Monday, November 9, 2015

Giya Kancheli, "Nu.Mu.Zu." November 5, 2015

I desperately needed a handkerchief.

Tears were rolling down my cheeks.  I needed to blow my nose.

But we were only five minutes into Nu.Mu.Zu., and I'd just have to be content with quietly sniffling for the next twenty minutes.

It was the first modern piece that I've seen receive a full standing ovation from a full house at the Seattle Symphony, and, despite the second half of the concert being taken up by Brahms Violin Concerto, Nu.Mu.Zu. was what the audience was talking excitedly about after everything was over for the evening.



Written by Georgian film composer Giya Kancheli, this piece was like a great soundtrack without having to endure the movie.  With interweaving thematic elements snagged neatly from Bach and crashing crescendos with an impressive battalion of excellent percussionists, the cinematic quality of this work drew us all in.

The words Nu.Mu.Zu are Sumerian for "I don't know", and the composer, having reached his 80th birthday this year, wanted to express his perplexion and despair of the current state of the world.

It is difficult to recount a piece of this nature that I've only heard once and of which there are no recordings, but a basic outline would be thus:

A soft, slow opening with gentle piano playing the theme from Bach's Invention in E minor, harp carrying much melodic weight.  A prominent suspension of the fourth gives motion and tension.

A build-up, featuring bassoon solos and a bow drawn across orchestral bells to create a sound like feedback from a stereo.

Explosion into a variation of the first theme, with a drop in the bass to a harmonic mediant relationship.  This repeats several times, each time building with gongs, cymbals, and other heavy percussion.

It seemed that one of the greatest things was how deeply sold on the piece the Symphony itself, as a unit, was.  The orchestra members gave everything they had for this piece, with enduring concentration throughout the piece.  In fact, I found myself thinking after the piece had finished that I really wanted to hear it again... But in that odd way, a recording, even a very high quality recording, wouldn't really match that intensity.

I do have one complaint, however, and that is that I feel that the piece could have been ten minutes shorter.  The build-up repeated itself no less than three times; the climax-heaviness was too oft repeated to be fully effective.  I'd have preferred another contrasting theme in the middle, followed by the soft beginning and then a repetition of the climactic theme.

That is, of course, only my opinion.

I can say with sincerity, however, that I haven't felt touched so deeply by a piece in quite a while.  It left a mark in my heart like a spontaneous, flame-bright love affair of a single night; waking in the morning to find the lover gone.

Update:  You can now download a recording of this piece on the Seattle Symphony Orchestra website.  Enjoy!

Saturday, August 8, 2015

Piano Recital, Aug. 22 2015

Welcome to the Piano Recital of

Grace Wallis

August 22, 2015 2:00 pm



Program:


Ludwig Beethoven (1770-1827)
Piano Sonata No. 8 in F minor, Op. 13
  1. Grave – Allegro di molto e con brio
  2. Adagio cantabile
  3. Rondo: Allegro

Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750)
Italian Concerto BVW 971
  1. Movement 1
  2. Andante
  3. Presto


Frederick Chopin (1810-1849)
Fantasie Impromptu Op. posthu. 66


Claude-Achille Debussy (1862-1918)
Children's Corner Suite L. 113
  1. Doctor Gradus ad Parnassum
  2. Jimbo's Lullaby
  3. Serenade of the Doll
  4. The Snow is Dancing
  5. The Little Shepherd
  6. Golliwog's Cakewalk


Isaac Albéniz (1860-1906)
España Op. 165
  1. Preludio
  2. Tango
  3. Malagueña
  4. Serenata
  5. Capricho Catalán
  6. Zortzico


Saturday, June 20, 2015

Brahms Symphony 1 at Seattle Symphony

After the concert, one of the friends who attended it with me said, "By the way, those eyes kinda should have required a license after that Brahms, sweetness..."

It's not a huge secret that I have a huge crush on the great composer who died almost 90 years before I was born.  Although my 'favorite' composer definitely began with Debussy, it quickly shifted over to Brahms in high school, as I heard for the first time the sublime Intermezzo op. 118 no 2...and have subsequently been unable to find an equal to that recording.  

My love for Brahms' work is a series of favorites in many of the standard forms: Piano Concerto 2, mvt. 2, Cello sonata 1Piano Quartet no. 1, and of course, the intensely emotional Symphony 3 mvt 3, subject of orchestration analysis for composition students around the world...to name just a few off the top of my head.

But when it comes to a whole, cohesive work that is perfect from beginning to end, I can't think of any symphony that comes as close to fulfilling my wildest expectations as far as sheer artistry, craftsmanship, and emotive power, as Symphony no. 1.

Symphony no. 1, Op. 68, was composed from 1845-1876.  That's right: this work was in progress for over 20 years.  Hailed as Beethoven's heir and the last hope for the revival of the symphonic form after that esteemed composer's 9th, Brahms felt the heavy burden of expectation placed on him (by Schumann)--and thus the need to create something truly fantastic.  It is an understatement to say that he accomplished his objective; unlike the disastrous reception to his Violin Concerto and first Piano Concerto, this work achieved acclaim from its premiere in Karlsruhe and established his true fame in the classical music world.  

The first time I came across this work, it was featured in the Japanese drama Nodame Cantabile.  Mirroring the protagonist Chiaki Shinichi's ascent from despair to triumph, the piece's massive 45 minute program manages to contain this simple message in an extraordinarily succinct way.  With the exception of the quaint and lovely little 3rd movement, with its flippant clarinet in 6/8, the entire work is not only devoted to this goal, it executes it without becoming repetitious or veering off course.

Some of my favorite things about this symphony:

The first movement begins with a huge unison, tutti and ff, with the timpani pounding like a heartbeat underneath counter to the suspended tone.  Then the orchestra divides, with melodic strings and horns moving up by step, and other instruments moving down by step in tandem.  The next time this beginning theme is heard, just after the exposition and before the development, the timpani crashes into a long roll; afterwards, although the listener's ears ache to hear it again, it never returns, leaving a feeling of unsatisfied expectations.  Where other composers would utilize such a powerful and impactful technique multiple times to get the most out of it, Brahms effectively teases us by leaving us wanting more.

At the end of the sweet but mournful second movement, the concertmaster (Alexander Velinzon) spins out into a eulogistic solo, freely flowing up into lovely atmospheric notes.  The rest of the movement is naturally perfect, as well, obviously, bringing tears to the eyes of the most stalwart of Romantic music skeptics (one of whom I dragged along for Thursday night...so I have concrete evidence!)

The third movement, which I find myself listening for most of all, begins with a playful clarinet solo, as mentioned above.  Supported and contrasting with the strings as a swirling background, it is a very toned down third movement, for a symphony, but nevertheless breathes a gentle breath of air before the very heavy final movement.

The fourth movement is often described in terms of struggle and victory (or, as Ludovic Morlot put it, "from darkness into light").  During a rehearsal prior to the concert, which was audible in the offices on the 5th floor, we heard the first horn, Jeffrey Fair, practice the exquisite 'triumph' solo theme over and over.  And at the same time, of course, there were about three people humming it upstairs, too...

Something that truly impresses me about this symphony is how much classic structure is utilized without becoming boring.  Indeed, Brahms builds his melodies on carefully measured sequences of steps and leaps, and yet not only is each original, each is also completely singable.  The development sections are all based on classic techniques; modulations, sequences, sentences, fragmentation, etc., and yet build and hold tension effectively until crashing to a close at the end of the movement.  It may be argued that he deliberately uses these forms and structures in order to build the perfect symphony, not only insofar as form is concerned, but also just from an aesthetic perspective.  The amount of work that must have gone into taking raw inspiration and crafting it into such a compact, finished form must have been staggering...well, we know it was, given how long it took him to complete it.

So, for one who has heard this symphony in recordings (mostly by Herbert von Karajan), how was my reaction to hearing it for the first time live...with the Seattle Symphony, no less?  Well, to be honest, I went to see it twice...on Thursday night (June 11) and Sunday afternoon (June 14).  The Thursday performance blew me away; rather than encouraging the orchestra to put energy into their performance, Morlot actually seemed to be reining them in.  They reached maximum volume, maximum emotiveness, maximum intensity, so many times that it was a cascade of peaks and towards the end, one had to wonder if there was really anything else to give.  Granted, the climax at the end was absolutely chilling -- with a sudden volume of air displacement due to the raised goosebumps on every audience member -- so it can't be said that it was disappointing, even with all of the lead-up the entire time.  Everyone was giving everything they had.

This remained true on Sunday as well, but having given all they had on three consecutive evenings earlier...I have to say that they did seem a little deflated.  They reached max volume, but it was a strained sort of emotion, the same feeling of climax as the last peak, where on Thursday night, every peak and climax had a completely different feeling.  So even though I give them absolute credit for going all out, knowing the tax on energy prerequisite to even just listening to the symphony, I was actually a little sad that I didn't get to hear a repeat of Thursday's performance.  Well, so it goes.  You can't have everything...

But you can get pretty damn close.


Sources:

Picture: http://www.jonathanjamesmusic.com/the-jaws-open-brahms-symphony-1/

Heinrich Neuhaus plays Brahms Intermezzo, Op. 118,No.2 truecrypt

Brahms: Piano Concerto No.2 In B Flat, Op.83 - 2. Allegro appassionato  #HélèneGrimaud

Brahms: Piano Quartet No. 1 Op.25-4 (Am, Stern, Laredo, Yo-Yo Ma)  TheGreatPerformers

Brahms Symphony n.3 III. Poco Allegretto - Bernstein rafottonello

Brahms Symphony No 1 Karajan Berliner Philharmoniker Adagio fukax

Monday, June 1, 2015

Dvořák Symphony 8, an analytical essay

Dvořák Symphony 8, Op. 88 

There is a definitive uniqueness to Antonín Dvořák’s eighth symphony, the so-called “English” Symphony.  Perhaps the sense of separateness can be attributed to the peaceful setting in which it was written: Vysoká, the composer’s summer haven, where he could compose his mind as well as his music.  The symphony did not undergo gruelling months or years of revision and struggles to set it properly; it was written in only 3 months, from September to November of 1889, which further underlines the fact that this symphony is so unconventional.  It seems likely under the circumstances that it is due to the ease and fluidity with which it was written that the symphony seems to write its own rules of form, thematic development, tonic progression, and instrumentation.  Commentators and critics alike have been unable to ignore it, but they do not all agree on its quality: “The symphony has been raised and damned, and comments range from eulogistic praise…to downright condemnation”  (Schönzeler 129) but one thing is unanimous: It creates its own off-the-beaten-path journey, and follows it without looking back.  While the opinion is often expressed that this is “experimental”, i.e. breaking from old forms to attempt to create new ones, I believe it is rather a salute back to composers of the Classical era, before rules were set down about the forms such music should follow, when the great composers wrote what sounded natural as well as original.  It is with this content-rather-than-container mindset that Dvořák set about writing what has been called “certainly the most intimate and original within the whole canon of Dvořák’s nine” (Schönzeler 129) and also “a meal consisting of clear soup, a small slice of smoked salmon, a light egg soufflé and a water-ice.” (Hughes 137)

In spite of the symphony’s freedom as it unwinds, there are several features which subtly bind together the four movements and their various themes so that the entire work flows logically from beginning to end.  The greatest freedom given to the symphony is the form; on this, there is no question.  Of the four movements, not one is conventional; they all have deviations from the standards dutifully recited by theory students.  Substitutions and additions of entire sections are included, and among the themes themselves, liberty is taken, particularly where the number of measures is concerned; since the melodies tend to be written along the lines of folk-tunes, they often have an irregular number of measures.  The form itself is the largest part of what sets the symphony apart as unique, and furthermore draws it together into a cohesive whole.  For example, every movement except the third starts out in a key that is not tonic at all, lending a wandering feeling to the beginning of each of these movements.  Furthermore, the thematic device of the call-and-respond motif, specifically between winds and strings, is prevalent in each movement not merely as a passing technique, but as a thematic shaper in and of itself.  One harmonic texture device that is notable is the use of repetitious scales to build tension, particularly in the second movement.  The Neopolitan chord is used with significance in several cases toward the beginning of the movements.  Finally,  Dvorak’s use of the flute, “a favoured instrument in Dvořák’s hands” (Clapham 96),  whether as bird-song or a passing descant, is remarkable for the melodic license granted in solos that are fantastic and otherworldly.  All these characteristics are seeded smoothly throughout the symphony and develop within it as a whole, growing from it organically rather than being forcibly engineered for the sake of consistency.

Movement 1 is perhaps the most eclectic of the four movements even though it maintains the basic sonata form.  It begins with a solemn funeral theme in g minor, which spreads out over three halting, unfinished sections (mm. 1-6, 6-11, 11-17 respectively), with a particularly noble effect at m. 10, where a Neopolitan chord sets a precedent for the other movements.  As it concludes, the hushed, ppp dynamic level and the continual weaving of voices in and out of the final chord in the true tonic of G major send out an aura of anticipation; though the theme begins like an actual theme, it feels more like an introduction; thus, it will henceforth be referred to as “Intro Theme 1”.  The next theme (Intro Theme 2) is a repetitive, fleeting set of dotted rhythms in the flute, lasting a mere 5 measures (mm. 18-22) and also with an unfinished feeling, as the strings echo (mm. 22-26) and fade as a piccolo maintains the dominant (D) above, and the tuba maintains it below, creating a strangely hollow atmosphere.  From this background fabric, a lively transition (mm. 28-38) quickly brings the volume back up to ff, and beginning at m. 34, bassoons, horns, and low strings echo a much heavier version of the previous flute theme, as if to emphasize the deep contrasts of range and timbre already in place.  At m. 37, the first of the sudden, fast scales appears in the strings, in D major, and a final dominant chord summons in Intro Theme 3 in tonic (mm. 38-57)...arguably.  Although the entrance is definite, the initial melody only lasts for the first four bars; instead, it morphs into a transition made from fragments of Intro Theme 2 (again in flutes), and with a succeeding melody in the violins in mm. 46-56, in a minor.  This section continues the spinning atmosphere of suspension: is the symphony actually starting yet?  So far, there have been three significant themes which will recur and develop throughout the movement (and in the case of Intro Theme 2, throughout the entire symphony), but nothing has been stated that is conclusive or even finished.  It is now almost 2:00 into the symphony, and one is inclined to wonder if new rules should be stated for the definition of an exposition.

            At m. 57, Theme 1 finally comes as a fully developed melody derived from the Intro Theme 2 fragment, again in tonic.  This time it appears tutti, and again not ending particularly conclusively, as it immediately fades at m. 60 and strings off with a light 3-note motive that passes from violins, to clarinets, to bassoons, and finally to horns, where it takes more shape (mm. 61-65); thus, the idea fizzles out, leaving multiple questions unanswered.  A second part to the theme in A major takes place in the strings from mm. 67-76, although due to its somewhat unfocused nature, it also seems to serve as a transition.  Theme 2 begins at m. 76, in flutes and clarinets, and is the first complete theme that actually has a fluid linear progression and development; there are no interruptions, and it flows evenly.  However, it does not even enter in the tonic; instead, it comes in b minor.  Melodically, the theme is even simpler than any of the preceding motives; it is a tidy little sentence structure (mm. 76-80), repeated (mm. 80-84).  Theme 2b begins in the same vein, except that it begins with the “sentence” (mm. 84-88), then disintegrates into shorter fragments in mm. 89-95.  The effect is oddly symmetrical.  A short transition leads directly into the Closing Theme (mm. 97-110), which begins to exploit two of the aforementioned tension-building devices.  The theme itself is in B major, now in the winds, repeated (mm. 97-100 and 101-104 respectively) and extended by a significant scale passed back and forth as the first call-and-respond between strings and winds ff, with spots of sfz, a harbinger of the tension to come (mm. 104-110).   A codetta begins in m. 111, echoing a trace of Intro Theme 3, with the flute fluttering soft bird-calls in the high treble, and the exposition spins itself out to m. 126, presenting the dominant chord for a re-entrance to G major (or minor).

             What transpires next is what can be called the development, though at first it sounds like a perfect repetition from the very beginning.  Intro Theme 1 is repeated verbatim (mm. 127-144), and at m. 145, Intro Theme 2 enters as if it is the original; however, it quickly begins to modulate to the Neopolitan chord at m. 152; subsequently, a series of call-and-respond, again between strings and winds, run through several diminished chords before arriving at C sharp major (m. 165) for Intro Theme 2 in the lower winds.  At m. 174, the flute receives a fanciful descant, light and stacatto, over Intro Theme 3 (A major) in violas and clarinets, repeated at m. 182 in oboes, which begins to get passed off as an echo-fragment between other instruments; meanwhile, at m. 194, the scales enter again, creating a definitive sense of heaviness and tension, up to m. 202-206, where Intro Theme 3 finally reaches a conclusion of its own in massive tutti chords that resolve into b minor.  A  transition into the next development section begins at m. 207, with fragments of Intro Theme 2 up in higher voices, and Intro Theme 3 in lower, reaching a frenzied state before starting the recapitulation at m. 218.  Intro Theme 1 is reintroduced, and furthermore in its original key of g minor.  This time however, it is stated in the brass ff, accompanied by the upper strings in a set of slowly descending chromatic scales, until m. 233 where they reverse and ascend into G major.  Intro Theme 2 begins in the dominant at m. 239, back in the flute with very light accompaniment, and is allowed to develop into a full theme which is different from Theme 1, completed by a descending melody in flutes and strings.  This takes the place of what would have been the following Intro Theme 3 and Theme 1; instead, it leads directly into the restatement of Theme 2 in g minor, at. m. 253. This and the Closing Theme in G major (mm. 274-287) are similar to the statements in the exposition in terms of construction.  The coda begins at m. 288, and though it begins similar to the codetta in the exposition, it quickly digresses, notably into a set of tutti sustained chords at mm. 296-300, with chord progressions smoothly moving from one to the next as follows: BM, A sharp dim, DM, FM, AM, FM, B flat M, DM and back to tonic.  The high strings then begin a set of short dotted rhythms (mm. 300-304), taken over by winds (mm. 305-310) while the strings switch to three sixteenth notes beginning on each beat; the sections switch roles at m. 312,, and all instruments join in for eighth note chords to the end (m. 317).  When all is said and done, the movement does not feel incomplete or fragmented; it spins out melodically, progresses reasonably, and ends appropriately.  The many thematic ideas present their voices in a seemingly haphazard way in the exposition, yet each receives a definitive conclusion as it is developed later on.  

           Movement 2, concerning which Robertson has said: “I take to be one of the considerable achievements of symphonic literature” (Robertson 169) also begins in an unrelated key (c minor), and furthermore it doesn’t even start there (the first chord is A flat major, the Neopolitan of G major); to reiterate the point, the Neopolitan of c minor is reached at m. 6, before G major leads to tonic at mm. 8-9.  This movement does not begin with an extended introduction as does its predecessor; rather, it begins immediately in Theme 1 (mm. 1-11), which lingers unfinished.  However, a curious Transition takes place at m. 12.  It is actually a miniature rounded binary form contained entirely in itself, with the first theme in flutes based on Intro Theme 2 of mvt. 1, and with the second (mm. 18-22) as a parallel period with a call-and-respond between strings and winds; afterwards, the first returns (mm. 23-31). Unlike the long phrases of melodic stretto portrayed in the first movement, this call-and-response consists of two short parts of a conversation.  At m. 32, Theme 1 (proper) returns,  this time starting in tonic, and finishes the idea from previous; thus, it may be inferred that Theme 1 forms another inclusive rounded binary form by sandwiching the transition.  This section cadences in the dominant at m. 44, there is a short transition, and Theme 2 begins in C Major at m. 47.  This theme contains the most notable set of descending scales for harmonic effect in the symphony.  While the flute, supported by an oboe, carries a lyrical, floating melody in the treble, more extended than the solo in the previous movement, a very light texture is set with the aforestated scales taking place in the strings, p.  At m. 57, a solo violin completes the parallel period of the theme (mm. 57-64), and the scales switch to the 1st oboe and clarinet.  The texture continues to be light but begins to gain momentum with tremolo in violas.  However, a third part to the theme begins at m. 65, and this time almost all instruments play f.  The scales have switched to the low strings and bassoon, for a sudden heavy effect, and the rest of the instruments take the melody in harmony until m. 69, where four different parts of harmonic texture, still including the scales, suddenly explode into a fff climax at m. 72.  A transition begins at m. 73, with trumpet and trombone, and the upper strings continue the scales at double tempo.  Concerning this part, a certain opinion has been put forth: “Presently it instigates a big build-up of arpeggios and scale-passages, almost unrelievedly in C major, which tend to outstay their welcome and distract one’s interest” (Hughes 137).  However, I find this buildup to be the most stimulating part of the movement, perhaps of the entire symphony, since the scales have been carefully crafted both fore and aft to draw attention to this very place.  Subsequently, a stately closing theme continues at m. 77, in all instruments except the bassoons and lower strings which continue the faster set of scales ff.  All scales immediately cease with a sudden interruption, pp (mm. 81-87), where a contrasting short, romantic statement in only strings ends the theme.  This ushers in the second statement of the Transition; this time, instead of the ABA form used before, only the A theme is played, completing itself with an extension in the clarinets in parallel thirds (mm. 87-100)...and is never heard again.  

           At the beginning of what might be considered the recapitulation, the lower strings begin with a curious quotation straight from the beginning of Brahms Symphony 1, mvt. 4, (mm. 101-105); subsequently, Theme 1 begins a series of developing fragments with a melodic call-and-respond between oboe, horn, and 1st violins, versus low strings.  It sounds deceptively more like a development than a recapitulation, as mm. 122-132 go on to further fragment the theme in triplets in winds, with a short chordal response from the strings on the beat.  However, Theme 2 reenters at m. 123, which resumes the descending scales in flutes and clarinets, while the violins take the melody; only the first part of the theme is stated before a transition to the coda (mm. 143-148), which includes the final example of the short call-and-response between strings and winds.  At the start of the coda (m. 149),  the melody in the violins is merely a descending C major scale, while the low strings counter with ascending C major scales; the two switch at m. 151.  Theme 1 reappears in C major at m. 155 (essentially creating another rounded binary form); it plays out through a series of call-and-respond between winds and brass versus the entire string section (mm. 160-162), before an unusual cadence of ii half-dim leads back to tonic, and to the end of the movement at m. 170.

           Movement 3 is, at least at first glance, comparatively conventional. The themes repeat themselves predictably, there is a lack of material that is not explicitly part of the form (at least until the 2/4 coda at the end), and the modulations contain no surprises.  However, what primarily saves this movement from being dull is the lovely, folk-like melodies, whose repetitive motives are countered by the irregularity of the arrangement of beats in each section, turning what could be a dull movement into a lively, interesting one.   Furthermore, this movement changes the motivic elements into a different character from the first two movements.  Although the scale motif itself does not appear in the movement, nearly all the themes are based on the scale motif, as either chromatic or broken scales; the call-and-response is not two voices comprising one melody or stretto, but rather entire themes passing back and forth between the wind and string sections; while the flute continues to receive fluid melodies, it is always supported by another instrument and does not showcase its highest register; and finally the Neopolitan does not even make an appearance until m. 59.  The movement begins with a Minuet immediately set in g minor, with a graceful melody in the first violins (a broken scale, overlapping itself and descending in sections) and a fast, repetitive harmonic texture in triplets in winds (mm. 1-22).  The contrasting Theme 2, a descending chromatic scale in the dominant, places the melody in the winds while the middle strings take over in repetitive 16th notes for harmony, and includes a call-and-response with winds versus strings (mm. 23-39).  A set of broken scales in strings from mm. 39-42 transition back to Theme 1 with the melody in winds and a contrary motion figure in 1st violins and violas, until at m. 53, the violins take the theme back.  Theme 2 is restated, again in winds, at m. 64, and from mm. 80-86 a transition of a broken g minor scale passed between various solo instruments (peaking with the only set of high, unaccompanied notes from the flute in mm. 82-83) leads to the Trio at m. 87.  

             The Trio is similarly predictable, with Theme 1 in G major (mm. 88-104, 119-136), in winds, loosely based on Movement 1 Intro Theme 2.  However, Theme 2 is actually an ascending scale in the strings, once again in the dominant (mm. 105-118, 137-150).  This breaks from the mould of the descending scales in everything that has come before in the symphony, and gestures ahead to the 4th movement.  Both themes are repeated with differences occurring mainly in instrumentation, and a final statement of Theme 1 (mm. 151-168), where it transitions back into the Minuet.  The striking characteristic of the Trio is a certain asymmetrical rhythm; when first stated in staccato in the strings, against the graceful melody in the winds, it does not immediately attract attention; however, when the exactly same rhythm is transferred to the brass in Theme 2, it instantly sets a halting yet insistent sensation against the violin melody.  As to be expected, the Minuet is repeated verbatim from the beginning, and then it transitions directly into a 2/4 coda, in G major, with an ABA form.  “A” is stated first in a light texture, with melody in 1st violins and a 1st species counterpoint in clarinets and bassoons constituting part of the harmony (mm. 181-189), then repeated tutti (mm. 190-198); afterwards, “B” continues the clarinets and bassoons harmonic theme, now as melody (mm. 199-206).  The A section repeats as before; the tutti section, with an off-beat cadence at m. 229, leads directly into the fourth movement.

         Movement 4 is often considered the most “experimental” of the symphony, with a theme and variations plus rondo-esque form that really has no name in musical theory.  “Nor has the fact that the last movement is in a sort of free variation form instead of the classical mould of a symphonic Finale any bearing on the matter: this last movement just blossoms out”  (Schönzeler 129).  It does not begin anywhere near G major; in fact, the opening theme by the trumpet (mm. 10-17) outlines the dominant chord for the key of F major (flat 7th of G).  Theme A (for all variations) makes its first entrance in G major in the celli (mm. 26-33); it continues the development of Mvt. 1 Intro Theme 2, adding to the melody of the Mvt. 3 Trio Theme 2, and it is immediately repeated.  The chord progressions are as follows (in G major): I, vi, I, IV, V7/vi, vi, V7/V, V.  Theme B comes in at 34-42 and is likewise repeated; harmony is V, vii dim/V, iv, VI I V aug, V7/vi, vi, and back to tonic.  The first variation (mm. 43-58) does not change much from the original except the instrumentation (melody in low strings and bassoons), and the B theme, in opposition to the previous movements’ use of descending scales, adds an impressive ascending scale that runs smoothly from violas, to 2nd violins, to 1st violins.  Variation 2 is suddenly tutti and ff, and only uses the A theme; this variation will reappear at intervals throughout the movement like a rondo theme; furthermore, it seems to represent the movement’s orchestral “togetherness” as a whole--there is no call-and-response between strings and winds at all.  At m. 63 the melody suddenly diverges and expands, supported with another ascending scale figure in oboes and clarinets; the variation is repeated with a closed ending (mm. 59- 66, repeat from mm. 67-74).  The melody in Variation 3 seems to bear no relation to the original except in harmonic progression; it appears to be a fluid flute fantasy, the highlight solo for this instrument in the symphony, which continues in this vein from 3A (mm. 75-83) to 3B (mm. 84-92).  Following this, Variation 2 is repeated verbatim (mm. 93-106), creating a miniature ABA form similar to the one in Mvt. 2, with an extended ending (mm. 107-112) and a transition to c minor (mm. 112-122) in strings with a unique set of fz as if to enunciate the point that the movement is now shifting to a different mood.  

            Variation 4, suddenly quiet, (mm. 123-145) further deviates from the original theme, shifting to c minor, with a comic melodic instrumentation in oboes and clarinets for 4A, while 4B places a melody reminiscent of Movement 1 Intro Theme 2 in both flutes.  Then 4B repeats a variation of itself ff, with the melody in the celli and D.B., and a chromatically ascending harmony in other instruments (mm. 146-157).  Variation 4 is repeated from the top in mm. 158-181, with a similar texture and the same melody, but considerably heavier with an enunciated bass and the melody in all winds simultaneously in 4A.  This heaviness only builds at the 4B section, as an echo effect takes place in winds and brass, while the strings build in contrasting motion to each other, with fz used on every beat.  A short transition (mm. 181-188) leads to Variation 5, in B flat minor, (mm. 189-218), which is even more free form with several distinct, overlapping themes; it features the “tension building” scales in the flutes at m. 191 and in 2nd violins at m. 195, and is primarily characterized by octave leaps.  In fact, the point of the variation seems to be not centered on the melodic content at all; instead, it serves as a long lead-in to Variation 6 (mm. 219-232).  This variation begins in the dominant key, fff, with the trumpet call from the very beginning; at m. 230, all instruments except trombones join in for solid diatonic chords on the beat.  The trumpet theme returns in the trombone in m. 233, where the transition back to the main theme (mm. 233-252) tempers the long-built climax back to its mellow beginning. 

           Finally, after all the divergence from the actual melody, the original theme itself returns (mm. 253-270), albeit slightly more subdued than the first time it is heard.  Variation 7 (mm. 271-294) is similar in feeling to Variation 1, but the timbre has changed significantly: the strings are the only voices present, and rather than increasing the tension, it begins to withdraw.  Variation 8 (mm. 295-322) continues to decrescendo and lessen the activity to a molto ritardando.  The final Variation 9 begins in the same vein, with only the first three notes of the original theme in flute and oboe, gradually diminishing to half notes, until at last there is a true ppp at m. 337.  Suddenly, Variation 2 returns in a very fast tempo (mm. 339-352), utilizing chromatic ascending scales and full orchestra in accord rhythmically, as the variation ends with a long, very fast coda.  Almost the entire orchestra ascends chromatically in mm. 356-362; next, the only descending scale in the movement at m. 363.  The orchestra outlines a progression of : I, flat III, iv, v (mm. 364-367), there is a slight ritardando from mm. 342-345 with a strong melody in trumpet and the other instruments supporting this progression: I, V, v dim, Neopolitan (presented at the end rather than at the beginning), Neo aug, v, V and back to tonic, where it finishes (mm. 346-359), with the final two chords tutti m. 358, followed by a measure of silence (m. 359).

          Although the symphony is by no means predictable, the elements that are used to tie it together into a whole are consistent, reasonable, and carefully planned. “In form, this symphony is perhaps the least orthodox of all, but it would be a mistake to attribute to a relaxation of formal discipline a composer’s reluctance to force ideas of a different character into the mould of classic tradition, the truth being that the ideas generated forms suited to them” (Fischl pg. 84) This is a symphony written not merely as an experiment in form, but rather as a return to what makes music beautiful, freely, thoughtfully, but also somewhat effortlessly.  “It treats the symphonic form much more loosely, but then this is exactly the treatment to which Dvořák had to subject his melodic material in order to achieve what he wanted to express.  He himself has said that he wanted to write a work ‘different from the other symphonies, with individual force worked out in a new way’, ” (Schönzeler 129).  Given the untamed nature of this symphony, it is no wonder that “musicians and music-loving laymen alike have long been at loggerheads about it” (Hughes 136) -- in any case, it is not a work that can be ignored, and if it pales in comparison to the melodic beauty of the justly famous Symphony 9, or to the youthful determination of Symphony 7, at least this much can be said: It is doubtlessly Dvořák’s most intriguing symphony.

Bibliography

Schönzeler Hans-Hubert. (1984) Dvořák.  New York, NY: Marion Boyars Publishers. pp. 128-130.

Hughes, Gervase. (1967) Dvořák: His Life and Music. New York, Dodd, Mead and Company. pp.  136-138.

Robertson, Alec. (1949) Dvořák. New York, Pellegrini and Cudaby Inc. pp. 56, 168.

Clapham, John. (1979) Dvořák. Newton Abbot London, David and Charles. pg. 72.

Fischl, Viktor ed. (1970) Antonin Dvorak: His Achievment. Westport, Connecticut, Greenwood Press, Publishers.  pp. 81-89.

Otakar Šourek. (1954) Antonín Dvořák: Letters and Reminiscences. Prague, Artia. pp. 130-133.

Dvořák, Antonín. (1892) Symphony in G Major, Op. 88. London, Novello.

Sunday, May 10, 2015

More about Jessika Kenney

Greetings!


In my last post, I provided a brief introduction to the delightful voice that is Jessika Kenney.  As I mentioned, I had the opportunity to meet her, albeit briefly, after the concert, and she invited me to visit her website and begin a "dialogue" with her.

I was most of all interested in her musical background and influences in her education.  These details are fairly straightforwardly presented in her bio, but she was happy to give me more information as well.  Kenney studied voice at the Cornish College of the Arts, where her interest in Persian and East Asian music was augmented by exposure to vocalists Diamanda Galas and Jay Clayton.  When asked about what in her musical education really stood out to her and shaped her course as a musician, she answered,

"One of the best things that happened in my early years at Cornish was meeting Jarrad Powell, composer and director of Gamelan Pacifica. The discussion on improvisation, vocal technique, and on the sung text really opened up for me after that."

Concerning her love for these ethnic styles, she says she spent time in Central Java, performing alongside distinguished artists of traditional shadow puppet shows.  Her compositions often incorporate elements of these styles in addition to her own unique experimentation, utilizing fluid and multi-faceted techniques which, although audible to the Western ear, are sometimes intangible.  About what stands out to her about music from these countries, she said,

"Javanese and Persian vocal traditions both have incredibly subtle elements, and are genuinely refined traditions which encourage the development of fine sensitivities. Without a context to recognize that a certain level of perception is real, valuable, and can be used for communication, those perceptions have the danger of turning in on themselves and becoming an obstacle. That tension, between acknowledgement/development of the subtle ear, and the reality of shifting contexts, really motivates my work." 

I then asked her about her collaboration with the Trimpin work that was debuted at the Symphony last weekend: Above, Below and In Between, where the singer has a central role in shaping several of the movements and seemed like an improvised endeavor to some audience members.  She says that

"It was a true collaboration, where first I came into Trimpin's studio, improvised with his mechanized piano. Later he wrote a graphic notation for the vocal and sang his own concept of what it would sound like for me. It happened within a few meetings but felt like a really interesting conversational process."

and furthermore, considering the 'improvisatory' quality,

"The graphic notation could have been interpreted in so many ways, but I tried to keep my sounds close to the relationship between Trimpin's visual aesthetic in the notation and his own vocalizations, which were such a delight."

To add to her knowledge and creativity, Kenney is studying Persian language and literature at UW, as well as radif, a collection of ancient Persian melodies organized in different tonal spaces.  

The breadth of her explorations and depth of her focused studies is astonishing: for example, her work "Anchor Zero" centers layers of harmonic color around a steady tone and plays with breath, pulse and 'emptying out'.  This intense pursuit of musical mastery has won her the 2014 Artist Trust James W Ray Distinguished Artist Award and the 2013 Stranger Genius Award in Music, alongside her husband, composer/violist Eyvind Kang.

There is far more than meets the eye or ear to this lovely singer, and I'm looking forward to hearing more of her future performances in person.  

Cheers!

Monday, May 4, 2015

[untitled] 3: May 1, 2015

Last Friday, as I entered Benaroya Hall for the show that night, the ushers said something I'd never heard them say before:

"Sure, go ahead and bring drinks into the auditorium.  Also, you can sit up on the stage if you get there early enough."

Well, I didn't take advantage of the new drink policy, feeling like it's absolute sacrilege no matter what anyone says, but I did head right for the stage and found myself engaged in a lovely conversation with two ladies soon after about modern music and who it was that invented twelve-tone.

This was only the start of an unprecedented program that symbolized, to me, the imminent changes that the Seattle Symphony Orchestra is implementing in its three-year innovative strategic plan.

Nowhere is the 'future' more evident than in its dynamic conductor, Ludovic Morlot.  In his introduction to the night's music, he told us that the [untitled] series, which encompasses quite a lot of modern music and only plays at 10:00 on Friday evenings, is his 'niche'.  It's an opportunity for him to introduce his devoted audience to the pieces that he loves, but doesn't really have the chance to present in the regular season programs.

His programming choices have been selling out houses; his collaborative interpretations with the orchestra leave his audience members stunned and rising in ovations afterwards.  Friday was no exception; by including a renowned pianist (Michael Brown) and introducing the Symphony's resident composer's newest site-specific work (Above, Below and In Between by Trimpin) with the intense vocals of Jessika Kenney, the house was completely sold out an hour before it started.

So first on the menu was a set of works by the late George Perle, all for ensemble, none (except the first, for string quartet) for conventional ensemble.  The second work, Critical Moments (No. 1), includes flue, clarinet, violin, cello, piano and percussion, utilizing a huge variety of effects for the strings, and a demanding entourage of instruments for the sole percussionist.  The third, Serenade 3, is a masked miniature piano concerto, with brass, strings, woodwinds and percussion in a five-part whirlwind.

My impression of Perle's work is complicated to express, because part-way through the first half of the concert, I realized what I now consider to be the purpose of modern music: not to internalize it and be able to sing it after, or even understand it; it's all about becoming immersed in the sensation of the moment, letting go of the tight grip on harmony, rhythm and form that drives most of the standard repertoire of classical music, and instead just giving into that very moment.  I think this is particularly true of the abstract variety of 20th century music, and for ensemble pieces, which allow room for voices to stand out and encourage the disparity of meaning.

In fact, the most accurate word I can think of to describe Above, Below and In Between is...immersive.  As we exited the hall into the grand lobby, we found that it had been transformed into the interactive experience hinted at by the piece's title.  The half-moon balcony was lit by masses of color; and music stands waited for the instrumentalists to join.  Hanging from the balcony was a series of large cylinders and pyramid-like blocks.  On ground level, which was covered with colorful mats for audience members to sit upon, an open grand piano was center stage, with a curious mechanical ensemble inside set to pluck and bang the strings across the soundboard, and play the keys themselves under the closed cover.

Morlot hastened to assure us that the black box with glaring red numbers inside the piano was 'not a time bomb'.  I assure you that's exactly what it looked like.


Above, Below and In Between is comprised of six movements, each showcasing the Frankenstein piano and introducing vocals and other instruments as well.  Not only did Morlot conduct the musicians, he conducted the piano as well; preset to play a certain work of music, he manually controlled the tempo and dynamics with his hands in thin air, like a theremin.  In essence, what Trimpin constructed is a method of controlling the interpretation of a mechanical work.

The first two movements consisted entirely of the piano; the third introduced Kenney, with her rich vocals that encompassed pure vowels moving through various diphthongs, bird-like gurgles and chatter, and mad-man cackles of laughter and enraged ejaculations.  In fact, her singing was possessed, and with her curly brown hair flying as she moved through the audience, one wondered if she was sane.  (I met her afterwards briefly, and found that her personality is very sweet, almost shy, her doe-like brown eyes deep and gentle).
For examples of her work, visit her website here.

The next movement consisted of the chimes ringing around the room, suspended and unstruck by visible hands; the fifth movement finally introduced the ensemble of instrumentalists, up on the balcony.  Coinciding with the nine pillars of the lobby, the nine instruments consisted of three trombones and  two each violas, cellos and basses.  Finally, Kenney rejoined the entire orchestra--piano, chimes, and ensemble--and escalated into a scream at the end.

Musically, this piece was about an anchored tone which centered the rest of the sounds and set up a platform for melodic and harmonic relationship.  Typically this tone was played in the piano at the beginning of the work, and a hum filled the room which took advantage of the natural harmonics of the lobby to create resonance.  Kenney's voice also took advantage of the harmonic series, building upon and sliding around it.

Needless to say, as the audience rose in unanimous ovation, the cry of 'encore' brought an appreciative laugh.  What made us even more appreciative, however, was the fact that they actually did an encore.  Trimpin plunged into the mechanics of the piano, resetting it for a new set of tones, and Kenney reprised her role, including screaming face first into the piano itself, which made every pianist in the room break out into laughter.

The encore was met with another standing ovation, and a highly charged audience, admittedly a very tired audience, seeing as it was then past midnight, excitedly engaged in conversation among themselves and the artists before leaving the Hall to head for bed.

I had come alone to the concert because the friend I intended to go with had come down ill; I found to my surprise that I had more capacity to actually enjoy the concert because I wasn't worried about what anyone else might think.  Typically with modern music, I find myself criticizing it in my head because I feel like my companion(s) aren't enjoying it.  But this time I was allowed to appreciate it purely for the sensation, and enjoy it I did indeed.

In conclusion, I think it's fair to say that Morlot's 'niche' is a phenomenal success.

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Creativity is Crossbreeding Obsessions

The picture to the left is the Japanese phenomenon 'BabyMetal' --something that every American views with bewilderment and shakes their head, saying, "Well, that's the Japanese for you..."  It's exactly what is looks/sounds like: a combination of the Japanese obsession with heavy metal and cutesy Lolita school girls.

The unique history of Japan--that is, the fact that it was a highly advanced culture locked in isolation until 150 years ago--has created a country that is ripe for ideas as it combines those of foreign cultures with its own--and with other foreigners.  Up until recently, having seen numerous bizarre combinations coming out of the media of that culture and being fascinated with them, I've been under the impression that there are so many permutations of possibilities that are tried that some of them have to stick eventually, and that is what we are exposed to.  While this is still true to some extent, I think that there may be a more concise formula for sparking that magic combination:

Creativity is Crossbreeding Obsessions

What does this mean?  It means that, first, only having one obsession will make one a copy-cat.  Second, double- or triple- obsessions are meant to intermingle in one's mind.  Ideas need to spontaneously meet and cross.  Third, it means that the number of obsessions need to be limited in order to allow one to properly obsess about them.

There are many advocates for the process of mentally detoxing for the purpose of creativity, myself included.  Bestselling author Tim Ferris has an entire section of his blog devoted to 'email detox' alone.  The truth is that most of us fill our lives and our heads with endless noise and activities so that we don't have to worry about the stillness that is there without it.  As one who has been through countless periods of existential crises, I can sympathize with this completely: action does help maintain sanity to a point.

But creativity doesn't come from a fully 'sane' mind, I think.  I'm personally at my most creative when I'm depressed, manic, obsessive, heart-broken, or exhausted.  There seems to be a space inside that opens up and side-lines everything 'important' in favor of that singular creative impulse that drags me into a subconscious state.  It's terrifying, because I'm afraid to get into it because I'm afraid to get out of it.  When I truly have my mind set on creating something, I don't think about anything else until it's done or I'm so tired that I physically can't continue...and then I dream about it until I wake up and keep going.  It's not terribly healthy, but I need it.

My primary obsession is music, obviously.  Other obsessions include Japanese culture and language, Zen, the process of learning, and to a lesser extent, things like cooking, nature and dance.  I should mention that all of my side obsessions except Japanese were deliberately chosen to compliment and balance my obsession with music and my need to stay healthy.  But primarily, I think about music non-stop.  I see it in everything: a pattern of grid-streets is interpreted by quarter note chords on a page, or a friend's recent emotional conflict might be interpreted as a rondo or sonata form.  These things don't just remind me of their musical equivalents; it's as if I see them overlaid like transparencies.  The situation or pattern is its musical counterpoint, for some bizarre reason.

I'm not claiming to be a genius, or even overly creative.  I'm merely explaining what goes on in my head, and why I see this hypothesis of reaching the creative inspiration worth looking into.  My own life is currently too busy with 'living' to be able to focus as much as I like.  I wish to reach a place of stability in my living arrangements such that I can delve into this state of mind regularly.

But living just for this one obsession isn't healthy, nor is it sustainable.  That's what the other little obsessions are about.  I tend to burn out or reach a place where I can't go any further until my mind settles down.  I need things that are relaxing enough to get back on track...which is hard for someone who's as addicted to study as I am.  Hence the more physical activities--particularly a good long walk. There are scads of studies that point to taking a walk as being facilitating to creativity, and scads of artists and thinkers who followed the same formula...including my beloved Brahms...

So I believe that when one is so obsessed that one begins seeing things in relation to other things in a completely and bizarrely different way...overlaying to the extent that there is no separation in the representation of those things...truly productive creativity can occur.  It's no longer random, and the mind automatically filters through arbitrary connections.  We remember things that stand out to us as remarkable.  The stronger the connections are, the more we remember them and can work off of them.

 Where is all this going?  Just back to my original hypothesis: Creativity is crossbreeding obsessions, and this encompasses an entire subset of prerequisites to enable the right way to obsess.  Which, I assume, is a life-long pursuit in and of itself.

What do you think?  How do you get and keep yourself in a mental space to be creative?  Have you found any of these principles for work for you?  Let me know in the comments below and I'll be eternally grateful!

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Sebastian Currier, composer


Last Tuesday at the Symphony, I had the privilege of attending a Q&A with composer Sebastian Currier, whose new composition commemorating the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I, 'Divisions', will be having its world premiere with the Seattle Symphony this evening at Benaroya Hall.

Currier, who was raised in Providence, RI and graduated with a DMA from the Julliard School of Music, composes primarily for ensembles and orchestra.  In his young-adulthood, he self-reportedly haunted the convenience store for new records until they began collecting new releases specifically for him.  He began listening to rock music with his brother, composer Nathan Currier, and gradually fell in love with the LPs of orchestral music that his father enjoyed, as the music had infinite possibilities of 'travel'.

His personality is very funny and down-to-earth; as he and SSO associate conductor Stilian Kirov took their seats for the Q&A, they engaged in quick-fire banter which made it somewhat unclear exactly who was supposed to be asking the questions.

What is 'Divisions'?  According to Currier, it represents a large variety of topics related to the WWI theme.  In addition to the battalion divisions in the war and the obvious divisions between nations, it also represents a music form from the 16th century known as 'divisions' in which the music begins slowly and divides and subdivides into smaller and smaller divisions of the beat; a classic example of this is J.S. Bach's 'Passacaglia'.  However, Currier takes this idea in reverse; his ideas start very fragmented and become more cohesive as the piece progresses.

There is much dialogue and instrumental depth in his works.  'Microsynth', which, as its name implies, is a miniature symphony, utilizes vibrant, spinning sounds, voices quickly passing with highlights in all sections, not simply strings or winds.  Many characters share a dialogue that, unlike Ives, do not seek to compete with each other, merely banter, like his introduction with Kirov.  Everything gets its chance to speak, and rather than being interrupted, the thought is taken over without pause and passed around.

Perhaps the most useful word I can think of to describe the effect his music has on me is 'collective'.  There is much melodic and harmonic richness, but to set his voice apart from the Romantics, he utilizes a faster pace of exchange.  The notes, the idea, the theme itself is cohesive, regardless of who or what is playing it.  With no overlap, they flit from timbre to timbre and yet remain pure.  This is a strong departure from the Romantic norm, in which melodies typically conclude with the instrument they began with, and then another instrument picks up the idea and answers back.

Favorite pieces that I have heard so far include:

Verge for Clarinet, Violin and Piano
Time Machines (dedicated to Anne-Sophie Mutter)
Next Atlantis (utilizing conversation between electronic effects and the symphony)

I'd recommend Currier's compositions for people who value complexity and have a moderate to advanced understanding of orchestral music.  The sound can be nearly overwhelming at times, but this effect is enhanced by a knowledge of instruments and their relationship to the score.

Visit Sebastian Currier's website

Sunday, April 19, 2015

SSO: Schnittke Violin Concerto no. 4 and Shostakovich Leningrad Symphony

In general, when I invite friends to come with me to the Symphony, I try to start them out with something a little more mainstream: some cheerful Mozart, memorable Beethoven or romantic Rachmaninoff.  Yet, for some reason I decided to invite a group to come with me tonight to the somewhat jarring combination of Schnittke and Shostakovich.  It is fortunate for me, therefore, that this group of friends actually enjoyed their night with me, rather than sending them fleeing from 20th century classical music forever.

It must be admitted that the first time I heard the Shostakovich Leningrad Symphony quoted, it was in an anime called "The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya" as the background midi music for a game called "Day of Sagittarius III".  Like with another fantastic quote of Mahler Symphony 5 mvt 3 at the end of the series, I found myself hearing the full version considerably later and nodding appreciation at the music director's taste.

On a more professional note, I had also attended a presentation at Benaroya Hall by second violin member Stephen Bryant, who had the luck of being "twelfth man" -- quite literally as the twelfth chair second violinist who performed a magnificent counter-solo to Alexander Velinzon's center stage solo.  Bryant opened his talk by explaining that the "most magnificent, deepest piece of music in the orchestral repertoire" was the Schnittke Violin Concerto no. 4.  His description of a piece which I had never even heard of before intrigued me; and in the pre-concert lecture, this sensation was echoed by speaker Claudia R. Jensen: "The only word to describe this work is...'Fantastic'."  While this indeed is the first adjective that came to mind as I started to hear the actual thing, I think that for me a more specific description is the word "riveting".

Indeed, I sat through the concerto riveted.  The eclectic nature of the work alone, with its moody themes tossed back and forth with whip-lash speed between baroque, classical, and just plain "lots of minor seconds everywhere", with harpsichord, celeste, two sets of orchestral bells, prepared piano, and an active vibraphone section in the percussion, was enough to elicit a whole array of emotional reactions, from creepy chills to sporadic laughter.  The highly lyrical quality of the melody, a variant of the Westminster chime, anchored the attention of the ear amid the otherwise helter-skelter themes, harmonies and rhythms scattered in a decisively free-form structure (one of my friends described it as "[Schnittke] has the Post-Modern philosophy of hiding the coolness of the piece in a bunch of noisy clutter".  Another would like me to quote her as saying "It sounds like driving a bus full of musicians through a wormhold.")  With impeccable timing, the music utilizes sweetness dragged into monotony for just long enough to tempt one to look at one's watch...and then quite suddenly dive into loud cacophony.   In all honesty, I must contrast this with the third and final movements of the Shostakovich, which did contain more length than the ear might desire.

One somewhat jarring effect of the concerto is the instruction for the violinist to perform a "cadenza visuale", in which Velinzon actually lifted the bow completely above the strings of his instrument and performed sweeping, exaggerated motions without even touching horsehair to catgut.  I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this instruction, although I think that if played quite seriously and not quite as blatantly, it might have a startling effect.



As for the Leningrad Symphony, its length is really the only complaint I have with it.  Otherwise I found myself rubbing the goosebumps on my arms the entire time.  The first movement is a staggering 20 minutes long in itself, but the transition from the beginning theme, a sturdy, placid theme of a sturdy, placid people, to the ominous off-stage snare drum, ushering in the famous march theme, repeated over and over to a terrifying climax, to the "battle" music, and ending back with the original theme, now faded and inglorious, is extraordinary, reminiscent of the buildup of Ravel's Bolero, yet more encompassing and certainly longer.  The second movement was pleasant; the third I have no fond memories of, and the fourth felt like something stretched out too long into a giant buildup, finishing with a "Lord of the Rings" climax...which is to say, a series of which continually felt like the end without actually being the end.

My reservations with its length notwithstanding, I must add the Leningrad Symphony has an impressive history, as Shostakovich was living in Leningrad when it was being besieged by Hitler's armies in 1941.  He completed three movements during the siege, while working as a fire fighter at the same time.  The symphony was smuggled across borders, through Casablanca to the States, where it received such a welcome as a patriotic masterpiece that it was performed over sixty times in the first year of its welcome in the US alone.  Whether its accolades are due to the integrity of the music, or to its sensational background, I think only time will tell.

Until next time, до свидания my friends...

Thursday, April 9, 2015

Performances at Wallingford Community Senior Center

Greetings!

This upcoming late spring/early summer, I'll be giving three performances at the Wallingford Community Senior Center:

http://wallingfordseniors.org/

The dates will be:

May 15th, Friday 11:30-1:00
June 6, Friday 11:30-1:00
June 19th, Friday 11:30-1:00

I'll be playing some soft popular music from the 40s-60s, open for requests and/or sing-alongs.

Cheers!

Thursday, March 5, 2015

Compositions CV

Compositions by G Wallis:

2000:
-Ode to Grandpa (voice and piano)

2001:
-Overwhelm Me (pop song)
-A Simple Song (piano)
-Waltz in Eb (piano)

2002:
-Tuning Out (pop song)
-Shattered (pop song)
-Pearls (piano)

2003:
-Unspeakable Grace (pop song)
-You Can't (pop song)
-For Erin (piano)
-Anna, Dear (voice and piano)

2004:
-So Many Times (pop song)
-Lullaby, My Dear (voice and piano)
-Etude in 5/4 time (piano)
-Allan (piano)
-Into the West arrangement (piano, violin, two voices)

2005:
-Amazing (choir and piano, unfinished)
-3 Intermezzos (piano)
-Interlude (piano)
-5:29 am (piano)

2006:
-"With Feeling" (piano)
-Beauty Enthroned (piano)
-Dark Eyes (piano)
-L'arc En Ciel (violin and piano)
-Crater Lake (clarinet and harp)
-Winter Scene (flute, violin, cello, piano)
-Cannibal Fire (cello, oboe and trombone)

2007:
-PW (?) (piano)
-Romanzse (piano)
-Bluch Hurl (5 variations for piano)
-Grumpy Fugue (organ)

2008:
-From 'Maud' (voice and piano)
-Interlude (flute and bass)
-On 'Spring' (voice and piano)

2009:
-Wandering Waltz (piano)
-Orchestral arrangement of Grieg's 'The Butterfly'
-'Leisurely' (piano)
-'Pacato' (piano, duduk, cello)
-'Adagio' (piano)
-'Allegro/Vivace' (piano)

2010:
-Yes! The Young Sparrows (voice and piano)
-Loved One's Fan (voice and piano)
-'Lento' (piano)
-Four Seasonal Haiku (voice and piano)
-A Route of Evanescence (voice and piano)
-I Wish that it would Rain (voice and piano)

(2011-2012 nothing)

2013:
-Fifteen Inventions and Fugues (piano)
-Morning Ditty (piano)
-Ae Fond Kiss (voice and piano)
-Mauchlin Belles (voice and piano)
-Winter (voice and piano)
-No Worst, there is None (voice and piano)

2014:
-Deep (voice and piano)
-Facebook (pop song)
-Violin Sonatina (violin and piano)
-Tristesse (piano)
-Zetsubou kara Kibou he (piano)
-Spanish Flurry (piano)
-Tam O'Shanter (choir)
-Snow (choir)
-1 Corinth. 13 (choir)
-The Master (orchestral cue)
-Achil's Challenge:
   -Einsam (piano)
   -Cho-Cho Chan (piano)
   -Ame no Te ga Semutai (piano)
   -Hi no Ki (piano)
-Quietly Crying (piano)
-Five Little Dances (piano)
-Ditty for Erika (piano)

2015:
-The Faceless Doll (poem background piano)
-The King of Ylys (voice, harp, guitar, recorder, percussion)
-The King of Ylys (choir)
-Drinking Under the Moon (choir)
-Insecurity (pop song)
-Candle (pop song)
-Lullaby for Amelia (classical guitar)

2016:
-Pie Jesu (choir)
-Loop Experimental Track 1 (electronic)
-Orchestration Experiment 2 (orchestra)
-Salton Sea (orchestra, choir, synth)
-Synth Shit 1.1, 1.2, 1.3
-Synth Shit 2.1, 2.2, 2.3
-Synth Shit 3.1, 3.2
-In the Village Plaza (harp, flute, strings)
-Theme Suite Variation no. 1 (orchestra)
-Theme Suite Variation no. 2 (pop song)
-Theme Suite Variation no. 3 (solo piano)

2017:
-Bloodstones (piano and poem)
-Bees and Butterflies (violin duet)
-Con Sordino (violin duet)
-Bloodstones (string quartet)
-End theme for Jackie Poon video (marimba, shaker and strings)
-Soundtrack for "Retreat" (48 hour film festival) - 16 tracks for full orchestra
-Enigma Demos 1 & 2 (MIDI)
-Soundscape (original recordings by the composer)
-Soundtrack for "Murder Moon" (48 hour horror film festival) - 10 tracks for synths, choir, and orchestra
-Soundtrack for "Lean on Me" (40 minute independent film directed by David Fowler) - 10 tracks for strings, winds, brass, jazz band, 8-bit instruments, piano, solo voice and solo cello

2018:
-Good Friend (piano, clarinet, cello)
-For String Ensemble
-The Elephant and the Clown (wind sextet)
-Sonata for Piano Duet (3 mvts)
-Soundtrack for "Speed Date" (48 Hour Film Festival) - 10 tracks for full orchestra
-Soundtrack for "Mara" (48 Hour Horror film festival) - 10 tracks for synthesizer
-Soundtrack for "The New James Richards Book" (20 minute independent film directed by Bilal Young) - 7 tracks for synthesizer

2019:
-Soundtrack for "Before I Go", (15 minute independent film directed by Ruchi Loomba) for piano, harp and strings


Friday, February 6, 2015

Seattle Symphony, Jan 29th, Charles Ives' Fourth Symphony


As the concert ended, half of the audience leapt to their feet in an applause that lasted ten minutes, as Ludovic Morlot, beaming, came back onto stage for another bow, and the orchestra stood, victorious.  The other half of the audience could be found streaming out the front doors as fast as they could, shaking their heads and grimacing.

At the "ask the artist" talk afterwards in the main lobby of Benaroya Hall, Morlot was asked, "Why did you choose to bill both Rachmaninoff's 3rd Piano Concerto and Charles Ive's Symphony 4 for the same concert?"  Morlot's answer was to the point: "Because I wanted you all to come!"

That impulsive billing decision succeeded in spades.  The next evening of the program, the house was completely sold-out, turning away dejected would-be audience at the box office.  I, being the unlucky usher that night who had to choose between the two above-mentioned magnificent pieces of art, went in for the second half, and got an earful of Ives.

To my utter surprise, I didn't hate it.  Actually, I can honestly say that the work appealed to my aesthetic values.

The entire work is a bipolar conglomeration of exceptional beauty and utter chaos.  Such chaos, in fact, that there has been a survival guide written for the orchestra by Thomas M. Brodhead.  It might also be mentioned, in passing, that although the work was completed in 1916, it was not performed until 1965.

Ives, who had a day job as a insurance salesman, has been called the "first American composer"--not by dint of nationality alone, but because he was the first to bring truly American elements of folk music together into formal composition.  This piece is littered with fragments of multiple folk songs, hymns, and American cultural phenomenon, often in blatant disregard of the others that happen to be playing at the same time.  In addition, the eerie timing of the work, on the crux of World War I, adds a chill to the otherwise innocently 20th century context.

A word must also be said about the orchestration of this piece.  In addition to the normal 20th century orchestral spread, an extra flute/piccolo has been added, more clarinets and bassoons than necessary, not one but three saxophones, two extra trumpets and a couple of cornets, 8 percussionists, two harps, and five keyboards, including two concert pianos, one for solo, one for four-hands, a celesta, an organ, and the obligatory upright piano--with random keys tuned at quarter tones.  Not to mention the chorus, of course, since their entrance is marked "preferably without chorus" (they sing anyway).  And to keep all this mess together, especially taking into account that there are two groups of instruments on opposite sides off-stage, Morlot decided to use four conductors, adding in a snarky aside to the audience in his introduction of the piece that as a result, there was a surplus of ego on stage as well.

So, what is it about this symphony that makes it actually enjoyable for some (albeit, hardly for everyone...)?  I believe it comes down to the craftsmanship that was poured into it.  As delicately balanced as Damocles sword, all of the melodic/harmonic elements, the pacing from climax to climax and beauty to chaos, and of course the orchestration, have been skillfully placed exactly where they have their greatest impact.  Nothing about it is haphazard or lazy.  It strings itself out, piece by piece, delivering the story without giving anything away.


The first movement begins by building an atmosphere that sounds like a quotation from every horror film ever made; with heavy piano and dark strings, and then a ghostly choir enters, singing a gentle hymn, in blissful unawareness of the harmonic significance of the rest of the orchestra.

The scherzo of a second movement, the 'comedy', spends its time dallying between slow, ghostly and at times hauntingly beautiful stretches of strings, the concert piano and light winds, interrupted with patches of brass, percussion, and many more pianos.  Thus, a series of climaxes lead up to a particularly poignant conclusion, as a solo violin plays its melancholy tune, and then four separate marching bands abruptly charge onto the scene, bombast the audience, and then collapse into silence.

A melancholy fugue based on a Christmas hymn, beginning in the celli, ushers in the third movement, lovely and actually tonal.  Almost completely scored for the strings, the movement also demands an organ, gloriously fulfilled at Benaroya Hall.

The final movement has more of the character of the second movement, with similar pendulum swinging through chaos and climax, yet it quotes the first and third movements as well, and closes with the choir, hauntingly beckoning in thoughts of the impending War.

I don't know if I will ever have a chance to hear this work again, but I can honestly say that I think the production put on by Morlot and the Seattle Symphony was outstanding.  The members of the orchestra seemed to be energized by the challenge of the music and exhilarated by the sound.  Their passion rolled over us, the audience, like a wave, drawing us into the dark world of Ives.

To be honest, I personally feel like this is the best performance I've experienced yet.

But we shall just have to wait for the Brahms Symphony 1 in June!

The Gardens Between

Imagine a game in which you can't actually control the characters you are playing - you can only move forwards and backwards in time...