"Among the major composers — and a major Twentieth Century composer is what this punctilious Frenchman is now belatedly thought to be — Albert Roussel is unique."

...a major Twentieth Century composer is what this punctilious Frenchman is now belatedly thought to be.... Yes, that about sums it up. Recognition is coming late, and hasn't yet spread throughout the musical community; but the qualities of a major composer are there.

"On the one hand, he upheld and developed the tradition o French symphonic writing, passed from Franck to d'Indy, although his abrasive final style is far removed in its attitudes from their works. On the other hand, he belonged to the succession of French pictorial composers stretching back to the 17th-century harpsichordists, with his ability to translate visual and verbal imagery into precise musical terms."

So, Roussel continued and extended longstanding traditions in French music. How did his fit into his own era?

"He shared some of the assumptions of composers of the interwar period in his move towards more concise, more abstract forms. Yet he did not follow the Gallic trend toward a more popular idiom."

By keeping his distance from the musical trends of his time undoubtedly hindered the acceptance of Roussel's music. Still, contemporary composers appreciated his fine human qualities. Darius Milhaud wrote to Poulenc: "Give my regards to Roussel. I'm glad you see him often; he is so nice, so sensitive, and so understanding."

But what of his musical influence on other composers?

"He was admired by such diverse composers as Satie, Poulenc, Prokofiev and Martinu, yet his direct influence has been slight. As his style was essentially an eclectic one, based on a personal manipulation of traditioanl elements, it did not lend itself to further development."

Roussel was, perhaps, a musical loner; yet isn't genius ultimately always alone?

It was Roussel's ability to create a modern and personal symphonic idiom on essentially traditional foundations that is the foundation of his place in history. And if, as Faure's biographer Coeuroy says, innovation within the traditional framework is a "typically French proceeding", then one can find in the music of Roussel the sanest and most deep-rooted traditions of French art.

Despite Deane's opinions of Roussel as a musical loner, he has not been without influence on the composers of this century. For example, through his teaching Roussel had a positive influence on many students including Satie, Vares, Martinu and Martinon. Notice that this list contains musicians of wildly different styles — which demonstrates forcibly how Roussel helped his students find their own styles, rather than forcing his own methods upon them. And that is the essence of real teaching.

Furthermore, Roussel has been an example for many composers. Paul LaFlem wrote music with much the same feel as Roussel's. Poulenc considered him one of the three main formative influences on his music — and indeed, in works such as the Divertissement, Roussel presaged much of the direction of Les Six with his brevity, rhythmic vigor and use of harmony. Poulenc honored this precursor in his Sextuor (for the same instrumentation as the Divertissement) by labelling the second movement — you guessed it — "Divertissement".

And just as Saint-Saens' Third Symphony inspired the first major wave of French symphonies, the huge success of Roussel's Third Symphony of 1930 helped to spawn one of the greatest symphonic eras in the history of French music, including works by composers such as Honegger, Milhaud and Dutilleux.

Roussel's musical influence has extended far beyond the boundaries of France, too. In his symphonies, Bohuslav Martinu inhabits much the same musical landscape as Roussel's Third Symphony; when I first heard Martinu's Fifth Symphony, I was almost overwhelmed with the similarities (although there are also great differences, as well). Author Robert Layton finds Roussel's influence in the English composer Rawsthorne and, even more noticeably, in the American Paul Creston. Walter Piston has been called "the American Roussel". Piston directly emulated Roussel in works such as the Suite for Oboe and Piano.

And so Roussel, though founding no "school" or artistic methodology, has nonetheless left his mark on the twentieth century soundscape.

Although virtually a contemporary of Debussy and Ravel, Albert Roussel's music seems to belong to a later generation.

The evolution of Roussel's place in musical history has many parallels with that of his Danish Contemporary, Carl Nielsen. Both Roussel and Nielsen were for decades totally overshadowed by a more famous composer from the same region: Ravel and Sibelius, respectively. Curiously, while Nielsen and Sibelius happened to be born in the same year (1865), Roussel and Ravel died in the same year (1937).

Like Nielsen, Roussel was for a long time more heard about than heard. Both composers were more popular in their homeland than internationally. And for both, recordings played a major role in their discovery by a wider audience. Even today, the majority of recordings of Roussel's work feature French (or, more broadly, French-speaking) artists.

The growing catalog of Roussel's work on compact disk reflects the increased recognition of this underappreciated composer. Those of us who enjoy the vigor of Roussel's music can only applaud the new attention being given to his work. Is the musical world more enriched by yet another recording of Beethoven's Fifth, or by a recording of a work by Roussel that cannot otherwise be heard?

The final word on Roussel's popularity should be given to the man himself. (But having said that, I still can't help but interject that he probably wouldn't be unduly upset by his relative obscurity; he was, after all, a very modest man.)

"It is not necessary that a symphony or an opera should become as popular as a song by Mayol [a popular cafe singer]. Of all the arts, music is the most closed and inaccessible. One could say far more of the musician than of the poet that he is completely isolated in the world, alone with his more or less incomprehensible language.... Other than two or three pretty pieces one might write for the public, all the rest, given the present state of give-and- take between music and the masses, will always be destined for very rare listeners."

You pegged yourself right, Albert Charles Paul Marie Roussel. You pegged yourself right.