Bruckner: Symphony No. 6. Bergen Philharmonic
Orchestra conducted by Thomas Dausgaard. BIS. $19.99 (SACD).
Mahler: Symphony No. 6. Essener Philharmoniker
conducted by Tomáš Netopil. Oehms. $28.99 (2 CDs).
One of the many intriguing coincidences
uniting the works of Bruckner and Mahler is that both composers wrote 11
symphonies – sort of. To get to that number for Bruckner, one must include both
“No. 0,” written after No. 1 but withdrawn by the composer, and “No. 00,” the
early so-called “Study Symphony.” Add those to the numbered nine, including the
unfinished Ninth, to get 11. As for Mahler, the nine completed works are added
to the unfinished Tenth and Das Lied von
der Erde, a symphony-in-all-but-name that would have been No. 9 had Mahler
not superstitiously decided to avoid attaching that digit to it.
Within both these 11-symphony universes,
Symphony No. 6 is the midpoint, and both Bruckner’s Sixth and Mahler’s Sixth
have some oddities that remain intriguing. In Bruckner’s case, the Sixth is the
only symphony that did not have revisions made to it by the composer –
indicating a level of self-confidence at odds with Bruckner’s usual
compositional personality. Bruckner’s Sixth is also the least frequently
performed of the mature symphonies, having characteristics that render it less
appealing than the other symphonies to many audiences and conductors. It has
the cycle’s strangest Scherzo, which has no recognizable theme at all. It has a
unique first-movement tempo indication, Majestoso.
Its first complete performance took place only after Bruckner’s death, in 1899
– conducted by Mahler. And that performance used a still-unpublished edition of
the work, prepared by Mahler himself, that made significant changes in the sole
symphony that Bruckner himself chose not to change.
As for Mahler’s Sixth, it is the only one
of his symphonies regarding which there are two major areas of dispute. One
involves the sequence of movements – whether the Scherzo should be performed
before or after the Andante moderato.
Mahler himself seems to have been ambivalent about this – unusual for so
decisive a composer and conductor. Also, the enormous finale is punctuated and
tremendously dramatized by three hammer blows that eventually destroy the
imagined heroic figure at its center; but Mahler eventually removed the third
of them, apparently out of another superstitious fear – in this case, of
keeping it in and thus inviting dire consequences into his world. For, strangely,
this deeply moving and intense symphony, now usually referred to as the
“Tragic,” was written at one of the happiest times of Mahler’s life – and
matters were indeed to take a dramatic turn for the worse afterwards.
Today’s many first-rate Bruckner and
Mahler conductors generally do a good job of absorbing the biographical and
musicological elements of these symphonies, but keeping them appropriately in
the background when presenting the works, allowing the music to speak for
itself and tell audiences what the conductors think the composers wanted them
to be told. Both Thomas Dausgaard and Tomáš Netopil have clearly studied the
scores of the Bruckner and Mahler, respectively, for their new recordings of
these symphonies, and have done a fine job of bringing forth the purely musical
elements of the works as well as at least some of their underlying emotional
terrain. And interestingly, their new recordings of these “middle” symphonies
do a fine, if unintended, job of showing just how different the sensibilities
of Bruckner and Mahler were at these respective points of their compositional
lives.
Bruckner’s Sixth is built on a far smaller
scale than his Fifth, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth, lasting well under an hour –
just 53 minutes in Dausgaard’s recording for BIS. Like other Bruckner symphonies,
No. 6 does build toward a final-movement climax, but in this case the symphony
is more front-weighted, with 32 minutes concentrated in the first two
movements. This is scarcely a “slight” symphony, but Dausgaard handles it with
more lightness than is usual in performances of Bruckner: this is a lean
reading rather than an opulent one, and listeners will seek in vain any grand
sense of organ-like sonorities or massively resonant full-orchestra passages.
The Bergen Philharmonic Orchestra plays Bruckner with a kind of cleanness that
it is tempting to associate with the fresh and distinctly chilly Norwegian air
– a notion more poetic than realistic, to be sure, but one that gives some sense
of the clarity that the orchestra brings to this music and that Dausgaard
extracts from it. Indeed, the Bruckner Sixth under Dausgaard has a lighter
feeling than Brahms’ Symphony No. 3 of two years later (1883). Dausgaard paces
the work quite well, being perhaps a little light in the emotional second
movement (marked Sehr feierlich,
“very solemnly”) but otherwise presenting the music in a way that brings its
exceptional structural clarity to the fore. Wisely, he does not rush the
Scherzo (nicht schnell, “not fast”)
and also pays close attention to the pacing of the finale (nicht zu schnell, “not too fast”). If there is a certain sense of
coldness to this symphony, a lessening of the great warmth and emotional power
associated with others by Bruckner, there is in its place a level of thematic
and rhythmic clarity that keeps the work, under Dausgaard’s baton, effectively
communicative from start to finish.
Mahler’s Sixth under Netopil, in a two-CD
Oehms recording, is a decidedly less thoroughly integrated affair. This is very
much a symphony of extremes, from the quiet use of cowbells and the
exceptionally beautiful opening of the slow movement to the pervasive march
rhythms and high drama of the outer movements and the ever-present sense of
barely contained doom overhanging the whole work. Netopil is content to allow
the disparate elements of the work’s construction to go their own ways:
notably, he makes little attempt to integrate the sprawling first and last
movements, so that the strong and highly rhythmic passages seem to come from a
work that differs significantly from the one containing the beautifully lyrical
material. This results in an episodic performance that involves listeners
strongly in one element, only to wrench them into another without much warning
or preparation – a legitimate approach to the music, but one that does take
some getting used to. Netopil places the Scherzo second – a more-convincing
approach than putting it third – and includes all the hammer blows, although he
does not give them the otherworldly sound that some conductors use to convey
their power to greater effect. On the other hand, Netopil’s opening of the
finale is genuinely spine-tingling: the anticipation he produces becomes almost
unbearable until the movement is eventually off and running through its dark
passages to its eventual dire conclusion. There is no orchestra with a greater
claim to this symphony than the Essener Philharmoniker: Mahler conducted the
work’s world première in Essen in 1906. So the fact that the orchestra plays
the music with sumptuous sound and a firm understanding of Mahler’s thematic
and rhythmic demands is scarcely a surprise. What is intriguing here is the way
Netopil turns the piece into a series of alleys and byways rather than a broad
avenue along which the audience journeys. Neither Netopil’s Mahler Sixth nor
Dausgaard’s Bruckner Sixth is a traditional interpretation – and that is all to
the good, since both these recordings show just how much remains to be explored
in the music of these closely related yet highly dissimilar composers.
No comments:
Post a Comment