Mahler, Albums: Part I
Piano Quartet in A-Minor
There are not a lot of recordings to chose from for this early masterpiece. Some exaggerate ludicriously in the hope of sounding like his ninth symphony. But this is really a Brahmsian work. The Quatuor Elyséen does not seem to miss this.
They wail like a cortège of flamencoists drowning painfully in insurmountable debt. It is more commonly expressed as aggression, and starts to sound a little like punk rock. Luckily, we haven’t that misfortune here.
Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen
And into the cool tranquil night glides Gustav Mahler. Darker than a Caspar David Friedrich, Mahler’s very own words shine through the orchestra. At its head is Furtwängler, that famed conductor of Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner and Wagner, in his only Mahler recording. I can think of no better preperation. That is why he starts running, reaches perfection in one fell swoop. His only Mahler recording- oh that there’d have been another!
Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, who’s later Mahler recordings I know well, is less of a singer than a force of nature. His voice digs deep into the ribcage, reaching his song into the palpitating heart of the listener.
Symphony No. 1 “Titan”
“Titan” here is generally taken as meaning big, but it actually is a reference to a novel by the now abscure Jean Paul, about a young man finding his feet in the world. Though I am sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the plot of the novel, one can see the correspondence.
Put simply, there are two ways in which this rendition vastly exceeds the others; first, that Bernstein does not pretend he is conducting late Mahler, and second, that here there is no shortage of vivacity.
I hear an awful lot of monumentality in other recordings, of the cold dry marble sort. Now whether or not you take the discarded program seriously, what monumentality it has is that of a forest, not a greek temple. Though this sort of classicism can work, it tends to miss the mark.
The nature-references (“cu-ckoo”) are much subtler than the gareish sound-effects of normal, and the instrumentation is distinctive and the phrasing not overwrought.
Lieder und Gesänge aus der Jugendzeit
At the piano, Bernstein has triumphed with Mozart, Ravel and Gershwin, but in every instance with orchestra. Here he makes another departure, with Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau. Surely this is the finest Mahler chamber album ever produced! I include in this calculation that fellow conductor-accompanist Bruno Walter (with Desi Halban).
Fischer-Dieskau is at his usual pitch, but this time with more expression put into diction. Perhaps it is the sound engineering?
Des Knaben Wunderhorn
This is really the most confusing of Mahler’s works. The childlike is juxtaposed uncomfortably with the worldly. Very few works have managed to sound any creepier than the “Revelge”.
Ah, but then Dietrich and Schwarzkopf come sweeping things up, telling us stories, magnetically. They become less of a dust cloud and more of a thread to the touch. They do not just sing the notes prettily; every affectation has meaning.
There are times when Szell’s thirst for electricity obscures the soulful, but rarely does he actually go over the edge. And besides, it’s such brilliant elecyticity that I am inclined to forgive him.
Symphony No. 2 “Resurrection”
About as tense as a suspension bridge. That is this symphony’s superpower, and it seems to be Bernstein’s too. Even in comparison to his other performances of the work: the 1st movement is better wrought, the 2nd subtler, the 3rd dancier, the 4th more vocal, and the 5th more dramatic.
There is studio version too, with the same grouping. In this, the live version, the performance is better, though the sound worse. And musically, it is the performance that matters.
The soloists: Baker is just perfect for the “Urlicht”; here she is as moving as a cool stream, her singing threading softly between the instrumental solos, hanging solemn and tender at the same time. Armstrong is very nearly as graceful as Baker, so much so that it pains me to be so unacquainted with her other performances. They contrast perfectly in the the finale.
Symphony No. 3
I believe it was described by Walter as a sort of big hymn to nature, and accordingly it bristles with the eyes of the forest, particularly the famous scherzo.
Ift there hasn’t been any one perfect recording of this performance, then surely this is the best. Kerstin Meyer is good, but not ideal. And Barbirolli is up to his usual fervour, but not in every movement. Or perhaps it is the symphony’s fault? In my opinion it is Mahler’s least brilliant (which isn’t saying much!).
This recording’s worst fault is that it is not readily available.
Symphony No. 4
“Happy” “Haydnesque” they say. It is true, but only in a certain way. When has Haydn ever sounded so raw and tender, so desperately sad? The minor sections, they say, are there for harmonic contrast. Under Bernstein they are all tragedies.
Off the top of my head, the only other conductor that get’s this is Klemperer. Though he sullies the general mood with it, like Furtwängler conducting Don Giovanni. There’s someting mocking about his danciness, whereas Bernstein’s is tender and light-hearted.
Here the the approach to instrumentation is also more nuanced as well. Bernstein triumphs in bringing order to some of the most difficult passages, pulling them off with great regard for form.
And now the finale. Grist, gives here her finest performance; so filled is it with sublime purity that others, like Schwarzkopf, start to sound melodramatic in comparison.
If it is not a sugar cube, then perhaps let’s call it a mint imperial or a sherbet lemon.
