The works presented at this splendid concert, Beethoven’s violin concerto and Schubert’s Symphony No 4 were united by a common factor: both works were relatively unsuccessful during the lifetimes of the composers, and only came to the fore well after the deaths of both Beethoven and Schubert.
Beethoven’s work remains the only major concerto for the violin between the Mozart violin concertos written in the 1770s and the Mendelssohn violin concerto of 1844. Why there were no major concertos written for the violin during that period of 70 years is an interesting question. I’m not aware of a valid explanation for this conundrum. The early Romantic period was of course dominated by the piano concerto, being the result, one supposes, of the influence of Beethoven, a piano virtuoso himself, who wrote five piano concertos of genius.
More on the gestation and history of both works below. First, let’s go to the concert itself. The violinist Harry Bennetts is the SSO’s Associate Concertmaster. His performance of the Beethoven concerto can only be considered a substantial triumph. Where I was sitting near the back of the stalls in row N, a long way from the stage, Bennetts’ sound on the violin was surprisingly clear, primarily as a result I imagine, of the excellent acoustics of the City Recital Hall.
While the acoustics certainly favoured the music, I still feel much credit also should go to Bennetts for his instrumental expertise. He articulated the famous Beethoven lines with delicacy when required, but with strength as well. His cadenzas were brilliant, appearing to be effortless while at the same time sounding extremely powerful when power was called for. His crescendos were inspiring. He articulated the light and shade in Beethoven’s writing brilliantly. I felt his judgment in these respects was pretty much faultless. When the time was right, his playing was majestic and moving. His reading of the work’s lovely slow movement was exquisite.
I was not surprised that the sold-out CRH audience delivered him a standing ovation and a number of curtain calls.
Following the Beethoven work, I found the Schubert symphony something of an anti-climax. I realise that tradition dictates that the concerto is played first, and the symphony closes the performance. But the Schubert work in my view was dwarfed by Beethoven’s masterpiece, particularly as that work was so forcefully played by Bennetts.
This performance confirmed that Schubert had a very promising youthful vision as to how the symphony orchestra should sound. And, I must say that hearing the SSO play the concerto live brought out something that I had missed in hearing versions of the piece earlier on YouTube. I felt at the performance that the work gathers in momentum and appeal the more it goes on, particularly during its third and fourth movements. Excitement builds during the last movement, so the concerto ends on a very high note, encouraging applause.
But I think there is enough evidence to indicate that Schubert, at that stage in his development, was no Beethoven. He wrote this concerto after all at the tender age of 19. His writing lacks the electrifying passages, and the surprises, one finds in Beethoven. While Beethoven is a treat, and his violin concerto is truly inspiring, Schubert’s writing by contrast is somewhat predictable, lacking the sort of flare, and at the same time the gravitas, which is endemic to Beethoven.
In many ways, the history of both works is as fascinating as the music itself. Beethoven’s violin concerto was written for his friend the violinist Franz Clement following a benefit concert on April 7, 1805 when Beethoven first publicly conducted his Eroica symphony. At the same performance, Clement premiered his own violin concerto in D Major. Clement subsequently went on to commission Beethoven to write the Violin Concerto in D major to be played at the next benefit concert scheduled for December 23, 1806, when Beethoven was 36 years of age.
That concert however was not hugely successful. Beethoven was still working on the manuscript until just before the performance, and Clement had to sight-read his part without the benefit of a rehearsal. Apparently Clement interrupted the work after the first movement with what sounds like a party trick: a solo composition of his own, played on one string of the violin held upside down. He delayed Beethoven’s slow movement and the finale until the second half of the concert.
Accordingly the premiere of Beethoven’s concerto was not a success, and this probably explains its neglect over the following decades. It was not revived until 1844, well after Beethoven’s death in 1827. The then 12-year-old Hungarian Joseph Joachim, widely regarded as one of the greatest violinists of the 19th century, performed the work in London with the London Philharmonia Society orchestra conducted by Felix Mendelssohn. Since then, it has been one of the most important works of the violin concerto repertoire, and is now frequently performed and recorded today.
Schubert’s Symphony No 4 in C minor was completed in April, 1816, when the composer was aged 19. Schubert however never heard it played during his lifetime, as it was not premiered until November, 1849, 33 years later, about 20 years after his death in 1828. So this symphony can hardly be considered a success in Schubert’s lifetime. Also why Schubert added the title Tragic to the manuscript sometime after the work was completed, is a mystery for which there is no clear explanation.
Schubert appears to have been a paradoxical figure. On the one hand he was a late developer who didn’t study counterpoint until the age of 15. On the other hand, as a teenager, his output of works was huge. In 1815, while still only 18, he composed six operas, two Masses, two symphonies, three sonatas and 144 songs.
While Schubert did not create lieder, or German art song – earlier composers such as Mozart and Beethoven also wrote lieder – Schubert is considered the “Shakespeare of Lieder”, creating over 600 such works during his short life, elevating the genre’s emotional depth and complexity. It’s not for nothing that George Gershwin described Irving Berlin as “America’s Schubert”.
Appreciation of Schubert’s music while he was alive was limited to a relatively small circle of admirers in Vienna, but interest in his work increased in the decades after his death. Composers such as Mendelssohn, Schumann, Liszt and Brahms championed him, as did others who discovered his works. Despite his lack of success when he was alive, Schubert is now regarded as one of the greatest composers of Western classical music and his works continue to be widely performed.
The conductor for the evening was Umberto Clerici, now the Chief Conductor of the Queensland Symphony Orchestra. Before he took up conducting Clerici was for more than 20 years, a gifted cello soloist and orchestral musician. He made his conducting debut with the Sydney Symphony Orchestra at the Sydney Opera House in 2018.
Needless to say, this performance underlined the brilliance of the SSO. It’s a truism to say that the sound of the symphony orchestra in the concert hall is so much more impressive than the sound one can hear on records, even in the case of vinyl where, of all platforms, the sound is truly gorgeous. But it’s only live in the concert hall that one can experience the full spectrum of unique sounds which the symphony orchestra offers. That is to say, both the power of the symphony orchestra and at the same time its delicacy of sound.
I stress that, in simple terms, music is only sound. Sometimes this is overlooked in complicated discussions which take place about the music. Even sitting a long way from the stage at this performance – I much prefer to be closer to the action if possible – I enjoyed immensely the way the SSO once again illustrated the elasticity in the sound of the symphony orchestra; to my way of thinking, that unique orchestral sound is an addictive tonic.
This concert took place in the City Recital Hall, 2 Angel Place, Sydney, on Thursday October 9, featuring Beethoven’s Violin Concerto and Schubert’s Symphony No 4. It featured Harry Bennetts playing the violin concerto with the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. The two works were conducted by Umberto Clerici.
