SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL

Other Links

Editorial Board

Google Site Search

Mozart and Mahler: Emanuel Ax (piano), Philharmonia Orchestra; Gustavo Dudamel (conductor). Royal Festival Hall, London, 21.2.2009 (JPr)


It was a matter of ‘concertus interruptus’ in the love affair of London classical music audiences with the young Venezuelan Gustavo Dudamel, because illness had kept him away from the first of an eagerly-awaited pair of concerts with the Philharmonia Orchestra a few days earlier. He is the much feted artistic director of the Simón Bolívar Youth Orchestra of Venezuela and came to fame when his conducting of Mahler’s Fifth Symphony helped to win him the 2004 Gustav Mahler Competition in Bamberg.

Everyone was waiting for the Mahler and a performance of one of Mozart’s most joyous and accessible Piano Concertos (No.17 in G, K453) may get overlooked but not by me because it was my highpoint of the concert. The restless appearance of Emanuel Ax’s bulky figure on the piano stool belied the detailed, multi-faceted, masterly performance he gave; alternatively intense and strong in the opening Allegro, then delicate and full of gravitas in the lamenting and rhapsodic slow movement, concluding with a light, airy, finale that was full of fun and so Papageno-like. There was wit and wisdom throughout and a genuine dialogue between the soloist and the orchestra particularly in the high spirited Allegretto variations. This was a wonderful discovery for me and I am surprised that it appears to be one of Mozart’s more neglected works. It is one his first piano concertos to exploit the concertante potential of the wind section and this is something the sublime virtuosi of the Philharmonia Orchestra highlighted during the Andante.

Let me put the performance of Mahler’s Fifth Symphony into context. Firstly Gustavo Dudamel has himself said about this symphony: ‘What everyone remembers about this work is the Adagietto. But for me the important thing is that movement's position within the work. One has to think of the structure as a whole, of how it is possible that a work that begins with a funeral march develops into a second movement filled with despair, then turns into a third movement filled with joy and happiness, which then grows and connects with love in the Adagietto, and then, by the end of the fifth movement, has arrived at hope.’

Then let us look at Mahler’s instructions for the three parts of the symphony: Part I consists (i) Funeral March: With measured step. Strict. Like a cortege; and (ii) Stormily. With greatest vehemence. Part II is ‘Scherzo: Vigorously, not too fast.’ Part III contains another two movements: (iv) Adagietto: Very slow; and (v) Rondo-Finale: Allegro giocoso. Lively.

Finally we must consider the historical context of this symphony composed at the height of Mahler’s love for Alma Schindler whom he married in March 1902 when she was pregnant with their first child.

So we have a work of contrasting dualities; despair and joy, nostalgia and anticipation, passion and pain, fear and hope. What did Dudamel give us? In my, possibly lone view it was all too episodic and neurotic. There was little of the ‘nature’ with which Mahler imbued his Wunderhorn symphonies and any there was was chopped down by the conductor like chainsaws attacking the rain forests. It started with an introduction from the trumpet that was a bit louder and therefore less distant than in some performances I have heard and Dudamel let the brass blare out from then on and throughout the performance. What begins loud has only one way to go and I found that the brass assaulted my ears as we progressed through the symphony. There was no respite or tenderness in the opening movement and the first glimmer of repose came about five minutes into the second movement with the Tristan moments in the cellos.

The centre of the Fifth Symphony is the Scherzo with its lilting dance-like passages and plaintive horn solos. Here we had too little haunting reminiscence in what amounted to a Danse Macabre. If there was any waltzing it was like the fast spinning ‘Waltzers’ at the funfair.

The eye of the storm was, of course, the Adagietto; here it was ideal in length (just under 10 minutes) and in the sublime elegance of the Philharmonia Orchestra’s excellent harp and strings. However this slow movement is long arching - and aching - and Dudamel kept the emotional temperature of this song without words rather on the cool side. We were back for more Sturm und Drang as the finale, the fugal movement, built a head of steam. Does it end in a paean of hope or a declaration of love – only Mahler knows? What Dudamel gave me, when this movement ended, after the music had tumbled along on its way, was a great sense of relief that it was over.

Gustavo Dudamel will soon become music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra and with his curly hair, boyish good looks, broad flamboyant conducting gestures and tendency to bounce around the podium he seems made for Hollywood. He undoubtedly has a long successful career ahead of him and at only 28 no one, surely, can expect him to be the finished article. I hope people will forgive the personal opinion of this jaded critic that his Mahler’s Fifth Symphony had all the gaucheness of youth. Mahler was in his early forties when he wrote the work and had already been buffeted by the vagaries of life. Perhaps Dudamel has had it too easy to have much sympathy for Mahler’s ironic vision of death, defeat, love and (ultimately) optimism. When he becomes a little more world-weary a more memorable account may evolve. The outstanding players of the Philharmonia Orchestra seemed to believe in him and Dudamel undoubtedly believes in his view of this work that he conducts without a score, yet I remained unconvinced at the end of the evening. I am sure the spontaneous standing ovation the young conductor got from large sections of the audience was because this performance clearly resonated more with them than it did with me.

Jim Pritchard


^{Back to Top                                                    Cumulative Index Page}