Prom 62: Mahler - Symphony No. 6, BRSO, Rattle

[Barbirollians]

I am not sure the composer left the door open by his errata note and his own performances I think he closed it shut. If one prefers it Scherzo-Andante as Ratz did and it seems for a period Alma Mahler did then that’s fine recorded performances allow us to make our own decisions but it isn’t what Mahler wanted .

[Barbirollians]

Some brief reactions to listening to the radio transmission: the first movement, taken quite swiftly, had me thinking that compared to the LSO the Bavarians seemed to lack heft. The slow movement (irritatingly, to me, placed second) was beautifully played, with some exceptionally warm string playing. The Scherzo was appropriately vigorous and sardonic. But the Finale was what sealed the overall success of the performance: wild and ferocious where it needed to be, delving into turgid depths of despair or scaling delirious lyrical heights. I always wish for the nightmarish expressionistic insights of a Tennstedt or Bernstein in this movement, but Rattle and his orchestra certainly approached this level of intensity. In fact, I thought that they appeared to have saved themselves for this fiery, no-holds-barred conclusion. The brass were particularly brilliant.

I rather agree about the lack of heft in the first movement from the Bavarian RSO compared to LSO/Rattle Mahler performances. Then again having become acquainted with this symphony through Barbirolli's studio account most others lack heft !

I enjoyed it a great deal but it did not quite blow me away unlike his LSO Mahler 2 and 9 at the Proms . Lovely Andante. properly grim Scherzo and a very well paced account of the finale.

[oliver sudden]

I am not sure the composer left the door open by his errata note and his own performances I think he closed it shut. If one prefers it Scherzo-Andante as Ratz did and it seems for a period Alma Mahler did then that’s fine recorded performances allow us to make our own decisions but it isn’t what Mahler wanted .

The big problem for me isn't that Scherzo-Andante exists as an option. It's that thanks to Ratz's actions the composer's own ordering wasn't a realistic option for decades of performers (or listeners), including some of the most important Mahler conductors of all, precisely at the time when Mahler's music seriously came to prominence. He didn't just say: here is another performance possibility. He presented the order Mahler rejected (indeed never even performed) as the sole version of the Mahler-Gesellschaft, resting on a completely spurious story of Mahler changing his mind. This is an entirely different business from the Vaughan Williams London symphony, for example.

[HighlandDougie]

I am not sure the composer left the door open by his errata note and his own performances I think he closed it shut. If one prefers it Scherzo-Andante as Ratz did and it seems for a period Alma Mahler did then that’s fine recorded performances allow us to make our own decisions but it isn’t what Mahler wanted .

I'm tempted to add QED. As the evidence suggests, Mahler was quite clear on how he wanted the symphony to be performed - Andante then Scherzo. One can speculate until the cows come home on what Mahler, "might have wanted", but, in short, he made no such change in his lifetime. I admit to bias in that Scherzo - Andante, despite my having being brought up with Bernstein et al, simply now sounds wrong to me in the overall architecture of the symphony.