The ending of Sibelius' 5th symphony

[DavidRoss]

Hi Cato,
It sounds like you have access to the score.    Maybe you can verify the chord sequence above.      I seem to remember the chords as being all the same, except for the final one.    

Yes, that's right...duh!

[Cato]

Here you can download the entire score:

http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/4/42/IMSLP15922-Sibelius_-_Symphony_No.5__Op.82__orch._score_.pdf


The Internet is amazing: and you will see how the composer begins and ends his coda with those 6 chords which are not all quite the same. 

[alkan]

Here you can download the entire score:

http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/4/42/IMSLP15922-Sibelius_-_Symphony_No.5__Op.82__orch._score_.pdf


The Internet is amazing: and you will see how the composer begins and ends his coda with those 6 chords which are not all quite the same. 

Thanks Cato !!      And you are right about the chords ......

[DavidRoss]

Here you can download the entire score:

http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/4/42/IMSLP15922-Sibelius_-_Symphony_No.5__Op.82__orch._score_.pdf


The Internet is amazing: and you will see how the composer begins and ends his coda with those 6 chords which are not all quite the same. 

Seconded, Alkan--terrific, thanks, Cato!

[Timmyb]

I'm afraid that I have to appear for the prosecution on this one.I'm probably just revealing my innate philistinism but - WHAT WAS HE THINKING OF!!!.It's all the more upsetting because I love the rest of the symphony.I've tried liking it, I really have but twenty years after the first disappointment it still hurts.

[nut-job]

The Internet is amazing: and you will see how the composer begins and ends his coda with those 6 chords which are not all quite the same. 

Basically five statements of the dominant then the tonic.  But there are shifting harmonies in the inner voices, as you note.  The question is how much to emphasize those differences.  In Jarvi's recording I wasn't really aware of them.  What impressed me about Karajan's recording is the extent to which he brought out those variations in voicing.  The lack of patience in beating out the full time to the rests seemed secondary to the balance of the instruments in those chords. 

[Cato]

Basically five statements of the dominant then the tonic.  But there are shifting harmonies in the inner voices, as you note.  The question is how much to emphasize those differences.   In Jarvi's recording I wasn't really aware of them.  What impressed me about Karajan's recording is the extent to which he brought out those variations in voicing.  The lack of patience in beating out the full time to the rests seemed secondary to the balance of the instruments in those chords. 

Precisely: and if Sibelius shifted those inner voices around, it was for a very good reason (most probably stemming from his ideas on motivic evolution, i.e. even these 6 chords are still evolving at the end).

Järvi vs. Karajan here could be the difference between a good conductor/orchestra and great ones.  It could also be, however, that the Järvi recording simply did not bring out what was audible on the podium.

[nut-job]

Precisely: and if Sibelius shifted those inner voices around, it was for a very good reason (most probably stemming from his ideas on motivic evolution, i.e. even these 6 chords are still evolving at the end).

Järvi vs. Karajan here could be the difference between a good conductor/orchestra and great ones.  It could also be, however, that the Järvi recording simply did not bring out what was audible on the podium.

The engineering by BIS on Jarvi's recording is very good, I don't think blame can be laid there.  It is also possible that Karajan tinkered with the instrumentation to get the sound he wanted.  There is no indication that he did, but it wouldn't be the first time that has happened. 

[alkan]

I listened to the ending again tonight .... with great attention .....

One thing that struck me was that contrary to my earlier memories, the music is not clearly heading to a triumphant ending.    It sinks into minor keys and there are all sorts of dissonances and grinding and groaning sounds.      At the end it seems to me that it could almost go either way .... triumph or disintegration.      In the end it's neither ..... the final chords are so different to all that went before.    I'm not sure whether this is a clue to what Sibelius was thinking ..... in any case he does seem to reject both triumph and disaster.

The other thing that strikes me is that the ending of Sibelius' 5th is almost the mirror of the beginning of Nielsen's 3rd, which starts with a series of irregular and abrupt blows, then launches into the main theme.      Hearing N3 immediately after S5 would be a strange experience ..... rather like the Phoenix rising from the ashes .....     

[Tapio Dmitriyevich]

To me it seems that Sibelius deliberately destroys his "happy ending".    He builds up to a "Brahms 1"-style triumphant ending and at the very last minute, at the very moment of fulfilment, he says "NO!", ....

Coitus interruptus...

I'm afraid that I have to appear for the prosecution on this one.I'm probably just revealing my innate philistinism but - WHAT WAS HE THINKING OF!!!.It's all the more upsetting because I love the rest of the symphony.I've tried liking it, I really have but twenty years after the first disappointment it still hurts.

...Coitus continuation at another device. Maybe Aino demanded his attention and Sibelius quickly finished the Symphony Es ist immer das Weib - Yes, the symphony still leaves an open wound, I know it maybe for 5 yrs. Interesting topic. Maybe someone could maintain a "Which ending leaves a wound" topic? Also Bruckner 8, after Generalpause, the could be more. More more. Or Pettersson 9. Why the hell did the composer add those positive notes in the very ending? Why did he decide to destroy the whole piece?

Other than the "is that it?" ending of Sibelius 4 - which I love, which is one of my favourite endings.

[nut-job]

To me it seems that Sibelius deliberately destroys his "happy ending".    He builds up to a "Brahms 1"-style triumphant ending and at the very last minute, at the very moment of fulfilment, he says "NO!", ....  and smashes to pieces the monument he has so painstaking constructed ....

I don't see any "happy ending" developing at the end of Sibelius V.  The final movement strikes me as a contrast of the "frenetic" opening theme and the more graceful, bittersweet music associated with the Swan theme.  At the closing the Swan theme becomes darker and darker, wandering off into harsher, more dissonant, grinding harmonies.  Finally when it seems about to reach its grim apothesis, the paradoxical staccato chords appear.  I hear not a trace of triumph there.

[alkan]

I don't see any "happy ending" developing at the end of Sibelius V.  The final movement strikes me as a contrast of the "frenetic" opening theme and the more graceful, bittersweet music associated with the Swan theme.  At the closing the Swan theme becomes darker and darker, wandering off into harsher, more dissonant, grinding harmonies.  Finally when it seems about to reach its grim apothesis, the paradoxical staccato chords appear.  I hear not a trace of triumph there.

Hi Nut-job,
Since I wrote the bit that you quoted, I listened again to the ending.      I agree with you ..... up to a point.      At the beginning of the last mvmt, after the frenetic opening, there is the swan theme .... in all its majesty and glory.      After this, it seems to me that the music is constantly struggling, and failing, to retrieve the swan theme   (return to innocence, childhood, ...??).    But nothing works ..... the swan theme is constantly distorted both harmonically and rhythmically.    This process builds to a climax at the end of the mvmt, where the swan theme struggles through minor keys and grinding dissonances.      YET, (and this is where I disagree with you) ...... right at the very end, the brass and bass line is fighting against this and it really seems that against all odds it will rise and pull the swan motif back into the sunlight.      There is a rising cadence from the brass and just at the critical moment, just when the music swells majestically into the major, and looks like it will conclude the symphony there ..... it abruptly cuts off !!!! ..... a short silence, then the 6 detached chords.     

I also realized that the music is NOT cut off BY the first chord.     There is a clear silence between them.       

[DavidRoss]

...right at the very end, the brass and bass line is fighting against this and it really seems that against all odds it will rise and pull the swan motif back into the sunlight.      There is a rising cadence from the brass and just at the critical moment, just when the music swells majestically into the major, and looks like it will conclude the symphony there..... it abruptly cuts off !!!! ..... a short silence, then the 6 detached chords.   

I like your "sunlight" metaphor.  It often strikes me this way, as if the sun's light were struggling to break through storm clouds of "grinding dissonances"--and the beginning of the symphony often seems like sunrise to me.

Sibelius is reputed to have felt a deep affection for the natural world.  Many commentators describe processes of nature reflected in the "absolute music" of his symphonies.  I can hardly listen to the fifth without some images from nature coming to mind: autumn leaves drifting on the wind, water dripping from trees to the forest floor, dragonflies darting about among cattails on a lake shore, sheets of ice groaning and cracking as they thaw, rivulets from snow melt scurrying across the earth, skies dark with rain on the far horizon, flowers turning toward the sun, cloud shadows racing across windblown fields....

According to Sibelius's diaries, the "swan theme" came to him when he was walking one day and heard the calling of several swans circling above him in the sky.  He described it as one of the most beautiful experiences of his life.  I suspect that the experience may have prompted an epiphany for him, in which he glimpsed the oneness of all things in the harmony of nature, including himself as a part of it.  If so, then perhaps the ending of the fifth is an effort to recapture this sense of harmony and oneness with the world, struggling against the feeling of separation that is our normal consciousness, punctuated only by occasional glimpses of a unifying order that makes sense of the cacophony of life.  Perhaps those chords are attempts to grasp and hold onto that intoxicating sense of oneness and wonder, the concluding two signifying acceptance that such moments pass and acceptance that such a moment is enough.

What a work of art "means" to us depends only partly on the artist's intent and largely on whatever we bring to it.  Glimpses of the unconscious surface in the work; the artist may not even be aware of them.  Some artists (or maybe all artists at some times) work almost entirely from the unconscious, at least during the moment of creation, with no intent to force "meaning" onto the work.  Perhaps Sibelius ended the fifth as he did simply because it seemed and felt "right" to him.  He fumbled his way toward that ending over a five-year period (1915-1919), trying to fit those mosaics God tossed down from Heaven back into the pattern God had in mind, revising it several times until finally those last pieces fell into place and the ending just "felt right"--that is, left him with the same feeling of awe and wonder and acceptance and resignation that he felt on seeing those swans wheeling above him on that fateful day.

[alkan]

Thanks David,

I understand what you say, and usually I can empathise with a musical work and derive pleasure, emotion or be amazed at the complexity and genius of the composer.      And Sibelius in no exception (in fact he speaks to me more than many other composers).

Which is why it is SOOOOO FRUSTRATING that I have not yet (I live in hope!) been able to tune in with the end of his 5th symphony !!!     It seems that others can, but I just want to strangle Sibelius for doing this .....       

[bhodges]

Coincidentally, I just heard this piece last Saturday night, with David Robertson and the Saint Louis Symphony Orchestra, and was mindful of the discussions here about the ending.  Robertson did a really splendid job; I'm writing a review but here is the review in today's paper (including the amusing-sounding Friday concert, for which most of the musicians were either late or absent due to travel weather).

Robertson made the entire symphony flow in a more-or-less seamless whole, similar to Sibelius's Seventh.   Where most conductors, for example, take a typical break after the first movement (e.g., long enough for people to cough, rustle in their seats, etc.), Robertson began the second almost immediately after the first's final chord. 

So when the six ending strokes came, they sounded incredibly novel, like nothing that had never been heard in the piece at all, and entering more or less without warning.  Where the bulk of the piece was swirling, pulsing, waves of sound, the final chords were done almost staccato, so startling that the ending took on a meaning of its own.  I am still pondering why this worked so well, but from the huge ovation at the end, it clearly did. 

--Bruce

[toledobass]

You're REALLY gonna hate the end to the 7th.

Allan

[alkan]

So when the six ending strokes came, they sounded incredibly novel, like nothing that had never been heard in the piece at all, and entering more or less without warning.  Where the bulk of the piece was swirling, pulsing, waves of sound, the final chords were done almost staccato, so startling that the ending took on a meaning of its own.  I am still pondering why this worked so well, but from the huge ovation at the end, it clearly did. 

Thanks .... very interesting.      The chords qre marked fffz, so he played them as Sibelius wrote them.     If you come to any conclusions after you have had time to reflect, please post.      Difficult to tell if the ovation was because of the ending as opposed to the rest of the performance.     What really interests me is the reason why people like, appreciate, "understand", this incredible ending, because for the time being I don't get it.       But I live in hope .....

[alkan]

You're REALLY gonna hate the end to the 7th.

It's not as shocking as the 5th !!!!

[Brian]

(including the amusing-sounding Friday concert, for which most of the musicians were either late or absent due to travel weather).

I saw the picture in the arts section of Maestro Robertson playing a kazoo solo. 

[bhodges]

I saw the picture in the arts section of Maestro Robertson playing a kazoo solo. 

It sounded hilarious (and great), and I wish I'd been there, but alas was at another concert.  Robertson was doing the "chansonnier" part in Frankenstein!! by H.K. Gruber, who was supposed to be there but his flight left him stranded in Chicago.  The piece requires the musician to sing, whistle, etc., hence the kazoo.  SLSO resident conductor Ward Stare then filled in for Robertson on the podium. 

--Bruce