Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Tempo.
http://www.jstor.org
BogdanGieraczynski
Witold Lutoslawski in Interview
WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview 5
your First Symphony - a work that culminated
all your previous experience, after which you
embarked upon a new phase of creative exploration, a momentus work in every way was branded a 'formalist'piece and banned from
public performance in Poland. Why was that
infelicitous term so significant in relation to
such an asemantic art as music?
A: I never understood what it was supposed
to mean. In my opinion it was nothing but
typical 'artofficial'jargon, useful for persecuting
artists who retained some individuality, whose
creativity didn't conform to the 'socialist
realism' that was obligatory in Poland at that
time. But in any case the fact remains that my
Symphony was labelled 'formalist'and, as such,
was not performed in my own country for ten
years. After the last performance of the work at
the Polish National Philharmonic Hall in I949,
the minister of culture stormed into the
conductor's room and in front of a dozen people
announced that a composer like me ought to be
thrown under the wheels of a streetcar. It is
interesting that this was not meant as ajoke - he
was really furious! This story is quite true,
although nowadays it does sound anecdotal; it
is also an illustration of most artists'situation in
Stalinist Poland.
Q: A bit of background should be added here:
The campaign against formalism in art was of
Soviet origin, and it dominated all of Eastern
and Central Europe. It was a battle - to use the
official terminology of the time - against
'bourgeois influences' and 'artisticimperialism'.
Atonality, dissonance, serialism, amelodic
composition and the like were regarded as
excessively intellectual - that is, as reactionary
and formalist tendencies. Formalism,in the view
of the communist bureaucrats, was a synonym
for subversion. In those days it was a particularly
serious and dangerous accusation against an
artist, and it was not at all difficult to deserve it:
All one had to do was to follow the traditions
and progressive trends in European music!
Could you tell me what the sources of your
aesthetic, artistic and compositional inspiration
were in these days, or even earlier?
A: I don't suppose a composer ever lived who
did not worship some great artists in his youth.
Copying favorite masters in order to learn their
skill is a pastime not restricted to painters. In
my musical career the works of various
composers have served as models for me. The
Viennese classics, above all; Beethoven, as an
unequalled master of large-scale forms in
general; Haydn and Mozart as well. Brahms's
symphonies and concertos, on the other hand,
photo:MalcolmCrowthers
despite my sincere love for them, had a 'negatively creative' impact on me, and its polemical
reaction is evident in many of my works, such
as my Second Symphony or String Quartet,
which oppose Brahms's concept of large-scale
forms as a matter of principle.
Among the Romantics, it is Chopin's work
that moves me the most deeply, and for me his
music is an inexhaustible source of inspiration
for my composing imagination. Another master
whose work had a very constructive influence
on me is Albert Roussel. Even in my early
youth I was unsettled at the thought that the
richesof the Frenchsound-palettethat Debussy,
Ravel, and their successors created still hadn't
been fully exploited in large-scaleworks. And it
was Rousselwho, in his Third Symphony (1930),
managed at least partiallyto fulfil this ideal.
And I must not neglect to mention Bartok
and Stravinsky,whose music made an enormous
impression on me and, I am sure, on every
composer of my generation. All the various
inspirations,cults and even imitations have their
place in the formation of a composer's creative
stance. But the time comes when all the outside
influences undergo a process of elimination,
and there comes a crystallizationof what we call
the composer's
personality- that is, of course, if he
has one.
Apropos the precedingremarks,I considerthe
form of my Third Symphony (1983)is the result
WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview
WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview
after another. To use the metaphor - you took a
seed, as it were, from 20th-century music and
cultivated it in your own artistic soil. Since
1961, it has been possible to speak of Witold
Lutoslawski's musical tradition. Your compositionJeux Venitiens,using limited aleatoricism
(which, briefly, consists in loosening the
temporal relations among the sounds so that the
performers have a certain freedom as regards
the tempo and rhythm in some passages), was
the culmination of all the experience that
contributed to the formation of your style. What
was the origin of aleatoricism in your music?
A: In 1960 I happened to hear a radio broadcast ofJohn Cage's ConcertforPianoandOrchestra
(I958), and in a flash I realized what potential
this entirelynew - for me - method of composing
had. Of course, Cage's actual music, which I
had heard long before, didn't have very much
to do with it.
Cage's answer to the so-called total serialism
of the I950s was to create somethingin absolute
opposition to that doctrine: he countered it with
music as a product of chance. Hence the term,
aleatoricism. For me, this method has always
been completely alien. Nevertheless, that one
momentary encounter with Cage's music,
during the radio concert I mentioned, excited
my imagination. And of course a composer can
listen to music in two ways: he can passively
expose his receptory faculties to it, or he can,
WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview
WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview 9
you have never permitted the use of your music
in the ballet. As a composer you clearly imply
that music is the most asemantic of the arts, and
that any attempt to combine it with extramusical matters contradicts its fundamental
message...
A: I have always subscribed to an abstract
concept of music. The only unambiguous
message that music in itself can convey is a
musical one. Music is music! Of course, that is
not an adequate definition, since we know how
strongly music affects human emotions. What
do they mean? What is their nature?Must these
emotions be given 'extra' meanings?
Some people are inclined to interpret music
in an extra-musical way. The world of sound
alone is not rich enough for them, not substantial
enough; music alone cannot encompass their
idea of music. Less sensitive listeners feel alien
in the world of sound; their thoughts escape to a
realm of images or feelings that do not exist in a
given piece of music. This is a subjectivereaction
to music. But there are people of greatermusical
sensitivity - composers, for instance - who do
not have this anxiety reflex, who confront the
sounds directly. For them, the sounds are part
of such a rich various beauty that they have no
need to search for anything beyond the sounds
themselves.
Q: One of your characteristic traits is your
unwillingness to compromise in your creative
work, your expression of truth through your
music. Perhaps it was even because of this trait
that world recognition of your art came so late?
What does the concept 'truth' mean in relation
to such a non-semantic art as music?
A: The word 'truth' as it applies to a work of
art must not be confused with the common
understanding of the term. It would be easierto
clarify this concept in relation to the semantic
arts. But in music? What I understandby truth
in a piece of music is a genuine, honest expression
of what you have to convey to others. Loyalty
to yourself, to your own esthetics, to your own
aims... A piece of music is true when it reflectsa
personal, original artistic conviction without
regard for the consequences. You may wonder
whether this position is not utterly egocentric,
and whether society needs art created on the
basic of such principles. It is my deep conviction
that society needs only such art. A work based
on lies, on the abandonment of principles for
the sake of transitory, capricious aims like
pleasing the tastes of critics or the public, just to
get applause or fame or money - thoseare the
works that are not only unnecessary, but even
harmful. They are not the products of purely
artisticmotivation!
Q: When it comes to art, our times, I think,
are no different from past epochs. Then and
now, one thing never changes: The ethics of
artistic creativity. Remaining in accord with
inner truth - the first commandment and
fundamentalduty of an artist- is often rewarded
only later. Your musical life is a prime example
of that. To speak of Witold Lutoslawski as a
classic of contemporary music, as a revitalizer
of musical language, and as the creator of his
own distinctive style is not merely a courtesy on
the partof criticsandmusic lovers ofthe I98os...
A: Very highflown words! I don't give much
weight to those opinions, although I can't deny
that every composer dreams of becoming a
classic. The hardestthing is to see yourself, and
what you are doing, from the point of view of
others. So I can't judge whether, or how, my
music has established a style. There are certain
indications that this is so. Some of my younger
colleagues are quite open about the influence of
my music on their work, they 'follow in my
footsteps', and have even - in England, for
instance - formed groups that imitate my
compositional methods. But although this is all
very pleasant and gratifying for me, it may be
misleading. I do not draw any far-reaching
conclusions from any of this, and I do not feel it
is my business to do so. Whether or not the
endeavorsof decadesof my life have any degree
of permanenceis a question that only the future
can decide.
Q: In the days ofJohann SebastianBach, artists
treated their work as a skill and did not worry
especially about the morality or immortality of
what they created. It was the i9th century that
began to pose the question of the future of art,
because by then art was no longer produced
specifically for a given occasion and time, but
had become something great, a lofty, grandiose
mission. I hope you will forgive my asking
whether somewhere in the deepest recesses of
your soul you believe in the permanent and
lasting value of your art.
A: I neither believe nor disbelieve. All I can
say is that I know from experience that some of
my pieces, written decades ago, are still being
played. That is, performers and audiences find
some value in them. But this is not one of my
overwhelming concerns. What I am interested
in is using all the creativeideas and concepts that
I still have in me, and producting new works.
That is what I care about - not the question of
the Futureof my compositions.
Q: What does music mean to you?
A: That's a puzzling question... A simple
10 WitoldLutoslawskiin Interview
question - so simple that it's difficultto answer...
For me music is something of immeasurable
importance; it is a need as basic as water and air.
I cannot imagine life without music or, for the
last half-century, without composing... No, I
can't give you a full answer. It seems I am not
yet ready to have the last word.
toMr.
(I wouldlike to expressmy heartfeltgratitude
WitoldLutoslawskifortakingvaluabletimefromhis
busylife in orderto conversewith me andauthorize
this interview.I wouldalsolike to thankMs. Sherill
Howard-Pociecha
for her help in preparingthe
Englishversionof theinterview.- B.G.)
s te\