Waldbühne
Brahms: Violin Concerto in D major, op.77
Schubert: Symphony no.9 in C major, ‘Great’, D 944
Anne-Sophie Mutter (violin)
West-Eastern Divan Orchestra
Daniel Barenboim (conductor)
 |
| Images: Jakob Tilmann |
That it came close to a miracle that this concert took place at all will not be news to anyone. The West-Eastern Divan Orchestra continues to offer hope, light, and crucially listening. It has for me ever since I first heard the players in a London memorial concert for Edward Said, conducted (partly from the piano) 20 years ago, almost to the day, by co-founder Daniel Barenboim. As Barenboim and Said made clear, it was not straightforwardly a political project; an orchestra was never going to bring justice to the world or to part of it. It could, however, show a way to listen to one another in extremely difficult – some might have thought, impossible – circumstances. That it has now been doing for 25 years. I was unable to attend the anniversary concert here in Berlin in April, but it helped nonetheless to know that it was taking place—and I was able the previous September to hear them come together once again to play the three final symphonies of Mozart, conducted as (almost) always by Barenboim. It was not a concert I reviewed, but the ultra-Klemperian performance of the E-flat Symphony was the finest I have ever heard. It compelled one above all to listen.
And so, it was a privilege once again to see, as well as to hear, these musicians assemble to perform Brahms and Schubert with long-term collaborator Anne-Sophie Mutter. Berlin’s Waldbühne is a strange venue. It was my first visit, earlier plans having been confounded. And it is certainly worth the visit for the ‘experience’, even if it rains for part of it, necessitating a sea of umbrellas and the rest. In the forest, as its name suggests, the vast ampitheatre offers no shelter for anyone but the performers; it offers little shelter either, save for the determinedly uninquisitive (never underestimate them!) from its Nazi origins and concept. Handel’s Hercules and Eberhard Wolfgang Möller’s Frankenburger Würfelspiel featured here in 1936, as well as the Olympic Games’s gymnastics competition. Still, boiling things down merely to alleged origins is as un-historical as it is un-musical. Barenboim has never been a musician to resort to such pseudo-archaeology, and nor should we be. History is, or should be, as much about dialogue, about listening, as music.
The major problem in saying much concerning the performances is the necessary amplification such a vast open-air theatre requires. I say that not to complain; if you do not wish to hear an amplified performance, do not attend one. I say it rather to explain why my remarks on the performances will be brief and somewhat generalised, and will take second place to the ‘event’ itself, reflecting the nature of the occasion and my experience of it. Insofar as I could tell, given the nature and consequences of amplification – that ‘insofar’ should be taken as read or heard for the rest – Mutter gave a fine performance: broad, unmannered, tonally centred throughout. From time to time, she led, but like those around her, she listened; her understanding with the players, as well as Barenboim, drawing on an even greater wealth of experience, was palpable. Barenboim ensured, often whilst doing apparently little – he has always known when not to conduct, as well as when to do so – that not only the proportion were there, but that they were thoroughly founded on harmony: another humanistic, as well as musical, lesson. The Divan’s strings, as so often of a greater size than one would hear with a ‘normal’ symphony orchestra, produced not only fine tone, but a true sense of how (relatively) massed musicians can come together to prove so much more than the sum of their parts—when they listen, and act on that listening. So too did the rest of the orchestra, the oboe and other wind solos in the slow movement exquisite, yet also somehow symbolic of how individual voices may continue to sound and matter when part of that greater whole.
Barenboim has long been an outstanding
interpreter of Schubert in general, and the ‘Great’ C major Symphony in
particular. A performance I heard him give at the Philharmonie, with
the Vienna Philharmonic, was without question the finest I had heard,
drawing as much as his Beethoven on the Furtwänglerian sources of his
musicianship. Here that lineage remained important, but it was joined – as indeed
as has much of his symphonic Beethoven over the past fifteen years or so – by a
reunion with another powerful influence on his career, albeit slightly later,
the aforementioned Otto Klemperer. As with Klemperer, if there could be
something implacable to the playing here, that did not preclude the more
mercurial, let alone the more human; it was part and parcel of the same
dialectical conception. And Furtwänger’s famed long-distance hearing or
listening (Fernhören, he called it) was just as apparent, from beginning
to end. Barenboim had no truck with currently fashionable, frankly idiotic ideas
concerning the opening tempo; he trusted the score, listened to it, and aided
his musicians to do likewise. Here, deep – well, not so deep, but one could
fancy it was after nightfall – in the German forest, horns and other wind took
on a magical quality of their all, spirits already presaging, like quicksilver
strings, the perfectly chosen and played encore, the Scherzo from Mendelssohn’s
Midsummer Night’s Dream music. The Andante con moto’s length felt
truly ‘heavenly’, to reprise Schumann’s celebrated description of Schubert’s ‘lengths’:
not a moment too long, but just long enough. Such Goldilocks proportions
characterised the symphony as a whole and in its myriad interrelations, not
least between trio and scherzo material, all with admirable, infectious Schwung.
The meteor-like finale thrilled, erupted, and not least, recalling Brahms, satisfied
just as it should. I may not have heard the music quite as in a concert hall,
but I was drawn in to listen to it as such.
The orchestra has released the following statement, which I do not wish to edit or to paraphrase. As in a musical performance, the text, whilst not everything, has intrinsic value:
As we witness and mourn tens of thousands of lives destroyed and communities shattered while political courage remains absent, we, the musicians of the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra, are horrified and deeply saddened by the extreme escalation of violence in the Middle East, which continues to intensify daily. The profound humanistic commitment of Maestro Daniel Barenboim and the late Palestinian intellectual Edward Said stands at the core of our orchestra. In and through our music we seek to model a life of mutual recognition between equals. We call on the local and the international communities and their leaders to stop procrastinating and put an end to the cycle of violence by effecting a permanent cease-fire, ensuring the safe return of all hostages and unlawfully held detainees. It is imperative to work toward a long-lasting peaceful resolution grounded in equality.
It would not have done so without Barenboim
or Said; indeed, it would not have come into existence without them. But nor
would words from their founders have had the import they do without these
musicians, and without the many others, musicians and otherwise, who have
worked with them. Such a statement does not just ‘happen’; it requires work,
reflection, listening, empathy: as do music and its performance, at least to be
worthwhile. I see no reason to add to or further to comment on the orchestra’s
words. The world, however, needs to listen: not at some point in the future,
near or far, but now. And, like Barenboim, Said, and the Divan, it needs to
act.
