Saturday 13 May 2000 Victoria Concert Hall	Singapore Symphony Chorus 20th Ann. Concert/Beethoven Symphony Cycle
	Wolfgang Amadeus MOZART (1756-1791) Divertimento in F major, K138 Ludwig van BEETHOVEN (1770-1827) Symphony No.9 in D minor, op.125 "Choral" Singapore Symphony Chorus GAO Manhua soprano (really, 'Manhua Gao' sounds like some pastry) YANG Jie mezzo-soprano David QUAH tenor ZHENG Zhou baritone George CLEVE conductor

OVERALL NOISE RATING: OFF THE SCALE!! (Disastrous - shoes being unstrapped, programmes dropped, pagers going off to "O Suzanna", parents gallumphing about bringing their kids with them, rustles of programmes, rustling of plastic bags, couple speaking to each other in the middle of the third movement, golden-headed woman offering Tic-Tac to neighbour on left who earlier raised his hands behind his head until I tapped him on the shoulder.......ARGHHHHH!!!)

The Noise Rating Index is a partially-objective measurement of pager and handphone blasts, 9pm and 10pm watch beeps, coughing-during-the-pianissimo-bits, intra-audience conversation and other mind-bogglingly inept noises emitted in the concert hall during actual performance of music. It is measured on a scale of 0 to 5, in increasing annoyance.

To cut straight to the chase, I was disappointed. It'll be a little harder to explain why exactly, but I shall attempt to do so. Let me begin by describing some aspects of my personal perception of the Ninth Symphony, and then perhaps the reader may understand my overall dissatisfaction with the performance.

For me, the Ninth is a cosmic symphony, original in every way. Its opening - tremolo strings with that "open fifth" signifies a kind of chaos, building up organically to an angry cry. The first movement is perfectly constructed - sonata form used to dramatic effect. It is emotional, terrifying, tumultuous, ferocious. The second movement is again not just music - again it depicts Beethoven's dissatisfaction with the world and has much of his sardonic humour - bassoon solos, timpani solos. It's not just a dance - it's one upheaval after another.

The third movement is tender, ethereal, transfigured - Adagio molto e cantabile - the beautifully written variations working up to the two knocks on heaven's gates represented by the brass - the critical moment of the whole movement, followed immediately by a sense of resignation. The fourth movement is Beethoven himself - his rejection of the first, second and third movements consecutively (O Freunde, nicht diese Töne) in favour of his tune, with Ode an die Freude set to it, no matter how unhappily, to bring in vocal soloists and chorus, and finally overcoming his personal doubts to end in victory. I take music in a very non-literal way, which may better explain, then, my problems with Mr. Cleve's interpretation.

Even after the HIP band-wagon I found his performance lacking in tension. Tension, as you know, is not accomplished by isolated 'spotlights' on selected 'climaxes' - tension is all about building up to climaxes. Tension in music is essential - the contrast in the subjects of a sonata-form movement (feminine-masculine) work to bring about drama, and then tension. Development is nothing without a feeling of tension, and in the first movement of Mr Cleve's interpretation, tension as a product of carefully considered tempi were sorely lacking.

It is important, no doubt, to set up a single overlying tempo for the whole movement, but more importantly, I feel, is the ability to mould tempi and dynamics, and inflect. It is not a conductor's duty merely to beat time and make sure instruments come in when they should - conductors were introduced so that more expressive devices could be employed, not less. I found Mr Cleve's Beethoven to have little expression.

His way with the second movement fared much better, if you like my description. There was some creative phrasing, and some attempt at interesting ideas. Some of the time, though, his jokes didn't have their punch-lines delivered as well.

Mr Cleve's performance of the third movement was on the fast side, no problem in itself (though the marking is Adagio molto e cantabile and personally I feel that following the spirit of the music is more important than the letter (as long as one doesn't go against the music!).

My problem was rather that, in these fast tempi there was little beautiful phrasing, and even less that was exquisite. There was a lot of brave 'virtuoso' playing, especially in the running-note variations in the First Violins. The third movement should always transport the listener to another dimension - it is after all, in symphonic form, the 'getaway' and should always contrast. There was inadequate attention to dynamics, the fault of whom cannot be acertained. Most of the time it seemed a little metronomic and unconsidered.

In my opinion, though, Mr Cleve (left) should have built up to the two passages (augmented by trumpets) rather than, as I feel, played them down. Beethoven wasn't a neat and tidy person, and the reason why listeners today like his music is because it is uninhibited and un-buttoned up - no one else could have written the (embarrassingly, some find) brash chorus parts in the finale. So why downplay the passages and shirk away from their power?

The fourth movement was generally well-performed as a conception, except that I thought the need for speed got a little in the way of music and drama. The opening wasn't terrifying, rather meek in fact; the recall of the opening before the baritone entry either; there was a distinct lack of grandeur in the passages approaching the great chorus "vor Gott" before the Turkish March - that same downplay of climaxes here - distinctly unsatisfying.

The fugue was too slow and became rather tedious instead of exciting, the linking passage after that before the chorus returns with "Freude" again lacking in tension totally. I also found the quieter passages rather uncontrasted and lacking a sense of hush and wonder. All things considered, it was a rather earth-bound, unmystical, fantasy-less performance. If Beethoven appeals to you with these adjectives, then you probably enjoyed his performance.

The Singapore Symphony Chorus (which I used to be part of) sang very enthusiastically - the Ninth is always an invigorating, exhilarating experience for choristers - and rather well overall, except for some spotty German ("Ihr schütz nieder") mostly in the words with umlauts in them. I found Gao Manhua's upper registers very beautiful, her middle rather hard (she sings, according to her resume, such diverse roles as Salome (the Wagnerian type) and Lucia (the bel canto type) which should, if you like to compare such things, put her voice somewhere in the Callas type.

Yang Jie's contribution to the quartet was polished and admirable, whereas David Quah's tenor is a little to light and lacking in weight for the part (he was a considerable Alfredo in a now-not-so-recent Traviata) and sounded a little forced as a whole, with some unwritten portamenti. Much gusto, though. Zheng Zhou I have reserved for last, as the baritone is entrusted with the most important role as he is the first voice to be heard in all symphonic repertoire. Mr Zhou was rather disappointing - though he possess a beautiful top, his German pronunciation, not to mention enunciation, is deficient, mauling the consonants and vowels ("Sthemen" indeed!) His lower range is rather unrefined and as a whole the soloists tried, and failed, to blend.

Well, enough of my quibbles. Again, I do emphasize that the views above are mine alone, and you are welcome to have enjoyed the concert in its entirety - if you did, let not my words influence your thoughts! The Ninth, as you know is the most public, and yet the most personal of pieces.

The Mozart Divertimento, rather a warm-up to the orchestra, was in contrast, beautifully played, and a delight in every way.

Derek Lim

Click to Return to the Concert Index!... or Visit the Inkvault archives!

713: 14.5.2000 ©Derek Lim

Explore the Flying Inkpot