George Enescu:
a fiftieth anniversary commemoration
through recordings
Part II: Enescu the performer: violinist,
conductor and pianist
The second part of
my commemoration of George Enescu is
in some respects shorter than part I
(in the number of recordings it covers).
It is however broader in scope as it
covers three distinct areas of Enescu’s
music-making - across a range of composers
- preserved on disc. Inevitably, I shall
revisit performances of his own compositions
– mentioned only in passing in part
I of my article, and consider the merits
in greater detail.
In dealing with the
material available, I shall deal with
each role in turn and individual composers
under subheadings. Details of other
recordings as violinist, conductor or
pianist that exist but have not yet
seen CD issue can be found in Noel Malcolm’s
excellent book, "George Enescu:
his life and music" (Pub: Toccata
Press). There awaits a treasure chest
of material for companies to explore,
if only they have the inclination.
Fate in some ways misrepresents
Enescu as a performer on disc. During
his life his fame in Europe was largely
as a violinist of world class. Ysaye
dedicated his third solo sonata, a single
movement "Ballade" to Enescu,
in admiration of his art. Yet in the
United States and on disc at least it
is as a conductor that he was better
known. He was considered as successor
to Toscanini in New York. Pianism was
a constant presence: Menuhin recounts
him teaching the violin from the keyboard
– try finding that technique in any
conservatoire today!
The violinist
Bach might reasonably
be said to form the backbone of Enescu’s
musical personality as a performer,
not just as a violinist. He was given
all but two volumes of the complete
Bach works by the Queen of Romania,
and committed them to memory. Later
in life, he commented that Bach must
be constant "like a heartbeat",
and there can be no greater summation
of his approach.
J.S. Bach: Sonatas
and Partitas for solo violin
2 CD set: Classica
d'Oro 2014
These works formed
a centre-piece of Enescu’s violin repertoire,
and he was justly famed in his interpretation
of them. Menuhin held Enescu without
equal in them; though his own early
recording comes close in my view. Recorded
when Enescu was arguably past his prime
as a violinist; although still capable
of beautiful and captivating things,
they do not show the full range of techniques
and subtlety of which he was capable.
But they do offer a
powerful vision of these works, thoughtful,
emotional and often moving. To miss
these performances when considering
the works is to miss a definitive interpretation.
The style – though different from today’s
– is nonetheless just as valid. Often
in listening to other versions I hear
the seeds sown by Enescu and wonder
how much this is known, recognised or
acknowledged, even by other violinists.
Probably not often enough is the answer.
J.S. Bach: Double
Concerto in D minor (rec.
HMV, Paris 1932)
With: Yehudi Menuhin,
violin I / Orchestre Symphonique de
Paris / Pierre Monteux
EMI References 7243
5 67201 2 1
Naxos Historical 8.110965
Arguably the most widely
available recording of Enescu’s playing
on disc. Had it not been for Menuhin’s
insistence and Monteux’s willingness
to pick up the baton, it might not have
happened. The orchestra is unmistakably
French - how things have changed today!
- and of great tone too. The pairing
of Enescu and Menuhin makes the hair
on your neck rise. At times Menuhin
sounds a little too Enescu-like, but
this is countered by Enescu’s own entries:
not a style of playing, just style and
dramatic for it. Facility and technique
is lightly worn and founded on understanding
by all in equal measure - an understanding
that permeates from the core outwards.
The largo is glorious and burnished,
the two outer movements apt sparkling
contrasts, making a performance to treasure.
This is a great memorial to a remarkable
musical vision that spanned the generations.
Enescu: Sonata for
violin and piano 2, op.6
Enescu: Sonata for
violin and piano 3 "in popular
Romanian character", op.6
With: Dinu Lipatti,
piano
Electrecord Romania
EDC 430/431
Enescu once remarked
that he found remembering his own works
more difficult than those of other composers
because he did not have that degree
of objectivity about the work, he felt
too closely connected with its genesis
and the related emotions.
If the approach is
not as refined as more recent accounts,
Enescu and Lipatti achieve accounts
that are more elemental in communicating
the essence of both works. The second
sonata, in some ways is perhaps the
more polished performance, but the third
carries the spirit of the gypsy fiddler.
Any imperfections, should one see them
that way, can equally be seen as bringing
something to the experience. Yet again
these recordings are testimony to the
fact that a composer’s own interpretations
of his works are often far from the
final word on the matter. They are a
viewpoint that can be challenged or
reinforced by later generations. The
recorded sound is serviceable.
The conductor
J.S. Bach: Violin
Concerti 1 in A minor and 2 in E (rec.
HMV, Paris 1932)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre Symphonique de Paris
EMI References 7243
5 67201 2 1
There is seemingly
little I can add to what I have already
said regarding Enescu’s performance
of the Bach double concerto with Menuhin
and Monteux. But there are subtle differences
to be noted between Enescu’s approach
to Bach and Monteux’s. The principal
among these is the sense of inevitability
that Bach’s music has with Enescu. The
sound is also more ‘grounded’, as if
built from the basses upwards – the
way any true orchestra should be. In
saying this I am not taking away from
Monteux, whom I also greatly revere.
If the slow movements show Bach at his
most reflective, the outer ones sparkle
to glorious effect.
J.S. Bach: Mass
in B Minor (rec.
BBC, London 1951)
With: Suzanne Danco,
sop; Kathleen Ferrier, contr.; Peter
Pears, tenor; Bruce Boyce, bass / BBC
Chorus / Boyd Neel Orchestra
BBC Legends BBCL 4008-7
The recorded sound
is muddy and, particularly in choral
passages, textures can cloy and distort
somewhat. All of this is strange given
this comes a BBC studio source at a
time when recording technology was reasonably
advanced. But if ever there was a recording
of Bach’s great mass that moved more
through vision and absolute commitment
than sound quality this is it. The soloists
all contribute keenly; Ferrier moving
with every word, Danco almost matching
her. Of the men, Pears is the more articulate,
showing the qualities of word-pointing
that made him so great in Schubert and
Britten.
Behind it all there
is Enescu’s benign guiding presence,
and yet again the sense of a constant
heartbeat is immediately apparent. If
more is felt than might be articulated
or captured through the recording, I
have little doubt that it is due to
Enescu’s personal yet timeless reading.
Those that think they know the work
should hear this, and be amazed at just
how revelatory it appears.
Bartók: Music
for strings, percussion and celesta (rec.
Besançon, 1951)
With: Orchestre National
de France
Tahra TAH 246
There is a story that
Enescu travelled to Bryanston to teach
at the summer school there, and was
to conduct Bartók’s Music
for strings, percussion and celesta
during his stay. However, the copy he
was sent in advance went missing en
route and he arrived without having
been able to consult the score. This
transpired shortly before the performance
was due to take place, and another score
was hastily procured. The performance
went ahead as planned, with Enescu sight-reading
the fiendishly complicated score as
he went! Reports of that event testify
that every detail and nuance was in
place.
The present performance
does much to back these claims up; it
is an impressively powerful reading,
though inevitably detail is lost in
the live recording. Bartók knew
Enescu well and they performed together
in Bucharest. They shared an interest
in the folk music of each other’s country.
So from this perspective too Enescu’s
understanding of Bartók’s idiom
is unimpeachable. If on the part of
the listener a little effort is required,
it is amply rewarded.
Chausson: Poème (rec.
HMV, Paris 1933)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre Symphonique de Paris
EMI References 7243
5 65960 2 3
Naxos Historical 8.110967
By all accounts, Enescu’s
finest recording as violinist was of
Chausson’s work, with Stanford Schlüssel
at the piano. Unfortunately it is not
currently commercially available, though
I was able to obtain a dubious sounding
transfer on CD (home made on a PC, with
hand-written label!) at a market in
Bucharest. In it Enescu’s violin is
infinitely pliable, and here more than
elsewhere it is possible to hear him
at something approaching the height
of his powers.
As elsewhere in their
joint ventures, Menuhin no doubt benefits
from Enescu’s guidance and performance
experience of the solo part. Again the
joy of having a true French orchestral
tone in this work is hard to underestimate.
It is interesting how closely Enescu
shapes the orchestra to fit his playing
of the solo part from years earlier.
Menuhin at times too shows that he could
have heard that recording, though he
is not above bringing his own ideas
to the work as well.
Dvořák:
Violin Concerto in A minor, op.53 (rec.
HMV, Paris 1936)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre de Conservatoire Paris
Naxos Historical 8.110966
Just as there is a
temptation to look back on recording
history and look at the opportunities
that were missed and the recordings
that were not made for whatever reason,
there is on occasion the thought, "Why
on earth did they record this?"
This recording sadly induces such thoughts.
It must have been something
the company wanted a recording of at
the time, hoping that Enescu and Menuhin
would bring something to it, or at very
least boost sales. But both conductor
and soloist seem uninterested
from the very start – Dvořák played
no great part in either of their performing
lives, and this is painfully obvious.
Although the sound is decent, I cannot
with all my love of Enescu, Menuhin
(and Dvořák) recommend this as
a performance to revisit, unless
mediocrity from the great is your thing.
However the coupling
of the Schumann (with Barbirolli as
conductor in New York, 1938) is another
story altogether.
Enescu: Romanian
Rhapsody 2 (rec.
Besançon, 1951)
With: Orchestre National
de France
Tahra TAH 246
That Enescu grew to
dislike his early rhapsodies, particularly
the first, is well documented. However
he did on more than one occasion submit
to making new recordings of them. This
version, from the Lipatti memorial concert,
is captured live in a rather hard acoustic.
It does at least show a tender ability
to shape tempi and phrasing, and provide
a reminder of the close ties that existed
culturally between Romania and France
at this time. Whilst other studio recordings
are in better sound, as yet none are
commonly available on CD.
Enescu: First orchestral
suite, op.9 (rec.
Bucharest)
With: Bucharest Philharmonic
Orchestra
Electrecord Romania
EDC 430/431
Whilst neither the
sound nor the playing are front rank,
the interpretation must be one of the
most deliberate available of this remarkable,
sparkling orchestral score. Enescu sanctions
small cuts in the opening Preludiu à
l’unison, which could only have been
written by a Romanian – the spirit of
the doina imbues every bar. The
rest is taken reasonably, although the
most perplexing is his reading of the
finale – taken at about half the speed
that most conductors adopt today. In
my opinion it misses the effervescent
quality that Mandeal for one puts across;
however, who am I to argue with Enescu?
There is sure to have been some reasoning
behind it, even if now this seems lost.
For those interested in the history
of Enescu performance, as with all his
recordings of his own works it remains
a key document.
Lalo: Symphonie
Espagnole (rec.
HMV, Paris 1933)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre Symphonique de Paris
EMI References 7243
5 65960 2 3
Naxos Historical 8.110967
Just as with the Bach
Sonatas and Partitas, Enescu’s influence
upon the performance history of Lalo’s
Symphonie Espagnole
often remains unrecognised.
It was he who first regularly performed
the work with the middle movement Intermezzo,
before which time only the outer four
movements were commonly performed. In
this recording the Menuhin / Enescu
partnership made the first case on recording
for its inclusion so coherently that
today it would be unthinkable for any
performance or recording to omit it.
Even so, following this recording it
took fully thirty years for every violinist
to faithfully follow the full score.
But what a work and
performance this is! It has the feeling
that it is deliberately setting out
to make a case for itself, not through
bombast but through calm and clear understatement.
Every fresh-faced violin student or
young virtuoso would do well to hear
it, and take on board a genuine slice
of recording history.
Lipatti: Symphonie
concertante (2 pianos and orchestra)
Lipatti: Satrarii
(Tziganes) (rec.
Besançon, 1951)
With: Madeleine Lipatti
and Bela Siki, pianos / Orchestre National
de France
Tahra TAH 246
For most music lovers
Dinu Lipatti’s genius will ever be at
the keyboard, but his secret passion
lay in composition. These two performances,
which are a commemoration of the composer
conducted by his godfather, Enescu,
in collaboration with his widow and
a pupil, should be taken as something
of a family affair and a mark of the
tireless work Enescu did to promote
Romanian contemporaries outside their
native land.
Lipatti’s compositional
idiom is somewhat complex, and the difficulty
the orchestra has with it shows at times.
When the concert was repeated later
in Geneva under Ansermet things appear
under greater control. (available on
Archiphon ARC-112/113).
If the symphonie concertante
is more classical in style with the
second movement in sonata form, the
tonal influence of Stravinsky is audible.
You can also hear polyrhythmic passages
reminiscent of Enescu’s own compositions,
jazzy interplay between soloists and
even the lyrical colouring of the Romanian
doina. Enescu brings this out
more than Ansermet. Tziganes
is Lipatti’s only piece of programme
music. It chronicles the wanderings
of Romanian gypsies and here surely
receives a performance from Enescu’s
heart, shaped with a deeply imbued love
of composer, people and country.
Mendelssohn: Violin
Concerto in E minor, op.64 (rec.
HMV, Paris 1938)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre des Concerts Colonne
Naxos Historical 8.110967
This is the first of
four recordings Menuhin made of the
work, and technically, from his point
of view, it is the best, though it did
fare as well as some later ones (1958
with Efrem Kurtz, particularly) in the
market at the time. Enescu’s gentle
presence is there as ever, and Menuhin
responds instinctively to this in the
way he shapes the outer movements with
their introspection and transition.
These are qualities that Enescu masterfully
handles with the orchestra, ensuring
that this is a recording no collector
should be without. As Naxos couples
it with the Lalo and Chausson (see entries)
also under Enescu’s direction this is
a CD you can’t go wrong with.
Mozart: Violin concerto
3 in G (rec. HMV,
Paris 1935)
Mozart: Violin concerto
7 in D (rec. HMV,
Paris 1932)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre Symphonique de Paris
History Magic Moment
205170-302
An interesting pairing:
one concerto beyond all doubt by Mozart,
the other probably from the nineteenth
century based upon fragments of actual
Mozart manuscript. Although both are
performed with considerable flair and
not a little soberness it is interesting
to reflect that were it not for Enescu’s
influence Menuhin might never have taken
the concerto in D into his repertoire.
As a violinist, Enescu
remained firm in his advocacy of the
concerto – practically the only international
violinist to do so. And, as with the
Chausson, this transferred to the young
Yehudi. Throughout Enescu directs with
a sureness and lightness of touch that
make the Andante particularly effective.
Menuhin’s shared vision is to be heard
throughout.
Turning to the concerto
in G a similar approach is in evidence
that shows maturity beyond Menuhin’s
years at the time, and a lifetime’s
authority from Enescu. There can be
few conductors that shape the concerto
so persuasively to the violinist’s part
as Enescu, but then few understood the
violin as he did.
Schumann: Symphony
2, op.61 (rec. Decca,
London 1947)
With: London Philharmonic
Orchestra
Dutton Labs CDK 1209
Enescu’s approach to
Schumann is considerably less romantic
than some, and beneficial for it, and
not dissimilar to the readings of Kubelik.
The LPO are in good sound and flexibly
mould their playing to Enescu’s tempi.
If I find something missing from the
opening Sostenuto assai, the Scherzo
is lively, the Adagio espressivo one
of the most expressive available and
the closing Allegro finely worked. This
is a distinct ‘take’ on Schumann, no
doubt the result to a large extent of
another composer’s understanding of
structure and building of orchestral
sound. Also, the coupling of the First
Symphony, conducted by Piero Coppola,
is much to be recommended.
Paganini: Violin
concerto 1 in D, op.6 (rec.
HMV, Paris 1934)
With: Yehudi Menuhin
/ Orchestre Symphonique de Paris
Biddulph LAB 051
Of all Menuhin’s early
recordings in Paris with orchestra,
this one is particularly insightful.
In later life he commented that as a
conductor many works he performed bore
the imprint of Enescu’s interpretation,
such was their lasting power upon him.
It might very easily have been the same
in terms of violin playing too. In this
concerto Menuhin displays technical
bravura alongside depth of insight to
an unusual degree, characteristics that
Enescu would have encouraged. Enescu
coaxes particularly Italianate playing
from the Paris orchestra, at a time
when individual orchestras still carried
a specific sound. Remarkable, and still
a benchmark reading.
As pianist
Enescu: First piano
suite, op.3 (fragments)
Enescu: Second piano
suite, op.10 (Sarabande and Pavanne)
Electrecord Romania
EDC 430/431
Though there are inevitable
deficiencies of sound quality - where
in this repertoire Luiza Borac on Avie
has swept all before her - the approach
to pianism says a lot for how Enescu
approached music-making in general.
With keen insight and
a decent technique, though by no means
virtuosic, I am reminded of Furtwängler’s
piano playing. The impression achieved
is greater than the parts, and achieved
in spite of a technique that occasionally
hinders. However everything is there
in spirit. A soft yet discernable bass
underlines a carefully drawn treble,
each aware of the other’s role and balance.
All in the service of interpretation
rather than ego.
This is Enescu in a
nutshell perhaps. The recording seems
appropriate to this towering musical
genius and most humble of men and that
sense increases with each passing moment
spent in the company of his precious
recorded legacy.
Evan Dickerson
see
also Part
I: Enescu the composer
