Mahlerly Challenged

[Bunny]

Sarge,

Here's what a musician in the orchestra wrote about Kaplan's conducting.  When you consider the DG recording, only consider the wizardry that can (and usually does) go on in the studio during production and in the case of "live" performances, post-production.

December 15, 2008

Some words about Gilbert Kaplan's "conducting"
Catch Me (Him) If You Can



I enjoy collecting movies on DVD. One of my favorites is the feature movie "Catch Me If You Can." It is a true story from the 1960's, of a young man, Frank Abagnale played by Leonardo Dicaprio, who manages to impersonate a doctor, a lawyer, an airline pilot and in the process also becomes a masterful counterfeiter. His expertise in the latter allows him to cash bad checks in excess of four million dollars. FBI agent, Carl Hanratty, portrayed by no less than Tom Hanks, chases him throughout the world. Of course, the Feds get their man and our protagonist turns his talents to helping law enforcement to catch similar crooks and thieves. In the end, the villain is repentant and the public and law officials are left somewhat less naive. A happy ending of sorts.



Impersonators, alas, still seem to rise to the surface. I contend that the story of another impersonator is continuing to be written. It is the story of Gilbert Kaplan. Mr. Kaplan is a self-professed scholar and conductor of Mahler's great second symphony, The Resurrection. While admittedly, I may be stretching the comparison beyond the breaking point, Mr. Kaplan and Frank Abagnale are and were, in my opinion, both impostors. 



I have come to this conclusion from first hand experience. On December 8, 2008, Mr. Kaplan took the podium in front of the New York Philharmonic. My colleagues and I gave what we could to this rudderless performance but the evening proved to be nothing more than a simplistic reading of a very wonderful piece of music.



There can be no other conclusion. To say that it was something more is to be ignorant of the many truly inspired performances under the batons of some of the world's great conductors. This masterpiece has had a century of interpretations that have delved into all aspects of Mr. Mahler's brilliant score. The list of quality performances led by professional conductors is long. From Arturo T. to Zubin M., the admirers of this work can find solace in many recordings that contain true passion and an understanding of the symphony.



Having not previously heard either of Mr. Kaplan's two recordings of the symphony, nor having seen him conduct, I came to our rehearsals with an open mind. My initial impression was that Mr. Kaplan displays an arrogance and self-delusion that is off-putting. As a conductor, he can best be described as a very poor beater of time who far too often is unable to keep the ensemble together and allows most tempo transitions to fall where they may. His direction lacks few indications of dynamic control or balance and there is absolutely no attempt to give phrases any requisite shape.  In rehearsal, he admitted to our orchestra that he is not capable of keeping a steady tempo and that he would have to depend on us for any stability in that department. Considering his Everest-sized ego, this admission must have caused him great consternation upon reflection. Mahler's wonderful use of the off stage brass in the fifth movement gave Kaplan much tribulation. One would think that after more than fifty performances of the work, even the most plebeian of conductors would have some understanding of how to bring together musicians that are separated by great distance. In the performance, these haunting moments of the symphony slipped away like some wayward musical slinky.



I have to take extreme exception to the many reviews I have read of his performances. Some critics have written that he brings the finest details of the work to the surface. If his past performances were anything like ours, Mr. Kaplan excels in ignoring the blizzard of Mahler's performance direction.



Yet, he sold out the house. "Or should I say, Mahler sold out the house?" It seems that this work, regardless of whoever takes the podium, never fails to attract a large audience, an obvious testimony to the strength of the composition. Mr. Kaplan's attempts seem to embody the proof that a mediocre performance is still worth the price of admission. But do most audience members, and seemingly most critics for that matter, really understand that he comes to the podium unable to bring to the surface any of Mahler's darkness, pensiveness, and schizophrenia?



Members of symphony orchestras truly have an unfair advantage over their audience. The musicians sit through countless rehearsals of a composition and are able to witness the culmination of careful, skillful study of a score combined with the conductor's ability to communicate his or her ideas clearly. At its best, the preparation of any great composition for concert should always be a profound, intimate and introspective journey shared between the interpreter and the instrumentalist. This is the intent of the composer and should never be compromised. When musicians are denied that journey, they feel cheated, marginalized and estranged from what they hold so dear.



Mr. Kaplan and his assault on conducting leave many musicians angry, bewildered and befuddled. I submit that Mr. Kaplan has succeeded in drawing an audience because of the wide popularity of Mahler's great symphony and our culture's intrinsic want to see someone break down barriers that have remained seemingly impenetrable. The Cinderella story is one of our favorites; Arnold Schwarzenegger is just one such case. This Hollywood movie idol pushed aside many "professional" politicians to become governor of one of the largest states of our country. The actor Ronald Reagan, the golfer Bobby Jones, the starlet discovered in a coffee shop, the prizefighter who sends the reigning champ to the mat, the American hockey team beating the Russians in the Olympics in 1980 and, of course, David and Goliath - the list could go on and on with underdogs or amateurs who have "beat the odds".  More recently, John McCain and Sarah Palin would have liked to join the ranks of famous long shots but, alas, the collective wisdom deemed them unqualified. All professions have their way of culling the crowd.



But the Kaplan/Mahler Symphony No. 2 myth has a different twist. There is no giant to push aside. No champion to dethrone. Mr. Kaplan did not have to beat, win or even draw any gold medalist. With careful marketing, money and influence, this no-talent, self-proclaimed Mahler expert has made his way to the front of many of the world's leading orchestras relying totally on their collective talents and experience to pad his conducting résumé. Orchestra management after orchestra management has been complicit in perpetuating his woefully sad farce. At the end of the day, his worth to classical music has been totally overstated. 



A word to all musicians: I maintain that we must take some of the responsibility in the blame for this predicament.



All artists must educate their audiences and their managements. We have failed to convince the powers that be how important it is always to put the most qualified conductors on the rostrum. If this had been clear to the managements of symphony orchestras, this man, regardless of how much money he is willing to throw at our feet, would never have taken a step on what should be hallowed ground. We owe it to ourselves, our public, and in this case, Mr. Mahler.



Much has been written about Mr. Kaplan's passion for Mahler's great symphony as if this emotion is unique to him. This assertion is an insult to all professional musicians who have dedicated their entire lives and have sacrificed much toward the preservation of all the great works of history's finest composers. His continued appearances are also an affront to all "real" conductors who have toiled relentlessly for the recognition they duly deserve.



In conclusion, there is no Carl Hanratty who will scour the planet to save us and the public from another fraudulent performance of this masterpiece and it is unlikely that we will ever witness a repentant Mr. Kaplan. We can rely only on ourselves to stand firm against any attempts to promote this imposter. In the end, we will need help to catch him if we can.

  David Finlay, Trombone, NYPO

[Bunny]

I don't agree with you at all. In my opinion Kaplan in Vienna gets almost everything right--certainly those key moments that I listen for and want perfect--and the performance has held up well to repeated hearings. All the recordings you mention have serious defects that keep them from being at the top of the pile although all are worthy contenders (the Slatkin surprised me how good it is).

To present a counter view about the Vienna performance:

"As to Kaplan's interpretation, it's mostly excellent. This first movement must be accounted one of the finest on disc--marvelously played by cellos and basses, the big moments pegged for all that they are worth, the second subject and quiet episodes gorgeously sustained and atmospheric. Kaplan times those tricky "breath pauses" at the movement's climax just about perfectly (note the changed position of the third cymbal crash), and no one makes more musical sense out of the closing measures--the trumpet swells to a real fortissimo, exactly as Mahler wrote it, with the final downward scale positively cataclysmic. The same virtues apply to the Andante moderato: ideal tempo, shapely phrasing, and beautiful string tone add up to as fine a view as you're likely to hear."

"No one realizes more effectively than Kaplan that troublesome moment just before the end when the "resurrection theme" gets banged out by timpani doubled by organ pedals, and you won't hear the final crescendo leading to that "punched out" last chord better handled by anyone, anywhere."

"In the final analysis, Mahlerians will want to hear it for Kaplan's own thoroughly sympathetic and cogent view of the music, one that should put to rest once and for all any questions doubters may have about his credentials as a true Mahler conductor with something to say and the technical means to say it."


Full review here This is one Hurwitz review I fully agree with.

Sarge

It's still not a top tier 2nd, and certainly not by Hurwitz's standards.  He gave it an 8/8, and summed up this way:

This is, then, a very fine (if a touch studied) Mahler Second, though not quite a first choice.

Btw, I have yet to hear any Mahler that reaches the impossible level of "perfection," there are only performances that approach that limit.

[DavidRoss]

I have an idea- to make the ultimate Mahler cycle playlist.

This was an interesting exercise, for I learned something that surprised me very much.  I began simply by listing my favorite recordings of each symphony—that is, those I return to most frequently because I find them most satisfying.  They are listed in the order in which they came to mind.  I could not pick one clear favorite for any except the 8th and 10th.   Mahler is just too big and multi-faceted for any one approach to be utterly satisfying to the exclusion of all others, though to be well served he requires a virtuoso orchestra capable of voluptuousness as well as precision—and also demands reasonably good sound.

I like my Mahler expansive and emotional (Bernstein, especially late in life), taut and clear (Boulez), or expansive, thoughtful, and clear (MTT), but do not care for interpretations that are clinical, maudlin, or bombastic.  What surprised me is that the three conductors just named claim top spots in my heart for virtually every one of the symphonies.  Take all three of their cycles (Lennie on DGG), add Nagano in the 8th and Barshai in the 5th and 10th, and you have most of my faves.

I also much admire Kubelik, Bertini, and Chailly, even though few of their individual symphony recordings make my list of faves at this time.  Their complete cycles are unfailingly well-played, engaging, and tasteful with much to recommend them.  Gielen seems likely to join these three on further acquaintance. (I don't own the set and have heard but few of his recordings, which share many of the virtues I admire in Boulez although I worry that Gielen may prove just a bit cool and detached.)  Also, I've only recently begun to familiarize myself with Sinopoli's Mahler on DGG, but on the evidence so far I would not be surprised to see him join Lennie, MTT, and Boulez among my faves a year hence.  Finally, note that this list merely expresses my personal preferences.  I make no claims of exhaustive familiarity with every known recording and have no pretensions to expertise or to the sort of thoroughness represented by Tony Duggan's survey--nor do I share his obvious bias toward "Golden Age" recordings.

1: Bernstein/WP, Kubelik/BRSO (DGG), Boulez/CSO, MTT/SFS
2: Bernstein/NYPO (DGG), Abbado/CSO, Klemperer/Philharmonia, MTT/SFS, Boulez/WP, Mehta/WP
3: Boulez/WP, MTT/SFS, Bernstein/NYPO (DGG)
4: MTT/SFS, Boulez/CO, Fischer/BFO, Kubelik/BRSO (DGG)
5: Bernstein/WP, Barshai/JDP, MTT/SFS, Boulez/WP
6: Boulez/WP, MTT/SFS, Bernstein/WP
7: MTT/SFS, Abbado/CSO, MTT/LSO, Boulez/CO, Bernstein/NYPO (DGG)
8: Nagano/DSOB
DLvdE:  Boulez/WP, Klemperer/Philharmonia, Haitink/RCO, Kubelik/BRSO (Audite), MTT/SFS
9: Bernstein/RCO, MTT/SFS, Boulez/CSO, Haitink/RCO
10: Barshai/JDP

[greg]

Whoa, everyone is acting like I invented the very idea of a Mahler playlist! 
(i'm pretty sure I've seen these lists before...)

Well, David, I have to say, out of the lists I've seen so far, yours seems to be the closest to my tastes, although that's only looking at conductor.....

I like my Mahler expansive and emotional (Bernstein, especially late in life), taut and clear (Boulez), or expansive, thoughtful, and clear (MTT)

Very good things to look for- especially if you can find them all in the same package.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Barshai in the 5th and 10th

I just bought this one, and given the amount of praise it's received, am looking very forward to hearing it.

I have another (personal) reason to be interested in this recording. I heard Barshai and the orchestra perform his version of the 10th in Prague on Sept. 14, 2001 - just 2 days after they recorded it, and just 3 days after 9/11. Barshai dedicated the concert to the victims of that. I remembered the story of the NY fireman's death, and how his funeral inspired the drum hits in the finale. Chilling, and rather poignant, in context.

[DavidW]

I looked over this thread, and I'm surprised how rarely Gielen was mentioned!  Out of all of the recordings that I've heard only his was definitive for every symphony. 

[Bunny]

I looked over this thread, and I'm surprised how rarely Gielen was mentioned!  Out of all of the recordings that I've heard only his was definitive for every symphony. 

If Gielen's cycle were less expensive, then more people would have it and more people would comment about it.  I have it, I recognize its excellence, but it's probably one of the grimmest cycles around so I don't listen to it too often.  Actually, the more Mahler I listen to, the less I listen to cycles and the more I find myself preferring individual symphonies culled from numerous cycles. 

[Bunny]

Btw, I don't think there are "definitive" Mahler cycles. It's a very crowded field and having the same point of view for each symphony has begun to tire me.  I'm beginning to find that I want   Mahler performances as individualized as possible.  And multiples of each symphony as different as possible.   

[Brian]

I'm going to skip that upstart anti-Mahler thread and post here. On our family road trip to the Grand Canyon, I listened to Mahler's Second for the first time - Fischer/Budapest, if you're curious. The last 10 minutes were enthralling - just what I was hoping for. Unfortunately, I thought that the first 72 were really, really uneven.    I couldn't help wondering what the "Resurrection" was all about - because the music didn't seem to die or become elegiac before its uplifting end; it just went on and on and on (pausing for an out-of-place Viennese landler, of course). Then I realized that in a way Mahler had it right: my interest in the symphony had indeed died and, in the finale, been resurrected. Maybe that's what he was about!

Though I doubt it.  

[eyeresist]

I'm going to skip that upstart anti-Mahler thread and post here. On our family road trip to the Grand Canyon, I listened to Mahler's Second for the first time - Fischer/Budapest, if you're curious. The last 10 minutes were enthralling - just what I was hoping for. Unfortunately, I thought that the first 72 were really, really uneven.    I couldn't help wondering what the "Resurrection" was all about - because the music didn't seem to die or become elegiac before its uplifting end; it just went on and on and on (pausing for an out-of-place Viennese landler, of course).

The symphony begins with death. Then it's about looking back on life and forward to redemption. BTW, I think "family road trip to the Grand Canyon" may be one of the least ideal situations in which to listen to Mahler.

[Sergeant Rock]

Unfortunately, I thought that the first 72 were really, really uneven.    I couldn't help wondering what the "Resurrection" was all about - because the music didn't seem to die or become elegiac before its uplifting end; it just went on and on and on (pausing for an out-of-place Viennese landler, of course).

Mahler acknowledged the problem with the second movement. He wrote in 1903:

Whereas the first, third, fourth and fifth movements are connected as to theme and atmosphere, the second stands alone and somewhat interrupts the austere progression of events. Perhaps this is a weakness in the plan, but my intention is certainly clear to you by now....the Andante is a kind of intermezzo (like the last echo of bygone days in the life of the man who was carried to his grave in the first movement-- "for the sun still smiles on him."

In Mahler's original program the "resurrection" isn't about the music dying and coming back but about the hero of the First Symphony. The Second's first movement is his funeral rites and the first four movements ask the eternal questions: What next? What is life? What is death? Will we live eternally? Is it all an empty dream or does our life have meaning? The Finale provides the answer.

Sarge

[greg]

I think it'd probably be better if he would've just left that movement out.

[DavidRoss]

I'm going to skip that upstart anti-Mahler thread and post here. On our family road trip to the Grand Canyon, I listened to Mahler's Second for the first time - Fischer/Budapest, if you're curious. The last 10 minutes were enthralling - just what I was hoping for. Unfortunately, I thought that the first 72 were really, really uneven.    I couldn't help wondering what the "Resurrection" was all about - because the music didn't seem to die or become elegiac before its uplifting end; it just went on and on and on (pausing for an out-of-place Viennese landler, of course). Then I realized that in a way Mahler had it right: my interest in the symphony had indeed died and, in the finale, been resurrected. Maybe that's what he was about!

More than most, Mahler's symphonies may require patient, repeated hearing for the sprawling mass to begin to make sense.  I find it hard to imagine driving and listening to them--yet I do enjoy hearing DLVDE in the car.  For me they require immersion: have plenty of time with no distractions, get comfortable, close my eyes, and let my soul get enmeshed with the music in a prolonged, voluptuous, sensuous encounter.

[Sergeant Rock]

I think it'd probably be better if he would've just left that movement out.

I'm glad he didn't eliminate it (like he did with the similarly toned Blumine of the Titan). I think it adds a much needed pastoral respite between the sturm und drang of the first movement, and the biting sarcasm of the third. Besides, it's so intensely lovely I can't imagine living without it. Greg, I predict you'll come to appreciate it as you grow older and more reflective. It might help, too, if you eventually spend time in the Alps, soaking up the atmosphere that nurtured Mahler's creativity.

Sarge

[DavidRoss]

I'm glad he didn't eliminate it (like he did with the similarly toned Blumine of the Titan). I think it adds a much needed pastoral respite between the sturm und drang of the first movement, and the biting sarcasm of the third. Besides, it's so intensely lovely I can't imagine living without it. Greg, I predict you'll come to appreciate it as you grow older and more reflective. It might help, too, if you eventually spend time in the Alps, soaking up the atmosphere that nurtured Mahler's creativity.

Good suggestion, Sarge, which I heartily endorse--and not just so that he may better be able to appreciate Mahler!  Greg, as you may recall, lives in Florida and has probably had little experience with mountains.  Although they may lack the majesty and grandeur of the Alps, the Sierra Nevada, or the Rockies, the Smoky Mountains are not far away.  A week or so hiking the Appalachian Trail would make a good start...and I bet Sonicman Dave would be happy to share a few tips!

Without that appreciation of God's world that comes from immersion in the grand sublimity of the natural world, I doubt it's possible to grasp the full spiritual dimension of Mahler's symphonies (or Sibelius's, either). 

[Coopmv]

As I do not yet have a sizable collection of Mahler's works, I am seriously considering the following set ...

[DavidRoss]

As I do not yet have a sizable collection of Mahler's works, I am seriously considering the following set ...

Few would quibble with that as among the finest complete sets, and at a bargain price.  At a similar bargain price, however, I suggest that you consider this one instead:

[Coopmv]

Few would quibble with that as among the finest complete sets, and at a bargain price.  At a similar bargain price, however, I suggest that you consider this one instead:

The Bertini's set probably is a later recording and presumably has better sound?

[DavidW]

The Bertini's set probably is a later recording and presumably has better sound?

Yup.  It's one of the few bargain sets with modern sound.

[Coopmv]

Yup.  It's one of the few bargain sets with modern sound.

I am not familiar with Bertini and do not have a single recording by him ...