PHILHARMONIA CONCERT SOCIETY LTD

Artistic Director:

PHILHARMONIA ORCHESTRA

GIULINI RUBINSTEIN

May 16, 1961 General Manager: T. E. Bean, c.b.e.

PHILHARMONIA CONCERT SOCIETY ltd

artistic director: WALTER LEGGE

PHILHARMONIA ORCHESTRA LEADER: HUGH BEAN

CARLO MARIA GIULINI ARTUR RUBINSTEIN

verdi: Overture, TCHAIKOVSKY: Piano Concerto No. I in B flat minor

INTERVAL

chopin: Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor

mussorgsky-ravbl: Pictures from an Exhibition

Tuesday, May 16, at 8 p.m.

Programme One Shilling and Sixpence PROGRAMME NOTES

BY MOSCO CARNER (Author’s Copyright)

Overture, La Forza del Destino Verdi 1813-1901 La Forza del Destino was written in answer to a commission from the Imperial Theatre at St Petersburg where it was produced, under Verdi’s direction, on November 10, 1862. Piave’s libretto, which is based on a sombre Spanish melodrama by the Duke of Rivas, has two great weaknesses: it lacks dramatic unity, with a number of comic scenes detracting from the tragic import of the opera, and it is deficient in psychological development and coherence. On the other hand, it contains a series of striking scenes in which the chief characters are aroused to powerful emotions and to these Verdi responded with a wealth of dramatic imagination. La Forza del Destino is one of his few works to which Verdi wrote a full-blown overture based on themes from the opera. Though it remains something of a hotch-potch—in spite of his revision of 1869—it is a most effective piece which well reflects the remarkably dramatic character and the rich melodic invention of the opera. At the very outset Verdi uses a theme—it is the ‘motto’ of the work—that admirably characterizes the agitation of the hapless heroine in its relentless and passionate rhythmic drive. It occurs several times during the course of the overture, its most noteworthy reappearance being as a counterpoint (in the Andante section) to the heroine’s second main theme which is the expansive and beautifully expressive melody for her great aria, Madre, pietosa Vergine.

Piano Concerto No. 1 in B flat minor Tchaikovsky 1840-1893 Allegro ma non troppo e molto maestoso—Allegro con spirito Andantino semplice Allegro confuoco

Tchaikovsky was thirty-four years of age when he wrote the first and most successful of his three piano concertos. Not being a pianist himself, the composer thought it advisable to consult Nicholas Rubinstein, the head of the Moscow Conservatoire at which Tchaikovsky taught the class of theory, about certain passages of the work which were ‘technically impracticable, ungrateful or ineffective’. He needed, he said, ‘a severe critic but at the same time one friendly disposed towards him’. But Rubinstein proved

3 himself not only most severe but hostile to the extent of completely damning the concerto which he declared ‘worthless and absolutely unplayable . . . the passages manufactured and, withal, so clumsy as to be beyond correction, the composition itself bad, trivial and commonplace’. And to add insult to injury, Rubinstein suggested that Tchaikovsky had stolen from others and that ‘only two or three pages had any value, all the rest should be either destroyed or entirely rewritten. There is no doubt that at the time Rubinstein sincerely meant what he had said, and presumably thought he was doing the young composer a service in being so cruelly frank with him. It took Tchaikovsky four years to forget this incident. The first move for a reconciliation came from Rubinstein who admitted with a disarming generosity of spirit that he had been completely at fault in his former judgment of the concerto and that he had failed to recognize its beauty and effectiveness. Rubinstein subsequently became one of its most ardent champions in Russia and elsewhere. Tchaikovsky had originally intended to dedicate the concerto to him but on account of the quarrel he changed his mind and inscribed it to Hans von Bulow who was a great admirer of the composer and one of the first to make the work known in Germany. With the exception of Beethoven’s last three piano concertos, there is no other concerto that enjoys a greater popularity than Tchaikovsky’s No. I and this it owes to a combination of three factors: the brilliant writing for the solo instrument which reaches the height of virtuoso display in the fiery finale; the wealth of sheer melody and the imaginative, colourful orchestration. Mention may be made of some salient points. Though the first movement is in B flat minor, it opens with an introduction in D flat major whose majestic tune is one of Tchaikovsky’s finest inventions. But it is strange that, in spite of the pomp and circumstance with which he stated it, Tchai­ kovsky does not use it in the further course of the music so that it remains a mere episode. The following Andante is noteworthy in that it combines a slow movement with a scherzo, the middle section being a Prestissimo which recalls the style of the composer’s ballet music. Its attractive tune derives from a French ditty, ‘Il faut s’amuser, danser et rire’, popular in Russia at the time, which, according to Tchaikovsky’s brother Modeste, the composer whistled incessantly about the house. The finale is in the character of a ferocious Cossack dance whose main theme comes from an Ukrainian song, ‘Come, come, Ivanka!’

INTERVAL

4 ARTUR RUBINSTEIN Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor Chopin 1810-1849 Maestoso Larghetto Allegro vivace

Chopin’s two concertos, like nearly all the rest of his compositions for piano and orchestra, date from his youth. He was nineteen years of age when he composed the F minor Concerto, his so-called No. 2 (1829) and in the following year he wrote the E minor work, known as No. 1—a discrepancy which is accounted for in the dates of their publication. (The E minor Concerto was published before the F minor.) There are weaknesses of structure in both—Chopin’s genius was not well adapted to thinking in a large symphonic design. But both works show a most extraordinary precociousness and individuality in the piano writing and it is not difficult to see that all the elements of his mature style are more than only foreshadowed in them. There is not merely great promise but already fulfilment. In the treatment of the orchestra, however, Chopin followed the type of concerto fashionable in Warsaw at the time. This was not the Beethoven type—his concertos were virtually unknown in Poland of the 1820s and 183CS—but that of such minor lights as Kalkbrenner, Ries, Hummel and Field in which the soloist played a role similar to that performed by the prima donna in contemporary Italian opera. The soloist was the predominant figure while the orchestra was relegated to the inferior position of a mere accompanist to his display of elegant, skin-deep sentiment and shallow virtuosity. True, Chopin showed himself a little more enter­ prising than these mediocrities, but he was too much absorbed in the piano to care a great deal about a truly symphonic orchestra and he evinced no inclination to become more proficient in the art of instrumentation; with the result that the orchestra in the two concertos is for the most part left to perform the necessary but humdrum function of filling-in the harmonies and providing the links between the soloist s soli. Chopin concentrated his imagination on the piano part which is distinguished by superb invention and the highest degree of refinement, elegance and technical brilliance. What with this and the poetic sentiment and youthful charm that fill them, the con­ certos have continued to exercise their appeal to this day. The first movement, in orthodox sonata form, has two contrasting subjects—the first, in F minor, is chivalrous yet somewhat wistful in expression; the second, in A flat, is of an alluring song-like character. After the orchestral exposition, the soloist takes them up in his turn, embellishing them with runs and arpeggios, and, apart from two further orchestral tutti, neither of which are very long, the piano monopolizes the working-out—or rather, the varied ornamentation of the themes.

6 The Larghetto, in ternary form, opens with what is essentially a vocal melody, much embroidered in the manner of Bellini, and bears the stamp of Chopin’s later nocturnes. By contrast, die middle section is in passionate recitative-like vein. The finale, also ternary, is of a somewhat discursive nature but marked by a vivacious charm and great rhythmic buoyancy. It looks towards the waltzes and mazurkas and it is here that the young composer shows the full extent of his virtuoso style.

Pictures from an Exhibition Mussorgsky, 1835-1881 arr. Ravel, 1875-1937

It is surprising that Mussorgsky, who was a pianist of considerable accomplishment and thoroughly acquainted with the piano music of Schubert, Schumann and Liszt, should have composed so little for that instrument and that this little, with a single exception, should be of no significance. The exception is Picturesfrom an Exhibition which dates from the period of Mussorgsky’s full maturity. In 1873 an intimate friend of his, the painter and architect Victor Alexandrovich Hartmann, died at the age of thirty-nine and in the following year a commemorative exhibition of his designs was organized at Moscow. It was then that the idea occurred to Mussorgsky to compose a suite of piano pieces by way of a tribute to the memory of his friend. The work is unique in that it represents a musical record of a visit the composer paid to the exhibition in June 1874. It consists of ten miniatures which attest Mussorgsky’s great gift of vivid musical realism by presenting a series of objective and succinctly drawn impressions of Hart­ mann’s designs. All subjective emotion is excluded—a feature that is all the more notable as the painter’s death was deeply felt by the composer. Mussorgsky has portrayed himself in the music as another visual object: as a visitor who, as he later explained to the critic Stassov, roved through the exhibition ‘now leisurely, now briskly, in order to come close to a picture that attracted my attention, and at times sadly thinking of my departed friend’. The visitor is limned in the prelude, entitled Promenade—an extended processional piece in which the alternating metres, 5/4 and 6/4, are suggestive of the varying pace at which Mussorgsky strolled from picture to picture. Promenade has a characteristically Russian flavour (pentatonic steps) and reappears, rondo-like, in various modifications several times during the course of the music. It also provides the main theme for Catacombae and The Heroes' Gate at Kiev. While Mussorgsky exploits the percussive nature of the instrument to great effect he rather neglects its more expressive possibilities and, altogether, his piano style suffers from being square, predominantly chordal and generally unpianistic. Several pieces, 8 including Promenade, read almost like a piano transcription of orchestral music. As a result, the cumulative effect of the suite verges on monotony. This was already recognized by Liadov who in 1903 contemplated scoring it for full orchestra but never carried out this idea. The odds are that his orchestration would have been far more Russian in character than Ravel’s version, made in 1922 at the instigation of Kous- sevitzky, which is written in the highly sophisticated and subtilized manner character­ istic of Ravel’s orchestral style. But his version represents a most brilliant tour deforce in which Mussorgsky’s opaque piano writing is transmuted into orchestral terms with such imagination and technical virtuosity that a listener might readily be induced into thinking that this was an original work for orchestra.

Promenade

No. 1, Gnomus. A piece, after Hartmann’s design for a nutcracker, depicting a mis­ shapen dwarf walking with clumsy, dragging steps.

Promenade

No. 2, Il Vecchio Castello, A medieval castle before which a troubadour sings a melan- choly song.

Promenade

No. 3, Tuileries {Dispute d’enfants apres jeu). An avenue in the garden of the Tuileries, with a swarm of children and their nurses. No. 4, Bydlo. A Polish ox-cart lumbering along on enormous wheels.

Promenade

No. 5, Ballet of the Unhatched Fledglings. After Hartmann’s design for the decor of a picturesque scene in the ballet, Trilby (Petersburg, 1871). The fledglings were canary chicks. No. 6, Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle. Two Polish Jews, the one rich and pompous, the other poor and whining. Ravel’s scoring of this scene is a little masterpiece, with the Jewish theme of Goldenberg played by strings and woodwind while Schmuyle’s high-pitched voice is characterized by a high muted trumpet. The title of this piece is not original. 10 WILFRID VAN WYCK LTD

present a RECITAL

by

ARTUR RUBINSTEIN

ROYAL FESTIVAL HALL

Monday, June 5, at 8 p.m.

SCHUMANN Fantasiestücke, Op. 12

LISZT Sonata in B minor (to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Liszt’s birth')

INTERVAL

PROKOFIEV 12 Visions fugitives, Op. 22

PROKOFIEV March from ‘Love of Three Oranges’

CHOPIN Ballade No. 4 in F minor, Op. 52

CHOPIN Four Etudes from Op. 10 and 25

Tickets: 30/-, 21/-, 15/-, 12/6, 10/-, 7/6 and 5/- Promenade No. 7, Limoges {The Market). French women quarrelling violently in the market of Limoges. In the autograph manuscript Mussorgsky entered two alternative versions, afterwards crossed out, of a noisy conversation about the disappearance and subsequent retrieve of a cow owned by M. Pimpant de Panta-Pantaleon or M. Puissangeout. No. 8, Catacombae (Sepulcrum romanum). Hartmann represented himself as examining the catacombs by the light of a lantern. Mussorgsky entered the following note in the manuscript score: ’N.B. Latin text: with the dead in a dead language. The creative soul of the dead Hartmann leads me to the skulls, invokes them, the skulls shine softly.’ Accordingly, the second part of the piece, based on the Promenade, is entitled in the published version, ‘Cum mortuis in lingua morta’. No. 9, The Hut on Fowl’s Legs. Hartmann’s design showed a clock in the form of a Baba-Yaga’s hut. Mussorgsky depicts the legendary Russian witch riding through the air on a mortar and propelled by a pestle. No. io, The Heroes’ Gate at Kiev. After Hartmann’s design for the great city gates of Kiev, built in the ancient Russian style, with a cupola the shape of a Slavonic helmet. The main melody of this piece is that of the Promenade.

LCC REQUIREMENTS (i) The public may leave at the end of the performance or exhibition by all exit doors and such doors must at that (ii) All^gangways, corridors, staircases and external passages intended for exit shall be kept entirely free from obstruction, whether permanent or temporary. . (iii) Persons shall not be permitted to stand or sit in any of the gangways intersecting the seating, or to sit in any of the other gangways. If standing be permitted in the gangways at the sides and rear of the seating, it shall be limited to the numbers indicated in the notices exhibited in those positions.

12 PHILHARMONIA CONCERT SOCIETY LTD (Artistic Director: Walter Legge)

ROYAL FESTIVAL HALL

Friday, May 26, at 8 p.m.

RECITAL Schubert Das Lied im Grünen Abendröthe Der Jüngling an der Quelle Der Schmetterling Du bist die Ruh’

Brahms Liebestreu Immer leise wird mein Schlummer Von ewiger Liebe

Liszt Kennst Du das Land Es muss ein Wunderbares sein Die drei Zigeuner

INTERVAL

Richard Strauss Sonnet [Ronsard) (First public performance) Two Songs from ‘Krämerspiegel’ (First public performance in Great Britain) Ruhe meine Seele Für fünfzehn Pfennige Meinem Kinde Schlechtes Wetter Zueignung

Folk Songs GERALD MOORE PHILHARMONIA CONCERT SOCIETY ltd

Artistic Director: Walter legge

ROYAL FESTIVAL HALL

Saturday, May 20, at 8 p.m.

berlioz Symphonic Fantastique

bartok Concerto for Orchestra

LORIN MAAZEL

Friday, June 2, at 8 p.m.

beethoven Piano Concerto No. i in C

Soloist:

beethoven Symphony No. 9 (Choral)

HEATHER HARPER URSULA BOESE

ALEXANDER YOUNG FRANZ CRASS

PHILHARMONIA CHORUS

WOLFGANG SAWALLISCH

PHILHARMONIA ORCHESTRA PHILHARMONIA CONCERT SOCIETY ltd

Artistic Director: Walter legge

ROYAL FESTIVAL HALL

Sunday, June 18, at 7.30 p.m.

PROKOFIEV: Romeo at the Tomb of Juliet

STRAVINSKY: Firebird Suite

orff:

LEOPOLD STOKOWSKI

AGNES GIEBEL PAUL KUEN MARCEL CORDES PHILHARMONIA CHORUS

PHILHARMONIA ORCHESTRA

Leader: HUGH bean