Other Links
Editorial Board
- Editor - Bill Kenny
- Founder - Len Mullenger
Google Site Search
SEEN AND HEARD UK CONCERT REVIEW
Mussorgsky, Grieg and
Shostakovich: Boris
Giltburg (piano) Philharmonia Orchestra, Vasily Petrenko (conductor)
Royal Festival Hall, London 12.11.2009
(GD)
Mussorgsky (arr.Rimsky Korsakov): 'Night on a Bare Mountain'
Grieg: Piano Concerto in A minor, Op.16
Shostakovich: Symphony No. 5 in D minor, Op. 47
I was hoping that an innovative young Russian conductor like Petrenko would
opt for Mussorgsy's own 1867 version of 'St John's Night on the
bare Bare Mountain' as it was originally entitled by the composer.
Of course Rimsky's re-orchestration (re-composition) of the work is
a fine accomplishment in its own right, which
has been and still is, mostly used in standard
concert renditions. But Rimsky transformed it into more of a Russian orchestral
show piece and the Mussorgsky original is far
from that: it is much more grotesque
and menacing in its stark dissonances
with more trenchantly grainy and harsh orchestration,
almost anticipating Stravinsky in places. As it was,
Petrenko gave a finely contoured reading of the Rimsky version.
The opening B minor stalking and ominous rhythmic figure in the basses
didn't quite 'sound' as they should tonight
however and in fact,
throughout the whole concert there was
a certain lack of thrust and weight, particularly
in celli and basses and a tendency towards stridency particularly
in the violins at top register. Unfortunately
too, Petrenko deployed the erroneous non-antiphonal
placement of first and second violins tonight. But he also achieved
some beautifully veiled string phrasing in the work's
poignantly 'cool-down' coda after its satanic
climax.
In the Grieg concerto, which at one time was a real concert 'war-horse',
Giltburg deployed plenty of full-toned
pianism in the grand style, although never really achieving
the magisterial effect in the manner of say Arrau or Gilels. In the
first movement, rather than playing in dialogue
with the conductor and orchestra, Giltburg frequently veered off into a
kind of micro-cadenza of pianistic indulgence,
with lots of excessive pedalling, but no real coherence in terms
of the concerto's structure of exchange and
contrast happening within a unified narrative. In
the short 'adagio' soloist and conductor again
seemed to be at odds with each other; the
one going off on his own course, the other attempting a semblance of structural
unity:here Grieg's chromatic harmony mostly
failed to register. The final 'allegro' in 'marcato'
march rhythm, though still not always together in terms of dialogue
between soloist and orchestra, did register a degree of old fashioned concerto
exhuberance with Giltburg pounding away at the D
minor rhythms in the allegro section taken from Norwegian dance/folk
themes. Petrenko incorporated the lyrical A major mid-section theme with
great skill, ensuring that its tutti
restatement in the concerto's
coda matched the initial tempo, thus avoiding any degree of sensational
bombast. Throughout this movement, Grieg's
'Hall of the Mountain King's' rhythms were well realised
although I did feel that a tighter check on the timpnaist's
zeal would not have gone amiss; his playing
becoming ludicrously loud towards and throughout
the coda.
Petrenko has recently recorded the Shostakovich 5th for Naxos with his own
Royal Liverpool Philharmonic. Although it received generally good reviews,
it was also criticised by some for
being too slow. Tonight's performance
was also measured, but in a sustained and intense manner in
which the music never dragged or sagged. Petrenko was
generally rather quicker that in the recorded performance
and there was an added sense of movement and forward drive permeating
the work as a whole, which
payed off magnificently in the
symphony's rousing coda. Commendably too, Petrenko
treated the symphony completely in its own terms,
as a symphony, without ever alluding to any kind of extra-musical
conjecture; speculative and often downright false
claims to this political meaning or that,
which have plagued - and continue
to plague - the
works imputed 'meaning'. Very few commentators indeed
seem to have accepted that Shostakovich
was simply writing a D minor symphony following a basic 'classical'
form.
It was obvious right from the D minor opening motives that Petrenko
had spent considerable time and concentration in rehearsing the work. I
don't think I have ever heard such a sustained
reflective and brooding quality in this long
opening meditation; here, as in the 'Largo'
third movement, Petrenko and the orchestra achieved a real pp
and ppp, especially in the strings. The later military sounding
march music was well paced and rhythmically well
defined, never sounding loud or raucous, and only reaching an
ff when the march together with the opening theme are
stated in the
D minor recapitulation. The
over zealous timpani contributions mentioned earlier, were modified by the
conductor; reined in so to speak, to integrate with the superbly
achieved symphonic balance and harmonic texture.
The second movement lรคndler-like
theme in 3/4 rhythm was well accented as were the Russian folk theme inflections
in the 'quasi trio'
section. But, again I
would have welcomed extra coarse grained thrust in the lower strings. The
'Largo' emerged
as a great musical arch, hushed and intense, slow in
real terms but never sounding slow in its sustained unfolding. I
missed the antiphonal effects for divided violins that
this movement offers of course, but this
was still a superb achievement.
Petrenko reminded us that the 'Allegro non troppo' finale is in fact very
skilfully related to the rest of the symphony; the largo's main theme
recast in the modulations of D minor/C minor in the sustained pp
just before the work's triumphant conclusion.
The coda itself, those D major repeated chords in brass and percussion,
had a more ominous and darkly menacing quality than usual.
There was nothing 'hollow' or 'banal' here
and and outside of the phantasy illusions of
those who insist that the passage represents
some extra-musical critical parody of Stalinist military bombast,
there is absolutely no de
facto evidence that Shostakovich
ever intended this. Tonight,
Petrenko successfully reformulated/ re-situated the
work as a great Russian/modern symphony:
a true symphony in its own
terms with any affective meaning existing
solely within its music.
Geoff Diggines
Back
to Top
Cumulative
Index Page