New York Philharmonic. Leonard Slatkin – guest conductor; Lynn Harrell - cello. 5/5/2005.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center. Second Tier Center. Seat AA114.

Program

The Throne of the Third Heaven of the Nations Millennium General Assembly (2002-04;
New York premiere) by Jefferson Friedman (b. 1974).
Schelomo (Solomon): A Hebrew Rhapsody for Violoncello Solo and Orchestra (1916) by
Ernest Bloch (1880-1959). Soloist: Lynn Harrell.
Symphonia domestica, op. 53 (1902-03) by Richard Strauss (1864-1949).

We had seats for the Saturday 5/7/2005 evening performance of this program. We live in New Jersey, so Saturdays usually work out better for us. However, we would like to drive to New Haven to visit our daughter who will have finished the last of her examinations at University (her graduation is in a couple of weeks), so I exchanged those tickets for tonight’s performance instead. As we expected, the concert was not well attended at all, I estimate it to be about 70% full. Even a city as big as New York can’t always muster up a good audience for its Philharmonic orchestra.

I had not seen Slatkin in person before, and had not heard any of the pieces either, so tonight was going to be a new experience for me.

Before the concert began, Slatkin turned to the audience and explained that the concert would be quite special. The pieces represented extremely personal statements by the composers. Strauss had already written a symphonic poem about himself (Ein Heldenleben) before he embarked on describing a day in his (family) life in tonight’s piece, Symphonia domestica. Slatkin promised that the audience would be fascinated by how the simple motifs (consisting of 3 notes) would bounce around in the piece. The piece “Solomon” is an example of Bloch’s work about faith, especially Judaism. The cello, representing Solomon, had a special meaning for Bloch. The maestro joked the opening piece had such a long title that he couldn’t remember it. The work was an expression for both the composer and the artist whose work inspired the piece. The set of elaborate sculptures was created by James Hampton, a janitor, from found objects such as tin cans. Slatkin talked about the difficulty of translating physical objects into aural ones, but the finished work reflected the sculptor’s deep faith. The composer was in the audience, and the performance of his work was dedicated to his father who had passed away six days earlier.

Friedman’s piece turned out to be quite interesting and pleasant to hear. It opened with the brass section accompanied by some background “noise.” A majestic theme was then heard over the cacophony of the percussion section. The music continued this way for four or five minutes before a lone viola led the orchestra into the next segment. The dissonance created by the violins and the cellos were joined gradually by the rest of the string section, with the timpani beats foreboding impending doom. Again other parts of the orchestra joined in with the strings providing a pedal point of sorts. It seems Friedman limited the tonal range and used instead dynamic range to develop the piece. Eventually we came to another climax, and then the orchestra was quiet again. When the new short melody was overtaken again by a similar construction, the technique felt a little tired and overused. According to the program notes, Friedman describes “the first half of the piece [as depicting] Hampton’s receipt of vision and the construction of The Throne.” About 15 minutes into the piece, a structured segment appeared, and it sounded like a collection of fragments from some familiar hymns with classical tonal harmony. One wonders if the glimmering sound was the reflection of the light off the objects in the sculpture. Towards the end we heard sounds that could be described as church bells. Friedman intends the second part to depict Hampton’s salvation. To produce the desired effects, the composer places trumpets and trombones in a ring around the outer edge of the orchestra, and placed two string quartets to the left and right of the orchestra to frame the string sections.

Overall, this was an enjoyable piece. The composer used combination of instruments to generate some interesting sounds. The audience showed its appreciation when Friedman was invited onto the stage by Slatkin.

Lynn Harrell’s entry onto the stage was energetic: he lifted the cello above his head as he walked to the podium. (The cello actually isn’t that heavy, but it’s a sizable piece of instrument.) The cello began the piece with string pizzicato as the backdrop. In contrast to the first piece, the full tonal range of the cello was utilized right at the outset. The cello’s tone was beautiful, and Harrell seemed to be able to make even the low registers sing pleasantly and clearly. Every now and then, however, I thought his intonation was a bit off. Even though a rather full orchestra was playing, the good balance between it and the soloist made for a good conversation between the two.

This piece was inspired by Ecclesiastes, where 11 of the 12 chapters describe the woes of mankind and that all is vanity. Bloch’s music seemed to go through different ways of raising one’s hope, only to plunge back into despair. The music was agitated in many parts. One can easily imagine Solomon screaming or tearing out his hair. Every now and then a euphoric sounding segment would appear, only to deteriorate into hopelessness. The piece ended on a sad note, to which Bloch said “This work … concludes in a complete negation. But the subject demanded it!” That was unfortunate. If one continues on with the 12th chapter of the book, one would realize meaning can be found in God, and that He should be remembered. Indeed the last two verses of Ecclesiastes reads, “Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

Strauss’s Symphonia domestica concluded the evening’s program after the intermission. By that time so many had left the concert hall that you could see a lot of empty seats in the preferred orchestra section. Which was too bad, as the piece was quite unique and had an interesting structure to it. It was about 44 minutes long, but is divided into seven sections each with depicts a particular aspect of the Strauss household.

The first section was five minutes in length and introduced Richard, Pauline his wife, and Franz their young son, with an assortment of relatives making appearances. It was delightful to hear, left an impression that the family led a harmonious and happy life, and that they complemented each other, but I must admit I couldn’t gleam from it the motifs that would describe the three characters.

The Scherzo had the motifs played in different sections of the orchestra and presented some interesting structures. It was surprisingly “heavy duty” for a supposedly light-hearted section, ending on a noisy segment. The slow lullaby section contained a pleasant melodic passage by the flutes and clarinets, with bassoons in the background. I was falling asleep together with Baby Franz, and therefore missed the seven bells marking the event.

The Adagio that followed described the grown ups’ private time. It had a relatively intense section which the program notes describes as “[making] the possibility of another Strauss child foreseeable.” It was mainly played by the strings, but didn’t sound erotic to me at all. The dream-like state that followed recalled some of the passion and contained a nice passage by the two harps and muted strings. I heard the clock striking seven very distinctly this time.

The orchestra launched into the Finale without so much as a pause – definitely not how I wake up in the mornings. The motifs made short, repeated appearances in this double fugue, and the listener was reassured that everyone was enjoying the day. Towards the end, Pauline’s motif kept asserting itself (nagging wife?) until the piece concluded with Strauss’s motif making a definitive statement.

Overall, this was a pleasant experience. The thing about modern music is that it requires more work on the audience’s part. I suspect my appreciation of the event would have been greatly enhanced if I had studied the music in advance. Also, vitality of a live performance depends a lot on the feedback from the audience; it was disappointing that not more people attended this particular concert.

See also the short review in the New York Times.