Michel Legrand (1932-2019): 6-10/1/25

[Master Jacques]

As a keen student of such mundanities I reckon it’s the Royal Naval College in London which is used all the time about in film / tv London street scenes (and for other cities ) from about 1780 to 1950. Unlike just about any where else - it’s big and is completely closed off so you can have the commune in Les Miserables rioting there or a London street scene from the war.

Ah, the Royal Naval College. You will know, I'm sure, that it also did (extremely convincing) duty for St Petersburg throughout Ken Russell's The Music Lovers. Richard Chamberlain, Glenda Jackson et al. strutting their stuff, and a great favourite in this household.

[Roger Webb]

Or, a few miles up the A420, Castle Combe (of Dr Dolittle fame).

Or down the A350 to Shaftesbury, which has seen a few since its debut in the Hovis advert - which judging by the accent of the voice-over is meant to be in Yorkshire....nearer Laycock....not Lacock (thanks Sir Velo).

[french frank]

All depends what you mean by “refine.”

Well, I was positing (for the sake of argument, not because I think it's true) that the opinions/statements/claims regarding degrees of excellence in matters of art can be objective and ultimately 'true'/'correct'/'right'; and that with careful, extensive study one's critical judgements will more and more coincide with the judgements of others who have similarly studied and gained a wide knowledge of the subject. Is Legrand a very fine composer? Oh, indubitably. And if I feel after today's cursory acquaintance (I do also remember Noel Harrison's Windmills of Your Mind) Legrand is a composer to avoid, what does it say, objectively, about my taste?

As for Kant's 'we take pleasure in something because we judge it beautiful, rather than judging it beautiful because we find it pleasurable', I'm not sure that it is actually possible to be clear which comes first. Does he equate aesthetic judgements with judgements of taste? If so, I agree with Kant

I think my tastes have got broader with age and knowledge whether they are more refined I wouldn’t like to say.

The main benefit of having broad tastes is that broader tastes means a wider range of pleasurable things and therefore the main beneficiary is oneself.

[vinteuil]

The main benefit of having broad tastes is that broader tastes means a wider range of pleasurable things and therefore the main beneficiary is oneself.

.... however - "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question."

John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (1863)

[Ein Heldenleben]

Well, I was positing (for the sake of argument, not because I think it's true) that the opinions/statements/claims regarding degrees of excellence in matters of art can be objective and ultimately 'true'/'correct'/'right'; and that with careful, extensive study one's critical judgements will more and more coincide with the judgements of others who have similarly studied and gained a wide knowledge of the subject. Is Legrand a very fine composer? Oh, indubitably. And if I feel after today's cursory acquaintance (I do also remember Noel Harrison's Windmills of Your Mind) Legrand is a composer to avoid, what does it say, objectively, about my taste?

As for Kant's 'we take pleasure in something because we judge it beautiful, rather than judging it beautiful because we find it pleasurable', I'm not sure that it is actually possible to be clear which comes first. Does he equate aesthetic judgements with judgements of taste? If so, I agree with Kant



The main benefit of having broad tastes is that broader tastes means a wider range of pleasurable things and therefore the main beneficiary is oneself.

I can think of lots of works of art that are thought of as masterpieces but that I either don’t like or don’t rate but I usually put that down to me and my prejudices . Examples include Don Quixote , Le Rouge et Le Noir, the works of Poussin , Fragonard, Watteau , Tennyson , Browning , Shelley , Byron , most Elizabethan drama, ….it’s a long list.

On the other hand the things I used to turn my nose up at include Dickens , Hardy , Mrs Gaskell. the Brontës (except WH ) , virtually all mediaeval literature in English (except Chaucer ) - now I rather enjoy them.

I can completely understand why people don’t like LeGrand’s music but not sure basing that opinion on one song is quite enough.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Ah, the Royal Naval College. You will know, I'm sure, that it also did (extremely convincing) duty for St Petersburg throughout Ken Russell's The Music Lovers. Richard Chamberlain, Glenda Jackson et al. strutting their stuff, and a great favourite in this household.

Yes well that part of Greenwich is associated with too many nights as a teenager in the Trafalgar and Cutty Sark….

[french frank]

.... however - "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question."

John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (1863)

Yep, you've quoted that one before

Context is all. I have narrow musical tastes, but that's mainly because music is not a principal interest. The reason I enjoyed Radio 3 when I first started listening was precisely because it introduced me to music new to me and was generally educational. It now seems sterile and uninteresting and I can't be bothered to search for the programmes that I feel would interest me. But I like investigating, experimenting and trying out new things on a somewhat wider range of subjects.

[french frank]

I can think of lots of works of art that are thought of as masterpieces but that I either don’t like or don’t rate but I usually put that down to me and my prejudices . Examples include Don Quixote , Le Rouge et Le Noir, the works of Poussin , Fragonard, Watteau , Tennyson , Browning , Shelley , Byron , most Elizabethan drama, ….it’s a long list.

Yes, that's an interesting point. Most of those works I would say I find mildly interesting but I wouldn't say I 'didn't rate' them or didn't like them. One aspect of a declared 'masterpiece' is its longevity, its continuance in the public domain. Those works indisputably fulfil that quality. They are still there, they can be and are read, looked at, studied and written about.

I can completely understand why people don’t like LeGrand’s music but not sure basing that opinion on one song is quite enough.

Well, my 'opinion' isn't a value judgement on the quality of the work. But cognitively, I categorise it with similar songs and styles of singing which I also don't like, and it would need to hold out the prospect that a wider knowledge would provide enjoyment for me to investigate further. When I think about it, I don't tend to make value judgements on such subjects anyway, though I'm irritatingly censorious on other matters.

[Master Jacques]

One aspect of a declared 'masterpiece' is its longevity, its continuance in the public domain.

You have a point. Though one generation's "masterpiece" is equally likely to be the next one's fallen meteorite. Some of the Spohr symphonies I was thinking about earlier were hailed as masterpieces, not least in London, as his presence on the border of old Novello vocal scores demonstrated. But in truth they hardly lasted a generation before disappearing without trace, due to being closely aligned with a spirit of the times which passed swiftly. In addition, they were superseded by even better works in the programmatic arena they opened up.

It's a salutary reason for avoiding this weasel word "masterpiece", if humanly possible, which it almost always is. Having said which, part of the joy of art lies in getting under the skin of other times and places, and trying to grasp exactly why our forbears thought that Chapman's Homer (to take Keat's famous subject in this line) would never be bettered. And sometimes artworks make unlikely returns to fashionable popularity: who would have thought that Handel opera would enjoy such a vibrant new lease of life? Yet now, at least a dozen of them are acclaimed "masterpieces" yet again!

Because we don't know better: we just know different. I wonder what future generations will make of Legrand's The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, which I - like many others of my generation - treasure beyond price. A work's value is not always in its longevity, but in the splash it makes in its time, to recalibrate individual lives.

[Ein Heldenleben]

You have a point. Though one generation's "masterpiece" is equally likely to be the next one's fallen meteorite. Some of the Spohr symphonies I was thinking about earlier were hailed as masterpieces, not least in London, as his presence on the border of old Novello vocal scores demonstrated. But in truth they hardly lasted a generation before disappearing without trace, due to being closely aligned with a spirit of the times which passed swiftly. In addition, they were superseded by even better works in the programmatic arena they opened up.

It's a salutary reason for avoiding this weasel word "masterpiece", if humanly possible, which it almost always is. Having said which, part of the joy of art lies in getting under the skin of other times and places, and trying to grasp exactly why our forbears thought that Chapman's Homer (to take Keat's famous subject in this line) would never be bettered. And sometimes artworks make unlikely returns to fashionable popularity: who would have thought that Handel opera would enjoy such a vibrant new lease of life? Yet now, at least a dozen of them are acclaimed "masterpieces" yet again!

Because we don't know better: we just know different. I wonder what future generations will make of Legrand's The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, which I - like many others of my generation - treasure beyond price. A work's value is not always in its longevity, but in the splash it makes in its time, to recalibrate individual lives.

Yes the word masterpiece is mightily abused and , of course , those works given the accolade fall in and out of favour . I wonder whether Handel’s return to favour is really based on a thorough musical appreciation or has more to do with more sympathetic carefully prepared performances and inventive “out there” productions like the Met Agrippina , Glyndebourne Guilio Cesare ? Not to mention voices of the quality of Di Donato, Connolly and Coote? Didn’t the Mozart Da Ponte operas fall out of favour in England till their revival in the thirties ? How many works have entered and never left the repertoire ? A few Wagner and Strauss operas , quite a bit of Verdi and Puccini and then works like Faust which seemed to have been consistently performed though I don’t think is in the same league. Going to see Jenufa tonight and in a couple of weeks . I suspect it’ll have empty seats despite being an excellent production of one of the greatest 20th century operas. In short collective taste whether aggregated over time or at a single point in time is not really the best judge.

As to Les Parapluies it was a red letter day when that came out on CD. If one of the tests of a “masterpiece “ is innovation it deserves it alone on that criterion . The first sung through musical in film (I think ) with everything that film can do working to a single end - direction , lighting, use of location , superb performances and above all LeGrand’s wonderful score. Like all film a team effort but with Demy and Legrand driving it all.

I did read in the paper though an account from a journalist who went to a premiere and the audience started laughing at the first bit of singing and didn’t stop for the whole film “ caviar to the general” indeed.

[Master Jacques]

I wonder whether Handel’s return to favour is really based on a thorough musical appreciation or has more to do with more sympathetic carefully prepared performances and inventive “out there” productions like the Met Agrippina , Glyndebourne Guilio Cesare ? Not to mention voices of the quality of Di Donato, Connolly and Coote?

Never mind yer Di Donatos, Cootes and Connollys: I believe the massive Handel revival can be traced to one, utterly outstanding production at ENO - Julius Caesar with Baker, Masterson, Bowman, Tomlinson, Della Jones and Sarah Walker. Conducted (it goes almost without saying) by Mackerras. Although the ground had been prepared by many of these singers by Handel Opera's productions in London, this one went round the world, and set a fashion which is still in vogue.

The moment where Janet Baker came down to the prompter's box, put her foot on it, and then sang the da capo of the 'stalking' hunting-horn aria pianissimo in her creamiest tones, will live forever in the memory.

[Master Jacques]

As to Les Parapluies it was a red letter day when that came out on CD. If one of the tests of a “masterpiece “ is innovation it deserves it alone on that criterion . The first sung through musical in film (I think ) with everything that film can do working to a single end - direction , lighting, use of location , superb performances and above all LeGrand’s wonderful score. Like all film a team effort but with Demy and Legrand driving it all.

I did read in the paper though an account from a journalist who went to a premiere and the audience started laughing at the first bit of singing and didn’t stop for the whole film “ caviar to the general” indeed.

If you liked the DVD, you'll find the Blu-ray something else again (especially when it comes to the wallpaper!) for visual smack and soundtrack quality.

My own theory is that Demy received the script, thought "what the heck can I do with this depressing pile of misery?" and then had the bright idea of asking Legrand to set the thing to music. The audience may have laughed, but actually that is a valid part of anyone's response. It laughs at itself - remember that scene in the garage washroom, where one of the mechanics sings "I can't stand opera. All that stupid singing". The whole thing seems so ludicrous, and then suddenly you find yourself with tears (the right kind) streaming down your face. My desert island film, for sure. I never tire of it.

[LMcD]

This thread led me to discover Dessay's duet with Camille Berthault of Les Don Juan, Dessay being a favourite performer of mine. After reading this post I tried a track of Elle et Lui. It led me to wonder what the connection is between extensive knowledge and personal taste. In other words, does knowing more 'refine or 'improve' your own taste?

I think I'd need to know more before attempting to answer your question.

[MickyD]

If you liked the DVD, you'll find the Blu-ray something else again (especially when it comes to the wallpaper!) for visual smack and soundtrack quality.

My own theory is that Demy received the script, thought "what the heck can I do with this depressing pile of misery?" and then had the bright idea of asking Legrand to set the thing to music. The audience may have laughed, but actually that is a valid part of anyone's response. It laughs at itself - remember that scene in the garage washroom, where one of the mechanics sings "I can't stand opera. All that stupid singing". The whole thing seems so ludicrous, and then suddenly you find yourself with tears (the right kind) streaming down your face. My desert island film, for sure. I never tire of it.

Me too, I find it very touching. But I think sung scripts do sound more ridiculous in your own language - for me, the French makes it sound very exotic but for my French husband, though a Legrand fan, he cannot help giggling when he hears them singing banal everyday conversation to music.

[Roger Webb]

.......But I think sung scripts do sound more ridiculous in your own language.......

Yes Mickey, and translations of opera. Is there anything more ridiculous than Puccini sung in English?! But Britten doesn't sound so(well not all of it!).

It would be interesting to know whether the 'Umbrellas of Cherbourg' that was performed in the West End was sung in French or English translation.