October 27, 2014

  • Some Prokofiev From Brazil

     

    Prokofiev: Symphonies 1 & 2; Dreams
    Sao Paulo Symphony Orchestra/Marin Alsop
    Naxos 8.573353
    Total Time:  56:55
    Recording:   ****/****
    Performance: (*)***/****

    Last year, Naxos released an interesting pairing of Villa-Lobos symphonies performed by the Sao Paulo orchestra.  Marin Alsop recently became their music director and apparently embarked on a cycle of Prokofiev symphonies and additional works by the composer.  Alsop is in the midst of a number of recorded cycles that continue confirming her role as one of the finest conductors working today.  These performances were made last August (2013) and this past March (2014) and follows releases of the fourth and fifth symphonies.

    For most casual listeners, Prokofiev’s symphonies are relatively obscure works and tend to rarely appear in concert.  The monumental fifth symphony is certainly worth exploring as it is one of the great works of the 20th Century.  More familiar is the composer’s foray into Neo-Classicism, practically creating the most definitive example of the aesthetic movement in his very first symphony, subtitled “Classical”.  Composed in 1916-1917, the four movement piece features musical rhetoric of the 18th Century, though with a number of harmonic and melodic “tricks” to firmly place the piece in the 20th Century.  First off, listeners will be struck at the great dynamic inflections that Alsop brings to this music.  The first movement is filled with these ideas and the structural outline of the movement works well here with the wit of the music shining through in often crisp playing.  The “Larghetto” is another of those unusually odd moments that feels very out of time and place.  Sometimes one may hear the roots of the sort of march-like moments from later in the composer’s career.  The “Gavotta” is always a romp and Alsop plays out the humor of this movement quite well.  Articulations are excellent throughout the making the shifts between the staccato ideas and the more “romantic” swells and romance a real treat here.  The final movement is a whirlwind.  All said, this maybe one of the better recorded performances of this brief work.

    By the 1920s, modernism was becoming a significant artistic expression and Prokofiev precociously moved to embrace this movement as well in his second symphony.  The composer referred to his exploration of “iron and steel” referring to this work which moves far away from the sound of the first symphony.  The form too has been adjusted to essentially 2 movements with the latter being a lengthy set of theme and six variations.  A very brash trumpet announcement kicks off the first movement that seems almost nightmarish at first as things are unleashed in angular lines and harsher harmonic structures.  The brass section does come alive in this work, though sometimes it feels a bit too brash.  Articulation and dynamics are again hallmarks here of Alsop’s performance which makes the music quite more dramatic.  It makes the more lyrical thematic idea of the work’s second half come off rather nicely.  (Interesting that here is some of that diffuse impressionist aesthetic heard in Dreams!).  Of course, the remaining variations are all rather innocuous traversals demonstrating less of the harshness of the first movement, though the modernist approach is part of the style approaching Honegger by the work’s conclusion.

    Nestled between these two larger essays is a rarely-heard symphonic poem from the composer’s post conservatory life.   Alsop has been bringing the music of Scriabin to the concert hall in Baltimore where she spends the other part of her busy schedule.  It is this composer’s semi-symbolist avant-garde style that cast a shadow over Dreams which premiered in 1911.  The arch-like structure of this piece, coupled with the unusual moody writing were not well received at its premiere.  Harmonically, things certainly are hard to pin down in this Impressionistic work at first.  Is it great Prokofiev?  Not really, but it is always interesting to hear what composers were exploring early in their development.  Perhaps this was a signal to Prokofiev that this was a “dead-end” for him personally, and it moved him towards trying other aesthetic developments in the years to come.  If nothing else, the work serves as an aural cushion to prepare us for the second symphony.  And the performance is probably as good as the work could expect to get.

    Alsop’s survey of the Prokofiev symphonies here are worth noting.  Many great performances exist of these pieces.  The Chandos Jarvi set is one of the benchmarks for complete cycles.  Alsop’s timings are certainly very close to his, but the recorded sound here is often much cleaner and less over ambient.  The pairing in this particular release may go a long way for some to consider exploring some of the composer’s later symphonic essays.  The Sao Paulo players seem to respond well to the modernistic style here, reminiscent of their Villa-Lobos recordings.