There has been a great deal of drama these past few months surrounding the departure of James Levine as Music Director of the Met Opera. While it's always wrenching to see any great artist's career curtailed by poor health, it's particularly regrettable in this case. Those who have attended performances led by Mr. Levine over the years know fully well that he is irreplaceable. It was particularly exciting then to see the revered conductor take the podium yesterday evening to lead the Met Orchestra in his first concert as "Music Director Emeritus" in an all-Russian program that included works by Glinka, Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky.
The evening began with Glinka's Overture to Ruslan and Lyudmila (1836-1842). Glinka's opera was not notably successful in its own day and, except for the lively overture, is largely forgotten today outside Russia where the composer is still venerated as the inspirational force behind the "Mighty Handful." Part of the blame for the opera's failure can be attributed to the death of Aleksandr Pushkin on whose poem the opera was based. The poet was to have written the libretto, but his collaboration with the composer ended abruptly when he was killed in a duel and Glinka was forced to rely instead on an undistinguished text written by Valerian Shirkov. The poor quality of the libretto, however, did not have any effect on the glistening overture. Despite Glinka's importance in creating a truly Russian style of classical music, he had already been familiar with the work of Rossini before meeting both Bellini and Donizetti while visiting Italy in 1830 and the sprightly Italian influence can clearly be heard in the overture.
The next work was Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18 (1900-1901) and featured the highly acclaimed Evgeny Kissin as soloist. In the case of most musical works, the dedication is no more than a formality. But behind this piece's simple wording, "To Monsieur N. Dahl," lies so fascinating a tale that no one can help referring to it when discussing this work. Briefly, after the disastrous premiere of his First Symphony, Rachmaninoff was so traumatized by the work's poor reception that he found himself unable to compose. Only through the intervention of a hypnotist, said Nikolai Dahl, could Rachmaninoff bring himself to undertake the present concerto. Whether this really has anything to do with the music is questionable, but it certainly does seem that in this work Rachmaninoff had achieved a new level of self-assurance. This can immediately be heard in the piano's dramatic opening chords and the ease with which soloist and orchestra change places back and forth as accompanist to one another. Rachmaninoff did not trust his own judgment however. He first played the second and third movements, which he had composed while traveling in Italy and the Crimea, at a concert in December 1900. Only after Rachmaninoff had satisfied himself that the work had been well received did he then compose the first movement. The full concerto was premiered in Moscow in November 1901 with Rachmaninoff as soloist and Alexsandr Siloti conducting and was an overwhelming success. Since then the work has become, along with Tchaikovsky's First Concerto, one of the most popular in the entire repertoire.
Continuing in the spirit of Russian Romanticism, the orchestra returned after intermission to perform Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 6 in B minor, Op. 74 (1893), entitled the Pathétique. While the work is obviously dark, I do not think there is any reason to believe, as many critics have written, that the composer felt while writing it a foreboding of his own death. Such claims make for a great story, especially those that hold Tchaikovsky was forced by a "court of honor" to commit suicide, but I personally think it much more likely that Tchaikovsky, unhappy over the reception given The Nutcracker and Iolanta the previous year, determined to move in an entirely different direction. And certainly nineteenth century Russian artists - one thinks immediately of Dostoevsky - never hesitated to explore the depths of despair and suffering in their works. Nor is Tchaikovsky's No. 6 all gloom and desolation. It is true that the indeterminate end of the final movement with which the work concludes refuses to provide the listener any sense of comfort. Nevertheless, if, as some have noted, the order of the third and final movements had been reversed the entire symphony would have had an entirely different and more uplifting character. As it is, though, one feels when listening to the final notes a powerful surge of empathy rising within oneself. There can be no doubt that this is Tchaikovsky's most powerful work, the one in which he most fully revealed his inner self.
I thought Mr. Levine's conducting throughout the performance as superb as ever. It has been suggested that the Parkinson's from which he suffers causes his hands to shake so badly that the musicians are unable to follow him, but I was close enough yesterday evening to follow his hand movements attentively and saw no sign of any such affliction. As for Evgeny Kissin, he was masterful in his interpretation of the Rachmaninoff concerto. This is a work in which the soloist must work more closely with the orchestra than usual and at times put himself in the background as an accompanist to it. Mr. Kissin's interaction with the orchestra was flawless and a great triumph for both. He well deserved the standing ovation he received. The encores which he performed afterwards were equally impressive.
No comments:
Post a Comment