Gustav MAHLER (1860-1911)
4 Movements
Totenfeier (1888)* [26:36)
Symphony No. 10: Adagio** [26:52]
Blumine (1884-1888) [7:22]
Gustav MAHLER/Benjamin BRITTEN (1913-1976) ‘What the wild flowers
tell me ‘Arrangement of the third movement of Mahler’s Symphony No 3 [9:26]
Frankfurt Radio Symphony Orchestra/Paavo Järvi
rec. Alte Oper, Frankfurt *February. 2008; **October 2007; hr-Sendesaal, Frankfurt
(no date)
VIRGIN CLASSICS 50999 2165762 7
With the best will in the world I’m not really sure I see the point of this
disc, which seems to me to be a rather bits-and-pieces programme and not terribly
satisfying.
There is one interesting link between two of the pieces, in the shape of Benjamin
Britten. As Michael Kennedy points out in his characteristically interesting
note, Britten became an enthusiast for Mahler’s music after attending a performance
of the Fourth Symphony when he was aged seventeen. Indeed, there’s a live
recording of Britten conducting that very symphony in 1961 and I share Tony
Duggan’s enthusiasm for it (see review).
I was interested to learn from Mr. Kennedy’s note that Britten conducted the
first modern performance of ‘Blumine’ as a stand-alone piece at the Aldeburgh
Festival in 1967. ‘Blumine’ was the second movement in the original five-movement
version of Mahler’s First Symphony, but he excised it in 1896. It was not
until 1968 that the five-movement version of the symphony was heard again.
The ‘Blumine’ movement is occasionally included in recordings and performances
of the symphony nowadays – though it’s more usual to hear it by itself. Personally,
I find it an attractive, if rather slender and slight composition and I certainly
wouldn’t wish to hear it impeding the flow of the familiar four-movement score.
The best solution, perhaps, is that adopted by Sir Simon Rattle, who prefaced
his EMI recording of the First Symphony by playing ‘Blumine’. That leaves
listeners free to programme their CD player according to choice.
Järvi conducts a perfectly acceptable performance of ‘Blumine’ and the same
verdict applies to his traversal of the excerpt from Mahler’s Third Symphony.
This is a rarity of passing interest; an arrangement for small orchestra made
by Britten in 1941, during his American sojourn. Frankly, there’s little more
than curiosity value in this but, in fairness to Britten, it should be remembered
that in 1941 opportunities to hear Mahler’s huge score were rare – Boult conducted
the UK première six years later, in 1947.
The other two offerings are much more substantial. The Adagio of the Tenth
Symphony was one of two performable movements left by Mahler when he died.
As is well known, in the 1960s the scholar Deryck Cooke made a performing
version of the full score. Since then there have been some other rival editions
but none has really challenged the hegemony of the Cooke version. Cooke’s
edition – never claimed by him as more than a performing version of the sketches
– has been accepted by many conductors but, presumably, not by Paavo Järvi.
As I made clear when I reviewed
Michael Tilson Thomas’s recording recently, I’m unrepentantly in the Cooke
camp. This is another decent performance – in fact, it’s probably the best
and most convincing one on the disc. The orchestra plays well and Järvi’s
control and shaping is impressive, without quite rivalling the best exponents
of this symphony. But one is left with the question: why stop there? Indeed,
that’s an opinion that Michael Kennedy seems to share for he concludes his
note with the following statement: “If it [the Adagio] was all we had of this
symphony it would satisfy. But what follows completes a masterpiece.” Quite
so.
The opening item on Järvi’s programme is Totenfeier. This was the original
first movement of Mahler’s Second Symphony and its composition dates back
to about 1888. He added the title Totenfeier (‘Funeral Rite’) in 1891
but in 1894, before the symphony had been completed, he composed a revised
version of the first movement in the form that we know it today. Totenfeier
was then forgotten until quite recently and Michael Kennedy tells us that
when Mahler played a movement bearing this title in a concert of his music
in Berlin in 1896, the year following the première of the Second Symphony
it was in fact the revised version, taken from the complete symphony, that
was played.
In the last few years there have been a couple of recordings. The one which
I’ve heard was made in 1999 by Riccardo Chailly and was issued as part of
his complete Mahler cycle, coupled with his recording of the complete Second
Symphony (see review).
Structurally Totenfeier is pretty similar to the first movement of
the Second Symphony. However, listeners who are familiar with the symphony
will notice many differences of scoring and a few instances where bars were
either added or deleted by Mahler during the revision. These differences are
interesting but I have to say that in every respect Mahler’s second thoughts
seem to me to be infinitely preferable.
Järvi’s performance is somewhat disappointing, I think. The main criticism
I’d have is that he relaxes excessively in the slower, more nostalgic episodes,
such as the passage between 2:39 and 3:29. Indeed, the music almost becomes
becalmed at one point (track 1 6:34 – 10:10) where Järvi’s slow speed not
only makes the music sound laboured but also he then has to pick up speed
quite rapidly in a way that seems unidiomatic; one wonders how often he’s
conducted the full symphony. This tendency to linger excessively largely explains
why his performance clocks in at 26:36, whereas the altogether tauter Chailly
performance lasts for 23:10. Chailly also has several other things going for
him. One is the fabulous playing of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, a band
with the music of Mahler in its collective DNA. Furthermore, they’re recorded
in the superb acoustic of the Concertgebouw, where the Decca engineers achieved
some fine results. And finally, I think Chailly is a much better – perhaps
more experienced? - Mahler conductor. If one must have a recording of this
early Mahler draft – which certainly is not devoid of interest – then the
Chailly version is the one to have and his coupling, as an appendix to the
Second Symphony, is much more logical.
Throughout this programme the playing of the Frankfurt orchestra and the recorded
sound are good, if not quite of top-notch quality. Järvi’s conducting is efficient
but on this evidence he’s not exceptional as a Mahler conductor. The disc
is of modest interest as a collection of Mahler fragments but I wouldn’t regard
it as an essential purchase. Frankly, this is not a disc that set my pulse
racing.
John Quinn