Bruckner: Symphony No. 9, with reconstructed
Finale.
Philharmonie Festiva conducted by Gerd Schaller. Profil. $22.99 (2 CDs).
Mahler: Symphony No. 10 (version by Michelle
Castelletti). Lapland Chamber Orchestra conducted by John Storgårds. BIS. $19.99
(SACD).
The one thing that can be absolutely,
unequivocally stated as truth with regard to efforts to complete the final
symphonies of Bruckner and Mahler is that every single attempt is wrong. That
is to say that no matter how carefully, no matter with what attention to detail
and style and academic/performance requirements and understanding a completion
of Bruckner’s Ninth and Mahler’s Tenth may be made, it is 100% certain not to be what the composer himself
would have done. Both these composers, throughout their lives and to a greater
extent as those lives neared their ends, were pushing the boundaries of
symphonic form, of harmony, of counterpoint, of musical structure itself, and both
their incomplete final symphonies show them going even further in directions in
which they had gone before. The chance that any existing sketches, drafts or
partial forms of these symphonies would have led in the direction in which any
well-meaning “completer” might take them is vanishingly small. But this in no
way invalidates the attempt, because the alternative is to withhold these works
from performance altogether (as Alma Mahler did with Mahler’s Tenth for a
considerable time) or to perform only the portions of the symphonies that exist
in finished or virtually finished form: the first three movements of the
Bruckner and the first and third of the Mahler. Truncated performances have in
fact been the norm for these works for decades, but while a three-movement
Bruckner Ninth continues to be deemed acceptable by many conductors and
listeners, the excerpted version of Mahler’s Tenth has long been deemed so
unsatisfactory that great Mahler interpreters such as Leonard Bernstein and
Bernard Haitink refused to play the remains of this work at all.
The urge to completion of both these
masterpieces – and make no mistake, they are
masterpieces – has become increasingly strong in recent years. Among the
thoughtful, careful and well-considered versions of the finale of the Bruckner
are ones by William Carragan, Nicola Samale and Benjamin-Gunnar Cohrs,
Sébastien Letocart, Nors S. Josephson, Ernst Märzendorfer, Roberto Ferrazza and
others. Some of these have been “re-completed” numerous times: Carragan’s 1983
completion has been revised four times, and the original Samale version,
created with Giuseppe Mazzucca, exists in two versions – and then Samale and
Mazzucca joined John A. Phillips and Cohrs to produce a third completion that itself
exists in five different versions. It is all a bit bewildering, and would be
frustrating to listeners if there were a “correct” version toward which
everyone was striving. But there is not. And everybody who tries to produce a
unified, coherent and performable Bruckner Ninth knows this. Certainly Gerd
Schaller does. A Bruckner specialist and an absolutely top-notch conductor,
Schaller created a meticulously crafted, thoroughly convincing and elegant,
even beautiful version of the fourth movement of Bruckner’s Ninth in 2016, and
offered it in a very fine recording of the symphony. Then he set to work to hone
and change it, and the modified version, from 2018, is now available on a
superb two-CD set from Profil – a live recording of a genuinely revelatory
concert. Schaller is an amazingly erudite and skilled advocate of this symphony
and his part in it, both as a conductor and verbally: his booklet notes, which
explain and analyze the finale in very considerable detail, are easily the best
discussion of this material ever offered to the general public. Schaller
himself founded Philharmonie Festiva – a collection of top-notch musicians from
various German orchestras – for the specific purpose of furthering his own
musical explorations, and it is a splendid Bruckner orchestra with all the
Germanic warmth that an audience could wish and all the sectional and
individual skill that a conductor could desire. The details of what Schaller
did and did not do in completing (and then re-completing)Bruckner’s Ninth are
many and complex; they are also arguable, as are the details of any attempt to finish
this work. But for the vast majority of listeners, what is going to matter is
whether the Schaller/2018 version of the symphony a) sounds like Bruckner, b)
holds together cohesively, and c) presents a conclusion that is in keeping with
the first three movements and at the same time takes them to a higher plane. It
does all these things, and does them surpassingly well: Schaller’s experience
as a conductor is a major reason, since both his versions of the finale needed
to take into account what Bruckner asked of musicians in the first three
movements of the Ninth and in his earlier works, and what more he was likely to
have asked of them in the completion of his final symphony. There are merits to
all the attempted completions of Bruckner’s Ninth, and there are intriguing
differences in the approaches underlying them – for instance, how much music
from earlier in the symphony or from earlier symphonies to include in the
finale, and how many of Bruckner’s numerous but ill-assorted manuscript pages
should be included and how many should be discarded as early drafts or as
incompatible with other pages. These are matters for scholars and conductors,
though, and not, by and large, for listeners. Schaller is both a scholar and a
conductor, and as such has created an exceptionally well-crafted, wholly
convincing finale to Bruckner’s Ninth that results in an entirely satisfactory
and emotionally trenchant conclusion, as uplifting as anything that Bruckner himself
lived to complete. The fact that what Schaller has done is incontrovertibly
wrong is, in terms of the impact of the music, pretty much irrelevant.
Michelle Castelletti is also both
conductor and scholar, although she is not the conductor of her version of
Mahler’s Tenth that is heard on a new SACD from BIS. That is something of a
shame, because John Storgårds is not a very idiomatic Mahler conductor, and it
is hard to tell whether the recording would have been more effective with
Castelletti at the helm of the orchestra. It is effective, and in some rather surprising ways, but whether it
could have been more so is difficult to determine. What makes this issue even
more complex than that of “merely” completing Mahler’s Tenth is that
Castelletti not only creates a performing version but also turns the symphony
into the sort of chamber work that could have been performed at one of
Schoenberg’s famous but short-lived Verein
für musikalische Privataufführungen concerts – places where, from 1919 to
1921, then-modern, then-forward-looking music was offered in chamber
arrangements made by Schoenberg himself or by one of his disciples. Mahler’s
music was heard in these concerts – in
fact, Das Lied von der Erde was
arranged by Schoenberg himself – so there is some fascinating history behind
what Castelletti does with Mahler’s Tenth. And Mahler’s handling of the
symphony orchestra makes his works peculiarly susceptible to chamber
arrangements, since Mahler – one of the greatest conductors of his time – wrote
for very large orchestra for the express purpose of utilizing the sound of parts of the ensemble through much of
his work, reserving the gigantic full-orchestra pronouncements for climaxes and
special occasions. That is to say that Mahler, who wrote almost no chamber
music, created mini-chamber-music ensembles within his large orchestral forces,
which means that much of the music in his symphonies fits surprisingly well with
a 24-piece ensemble such as the Lapland Chamber Orchestra. Much is not all, however,
and where Mahler drew on the substantial forces at his command – as in the
famous dissonance that climaxes the first movement of the Tenth and recurs in
the finale – the Storgårds performance is less than fully convincing. Or
perhaps it is the Castelletti arrangement that falls a bit short here; it is
hard to know. What makes this recording very much worth hearing and very much
worthwhile for Mahler lovers to own is the fact that in most of the symphony,
the completion and arrangement are exceptionally effective and deeply
intriguing. This is truest in the parts of the symphony that are the most
forward-looking, the ones in which Mahler himself almost seems part of the
Second Viennese School as he strains tonality to and beyond the breaking point.
The odd, angular rhythms that pervade this symphony may not come across as well
here as in some other performances, but the extreme dissonances and the tonal
misdirections, and the repeated refusal to allow this often-anguished music to
settle into any sort of pleasant harmony, come through exceptionally well. It
was Theodore Roosevelt who said, in a very different context, that the person
who counts is the one “who strives valiantly, who errs, who comes short again
and again, because there is no effort without shortcoming…and who at the worst,
if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.” The “completers” of
Bruckner’s Ninth and Mahler’s Tenth, most emphatically including Schaller and
Castelletti, are incapable of producing what these great composers would have
created if they had finished these works. But by daring greatly, these
“completers” give us insight, emotional uplift, intelligent thoughts about
music, and greater understanding of the composers whose work they so admire
that they strive to make performable what would otherwise be left unperformed
or, at best, played as a shadow of what it could be. This is the sort of
failure that, philosophically as well as musically, is well-nigh
indistinguishable from success.
No comments:
Post a Comment