INTERVIEW NO.

1 WITH PIERRE HENRY

This interview and text are by Ios Smolders, and originally appeared in issue 44 of
Vital magazine, in 1995. This version has been slightly edited by Brian Duguid;
some quotes by Ios, Henry and Michel Chion have been altered to make them read
better in English.

For years the list of people who I wanted to interview was headed by
Pierre Henry. Together with Pierre Schaeffer, Henry was one of the
founding fathers of musique concrète. He was especially interesting to me
because after an initial close relationship with the "official teachings" of
musique concrète Henry chose his own path. Having left the Groupe de
Recherches Musicales (G.R.M.), Henry successfully set up his own studio
and pursued his own career. His latest release is L'Homme a le Camera,
based on the film by Dziga Vertov with the same title. For this interview
the questions were faxed to M. Henry. For his answers he set up a little sketch, his assistant
assuming the role of interviewer. This fake interview was recorded and the tape returned.

THE COMPOSER: PIERRE HENRY

After your musical training you started to investigate the nature of sounds. When was that
and why?
Why did I suddenly want to start to work with a new musical universe? This was at
practically the end of my formal musical studies. I have said it many times and I will
tell it again now: I started to listen to the world around me, outside and in my parents'
garden, inside the house where I had started my musical studies at the piano and
vocal scales. Well, all of it must have been due to my fondness for noises. I had
started my career as a percussionist quite early, beating on anything around me;
furniture, the tables, the drums. I arrived at the moment of creating a noise, and went
on to create something entirely new, an unheard sound that was much more complex
and extraordinary. At the beginning I wanted very much to create something strange.

Henry loved the theatrical presentation of music, admiring Wagner for example. He also became an
ardent admirer of the ballet of Maurice Bejart. With Bejart's group Henry travelled the world as
sound engineer. He also composed many works for ballet. La Messe Pour Le Temps Present became
a very popular piece of music that was scored for ballet. He expressed this fondness for dramatic
theatre in compositions, staged in large halls, that had the atmosphere of (pagan?) masses, lasting
at least three hours without a break.
In the 60s you worked with the rock group Spooky Tooth on Ceremony. Why was that?
The reason for this was much more commercial than artistic. The great success of La
Messe Pour Le Temps Present and Les Jerks Electroniques with Michel Colombier
gave my editor at Philips the idea that I should work together with an English group
to make a thematic album, based on the idea of the Mass. When this started, I didn't
know these people at all, and I accepted for a number of reasons which would not
interest me now, but to me this enterprise was totally without any result for years. I
am planning a new work with a rock group, but I can't say anything about that now.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 1 of 15

Henry went to London to supervise the recordings. He brought the tapes home and began the
editing process. "He didn't like the heavy basses and the voice drowned in reverb, so he composed a
sort of counterpart Ceremony II. This work is a myriad of little additional movements based on
concrete sounds, beaten tam-tams, carillons, forming little pagan rites for an imaginary savage
religion." (Michel Chion). Perhaps that shows how Henry looks at pop music; a pagan ritual.

Were you interested in the popular side of electronic music?

To me that is not a big deal, because my music has never been truly electronic. It's
music for tape, an electro-acoustic music. It leaves me a bit cold. A creator does not
search for immediate success.
But do you look around you at what happens with electronics in popular music?
Well, actually, I don't have the time to have a pressing curiosity in that area. I hold
tight to my own formulae and my system. Moreover, I think this music becomes
more and more polluted ... this music is absolutely disgraceful on the radio, at the
cinema, in adverts. And I see that at the moment there is one sound. Not sounds. One
single sound, everywhere. It's a sound that has been standardised. It's a sound that is
produced digitally, and it all comes down to the same sound, which is a painful thing
at this end of the century.
What was the effect on you, when you scored a number 1 hit single in the French charts?
But I haven't been number one in the hit parade! That is a big misunderstanding! The
record was released in a category of classical music, and I was judged by the
standards of classical music, not of pop or rock music. In the same list, 2nd and 3rd,
were the Concerto de Aranjuez, The Four Seasons, Albinoni. So, all in all, the young
people were right to buy La Messe Pour Le Temps Present and Le Voyage, La Porte
Et Un Soupir. But it was a list of classical music.
You did attract large audiences at your live concerts. Did you feel like a rock star?
I have met with the appreciation of a large public that was interested in my concerts.
I believe that everywhere where I have performed interpretations of my work, I
received an immediate response from the audience. Whereas, with the release of
records, the reactions of the audience are quite remote. Now it is more interesting for
the audience, because the records are copied, and less interesting for the composer.
But overall, the music gets everywhere which is basically a good thing. But don't
forget that as well as discs, there is also radio. I have renewed my acquaintance with
the radio waves recently.
I think it must have been an awkward experience to suddenly see masses of people crazed
over your music.
I was not very much embarrassed by this because I was always occupied by my
music. And by its continuity.
Could one say that your reputation from the 70s is what has brought you into the Mantra
label's catalogue?
I don't think so, because Mantra has a catalogue that features music that differs from
mine, even though that music too is outside of the norm. The label believes in my
music. No, there's nothing to be astonished about. These people happen to like my
music. They're nice people and they want to release my work. I'm quite content with
this label.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 2 of 15

BASIS: MUSIC / SOUND
Using non-musical sounds inside a traditionally musical context is one thing. In the 50s (and 60s)
we saw electronic composers work with electronic sounds inside a classical musical structure. Do
new sounds require, or even lead to new compositional structures? Michel Chion, in his book "L'Art
des Sons Fixés" advocates a compositional approach that is different from the classical (notated)
manner. Not (only) work according to a preconceived structure and sound-palette but adopting the
approach that the material induces as well. That is, improvising in the studio. Working by trial and
error.
How do you set to work? Do you work like the classical composer, writing things down and
then executing them (collect sound material, equipment, record, and edit)?
Like you say ... these new structures, the way you say it, that's like putting the horse
behind the cart. One of course has to compose with a direction, a lucid idea. One has
to have in mind a certain construction, a form. But that form differs according to the
theme, to the character of the work and of course according to the material. A work
like Le Voyage [a piece based almost entirely on feedback - IS] has a form, another
like La Porte another one. And another work that requires a voice or chanting ...
every work has its form, but this form is there in the art of creation. I think that from
the beginning of my work I have been more original in my form than in my material.
Pierre Schaeffer wanted to educate composers (and as a result of that, of course, audiences,
too) to find a new way of experiencing music, a sort of "pure listening experience" somehow
even coming close to the theories of John Cage. It has become clear, through the years, that
you do not see things that way. Although you use sounds 'clean' (with a very clear relationship
and association to its source), you use it in such a manner (by encapsulating it in a structure,
or combining it with other sounds) that it becomes disassociated from its source, or perhaps
becomes an icon, a metaphor. Sometimes this leads towards a solemn, and theatrical
atmosphere. What is the function of a sound in your composition? Is it a metaphor?
No, but as you already say in your words it is certain ... my work is so varied that
there are works where sounds are exposed with their tempered notes like La Noire à
Soixanteand others which are truly life; the development of sound and its
multiplication, its transformation, its mutation, I think that is the better word for it,
like in Le Livre de Morts Egyptien. There are sometimes no laws, basically. My
sounds are sometimes ideograms. The sounds need to disclose an idea, a symbol ... I
often very much like a psychological approach in my work, I want it to be a
psychological action, with a dramatic or poetic construction or association of timbre
or, in relation to painting, of colour. Sounds are everywhere. They do not have to
come from a library, a museum. The grand richness of a sound palette basically
determines the atmosphere. At the moment I try to manufacture a certain 'tablature de
serie'. I won't talk about it. I almost become a late serialist. After a big vehement
expressive period, post-romantic, I think that now I'm going into a period of pure
ideas. It all reminds me very much of my work of the 50s.
Can you tell something about what sound is, and/or what it means in your work?
It is more a phrase. Contemporary digital sound is very realistic, but also very
impersonal, it's not a word but an atom, almost virtual. The words together become
phrases. These phrases are combined by me.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 3 of 15

MATERIAL: THEMES
The atmosphere and themes of your work have changed through the years. When we listen to
your early work it is noticeable that humour plays a part. This is hardly ever present in the
work (that I know) of the last 20 years. I also notice that in the early days you regarded
yourself as a man of modern times, who wants to break with the history of music, become a
composer with modern means. This unruly, stubborn attitude later on seems less emphatically
present. What do think of that yourself? Do you still think one should destroy all music?
Well, the things that one says at the age of 20 are, of course, not the same as those
one would say at the age of 60 ... I believe that every day one destroys their past. My
earlier works are not literally destroyed of course, but when I listen to one after the
other they are non-existent now. I don't regard myself as more or less revolutionary
now than in the beginning, but now I compose works that are less spontaneous, and
more reflective on the things that I see around me, comprising issues of philosophy
and metaphysics, radiating a certain serenity which is, I think, a natural thing for an
artist. After years of hard work one arrives at a sort of peace and one tries to restrain
one's language.
Death is an important issue in your work. I think of Le Voyage, Le Livre des Morts Egyptien
and Le Livre des Morts Thibetain. Why are you so fascinated with the theme?
That's very difficult to say. I think it is the emotional part of my self. I have had
many relations who have died. I think that the loss of a friend or a loved one invoke
emotions and these emotions are also the emotions that come from tragedies or
stories. Death is a great subject for a work. On the other hand I prefer birth, but to
me, artistically, I like very much the notion of death, more than birth. I believe that
one departs from the end and works towards the beginning.

THE COMPOSER AND THE FIELD OF ELECTROACOUSTIC COMPOSITION

In 1964 you made a prophecy for a newspaper. Fifty years later there would be less other
music, but more electronic music. We are now 30 years on the way to 2014. Indeed electronics
play an important part in the production of music of these days. What do you think of the
developments?
I have said that these developments were an inflation of the imagination musically
and soundwise because ... I believe that the dressing up of electronics by CD-ROM
and all the communications techniques, I think that this adventure will turn back at
the music made with a twisted voice ... that's a pity because, for example, people
with a fantastic creative mind will be submerged in showbiz. They will be
overloaded with synthesizers. I now have strong confidence that we will reach a
musical life.
You are a film enthusiast. Brigitte Massin once said that in your studio you sometimes write
down your composition like a filmscript. Does the notion of "acousmatism" [the musical
equivalent of cinematography - Ed.] appeal to you?
I can't see the relation between film and the acousmatic. I think that cinema is a way
of imagining life, the rhythm, whereas the acousmatic is a way of catching it. One
should not confuse a cinema with the film that is projected.
When I listen to contemporary electronic and electroacoustic music I see that to many
composers one aspect is very important: the use of technology and the meaning it has to the
composer. Of course the management of the machine/instrument that one plays is quite

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 4 of 15

important. And composers of electronic or electroacoustic music have the disadvantage of
having to learn to play new (and improved?) instruments every month. When listening to
many contemporary compositions I hear a composer who is still impressed by his machinery.
As a result we hear beautiful sounds that only function as a catalogue of the capabilities of the
equipment used. Creative aesthetic statement seems to have become of minor importance. I
see that in this regard you stand out from the crowd of composers. Why is it that in your
music this pre-occupation with machinery in most cases is absent? And (having asked you
about your relation with sound): what is your attitude towards your machinery?
That's very simple. I have always had a battle with the machines; not for aesthetic
reasons but for reasons of quality. At the beginning of music concrète we worked
with discs, but the result of copying a piece of sound was quite poor. So I have
always struggled to have the sounds retain their transparency. Now I have conquered
these problems, thanks to digital techniques. It is possible to make a perfect copy, but
I am worried about the machines doing the work that I should be doing. This is the
case with many of the logical catalogues that are available to which one can
subscribe. The computer works instead of you. The computer has decided. I think
that we now live in a dangerous age because the composer should certainly not work
with a tap, that he can open or close. That's a very bad development.
I try to work without any specific machinery and when I find a machine ... I find a
machine interesting when I have twisted it without knowing. That's same thing like
in painting. I love it when the objects have been led away from their function. When
working with a filter, and this filter turns a sound into something entirely new and
unexpected, that interests me more because I am less connected to the style of the
machine and its function than to the source of the sound. The source of a sound
interests me because that's the adventure of mind's world. There are particular sounds
that interest me because they have been cut in certain fashion, because they have a
certain roughness, because perhaps there are these stories that have not been entirely
excised. An analogy: Raymond Roussel wrote his books with mirrored images with
coded words and I use coded sounds and shallow sounds and sounds that tell a story.
And these latter sounds to me are The Sound.
The second aspect is a direct consequence of the first one: your music is able to express a
clear-cut statement, just because you concentrate on what you want to express. You make
quite dramatic statements. Is that caused by a passion for stage presentations?
It is not easy. It is a passion for the dramaturgy and also for the psychological
problems of this age, the suspense and the curiosity as to where society will go.
Music to me is also finding a solution. I am very much interested by the language of
sounds and more still to make with the sounds a personal theatre where there are
actors who meet and then fight or embrace.
Is it an emotion?
It's an emotion, but ... it's me who steers them and they stem from myself. They do
not necessarily have to be emotional. They exist.
The electronic/electroacoustic composer is often a lonely man, sitting behind his desk with his
tools. In your case, most of the photographs I have seen picture you in a live situation. You did
some large scale live performances. Were these the consequence of your popularity in the 60s
and 70s? Did you attract a large and broad audience?
Well, I wanted an audience that was adapted to a certain condition. I wanted a
concert that was made theatrical by decoration, light, glass, sounds. Certainly also by

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 5 of 15

 the spatialisation of the sounds that were made audible. These concerts were given in
boxing venues, churches and concert halls. I certainly had a long period of well-
attended concerts but now it is different because the audience now has the radio and
the discs.
Nowadays many people hear music at home. Electronic music has certainly drawn back inside
the cocoon of the living room. Many of your works have been designed for stage performance.
How do you feel about this situation? Why is stage performance so important to you?
The concert is an artistic performance. A concert work must be re-recorded and re-
edited for home listening. When I make a version for home, this version is aimed at a
close listening, but it must be more profound and richer. Both situations and both
versions are interesting. Practically all my important works have been released on
disc but only the future will tell what will happen in the area of concerts.

CONTEXT
Henry was almost the opposite of Pierre Schaeffer, the godfather of musique concrète. Schaeffer
was a thinker, a theoretician, and not a musician. Schaeffer was interested in concrete sounds from a
theoretical point of view. Henry on the other hand was a trained composer, and most of all
audacious, ready to set about things. Concrete sounds were interesting to him as a means for
composing music. The two Frenchmen had in common their curiosity and a maniacal search for
order. But whereas Schaeffer got stuck in ordering his thoughts about sound and instrumentation, in
search for a totally experience of music, Henry in 1958 left the Paris institute to set up his private
studio, where he could work with his sounds without being bothered by bureaucratic rules and
regulations.

HISTORY
Pierre Henry was born in Paris in 1927. He never went to school; his teachers came to his house.
Being of feeble health he had to do gymnastic excercises and perhaps that is the reason that he
developed a strong feeling for rhythm. In 1944 he studied at the conservatory; piano and percussion
with Passeronne, composition with Nadia Boulanger and harmony with Olivier Messiaen. Henry is
an ardent film lover and visits the cinema two or three times a week. "Le Ballet Mecanique" by
Fernand Leger is a great inspiration because of the direct link between sound and vision. In 1949 he
received a commission to write music for a television documentary called "Seeing the Invisible".
He then started working with the 'disque souple', the writable record. The tape recorder was not yet
available in a practical model. He by then had already made acquaintance with Pierre Schaeffer and
with the music of Luigi Russolo, John Cage, Walter Ruttmann etc. When Schaeffer asked Henry,
because of his skills as a percussionist and at the piano, to assist him with the Symphonie pour un
Homme Seul in 1950, the career as a composer of musique concrète or, better, electroacoustic music
has taken a lift-off.
The early electroacoustic compositions, dating from 1950, show Henry dabbling about with sounds
recorded with the disque souple recorder, much in the same vein as Schaeffer. The structure,
however, is much more complicated. Whereas Schaeffer keeps to simple classical and rhythmical
structures, Henry shows much more insight into complex composition.
In 1964 Henry produced his Jerks Electronique with a 'song' called Psyche Rock under the
pseudonym Yper Sound. It sold some 150,000 copies. It made Henry instantly famous, not only
with connoisseurs of avant garde art but also with the man in the street. A few years ago its echo
was to be heard in the background of a house music record. Anyway, it enabled Henry to make a
good deal with the Philips label. Although always following his own path, Henry has never been a

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 6 of 15

solitary closed man. His friendship with dancer Maurice Bejart has taken him all over the world.
Henry has produced music for films and advertisements.
Another difference between Schaeffer (and the disciples of his theories) and Henry was that Henry
did not follow the Husserlian ideas about music. To Henry sound has never been interesting as a
phenomenon as such. That's why he denies the existence of noise; there is only sound. The sound
that is there for music. To Henry, emotion, he calls it nature, is to be captured in music. That's a
fundamental step over the line that Schaeffer had drawn.
Towards the end of the 70s the public attention died down, but Henry continued to develop his
music. Through the years Henry's work has gradually changed from spikey, and sometimes even
anarchistic (certainly for the well-behaved musical society of the 50s) towards themes that are more
sincere and more reflective. Perhaps it is because of these themes, not fit for a society that
welcomes the energy and ideas of punk-rock and anarchy, that Henry has remained more in the
background. In 1989 however, the WDR broadcast a radio-play in three episodes, each lasting 180
minutes, on Proust's "A La Recherche...". In 1990 a new work was released: Le Livre des Morts
Egyptien. Henry has been invited to perform the work on several occasions around the world. Let us
listen to Henry's music from a cool distance.

RECORDINGS
Henry's works have in the past been released on vinyl by Philips, all of which have been long
deleted. Much to my regret because what I did know of his work I have been able to purchase at
fleamarkets. But sound quality was poor of course. Philips only rereleased the Variations pour Une
Porte et Un Soupir on CD a couple of years ago. Now French label Mantra has rereleased a series
of works by Henry. I was amazed to see this because the Mantra catalogue for the most part features
New Age, Krautrock and hippy music. Henry however doesn't seem to be worried by this marketing
anomaly. So why should we? The quality of the releases is excellent.

Les Années 50 (3CD)

This trio surveys the early works of Henry when he still worked with Pierre Schaeffer. As with
many creative people the early work in hindsight reveals the core of the later work. The core of
Henry's work are the piano (snares) and percussion. They are abundantly present on these three
discs. The later solemnity of the work of Henry is completely absent in these works. Humour plays
a part (Vocalises), and we hear comments on jazz music (Tabou Clairon). Now and again there is a
wildness and freakiness that Nurse With Wound could only dream of (the hilariousKesquidi,
something like a Marx Bros film on tape).

Messe de Liverpool / Pierres Reflechies

A time warp and arriving in 1967 brings us to Liverpool, with its monstrous concrete cathedral.
Henry had been asked to compose music for the inaugurational mass. Henry by that time already
wore the aura of being a composer with a deep affection for public performances of a mass-like
character. Messe de Liverpool is structured as a classical Catholic mass. Starting with a Kyrie,
moving on with Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and finishing with Communion. The work consists of
recitation of the traditional texts in a way that is definitely Buddhist. These voices are supported by
traditional musical instruments that are traditionally played at first but after some ten minutes they
are played in a typically Henry-esque fashion: plucking and scratching the snares.Pierres
Reflechies, composed in 1982, bears all the characteristics of the contemporary Henry: ostinatos of
a certain number of instruments that are placed, superimposed over each other in thousands of
combinations that differ only slightly. This description makes one think of minimal music. But this

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 7 of 15

is much more anarchistic, more undisciplined. Here the ideograms that Henry speaks of in the
interview are applied. Some parts reminded me very much of the Cristal-Memoires radio-play that
he composed for the German radio (which is to my opinion, next to theApocalypse is the best he
ever did). In this composition Proust's work is translated in sound, which of course has all to do
with ideogrammes and synaesthesia. Pierres Reflechies is dedicated to the late Pierre Schaeffer.

Mouvement, Rhythme, Etude

This work is dedicated to a close friend of Henry: Maurice Bejart, the famous dancer. Henry has
composed numerous works for ballet, which were staged by the dancers of Bejart. In the early days
Henry even accompanied the dance group all over the world. This work is exactly what the title
says: it's a study of movement and rhythm. Starting of with very simple beats that meet with the
reversed sound of scraped metal wires. Track 2 is a play for blowing balloons and a person saying:
'pssh' and 'psst'. Talking about humour. Track 3 is instrumental and quite acoustic whereas track 4 is
entirely electronic. And that's how it continues. The whole things consists of 21 etudes for a ballet
dancer.

L'Apocalypse de Jean (2CD)

This is Henry's masterpiece. Actually there is nothing much to say about the composition when one
decides not to dissect the work in exegesis. The apocalypse, spooky already in the literary form, is
performed in a fashion that makes the hair on your back stand up. Henry's translation of the
different scenes, using no doubt the ideograms, is more than perfect and the narration that
accompanies the auditive scenery brings shivers down your spine. When your French is below
average I advise you to read along with the music in your own language. Try to find a Bible
somewhere. John's apocalypse inspired Clive Barker too, you know.

Le Livre Des Morts Eqyptien

Death is an important theme in Henry's work. The Egytian book of the Dead therefore is an ideal
theme for Henry to work on. The ideograms that are essential in this composition are magnificently
worked out. The course that the sounds take is quite dramatic and theatrical. The introduction is
awe-inspiring. Henry follows in the subsequent scenes quite exactly the course that the dead person
will go when on his/her trip towards the realm of the dead. The associations with large pyramids
and ancient Egypt are but one layer in this 'spectacle'.

L'Homme A La Camera
Based on the film by Dziga Vertov. Here again Henry's love for the filmic genre is shown. Actually
this work should not be listened to without seeing the images. The titles give a clue about the
scenery but that's hardly enough. Indeed, we can hear Henry go back to what he calls the pure
composition that he favoured in his early works. In this soundtrack the large and dramatic
movements are absent. The music is as machine-like as the film is. It tries to abstract the concrete.

This interview was made possible thanks to Jerome Noetinger of Metamkine. For
those who would like to read more on the life of Pierre Henry, Michel Chion wrote a
biography in 1980, published by Fayard in Paris, and available from Metamkine, 13
rue de la Drague, 38600 Fontaine, France.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 8 of 15

 INTERVIEW NO. 2 WITH PIERRE HENRY

photo by S. Ouzounoff (Radio France)

Interview by Iara Lee for Modulations

As you could tell by the name, music concrete is a French concoction- one of its
pioneers is composer Pierre Henry. Along with Pierre Schaeffer, Henry took sounds and
manipulated, re-arranged and recontextualized them. In one brilliant piece, Henry took a
squeaky door and a person sighing and turned these into saxophones, bells, laughter,
gongs, wind gushes and other unidentifiable noises. After creating his early
revolutionary work with Shaeffer in a state sponsored studio, Henry went to work on his
own studio in the late '50's, further exploring this medium, which continues even now.
Today, Henry's work with sound manipulation is what we usually think of as sampling.
His works have included the very moving "Voile d'Orphee" (1953) (where sound
sources become meditative orchestras and choirs), the above mentioned "Variations
pour une Porte et un Soupir" (1963), "Le Voyage" (1961-63, based on the Tibetan Book
of the Dead) and more recently "A La Recherche..." (a radio play based on a Proust
work) and "Le Livre des Morts Egyptien" (1990). His work has also included assorted
collaborations with poets, dancers, film makers and rock bands (Ceremony with Spooky
Tooth, 1968), not to mention his foray into popular music with Yper Sound ("Psyche
Rock", 1964).

Iara Lee conducted this interview for her film Modulations in September 1997 at
Henry's home/studio in Paris.

Q: What time or period do you consider music concrete to be rooted in?

Concrete music is not a music of today nor of yesterday. It comes from a long
way off. Many composers, artists, writers, painters imagined that one day
music would transform itself into a vast opera of new sounds, unprecedented
sounds, sounds that have never been heard of.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 9 of 15

 As a child, my head was filled with new sounds, sounds that couldn't be
interpreted. And that is the peculiarity of concrete music. It resides in the fact
that it doesn't come from interpretation nor performance. Thus imagination is
the core of concrete music. And this imagination is linked to a technique, to a
way of doing. So the first would be that concrete music is a music that is done
differently. It's the fabrication of music and not only fabrication but also its
conception and its composition.

Q: What do you mean here by "conception"?

I refer to conception because it's unwritten music. It is thought and imagined

and is engraved in the memory. It's a music of memory. Usually when a
musician leaves out a fragment, a chord, he leaves it out from his score. In
concrete music, we can't leave anything out because it's always there. So the
second posit is to isolate a sound, keep it, record it and than proceed to make
manipulations, developments, imitation of old pieces, and synthetic exploration
of the nature.

Because concrete music comes from nothing it has a high range of possibilities.
It's a spontaneous creation and at the same time it doesn't play, therefore it
keeps on being. Fortunately recording still exists. Now it's through digital
recording, before it was on a tape recorder and before that on a soft record.
Concrete music was born in Pierre Schaeffer's studio. Pierre Schaeffer had the
idea to produce sounds by means of different tools, by splitting the attack of a
sound, prolonging the sound by reverberation, repetition, a sort of alchemy that
doesn't exist in orchestral music.

Q: What was the initial reaction to this music?

There weren't many reactions because it simply didn't exist. When we started it
in 1948, 50 years ago, there weren't any researchers or inventors. We were
isolated. Many instruments could be considered electric. There were
sophisticated organs. Electricity was fashionable. The introduction of electric
guitars and other electronic instruments was certainly interesting for us. It
encouraged us to use high-speakers in order to create other sounds that came
from nowhere. Thus concrete music is a music that was invented based on
nothing. It's a dust of sound, it's a coma of sound, it's almost nothing. In a piece
entitled "Spiral," the sound came from some sort of amplified respiration that
repeated itself endlessly, this continuity was of a very interesting choice in the
sense that one could see that it could be performed and developed with the
wrist and with fingers. This music cannot be played with instruments but with
electronic tools.

Q: Did you consider this music to be a stance against any particular school of
musical thought that came before it?

There weren't any reactions against any school. We came from a musical cell.
Before, I was a normal music composer. I wrote for instruments. I studied at
the academy of music with Olivier Messiaen. I played percussion. The classical
approach to music led me to connect this new music to tradition. So there

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 10 of 15

 wasn't any opposition to atonal music nor to serial music.

The idea was to find a new form of music, a new writing style instead of just
imitating and being stuck in a trend. We essentially wanted to bring out a new
music. It had nothing to do with the other kind of music. It was meant to be a
revolution in connection with the state of being a musician, to the musician's
function and to listening. We are different from other musicians but we are not
opposed to any music.

Henri Michaux had lent me a record of Japanese music, sacred music and I
started doing something with it. It was an interesting way to begin, more
interesting than a flute. It had a different blow that we could play off. We could
make variations out of it. Variation is the principle of concrete music. A cell
becomes another and then there are combinations, associations, and many
possibilities of inter-mixing, of polyphony. Current music is extremely
polyphonic. It's like a grand orchestra but it's done track by track.

Q: How did the sounds that you create literally come about?

It was a day by day, in the 50s an ongoing invention, but it was also a search
for brainwaves. This music was still not codified, standardized equipment such
as the synthetics, before synthesizers.

All current processes were discovered at that time. The anarchy was to search
for these processes but it wasn't a revolution. A composer is inevitably
revolutionary. But it's not necessarily revolutionary in his writing, in the way
he composes. He is a revolutionary in the mind meaning he has his own
esthetic. Beethoven was a revolutionary compared to those that preceded him.

I wrote about destroying music in order to alter little by little the listening of
music. But contrary to groups of painters or writers, the musician is like a
monk. He has to stay in his studio and work everyday by constantly trying out,
listening, starting all over a piece. Musicians don't have time to be
revolutionary.

Concrete music leads to authenticity more than the usual kind of music. It's like
a photographer who makes try outs, does Polaroid, spotting. Music proceeds
from photography, cinema. We set up planes, cut out the editing but also the
grain of sound like the grain of photography.

It's a music that is connected to photography, to cinema, a little to literature,

and less to music because the music lies within you, you don't learn it whereas
you have to learn the rest. A story needs to be told with this type of music. It
needs an action of gestures, a choreography of sounds, movements. Concrete
music is the music of movements, of rhythm, of beat. The body needs to be
linked to a musical sentence different from the one of other kind of music. This
other music is thought and abstract whereas ours is concrete. It is concrete
because it is related to the body, to the surrounding, to objects, to nature, to
emotions.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 11 of 15

 There is an emotion. I'm currently composing a new piece in which I'm trying
to bring forth an emotion that will then be experienced by a public. There is
also a communication. It's a music of communication.

Q: How important is rhythm to you?

I'm interested by all kinds of rhythm, irrational rhythm and arithmetic...

syncopation, jazz, rhythm, beats. There is always a beat in my music. The beat
is what I find more interesting than something asymmetrical. Everything has to
be natural for me. It's a music that comes from nature, there are rhythms in
nature that can be qualified of elementary, surprising, aleatory, that come and
go. I don't like codified music.

Q: So do you see a connection between your work and techno?

We've been recently talking a lot about techno music, in reference to the mass
of the present that sort of initiated not so much rhythmic music than music of
the rhythm. It's a music that must be drawn from technique and be connected to
what I'm trying to do that is inspiration, to the body, some sort of cerebral
trans., though I think it's unfortunate that it is for the moment too much
connected to the place it is listened to, to high volume listening where bass is
powerful. It's a music far too much connected to physiological reactions and
not enough to mental reaction. It has no sensitivity, it's not surprising enough
and it lacks poetry. I feel music should keep its share of poetry.

Q: Do you think it should also have a soul to it?

I don't think music shouldn't have a soul. Music should consider the past as
much as the future. And there are still many things to discover in the future. So
we should begin illustrating this future with futurist projections such as the
apocalypse, by emphasizing changes, and by pointing out the differences in
each centuries, and that there is an evolution. A technical music is of no interest
for me.

Q: Does it bother you to use digital equipment for your work nowadays?

No, it doesn't disturb me. It helps me keep and preserve the sound. Concrete
music was precarious, very difficult because sounds were almost immediately
damaged.

There are many things we can do with digital sound such as uncovering the
original sound. All sounds become original sounds, the sound of the beginning.
That's interesting but there is a betrayal in the sense that digital sound is not as
good as analogical sound. It has less strength, less impact, less presence.
Therefore it's necessary to mix analog, that is, old equipment with new
equipment. We can't get rid of old equipment. We still need to have the future
connected to the past. And that's what life is, this mixture slightly archeological
of the laws of the past with the foresight of the future.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 12 of 15

 Q: Is it possible to create music that expresses inner thoughts and expressions?

I did that in the '50's while I was working with records and making
improvisations. But I used tape recorders. I did concerts where I would
improvise and perform using artificial waves. I had transmitters set on my skull
so that we could hear what came directly out of my skull. Instinct served
music. The music was intuitive, instinctive.

Q: Do you find it necessary to be open to chance in your work?

It's as important as fate. Without fate, without any deviation... drifting is

necessary once in a while. I often play everything together and then listen.
Sometimes a strange phenomenon occurs.

We need to catch it. But that which is intuitive, instinctive, imaginary comes
also from fate because fate is nature. It's always the same. There's thought and
fate, the control of fate by thought, and the simulation of thought by
fate.

Q: Did you see composers such as Russolo as kindered spirits?

I can't really say that I felt close to Italian futurists. I thought of them as fascists
and not as artists. Of course it was glorifying for them to say we could make
noise, but there always has been noise, even classical composers would add a
cannon shot in their work. Noise becomes a musical note when altered.

Real noise is very interesting. A drama should be told with noise, and then it
can be broadcast. I enjoy noise in film, I dislike music in film. I like to
conceive a score like a film, with noises, voices.

Q: So music concrete stood alone?

We were isolated. There was the bet. There was John Cage whom I didn't
know. And Stockhausen was much younger. It all started distinctively and then
similarities were discovered. I've also performed prepared piano different from
John Cage's performance. Stockhausen's research was somehow slightly
similar to mine. And then there was the splitting. There was a need for new
music. New music meant new sounds, new ears.

Q: How do you see changes in recording technology as having an effect on music?

Has it been a positive effect?

During the evolution of technique, engineers wanted to bring out finished

products, standardize manufactured products. What was interesting in
electroacoustic music, was to search, to find new ways, new possibilities. The
automatism of finding didn't bring forth much possible aspiration. Though
gradually this music evolved and became quite convenient. It has become a
homemade music, the music of the new studios, the music of films. Now we
can't imagine any other kind of music for those kind of work. So we play
classical music, but current music is constantly invented over and over again, it

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 13 of 15

 has become like the sound of the sea, constantly renewed, but always the same.
That's why I fear that sound will be the same everywhere, on the radio, in
films.

And it's easy now for youngsters. They can get for only a few thousand francs,
a box, an amp, something that makes sounds. There is no longer a formal
sensitivity, meaning that music comes out. I prefer music that stays inside of
us, that allows us to dream, to imagine and even perhaps to love. The music I'm
referring to is the one of communication. It's a language more than an art. Now
it's no longer a language. It's some sort of tam-tam constantly present. I'm not
convinced by current music, the way it is done. But there are some
possibilities. It's form is similar to the one of beginning of music in the Middle
Age in France where it was not only just a form but it was also very boring. I
don't particularly like cave music. I prefer vocal music starting with Bel canto
and then with Melesande and Pelleas. Music of yesterday was linear and white.
When Renoir spoke of white he meant with no colors. And music of today has
no colors. That's why I try to add a little spatial effect and colors in my music.

Q: What do you mean by 'space' then?

Speaking of space means that there is already space in reactions, in music. I

want music to be profound. Even in mono. At first, I was against stereo. I didn't
like it. I like mono sound, the sound of a dimension and that in this dimension
there is a past, a present, that it moves. I didn't like the panoramic aspect of
sound. I like the sound to be enlarged and elaborate like under a microscope.
The first concerts I did were in mono. First the sound came through one track.
Then there were tape recorders with two tracks, stereo, which had inevitably a
center. There was still mono in stereo. I thought of it as being too artificial. I
then imagined concerts using a lot of mono, which created movements using
specific technical tools, or gestures that would attract sound to a high speaker.
Mono sound was moving and I found it more interesting then to create
movements with stereo sounds. Gradually I stuck to the cinematography point
of view, where sounds had various dimension, were very focused that is with a
sound here, on the top on the bottom but stereo couldn't be used to give spatial
effect to a concert room. I refer more in terms of specialization than of stereo.
My next creative piece for the radio will be on 16 tracks. Those 16 tracks will
each go directly in a speaker.

Q: How has editing figured into your work?

It was an option because sound existed with length. With length on a record or
a soundtrack, we couldn't always cut off the attack but we could place it at the
end or reverse part of the sound. Cutting off the attack... well many film
makers have done it way before us. Optical tools allow us to cut off the attack
of sounds. Many film effect were done that way. It's not an invention. Invention
is recording a sound and playing with it. That's invention. Cutting off the attack
is part of the 1001 possibilities of manipulation.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 14 of 15

 Q: Is it a technique that interests you?

That's a harmonic question. It's a question of thickness of sound. It's not very
interesting. At the beginning Pierre Schaeffer cut off the attack of the piano and
it gave sound. What's important is to have many possibilities of manipulation
in order to give substance to the game, the game of sounds.

Sounds must play for we don't play with instruments, we play with soundtrack,
with editing, filtering, reverberation. These games must use all kind of
possibilities. It's about transformation, the magic of transformation of sounds is
important. I've always thought of music as a way to let things come out. Many
sounds, and also many ideas. It's an animation, an animation of sound talk.

Q: Do you find that your work with Sheaffer has been something of an
exploration?

"Symphony for a Lonely Man" corresponds to my first step toward concrete

music. Before that, I did some try outs with equipment, with instrument of
sound search. When I met with Sheaffer again, we composed this piece. It's not
a research. The search had already been done. It was a continuity. We wanted it
to be like a spokesman, with an aesthetic approach. And the aestheticism was a
symphony of voices, instruments with noise. "Symphony for a Lonely Man"
was composed by two lonely men.

Two interviews with Pierre Henry pg. 15 of 15