Elgar butchered- film at eleven
‘Here come the ouches and squirms, the fuss and hubbub,’ he said. ‘I was expecting it, I’m throwing a hand grenade at musicians who simply have to accept they must transform their way of playing if they are to play as composers intended.’
When a conductor has built a huge career off the free publicity created through a relentless advocacy of a nonsensical but highly controversial musical idea, it is probably not wise to call attention to new press coverage of their latest mistreatments of music.
However, I’m only human, and some statements are simply too, forgive me, asinine to ignore. The conductor in question recently attracted a new level of press attention by performing Elgar’s First Symphony at the Proms completely without vibrato, and plans to attract even more publicity by performing Pomp and Circumstance at the Last Night, also completely without vibrato.
The conductor in question contends that he is presenting Elgar’s music as the composer intended it to be heard. Were that true, I think his efforts would be considerably less controversial and newsworthy, as Elgar’s many disciples, admirers, former students and devotees would have been performing his music without vibrato for 100 years. I hate to impugn the motives of a colleague, but it even ten minutes research would be enough to disabusive any honest musician of the notion that Elgar intended his music to be played without vibrato- I find it hard to believe that this conductor actually believes what he is saying, and am tempted to assume that this is nothing more than a cynical publicity stunt, although I may be wrong.
In fact, the very notion is so ludicrous that it hardly needs or merits rebutting, but, in haste, let me point out a few things.
1- Unlike Mahler, Elgar (who was also a very good conductor) did live to make a number of recordings of his own music in reasonably high fidelity. They are all remarkable documents, and certainly the orchestra playing is of a different time, but they all use vibrato. They also all use a tremendous amount of portamento.
2- Elgar wrote his Violin Concerto for none-other than Fritz Kreisler, the violinist most often demonized by the conductor-in-question for perverting the course of music by inventing continuous vibrato. If Elgar found vibrato offensive, he certainly would never have written one of his greatest works for its greatest advocate and most well-known practicioner.
3- Elgar later recorded the Violin Concerto with the young Yehudi Menuhin, who, of course, played with vibrato for another 50 years. Menuhin also recorded a great deal of Elgar’s orchestral music as a conductor, and took great pride in his role in passing on what he’d learned from Elgar about his music. To my knowledge, there are no Menuhin recordings played without vibrato.
4- Elgar’s closest conducting associate in his later years was Adrian Boult, who lived and recorded into the 1970’s. His many recordings of all of Elgar’s major orchestral works are all played with a judicious and robust use of vibrato. There is no record of Boult ever mentioning that Elgar wanted his music played senza-vib in all his years in the heart of British musical life.
There is more that could be said, but none of it need be said. The fact is, it seems that the conductor-in-question has figured out that he can advance his career to the highest levels by relentlessly advocating a loony idea. He could just as easily be recommending that we all read our music upside-down and backwards. A critic may very well write that a non-vibrato performance of Elgar reveals new colors, but so would a performance on kazoo choir- both may be entertaining in their way, but neither should be treated as anything more legitmate than an amusing novelty.
I can’t help but feel that in all music the “non-vibrato sempre” method is a weak-minded cop-out, an easy way to avoid thinking about whether, when, why and how to vibrate, a process which demands an awareness of harmony, instrumentation, color and taste. It stops the process of thinking, listening, responding and contemplating sound dead in its tracks.
Of course, the vagaries of the historical record leave room for us to argue about whether any vibrato is ever appropriate in the music of Mozart or Bach until the cows come home…
But the same is simply not true of Elgar- the historical record is clear, and nothing could be further from Elgar’s aesthetic than the sort of glassy, thin, cold sound-world that is the stock-in-trade of this maestro.
But, of course, this was never about Elgar- surely it’s more about the heady rush of controversy and press attention.
I’ve attached a short excerpt from the Elgar Violin Concerto, conducted by Elgar, with Yehudi Menuhin as soloist. Now that’s what I call vibrato- do you think Menuhin would have dared to play like that with Elgar standing 3 feet away if the great man had hated vibrato?
There’s more from Tom Service in the Guardian, here.
Please pardon my French, but the you-must-not-vibrate-ever-ever-ever movement is a load of utter bollocks. I don’t know how people have been duped by it for so long. Has everyone forgotten that Leopold Mozart in his mid-18th-century treatise provides exercises for practising something that any Grade V violin pupil would recognise as vibrato?
UPDATE- Pliable has some thoughts over at On An Overgrown Path here and here, and some wonderful observations about Adrian Boult, mentioned above, one of the most under-rated and marvellous musicians Britain ever produced. As Pliable rightly points out, it was no accident that Elgar said to Boult “my reputation is safe in your hands.”
UPDATE 2- There are more interesting thoughts at Through These Ears, a very good blog I am just getting to know. Check here and here. The author, David Presier also has many more links for you to follow, including this and this.
I’m hoping that the next thing in line for the no vibrato treatment is the Tallis Fantasia. That piece definitely sucks and needs a lot of help, and I think no vibrato would do it.
This reminds me of a time when I was asked to help provide music for a special education graduation ceremony. I suggested they use the Pomp and Circumstance March no. 1, obviously, and was told they couldn’t do that because “that was a slave-marching song, and it would be offensive to African-Americans.” What I’m saying is that the conductor in question should teach special ed…or be in it.
Comment by Erik K — August 7, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
I think you’ve got it right. This little fiasco is a mostly manufactured one, just because Norrington has always liked to cause trouble. You and everyone else are, of course, correct that vibrato had been used - at least as an ornament - for a very long time before Elgar was even born. I’ve seen composer’s notes on the use of vibrato as an ornament in scores of Viol music by Marin Marais. The other dishonest part of Norrington’s posturing is that vibrato isn’t even really banned in the HIP world. It’s treated as an ornament, as it should be, which is entirely different than not using it at all. Yet everyone keeps saying it’s “no vibrato, full stop”. (pun unavoidable, sorry)
So this is all a bit of a joke, really, and the excitable press is happy to help. But how many people complaining actually heard the performance? I missed it, but RTBF Musique 3 (Belgian Francophone Classical Radio) is going to rebroadcast it tomorrow (Aug.
afternoon at 2pm. I am definitely going to check it out. Only then can I really tell exactly what Norrington actually did.
According to one account there was some vibrato on evidence. I did read a transcription of some of Norrington’s BBC interview. He claimed that Elgar allowed fully modern vibrato on his recordings because tastes had changed between the wars. So even if he did allow some vibrato on longer notes, etc., he’s still acting the buffoon.
I agree with Erik K above - it would be great fun to hear not only the Tallis Fantasia, but how about “Lark Ascending” done sans vibrato? And then we can move on to the works of other Elgar contemporaries. I volunteer to sit in the back of the cello section for Norrington’s first performance of “Jerusalem” and the The Planets, especially the big moment in “Jupiter”.
There’s a fun experiment for your next workshop!
Comment by David Preiser — August 7, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
Here here!!
When my assistant suggested that having a choir of 100 perform the St. Matthew Passion was not a worthy exercise, we argued long an hard about the difference between “Historically accurate” and “Historically informed” performances (which this Elgar example is neither). Perhaps he is confusing the English choral music tradition, Men and Boys choirs which are famed for their straight tone, with instrumental playing traditions? What is his evidence?
To me - removing the vibrato from a stringed instrument is like removing the soul. Even with Bach and Mozart to varying degrees. It’s as absurd as the trend to record Bach Cantatas with just one to a part!
Comment by John — August 7, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
Major fallacy of the tail wagging the dog. Excuse me…but the history of VIBRATO in recordings is just FOR that. Vibrato was introduced into recordings because the fidelity was so horrible as to make the orchestra or singer sound tinish and thin. Therefore they started infusing vibrato any which way they could.
I thought this bit of recording history was quite understood by now - especially conductors who insist it should be there and whom are ranting and foaming at the mouth like a dog on a horsesled.
Comment by ComposerBastard — August 7, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
Sorry CB, but you couldn’t be more completely and totally wrong. As Jessica Duchen points out, even the earliest string treatises provide exercises for developing a vibrato. Elgar wrote the violin concert for Kreisler in the first decade of the 20th c, by which point Kreisler’s mature, vibrato rich style had already evolved, but well before recordings had begun to make their mark. Walter, Mengelberg, Klemperer and countless other vibrato practicioning conductors were already well into their careers before the advent of recordings, and none of them ever spoke of a sea change in the use of vibrato. Mahler’s musicians in New York later spoke of how he demanded more vibrato than a modern conductor would have. My own cello teacher grew up in early 20th c. Vienna and studied with all the Vienna Phil gods of the day and all the famous early 20th c pedagogues (Alexanian, Grummer et al), and he said often that modern (ie- late 20th c.) vibrato was, in general, sparer, thiner and less conspicuous than that he was raised on or that used by Casals in his prime.
I’m not at all an advocate of wiggling away indiscriminantly on every note- that’s just as much a cop out as never wiggling on any notoe, but the non-vibrato hyphothesis is a load of horse hooey.
Good to hear from you, though- it’s been a while
K
Comment by Kenneth Woods — August 7, 2008 @ 10:40 pm
But Elgar wasn’t a munchkin Vienna coffee snorting faux paux living on the continent - , by God he was ENGLISH! And not just ANY English bloke, mind you, he was from Lower Broadheath!!!!
Just because a vibrato was studied in books and home study courses, my good man, doesn’t mean it had to be used, especially in GOOD ENGLISH music! And Kreisler was only the soloist for sake - he could get away with it…just as a house guest’s poor feeding habits tend to be ignored in situations.
I, as you can tell, am a passionate advocate of poco vibrato…especially in large string sections. yuk!
Comment by ComposerBastard — August 8, 2008 @ 1:12 am
oh yeah I forgot to mention. Elgar wasn’t even at the whole recording session. He spent about 10 minutes…ended up saying “Right, I think you got it…” and then went off to the race tracks or some football match!
Comment by ComposerBastard — August 8, 2008 @ 3:51 am
I weep for RSO Stuttgart, an otherwise amazing orchestra.
Comment by Erik K — August 8, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
After Norrington, I think we’ll have to call it “Pomp and Circumcision”.
Comment by Robert Berger — August 11, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
As a seasonal subscriber to this orchestra let me add that they indeed play marvellously under guest conductors (Boreyko, Blomdstedt or Dudamel), like that hair-raising Shostakovich 4th in 2006 under Boreyko.
(ducking from this controversy though)
Comment by Zoltan — August 12, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
[…] But bitchy? Well, I wasn’t always a classical music head (at least not exclusively a classical music head, and I did conduct a funk band this summer….), but maybe I was a little bitchy… However, they won me over with this- And finally, one of the more interesting posts I read, a two-parter: 1) A rebuttal of the idea that Elgar should be played without vibrato: http://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2008/08/07/elgar-butchered-film-at-eleven/ […]
Pingback by Kenneth Woods- a view from the podium » Elgar thread…. — August 13, 2008 @ 12:07 am
Calling HIP the ‘you-must-not-vibrate-ever-ever-ever movement’ is equally ‘bollocks,’ as it happens. The approach to vibrato in the 18th century, for instance, is not to avoid using it at all, but to use it judiciously and tastefully - where appropriate; i.e. it should not be used continuously on every single note, but as an ornament - and the size, length and speed of the vibrato should be judged according to what was at the time called ‘good taste.’ Vibrato was treated as an ornament - something to decorate a note and to add to the music. No sane musician would trill on every note, nor would they use portamenti between every note, nor staccato every note. Likewise, no sane musician would vibrate on every single note. It is offensive to the ear, and makes for very boring (perhaps even ridiculous) playing indeed.
Comment by Tom O'Drisceoil — November 22, 2008 @ 9:14 pm
Hi Tom
I couldn’t agree more- when I’ve tried to tackle this controversial point, I’ve tried to make clear that my beef is with the notion of “never-ever,” which some conductors DO subscribe to, and which seems to me just as ridiculous and boring. Either extreme strikes me as simplistic and lazy….
Thanks for commenting
KW
Comment by Kenneth Woods — November 22, 2008 @ 9:28 pm