David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center. Orchestra (Seat HH107, $47).
Program
Pohjola’s Daughter,
A Symphony Fantasy, Op. 49 (1906) by Sibelius (1865-1957).
Fantaisie for
Piano and Orchestra (1889-96) by Debussy (1862-1918).
Concerto for Orchestra, BB 123, Sz 116 (1943) by Bartok
(1881-1945).
This was Gardner’s debut performance with the New York
Philharmonic; we had seen him before (per my blog entries) conducting at the
Met and at Mostly Mozart.
He began by talking a bit about Sibelius’s work and the
Finnish folklore behind it. He described
how the orchestra would sound for some of the passages (e.g., when Pohjola’s
daughter asked that a boat be built from the splinters of a spindle.) The protagonist of the story is Vainamoinen,
which was the name Sibelius wanted to give the piece. It was good that Sibelius was talked out of
this name as the piece would probably see even fewer performances.
The 15-minute piece utilized a large orchestra with a
traditional complement of instruments (no woodblocks, for example.) The story can best be characterized as one of
failed seduction, and the music is correspondingly limited in emotion. Instead, the listener is invited to listen
for the harmony, and to try to correlate the music with the verses printed in
the Playbill.
Debussy’s Fantaisie took a long time to come to fruition,
and many attempts to have it performed failed during Debussy’s lifetime (he
still had many years left when the piece was completed.) Those of us not into the intricacies of
balance between piano and orchestra would not understand the struggles Debussy
went through, and the piece sounded very “Debussyeque.” I would characterize the piece as dreamy,
will bursts of virtuoso passages scattered about. Andsnes sounded weak at times
to us, seated in the rear of the orchestra section. The movements are certainly not one finds in a
more standard concerto: Andante ma no troppo, Lento e molto espressivo, and
Allegro molto.
Andsnes and Gardner after performing the Debussy piece.
Bartok’s Concerto for Orchestra allows different sections
of the orchestra to come to the fore, usually not in a particularly loud
manner. The orchestra and sections did
an admirable job of proving itself to be competent. The five movements are (i) Introduzione
(Introduction); (ii) Giuoco delle coppie (Game of Couples), (iii) Elegia
(Elegy); (iv) Intermezzo Interrotto (Interrupted Intermezzo); and (v)
Finale. Per Bartok, “The general mood …
a gradual transition from the sternness of the first movement … to the
life-assertion of the last one.”
Whatever his message was, Bartok still felt the need to give a dig to
Shostakovich by mocking a theme Shostakovich used in his seventh symphony. By this time Bartok was already quite sick –
he would die a couple of years late of leukemia. The must be a lot of animosity or jealousy
involved.
After performing Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra.
The characterization for the concert that came to mind was “adequate.” No doubt many orchestras would work very hard
to try to reach the level of competence shown by the conductor and the
orchestra, but at the end I was left wondering “why this particular program.”
The New York Times review is quite positive, with the reviewer managing some sense out of the program, calling the pieces Gardner's favorite, a concerto-like work that is not a concerto, and a concerto that isn't quite concerto-like. Clever use of words, but still not enough to make this a well-conceived program. He also singled out some individuals and sections for praise.
Our drive into and out of New York was okay, despite traffic
reports that indicated some massive traffic jams into the city.
No comments:
Post a Comment