Filed under: Reviews | Tags: Adele Mayne, Aniel Cabán, Bahman Saless, Boulder Chamber Orchestra, Cobus Du Toit, Copland, Kent Hurd, Kim Brody, Martinu, Max Soto, Robert Bliss, Rossini, Soulima Stravinsky, Stravinsky
Saturday evening, February 12, I drove up to Broomfield to hear the Boulder Chamber Orchestra do a program of Stravinsky, Martinu, Copland, and Rossini. The Broomfield auditorium is really a perfect place for chamber music of any kind. It seats about 400 people, and the acoustics are quite adequate.
Maestro Bahman Saless, who founded the Boulder Chamber Orchestra in 2004, opened the program with Igor Stravinsky’s Dumbarton Oaks Concerto in E Flat Major, known as Dumbarton Oaks. Its nickname, Dumbarton Oaks, comes from the fact that it was commissioned in 1937 by Mr. Robert Woods Bliss and his wife who were totally devoted to the avant-garde arts. Mr. Bliss and his wife had just bought an estate in the Georgetown area of Washington DC, upon his retirement from the diplomatic corps. It is an impressive place with ten acres of gardens and a Federalist style mansion which had been built in 1801. The commission of this work was to celebrate their 30th wedding anniversary. The Blisses had the mansion renovated extensively before their deaths in the 1960s, and that renovation included a new library for the benefit of scholars, but it was not completed until 2005, after the estate had been given to Harvard University, which was the alma mater of Robert Bliss.
At the time Stravinsky wrote this concerto, he was renewing his acquaintance with, and studying the works of Johann Sebastian Bach, and Stravinsky himself wasn’t quite sure (and this is what was related to me by his son, Soulima Stravinsky at the University of Illinois) that thematic material, which is quite similar to Bach’s Third Brandenburg Concerto, was an unconscious borrowing of Bach’s theme. Yet, similar it certainly is. And there is no question that it is written in the Baroque concerto grosso style. That is to say the movements are fast, slow, fast. At the time the work was premiered, Stravinsky was recovering from tuberculosis which had claimed the life of his wife and oldest daughter. He was able to reach his friend, Nadia Boulanger, and she premiered the work on May 8, 1938, at Dumbarton Oaks. As a matter of fact, the original score is in the library at Dumbarton Oaks, where it is available to scholars, thus fulfilling Robert Bliss’ desire to fulfill “… a need in this country, we thought, of a quiet place where the advanced students and scholars could withdraw, the one to mellow and develop, the other to write the result of a life’s study.”
To be quite truthful, I was somewhat disappointed in the performance of this work. It seemed to lack the sharpness of Stravinsky’s rhythms and the energy that so characterize the works from his neo-Classical period. And if one wants to make a comparison, and why not, with Bach’s Concerto Grossi, it seemed to lack even the rhythmic drive of even those compositions. It was not until the last movement that I began to hear the rhythmic angularity which brings much of Stravinsky’s works to life, and helps to emphasize the harmony that he used. I have always enjoyed listening to the Boulder Chamber Orchestra, so I was a little disappointed at this almost lackluster performance – and this, in spite of the fact that the flute, clarinet, and bassoon gave stellar performances in all three movements.
During the 1920s, there were so many different styles of music literally being invented by composers, that it is very difficult to decide just which genre the Czech composer Bohuslav Martinu belongs to. He began his music career at the Prague Conservatory, but was soon asked to leave because he was considered to be an incorrigible student, because he was interested in too many subjects. He left Prague and went to Paris where he began to flourish, writing ballets, and truthfully, compositions in every genre. When the Germans invaded France he left for the United States and taught and wrote at the Mannes College of Music in New York City, as well as Princeton University. He became an American citizen, but he spent a great deal of time in Europe, and was made Professor of Music at the Prague Conservatory. In my way of thinking, he remains one of the most uncelebrated, but one of the most important composers of the 20th century.
The work of his which was performed Saturday evening is the nonet which was finished in 1959 (its origins come from his stay in Paris before the German invasion) while he was ill with cancer. He died in Switzerland on August 28, a month after its premiere which was July 27, 1959.
Make no mistake about it: the Boulder Chamber Orchestra truly seemed to identify with this marvelous piece. It had energy, dynamism, and they seemed to revel in the fact that this was a very difficult piece. I would also like to point out that this was one of two pieces on the program which they performed without the conductor, Bahman Saless. The instrumentation for this work is flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, horn, violin, viola, cello and bass. I really do believe that the Boulder Chamber Orchestra members identified with this work far more than they did the Stravinsky. It was so full of vivacity and spirit, that the contrast between the two composers was marked. Cobus du Toit, Max Soto, Adele Mayne, and Kent Hurd were truly exceptional. But, the whole ensemble was exceptional in this work. Yes, it is more lithe then the Stravinsky (whom Martinu admired), but there is no mistaking the fact that these musicians were more enthusiastic about this work than they were the Stravinsky. And while the Stravinsky is a difficult piece, it seemed to me that its difficulties were outshone by the Martinu. And it also seemed to me, that the musicians, for whatever reason, seem to relish the difficulty which was inherent in the Martinu.
The program stated that after the intermission, the Boulder Chamber Orchestra would perform Aaron Copland’s suite from the ballet Appalachian Spring. This was to be followed by the Rossini work, Seranata, which, if truth be told, is one of his lesser-known compositions. But I must point out a two items, one of which I found inexcusable, and the other, which I just found annoying. The program stated that Rossini’s dates were 1653 to 1713. In truth, Rossini was born February 29, 1792, and died November 13, 1868. Mistakes like this are evidence that the program was not properly proofread, which is a shame considering the stature of the Boulder Chamber Orchestra.
The item that I found annoying (and I stress that this is not the only organization to be guilty of last-minute changes) was the fact that, unannounced, the decision was made to begin the second half of this concert with the Rossini rather than the Copland which was stated in the program. I recognized the fact that the opening piece after the intermission was not Copland, but many in the audience did not, and I heard one audience member ask another who wrote the piece of music that was just performed. That audience member was assured that what he had just heard was Copland’s Appalachian Spring. In this day and age when serious music is suffering many slings and arrows, this kind of error is troublesome. While these two errors may seem like nothing, those of us who have been involved in serious music all of our lives need to guard against errors like these. After the Rossini was played, Maestro Saless came out on stage (the Rossini was played without a conductor) and explained that that had been the Rossini and not the Copland. But it is a shame that he did not make the announcement before the performance.
The Rossini nonet, which is from 1823, was written specifically for Vincenzo Bianchi for violins, viola, flute, oboe, English horn, and cello. It really is a delightful set of variations on an original theme, and as the program notes explain, each instrument is given its own solo in turn. It is a difficult piece, and again I was particularly struck by the excellent playing by Cobus du Toit, Kim Brody, Adele Mayne, and Aniel Cabán. This piece is certainly not performed enough, perhaps because it is not as weighty as other woodwind nonets. But it certainly is worth programming, and I was delighted to hear it.
The last work on the program hardly needs any introduction at all as it is one of the most famous pieces of American music written by one of the most famous American composers, Aaron Copland. As Maestro Saless explained before the performance, everyone the world over can identify this as a piece of American music, and I think it is because of the expansive themes, not to mention the inclusion of the Shaker hymn Simple Gifts. Copland used his trademark harmonies which theorists have labeled white key diatonicism. To make a very long story short it involves the use of key signatures and enharmonic equivalence taken as points of departure for the expression of the diatonic-chromatic relationship. I apologize if that sounds circuitous, but without room for a lengthy explanation that’s about the best I can do. It results in very spare harmonies, and sometimes cadences that involve a leap, rather than step-wise motion, to resolve. It is what sets Aaron Copland’s music apart and makes it so recognizable. There was no question that everybody on stage was in love with this piece of music, and it was readily apparent on their faces as they performed. And of course, there is good reason for that because it is an outstanding piece of 20th century music literature. There were a few places where the orchestra wasn’t quite together, but there was a remarkable rhythmic flow to the entire piece especially the seventh and the eighth section of this piece, which Copland calls Calm and Flowing followed by the tempo indication of Moderate which identifies the coda.
This was a good performance, but there were some errors that were unusual for an ensemble of this ilk. I do hope that future programs will be more carefully proofread, and believe me, I do understand that errors like that can occur. But I also point out that similar errors are the most easily corrected. I am truly looking forward to their April 8 and April 9 concert, because they are going to perform the Dvorák Serenade for Strings which is one of his most beautiful pieces. I also am of the opinion that Dvorák, like Martinu, is a well-known, but highly underrated composer. If you are unfamiliar with this composition you must attend the April concerts.
Filed under: Reviews | Tags: Dmitri Shostakovich, J. Mark Scearce, Judith Christin, Kim Axline, Lamont Symphony Orchestra, Lawrence Golan, Toni Morrison, Yumi Hwang-Williams
Thursday evening, February 10, I sat, spellbound, in Gates Hall listening to the Lamont Symphony Orchestra under the direction of Dr. Lawrence Golan. It was A Bridges to the Future Event: the ten-year anniversary of September 11. The orchestra performed two works, both of them absolutely enormous in their own way. The first (which was a Colorado Premier) was a work entitled “This Thread” by J. Mark Scearce, which is enormous because of its emotive power. The second work performed on the program, was one of the great symphonies of the 20th – or any – century: Shostakovich’s Symphony Nr. 7, enormous not only for its emotive power, but for its remarkable length. The glue that held both of these works together for this program is the fact that both were created as a result of human conflict. “This Thread,” with a text by Toni Morrison, was a reaction to the tragedy of September 11, 2001. The Shostakovich Symphony was written as a reaction to the German invasion of Russia in World War II.
I have heard of the composer J. Mark Scearce, but I must admit this is the first time that I have heard one of his compositions. But first, before I speak about his work, let me introduce you to him by way of a short bio statement taken from his website:
“J. Mark Scearce is the Director of the Music Department at NC State. Prior appointments were on the music faculties of the Universities of Hawaii, North Texas, and Southern Maine, among others. With sixty active titles in his catalogue, including musical settings of more than a hundred and twenty texts, Scearce’s many works for orchestra, band, chorus, opera, chamber, and ballet have been performed throughout North America, Europe, Asia, and the Pacific. The recipient of five advanced degrees in music, philosophy and religion, including the doctorate in composition from Indiana University, Scearce has won six international music competitions and his music has been honored by the Wellesley Composers’ Conference, the Buffalo Festival, the Atlantic Center for the Arts, The MacDowell Colony, Yaddo, Ucross, and the American Music Center. Scearce currently has seven works commercially available on compact disc on the Delos, Warner Bros, Capstone, Centaur, Albany, and Equilibrium labels, and on a Sony 4-channel SACD available online at frystreetquartet.com.”
When Dr. Scearce was at Indiana University where he received his DMA in composition, he studied with John Eaton. Eaton is internationally known as an opera composer and for his work in electronic and microtonal music. Eaton’s composition teachers included Milton Babbitt (who, unfortunately and sadly, died just a few weeks ago at the age of 94) and Roger Sessions. After receiving BA and MFA degrees at Princeton University, he joined the Indiana University faculty in 1970. He is currently Professor of Music Composition at the University of Chicago.
Scearce has also expanded our musical vocabulary by using microtonal technique. Instead of using a scale or a 12 tone serial technique where the notes are separated from themselves by the typical half step, the microtonal “scale” has “notes” that are separated by divisions much smaller than a half step. For example, a piano has 88 keys, and all of the notes on the keyboard are separated by a half step. The German piano manufacturer, Ulrich Sauter, has responded to the need of composers by building microtonal pianos. As far as I know, he is the only manufacturer to do so. On his microtonal pianos, instead of having 88 keys, there are 97 keys, and those 97 keys – the entire keyboard – encompass only one octave. From note to note, instead of a half step, there are eight divisions.
In Scearce’s composition, This Thread, his use of microtonal technique gives his work the sound and feel of searing pain, especially when accompanied by the text which was written by Toni Morrison, the first African-American woman to win the Nobel Prize in literature, and only the eighth woman to win the prize. The text was read by Kim Axline, Associate Professor of Theatre, as part of the performance. The work is written for orchestra, violin, and mezzo-soprano who sings the text that was read. Yumi Hwang-Williams performed the violin solo, and Judith Christin was the mezzo in Thursday’s performance. Both of these women were, of course, exceptional. It seems an odd thing to say, but the combination of text, violin, and the mezzo voice quality that Ms. Christin possesses, were integral in the overall sound and timbre of this piece. Christin has sung over 50 opera roles, and has performed with all of the major opera companies in the United States, Europe and in the Orient, and major orchestras in those countries. The quality of her voice matched this work so remarkably, that I wonder if Scearce chose her particularly to sing in this work. And, we all know that Yumi Hwang-Williams is consistent in her excellent ability to match her sound with whatever she is playing. And it is in this work that the timbre and resonance of the sound is so important. There were moments when I was reminded of Krzysztof Penderecki’s monumental work, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima, in which Penderecki uses the same compositional technique as Scearce. And Penderecki even commented that he was surprised at this sound’s emotional impact. Scearce is exemplifying his hope that such an event as September 11 will never happen again, just as Penderecki stated that, “Let the Threnody express my firm belief that the sacrifice of Hiroshima will never be forgotten and lost.”
In this work I was absolutely astounded at the very emotional, mellow, but intense tonal quality that the Lamont Symphony generated. I was also struck by how committed the orchestra members were in generating this sound. It was very evident that they were working very hard, and it was also evident that Maestro Golan was working them very hard to get the kind of sound that this composition demands. Christin and Hwang-Williams were in total partnership. I have never heard this orchestra play with such intensity and with such professional devotion to making music. As I said above, this was the Colorado premiere of this work, but it was also a premier of another rung in the ladder that this orchestra has taken. There is no question that many in the orchestra were quite young on September 11, 2001, but it seemed as though they had memories of it happening as if it were yesterday. This was a very somber and compelling performance of a very difficult work, and its beauty is undeniable. Yumi Hwang-Williams, Judith Christin, and the Lamont Symphony performed as if they were one instrument under the benevolent control of Lawrence Golan. What more could one ask for? During the intermission, I could only remain in my seat, and wonder at the emotion and the dignity of the music that I had just heard.
There is no way to under estimate the phenomenal impact that Shostakovich’s Seventh Symphony had on the public when it was premiered in 1941. Shostakovich had left Leningrad as a member of the Russian Home Guards, and it seems an odd thing, but his main vocation during the war was writing patriotic songs, much the same way that the French troops during the French Revolution wrote patriotic songs which, to make a long story short, led to the establishment of the Paris Conservatory. Of course, this also says something about the inactivity that Shostakovich faced as a member of the Home Guard. Nonetheless he missed Leningrad, and he swore that if he finished this Symphony, he would dedicate it to the “beloved native city of mine.” After its premiere in Russia, there was a considerable rivalry between the conductors Toscanini, Stokowski, and Koussevitzky, to see who would be the first conductor to perform it outside of Russia. This seems unusual in a way, because after the war it had lost its popularity, largely, because Stalin derided the work as prosaic and banal. But you must remember, that in 1948, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, and Kabalevsky, were among the composers and other artists, including the great Russian poetess, Anna Akhmatova who were called before the Central Communist Committee where they were told that their art was worthless and not in the true Soviet tradition. Shostakovich truly feared that he and his family might suffer consequences. But this symphony’s popularity began to grow again and it received regular performances. This is a huge composition, taking on the average of 70 minutes to play. But be warned – there are some performances that take fifty minutes and there are some that take almost an hour and twenty minutes. The less time a performance takes, the more one feels one is being rushed through the performance. And, of course, the longer it takes, the more it seems to drag.
Dr. Lawrence Golan took a perfect tempo at Thursday’s performance. And once again, the Lamont Symphony absolutely dazzled in this monumentally difficult work. Again the orchestra produced a very rich sound, and the opening theme after the introduction was well-nigh perfect in the violins. The woodwind section: (flute piccolo bassoon), all of them, performed exceedingly well. The second movement was almost ballet like in its grace and flow, and the pizzicato sections were perfectly together. The wonderful sound that this orchestra produced Thursday night was quite noticeable in the opening of the third movement. If one had their back to the stage so that the orchestra could not be seen, it would have been quite excusable to think that an organ was playing. The fourth movement, which begins without pause, was one of the most exciting live performances of this symphony that I have heard. I promise you that I am not exaggerating. You must understand that there are some performances where everything fits together almost miraculously. However, I hasten to point out that any miracle was made possible by the hard work of everybody in the orchestra, the podium included. The time it took to perform this piece went very quickly, even though I think it was about an hour and ten minutes. But, I assure you I was not counting because I was reveling in the music. As was stated in the program notes: “This symphony is the embodiment of the idea that despite the turmoil of war, the Soviet people would persevere in hope of freedom from oppression. The people of the United States of America certainly exhibited this same sense of unity and perseverance in the wake of September 11, and it is due to this correlation that Shostakovich’s 7th Symphony was chosen for tonight’s performance.”
Was it a perfect concert? Perhaps not, but what performance is ever perfect? It was so amazingly well done, and the students, and the soloists, and Maestro Golan work so hard and produced so much beauty, that a wrong note here or there, or an entrance that was a nano second late or early was superfluous. The minute the concert was over, the audience literally sprang to their feet. Golan recognized every section in the orchestra during the applause. They deserved it. You have to understand that the students got a true lesson in stamina at this concert. Not just physical stamina, but mental stamina as well, and it is my sincere hope that the ovation they received is ample reward for lessons well learned.
Filed under: Commentary
The other day while on the computer, I ran across a review of the Denver Philharmonic Orchestra that I had not seen before, even though it had been written October 11 of 2010. This review appeared in Westword and concerned the opening concert that the Denver Philharmonic Orchestra performed on its opening night. It was a favorable review, and even if it had not been, certainly the author, Jef Otte, is entitled to his opinion of the performance. But what attracted my attention, was that like many articles written in Westword, this was written in a very “hip” style with much use of the colloquial.
I once asked Westword, perhaps a year or two ago, if they would like to use some of the articles that I had written on music commentary and concert reviews. At their request I sent them some articles and I was told by the entertainment editor that my style of writing was too serious, and that I needed to make it more contemporary so that young people would understand it and read it. Apparently, I was naïve enough to believe that people, especially those who were born in the United States, knew the English language.
At any rate, the review that I refer to carries the title, “The Denver Philharmonic Orchestra opens up its season with chops to spare.” The title alone, unfortunately, caught my attention because I wondered why the author said “opens up its season” rather than “opens its season.” That may be the way many young people speak, but it is not good grammar, and I don’t understand why any publication would condone bad grammar from one of its writers. That statement, “opens up” is akin to the carelessness that is possessed by many who do not know English. For example, some individuals will say, “Well, I think I will heat up some water.” Why does one find it necessary to use the word “up?” Also, in the title was the use of the word “chops.” By now, everyone knows that is a popular colloquialism that means the ability to play. But if one is writing a review of a serious art, performed by serious musicians with an outstanding conductor and a dedicated audience, why use a colloquialism in the title?
Mr. Otte, in his first sentence of the review, tries to demonstrate his belief, mistaken though it is, that classical music is dwindling in its relevance (I have previously written a great deal about this. My latest blog on this subject was December 27, 2010, and was entitled “Music and Art rely on intelligence.”).
Mr. Otte writes, and I quote: “Maybe it’s all those tuxedos they have to buy everybody, but this Symphony is expensive. Which is a shame, because it just reinforces classical music’s reputation as something reserved for rich people who wear top hats and monocles, an exclusive party regular folks aren’t invited to.” Apparently he thinks that is a catchy comment, but it does not make sense logically. The people in the orchestra wear tuxes so that they will look nice for the audience. If it had anything to do with rich people who wear top hats and monocles, the people in the audience would have had on tuxedos, top hats, and monocles. But of course, Mr. Otte, and I’m guessing here, probably doesn’t know too much about serious music, because if he did, I would expect him to write a little more intelligently. It would also seem that he is of a generation that wants everything made easy and just for him so that he does not have to work hard at thinking.
Later in the review, he says that he felt sorry for “the guy” who had to stand in the back and play the triangle. Well, Mr. Otte, I think it’s wonderful that you feel sorry for a member of the orchestra, but really, you mustn’t. He stands in the back because he is a member of the percussion section and that’s where the percussion section is located. I have a suspicion that the triangle player would simply shrug at your largess.
In the next paragraph, Mr. Otte states that the soloist, Hsing-ay Hsu, came, and I quote: “pretty damn close” to giving a perfect performance. Of course, what he says in his review at this point is almost totally meaningless because he does not write as if he knows anything at all about music.
He reminds me of a young person in his early teens who is so concerned with making friends, that he or she makes himself or herself appear stupid so he/she will fit into the crowd. If Mr. Otte does not feel that way about himself, he is certainly writing to those people who do feel that way. Either way, it is clear that Mr. Otte does not feel that the individuals who read his article need to know proper grammar, do not need to know when to use proper grammar, and that intelligence is of a questionable necessity. Perhaps Mr. Otte thinks that only rich people who wear tuxedos, top hats, and monocles know proper grammar, and that regular folks just don’t care. He does not define “regular folks.” Whether he does or not, he is still insulting the intelligence of a lot of people in the audience.
In his book entitled “The Search for the Perfect Language,” Umberto Eco (please investigate him, Mr. Otte) does state that the result of a search for the perfect language might be hard to live with because of its orderliness and exactness. He goes so far as to say that the search might not even be successful. Perhaps so. But there is no question that Mr. Otte believes that language is another form of info-tainment, the definition of which should be “noise lacking structure and wisdom.”
If Mr. Otte wants to write, why doesn’t he care about it enough to do it in an intelligent way? If Mr. Otte wants to write about music, why doesn’t he care about it enough to do it an intelligent way?
Certainly he has the freedom of speech, but because of that, he thinks he is being compensated for the freedom of thought which he has seldom used.