Ask
people which of Johann Sebastian Bach's Passions they prefer,
and probably 9 out of 10 will answer: the St Matthew.
The St John Passion has always been in the shadow of
its larger counterpart. In the Netherlands, where I live, there
is a long-standing tradition of performing the St Matthew
every year. No such tradition exists in regard to the St
John Passion. In particular the large number of arias make
the St Matthew Passion the most popular, and many also
consider it the most dramatic, although that is highly debatable.
One could also argue that its more concise character and the
relatively small number of arias make the St John Passion
the more dramatic of the two. The difference in appreciation
is not a phenomenon of our time. In the 19th century, when Bach's
religious music was rediscovered, the difference in the appreciation
of Bach's Passions was largely the same. The first performance
of the St John Passion in the 19th century took place
in Berlin in 1833, by the Berlin Singakademie, directed by Carl
Friedrich Rungenhagen. The reception was rather lacklustre in
comparison to the deep impression the first performance of the
St Matthew Passion in 1826 made. The man responsible
for this performance, Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, never paid
any attention to the St John Passion.
Robert
Schumann held a different opinion about the St John.
Like many others he highly appreciated the St Matthew,
but when he became acquainted with the St John - most
likely by just studying the score - he was very impressed and
from his writings one may conclude that he in fact preferred
the smaller of Bach's two Passions. In 1849, in a letter to
the director of music in Hamburg, Georg Dietrich Otten, he wrote:
"But do you not also happen to find it much bolder, greater,
and more poetic than the one based on the Gospel according to
Matthew?" He considered the St Matthew Passion "not
entirely free of lengthy passages, and indeed altogether much
too long - whereas the other is as if pressed for time, though
quite brilliant, especially in the chorus work, and what great
art!".
While
still in Dresden he started to perform choruses from the St
John Passion in public performances of his own choir. When
he moved to Düsseldorf, where he had been appointed director
of music in 1850 he planned to perform the entire work. That
wasn't easy: he faced the same problems Mendelssohn had to confront
in his attempts to perform the St Matthew Passion. The
main problem was the instrumentation: instruments like the lute
and the viola d'amore were no longer in use and substitutes
had to be employed. In addition a solution had to be found for
the realisation of the basso continuo. He also had to find singers
who were able to perform the solo parts. This in particular
caused some sections to be omitted in the first performance
which he conducted in 1851. Fortunately Schumann's conductor's
score for this performance has been preserved. It contains much
information about instrumentation, dynamics and articulation.
But as some of his notes are rather rudimentary a modern performer
has much work to do. Performers also have use their knowledge
of Schumann's preferences regarding performance practice and
of the aesthetic ideals of the time to create a convincing performance.
Even so a modern realisation can never pretend to be a 'reconstruction'
of Schumann's performance of 1851.
Although
the booklet contains extensive programme notes it isn't always
clear to what extent Schumann had 'arranged' Bach's score. Part
of the problem is that some changes had to be made at the last
moment because a particular singer was not available. The arias
'Mein teurer Heiland' and 'Zerfliesse mein Herze' were omitted
in Schumann's performance. Here they are both performed. Unfortunately,
though, the booklet doesn't make it totally clear as to what
extent Schumann left notes as to what instruments he had prescribed.
The programme notes are confusing about the aria 'Mein Jesu,
ach!' - the text which replaced 'Erwäge' in Bach's fourth version
of 1749. According to Thomas Synofzik this aria was elided from
Schumann's performance, "probably mainly due to problems
with the instrumentation". But in this performance it is
sung. According to Hermann Max this aria was "eliminated
on short notice from Schumann's performance". Do we have
to conclude from this that Schumann wanted it to be performed
and that he gave some indications in regard to its instrumentation?
That remains a mystery.
It
goes beyond the scope of this review to list all the changes
Schumann made in comparison to the original. I'll just give
some examples. As there was no tenor involved - apart from the
interpreter of the Evangelist - the tenor solos are set for
soprano. The basso continuo part is performed with piano, cello
and double-bass. In the arioso 'Betrachte meine Seel' the part
of the lute is given to clarinet and violas, whereas the two
viola d'amore parts have to be played on muted violins. Although
the aria 'Zerfließe mein Herze' was omitted by Schumann there
are indications in his notes that he wanted the oboe da caccia
part to be played on the basset horn - that is how it is performed
here. The most drastic change comes in the instrumentation of
the aria 'Es ist vollbracht'. In the slow section the part for
viola da gamba is given to a viola, whereas the basso continuo
is performed by viola and cello. In the fast section Schumann
adds parts for two trumpets, underlining the triumphant character
of the text. Trumpets in a Passion - that is probably too much
to swallow for many modern listeners, even those who could live
with all the other instrumentation changes.
It
is not easy to perform an arrangement like this. In particular
an ensemble which often performs baroque music - and will have
performed Bach's St John Passion more than once - could
easily play this work in too 'baroque' a fashion. Most of the
turbae choruses, for instance, are sung at more or less the
same speed and with the same flexibility as in baroque performances.
I sometimes wondered whether the tempi were not too fast. On
the other hand, the chorales are sung in a much more romantic
fashion, for example in sometimes ignoring the fermatas at the
end of the lines. The performance choices for the recitatives
are interesting. For this interpretation Hermann Max used a
book by Adolph Bernhard Marx (Die Kunst des Gesanges,
1826), whom Schumann admired. He "called for free treatment
of the note values and rests in keeping with the rhetorical
flow". Hermann Max rightly concludes that this reflects
the practice of the baroque era. Therefore in this performance
the recitatives are not that different from those adopted in
'authentic' performances of Bach's original score. The main
difference is that no appogiaturas are sung, which was common
practice in the baroque era.
There
are also some deviations from the original in music and text.
This is only referred to in the booklet but without further
specification, as that would take too much space. There are
changes which reflect the 'modernisation' of the German language
- often the present tense is changed into past tense.
The
key figure in any Passion performance is the Evangelist. This
role is brilliantly sung by the German tenor Jan Kobow. His
diction is impeccable, and he rightly adapts his articulation
to follow the romantic performance model. The original soprano
part is sung by Veronika Winter, who does so very well. Elisabeth
Scholl sings the part which Bach gave to a tenor. Not only is
this part technically demanding, its tessitura is rather high,
and it is perhaps due to this fact that Schumann didn't have
a tenor available to sing it. Ms Scholl does a marvellous job
here, and her voice never sounds stressed, not even at the top
notes. Gerhild Romberger gives a good account of the alto part,
in particular in the first aria, 'Von den Stricken'. I am less
happy with the other aria, 'Es ist vollbracht', where she uses
too much vibrato. Clemens Heidrich is excellent in the role
of Christ, and Ekkehard Abele is doing well in the arias and
in the role of Pilate, although the lowest notes are a little
weak sometimes. There are impressive performances of the choir
and the orchestra whose contributions are crucial to this interpretation
of Schumann's arrangement of Bach's masterpiece.
In
the chorales the sopranos are supported by twenty trebles from
the Kölner Domchor - the Choir of Cologne Cathedral. This is
in line with Schumann's own performance, where fifty trebles
were used. This is an indication that the vocal and instrumental
forces he had at his disposal were larger than those Hermann
Max uses, among them a choir of just 28 singers. Maybe the sound
his ensembles produce isn't that much different from the sound
of Schumann's forces. His performance took place in a concert
hall, whereas this recording was made in what seems to be a
pretty large church. The reverberation is often a problem, but
here it works in a positive way, making the ensembles - and
in particular the choir - sound larger than they are.
As
I have already indicated the booklet contains extensive information
about Schumann's treatment of Bach's score, and about the decisions
which have been taken to realise this performance. It is a shame
that the trebles of the Kölner Domchor are omitted from the
list of performers. There is also no indication that this recording
was made during live performances. If it was taken down live
this would explain some minor technical imperfections and background
noises.
This recording is testimony to Robert Schumann's
appreciation of Bach's St John Passion. One can only be
grateful that his role in the rediscovery of Bach's sacred music
has been brought to our attention with this impressive recording.
Johan van Veen
Veronika Winter,
Elisabeth Scholl (soprano); Gerhild Romberger (alto); Jan Kobow
(tenor); Ekkehard Abele, Clemens Heidrich (bass) 
[62:00 + 51:24]
