Other Links
Editorial Board
- Editor - Bill Kenny
- London Editor-Melanie Eskenazi
- Founder - Len Mullenger
Google Site Search
SEEN AND HEARD CONCERT REVIEW
            
            Schubert and Bruckner: 
            London 
            Symphony Orchestra, Sir Colin Davis (conductor). Barbican Hall, 
            London, 23.5.2008 (MB)
            
            
            Schubert – Symphony no.5 in B-flat major, D.485
            Bruckner – Symphony no.7 in E major (ed. Nowak)
            
            
            A surprisingly small London Symphony Orchestra – ten first violins 
            and so on – assembled on the stage for Schubert’s Fifth Symphony. 
            Had Sir Colin Davis finally succumbed to the ‘authenticity’ bug? 
            That is scarcely more likely than Daniel Barenboim or Riccardo Muti 
            doing so, and the answer remained no, yet there was something a 
            little – and I do not wish to exaggerate – perfunctory about this 
            performance. The tempo of each movement was swifter than one might 
            have expected, the outer movements fast by any standards and all the 
            music more urgently driven than Davis’s Mozart. Schubert marked the 
            second movement as a flowing Andante con moto and this was 
            certainly what we heard. If not quite hard-driven, I thought that 
            Davis might profitably have yielded a little more. The ‘minuet’ (Allegro 
            molto) was taken one beat to a bar, although there was – 
            thankfully – a considerable relaxation for the rustic, rather 
            Haydnesque trio. This was recalled in a slight relaxation for the 
            second subject of the finale, which worked well, but otherwise there 
            was little variation of tempo. There were numerous instances of 
            finely-etched instrumental detail, for instance carefully-projected 
            bass lines, beautiful horn arpeggios at the close of the second 
            movement, and a telling bassoon underlay in the third movement’s 
            trio. It was all very stylish, not least in its unerring 
            articulation, and was without exception most beautifully performed, 
            but ultimately something was missing. Although I can appreciate the 
            retort that Teutonic profundity would be out of place in this work 
            and should agree that an attempt to transform it into late Bruckner 
            would be misguided, I am far from convinced that an attempt to 
            penetrate deeper beneath the surface would have been in vain. Karl 
            Böhm in his Vienna recording of the work provides an object lesson 
            in this respect, as indeed do many of Davis’s own Schubert 
            recordings with the Staatskapelle Dresden.
            
            The orchestra reverted to full-size for Bruckner’s Seventh Symphony. 
            It opened most promisingly, with a beautifully – yet never 
            self-consciously – moulded ’cello line, surrounded by shimmering 
            upper strings. How glorious the full orchestra now sounded, the 
            brass soon making us realise just how ‘full’ it was. There were in 
            this first movement slight yet telling hints of rubato, which 
            would not have gone amiss later on. For this was as about far from a 
            Furtwänglerian reading as one might travel, not that anyone – even 
            Barenboim – conducts Bruckner like Furtwängler any more. There was 
            an implacability that perhaps recalled Klemperer, although the sheer 
            beauty of orchestral sound had more in common, rather to my 
            surprise, with Karajan. Davis’s care with articulation and phrasing 
            were once again worthy of note.
            
            Then, however, something truly extraordinary happened. Instead of 
            the expected Adagio we heard the Scherzo. It appears 
            that this has been Davis’s practice in the past; it is certainly the 
            order to which he adheres in his Orfeo recording with the Bavarian 
            Radio Symphony Orchestra. But why? It is, I freely admit, refreshing 
            to experience a performance that stands for itself rather than being 
            prefaced by lengthy ‘justifications’, but in this case, I do think 
            that at least some reference in the programme to this unusual – to 
            put it mildly – practice would have been welcome. This is not a 
            disputed case, such as the movement order of Mahler’s Sixth 
            Symphony, but a unilateral reorganisation, all the more surprising 
            given that it hails from a conductor with a far from radical 
            reputation. As it happens, it worked better than I should have 
            expected, at least until the finale, which, coming after the 
            Adagio, sounded more lightweight than ever and simply seemed 
            incapable of taking the emotional and musico-dramatic strain.
            
            Much of what we heard, however, was once again extremely beautiful. 
            There was a sense of the apocalyptic to the Scherzo, not in 
            an overriding metaphysical (Furtwänglerian) manner, but it was 
            nevertheless present. The care taken to spring the movement’s 
            rhythms was much appreciated by this listener. Silences were 
            observed, though never milked; both here and in the Adagio, 
            Davis displayed a commendable ability to incorporate Bruckner’s 
            silences into an overarching phrasal structure. The ending of the 
            trio sounded oddly dissipated, but this was very much an exception. 
            Depth of tone was wonderfully apparent in much of the Adagio, 
            although there were lighter moments too, perhaps a few too many. The 
            depth of the strings did not preclude a full appreciation of 
            woodwind soli, especially that of Gareth Davies’s truly magical 
            flute. Again, the conductor’s moulding of phrases was exquisite, 
            without sounding appliqué. This being the Nowak edition, we 
            heard the cymbal clash suggested to the composer by Arthur Nikisch. 
            The finale’s opening sounded more than usually jaunty, which, as I 
            suggested above, was exacerbated by the reordering of the inner 
            movements. This opening phrase was, however, surrounded once again 
            by ravishingly shimmering strings. The LSO’s brass section soon 
            reached volume-levels very close to its fabled Chicago Symphony 
            counterpart, albeit without the slightest hint of brashness. An 
            unfortunate horn slip toward the end highlighted the otherwise 
            extremely high level of orchestral execution, which produced a most 
            impressive weight to the symphony’s conclusion. However, some 
            flexibility in tempo would have made this movement seem less of a 
            race and more viable as a solution to the ‘finale problem’ that had 
            dogged symphonists since Beethoven. I suspect that this would not 
            have been enough, given the reordering, but it would have helped. As 
            for the latter aspect, I can only ask again: why?
            
            
            Mark Berry
            
	
	
		       
            
            
            
              
              
              
              Back 
              to Top                                                 
                
              Cumulative Index Page 
              
                                                                                                    
                                    
                          

