Article received on 3rd September 2009 Article accepted on October 2nd 2009 UDK 7.037.3:78] Varèse Е. Dragana Stojanović-Novičić1 University of Arts in Belgrade Faculty of Music – Department of Musicology WORK OF EDGARD VARÈSE AND ‘FUTURIST MUSIC’: AFFINITIES (AND DIFFERENCES)2 Abstract: The author discusses a relation between Edgard Varèse and Futurism in music. Varèse rejected to be treated as a part of the Futurist movement. He was rather sure that Futurist musicians just wanted to imitate nature; but we have to have in mind that his approach to musical Futurism was much more based on what he read in press than on his live contact(s) with projects of Futurist composers. Anyway, he was a close friend of Luigi Russolo who, although an amateur in music, should be regarded as the most prominent Futurist musician. Varèse gave a talk at the presentation of some of Russolo’s instruments at a concert in Paris in 1929. Key words: Edgard Varèse, Futurism, Luigi Russolo, intonarumori, rumorarmonio, Arte dei rumori, Ferruccio Busoni, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, Henry Cowell, Umberto Boccioni, machine. In order to understand the kinship between the Futurist movement, especially Futurist music production, and the opus of Edgard Varèse (1883–1965), as well as discrepancies in their artistic preoccupations, we need to outline some of the manifest postulates of Futurism. What was the meaning of being a Futurist com- 1 Author contact information: [email protected] 2 The research for this article was carried out as a part of the project World Chronotopes of Ser- bian Music, No. 147045D (2006-2010), supported by the Serbian Ministry of Science and Tech- nological Development. 50 Stojanović-Novičić, D.: Work Of Edgard Varèse And ‘Futurist Music’... (50-61) poser, i.e. an exponent of Futurist music? Besides the implied adherence to the movement, which is to say display and realization of an intention to participate in group activities,3 it meant primarily to write music which will incarnate the appointed (musical) principles (atonal music, microtonal music, aggressively charged music with sharp rhythmic curves, ‘machine’ music, fast tempo music etc.)4 and/or to compose works using the new musical instruments which were, under the general term intonarumori, invented by the proponents of Futurist aes- 3 The book Arte dei rumori by Luigi Russolo (1885–1947) contains a detailed list of the move- ment members, sorted in several artistic (poetry, painting, architecture, music, art of noises, intonarumori, synthetic theatre) and organizational groups (politics, propaganda, etc.). Inter- estingly enough, the only representative of music was Francesco Balilla Pratella (1880–1953), while Russolo was put in charge of the art of noises and, together with Ugo Piatti (1885–1953), of the instruments from the intonarumori group. The gesture almost suggests that the traditional music is clearly divided from the art of noises and the set of new instruments, as well as the exponents of the new art, the art of future. (Cf. Luigi Russolo, L’arte dei rumori, Milano, Edizione Futuriste di ‘Poesia’, 1916). Russolo presented Varèse with his book on 29th May 1929; the copy is kept in Edgard Varèse Collection, Paul Sacher Foundation, marked EV B 1006. The gift is ac- companied by an inscription: ‘To my dear and great friend Edgard Varèse, my soul still fi lled with the passionate enthusiasm aroused in me by his magnifi cent Amériques.’ The text of the inscription, written in Italian in the book itself, is quoted after the translation in: Olivia Mattis, ‘Futurism’, in: Olivia Mattis, Edgard Varèse and the Visual Arts, Ann Arbor, MI, UMI Dissertation Services, 1992, 62. 4 This music could be diverse in terms of genre classifi cation. For example, Pratella’s composi- tion La Guerra op. 32 (1912) was written for piano solo, but regarding the treatment of the music material, it strives towards the Futurist ideal. The opera L’aviatore Dro (op. 33, 1912–1914) by the same author, however, includes a range of Futurist instruments (rombatori [roarers], sibilatore [low whistler], scoppiatori [bursters], ululatori [howlers]); the music material of the opera, at least in those short segments available today (provided, of course, the segments are correctly inter- preted), also refl ects the Futurist endeavours. Also, if we disregard that manifest adherence of certain authors to the Futurist movement, we would have little reason not to include Bartók’s Allegro barbaro (1911) – written one year after Pratella created Manifesto dei musicisti futuristi his fi rst manifesto of musical Futurism – among Futurist works. Regarding that, we should note the exceptional affi nity of the composition Danza meccanica (1933) by Francesco Balilla Pratella and the foregoing Bartók’s work. Daniele Lombardi, one of the most prominent researchers of Futurist music is inclined to connect a very great deal of compositions with the Futurist ideas. For example, he puts Igor Stravinsky in a similar context: ‘Igor Stravinsky, whom the poet Francesco Cangiullo described as the most Futurist musician of all, in whom the Futurist theories seem to have been realized in brilliant fashion. And in this sense, Piano rag Music has lost none of its energy.’ (Daniele Lombardi, the booklet of futurisMUSIC, Piano Anthology 1 – Daniele Lombardi, col legno, 2000, WWE 1CD, 20076, LC 07989). It turns out that the works of Edgard Varèse belong to that wide circle of Futurism-coloured works as well. Sergei Diaghilev was very impressed by the intonarumori instruments. It is known that he spoke with Maurice Ravel and Stravinsky about whether they could include this set of instruments in their works. Although both of them showed considerable enthusiasm, the idea of using the new instruments in their opuses was not realized. Stravinsky could hear Russolo’s instruments at the Futurist concert in London in 1914. Ravel heard these instruments in 1921, at a concert in Paris. 51 New Sound 34, II/2009 thetics,5 be the foregoing structural characteristics prominent in those works or, on the contrary, completely absent. However, we must keep in mind that the so- called Futurist composers also wrote pieces that had no common ground with the aesthetics they belonged to.6 It is typical that Luigi Russolo,7 one of the most distinguished members of Futurism, wrote all his works for the intonarumori instruments;8 adaptations of Russolo’s works for conventional ensembles combined with the intonarumori in- struments were made by his brother Antonio Russolo.9 Although he did not dis- 5 This family of instruments was constructed, built and, to an extent, patented by Luigi Rus- solo and his assistant Ugo Piatti. 6 Among those works, we should mention the major part of the opus of Francesco Balilla Pratella, the composer whose works directly inspired Russolo to write his manifesto of Futur- ist music. One of Pratella’s best-known compositions, which practically shows no intention to considerably evoke the postulates of Futurist music (apart from an occasional atonal oasis in the musical tissue), is the string quartet Giallo pallido op. 39 (1920 or 1923). This music is in some elements reminiscent of applied music, which is not at all unusual in Pratella’s case; during his career, he dealt with fi lm music, among other things. 7 At the beginning of his career, Russolo was known as a painter. After the period of compos- ing for intonarumori instruments, Russolo went on to writing philosophical books, and later on he turned back to painting. 8 Combattimento nell’oasi (Skirmish at the Oasis, 1913), Risveglio di una cittŕ (The Awakening of a City, 1913/14), Convegno di automobile e aeroplani (Meeting of Automobiles and Airplanes, 1913/14) and others. 9 Antonio Russolo, to a certain degree, also belonged to the movement and wrote several compositions which are considered a refl ection of Futurist ideals. In his opus we can note a ‘bifurcation’, and the separate streams, under scrutiny, show no convincing unrelatedness: in Gavotta for piano, violin and violoncello (1914), a work of a (Middle European) Romantic concept, written during the ‘fi ery’ phase of the Futurist movement, nothing suggests that the author is interested in Futurist principles. Quite another matter is his Serenata for orchestra and intonarumori instruments (1921); this work leaves the impression that the author is basi- cally a Neo-classicist with a tinge of world-music, but wants to reach some pretty uncertain degree of ‘modernity’, hence fi nds the solution in incorporating the Futurist instruments. With their cumbersome and gigantic bursts in this work, it is as if they come from another musical environment, disturbing almost provincial serenity of the instrumental tissue. The original recording (i.e. the one dating back from the time of the work’s conception – 1921) is preserved; it is available on the CD edition Luigi Russolo – Francesco B. Pratella, Pionieri del Nuovo Suono in Musica, Musica Futurista & Futuro, © Fondazione Russolo Pratella, ef. er. P’97. An analogous situation we fi nd in Varèse’s case: there were opinions (which could surely be vehemently dis- puted) that the coexistence of acoustical and electronic part in Varèse’s work Déserts was done in an utterly unsatisfactory manner, that what was merged was unrelated and incompatible. Considering that some electronic implementations of the work’s recorded component were produced in Pierre Schaeffer’s studio for musique concrète, this composer emphasized that the complete fi asco of the premiere performance of Varèse’s work endangered