My connection with this symphony goes back to my time at the Milan Conservatory, but I never dared to conduct such a masterpiece until 1990, when I was the Music Director at the Musicale Communale in Bologna. I started conducting Beethoven with the First Symphony when I was not even 20 years old, but I postponed the Eroica, the Fifth and the Ninth for as long as I could. The ones that gave me courage to start were the Fourth and the Eighth. I still remember like it was yesterday the feeling almost of being guilty, to have had the courage to get close to such a piece as the Ninth – and, at the same time, the joy of being inflamed by the power of that music. Unforgettable. Since then I have conducted the piece regularly. First with the Verdi orchestra in Turin in the late 1990s I imported the tradition (which started in Leipzig) to play the symphony at the end of every year. Now it is the Beethoven symphony I have conducted the most. Then my destiny of life brought me to Leipzig where that tradition started under Arthur Nikisch in 1918, continuing even during the war years. The Leipzig connection is strong. Schiller was living in Leipzig when he composed the text ‘An die Freude’. You can even visit a museum now and see the corner where he sat and wrote. The Gewandhaus Orchestra was the first to premiere the entire cycle. I am proud of the way in which the orchestra showed flexibility and a willingness to change gear in terms of pacing the Ninth. I have always sought to respect the aesthetics and the roots of the past, never to ignore or neglect them, but still to find a new frame of interpretation.
I could not even think to push myself into the adventure of recording the Beethoven symphonies without being familiar with Arturo Toscanini’s approach – for me, he was the first modern interpreter. If you compare him to, say, Willem Mengelberg, Toscanini is in a totally different universe. Then there is the unforgettable experience of hearing Sir John Eliot Gardiner, a confirmation of how the Toscanini tradition of the late 1920s could, in this new century, have its own independent and proper life, as a need, as a must. Gardiner proved that this change of gear was necessary and I try to follow that line, but in my own, different way. He did it with a smaller orchestra and original instruments; we did it with a larger ensemble, but with many elements in common, in terms of transparency, articulation, extreme care for the dynamic range and respect for the metronome – whose markings were considered, for perhaps a century, to be crazy.
The Ninth Symphony was the principal victim of the ‘old school’ and there certainly are markings which really do provoke discussion: I think of one in the Scherzo, one in the last movement. In the first and third movements matters are pretty clear, but, of course, you have to change radically your approach to those movements in terms of tempo. It must all make sense, within the unitary vision of the piece. The second movement has a trio, where the metronome markings really force you to think and to make your own decisions. The same is true of several spots in the finale. The liberty taken by renowned Beethoven conductors, not only in terms of tempo choice but also in transitions between moments in the finale for instance, would disguise the clarity and the rigour that Beethoven sought to impose on the conductor.
‘I see this work not just in its own right, but also as the conclusion of a major opus’
I see this work not just in its own right, but also as the conclusion of a major opus. Like with Mahler, I consider ‘Beethoven’s Nine’ as being like one huge span of time, from the beginning of the first work to the end of the last. The Ninth, being the conclusion, needed the extra element of the vocal presence, which made so much sense and somehow provoked even critics at the time, being at first too modern as an idea – one wouldn’t have associated the word sinfonia with a vocal element. If you check what followed, such as the Lobgesang of Mendelssohn or Mahler’s Second Symphony, you can see the effect of what Beethoven provoked. He prompted the births of new masterpieces. Given the stage he had reached in his life, I believe he felt that this should be something beyond human beings. He certainly achieved that, pushing the poor sopranos with the mad tessitura in the finale, which is so high and exposed. That is what makes this piece, every time you perform it, transformative for the musician and for the public.
The D minor opening movement is probably the most tragic opening movement of a symphony. I have a feeling that this represents another long journey from darkness to light. I always finish that first movement feeling completely shaken up by the tragedy and drama. You need a few moments to establish inner serenity before you switch to the joy of theScherzo. Such a contrast, one against the other, is almost Mahlerian. Obviously the greatness of the cantabile melody of the third movement is one of the truest examples of the so-called ‘endless melody’, along with the slow movement of the Reformation Symphony of Mendelssohn and in the Second Symphony of Schumann, as well as in symphonies byBrahms and Mahler. This music does not search for an end; it searches instead for an endless development. It is like a labyrinth that never finishes.
In a way I cannot wait to start the fourth movement. I have always approached that attacca, but the timpani have to change their tuning very quickly between those movements, so the agreement is that, before I give the upbeat, which is so dramatic with that ‘out of tune armoury’, the timpanist has to give me a nod, as quickly as possible, to let me know he’s ready. I don’t think it is right to give silence after the slow movement. There are conductors who wait, but really I cannot. That meditative, spiritual mood needs to be broken up. It is so long and so highly developed, with its reprise and variations, that I do need to break through. I prefer the listener to think back to it once the entire symphony is over. Beethoven wants to move on – ‘Nicht diese Töne!’. You feel the pain and violence, almost physically, of that opening chord. It’s a very crude dissonance. Then the celli and basses start their long monologue. It’s like the Second Symphony of Mahler. Both rationally and irrationally, they take charge.
When Mendelssohn was Gewandhaus Kapellmeister, he conducted the Beethoven symphonies year after year. Robert Schumann, a great friend of Mendelssohn, was a leading music critic in the city at the time. The critics generally raved about Mendelssohn as a conductor, but Schumann in particular was always critical of his choice of tempos in Beethoven, criticising him for being too fast. This criticism, to my mind, is the proof that Mendelssohn was one of the earliest advocates of what we now think of as both ‘modern’ and ‘authentic’ performing practice in these works.
Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chailly
Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chailly
"To appreciate the greatness of the Masters is to keep faith in the greatness of humanity." - Wilhelm Furtwängler
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
If you do not know the Chailly version you can listen to it on the following YouTube clip….
Like any great and monumental work of Art Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony created some controversy right from its premiere even though it was very well received on its premiere. There were basically two lines of thought, either Beethoven had lost his mind or that he was the complete genius. I think we know how that argument has been resolved. The work was so revolutionary in its time that to many it was totally incomprehensible, was far too technically demanding and that the inclusion of the vocal element amounted to total madness. However, posterity has seen that this was the work of a visionary. The fact that Beethoven wrote the Ode to Joy as an anthem of Humanity, a role in which it has very much succeeded in, even becoming the anthem of the EU, would have, I think, pleased the man very much.
Beethoven completed the work in 1824 but it had its gestation as far back as 1793 [apparently evident from his sketches] when Beethoven, who had always admired Schiller, and had first wanted to set his Ode to Joy to music. Interestingly, Symphony No. 9 was not originally meant to include a vocal element at all. Beethoven had apparently originally written a totally instrumental fourth movement. This was ultimately abandoned and later became the finale in the String Quartet in A minor Op. 132. I have read that Beethoven had planned to write a Tenth Symphony. His Ninth would be totally instrumental while the Tenth would gradually introduce the voice into the symphony. He apparently wanted to introduce the voice into the Symphony because he felt that he had “exhausted the expressive resources of instrumentation”.
A sketchbook from 1811 also apparently shows that the Ode to Joy was to be a cantata.
So this was not a work that Beethoven wrote overnight. Like many of his other works he struggled long and hard to bring it to perfection. His problem was how to resolve three separate issues simultaneously; finally setting the Ode to Joy to music in some shape or form, writing a fully instrumental new symphony and finally incorporating the voice into a symphony. An example of how he struggled with this work is that apparently he wrote and ultimately rejected over 200 different versions of the Ode to Joy theme alone!
The tragic irony of this wonderful work is that Beethoven never heard it for he was by that time profoundly deaf. Then there is also the famous legend of the premiere where, although Beethoven was onstage conducting, Michael Umlauf who apparently sat out of sight actually led the orchestra. Well, according to the legend, at the conclusion of the work the audience applauded rapturously and Beethoven, still facing the orchestra, could not hear this. Fraulein Ungher, the contralto soloist, walked up to him, took him by the arm and turned him around to witness the audience’s response. Beethoven is said to have left the auditorium with tears in his eyes.
So, to conclude this introduction it should also be pointed out that Beethoven was innovative right up to the end. Symphony No. 9 certainly confounded many people at the time despite its success. Once again his innovative approach to composition pushed many of the known boundaries right out. First of all it was scored for an unusually large orchestra for its time. Secondly it was also scored for choir and four soloists in a genre that was, until then, the sole preserve of instrumentalists. Then there was the length of the work which, at over an hour was, by the standard of the times, extraordinary. Beethoven also interfered with the structure of the traditional symphony by placing the Scherzo as the second movement when it was traditionally placed as the third movement.
The work even had its implications on modern technology more than 200 years later because I remember reading some years ago that when they were trying to decide what the capacity of a CD was going to be they decided on 74 minutes because that time would comfortably accommodate a complete recording of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9.
Chailly says above: “The D minor opening movement is probably the most tragic opening movement of a symphony. I have a feeling that this represents another long journey from darkness to light. I always finish that first movement feeling completely shaken up by the tragedy and drama”. I have also read somewhere that the opening of the first movement sounds like an orchestra tuning up. Either way, this is a new beginning. Beethoven has decided to leave everything from the past behind him and start afresh. Then the first theme is forcibly introduced and the entire stormy movement is said to represent the death of the heroic ideal first announced way back in Symphony No. 3. It is interesting to read Chailly’s thoughts on tempos for this work. The opening speeds are certainly aggressive and help with the tension and mood generally.
The second movement is an energetic scherzo with great forward momentum. It was apparently originally meant to be a Fugue and this form is not entirely lost in the movement. The Trio section is calmer with a different tonal pallette but the scherzo reappears with renewed exuberance. I like the timpani in this movement; I feel that it adds to the excitement. The Scherzo comes to a sudden, shuddering conclusion.
What follows in the third, slow movement is, for me, some of the most beautiful music that Beethoven wrote. It is beautifully lyrical and offers us a vision of Arcadia. It is one of the movements which I judge critically when listening to a new Beethoven Symphonic Cycle; how is the serenity and grace of this music handled? It is an oasis of calm in an otherwise energetic and turbulent work. I have often wondered how a man who was often so embittered and embattled could write such beautiful, ethereal music.
And so we come to the final movement; a movement that changed a lot in the world of music and laid the foundations for the likes of Mahler and Wagner among others.
Beethoven had obviously worked out by this time how to introduce the voice into the final movement when the choir and soloists had been sitting quietly on the stage for the previous three movements. His ultimate solution was to introduce the voice slowly, starting with the solo baritone and eventually leading up to the whole chorus entering in a blaze of sound.
The opening of the final movement is a bold and dramatic one. What about those dark, threatening cellos and double basses? They have their own role to play. Small fragments of melodies from previous movements are introduced but, one by one, they are culled by the bass strings with ruthless authority; it is as if they are saying “We are the guardians and we will not allow this!”. This is a truly wonderful technique! The drama and tension is on an operatic scale. The woodwinds eventually sing out a theme but that is also cut short. Then, the woodwinds sing out a second theme and yet again the lower strings reject it but not totally; they consider it for a few moments. Then, when everything that has gone before has been rejected the bass strings introduce their own theme, the Ode to Joy! The theme is eventually taken up by the whole orchestra who, as one, joyfully declare it to the world. At the end of this triumphant proclamation however, the protestations and confrontations suddenly re-occur. Then, everything changes; instead of the lower register strings protesting we now have a solo baritone declaring “O friends, not these tones; instead let us sing more pleasing and joyful ones”. All previous “tones” are now finally and totally rejected in favour of new ones. The full choir is gradually introduced. Beethoven offers great continuity by incorporating the choir singing the Ode to Joy just as the orchestra had done earlier which really helps with the introduction and amalgamation of the choir. The music goes through a development stage which is terrifically expressive and exciting. The restatement of the Ode to Joy theme by full orchestra and choir is truly spine tingling when performed properly. The steady build up to the climax and conclusion is wonderful and the work ends in a tumult of noise, joy and celebration. Beethoven could not have celebrated humanity and the universal brotherhood of man in a more jubilant and celebratory manner. It may have taken a lot of time, blood sweat and tears to ultimately get right but in the final analysis it is simply magnificent!
Like any great and monumental work of Art Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony created some controversy right from its premiere even though it was very well received on its premiere. There were basically two lines of thought, either Beethoven had lost his mind or that he was the complete genius. I think we know how that argument has been resolved. The work was so revolutionary in its time that to many it was totally incomprehensible, was far too technically demanding and that the inclusion of the vocal element amounted to total madness. However, posterity has seen that this was the work of a visionary. The fact that Beethoven wrote the Ode to Joy as an anthem of Humanity, a role in which it has very much succeeded in, even becoming the anthem of the EU, would have, I think, pleased the man very much.
Beethoven completed the work in 1824 but it had its gestation as far back as 1793 [apparently evident from his sketches] when Beethoven, who had always admired Schiller, and had first wanted to set his Ode to Joy to music. Interestingly, Symphony No. 9 was not originally meant to include a vocal element at all. Beethoven had apparently originally written a totally instrumental fourth movement. This was ultimately abandoned and later became the finale in the String Quartet in A minor Op. 132. I have read that Beethoven had planned to write a Tenth Symphony. His Ninth would be totally instrumental while the Tenth would gradually introduce the voice into the symphony. He apparently wanted to introduce the voice into the Symphony because he felt that he had “exhausted the expressive resources of instrumentation”.
A sketchbook from 1811 also apparently shows that the Ode to Joy was to be a cantata.
So this was not a work that Beethoven wrote overnight. Like many of his other works he struggled long and hard to bring it to perfection. His problem was how to resolve three separate issues simultaneously; finally setting the Ode to Joy to music in some shape or form, writing a fully instrumental new symphony and finally incorporating the voice into a symphony. An example of how he struggled with this work is that apparently he wrote and ultimately rejected over 200 different versions of the Ode to Joy theme alone!
The tragic irony of this wonderful work is that Beethoven never heard it for he was by that time profoundly deaf. Then there is also the famous legend of the premiere where, although Beethoven was onstage conducting, Michael Umlauf who apparently sat out of sight actually led the orchestra. Well, according to the legend, at the conclusion of the work the audience applauded rapturously and Beethoven, still facing the orchestra, could not hear this. Fraulein Ungher, the contralto soloist, walked up to him, took him by the arm and turned him around to witness the audience’s response. Beethoven is said to have left the auditorium with tears in his eyes.
So, to conclude this introduction it should also be pointed out that Beethoven was innovative right up to the end. Symphony No. 9 certainly confounded many people at the time despite its success. Once again his innovative approach to composition pushed many of the known boundaries right out. First of all it was scored for an unusually large orchestra for its time. Secondly it was also scored for choir and four soloists in a genre that was, until then, the sole preserve of instrumentalists. Then there was the length of the work which, at over an hour was, by the standard of the times, extraordinary. Beethoven also interfered with the structure of the traditional symphony by placing the Scherzo as the second movement when it was traditionally placed as the third movement.
The work even had its implications on modern technology more than 200 years later because I remember reading some years ago that when they were trying to decide what the capacity of a CD was going to be they decided on 74 minutes because that time would comfortably accommodate a complete recording of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9.
Chailly says above: “The D minor opening movement is probably the most tragic opening movement of a symphony. I have a feeling that this represents another long journey from darkness to light. I always finish that first movement feeling completely shaken up by the tragedy and drama”. I have also read somewhere that the opening of the first movement sounds like an orchestra tuning up. Either way, this is a new beginning. Beethoven has decided to leave everything from the past behind him and start afresh. Then the first theme is forcibly introduced and the entire stormy movement is said to represent the death of the heroic ideal first announced way back in Symphony No. 3. It is interesting to read Chailly’s thoughts on tempos for this work. The opening speeds are certainly aggressive and help with the tension and mood generally.
The second movement is an energetic scherzo with great forward momentum. It was apparently originally meant to be a Fugue and this form is not entirely lost in the movement. The Trio section is calmer with a different tonal pallette but the scherzo reappears with renewed exuberance. I like the timpani in this movement; I feel that it adds to the excitement. The Scherzo comes to a sudden, shuddering conclusion.
What follows in the third, slow movement is, for me, some of the most beautiful music that Beethoven wrote. It is beautifully lyrical and offers us a vision of Arcadia. It is one of the movements which I judge critically when listening to a new Beethoven Symphonic Cycle; how is the serenity and grace of this music handled? It is an oasis of calm in an otherwise energetic and turbulent work. I have often wondered how a man who was often so embittered and embattled could write such beautiful, ethereal music.
And so we come to the final movement; a movement that changed a lot in the world of music and laid the foundations for the likes of Mahler and Wagner among others.
Beethoven had obviously worked out by this time how to introduce the voice into the final movement when the choir and soloists had been sitting quietly on the stage for the previous three movements. His ultimate solution was to introduce the voice slowly, starting with the solo baritone and eventually leading up to the whole chorus entering in a blaze of sound.
The opening of the final movement is a bold and dramatic one. What about those dark, threatening cellos and double basses? They have their own role to play. Small fragments of melodies from previous movements are introduced but, one by one, they are culled by the bass strings with ruthless authority; it is as if they are saying “We are the guardians and we will not allow this!”. This is a truly wonderful technique! The drama and tension is on an operatic scale. The woodwinds eventually sing out a theme but that is also cut short. Then, the woodwinds sing out a second theme and yet again the lower strings reject it but not totally; they consider it for a few moments. Then, when everything that has gone before has been rejected the bass strings introduce their own theme, the Ode to Joy! The theme is eventually taken up by the whole orchestra who, as one, joyfully declare it to the world. At the end of this triumphant proclamation however, the protestations and confrontations suddenly re-occur. Then, everything changes; instead of the lower register strings protesting we now have a solo baritone declaring “O friends, not these tones; instead let us sing more pleasing and joyful ones”. All previous “tones” are now finally and totally rejected in favour of new ones. The full choir is gradually introduced. Beethoven offers great continuity by incorporating the choir singing the Ode to Joy just as the orchestra had done earlier which really helps with the introduction and amalgamation of the choir. The music goes through a development stage which is terrifically expressive and exciting. The restatement of the Ode to Joy theme by full orchestra and choir is truly spine tingling when performed properly. The steady build up to the climax and conclusion is wonderful and the work ends in a tumult of noise, joy and celebration. Beethoven could not have celebrated humanity and the universal brotherhood of man in a more jubilant and celebratory manner. It may have taken a lot of time, blood sweat and tears to ultimately get right but in the final analysis it is simply magnificent!
To be is to do: Socrates
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
That is another lovely piece Fergus, thank you. I had to read it a couple of times to fully digest it.
"To appreciate the greatness of the Masters is to keep faith in the greatness of humanity." - Wilhelm Furtwängler
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
LOL, Was it that unintelligible Seán !!!Seán wrote:That is another lovely piece Fergus, thank you. I had to read it a couple of times to fully digest it.
To be is to do: Socrates
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
Not at all, it was worth reading a second time.fergus wrote:LOL, Was it that unintelligible Seán !!!Seán wrote:That is another lovely piece Fergus, thank you. I had to read it a couple of times to fully digest it.
"To appreciate the greatness of the Masters is to keep faith in the greatness of humanity." - Wilhelm Furtwängler
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
An interesting version !!
Wagner kept everything except the orchestra !!
"Change is Possible" [Parking Meter in Dundrum Shopping Centre]
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
Wow!! I just cannot envisage that somehow!james wrote:
An interesting version !!
Wagner kept everything except the orchestra !!
To be is to do: Socrates
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
To do is to be: Sartre
Do be do be do: Sinatra
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
It could be great or it could be horrendous.james wrote:
An interesting version !!
Wagner kept everything except the orchestra !!
"To appreciate the greatness of the Masters is to keep faith in the greatness of humanity." - Wilhelm Furtwängler
Re: Beethoven's Ninth Symphony iintroduced by Riccardo Chail
I started with ..
and then got all the Liszt/Beethoven symphonies .. this is part of a set but I cant find the full set ...
[Although I think I heard Charles Lynch in 1970 on RTE doing some of the symphonies on piano -- Beethoven was born in 1770 and DG produced a complete set of his works that year that cost a fortune]
Anyway I was biased since I love the piano so I got the Wagner transcription and I really like it [but, as I said, I am biased towards the piano]
James
and then got all the Liszt/Beethoven symphonies .. this is part of a set but I cant find the full set ...
[Although I think I heard Charles Lynch in 1970 on RTE doing some of the symphonies on piano -- Beethoven was born in 1770 and DG produced a complete set of his works that year that cost a fortune]
Anyway I was biased since I love the piano so I got the Wagner transcription and I really like it [but, as I said, I am biased towards the piano]
James
"Change is Possible" [Parking Meter in Dundrum Shopping Centre]