|
I've
known for more than a half century that Debussy was a great
composer. This release reminded me why he was a great 20th
century composer, a forerunner of Bartok and Stravinsky. Debussy
had a deep, almost mystical relationship with nature - the
sea, the sky, the water, the snow, the rocks, the land. He
was comfortable with the primitive. Most of all, he viewed
everything and himself with an objective eye, without sentimentality.
Oddly enough, the three significant performances in this seeming
lollipop of a release further this view of Debussy.
La
Mer (Boston Symphony, Koussevitzky) (1938).
One of the greatest of all performances of this supreme masterpiece.
Unexpectedly tough, masculine and austere. There is no lovely
mist; this is not a tropical ocean. The oceanic movement begins
and does not stop until three-quarters into the first movement
after the cello divisi theme when there is a pause with a
bit of melodic tenderness and then the constant oceanic motion
resumes. There is no lingering over details in the second
movement, but there is a lightening of texture and (as Eric
Satie said) there are some nice parts around "quarter
to eleven". But there is the constant awareness of the
unceasing movement of the sea, the fact that the sea is always
the same and never the same. The end of the second movement
comes more quickly that I had expected. The third movement
begins with overhanging gray menace which leads to a storm
which finally clears up and yields the first real calm and
warmth in the performance: the magnificent high string harmonics
over the yearning theme in the woodwinds representing humanity
at last. But the storm returns more ferocious than ever and
ends this greatest of French tone poems. Koussevitzky belongs
with Toscanini and Boulez in taking a tough, objective view
of La Mer.
Images
#1 (Gigues Triste) and #3 (Rondes de Printemps) (San Francisco
Symphony Orchestra, Monteux) (1942).
I don't know if it's Monteux's conducting or it's hearing
the two images divorced from their more famous #2 (Iberia),
but I was simply bowled over. I never knew they were such
wonderful works! The oboe in the Gigue Triste sounded so plangent,
so antic that I could believe I was in 13th century England.
The words I wrote down for Image #3 were joyous, primitive,
irrepressible, pileup of energy and joy. I have never heard
Monteux so unbuttoned before. Score a bullseye!
Printemps
(Royal Philharmonic, Beecham). (1946)
I don't care for this early, derivative Debussy work, mostly
warmed over Massenet. I don't even like fresh Massenet. Sir
Thomas is always at his most inspired playing second and third-rate
music, so he does well here.
Images
(Paris Conservatory Orchestra, Fournet) (1952).
While not quite on the level of Koussevitzky or Monteux, this
is a very good performance by Jean Fournet. Again, Nuages
and Fetes are rather clear-eyed and a bit austere, quite devoid
of mist. I could have done with a bit more excitement in Fetes
at the climax of the march. Sirenes, however, is extremely
good. Those ladies are very voluptuous and close and tying
one down to the mast might not have been sufficient.
My
stock of adjectives to praise the sound on Pristine Audio
releases is exhausted. May I only say that if Serge Koussevitzky
could briefly appear to hear his La Mer on my speakers, both
he and I might drop a tear or two.
Reviewer:
Bill Rosen |
