Skip to main content

Rimsky-Korsakov: Symphony #1 and Symphony #2

"The works of Rimsky-Korsakov music may be conveniently divided into two groups: the overplayed and the unknown."
--Richard Taruskin, author, The Oxford History of Western Music (6 Volume Set)

After tackling one of Rimsky-Korsakov's most "overplayed" works last week, I have to share the unfortunate truth that his three stunning symphonies tend to fall into the "unknown" category for most people.

This post will discuss R-K' s First and Second Symphonies, and in the near future we'll tackle the second disc of this two-CD set, which includes his Third Symphony as well as two of his best known works: the Russian Easter Festival Overture and Capriccio Espagnol.
**********************
Neeme Jarvi and the Gothenburg Symphony Orchestra
Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov (1844-1908)

3 Symphonies; Capriccio espagnol; Russian Easter Overture
Deutsche Grammophon, 1988

**********************
Some interesting trivia on Rimsky-Korsakov:
1) As a member of the Russian navy, he was stationed on a Russian frigate that did tours in the Hudson River and the Chesapeake Bay during the American Civil War.

2) He taught some of Russia's most famous composers, including Sergei Prokofiev, Alexander Glazunov and Igor Stravinsky.

3) He had synesthesia, a condition in which the mind cross-wires sensory perceptions. Rimsky-Korsakov apparently saw colors when he heard certain chords. And I thought you had to drop acid to experience this.

Listener notes on the First and Second Symphonies:
1) Does the opening chord of the First Symphony sound at all familiar? Yep, practically identical to the first chord of Scheherazade. Other than that, these two pieces couldn't be more different.

2) If Symphony #1 doesn't grab you at first, give it time and a few more tries. I found that this symphony became more compelling and much more interesting to me after a three or four close listens.

3) Listen for the soft, rising harp arpeggios at the very end of the second movement of Symphony #1. If you have a copy of the Neeme Jarvi/Gothenburg Symphony Orchestra recording, you might cringe. That harp is badly out of tune!

4) Doesn't the opening minute or two of the Second Symphony sound like it could be the soundtrack to a 1940s-era film noir movie?

5) Note that R-K's Symphony #2 has an idee fixe that appears and reappears throughout the four movements, just like Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique. In R-K's case the idee fixe represents Antar, the protagonist of his story.

6) Note that both Symphony #1 (at about 26 minutes) and #2 (at about 32 minutes) are relatively brief works, and the individual movements (with one exception) are a reasonably bite-sized five to eight minutes long. Perfect for any of you who might be a bit intimidated by the potential time commitment involved in learning the great classical musical works.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Does Bach Suck?

It's not often that you see a classical music-related comment that makes you spit out your coffee : "Bach sucks because he was not a true composer. A true composer hears the music before he writes it. Bach composed using a mathematical system of numbers which he tought[sic] his students. After his death one of his students published a book “How to write a menuet[sic] with little or no musical knowledge”. Frankly, the result of his work is not musical, the opening bars always sound musical because he copied someone else’s melody, broke it down into numbers and wrote counterpoint from it. Handel did not even like Bach, because Handel wrote music. Anyone who does like Bach does so because they are told to. For a comparison, listen to music by Frescobaldi, Rameau, or Couperin, then listen to Bach. The difference? Something that is musical throughout the entire piece, and something that is musical for 10 seconds and quickly loses interest." Once I'd finished mopping the co

Why Classical Music Writing is So Difficult to Read

Have you ever read the liner notes of a classical music CD and scratched your head wondering what the heck the writer was trying to say? Or attempted to read a classical music concert review in your newspaper and felt totally illiterate? One of the things that frustrates many people about classical music is its perceived elitism. It's unfortunate, but most of what gets written about classical music only worsens that perception. Most of the classical music writing I see out there--either in symphony concert program books, in concert reviews in major papers like the New York Times, or worst of all in the little essays in the booklets accompanying most classical music CDs--is quite simply terrible. Often, it is pretentiously written, it is full of industry jargon (yes, even the classical music industry has its own jargon), and it reads like an intellectually insecure liberal arts student's PhD thesis. There are a few reasons for this. First, there's the fundamental difficulty

Schubert: Symphony #3

I have a confession to make. Today's CD is not only further proof of my need to start this blog, but it is perhaps the most embarrassing example of how mindless and uncontemplative my life had become over the past several years. This CD sat on my shelf with more than a hundred other CDs for years, unlistened to, unnoticed, and collecting dust. It was just like all the rest of my CDs, except, uh, in one key respect: It was still in its cellophane wrapper. I had been so out of touch with myself that I bought CDs that I forgot I bought. I must have wanted to listen to this CD at some point, but apparently in the time between buying the CD and putting it on the shelf, I got distracted. For ten years. That is a prime, and admittedly foolish-sounding, example of why I'm taking a break from my career, and why I started this blog. I guess I didn't want to wake up in another ten years and hear myself making excuses for myself like "I work too hard and make too much money to