MiV Home
University Centre Auditorium
October 27, 2006
According to Neville Cardus, the music of Sibelius found an escape "from outmoded romanticism on the one hand and from a barren objectivity on the other."
The work which marks the beginning of this escape is the Symphony No.2. While the full-blown Tchaikovskian romanticism of the first symphony has not yet been completely erased, in his second symphony Sibelius has already moved beyond the conventions of the form and, if he cannot yet see his ultimate goal, he is at least certainly on the right road.
János Sándor and the University of Victoria Orchestra concluded a superb concert on Friday evening with a truly magnificent performance of the symphony, once Sibelius's most popular.
Throughout the work Sándor shaped the music wonderfully, keep a tight rein on Sibelius's occasionally creaky structures, revealing hidden depths to his orchestration and unleashing a veritable torrent of sound at the climaxes. If I had to nominate a single word to describe the performance, it would, without doubt, be "intense".
There is no doubt that the work done in the Farquhar Auditorium this summer has reaped benefits - the sound is definitely warmer than previously - but the lion's share of the praise for the sumptuous sound of Friday's concert must go to the players themselves; whether it was the luscious strings, the characterful wind or the tastefully restrained brass, this current incarnation of the UVic Orchestra is evidently a force to be reckoned with.
Even during the finale of the Sibelius, which, as Harold Truscott has observed, is the work's "weakest feature", there was no sense of ennui, as Sándor and his players piled on the tension inexorably towards the music's fiery conclusion.
The first half of the concert consisted of Beethoven's third Leonore overture and Haydn's "Military" Symphony.
This latter was undeniably what some today would (disparagingly) refer to as "big band" Haydn and although orchestral Haydn is a less stringent test than a Haydn quartet, nonetheless it is by no means easy music, no matter how simple it appears on the page.
Sándor directed a stylish performance which was full of life and rhythmically tightly-focused; nor, despite the relatively large size of the orchestra (and the tastefully exuberant presence of the "Turkish" percussion section) did it ever stray beyond the bounds of good taste. In my notes I described the final pages as "restrained tumult" and I see no reason to amend that description.
Nor was the opening overture treated as a mere "throwaway" piece, an opportunity for the musicians to play themselves in. Rather it was a taut, atmospheric and - once again - marvellously controlled and shaped performance. The scurrying strings and the long crescendo of the final pages proved terrifically exciting.
It has been some time since I heard an orchestral concert which reminded me quite so forcibly of exactly why it is that I love orchestral music, perhaps above all other forms.
This year's UVic Orchestra is a formidable ensemble and in János Sándor they (and we) are fortunate to have a conductor of considerable stature, steeped in the Central European tradition; I look forward to hearing them again. Soon.
Incidentally, audience members familiar with the Sibelius might have wondered whether timpanist Jeff Donkersgoed had taken leave of his senses during the final coda, even though his thundering departures from the score were clearly being cued by Sándor.
In fact, he was playing the Koussevitsky emendation of the parts - which can be heard in the two recordings of the work by Koussevitsky himself (the first dating from 1935), that of Anthony Collins and both of Sir Charles Mackerras's.
It was the first Mackerras recording, in 1988, which led to a small flurry of correspondence in the letters page of an English review magazine - whose reviewer seems not to have noticed the altered passages - beginning with "what on earth is going on in the timpani part?"
In addition to the information about Koussevitsky's role (apparently Sibelius had heard and approved of the changes and supposedly wrote to Koussevitsky that he intended to incorporate them into a future edition of the symphony - alas, it did not happen) there was a letter from Mackerras himself, expressing a certain amount of surprise, as, for the recording in question, he had simply used the parts from the London Symphony Orchestra's library.
For what it's worth, Koussevitsky's first and Collins' recording were both made with the LSO.
For my part, I'm glad to have had the opportunity to hear the amendments in the flesh and confirm my opinion that they do indeed add a certain fillip to the work's conclusion.
MiV HomeLast modified: Sat Oct 28 16:00:11 PDT 2006