92nd Street Y, Theresa L. Kaufmann Concert Hall, Orchestra (Seat R2, $57).
Program
Sonatina for Violin and Piano in G minor, D. 408 (1816) by Franz Schubert (1797-1828).
Sonatina for Violin and Piano in A minor, D. 385 (1816) by Schubert.
Chaconne from Partita No. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004 (1720, arr. Brahms for Left Hand 1877-78) by Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750).
“Sheep May Safely Graze” from Cantata No. 208 (1713, arr. Egon Petri 1944) by Bach.
Sonata for Violin and Piano in A major, D. 574, “Grand Duo” (1817) by Schubert.
We saw Leon Fleisher for the first time in Toronto this past April when the program he was to perform had to be modified to accommodate his right hand, which was recovering from surgery. When we found out he was going to perform that program at the 92Y we decided to give it another try, hoping that the hand would be fully healed by then. Evidently that wasn’t to be, we got an announcement a couple of weeks ago saying that Jaime Laredo will now be on the program, performing three works by Schubert. Turns out I saw Laredo, also for the first time, last April, so this was going to be a reunion of some sorts.
Today (i.e., day of the concert, I am writing this a day later) turned out to be a nice day, so naturally traffic began to back up starting mid afternoon. Chung Shu drove in and it was basically quite uneventful, with most delays caused by cross-town traffic. Shirley couldn’t go, and Daphne joined us instead. We had enough time to wolf down a sandwich before the concert.
All of Schubert’s four violin sonatas were published posthumously. He wrote a series of three when he was 19 (Program Notes say 20), and the publisher decided to call them sonatinas so they could reach a wider audience. We heard two of them tonight. While they were not particularly difficult (I am thinking of buying the music to give them a try), they are certainly serious enough pieces to warrant the designation of “sonata.” The last piece we heard was written a year later. It was very different from the first two, Schubert having matured a lot during that time.
The first piece (Sonatina in G minor) contains four movements: Allegro giusto; Andante; Menuetto: Allegro vivace; and Allegro moderato. The second Sonatina’s movements are: Allegro moderato; Andante; Allegro; and Allegro. The Sonata in A major’s movements are: Allegro moderato; Scherzo:Presto; Andantino; and Allegro vivace.
The Program Notes contains good descriptions of the pieces, and I find the sudden changes in mood of the works especially fascinating. Indeed Schubert seemed to be able to, say, go from a major key to a minor key and back to the major key in one line without the music feeling abrupt or disjoint.
In general the musicians sounded good, although both were unsteady at times, and Laredo sometimes had an intonation problem. I am not into chamber music as a listener, and I find it difficult to determine what makes a great performance. I guess one tries to enjoy the individual artists as well as how they work together. In that regard things worked quite well.
The two piano pieces left quite a bit to be desired. Fleisher has a compelling story, staging a comeback in his 70s from an adversity that effectively sidelined him as a soloist for 40 or so years. If one didn’t know whom he was listening to, one would conclude the performance was sloppy, and some rather simple passages were botched. As far as I could tell, the Bach/Petri piece is relatively simple, yet sounded muddled in several places. In that sense Fleisher had a better performance in April in Toronto.
After Brahms arranged the Chaconne for piano left hand, he wrote to Clara Schumann saying how pleased he was with what he had done. The Program Notes quoted the sentence “Now if the greatest violinist is not around, then the best enjoyment is probably just to let it sound in one’s mind” is puzzling. One could ask the question, if Brahms was talking so effusively about the violin piece, why would he bother to transcribe it into a piano piece? The notes at the Toronto concert says Brahms thought it wouldn’t sound quite right if he transcribed it for both hands, thus the decision to do it for the left hand only. The violin and the piano are very different instruments, with the piano being a percussive one. It is difficult, if not impossible, for one instrument to mimic the other well. How one gets the effect of harmony and counterpoint on one instrument is different from how they are generated in the other. While the mimicry worked well in some passages, most of the time it left one scratching one's head. We listened to the violin piece on our return trip (I have it in my iPod) and the piece hangs together very well as written. I can understand writing a piano piece (one hand or two) based on the violin piece, but in this case a transcription didn’t work. There, I critiqued Brahms!
Having said that, there were a couple of places where the counterpoint worked very well.
I have mixed feelings about this performance. The audience was not particularly quiet or circumspect tonight, and someone sitting behind me started a discussion with his friend with “I know his story is compelling, but …” Also, Fleisher is in his 80s, and I assume the physical challenges of piano playing must be catching up with him (surprising little, if his left hand is any indication.) His story is admirable, but at some point one has to concede. Since Fleisher didn't explain why there was a program change, as he had done in Toronto, pity doesn't seem to be something he wants. Reality is harsh.
Turns out I also had one of Fleisher’s early Beethoven recordings (Emperor Concerto) on my iPod and played a bit of it during our drive. It was marvelous.
Friday, June 03, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment