A Critical Review of Ravel's Piano Repertoire

Key Narrative

Ravel’s piano music occupies a peculiar position: universally admired, frequently programmed, yet often misunderstood. The surface glitter can obscure the structural rigor; the technical demands can overshadow the musical substance. This review examines each major work critically—not merely to praise, but to understand what Ravel achieved and where his approach creates challenges for performers and listeners alike.

The through-line: Ravel was an orchestrator who wrote for piano. His keyboard works often sound like reductions of imaginary orchestral scores—this is both their magic and their limitation.

Outline

I. Introduction: The Ravel Problem

• Ravel as the “Swiss watchmaker”—what this metaphor gets right and wrong
• His place in the piano repertoire: between Debussy and neoclassicism
• The tension between surface and substance
• Why he’s harder to play (and to hear) than he seems

II. Early Works (1895-1905)

A. Menuet antique (1895)

• A student work, but already characteristic
• The archaic style as affectation
• Harmonic language: modal meets late Romantic
• Verdict: Apprentice work; historically interesting, rarely compelling

B. Pavane pour une infante défunte (1899)

• The most famous, least representative work
• Why it’s actually not very good Ravel
• The sentimentality problem
• Verdict: Beautiful, but points toward a path he (thankfully) didn’t take

C. Jeux d’eau (1901)

• The revolutionary work
• Liszt + Debussy + something new
• Technical innovations: extended arpeggiation, spacing, resonance
• Why this matters more than Clair de lune
• Verdict: Essential; the fountainhead

D. Sonatine (1905)

• Neoclassicism before neoclassicism
• Economy as aesthetic
• The three movements: miniature perfection
• Verdict: Among the best—clarity, wit, structural integrity

III. The Middle Period (1905-1913)

A. Miroirs (1905)

• Five character pieces, five sound-worlds
• “Noctuelles”: flutter and unease
• “Oiseaux tristes”: the still center
• “Une barque sur l’océan”: overwritten?
• “Alborada del gracioso”: Spain through French eyes
• “La vallée des cloches”: bells as metaphysics
• Verdict: Uneven but indispensable; “Alborada” and “Oiseaux tristes” are peaks

B. Gaspard de la nuit (1908)

• The Mount Everest of piano music
• Three poems after Aloysius Bertrand
• “Ondine”: seduction and shimmer
• “Le Gibet”: obsession and stasis
• “Scarbo”: virtuosity as terror
• The transcendent difficulty problem
• Verdict: Masterpiece, with reservations—sometimes the effort shows

C. Ma mère l’Oye (four hands, 1910)

• Childhood reimagined, not imitated
• The piano original vs. the orchestration
• Simplicity as sophistication
• Verdict: Perfect; may be his best work

D. Valses nobles et sentimentales (1911)

• The waltz as deconstruction
• Harmonic language at its most advanced
• Why this is underrated
• Verdict: Challenging, rewarding; requires repeated listening

IV. Late Works (1914-1932)

A. Le Tombeau de Couperin (1917)

• War memorial as baroque suite
• Each movement’s dedicatee, each movement’s character
• The question: nostalgia or irony?
• Prélude, Fugue, Forlane, Rigaudon, Menuet, Toccata
• Verdict: Among the greatest; grief transfigured into form

B. La Valse (two-piano version, 1920)

• The destruction of the waltz
• Orchestral conception, keyboard execution
• Is the piano version valid?
• Verdict: Listen to the orchestra; play this for study

C. Concerto for the Left Hand (1930)

• Written for Paul Wittgenstein
• One hand, full texture
• The darkness beneath the virtuosity
• Verdict: His most emotionally direct work; essential

D. Concerto in G (1931)

• Jazz, Mozart, Basque folk—and Ravel
• The slow movement: Bach + blues
• Gershwin’s influence (or not)
• Verdict: Joyous, brilliant; the orchestral context matters

V. Cross-Cutting Observations

A. Technical Demands

• What makes Ravel hard
• The precision problem
• Voicing and resonance
• Why pianists both love and fear this repertoire

B. Interpretive Challenges

• Objectivity vs. expression
• The tempo question
• How much rubato?
• What does “playing Ravel” mean?

C. Recorded Performances

• Ravel’s own recordings (revealing)
• Essential interpretations: Perlemuter, Argerich, Thibaudet, Pogorelich
• What to listen for

VI. Summary Assessment

• The complete solo piano works: what to play, what to program
• His place in the 20th century
• Why Ravel still matters
• What we might miss about him

Suggested Sources

Scores

• Durand editions (standard, authorized)
• Henle Urtext editions (scholarly)

Biographies

• Roger Nichols, Ravel (2011)—the definitive biography
• Arbie Orenstein, Ravel: Man and Musician
• Benjamin Ivry, Maurice Ravel: A Life

Analysis

• Steven Huebner’s work on French music
• Peter Kaminsky on Ravel’s form
• Roy Howat, The Art of French Piano Music

Recordings to Study

• Ravel playing Ravel (historical, essential)
• Vlado Perlemuter (student of Ravel)
• Martha Argerich, Gaspard de la nuit
• Ivo Pogorelich (controversial, illuminating)
• Steven Osborne (recent, excellent)
• Alexandre Tharaud (complete works)

Context

• Debussy’s piano works (comparison)
• French piano school history
• Marguerite Long, At the Piano with Ravel