Comments on: Performer’s Perspective- Mahler 3, a shout-out

By: Kenneth Woods- A View From the Podium » Composer’s Perspective- Gregson on Mahler (and Gregson)

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:33:49 +0000

[...] The flip side of this is that, as we’ve already been discussing in this series, Mahler was an almost obsessive shouter-outer, quoting and referencing other works all the time, whether they be Brahms, Rott, Beethoven, or any [...]

By: 馬勒三 « 永遠等待：Life in transition

馬勒三 « 永遠等待：Life in transition — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:59:08 +0000

[...] 事緣，前一天聽家人說，會去聽馬勒三。剛好那天晚上我有點空，也很久沒聽港樂的音樂會。何況，下個月轉部門（到人稱敝機構的「地獄中的地獄」）後，也不知何時再有空，於是便決定去聽了。中學初聽古典音樂時，也為馬勒交響曲的磅礡氣勢所震懾。但當時愛故作老成，喜聽第九和第十，對早期那些興趣沒那麼大，即使買了唱片也沒好好聽過。第三也不例外，只對其個半小時的長度和開首的圓號旋律略有印象。（以前唱片買得多，反倒聽得不專心，如今找mp3那麼容易，怪不得什麼音樂也沒大印象。）趁這機會，當天我也先上網看一些資料，從新認識一下這首作品，而非只知道這是馬勒其中一首交響曲。除了那些關於牧神初醒，自然各物以至人類、天使之言，到最終愛的樂章的介紹外，指揮家Kenneth Woods對本曲與前人的對話之解說也開了我眼界，對其在音樂史脈絡的位置更有掌握。 [...]

By: Peter

Peter — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:25:10 +0000

Ken-
The latest blog is very interesting, because you use the language that matches the gesture. Nothing subtle like an exclamation – but a shout-out – a statement of intent, laying down the gauntlet, even a declaration of war! Dionysus claims back what Apollo has stolen from him. Mahler thought of Brahms as feeble in some way, effeminate, lacking balls as we said this afternoon. Mahler’s music is ballsy!

It also bears a resemblance to a big tune from Brahms Academic Festival overture and I think all these themes may share a common source in the revolutionary student song “Wir hatten gebauet ein stattliches Haus”. Peter Franklin makes the connection also with Rott and Mahler’s student days too. But this all makes sense – here we have revolutionary fervour and youthful solidarity, What Brahms had made academically acceptable in his overture and which also found a respectable place in the veiled protestantism of his first symphony, Mahler here wrests back as the “Weckruf” – a summoning of primitive Dionysian energy to release a creative earthquake.

As you said – when you hear that first movement as a riposte to Brahms’ traditionalism and conservatism, its revolutionary energy seems more obvious than ever. Of course, by the end Mahler has rediscovered the Apollonian beauty which this first movement had simply trampled upon. But Mahler’s vision is all-encompassing, true-to-life – and not simply bourgeois and polite. Mahler wanted to go on protest marches, to shout out and rebel – but what a vision to steer that youthful vitality and energy towards the resolution of that finale. It is a rebellion aimed at restoring the spiritual and the ideal….turning the money-lenders out of the temple, and the conservatives from their seats of power. Wow – what a composer that is!

Peter

By: Erik K

Erik K — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:05:19 +0000

Wonderful post, as always. One possible contender for the 20th-century quotation crown with Shostakovich is Charles Ives…the 2nd symphony makes my head explode.

Am I reading correctly that this concert will feature a work IN ADDITION to the Mahler? Very old school.

By: Mitch F

Mitch F — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:35:58 +0000

There’s another instance of a Mahler-Brahms shout-out — I like that lingo, Ken! — but one with which Mahler was perhaps not eager even to hint at. Why did Mahler eliminate the Blumine movement from the predecessor of his Symphony No. 1? One of the speakers at a recent Colorado MahlerFest maintained that possibly the main reason was the trumpet solo’s striking resemblance to the main theme of Brahms 1: the very theme you link to above, where you talk about the opening of Mahler 3. According to the speaker, Mahler may have excised Blumine because the obvious similarity to the Brahms would have made him appear derivative, even plagiaristic. The music is at least similar, it must be admitted.