Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra (Seat
Y103, $67).
Program
Les Offrandes oubliees: Meditation symphonique pour
orchestra (The Forgotten Offerings: Symphonic Meditation for Orchestra; 1930)
by Messiaen (1908-92).
Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major, K. 488 (ca. 1784-86) by
Mozart (1756-91).
Le Desenchantement du monde (The Disenchantment of the
World), Symphonic Concerto for Piano and Orchestra (2012) by Tristan Murail (b.
1947).
Symphony No. 2 in D maor, Op. 36 (1801-02) by Beethoven
(1770-1827).
We bought these tickets about a week ago with the $59 per
ticket eClub promotion. After all the
fees were tagged on, the price per ticket ended up being $67. A “regular” ticket in this section would cost
around $100, plus fees.
We had a simple lunch at Ellie’s and Kuau’s new condo in
Jersey City with a great view of the Manhattan skyline. Afterwards we decided to spend the afternoon
there. Traffic into Manhattan was a
breeze, except for a minor tie-up around 40th Street. We had dinner at China Fun.
This was a relatively long concert, the durations of the
four pieces add up to about 100 minutes, and the concert wasn’t done until
about 10:20 pm.
The programming was quite interesting, a (relatively)
modern piece followeded with a classical/romantic warhorse for each of the
halves. Further, Murail was Messiaen’s
student, and Beethoven followed Mozart by a couple of decades in Vienna. One may argue this speaks to Richardson’s
alleged genius as a program designer, juxtaposing pieces in the order he did. On the other hand, I am not sure if the
relationships came out as intended (if indeed that was the intention.) A regular concertgoer like myself can
definitely tell the pieces are quite different, but won’t be able to get how
Murail is related to Messiaen contrasts with how Beethoven is related to
Mozart. (I had a lot of trouble trying
to put the thought into words.) My
thoughts on the concert are thus limited mostly to comments on the individual
pieces.
The Messiaen piece is the shortest at about 10 minutes,
divided into three sections: (i) Very slow, dolorous, profoundly sad; (ii)
Rapid, ferocious, desperate, breathless; and (iii) Extremely slow, with great
pity and great love. (I won’t bother
with the French.) The composer also
wrote a prayer to go with each of the sections: Christ’s sacrifice, human sin
(mortal disregard for divine redemption,) and eucharist (re-establishing the
balance by divine forgiveness.) As I
type this about a week after the concert, I have forgotten most of the piece –
and am quite sure I won’t recognize it if I hear it again. I do remember a few thoughts I had. the first
two parts were relatively short, there was quite a bit of contrast between the
movements, and most surprisingly, it sounded quite simple.
The Mozart piece was quintessential Mozart, written
during a time when his popularity in Vienna, while high, was on the
decline. It is a familiar piece, with
the cadenza written by Mozart, and played very well tonight. I often say I have trouble telling a good
Mozart performance from a great one, and it is the case again tonight. Our seats were a few row behind our usual
seating, and the acoustics was noticeably weaker. Still, the balance between the soloist and
the orchestra was good. I don’t think I
had seen Airmard perform before tonight, the one time we had tickets he
withdrew due to sickness. (I have no way
of finding out for sure since I am inside a plane.) The movemnts are Allegro,
Adagio and Allegro assai
I am quite sure I have heard Murail before, and was
somewhat familiar with the Program Notes description of him as mostly a
composer of spectral music, although tonight’s piece was not quite written with
that technique. On the other hand, some
instruments were to be tuned about a quarter-note lower than the others. I certainly can’t sing a quarter-note
interval, and the physics of acoustics tells me when two closely tuned notes
are played together one hears a pitch that is the average of the two with a
beat frequency equal to the difference in frequencies. Perhaps the tuning gives the music a special
timbre, but I can’t tell without an “AB” comparison, and I suspect most people
cannot. In any case, music should speak
to one’s heart, not one’s mind. A piece
like this one will remain a curiosity unless it also appeals to one’s heart. I must say, however, that there is that
potential. Although on the whole I would
equate my experience with that of Messiaen’s piece: I won’t recognize it if I
hear it again. This piece was jointly
commissioned by the New York Philharmonic the Bavarian Radio, the Royal
Concertgebaouw, and the Seoul Philharmonic Orchestras; so it will at least be
performed four times. It is called a
Symphonic Concerto as the piano collaborates with the orchestra rather than be
in dialogue with it (my paraphrase.)
Despite being the least played of Beethoven’s symphonies
(a statement made in the Notes that I somewhat dispute), the second is familiar
to most concert goers. I am sure I read
not too long ago in New York Philharmonic’s Notes that there is a dichotomy
between Beethoven’s odd and even-numbered symphonies, thus I was somewhat taken
aback by the statement “It is no longer fashionable” to do so. Having said that, however, I must agree this
Symphony is more on the radical and extroverted side, despite its being his
second. The most important issue, of
course, was if the performance was enjoyable.
It was. The movements were Adagio
molto – Allegro con brio, Larghetto, Scherzo (Allegro), and Allegro molto.
For some reason many in tonight’s audience found it
necessary to applaud after each movement.
It was funny at first, but became annoying after it kept happening. At some point Robertson turned around and
mutter, “yes, I like the music too,”
Speaking of which, Robertson was quite energetic tonight. My mental recollection that he was usually
quite wooden was dispelled by a re-reading of my earlier blogs. His gestures were certainly many tonight,
some I consider unnecessary for an orchestra as professional as tonight’s. Robertson leads the St. Louis Symphony, and
will be starting a stint with the Sydney Symphony in January 2014 (I wonder it
is an additional appointment.) Many had
hoped he would be Maazel’s replacement; perhaps he had given up since Gilbert
was re-appointed, and thus decided to conduct with abandon? I looked at next year’s programs and didn’t
see him as a guest conductor.
No comments:
Post a Comment