Despite being keen on Messiaen's soundworld I've never really had the urge to go for Saint François - as it's categorised as a dramatic work I would feel as if I would have to immerse myself in the whole thing unlike certain other large scale compositions of his where you need listen to only part of it at a time (Vingt Regards, for example), but as it weighs in at over four hours I might find it a bit of a struggle. The apparent lack of 'action' and its length is also why I've baulked at investigating the opera Harmonie der Welt (based on the work of the astronomer Johannes Kepler) by Hindemith, who is nevertheless one of my favourite composers.

The Parsifal comparison is interesting, but is Messiaen's music multifaceted enough to push the story along in the way that Wagner's manages to do, especially as I gather that there is far less vocal content in Saint François?

 

It's funny you should mention feeling compelled to immerse yourself in the whole thing. When I finished it my first thought was that I might have enjoyed it more had I listened to each of its three acts as separate works rather than as a whole piece. It's a lot to take in at once over the course of ~4hrs, but its acts--being basically written as tableaus and not following any central action/story/plot--would, it seems to me, work just as well separately. I'm sure many would be quick to point out the leitmotifs that tie the work together--and, yes, they're plentiful and unmissable--but such things are probably better at creating a sense of sonic unity as a correlative of dramatic unity, of which François lacks. Still, I also listened to all of Messiaen's longer works--including Vingt Regards and catalogue d'oiseaux as wholes and didn't struggle much. I also have Harmonie der Welt but have put off investing the time into it as well.

The problem with François, even in comparison to Parisifal, is that there's simply no story TO push along! The problem certainly isn't with Messiaen's music not being multi-faceted enough, its plenty multi-faceted, but rather with there just being nothing to push, dramatically speaking. If anything, Messiaen's music is mostly just pushing itself along. One might could argue that in François there are underlying themes that are being developed even as the dramatic action is at a standstill, but then I guess it's a question of how much can one be engaged in the advancement of abstraction when the flesh-and-blood representation seems so lifeless.

The thing with Parisifal is that Wagner knew he was dealing with this dichotomy between the world of the "living," of flesh-and-blood men-and-women, desire, and all the suffering that came along with it; VS the realm of symbols, ideas, and ideals, which could necrotize when it became too disconnected from the world of the living. So Parsifal (the man) becomes the mediator between those worlds, and the drama is, essentially, in how he redeems the power of the grail as symbols while traversing the temptations of Klingsor, and becoming sympathetic with the suffering that world entails. I know Messiaen was a deeply spiritual believer, but one could argue that the world of François is precisely the caution that Wagner speaks of in Parisifal when the realm of symbols have become too disconnected from the world of the living. Not to say there's NO life in François; I'd say the scene with the leper, the first with the angel, and, in its own way, the sermon to the birds have those elements, and even the scenes without action have plenty of sonically appealing qualities.

 

Thanks for the response - it made for good reading and an interesting commentary on the work's obviously singular nature.

 

When Yvonne Loriod (Messian's widow) was asked about if "Saint François" was too long, she replied: 'Long?... Oh, no, it's not long at all!. It's so generous'...

The plot is quite simple, indeed, but also complex, at the same time. It's not a biography of Saint Francis, but rather an insight into the soul of a man, on the verge of reaching Saintliness.

Messiaen himself wrote the libretto, and the final result is really fascinating, though it's a long journey of more than four hours, and actually it resembles more an Oratory than your average Romantic opera, due to the lack of conventional drama. Then again, conventional operatic drama was never the goal of Messiaen. He was not trying to write just another Romantic opera, already in the 1980s.

I watched "Saint François d'Assise" live in Madrid, a few years ago. Total time for the performance, including intermissions, was well over five hours.

My feeling that the opera is indeed too long (notwithstanding Madame Loriod's opinion) was reinforced by the live experience. I think that cutting the sixth scene: Le Prêche aux oiseaux, would be a sensible move. Not for the quality, this is an amazing piece of music, a wonderful feat and a worthy example of Messiaen's claim that he worked "on the complex, not on the complicated"; but it stands rather separated from the other scenes.

The end of the opera is great:

CHOEUR
Autre est l'éclat de la lune, autre est l'éclat du soleil,
Alléluia ! Autres sont les corps terrestres, autres sont
les corps célestes, Alléluia !
Même, une étoile diffère en éclat d'une autre étoile !
Ainsi en va-t-il de la résurrection des morts, Alléluia !
Alléluia !
De la douleur, de la faiblesse, et de l'ignominie : il
ressuscite, il ressuscite, il ressuscite de la Force, de la
Gloire, de la Joie !!!

In a gleaming C major, and in a seemingly endless chord on "Joie", accompanied by the trumpets... I just love it!.

 

^ I definitely agree it resembles an oratorio more than an opera, and we agree that it's a very fine ending. I couldn't in good consciousness cut Le Prêche aux oiseaux though, which I'd rank as one of the opera's finest moments. At least, I prefer it overall to the first and final two scenes. To shorten it, I'd probably recommend just cutting bits and pieces from each section. For one thing, I don't think all of the "lone orchestra -> unaccompanied singing" was necessary, and I think in some parts Messiaen could've sped up the tempo a bit, or created shorter/faster vocal lines. No need to have everyone singing as if they're in a permanent trance.

 

I figured I better revisit this massive work while I'm on a Messiaen binge. I'm enjoying and appreciating this beautiful music much more this time around.

 

What are the opinions of TC on this piece? Masterpiece? Abject failure? Something in the middle?

Glorious music. Very beautiful. No, it’s not particularly dramatic, and it is long, but a masterpiece nonetheless.