As Henle’s Ravel year is being organised under the heading “Ravel and Friends”, Claude Debussy is no doubt one of the most important composers with whom Maurice Ravel maintained personal contact, though their relationship was not unclouded. So, we’ve asked the French musicologist Denis Herlin, one of the world’s top Debussy specialists, about some aspects of this interesting, yet also complex association.
left: Claude Debussy, right: Maurice Ravel
Peter Jost (PJ): Numerous musicians and composers became acquainted at the Paris Conservatoire, the music education centre in France. By the time Ravel was admitted to the Conservatoire in 1889, Debussy had long since left. When and where did Debussy and Ravel actually meet in person?
Denis Herlin (DH): Debussy and Ravel got to know each other in 
early 1901 through Raoul Bardac (son of Emma Bardac, who was to become Debussy’s second wife in 1908). At the time, Debussy was giving Raoul composition lessons. On this occasion, Debussy commissioned both Bardac and Ravel, together with Lucien Garban, another friend of Ravel’s, to arrange the orchestral work Nocturnes for two pianos. We do not know where they first met, but we do know that Debussy presented Ravel with an exemplar of the Nocturnes orchestral score in April 1901.
Debussy’s autograph dedication in the Nocturnes full score: à Maurice Ravel, en réelle sympathie. Claude Debussy. Avril 1901.
PJ: Can you say that at that time Ravel unreservedly admired Debussy, who was a good 12 years older? What exactly did Ravel appreciate about Debussy’s music?
DH: Ravel always deeply admired Debussy’s music, especially Pelléas et Mélisande, but above all the Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune. In October 1931, he confided to a journalist that it was “his dearest wish to be able to die in the soft cradle of the tender and sensual embrace of this unique miracle in all music, which is the Prélude”. D’un cahier d’esquisses for piano was one of his favourite pieces. He appreciated Debussy’s economical use of musical material, the refined precision of his writing and the resulting magic of its sound.
PJ: In reviews of Ravel’s early works, such as the overture to Shéhérazade or his F-major string quartet, he is often categorised as being a “Debussyite”, that is, as belonging to Debussy’s “school” – he was also accused of imitating Debussy. Do we know what the older composer himself thought of these early Ravel works?
DH: Debussy was enthusiastic about the young Ravel’s works, especially the Jeux d’eau, an exemplar of which Ravel had given him as a “warm and admiring homage”. In return, Debussy dedicated Pour le piano to him “as a tribute to the Jeux d’eau”. He was particularly interested in Ravel’s quartet, as it undoubtedly reminded him of his youth, when he himself had dared to tackle this difficult form. In March 1904, before the première, Debussy wrote Ravel that his quartet should not be played more quietly, but perhaps just to tone the viola down a bit. He concluded with the words: “Don’t touch anything and everything will be fine.”
Title page of the first edition of Ravel’s string quartet (1905)
PJ: After years of friendly interaction, personal relations between Debussy and Ravel broke down around 1906/07. The press had discussed the primacy of ideas and innovations in the piano works of both composers. But did other reasons also perhaps play a role?
The music critic and translator Pierre Lalo (1866–1943) was the son of the composer Édouard Lalo.
DH: The rift between Debussy and Ravel was triggered by a letter from Ravel to the critic Pierre Lalo in February 1906, in which he pointed out that he was the first to introduce a rather special pianistic writing style, the invention of which Lalo had attributed to Debussy. He added that despite his passionate admiration for Pour le piano, he believed that these pieces offered nothing truly new from a purely pianistic point of view. Lalo published the letter without Ravel’s consent in April 1907, leading to a rift between the two composers. Two months before this unfortunate episode, Debussy had already expressed reservations about Ravel’s Histoires naturelles (except for “Le Cygne”). He considered Ravel to be “extremely talented”, but a “conjurer, or rather a charming fakir”. On the other hand, there is no documentation, however, about what Debussy thought of Miroirs or Gaspard de la nuit. As Romain Rolland reported in May 1907, Ravel was distressed by the rift and Debussy’s intense dislike of his music, combined undoubtedly with a certain jealousy.
PJ: What is known about their relations after the rift?
DH: Both respected but avoided each other. What Debussy thought of Ravel’s new works is not known. Ravel, however, continued to appreciate Debussy’s music, as he accepted two further commissions besides the aforementioned arrangement of the Nocturnes for two pianos (Ravel reworked the parts by Bardac and Garban in 1908): the arrangement of the Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune for four-hand piano in 1909 and the orchestration of the piano pieces Sarabande and Danse in 1922. He also took on the premiere of Debussy’s D’un cahier d’esquisses in 1910 and dedicated his Sonate pour violon et violoncelle to Debussy’s memory.
Ravel’s arrangement of Debussy’s Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune for four-hand piano, first page of the galley proof with Ravel’s corrections (New York, The Morgan Library & Museum)
PJ: Early on, both composers were associated with each other under the dubious label of “Impressionism” – which still continues to have an effect on the general public today. From our present perspective, what are the biggest differences between Debussy and Ravel in terms of compositional technique and aesthetics?
DH: That’s a delicate question needing a more detailed explanation. To understand how their aesthetics differ, we have to go back to what Ravel reveals in his interviews. He repeatedly reaffirms what he owes to Fauré, Chabrier and Satie. Debussy, for his part, acknowledges no other musical heritage except, in the last two decades of his life, that of Couperin and Rameau. Beyond a shared love of Edgar Allan Poe’s works, their literary tastes are also different: Debussy remains attached to the Symbolist literature of the 1890s, even if his curiosity extends far beyond it, as shown by his interest in English writers; Ravel is more eclectic in his choices and more modern, drawn to Colette, Jules Renard or Franc-Nohain. Ultimately, Ravel remains so committed to adhering to musical forms that he describes himself as “Mozartian”. And on several occasions he criticises Debussy’s “lack of architectural creativity”, even adding that it is impossible to understand how the Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune is constructed. With Debussy, the musical structure, from which the form emerges, is more organic. In his compositional process, Debussy endeavours to remove anything revealing a visible form, as shown by his sketches when he deletes certain sequences. Finally, the duplication so characteristic of his style allows him to expand the sound space and thus evade development.
PJ: Thank you very much for this interview.