Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 5, No. 5 (1931-02)

156 The Phonograph Monthly Review Reviews of New Records Special reviews of larger works x classified reviews of domestic releases reviews of imported records Beethoven's First Beethoven: Symphony No 1, in C major, Op. 21, played by the Philharmonic-Symphony Orchestra of New York, conducted by Willem Mengelberg. Victor Musical Master- piece Set M-73 (4 D12s, Alb., $8.00). “Beethoven’s symphonies rise like a great nine-pointed peak from the mountain range of his work,” says Paul Bekker in his book on the composer. How undeniable this is. Even the First of his famous nine-pointed symphonic peaks holds up its head in an individual manner to dis- tinguish it from those which came before it, even though the new master pays his homage to Haydn and Mozart in more than one way. Yet, as one writer remarks, even though we meet the old tradition of Haydn in the opening Adagio molto — we realize almost immediately that Beethoven is not writing in the ceremonial manner of his predecessor. For one thing, as Bekker says, he opens on a chord, which in relation to the key of the work, is a veritable harmonic audacity that must have struck strangely upon the ears of his contemporaries. Most of us, who pursue the paths of recorded music, are not unfamiliar with the First Symphony. In the old days, we had a recorded version which seemed quite satisfactory for its period on Odeon records. Since the advent of electri- cal recording, we have had several set’s, led by Sir George Henschers reading on Columbia discs—one of the many albums they issued in their splendid observance of the Beetho- ven Centennial. More recently we have had through im- portation the sets made by Pablo Casals for European Victor and the Polydor recording conducted by Hans Pfitzner. And now, we have this performance from the N. Y. Philharmonic Orchestra under the direction of Willem Mengelberg. It seems strange that Victor should neglect to complete the nine-pointed symphonic peak of Beethoven’s genius. To date, they have given us, at wide intervals, only six of the famous nine, and strange to say—none of these six set forth a really remarkable performance of the work under hand. Just why Mengelberg was chosen to conduct the First for Victor is something we cannot understand. After one has heard Toscanini perform this work — or better, recreate it as Lawrence Gilman says — one wonders why Victor who had access to his remarkable performance should chose to have Mengelberg perform it for them. Not so long ago, an English critic remarked that there was “a certain square-toedness to Mengelberg’s interpreta- tions.” A first hearing of the present set forcibly brings this remark to our mind. The especial precision, the resiliency and the finesse of Toscanini is completely absent. Yet, we perforce must admit Mengelberg displays a musicianly care and exactitude. Certainly he realizes some lovely moments; particularly in the Andante, yet on the whole his reading is over-weighted and heavy handed. To us, the minuet lacks distinction and the finale lacks a requisite sparkle and grace. We can appreciate that Mengelberg wishes to pay heed to Beethoven’s energetic roughness — a quality which ever pro- claims his superb humanness; yet, the youthful concept and spontaneity in this work makes a lighter handed and more resilient treatment of its melodies preferable. Listening to this recording, and again listening to the Toscanini recordings of Haydn’s “Clock” Symphony and Mozart’s D Major Symphony, it is difficult to bring oneself to the realization that the orchestra is one and the same so completely at variance are the two conductors’ manner of handling it. Peter Hugh Reed Willem Mengelberg Shakespeare in Russian Tchaikowsky: Romeo and Juliet—Fantasy Overture, played by the Concertgebouw Orchestra of Amsterdam conducted by Willem Mengelberg. Columbia 67868-9-D (2 D12s, $2.00 each). The tragic tale of Shakespeare’s lovers was apt material for the hand of Tchaikowsky at twenty-nine, when his unsuccess- ful courtship of the French singer, Desiree Artot, must have sharpened to almost unbearable pitch his inherently sensitive sensibilities. The voluble, domineering Balikirew, self-appoint- ed leader of the group of younger Russian composers, was the first to suggest the subject to Tchaikowsky. It appealed to him, but he must have been irritated and repelled by Balikirew’s incessant urging to get down to actual work on the overture. Balikirew even drew up a synopsis of the form the music should take, indicated the nature of the themes, and criticized the composer’s first rough drafts. The first performance took place in the center of a storm of musical politics, in which poor Tchaikowsky’s piece went quite unheard and undiscussed. But his obstinacy and pride were aroused. He quietly set to work on a complete revision of the work and even ten years later still had the music closely enough at heart to re-call the pub- lished version in favor of a third revision. The scheme of the work is on the old order of symphonic program-making. Friar Lawrence is depicted in the churchly introduction, the tumultuous first theme paints the warring families—Capulets and Montagues, Romeo sings his love song for second theme, the conflict grows more intense despite the solemn warnings of Friar Lawrence, the lovers exchange their passionate vows, and the music closes with an elegaic apotheosis of the dead pair. But within the conventional frame-work