Many will have found Jonathan Nott’s
all but total musical exile from his homeland a source of
frustration based on previous recordings that largely focus
on contemporary music. In these he shows that he has skill
and things to say. However, being stuck in Germany - rarely
a thing to be suffered musically - he has experience of Rattle’s
Berlin Phil (if rumours of the malaise are true, would they
tempted to swap one Englishman for another when the time comes?),
and amongst others the Bamberg Symphony. It’s good to have
the opportunity to hear the Bambergers on disc again: their
heyday was with Jonel Perlea in the 1960s and 1970s, and Horst
Stein in the 1980s, when they were also experienced Schubert
players.
Nott has claimed
that Schubert’s First Symphony has something Mozartian about
it. If this is the case he does not bring it out successfully
enough. The whole thing is too four-square for my taste, with
overly emphasised rhythms. That is not to say there are not
nice things in the playing; there are. The brass are well
caught at the very opening, the second movement has nice wind
textures at work (c. 2.30 onwards) but the strings underneath
are too self-conscious. Things are continued and improved
somewhat in the Menuetto, though I still feel the strings
are too hard, despite a generally well judged tempo.
It’s as if things
have to be stated rather than suggested in this interpretation,
though perhaps some of what I find could be down to the precision
of the recording too. The same feeling pervades the third
symphony to a large extent. The opening Adagio maestoso is
spacious, with impressive unison, though weaknesses are exposed
when the music reduces to one or two lines. There are again
pleasing textures in the winds, but Nott again proves he is
not a natural Schubert conductor by his phrasing and failing
to make the movement gel. Being the most conventionally classical
of all the symphonies, this feeling does come across well
in the Allegretto, which contrary to the opening movement
is convincingly paced and voiced. However it is maybe lacking
in some spontaneity in the playing that orchestras such as
the Vienna Philharmonic would naturally bring to the movement.
The Menuetto again
suffers slightly from the forward timpani, leading rhythms
to be emphasised more than they might need. The closing Presto
vivace is taken at a genuine presto tempo with some lightness
of touch that gains character with the brass entries. More
than elsewhere in this symphony the building of dynamic and
texture seems natural and relatively unforced.
Moving to the
later unfinished symphony, this is the work that most listeners
will be familiar with. Naturally the main draw too, it understandable
for Tudor to include it in volume one of this already recorded
complete cycle. The Allegro moderato is darkly announced
by the basses, although the transition to the main theme is
taken too literally and the contrasting chords seem less abrupt
than I had expected Nott to make them given his style with
the earlier works. He still has difficulty in making the contrasting
music seem entirely natural to him, and where any dynamic
emphasis is marked this can be overdone, which means that
the lower strings take longer to ‘bite’ on their entries.
Where chords are held these might have been less held, more
a comma in the argument than a full stop placed mid-sentence.
The Andante con
moto starts averagely and degenerates at times to near crudeness
in the tone of the strings when under pressure, added to as
ever by over-emphasised timpani and forceful brass. In quieter
passages the music is in danger of losing its thread, partially
due to the extreme pianissimo it is played at, and from there
the movement never really recovers.
The fragmentary
Allegro that follows should be treated as a curiosity. Cutting
out after 22 seconds, this rather uninspired Ländler goes
against the previous two movements. Despite working on it
further in piano reduction, Schubert’s instinct that it would
not work was well-founded. I hope that the trend does not
develop, as it did with Bruckner’s 9th, of giving
us probable orchestrated endings to the work.
It’s a release
for me that does not deliver. This is despite a conductor
of interest (in other repertoire) and an orchestra on decent
form. Having listened and thought about this long and hard,
I conclude that this is Schubert playing for 2005, and as
such is almost as bad as the worst of the authentic brigade.
What is lacking is an understanding of Schubert as a composer
of his time in innate stylistic and musical terms.
To make the music
something it is not, to push against the grain, is the huge
error that mistakes emphasis for interpretation. The responsibility
rests primarily with Nott, though as suggested, the recording
could have contributed slightly to this view. A controversial
statement I know. I await the outcry of disapproval, given
their much anticipated August residency in Edinburgh. There
at least the repertoire plays more to Nott’s forte of the
contemporary. Might, I wonder, the simultaneous release ‘Schubert
Epilogue’ be more successful somehow because of the contemporary
input?
As for what is
to follow, I shall be steering well clear, though no doubt
others will eagerly snap it up. Having heard this a few of
times, I rather fancy silence, and therein to anticipate a
return to Böhm or anyone with Schubert in their being and
the ability to draw playing accordingly. It is strange for
me to feel this way, but the high art of music arouses strong
emotions.
Evan Dickerson
Bamberg Symphony Orchestra/Jonathan
Nott
