BaL 7.01.23 - Mahler: Symphony no. 6 in A minor

[Petrushka]

I downloaded the Petrenko after reading this post. It is great playing, and it is good to have another Berlin PO to compare with 50 year old Karajan. My mileage is varying however about the scherzo-finale transition, as I don’t find it more convincing here than on another few recent recordings. I will now play it by reversing the inner movements

You can see why Mahler had his doubts about the order of the inner movements. The transition from Scherzo to Finale doesn't really work whereas Andante to Finale certainly does. The Scherzo plunges straight into the march/counter-march of the first movement which has just ended in a different mood to the way it began whereas Andante second is a good contrast.

Mahler therefore left himself and his interpreters with a problem. The only satisfactory solution is the one that our friend Roehre suggested and that is to omit the Scherzo second movement altogether. Now, I would never do this in listening nor would I I advocate it being done in concert but I can certainly see the logic. What you would have is a three movement symphony that would make perfect sense. The Scherzo is redundant in the scheme of things but there is so much fine music in it that Mahler surely couldn't have ever been persuaded to discard it.

[RichardB]

The transition from Scherzo to Finale doesn't really work

But that's a matter of opinion. As you've seen, both HighlandDougie and myself found listening to this transition in Petrenko's recent recording completely convincing. Of course we can also go one stage further and ask ourselves what it actually means for something to "work", or not. I think that in times gone by very many aspects of Mahler's music would have been regarded by many people as "not working", and these things change over the course of time. The inconclusive and fragmented ending of the Scherzo could be thought of as precisely setting up a context for the existential outburst at the beginning of the Finale, after which the music gradually pieces itself back together again, so that the end of one movement and the beginning of the next are actually part of a single structural/expressive process, but that of course only goes if one understands the materials in one particular way among all the possibilities. I'm not saying it's the way, just that it can't be discounted as "not really working" without taking into account the way a particular conductor might see things. It's surely not a conclusion one can come to in the abstract.

To put it another way: it occurred to me that the Andante-Scherzo order might be seen as going together with a less romantic, more "modern" and anti-heroic view of the symphony.

[Serial_Apologist]

A propos of nothing in particular I am trying to think of another symphony whose first movement starts in the minor and ends in the major with the second subject.

Beethoven 5 came immediately to mind.

[jayne lee wilson]

But that's a matter of opinion. As you've seen, both HighlandDougie and myself found listening to this transition in Petrenko's recent recording completely convincing. Of course we can also go one stage further and ask ourselves what it actually means for something to "work", or not. I think that in times gone by very many aspects of Mahler's music would have been regarded by many people as "not working", and these things change over the course of time. The inconclusive and fragmented ending of the Scherzo could be thought of as precisely setting up a context for the existential outburst at the beginning of the Finale, after which the music gradually pieces itself back together again, so that the end of one movement and the beginning of the next are actually part of a single structural/expressive process, but that of course only goes if one understands the materials in one particular way among all the possibilities. I'm not saying it's the way, just that it can't be discounted as "not really working" without taking into account the way a particular conductor might see things. It's surely not a conclusion one can come to in the abstract.

To put it another way: it occurred to me that the Andante-Scherzo order might be seen as going together with a less romantic, more "modern" and anti-heroic view of the symphony.

But slow movement - scherzo is surely the more conventional structural order among Classical or Romantic symphonies generally. Second-placed scherzi are quite rare and usually have a particular musical point for their position, e.g Haydn 44, Beethoven 9, Bruckner 9....so for me at least, the slow movement-2nd always seems less "modern".....

The Beethoven 9th is most intriguing, as it follows an epic, thunderously eventful minor-key sonata-movement with.....another dramatic, highly eventful, fully-developed sonata-scherzo - in the same key (combined with the more usual scherzo/trio structure).
Then the slow movement's serenities have a vast and very innovative finale crashing in upon them; which refers back to the main ideas of the previous movements in its introduction. The Mahler 6th finale intro takes up the motto-motifs from the 1st and 2nd movements. I can't help feeling Mahler had this as one of his models, or inspirations, for the 6th...

[RichardB]

But slow movement - scherzo is surely the more conventional structural order among Classical or Romantic symphonies generally. Second-placed scherzi are quite rare and usually have a particular musical point for their position, e.g Haydn 44, Beethoven 9, Bruckner 2, (1872), Bruckner 9....so for me at least, the slow movement-2nd always seems less "modern".....

Although I can't claim that this is a fully worked-out thought, and I don't think I can yet put it into coherent words, it's clear to me that it's not the order of slow movement and scherzo in itself I was thinking of as conventional or anything else, but the way the expressive flow of the whole piece is organised.

[silvestrione]

But slow movement - scherzo is surely the more conventional structural order among Classical or Romantic symphonies generally. Second-placed scherzi are quite rare and usually have a particular musical point for their position, e.g Haydn 44, Beethoven 9, Bruckner 9....so for me at least, the slow movement-2nd always seems less "modern".....

The Beethoven 9th is most intriguing, as it follows an epic, thunderously eventful minor-key sonata-movement with.....another dramatic, highly eventful, fully-developed sonata-scherzo - in the same key (combined with the more usual scherzo/trio structure).
Then the slow movement's serenities have a vast and very innovative finale crashing in upon them; which refers back to the main ideas of the previous movements in its introduction. The Mahler 6th finale intro takes up the motto-motifs from the 1st and 2nd movements. I can't help feeling Mahler had this as one of his models, or inspirations, for the 6th...

And there's the 'Hammerklavier', of course, where the second movement scherzo is a playful, ironic/satiric version of the b flat/b natural, b flat/g major/b minor oscillation of the first movement. When the Mahler 6 scherzo second 'works', it can feel like a similar ironic commentary on the first movement.

[cloughie]

And there's the 'Hammerklavier', of course, where the second movement scherzo is a playful, ironic/satiric version of the b flat/b natural, b flat/g major/b minor oscillation of the first movement. When the Mahler 6 scherzo second 'works', it can feel like a similar ironic commentary on the first movement.

Schumann 2 has a pretty lively movt 2 - which Solti exploits to the full, and then that lovely slow 3rd movt!

[Ein Heldenleben]

Beethoven 5 came immediately to mind.

I think that’s the finale of Beethoven’s fifth you’re talking about which does indeed end in the major but with a coda that’s essentially a rearrangement of the finale’s first subject - a C major chord.
The first movement of Mahler 5 ends with a sort of triumphant restatement of the F major second subject ( the Alma Mahler love theme as it’s been described) . It’s orchestrated with a sort of brassy flourish rather than its first appearance with swooning strings if you will. For me the junction then into the Scherzo with its slight reminiscence of the symphony opening works very well. Almost as if the scherzo opening is the coda to the first. Still trying to think of a major symphony first movement which ends in such an unusual way.

[jayne lee wilson]

I think that’s the finale of Beethoven’s fifth you’re talking about which does indeed end in the major but with a coda that’s essentially a rearrangement of the finale’s first subject - a C major chord.
The first movement of Mahler 5 ends with a sort of triumphant restatement of the F major second subject ( the Alma Mahler love theme as it’s been described) . It’s orchestrated with a sort of brassy flourish rather than its first appearance with swooning strings if you will. For me the junction then into the Scherzo with its slight reminiscence of the symphony opening works very well. Almost as if the scherzo opening is the coda to the first. Still trying to think of a major symphony first movement which ends in such an unusual way.

Surely the point about the coda to 6(i) is how the grim rhythms of the symphony's motto themes are gradually transformed into the Alma Theme, combining with it to create that overwhelming final climax - far from a restatement, it's a very meaningful development.
(With intriguing programmatic implications...the Triumph of Love, or the Triumph of Alma, or...perhaps rather more to it. Remember the (brilliantly devised) ending of the Ken Russell film...?).

Such a coda-combination isn't so far from similar procedures in other symphonies, especially the further one gets into the era of Cyclic Form.
Just listen to how César Franck uses all the main ideas in his D Minor Symphony's 1st movement to build up that dramatic coda. Schumann gets up to all sorts of thematic tricks in his ever-fluid, ever-evolving opening movements, e.g in No.2, where the "2nd subject" (if you can call it that - a very relativistic term with this composer...) leads off in the coda, then the quiet trumpet theme from the intro comes back in a triumphant blaze, driving the main allegro theme to the conclusion. And as for the revolutionary one-movement 4th, well....

So as with the Mahler, the forms are driven by the specific musical and emotional demands of the individual work...

[richardfinegold]

And there's the 'Hammerklavier', of course, where the second movement scherzo is a playful, ironic/satiric version of the b flat/b natural, b flat/g major/b minor oscillation of the first movement. When the Mahler 6 scherzo second 'works', it can feel like a similar ironic commentary on the first movement.

Excellent

[richardfinegold]

The only satisfactory solution is the one that our friend Roehre suggested and that is to omit the Scherzo second movement altogether. Now, I would never do this in listening nor would I I advocate it being done in concert but I can certainly see the logic. What you would have is a three movement symphony that would make perfect sense. The Scherzo is redundant in the scheme of things but there is so much fine music in it that Mahler surely couldn't have ever been persuaded to discard it.

That is a bit to radical for me. I know that in a concert performance the length of the piece can make one feel the redundancy of some of the music, but I would argue that perhaps if anything GM didn't make the scherzo parodistic enough of the First movement. Or perhaps some conductors downplay some of the parodistic elements? At any rate Mahler always seems so filled with doubts about the ambiguity of life. Eliminating the scherzo would eliminate the self questioning nature of the Composer that contributes to the fascination

[richardfinegold]

Surely the point about the coda to 6(i) is how the grim rhythms of the symphony's motto themes are gradually transformed into the Alma Theme, combining with it to create that overwhelming final climax - far from a restatement, it's a very meaningful development.
(With intriguing programmatic implications...the Triumph of Love, or the Triumph of Alma, or...perhaps rather more to it. Remember the (brilliantly devised) ending of the Ken Russell film...?)

So as with the Mahler, the forms are driven by the specific musical and emotional demands of the individual work...

I haven't seen the Russell Film (Title Please?) but that is a very interesting way to view the progression, one which never occurred to me..thank you for that

[Serial_Apologist]

I think that’s the finale of Beethoven’s fifth you’re talking about which does indeed end in the major but with a coda that’s essentially a rearrangement of the finale’s first subject - a C major chord.
The first movement of Mahler 5 ends with a sort of triumphant restatement of the F major second subject ( the Alma Mahler love theme as it’s been described) . It’s orchestrated with a sort of brassy flourish rather than its first appearance with swooning strings if you will. For me the junction then into the Scherzo with its slight reminiscence of the symphony opening works very well. Almost as if the scherzo opening is the coda to the first. Still trying to think of a major symphony first movement which ends in such an unusual way.

Ah, my misunderstanding there...

[Serial_Apologist]

I haven't seen the Russell Film (Title Please?) but that is a very interesting way to view the progression, one which never occurred to me..thank you for that

The title's simply "Mahler" - KR made it for TV in 1974. I can't rememberr having seen it myself - something for Xmas viewing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGq7TFoxB4E

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The title's simply "Mahler" - KR made it for TV in 1974. I can't rememberr having seen it myself - something for Xmas viewing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGq7TFoxB4E

More info here. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahler_(film)



Being familiar with the English Lake District, it’s interesting to see Derwentwater and the surrounding fells being used to represent the Austrian Alps.