Szymanowski's First symphony

[Sean]

This is a twenty minute two movement extrapolation of Schoenberg's Pelleas and Gurrelieder, The Poem of ecstasy and Til Eulenspiegel, plus an ending from Sinfonia domestica (Marco Polo CD under Stryja). That's it.

[Maciek]

Yeah, I guess it's a work very much of its time: abandoned in 1907; by comparison: Scriabin's Poem of Ecstasy was completed in 1908, Schoenberg's Gurre-Lieder was completed in 1911, and Pelleas was published in 1912. You should mention, though, that what you heard was what remains of the two outer movements. It hasn't been established if the middle movement was ever even written.

There might be a general link to Strauss's Till but there is also a sort-of-quotation from Ein Heldenleben (The Hero's Adversaries) in the second movement.

[Sean]

Thanks a lot Maciek, I didn't know the dates; I was originally going to say Heldenleben though.

[Maciek]

You're welcome (I had to check them, you know, but I had the general notion that it was all stuff floating about at roughly that time ). FWIW Szymanowski apparently hated the piece (which is probably why he never completed it - unless he actually did, but, nah, that seems unlikely).

[Sean]

I'm still interested in such music, I don't mean to give any other impression, just that I keep a keen sense of what's really valuable and what's less so.

[schweitzeralan]

I'm still interested in such music, I don't mean to give any other impression, just that I keep a keen sense of what's really valuable and what's less so.

What is your impression of is second and his third symphonies; both seem to suggest certain Straussian Scriabinesque subtleties. That's one of the reasons they appeal to me. Over the last ten to fifteen years newly available recordings of Szymanowski's work: pianistic, symphonic, or vocal, enabled me to discover and to appreciate a newly resurrection giant of a musician.

[Sean]

What is your impression of is second and his third symphonies; bothseem to suggest certain Straussian Scriabinesque subtleties. That's one of the reasons they appeal to me. Over the last ten to fifteen years newly available recordings of Szymanowski's work: pianistic, symphonic, or vocal, enabled me to discover and to appreciate a newly resurrection giant of a musician.

Hi, short reply, the sacred vocal is of exceptional interest needless to say, particularly the Stabat Mater but several of the others too; the Third is another luminous work though didn't stay with me quite so much; I remember the Fourth as a sophisticated effort but I'm in a rush to return to none of the symphonies. I bought a complete set on CD years back but need to check my records which one it was... Best, S

[schweitzeralan]

Hi, short reply, the sacred vocal is of exceptional interest needless to say, particularly the Stabat Mater but several of the others too; the Third is another luminous work though didn't stay with me quite so much; I remember the Fourth as a sophisticated effort but I'm in a rush to return to none of the symphonies. I bought a complete set on CD years back but need to check my records which one it was... Best, S

Thanks for the reply.  from what little I know of Szymanowski, he went through several "periods" or aesthetic influences and manifestations throughout his professional life. His early works were influenced, more or less, by late 19th century Germanic/Viennese sources.  His "middle" period is manifested by szmanowski's interest in French/impressionistic influences.  His "last" period evinces a certain modernistic trend.

[Maciek]

Hm, Szymanowski and influences... Perhaps I should keep my peace.

No, no, can't help it.

Can't stop myself.

I really am trying.

But... no, it's impossible. It just happens to be a pet peeve of mine.

OK, I'll just go ahead then, shall I?

I really don't understand this talk of "influences" every time Szymanowski is mentioned. The only unquestionable influences are Wagner and Strauss in the early years - Szymanowski, like many others, was quite obsessed with those two. Though in most cases Szymanowski's music has such a strong individual stamp that comparing it to those two loses most of its force (I mean what some call the "eroticism" of his music: the insane "intensity", the extremeness of expression; the Wagnerian harmonies, the Straussian orchestral colors are all subjugated to this primacy of expression). But Szymanowski consciously shed it all, and by the 1910s (World War I at the latest) it can be said that he had completely abandoned that idiom, having reached the conclusion that nothing interesting could really be done with it.

(OK, then there's probably the "influence" of Chopin on his piano music, the texture of his piano writing - but that's another matter.)

As for French impressionism, we have first hand knowledge (an interview) that Szymanowski rejected it. Not just that, he simply hated it (at least until quite late in his life). If I remember correctly, of his contemporaries he singled out Stravinsky - the Russian composer was his great fascination (the ballets) but, again, he felt that Stravinsky's wasn't THE way for contemporary music to go. (Szymanowski's ballet Harnasie can be listened to as a sort of musical polemic with Stravinsky.)

Anyway, even if he hadn't been so openly irreverent towards impressionism, I personally don't think there's much in the music to allow for such comparisons. If we look at his first mature works: Love Songs of Hafis, the 3rd Symphony, the Violin Concerto - they are so shatteringly original, there's absolutely no sense in perceiving them as effects of any influence whatsoever (unless, of course, we insist on constantly listening for influences of Haydn in Beethoven and Mozart, or influences of Schumann in Brahms, etc. etc. etc.). The philosophy of art, the aesthetics behind the music (but clearly perceptible in the music itself) are radically different to those of impressionism.

I know that hearing the "influence" of this or that composer in another composer doesn't really mean as much as I'm reading into it. And, schweitzeralan, don't worry, I'm fully aware that you didn't mean to imply nothing of that kind. But what irks me so, is that when I read about Szymanowski, more often than not this talk of influences is all that I find. The overall impression is that he was some sort of second or third rate composer who cribbed from the 20th century greats and was incapable of any original musical thought. While in fact quite the opposite is the case: he was one of the most original composers of his time, he was one of "the greats" and, like in all big, happy families - they actually cribbed from him (Bartok, Prokofiev - not that there's anything wrong with that, or shocking about it). In terms of harmony, there were almost no contemporaries as daring as he was (the obvious exceptions would be composers such as Varèse or Ives). In terms of musical form, pieces such as the VC or the 3rd Symphony are quite unprecedented. The textures of his piano writing are amazing in their inventiveness (even if they are indeed a continuation of Scriabin and Debussy). Same goes for his violin writing, which, in its extreme emphasis on color and articulation, was absolutely new.

OK, carry on, sorry for the outburst. (As I say, this is a pet peeve - I've recently stopped listening to all Boulez recordings, having heard him proclaim that there are visible influences of Roussel - Roussel!!! - in Szymanowski's Violin Cto; and not a word about the originality of the violin writing and such; and they say he has good hearing ).

[schweitzeralan]

Hm, Szymanowski and influences... Perhaps I should keep my peace.

No, no, can't help it.

Can't stop myself.

I really am trying.

But... no, it's impossible. It just happens to be a pet peeve of mine.

OK, I'll just go ahead then, shall I?

I really don't understand this talk of "influences" every time Szymanowski is mentioned. The only unquestionable influences are Wagner and Strauss in the early years - Szymanowski, like many others, was quite obsessed with those two. Though in most cases Szymanowski's music has such a strong individual stamp that comparing it to those two loses most of its force (I mean what some call the "eroticism" of his music: the insane "intensity", the extremeness of expression; the Wagnerian harmonies, the Straussian orchestral colors are all subjugated to this primacy of expression). But Szymanowski consciously shed it all, and by the 1910s (World War I at the latest) it can be said that he had completely abandoned that idiom, having reached the conclusion that nothing interesting could really be done with it.

(OK, then there's probably the "influence" of Chopin on his piano music, the texture of his piano writing - but that's another matter.)

As for French impressionism, we have first hand knowledge (an interview) that Szymanowski rejected it. Not just that, he simply hated it (at least until quite late in his life). If I remember correctly, of his contemporaries he singled out Stravinsky - the Russian composer was his great fascination (the ballets) but, again, he felt that Stravinsky's wasn't THE way for contemporary music to go. (Szymanowski's ballet Harnasie can be listened to as a sort of musical polemic with Stravinsky.)

Anyway, even if he hadn't been so openly irreverent towards impressionism, I personally don't think there's much in the music to allow for such comparisons. If we look at his first mature works: Love Songs of Hafis, the 3rd Symphony, the Violin Concerto - they are so shatteringly original, there's absolutely no sense in perceiving them as effects of any influence whatsoever (unless, of course, we insist on constantly listening for influences of Haydn in Beethoven and Mozart, or influences of Schumann in Brahms, etc. etc. etc.). The philosophy of art, the aesthetics behind the music (but clearly perceptible in the music itself) are radically different to those of impressionism.

I know that hearing the "influence" of this or that composer in another composer doesn't really mean as much as I'm reading into it. And, schweitzeralan, don't worry, I'm fully aware that you didn't mean to imply nothing of that kind. But what irks me so, is that when I read about Szymanowski, more often than not this talk of influences is all that I find. The overall impression is that he was some sort of second or third rate composer who cribbed from the 20th century greats and was incapable of any original musical thought. While in fact quite the opposite is the case: he was one of the most original composers of his time, he was one of "the greats" and, like in all big, happy families - they actually cribbed from him (Bartok, Prokofiev - not that there's anything wrong with that, or shocking about it). In terms of harmony, there were almost no contemporaries as daring as he was (the obvious exceptions would be composers such as Varèse or Ives). In terms of musical form, pieces such as the VC or the 3rd Symphony are quite unprecedented. The textures of his piano writing are amazing in their inventiveness (even if they are indeed a continuation of Scriabin and Debussy). Same goes for his violin writing, which, in its extreme emphasis on color and articulation, was absolutely new.

OK, carry on, sorry for the outburst. (As I say, this is a pet peeve - I've recently stopped listening to all Boulez recordings, having heard him proclaim that there are visible influences of Roussel - Roussel!!! - in Szymanowski's Violin Cto; and not a word about the originality of the violin writing and such; and they say he has good hearing ).

Hey,  considerable knowledge on your part.  I've listened to several works of Szymanowski and know a little about his compositions. There is one work that does smack of impressionistic elements, and that is the work entitled "Myths."  I've never read, nor have I engaged in further, detailed research about the composer. I do like the  2nd and 3rd symphonies and listen to them frequently..  What little I have learned from  various sources is that many reviewers, critics, and various performers consider Szymanowski a major composer.

[Sean]

Yes, a most interesting and informative read that, Maciek. I notice you speak of the VC? Do you mean the First? Some quarters indeed rave about the two concertos but though there's the manic intensity you speak of, particularly in the openings, the works don't bear comparison with the Prokofiev that they're sometimes mentioned alongside. Much of his output drifts into the rhapsodic and it seems like only in the sacred quarter where his mysticism found its place does he really shine... Great to read your enthusiasm.

[Maciek]

Thanks for the friendly comments, guys.

Sean, yes, I meant the first concerto - the second is formally much less unusual. I like them both, actually, but the second seems to be much more difficult to pull off, in terms of performance. I have a couple of recordings, but except for Szeryng no one really makes the piece work (at least for me). But then, there are still quite a few versions I haven't heard (and probably never will).

Don't really agree with you about the Prokofiev VCs, though. Prokofiev is one of my favorite composers but I don't really like his VCs all that much. (Incidentally, Prokofiev attended the premiere of two of Szymanowski's Myths and there are traces of their presence in his first VC - which he wrote a couple of years after that).

Can't agree with you about the relative merits of Szymanowski's sacred music vs. his other writing either. I have no doubts that after about 1910 almost all of his works, with very few exceptions (such as the opera Hagith), are masterpieces. The list includes lots of "secular" compositions: the 4th Symphony, Myths, King Roger, Kurpie songs for choir, Harnasie, to say nothing of the songs or piano pieces.

Not sure what you mean by "the rhapsodic". All of his music is very carefully structured, even if he rarely employs the sonata form. The 1st VC or the 3rd Symphony show this very clearly: the music seems to be just a continuous flow, but I've read one or two analyses of each, and they showed Szymanowski's admirable formal discipline; it's just that the structure is not easy to grasp at first, as it is completely unfamiliar.

Schweitzeralan, as for the impressionism of the Myths - I can see what you mean but I still think it's a superficial connection. For one thing, can you imagine Debussy or Ravel ever composing these pieces? I can't. To me it would be absolutely out of the question. Ravel was never this radical. For instance, compare the Myths to Ravel's Tzigane (written 9 years after Szymanowski's cycle!). They are worlds apart. Not sure what to compare the Myths to in Debussy? The Violin Sonata maybe (again, written 2 years after Szymanowski's piece)? Anyway, this thought experiment of putting pieces side by side is quite interesting because it clearly shows the yawning chasm that separates the idioms of the impressionists and Szymanowski - despite some slight similarities.

Boy, as much as I love pontificating on this subject, I feel that I might be overstaying my welcome...

[Maciek]

Incidentally, I got a Naxos newsletter today and by following one of the links I reached this page. It contains snippets from various reviews of the recent Wit recording of the 1st Symphony. Not one of them mentions the fact that the work was never completed. I assume this means the liner notes do not contain that information either (and the reviewers don't do any research of their own). How is that even possible? O tempora, o mores! One would think it's the sort of basic information which simply cannot be omitted, no?

[schweitzeralan]

Thanks for the friendly comments, guys.

Sean, yes, I meant the first concerto - the second is formally much less unusual. I like them both, actually, but the second seems to be much more difficult to pull off, in terms of performance. I have a couple of recordings, but except for Szeryng no one really makes the piece work (at least for me). But then, there are still quite a few versions I haven't heard (and probably never will).

Don't really agree with you about the Prokofiev VCs, though. Prokofiev is one of my favorite composers but I don't really like his VCs all that much. (Incidentally, Prokofiev attended the premiere of two of Szymanowski's Myths and there are traces of their presence in his first VC - which he wrote a couple of years after that).

Can't agree with you about the relative merits of Szymanowski's sacred music vs. his other writing either. I have no doubts that after about 1910 almost all of his works, with very few exceptions (such as the opera Hagith), are masterpieces. The list includes lots of "secular" compositions: the 4th Symphony, Myths, King Roger, Kurpie songs for choir, Harnasie, to say nothing of the songs or piano pieces.

Not sure what you mean by "the rhapsodic". All of his music is very carefully structured, even if he rarely employs the sonata form. The 1st VC or the 3rd Symphony show this very clearly: the music seems to be just a continuous flow, but I've read one or two analyses of each, and they showed Szymanowski's admirable formal discipline; it's just that the structure is not easy to grasp at first, as it is completely unfamiliar.

Schweitzeralan, as for the impressionism of the Myths - I can see what you mean but I still think it's a superficial connection. For one thing, can you imagine Debussy or Ravel ever composing these pieces? I can't. To me it would be absolutely out of the question. Ravel was never this radical. For instance, compare the Myths to Ravel's Tzigane (written 9 years after Szymanowski's cycle!). They are worlds apart. Not sure what to compare the Myths to in Debussy? The Violin Sonata maybe (again, written 2 years after Szymanowski's piece)? Anyway, this thought experiment of putting pieces side by side is quite interesting because it clearly shows the yawning chasm that separates the idioms of the impressionists and Szymanowski - despite some slight similarities.

Boy, as much as I love pontificating on this subject, I feel that I might be overstaying my welcome...

Good to learn things about Szymanowski I never knew.  I posted on this thread because I've been concentrating on the 2nd Symphony.  It's a strong work throughout, but I love that first movement.

[Maciek]

Good to learn things about Szymanowski I never knew.  I posted on this thread because I've been concentrating on the 2nd Symphony.  It's a strong work throughout, but I love that first movement.

Come to think of it: the only ("real") symphony Szymanowski ever wrote (the first was left unfinished, the 3rd is an orchestral song, the 4th a piano concerto ).

[Sean]

Hi Maciek, I admire your focus of interest in this repertory; Szeryng is an amazing violinist with the most individual silvery tone production, I know him first from his Brahms VC recording with the matchingly tempered Monteux: Szeryng would be ideally suited to Szymanowski I'm sure.

I threw in the word 'rhapsodic' when I just meant I feel the VCs for instance don't have the inevitability of either the Prokofiev, certainly not his amazing Second. After reading recommendations years ago I was looking forward to the Szymanowski concertos but I've always felt since that the potential of those peculiar harmonies and unisons(?) doesn't materialize: it's been a while since I heard them though...

The Szymanowski I've got to know over the years is Concert overture, Symphonies Nos.1-4, Violin concertos Nos.1-2, String quartets Nos.1-2, Violin sonata, Metopes, Piano sonatas Nos.2 & 3 Twelve Studies (all)- Nos.1-12 (piano), Love songs of Hafiz, Songs of a fairy tale princess, Demeter, Litany to the Virgin Mary, Stabat Mater, Veni Creator & King Roger.

I look forward to getting hold of the Myths (vn&pf?), also the Masques.

[schweitzeralan]

Hi Maciek, I admire your focus of interest in this repertory; Szeryng is an amazing violinist with the most individual silvery tone production, I know him first from his Brahms VC recording with the matchingly tempered Monteux: Szeryng would be ideally suited to Szymanowski I'm sure.

I threw in the word 'rhapsodic' when I just meant I feel the VCs for instance don't have the inevitability of either the Prokofiev, certainly not his amazing Second. After reading recommendations years ago I was looking forward to the Szymanowski concertos but I've always felt since that the potential of those peculiar harmonies and unisons(?) doesn't materialize: it's been a while since I heard them though...

The Szymanowski I've got to know over the years is Concert overture, Symphonies Nos.1-4, Violin concertos Nos.1-2, String quartets Nos.1-2, Violin sonata, Metopes, Piano sonatas Nos.2 & 3 Twelve Studies (all)- Nos.1-12 (piano), Love songs of Hafiz, Songs of a fairy tale princess, Demeter, Litany to the Virgin Mary, Stabat Mater, Veni Creator & King Roger.

I look forward to getting hold of the Myths (vn&pf?), also the Masques.

Both 'Myths," and "Masques" are superb works.

[Maciek]

Hi Sean!

After reading recommendations years ago I was looking forward to the Szymanowski concertos but I've always felt since that the potential of those peculiar harmonies and unisons(?) doesn't materialize: it's been a while since I heard them though...

Hm, perhaps that varies from performance to performance, or maybe the particular something you're looking for really isn't there, difficult to say. I've always felt that whenever the violinist truly engages with the music, the piece really does fulfill its promise. But then, maybe it promises something else to me than it does to you?

The Szymanowski I've got to know over the years is Concert overture, Symphonies Nos.1-4, Violin concertos Nos.1-2, String quartets Nos.1-2, Violin sonata, Metopes, Piano sonatas Nos.2 & 3 Twelve Studies (all)- Nos.1-12 (piano), Love songs of Hafiz, Songs of a fairy tale princess, Demeter, Litany to the Virgin Mary, Stabat Mater, Veni Creator & King Roger.

That's an excellent selection. Actually, I think it's even too vast to call it a "selection" anymore.

I look forward to getting hold of the Myths (vn&pf?), also the Masques.

Like schweitzeralan said - these are wonderful. Myths are almost a purely sonoristic piece, quite ahead of their time in some respects, I'm sure you'll find them interesting (whether you'll like them is of course another matter but I'm sure you won't hate them).

[Sean]

Hi Maciek & will let you know re futher explorations...