Program
Mahler's Symphony No. 9.
When I booked the ticket for this concert Anne decided not to go because of her worries about jet lag and physical exertion. Jet lag has not been too difficult for either of us, and Anne felt quite good physically yesterday - our first day of arrival. By then, however, the concert was sold out. Before we got to Amsterdam, we didn't realize the tram stops from the hotel to the concert hall were practically door-to-door.
As I described in the last entry, I didn't feel the acoustics of the concert hall was particularly amazing. For today's concert the orchestra sounded good enough, but the clarity I expected wasn't there.
Of course this is a difficult Mahler piece to interpret, both for the orchestra and for the listener. What is undisputed is that this is Mahler's attempt at portraying the struggle between life and death. By this time he had been diagnosed with an incurable heart problem, so unlike the Tragic Symphony - dark but not clear whether Mahler had specific events in his mind - death was clearly a presence throughout the ninth symphony. Or was it? While it is easy to argue life and death can be linked with the first and last movements, it is debatable, and often debated, what the significance of the middle movements are.
An issue of more interest to musicologists is if this is actually Mahler's tenth symphony, despite himself calling it the nineth. He had earlier called "Das Lied von der Erde" a symphony. He did not get to hear this symphony during his life time. A performance can last from 75 to 90 minutes, today's was on the shorter side.
What a piece of music says depends on the artists as well as the listener. Take the silence at the end of the first and fourth movements: does it signify nothingness, or entry into an unknown realm? While Mahler the atheist might not have believed in a conscious afterlife, he could still be trying to portray a "circle of life" situation. The loud passages: are they celebrations of life, or screaming at fate and the unfairness of it all (atheists still have a sense of cosmic fairness, I imagine). The conductor did hold his position for a long time after the symphony ended, I think the tentative clapping of a few audience members finally broke the "spell."
A particular interpreter may have a specific interpretation of the piece, but should he tell the audience? Or should it simply try to look at the piece as absolute music and let the listener extract what he wants to hear from it?
Today's performance didn't answer any of the questions I have about the piece. A great performance would still allow the listener to construct a message. I have been able to do so with many of Mahler's symphonies, but not tonight. So my remark is not particularly unfair to the music director.
For completeness, the movements of the symphony are (1) Allegro comodo; (2) Im Tempo eines gemachlichen Landlers, Etwas tappisch und sehr derb; (3) Rondo-Burleske: Allegro assai. Sehr trotzig; and (4) Adagio. Sehr langsam und noch zuruckhaltend.
Viotti is the NL Philharmonic's music director, and he is all of 34 years old. His name may lead one to think he is Italian, but he is Swiss.
Drinks are again included with the ticket price. Since there was no intermission, they were available after the concert as well.
Both concerts offered free drinks. Here they are on offer after completion of the symphony as there was no intermission.
Tram No. 12 got me back to the hotel in no time.
No comments:
Post a Comment