Skip to main content

Mahler: Symphony #2 "Resurrection"

If you love Mahler for his larger than life, supersized symphonic productions, this symphony is for you.
**********************
Claudio Abbado and the Weiner Philharmoniker
Gustav Mahler (1860-1911)
Symphony #2 "Resurrection"
Deutsche Grammophon, 1994
**********************

The Second Symphony contains everything, and I mean everything, in Mahler's arsenal. Powerful emotion, life and death themes, lush melodies, ripping brass parts, melodrama, pianissimo to fortissimissimo dynamic ranges, choral arrangements (in German no less), even extra parts for a sizable off-stage orchestra. They're all here in this nearly 90-minute long symphony.

But let me warn you, listening to this symphony can be a shocking experience. At times it leaps from repose to climax with little warning or seeming logic. Mahler takes you from emotional valleys to sudden emotional peaks, from straight instrumental music to a consonant-laden German contralto solo, from lush woodwind melodies to deafening brass parts.

One of the things I struggled with, when listening to this symphony for the first time, was trying to be engaged by the symphony without being stunned into submission. I was so often in a state of surprise that it was difficult remaining engrossed in the music. The transition from the end of the 4th movement to the beginning of the 5th and final movement is a typical example: Mahler lulls you gently and serenely to sleep--and then blows your eardrums halfway into your brain with the first note of the final movement.

This is a blessing, however; it simply means that I'm going to have to listen to this symphony a few more times to really get my arms around it.

A handful of listener notes for Mahler's Second Symphony:
1) The dramatic (or maybe better said: melodramatic) first movement, which represents the funeral march, was written in 1888. Mahler then put the work down for some five years before returning to it.

2) How about all of the stray coughs from the audience throughout the recording? They're particularly noticeable at the very beginning of the 3rd movement. It reminds me why I get so annoyed when I'm at a live symphony, and it helps explain why there aren't that many live classical music recordings made. Suck on a damn cough drop!

3) The 3rd movement might remind you of Berlioz's Symphony Fantastique.

4) If you ever wanted to hear conclusive proof that Mahler never played the trumpet, you'll hear it about 10 minutes into the 5th movement. Mahler writes a high B (I think--at least that's what it sounds like) that starts off fortissimo and fades away to pianissimo. The problem is, he has two trumpets playing it in unison. Anyone who actually played a trumpet would know better than to score something like that. Even skilled trumpet players will struggle to nail a note like that--and even the best trumpet players won't be to do it together and stay in tune with each other. It's too hard a note to control.

5) Remember my comment about how you need to keep your finger on the volume dial whenever you're listening to a Mahler symphony? This symphony is yet another example; it goes from inaudible to ear-scorchingly loud. Many times I felt my hair blowing back like in the old Memorex commercial.

6) This Deutsche Grammophon CD set breaks up the symphony into two discs, which in my opinion is total crap. There's no reason, other than charging me extra for the recording, everything can't be put onto one disc.

7) Finally, think about the economics of a putting on a performance of Mahler's Second. All of Mahler symphonies require extra musicians (usually double the typical number of woodwinds, beefed up string sections, what sounds like at least six trumpets and probably as many french horns and trombones, etc). Moreover, this symphony requires still more musicians for the "offstage orchestra" in the 5th movement. On top of that you've got two solo singers and an entire choir. Heck, if you're going to hire all those extra musicians, you might as well put on an opera. Helps explain why this symphony isn't performed live all that often. A shame.



Comments

Chantal said…
A most excellent post!!!!

You are certainly right, Mahler 2 is not performed often enough. (but I would say that about any Mahler symphony though, but that's me of course!)

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