Interlude at the side of the road: Luigi Cherubini

When Beethoven was asked to name the greatest living composer, his answer was Luigi Cherubini. When asked to name his favorite composer of operas, Beethoven’s answer was the same: Cherubini. Rarely performed, perhaps Cerubini’s music is due for reevaluation?

Before diving into his music, a few words about the man are needed. Cherubini was blessed with long life: Only four years younger than Mozart, Cherubini died 15 years after Beethoven. As his name suggests, Cherubini was Italian by birth, but lived most of his adult life in France. Ironically, Napoleon objected to his music as being “too French” as the Emperor preferred the Italian School. Nonetheless, Cherubini was installed in Vienna by Napoleon, where he met Beethoven. In later years, Cherubini was the headmaster of the Paris Conservatoire, where he was reknowned for his strict rules and dour demeanor, clashing with young Romantics such as Hector Berlioz.

Cherubini’s best known work is his opera Mèdeè (or Medea in its Italian version). The opera became a vehicle for the great Maria Callas and few have sought to follow in her footsteps, given the huge demands made of the lead soprano role. This fall, Medea makes its premiere at the leading opera house in the United States–the Metropolitan–225 years after its French premiere. Sondra Radvonovsky’s turn as the crazed sorceress is simply breathtaking–her performance alone, and the chance to see Medea live, make it THE must see opera event of the season.

Two orchestral parts, the overture and the prelude to the third act, reveal a bit about what Beethoven prized in Cherubini’s compositional technique–Dramatic orchestration, and repetitive motifs stand out, but fall well short of Beethoven’s mark in my estimation. Where Cherubini excells, however, is in vocal composition, which seems far more natural, while just as demanding as Beethoven’s. The best example of Cherubini’s talent for vocal composition is his Requiem in C. Not surprisingly, it featured at Beethoven’s funeral. Here is a brief playlist of some of these highlights:

If you can look beyond the mono recording, Maria Callas’ 1953 recording of Medea remains the benchmark. I, for one, will confess that the joys of old recordings are simply lost on me. Maybe on the right system, on vinyl with tube amplification–maybe. But certainly not streamed. Record companies take note: Radvonovsky (and her excellent Jason (Matthew Polenzani) and Neris (Ekaterian Gubanova)) would define the opera for the digital age.

And Now We Will Talk to Each Other in Tones

What does a deaf composer write? Simply the greatest music ever composed.

Had Beethoven stopped composing in 1812, he still would have found a place in the first rank of composers in history. But what Beethoven did between 1817 and 1827 is simply remarkable, even setting aside his disability. Looking back from our 21st century vantage point at these works mutes just how revolutionary Beethoven really was. He slammed the door on the Classical Period, but instead of evolving into the first Romantic composer, he simply skipped Romanticism entirely. It is tempting to say that he was the first Modernist, but that’s not exactly right either. In 1817, Beethoven simply evolved into the first and last of his kind. He became Beethoven. And we will never see his like again. Here is the story:

By 1816, Beethoven’s life was in shambles. His “popular” compositions were no longer attracting crowds and his deafness was all but complete. A true virtuoso who had initially gained acclaim as a performer, Beethoven hadn’t performed live in two years and his disability would prevent him from ever doing so again. His family squabbles had all ended badly and he was now resigned to never marrying. His patronage had all but dried up, he was living in abject squalor, and actually had been arrested, having been mistaken for a vagrant. Beethoven’s friends and patrons began to despair.

Beethoven’s muse, however, was far from done with her greatest disciple; music, once again, proved the path back. One of Beethoven’s pupils and staunchest supporters, the Baroness Dorothea Ertmann, convinced Beethoven to write a new piano sonata for her. And in composing what became his Opus 101, Beethoven began to unlock new doors. The prodigal had returned.

Beethoven’s Late Period would see the composer fully fuse his art with his own emotions. Great performances of these remarkable works connect you, as the audience, with Beethoven’s soul in such a profound way that it appears to be truly mystical. Forget mass. If you want to have a true religious experience, get to a concert hall and see on of these remarkable works performed live.

Beethoven opens his 28th piano sonata on a tender note. Abandoning the generic Italian tempo notations, he instead instructs the pianist: Etwas Lebhaft und mit der Innigsten Empfindung (somewhat lively with the most intimate emotion). What does this mean? Consider his relationship with the Baroness. As relayed by her confidant, Felix Mendelssohn:

When she lost her last child, Beethoven at first did not want to come into the house; at length he invited her to visit with him, and when she came he sat himself down at the pianoforte and said simply: “We will now talk to each other in tones” and for over an hour played without stopping. She remarked: “He told me everything, and at last brought me comfort.”

Felix Mendelssohn

The piano (still called a fortepiano during Beethoven’s life) was still evolving further away from the harpsichord. The pedal had been invented, which allowed for the suspension of notes over time and Beethoven had been the first composer to make extensive use of this new innovation. The keyboard itself continued to grow–now to over six octaves–and Beethoven notes a low E in the score of the 28th sonata in fortissimo as if to say “look what we can now play!” It is also notable that Beethoven’s fortepiano contained a pedal that no longer exists on modern instruments. Then, and now, each hammer of the piano strikes three strings. But Beethoven’s pedal, if I understand this correctly, could shift the hammers over so that they struck only one string, creating a thinner timbre. Much of the third movement in the 28th piano sonata is notated to be played with this “sul una corda” pedal. Sadly, that sound is now lost to us.

Beethoven’s harmonic language in the 28th piano sonata hews closely to the Classical traditions, but he begins to stretch the rules at the margins. The opening theme outlines the tonic key of A major, largely by defining the scale around the fifth (or dominant) tone of A major. We naturally expect a resolution to the tonic–an A major triad–that will relieve the harmonic tension. Instead, Beethoven provides a deceptive cadence that allows him to modulate to the subdominant key, F-Sharp major. Over and over again, Beethoven creates the expectation of A major, only to frustrate the audience with something else. In the final measure, Beethoven finally give us a low A, which merely suggests the resolution that arrives a beat later at the very end. Between those tones, Beethoven contemplates the end of tonal harmony. But he’s not there yet. The Late Period has only just begun.

Ludwig van Beethoven, Piano Sonata No. 28 in A major, Op. 101:

There is so much to say about this remarkable first work of the Late Period. Following the dream-like first movement, Beethoven presents two further movements that seemingly have little to do with each other–a march followed by a hymn. But out of the final trills of the third movement (starting at around 13:50), the finale bursts forth, unifying everything that has come before. The structure of this movement combines the typical sonata form (exposition, development, recapitulation) with Baroque fugue. Beethoven, it seems, had not been a complete dilettante as he pursued popular fame. He had recommitted himself to the study of great composers–Palestrina, Handel and Bach, most notably. But Beethoven was not merely looking backwards. With two eyes ever focused on the future, Beethoven set about laying down a marker for posterity.

The Friday Symposium: Beethoven Sells Out

The year 1812 began in the flower of spring for Beethoven–he was in love again. The identity of Beethoven’s “immortal beloved” has been debated endlessly, including by Hollywood in the risable film that bears her sobriquet. For those unfamiliar with the story, following Beethoven’s death, his executors found a set of letters Beethoven had written to an “Immortal Beloved.” Although the letters did not bear a date, they did specify the location where they were drafted–and those movements correspond to Beethoven’s whereabouts in early 1812. Regardless of her identity, I think the key fact is that Beethoven never mailed the letters, suggesting that once again Beethoven had set his sights on the unattainable, either due to her position or her marital status. Regardless, by mid-1812, the relationship appears to have been over and Beethoven emerged in a particularly foul mood.

The loss of love was bad enough, but Beethoven’s finances were failing as well. Having signed an annuity agreement with the Archduke Rudolf and two other princes in 1809, Beethoven assumed that he would be well-provided for indefinetly. Fate, however, had different plans. Although the Archduke was able to easily keep current on his share of the annuity, the other two princes fell behind. Austria, following years of war with Napoleon, was experiencing runaway inflation, ruining one of his other benefactors. The other prince died–and the estate refused to adjust Beethoven’s annuity payments for inflation. So Beethoven sued them–stopping all payments for years.

Not content with fighting with his benefactors, Beethoven set his sights on his family. His youngest brother had entered into a scandalous relationship with his housekeeper. Beethoven used his connections to force the woman to move away–but his brother married her instead. Foiled, Beethoven set his sights on his other sister-in-law (who he long despised). His other brother had recently died and Beethoven was not going to allow his much loathed sister-in-law to raise their child Karl. So Beethoven sued for custody. Incidentally, through this court case, it became known that Beethoven had been misrepresenting the “van” in his name as “von”, insinuating that he was German royalty. Fortunately for him, The New York Post was only publishing local stories at the time and passed on this tasty bit of scandal.

Distracted, Beethoven’s compositional output slowed to a crawl, the most notable of which are his lovley and light Eighth Symphony and the Tenth Violin Sonata, which was dedicated to Pierre Rode.

I will say no more about Beethoven’s personal life–but include these brief stories as a way of explaining what happened next. In one of the most perplexing shifts in all of music history, the great Ludwig van Beethoven, who had spent a career challenging (and often alienating) his audience, sold out. Bigly. And it began, naturally, with Napoleon.

While the Emperor was engaged in his ill-fated Russian campaign, the Duke of Wellington defeated Joseph Bonaparte’s army in Spain at the Battle of Vitoria in June 1813. As the news spread through Europe, Johann Nepomuk Maelzel convinced Beethoven to compose a “symphony” for his panharmonicon, a mechanical orchestra.

Panharmonicon

Beethoven did so, composing a work of stunning banality. It was, however, a hit. The success of Wellington’s Victory likely led to the organization of the benefit concert at which his Seventh Symphony had also premiered. Wellington’s Victory proved every bit, if not more, popular than anything Beethoven had ever written–and it was lucrative as well. This led Beethoven to compose more “popular” works, the best known of which is Der glorreiche Augenblick (“The Glorious Moment”). It is as awful as the name suggests.

I don’t actually recommend listening to any of this music. But if you choose to do so, there is only one drink to have. For relaxing times (and for contemplating the fine art of selling out), make it Suntory time.

Fortunately for all of us, Viennese music fans deplored what had become of their greatest citizen and the popularity of Beethoven’s popular music waned. Facing ruin, Beethoven turned inward and channeled his complex web of emotions into his music. The world had turned on Ludwig van Beethoven and now the great composer would no longer seek to appease the crowd at all. Starting in or around 1817, Beethoven was writing solely for himself and, he hoped, for posterity. The music he would produce over the last decade of his life are among the most remarkable compositions in history. Next week, the Late Period arrives.

Beethoven Exits Stage Left: The Archduke Trio

On account of his deafness there was scarcely anything left of the virtuosity of the artist which had formerly been so greatly admired. In forte passages the poor deaf man pounded on the keys until the strings jangled, and in piano he played so softly that whole groups of notes were omitted, so that the music was unintelligible unless one could look into the pianoforte part. I was deeply saddened at so hard a fate. It is a great misfortune for anyone to be deaf, but how can a musician endure it without giving way to despair? From now on Beethoven’s continual melancholy was no longer a riddle to me .

Ludwig Spohr, on the premiere of the Archduke Trio

The singular relationship in Beethoven’s life was with the Archduke Rudolf, the youngest son of the Emperor Leopold II. Beethoven’s student, benefactor and friend for more than 20 years, the Archduke was an avid patron of the arts and Beethoven dedicated no less than 14 compositions to him, including the Fourth and Fifth Piano Concertos, the Hammerklavier Sonata, the Missa Solemnis, which was written to celebrate the Archduke’s elevation to Archbishop, and the Grosse Fugue. This is not to say that Beethoven’s views on the aristocracy had waned in his maturity–he was still very much the revolutionary firebrand who penned the Eroica in hopes that Napoleon would bring French liberty to all of Europe. His views on the aristocracy can be summed up thusly:

Prince, what you are, you are by accident of birth; what I am, I am of myself. There are and will be thousands of princes. There is only one Beethoven.

Ludwig van Beethoven

Perhaps it was the Archduke’s admiration for Beethoven, or more likely the fact that the Archduke treated Beethoven as a peer and not as a servant, but the Archduke Trio isn’t about those great subjects of liberté, égalité, fraternité — it is clearly about the true nobility of his friend.

While the Seventh Symphony is the culmination of his “heroic” or middle period style, the contemporaneously composed Archduke Trio is the first clue as to Beethoven’s next evolution. Here, Beethoven begins to truly explore the outer realms of harmony. Beneath the lyricism lies some remarkable bits of compositional daring. There is so much strangeness in the first movement, which for me recalls this Beatles’ masterpiece of dissonance:

The Beatles, I Am The Walrus

For example, there is this moment (1:44 of the first movement in the below), which is a cadence where Beethoven notates V7-I. This is as basic as white bread. But as musicologist Bruce Adolphe points out, Beethoven’s spacing of the chord is unique: He removes the dissonant tone from the bass and makes it the leading tone in the violin. So instead of an ordinary V7-I cadance, we get something distinctly modern–as Adolphe notes, something that immediately recalls Stravinsky’s neo-classical period. During this period, Stravinsky’s music centered on rhythmic and harmonic displacement–taking up where Beethoven left off more than 100 years earlier.

Many trios have performed the Archduke, including the so-called Million Dollar Trio, compirsed of Jascha Heifetz, Arthur Rubinstein and Gregor Piatigorsky. But for my money, this early Beaux Arts Trio performance is truly definitive. The audio quality is terrible, so I’ve linked to Spotify as well (in which case the chord mentioned above happens at 1:41).

Ludwig van Beethoven, Piano Trio in B-Flat Major, Op. 97, Archduke:

Beethoven premiered the Archduke Trio at a concert given on April 11, 1814. It would be the last time that Beethoven would play in public. The ensuing years were not kind to the great composer. Having overcome thoughts of suicide a decade earlier, Beethoven produced a remarkable series of works in his middle period that form the core of the classical repertorie. But as his deafness finally overcame him, Beethoven retreated into solitude and despair.

Beethoven’s Symphonic Masterpiece

The work of a madman.

Carl Maria von Weber

We’ve already heard Beethoven’s Third, Fifth and Sixth. The Ninth is still to come, but today’s selection, his Seventh Symphony, is my personal favorite.  I’m not alone.  Berlioz declared it to be Beethoven’s “masterpiece.”  Wagner wrote rhapsodic essays about it.  And it was extremely popular with Viennese audiences from the get-go.  While audiences needed time to warm up to many of Beethoven’s prior works, the Seventh was insanely popular upon its premiere, especially the second movement, which the audience applauded until the orchestra agreed to immediately encore it at the premiere. I can’t disagree: I’ve probably listened to that second movement more times than any other work of music, full stop.

I was fortunate to take a Master Class with Leonard Bernstein on this piece, so I’m cribbing from what I remember about his analysis combined with some acquired insights of my own. If you really want to understand what Beethoven was doing here, listen to AC/DC or The Rolling Stones. Because at the beating heart of those two bands lie the greatest rhythm guitarists of all time, Malcolm Young and Keith Richards–and their obsession with rhythmic motifs (or riffs)–finds its root in the symphonies of Beethoven’s heroic period. Let’s start there, with one of the most obsessive riffs in rock history:

AC/DC, Hells Bells

Now, let’s see how a real master does it. In his most proto-rock symphony, Beethoven simply tears the roof off. To help walk through this remarkable work, I’m including references to points in the Carlos Kleiber recording with the Vienna Philharmonic. You can use the YouTube clip below, but the time markings after the first movement need the separate tracks from the CD or streamed versions available on Spotify or Apple Music.

The first movement (A Major) opens with an introduction that is one of if not the longest that Beethoven ever wrote–bringing us to about the 3:15 mark when the music, which had been grand and soaring up until that point, appears to break, settling on an E. This resolution is deeply satisfying, since E is the resolving note to A Major. Beethoven hammers this idea home by repeating this E–varying only the rhythm. And for what must be the first time since early medieval music, the same note repeats more than 30 times in a row, taking us to about 3:50. Where this will go? Beethoven speeds up the pace to vivace–building our anticipation–but what we get is just more Es, repeating the same exact note for a total of 61 times, before the theme finally breaks out at 3:55. And these Es set out Beethoven’s great galloping riff, which figures in nearly every bar of the movement.

Once the theme enters, the momentum begins to build–and you can feel the power of the music straining the break free, which it finally does, like a great wave crashing over the audience, at around 4:21. If there is more joyous music in this world, I don’t know what it is. And yet, like a great Rolling Stones song, Beethoven’s accompanying rhythm is persistent. The harmony barely changes. Just by controlling the dynamics, Beethoven creates music where no music should really exist.

Then, just when you’ve surrendered the power of that riff, Beethoven starts ripping everything apart–we don’t get a true second theme here, just a reexamination of the dominant theme from different perspectives. All with that persistent rhythm driving the score forward to the end of the exposition. The exposition ends with scales (starting around 5:57) that recalls the introduction. First we get the customary repeat of the exposition with those endless Es, but, the second time through, Beethoven changes the tonality, which takes us into the development (around 8:20). The end of the exposition features two jarring pauses, breaking the rhythm and hence the momentum of the movement. This will need to be resolved. Thankfully, that’s what the development is for–and for what may be the first time in history, the development is going to be primarily about rhythmic development, not harmonic development. The profound satisfaction achieved through rhythmic development and resolution was not lost on rock bands either, although few can pull it off convincingly. Here’s one good example:

Rush, Jacob’s Ladder

Back to Beethoven: The development begins in pianissimo, with that persistent rhythmic motif in the strings: Of the 101 measures of the development, only two do not feature this omnipresent rhythm. Beethoven sets winds, brass and strings against each other, each trying outplay each other on the same rhythm. Those two measures without the rhythmic motif appear at around 9:05–leading to Beethoven changing the rhythm in the string section, while the winds retain the original. This polyrhythmic dissonance, surely the first in symphonic music, must be resolved. And resolve it Beethoven does, with heapings of brass and timpani (starting around 9:40). As the various components of the orchestra begin to get into sync, the music arrives . . . yes, no surprise here, on that dotted E rhythmic motif (10:03). And, just like that, we are in the recapitulation, with the main, joyous theme breaking out in the strings (10:07). Then those scales come back at the end (12:12), leading us into the coda this time after two bars of silence. The coda starts with what can only be described as a music shrug (12:20). The violins take up those persistent Es, while the lower strings play the chromatic scales from the introduction, melding the two great ideas of the movement–all supported by the omnipresent rhythm–before breaking into another moment of pure joy (12:59) to wrap everything up in a bow. The first movement is all about balance. The introduction and the coda are each 62 measures. The exposition and recapitulation are 115 measures each, bookending a development section of 97 measures. It is a triumph in A Major.

Which is why the next movement, starting in the parallel key of A Minor, is so jarring emotionally. After an A Minor chord in the winds and brass, the strings enter with some of Beethoven’s most iconic music. Naturally, it’s another rhythmic motif on an E:

While Beethoven surely didn’t know this while composing the symphony, its premiere would be at a benefit concert for wounded soldiers. It’s hard not to think of the horror of war during this opening march, but the music invites the imagination to run wild here. Beethoven’s music isn’t bound by any formal structure I can determine–at times it seems like a theme and variation or alternatively as a rondo. And, in another break from tradition, it isn’t a traditional slow movement (although some conductors reprehensibly slow it down to nearly an adagio)–it is allegretto.

Everything in this movement again revolves around this rhythmic motif. And even more than the first movement, the motif dominates. As Bernstein said, there is little remarkable about this music if you break it down into its constituent elements. It’s barely a melody. The harmonics are compressed into no more than a 4th. Even the rhythm is pretty basic (and much, much easier to play than that dotted E rhythm in the first movement). But everything is just perfect. From the proportions of line to the dynamics. And as I recall Bernstein saying, Beethoven more than any other composer in history knew the perfect next note. Even though he struggled with composition, the end result was beyond anything even Mozart or Bach could put forth, because of his singular genius of knowing the next right note, even when the music is at its most unexpected. This singular genius is on no greater display than during THAT MOMENT, where the brass finally enters in full (2:10), which is unquestionably my favorite moment in all of music history. Everything in this movement is music at its most basic, and yet the effect that Beethoven produces is truly transcendent.

The movement takes a detour back into A Major (listen for the clarinet), before the serenity of A Major is abruptly and forcefully resolved (again) on a series of Es (4:22). The rhythmic motif reappears in the winds, supported by a nervous accompaniment in the strings. The 16th notes in this accompaniment mutates into a fugue on the main theme (5:20), before returning in full (6:10). Eventually, the music will die away–the rhythmic motif been passed by diminishing winds, brass, and strings playing pizzicato before concluding on the same A Minor chord on which it opened.

The third movement is a rollicking Scherzo. Beethoven invented the idea of a scherzo (joke in Italian) to replace the traditional minuet movement pioneered by Haydn. This Scherzo has it all–an addictive theme that retains much of the dance ethic of Haydn’s minuet (albeit faster and much less courtly), as well as a lovely trio that was based on an Austrian folk song. The movement is in the key of F Major, as the opening chord announces. F is the diatonic mediant of A minor, which enables Beethoven to seamlessly modulate from the final chord of the second movement (A Minor (A-C-E)) to the opening chord of the third movement (F Major (A-C-F)). This is a very thickly textured movement, which recalls the opening movement from the Sixth Symphony, as Beethoven uses multiple rhythmic motifs to build his dance. The result is infectious. If I have one complaint with Kleiber’s account it is that the trio (starting at 2:12) is taken too slowly. The effect is to transform a languid passage into something of a slow dance. Beethoven ends the movement with a joke. The A theme returns three times in the movement, but as the B theme returns for a third time, Beethoven rudely cuts it off at the knees with a series of jarring chords.

So, how to resolve such a monumental work? Beethoven’s solution was to present a movement of unprecedented propulsion and joy. There is barely any theme here, and virtually no melody to speak of. Beethoven has, to borrow a phrase, completely surrendered to the rhythm–and music would never be the same again. This is all riff, no fluff. In fact, the same music appears in Beethoven’s setting of a contemporary Irish folks song. Listen to the piano, starting at 1:50 in the below:

Ludwig van Beethoven, 12 Irish Songs: 8 “Save me from the grave and wise:

Beethoven uses the same music for both an Irish folk song and the conclusion of what is arguably his best symphony. I began this blog with a quote from the composer Alban Berg, who told George Gershwin that it didn’t matter that Gershwin’s music wasn’t as complex or elevated–“Music is music,” Berg said. Yes–but that’s only because Beethoven deemed it so. After Beethoven, the lines between formal music and popular music become blurry–who writes the more “elevated” music today, Philip Glass or Radiohead? Does that question even matter?

The “bacchanalia” of this final movement is created intentionally, with sforzandi coming on the off beats of each measure, as well as more dotted rhythms that recall the theme of the first movement. So much of this movement is just pure rhythm, which strikes us as perfectly natural after a century plus of rhythmically-driven music. But think about what has led up to this point, as catalogued here–is there anything remotely like this? Even the Romantics, with all of their wild and wondrous inventions, would never dedicate an entire major work to an examination of rhythm. The elevation of rhythm over melody was uniquely Beethovian and the secret of his enduring appeal.

But that’s not all what’s going on in this remarkable movement. Entire essays could (and likely do) examine what Beethoven is doing harmonically, as the music runs far afield of the tonic A Major. And Beethoven seems to blend the sonata and rondo forms, especially in the development sections where the theme repeatedly emerges before returning triumphantly at the start of the recapitulation (5:15). The coda is more of the same. As the music builds frenetically, with the rhythmic motif of the movement being handed off like a baton around the various sections of the orchestra, the key becomes totally lost (at least to my ear). Tonally adrift in raucous celebration, final resolution emerges in the lower strings, which find, what else, but an E. And this is the point: The Seventh Symphony may be in the key of A, but it is all about movement to the dominant E. That’s what the rhythms are driving us to. We know this intuitively by now–Beethoven has spent the better part of 40 minutes training our ears to expect that E. And when it arrives, it is like the gates of heaven open before us. To celebrate this momentous occasion, Beethoven notates fff–triple forte–for the first time in music history. At the time, fortissimo–ff— was understood to be “as loud as possible,” so here, in 1812, Beethoven is quite literally dialing up his orchestra to 11.

In the 1960s, The Who would smash their instruments at the end of their set, while Jimmy Hendrix set his on fire. In the 1980s, AC/DC would fire off cannons during their final encore. But nothing–NOTHING–compares with this: Quite simply the greatest mic drop in music history.

Ludwig van Beethoven, Symphony No. 7 in A, Op. 92:

The Friday Symposium: A Cocktail for the End of Time

And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire … and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth …. And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever … that there should be time no longer: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished …

Revelation 10:1-2, 5-7 (KJV)

Our good friend Luke!!! has suffered through some sleepless nights of late, worried about the potential atomic consequences of events unfolding in the Ukraine. This one is for him.

Stalag VIII-A was as far from paradise as one could get in 1940, a dark and dreary German prisoner-of-war camp. By 1940, the better part of 50,000 French and Belgian prisoners were being housed in barracks originally intended to hold only 15,000. The prisoners were malnourished and unprotected from the cold, having been stripped of their clothing by their Nazi captors.

Into this hell on earth arrived a 30-something French conscript named Olivier Messiaen, already a noted composer and whose deep Catholic faith animated his music to a degree not seen since J.S. Bach sought to express his own Lutheran ideals in tones. Messiaen was not unknown to the cultured German officers, who provided the composer with pencils and music paper. So Messiaen, cold and starving, began to pray. The result was one of the more remarkable compositions in music history.

Inspired by the above quote from the Book of Revelation, Messiaen dedicated his Quatuor pour la fin du temps (Quartet for the End of Time) to the Angel of the Apocalypse. Born amidst the horrors of war, the immediacy of famine and frost, Messiaen’s music is the antithesis of what we would anticipate. No bombast here. Messiaen is instead concerned with moving rhythm out of time and space itself. And what emerges from his music isn’t despair, but rather transcendence.

Messiaen’s time in this blog will come in due course and I will have a lot to say about this remarkable composition. But not today: For this Friday–with Armageddon ever present in our news cycle–I can think of no more appropriate music.

Olivier Messiaen, Quatuor pour la fin du temps:

Is there a cocktail for the end of time? Well, sort of. The Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster is the stuff of legend. As reported by Douglas Adams in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the cocktail was invented by Zaphod Beeblebrox, one-time President of the Galaxy. The Guide states: “The best drink in existence is the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster, the effect of which is like having your brains smashed out with a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick.” If the Apocalypse is truly upon us, this is the cocktail I want.

There is only one small catch. The ingredients are a bit tough to come by. Ol’ Janx Spirit, water from the seas of Santraginus V, Arcturan Mega-gin, Fallian marsh gas, etc. are just not exactly available in my local liquor store (or, in fact, exactly real). So to recreate this recipe in the real world, I will take inspiration from the Guide liberally.

Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster (as adapted for Earth)

  • 1oz clarified lemon juice
  • 2oz Beefeater gin (chilled in freezer)
  • 1/2oz Goldschlager
  • 1/2oz Everclear
  • splash tonic water
  • 2 dashes mint bitters
  • olive to garnish

Combine clarified lemon juice, gin, Goldschlager, Everclear, bitters and shake well. Pour into glass with one large ice cube. Top with a splash of tonic water with a single olive to garnish. Do not consume more than one of these, unless you are a thirty ton mega elephant with bronchial pneumonia. (Don’t look at me, I didn’t make the rules.)

Bonus Recipe:

After creating the above, I consulted with The Godfather who is responsible for the “clarified” instruction above. After saying that was the only thing he would change, he set about changing virtually everything else. So, for the first time, an “improved” version:

Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster (as adapted for Earth, improved version)

  • 1oz clarified lemon juice
  • 2oz Beefeater gin
  • 1/2oz Buffalo Trace White Dog Mash moonshine
  • 1/2oz Yellow Chartreuse
  • 1/2 tab Alka Seltzer
  • 2 dashes mint bitters
  • dash of edible gold leaf flakes
  • lemon peel stuffed olive

Combine clarified lemon juice, gin, moonshine, chartreuse, bitters and shake well. Pour into a cocktail glass and add Alka Seltzer. Sprinkle gold leaf on top and add single olive to garnish. Do not consume more than one of these (see above).

Under Siege: Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto

In 1809, Vienna was under siege by Napoleon and Beethoven, now more or less completely deaf, was hiding in his brother’s basement.  Terrified and feeling, perhaps more than others, the constant percussive effect of war, Beethoven produced one of his best compositions, the Emperor concerto.  It would prove to be his final statement on the genre.

The Emperor is in many ways different from the four that preceded it. In each prior case, Beethoven had been booked to perform with an orchestra and required a new concerto for the occasion. By 1809, that was no longer the case and the Emperor appears to have been composed without thought of a premiere. It is likely that Beethoven realized that he could no longer perform with a full orchestra.

The concerto is composed in the now familiar “heroic” style that defined Beethoven’s middle period. But what about that name? Surely, not a reference to Napoleon; then, what? My view, which you should immediately discount, is that this is Beethoven’s declaration of the piano as the Emperor of all musical instruments.

Consider the first movement. As he did in the first movement of the Eroica Symphony, he opens with three power chords: E-Flat (the tonic), A-Flat (the subdominant) and B-Flat (the dominant). Over this tonally anchored orchestral accompaniment, the piano presents a chromatic contrast, while matching the dynamic range of the full orchestra, from piano to fortissimo. Deploying a technique pioneered in his Violin Concerto, the piano comments around the edges of the orchestral themes, presenting dizzying runs of scales and arpeggios, to the point that a final grand cadenza was deemed superfluous–Beethoven notes in the score “Non si fa una Cadenza, ma s’attaco subito il seguento”. (“Do not make a cadenza here but attack the following immediately.”). Beethoven’s decision changed the genre of the concerto forever–while cadenzas had traditionally been written (or improvised on the spot) by the soloist, future composers would leave nothing to chance, scoring their own cadenzas in their published scores.

There can be no doubt anymore. Here, at the threshold of the 19th century, the piano had assumed its primacy among instruments–one which it would never fully surrender through to the present day despite the robust challenge from the guitar.

Nearly every great pianist has recorded the Emperor Concerto, including my father’s (and my) favorite, Emil Gilels.

But, as great as Gilels’ version is, and as great as some of the others are, the choice here is Vladimir Horowitz. Long considered to be the greatest pianist of his generation and a musical superstar equal to that of the greatest pop stars of today, Horowitz suffered a mental breakdown at the peak of his career and stopped performing. After a decade away from the stage, Horowitz made his return at Carnegie Hall in May 1965. The Beatles aside, this was the musical event of the decade in NYC. Nearly half the population of New York attended that concert (or so they would have you believe). My father, who loved reminding me that he had seen everyone from Callas to Heifetz to Bird in their prime, was downright giddy at having attended this. There are recordings out there, but, much like the Beatles at Shea, they are largely terrible. His Emperor with Fritz Reiner and the RCA Victor Symphony Orchestra is anything but. The Emperor playing the Emperor–what could be better?

Ludwig van Beethoven, Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-Flat, Op. 73 “Emperor”:

Conversation:

Leonard Bernstein looms large in my understanding of Beethoven, as will be revealed next week. He was, by all accounts, one of the greatest conductors in history–a singular musical genius whose interests were unfortunately too widely dispersed to leave as profound a legacy as he should have. Lenny will be forever linked with the legacy of Gustav Mahler and his restoration of Mahler’s symphonies to the world stage is his greatest achievement in music. But Lenny was also a Beethovian and, a wonderful pianist in his own right, likely dipped into the Emperor when scoring one of the singular tunes from West Side Story. Listen to the opening of the second movement and then to this:

Leonard Bernstein, West Side Story: Somewhere

The Friday Symposium: Collapse the Light Into Earth

At some point in the 1980s or early 1990s, rock musicians began to abandon functional harmony–the idea of building music around a tonic chord or key. Kurt Cobain of the band Nirvana is a good example of this. Drawing on a wide range of inspirations, such as The Pixies and Sonic Youth, Niravana began charting a decidedly atonal future for rock music in which harmonic tension and resolution would be abandoned. Of course, classical composers got there first, nearly 100 years earlier, but it would be a fool’s errand to argue that Cobain and his grungy peers were studying scores by Debussy, Bartok, Schoenberg or other 20th century composers. Most of them were barely music literate and were simply writing what sounded angsty and non-commercial to them.

Around the time that Nirvana was blowing up, in England, a young progressive guitarist and songwriter was beginning to chart his own path. Steven Wilson and his band Porcupine Tree began life solidly in the space-progressive world first charted by Pink Floyd. Wilson wears his influences–Floyd, Genesis, King Crimson, Yes, most prominently among others–on his sleeve, often leading critics to declare his music to be derivative. That’s unfair. Brahms’ First Symphony sounds so much like Beethoven that it is routinely referred to still as Beethoven’s 10th. Today, Porcupine Tree inhabits a space best described as progressive-metal, which if you are imagining Metallica performing albums like Selling England by the Pound, you are not too far off from the truth.

As it happens, Porcupine Tree is one of the Professor’s favorite bands, so when the opportunity arose to see them live with him, I jumped at the chance. Porcupine Tree are a hard band to connect to, especially if you jump around their catalogue instead of listening to complete albums. I had a hunch that a live show might help me find their groove a bit more efficiently. It did, which isn’t to say that I came away entirely sold on the band–especially in its current prog-metal phase.

Having immersed myself in Beethoven over the last several weeks, it was easy to pick up on Porcupine Tree’s obsessively repeating rhythms and riffs. I even heard what I thought were polyrhythmic sections, but listening again to the studio versions I determined that I was wrong–instead of two truly independent rhythms, the band is quite skilled at disguising variations of a rhythm over a 4-5 bars, after which you get what appears to be rhythmic resolution, but in fact was never truly clashing to begin with. Wilson also veers into atonal composition at times, producing strange chord progressions that bend your ear while, as a singer, using chromatic progressions that further distance his music from any sort of obvious tonal center.

That said, I think the band is at their best when they mix things up, either by retreating back to Meddle-like space-prog (The Moon Touches Your Shoulder) or by incorporating pseudo-polyrhythms to break up the ever-repeating riffs that sometimes can border on monotony. Personally, I welcome Wilson’s rare returns to a more functional harmony in his singing (Piano Lesson–an homage of sorts to late 90s Brit Pop).

While Wilson’s jazz and classical influences permeate his solo efforts (for example, Deform to Form a Star), his efforts to do so within the confines of Porcupine Tree appear to be more limited. That said, from time to time a few of these interesting Conversations peak out from the gloom, most notably this Philip Glass-inspired piano introduction.

Porcupine Tree, Sentimental

Philip Glass, String Quartet No. 2, IV. Quarter Note = 160

Philip Glass, Mad Rush:

At the close of the concert, Wilson remarked that Porcupine Tree isn’t the sort of band that has that one song that they have to play at every concert. And then they played the one song they have to play at every concert (Trains). It’s a good tune and clearly one of their very best, but I actually prefer another song on that album, which they also played last Friday night. For a band that embraces the dark and morose side of life, the lyrics are almost uplifting, as is the spare music that backs Wilson’s line.

I won’t shiver in the cold

I won’t let the shadows take their toll

I won’t cover my head in the dark

And I wont forget you when we part.

I won’t heal given time

I won’t try to change your mind

I won’t feel better in the cold light of day

But I wouldn’t stop you if you wanted to stay

Collapse the light into earth.

Steven Wilson

As autumn approaches, here is a cocktail worthy of that song, along with a playlist of some of the Porcupine Tree songs that I’ve come to appreciated over the last week.

Collapse the Light Into Earth

  • 1oz Laird’s Apple Brandy Bottled-in-Bond
  • 3/4oz lemon juice
  • 1/2oz honey simple syrup (1:1 ratio)
  • Champagne
  • Grated nutmeg

Combine brandy, lemon juice and syrup and shake well to combine. Strain into a coupe, top with Champagne and grate fresh nutmeg over the top.

A Mass Made Operatic: Fidelio

When I look back across my entire life, I find no event to place beside this in the impression it produced on me.

Richard Wagner, on Fidelio

In 1950, one of the greatest conductors of all-time, Wilhelm Furtwängler led a production of Beethoven’s lone operatic effort, Fidelio, in Mozart’s hometown of Salzburg. And what a cast too, led by Kirsten Flagstad as the heroine Leonora and Elisabeth Schwarzkopf as the jailkeeper’s daughter who falls in love with her. Say what?

Yes, that’s not a typo. The plot of Fidelio is among the silliest this genre has to offer–and that’s saying quite a lot. The opera centers on a heroine, Leonora, whose husband, Florestan, is being held prisoner by his political enemy, the despotic Don Pizarro. Leonora disgues herself as a young man named Fidelio and obtains a job at the prison, determined to rescue her husband. The prison warden, Rocco, has a young daughter, Marcellina, who throws over her suitor, Jaquino, because she has fallen in love with Leonora. Rocco, despite being a pretty decent guy, is starving Florestan on the orders of Don Pizarro. But when Don Pizarro learns that his prison is to be inspected, he decides to kill Florestan himself and gives the order to dig a grave. Leonora, disguised as Fidelio, overhears the plan and asks Rocco to accompany him to Florestan’s cell. The second act opens in Florestan’s cell. Although Florestan has just sung an aria about Leonora coming to save him, he does not recognize his wife when she in fact arrives to save him. Rocco and “Fidelio” begin digging the grave. When Pizarro enters to do the deed, Leonora springs forward, pulls out a pistol and reveals her true identity. At that moment, the governor arrives and Rocco confesses everything. Pizarro is arrested, the prisoners are freed, and they join Florestan and Leonora in a joyful celebration as the curtain falls. (Somewhere along the way, Marcellina learns that her Fidelio is acutally a woman, but for the life of me I can’t recall how that works out.)

Again, say what? The greatest composer in Europe, the composer of six mighty symphonies to date that changed the musical landscape forever, the composer of piano sonatas of such emotional depth they have inspired composers nearly 200 years after his death, the composer who would go on to write music of such transcendental beauty that we have only begun to really wrestle with them . . . this is the opera he produced? What was he thinking?

Well, in the first instance, let’s take a look at Beethoven’s operatic history. As a young man, Beethoven played viola in the Bonn opera company, so he was very familiar with the genre. His favorite opera composer was, surprisingly, not Mozart or Rossini, but rather Cherubini. Despite the fact that Beethoven, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Wagner and Brahams all held Cherubini to be among the first rank of opera composers (if not the “greatest living composer” as Beethoven wrote to him), his 35(!) operas are rarely performed today. That said, the Metropolitan Opera is putting on a production of Medea this fall, which will give New York audiences a rare opportunity to hear, firsthand, the man Wagner called the “greatest of musical architects.”

Beethoven admired Cherubini as much for the music in his operas as the morals of his librettos. That’s clue number one. Beethoven’s perference for The Magic Flute over either Don Giovanni or The Marriage of Figaro is another. Dismissing Don Giovanni and Figaro as frivolous, Beethoven embraced what for many is the silliest of Mozart’s operatic output. Beethoven didn’t really care about the plot–he cared only about the theme, the triumph of true love against all odds. He was a cuddly romantic after all.

So why this story? We know that the libretto was based on a French “rescue” play by Jean Nicholas Bouilly called Léonore ou L’amour congugal, which the author claimed was based on actual historical events during the Reign of Terror. French composer Pierre Gaveaux had turned the play into an opera, which had apparently made its way into Beethoven’s hands. Not only did Beethoven take the plot from Gaveaux’s opera, he also cribbed many of the themes and details from Gaveaux’s instrumentation. Beethoven also liberally borrowed from the various operatic traditions, melding the dialogue of German singspiel with the dramatic arias of opera seria and the grand finale of opera buffa. Which is to say, the resulting opera is a bit of a mess.

Much has been read into this opera. Beethoven was clearly attracted to the theme of a rescue from political tyranny, as we find that inspiration dotted throughout his work of his second period. Others suggest that Beethoven connected with Florestan’s plight–the prison serving as a metaphor for Beethoven’s deafness. Others suggest that Florestan’s dreams of being rescued by Leonora (a somewhat preposterous notion) reflected Beethoven’s own fruitless search for love. And yet I focus on a different element–Florestan’s rescue after taking communion in the form of bread and wine. Is this an allegory for salvation? Well, I’m not alone in thinking so. Very much still in the shadow of WWII and Nazi Germany, Furthwängler wrote:

Fidelio is not an opera in the sense we are used to, nor is Beethoven a musician for the theater, or a dramaturgist. He is quite a bit more, a whole musician, and beyond that, a saint and a visionary. That which disturbs us is not a material effect, nor the fact of the ‘imprisonment’; any film could create the same effect. No, it is the music, it is Beethoven himself. It is this ‘nostalgia of liberty’ he feels, or better, makes us feel; this is what moves us to tears. His Fidelio has more of the Mass than of the Opera to it; the sentiments it expresses come from the sphere of the sacred, and preach a ‘religion of humanity’, which we never found so beautiful, or necessary as we do today, after all we have lived through. Herein lies the singular power of this unique opera…. Independent of any historical consideration … the flaming message of Fidelio touches deeply. We realize that for us Europeans, as for all men, this music will always represent an appeal to our conscience.

Wilhelm Furtwängler

Why does Fidelio stirs such emotions in us? Well, it certainly isn’t the plot: When Gaveaux turned the play into an opera, he chose to make it a comedy. Furtwängler hits the nail on the head–it’s Beethoven, always Beethoven and his incomparable music.

So let’s turn to the music. The first act is largely forgettable. There is a much admired quartet (Leonora, Jacquino, Marcellina and Rooco) and a good aria or two, but the real meat comes in Act II. In the last production I saw at the Metropolitan Opera, the second act opens in absolute darkness–I have never seen the Met stage so completely black. The prelude that introduces the scene is some of the greatest music Beethoven ever wrote. This is a composer who can effortlessly pull on your emotional strings at will; here, he pulls on all of them at once. All of those innovations we heard in the Fifth and Sixth Symphonies are present here–Beethoven’s use of repetitive use of rhythmic motifs, dramatic dynanimsm, powerful brass, and perhaps most notably, music that turns on a tritone (A-E flat). We feel it all. Despair as well as hope; anguish as well as elation. Before Florestan even opens his mouth, we’ve been transported into Florestan’s soul–his aria confirms what we already know: This is a man at the literal end of his rope. There are other great moments as well. The Leonora-Florestan-Rocco scene in which Rocco realizes the great injustice he is helping to facilitate. And the moment just after Leonora pulls her gun on Pizarro — “one more step and you’re dead” — the music suddenly falls away, as if Leonora was threatening the orchestra too. Silence, as ever in Beethoven, provides much of the dramatic tension.

But then we get the finale–a pedantic oratorio on the joys of matrital fidelity. Sure, the music is great and Beethoven cranks up the emotion-machine to 11 here, but the messaging is all wrong. In many ways, Beethoven finally found the finale he was looking for at the end of his Ninth Symphony.

Contemporary audiences hated the opera. And Beethoven, supremely frustrated by the process of composing opera, never finished another. Interestingly, Fidelio was neither Beethoven’s first attempt at writing an opera–an abandoned effort called Vestas Feuer was abandoned in 1803 (some of the music found its way into Fidelio)–nor his last. Beethoven tantalizing planned to write an opera based on Shakespeare’s Macbeth, but his librettist Joseph von Collin died in 1811 before completing the libretto and Beethoven never found a substitute.

Over the centuries, Fidelio has tapped into our need to express our desire for liberty, perhaps like no other work of art. In 1814, a much revised version was premiered to celebrate Napoleon’s defeat. In 1933, the great Arturo Toscanni left Nazi-occupied Baytheuth to conduct Fidelio in Salzburg to protest Hitler and his regime. In 1941, a cast of European refugees again turned to Fidelio to mount a protest performance, this time at the Metropolitan Opera. And when the Vienna State Opera reopened, it was Fidelio on the bill. More recently, a small opera company in New York used Fidelio to examine the injustices that gave rise to the Black Lives Matter movement. Fidelio isn’t an opera–it is the greatest hymn to liberty that we have.

Ludwig van Beethoven, Fidelio, Op. 72:

The Friday Symposium: Chianti and Rossini

As Beethoven entered his Late Period, he was facing intense competition for his audience. While Beethoven was placing ever increasing demands on his audience, requiring them to accept novel harmonics, extreme dissonances, and uncertain forms, a young composer from Italy was giving Viennese audiences exactly what they wanted–timeless, easy melodies and a rollicking good time at the opera house. That composer was, of course, Gioachino Rossini and the immense popularity of Rossini’s music frustrated Beethoven.

Starting around this time, Beethoven took to carrying with him notebooks, where he made people write out their questions to him. Since Beethoven was able to answer orally, these “Conversation Books” only have the questions, not Beethoven’s answers. So many questions that we have about the great composer and his music were posed by his contemporaries, but all history left for us are the questions. Questions about other composers–Haydn, Handel, Bach, and Rossini, among others–pop up in these Conversation Books and we are left to wonder what exactly Beethoven’s response might have been. I’d like to think the Beethoven’s opinion of Rossini’s operas would be much the same as the Baron’s view: A big meatball, in the best sense of the word.

Today’s music selection are Rossini’s greatest hits for tenors, sung by the incomparable Juan Diego Florez. Recorded in the flush of his youth, Florez’s voice is truly like none other.

What to pair with Rossini? The choice is easy: Chianti. Long considered a cheap wine served in straw-covered bottles, Chianti has emerged as one of Italy’s great wines, and one of the world’s great values. The best wines of Chianti easily hold their own against their more distinguished neighbor to the South, Brunello di Montalcino, and make the case that sangiovese is the greatest of all Italian grapes.

Having spent time in the Chianti region this summer, I can attest to the singular beauty of the region, the richness of its soils, and the high quality of its wines–especially from the central Chianti Classico region. Picking up a great Chianti has never been easier. Just follow these basic rules:

  • Ensure that the label says “Chianti Classico”–look for the black rooster on the bottle, which is the symbol of the region.
  • Opt for a “Riserva”, which spends an extra year in cask, which helps considerably to mellow out the famously harsh edges of sangiovese.
  • Get a bottle with some age. The 2015s and 2016s are drinking perfectly now and the 2017s are coming into their own.
  • Do not spend more than $35. Great Chianti Classico Riservas can be had at this price point.
  • Some producers of note: Querciabella, Fontodi, Felsina, Castello di Ama, Badia a Coltibuono, Castello di Rampola, Monsanto.

It helps to be in Chianti, but for the foreseeable future, I will need to make do with my memories of a place that is quite literally heaven on earth: