The Schubert Sonatas

[Despina41]

Tarantella, your comment about "too many repeats" in the 9th Symphony made me think of Gould's criticism of Schubert sonatas -- until he heard Richter play, that is.

Have you seen this?
All about Schubert sonatas

[Felix]

Thanks, Despina for repsonding to this thread with comments on Tarantella' feeling that the that the C major Symphony is too repetitive. I have often felt a bit dsicomforted by the form of that Symphony, but, don't you find that a good live performance makes all the difference? I had this Symphony performed well at a concert hall with a friend in Paris and we were both enthralled from first note to the last.

The Richter performances intrduced are without a doubt - who could deny it? very great interpretations but in my humble opinion too ponderous. Schbert was NOT a ponderous composer and without at least a touch of carefreenes he is not himself. Un upstairs neighbour lent me the Sonata 960, and I was so put off by the ponderousness that I gave him back the cd without listening to all of it. As Goethe said, "Man merk di Absicht und ist verstimmt/one notices the intention and is put off. Who does not hear the light airiness in the first theme. Of course many will disagree withh me.

Apologies to Gould and Richter,
Felix

[Tarantella]

This is quite beautiful and eloquently expressed, Felix. Yes, Schubert is never ponderous and you are quite right, a riveting concert-hall performance can never be surpassed - never!! It brings new colour and meaning to each performance. Richter was a great, great pianist but by the 1970's he was past his prime. I listened to a BBC doco about this 18 months ago, on Radio 3. Richter was at the top of his game in the 50's and 60's IMO. Having explored every possibility interpretationally, it is quite possible he was trying to find a new way into Schubert.

Forget Gould - he was a narcissistic pseudo-polymath, unlike the gentle and sensitive REAL deal, Brendel. Gould never smiled and had no sense of humour, poor man. Some of Gould's performances give me a big pain where I sit down. Less ego, more music please.

[James C. Fretz]

I am ashamed to admit that it took me such a long time to realize the genius of Schubert. It's all too easy to take the brilliance of Mozart and Schubert for granted; but try filling empty staves with a meaningful arrangement of notes which will be deemed "Immortal" by general consensus.

Now, years....decades later, the lesson is learned and Schubert is on the hierarchy where he needs to be.

For myself, it was the D. 850 in D Major which grabbed me by both ears and made me a believer. Such an enormous outpouring of melody and syncopation....for reasons I can't explain, it is Brendel's performance which claims first position.

[Tarantella]

Couldn't agree more, James!! I'm running some programs for Musical Appreciation in our local city and I'm going to discuss Music in Vienna: Mozart and Schubert - the Rebel and the Quiet Achiever.

I always think of Schubert as the understated, quietly diligent composer who shows such love and reverence towards the great master, Beethoven. Indeed, he was laid to rest - at his own request - right next to his idol. I went to the original grave site in Wahringer Friedhof during my year in Vienna (both graves have now been moved to Zentralfriedhof) and it was a profoundly moving experience seeing those engraved headstones, surrounded by iron fences, sitting all alone in a park with noisy children playing all around. I sat there with my thoughts for quite a long while.

Schubert: the master of the miniature and the bold, larger work. His death house on Kettenbruckengasse, Bezirk 6 (Mariahilf) was brand new when he died in it and today is in remarkably good condition.

[Felix]

I was dreading my answer to your last letter, as I thought I would have to admit that your special Sonata, D 850 in D major was the one I liked least. But I have just listened to Brendel playing it, and certainly the first movement is shattering in its beauty. I have reluctantly to admit that the next two movements, though containing wonderful things, are too persistent in their repetitive figures and rhythms and that, for me, becomes monotonous.. I love the final Rondo. When the main Rondo theme was due to back I begged, "Please don't bring it back identical!" and he doesn't, but varies it with a lively triplet figure, and then spares us of a repetition of all that comes before.

On my Brendel CD he puts together this Sonata with another I have my doubts about, the A minor, D 784. I am incerdibly impressed by it but feel that it is the scaffolding for a great tragic Symphonic work.. There is the presistence of a two beat figure, which may be stands for the blows of fate.. If I had been an intimate friend of Mahler's I would have suggested he made a Symphony out of this Sonata. I particualrly like the endings of the exposiitons in which the harmoies sink into ever deeper dispondency - A foreboding of the Trio of the Strinquintet? As much as I admire these Sonatas I don't think they reach the expressive coherence of the late chamber music or for that matter the last Sonatas.

I have just listened to both these Sonatas from begining to end, and feel totally humbled by their their genius, but can genius sometimes misfire?

Yours,
Felix

[Tarantella]

I don't know this A Minor Sonata, D784. I have played the first movement of A Minor D845 (not very well) and love that one. These sonatas, I think, must be regarded as early or even early middle period works because Schubert died when he was 31!! So, it many ways they are doomed to remain youthful - this is where, I suspect, one gets the sense of 'fate' in hearing certain patterns. Personally, I have never experienced this with any Schubert and have long regarded his personal narrative (if you like) as subsumed in his wonderful musical poetry.

Those last sonatas and the Grosse 9 Symphonie - there's not a hint of 'destiny' or 'fate' in any of these, IMO. They glory in the classical form without any hint of irony, unlike Beethoven.

You ask can genius misfire? Almost certainly it can as one is seldom born a genius fully grown!! Those repeats to which you refer; they've always been 'the problem' for me in Schubert but, as you suggest, he does manage to vary these - as does Mozart, of course. He LOVED repeats. I've often wondered about the function of repeats and this could be the subject of a separate thread altogether. I don't speak about opera here - da capo aria etc. - strictly orchestral or instrumental repertoire.

[Felix]

I have been at the computer all day, apart from making an elaborate stew for a friend, completed a letter on the Berg Violin Concerto which I moved to a file that goes back to 1009. I don't real understand what you mean about Mozart being repetitive. I was thinking of a kind of compulsive, bar by bar, repetitiveness that you sometimes fiind in Schubert and Schumann. Mozart was to elegant and too great a master of classical form. Ofcourse the all wrote their minuets and Trios witha lot of repeats. but maybe those movements were the most popular at the time?

[Tarantella]

Well, there we are...I consider Mozart repetitive - look at all those dotted double bar lines in the symphonies!! Throughout. I have tired of this kind of musical 'perfection' and at my stage in life am looking for the composer who 'thinks outside the square'!!

[Despina41]

I don't understand this "repetitive" business when you are talking about large-scale forms.

Of course the sonata form came from a binary form in which each half is repeated. And a minuet and trio is comprised of two binary-form dances..

So.... are you complaining about a convention that has ruled music for a good 200 years in the common practice period? I'm confused.