13 of 16 people found the following review helpful
Inspired and surprisingly lightweight performance,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Mahler: Symphony No.9 (LSO/Gergiev) (Audio CD)
Valery Gergiev's interpretations of Mahler have aroused divergent responses; I find them for the most part very appealing even if they come with a few idiosyncrasies. What struck me about this Ninth is how surprisingly lightweight it feels despite the utter intensity of the performance. Finally here is an interpretation that does not wallow in the myth of the "Mahler death wish". Some might think this inadequate, but when he wrote this, Mahler was not mortally ill, had realized that his heart condition would not kill him right away and was vividly praparing his 2nd season as musical director of the New York Philharmonic. He was full of plans, not yet having caught the simple throat infection that would eventually kill him. Death was a topic, but certainly not a preoccupation for Mahler when he wrote this symphony.
This is a performance that is not burdened by the sense of impending doom some conductors like to celebrate - quite the opposite to Horenstein's dark 1966 mono recording. Mahler may be dealing with images of mortality in this symphony, but he is doing it with a fair amount of critical distance, and this comes across very well in Gergiev's interpretation. The first movement approaches delicately, almost reluctantly, and before you know unfolds into a marvelous musical experience. The "sighs" written into the music have impact, but do not weigh down heavily on the listener, and the overall mood is very positive.
Granted, neither of the two middle movements come across with all the acerbity they could have, but they make their point well and while they don't have all of the potential sarcasm and dark humour outlined by Mahler, they do have lots of momentum - even though "sehr derb" (rather vulgar) is something the 2nd movement is not; still, Gergiev is a lot coarser here than, say, Abbado or Karajan. Gergiev handles the final Adagio very delicately: other conductors decide either to make this the musical equivalent of a dark death wish or the peaceful embracement of impending heaven; here there is no sense of "great significance", no over-interpretation of any kind, just a sense of falling asleep to greet another day on the next morning. It's a pleasant feeling that I like very much, as it remains lightweight, has depth, but is not drawing undue attention to itself.
This is certainly a recording that is to be recommended. For me it's not quite up to par with Sinopoli, Chailly or Nott, but Gergiev does complement these recordings well. It also appeals more to me than Karajan's famous 1982 recording, except of course for the final Adagio, where it seems inconceivable that Karajan could be bettered by anyone. That said, every Mahlerite should really have this one, if only for its surprisingly refreshing approach to the music.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 10 Nov 2011 22:30:15 GMT
Santa Fe Listener says:
"Lightweight" is about as far from accurate as an adjective could be to describe this intense performance.
Posted on 30 Jan 2012 16:21:18 GMT
I would argue that Mahler was definitely contemplating his own death before this symphony was written. Das Lied von der Erde is testament to that!
But a preoccupation with death is not necessarily a death-wish.
A couple of points are pertinent.... Mahler was suffering with sore throats from an early age. If antibiotics had been available those sore throats would not have led to his heart disease - which was developing also from an early age. The irregular rhthym at the beginning of the symphony is absolutely a replica of his own faltering heart beat! This has to be recognised as the precursor to 80 minutes of considering how to confront the inevitable!
Horenstein's Mono version of this was laid down in 1954 with the Vienna Symphony Orchestra (unfortunately not the VPO). It is a shame that Jascha did not have the orchestras at his disposal in those years that Gergiev is fortunate to be able to stand in front of these days
And, finally, if this performance is NOT even on a par with Sinopoli, Chailly and Barbirolli then why does it merit a five-star rating? Those three performances are surely not much better than four-star efforts themselves.
Frankly I think five stars are often too easily handed out in the reviews on Amazon
In reply to an earlier post on 18 Feb 2012 17:59:25 GMT
JayJayDee - Amazon's instructions are to use 5 stars for items you love, 4 for those you like, 3 for the OK and 2 and 1 for items you don't like or even hate. So it is supposed to be subjective. Reviews of art seek to be more objective (not "I was deeply moved" but "it is deeply moving") but I am not sure that is our role here, is it? I am not sure whether this reviewer intended the stars to represent his personal feelings about the performance or a more objective assessment of its worth.
He has probably merely behaved as most other Amazon reviewers behave (and as you describe in your final sentence) and, given this, can hardly be blamed for speaking in the language of the community?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›