I discovered the Symphonic Dances quite by accident in 1980 when I ordered
a double cassette from Decca (a Mahler symphony I think) and found the second
cassette to be correctly labelled but actually containing an incorrect tape
of the most wonderful unknown music. I soon decided it was Rachmaninov and
found that the other side contained the Isle of the Dead so this had
to be the then new Ashkenazy recording. I have treasured those performances
ever since.
Rachmaninov refused to talk about death and yet his music discusses it all
the time - even in the Symphonic Dances the Dies irae stalks abroad.
This was Rachmaninov's final work and he referred to it as a 'final flicker'.
It was 1940, France had fallen and the world outlook was bleak. Rachmaninov
was recovering from a minor operation on a secluded estate on Long Island.
Ormandy was able to visit him for a piano run-through of the new score -
Fantastic Dances in three parts Noon, Twilight and
Midnight. These titles were soon withdrawn and the work renamed
Symphonic Dances (many regard it as his fourth symphony). Rachmaninov
quipped that this title was chosen so that the public would not be confused
into thinking he had created a Dance Suite for Jazz Band. However the movements
are written as dances and Rachmaninov hoped Fokine would make a ballet out
of them. Fokine had been impressed by an earlier run-through of sketches
at the piano and made the suggestion to Rachmaninov that he should relax
his self-imposed stranglehold of strict waltz rhythm. Dance rhythms,
nevertheless, are central to this piece.
The orchestration was started in the October whilst Rachmaninov was actually
on tour. Every spare minute had to be utilized as it had to be completed
in the December for an early January première. At the final rehearsal
Rachmaninov said to the orchestra "Years ago I composed for the great Chaliapin.
Now he is dead and so I compose for a new kind of artist, the Philadelphia
Orchestra" Ormandy gave the first performance in Philadelphia and then it
moved to New York. As with the First Symphony, the critical reaction was
harsh - one description was of a mere novelty and a rehash of old tricks.
Rachmaninov wanted to record the work but difficulties were deliberately
put in his way to prevent this. The first recording was eventually made by
the Chicago Orchestra under Dr Frederick Stock - which Rachmaninov greatly
resented. Symphonic Dances did not meet critical approval until performed
by Mitropoulos and the New York Philharmonic in 1942 after which Rachmaninov
was given a surprise 50th birthday party and received a present of a new
piano from Steinway.
By now Rachmaninov was feeling ill and tired and had to abandon his 1943
tour. He was hospitalised and diagnosed with melanoma cancer. He died on
March 28th 1943.
Being dances, these pieces are intensely rhythmical. The first dance opens
with a soft ticking on the strings which you could tap out as follows:
| 1 2| rest |1 2| ./. |rest |3 4| |5 6| |7
8| ./. |1 2| |3 4| |5 6| |7 8|
./. etc.
The cor anglais overlies this with a three-note motif with the third long-held;
a motif that is heard throughout the movement. The strings increase from
pp to ff and the dance is stamped out in an irregular rhythm
involving two then three then four notes in the bar - molto marcato
(strong accentuation). There is an immediate difference here between
Ashkenazy and Polyansky and their conducting styles happen to be mirrored
by the recordings. Ashkenazy produces an exciting, driven performance which
sounds as if it is twice as fast as Polyansky although it is actually only
10% faster. This is matched by a typical bright close-up sound by Decca which
loses much of the Concertgebouw hall resonance. It is an exciting recording
that has impressed me for years and everything seems crystal clear -- but
is it? I have always favoured the Ashkenazy over all other recordings but
Polyansky is the only conductor to make me listen to this work afresh. His
recording from the Moscow Conservatoire has a warm natural acoustic and indeed
yes I can hear more. His pace is steadier, which is surely
how it would have been if danced, and this allows each player time to phrase
their parts and make more impact. At 6 after [4] there is a piano entry that
reinforces the basses and contrabassoon and underpins the trumpets. This
is barely noticeable in the Concertgebouw recording but it comes out very
clearly with Polyansky. After all this intense rhythmic activity the movement
dissolves into a pastoral passage for oboes and clarinets and a marvellously
slinky alto saxophone. Whilst far from inaudible in the Ashkenazy recording
Polyansky's sax produces a more virtuoso performance - almost like listening
to Jan Gabarek. It is points like this that enable one to hear a work as
if with new ears.
I can sum up my first movement impressions by saying that Polyansky is more
flexible in his approach to rhythm, supported in this by a virtuoso orchestra,
and he allows his instrumentalists time to phrase and present a passage that
may go for little or nothing with Ashkenazy. I have been very impressed,
so can this now become my first recommendation? This flexibility is most
obvious in the waltz of the second movement where Polyansky constantly varies
the tempo introducing hesitations and slight accelerandi to produce the swaying
ebbing and flowing of a real dance; Ashkenazy is more set on speed. Philip
Taylor in the accompanying notes refers to this passage as valse triste
- parts are reminiscent of the Sibelius - it is more valse and
much more triste with Polyansky. Ashkenazy gains a whole two minutes
on Polyansky in this movement, which is an incredible difference and yet,
even so, I have never felt that Ashkenazy lacked anything when it came to
expressiveness. I regret that Polyansky's much slower speed does becomes
self-indulgent and he begins to lose its way. When my mind starts to wander
something must be wrong. This is the critical movement to hear if you are
wondering whether to purchase this performance. I can admire the way in which
it is done without always approving of it.
Polyansky recovers in the third movement; midnight sounds and the orchestral
sound flickers and then there is a wonderful energetic melody on the strings
which Philip Taylor identifies as a Russian Orthodox chant. The quiet reflective
section that follows again emphasises the different approach of the two
conductors. With Ashkenazy it passes without incident; with Polyansky it
is much slower, almost grinding to a halt but what a wonderful bass clarinet
leading us to the allegro vivace. Polyansky brings out the supernatural
in this work. It is in the climax itself that Polyansky's approach reaps
dividends. With Ashkenazy the climax is almost perfunctory but Polyansky
makes a majestic climax topped off through the taking of a little
liberty with the tam-tam which is well and truly wound up with each stroke,
culminating in a long held crash that only slowly dies away. Laisser
vibrer indeed!
The Polyansky is faultless as a recording and make the Ashkenazy now sound
a little brash but overall it is still the Ashkenazy performance I would
want for repeated listening. On wide-range equipment here is a noticeable
hum on the Decca recording at the very opening. Either it dissappears after
that or I just get used to it. It has never marred my enjoyment of the disc.
[I have been listening to the original full price recording and this
may have been improved on remastering.] But there are further
considerations. The Ashkenazy is now at mid-price and is coupled with a truly
magnificent, compelling Isle of the Dead; unbeatable at any price. This make
the Decca the must-have disc. Polyansky has the earlier cantata The
Bells. My gripe with Chandos here is that they have presented the text
in English, German and French and Russian cyrillic. This makes it quite
impossible to follow and must have involved considerable expense in typesetting.
The usual practice is to include a transliteration that can be followed alongside
the english text.
Reviewer
Len Mullenger
Ashkenazy
Polyansky