SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL

Other Links

Editorial Board

Google Site Search

Internet MusicWeb

Sibelius, Mozart and Schumann: London Symphony Orchestra: Imogen Cooper (piano Daniel Harding (conductor)) Barbican Hall London 19 10 2008 (GD)

Sibelius: Symphony No 7 in C major, Op 105
Mozart: Piano Concerto No 25 in C major, K 503
Schumann: Symphony No 2 in C major, Op 61

Sibelius’s Seventh symphony is a uniquely coherent, compact symphonic statement: a complex range of themes having a motific unity in one unbroken single movement symphonic structure: and as such, the best performances emphasise this conflation of difference and coherence. Notable performances from Mravinsky, Koussevitsky, Segerstam and Blomstedt understand this singular symphonic line casting the symphony as a great arch of inter-related ideas. I mention this because although there was much to admire in Harding's reading tonight I found myself attuned to specific orchestral details, to emphasis and underlined points; illuminating but detracting from the work as a whole. A point in question came in the string ensemble passage after the dark brief introduction and quasi exposition. Sibelius here was experimenting with older musical forms from the times of Palestrina and the use of Mixolydian harmonies: it is a beautiful passage of subtle polyphonic harmony but Harding lingered over it making it too espressivo, when it should cohere more instead of standing out like a set piece. The arrival, through complex gradations of polyphony and various tonal modulations, of the great trombone theme hovering between C major and C minor, sounded when it came curiously devoid of the central impact that the passage should register. It is not a question of loudness;  more one of the conductor pacing it in strict relation to the work's main themes and transitions. Here it didn’t unfold and emerge as it should. The rest of the performance, with some occasional messy woodwind ensemble, was no more than adequate in terms of coherence/unity despite some arresting brass playing in the final noble but dissonant crescendo which negates the preceding C major’s semblance of hope.

Like the ‘Jupiter’ symphony,  Mozart’s K503 is the paradigm of the classical concerto in olympian mode. As such it requires tremendous perception and maturity of technique from both soloist and conductor. Delightful though Imogen Cooper’s playing was, with plenty clarity and elegance, it didn’t quite have the enormous and subtle diversity and contrast needed;  something pianists like Serkin, Casadesus and Brendel (in his prime) could all manage. This was especially apparent in the great contrasting pianistic tonal cascades and runs in the first movement development section and recapitulation which take us into as remote tonal regions as G major, E minor, variants of C minor/major, and the tonal register of F sharp; which all align in perfect tonal symmetry at the dominant C major close of the movement. All this is excruciatingly difficult for both pianist and orchestra, who must at all times be in perfect accord with each other. Harding's conducting had its moments and he encouraged/underlined some very clear woodwind detail but, as in the Sibelius, I rather feel that Mozart at his most stunningly original doesn’t need underlining. It is all so exquisitely orchestrated and balanced and any attention, or underlining of detail, is even more (almost embarrasingly) unidiomatic, than in the Sibelius symphony. And why did Harding make a specious crescendo just after the ‘Maestoso’ opening on those luminous figures in the bass? A passage Tovey so aptly described as ‘mysterious soft shadows, that give a solemn depth to the tone’. Harding held back the majestic C major opening chords too much; Mozart’s maestoso markings are always punctuated by a sense of thrust and movement. Indeed the whole opening sounded unsteady and muffled; those ceremonial C major trumpets at the end of the orchestral ritornello were virtually inaudible!

The exquisite ‘Andante’ could have easily come from ‘Cosi fan Tutte’. Here at times I had the impression that Cooper wanted to move on more, Harding dragging somewhat. All a bit too slow for this movement's F major flow and grace. The E flat interpolations for woodwind and piano were well handled, although Harding's emphasis on woodwind sonority didn’t always allow for the sense of concertante balance.

The ‘Allegretto’ finale with its mock gavotte-like features, and sudden declensions into minor key territory was handled quite well and the sheer elegance and musicality of Cooper's playing was a special a delight here. But again I felt a lack of line and grace in the orchestral part; Harding's forceful rhythms lacking buoyancy and élan,  sounded very un-Mozartian.

Harding rather dragged the ‘Sostenuto assai’ in the opening of Schumann’s second symphony and I heard none of Schumann’s sustained p; it all sounded too loud especially in the trumpet theme. The ‘Allegro ma non troppo’ sounded rather four-square with prosaic phrasing. And why did Harding speed up for the movement's coda? The second movement scherzo ‘Allegro vivace’ lacked the kind of Mendelssohnian grace which conductors like Toscanini and Kubelik used to bring to it and Harding overdid the dynamics,  especially in the second trio. The wonderful adagio with its references to a theme from Bach’s ‘Musical Offering’ lacked lucidity and flow and Harding's rather awkward slowing down for the intricate fugato middle section sounded contrived and unconvincing. Harding encouraged some powerful climaxes in the finale, especially in the triumphant C major coda, but often it sounded merely loud and forced. And the ff timpani figures in the coda were bashed out, sounding crude and bombastic rather than noble and arresting.

Geoff Diggines


^{Back to Top                                                    Cumulative Index Page}