mahler's tenth symphony. 2 the performing version
DESCRIPTION
Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2 the Performing VersionTRANSCRIPT
7/17/2019 Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2 the Performing Version
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mahlers-tenth-symphony-2-the-performing-version 1/4
Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2: The Performing VersionAuthor(s): Deryck CookeSource: The Musical Times, Vol. 117, No. 1602 (Aug., 1976), pp. 645+647+649Published by: Musical Times Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/958541
Accessed: 28/07/2010 14:56
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mtpl.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Musical Times Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Musical Times.
http://www.jstor.org
7/17/2019 Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2 the Performing Version
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mahlers-tenth-symphony-2-the-performing-version 2/4
Mahler'sTenth
Symphony
2:
The
performing
version
Deryck
Cooke
Specht,
in
his
1925
postscript,
had
gone
further
than
merely justifying
the
performance
of the
Adagio
and
Purgatorio
movements: he had advo-
cated
that someone should draw
up
an
orchestral
score
of the
whole
work.
He
said:
The
fully-prepared
sketches
comprise
five move-
ments. Two
of them
have
reached
the
stage
of
performable
full
scores
. .
.
The other
three seem
to be written out
from
beginning
to end
in
the
sketch;
but
they
obviously
need
to
be
filled
out
with
orchestration,
and
with
counter-themes and
inner
parts,
by
some musician
of
high
standing
who is devoted to Mahler and intimate with his
style,
and
who,
by comparing
the sketches and
completed
scores of his earlier
works,
would
surely
find the
right way
to
the
goal.
(Such
a
musician
is,
above all
others,
Arnold
Schoenberg,
whose whole
heart
belongs
to the
master,
who is
at home
with
his
style,
and
who
may
lay
claim
to the
mastery
and the
modesty
appropriate
to
such
a task-which
he
may
yet
carry out.)
Schoenberg
never took
Specht's
hint,
any
more
than
he later concerned himself with
attempting
to
draw
up
a score
of the
last
act of
Berg's opera
Lulu;
and
when Mrs
Mahler,
in
the
presence
of the
American
Mahler
authority
Jack
Diether,
showed
him
the
manuscript
of the Tenth in
1949,
he
took
it aside, looked through it briefly, and said regret-
fully
that he could
not
undertake the task.
This is
understandable;
a
great
composer
has
enough
to
do
to create
his
own works
without
concerning
himself
with the
half-finished
creations
of
his de-
ceased
colleagues
and
contemporaries.
Indeed,
he
may
well
be the
very
last
person
to
undertake such
a
thing,
since
his
personal style
and
world
of
feeling
are
very
much
his
own
and not
akin to
anyone else's;
and
if he were
to
undertake to
complete
a
work
by
another
composer,
he would
be almost
certain to
imprint
his
own
powerful
personality
so
forcibly
on
the
result as
partly
to obscure
the
personality
of
the
original composer.
For
the same
reasons,
no
doubt, Dmitri Shostakovich, when Jack Diether
wrote to
him
in
1942,
suggesting
he
might
undertake
the
project,
wrote back as follows:
In
spite
of
my
love
for this
composer,
I
cannot
take
upon
myself
this
huge
task. This
calls for
deep
penetration
into
the
spiritual
world
of the
composer,
as
well as his creative and
individual
style.
For
me this
would
be
impossible.
So
it was that
attempts
to
prepare
a
performing
score
of the
Tenth
Symphony
eventually
came
not
from
composers,
but from
Mahler-loving
music-
ologists
in
various
countries:
Joe Wheeler
in
England,
Clinton
Carpenter
in
America,
Hans
Wollschlager
in
Germany,
and
(again
in
England) myself.
It was
in 1959 that
1
came
to
study
the
facsimile
of
the
manuscript, knowing
nothing
of
the
history
of
the work
or of the other
attempts
to
make
a
performing
version. The BBC had
asked me
to
write
a booklet to
accompany
their Mahler
centenary
celebrations;
and when I
approached
the end
of
this,
I felt
bound to
say something meaningful
about
the
last,
unfinished
work,
so
I
determined to
find out
all
I
could about it.
The
two
published
movements
were
obviously
inconclusive,
it
was as
though
one
should
try
to understand the
Fifth
Symphony,
say,
from the
opening
Funeral March and the
short
Adagietto
alone.
Did
the other movements
make
any
sort
of
sense?
A
first brief examination
was
discouraging,
but
1
nevertheless
got
down
to
making
a
fair
copy
of
them
from
the
facsimile;
and
to my amazement I discovered what had been
discovered
by
Specht
and
others
before
me-that,
as Mahler
himself had
said,
the
work was
'fully
prepared
in
the sketch'.
However,
it did
not occur to
me
to
try
and
com-
plete
the
symphony,
since
it
was obvious
that no-
one could
do this for
Mahler.
What did
seem
worth
doing-and
I
was
generously
encouraged
to
go
ahead
by
Robert
Simpson
of the
BBC-was
to
give
a
radio talk
on
the Tenth
during
the cen-
tenary
year,
illustrating
it with the
two
published
movements,
with
the
performable
sections
of the
full-score
draft of
the
second
movement,
and
with
the more
fully-textured parts
of
the
short
scores
of
the last two
movements,
scored
by myself
as closely
to
Mahler's orchestral
style
as
I
could
manage.
As
I
laboured
on
this
project,
the
manuscript
yielded
up
more
and
more
of
its
secrets;
moreover,
the
short
scores
proved
to
be
so
clearly
conceived
in
orchestral
terms
that it was not
a
matter
of
trying
to
work out
some suitable
instrumentation,
but of
divining
the
actual
basic
orchestration
that
Mahler
had
in
mind.
When I had
finished each
stage,
I was
able
to
rely
on the
expert
criticism
and
active
imaginative
assistance of Berthold
Goldschmidt,
which
caused
many changes
to be
made.
In the event
I
drew
up
far more of the draft
in
full
score
than I
had
originally thought possible.
All
but
about five or
six minutes of the 75-minute
whole
was
ready
for
performance,
the
only missing
portions being
some
developmental passages
in
the
second
and
fourth
movements,
and
the whole
central
A
major
section of the
fourth,
which
required
what
seemed
a
daunting
amount of
filling
out
to
make them
performable.
The result
was
that the
eventual
programme,
which was broadcast on
the
BBC Third
Programme
on 19
December
1960,
with Goldschmidt
conducting
the Philharmonia
Orchestra,
was no
longer
a
talk with
illustrations,
but a
preliminary explanation
of the
problem,
followed
by
an
audible
presentation
of
nearly
the
whole of
Mahler's draft.
The
climax of the
programme-the
full-length
presentation
of
the finale-made
a
profound
im-
pression
on
many
Mahler-lovers
who
heard
it: the
645
7/17/2019 Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2 the Performing Version
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mahlers-tenth-symphony-2-the-performing-version 3/4
7/17/2019 Mahler's Tenth Symphony. 2 the Performing Version
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mahlers-tenth-symphony-2-the-performing-version 4/4
so
long
as
Mahler's
characteristic
widely-spaced
texture
s
faithfullypreserved.
After
all,
the
thematic
line
throughout
and
something
like
90
of the
counterpoint
and
harmony
are
pure
Mahler,
and
vintage
Mahler
at
that.
In
the
originalpiecemeal
presentation
f
the
work
in
1960-intended more
as a
musicological
experi-
ment than as a realperformance-therewas only a
modicum
of
pastiche;
but after
listening many
times to
a
recording
of
that
version
1
grew
a little
bolder.
I
had
always
been
struggling
with
my
inherent
purism,
but came to realize that here
a
total
purism
could
result
only
in
a
pedantic
distortion
of
Mahler's
intentions,
by
leaving passages
of
the
work
unrealistically
nd
ineffectively
mpty.
In
consequence,
the score used
for
the
first full-
length
performance
of
1964,
and for those
that
followed
it
(including
he CBS
recording),
ontained
rather
more
pastiche.
After
a number of
hearings
1 felt that this
version,
too,
could
be
considerably
improved,
and from
1966 onwards
1 undertook
a
thorough-goingrevision.1 was helpedthis time by
the
expert
criticism
and active
imaginative
assistance
of
two
young
Mahler
scholars,
Colin
and David
Matthews,
who
were as
eager
that the
performing
version
of Mahler's
draft should be the best
possible
one
as
I and Berthold
Goldschmidtwere.
In the final
version,
Mahler's
thematic,
contra-
puntal
and
harmonic
substance,
his
orchestration,
so
long
as
Mahler's
characteristic
widely-spaced
texture
s
faithfullypreserved.
After
all,
the
thematic
line
throughout
and
something
like
90
of the
counterpoint
and
harmony
are
pure
Mahler,
and
vintage
Mahler
at
that.
In
the
originalpiecemeal
presentation
f
the
work
in
1960-intended more
as a
musicological
experi-
ment than as a realperformance-therewas only a
modicum
of
pastiche;
but after
listening many
times to
a
recording
of
that
version
1
grew
a little
bolder.
I
had
always
been
struggling
with
my
inherent
purism,
but came to realize that here
a
total
purism
could
result
only
in
a
pedantic
distortion
of
Mahler's
intentions,
by
leaving passages
of
the
work
unrealistically
nd
ineffectively
mpty.
In
consequence,
the score used
for
the
first full-
length
performance
of
1964,
and for those
that
followed
it
(including
he CBS
recording),
ontained
rather
more
pastiche.
After
a number of
hearings
1 felt that this
version,
too,
could
be
considerably
improved,
and from
1966 onwards
1 undertook
a
thorough-goingrevision.1 was helpedthis time by
the
expert
criticism
and active
imaginative
assistance
of
two
young
Mahler
scholars,
Colin
and David
Matthews,
who
were as
eager
that the
performing
version
of Mahler's
draft should be the best
possible
one
as
I and Berthold
Goldschmidtwere.
In the final
version,
Mahler's
thematic,
contra-
puntal
and
harmonic
substance,
his
orchestration,
and his
bar-by-bar
tructure
except
for
the deletion
of a
single
bar in the
fourth
movement)
have
still
not been altered
in
any way-as they
could
hardly
be,
since
he laid them down so
firmly
in
his
draft;
the one or
two
changed
notes
represent
orrections
of
misreadings.
But
I
have removed some of
my
additions
to the texture and added new
ones;
also,
the additional nstrumentation n the second move-
ment has been
thoroughly
revised,
and
so
has the
orchestration
of
the
fourth
and fifth. In
particular,
the
triple
woodwind of the
previous
score
(taken
over too
unthinkingly
from the Krenek-Schalk-
Zemlinsky
edition of the
Adagio
and
Purgatorio,
published
n
1951
by
Associated
Music
Publishers,
New
York)
has been
expanded
to
a full Mahlerian
woodwind
section,
which allows
for far
greater
separation
of the woodwind and
string
lines. The
result,
it is
hoped,
will
present
Mahler's draft as
clearly
and
powerfully
as
possible,
while still not
interfering
with
its substance
rather
ess than
before,
in
fact).
The score is dedicatedto the memory of Mrs
Mahler,
for three reasons.
First,
because
Mahler
wrote his
Tenth
Symphony
for
her,
and would
undoubtedly
have dedicated
it to her himself.
Second,
because
she
did
so much to
try
to
have the
work
brought
to
life. And
third,
because
in
the
end she
withdrewher ban on the
presentperforming
version and
gave
it her
blessing.
and his
bar-by-bar
tructure
except
for
the deletion
of a
single
bar in the
fourth
movement)
have
still
not been altered
in
any way-as they
could
hardly
be,
since
he laid them down so
firmly
in
his
draft;
the one or
two
changed
notes
represent
orrections
of
misreadings.
But
I
have removed some of
my
additions
to the texture and added new
ones;
also,
the additional nstrumentation n the second move-
ment has been
thoroughly
revised,
and
so
has the
orchestration
of
the
fourth
and fifth. In
particular,
the
triple
woodwind of the
previous
score
(taken
over too
unthinkingly
from the Krenek-Schalk-
Zemlinsky
edition of the
Adagio
and
Purgatorio,
published
n
1951
by
Associated
Music
Publishers,
New
York)
has been
expanded
to
a full Mahlerian
woodwind
section,
which allows
for far
greater
separation
of the woodwind and
string
lines. The
result,
it is
hoped,
will
present
Mahler's draft as
clearly
and
powerfully
as
possible,
while still not
interfering
with
its substance
rather
ess than
before,
in
fact).
The score is dedicatedto the memory of Mrs
Mahler,
for three reasons.
First,
because
Mahler
wrote his
Tenth
Symphony
for
her,
and would
undoubtedly
have dedicated
it to her himself.
Second,
because
she
did
so much to
try
to
have the
work
brought
to
life. And
third,
because
in
the
end she
withdrewher ban on the
presentperforming
version and
gave
it her
blessing.
David
Blake'sViolin
Concerto
Gerald Larner
David
Blake'sViolin
Concerto
Gerald Larner
The
work,
a
BBC
commission,
will be
performed during
the
Albert
Hall
Prom
on
August
19.
Reading
hrough
David
Blake'snew
Violin Concerto
was
an
unexpectedly exciting
experience.
It
was
unexpected
or two reasons:
one,
frankly,
is that
I
do not
claim to be able to see half
as much in
a
faint
photocopy
of
a
manuscript
core
as
I
can hear
in a
tolerably
clear
performance;
he other
is that
not one
of Blake's
other instrumental
works is
nearly
so sensual.
It
is
true
that
his
In
Praise
of
Krishna
s a
voluptuous
score. It is
probably
also
true that working for the past two years on his
Caribbean
opera,
Toussaint
l'Ouverture
(which
is
due
for
first
performance
at
the
Coliseum
in
1978)
has
helped
to
liberate
his
imagination.
Those
are,
on the
other
hand,
vocal
works,
each
with
a text
to
inspire
a
physical
reaction.
There is
a
sort
of
programme
behind the
Violin
Concerto
but, unforewarned,
ne need
not become
aware
of this
until
after
the
beginning
of
the
second
of the
two
movements, by
which time it
is too late
to resist.
A
nocturnal
beginning
is
not
without
precedent
n
the modern violin
concerto,
and there
is
no
programme,
as
far
as
we
know,
behind
Shostakovich's
First.
Like
Shostakovich's
nocturne,
Blake's
is
serially organized
without the formal
introduction
of
a
series.
The
difference
is
that,
whereas
Shostakovich's
is
of a
fairly
obvious
tonality,
Blake's
is
not. The
7ths, 9ths,
and
tritones
The
work,
a
BBC
commission,
will be
performed during
the
Albert
Hall
Prom
on
August
19.
Reading
hrough
David
Blake'snew
Violin Concerto
was
an
unexpectedly exciting
experience.
It
was
unexpected
or two reasons:
one,
frankly,
is that
I
do not
claim to be able to see half
as much in
a
faint
photocopy
of
a
manuscript
core
as
I
can hear
in a
tolerably
clear
performance;
he other
is that
not one
of Blake's
other instrumental
works is
nearly
so sensual.
It
is
true
that
his
In
Praise
of
Krishna
s a
voluptuous
score. It is
probably
also
true that working for the past two years on his
Caribbean
opera,
Toussaint
l'Ouverture
(which
is
due
for
first
performance
at
the
Coliseum
in
1978)
has
helped
to
liberate
his
imagination.
Those
are,
on the
other
hand,
vocal
works,
each
with
a text
to
inspire
a
physical
reaction.
There is
a
sort
of
programme
behind the
Violin
Concerto
but, unforewarned,
ne need
not become
aware
of this
until
after
the
beginning
of
the
second
of the
two
movements, by
which time it
is too late
to resist.
A
nocturnal
beginning
is
not
without
precedent
n
the modern violin
concerto,
and there
is
no
programme,
as
far
as
we
know,
behind
Shostakovich's
First.
Like
Shostakovich's
nocturne,
Blake's
is
serially organized
without the formal
introduction
of
a
series.
The
difference
is
that,
whereas
Shostakovich's
is
of a
fairly
obvious
tonality,
Blake's
is
not. The
7ths, 9ths,
and
tritones
in the
expressive
melodic
line,
passing
from bass
clarinet to clarinet
to
horn,
and
in the
dark
har-
monies
in the
lower
strings,
ensure
that
there are
no
tonal
associations,
ust
as the
rhythms
obscure
the
underlying
metre. The main
theme
of the
nocturne
is a
composite
of a
legato
melody
on
second
violins and violas
with a cantabile
counter-
point
high
on
first violins
against
a
murmuring
background
n fluteand
clarinet.
The
solo
violin,
which
has entered
imperceptibly
on
a
top
E
in
unison
with the
first
violins,
suddenly
disturbs the atmosphere with a passionate and
capricious
cadenza. But it does this
in
its own
time,
independently
of the
orchestra,
which
calmly
continues
as
before and
which
eventually
draws
the
soloist
into
its
lyrical
mbrace.
Peace
is
definitively
breached,
however,
by
a
staccato
chattering
of
woodwind
and,
after
a
short
but
thematically mportant
olo
cadenza,
the
tempo
changes
to
allegro
deciso. This
is
the
beginning
of
the
equivalent
of
a
concerto first
movement,
with
the
first
subject
another
composite,
a 12-note theme
in the horns and
an
energetic
variant
in
smaller
note values
on the
solo
violin. There are several
other
prominent
ideas,
including
a
rhythmically
complex, contrapuntal
fanfare for brass.
But the
second
subject
must be the
episode
marked
calmo,
with
a
tinkling
celesta
ostinato,
glissando
chord
clusters on
violins,
and a
lyrical
hint
on
the
oboe
649
in the
expressive
melodic
line,
passing
from bass
clarinet to clarinet
to
horn,
and
in the
dark
har-
monies
in the
lower
strings,
ensure
that
there are
no
tonal
associations,
ust
as the
rhythms
obscure
the
underlying
metre. The main
theme
of the
nocturne
is a
composite
of a
legato
melody
on
second
violins and violas
with a cantabile
counter-
point
high
on
first violins
against
a
murmuring
background
n fluteand
clarinet.
The
solo
violin,
which
has entered
imperceptibly
on
a
top
E
in
unison
with the
first
violins,
suddenly
disturbs the atmosphere with a passionate and
capricious
cadenza. But it does this
in
its own
time,
independently
of the
orchestra,
which
calmly
continues
as
before and
which
eventually
draws
the
soloist
into
its
lyrical
mbrace.
Peace
is
definitively
breached,
however,
by
a
staccato
chattering
of
woodwind
and,
after
a
short
but
thematically mportant
olo
cadenza,
the
tempo
changes
to
allegro
deciso. This
is
the
beginning
of
the
equivalent
of
a
concerto first
movement,
with
the
first
subject
another
composite,
a 12-note theme
in the horns and
an
energetic
variant
in
smaller
note values
on the
solo
violin. There are several
other
prominent
ideas,
including
a
rhythmically
complex, contrapuntal
fanfare for brass.
But the
second
subject
must be the
episode
marked
calmo,
with
a
tinkling
celesta
ostinato,
glissando
chord
clusters on
violins,
and a
lyrical
hint
on
the
oboe
649