|
|
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A refreshing breath of fresh air, 10 Aug 2005
When Boulez first went to Bayreuth to conduct Parsifal in the mid-60's it was a highly controversial choice. It was not so long after he had expressed the desire to blow up all the opera houses and here he was, setting heretical foot in the most hallowed halls of all of them. And, what's more, in the famous production by Wieland Wagner that had been the special preserve of the likes of Knappertsbusch and Krauss since its inception back at the re-opening Festival of 1951. The performances, too, were just as controversial. Too fast, too superficial, too light and the orchestra found it hard to follow his batonless beat, they said.This recording was taken from performances a few years later at the Festival of 1970 - my first experience of Wagner in Bayreuth in the flesh, incidentally - and if there were any problems of ensemble back in 1965, they had been ironed out by then. As for the interpretation - well, yes, it certainly is radically different from the likes of Muck and Kna from previous generations. But, like all great music, there is not just one way to play Parsifal. What Boulez did is to let light and air into the textures and freshness and (in Act 2 especially) urgency into the tempi. Much of the Nature music benefits enormously. Try the passage when Amfortas is taken down to his bath or, better still, the Good Friday music - the latter sounds so 'natural' when it is allowed to flow and keep moving like this. Nor do the scenes in the Grail Castle feel short-changed - indeed, some passages like the somewhat banal hymn the knights sing as they leave in Act 1 positively benefit from a little more speed. The moments of real solemnity (as when the Grail is first revealed) do not lose any of their profundity in the clarified textures. Indeed, from the tremolo hush through the carefully tiered on and off-stage choruses to Titurel's passionate outburst, this is as moving an experience as ever. It's a bit like viewing a much-loved and newly restored painting with all the acquired patina of age removed. And Boulez understands as well as any of his respected predecessors that Parsifal is about pacing, not about tempi. Like them he gets the weight and proportions of climaxes - musical and dramatic - spot on. He is also, of course, very aware of the modernity of much of the score. For example, he makes us very aware that a passage like the Prelude to Act 3 is harmonically far more challenging and disorienting than anything in Tristan. The singers are a little less interesting and/or novel in their approach. James King is a good but not a great Parsifal. So, too, Franz Crass as Gurnemanz (a graduate of the Bayreuth chorus, by the way). Gwyneth Jones is as dramatically committed and as unpredictably squally as ever. Stewart, once you accept a slightly more gritty sound than a London or a Fischer-Dieskau, is actually an excellent Amfortas, as convincing in his anguish as either of them. I've always felt that Klingsor was McIntyre's best part in Parsifal - he has also essayed both Amfortas and Gurnemanz - and so he proves here: not quite in the Uhde class, but very impressive none the less. All in all, then, a fascinating reading of Wagner's last score and a refreshing counterbalance to the Knappertsbusch point of view. I'd hate to be without either but, if pushed, I'd still turn to Kna in 1951 for a truly comprehensive summation of what this piece is about.
|