On June 12, 1923, Façade
premiered at the Aeolian Hall in London. There was (supposedly) hissing and booing,
though nothing like when Stravinsky’s “Rite of Spring” was first performed, at
the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées on 29 May 1913. Virginia Woolf attended the
opening of Façade, and described a
puzzled but polite audience. Reviews were rotten. A sample headline: “Drivel
They Paid To Hear.” After this night, William Walton acquired a reputation as
the enfant terrible of British music, probably because Sitwellspread
stories that they were almost physically attacked by the audience.
Sitwell's early verse
comprised "abstract patterns in
sounds" to overcome "verbal deadness" and "rhythmic
flaccidity" in English poetry. They are experiments in rhyme, assonance
and dissonance, and syllabic combinations. Belgian writer Emil Cammaerts said
Sitwell's verses were "poetry gone mad, poetry on the verge of becoming
music."
Walton treated the voice as just
another instrument, and sometimes the orchestra overwhelms it. Sitwell put the
orchestra behind a screen on one occasion, and spoke through a megaphone on
another. The work changed as they added, subtracted, rewrote and reordered things.
Another early change was the addition of a flute and saxophone to the quartet,
giving a music-hall or dance-band flavor to things. Walton parodies popular and
classical music, and also various dance styles, from tap-dance and waltz (as
inherited from Tchaikovsky, Ravel and the Strausses), to folk reels ("Scotch
Rhapsody"). The "Jodelling Song" quotes Rossini's William
Tell. Most of the movements are a kind of extended
word-painting, ideally suited to the extended onomatopoeia of the
verses, and
in most cases contain some more literal translation of the words into
music. In this aspect, would you agree that Sitwell was following a path
blazed by Gertrude Stein's Tender Buttons?
Listening to the YouTube clips, I was shocked at how nearly unintelligible Façade would be if I didn't have the words in front of me, and even then it's so abstract as to be almost meaningless. Outside of admiring the sheer speed with which the songs are sung, I have a hard time imagining audiences getting much out of this performance. The comparison to Stein is apt, though, and I can see where Tender Buttons could have been influential to Sitwell. Stein and Sitwell both seem as though they're willing to beat the audience into submission with their words: "Make sense of this nonsense... or else!" Where Sitwell has the advantage, however, is in her rhythms. Even without hearing the songs performed, one can feel the urgency in them, so readily do the words lend themselves to an automatic, thrumming musicality, an aspect that wasn't particularly prevalent in the Imagist poetry we read last week. Because of this, I think Sitwell is more successful than Stein, if for no other reason than that the musical cadence of Façade makes the piece more accessible than Tender Buttons if not necessarily more decipherable.
ReplyDeleteSitwell’s “Façade” is like Stein’s Tender Buttons in the sense that both works are experimental and egregiously nonsensical. But, the distinction of Sitwell’s poetry is her rhyming cacophony of assonance and consonance that has a playful, cartoony sound to it, whereas Stein’s Tender Buttons has a more serious and philosophical bent to it that would sound even worse set to music than Sitwell’s work. I agree with Michael that there is a strong feeling of urgency in Sitwell’s poetry that just begs to be set to bad music. Although the music of “Façade” was clamorous and discordant, it blends well with the sense of dissonance in her poetry.
ReplyDeleteI can see how Sitwell could have very well been influenced by Stein’s work. Sitwell was obviously determined to do something out of the realm of normalcy, so much so that it seems as if she didn’t care whether her work was going to be well received or not since her poetry is not suited for the average reader and the accompanying music is enough to cause a nightmarish headache for even an interested listener.
I can see how Stein's "Tender Buttons" may have been a great source of inspiration for the style Sitwell uses in Façade but there is such a difference, in my listening ear, in letting Sitwell's poetic lines (like the ones in Mariner Man) reverberate with the flute chirps and saxophone squawks in the background. (It sounds a lot to me like the jumbled language the witch in Sword in the Stone uses, ha!) I agree with Michael that where Sitwell thrives and Stein confuses is in the rhythms in poems like Poem 16, Valse. There is a liveliness--a bouncing I can do along with the time signatures--that makes the oftentimes monotonous tone of Sitwell's voice actually engaging. I found myself reading and re-reading Stein's poetry because I could not follow her logic at all. At least with Sitwell, if I cannot understand WHAT she's saying, I can enjoy HOW she's saying it as she simultaneously comments on and parodies classical styles of music. I love Poem 21, Sir Beelzebub, where Walton reads off a seemingly endless catalog of qualities until he breaks the rhythm and meter of the lines by pausing and ironically exclaiming "moving in classical meters" followed by a big breath in to finish the catalog.These "songs" are playing upon the conventions of language in the same way that Stein's "Tender Buttons" does but I see much more wit in them overall.
ReplyDeleteI think Michael's observation about Sitwell's use of rhythm is an astute one. Sitwell's work has a wonderful lyrical quality that seems conducive to musical accompaniment. For example: "Cockscomb flowers that none will pluck / And wooden flowers that 'gin to cluck." Wonderful.
ReplyDeleteI can't say the same for Stein. However, I don't mean to cast aspersions on Stein. The lineage from Stein to Sitwell is quite apparent: "flames as staring, red and white."
Finally, Façade reminds me of Dave Brubeck's "Unsquare Dance" (Country Dance vis a vis Unsquare Dance). The song is part of a larger exploration of unusual time signatures that are basically impossible to snap your fingers or bob your head to, yet they are very catchy. I feel the same about Sitwell.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI could certainly believe that Sitwell was influenced by Stein, though I think I took away a different message from Stein's work than Sitwell did. Sitwell focused mostly on Stein's lyricism, the way she paired words in seemingly nonsensical ways merely to create interesting rhyme or rhythm, while I focused more on the content of Stein's imagery: I felt Stein was trying to recreate on paper the chaotic thought patterns often experienced when one attempts to focus on a single object or subject.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Facade itself, I view it as a lampoon of songwriting in general. Song lyrics often bend pronunciation to fit in with a meter or rhyme scheme. I can think of many modern pop songs that are guilty of this, and though I am not knowledgeable about popular music of the 1910's I assume the phenomenon is not unique to our age. Songs usually attempt to be meaningful, dare I say "poetic". When a song that attempts to be taken seriously bends the pronunciation of words, this "seriousness" is undermined. By eschewing the pretense of meaning, by not attempting to be "poetic", Facade presents music that more pure, lyrically, than many other kinds of music: the lyrics are there to create music, not meaning. The sounds of the words are the only thing that matters, and by not attempting to do more than that, Sitwell creates more effictive lyrics than is found in a lot of other pop music.
I also liked how Sitwell revised Facade over time, changing the song order and how the orchestra performed. It's a very "jazzy" approach to music, as jazz encourage improvisation and playfulness-a jazz standard does not, should not, sound exactly the same every time it is performed.
I had a wonderful time listening to Sitwell’s and Walton’s recitations, particularly “The Mariner Man,” “Lullaby for Jumbo,” “Waltz,” “Popular Song,” and “I Do Like To Be Beside the Seaside.” The nonsensical words were transformed into peppy, lilting, rhythmic ditties by the stunning composition. The music may have sounded jarring and discordant when it was first produced, but, like Stravinsky’s radical piece, what was once harsh on the ear is now pleasing and familiar.
ReplyDeleteSitwell’s poetry is similar to Stein’s only in their experimental style. While Tender Buttons is prose-poetry, Façade reminds me of the nonsense poems by Edward Lear and Lewis Carroll. I don’t think Stein’s poetry is cacophony; her words are framed in sentences that feel like they should mean something, but, when read completely, they don’t. This is different from Sitwell’s obvious nonsensical words that seem to tumble forth in a mad rush of music.
I imagine why Sitwell's audience may have had a difficult time enjoying Facade. However, I think it is more enjoyable as long as it is accepted for what it claims to be: entertainment. It's fun! It rhymes! If Sitwell's experimental use of language was inspired by anyone I suppose it could have been Stein. I agree with Shanna though that Stein's Tender Buttons is more serious in tone and intention than Sitwell's Facade. Facade has a satirical element to it, while Tender Buttons takes itself pretty seriously. I can't help but wonder what Tender Buttons sound like set to music or danced to?
ReplyDelete