SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL

SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL CONCERT REVIEW
 

Haitink’s Chicago Beethoven Cycle Symphonies 4 and 6: Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Bernard Haitink, Principal Conductor, Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Symphony Center, Chicago 11.6.2010 (JLZ) 

Beethoven: Leonore Overture no. 2

Beethoven: Symphony no. 4 in B-flat major, Op. 6

Beethoven: Symphony no. 6 in F major, Op. 68 “Pastoral”


The Chicago Symphony Orchestra’s Beethoven Festival continued this week with further concerts conducted by the Bernard Haitink before he completes his term as the orchestra’s principal conductor. While each concert so far has stood out for its quality, it was significant to hear a performance of Beethoven’s Fourth and Sixth Symphonies, works which deserve more attention alongside the composer’s other symphonies which are played more often. More than that, since the Second and Fourth Symphonies were composed around the same time in Beethoven’s life, with both premiered in 1808, it is useful to hear them both in the same concert.

The concert opened with the  Leonore Overture no. 2, a piece which may be less familiar than the overture Beethoven eventually used for the opera Fidelio or thatn the Leonore Overture no. 3, which has often been played between the scenes of the opera’s second act from Mahler’s time to the present. As annotator Philip Huscher mentioned in his program notes Leonore Overture no. 2 was actually the composer’s first attempt at his only opera’s prelude. It is certainly a piece worth hearing in concert programs, as evident in this well-paced performance. Haitink brought out all of the dramatic elements in a solid, balanced reading and the clear but full sound of the tutti passages was particularly welcome, especially when when tempos increased. The off-stage trumpet solo, so famous in the opera, came off with appropriate precision by Christopher Martin, with the distance adding nicely to an appropriate sense of sonic spaciousness. The concluding section, had a distinctly majestic feel under Haitink’s direction.

Beethoven’s Fourth Symphony, which was composed approximately three years later than the Overture, often suffers from comparisons with the two symphonies surrounding it. It is a work that benefits from Beethoven’s explorations of symphonic structure, an element that emerges readily in the hands of a conductor like Haitink. The careful pacing of the introduction served as a foil for the main theme, and the contrast came off nicely in this performance. With his clear phrasing of the exposition, Haitink delineated the themes deftly, before exploring them carefully in the development section. At the recapitulation, the reprise worked particularly well, with some varied touches which allowed further appreciation of the earlier content before the movement came to a graceful conclusion.

The second movement adagio is an intriguing piece, but it sounded less convincing in this performance than it sometimes does. The accompaniment figure, while important, seemed to dominate and overbalance the principal thematic lines at times. This might have been the fault of the seating or, perhaps, the placement of the orchestra on a single , level stage, without risers. Dense textures are not typical of Haitink’s approach to Beethoven’s symphonies, particularly in these Festival performances, and seemed out of place. In contrast, the Scherzo was highly successful for the east way in which the various orchestral sections combined under Haitink’s apt direction. The movement was elegantly quick, without ever sounding hurried or rushed and dynamic levels allowed the return of the Scherzo theme to sound new marvellously fresh at the movement’s conclusion.

In bringing the Fourth to completion, Haitink led the Finale masterfully, with a solid interpretation in which the structure was clearly apparent without ever overshadowing thematic content. Haitink balanced all the important factors beautifully, and more than that, arrived at an elegant reading of the whole symphony.

Beethoven’s Sixth received similar treatment, pointing to Haitink’s detailed knowledge of this work too. In the first movement, orchestral balance and tempi felt exactly appropriate to the music and to the orchestra, which certainly demonstrated its affinity with the score. The second movement brought about a clear presentation of the brook’s gentle meanderings and the bird call motifs were executed cheerfully by flutist Matthieu Dufour and oboist Eugene Izatov. An elegiac quality was always present – exactly as the composer intended – before the rudely interrupted merriment of the Scherzo that followed.

With the Scherzo, many details were present that escape performances by some other conductors, which also pointed up a further fine execution by the CSO. While string textures dominated the movement, the oboe solo by Izatov was distinctive in its elegant phrasing. The cellos, too, offered a fine reading of the soli passages, and subtleties like this made the performance memorable. The fourth and fifth movements followed without pause, and allowed for a cohesive progression to the Finale. While the programmatic ideas in the fourth movement received their due attention, the clear articulation of the structure of each movement was readily apparent. It was an outstanding performance of a work that the CSO deserves to play more often.

As with the other concerts in this Festival, it was unusually rewarding to hear such exemplary performances under Bernard Haitink’s baton but more than unfortunate that the audience for this specific performance was not entirely attentive. A gentleman behind me, for example, began his audible commentary with the downbeat of the Leonore Overture that opened the program and continued through the Fourth Symphony, with no efforts by those around him making him shut up. Since I was able to change my seat at the intermission, thanks to the helpful ushers, I cannot say if this distraction continued during the program’s second half. Such behavior is not only annoying to those who want to hear fine performances, but also shows blatant disrespect to the conductor and to Chicago’s great orchestra. Thank goodness then, for the enthusiasm of the larger number of thinking individuals who came along to hear the actual music.

 

James L Zychowicz