Mahler 6 Halle/Elder

[ahinton]

You mean like the long list of distinguished conductors, from Mahler onwards, who performed it like that.

In making the decision that he did, Mahler inevitably sowed all manner of doubts in the minds of many conductors, distinguished and otherwise, as to what to do about it; in my observations on the subject, for what they may or may not be worth, I am not for one moment seeking to undermine the perplexity and conundrum-like aspects to which that last-minute decision gave rise - merely to question whether even those who believe that the composer always knows best can be confident in Mahler's decision, given that, if inddeed Mahler did know best, why did he ever change the movement order and why did it take him until the rehearsals for its première to come to realise what he appears to have thought to be his mistake?

And perhaps for those who know better than Mahler how to compose his own symphonies.

See above; it is surely clear to all, whatever they might feel about Mahler's decision and its appropriateness or otherwise, that Mahler himself appears not to have known best how to write his Sixth because he decided at so late a stage to implement so fundamental a change to it...

[Nick Armstrong]

I might have added that one of the worst aspects of Andante ... second is that the sheer shock of the transitions that open the finale is gravely undermined by following the collapse of the scherzo in what's left of A minor, especially as it settles back onto A within a mere page, whereas coming after the close of the Andante its sheer power is, by comparison, enormous.

I couldn't agree more. Having heard the 'andante followed by scherzo' approach live (LSO/Dausgaard, 2013), this was a key element in my feeling 'this is wrong'...

[aeolium]

In making the decision that he did, Mahler inevitably sowed all manner of doubts in the minds of many conductors, distinguished and otherwise, as to what to do about it; in my observations on the subject, for what they may or may not be worth, I am not for one moment seeking to undermine the perplexity and conundrum-like aspects to which that last-minute decision gave rise - merely to question whether even those who believe that the composer always knows best can be confident in Mahler's decision, given that, if inddeed Mahler did know best, why did he ever change the movement order and why did it take him until the rehearsals for its première to come to realise what he appears to have thought to be his mistake?

But aren't there many examples of cases in which composers have changed their minds at a late stage, or even after publication? And surely the reasons Mahler made the change, however mysterious to us, must have been powerful enough to risk the ridicule it invited in requiring all the published copies of the original edition to be amended. Not only Mahler conducted the symphony in the revised order, twice, but his close confidante Oskar Fried who gave the Berlin premiere of the work did too - and continued to perform the work in that order throughout his life. Is it likely that Mahler would have changed his mind again and not informed Fried (or indeed Mengelberg who was performing the work in A-S order in 1916)? Those are the facts - the belief that Mahler must have changed his mind again because S-A is so obviously superior, even though the extra-musical evidence for that belief is so flimsy, is something else.

[Flosshilde]

why did he ever change the movement order and why did it take him until the rehearsals for its première to come to realise what he appears to have thought to be his mistake?

Perhaps because it wasn't until he heard it in reality, rather than in his head, that he realised that the effect he wanted required the change in order?

Musical theory might say that one key should or shouldn't follow another, but art is more than theory - it's about what produces the impact that the artist wants. Plenty of painters have changed their mind after finishing a painting & altered it - overpainting areas of their original ideas. Should we say they were wrong & scrape off the overpainting?

[ahinton]

But aren't there many examples of cases in which composers have changed their minds at a late stage, or even after publication?

There are undoubtedly quite a few - and Chopin, to give just one example, was quite often in the habit of changing tiny details on the way to the publisher's.

And surely the reasons Mahler made the change, however mysterious to us, must have been powerful enough to risk the ridicule it invited in requiring all the published copies of the original edition to be amended.

Indeed so; Mahler indeed knew that he was taking a great risk with his reputation in doing this - and it's hardly as though that reputation as a composer was anything like as firmly established as it has been for decades today.

Not only Mahler conducted the symphony in the revised order, twice, but his close confidante Oskar Fried who gave the Berlin premiere of the work did too - and continued to perform the work in that order throughout his life, including on the first recording of the work.

I know. Mahler's revised order was, I believe, adhered to in all subsequent performances until around 1916, at which time it was Mengelberg, who was indeed quite close to Mahler in the composer's final years, who first reverted to the original order having already performed it using the revised order (I think that this change of heart first occurred on the occasion of its Dutch première). Whilst I know, of course, that Fried, a long-time Mahler devotee, recorded this symphony, wasn't the work's first recording made by Charles Adler conducting the Vienna Symphony Orchestra in 1952?

Is it likely that Mahler would have changed his mind again and not informed Fried (or indeed Mengelberg who was performing the work in A-S order in 1916)?

Well, no, of course not - but then he wasn't around for long to change his mind in any case!

Those are the facts - the belief that Mahler must have changed his mind again because S-A is so obviously superior, even though the extra-musical evidence for that belief is so flimsy, is something else.

Alma and, later, Ratz, threw several spanners into the works by making pronouncements about this movement order that had no basis in evidential fact, but who's to say what Mahler might have decided to do after the symphony had received dozens of performances at his own and others' hands had be lived to be around 80 years of age and been able to witness some of them? I think that the most important things to consider here - apart from any personal view about the best order for the work's central movements - are the fact that Mahler could and did change his mind about it once and that, before he did so, he appears to have harboured superstitions about conducting it, fuelled in part, perhaps, by its unprecedentedly pessimistic expression.

[aeolium]

Whilst I know, of course, that Fried, a long-time Mahler devotee, recorded this symphony, wasn't the work's first recording made by Charles Adler conducting the Vienna Symphony Orchestra in 1952?

You're quite right, and I had realised this error shortly after posting - I've corrected the post.

who's to say what Mahler might have decided to do after the symphony had received dozens of performances at his own and others' hands had be lived to be around 80 years of age and been able to witness some of them? I think that the most important things to consider here - apart from any personal view about the best order for the work's central movements - are the fact that Mahler could and did change his mind about it once and that, before he did so, he appears to have harboured superstitions about conducting it, fuelled in part, perhaps, by its unprecedentedly pessimistic expression.

That's true - he might have changed his mind again. Though there are hundreds if not thousands of "what if's?" in music. I just think that the decision of a conductor to follow the order that we know the composer endorsed should be respected, even if you disagree with it. I think, though I don't have statistics for this, that there has been an increasing move towards the Andante-Scherzo sequence since the discrediting of the Ratz edition. Abbado AFAICR recorded it in the 1970s with the CSO with the original S-A order, but more recently with Berlin and Lucerne reverted to A-S.

[HighlandDougie]

Oskar Fried who gave the Berlin premiere of the work did too - and continued to perform the work in that order throughout his life, including on his recording of the work.

Fried died in 1941. While I would be delighted to be proved wrong about the first recording of the 6th, I have assumed for a long time that it was the 1952 Charles Adler recording which claimed that accolade (Fried recorded the 2nd in 1924 - and, new to me, emigrated to the USSR in 1934 where he died in Tbilisi). Is there a Fried recording of the 6th somewhere?

Ed: apologies to Aeolium - I've just read the previous post. I have the Adler on LP - not sure that it ever made it to CD (unlike his recording of the 3rd, issued by Harmonia Mundi)

[Beef Oven!]

I might have added that one of the worst aspects of Andante (not Adagio, as I wrote incorrectly above) second is that the sheer shock of the transitions that open the finale is gravely undermined by following the collapse of the scherzo in what's left of A minor, especially as it settles back onto A within a mere page, whereas coming after the close of the Andante its sheer power is, by comparison, enormous.

Totally agree.

[Petrushka]

Amid all the debate and controversy surrounding the order of the middle movements did anyone else actually listen to the Halle/Elder performance from beginning to end??

[richardfinegold]

I read a review that the Adler recordings have just been released, at least here, on the Music and Arts Label.
Adler was apparently one of those Conductors that used his wife's fortune to be able to make recordings and performances. Shades of Beecham, Kousevitsky, Paul Sacher, and Gilbert Kaplan

[Beef Oven!]

Amid all the debate and controversy surrounding the order of the middle movements did anyone else actually listen to the Halle/Elder performance from beginning to end??

I haven't heard a note of it.

[Alison]

Not yet Pet!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Musical theory might say that one key should or shouldn't follow another

MIGHT it? Where do you get this remarkable idea from, Floss?

[Ein Heldenleben]

Yes - heard it and thought it excellent . Particularly fine first movement . Hate to say it but I don't mind which order the middle movements come in . It's been a good couple of weeks for Mahler on R3 with a tremendous Mahler 10 from Runnicles / BBC SO recently. I am a fan of Elder's Mahler . I was at the Mahler 9 prom he did with the NYO and was full of admiration for the way he steered them through the score - a real tour de force.

[Flosshilde]

MIGHT it? Where do you get this remarkable idea from, Floss?

You, possibly

For those for whom the Musical structure is more important, the A minor following the A major is the final arbiter.