When I first played this disk I wondered exactly what Inkinen
was trying to tell us. His interpretation of the 1st
Symphony seemed to be at odds with what I understood this
music to be about. I thought that perhaps his was some new kind
of revisionist, existential, view, where the conductor stands
back from the music and displays it dispassionately. I simply
couldn’t make head or tail of it. After a couple of hearings
I am starting to grasp the essentials of the performance. The
single most important point about this performance is that Inkinen
manages to dispel any ideas that this is a work heavily indebted
to Tchaikovsky. He displays a Symphony which, most emphatically,
is not a romantic piece in the grand manner; rather it has the
kind of classical sensibility to be found in the 3rd
Symphony.
In general the performance is good, but there are strange lapses.
In the first movement there is, occasionally, a lack of tension
which made me feel that Inkinen was more interested in the various
episodes rather than the movement as a whole, and at the moment
where the timpani thunder out the rhythm of the main theme,
in augmentation – 08:51 – the drums are almost inaudible, thus
weakening the climactic flash. Indeed, throughout the timpani
are reduced to sounding like dull thuds in the distance. Also,
Inkinen indulges in romantic rubato and he pulls the
tempo round to suit his vision. This is at odds with his overall
classical view; sometimes it jars and at other times it works.
The slow movement has lots of atmosphere and well built climaxes,
the scherzo is quite small in scale, and almost Schubertian,
whilst the finale has a nicely paced race across the frozen
wastes and the big tune soars as it should. At the end I was
left with two nagging feelings. Good though this performance
is, for me, there is a lack of real impetus; we’re spectators
and we’re not taking part in the adventure. At times, the orchestra
sounds understrung, but this, surely, must be the fault of the
recording, which places the players at some distance from the
microphones and the space weakens the overall effect.
The 3rd Symphony is much better
suited to Inkinen’s approach. Indeed, the interpretation is
more rounded than that of the 1st.
The opening movement is supposed to represent fog on the English
Channel and Inkinen plays the music with a slightly fuzzy, unclear,
veneer which is perfect, so when the climax happens, at the
start of the recapitulation the sun breaks through. We’re then
in the brightest light and the music is clear and precise –
but the timpani are till too backwardly balanced. The intermezzo
second movement is a delight. Inkinen simply allows the music
to float around the themes and weave a magical spell. The third
movement, which rolls scherzo and finale into one contains a
good transition from one section to the other and the latter
part is made all the more powerful for the former being somewhat
lightweight. The ending is all power and strength.
Although the performance of the 1st
Symphony isn’t to my taste, nor does it seem to be truly
well thought out, the 3rd is excellent
and this alone bodes well for a complete cycle of the Finnish
master’s Symphonies. The recording of the 3rd
is more immediate than that of the 1st,
with the orchestra closer to the microphones, and the detail
clearer and cleaner.
For a truly gripping performance of No. 1. please go
to the complete sets of the Symphonies by the London
Symphony Orchestra under Anthony Collins, recorded between
1952 and 1955, on Beulah 1-4PD8, Berglund and the Bournemouth
Symphony, on Royal Classics HR703862 or Barbirolli
and the Hallé on EMI Classics CMS5 67299 2 . All of these
offer excellent alternatives and insightful performances. What’s
more, I couldn’t live without them.
Bob Briggs
See also review by Brian
Reinhart
New Zealand Symphony Orchestra/Pietari Inkinen
