Whenever I review one
of Michael Tilson Thomas’s mew San Francisco
Mahler recordings I resolve at the outset
that I will not mention the name Leonard
Bernstein. Looking back I seem to have
had mixed success in my resolve and
you will see that I have already failed
this time. The reason for this is clear
once again because the ghost of Tilson
Thomas’s admired mentor hovers over
at least parts of this new recording
and, as is often the case, secondhand
clothes never look right on the new
wearer. The main problem lies mostly,
but not exclusively, in the first movement
where the funeral march passages, so
crucially important to establishing
the initial mood of tragedy and despair
that will in the end be overturned by
Mahler, are tampered with by MTT in
much the same way that Bernstein did.
The difference is that Bernstein carried
it all off because he seemed to have
absorbed the music into himself so much
that it became part of the whole experience.
I never quite liked it very much or
approved, but it didn’t bother me too
much. Here with Tilson Thomas these
mannerisms seem fixed to the surface
of the music rather than embedded in
it. This is a march and marches have
to be regular - fundamentally rhythmic.
Anyone marching behind this coffin would
keep having to hesitate to fall back
into step. There is also a tendency
for the woodwind to be too "clipped"
in some of their phrasing that, at times,
suggests an air of jauntiness. I think
I know what Tilson Thomas is aiming
at - a kind of military brusqueness
- but I think he is just complicating
the movement with too many ideas when
less would have been "more".
Compare him with Rudolf Schwarz and
you get the march idea straightaway.
These woodwind players are very good,
but I do miss the unique "keening"
sound that Barbirolli gets from the
New Philharmonia though that is unique.
It’s not all negative, though. The clarity
of the recording and playing of the
bass end of the music, especially in
the coda, is impressive and moving.
There will be some Mahlerites who will,
nevertheless, warm to this whole approach
to the first movement, but I am not
one.
This mindset is maintained
in the second movement, just as it should
be and has the effect of knitting together
the two movements well enough. Indeed
the opening is excellent with any slight
lack of wildness more than made up for
in trenchancy by the digging in of the
lower strings. As he starts out Tilson
Thomas puts not a foot wrong in what
is one of the most challenging of movements
Mahler ever wrote. The clearly balanced
recording and excellent playing again
picks out every contrapuntal line up
to and including the central monody
of cellos which is treated with a mellow
nostalgia that is most affecting. It
is from about now that the interference
I noted in the first movement comes
back to cause more problems. The predilection
for "stop-go" tempo change,
this time on a grander scale, causes
Tilson Thomas to lose his way a little
through the complex argument. He drags
out the tempo prior to the chorale’s
approach and also seems determined to
make as much noise as possible with
the heavy brass, superb though they
are. Then he hurries up the chorale
only to slam on the breaks for the collapse
at the end. It is all impressively achieved
by the orchestra but I think it overheats
music that is already white-hot without
any more stoking.
The change of mood
demanded by the Scherzo is well delivered
because this movement is easily the
finest part of the performance. This
is a movement where a flexibility of
tempo, where a "stop-go" that
is confidently delivered, can enhance
this movement and so it proves. Tilson
Thomas allows himself to illuminate
every little highway and byway of this
music and even though he slows down
in some of the passages to a remarkable
degree he never loses sight of the bigger
picture or that element of dance that
is so important. The horn solos are
all superb, gloriously ripe and life-enhancing.
Mahler worried that conductors would
take this movement too fast and so I
think he would have liked this performance
very much, as do I. Here is Mahler in
"full leaf and flower" and
glorious it is to hear even at a duration
of over nineteen minutes.
The Adagietto starts
with a wistful serenity about it but
as it progresses the slowing down that
Mahler certainly asks for is taken far
too literally and also the mannerisms
in the wrong place creep back in. Simple,
heartfelt music gets distorted by trying
to wring out extra emotion. When you
are glad for the arrival of the last
movement something is not quite right
about the Adagietto you have just heard.
As it happens the last movement is delivered
most winningly and, with the excellence
of the orchestra in every department
keeping everything bowling along, the
recording strides home with verve and
confidence. The fact that the Adagietto
recalls in this movement don’t seem
to really register says more about the
performance the former movement received
than the latter. Let it be said that
the end wins through well after what
has been a patchy performance.
It always seems to
be damning with faint praise when I
find myself making the caveat that those
who are collecting a particular cycle
of Mahler symphonies can buy a current
instalment with confidence. It isn’t
meant that way but it does mean that
I would not recommend the individual
issue of that particular work over and
above any rival versions. As far as
I can tell only the Fourth Symphony
in this Tilson Thomas cycle can have
that accolade and this Fifth does not
equal it. It is, therefore, another
worthy addition to a fine cycle for
those collecting it, but other collectors
need to look to Barshai (Brilliant Classics
92205), Rudolf Schwarz (Everest EVC9032),
Barbirolli (EMI GROC CDM5 669102) and
Shipway (Membran 222845) to name but
four absolutely outstanding Fifths with
the first two remaining my personal
favourites for their overall grasp of
Mahler’s greatest work.
For the collectors
of the Tilson Thomas cycle, a fine Fifth.
For everyone else, look elsewhere.
Tony Duggan