Sergei Rachmaninov (1873-1943)

[Florestan]

Anyone else consider the Symphonic Dances a symphony in all but name? It doesn't adhere to strict symphonic form but then plenty of 20th century symphonies don't. Maybe a symphony without a slow movement?

It's certainly a valid interpretation.

[vandermolen]

Anyone else consider the Symphonic Dances a symphony in all but name? It doesn't adhere to strict symphonic form but then plenty of 20th century symphonies don't. Maybe a symphony without a slow movement?

Makes good sense to me.

[BasilValentine]

No. His other symphonies, including The Bells, are thematically unified and have strong dramatic resolutions in their finales. The Symphonic Dances are exactly what they seem and what Rachmaninoff called them. If he had intended to write a symphony he would have called it a symphony.

[Maestro267]

But it has the ULTIMATE dramatic resolution at the end of the Dances, one that brings dramatic resolution to his entire oeuvre. The Dies Irae, that which haunts his music throughout, is utterly destroyed.

[BasilValentine]

But it has the ULTIMATE dramatic resolution at the end of the Dances, one that brings dramatic resolution to his entire oeuvre. The Dies Irae, that which haunts his music throughout, is utterly destroyed.

In what way is the Dies Irae destroyed? By quotation in the major mode? That's usually called glorification. The principal theme of iii also has the same profile (fixed or pedal tone alternating with scalar motion). Is it the agent of destruction? 

In any case, the important thematic quotations of earlier works in Symphonic Dances are of the principal theme of Symphony no. 1/i and of a theme from The Isle of the Dead, both in the same movement. The quotations of earlier works make the Dances a summation of Rachmaninoff's oeuvre, but they tend to weaken the internal unity of the work and make it less like a symphony and more like a suite. The quotation of the First Symphony was intended to be cryptic and for his own ears because he thought he had successfully destroyed the work. Fortunately, he forgot about a set of parts in the St. Petersburg Conservatory Library, from which the symphony was later reconstructed.

[Maestro267]

Overcome, then. Vanquished and the powers of Light reign victorious.

Per aspera ad astra

[Madiel]

Anyone else consider the Symphonic Dances a symphony in all but name? It doesn't adhere to strict symphonic form but then plenty of 20th century symphonies don't. Maybe a symphony without a slow movement?

Well the clue is right there in the name. Saying "in all but name" when Rachmaninov actually put the adjective "symphonic" in the title for you is... a bit weird. He clearly wanted listeners to regard the work as symphony-adjacent at the very least, not merely dances for orchestra.

[Maestro267]

OK so you agree with me. Fantastic!

[Madiel]

Well put it this way: I agree with you more than the people saying that a work called Symphonic Dances couldn't possibly have any symphonic aspirations.

But I don't feel the need to shove the work firmly into either category. If someone asks me, is it symphonic or is it a set of dances, my answer is: Yes.

[Florestan]

Overcome, then. Vanquished and the powers of Light reign victorious.

Per aspera ad astra

Absolutely correct. Extremely significant Dies irae is not the final quotation of the 3rd movement. That honor goes to "Blessed be The Lord", the 9th movement of the All-Night Vigils, at which point (of the SD, that is) Rachmaninoff wrote "Halleluja!" in the score. And at the very end of the score he wrote "I thank Thee, Lord!", echoing (perhaps unwittingly) Haydn and giving a clear indication of how this final work of his is to be interpreted: exactly as you wrote above.

[BasilValentine]

Overcome, then. Vanquished and the powers of Light reign victorious.

Per aspera ad astra

Or accepted. Come to terms with. It's worth noting that every one of Rachmaninoff's multimovment cycles except the First Symphony ends triumphantly.

Well the clue is right there in the name. Saying "in all but name" when Rachmaninov actually put the adjective "symphonic" in the title for you is... a bit weird. He clearly wanted listeners to regard the work as symphony-adjacent at the very least, not merely dances for orchestra.

Well, consider the alternatives. He wasn't going to call it just "Dances" and Dances for Orchestra is clunky and kind of dumb sounding. What's that leave? I don't see a need to read more into it. Occam's Razor.

[Brian]

If someone asks me, is it symphonic or is it a set of dances, my answer is: Yes.

Are we symphony, or are we dances?

I'm a little surprised as I never thought of the ending as triumphant or particularly happy. Seems grim to me.

[Jo498]

There was a tendency in the early-mid 20th century to avoid the term "symphony" in favor of "Music for...", "Symphonic something", "Pieces", etc. Of course, Rachmaninoff didn't do this; he wrote 3 symphonies and some titled tone poems. So it seems significant that for this later work he used the term he did and didn't call it a symphony.

[Florestan]

Well, consider the alternatives. He wasn't going to call it just "Dances" and Dances for Orchestra is clunky and kind of dumb sounding. What's that leave? I don't see a need to read more into it. Occam's Razor.

Actually, what precedents are there for "Symphonic Dances"? What composer(s) besides Rachmaninoff used it? Otomh I can think only of Grieg, and even if Rachmaninoff knew them, there's not  much kinship between the two works.

[Maestro267]

Are we symphony, or are we dances?

I'm a little surprised as I never thought of the ending as triumphant or particularly happy. Seems grim to me.

I think it's defiant. Like stomping the Dies irae into the ground and crushing it with Alleluias.

[Jo498]

Actually, what precedents are there for "Symphonic Dances"? What composer(s) besides Rachmaninoff used it? Otomh I can think only of Grieg, and even if Rachmaninoff knew them, there's not  much kinship between the two works.

There is Hindemith Symphonische Tänze (1937).
But my argument would more rest on the fact that a composer who had no problem writing symphonies (and calling them thus) apparently choose to avoid the term for the later work.

[Florestan]

stomping the Dies irae into the ground and crushing it with Alleluias.

I'm with you all the way --- and it's clearly triumphant and the symbolism in its entirety is fully in accordance with Rachmaninoff's beliefs. Dies irae is juxtaposed to, and eventually vanquished by, Blagosloven yesi, Gospodi! (Blessed art Thou, Lord!), the 9th movement of Rachmaninoff's All-Night Vigil which in fact is about the discovery of Christ's empty grave and the Resurrection. Now, if Death being conquered by Resurrection is not a triumph, I don't know what could acrually qualify. And in this context, that final cymbals crash is like a flash of light and life penetrating the outermost recesses of the world and the innermost recesses of the human soul --- and it should sound grand and loud and all powerful. I stand firmly by this interpretation and I'm sure this is what Rachmaninoff, a devout Orthodox Christian himself, had in mind.

Btw, which is / are your (plural) favorite performance(s) of this magnificent work?

[Florestan]

There is Hindemith Symphonische Tänze (1937).

Interesting. How are they in character compared to Rachmaninoff's?

a composer who had no problem writing symphonies (and calling them thus) apparently choose to avoid the term for the later work.

Sure, this is a very compelling argument. Personally I don't think he envisaged the work as a symphony in disguise but neither do I object to anyone seeing it this way.

[Brian]

Interesting. How are they in character compared to Rachmaninoff's?

If I remember right, the answer is: much shorter!

[Jo498]

I don't remember the Hindemith; I have two recordings (both from the 1950s, Hindemith himself and Fricsay). There are 4 movements, each ca. 6-8 min.