Elgar (1857-1934) - Symphony No. 1
“Gentlemen,
now let us rehearse the greatest symphony of modern times, written by the
greatest modern composer - and not only in this country.” Thus spake
Hans Richter, in 1908, of Elgar's First Symphony - dismissing
Dvorak and Sibelius, to name but two. Was he overstating his case?
Maybe, but then maybe it was justifiable considering the circumstances,
which much later led Michael Kennedy to conclude, “This was not only Elgar's
first symphony, it was England's.” For many, many years England had
been “the Land without Music”, perhaps a harsh judgement, but true. Admittedly,
Englishmen like Parry, Stanford and Sullivan had written much splendid
music, including symphonies, but at best they imparted an English flavour
to a menu already served, consumed and digested in mainland Europe. Musically,
England was a backwater, producing plenty of also-rans but no front-runners.
Then along
came Elgar, dishing up roast beef and veg. liberally laced with tongue-toasting
English mustard. His pièce de resistance (to date) came courtesy
of a symphony that was, in many ways, right at the cutting edge of
the avant-garde of the time! If that itself seems like overstatement, try
comparing it with Mahler's Seventh which was also premièred
in
1908. Then ask yourself whether our ears, cosied by the comfy
nobilmente
of his popular public gestures, aren't thereby conned into glossing
over his more abrasive, personally expressive music - in effect tucking
the wood behind the trees.
By the
end of the Nineteenth Century, people habitually accepted the British Empire's
stability and security. But, during the first decade of the Twentieth,
it became obvious that it was flaking around the edges. A growing unease
was felt generally, but perhaps most acutely by the hyper-sensitive nerve-endings
of the artistic. From this angle, it's easy to imagine a symphony being
written as something of a “mission statement” reminding people firstly
of what they stood to lose, secondly of the “bulldog” spirit that built
the Empire, and thirdly of their track record in coming out on top.
If anyone
could put this message across, it was Elgar. In Froissart (1890),
the Enigma Variations (1899), Cockaigne (1901) and
Alassio
(1904) he'd shown an exceptional talent for bold, colourful expression.
Indeed, in Froissart and Alassio you can readily detect a
stylistic affinity with Strauss, the current ruler of that particular
roost. Following Brahms, however, Elgar acquired a rock-solid craftsmanship
and structural ingenuity, evident in pieces like Cockaigne
and the Introduction and Allegro (1905). Finally, there's Elgar's
in-depth experience of musical dramatisation, developed through that
long, magnificent line of oratorios and cantatas, culminating in
The
Kingdom (1906).
The CV
was spot-on, the motivation was there: the time was ripe. All that remained
was to deliver the goods. Judging by the number of performances his symphony
received during its first year - nearly one every three days - Elgar's
“goods” were in the “blockbuster” class. It had struck a singularly resonant
chord, whose relevance has reverberated down through the years, wherever
and whenever the well-being of honest citizens is jeopardised.
Viewed
this way, the symphony can be said to deal with time-honoured subjects
like peace under threat, conflict and victory. However, the secret
of its success probably depends less on the subject matter itself than
on the way it's handled. While others might have composed four symphonic
poems dressed up as a symphony, Elgar composed a symphony, first and foremost:
extramusical ideas are subservient to the logical processes. As I see it,
any one theme generally characterises one positive idea: “stability”,
“optimism”, “fighting”. However, opposing elements like (say) “threat”
and “attack” aren't - they seem to derive from the positives. Typically,
Elgar's predecessors offered relatively cut-and-dried views of conflict,
notably overlooking the aspect he covers in his slow movement. With his
First
Symphony, Elgar shattered the mould. So, maybe Richter wasn't exaggerating?
The opening
theme forms an introduction comparable to those of Tchaikovsky's First
Piano Concerto or Sibelius' First Symphony. However, unlike
Tchaikovsky's, Elgar's theme is no mere introduction, and unlike Sibelius'
it is threaded through the fabric of the entire work. In fact, it's
soon obvious that Elgar's motto theme represents himself in the symphonic
scenario. To me, what's most astonishing is that Elgar contrives a work
that is at once a superb structure and a drama that's more graphically
involving than anything on stage or screen.
1.
Andante nobilmente e semplice - Allegro: From gloomy rumbling emerges
Elgar's motto, at first subdued then resonating confidently. The buoyant,
athletic first subject is linked to the serene but capricious second via
subsidiary, dancing motives. A codetta based on the first subject is subverted
by belligerent brass charging down the hillsides, torching the latter
dancing motive's innocence into a corrupt inferno! Stunned, the motto
creeps among the ruins (marking the start of the development), the air
of bewilderment subsequently increased by chimerical scoring. Development
focuses on the second subject group, at first increasingly panicky, but
then subsiding into exhausted anxiety. The motto returns, subdued
and questioning (marking the end of the development). Increasing activity
coalesces into the first subject's reprise. Both main subjects show
signs of shaken self-assurance, confirmed by the re-emergence of that infernal
apparition, its ferocity unabated. But in the ensuing coda, fleeting anxious
visions are supplanted by the motto, now growing in fortitude and reaching
a climax of immense resolve. Anxiety is not relieved (“resolve” is not
“solution”!), yet in the gloaming there is a wonderful image of hope:
the motto pleads, and is answered by a magical modulation onto the
dancing motive, cleansed of corruption.
2.
Allegro: There's a curiously prophetic parallel between the import
of this music and the “Your Country Needs You!” enlistment method
soon to become necessary. Like some defensive reflex, scampering
strings urgently stir the blood, giving rise to a masculine, militaristic
rallying-march which itself generates a ferocious - and fearsome
- enthusiasm. The scene cross-fades to a second subject which
(as Elgar put it) “is like something you hear down by the river”. This
whimsical filigree of feminine enchantment incites the resurgence
of the bellicose first subject which, impatiently, gets going even
before the second has “finished speaking”. But the marching is more dogged
- as if chastened by its grim purpose. Not so the “ladies”, who press
forward in high excitement before catching themselves, as if suddenly realising
an impropriety! As they regain their composure, icy tremolandi suggest
encroaching anxiety: “white silk hankies waved as the men march off”, and
indeed the militarist music recedes. Then “a final wave” brings a hint
of the motto, subtly altered and preparing a moment of inimitable Elgarian
magic . . .
3.
Lento: If we take the first movement to represent “threat and dismay”
and the second “active response”, then this is surely the “vision
of the cherishable”, seen through the eyes of those who must sit and await
the outcome. It fits, being a set of variations on two alternating themes,
one glowing like an English summer afternoon, the other like clouds
obscuring the sun. The motto's altered phrase is transformed into a flowing
theme of matchless, expanding beauty. As this glorious exposition ends,
a shadow clouds our vision, both without and within. The phrases of the
second theme, lilting and rocking, turn down within themselves, and
stepwise descend the scale like falling leaves. Ominous also are the sombre
tones of hushed brass, again darkly descending. The progression,
of three variations for each theme, seems to amplify both our cherishing
and our fears. Thus the last variations find the first subject less
fulsome, becoming submerged by the second. As the latter fades, the former
appears once more - very softly, but with the feelings of foreboding
embedded within.
4.
Allegro molto: Rather like the Prelude to Act II of Siegfried,
sustained tremolandi underpin the motto, mingling with the fretful shades
of the main themes. A pregnant pause - and then the movement leaps into
life. Three shades gain substance in quick succession: firstly, strings
juggle pairs of notes in canon. Secondly, over a tramping rhythm
'cellos contribute a rolling tune to which a great arching phrase (also
presaged in the introduction) seems to be related. Thirdly, an assertive
and (again) militaristic march gets a big build-up. The climax spills into
development, a festive tumult in which a triplet phrase becomes detached
from the rolling tune, to be tossed around the orchestra with joyous abandon.
The “troops”, you might say, are back - and delirious about it! However,
a sudden halt is called - the motto, cautiously questioning, seems to seek
reassurance, and reassurance is forthcoming: a truly marvellous transformation
of the militaristic march glows with visionary optimism. Out of a climax
of immense grandeur, the festive development resumes, blurring into
a recapitulation which becomes apparent only when the rolling tune rolls
back in. The reprise of the militaristic build-up bursts brilliantly into
jubilation, the “troops” hoisting the wise and wary motto shoulder
high. At first buffeted by the celebratory clamour, the motto heaves itself
clear and, thus untrammelled, grandly proclaims victory. At this particular
moment, it's very hard to disagree with Richter.
.
© Paul Serotsky
37, Mayfield Grove,
Brighouse,
West Yorkshire HD6 4EE
contact@serotsky.f9.co.uk
Conditions
for use apply. Details here
Copyright in these notes is retained by the author without whose prior written permission they may not be used, reproduced, or kept in any form of data storage system. Permission for use will generally be granted on application, free of charge subject to the conditions that (a) the author is duly credited, and (b) a donation is made to a charity of the author's choice.