|
|
MDT
AmazonUK
AmazonUS
|
Gustav MAHLER (1860-1911)
Symphony no.4 in G major [52:02] (1), Songs from “Des Knaben Wunderhorn”:
Urlicht [4:59] (2), Trost im Unglück [2:11] (3), Lied
des verfolgten im Turm [3:51] (3), Lob des hohen Verstandes
[2:21] (3), Rheinlegendchen [3:16] (2), Revelge [6:43]
(3)
Margaret Ritchie (soprano) (1), Concertgebouw Orchestra, Amsterdam/Eduard
van Beinum (1), Lorna Sydney (mezzo, 2), Alfred Poell (baritone,
3), Vienna State Opera Orchestra/Felix Prohaska (2, 3)
rec. April-May 1952, (1), Brahms Saal, Vienna 1950 (2, 3)
Song texts not included
MAGDALEN METCD 8004 [75:23]
|
|
The history of Mahler 4 on record is intimately bound up with
the Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchestra. Under Van Beinum’s long-serving
predecessor, Willem Mengelberg, they set the symphony down in
1939. This was not quite the first version – the symphony had
been recorded in Japan – but it was the one that established
the work in the public eye. Mengelberg was known as an admirer,
disciple and friend of Mahler; also as the ultimate in personalized
interpretation and “changements”. Van Beinum served a considerable
apprenticeship as Mengelberg’s second-in-command before taking
full charge after the war. Yet he was the antithesis of Mengelberg,
a faithful servant of the score, unglamorous but far from dry
or uninspired.
This Mahler 4 was recorded when memories of Mengelberg were
still vivid among many players. The curious thing is that the
typical string portamenti, of which Mengelberg was a
supreme master, remain substantially in place. They are executed
so finely that one cannot feel Van Beinum has tried to discourage
them. What would be really fascinating would be if somebody
could find a tape of him performing the same work as a guest
conductor, maybe in London where orchestras had long abandoned
portamenti as a habit and would have provided them only
if Van Beinum had specifically asked for them and worked at
them. Would he have done this, I wonder?
When I say this is curious, I mean that it is odd to hear so
much well-controlled sliding in the context of a performance
that otherwise treats the score with Mozartian purity. The result
is that the symphony is often made to resemble high-class light
music that periodically goes off the rails. Or, at any rate,
a slightly furrow-browed cousin of Elgar’s “Wand of Youth” –
pieces which Van Beinum interpreted with great insight. The
elegance of Van Beinum’s opening is magical but as the movement
develops there seems a refusal to allow the music its more uncomfortable,
even brutal, aspects. Or its more emotional ones – the cello
theme is kept “clean” in spite of the warmly coloured playing.
I found myself listening with admiration but not very much involvement.
Another symptomatic aspect is the treatment of the treading
bass at the beginning of the slow movement. In Van Beinum’s
hands it provides a sort of Schubertian perpetuum mobile.
Go to Bruno Walter, faster overall in this movement, and the
ostinato bass notes actually cause the music to stick at times.
Rather like a boat gently drifting downstream and sometimes
dragging its keel on the bottom. This combination of movement
with dragging is the essence of Mahler interpretation, the common
feature between the otherwise very different conductors who
have excelled at his music. On the basis of this highly proficient
performance I am not sure Van Beinum belongs in that category.
Margaret Ritchie’s contribution to the finale has drawn a fair
amount of criticism over the years. There are some ungainly
sounds at the beginning and at times she sounds like a pantomime
witch. An odd view of the “heavenly life”. On the other hand,
having complained that the tendency of the seemingly innocent
music to break into violence has been elegantly swept aside
thus far, I must say that Ritchie is not afraid of ugliness
in the first two verses, settling into something more heavenly
for the concluding one. The orchestra responds to her interpretation
and in truth I found this movement the most interestingly performed
of the four.
The recording is very clear in the upper register, less well-defined
in the lower. This is fairly typical of Decca’s work in the
early days of LP. The transfer is truthful, retaining a certain
bass rumble, which you quickly forget even on headphones. There
is no attempt to add extra brilliance at the expense of the
characteristic Concertgebouw warmth. In short, it is as though
you had the original LXT issue and high class equipment to hear
it on.
The battle-lines were drawn early over this recording. Comparing
it with Bruno Walter’s New York version – originally on 78s
– “The Record Guide” by Edward Sackville-West and Desmond Shaw-Taylor
(1955) remarked: “The two LP issues create a dilemma, less for
the keen Mahlerite, who is unlikely to hesitate, than for the
amateur of first-class recording. Van Beinum secures a good,
straightforward performance and, considering the complexity
of the score, the recording is a triumphant success. But one
only has to listen to the opening of the symphony in the Columbia
edition to become aware how much more idiomatic, how much gentler
and more lovingly phrased, is Walter’s rendering.” In reality,
Walter’s opening is so very much slower that you would need
to listen to several minutes of each just to get the hang of
what the respective conductors are doing. Granted that, I think
the judgment still stands. And I would add that the more abrasive
elements register better with Walter too, though they may have
been explored even more scarily since.
The Vanguard recording of 13 of Mahler’s “Knaben Wunderhorn”
settings was issued in the UK by Nixa on 2 LPs. Six were sung
by Alfred Poell, the remainder by the Australian mezzo-soprano
Lorna Sydney. Since we are given just six here, it is maybe
a pity that Magdalen did not simply concentrate on Poell. A
Vienna State Opera regular, he has an honoured place in some
of the most famous opera sets ever made, in particular as Count
Almaviva in “Le Nozze di Figaro” and Faninal in “Der Rosenkavalier”,
both conducted by Erich Kleiber (Decca). His vivid characterization
and rich tones are remarkably well caught by the 61-year-old
recording. Once again it is difficult not to agree with “The
Record Guide”, which found him “little short of superb”. In
the case of Sydney, the excellent presence of the recording
only emphasizes her lack of vocal lustre in the lower register
and unimaginative, literal phrasing. “The Record Guide” noted
that her “contributions are on a much lower level” and maybe
I should have left it at that too. Back in the early 1950s the
authors could nevertheless feel that “her singing, inadequate
as it is, cannot prevent the issue of these records from being
a most exciting event”. Little did Messrs. Sackville-West and
Shaw-Taylor imagine the choice that would face the listener
as the 21st century entered its second decade!
Felix Prohaska is a straightforward Mahlerian, but one who recognizes
the pungency and bite of Mahler’s orchestral colours better
than Van Beinum. There is a feeling of shared Viennese tradition,
as opposed to the sensation that Van Beinum is coming to compromises
with an orchestra trained to play Mahler in another way. All
this adds positively to our appreciation of Poell’s performances
and the orchestral sound, if backward, still registers well.
Prohaska can also be enjoyed in the Sydney songs, but it’s not
as if other conductors haven’t conducted the music well since,
and with better soloists.
A lot of companies offering LP transfers limit their documentation
to a track list and dates. So it’s worth pointing out that Magdalen,
though they don’t provide sung texts and translations – you
can find these on Internet quite easily – do give full notes
on the music and the performers.
To return to my original point. Van Beinum’s Mahler 4 takes
its place in the Concertgebouw Orchestra’s history. As well
as expected versions by his successors Haitink and Chailly,
this orchestra also appeared on the first Solti and the last
Bernstein versions. This in itself will provide Mahlerians with
ample reason to study it.
Christopher Howell
|
|