Wilhelm
Furtwängler (1886-1954)
Symphonisches
Konzert / Symphonic Concerto in B Minor for Piano and Orchestra
(1954
version)
As
a composer Wilhelm Furtwänglerwas only too well aware of the probable
prejudices he would encounter. The "world", he wrote in his
Notebooks, would not take "seriously" the compositions of one known
for 35 years as a conductor. He adds his own view of himself as, from the
outset of his career, a conducting composer rather than a composing conductor.
Another problem arose from criticism that accused him of rejecting wholesale
contemporary music, a charge he indignantly rejects, while insisting that the
future lay with tonality and consistent atonality, rather than with the
eclectic individualism that he certainly found unsatisfactory.
Wilhelm
Furtwängler was born in 1886 in Berlin, the son of the archaeologist Adolf
Furtwängler and his wife, the painter Adelheid Wendt. The family later moved to
Munich, where his father became a professor in 1894, and there he was educated
privately under the tutelage of the archaeologist Ludwig Curtius and the
sculptor Adolf Hildebrand. His early musical education was with the art
historian and musicologist Walter Riezler, continued with Joseph Rheinberger
and Max von Schillings.
As
an adolescent Furtwängler wrote a great deal of music. By the age of twelve he
had completed a choral setting of Die erste Walpurgisnacht from Goethe's Faust
in addition to other compositions of various degrees of complexity. The failure
of his Symphony in D, performed in Breslau in the winter of 1903, may have
deflected him from a career as a composer and turned his practical attention
towards conducting, whatever his private creative ambitions. His early
experience as a conductor took him from Breslau to Zurich and to the
opera-houses of Munich and Strasbourg, before his appointment to Lübeck, where
he remained for four years from 1911 to 1915. There followed a period of five
years at the Opera in Mannheim and after the war engagements in Vienna and a
chance to study with the influential theorist Heinrich Schenker.
The
death of Nikisch in 1922 brought Furtwängler to the position that he was to
retain for the rest of his life as conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic
Orchestra, coupled, for some six years, with direction of the Leipzig
Gewandhaus Orchestra and a continuing association with the Vienna Philharmonic.
A brief association with the New York Philharmonic Orchestra from 1925 earned
him the respect of musicians and audiences, but the enmity of influential critics,
who compared him unfavourably with Toscanini and the latter's allegedly
objective approach to interpretation.
As
a conductor Furtwängler had his own idiosyncrasies. He approached his task with
the imagination and creative power of a composer, so that some critics
castigated his magisterial performances as a distortion of the original
composer's intentions. He himself regarded a slavish adherence to the text as a
sign of artistic insecurity, analysing the problem as one of excessive reaction
to the subjective and arbitrary individualism of the previous generation of
interpreters.
During
the years of National Socialism in Germany, Furtwängler occupied a position of
some outward ambiguity. While firmly opposed to the new régime, he decided that
he should remain in Germany, rather than seek exile, as so many of his
colleagues did. The condemnation of Hindemith's opera Mathis der Maler in 1934
led him to resign his official positions at the Berlin State Opera, the Berlin
Philharmonic and in the Reichsmusikkammer, in what threatened to be a cause
célèbre particularly damaging to the National Socialist Party, although he was
later induced to reach a compromise. Furtwängler himself deeply resented the
intrusion of politics into artistic matters. His international reputation at
first ensured him a measure of personal safety and he was able to exert some
influence in favour of musicians of Jewish extraction, persecuted by the
régime. This did not save him, however, from hostility abroad afterthe war. In
January 1945 he escaped imminent arrest in Germany by taking refuge in
Switzerland. On his return he was detained by the occupying powers in
Innsbruck, before being exonerated in December 1946. Nevertheless ill-informed
prejudice against him remained in certain quarters, although this was generally
overcome in Europe by the time of his death in 1954.
Keith
Anderson
The
twentieth century has seen a number of performing musicians who feel the urge
to make use of their knowledge of music by composing. Among them musicians such
as Yves Nat, Artur Schnabel or Otto Klemperer seem primarily performers. With
Wilhelm Furtwängler the situation is very different. Rejecting the description
interpreter-composer, he claimed throughout his life the right to the title
composer-interpreter. In his own words he declared himself not a conductor who
composed but a composer who conducted.
Outstanding
among the compositions that witness to Furtwängler's creative ability is the
Symphonic Concerto in B minor for piano and orchestra. Although it is difficult
to give any precise date for the origin of the work, Furtwängler was certainly
occupied with it in 1925. In a letter of 27th July 1930 to John Knittel he
remarked that it was imperative that the Concerto, work on which had already lasted
several years, should soon reach an end. In fact it was only completed in 1936,
in Egypt, and first performed on 26th October 1937 by the pianist Edwin Fischer
with the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra, under the direction of the composer.
Revised by Furtwängler, the work was finally published in 1954. These changes
affect the structure rather than the musical argument. It is, in any case, the
final, 1954 version that David Lively and Alfred Walter have used for the
purposes of the present recording.
The
Symphonic Concerto exemplifies clearly the style of Furtwängler, a style that
has an intellectual as much as a musical basis. Fundamental to his work is the
conjoining of the organic, the duality and the tragic. This symbiosis has for
corollary three ideas which the creator invests with a symbolic dimension:
form, tonality and symphonic function. These are the three keystones of
Furtwängler's aesthetic.
The
concept of a symphonic concerto is not foreign to this way of thinking. If the
work is not to be identified as a symphonie concertante, one may rather find
its origin in the thematic duality inherent in sonata-form, as Beethoven
envisaged it. In Furtwängler's Symphonic Concerto the opposing principles are
not exclusively thematic, but seem essential to the conveyance of the musical
message. In this way the orchestra and the piano become two separate symphonic
entities, struggling against one another, uniting. loving and hating.
Furtwängler himself told Ludwig Curtius that his concerto could be compared to
a vast tragedy of Titans.
The
influence on Furtwängler of the two piano concertos of Brahms was as definitive
as on the concertos of Reger or Pfitzner. There are the massive architectural
proportions and the symphonic character of the piano part that demand a very
physical involvement from the soloist. At the same time there are a number of
similarities in structure and in musical language. These include the important
agogic part played by the transitions, the writing in thirds and sixths and the
use of the rhythmic hemiola. The cyclic basis of the work and the use of
counterpoint in a tradition stemming from Bach are all part of the legacy of
Brahms.
In
spite of the traces of the Austro-German aesthetic of the end of the nineteenth
century that characterise it, the Concerto in B minor is not untypical or
impersonal. Drawing on his perfect mastery of orchestral technique, Furtwängler
succeeds in creating a singular fusion of sound and harmonic language. In these
circumstances the varied timbres of specific harmonic colours coming from this
mysterious musical alchemy are always justified by expression. Furtwängler's
concerto has no element in it that is without its purpose.
One
of the modern characteristics that emerges from the concerto is the elaborate
development of harmonic series, which, subject to analysis, reveal various
ambiguities. It must be added that the Symphonic Concerto is extremely
difficult and the piano writing in the virtuoso solo part is less naturally
pianistic than that of Brahms.
Of
the three movements of the concerto, the first is the most considerable. The
direction Schwer - Pesante indicates the intense seriousness and inexorably
tragic character of the music. In structure the movement is in the three
sections of sonata-form. Four themes emerge from the various motifs of the
exposition. At first the sombre B minor ascending motif of the introduction
appears, recalling the opening of the Second Symphony of the same composer, and
the mournful singing phrase in F sharp minor in the violins, accompanied by
pizzicato violas and cellos. Then, after the orchestral repetition of a
modified version of the introductory motif, the piano announces the third
theme, in F sharp minor, opening the second section of the exposition. With its
repeated notes, this phrase recalls the first piano theme of the First Piano
Concerto of Brahms. Later, after a repetition of the second motif, the violins
tenderly introduce the fourth theme in A major, gently lyrical in feeling, to
be repeated passionately by the piano. The introductory motif ends the
exposition in a wild outburst of orchestral sound.
The
development is marked by an important contrapuntal element and introduces a new
theme, sadly resigned in mood, and based initiallyon the arpeggio of D minor.
Later the tension reaches its height with angrily hammered chords at the
extremes of the keyboard, leading to the return of the introductory motif which
now triumphs in the orchestra, before sinking into an abyss of terror. This
apocalyptic vision is the climax of the first movement.
The
recapitulation that follows consists of three episodes. The first brings back
the four principal themes, in the piano and the orchestra. The second, which
follows the repetition of the introductory motif, is a piano cadenza, in which
only the fourth theme is omitted. A coda leads to a short presto, its motoric
impulse in contrast with the general aesthetic of the movement.
The
second movement, in D major, marked Adagio solenne, is in ternary form and is
among the most inspired creations of Furtwängler. Leaving the tumult of what
has gone before, the first bars have an air of meditative serenity. The
orchestra, dreamy and contemplative, murmurs in radiantly translucent textures,
then, in a plaintive voice, the piano announces the second motif, peaceful and
sadly resigned, and the third, based on a descending figure. This last precedes
the return of the orchestra. Finally, after a short episode of fuller sonority,
the first motif reappears in the orchestra, ending the first section of the
movement. The central section starts with the piano and the answer of the
second motif transposed into B flat major. Later on the musical argument grows
darker and the tormented third motif raises the dynamic level to quadruple
forte. The third section brings back the first motif, proclaiming its triumph
over the dark turmoil that has passed. Finally the orchestra takes over the
second motif from the piano and gradually takes on an air of sad resignation,
as the movement ends in a mood that is meditative and questioning. The third
movement follows immediately, without a break, restoring the original key of B
minor. In free form, it is structurally a form of rondo, with two themes
serving the purpose of refrains. The movement is in four episodes, followed by
a short concluding epilogue.
In
the first part, after the woodwind announcement of the first disturbing and
mysterious theme, the piano introduces the first refrain, charming if hesitant.
An orchestral transition follows, victorious and sonorous in character, leading
to a third theme in F sharp minor. This tragic theme, with its aura of
suffering, is at first entrusted to the French horns, then taken up by the
violins, treating it with gentle resignation. The fourth theme in C sharp minor
then appears in the piano. This is the second refrain, the repeated notes of
which recall the third theme of the first movement. The subsequent transition,
resilient and almost happy is derived from the preceding refrain. It leads to
the return of the first theme, entrusted to the trumpet and trombones, followed
by the close of the section. The second part of the movement is perceptibly
analogous to the first. It is dominated by the presence of the first refrain,
allowing no reappearance of the second. The third section follows a violent
outburst of sound. There is the unexpected reappearance of the ethereal first
motif of the Adagio, then, after a discreet reminiscence of the first refrain,
the second finishes by taking a dominant position both in the piano and the
orchestra. The fourth section follows a stormy and impatient declaration from
orchestra and piano, but once again the motif of the Adagio brings a calm
resolution of conflict, leading in a grandiose progress to victory. The presto
that follows brings back virtually all the themes, treated in various ways and
leading to the edge of the abyss of Dante's Inferno. At this moment the whole
edifice of sound seems to part under the effect of the invincible powers of the
earth, symbolised by the continuous roll of drums and cymbals, darkening into a
Titanic void. The first refrain, defeated, reappears in the piano, by way of
epilogue, but is obliged to give way to the orchestra, a reason for describing
Furtwängler's work as an anti-concerto. The passionate peroration that ends the
traditional grand concerto is here replaced by a sober and discreet humility.
This final meditative conclusion is surely a product of the wisdom with which
Furtwängler regards eternity.
Bruno
d'Heudières (English version by Keith Anderson)
David
Lively
David
Lively is among the most successful young American pianists. He studied in the
United States and in France, where he now lives, and won awards in anumber of
important international competitions such as the Marguerite Long Competition in
Paris, where he met Claudio Arrau. later to become one of his rare pupils. He
won awards also in the Belgian Queen Elizabeth Competition and the Tchaikovsky
Competition in Moscow. In 1977 he won the Dino Ciani Prize at La Scala in
Milan. David Lively made his début with the Cleveland Symphony Orchestra at the
invitation of Lorin Maazel. He has since then worked with many conductors and
orchestras of distinction and is director of the Saint Lizier Festival in the
Pyrenees.
Czecho-Slovak
State Philharmonic Orchestra (Košice)
The
East Slovakian town of Košice boasts a long and distinguished musical
tradition, as part of a province that once provided Vienna with musicians. The
State Philharmonic Orchestra is of relatively recent origin and was established
in 1968 under the conductor Bystrik Rezucha. Subsequent principal conductors
have included Stanislav Macura and Ladislav Slovák, the latter succeeded in
1985 by his pupil Richard Zimmer. The orchestra has toured widely in Eastern and
Western Europe and plays an important part in the Košice Musical Spring and the
Košice InternationalOrgan Festival.
For
Marco Polo the orchestra has made the first compact disc recordings of rare
works by Granville Bantock and Joachim Raff. Writing on the last of these, one
critic praised the orchestra for its competence comparable to that of the major
orchestras of Vienna and Prague. The orchestra has contributed several
successful volumes to the complete compact disc Johann Strauss II and for Naxos
has recorded a varied repertoire.
Alfred
Walter
Alfred
Walter was born in Southern Bohemia in 1929 of Austrian parents. He studied at
the University of Graz and in 1948 was appointed assistant conductor to the
Opera of Ravensburg. At the age of 22 he became conductor of the Graz Opera,
where he continued until 1965, while serving at Bayreuth as assistant to Hans
Knappertsbusch and Karl Böhm. From 1966 until 1969 he was Principal Conductor
of the Durban Symphony Orchestra in South Africa. followed by a period of 15 years
as General Director of Music in Münster. In Vienna he has worked as guest
conductor at the State Opera and in 1986 was given the title of Professor by
the Austrian Government. In 1980 he was awarded the Golden Medal of the
International Gustav Mahler Society.