BRUCKNER’S FIFTH SYMPHONY – A SYMPHONIC COSMOS
(Notes from Christoph Campestrini)
Among all nine symphonies by Anton Bruckner, the Fifth is arguably his most unusual, complex, challenging – and yet also his most rewarding symphonic creation. With a duration of close to 80 minutes it is of unheard proportions, of unparalleled artistic density and of a compelling inner logic, that stretches from the opening soft pizzicati in cellos and double basses to the crowning
apotheosis of the final brass chorale.
Bruckner never heard a performance of what he called his “contrapuntal masterpiece”. He had to miss the world premiere in Graz conducted by Franz Schalk on 9 April 1894 because of illness. At any rate, Schalk at that time conducted a distorted version, with countless changes in the instrumentation, a shortened Scherzo, a cut of 122 (!) bars in the Finale as well as an additional off-stage brass band with cymbals and triangle for the end. What a crime to our ears of today…
This symphony is without any doubt the work of an uncompromising individualist. Much has been written about Bruckner’s affiliation to Catholicism, but I personally hear in this symphony first and foremost a creative artists facing and questioning the transcendental borders of human existence. This artistic search sometimes shows itself as a simple dialectic process, but more often than not also in soul wrenching outcries of doubt and despair, expressed through agonizing dissonances that give way to resolution only at the very end.
But let me start somewhere else in my own personal story with Anton Bruckner. I was born in Linz, Austria, the center of all Bruckner veneration, and so literally from kindergarten on it was virtually impossible not to be surrounded by his music. At the city´s concert hall
(the “Brucknerhaus”) for instance, at the beginning of every single performance the audience is being called to the seats with the Chorale theme from the Finale of his Fifth symphony. So from my earliest experiences as a boy on, Bruckner 5 was somehow subconsciously part of every concert that I heard. However only years later, after maturing musically and personally did I start to understand the enormous inner strength and artistic substance hidden in this music, going way beyond the mere sonic impact of its mesmerizing sounds.
Historically, this music evolves from a long tradition going back to Baroque times. The choice of key, for instance, from Bach on always carried significant non musical implications. D Major, as an example, was considered to be an aristocratic key (after the Italian word “re”, equivalent
to D, for king) or F Major the key for natural beauty such as in Beethoven’s “Pastoral Symphony”. B flat Major, as in the case of this symphony, is the symbol for the Catholic trinity of Faith, Hope and Love. The same historic references apply to Bruckner’s approach to form in this work: Even though the work is extended to nearly 80 minutes of duration, it uses the same form model that Haydn established in his early symphonies: A slow introduction followed by an Allegro, a contemplative second movement, a dance (Scherzo or Minuet) and a rousing Finale Allegro.
But let`s have a look at the symphony a bit more specifically now:
The first movement starts with a slowly moving scale in the lower strings, above which a sighing motif consisting of so-called “Palestrina suspensions” is heard. Unexpectedly the brass enters with a majestic upward moving signal, followed by a “Generalpause” – an extended moment of silence.
It is important to note that for Bruckner silence is as much a conceptual element as sound itself and is often used to juxtapose dynamically contrasting blocks of sound. Later, in the early 20th century, Leos Janacek would use the same structural device in his operas. Bruckner extended Haydn’s classical model in the first movement by employing a 3rd principal theme in the exposition (instead of the customary 2), an idea which was first used by Schubert in his 9th Symphony “The Great”.
In the beginning of the second movement we hear the depiction of utter hopelessness. From a letter that Bruckner wrote in February 1875 while he was working on this movement we know that he went through a phase of depression at the time, after his 3rd and 4th symphony had been denied a performance. It is easy to catch this atmosphere listening to the lonely oboe tune, accompanied by plugged strings only.
Conducting this movement actually poses quite a challenge as the rhythm of the oboe is in 4, against which the strings play in a rhythm of 6. Later in the movement different sections of the orchestra play in 2 against 3, 4 against 6 or sometimes even 6 against 8, so that is becomes a tough decision for the conductor which group to abandon(!) The second theme in this movement, by contrast, is a lush hymn for which great sensuality and beauty of sound is required.
With the third movement it becomes especially apparent how Bruckner has enlarged Haydn’s model: Whereas the standard structure of such a movement used to be A B A – Trio – A B A, Bruckner infused the principle of sonata form into it and thus created A B A D (development section)
A B A Coda – Trio and a repeat of everything up to the Trio. It is also fascinating to see that this movement starts with exactly the same 3 notes as the second movement, only played much faster now: Propelled from the earlier despair into the frenzy of a whirling Scherzo dance.
The Finale is what lifts this symphony up to the sublime.
Legendary conductor Wilhelm Furtwängler once labelled this movement as the “greatest Finale in the entire orchestra literature, including Beethoven 9th. In fact it is hard to resist the overwhelming impact of this music. Beethoven 9 is a point of reference for Bruckner as well, as he continues the tradition of quoting each preceding movement at the outset of the Finale. The main section of this movement, quite different from the Beethoven model, is a mighty double fugue – meaning that two different themes are piled on top of each other simultaneously.
Bruckner had given up composing for six years when he was in his thirties to study counterpoint in Vienna with Simon Sechter, and in this movement he uses all imaginable possibilities of theme manipulation that he had learned there. Without intending to become too technical, these include inversion, canon, transposition, extension, fraction, and stretta of the original themes, to name a few. I think it is fair to say that since Bach this level of
polyphonic writing had not been reached.
The Finale builds and builds until at the very end the entire brass section comes in with a final rendition of the Chorale theme (the same that sent me to my seat as a boy in Linz…) and the symphony finishes in life affirming jubilation.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to invite you to suspend time for the next 80 minutes, to join us in a mystical journey into great artistic depths, to open yourself to Bruckner – and to be rewarded with the blessings of this incomparable masterwork.
Christoph Campestrini
