SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL

Mahler and Karetnikov: London Symphony Orchestra, Valery Gergiev (conductor) Barbican Hall London 6.3.2008 (JPr)


As most of my reviews so far in Gergiev’s ‘Mahler cycle’ reveal I have been persuaded by his ‘gung-ho’ approach more often than not and  his is certainly a very desensitised, brutal and seemingly anti-Romantic approach. That he has not lost his skills as a conductor was revealed by the generally warm critical response to his two recent London concerts with the Vienna Philharmonic, so it seems mostly his Mahler that divides those listening to it into ‘pro’ or ‘contra’ camps so clinically.

First there was an intriguing introduction for many of the audience at this concert to a work by the little-known Nikolai Karetnikov, an advocate of Schoenberg’s atonalism. The composer suffered from the fact that this very symphony was premièred at the 1968 Prague Spring Festival and he was immediately branded a collaborator with the enemy by the Soviet authorities. Karetnikov was virtually ignored in the Soviet Union from then on and had to support himself writing scores for film and television. Only a few years before his death in 1994 was the ban on performing his music lifted. In Karetnikov’s own words about this work:  ‘I was to build up a composition based on the serial technique, being its consistent adherent, and at the same time to create within it a prolonged spatial structure which would allow (me) to express myself as fully (and) frankly as possible.’ Committing himself to a neo-Viennese scheme of a one-movement work whose five sections correspond basically to a five-movement symphony meant that this is a short work - barely a little over 20 minutes in this performance - which mixes Schoenbergian modernity with Russian bombast and bleakness.

There was much influence from Mahler here (as we would hear it in the second half of the programme) perhaps gained through the baton-passing via Schoenberg. We  had use of the slap-stick or Holzklapper and a lot of work for the timpani and tuba player. Standing out in this typically relentless performance from Gergiev and the hard-worked players of the LSO,  were vivid passages for tenor saxophone and for tuba and piano. There were also some potent yet brief phrases that passed across all the strings like a Mexican wave. A poignant lament in solo viola and cello started the upward climb to a noisy assault on the eardrums in the third movement after which followed an apotheosis for muted brass, timpani and piano in the fourth movement. Strings then re-entered, building up then dying away with an effect like the passing of a storm. Towards the end,  all sections of orchestra competed in building stepwise to a dramatic and even tragic climax, underpinned by two xylophones, and once again typically Mahlerian. Undoubtedly, this is a work to experience once because of its place in the history of music but surely no more often.

So how would Valery Gergiev fare with the ‘love until death’ Fifth Symphony of Mahler? Well, it was all we have come to expect from him; loud or even louder, inconsistent, perhaps slightly incoherent at times even allowing for the schizophrenic nature of the symphony, but totally compelling. Once  taken grip by this interpretation you are never released so that you end shaken by the sheer brutal force of the outbursts at times, yet emotionally stirred nonetheless.

Only in one of his last letters written in February 1911 did Mahler concede that ‘The Fifth is finished. I have been forced to re-orchestrate it completely. I fail to comprehend how at that time [1902] I could have blundered so like a greenhorn.’ The Mahlers considered this ‘their’ symphony despite Alma never being too happy with the brass chorale at the end. It was composed during their first summer together, yet Bruno Walter has written ‘Nothing in any of my conversations with Mahler and not a single note point to the influence of extra-musical thoughts or emotions upon the composition of the Fifth. It is music - passionate, wild, pathetic, buoyant, solemn, tender, full of all the sentiments of which the human heart is capable - but still “only” music, and no metaphysical questioning, not even from very far off, interferes with its purely musical course.’ Mahler exclaimed once at a dinner-party ‘Pereant die Programme!’ (‘Perish all programmes!’) and never wrote a description of this symphony, as he had for others written earlier. The only indication along these lines is the title of the first movement -Trauermarsch (‘funeral march’) - but even this is only indicates a relevant mood and may not be describing events. However, if we remember ‘To live for you! To die for you! Almschi!’ which Mahler wrote on the manuscript of the unfinished Tenth Symphony,  we can  get the idea that there is probably more to the Fifth Symphony than just music and  that Alma is present far more than only in the famous Adagietto.

To my ears the first movement's ‘funeral march’ - if that is what it really is - was the single most disappointing movement so far in my ‘Gergiev’s Mahler’ experience. The conductor’s head was – as it often is – resolutely on the score and at one point the brass seemed to be all over the place so that even the principal trumpet player seemed to be having a momentary off night. Yet the second movement began with beautiful detail in the cello (and did I hear Tristan ever so briefly?), the brass seemed more secure with the result that  their outbursts were more exciting than exacting. The only problem was in the dynamics which were either soft or loud with little leeway in between. Gergiev seemed much more at home with the Viennese-waltz inspired frenzy of the Scherzo, for here there was more light and shade and it was the best played movement so far. Though this was surpassed by an Adagietto, which at barely nine minutes long was perhaps the fastest I have heard in performance, this playing was sublime. By now, the conductor was looking less often at his score and had visibly relaxed (if that is possible for him) and he whipped up his orchestra - particularly the horns - to a resounding and affirmative conclusion, even though the thought was never very far away about whether they would all finish together. This they most certainly did however,  and among tumultuous applause more patrons stood up to acclaim this example  of Gergiev’s Mahler  with the valiant members of the London Symphony Orchestra,  than I had seen them do before.

The following evening everything came together in the most coherent Mahler Seventh Symphony I have ever heard. The  supposedly  ‘problem symphony’ created no obstacles for the conductor and his near-faultless orchestra. Undoubtedly someone (even on this website) may have a different view but then such  is the joy of music; there is no totally right way to perform Mahler (or any other composer) and if there were, we might just  as well stay at home listening to the 'perfect'  recorded interpretation over and over again.

Jim Pritchard

Broadcasts on BBC Radio’s Performance on 3 of Gergiev’s Mahler continue with Mahler 2 (7 July), Mahler 5 (8 July), Mahler 7 (9 July), Mahler 8 (live on 10 July) and concludes with Mahler 10, Adagio and Mahler 9 (11 July.)


Back to Top                                                    Cumulative Index Page