Maurice Ravel Orchestrations Inédites 1896-Chants Traditionnels Corses
Product ID: 103325662
13 tracks: Hymne de Sampieru, Chant satirique des Bonifaciens,Serenada di Serra, Nanna di Palneca, Tre marinari (la cueillette des olives), Voceru di u Niolu, U Mere Pastore, Nanna di u Cuscione, Voceru di Sarte, Lamentu d'Orezza, Cantu des Pecheurs, Lamentu di Biguglia. Review: A Ravel curio - but you get more Corsican traditional chants (and uniformly plangent too) than genuine Ravel - In 1895, aged 20, not yet entered the composition class of Gabriel Fauré at the Paris Conservatoire, Ravel orchestrated a collection of Corsican chants. The manuscript was never published and is kept at the Museum of Corsica, an anthropology museum located in the city of Corte, in Corsica. The liner notes refer to Austin de Croze, an ethnomusicologist before the word and concept were invented, who made a series of conferences in January and February 1896, after the publication of an erudite and well-researched book on "The folk song of Corsica". The relation to Ravel's orchestration isn't made very clear, but from what I understand Ravel's orchestrations were commissioned on the occasion of those conferences, and it is hinted that he used the book and its precise descriptions of the vocal techniques and melodies of traditional Corsican singing. Since conductor Jean Michel Giannelli is credited for "rewriting the missing parts", it isn't clear exactly in what shape Ravel's orchestrations are, and what must be attributed to whom. And what did Ravel orchestrate in the two songs sung "a capella" (track 11, a lullaby, and track 13, a lament), is anybody's guess. The instrumental ensemble here is comprised of mandolin, guitar, string quartet, harp, piano, celesta and organ - the latter very present. It is not clear either in what form Ravel left the vocal line(s), if he "classicalized" them or not. Here, the performing ensemble is one specialized in traditional Corsican chant, and the liner note contains a staunch rejection by Giannelli of the usual (I don't want to use the word "traditional", here, it would be misleading) approach of classical composers when they orchestrate or harmonize folk music - by which I don't know if he's referring to Canteloube or Bartok... or Ravel, but anyway... . He contends that, often with the best intentions, these composers and approach betray the true nature of these folk songs, and that these should be sung with traditional vocal techniques and keeping their linguistic specificity. And that's what the ensemble does. They are sung as traditional chant with instrumental ensemble. The songs are shared between men, women and mixed chorus - we're talking here about a "traditional" chorus: homogeneity of voices isn't an objective. I can't say that the result is very convincing. You get less the impression of hearing Ravel than of hearing Corsican folk song. And this selection of folk songs doesn't really capture one's attention, either. The main problem is that these songs lack diversity, they are all in a plangent, longing and nostalgic mood. No dance or romp to change mood and rhythm, and wake you up from your lull. In that context, and despite their commendable sparseness, I don't find that the arrangements of Ravel add very much either; on the contrary, many of them sound like the kind of bastardization you encounter on commercial arrangements of Italian folk songs - you know, "O sole mio" and the syrupy violins. It comes as no surprise that the two most enjoyable songs are the two sung "a capella". Sorry Mr Giannelli, but this is no match for Canteloube's betrayal of the folk songs of Auvergne. (For a great collection of contemporary arrangement of folk songs - other of course than Berio's famous Folksongs - give a try to Folk Songs: Olivero, Mascagni, Galante, Krauze, Savona, Sciarrino, Ambrosini, Petrov, Francesconi, Stuppner, Zimmermann (From Festival Musica '900 a Trento) )
D**E
A Ravel curio - but you get more Corsican traditional chants (and uniformly plangent too) than genuine Ravel
In 1895, aged 20, not yet entered the composition class of Gabriel Fauré at the Paris Conservatoire, Ravel orchestrated a collection of Corsican chants. The manuscript was never published and is kept at the Museum of Corsica, an anthropology museum located in the city of Corte, in Corsica. The liner notes refer to Austin de Croze, an ethnomusicologist before the word and concept were invented, who made a series of conferences in January and February 1896, after the publication of an erudite and well-researched book on "The folk song of Corsica". The relation to Ravel's orchestration isn't made very clear, but from what I understand Ravel's orchestrations were commissioned on the occasion of those conferences, and it is hinted that he used the book and its precise descriptions of the vocal techniques and melodies of traditional Corsican singing. Since conductor Jean Michel Giannelli is credited for "rewriting the missing parts", it isn't clear exactly in what shape Ravel's orchestrations are, and what must be attributed to whom. And what did Ravel orchestrate in the two songs sung "a capella" (track 11, a lullaby, and track 13, a lament), is anybody's guess. The instrumental ensemble here is comprised of mandolin, guitar, string quartet, harp, piano, celesta and organ - the latter very present. It is not clear either in what form Ravel left the vocal line(s), if he "classicalized" them or not. Here, the performing ensemble is one specialized in traditional Corsican chant, and the liner note contains a staunch rejection by Giannelli of the usual (I don't want to use the word "traditional", here, it would be misleading) approach of classical composers when they orchestrate or harmonize folk music - by which I don't know if he's referring to Canteloube or Bartok... or Ravel, but anyway... . He contends that, often with the best intentions, these composers and approach betray the true nature of these folk songs, and that these should be sung with traditional vocal techniques and keeping their linguistic specificity. And that's what the ensemble does. They are sung as traditional chant with instrumental ensemble. The songs are shared between men, women and mixed chorus - we're talking here about a "traditional" chorus: homogeneity of voices isn't an objective. I can't say that the result is very convincing. You get less the impression of hearing Ravel than of hearing Corsican folk song. And this selection of folk songs doesn't really capture one's attention, either. The main problem is that these songs lack diversity, they are all in a plangent, longing and nostalgic mood. No dance or romp to change mood and rhythm, and wake you up from your lull. In that context, and despite their commendable sparseness, I don't find that the arrangements of Ravel add very much either; on the contrary, many of them sound like the kind of bastardization you encounter on commercial arrangements of Italian folk songs - you know, "O sole mio" and the syrupy violins. It comes as no surprise that the two most enjoyable songs are the two sung "a capella". Sorry Mr Giannelli, but this is no match for Canteloube's betrayal of the folk songs of Auvergne. (For a great collection of contemporary arrangement of folk songs - other of course than Berio's famous Folksongs - give a try to Folk Songs: Olivero, Mascagni, Galante, Krauze, Savona, Sciarrino, Ambrosini, Petrov, Francesconi, Stuppner, Zimmermann (From Festival Musica '900 a Trento) )
Trustpilot
2 weeks ago
5 days ago