Trauermarsch
(In gemessenem Schritt.Streng.
Wie ein Kondukt - Plötzlich schneller. Leidenschaftlich.
Wild - Tempo I)
12 26"
2
Stürmisch bewegt. Mit größter Vehemenz -
Bedeutend langsamer -
Tempo I subito
14 40"
3
Scherzo
(Kräftig, nicht zu schnell)
17 07"
4
Adagietto (Sehr
langsam)
8 54"
5
Rondo - Finale
(Allegro)
14 46"
Gustav Mahler (1860 - 1911)
Symphony No. 5 in C sharp minor
Symphonie cis-moll en ut dièse mineur
Netherlands Philharmonic Orchestra
Conducted by Hartmut Haenchen
PTC 5186 004
DSD recorded
A
SYMPHONY OF SUBTLE FORM
Bernard Jacobson
Mahlers symphonic output is in one sense much smaller than, say, Mozarts:
11works (including Das Lied von der Erde and the unfinished Tenth Symphony),
compared with about 50. But if you multiply those numbers by the respective
durations of the two mens works, the result is two roughly equal figures,
and if the size of Mahlers orchestral forces and the complexity of his
textures are taken into account, it can be seen that in purely quantitative
terms there is a lot more symphony here. The Fifth Symphony is a characteristic
though not extreme example of Mahlers symphonic scale, and the formidable
group of tempo and expression markings that heads the movements is typically
Mahlerian in its mixture of German and Italian terms. The list suggests, moreover,
an overall structure very different from that of earlier symphonies. Here the
divisions are laid out according to two distinct lines of demarcation: there
are five movements, yet three parts.
The central scherzo ("Powerful, not too fast") stands alone. The outer
segments comprise two movements each, slow followed by fast in both cases. In
Part I a solemn funeral march ("With measured tread; rigorous, like a cortege")
leads into a strident quick movement ("Stormily agitated; with the greatest
vehemence"). Part III correspondingly links an exquisite Adagietto, or
"little Adagio" (marked "Very slow"), for strings and harp
with a cheerfully energetic rondo. In one sense this scheme can be regarded
as a gigantic expansion of a regular three-movement structure, with each of
the outer quick movements preceded by a slow introduction. That formulation
has its validity, and it is useful insofar as it underlines the new trend exemplified
by this first of Mahlers middle-period symphonies: the trend toward concentration
rather than expansion. Its three immediate predecessors had all, in one way
or another, modified the four-movement pattern of the First Symphonys
final version.
The addition of voices in one or more of their movements had introduced an unconventional
though not unprecedented element into the symphonic fabric. Now, with the Fifth
Symphony, completed in 1902 when he was 42 and first performed two years later,
Mahler moved toward a more classical clarity of structure. In this and the next
two symphonies he used a purely orchestral apparatus, though one that was still
vastly bigger than that of Beethoven, Brahms, or even Bruckner. But then,
even to say that the outer sequences of movements are "slow followed by
fast in both cases" is to oversimplify the extraordinarily subtle form
of the Fifth Symphony. It is more or less true of Part III, but only sketchily
so of Part I.
For what Mahler actually does in this remarkable pair of movements is to break
down, gradually and inexorably, the distinction between slow and fast material.
Thus the first is a slow movement that is constantly striving to move ahead,
and the second a fast movement whose urgency is constantly being brought under
restraint. It is a technique of interpenetration that Mahler had already tried
in the Fourth Symphony (particularly in the variations of the third movement);
and quite apart from the profound effect it was to have on his own later work,
it has also influenced the whole direction of 20th-century symphonic thought.
Among many possible examples, the music of such later symphonists as Allan Petterson,
Andrzej Panufnik, and Wilfred Josephs in Europe, or Roger Sessions, William
Schuman, and Richard Wernick in America, amply bears this out. The essential
unity of the two movements in Part I is furthered by strong and pervasive thematic
links. The suggestion of an exultant chorale just before the end of the second
movement derives from a tiny upward-aspiring motif, gradually evolved in the
course of the first as a countermelody to its main funeral-march material.
These links, indeed, reach out beyond Part I.
The embryonic chorale will be found interwoven, in the symphonys finale,
with a protean fantasy on the themes prefigured in the Adagietto. This same
chorale provides not only the melodic shape of the perky tunes that begin the
finale but also, in a grandly expanded version, the peroration that gathers
all the threads together at the very end. In this progression the scherzo
is no mere side-issue. Its tumultuous life affirmation is the pivot on which
the whole work turns. Try to imagine the effect the Adagietto would have if
it followed directly on the bleak, hollow ending of Part I, and you will immediately
see the crucial role the scherzo plays. It seizes on the triumphal ecstasy of
the snatch of chorale heard a moment earlier, and establishes it as a viable,
steady world-view instead of a piercing but transient vision. And it does so,
by no means incidentally, with themes like the one completed in the first
few measures by the obbligato first horn that are themselves forged from
the same material as the chorale and its companion themes in the outer movements.
As he told Sibelius at the two mens famous meeting, Mahler thought the
symphony as a medium should be all-inclusive like the world. But his unflagging
endeavour, torn as he was by spiritual and consciously racial conflicts of schizophrenic
magnitude, was to reduce the teeming contrasts of that world to some kind of
order.
The force behind a Mahler symphony is centrifugal and centripetal at the same
time. It is a force driving in equal measure toward expansion and toward concentration.
In the present case, the chorale theme and the tonality of D major to
which it eventually conducts the symphony after its C sharp minor opening
can be seen as the focus of the whole multifarious plan. When you come to the
end, you realise that the centre was there all the time, however shadowily at
the outset. And this, no matter how cavalier a composers attitude to traditional
patterns may be, is the underlying unity that has always been the point of symphonic
form.
“Very nice dynamics, and a lovely variation in tempo that never drags
or goes too fast. I can confidently recommend this disc” --vonwegen, SA-CD.net
“Recorded live in Amsterdam's famed Concertgebouw, the sound is not
overly reverberant, but nicely balanced. Played at realistic volume levels,
climaxes have shattering power, while quiet passages sound clear and focussed….You
hear lots of detail because the sound is so open and transparent. .. A very
good performance, superbly recorded.” ---Classical and Audiophile Music Review Archive
( issue 25)
“Haenchen produces an unprecedented robust fierce and vehement Fifth,
in many places overwhelmingly intensified” ---Kasper Jansen, NRC Handelsblad (August 2002)