Wednesday, March 11, 2009
So just what is it about Mahler that’s so special?
I don’t know that this can be easily summarised, but to me there is just something deeply profound and sublime about much of his music.
Mahler’s music is not without its’ challenges.
For one thing, his works are long – and not every bar is sublime, and/or profound. But perhaps, after decades of being subsumed in our ever shrinking time-frame society, I had reached the point where there is something wondrous, luxurious, about letting a work of art take its time to unfold, letting yourself get lost in the process. When I allow myself to do this, I find my whole body breathing in rhythm with his music, in a completely enveloping way.
There are section that on the surface can seem a bit weak, even ‘twee’. How could this be, from such a great composer? There are several theories here, which I won’t get into now. The thing is, for me, even when the music seems a little ‘trite’, I have still found it absolutely compelling. Why? What’s going on here? I have two suggestions. Firstly, that his work as a master conductor, led to his becoming a master orchestrator, and even the simplest of melody & harmony in his hands can sound fresh and invigorating through the incredibly original and creative orchestration. He really was a ‘weaver of sound’, which is of course much more than just notes. Secondly, you can’t have black without white, happy without sad – Mahler, more than any composer I can think of, attempted to put all of life into his work, and to do that, he needed to cover all aspects of human emotion and existence. I think he does that in his music.
Actually, I’ll add a third idea: as I’ve alluded to above, Mahler had the most incredible talent for representing humanity in music. And in his life, for all his undoubted genius, there was an aspect of naivety. A simplistic view of artistic endeavour, of love, of beauty in nature. I have no doubt that it is elements of this simplicity, this naivety, that underpin the profoundly sublime nature of so much of his music. And yes, sometimes that naivety rises to the surface of the music itself, and the unprepared, or unresponsive, perhaps just see the surface simplicity, but if understood in the context of the larger work, and of Mahler’s life, the poignancy comes through.
Well, that’s what I think anyway!
Mahler’s music is not without its’ challenges.
For one thing, his works are long – and not every bar is sublime, and/or profound. But perhaps, after decades of being subsumed in our ever shrinking time-frame society, I had reached the point where there is something wondrous, luxurious, about letting a work of art take its time to unfold, letting yourself get lost in the process. When I allow myself to do this, I find my whole body breathing in rhythm with his music, in a completely enveloping way.
There are section that on the surface can seem a bit weak, even ‘twee’. How could this be, from such a great composer? There are several theories here, which I won’t get into now. The thing is, for me, even when the music seems a little ‘trite’, I have still found it absolutely compelling. Why? What’s going on here? I have two suggestions. Firstly, that his work as a master conductor, led to his becoming a master orchestrator, and even the simplest of melody & harmony in his hands can sound fresh and invigorating through the incredibly original and creative orchestration. He really was a ‘weaver of sound’, which is of course much more than just notes. Secondly, you can’t have black without white, happy without sad – Mahler, more than any composer I can think of, attempted to put all of life into his work, and to do that, he needed to cover all aspects of human emotion and existence. I think he does that in his music.
Actually, I’ll add a third idea: as I’ve alluded to above, Mahler had the most incredible talent for representing humanity in music. And in his life, for all his undoubted genius, there was an aspect of naivety. A simplistic view of artistic endeavour, of love, of beauty in nature. I have no doubt that it is elements of this simplicity, this naivety, that underpin the profoundly sublime nature of so much of his music. And yes, sometimes that naivety rises to the surface of the music itself, and the unprepared, or unresponsive, perhaps just see the surface simplicity, but if understood in the context of the larger work, and of Mahler’s life, the poignancy comes through.
Well, that’s what I think anyway!
Labels: classical music, Mahler, symphonies, symphony
So – what are my favourite bits of Mahler then?
Symphony No 1 – Lento Trascinante
Symphony No 1 – Allegro non Troppo
Symphony No 3 – 2nd, 4th, & 6th movements
Symphony No 4 – 3rd movement
Symphony No 5 – 2nd, 3rd (Adagietto), & 4th movements)
Symphony No 6 – 3rd & 4th movements
Symphony No 9 – 1st, 2nd, & 4th movements
Symphony No 10 – 1st movement (Adagio)
Symphony No 1 – Allegro non Troppo
Symphony No 3 – 2nd, 4th, & 6th movements
Symphony No 4 – 3rd movement
Symphony No 5 – 2nd, 3rd (Adagietto), & 4th movements)
Symphony No 6 – 3rd & 4th movements
Symphony No 9 – 1st, 2nd, & 4th movements
Symphony No 10 – 1st movement (Adagio)
Labels: classical music, Mahler, symphonies, symphony
Mahler & Me
I came late to Mahler. Despite learning to play an instrument from the age of 9, and pursuing my interest in music through to a degree in Music Theory & Composition, with even a few years as a professional musician (before cowardly deciding to earn my living through other means), I didn’t really discover Mahler until I was 45 (in 2008).
I think this due to some intimidation regarding what I’d heard about the length of his symphonies, and some idea that they would just be heavy, Germanic, bombastic, and not particularly harmonically interesting. I don’t know where I got this idea from – but I was wrong! (Well, right about the length, but not the other points).
The revelation came to me when listening one day to the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘Desert Island Discs’, where a person of note gets to select the 8 tracks they’d like to have with them if they were shipwrecked indefinitely on a desert island.
One day last year they had a film composer on (sorry, I can’t remember who) and his playlist sounded like it could have come from me! There was an eclectic mix of jazz & classical, Miles & Bach, just my sort of stuff – and then he played the Adagietto from Mahler’s 5th symphony: one of the most beautiful pieces of music I’ve ever heard.
And from that, my curiosity was peaked, and I’ve spent the time since then gathering recordings of all his symphonies, as well as several study/full scores to read & follow, and most of the acclaimed biographies and books about him (eg: The Mahler Companion, Adorno’s work, etc.). So now I feel I have a pretty good overview of the man & his music.
I think this due to some intimidation regarding what I’d heard about the length of his symphonies, and some idea that they would just be heavy, Germanic, bombastic, and not particularly harmonically interesting. I don’t know where I got this idea from – but I was wrong! (Well, right about the length, but not the other points).
The revelation came to me when listening one day to the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘Desert Island Discs’, where a person of note gets to select the 8 tracks they’d like to have with them if they were shipwrecked indefinitely on a desert island.
One day last year they had a film composer on (sorry, I can’t remember who) and his playlist sounded like it could have come from me! There was an eclectic mix of jazz & classical, Miles & Bach, just my sort of stuff – and then he played the Adagietto from Mahler’s 5th symphony: one of the most beautiful pieces of music I’ve ever heard.
And from that, my curiosity was peaked, and I’ve spent the time since then gathering recordings of all his symphonies, as well as several study/full scores to read & follow, and most of the acclaimed biographies and books about him (eg: The Mahler Companion, Adorno’s work, etc.). So now I feel I have a pretty good overview of the man & his music.
Labels: classical music, Mahler, symphonies, symphony
