Since we’d pretty well exhausted the repertoire of First Symphonies, I guess it’s time to move on to Seconds. Unfortunately I left some of my study materials at home, but that just gives me more opportunities to post things later. I also was hoping to have people post more information like their own experiences or impressions when hearing the works, critical analyses, favorite recordings, whatever.
There are many fine examples of composers’ sophomore efforts at writing a symphony, but probably the best-known of these is Rachmaninoff’s 2nd. Though better known for his piano music (especially the four concerti), Rachmaninoff shows the he can compose just as well without a piano present. However, according to this site, Rachmaninoff was “tormented by many demons” after the critical failure of his First Symphony (1897). He turned to the help of a hypno-therapist, but despite the success of the Piano Concerto No. 2, he “remained plagued by self-doubt until the end of his days.” The Second Symphony, among others, remained in its heavily edited state until Andre Previn recorded it unabridged in 1973, the version which is known best today.
Mahler’s 2nd symphony, The Resurrection, is my all-time favorite piece of classical music, a massive explosion of music of truly breathtaking scale. It has 5 movements, and its 5th movement alone is longer than many complete symphonies.
I’m not enough of a classical music sophisticate to give it an in-depth analysis, so I’ll just heartily recommend that everyone give it a listen.
I’ll put in a word for Sibelius’ second. Like Brahms’ second, it is characterised by a sunny atmosphere.
If you like the grand gesture in music there is something rather satisfying about the development of the fourth movement, a sarabande. A simple but strong melodic fragment rises above the rumour of the orchestra, and is taken up and repeated with variations, with an interlude in minor.
Beethoven’s Second is, at first listen, similar in style to his First… however it comes off much better. It is very happy and warm and loses the rough edges of the first.
A couple of peculiarities:
The most genial symphony written at a crisis in his life: he was realizing that his deafness was irreversible. Also, it represented a culmination in his mastery of the Classical style of Haydn and Mozart which he then expressed dissatisfaction for, and ultimately moved on to the third symphony and his middle period.
I have a CD with Soviet composer Tikhon Khrennikov’s Symphony No. 2, which I like very much (even though I’m not sure he’s all that highly regarded these days, either as a composer or as a human being).
Keep going with these threads. Although by the time you get to the 80’s and 90’s, Joe Haydn’s going to have the field pretty much to himself.
I think I had mentioned before that I wasn’t going to make that many threads… But I can’t say I’d ever heard of Khrennikov before. That CD must be a rarity!
Speaking of Russian composers, no one has yet mentioned Tchaikovsky’s Second, his salute to Little Russians everywhere.
OK, OK… I know it’s not that. The title, of course, refers to the Ukraine, nicknamed “Little Russia.” Here are some good notes I found on the symphony:
During the second half of the 19th century, Russian composers struggled to create a distinctive national musical voice. These composers were established into two groups: The first was known as the “Mighty Five” or sometimes, “Mighty Handful.” This group consisted of Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakoff, Modeste Mussorgsky, Alexander Borodin, Milly Balakirev, and Cesar Cui, and believed that the Russian national “voice” could not succeed on its own unless it was based on native folk music. The opposing camp, consisting only of Tchaikovsky, believed Russian music could freely absorb European voices, while still remaining distinctively Russian.
The Second Symphony, Tchaikovsky’s least brooding and complicated one, was an unbridled success at its premier. Even the Mighty Five were ecstatic in their praise of Tchaikovsky’s success at combining indigenous folk material with folk-inspired melodies of his own creation. Among the melodies used were “Down by Mother Volga” in the first movement, “Spin, O my Spinner” in the second, a Berlioz-inspired original melody in the third, and an extensive treatment of “The Crane” in the fourth.
I’ll expound a little on this, because I think it deserves more than a cursory mention. (Why do I feel like a college professor lecturing to a hall full of napping students? :))
Nielsen’s works explore what Robert Simpson calls “progressive tonality.” The First Symphony, in particular, is a virtual “tug-of-war” between key signatures, like back and forth between C major and G minor. The piece spends a brief time at a “no-mans land” of E-flat major, between C and G, before returning to the dominant key of C major.
The Second Symphony, as GorillaMan notes, is subtitled “The Four Temperaments” and was supposedly influenced by a painting on a tavern wall entitled, “De Fire Temperamenter.” Each movement corresponds to one of the four medieval humors (the choleric, the phlegmatic, the melancholic, and the sanguine) which together comprise the human personality. The opening movement lies in the key of B minor, but the noble and expansive secondary theme in G major (which happens to be one of my favorites) provides a stark contrast to the angry jerkiness of the primary theme.
For the second movement, Nielsen wrote that he pictured a youth: “everything idyllic and heavenly in nature was to be found in this young lad.” The music suggests this lad on a country walk. A sudden noise causes him momentary concern, but after a brief pause he continues on his way. The third movement in E-flat minor is characterized by a sighing motif played on an oboe (the most melancholic of instruments). Simpson notes that the first three movements are linked harmonically by descending major thirds: B minor, G major, E-flat minor.
Rather than conclude the symphony in the expected key of B major, Nielsen opts instead for an exhilarating D major, the relative major of B minor. In the middle section the sighing motif of the third movement brings a reminder of man’s vulnerability, but this is shrugged off and the symphony proceeds to a confident finish.
Hey! I’m not napping. My eyes are only closed in order to concentrate to the fullest.
Seriously though, I enjoy these threads and hope you’ll continue at least up to nine.
I have never really listened to Nielsen; heard some symphonies on the radio but they didn’t really catch my attention. Guess I’ll try to find a copy of the second and give it a try.
But I can’t say I’d ever heard of Khrennikov before. That CD must be a rarity!