St Petersburg, Concert Hall

Sibelius. Tchaikovsky


PERFORMERS:
Ivan Sendetsky (cello)

The Mariinsky Youth Orchestra
Conductor: David Geringas


PROGRAMME:
Jean Sibelius
Symphony No 2 in D Major, Op. 43

Pyotr Tchaikovsky
Variations on a Rococo Theme for Cello and Orchestra, Op. 33

Pyotr Tchaikovsky
Symphony No 7 (Symphony in E Flat Major), revised version by Semyon Bogatyryov


The Mariinsky Youth Philharmonic was founded in 1999 on the initiative of Valery Gergiev with the aim of training the next generation of theatre musicians and perfecting their performing skills. From that day to this, the orchestra has seen a constant flow of new young musicians. Since its inception, the orchestra has been conducted by such maestri as Gianandrea Noseda, Algirdas Paulavičius and Valery Gergiev himself, thus ensuring the continuity of traditions and involving young performers in the established routine of theatre life. The orchestra has also been conducted by Vladimir Feltsman, François Xavier-Roth, Kazuhiko Komatsu, Daniel Smith and young conductors from Russia, the USA, Greece and China who trained under Ilya Musin.
The orchestra made its first independent appearance in 1999 at the Stars of the White Nights festival when it featured in a performance of the opera Le nozze di Figaro. That same year saw the Youth Philharmonic Orchestra undertake its first tour to cities in Italy. The ensemble went on to perform in Finland, Germany and Japan.


The music of Jean Sibelius was inspired by the bleak poetry of Nordic nature, the Finnish national epos Kalevala and the traditions and entire way of life of the Finnish people. “I love nature more than anything else, I love the mysterious sounds of the fields and the forests, the water and the mountains,” the composer wrote.
Sibelius wrote his Second Symphony on the crest of the wave of success that followed his First Symphony. This symphony continued and revealed in a new light the epic line in the composer’s work. The premiere of the symphony took place to great acclaim in Helsinki on 3 March 1902 and was conducted by the composer. The symphony quickly won popularity not just in Finland but internationally as well.
“It would appear that the Most High, in throwing down stones from the vault of Heaven out of which one could produce a mosaic, is ordering me to combine them all together” is how Sibelius described the process of the symphony’s creation. One could not describe better the structure of the first movement, the exposition of which comes as a series of such “stones”, at times even as shards of themes. In the development the composer uses them to produce a technically refined and yet absolutely natural drawing, or pattern. Here the light pastoral nature of the music is markedly dramatised, although the reprise returns to the initial mood.
Ignoring traditions, the dramatic core of the symphony is the slow second movement – a broadly developed symphonic ballade. In accordance with surviving commentary from the composer, this embodies the tragic confrontational dialogue between Don Juan and the Stone Guest, between Life and Death.
The third movement – a whirlwind of a scherzo – is twice interrupted by a lyrical oboe intermezzo with clear folkloric roots which brings to mind melodic imagery from the first movement. The finale opens with the pathétique principal theme (the “chorus” of strings is accompanied by trombones and trumpet fanfares). This is one of Sibelius’ most inspired melodic discoveries. The second theme of the finale contrasts with the main theme and is imbued with deep grief (the wind instruments sing this out against a backdrop of the mysterious and scale-like movement of strings).
In the reprise this theme becomes brighter (the gloomy D Minor key cedes to dazzling D Major) and together with the triumphant main theme crowns the symphony with a majestic apotheosis.
Iosif Raiskin

The refined timbre of the cello, expressive yet also noble, was tremendously popular among 19th century Russian composers. Musical soirées, held regularly at noble families' estates, rarely passed without his being involved: as well as instrumental pieces for various ensembles, the rich and beautiful sound of the cello often had a solo role in vocal works in a duet with the singer. Tchaikovsky’s Variations on a Rococo Theme for Cello and Orchestra (1876) is a brilliant example of combining two styles – the concert virtuoso and the chamber domestic – in one work. In spite of certain allusions to music of the 18th century – and first and foremost the style of Mozart who was reverentially admired by the Russian composer – the theme of the Variations is absolutely unique. Developing throughout the work, it as if travels through a century of musical history, building a bridge from Mozart’s era to the time when Tchaikovsky lived and wrote. “Brilliant! There, at last, is real music!” exclaimed Liszt after hearing the Russian composer’s latest opus at a music festival in Wiesbaden.
Nadezhda Kulygina

By the time he commenced work on his Symphony in E Flat Major in 1891, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky had composed five “numbered” symphonies (the last being Symphony No 5 in E Minor in 1888). Previously, the composer had written the programme symphony Manfred, to which he never gave a number. The composer conceived a new programme symphony in 1891, and in May 1892 he officially announced he was working on the symphony which he aimed to complete by December.
Dissatisfied with his sketches for the symphony, Tchaikovsky lifted a large portion of its material and used it in his Third Piano Concerto. Alas, neither the concerto nor the symphony were to be completed. Before his tragic death, however, Tchaikovsky did conduct the premiere of his Sixth Pathétique Symphony in B Minor (1893).
Between 1951 and 1955 the composer and music historian Semyon Bogatyryov undertook an attempt to recreate the Symphony in E Flat Major using Tchaikovsky’s surviving sketches and notes. 1957 saw the premiere of the thus-revived score, which Bogatyryov named Tchaikovsky’s Seventh Symphony. Of the Symphony in E Flat Major this included only half of the first movement (Allegro brillante) which had been orchestrated by Tchaikovsky himself (this material was used by Tchaikovsky in his Third Piano Concerto). The remaining movements of the symphonic cycle were “conjectured” by Bogatyryov. For the second movement (Andante) he took as his basis the  Andante completed by Sergei Taneyev from Tchaikovsky’s “Andante” and Finale for Piano and Orchestra, Op. 79.
Guided by the memories of Modest Tchaikovsky, who had told him that the composer had envisaged the third movement of his symphony as a scherzo, for the Scherzo. Vivace assai Bogatyryov instrumented one of the Eighteen Pieces for Piano, Op. 72 (apropos, this is the most disputed instance regarding the entire reconstruction of the symphony). For the finale (Allegro maestoso), Bogatyryov used the finale of the aforementioned diptych completed by Taneyev (Op. 79).
Taking into account the experimental character apparent in Bogatyryov’s reconstruction, as well as the fact that Tchaikovsky differentiated in principle between “numbered” symphonies and other (programme) symphony works (not to mention the chronology of their creation), it is generally accepted that we should abandon the title of “Seventh Symphony” in favour of the more correct and precise “Symphony in E Flat Major”.
Iosif Raiskin

Age category 6+

Any use or copying of site materials, design elements or layout is forbidden without the permission of the rightholder.
user_nameExit