Barbican Hall
Scriabin – Symphony no.1 in E
major, op.26
Liszt – Piano Concerto no.2
in A major, S 125Scriabin – Symphony no.4, The Poem of Ecstasy, op.54
It is not every day one hears
Scriabin’s First Symphony, and that is no bad thing. Valery Gergiev’s
exhumation with the LSO was not without interest, but ultimately it is at best
a mediocre piece, which long outstays its welcome. That said, the occasional
opportunity to hear such a work – Gergiev is performing all of Scriabin’s
symphonies with the LSO – is worth taking, even if the performance were not on
the level of, say, Riccardo Muti’s Philadelphia recording. The first movement
was properly languorous – an almost unavoidable word here – and, yes, ‘perfumed’.
It meandered along its way, but one could take solace, not for the last time,
in a beautifully-played violin solo from Roman Simovic. Wagnerisms one could
spot in isolation, but they lacked the Master’s direction or development.
Wagner and late-ish Romanticism made their mark again in the second movement.
One sensed that Gergiev might have traced a clearer path, had his head not been
so often buried in the score, though by the same token, whatever might have
seemed to be the case, it was not his first encounter with the work. That said,
awkwardness and novelty, even a degree of originality, came through. But there
was nothing here to counter Pierre Boulez’s claim that the most interesting
Scriabin lies in his piano music. The third movement glowed and swelled: more
like a warm bath than anything more invigorating, but no matter. Brahms,
however, this certainly is not. There is perhaps something more traditionally ‘Russian’,
even reminiscent of Tchaikovsky (bad Tchaikovsky, though) to the writing of the
scherzo. Rhythms were nicely sprung, and a familiar vein of (quasi-)orientalist
fantasy was mined to pleasing enough effect. Ridiculous applause marred the
pause before the fifth movement, as the soloists walked on. They proved
excellent in the finale, Ekaterina Sergeyeva splendidly rich-toned and centred,
Alexander Timchenko ardent, tending even toward the ecstatic. Beautiful wind
solos, shimmering violins, brass as resplendent as the voices: Gergiev’s forces
gave this paean to art a committed performance, the conductor clearly far
better suited to Scriabin than, say, to Mahler. The fugal writing still sounded
forced, the ending ultimately oddly conventional, but that was not the fault of
the performers. It was a pity, especially in what must to most have been an
unfamiliar work, that Andrew Huth’s booklet note should have said so little
about the music and nothing at all in any detail; there were plenty of words
available, but alas they were not well chosen.