Wigmore Hall
String Quartet in C major,
op.33 no.3, ‘The Bird’
String Quartet in D major,
op.64 no.5, ‘The Lark’String Quartet in G major, op.77 no.1
Alexander Pavlovsky, Sergei Bresler (violins)
Ori Kam (viola)
Kyril Zlotnikov (cello)
Haydn surprises with the
unexpected, whereas Mozart surprises with the expected. As with all rules of
thumb, there are exceptions, sometimes important enough to have one rethink the
entire generalisation. (I remain convinced that I read it once in HC Robbins
Landon, yet have been unable to find the source. Please do let me know if you
know!) There was no doubting, however, the ‘surprises’, however well one ‘knew’
them already, revealed in the tension of the opening of the first movement to
the C major Quartet, op.33 no.3, often known as ‘The Bird’. Indeed, the
Jerusalem Quartet’s performance occasionally put me in mind of Bartók. Chirping
was no mere tone-painting, of course, but musically generative, just as it
would be in the music of the later composer. Throughout, sonata form emerged from
and through the musical material and its development, not least the jolt of the
recapitulation opening in so unexpected – yes – a key. Tone was varied, at
times verging even upon the relatively astringent; there was always, however, a
musical justification for what we heard. The throwaway ending was, rightly,
possessed of a knowledge that comedy is not only a laughing matter. The ensuing
scherzo was heard with a strange, straightforward, almost Beethovenian simplicity
and sincerity. Surprises galore followed, with a concision beyond even that of
the first movement. The slow movement was taken swiftly indeed, but it worked.
If its beginnings seemed again sometimes to hint at Beethoven, the path taken
proved quite different. A modulation one can surely only call Schubertian was
judged in performance to perfection, telling on account of its integration.
Motivic integrity and invention were revealed truly as the agents of comedic
drama in a finale that did just what it should, when it should, how it should –
without that ever implying there to be no other way.
However much there is of Haydn’s
music, it is always different. Only to a ear that does not, cannot, listen,
will it ever sound ‘the same’. The ‘Lark’ Quartet showed that very well, both
as work and as performance. Here, interestingly, the players’ general tone was
somewhat different: more modern, even Romantic, although there was certainly
nothing anachronistic to it. The contrast with the earlier quartet could only
be described as fruitfully dialectical. One size never fits all; there was no
attempt to make it do so here. I also noticed immediately how the mood of the
first movement’s marking ‘Allegro moderato’ had been captured; tempo is never
just, or even principally, about speed. Throughout, an almost Mozartian joy in
counterpoint told for itself. The slow movement, here placed second, was again
on the swift side for an Adagio but
was undoubtedly cantabile. That
songfulness was full of integrated incident, worlds away from any lazy
all-purpose ‘lyricism’ and all the better for it. The Minuet, again in
character as much as mere crotchets per minute, was very much of the allegretto variety. Counterpoint was
lightly worn yet generative; so too was the humour of expectation. A Haydn
finale, if ever there were one, followed, its moto perpetuo no mere display but musically necessary. Again,
counterpoint proved the agent of joy, and vice
versa.
Following the interval, a
performance of the op.77 no.1 quartet breathed the initial sprit of opera buffa, blossoming into ‘purely
musical’ delight. The first movement’s tonal structure proved as well judged in
performance as in the score, the development’s first modulation the gateway to
an exploration such as, one felt, Haydn had never quite conducted before. After
The Creation, before The Seasons, he still had so much to
say, so many new tonal relations to explore. Beethoven again came frequently to
mind in the Adagio, some passages
even suggesting his later quartets. The music sang with, through an
intellectual complexity that was anything but forbidding; it could hardly have
been more inviting. There were surprises galore again in the minuet – a Presto scherzo in all but name – and its
trio, the world of the Razumovsky
Quartets again close, yet never quite to be confused with what we heard. Invention
and wisdom proved quite undimmed in the finale. The minuet from the ‘Sunrise’
Quartet, op.76 no.4, proved a splendid choice of encore, the humour with which
its own surprises told as infectious as anything heard earlier. How could
anyone not love Haydn?
