Page 235 - Vinkler, Jonatan, in Jernej Weiss. ur. 2014. Musica et Artes: ob osemdesetletnici Primoža Kureta. Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem.
P. 235
mahler’s tenth symphony: motivic development ...
er.11 As chief editor of the Mahler complete edition, Ratz’s pronouncements
would certainly carry weight and authority. His only concession was to pro-
duce an edition of the Adagio first movement,12 with his views unambigu-
ously expressed in the preface to the score, and a new edition of the sketch-
es with the more recently discovered sheets.13 What is also important is that
Ratz attempted to suppress a performance of the remainder of the sympho-
ny permanently on a hotly disputed subjective opinion.14 We would then be
left with a 20-25 minute symphonic poem, impressive admittedly, ripped out
of its context, now without its superb continuation and completion. Some
older conductors such as Leonard Bernstein, Georg Solti, Pierre Boulez and
Bernard Haitink still felt unable to perform the work beyond the first move-
ment. Following the lead by Berthold Goldschmidt and Eugene Ormandy,
others such as Wyn Morris, Kurt Sanderling, James Levine, Riccardo Chail-
ly, Simon Rattle and Michael Gielen, have felt differently, with performances
and recordings that bring to life the sketches that Mahler left. We must now
ask whether the realisation by Cooke or any of the others brings a plausible
representation of the score that Mahler was preparing. Many commentators
and analysts have answered this question positively.
Musicological discussion is similarly divided. The detailed analysis of
Peter Reevers, for example, is only of the first movement.15 Excellent analysis
of the complete symphony has been forthcoming, however, in books by Der
yck Cooke,16 Constantin Floros,17 Henri-Louis de La Grange18 and Jörg Roth-
kamm.19 These analyses have been very revealing.
11 La Grange, “The Unfinished Tenth Symphony in F sharp (1910),” 1464, disputes this report.
12 Gustav Mahler, Adagio aus der 10. Symphonie, ed. Erwin Ratz (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1964).
13 Gustav Mahler, X. Symphonie. Faksimile nach der Handschrift, ed. Erwin Ratz (Munich: Ricke;
Meran: Laurin, 1967).
14 Just as in the case of the order of the middle movements of the Sixth Symphony in which he was
able to alter performing practice for some forty years on some very weak or non-existent evidence.
For details see Reinhold Kubik, “Analysis versus History: Erwin Ratz and the Sixth Symphony”
in The Correct Movement Order in Mahler’s Sixth Symphony, ed. Gilbert Kaplan (New York: The
Kaplan Foundation, 2004), 37–43.
15 Peter Reevers, Gustav Mahler: Untersuchungen zu den späten Sinfonien (Hamburg: Karl Dieter
Wagner, 1985), 161–184.
16 Cooke, “The Facts Concerning Mahler’s Tenth Symphony,” 72–94.
17 Constantin Floros, Gustav Mahler: the Symphonies (Aldershot, UK: Scolar, 1994), 296–317.
18 La Grange, “The Unfinished Tenth Symphony in F sharp (1910),” 1453–1529.
19 Jörg Rothkamm, Gustav Mahlers zehnte Symphonie: Entstehung, Analyse, Rezeption (Frankfurt am
Main: Peter Lang, 2003) and the summary of his main researches in “The Last Works”, in The
Cambridge Companion to Mahler, ed. Jeremy Barham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2007), 150–161.
233
er.11 As chief editor of the Mahler complete edition, Ratz’s pronouncements
would certainly carry weight and authority. His only concession was to pro-
duce an edition of the Adagio first movement,12 with his views unambigu-
ously expressed in the preface to the score, and a new edition of the sketch-
es with the more recently discovered sheets.13 What is also important is that
Ratz attempted to suppress a performance of the remainder of the sympho-
ny permanently on a hotly disputed subjective opinion.14 We would then be
left with a 20-25 minute symphonic poem, impressive admittedly, ripped out
of its context, now without its superb continuation and completion. Some
older conductors such as Leonard Bernstein, Georg Solti, Pierre Boulez and
Bernard Haitink still felt unable to perform the work beyond the first move-
ment. Following the lead by Berthold Goldschmidt and Eugene Ormandy,
others such as Wyn Morris, Kurt Sanderling, James Levine, Riccardo Chail-
ly, Simon Rattle and Michael Gielen, have felt differently, with performances
and recordings that bring to life the sketches that Mahler left. We must now
ask whether the realisation by Cooke or any of the others brings a plausible
representation of the score that Mahler was preparing. Many commentators
and analysts have answered this question positively.
Musicological discussion is similarly divided. The detailed analysis of
Peter Reevers, for example, is only of the first movement.15 Excellent analysis
of the complete symphony has been forthcoming, however, in books by Der
yck Cooke,16 Constantin Floros,17 Henri-Louis de La Grange18 and Jörg Roth-
kamm.19 These analyses have been very revealing.
11 La Grange, “The Unfinished Tenth Symphony in F sharp (1910),” 1464, disputes this report.
12 Gustav Mahler, Adagio aus der 10. Symphonie, ed. Erwin Ratz (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1964).
13 Gustav Mahler, X. Symphonie. Faksimile nach der Handschrift, ed. Erwin Ratz (Munich: Ricke;
Meran: Laurin, 1967).
14 Just as in the case of the order of the middle movements of the Sixth Symphony in which he was
able to alter performing practice for some forty years on some very weak or non-existent evidence.
For details see Reinhold Kubik, “Analysis versus History: Erwin Ratz and the Sixth Symphony”
in The Correct Movement Order in Mahler’s Sixth Symphony, ed. Gilbert Kaplan (New York: The
Kaplan Foundation, 2004), 37–43.
15 Peter Reevers, Gustav Mahler: Untersuchungen zu den späten Sinfonien (Hamburg: Karl Dieter
Wagner, 1985), 161–184.
16 Cooke, “The Facts Concerning Mahler’s Tenth Symphony,” 72–94.
17 Constantin Floros, Gustav Mahler: the Symphonies (Aldershot, UK: Scolar, 1994), 296–317.
18 La Grange, “The Unfinished Tenth Symphony in F sharp (1910),” 1453–1529.
19 Jörg Rothkamm, Gustav Mahlers zehnte Symphonie: Entstehung, Analyse, Rezeption (Frankfurt am
Main: Peter Lang, 2003) and the summary of his main researches in “The Last Works”, in The
Cambridge Companion to Mahler, ed. Jeremy Barham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2007), 150–161.
233
