Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[Renfield]

Being a  Wagnerian, I don't mind the singing. But why Part 2 of Symphony No. 8 isn't a movement I listen to very often is because the musical invention is too thin and, more importantly, there is no conflict. As there is nothing at stake, the whole piece becomes a series of static tableaux, with an assured outcome. (I have this problem too with Bruckner's Te Deum.) In Part 1 there is the threat of disintegration in the extended 'Accende' stretch in the middle, which makes the return of the 'Veni' all the more triumphant. No such dangers in Part 2.

A fascinating angle I'd not considered before. For me, the emotional power of Part 2 comes not from the outcome, which is as you say assured, but from sharing the musical experience of Faust's redemption, almost like a tone-poem with vocal commentary.

Consider the Hostias section of a Mass, wherein God is finally expected to accept the sacrifice, and accept the faithful into the eternal world (your Te Deum comparison being extremely apt).: it's the tension of the faithful's desire, and then subsequent expectation that 'makes the [liturgic] moment', so to speak. The thematic bridge between parts 1 and 2 in the Mahler 8th centres on this, in my view.

[That is to say, the believers subsequently expect their redemption, as I'd expect the morning bus, but in itself it is still powerful.]

Part 1 is about the desire for transcendence, and the uncertainty that it may never arrive.

Part 2 is about, first the expectation for, then the actual fulfillment of Part 1's wish, and the celebration of what it was that made the difference: what took us as listeners from unrequited desire, to categorical fulfillment, and transcendence. Namely love.


I admit I have not read the whole of Faust, least of all in German, but I'd expect the original text to not be dissimilar in spirit.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Hm. Your contribution makes me think in my turn, Eugene! I must confess I have always found it difficult to see the connection between the Easter hymn of Part 1 and Part 2's Faust setting. Your post argues eloquently for the philosophical connection. It is certainly backed up by the musical connections that are there aplenty.


I 'know' Faust. I have read Faust 1 (in German) several times, and of Faust 2 (which is an enormously long, symbolic and rather undramatic work) I really love that final Act 5 of which Mahler sets a part of the conclusion. The problem for me there is that Mahler is very very selective - he only picks the transcendent, other-worldly bits. No Mephisto, no beautiful boy angels that catch the devil's eye, so that Faust's soul can be saved in the nick of time! Schumann's Faust setting is much more faithful to the richness of Goethe's text.


That said, from the moment the 'Blicket auf!' section starts, I shut up and the music carries me along.

[Renfield]

I see now what you'd be missing in the 'Faust' bit of the 8th. (And once again renew my promise to myself to read Faust.)

Re: philosophical connections, I suppose part of why I 'get' all of Mahler's symphonies quite naturally is that very predisposition I have of modelling everything conceptually, and looking for bits that match; of which there are aplenty in Mahler, both textually and musically.

(Of course, I may well sometimes find bits that 'match' only by accident, or in a different way than I 'match' them!)

[Papy Oli]

Has anybody read that one please ? any good ?

[asin]1571134670[/asin]

[DavidRoss]

Being a  Wagnerian, I don't mind the singing. But why Part 2 of Symphony No. 8 isn't a movement I listen to very often is because the musical invention is too thin and, more importantly, there is no conflict. As there is nothing at stake, the whole piece becomes a series of static tableaux, with an assured outcome. (I have this problem too with Bruckner's Te Deum.) In Part 1 there is the threat of disintegration in the extended 'Accende' stretch in the middle, which makes the return of the 'Veni' all the more triumphant. No such dangers in Part 2.

I love this.  It reminds me of just how much reasonable people can differ, depending on their tastes and experience.  It's Part 1 that I have trouble with, not Part 2. 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I love this.  It reminds me of just how much reasonable people can differ, depending on their tastes and experience.  It's Part 1 that I have trouble with, not Part 2. 

Why? That would interest me!

[Renfield]

I'm actually fairly certain a lot of people have trouble with Act 1, in so far as it's the most 'unsymphonic' thing Mahler has written.

(At least prima facie - of course, its structure is very symphonic indeed, least of all for how Mahler uses the choirs like instruments.)


Edit: Nor a song cycle, obviously. It is quite unique.

[Renfield]

On a tangent to the post above: I suspect a transcription of the 8th for symphonic orchestra and organ(s) - standing in for the choir parts - might work very well, both musically and as a way to illustrate the structure that the LOUD FERVENT SINGING can obscure.

Now all I need is a lot of money and someone to commission it from.

[DavidRoss]

Why? That would interest me!

This is a large part of the reason:

LOUD FERVENT SINGING

There are beautiful passages, but I have a low threshold for bombast.  Reflecting on how long the 3rd eluded me and how much I love it now, I keep trying with the 8th, even though I start wincing at the first bar. 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I don't regard it as bombast. To me it's just strong and massive. I like that. Bombast is when the material is thin and being inflated. I don't hear that in Part 1.

[ibanezmonster]

http://www.youtube.com/v/n2HLGdw309o
What does everyone think of this?
Mahler 9 Adagio for Organ.

[TheGSMoeller]

http://www.youtube.com/v/n2HLGdw309o
What does everyone think of this?
Mahler 9 Adagio for Organ.

Enjoyed that, thanks for sharing. 

that movement could be played on kazoos and still be beautiful.

[Mirror Image]

I don't regard it as bombast. To me it's just strong and massive. I like that. Bombast is when the material is thin and being inflated. I don't hear that in Part 1.

There's nothing wrong with some good, old fashion bombast.

[DavidRoss]

A lot of conductors try to de-pompositize the Mahler 8th, emphasizing the (plenty!) chamber-music-like qualities in it.

[DavidRoss]

Perhaps the Mahler Maniacs around here might enjoy this review by John Adams in last Sunday's Pravda...er...New York Times Book Review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/books/review/gustav-mahler-by-jens-malte-fischer-book-review.html?_r=1

[The new erato]

There's nothing wrong with some good, old fashion bombast.

But why post it here?   

[Renfield]

Perhaps the Mahler Maniacs around here might enjoy this review by John Adams in last Sunday's Pravda...er...New York Times Book Review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/books/review/gustav-mahler-by-jens-malte-fischer-book-review.html?_r=1

Thanks for the link!

I bought the Fischer book on my birthday, so the Adams perspective on it is quite informative as a sort of 'forward' to the volume.

[ibanezmonster]

Here's some Weber that Mahler reconstructed and orchestrated.

http://www.youtube.com/v/DS4NAH4ft2I

I don't listen to Weber... does he normally sound like this? I know Mahler often conducted Weber, but many stretches of this sound like it could be in a Mahler scherzo. I'd imagine maybe Weber was a pretty big influence...

[Cato]

Okay, so...

I was walking through a forest yesterday (a long story involving Seventh Graders and a field trip) by myself, and after several minutes I noticed that the Kalliwoda Symphony #4, which I had been running through my head, had faded away and something else was there now.

I was listening to it, without realizing precisely what it was, but it fit the rhythm of my marching feet and the autumnal forest surrounding me perfectly.

Yes!  The jaunty march from the First Movement of Mahler's Third Symphony had appeared in my mental ear to accompany my steps through the misty moisty flora!   

Has anything similar happened to you?

[Sergeant Rock]

Here's some Weber that Mahler reconstructed and orchestrated.

http://www.youtube.com/v/DS4NAH4ft2I

I don't listen to Weber... does he normally sound like this?

No, Weber doesn't sound like this. This part of the reconstruction is almost entirely Mahler.

Sarge