What unifies the 1st movement. of Debussy's 'La Mer'?

Hi,

I'm studying Debussy's La Mer from the perspective of a composer. I have recently noticed (from studying the score with CD) that each movement, but especially the 1st, is not in any of the usual large-scale forms.

It seems to me that what's important are musical phrases or 'sections' lasting 20 bars or more, and within those smaller phrases associated with the intended gesturing and movement. But from section to section and phrase to phrase, there seems to be very little that binds them together; yet the piece seems completely coherent. Apart from some pedal bass, there is often little that connects one section to the next.

Hence - what is it that keeps the movement unified? Why does it sound coherent. Is it that it might not be that coherent and that once Debussy follows one masterful section with another that the listener 'buys into' the piece and after a while is sounds coherent, or are there compositional mechanisms I can't spot that he's using to make sure the piece actually works as a whole?

I ask this as an aspiring composer currently sketching a piece with various sections that are not _that_ connected and that do not suggest a traditional large-form piece. But I'm afraid to trust my work to date to eventually lead to a coherent orchestral piece, yet need it to eventually be unified as a single piece - whether through (hopefully) robust writing and/or through intended mechanisms that help bind the piece (even though this will be difficult as the piece will start off quite textural but eventually become more melodic).

Any 'overview' pointers to Debussy's La Mer that might reveal binding mechanisms will be greatly appreciated.

Kind regards,

Kevin Nolan,

Dublin, Ireland.

I've never even heard of this piece is there a link or something I can read or hear on it?

I've listened to "La Mer" before, and found it to be a bunch of... blah, to me. I didn't really pay attention because I couldn't really find anything like a hook or central theme (either that or the volume was too low in the car... :P ) Anyway, I really can't help you. Sorry. :(

Any useful answers to my query would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Kevin.

Given the complete lack of response, I have found this forum to be bitterly disappointing - a great pity.

However, for those who might be interested, I've studied the 1st movement of La Mer intensely and this is what I've come up with so far:

Bars 1-30 - Introduction

Bars 31-82 - 1st Major Section built on one single motif

Bars 83-121 - 2nd Major section built on one single contrasting motif

Bars 122-141 - Reprise, using rhythm of 1st motif.

...so there are just two ideas in the movement, and each is developed using appropriate texture, rhythmic figurations and harmonies appropriate to Debussy. Of course the devil is in the detail - ah well I have the rest of my life to try to figure that out.

None the less, I see the broad 'pace' of ideas explored in the piece now and can see that about 8 minutes is needed to do justice to just two ideas.

My piece has 6 (related) ideas and I was aiming for it to be 7 minutes long. I could sense it wasn't going to work. I don't know enough of the details of Debussy's compositional technique to mimic it but I can sense that my piece will draw on impressionistic idioms fused with my Celtic roots. So this analysis has given me a sense of what I can achieve in 7 minutes so it was a fruitful exercise. In essence I need to either pare back the scope of my piece or start burning the midnight oil to write well enough to bind six ideas todether in 7 or 8 minutes!

Kevin.

Sorry that nobody gave you an answer to your query, but I think that plenty of our members are either not musicologists or just don't want to take the time to find the answer. I'm sure that not everyone is like this, but things DO get missed.

(It's also a mildly small forum... :P )

I would like to check out a score to La Mer, but I haven't had time lately. I identify with this style of writing greatly. I think the cohesive factor comes from the atmosphere it projects, as it's not so much about pitch and rhythm as texture and style, perhaps.

I'll try to study the score a bit this weekend and give you my thoughts. However, do keep in mind that this is Young Composers forum, and likely a lot of the composers here will be a bit on the younger side, and probably won't have the most developed sense of cohesiveness in music.

Given the complete lack of response, I have found this forum to be bitterly disappointing - a great pity.

I'm sorry you feel this forum is disappointing, but as has been mentionned, it IS a "young" composers' forum, and not a conference of musicologists specializing in the analysis of impressionist symphonic music.

All I can tell you is that if La Mer really fascinates you, then it is clearly worth your while to study it and come to your own conclusions about what creates its cohesiveness.

Or, a novel idea, you COULD look up one of the dozens of in-depth books written on Debussy and find the chapters on that particular work where much of it is explained, and some even in Debussy's own words.

A hint as to what you might look for, if you decide to go it alone: examine the modes that Debussy uses in La Mer. They are a large part of the key to the cohesiveness of that particular work (and many, if not most, of his mature works).

Knolan, listen to this analysis of the piece. I listened to this a while ago and I remember thinking it was interesting. I think a lot of what they said made sense to me.

I do want to say something about your analysis - and I hope I am not getting over my head - but it seems to me that the first section of the piece that you call "introduction" is not necessarily and introduction in the traditional sense. I look at it more like Debussy is developing a sound like he is laying a foundation for what is to come next. I think when the first minimal motif comes in that what is happening is he is building upon that foundation; like he is laying another layer.

BBC - Radio 3 - Discovering Music Archive

Also, to you guys who either say they have not heard La Mer or that they did not think much of it, you have no idea what you are missing. La Mer is a very innovative and beautiful piece of music. I really think it is a very important work in music history. It is different than a lot fo music that came before it in that it does not rely heavily on a melody or any major motif. Now, that is about all I want to say before I get into the deep end and start saying stuff that is beyond me.

You guys have just got to give it another chance. So, I uploaded the first movement. It is my favorite. I love the second as well. I might get around to uploading the other two later.

Free file hosting by Savefile.com

Dear Colleagues,

Thanks a million for your replies.

I appreciate it that it looks like I'm in musicologist mode here; but the question was posted with composition of a new piece in mind. Inadvertently, I found my own piece being planned in discrete sections that must however bind together. Hence in looking for mechanisms to make sure it is unified, La Mer came to mind. But although I'm no spring chicken, I am relatively new to orchestral composing and it does explicitly say on the welcome page of this web site that it is for new composers of all ages. Hence I felt it justified to post my question. I also felt that any pointers derived would be of benefit to all reading the forum.

I do not believe, by the way, that analysis of works is in the realm of musicology. Analysis of works occurs for many reasons, most especially by composers to understand the masters and their masterpieces and of course by conductors. Musicology is far more rooted in the 'science' in music (using the word science in a broad context); and my question does not venture into that territory whatsoever. My queries are straight forward, good and old fashioned analysis for very musical and compositional reasons. And, having searched exhaustively, I have found that good analyses of Debussy's music are rare. There simply aren't many good sources of analysis of either Debussy's or Ravel's music.

(As an aside - if anyone could provide a pointer to a harmonic analysis of Ravel's Daphnis and Chloe 3rd suite, I'd be very grateful!!)

I agree wholeheartedly with proposal above that what unifies Debussy's first movement of La Mer is it's atmosphere more so than any form or structure. Interestingly I recently played it to my sister who is not into classical music; and the movement did not seem unified to her at all. But she still 'bought into it' because the writing was just so good, and because it creates such a wonderful atmosphere. That puts it up to me in my own piece of course - I have to write well or my piece is going to turn out absolutely terrible :-(

Thanks for your posts - they are genuinely appreciated and I take back whole heartedly my disheartened feelings earlier in the year regarding this forum. Your time and expertise is genuinely appreciated.

Cheers,

Kevin.

I was always under the impression that Debussy built up the whole first movement of La Mer from two small cells found in the opening oboe motif and cor anglais/trumpet solo...

I was always under the impression that Debussy built up the whole first movement of La Mer from two small cells found in the opening oboe motif and cor anglais/trumpet solo...

I'm just going to call me friend "standing Brittanica" to check on this. Hang on!

:w00t::toothygrin::w00t::toothygrin:

This will seem like a very vague reply and it has been a long time since I have heard this piece but.

Debussy was a master of modulating/changing without a harmonic bridge. I think he generally achieves this because his style was so reliant on colours. It is as if the listener goes through a gate from one scene to the next. The colours in the piece simply allow the listener to sail along and thus they don't feel shocked to suddenly find themselves at a new destination. it is as if Debussy takes the listener on a magic carpet ride through a place of whimsical fantasy or something. But really, these are just my general thoughts on some of his writing and it has been a LONG time since I have heard the piece. Ok, so essentially what I am saying is working with long periods of somewhat static and coloristic harmonies and textures lend themselves well to sudden transitions because it is almost as if it is just one giant chord progression that moves slowly. Does that make any sense?