ABSTRACT
In an interview with Ulrich Dibelius in 1993, György Ligeti virtually excluded Hungarian Rock and Passacaglia ungherese from his oeuvre, stating that the two harpsichord pieces had been intended only as ironic commentaries on discussions with his pupils at the Hamburg Hochschule, and as reactions to ‘the whole neo-tonal and postmodern movement’. From today’s perspective, however, it is hardly questionable that those two pastiches are integral to Ligeti’s oeuvre, inasmuch as they anticipated some typical features, both technical and aesthetic, of his late style, such as overt historic and ethnic references, latent tonality, the simultaneity of diatonic and chromatic materials, and a paramount interest in complex polyrhythmic structures.
What has not yet been sufficiently analysed in these pieces is their ‘Hungarianness’. Which features can be regarded as Hungarian; how are these related to other, culturally more distant references; and what role are they playing in both pieces? What is the meaning of the distorted citations and ‘false quotations’ of Hungarian folksongs? Is the ‘Hungarianness’ of these pieces only a mask, like the allusions to Baroque techniques and forms, as Dibelius suggested, or does it have a deeper meaning? Would it be too daring to interpret Hungarian Rock and Passacaglia ungherese as artistic manifestations of Ligeti’s ambivalent attitude toward his roots, and eventually as ironic self-portraits?
