically functional work, he created irony by juxtaposing non-liturgical texts, excerpts from Wilfred Owen’s wartime poetry, with the Latin texts from the Mass for the Dead: Britten has approached the task in his own fresh and deeply felt way. It is not a Requiem to console the living; sometimes it does not even help the dead to sleep soundly. It can only disturb every living soul, for it denounces the barbarism more or less awake in mankind with all the authority that a great composer can muster. 57 Twentieth-century French requiems by Duruflé and others Although it has only recently become part of the canon, Maurice Duruflé’s Requiem, op. 9 (1947) is the one most often compared to Fauré’s. 58 Both composers are French, and though their settings were written nearly fifty years apart, Duruflé’s compositional style shared many of the characteristics of early twentieth-century French 57 William Mann, “Britten’s Masterpiece,” 15. 58 For one recent comparison, see Christopher Gardner Gravis, “Gabriel Fauré’s and Maurice Duruflé’s Requiem Mass Settings: A Comparative Analysis” (master’s thesis, California State University, Fullerton, 2008). Moreover, the modest length of both of these works makes them suitable to be paired on a compact disc, and several albums have appeared with both. See for example, George Guest, dir., Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [organ version], Choir of St. John’s College, Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields (London compact disc 436 486-2, 1975); Robert Shaw, dir., Fauré Requiem, Op. 48 [R-JR] and Duruflé Requiem, Op. 9 [full orchestra version], Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus (Telarc compact disc CD-80135, 1987); Myung-Whun Chung, dir., Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [full orchestra version], Coro e Orchestra dell’Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia (Deutsche Grammophon compact disc 289 459 365-2, 1998). 153 music, earning him the label “the last impressionist.” 59 However, in his lifetime, Duruflé received more recognition as an organist than as a composer (his oeuvre of mostly choral and organ works is quite small), and today he is unfamiliar to the general public though his Requiem is becoming increasingly popular. 60 Beginning his career at the age of six as a choirboy, Duruflé was a lifelong church musician, and the influence of his education in Gregorian chant is evident in many of his works. 61 The nineteenth-century movements to restore older music to the Church had come to fruition in the early part of the twentieth century: chant was re-introduced into church services, organists harmonized and improvised upon chant melodies (when Duruflé was a student, these skills were required of all organ students at the Conservatoire), and the Benedictine monks of Solesmes introduced a uniform way of rhythmically performing chant to the Church. Duruflé’s Requiem is clearly based upon the Gregorian chants of the requiem mass. In many instances, the chant tune is clearly pronounced, and throughout the work, he employs harmonies evocative of chant modes. In noticing the outward similarities of these works, some have accused Duruflé of being unoriginal: The immediate model for the choral work was Fauré’s Requiem… the Op 9 Requiem may not be as original in conception, mood and content as they might 59 Ronald Ebrecht, ed., Maurice Duruflé, 1902-1986: The Last Impressionist (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2002). 60 Duruflé’s oeuvre consists of fourteen works with opus numbers though his Opus 1 was never published. Four of them are written for chorus: Requiem, Quatre motets, Messe cum jubilo, and Notre Père. For more information on Durufle’s choral output, see Jeffrey W. Reynolds, “The Choral Music of Maurice Duruflé (1902-1986)” (doctoral diss., University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, 1990). 61 Duruflé’s Notre Père, a brief setting of the Lord’s Prayer which became his final published work, is the only one of his choral works not to be based on chant. 154 have wished or expected, and the music of the older French composer may have influenced it to too great an extent. 62 Duruflé himself resisted the comparison between the works: I do not think I was influenced by Fauré, contrary to the opinion of certain musical critics, who, [sic] anyway have never given any explanation concerning their viewpoint. I have simply tried to surround myself with the style suitable to the Gregorian chants as well as the rhythmic interpretation of the Benedictines of Solesmes. 63 This statement may seem like a case of “protesting too much,” Duruflé was certainly aware of Fauré’s setting, which had joined the canon in the first half of the twentieth century, and, as pointed out by Britten earlier, it is impossible not to know and consequently be influenced by earlier settings. 64 Nevertheless, it is as presumptuous to attribute Duruflé’s setting solely to Fauré’s influence as it is to assume Fauré’s setting emerged without predecessors. Duruflé’s use of chant, colored by his understanding of the Solesmes method, is more extensive than the modal techniques or chant-like melodic writing Fauré employed. Though Duruflé’s setting offers a similar air of restraint, it is not as superficially simple. In attempting to transcribe the Solesmes-style chant rhythm and accentuation into modern notation, the work is much more rhythmically and metrically complex. The texts of the two settings are similar: both omit the Sequence “Dies irae” and include “Libera me” and “In paradisum,” texts from the Office for the Dead. Duruflé split 62 Gwilym Beechey, “Maurice Duruflé and his Requiem, Op 9,” Musical Opinion 105 (December 1981): 89. 63 Maurice Duruflé to Charles E. Lewis, [location unknown], 8 November 1971, in Charles E. Lewis, “A Conductor’s Analysis of Four Penitential Motets by Francis Poulenc and Requiem by Maurice Duruflé,” master’s thesis, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1972), 93. 64 Later in his life, Duruflé would play the organ on three recordings of Fauré Requiem, the most noteworthy of which perhaps is recording conducted by Nadia Boulanger made in 1948, a year after the premiere of his own Requiem. Frazier, James E. Maurice Duruflé: the Man and his Music. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2007), 252. 155 the Kyrie from Introït (though the score indicates they are to be played without pause) and Lux Aeterna from Agnus Dei. Consequently Opus 9 consists of nine movements: Introït, Kyrie, Domine Jesu Christe, Sanctus, Pie Jesu, Libera me, Agnus Dei, Lux Aeterna, and In paradisum. Unlike Fauré who made cuts, Duruflé strictly adheres to the liturgical texts; the differences are most noticeable in the third movement (for Fauré’s alterations, see Figure 3.1). The solo movements of these works also seem similar on the surface level; originally Duruflé’s Requiem required baritone and soprano (albeit mezzo-soprano) soloists for the same solo movements as Fauré’s. However, although Duruflé wrote the Domine Jesu Christe (containing the “Hostias” section) and Libera me movements to include baritone soloist, the composer later reassigned the baritone solos to the chorus, admitting, “[i]t is a mistake on my part to have entrusted these few bars to a soloist.” 65 Abiding by Duruflé’s request completely eliminates the need for a baritone soloist. As in Fauré’s setting, the central Pie Jesu is scored for a treble soloist, but as discussed in Chapter 3, the French practice of setting this text as a solo predates Fauré’s Requiem. Duruflé’s church music career would likely have provided the opportunity to find and 65 “C'est une erreur de ma part d'avoir confié ces quelques mesures à un soliste.” Maurice Duruflé to George H. Guest, Paris, 3 April 1978, in George H. Guest, A Guest at Cambridge (Orleans, Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 1994), 97-98. Duruflé indicates this change in the score of the organ version, which was published a year after the premiere: “In movement III from [rehearsal numbers] 38 to 41 and movement VIII from 85 to 87, it is preferable to have the baritone solo part sung by all the baritones and second tenors.” [Dans les n os III de 38 à 41, et VIII de 85 à 87, il est préférable de faire chanter la partie de Baryton-solo par tous les barytons et seconds ténors.] Maurice Duruflé, note de l’auteur to Maurice Duruflé, Requiem: réduction pour chant et orgue par l’auteur (Paris: Durand, 1948), unnumbered (my translation). 156 perform examples of this genre. 66 Though the range of the two settings may not be very different, Duruflé’s call for a mezzo-soprano appears to be based on timbre; the vocal soloist, who is singing in the upper part of her range, is joined by a cello soloist, who likewise plays in the upper part of that instrument’s range. This creates a more dramatic color than the purity associated with Fauré’s Pie Jesu, which is often rendered by a boy soprano. 67 Considering the performing options made available by the published materials Duruflé himself provided, his interest in practicality is more evident than Fauré’s, who adjusted the constituency of the ensemble as needed but did not intend to leave behind a record for future performances. Duruflé created his own reduced orchestrations of his Requiem: for organ, chamber orchestra, and full orchestra accompaniment. There is no question of their authorship, and they are not akin to the three versions of Fauré’s Requiem with their additions of musical material in addition to instrumentation. He 66 While Duruflé did express a desire to eliminate the baritone solos, he did not recast Pie Jesu for chorus. However, in the recording conducted by Robert Shaw, women from the chorus sing the solo line. According to the liner notes: “In accordance with the composer’s preference, expressed on more than one occasion, this recording allots the baritone and mezzo-soprano solos to the choral sections.” This change eliminates the double solo (voice and cello) nature of this movement and appears to be unique to this recording. Nick Jones, liner notes to Robert Shaw, dir., Fauré Requiem. 67 Duruflé also offers an option to capitalize on the unique quality of children’s voices. Along with the recasting of the baritone solos, Duruflé suggest a children’s chorus sing in lieu of the soprano section in two passages: “In movement II from [rehearsal number] 34 to 36, VIII from 93 to 94, and IX from the beginning until 101, it is possible to have these passages sung by a small choir of children.” [Dans les n os III de 34 à 36, VIII de 93 à 94, et IX depuis le début jusqu’à 101, il est possible de faire chanter ces passages par un petit choeur d’enfants.] (my translation) Maurice Duruflé, note de l’auteur to Maurice Duruflé, Requiem: réduction pour chant et orgue par l’auteur, unnumbered. 157 preferred the full orchestra version, which certainly reveals a greater interest in capitalizing on the timbral possibilities than Fauré’s setting. 68 These two requiems share many qualities, and early reviews of Duruflé’s Requiem contained comparisons to Fauré’s setting; these comparisons will naturally continue to be made. 69 However one compares these works, to deny Duruflé his originality is to not credit enough his independence from Fauré and, in a fashion, to overlook many of the influences Fauré and Duruflé shared, especially the influence of earlier sacred music. Other requiems composed in France show Fauré’s influence. Joseph-Guy Ropartz’s Requiem (1937-8) includes Pie Jesu and In paradisum but not a Dies irae in its eight movements. Henri le François’s setting (c1942-52) for mixed chorus and organ has only three movements: Kyrie, Pie Jesu, and In paradisum. Desenclos’s Requiem (1963) has seven movements; their choice of texts parallels Fauré’s. These French settings can help establish Duruflé’s displeasure, as evidenced by the quotation presented above, at being accused of copying Fauré. For example, Fauré’s precursors and successors selected different texts; in theory it is possible for Duruflé to have been influenced by other requiems written in the half century after the premiere of Fauré’s setting. John Rutter, requiem editor and composer John Rutter’s Requiem received its premiere in 1985, one year after his edition of Fauré’s Requiem was published. Like Fauré’s setting, Rutter’s Requiem is small-scaled, requiring about forty minutes in performance. It has seven movements: Requiem 68 Duruflé to Lewis, 91. “My favorite version is the one of the complete orchestra, followed by the reduction for orchestra and organ.” 69 For more information, see Frazier, 169-175. 158 aeternam, Out of the deep, Pie Jesu, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, The Lord is my shepherd, and Lux aeterna. 70 He combines texts in English (two psalms and an excerpt from the Burial Service in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer) with the traditional Latin texts (for which he also provides singable English translations). 71 As he believes Pie Jesu is an excerpt “from ‘Dies irae’, Missa pro defunctis,” he orders his movements differently than Fauré, placing it before the Sanctus, where the Sequence would be. 72 While it can be appropriate for a church service, Rutter’s Requiem does not conform to Catholic liturgy. 73 It is available with two instrumentations: organ and six instrumentalists or chamber orchestra. He also features a soprano soloist in Pie Jesu and Lux Aeterna. 74 Marvin Crawford asked Rutter, “What influence, if any, did Fauré’s Requiem have on your setting of the Requiem?” 75 The composer did not hesitate to acknowledge, “It’s absolutely no secret that the Fauré Requiem was a major influence on me in the composition of my own Requiem.” 76 The most important feature Rutter draws from Fauré’s setting is the theme of consolation: I do think that there is some kind of spiritual parenthood that I should acknowledge from Fauré, because, I think that the overall message that people 70 According to Rutter, “The Lord is my shepherd was originally written in 1976 as a separate anthem.” Rutter, prefatory notes to vocal score of R-JR, unnumbered. 71 Rutter credits this juxtaposition to his unique participation in the first recording of Britten’s Requiem: “I think the idea of counterpointing English and Latin came to me as a result of singing in the first recording of the Britten War Requiem. I was a humble member of the boys’ choir…” Reel, 132. 72 Rutter, prefatory notes to vocal score of R-JR, unnumbered. He also switches the final words “dona eis sempiternam requiem.” 73 According to Rutter, “I think that I had in mind that whatever I wrote would be performable in church even though it could also be performed in the concert hall.” Crawford, 58. 74 Like the Duruflé Requiem, Rutter also includes a solo for cello in Out of the Deep. 75 Crawford, 54. 76 Ibid., 55. 159 seem to deduce from listening to my work is a message of consolation and that of course isn’t true of every requiem. 77 For Rutter, “…it seems to be almost customary to pay homage to earlier requiem settings when you write a requiem.” 78 Throughout this interview, Rutter mentions many composers of requiem settings: Berlioz, Verdi, Brahms, Fauré, Duruflé, Howells, and Britten. 79 By referring to the musical tradition, one can position oneself as the successor to that tradition: “[a]nd of course, in my Requiem, the most obvious homage of all is…the homage to Fauré.” 80 The genre’s popularization: works by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Kurt Vonnegut The musical tradition of requiem settings continues to expand and cross boundaries. Andrew Lloyd Webber’s Requiem (1985) was the musical theatre composer’s first large-scale crossover work. 81 It consists of ten movements: Requiem— Kyrie, Dies irae, Rex tremendae, Recordare, Ingemisco—Lacrimosa, Offertorium, Hosanna, Pie Jesu, Lux aeterna, and Libera me. 82 It is scored for boy soprano, soprano and tenor soloists, chorus, and an unusual orchestra. Resembling Fauré’s low-voiced string orchestration, Webber’s orchestra does not include violins, but the ensemble does 77 Ibid., 68. 78 Ibid., 65. 79 Rutter also distinguishes Duruflé’s Requiem from Fauré’s based on Gregorian chant use: “There’s something I should perhaps mention, that is my use of Gregorian melodies. Something Fauré didn’t do… The Duruflé Requiem is of course the one that has specifically Gregorian chants used at a number of points in the work and Gregorian melodies come up in mine certainly twice.” Crawford, 64. 80 Crawford, 66. 81 For an analysis of the work, see Daniel Joseph Green, “A Study of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s ‘Requiem’” (Doctoral diss., University of Miami, 1988). 82 In several movements, Webber creates unusual combinations of requiem texts: Offertorium includes the first line of the “Sanctus,” Hosanna includes the “Benedictus” and second “Hosanna,” Pie Jesu includes the “Agnus Dei.” 160 introduce some non-standard instruments (synthesizer with piano and organ and a large percussion ensemble including maracas) and requires woodwind doublers. 83 It is interesting to note Webber included “Dies irae,” a text that had been eliminated from the Catholic Mass for the Dead by the Second Vatican Council (1962- 1965). Kurt Vonnegut attended the world premiere and was so bothered by the meaning of these words he wrote his own Latin Requiem, which was set to music by David Grana. 84 A few years later, Vonnegut cheekily gave an account of his wife’s introduction to Webber, which provided the opportunity for her to mention Vonnegut’s Requiem text: “You know, my husband was so inspired by your Requiem that he went straight home and wrote one himself.” According to her, Webber looked very tired as he replied, “Oh yes—now everybody is writing a Requiem.” Everybody was copying him. 85 Clearly since the turn of the century, there has been a substantial popularization of the requiem genre. 86 A Pie Jesu genre With its inclusion of a boy treble paired with an adult soprano soloist, Webber’s Pie Jesu calls to mind Fauré’s, which undoubtedly is the most famous setting of this text. As an excerpt and in arrangement (much like Fauré’s), Webber’s setting became more famous than the entire work. Individual settings of “Pie Jesu,” though performed before Fauré’s Requiem, flourished after. 87 This movement gained a stature all its own. Saint- 83 The pianist doubles on celesta. 84 Kurt Vonnegut, “Requiem: The Hocus Pocus Laundromat,” North American Review 271/4 (December 1986): 34-35. 85 Vonnegut, 35. 86 For a discussion of twentieth-century non-liturgical requiems, see Kovalenko. 87 See Chapter 3. 161 Saëns claimed, “Your Pie Jesu is the ONLY Pie Jesu, just as Mozart’s Ave verum is the ONLY Ave verum.” 88 Fauré’s Pie Jesu was printed as an excerpt in his lifetime (for excerpt publication information, see Figure 2.9). Charles Bordes, Emile Pessard, and F. Boissiere had settings published by Alphonse Leduc in 1902 (Bordes and Pessard wrote solos for either baritone or mezzo-soprano). The Schola Cantorum published settings by Felice Anerio (1911) and Leon Saint-Requier (1913). Lili Boulanger’s Pie Jesu (1922) was her final work, scored for soprano, string quartet, harp and organ. Debussy’s student André Caplet wrote a setting in 1925. Fauré’s legacy Some have stated Fauré’s music cannot be fully understood or appreciated outside of France as Copland tried to explain to his American audience in 1924: There are several causes which might be suggested in an attempt to explain exactly why Fauré has been thus overlooked outside of France. It has been many times written and said that Faure’s art is so extremely Gallic in its very essence that it is hardly possible for anyone without the French temperament and mind to understand and appreciate it. One cannot export him, they tell us, just as one cannot export Racine. 89 This excerpt clearly parallels the sentiments of his teacher Nadia Boulanger [complete with the comparison to French poet and playwright Jean Racine (1639-1699)], as was summarized in her lectures on modern music at Rice University in 1926: Like Mozart, Fauré is essentially a “musician’s composer”. The unique concentration of his style, his refinement and his grace are of the sort that sum up centuries of previous culture and development, which can be loved by any 88 “Ton Pie Jesu est le SEUL Pie Jesu, comme l’Ave verum de Mozart est le SEUL Ave verum.” Camille Saint-Saëns to Gabriel Fauré, Paris, 2 November 1916, in CSS/GF, letter 114, 118 (111). This statement is particularly striking since Saint-Saëns had also written his own Pie Jesu. 89 Copland, 573. 162 sensitive spirit, but which only the trained musician can perhaps fully appreciate. For a foreigner the problem is perhaps even more difficult, for Fauré’s music, like the dramas of Racine, is essentially French. Before its deceptive elegance, an Anglo-Saxon or a German sometimes feels those movements of impatience and irritation which the music of Brahms or Malher [sic] tends to provoke in a Frenchman. 90 Clearly in and out of France, Fauré came to represent his country. According to Nectoux: During the years following the First World War in which the superiority of rediscovered national characteristics was celebrated as a matter of course, Gabriel Fauré came almost to embody ‘French music’, with its traditional virtues of moderation, elegance and clarity. 91 While a case can be made for the difficulty of exporting Fauré’s settings of French poetry, it was the influence of fauréennes such as Boulanger upon future composers and upon the public that would continuously extend his influence beyond his nation’s borders. Fauré himself steered away from generalizations based on nationalism: …I will even admit to you that in general I don’t hold with such subtleties in dealing with this art called music, whose primary quality it to be a universal language, or rather the language of a country so far above all others that it lowers itself when it treats of the feelings or the traits of character proper to any particular nation. It’s a theory too easily accepted, that French music should be light and spruce and that German music should be heavy, compact or unintelligible in its search for depth. I believe, on the contrary, that a really gifted composer writes music without a nationalist mask. 92 90 Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” 124. 91 GF-ML, 424. 92 “…je vous avouerai meme que, d’une manière générale, je ne puis pas admettre de ttelles subtilités pour cet art qui s’appelle la musique et dont la première qualité est d’être une langue universelle ou plutôt la langue d’une patrie tellement au-dessus de toutes les autres qu’elle s’abaisse lorsqu’elle traduit des sentiments ou des traits de caractère propres à telle ou telle nation. C’est au moyen d’une théorie si volontiers admise que la musique française doit être légère et pimpante, que la musique allemande doit être lourde, compacte ou inintelligible à force de profondeur. Je crois, au contraire de cela, qu’un musicien véritablement doué fait de la musique sans masque de nationalité.” Gabriel Fauré to Paul Poujaud, Néris-les-Bains, [3 September 1885], in Corr., letter 55, 125-126 (124). 163 Fauré did not have great expectations for the way he would be treated after his death: After I’m gone… you’ll hear people say “When all’s said and done, that’s all there is to it!”… Supporters will fall away, maybe … You mustn’t be upset by this. It’s fate, it happened with Saint-Saëns and with other composers… They all go through a period of oblivion… None of that is important. I did what I could… now let God be my judge!... 93 However, along with Saint-Saëns, he was one of only three musicians, in fact artists of any kind, who were awarded a state funeral during the Third Republic. 94 Instead of supporters falling away, some manipulated the significance of the man’s life. Jane Fulcher argues that the Third Republic appropriated the deceased composer and his Requiem for nationalist sentiment: …Fauré’s funeral included a performance of his own great Requiem mass, which could still be interpreted as—or conflated with—a requiem for the French dead of the war. The new government was thus present in force, represented by an impressively large official contingent that included the presidents of the Republic, the Senate, and the Chamber of Deputies, in addition to the archbishop of Paris. The presence of the latter, unusual in a republican ceremony, was undoubtedly related both to Fauré’s position at the Madeleine and to the greater republican tolerance of religion after the war. 95 The government attempted to use Fauré as a symbol of tradition. Alfred Bruneau paid tribute to Fauré in his inauguration speech upon replacing Fauré at the Académie des 93 “Quand je n’y serai plus, nous dit-il, vous entendrez dire de mon œuvre: Après tout, ce n’était que ça!... On s’en détachera peut-être… Il ne faudra pas vous tourmenter ni vous affliger. C’est fatal, cela s’est produit pour Saint-Saëns et pour d’autres… Il y a toujours un moment d’oubli… Tout cela n’a pas d’importance. J’ai fait ce que j’ai pu… et puis jugez, mon Dieu!…” Fauré- Fremiet, Gabriel Fauré, 129-130. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 467. 94 Gounod was the third. 95 CAI, 87. 164 Beaux-Arts, but, by using him as a symbol of classicism, he undermined “both Fauré’s cosmopolitan style and his tolerance of or openness to the innovations of youth.” 96 There can be no doubt that modern thinking has inherited some of these conceptions of Fauré. However, he was progressive and influential enough to have had a broad effect on music and particularly the musical requiem tradition. John Rutter, who as a requiem composer and editor is perhaps most strongly identified with Fauré’s setting today, stated: …I certainly think that his Requiem paved the way for other composers to write rather free, rather intimate, liturgical or concert requiems that could in some sense address the themes of life and death without sticking to the liturgical pattern set by the church back in whatever century it was. 97 As recently as 2008, for example, Mack Wilberg credited Fauré and Brahms as the influences for his Requiem. 98 Having influenced requiem settings for more than a century, Fauré’s contribution to the canon is more nuanced and complex than is often realized. His Requiem has helped shape the future of the genre. 96 CAI, 89 97 Crawford, 72. 98 According to Wilberg, “Mine [Wilberg’s requiem setting] is more in the tradition of Brahms and Fauré… composers who preferred to offer comfort.” Carma Wadley, “Music Vital in Bringing Comfort,” Deseret News, 4 April 2008, <http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695266940,00.html> (accessed 9 January 2009). Wilberg’s Requiem requires mezzo-soprano and baritone soloists, chorus, and orchestra. It consists of seven movements with texts in both Latin and English; of particular note is the fourth movement’s text, Psalm 84, in English, the same text Brahms set in German for his Requiem. Likewise Swedish composer Fredrik Sixten’s Requiem (2007/2008) includes Pie Jesu and In paradisum movements; throughout the work the traditional Latin texts have been integrated with texts by Bengt Pohjanen (with a singing English translation by John Hearne provided). This work requires soprano and bass soloists, chorus, and orchestra (2 horns, timpani, and strings). 165 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION Fauré in the “long nineteenth century” Historian Eric Hobsbawn’s “long nineteenth century” encompassed 125 years, 1789 to 1914, in order to include two European revolutions—the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution—and the advent of the First World War. 1 Seventy years of Fauré’s life (1845-1924) occurred in this historical window. Today we are still searching for Fauré’s place in the “long nineteenth century” and need to better understand the significance of his works. It has been the goal of this study to highlight the varied and important influences upon this composer, particularly as exerted upon Requiem. Nowadays, since many are unfamiliar with Fauré’s oeuvre, his Requiem has come to represent his entire output. 1 E. J. Hobsbawn, The Age of Revolution, 1789-1848 (New York: Mentor, 1962); E. J. Hobsbawn, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1975); and E. J. Hobsbawn, The Age of Empire, 1875-1914 (New York: Pantheon Books, 1987). The “long nineteenth century” in France is specifically explored in Robert Gildea’s Children of the Revolution, 1799-1914. (London: Penguin Books/Allen Lane, 2008. Michael Burleigh investigates the relationships between church and state in European nations in the same period. See Michael Burleigh, Earthly Powers: Religions and Politics in Europe from the French Revolution to the Great War (London: HarperCollins, 2005). 166 Similarly, as the Berlioz and Fauré requiems are the most famous requiem settings by French composers, they have come to represent requiem French settings (particularly those from the nineteenth century), with Berlioz’s massive setting tending to overshadow Fauré’s more restrained one. These characterizations are highly problematic. Fauré composed over a period of sixty years, and Opus 48 does not contain all of the innovations present in his later songs and chamber works. In addition, his work as a composition teacher, Director of the Conservatoire, and music critic for Le Figaro influenced the musical world. Without familiarity with a wide variety of requiems, especially the liturgically functional settings composed in France for centuries, it is impossible to find the context of these two canonical works. Fauré brought together many elements, particularly French liturgical tradition and older sacred music, to shape his Requiem; when creating the dramatic effects in his monumental setting Berlioz had no concern for, nor practical experience with, Catholic liturgy. On the whole, Fauré’s place has been underestimated. His work remained outside the familiar labels, the “-isms” that characterized the latter half of the “long nineteenth century,” or the experimentation that characterized the early part of the twentieth. He would not have succeeded as he did had not many advocated passionately for him. Some would advance his career during his life, and some would fervently promote his work after his death. A constant source of support, Camille Saint-Saëns helped his student-turned- friend Fauré find work and meet many influential figures in French society and the musical world. These experiences and relationships fueled Fauré’s growth and reputation. Nevertheless the musical institutions in Paris tended to resist Fauré. In certain ways his 167 status as an outsider stems from his education. Because he attended the École Niedermeyer instead of the Paris Conservatoire, Fauré was not an associate of the Conservatoire’s many distinguished musicians; he was not a winner of, or even a competitor for, the prestigious Prix de Rome; and though less evident, his musical understanding and approach to composition were shaped by the École’s unique emphasis on sacred music, particularly older sacred music. Though the École’s founder Louis Niedermeyer was conservative, its piano and composition teacher Camille Saint-Saëns, one of the founding co-presidents of the Société nationale de musique, was not; and both had significant and separate influences upon Fauré. He did not focus on the genres that secured admiration from the musical elite, larger forms such as symphonic works and opera, and consequently Fauré has been consigned to the periphery. In her lectures at Rice University given in 1926, Nadia Boulanger ranked Fauré with Debussy and Stravinsky: Fauré, Debussy and Stravinsky are, of course, the chief figures in the musical history of the last thirty-five years. The work of Debussy and Stravinsky is known, if it is not always understood, the world over; but Fauré, who is perhaps the greatest of the three, is still practically unknown outside of France. 2 Certainly the opinion that Fauré is greater than Debussy and Stravinsky is a controversial one, but it makes evident the extent of her appreciation for her former teacher. Something in Fauré clearly excited this degree of loyalty from many of his students, and this helped perpetuate Fauré’s influence upon the future of music. In the case of Boulanger she passed on this passion to her students, perhaps most notably to Aaron Copland and Elliott 2 Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” 122. 168 Carter; both would be inspired to advocate for Fauré in America. Carter, who recently celebrated his hundredth birthday, wrote in 1945: There is no better example of the power of persuasion in the music of recent times than in the compositions of Gabriel Fauré. Unlike other musicians writing around the turn of the century, he was not interested in attracting the listener by large dramatic effects or sumptuous orchestration. Neither did he believe in the exploitation of any other of those extremes of musical language which overcome the listener by their violence or strangeness and only too quickly lose their effect. His music has a precision of outline, a marvelous clarity, and an intimacy of expression that differentiates it from that of his younger and more widely known contemporaries, Debussy and Ravel. It is the work of a man both simple and modest whose warmth of feeling and loving kindness reveal themselves in every detail. It is by these rare qualities that Fauré stands out as one of the great figures of French music. 3 It is this “precision of outline,… marvelous clarity, and intimacy of expression,” characteristics which constitute its “Frenchness,” that have typified Fauré’s music. By being recognized as understated, his works have been hidden between the large-scale dramatic works epitomized by Berlioz and the more distinctively modern works of Debussy and Ravel. The challenge for those who have become accustomed to hearing more radical departures from functional tonality is to appreciate Fauré’s voice as distinctive in spite of later developments. Fauréennes often point to Fauré’s harmonic language as part of his unique style: The syntax of modern harmony owes more to his music than we as yet realize. His vocabulary, to be sure, is the vocabulary of every one, the vocabulary of the classics: triads, seventh chords and an occasional ninth; but in his work these 3 Elliott Carter, “Gabriel Fauré,” originally published in Listen 6/1 (May 1945): pages unknown, reprinted in The Writings of Elliott Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern Music, edited by Else Stone and Kurt Stone (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1977), 107. 169 routine harmonies follow each other in a manner so distinctive, so ineffably personal, that they seem quite new, entirely original. 4 As early as 1922, Émile Vuillermoz, another of Fauré’s students, argued against the view of Fauré as merely leading the way for future innovators: Fauré was not a simple precursor, a pioneer whose path was enlarged by better equipped explorers. He was a musician, who, a quarter of a century in advance of the other composers, spoke freely a prophetic language with an ease and an elegance which have never been surpassed. 5 Indeed Fauré was a progressive whose work was steeped in an understanding of the past; his innovations with modulation and formal structures stemmed from his early music education. Late in his life and after his death, he also became a symbol of French music for his countrymen, and his reputation was colored by the recollections passed down by those who knew him and by assumptions that were perpetuated about his music. Opus 48 in the “long nineteenth century” and beyond Though distinguished from other Masses for the Dead by its restraint, Gabriel Fauré’s Requiem should not be mistaken for simple. In a 1963 article in The Musical Times, Malcolm Boyd cautioned: Much of what has so far been written about Faure's Requiem, both for and against, has stressed the emotional impact which it makes on the listener, and those who value the work highly can now best serve Faure's cause, perhaps, by drawing attention to some of the many subtleties in its construction which have 4 Boulanger, “Lectures on Modern Music,” 125. 5 “…Fauré ne fut pas un simple précurseur, un pionnier dont des explorateurs mieux armés élargirent la voie: il fut un musicien qui, un quart de siècle avant les autres compositeurs, parla couramment un langage prophétique, avec une aisance, une virtuosité et une elegance qui n’ont jamais été dépassées.” Émile Vuillermoz, “Gabriel Fauré,” La Revue Musicale (October 1922): 14 (206). Translated by Edward Burlingame Hill in Edward Burlingame Hill, Modern French Music (New York: Da Capo Press, 1924), 105. 170 passed largely unnoticed. Careful examination of the score shows it to be made of sterner stuff than some recent critics would seem to admit. 6 As we have seen, the score requires more than careful examination. In 1963, the only scores available to Boyd were those published by Parisian publisher Julian Hamelle in 1900/1901 and reprints of the Hamelle print, some of which included singing English translations. More than a decade would pass between the publication of Boyd’s article and the movement to reconstruct a new full score would begin. The evolution of the work To summarize, these new editions would draw information from the only manuscripts in the composer’s hand extant—the scores for the Introït et Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and In paradisum written in late 1887 and early 1888—and attempt to correct the many errors in the original Hamelle print. As the manuscripts lack three of the print’s seven movements and vary from the print’s orchestration, these manuscripts clearly cannot provide a complete picture. However, by examining the many layers of overwriting and by grouping them by the various early performance dates, one can observe a portion of the work’s long evolution. More recently new sources have been discovered which provide a more complete picture. It is generally believed Fauré’s first sketch of Requiem music was a solo version of Libera me, written in 1877 but missing today. At the time Fauré set the solo aside, and, through an examination of the material in his sketchbooks, it appears a decade passed before Fauré considered a multi-movement requiem setting. These sketches coalesced into a five-movement setting, consisting of the four extant manuscripts mentioned above 6 Boyd, 408. 171 with the missing Pie Jesu placed at the center. This work was first performed at the Madeleine on January 16, 1888. When it was performed again at the Madeleine four months later, Fauré had made some additions to the orchestration. More significant changes would occur in preparation for performances in 1893 and 1894, and again for the official premiere on July 12, 1900 in conjunction with the aforementioned publication by Hamelle. Within the period from 1888 to 1900, the now seven-movement work, including one of the two versions of Offertoire and Libera me, grew from its smaller orchestration to a larger one, most probably due to Hamelle’s appeal for a more standard, and consequently more marketable, orchestration. An understanding of these many stages of development gives insight into Fauré’s claim: “I have never been able to resist (and perhaps just as well) polishing and repolishing a piece and brooding over it endlessly!” 7 This long genesis (1877-1900) and the varied states of the work in the early performances (1888-1900) have challenged scholars to reconsider which version of the work is the “real” Fauré Requiem. In this search, they have isolated three different versions of the work: 1888, 1893 (Church/Chamber Orchestra version), and 1900 (Concert/Symphonic or Full Orchestra version). Due to the substantial number of errors in the print as well as discrepancies between it and the manuscripts, the authorship of the orchestration of the 1900/1901 Hamelle print has also been called into question; several scholars have suggested that his student Roger-Ducasse prepared this version. 7 “Je n’ai jamais su (cela vaut peut-être mieux) ne pas lécher et relécher mon ouvrage et m’y attarder infiniment!” Gabriel Fauré to Marie Fremiet, Lausanne, 20 August 1903 in Li, 75. Translated by Nichols in GF-ML, 487. 172 Some editors, principally John Rutter and Jean-Michel Nectoux, have published editions that aim to reconstruct an earlier version with a reduced orchestration although it is difficult to draw a precise boundary around this middle version. Rutter’s edition, the first edition of the 1893 version to be published, relies heavily on a few sources and, with its options for flexible orchestration and singable English translation, is biased more toward concerns for practicality instead of authenticity. Nectoux’s 1893 edition mediates the many primary and secondary sources he has located with his well-researched chronology of events; however, as his edition also includes the choral sections of Offertoire, which were not inserted in Requiem until 1894, Nectoux compromises a true reconstruction in favor of including seven complete movements. Others have published corrected editions of the 1900 version. Jean-Michel Nectoux again incorporates his understanding of the work’s evolution to bring aspects of earlier performances forward into the edition. Marc Rigaudière has edited the most recent 1900 version published to date and principally focuses on removing the many errors and inconsistencies found in the original 1900/1901 Hamelle materials. Opus 48 in context In the early Christian Church, the Mass for the Dead consisted of a set of texts read or chanted for a funeral service, but with musical and cultural changes, the genre has grown to include both sacred and secular musical memorials; the canon of requiem settings offers a wide range of spiritual statements and, in more recent history, socio- political ones. Compared to its well-known precursors written by Mozart, Berlioz, and Verdi, Fauré’s Requiem, with its shorter length, thinner orchestration, slower harmonic 173 rhythm, and tranquil character, clearly is more restrained. This restraint has given rise not only to the work’s popularity but also to assumptions about its simplicity. It is very challenging to appreciate the context for a work in the standard repertoire. Such a work has been deemed worthy of preservation (in a sort of musical “museum”) and is studied. However, oftentimes the factors that make a work memorable also distinguish it from its contemporaries; this would make the work an inaccurate representation of its company. Conversely, without an understanding of a work’s contemporaries one might unknowingly assume the memorable attributes of the work came from nowhere. The two most widely known nineteenth-century French requiems are those by Berlioz and Fauré. Berlioz’s work, with its considerable performing forces deployed for the greatest dramatic effect, however, can hardly be representative of the kind of church music taking place in France at the time. Fauré’s Requiem, while it does provide a conspicuous contrast to Berlioz’s Grand messe des morts and qualifies as a unique contribution to the canon, emanates from Fauré’s church music career. One must locate it on two different axes: its place among requiems written to function within a mass (the tradition of the church) and its place among requiems written to capitalize on the work’s function for musical purposes (the tradition of the concert hall/the requiem canon). Much of the discussion of Requiem focuses on the work’s texts; however, many times these comments are based in misunderstandings about liturgical practice. It is important to recognize the lack of liturgical unity in the Catholic Church at the time of Requiem and the precedents for some of Fauré’s textual decisions. The absence of the sequence “Dies irae” has been offered as evidence of Fauré’s religious beliefs (which 174 were not strictly Catholic and gradually transformed to near atheism or pantheism later in life) or to his lack of ability to set such a dramatic text. Fauré’s religious beliefs indeed may have informed his text choices, particularly the subtle but meaningful omission of “omnium fidelium” to widen the plea on behalf of all souls rather than solely faithful ones in Offertoire. However, an examination of less familiar requiem settings indicates that churches in France, and particularly those in Paris, followed traditions different from the liturgical practice better known today: the Roman liturgy established by the sixteenth- century Council of Trent. This form of liturgy is known as Gallican or neo-Gallican, and while there was not a strict outline for a “Gallican requiem” per se, there is evidence of certain conventions among musical requiems composed in France. Such traditions included the omission of a composed Dies irae, which could be included in the service in a different form, and the inclusion of a Pie Jesu, which would function as an Elevation motet (not as an excerpt from the Sequence). The texts drawn from the Office for the Dead, “Libera me” and “In paradisum,” are less typical for Masses for the Dead, French or otherwise, but Verdi’s Requiem, already known and admired in Paris, had included Libera me. No precedent for In paradisum within a requiem setting has been identified to date, but at the end of the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth, French composers created organ works with that title appropriate for a funeral mass; a practice of using these works in funeral services would likely have paved the way to some extent for the text’s use in a musical requiem. 175 Looking forward Fauré played a greater role in music’s course at the turn of the century than has generally been recognized. Though he is known primarily as a composer today, Fauré was active in many related musical fields and exerted great influence upon his composition students and, in his tenure as Director of the Conservatoire de Paris, upon the curriculum of the foremost music school in France. His entrance into the French musical establishment was initially met with much resistance. Some perceived Fauré as an outsider and radical, others judged him a salon artist, and yet others were not even familiar with his work. However, in 1896 he was appointed Professor of Composition at the Conservatoire. His students described him not as a didact armed with treatises and rules but as a mentor tailoring his approach for the individuals in his classes. He also did not press the Prix de Rome competition upon his students and consequently tempered the normally intense focus on composing cantatas. As his students became composers, teachers, and critics themselves, they extended his influence still further. In 1905 Fauré became the Director of the Conservatoire and abruptly introduced measures to reform the curriculum. These reforms required composition and harmony students to attend music history classes and composition students to take additional counterpoint classes. These reforms also affected student performers, who would learn a wider variety of music for their exams, works from different genres and older works. The updates to the curriculum would integrate some of the aspects of the newer Schola Cantorum’s curriculum and would influence generations of musicians. 176 Maurice Ravel, perhaps Fauré’s most famous student, struggled against the conservatism of the Conservatoire and its affiliated musical community. After initially dropping out of the Conservatoire he returned and joined Fauré’s composition class, he then lost the Prix de Rome competition five times, and, feeling rejected by the Société nationale which was then dominated by the Schola Cantorum, founded his own organization, the Société musicale indépendante, in 1909. Both societies looked to Fauré for leadership; Ravel asked Fauré to be the president of the new society, and in order to bridge the divide, Vincent d’Indy, then-president of the older society, stepped down to let Fauré take his place. Fauré served as an unusual representative of the both old and new guards of the musical community: Although Fauré, if always evolving, was no longer [at the time of his death] considered ‘progressive’ by the postwar period, he had continued to promote the nascent avant-garde and remained a member of both the conservative Société Nationale de Musique and the more innovative Société Musicale Indépendante. 8 In another demonstration of further ties to the old and new, Fauré also edited and reviewed the compositions of others. His reputation as a proponent of early music made him Durand’s candidate to edit French prints of Bach’s keyboard works, Well-Tempered Clavier and all of the organ pieces. Fauré also served as music critic for the Parisian paper Le Figaro, and reviewed both premiere performances as well as revivals, many of which were performances of French works written in the nineteenth century. The quick rise to fame achieved by his masterpiece, Requiem, op. 48, surprised even Fauré. This work’s reputation only continued to grow through the many performances and recordings made since his death. As a new member of the canon the 8 CAI, 87. 177 work helped usher in a new generation of requiems by composers who, inheriting a greater sense of textual liberty and the license to create a work with personal significance, incorporated some of Fauré’s text choices (particularly the inclusion of “In paradisum”) or made completely new ones and introduced personal or socio-political messages into their requiem settings. Most often scholars point to Duruflé’s Requiem, op. 9 (1947) as the obvious successor to Fauré’s setting. Since its premiere more than fifty years ago, its stature has risen to the level where the work can be considered the next French addition to the requiem canon. While there are many parallels between the works, there are enough significant differences to forestall a denial of Duruflé’s originality. Fauré’s influence also extends outside of his country’s borders to the requiems of Englishmen John Rutter (1985) (also editor of an 1893 version of Fauré’s Requiem), and Andrew Lloyd Webber (1985); and most recently to the Requiem of American Mack Wilberg (2008). Rutter and Wilberg have both acknowledged using Fauré’s Requiem as one of their models. These are not liturgical settings and cannot be considered members of the requiem canon at this point in time. However, they perpetuate traits exhibited by Opus 48. Conservative and progressive Most composers who worked regularly in both sacred and secular spheres had – to be accepted at all in either – to make some gesture of stylistic differentiation, but in some cases the distinction is very subtle or complex. Fauré, in his famous Requiem developed from 1877 to 1900, adopts a very suitable, austere and semi- polyphonic idiom. But the style is not enormously different from that of his simpler song settings and the work is full of lyrical, expressive moments. In some ways, it may be that his style per se owes something to what he had learned from the austerity of church music and the implications of the recently resurrected 178 chant and modal systems. What makes the Requiem entirely suitable for a liturgical context is a certain stasis of harmonic movement coupled with modal turns and a tendency towards repetition… All these elements, so expertly handled, actually become mildly progressive in the wider context of French music at the end of the century. 9 For such a modest man and a modest work, Gabriel Fauré and his Requiem, op. 48 warrant closer examinations than are generally granted them as both have a more nuanced place in music’s history than has been assumed. After his death those advocating for classicism appropriated Fauré for their own purposes, starting at his state funeral: “Fauré… was by no means mired in the past, and yet through this ceremony conservative factions began to ‘construct’ the composer in their image of a classical and traditionalist French culture.” 10 Educated within the nineteenth-century movement to revive sacred music education in France, Fauré learned a broad repertoire of earlier music. Although he did not subscribe to the more extreme notion of recreating the past that developed in the latter part of the century, he incorporated compositional techniques derived from those works into his writing. His funeral included a performance of his Requiem, which would not sound as new and different as the works being written at the time but should be recognized for its progressive elements: …[Requiem,] characteristic of the composer’s later nineteenth-century style, was reassuring in 1924, spanning, as it did late romantic and early twentieth-century innovations. For as Jean-Michel Nectoux has observed, although Fauré, in fact, never transgressed the limits of traditional tonality (and modality), he did broaden them considerably. Indeed, his use of “expanded tonality” and modality, as well 9 John Butt, “Choral Culture and the Regeneration of the Organ,” in The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-Century Music, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 535. 10 CAI, 88. 179 as his long, rhythmically fluid and continually evolving melodies, were highly progressive at the turn of the century. 11 Fauré’s holds an important place in the “long nineteenth century.” Throughout his sixty years of composing, Fauré extended the boundaries of form and harmony as suited his unique style, a style that was infused with the resources of older techniques. It would be unfortunate to pigeonhole Fauré as solely a transitional figure who served as a stepping stone for later, more advanced composers. His compositions were only a part of his overall contribution to music; his work at the Conservatoire exerted great influence upon the direction of music inside of his country and affected a wider sphere through the influence of his students, most importantly Nadia Boulanger. Many of his works, though infrequently performed, deserve further exploration and could more clearly demonstrate his progressiveness than can a middle period sacred work intended for use inside a church service. However, after a long and complicated genesis, Requiem, his most famous composition, joined the canon as a uniquely restrained work. It brought together old and new elements and broadened the possibilities for and within requiem settings. 11 CAI, 87. 180 REFERENCES Scores of Requiem, op. 48 by Gabriel Fauré Bock, Fred, editor and arranger. Requiem [SAB arrangement], by Gabriel Fauré. Tarzana, CA: Fred Bock Music Company, 1990. Bredenbach, Ingo, editor and arranger. Requiem [organ accompaniment], by Gabriel Fauré. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2002. Fauré, Gabriel. Pie Jesu [soprano]. Paris: Hamelle, 1900. ———. Pie Jesu [mezzo-soprano]. Paris: Hamelle, 1901. ———. Requiem. Paris: J. Hamelle, 1901. Reprint, Chicago: H.T. FitzSimons, 1944. Reprint, New York: G. Schirmer, 1956. Reprint, New York: International, 1960. Reprint, Boca Raton, FL: Kalmus, 1965. Reprint, Madison Heights, MI: Lucks Music Library, 1992. Reprint, New York: Dover Publications, 2000. Fiske, Roger, and Paul Inwood, ed. Requiem, Op. 48, by Gabriel Fauré. London: Eulenburg, 1978. Howden, Bruce, arranger. Requiem for Four-Part Chorus of Mixed Voices with Soprano and Baritone Soli [piano reduction], by Gabriel Fauré. New York: G. Schirmer, 1975. Legge, Philip, ed. Requiem in D Minor, Opus 48 (1888/1893 Version), by Gabriel Fauré. Self-published, 2005. Distributed by Choral Public Domain Library. http://www.choralwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Requiem_in_D_minor%2C_Op._48_( Gabriel_Faur%C3%A9) (accessed October 8, 2008). Distributed by International Music Score Library Project http://imslp.org/index.php?title=Requiem,_Op.48_(Faur%C3%A9,_Gabriel)& (accessed October 8, 2008) 181 Naoumoff, Emile, transcriber. Requiem, Op. 48 (1887/1888) [piano transcription], by Gabriel Fauré. The Virtuoso Piano Transcription Series. Vol. 3. Mainz: Schott Musik International, 2001. Nectoux, Jean-Michel, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 (Concert Version, 1900), by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1998. Nectoux, Jean-Michel, and Reiner Zimmermann, ed. Messe de Requiem, by Gabriel Fauré. Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1977. 2 nd ed., Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1995. Nectoux, Jean-Michel, and Roger Delage, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 (Version 1893), by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1994. 2 nd ed., Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 2000. Ratcliffe, Desmond, ed. Requiem, Opus 48. Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1975. ———, editor and arranger. Requiem, Opus 48: Arranged for Soprano and Baritone (or Mezzo-Soprano) Soli, SSA and Orchestra. Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1975. Rigaudière, Marc, ed. Requiem, Op. 48, by Gabriel Fauré. Stuttgart: Carus, 2005. Roger-Ducasse, [Jean], arranger. Requiem [piano reduction], by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle, 1900. Revised edition, Paris: J. Hamelle, 1901. Reprint with English text, Mack Evans, ed., Chicago: FitzSimons, 1953. Rutter, John, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 with Fauré’s Original Chamber Instrumentation, by Gabriel Fauré. Chapel Hill, NC: Hinshaw Music, 1984. Reprint, Requiem (1893 Version) with the Composer’s Original Chamber Instrumentation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. Stephens, Norris L., arranger. Requiem [organ accompaniment]. New York: G. Schirmer, 1965. Other scores Bach, Johann Sebastian. Œuvres completes pour orgue de J.S. Bach. Edited by Gabriel Fauré. Preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Durand, 1917. ———. Preludes et fugues. Edited by Gabriel Fauré. Preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Durand, 1915. 182 Benefield, Richard, ed. Motets for One Voice: The Organ-Accompanied Solo Motet in Nineteenth-Century France. Middleton, WI: A-R Editions, 2003. Berlioz, Hector. Requiem [Grande messe des morts]. New York: Dover Publications, 2006. Boulanger, Lili. Pie Jesu pour chant, quatuor à cordes, harpe et orgue. Paris: Editions Durand, 1922. Brahms, Johannes. Ein deutsches Requiem in der Bearbeitung für Klavier zu vier Händen durch den Komponisten. Reprint Leipzig: Rieter-Biedermann, 1869. Edited by Wolfgang Hochstein. Stuttgart: Carus-Verlag, 1991. ———. Requiem: Version for Piano, Four Hands (or Two Pianos). Edited by Leonard Van Camp. New York: G. Schirmer, 1968. Britten, Benjamin. War Requiem, Op. 66. London: Boosey & Hawkes, 1962. Bruneau, Alfred. Requiem pour soli et chœurs. Paris: Paul Dupont, 1895. Caplet, André. Messe a trois voix. Paris: Durand, 1920. ———. Pie Jesu. Paris: Durand, 1925. Charpentier, Marc-Antoine. Messe des morts a quatre voix et orchestre. Paris: Editions Costallat, 1979. ———. Messes, vol. 2: messes à quatre voix et orchestre [H. 6, 9, 10, 269, 299, 531 (2)]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 1997. ———. Messes, vol. 3 [H. 1, 5, 7, 8]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 2001. ———. Messes, vol. 4 [H. 2, 3, 4, 234, 236, 283, 285]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 2002. Cherubini, Luigi. Requiem für Männerchor und Orchester. London: Edition Eulenburg, 1962. ———. Requiem in C Minor for Mixed Chorus and Orchestra. Melville, NY: Belwin Mills Publishing Corp., n.d. Daniel-Lesur, [Jean Yves]. In paradisum pour orgue. Paris: Alphonse Leduc, 1935. Desenclos, Alfred. Messe de Requiem pour soli, chœurs et orchestre. Paris: Editions Durand, 1967. 183 Du Caurroy, Eustache. Missa pro defunctis. Edited by Marie-Alexis Colin. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols Publishers, 2003. ———. Missa pro defunctis, Quinque Vocum. Edited by Michel Sanvoisin. Paris: Heugel & C ie ., 1983. Dubois, Théodore. Deux morceaux per organo [In Paradisum/Marche des Rois Mages]. Edited by Maurizio Machella. Padova: Euganea Editoriale Comunicazioni, 1994. Dubois, Théodore, and others. The Church Soloist: a Collection of Sacred Solos. New York: J. Fischer & Bro., 1900. Duruflé, Maurice. Requiem, opus 9 pour soli, chœurs, orchestre et orgue. Paris: Durand, 1950. ———. Requiem: réduction pour chant et orgue par l’auteur. Paris: Durand, 1948. ———. Requiem: réduction pour chant, orgue et quintette à cordes par l’auteur. Paris: Durand, 1961. Fauré, Gabriel. Messe basse pour voix de femmes. Paris: Heugel & Cie., 1907. ———. Musique religieuse à une ou plusieurs voix. Paris: J. Hamelle, n.d. ———. Musique religieuse. Edited by Jean-Michael Nectoux. Stuttgart: Carus, 2002/2005. Fauré, Gabriel, and André Messager. Messe des Pêcheurs de Villerville. Edited by Pascal Duc. Paris: Heugel-Leduc: 2000. Franck, Cesar. Messe in A-Dur, op. 12. Edited by Armin Landgraf. Stuttgart: Carus, 1982. Gorczycki, Grzegorz Gerwazy. Conductus Funebris III In Paradisum. Edited by Jan Wȩcowski. Warsaw, Poland: Triangiel, 1994. ———. Opera Omnia. Volume II: Utwory wokalno-instrumentalne. Edited by Karol Mrowiec. Kraków: Musica Iagellonica, 1995. Gossec, François Joseph. Grande messe des morts. Edited by Wolfgang Kiess. Vienna: Musikverlag Mersich & Kiess, 1999. Gounod, Charles. Messe brève pour les morts. Edited by Günter Graulich. Stuttgart: Carus-Verlag, 2005. ———. Requiem (1893). Edited by József Ács. Eschweiler: Edition József Ács, 1996. 184 Gouvy, Théodore. Requiem für Solostimmen, gemischten Chor und Orchester, Op. 70. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, n.d. Jongen, Joseph. Three Sacred Songs [O quam suavis est, Hostias et preces, Pie Jesu]. Edited by Tom Cunningham. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Krenek, Ernst. In Paradisum. New York: Rongwen Music, 1966. Kunc, Pierre. Poème funèbre [Libera—In Paradisum]. Arras: Procure Générale de Musique Religieuse, 1911. Rivier, Jean. Requiem. Paris: Editions Musicales Transatlantiques, 1956. Rutter, John. Requiem. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Reprint, Chapel Hill, NC.: Hinshaw Music, Inc., 1986. Saint-Saëns, Camille. Messe de requiem, Op. 54. Boca Raton, FL: Kalmus, n.d. Sixten, Fredrik. Requiem. Stockholm: Gerhmans Musikförlag, 2008. Verdi, Giuseppe. Requiem. New York: Dover Publications, 1978. Webber, Andrew Lloyd. Requiem. London: Novello, 1985. Wilberg, Mack. Requiem. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Recordings of Fauré’s Requiem Boulanger, Nadia, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition], Lili Boulanger Pie Jesu and other works. BBC Symphony Orchestra & Chorus. BBC Music compact disc BBCL 4026-2, 1968. Christopher, Harry, dir. Mozart: Vespers and Fauré: Requiem [R-JMN2]. The Sixteen. Academy of St. Martin in the Fields. Coro compact disc COR16057, 2008. Chung, Myung-Whun, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [full orchestra version]. Coro e Orchestra dell’Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia. Deutsche Grammophon compact disc 289 459 365-2, 1998. Dutoit, Charles, dir. Fauré Requiem [full orchestra version, edition unspecified], Pelléas et Mélisande, and Pavane. Chœur et l’Orchestre symphonique de Montréal. London compact disc 421 440-2, 1987. Gardiner, John Eliot, dir. Fauré Requiem [R-JMN1]. Monteverdi Choir. Orchestre Révoluntionnaire et Romantique. Philips compact disc 438 149-2, 1994. 185 Guest, George, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [organ version]. Choir of St. John’s College. Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. London compact disc 436 486-2, 1975. Herreweghe, Philippe, dir. Fauré Messe de requiem (Version 1893) [R-JMN1] and Messe des pêcheurs de Villerville. Le Chapelle Royale. Ensemble Musique Oblique. Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 801292, 1988. ———. Fauré Requiem (Version pour grand orchestre) [R-JMN2] and Frank Symphony in D Minor. La Chapelle Royale. Orchestre des Champs Élysées. Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 901771, 2002. Naoumoff, Émile, pianist. Fauré Requiem [Schott piano transcription]. Sony compact disk JK 89791, 2001. Rutter, John, dir. Fauré Requiem and Other Choral Music [R-JR]. The Cambridge Singers. Members of the City of London Sinfonia. Collegium compact disk COLCD109, 1984. Shaw, Robert, dir. Fauré Requiem, Op. 48 [R-JR] and Duruflé Requiem, Op. 9 [full orchestra version]. Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus. Telarc compact disc CD-80135, 1987. Summerly, Jeremy, dir. Fauré Requiem [chamber orchestra version, edition unspecified]. Schola Cantorum of Oxford. Oxford Camerata. Naxos compact disk 8.550765, 1993. Wagner, Roger, dir. Palestrina Missa Papae Marcelli and Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition]. Roger Wagner Chorale. Concert Arts Orchestra. EMI Classics compact disc 67251, 1953, re-released, 1999. Other recordings Grana, David. Stones, Time, and Elements: A Humanist Requiem. Kurt Vonnegut. Magic Circle Opera Ensemble. Manhattan Chamber Orchestra. Richard Auldon Clark, director. Newport Classic NPD85573, 1994. Wilberg, Mack. Requiem and Other Choral Works. Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Orchestra at Temple Square. Craig Jessop, director. Mormon Tabernacle Choir CFN 0813-2, 2008. Sixten, Fredrik. Requiem. Maria Magdalena Motett Choir. Members from the Royal Opera. Ragnar Bohlin, director. Gerhmans Musikförlag, GEPRCD03, 2007. 186 Dissertations and theses Adamski-Störmer, Ursula. “Requiem aeternam: Tod und Trauer im 19. Jahrhundert im Spiegel einer musikalischen Gattung.” Diss., Münster University, 1991. Reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1991. Auger-Crowe, Jean Elizabeth. “Tonality and Elusiveness in Selected Mélodies by Gabriel Fauré.” Master’s thesis, University of Calgary, 1985. Borgman, Jean P. “The Fauré Requiem.” Master’s thesis, Eastman School of Music of the University of Rochester, 1948. Caballero, Carlo. “Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics.” Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1996. Crawford, Marvin L. “The Requiem Settings of Gabriel Fauré and John Rutter: Comparisons and Influences.” Master’s thesis, Boise State University, 1993. Gerber, Gary George. “A Conductor’s Analysis of the Sacred Choral Music of Luigi Cherubini.” Doctoral diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1993. Gervais, Françoise. “Étude Comparée des Langages harmoniques de Fauré et Debussy.” Diss., Sorbonne, 1954. Reprint in la Revue Musicale 272-273 (1971): 3-152, 7- 131. Gravis, Christopher Gardner. “Gabriel Fauré’s and Maurice Duruflé’s Requiem Mass Settings: A Comparative Analysis.” Master’s thesis, California State University, Fullerton, 2008. Green, Daniel Joseph. “A Study of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s ‘Requiem.’” Doctoral diss., University of Miami, 1988. Hall, William Dawson. “The Requiem Mass: A Study of Performance Practices from the Baroque Era to the Present Day as Related to Four Requiem Settings by Gilles, Mozart, Verdi, and Britten.” Doctoral diss., University of Southern California, 1970. Kidd, James C. “Louis Niedermeyer’s System for Gregorian Chant Accompaniment as a Compositional Source for Gabriel Fauré.” Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1974. Kovalenko, Susan Chaffins. “The Twentieth Century Requiem: An Emerging Concept.” Ph.D. diss., Washington University, 1971. 187 Lewis, Charles E. “A Conductor’s Analysis of Four Penitential Motets by Francis Poulenc and Requiem by Maurice Duruflé.” Master’s thesis, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1972. Lewis, Rosa E. “Hector Berlioz’s Religious Ambivalence and Its Impact on His Music.” Master’s thesis, University of Hawaii, 2000. Luce, Harold T. “The Requiem Mass from Its Plainsong Beginnings to 1600.” Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, 1958. Matonti, Rev. Charles Joseph. “Discovering Principles for the Composition and Use of Contemporary Liturgical Music through the Study of Selected Requiem Masses.” Ed.D. diss., Columbia University, 1972. McKendrick, Ryan P. “A Conductor’s Analysis of Gabriel Fauré’s Requiem, Op. 48.” Master’s thesis, Georgia State University, 2007. Mick, Steven D. “Fauré Requiem, Op. 48: A Comparative Analysis of the John Rutter Edition.” Master’s thesis, St. Cloud State University, 2007. Reynolds, Jeffrey W. “The Choral Music of Maurice Duruflé (1902-1986).” Doctoral diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1990. Scott, Jr., Earl K. “The Requiem by Gabriel Fauré: A Conductor’s Analysis for Performance.” Doctoral diss., Indiana University, 1980. Snyder, Jane. “Ritual and Drama in the Nineteenth-Century French Requiem.” Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 2005. Woldu, Gail Hilson. “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905-1920.” Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983. Books Archbold, Lawrence, and William J. Peterson, ed. French Organ Music: from the Revolution to Franck and Widor. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 1995. Ben-Amos, Avner. Funerals, Politics, and Memory in Modern France, 1789-1996. London: Oxford University Press, 2000. Bloom, Harold. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. 2 nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. 188 Bradshaw, Paul F. The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy. 2 nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Brody, Elaine. Paris: The Musical Kaleidoscope, 1870-1925. New York: George Braziller, 1987. Bruneau, Alfred. La Vie et les œuvres de Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Librairie Charpentier et Fasquelle, 1925. ———. La Musique française: Rapport sur la musique en France du XIII e au XX e siècle, la musique a Paris en 1900 au théatre, au concert, a l’Exposition. Paris: Bibliothèque-Charpentier, 1901. Bulman, Raymond F., and Frederick J. Parrella, ed. From Trent to Vatican II: Historical and Theological Investigations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Burleigh, Michael. Earthly Powers: Religions and Politics in Europe from the French Revolution to the Great War. London: HarperCollins, 2005. Byrnes, Joseph F. Catholic and French Forever: Religious and National Identity in Modern France. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania Sate University Press, 2005. Caballero, Carlo. Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Campbell, Don G. Master Teacher: Nadia Boulanger. Washington, D.C.: The Pastoral Press, 1984. Chase, Robert. Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2003. ———. Memento Mori: A Guide to Contemporary Memorial Music. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007. Cooke, Mervyn. Britten: War Requiem. Cambridge Music Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Cooper, Jeffrey. The Rise of Instrumental Music and Concert Series in Paris, 1828-1871. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1983. Cooper, Martin. French Music from the Death of Berlioz to the Death of Fauré. London: Oxford University Press, 1951. Dahlhaus, Carl. Nineteenth-Century Music. Translated by J. Bradford Robinson. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989. 189 Deane, Basil. Cherubini. Oxford Studies of Composers. London: Oxford University Press, 1965. Debussy, Claude. Lettres (1884-1918). Edited by François Lesure. Paris: Hermann, 1980. 2 nd ed., Correspondance (1884-1918). Paris: Hermann, 1993. First edition translated by Roger Nichols under the title Debussy Letters (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987). Douglass, Fenner. Cavaillé-Coll and the French Romantic Tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. Duchen, Jessica. Gabriel Fauré. London: Phaidon Press Limited, 2000. Duchesneau, Michel. L’avant-garde musicale et ses sociétés à Paris de 1871 à 1939. Liège, Belgium: Pierre Mardaga, 1997. Durand, Jacques. Quelques Souvenirs d’un éditeur de musique, 2 e série (1910-1924). Paris: Durand et Cie., 1925. Ebrecht, Ronald, editor. Maurice Duruflé, 1902-1986: The Last Impressionist. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2002. Ellis, Katharine. Interpreting the Musical Past: Early Music in Nineteenth-Century France. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Fauré, Gabriel. Correspondance. Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Paris: Flammarion, 1980. Translated by J. A. Underwood under the title His Life through His Letters (London: Scribner Book Companies, 1984). ———. Gabriel Fauré: A Life in Letters. Translated and edited by J. Barrie Jones. London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1988. ———. Lettres intimes. Edited by Philippe Fauré-Fremiet. Paris: La Colombe, 1951. ———. Opinions musicales. Paris: Éditions Rieder, 1930. Fauré-Fremiet, Philippe. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: les Éditions Rieder, 1929. Revised and expanded edition, Paris: Albin Michel, 1957. Fellerer, Karl Gustav. Geschicte der katholischen Kirchenmusik. Düsseldorf: Musikverlag Schwann, 1949. Translation, The History of Catholic Church music. Baltimore, MD: Helicon Press, 1961. Reprint, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1979. 190 Ferretti, O.S.B., Paul M. Papal Documents on Sacred Music: From the Fourteenth to the Twentieth Century. Edited by the Music Committee of the Society of St. Gregory of America. New York: Society of St. Gregory of America, 1947. Flynn, Timothy S. Camille Saint-Saëns. New York: Routledge, 2003. Frazier, James E. Maurice Duruflé: the Man and his Music. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2007. Frisch, Walter. Brahms and the Principle of Developing Variation. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Fulcher, Jane. The Composer as Intellectual: Music and Ideology in France, 1914-1940. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. ———. French Cultural Politics and Music: From the Dreyfus Affair to the First World War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Galerne, Maurice. L’École Niedermeyer: Sa creation, son but, son développement. Paris: Éditions Margueritat, 1928. Gildea, Robert. Children of the Revolution, 1799-1914. London: Penguin Books (Allen Lane), 2008. Gordon, Tom, ed. and trans. Regarding Fauré. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Publishers, 1999. Guest, George H. A Guest at Cambridge. Orleans, Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 1994. Hayburn, Robert F. Papal Legislation on Sacred Music, 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1979. Hayden, J. Michael, and Malcolm R. Greenshields. Six Hundred Years of Reform: Bishops and the French Church, 1190-1789. Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2005. Hill, Edward Burlingame. Modern French Music. New York: Da Capo Press, 1924. Hobsbawn, E. J. The Age of Revolution, 1789-1848. New York: Mentor, 1962. ———. The Age of Capital, 1848-1875. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1975. ———. The Age of Empire, 1875-1914. New York: Pantheon Books, 1987. Houziaux, Mutien-Omer. À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré ou l'Authenticité musicale en questions. With a preface by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Liège: Société Liégeoise de Musicologie, 2000. 191 Hutchings, Arthur. Church Music in the Nineteenth Century. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1977. Jankélévitch, Vladimir. Gabriel Fauré et ses melodies. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1938. Second and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré: ses melodies et son esthétique. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1951. Third and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré et l’inexprimable. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1974. Jean-Aubry, Georges. La Musique française d’aujourd’hui. With a preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Librairie Académique Perrin, 1916. Translation, French Music of Today. Translated by E. Evans. London: K. Paul, Trench Trubner & Co. Ltd., 1919. Jeffers, Ron. Translations and Annotations of Choral Repertoire. Volume I: Sacred Latin Texts. Corvallis, OR: earthsongs, 1988. Johnson, O.S.B., Cuthbert. Prosper Guéranger (1805-1875): A Liturgical Theologian. Rome: Edizioni Abbazia, 1984. Jost, Peter, ed. Gabriel Fauré, Werk und Rezeption: mit Werkverzeichnis und Bibliographie. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996. Kœchlin, Charles. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: F. Alcan, 1927. Revised edition, Gabriel Fauré: avec citations musicales dans le texte. Paris: Plon, 1949. Translated by Leslie Orrey under the title Gabriel Fauré (London: Dennis Dobson Limited, 1946). Lang, Paul Henry. Music in Western Civilization. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1941. Léon, Paul. Du Palais-Royal au Palais Bourbon: Souvenirs. Paris: Albin Michel, 1947. Long, Marguerite. Au Piano avec Fauré. Paris: René Julliard, 1963. Translated by Olive Senior-Ellis under the title At the Piano with Fauré (New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1981). Minear, Paul S. Death Set to Music: Masterworks by Bach, Brahms, Penderecki, Bernstein. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987. Musgrave, Michael. Brahms: A German Requiem. Cambridge Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Myers, Rollo H. Modern French Music from Fauré to Boulez. New York: Praeger Publications, 1971. Nectoux, Jean-Michel. Fauré. Solfèges. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1972. Revised edition, Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1995. 192 ———. Gabriel Fauré: Les voix du clair-obscur. Paris: Flammarion, 1990. Translated by Roger Nichols under the title Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). ———. Phonographies Gabriel Fauré 1900-1977. Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1979. Nichols, Roger. The Harlequin Years: Music in Paris, 1917-1929. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. Ochse, Orpha. Organists and Organ Playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2000. Orledge, Robert. Gabriel Fauré. London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1979. Revised edition, London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1983. Phillips, Edward R. Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research. New York: Garland Publishing, 2000. Reid, O.S.B., Alcuin. The Organic Development of the Liturgy. 2 nd ed. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005. Robertson, Alec. Requiem: Music of Mourning and Consolation. New York: Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1968. Reprint, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1976. Rosen, David. Verdi: Requiem. Cambridge Music Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Saint-Saëns, Camille. École buissonnière: Notes et Souvenirs. Paris: Pierre Lafitte & C ie , 1913. Extracts translated by Edwin Gile Rich, under the title Musical Memories. New York: Da Capo Press, 1969. Saint-Saëns, Camille, and Gabriel Fauré. Correspondance (1862-1920). Edited by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Paris: Éditions Klincksieck, 1994. Translated by J. Barrie Jones, under the title The Correspondence of Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré: Sixty Years of Friendship (Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004). Samson, Jim, ed. The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-Century Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Schoenberg, Arnold. Style and Idea. Edited by Dika Newlin. New York: Philosophical Library, 1950. Revised edition, Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg. Edited by Leonard Stein. Translated by Leo Black. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Smith, Richard Langham, and Caroline Potter, eds. French Music since Berlioz. Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing, 2006. 193 Smith, Rollin. Saint-Saëns and the Organ. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1992. Steinberg, Michael. Listening to Reason: Culture, Subjectivity, and Nineteenth-Century Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004. Suckling, Norman. Fauré. London: J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd., 1951. Swafford, Jan. Johannes Brahms: A Biography. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997. Tiersot, Julien. Un demi-siècle de musique française, 1870-1919. 2 nd ed. Paris: Alcan, 1924. Van Camp, Leonard. A Practical Guide for Performing, Teaching and Singing the Brahms Requiem. Lawson-Gould Music Publishers, 2002. Vuillermoz, Émile. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Flammarion, 1960. Translated by Kenneth Schapin under the title Gabriel Fauré (Philadelphia: Chilton Book Company, 1969). Warren, Rev. Charles F. S. The Authorship, Text, and History of the Hymn Dies Irae: With Critical, Historical and Biographical Notes. London: Thomas Baker/Charles Higham, 1902. Weber, Edith. Le Concile de Trente et la musique de la Réforme a la Contre-réforme. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1982. Wienandt, Elwyn A. Choral Music of the Church. New York: Macmillan Company, 1965 Wolff, Christoph. Mozart’s Requiem. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1994. Wright, Gordon. France in Modern Times: From the Enlightenment to the Present. 3 rd ed. New York: Norton, 1981. Articles and Shorter Works Aguettant, Louis. “Gabriel Fauré.” La Vie intellectuelle 1 (November 1949): 388-97. ———. “Rencontres avec Gabriel Fauré [letter to André Lambinet].” Edited by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Études fauréennes 19 (1982): 3-7. Excerpts first published as “Gabriel Fauré: Mon Requiem est une Aspiration au Bonheur.” Paris-Comœdia, 3-9 March 1954, 1,6. Anonymous, “Les Funérailles de Gabriel Fauré.” Le Temps, 9 November 1924, 6. Anonymous, “Obsèques de M. Saint-Saëns.” Le Temps, 25 December 1921, 6. 194 Anonymous, “Les Obsèques de Gounod.” Le Temps, 28 October 1893, 4. Aprahamian, Felix. “Crossing the Channel.” Choir and Organ 8/3 (May-June 2000): 13- 15. Barraud, Henry. “French Religious Music: Precursors and Innovators.” Musical America 72 (February 1952): 26, 108, 146. Beechey, Gwilym. “Maurice Duruflé and his Requiem, Op 9.” Musical Opinion 105 (December 1981): 89. Bell, Richard. “Original Score Provides Clearer View of Heaven.” Review of performance of Fauré, Requiem [R-JR], Trinity Church (Boston), conducted by Brian Jones. The Boston Globe, 28 March, 1989, 27. Bellaigue, Camille. “Lettres a une fiancée: Août-Septembre 1877.” Revue des deux mondes 328 (15 July 1928): 911-943. Beller-McKenna, Daniel. “How ‘deutsch’ a Requiem? Absolute Music, Universality, and the Reception of Brahms’s ‘Ein deutsches Requiem,’ Op. 45.” Nineteenth- Century Music 22/1 (summer 1998): 3-19. Benoît, Camille. “La Messe de requiem de Gabriel Fauré.” Le Guide musical 34/32-33 (9/16 August 1888): 195-97. Boschot, Adolphe. “Mort de Gabriel Fauré” and “Fauré, et le sens de la beauté.” In Chez les musiciens (Du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours): Troisième série, 137-146. Paris: Plon, 1926. Boulanger, Nadia. “Lectures on Modern Music.” Rice Institute Pamphlet 13/2 (April 1926). ———. “La Musique religieuse.” La Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 104-111 (296- 303). Boyd, Malcolm. “Fauré’s Requiem: A Reappraisal.” The Musical Times 104/1444 (June 1963): 408-409. Burkholder, J. Peter. “Museum Pieces: The Historicist Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years.” The Journal of Musicology 2/2 (spring 1983): 115-134. Caballero, Carlo. “Patriotism or Nationalism? Fauré and the Great War.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 52/3 (autumn 1999): 593-625. ———. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life by Jean-Michel Nectoux, translated by Roger Nichols. Nineteenth-Century Music 16/1 (summer 1992): 85-92. 195 Calvocoressi, M. D. “Modern French Composers: I. How They are Encouraged.” The Musical Times 62/938 (1 April 1921): 238-240. ———. “Obituary: Gabriel Fauré.” The Musical Times 65/982 (1 December 1924): 1134. Carter, Elliott. “Gabriel Fauré.” Originally published in Listen 6/1 (May 1945): pages unknown. Reprinted in The Writings of Elliott Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern Music. Edited by Else Stone and Kurt Stone. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1977, 107-110. Chadwick, Nick. Review of The Correspondence of Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré: Sixty Years of Friendship, edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux, translated by J. Barrie Jones. Music and Letters 81/1 (January 2006): 141-147. Chamberlain, Bruce, Matthew W. Mehaffey, and Anthony Reeves. “Masterwork: Requiem, Op. 48 by Gabriel Fauré.” In Teaching Music through Performance in Choir: Volume 1. Edited by Heather J. Buchanan and Matthew W. Mehaffey. Chicago: GIA Publications, 2005. Chanler, Theodore. “Gabriel Fauré, a Re-appraisal.” Modern Music 22/3 (March-April 1945): 165-169. ———. “Music Chronicle: Aspects of Gabriel Fauré.” Hound and Horn 3/4 (July- September 1930): 557-563. Christensen, Thomas. “Fétis and Emerging Tonal Consciousness.” In Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism. Edited by Ian Bent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Cœuroy, André. “Present Tendencies of Sacred Music in France.” Translated by Theodore Baker. The Musical Quarterly 13/4 (October 1927): 582-604. Cohrs, Gunnar. “Gabriel Fauré und sein Requiem.” In Lili Boulanger-Tage 1993, Bremen: Zum 100. Geburtstag der Komponistin. Edited by Kathrin Mosler. Bremen: Callas/Zeichen und Spuren, 1993. Cooper, Martin. “The Nineteenth Century Musical Renaissance in France (1870-1895).” Proceeding of the Royal Musical Association, 74 th Session (1947-1948): 11-23. Copland, Aaron. “Gabriel Faure, a Neglected Master.” The Musical Quarterly 10 (October 1924): 573-86. Crucy, François. “Les grands figures contemporaines: Gabriel Fauré.” Le petit parisien, 28 April 1922, 1-2. 196 Duchesneau, Michel. “La musique française pendant la Guerre 1914-1918: Autour de la tentative de fusion de la Société Nationale de Musique et de la Société Musical Indépendante.” Revue de musicologie 82/1 (1996): 123-153. Dujardin-Beaumetz, “Partie non officielle,” Journal Officiel de la République Française, 4 August 1905, 4799-4800. Facsimile in Gail Hilson Woldu. “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905- 1920.” Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983, 191-192. Fauré, Gabriel. “Appel aux musiciens français.” Le Courrier musical, 15 March 1917, 133. ———. “Le critique musicale.” Le gaulois, 30 October 1903, 3. ———. “Souvenirs.” La Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 3-9 (195-201). Fauré-Fremiet, Philippe. “La pensée Fauréenne.” In Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946. Fend, Michael. “Cherubini, Luigi.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/53110 (accessed 13 January 2009). Feurzeig, Lisa. “The Business Affairs of Gabriel Fauré.” In The Dissemination of Music: Studies in the History of Music Publishing. Edited by Hans Lenneberg. Lausanne, Switzerland: Gordon and Breach, 1994. Ford, Andrew. “Fauré’s Requiem: The Mystery and the Marketing.” In Undue Noise: Words about Music. Sydney: ABC Books, 2002. Fulcher, Jane. “The Composer as Intellectual: Ideological Inscriptions in French Interwar Neoclassicism.” The Journal of Musicology 17/2 (spring 1999): 197-230. ———. “The Concert as Political Propaganda in France and the Control of ‘Performative Context.’” The Musical Quarterly 82/1 (spring 1998): 41-67. Gilbert, David. “Requiem pour solo, chœur et orchestre de chamber, op. 48, version 1893 by Gabriel Fauré, éditée par Jean-Michel Nectoux et Roger Delage.” Notes, Second Series, 54/2 (December 1997): 574-576. ———. “Requiem, op. 48, pour soli, chœur et orchestre symphonique, version de concert, 1900, éditée par Jean-Michel Nectoux.” Notes, Second Series, 57/4 (June 2001): 1018-1020. Hanslick, Eduard. “Verdi’s Requiem.” In Music Criticisms 1846-99, trans. and ed. Henry Pleasants. Baltimore, MD: Dover Publications, 1963: 160-6. 197 Henderson, A. M. “Memories of Some Distinguished French Organists: Fauré.” The Musical Times 78/1135 (September 1937): 817-819. Hibberd, Sarah. “Murder in the Cathedral? Stradella, Musical Power, and Performing the Past in 1830s Paris.” Music and Letters 87/4 (2006): 551-579. Huntington, Robert R. “The ‘Real’ Fauré Requiem? The Search Continues.” Choral Journal 37/3 (October 1996): 9-15. Hutchings, Arthur. “A Grand Noise.” The Musical Times 102/1425 (November 1961): 694-695. Imbert, Hugues. “Le Requiem de Gabriel Fauré à Lille.” Notes for a lecture presented in conjunction with a performance of Fauré’s Requiem on 6 April 1900. Rés. Vmb. MS 42, Département de la Musique. Bibliothèque nationale de France. Kallberg, Jeffrey. “Chopin’s March, Chopin’s Death.” Nineteenth-Century Music 25/1 (summer 2001): 3-26. Karp, Theodore, et al. “Requiem Mass.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/43221 (accessed 21 December 2008). Kidd, James C. Review of Gabriel Fauré by Robert Orledge. Nineteenth-Century Music 4/3 (spring 1981): 276-280. Koob, Lindsay. Review of Fauré Requiem and Frank Symphony recording, directed by Philippe Herreweghe. American Record Guide 65/5 (September-October 2002): 113-114. Krones, Hartmut. “Ein französisches Vorbild für Mozarts ‘Requiem’: Die ‘Messe des Morts’ von François-Joseph Gossec.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 42 (1987): 2-17. Lalo, Pierre. “La musique,” Le temps, 27 January 1906, 3. Laloy, Louis. “Concerts du Conservatoire.” Revue d’histoire et de critique musicales 1/4 (April 1901): 162-163. Langham Smith, Richard. Review of À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré, ou l’Authenticité musicale en questions by Mutien-Omer Houziaux. Music and Letters 86/4 (November 2005): 648-650. ———. Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter. Music and Letters 71/1 (February 1990): 143-44. 198 Landormy, Paul, and M. D. Herter Norton. “Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924).” The Musical Quarterly 17/3 (July 1931): 293-301. Leaver, Robin A. “Brahms’s Opus 45 and German Protestant Funeral Music.” The Journal of Musicology 19/4 (autumn 2002): 616-640. Locke, Ralph P. “The French Symphony: David, Gounod, and Bizet to Saint-Saëns, Franck, and Their Followers.” In The Nineteenth Century Symphony. Edited by D. Kern Holoman. New York: Schirmer Books, 1997. ———. “Paris: Centre of Intellectual Ferment.” In The Early Romantic Era: Between Revolutions, 1789-1848. Edited by Alexander Ringer. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1991. Lockspeiser, Edward. “Gabriel Fauré and Marcel Proust.” The Listener, 1 June 1961. Reprinted in Essays on Music: an Anthology from “The Listener.” Edited by Felix Aprahamian. London: Cassell, 1967. Mann, William. “Britten’s Masterpiece Denounces Way.” The Times (London), 25 May 1962, 15. Mellers, Wilfrid. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life by Jean-Michel Nectoux. The New Republic 208/6 (8 February 1993): 35-40. Mitchell, Donald. “Map Reading: Benjamin Britten in Conversation with Donald Mitchell.” In The Britten Companion. Edited by Christopher Palmer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Nectoux, Jean-Michel. “Chemins de la musique française.” In 20e siècle: Images de la musique française. Edited by Jean-Pierre Derrien. Paris: Sacem et Papiers, 1986. ———. “Correspondance: Saint-Saëns et Fauré.” Revue de musicologie 58/1 (1972): 65- 89. ———. “Fauré, Henry Prunières et la Revue musicale.” Etudes fauréennes 17 (1980): 17-24. ———. “French Archives: Music in the Archives of Paris Churches.” Nineteenth- Century Music 7/2, special issue: French Archives (autumn 1983): 100-103. ———. “Letter by Jean-Michel Nectoux.” International Choral Bulletin 12/4 (July 1993): 14 (English), 39 (French). ———. “Les Orchestrations de Gabriel Fauré: Légende et vérité.” Schweizerische Musikzeitung/Revue musicale suisse 15 (1975): 243-249. 199 ———. “Ravel/Fauré et les débuts de la Société Musicale Indépendante.” Revue de musicologie 61/2 (1975): 295-318. ———. “Works Renounced, Themes Rediscovered: Eléments pour une thématique fauréenne.” Nineteenth-Century Music 2/3 (March 1979): 231-244. Nichols, Roger. “A Must-Buy Volume.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Marc Rigaudière; and Musique Religieuse by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Choir and Organ 15/2 (March-April 2007): 69, 71. Orledge, Robert. “Fauré Revised.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, editions by Jean-Michel Nectoux/Reiner Zimmerman (C.F. Peters) and Roger Fiske/Paul Inwood (Eulenburg/Schott). The Musical Times 121/1647 (May 1980): 327. ———. “A Happy Deliverance.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter. The Musical Times 126/1714 (December 1985): 738. Orrey, Leslie. “Gabriel Fauré, 1845-1924.” The Musical Times 86/1227 (May 1945): 137-139. Reel, James. “A Conversation with John Rutter.” Fanfare 22/2 (November-December 1998): 131-135. Roger-Ducasse, [Jean]. “L’enseignement de Gabriel Fauré.” In Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946. Rutter, John. “Fauré: Requiem in Original Orchestration.” International Choral Bulletin 12/2 (January 1993): 41. ———. “In Search of the Real Fauré Requiem?” The American Organist 18/11 (November 1984): 58-61. ———. “Reply to Jean Nectoux’s Letter on the Fauré Requiem.” International Choral Bulletin 13/1 (October 1993): 34. Saint-Saëns, Camille. “Music in the Church.” Translated by Theodore Baker. The Musical Quarterly 2/1 (January 1916): 1-8. ———. “Les Hommes du jour. Gabriel Fauré.” L’Éclair, 23 January 1893, 2. Saint-Saëns, Camille, Gabriel Fauré, and others. “La Réforme de la Musique Religieuse: Opinions de MM. C. Saint-Saëns, Gabriel Fauré, G. Houdard, A. Guilmant.” Le Monde Musical 16 (15 February 1904): 34-36. Smith, Rollin. “Gabriel Fauré: Organist.” The American Organist 13/6 (June 1979): 41- 42. 200 Sobaskie, James William. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research by Edward R. Phillips. Notes, Second Series 57/3 (March 2001): 612-613. Steinberg, Michael. “Gabriel Fauré Requiem, op. 48.” In Choral Masterworks: A Listener’s Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Summer, Robert J. “Gabriel Fauré: Requiem, Op. 48.” In Choral Masterworks from Bach to Britten: Reflections of a Conductor. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007. Thomson, Andrew. Review of Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics by Carlo Caballero. The Musical Times 142/1877 (winter 2001): 67-68. Valbelle, Roger. “Entretien avec M. Gabriel Fauré.” Association des amis de Gabriel Fauré: Bulletin 12 (1975): 9-11. First published in Excelsior (12 June 1922): 2. Verhelst, F[rançois]. “Musique religieuse. La messe en ré de Beethoven—Le Requiem de G. Fauré—Sanctus Petrus de R.P. Hartmann.” Durendal: Revue catholique d'art de de littérature 8 (February 1901): 115-118. Vivet, Armand. “La Musique sacrée en France depuis la Révolution.” In Congrès de musique sacrée. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1937. Vonnegut, Kurt. “Requiem: The Hocus Pocus Laundromat.” North American Review 271/4 (December 1986): 29-36. Vuillermoz, Émile. “Gabriel Fauré.” La Revue musicale (October 1922): 10-21 (202- 213). Wishart, Peter. “Fauré and Brahms Requiems.” The Musical Times 103/1427 (January 1962): 33. Woldu, Gail Hilson. “Gabriel Fauré, directeur du Conservatoire: les réformes de 1905.” Revue de musicology 70/2 (1984): 199-228. Wright, Lesley A. Introduction to Carmen: A Performing Guide by Mary Dibbern. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2000. Internet websites Pius IX, Pope. Inter Multiplices. 21 March 1853. Papal Encyclicals Online. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9interm.htm (accessed 13 January 2009) Van der Vloed, Kees. “Requiem Survey.” http://www.requiemsurvey.org/ (accessed 8 December 2008). 201 Wadley, Carma. “Music Vital in Bringing Comfort.” Deseret News, 4 April 2008. <http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695266940,00.html> (accessed 9 January 2009). 202 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adamski-Störmer, Ursula. “Requiem aeternam: Tod und Trauer im 19. Jahrhundert im Spiegel einer musikalischen Gattung.” Diss., Münster University, 1991. Reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1991. Aguettant, Louis. “Gabriel Fauré.” La Vie intellectuelle 1 (November 1949): 388-97. ———. “Rencontres avec Gabriel Fauré [letter to André Lambinet].” Edited by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Études fauréennes 19 (1982): 3-7. Excerpts first published as “Gabriel Fauré: Mon Requiem est une Aspiration au Bonheur.” Paris-Comœdia, 3-9 March 1954, 1,6. Anonymous, “Les Funérailles de Gabriel Fauré.” Le Temps, 9 November 1924, 6. Anonymous, “Obsèques de M. Saint-Saëns.” Le Temps, 25 December 1921, 6. Anonymous, “Les Obsèques de Gounod.” Le Temps, 28 October 1893, 4. Aprahamian, Felix. “Crossing the Channel.” Choir and Organ 8/3 (May-June 2000): 13- 15. Archbold, Lawrence, and William J. Peterson, ed. French Organ Music: from the Revolution to Franck and Widor. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 1995. Auger-Crowe, Jean Elizabeth. “Tonality and Elusiveness in Selected Mélodies by Gabriel Fauré.” Master’s thesis, University of Calgary, 1985. Bach, Johann Sebastian. Œuvres completes pour orgue de J.S. Bach. Edited by Gabriel Fauré. Preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Durand, 1917. ———. Preludes et fugues. Edited by Gabriel Fauré. Preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Durand, 1915. 203 Barraud, Henry. “French Religious Music: Precursors and Innovators.” Musical America 72 (February 1952): 26, 108, 146. Beechey, Gwilym. “Maurice Duruflé and his Requiem, Op 9.” Musical Opinion 105 (December 1981): 89. Bell, Richard. “Original Score Provides Clearer View of Heaven.” Review of performance of Fauré, Requiem [R-JR], Trinity Church (Boston), conducted by Brian Jones. The Boston Globe, 28 March, 1989, 27. Bellaigue, Camille. “Lettres a une fiancée: Août-Septembre 1877.” Revue des deux mondes 328 (15 July 1928): 911-943. Beller-McKenna, Daniel. “How ‘deutsch’ a Requiem? Absolute Music, Universality, and the Reception of Brahms’s ‘Ein deutsches Requiem,’ Op. 45.” Nineteenth- Century Music 22/1 (summer 1998): 3-19. Ben-Amos, Avner. Funerals, Politics, and Memory in Modern France, 1789-1996. London: Oxford University Press, 2000. Benefield, Richard, ed. Motets for One Voice: The Organ-Accompanied Solo Motet in Nineteenth-Century France. Middleton, WI: A-R Editions, 2003. Benoît, Camille. “La Messe de requiem de Gabriel Fauré.” Le Guide musical 34/32-33 (9/16 August 1888): 195-97. Berlioz, Hector. Requiem [Grande messe des morts]. New York: Dover Publications, 2006. Bloom, Harold. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. 2 nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. Bock, Fred, editor and arranger. Requiem [SAB arrangement], by Gabriel Fauré. Tarzana, CA: Fred Bock Music Company, 1990. Borgman, Jean P. “The Fauré Requiem.” Master’s thesis, Eastman School of Music of the University of Rochester, 1948. Boschot, Adolphe. “Mort de Gabriel Fauré” and “Fauré, et le sens de la beauté.” In Chez les musiciens (Du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours): Troisième série, 137-146. Paris: Plon, 1926. Boulanger, Lili. Pie Jesu pour chant, quatuor à cordes, harpe et orgue. Paris: Editions Durand, 1922. 204 Boulanger, Nadia. “Lectures on Modern Music.” Rice Institute Pamphlet 13/2 (April 1926). ———. “La Musique religieuse.” La Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 104-111 (296- 303). ———, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition], Lili Boulanger Pie Jesu and other works. BBC Symphony Orchestra & Chorus. BBC Music compact disc BBCL 4026-2, 1968. Boyd, Malcolm. “Fauré’s Requiem: A Reappraisal.” The Musical Times 104/1444 (June 1963): 408-409. Bradshaw, Paul F. The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy. 2 nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Brahms, Johannes. Ein deutsches Requiem in der Bearbeitung für Klavier zu vier Händen durch den Komponisten. Reprint Leipzig: Rieter-Biedermann, 1869. Edited by Wolfgang Hochstein. Stuttgart: Carus-Verlag, 1991. ———. Requiem: Version for Piano, Four Hands (or Two Pianos). Edited by Leonard Van Camp. New York: G. Schirmer, 1968. Bredenbach, Ingo, editor and arranger. Requiem [organ accompaniment], by Gabriel Fauré. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2002. Britten, Benjamin. War Requiem, Op. 66. London: Boosey & Hawkes, 1962. Brody, Elaine. Paris: The Musical Kaleidoscope, 1870-1925. New York: George Braziller, 1987. Bruneau, Alfred. La Musique française: Rapport sur la musique en France du XIII e au XX e siècle, la musique a Paris en 1900 au théatre, au concert, a l’Exposition. Paris: Bibliothèque-Charpentier, 1901. ———. Requiem pour soli et chœurs. Paris: Paul Dupont, 1895. ———. La Vie et les œuvres de Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Librairie Charpentier et Fasquelle, 1925. Bulman, Raymond F., and Frederick J. Parrella, ed. From Trent to Vatican II: Historical and Theological Investigations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Burkholder, J. Peter. “Museum Pieces: The Historicist Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years.” The Journal of Musicology 2/2 (spring 1983): 115-134. 205 Burleigh, Michael. Earthly Powers: Religions and Politics in Europe from the French Revolution to the Great War. London: HarperCollins, 2005. Byrnes, Joseph F. Catholic and French Forever: Religious and National Identity in Modern France. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania Sate University Press, 2005. Caballero, Carlo. “Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics.” Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1996. ———. Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. ———. “Patriotism or Nationalism? Fauré and the Great War.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 52/3 (autumn 1999): 593-625. ———. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life by Jean-Michel Nectoux, translated by Roger Nichols. Nineteenth-Century Music 16/1 (summer 1992): 85-92. Calvocoressi, M. D. “Modern French Composers: I. How They are Encouraged.” The Musical Times 62/938 (1 April 1921): 238-240. ———. “Obituary: Gabriel Fauré.” The Musical Times 65/982 (1 December 1924): 1134. Campbell, Don G. Master Teacher: Nadia Boulanger. Washington, D.C.: The Pastoral Press, 1984. Caplet, André. Messe a trois voix. Paris: Durand, 1920. ———. Pie Jesu. Paris: Durand, 1925. Carter, Elliott. “Gabriel Fauré.” Originally published in Listen 6/1 (May 1945): pages unknown. Reprinted in The Writings of Elliott Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern Music. Edited by Else Stone and Kurt Stone. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1977, 107-110. Chadwick, Nick. Review of The Correspondence of Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré: Sixty Years of Friendship, edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux, translated by J. Barrie Jones. Music and Letters 81/1 (January 2006): 141-147. Chamberlain, Bruce, Matthew W. Mehaffey, and Anthony Reeves. “Masterwork: Requiem, Op. 48 by Gabriel Fauré.” In Teaching Music through Performance in Choir: Volume 1. Edited by Heather J. Buchanan and Matthew W. Mehaffey. Chicago: GIA Publications, 2005. Chanler, Theodore. “Gabriel Fauré, a Re-appraisal.” Modern Music 22/3 (March-April 1945): 165-169. 206 ———. “Music Chronicle: Aspects of Gabriel Fauré.” Hound and Horn 3/4 (July- September 1930): 557-563. Charpentier, Marc-Antoine. Messe des morts a quatre voix et orchestre. Paris: Editions Costallat, 1979. ———. Messes, vol. 2: messes à quatre voix et orchestre [H. 6, 9, 10, 269, 299, 531 (2)]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 1997. ———. Messes, vol. 3 [H. 1, 5, 7, 8]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 2001. ———. Messes, vol. 4 [H. 2, 3, 4, 234, 236, 283, 285]. Edited by Catherine Cessac. Versailles: Éditions du Centre de Musique Baroque de Versailles, 2002. Chase, Robert. Dies Irae: A Guide to Requiem Music. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2003. ———. Memento Mori: A Guide to Contemporary Memorial Music. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007. Cherubini, Luigi. Requiem für Männerchor und Orchester. London: Edition Eulenburg, 1962. ———. Requiem in C Minor for Mixed Chorus and Orchestra. Melville, NY: Belwin Mills Publishing Corp., n.d. Christensen, Thomas. “Fétis and Emerging Tonal Consciousness.” In Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism. Edited by Ian Bent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Christopher, Harry, dir. Mozart: Vespers and Fauré: Requiem [R-JMN2]. The Sixteen. Academy of St. Martin in the Fields. Coro compact disc COR16057, 2008. Chung, Myung-Whun, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [full orchestra version]. Coro e Orchestra dell’Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia. Deutsche Grammophon compact disc 289 459 365-2, 1998. Cœuroy, André. “Present Tendencies of Sacred Music in France.” Translated by Theodore Baker. The Musical Quarterly 13/4 (October 1927): 582-604. Cohrs, Gunnar. “Gabriel Fauré und sein Requiem.” In Lili Boulanger-Tage 1993, Bremen: Zum 100. Geburtstag der Komponistin. Edited by Kathrin Mosler. Bremen: Callas/Zeichen und Spuren, 1993. 207 Cooke, Mervyn. Britten: War Requiem. Cambridge Music Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Cooper, Jeffrey. The Rise of Instrumental Music and Concert Series in Paris, 1828-1871. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1983. Cooper, Martin. “The Nineteenth Century Musical Renaissance in France (1870-1895).” Proceeding of the Royal Musical Association, 74 th Session (1947-1948): 11-23. Copland, Aaron. “Gabriel Faure, a Neglected Master.” The Musical Quarterly 10 (October 1924): 573-86. Crawford, Marvin L. “The Requiem Settings of Gabriel Fauré and John Rutter: Comparisons and Influences.” Master’s thesis, Boise State University, 1993. Crucy, François. “Les grands figures contemporaines: Gabriel Fauré.” Le petit parisien, 28 April 1922, 1-2. Dahlhaus, Carl. Nineteenth-Century Music. Translated by J. Bradford Robinson. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989. Daniel-Lesur, [Jean Yves]. In paradisum pour orgue. Paris: Alphonse Leduc, 1935. Deane, Basil. Cherubini. Oxford Studies of Composers. London: Oxford University Press, 1965. Debussy, Claude. Lettres (1884-1918). Edited by François Lesure. Paris: Hermann, 1980. 2 nd ed., Correspondance (1884-1918). Paris: Hermann, 1993. First edition translated by Roger Nichols under the title Debussy Letters (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987). Desenclos, Alfred. Messe de Requiem pour soli, chœurs et orchestre. Paris: Editions Durand, 1967. Douglass, Fenner. Cavaillé-Coll and the French Romantic Tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. Du Caurroy, Eustache. Missa pro defunctis. Edited by Marie-Alexis Colin. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols Publishers, 2003. ———. Missa pro defunctis, Quinque Vocum. Edited by Michel Sanvoisin. Paris: Heugel & C ie ., 1983. Duchen, Jessica. Gabriel Fauré. London: Phaidon Press Limited, 2000. 208 Dubois, Théodore. Deux morceaux per organo [In Paradisum/Marche des Rois Mages]. Edited by Maurizio Machella. Padova: Euganea Editoriale Comunicazioni, 1994. Dubois, Théodore, and others. The Church Soloist: a Collection of Sacred Solos. New York: J. Fischer & Bro., 1900. Duchesneau, Michel. L’avant-garde musicale et ses sociétés à Paris de 1871 à 1939. Liège, Belgium: Pierre Mardaga, 1997. ———. “La musique française pendant la Guerre 1914-1918: Autour de la tentative de fusion de la Société Nationale de Musique et de la Société Musical Indépendante.” Revue de musicologie 82/1 (1996): 123-153. Dujardin-Beaumetz, “Partie non officielle,” Journal Officiel de la République Française, 4 August 1905, 4799-4800. Facsimile in Gail Hilson Woldu. “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905- 1920.” Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983, 191-192. Durand, Jacques. Quelques Souvenirs d’un éditeur de musique, 2 e série (1910-1924). Paris: Durand et Cie., 1925. Duruflé, Maurice. Requiem, opus 9 pour soli, chœurs, orchestre et orgue. Paris: Durand, 1950. ———. Requiem: réduction pour chant et orgue par l’auteur. Paris: Durand, 1948. ———. Requiem: réduction pour chant, orgue et quintette à cordes par l’auteur. Paris: Durand, 1961. Dutoit, Charles, dir. Fauré Requiem [full orchestra version, edition unspecified], Pelléas et Mélisande, and Pavane. Chœur et l’Orchestre symphonique de Montréal. London compact disc 421 440-2, 1987. Ebrecht, Ronald, editor. Maurice Duruflé, 1902-1986: The Last Impressionist. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2002. Ellis, Katharine. Interpreting the Musical Past: Early Music in Nineteenth-Century France. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Fauré, Gabriel. “Appel aux musiciens français.” Le Courrier musical, 15 March 1917, 133. ———. Correspondance. Edited by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Paris: Flammarion, 1980. Translated by J. A. Underwood under the title His Life through His Letters (London: Scribner Book Companies, 1984). 209 ———. “Le critique musicale.” Le gaulois, 30 October 1903, 3. ———. Gabriel Fauré: A Life in Letters. Translated and edited by J. Barrie Jones. London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1988. ———. Lettres intimes. Edited by Philippe Fauré-Fremiet. Paris: La Colombe, 1951. ———. Messe basse pour voix de femmes. Paris: Heugel & Cie., 1907. ———. Musique religieuse à une ou plusieurs voix. Paris: J. Hamelle, n.d. ———. Musique religieuse. Edited by Jean-Michael Nectoux. Stuttgart: Carus, 2002/2005. ———. Opinions musicales. Paris: Éditions Rieder, 1930. ———. Pie Jesu [soprano]. Paris: Hamelle, 1900. ———. Pie Jesu [mezzo-soprano]. Paris: Hamelle, 1901. ———. Requiem. Paris: J. Hamelle, 1901. Reprint, Chicago: H.T. FitzSimons, 1944. Reprint, New York: G. Schirmer, 1956. Reprint, New York: International, 1960. Reprint, Boca Raton, FL: Kalmus, 1965. Reprint, Madison Heights, MI: Lucks Music Library, 1992. Reprint, New York: Dover Publications, 2000. ———. “Souvenirs.” La Revue musicale 4 (1 October 1922): 3-9 (195-201). Fauré, Gabriel, and André Messager. Messe des Pêcheurs de Villerville. Edited by Pascal Duc. Paris: Heugel-Leduc: 2000. Fauré-Fremiet, Philippe. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: les Éditions Rieder, 1929. Revised and expanded edition, Paris: Albin Michel, 1957. ———. “La pensée Fauréenne.” In Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946. Fellerer, Karl Gustav. Geschicte der katholischen Kirchenmusik. Düsseldorf: Musikverlag Schwann, 1949. Translation, The History of Catholic Church music. Baltimore, MD: Helicon Press, 1961. Reprint, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1979. Fend, Michael. “Cherubini, Luigi.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/53110 (accessed 13 January 2009). 210 Ferretti, O.S.B., Paul M. Papal Documents on Sacred Music: From the Fourteenth to the Twentieth Century. Edited by the Music Committee of the Society of St. Gregory of America. New York: Society of St. Gregory of America, 1947. Feurzeig, Lisa. “The Business Affairs of Gabriel Fauré.” In The Dissemination of Music: Studies in the History of Music Publishing. Edited by Hans Lenneberg. Lausanne, Switzerland: Gordon and Breach, 1994. Fiske, Roger, and Paul Inwood, ed. Requiem, Op. 48, by Gabriel Fauré. London: Eulenburg, 1978. Flynn, Timothy S. Camille Saint-Saëns. New York: Routledge, 2003. Ford, Andrew. “Fauré’s Requiem: The Mystery and the Marketing.” In Undue Noise: Words about Music. Sydney: ABC Books, 2002. Franck, Cesar. Messe in A-Dur, op. 12. Edited by Armin Landgraf. Stuttgart: Carus, 1982. Frazier, James E. Maurice Duruflé: the Man and his Music. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2007. Frisch, Walter. Brahms and the Principle of Developing Variation. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Fulcher, Jane. “The Composer as Intellectual: Ideological Inscriptions in French Interwar Neoclassicism.” The Journal of Musicology 17/2 (spring 1999): 197-230. ———. The Composer as Intellectual: Music and Ideology in France, 1914-1940. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. ———. “The Concert as Political Propaganda in France and the Control of ‘Performative Context.’” The Musical Quarterly 82/1 (spring 1998): 41-67. ———. French Cultural Politics and Music: From the Dreyfus Affair to the First World War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Galerne, Maurice. L’École Niedermeyer: Sa creation, son but, son développement. Paris: Éditions Margueritat, 1928. Gardiner, John Eliot, dir. Fauré Requiem [R-JMN1]. Monteverdi Choir. Orchestre Révoluntionnaire et Romantique. Philips compact disc 438 149-2, 1994. Gerber, Gary George. “A Conductor’s Analysis of the Sacred Choral Music of Luigi Cherubini.” Doctoral diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1993. 211 Gervais, Françoise. “Étude Comparée des Langages harmoniques de Fauré et Debussy.” Diss., Sorbonne, 1954. Reprint in la Revue Musicale 272-273 (1971): 3-152, 7- 131. Gilbert, David. “Requiem pour solo, chœur et orchestre de chamber, op. 48, version 1893 by Gabriel Fauré, éditée par Jean-Michel Nectoux et Roger Delage.” Notes, Second Series, 54/2 (December 1997): 574-576. ———. “Requiem, op. 48, pour soli, chœur et orchestre symphonique, version de concert, 1900, éditée par Jean-Michel Nectoux.” Notes, Second Series, 57/4 (June 2001): 1018-1020. Gildea, Robert. Children of the Revolution, 1799-1914. London: Penguin Books (Allen Lane), 2008. Gorczycki, Grzegorz Gerwazy. Conductus Funebris III In Paradisum. Edited by Jan Wȩcowski. Warsaw, Poland: Triangiel, 1994. ———. Opera Omnia. Volume II: Utwory wokalno-instrumentalne. Edited by Karol Mrowiec. Kraków: Musica Iagellonica, 1995. Gordon, Tom, ed. and trans. Regarding Fauré. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Publishers, 1999. Gossec, François Joseph. Grande messe des morts. Edited by Wolfgang Kiess. Vienna: Musikverlag Mersich & Kiess, 1999. Gounod, Charles. Messe brève pour les morts. Edited by Günter Graulich. Stuttgart: Carus-Verlag, 2005. ———. Requiem (1893). Edited by József Ács. Eschweiler: Edition József Ács, 1996. Gouvy, Théodore. Requiem für Solostimmen, gemischten Chor und Orchester, Op. 70. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, n.d. Grana, David. Stones, Time, and Elements: A Humanist Requiem. Kurt Vonnegut. Magic Circle Opera Ensemble. Manhattan Chamber Orchestra. Richard Auldon Clark, director. Newport Classic NPD85573, 1994. Gravis, Christopher Gardner. “Gabriel Fauré’s and Maurice Duruflé’s Requiem Mass Settings: A Comparative Analysis.” Master’s thesis, California State University, Fullerton, 2008. Green, Daniel Joseph. “A Study of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s ‘Requiem.’” Doctoral diss., University of Miami, 1988. 212 Guest, George H. A Guest at Cambridge. Orleans, Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 1994. ———, dir. Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition] and Duruflé Requiem [organ version]. Choir of St. John’s College. Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. London compact disc 436 486-2, 1975. Hall, William Dawson. “The Requiem Mass: A Study of Performance Practices from the Baroque Era to the Present Day as Related to Four Requiem Settings by Gilles, Mozart, Verdi, and Britten.” Doctoral diss., University of Southern California, 1970. Hanslick, Eduard. “Verdi’s Requiem.” In Music Criticisms 1846-99, trans. and ed. Henry Pleasants. Baltimore, MD: Dover Publications, 1963: 160-6. Hayburn, Robert F. Papal Legislation on Sacred Music, 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D. Henderson, A. M. “Memories of Some Distinguished French Organists: Fauré.” The Musical Times 78/1135 (September 1937): 817-819. Hayden, J. Michael, and Malcolm R. Greenshields. Six Hundred Years of Reform: Bishops and the French Church, 1190-1789. Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2005. Herreweghe, Philippe, dir. Fauré Messe de requiem (Version 1893) [R-JMN1] and Messe des pêcheurs de Villerville. Le Chapelle Royale. Ensemble Musique Oblique. Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 801292, 1988. ———. Fauré Requiem (Version pour grand orchestre) [R-JMN2] and Frank Symphony in D Minor. La Chapelle Royale. Orchestre des Champs Élysées. Harmonia mundi compact disk HMC 901771, 2002. Hibberd, Sarah. “Murder in the Cathedral? Stradella, Musical Power, and Performing the Past in 1830s Paris.” Music and Letters 87/4 (2006): 551-579. Hill, Edward Burlingame. Modern French Music. New York: Da Capo Press, 1924. Hobsbawn, E. J. The Age of Revolution, 1789-1848. New York: Mentor, 1962. ———. The Age of Capital, 1848-1875. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1975. ———. The Age of Empire, 1875-1914. New York: Pantheon Books, 1987. Houziaux, Mutien-Omer. À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré ou l'Authenticité musicale en questions. With a preface by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Liège: Société Liégeoise de Musicologie, 2000. 213 Howden, Bruce, arranger. Requiem for Four-Part Chorus of Mixed Voices with Soprano and Baritone Soli [piano reduction], by Gabriel Fauré. New York: G. Schirmer, 1975. Huntington, Robert R. “The ‘Real’ Fauré Requiem? The Search Continues.” Choral Journal 37/3 (October 1996): 9-15. Hutchings, Arthur. Church Music in the Nineteenth Century. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1977. ———. “A Grand Noise.” The Musical Times 102/1425 (November 1961): 694-695. Imbert, Hugues. “Le Requiem de Gabriel Fauré à Lille.” Notes for a lecture presented in conjunction with a performance of Fauré’s Requiem on 6 April 1900. Rés. Vmb. MS 42, Département de la Musique. Bibliothèque nationale de France. Jankélévitch, Vladimir. Gabriel Fauré et ses melodies. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1938. Second and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré: ses melodies et son esthétique. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1951. Third and enlarged edition, Gabriel Fauré et l’inexprimable. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1974. Jean-Aubry, Georges. La Musique française d’aujourd’hui. With a preface by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Librairie Académique Perrin, 1916. Translation, French Music of Today. Translated by E. Evans. London: K. Paul, Trench Trubner & Co. Ltd., 1919. Jeffers, Ron. Translations and Annotations of Choral Repertoire. Volume I: Sacred Latin Texts. Corvallis, OR: earthsongs, 1988. Johnson, O.S.B., Cuthbert. Prosper Guéranger (1805-1875): A Liturgical Theologian. Rome: Edizioni Abbazia, 1984. Jongen, Joseph. Three Sacred Songs [O quam suavis est, Hostias et preces, Pie Jesu]. Edited by Tom Cunningham. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Jost, Peter, ed. Gabriel Fauré, Werk und Rezeption: mit Werkverzeichnis und Bibliographie. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996. Kallberg, Jeffrey. “Chopin’s March, Chopin’s Death.” Nineteenth-Century Music 25/1 (summer 2001): 3-26. Karp, Theodore, et al. “Requiem Mass.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/43221 (accessed 21 December 2008). 214 Kidd, James C. “Louis Niedermeyer’s System for Gregorian Chant Accompaniment as a Compositional Source for Gabriel Fauré.” Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1974. ———. Review of Gabriel Fauré by Robert Orledge. Nineteenth-Century Music 4/3 (spring 1981): 276-280. Kœchlin, Charles. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: F. Alcan, 1927. Revised edition, Gabriel Fauré: avec citations musicales dans le texte. Paris: Plon, 1949. Translated by Leslie Orrey under the title Gabriel Fauré (London: Dennis Dobson Limited, 1946). Koob, Lindsay. Review of Fauré Requiem and Frank Symphony recording, directed by Philippe Herreweghe. American Record Guide 65/5 (September-October 2002): 113-114. Kovalenko, Susan Chaffins. “The Twentieth Century Requiem: An Emerging Concept.” Ph.D. diss., Washington University, 1971. Krenek, Ernst. In Paradisum. New York: Rongwen Music, 1966. Krones, Hartmut. “Ein französisches Vorbild für Mozarts ‘Requiem’: Die ‘Messe des Morts’ von François-Joseph Gossec.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 42 (1987): 2-17. Kunc, Pierre. Poème funèbre [Libera—In Paradisum]. Arras: Procure Générale de Musique Religieuse, 1911. Lalo, Pierre. “La musique,” Le temps, 27 January 1906, 3. Laloy, Louis. “Concerts du Conservatoire.” Revue d’histoire et de critique musicales 1/4 (April 1901): 162-163. Lang, Paul Henry. Music in Western Civilization. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1941. Langham Smith, Richard. Review of À la recherche “des” Requiem de Fauré, ou l’Authenticité musicale en questions by Mutien-Omer Houziaux. Music and Letters 86/4 (November 2005): 648-650. ———. Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter. Music and Letters 71/1 (February 1990): 143-44. Landormy, Paul, and M. D. Herter Norton. “Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924).” The Musical Quarterly 17/3 (July 1931): 293-301. 215 Leaver, Robin A. “Brahms’s Opus 45 and German Protestant Funeral Music.” The Journal of Musicology 19/4 (autumn 2002): 616-640. Legge, Philip, ed. Requiem in D Minor, Opus 48 (1888/1893 Version), by Gabriel Fauré. Self-published, 2005. Distributed by Choral Public Domain Library. http://www.choralwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Requiem_in_D_minor%2C_Op._48_( Gabriel_Faur%C3%A9) (accessed October 8, 2008). Distributed by International Music Score Library Project http://imslp.org/index.php?title=Requiem,_Op.48_(Faur%C3%A9,_Gabriel)& (accessed October 8, 2008) Léon, Paul. Du Palais-Royal au Palais Bourbon: Souvenirs. Paris: Albin Michel, 1947. Lewis, Charles E. “A Conductor’s Analysis of Four Penitential Motets by Francis Poulenc and Requiem by Maurice Duruflé.” Master’s thesis, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1972. Locke, Ralph P. “The French Symphony: David, Gounod, and Bizet to Saint-Saëns, Franck, and Their Followers.” In The Nineteenth Century Symphony. Edited by D. Kern Holoman. New York: Schirmer Books, 1997. ———. “Paris: Centre of Intellectual Ferment.” In The Early Romantic Era: Between Revolutions, 1789-1848. Edited by Alexander Ringer. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1991. Lockspeiser, Edward. “Gabriel Fauré and Marcel Proust.” The Listener, 1 June 1961. Reprinted in Essays on Music: an Anthology from “The Listener.” Edited by Felix Aprahamian. London: Cassell, 1967. Long, Marguerite. Au Piano avec Fauré. Paris: René Julliard, 1963. Translated by Olive Senior-Ellis under the title At the Piano with Fauré (New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1981). Luce, Harold T. “The Requiem Mass from Its Plainsong Beginnings to 1600.” Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, 1958. Mann, William. “Britten’s Masterpiece Denounces Way.” The Times (London), 25 May 1962, 15. Matonti, Rev. Charles Joseph. “Discovering Principles for the Composition and Use of Contemporary Liturgical Music through the Study of Selected Requiem Masses.” Ed.D. diss., Columbia University, 1972. McKendrick, Ryan P. “A Conductor’s Analysis of Gabriel Fauré’s Requiem, Op. 48.” Master’s thesis, Georgia State University, 2007. 216 Mellers, Wilfrid. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life by Jean-Michel Nectoux. The New Republic 208/6 (8 February 1993): 35-40. Mick, Steven D. “Fauré Requiem, Op. 48: A Comparative Analysis of the John Rutter Edition.” Master’s thesis, St. Cloud State University, 2007. Minear, Paul S. Death Set to Music: Masterworks by Bach, Brahms, Penderecki, Bernstein. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987. Mitchell, Donald. “Map Reading: Benjamin Britten in Conversation with Donald Mitchell.” In The Britten Companion. Edited by Christopher Palmer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Musgrave, Michael. Brahms: A German Requiem. Cambridge Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Myers, Rollo H. Modern French Music from Fauré to Boulez. New York: Praeger Publications, 1971. Naoumoff, Émile, pianist. Fauré Requiem [Schott piano transcription]. Sony compact disk JK 89791, 2001. ———, transcriber. Requiem, Op. 48 (1887/1888) [piano transcription], by Gabriel Fauré. The Virtuoso Piano Transcription Series. Vol. 3. Mainz: Schott Musik International, 2001. Nectoux, Jean-Michel. “Chemins de la musique française.” In 20e siècle: Images de la musique française. Edited by Jean-Pierre Derrien. Paris: Sacem et Papiers, 1986. ———. “Correspondance: Saint-Saëns et Fauré.” Revue de musicologie 58/1 (1972): 65- 89. ———. Fauré. Solfèges. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1972. Revised edition, Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1995. ———. “Fauré, Henry Prunières et la Revue musicale.” Etudes fauréennes 17 (1980): 17-24. ———. “French Archives: Music in the Archives of Paris Churches.” Nineteenth- Century Music 7/2, special issue: French Archives (autumn 1983): 100-103. ———. Gabriel Fauré: Les voix du clair-obscur. Paris: Flammarion, 1990. Translated by Roger Nichols under the title Gabriel Fauré: A Musical Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). 217 ———. “Letter by Jean-Michel Nectoux.” International Choral Bulletin 12/4 (July 1993): 14 (English), 39 (French). ———. “Les Orchestrations de Gabriel Fauré: Légende et vérité.” Schweizerische Musikzeitung/Revue musicale suisse 15 (1975): 243-249. ———. Phonographies Gabriel Fauré 1900-1977. Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1979. ———. “Ravel/Fauré et les débuts de la Société Musicale Indépendante.” Revue de musicologie 61/2 (1975): 295-318. ———. “Works Renounced, Themes Rediscovered: Eléments pour une thématique fauréenne.” Nineteenth-Century Music 2/3 (March 1979): 231-244. Nectoux, Jean-Michel, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 (Concert Version, 1900), by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1998. Nectoux, Jean-Michel and Reiner Zimmermann, ed. Messe de Requiem, by Gabriel Fauré. Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1977. 2 nd ed., Frankfurt: C. F. Peters, 1995. Nectoux, Jean-Michel and Roger Delage, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 (Version 1893), by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 1994. 2 nd ed., Paris: J. Hamelle/Leduc, 2000. Nichols, Roger. The Harlequin Years: Music in Paris, 1917-1929. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. ———. “A Must-Buy Volume.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Marc Rigaudière; and Musique Religieuse by Gabriel Fauré, edition by Jean-Michel Nectoux. Choir and Organ 15/2 (March-April 2007): 69, 71. Ochse, Orpha. Organists and Organ Playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2000. Orledge, Robert. “Fauré Revised.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, editions by Jean-Michel Nectoux/Reiner Zimmerman (C.F. Peters) and Roger Fiske/Paul Inwood (Eulenburg/Schott). The Musical Times 121/1647 (May 1980): 327. ———. Gabriel Fauré. London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1979. Revised edition, London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd., 1983. ———. “A Happy Deliverance.” Review of Requiem by Gabriel Fauré, edition by John Rutter. The Musical Times 126/1714 (December 1985): 738. Orrey, Leslie. “Gabriel Fauré, 1845-1924.” The Musical Times 86/1227 (May 1945): 137-139. 218 Phillips, Edward R. Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research. New York: Garland Publishing, 2000. Pius IX, Pope. Inter Multiplices. 21 March 1853. Papal Encyclicals Online. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9interm.htm (accessed 13 January 2009) Ratcliffe, Desmond, ed. Requiem, Opus 48. Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1975. ———, editor and arranger. Requiem, Opus 48: Arranged for Soprano and Baritone (or Mezzo-Soprano) Soli, SSA and Orchestra. Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1975. Reel, James. “A Conversation with John Rutter.” Fanfare 22/2 (November-December 1998): 131-135. Reid, O.S.B., Alcuin. The Organic Development of the Liturgy. 2 nd ed. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005. Reynolds, Jeffrey W. “The Choral Music of Maurice Duruflé (1902-1986).” Doctoral diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1990. Rigaudière, Marc, ed. Requiem, Op. 48, by Gabriel Fauré. Stuttgart: Carus, 2005. Rivier, Jean. Requiem. Paris: Editions Musicales Transatlantiques, 1956. Robertson, Alec. Requiem: Music of Mourning and Consolation. New York: Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1968. Reprint, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1976. Roger-Ducasse, [Jean]. “L’enseignement de Gabriel Fauré.” In Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Les Publications Techniques et Artistiques, 1946. ———, arranger. Requiem [piano reduction], by Gabriel Fauré. Paris: J. Hamelle, 1900. Revised edition, Paris: J. Hamelle, 1901. Reprint with English text, Mack Evans, ed., Chicago: FitzSimons, 1953. Rosen, David. Verdi: Requiem. Cambridge Music Handbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Rutter, John. “Fauré: Requiem in Original Orchestration.” International Choral Bulletin 12/2 (January 1993): 41. ———. “In Search of the Real Fauré Requiem?” The American Organist 18/11 (November 1984): 58-61. 219 ———. “Reply to Jean Nectoux’s Letter on the Fauré Requiem.” International Choral Bulletin 13/1 (October 1993): 34. ———. Requiem. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Reprint, Chapel Hill, NC.: Hinshaw Music, Inc., 1986. ———, ed. Requiem, Op. 48 with Fauré’s Original Chamber Instrumentation, by Gabriel Fauré. Chapel Hill, NC: Hinshaw Music, 1984. Reprint, Requiem (1893 Version) with the Composer’s Original Chamber Instrumentation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. ———, dir. Fauré Requiem and Other Choral Music [R-JR]. The Cambridge Singers. Members of the City of London Sinfonia. Collegium compact disk COLCD109, 1984. Saint-Saëns, Camille. École buissonnière: Notes et Souvenirs. Paris: Pierre Lafitte & C ie , 1913. Extracts translated by Edwin Gile Rich, under the title Musical Memories. New York: Da Capo Press, 1969. ———. “Les Hommes du jour. Gabriel Fauré.” L’Éclair, 23 January 1893, 2. ———. Messe de requiem, Op. 54. Boca Raton, FL: Kalmus, n.d. ———. “Music in the Church.” Translated by Theodore Baker. The Musical Quarterly 2/1 (January 1916): 1-8. Saint-Saëns, Camille, and Gabriel Fauré. Correspondance (1862-1920). Edited by Jean- Michel Nectoux. Paris: Éditions Klincksieck, 1994. Translated by J. Barrie Jones, under the title The Correspondence of Camille Saint-Saëns and Gabriel Fauré: Sixty Years of Friendship (Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004). Saint-Saëns, Camille, Gabriel Fauré, and others. “La Réforme de la Musique Religieuse: Opinions de MM. C. Saint-Saëns, Gabriel Fauré, G. Houdard, A. Guilmant.” Le Monde Musical 16 (15 February 1904): 34-36. Samson, Jim, ed. The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-Century Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Schoenberg, Arnold. Style and Idea. Edited by Dika Newlin. New York: Philosophical Library, 1950. Revised edition, Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg. Edited by Leonard Stein. Translated by Leo Black. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Scott, Jr., Earl K. “The Requiem by Gabriel Fauré: A Conductor’s Analysis for Performance.” Doctoral diss., Indiana University, 1980. 220 Shaw, Robert, dir. Fauré Requiem, Op. 48 [R-JR] and Duruflé Requiem, Op. 9 [full orchestra version]. Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus. Telarc compact disc CD-80135, 1987. Sixten, Fredrik. Requiem. Stockholm: Gerhmans Musikförlag, 2008. ———. Requiem. Maria Magdalena Motett Choir. Members from the Royal Opera. Ragnar Bohlin, director. Gerhmans Musikförlag, GEPRCD03, 2007. Smith, Richard Langham, and Caroline Potter, eds. French Music since Berlioz. Cornwall: Ashgate Publishing, 2006. Smith, Rollin. “Gabriel Fauré: Organist.” The American Organist 13/6 (June 1979): 41- 42. ———. Saint-Saëns and the Organ. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1992. Snyder, Jane. “Ritual and Drama in the Nineteenth-Century French Requiem.” Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 2005. Sobaskie, James William. Review of Gabriel Fauré: A Guide to Research by Edward R. Phillips. Notes, Second Series 57/3 (March 2001): 612-613. Steinberg, Michael. “Gabriel Fauré Requiem, op. 48.” In Choral Masterworks: A Listener’s Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. ———. Listening to Reason: Culture, Subjectivity, and Nineteenth-Century Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004. Stephens, Norris L., arranger. Requiem [organ accompaniment]. New York: G. Schirmer, 1965. Suckling, Norman. Fauré. London: J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd., 1951. Summer, Robert J. “Gabriel Fauré: Requiem, Op. 48.” In Choral Masterworks from Bach to Britten: Reflections of a Conductor. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2007. Summerly, Jeremy, dir. Fauré Requiem [chamber orchestra version, edition unspecified]. Schola Cantorum of Oxford. Oxford Camerata. Naxos compact disk 8.550765, 1993. Swafford, Jan. Johannes Brahms: A Biography. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997. Thomson, Andrew. Review of Fauré and French Musical Aesthetics by Carlo Caballero. The Musical Times 142/1877 (winter 2001): 67-68. 221 Tiersot, Julien. Un demi-siècle de musique française, 1870-1919. 2 nd ed. Paris: Alcan, 1924. Valbelle, Roger. “Entretien avec M. Gabriel Fauré.” Association des amis de Gabriel Fauré: Bulletin 12 (1975): 9-11. First published in Excelsior (12 June 1922): 2. Van Camp, Leonard. A Practical Guide for Performing, Teaching and Singing the Brahms Requiem. Lawson-Gould Music Publishers, 2002. Van der Vloed, Kees. “Requiem Survey.” http://www.requiemsurvey.org/ (accessed 8 December 2008). Verdi, Giuseppe. Requiem. New York: Dover Publications, 1978. Verhelst, F[rançois]. “Musique religieuse. La messe en ré de Beethoven—Le Requiem de G. Fauré—Sanctus Petrus de R.P. Hartmann.” Durendal: Revue catholique d'art de de littérature 8 (February 1901): 115-118. Vivet, Armand. “La Musique sacrée en France depuis la Révolution.” In Congrès de musique sacrée. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1937. Vonnegut, Kurt. “Requiem: The Hocus Pocus Laundromat.” North American Review 271/4 (December 1986): 29-36. Vuillermoz, Émile. “Gabriel Fauré.” La Revue musicale (October 1922): 10-21 (202- 213). ———. Gabriel Fauré. Paris: Flammarion, 1960. Translated by Kenneth Schapin under the title Gabriel Fauré (Philadelphia: Chilton Book Company, 1969). Wadley, Carma. “Music Vital in Bringing Comfort.” Deseret News, 4 April 2008. <http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695266940,00.html> (accessed 9 January 2009). Wagner, Roger, dir. Palestrina Missa Papae Marcelli and Fauré Requiem [Hamelle 1900/1901 edition]. Roger Wagner Chorale. Concert Arts Orchestra. EMI Classics compact disc 67251, 1953, re-released, 1999. Warren, Rev. Charles F. S. The Authorship, Text, and History of the Hymn Dies Irae: With Critical, Historical and Biographical Notes. London: Thomas Baker/Charles Higham, 1902. Webber, Andrew Lloyd. Requiem. London: Novello, 1985. Weber, Edith. Le Concile de Trente et la musique de la Réforme a la Contre-réforme. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1982. 222 Wienandt, Elwyn A. Choral Music of the Church. New York: Macmillan Company, 1965 Wilberg, Mack. Requiem. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. ———. Requiem and Other Choral Works. Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Orchestra at Temple Square. Craig Jessop, director. Mormon Tabernacle Choir CFN 0813-2, 2008. Wishart, Peter. “Fauré and Brahms Requiems.” The Musical Times 103/1427 (January 1962): 33. Woldu, Gail Hilson. “Gabriel Fauré as Director of the Conservatoire nationale de musique et de déclamation, 1905-1920.” Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1983. ———. “Gabriel Fauré, directeur du Conservatoire: les réformes de 1905.” Revue de musicology 70/2 (1984): 199-228. Wolff, Christoph. Mozart’s Requiem. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1994. Wright, Gordon. France in Modern Times: From the Enlightenment to the Present. 3 rd ed. New York: Norton, 1981. Wright, Lesley A. Introduction to Carmen: A Performing Guide by Mary Dibbern. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2000. 223 APPENDIX Directors of the Conservatoire from 1795-1941 Years Director 1795-1815 Bernard Sarrette 1815-1822 François Perne 1822-1842 Luigi Cherubini 1842-1871 Louis Auber 1871-1896 Ambroise Thomas 1896-1905 Théodore Dubois 1905-1920 Gabriel Fauré 1920-1941 Henri Rabaud Selected Professors of Composition of the Conservatoire from 1871-1940 Years Professor of Composition 1871-1896 Théodore Dubois 1876-1892 Ernest Guirard 1878-1896 Jules Massenet 1894-1910 Charles Lenepveu (who succeeded Guirard) 1896-1905 Gabriel Fauré (who succeeded Massenet) 1896-1928 Charles Widor (who succeeded Dubois) 1928-1935 Paul Dukas (who succeeded Widor) 1935-1940 Jean Roger-Ducasse (who succeeded Dukas) Sources: Data from Roger Nichols, The Harlequin Years: Music in Paris, 1917-1929 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 181; and GMO.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Gabriel Fauré's Requiem, op. 48 is the most famous work of his oeuvre and the most frequently performed French requiem. Although it has become a much beloved member of the canon of requiem settings, our understanding of this work has been often oversimplified by taking the 1900/1901 Hamelle publication of Requiem at face value and by our lack of knowledge of the influence Fauré's church music background had upon the work. The first chapter lays the foundation for this study including a brief biography of the composer and a scholarship overview. Chapter 2 builds on the work of other scholars and outlines the evolution of the work from its sketches (dating as early as 1877) and early performances to the "official" premiere in 1900. It condenses information on major performing editions in one place, including reconstructions of a "Chamber" or "1893" version. Chapter 3 defines two requiem "traditions" -- the conservative one within the church and the progressive one developing later in the concert hall. It discusses the co-existence of tradition and innovation within Opus 48, describing the influences of Fauré's education and employment in church music and the influences of the growing canon of requiem settings upon his Requiem. Chapter 4 examines the influence of Fauré and his Requiem upon future composers. Although Fauré may not seem progressive today, his work opened the door for future composers, and his choice of texts for the Requiem in particular influenced future settings. The final chapter will summarize the major points of this study.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Herbert Howells' Requiem and Hymnus paradisi: works of interconnected genesis and development
PDF
A study of Arirang and its influence on contemporary Korean choral works
PDF
Osvaldo Golijov’s Oceana: performance considerations
PDF
A cultural history of Georg Friedrich Daumer's Polydora and Johannes Brahms's Liebeslieder waltzes, op. 52
PDF
Karol Szymanowski and his Stabat Mater
PDF
The influence of the Australian landscape and indigenous Aboriginal music and traditions on Australian choral music: a study of choral works by nine Australian composers
PDF
David Ward-Steinman and his oratorio The Song of Moses: an appreciation and analysis
PDF
The life and influence of Dr. Lynn Bielefelt
PDF
Hugo Distler and the renewal movement in Nazi Germany
PDF
Frank Martin's Le vin herbé: a critical analysis and guide to performance
PDF
The romantic loner: a conductor’s guide to the choral-orchestral works of Sir William Walton
PDF
A choral conductor's guide to the Messe de requiem by Alfred Désenclos
PDF
The sacred choral works of Samuel Coleridge-Taylor
PDF
The influence of African-American harmonizing on the 'American' choral works of Frederick Delius
PDF
Three periods in Frank Martin's compositional evolution as exemplified in Messe pour double choeur, In Terra Pax and Requiem
PDF
Howard Swan, Charles Hirt, and Roger Wagner: their influences and the building of choral culture in southern California
PDF
The motets of Georg Philipp Telemann: a study of their sources, musical style, and performance practice
PDF
A historical analysis and performing edition of Baladassare Galuppi's C-minor Miserere for double treble chorus and orchestra
PDF
Musical landscape in Northern Germany in the early seventeenth century: musica poetica and its application in the settings of Komm, Heiliger Geist, Herre Gott by Heinrich Schütz, Johann Hermann S...
PDF
Anglican chant in the twentieth-century: Genesis, harmonic development, and style
Asset Metadata
Creator
Cooksey, Karen
(author)
Core Title
Fauré's Requiem re-examined: a study of the work's genesis, influences, and influence
School
Thornton School of Music
Degree
Doctor of Musical Arts
Degree Program
Choral Music
Publication Date
04/29/2009
Defense Date
03/13/2009
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Catholic,Fauré,Gallican,liturgy,Mass,Nectoux,OAI-PMH Harvest,requiem,Rutter,Saint-Saëns
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Solomon, Magen (
committee chair
), Simms, Bryan (
committee member
), Strimple, Nick (
committee member
)
Creator Email
karen.cooksey@gmail.com,kcooksey@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2145
Unique identifier
UC1202062
Identifier
etd-Cooksey-2647 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-228731 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2145 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Cooksey-2647.pdf
Dmrecord
228731
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Cooksey, Karen
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
Fauré
Gallican
Nectoux
requiem
Rutter
Saint-Saëns