State Theatre in New Brunswick, Front Orchestra (Seat D5,
$36.)
Program
Barcarolles for a Sinking City (2013) by Lowell
Liebermann (b. 1961).
Piano Concerto in G Major (1929-31) by Ravel (1875-1937).
Concerto for Orchestra, Sz. 116, BB 123 (1942-43, rev.
1945) by Bartok (1881-1945).
We purchased these tickets, at half price, from Amazon
Local. At their regular prices these
seats, located in the fourth row on the front left, would be quite expensive;
they were good value for the price we paid, though.
I do not go to a New Jersey Symphony concert with high
expectations; however, today’s performance was entirely satisfactory. This is especially gratifying given our seats
in front of the third row of first violinists, and that the piano sound was
surprisingly weak even though it was quite close to us. But let us get back to the program first …
While I have been to several NJSO concerts before, this
is the first time I saw its music director Lacombe, a youngish (at 50 years)
Canadian who has led the orchestra since 2010.
He began the program by talking about the compositions for the first half
of the program at length. Both Anne and
I found what he said illuminating – Anne even took some notes. The remarks helped, especially with the first
piece of the program.
The phrase “Sinking City” naturally makes one think of
Venice. Indeed the Lieberman piece was
composed with that in mind (the thought that it could be about Superstorm Sandy
also crossed my mind). Between the
Program Notes and Lacombe’s remarks I learned the following: Lieberman’s music
is surprisingly tonal for a contemporary composer; he lives in Weehawken, NJ,
right across the Hudson from New York City; the piece is premiered at this
series of concerts. The program – such as
it is – for the composition is (i) Funeral Gondola, evokes how Wagner’s body
was transported from Venice to Bayreuth; (ii) Barcarolle/Quodlibet is described
by Lacombe as a “name that tune” movement as it quotes many popular tunes (I
don’t remember him saying it, but I assume they have to do with Venice?); (iii)
Barcarolle/Ostinato/Carillon evokes the music of a music box; and (iv)
Barcarolle Qubliee describes the fading away of the city. Well, that’s what I remember of what he
said. In general, the music was quite
easy to understand, and pleasant to listen to.
So happens Anne and I were TV channel surfing the night before and saw the
end of Casino Royale where a gun battle in Venice caused an entire building to
collapse violently into the sea. The
fourth movement was nothing like that.
Lieberman came out to take a bow afterwards. Surprisingly the audience’s applause was such
that there was not a second curtain call.
The other surprise was myself. Over the years I have been exposed to many
modern pieces, my general reaction has been from “it was a mistake to come” to
lukewarm at best. Thus I have always
wondered what a “classical” composition by a modern composer would sound like. If today’s work is any indication, then
perhaps modern composers should stick to writing modern pieces, while not
emotionally appealing, they are at least intellectually so.
Golka is 26 years old and his picture in the Program
shows a youthful face. In person he
looks quite a bit more mature – helped by thinning hair, no doubt; he is a tall
man, and his knees touch the piano. That
didn’t seem to put any limitations on how “flexible” he was, though. The Ravel piece was no doubt demanding
technically – glissandos, cross-overs, double octaves, rapid runs, … He had no
trouble with any of those. I did remark
the piano sounded weak, most likely because it was at an oblique angle to us
and our proximity to the left side of the orchestra. Probably because of that weak sound, I can’t
say I was extremely impressed, but it was an enjoyable performance. The 20 some minute piece consists of three
movements: Allegramente, Adagio assai, and Presto.
Four years ago, I heard David Fray play the same piece
with the New York Philharmonic. Of
course I don’t remember any specifics from that performance. I did read the blog entry for that concerto
and found out what I wrote about the piece and performance generally carried
over to today. While that review wasn’t
all positive, I do take it as a positive sign: I go away with a similar
evaluation of a NJSO performance with a NYP one. Of course by doing so I may have managed to
insult both organizations.
The Program Notes indicates that Lacombe cut his teeth on
the Bartok piece. This is again a piece
I had heard a couple of times before, performed by the NYP. I generally enjoyed this piece which wasn’t
quite congruent with the dire situation Bartok was in (he would die of leukemia
soon afterwards, and was in some financial difficulty at the time he composed
the work.) The five movements are (i)
Introduzione: Andante non troppo – Allegro vivace; (ii) Giuocco delle coppie:
Allegretto scherzando; (iii) Elegia: Andante non troppo; (iv) Intermesso
interrotto: Allegretto; and (v) Finale: Pesante – Presto. It was not surprising that Lacombe didn’t
need the music score; it was somewhat surprising that there were long pauses
between movements. Again at the risk of
offending both organizations, I thought today’s performance was as good as my
previous encounters with the music.
During the intermission there was a “meet the musician”
event where several orchestra members stayed behind to chat with the
audience. Not too many conversations
were going on, as far as I could tell.
Another remark is the State Theatre which is no doubt seeing its best
days through its 100 or so year history.
The only other event at this theater we attended was when Ellie
graduated from UMDNJ in 2009. It seats
1800, and has reasonable acoustics.
NJSO had a black Friday sale and I bought tickets to five
concerts. While the prices were great
($32 per ticket including fees), I was nonetheless not sure if it would be a
waste of money. Given today’s
experience, I now believe I got a great deal.
No comments:
Post a Comment