Talk:Requiem (Duruflé)

message: Professor of the History of the Church at the University of Oxford Diarmaid MacCulloch's recent 1,200-page doorstop "Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years" describes this work as actually having been commissioned and composed earlier, during the État Français period by Durufle, which fact was "conveniently shrouded in obscurity" after the end of the war. The work was actually commissioned by the Nazi collaborationist Vichy government, and the publisher was a supporter of Petain. (Nevertheless, MacCulloch describes it as "one of the most beautiful works of modern Catholic liturgical music.")  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.1.47.98 (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Man, this was bugging me so I took a look at the text of Libera Me and the requiem mass. Although Libera Me does include the words 'Dies irae', it's a interpretation of the responsory 'Libera Me' - take a look at this page at free choral music.--Gypsydave5 (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background and History of Composition 

message: It exists in three orchestrations: one for organ alone, one for organ with string orchestra, and one for organ and full orchestra.
In the main Durufle page, it says the following:
''
    * Version with Organ (1948)
    * Version with Orchestra (1950)
    * Version with small Orchestra (1961)''
Which one is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperOctave (talk • contribs) 20:30, December 5, 2006
:The Requiem (Duruflé) article is correct: all three versions contain an organ part, which is very difficult indeed in each case. —Cor anglais 16 22:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  But 1950 for the version with orchestra is nonsense, isn't it? The Requiem was composed in 1947, and if I am not mistaken, the orchestral version is the original one. --FordPrefect42 14:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Versions 

message: Is the structure presented really correct? I have checked CDs available, and the structure seems rather to be 1-Introit, 2-Kyrie, 3-Domnie Jesu Christe, 4-Sanctus, 5-Pie Jesu, 6-Agnus Dei, 7-Lux aeterna, 8-Libera me, 9-In Paradisum. That is, 3,4 and 7 is not correct in this text? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.211.134.33 (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the structure presented is correct. Domine Jesu Christe is the appointed Offertory text for the Roman rite Requiem mass; the Sanctus includes the Benedictus (in some mass settings, the Benedictus appears as its own movement); and Lux aeterna is the appointed Communion text for the Roman rite Requiem mass. However, Duruflé does not label all of the movements of his Requiem with the generally accepted terms (i.e., as they are referred to in the Liber usualis); he used the incipits from the text instead in the movements you specified. Perhaps the incipits should be noted in the movement list as well? —Cor anglais 16 23:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure 

message: I heard this piece performed by the USC Choir and Thornton Symphony last night, and I cannot figure out why Durufle would end such a masterful piece with a dominant 9 chord.  Does anyone have any idea?
The overall harmonic content of the piece is extremely modal, especially in reference to Gregorian chant mode systems and contrapuntal structure.  But the dominant 9 chord at the end of the piece seems to emerge from nowhere.  And in all places, the very last note of the piece!  It is a beautiful coloristic ending, but it seemed unprepared.
-Kyle Malkin
You have answered your own question:  Durufle did not conclude REQUIEM with the major/minor Diatonic (dominant 9) chord; his harmonic arena embraced modes as employed by Palestrina and Renaissance polyphonists.  
Durufle was a mystic, and the final chord is penultimate; in that, on earth, we have a glimpse of Life Eternal, and our 'eternity' is incomplete.  You say "it seemed unprepared" rather than "unresolved".  (Durufle believed in the perfection of Eternity and strove for perfection in his compositional craft.) 
One curiosity, the final chord of REQUIEM has, in it's center area 4 consecutive whole steps (e-f#-g#-a#, as represented by fa-so-la-ti).  The spaces between those tones, the 3 whole steps could be said to represent a Trinitarian idea, intended by Durufle as a suggestion the body, at death, returns to God, or to perfection.  In this instance the symbol is surrounded by tones of the Harmonic Series that occurs in Nature.  Writing a final chord and leaving listeners with heightened expectation seems an appropriate, lovely gift and a natural musical conclusion for Durufle's REQUIEM.
Jean Thiel, DMA Hailbale (talk) 00:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harmonic Content 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Requiem (Duruflé). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130106034821/http://www.stetson.edu/music/concert-choir/choirCDinfo.php to http://www.stetson.edu/music/concert-choir/choirCDinfo.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:07, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As the term variations has a specific meaning in music, I wouldn't use it instead of "various" or "different". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:01, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, thanks. Jmar67 (talk) 12:51, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variations 

message: The section mentions baritone & mezzo solos; it places the mezzo solo as in the Pie Jesu in the narrative, but not the baritone solos. I suggest the solos should be included in the list of movements, as is common. Iirc, the baritone has two solos, the Hostias, and one other brief interpolation — I can't remember where (I should, I sang the solo years ago ;-). Alas, I don't have the score handy. I'll check the ref for the list, or see if I can dig up the score, and update if possible. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 19:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Travelling, no score at hand. I think that at least the short interpolation is not necessarily marked by the composer as solo, so hesitate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've checked the source & made the change, also reviewed the score on Youtube. Duruflé apparently later indicated a preference for the solos to be sung by the choir, and it is often performed that way. It's always been a solo in the performances I've sung in. More to the point, the score says solo. But see also my next comment. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

text: The solist information and other useful explanation was already in the article, but commented out Why? Anyone know? Nothing here on the Talk page that I noticed. I'll check the history, tho that can be laborious. If I can't find a good reason for its removal (or non-addition), I'l uncomment it and redact it a bit. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 21:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, a lot was going on a while ago, and I don't remember exactly why what. One possible reason was no reference, but the score can be used as a reference. - The main critic back then is not active, so be bold ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks—I just saw it was you commented out that para. The overall edit you made was good IMO, reducing considerable verbal clutter and POV. I will restore the commented text but pare it down a bit. Thanks again for your helpful comments! --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 21:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure and scoring — solos? 

message: There is a performance on YouTube with the score displayed in synch, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRzPi0CA1rg.  As the score is not PD, this is a great resource for anyone editing this article or researching the subject. I am tempted to add an external link to it. I know WP deprecates links to YouTube, since YT posts are unreviewed and often evanescent, but this one looks good, and stable (3.5 years, 385K views). Anyway, I've posted the link here in case the external link is reverted ;-( --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead. If you are sure that the upload is properly licensed, add it please, say "per talk" in the edit summary. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

text: ps: The fact that the score is not PD is unfortunately an indicator that the licensing may be not adequate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The performances (VA for each movement) are licensed, but no mention of the score (a distinction I'm sensitive to as a composer & perfromer myself!). I'll see if I can contact the poster. However, even if the use of the score is unlicensed, I don't see that WP should object to the link (no upload to WP incolved). If you know of a policy on this, please let me know; it's an important issue for me. 
I would really like to put the link in; besides the synch'd score, the poster's comments include much useful background history, unfortunately unsourced, so it may be unreviewed OR or lifted verbatim from elsewhere. Obviously, I can't quote the poster's comments or even paraphrase him as a source, given the lack of references. But maybe I can google snippets of his text & find HIS source(s)! --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 21:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Hah! I found the source of the YouTube comments, and they are indeed lifted verbatim from an online article by David A. McCarthy, at https://www.allmusic.com/composition/requiem-for-orchestra-organ-chorus-for-organ-chorus-for-small-ensemble-organ-chorus-op-9-3-versions-mc0002363699. The latter article is a very useful chunk of history & discussion of the structure; I believe Allmusic is a moderately reliable source. CAVEAT: the first para of McCarthy's article is incorrect or at least incomplete re the commissioning of the work by the Vichy régime vs commission from Durand, see Frazier in the article sources, so it had better be taken with some grains of NaCl. I will keep it in mind for the future (no time right now). I do think this article deserves to be expanded--one source says the Requiem has earned more royalties than any other piece of French Choral Music, iirc. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link to performance with score