There've been a few enquiries about my pre-concert talk for the CBSO & Andris Nelsons's Beethoven cycle in Symphony Hall, Birmingham, on 20 and 21 March. Here's the complete text, plus a recording of the movement I took apart via a surprise analogy that worked even better than I'd expected when I started preparing it...
BEETHOVEN,
MUSIC AND REVOLUTION
Good
evening, ladies and gentlemen, and a very warm welcome to Symphony Hall for the
continuation of Andris Nelsons and the CBSO’s Beethoven cycle.
We’ve
got to symphonies numbers 6 and 7 today and it’s a very great pleasure for me
to be here to introduce them, as they happen to be my personal favourites of the nine. The sixth is, of course, the ‘Pastoral’ symphony
and the seventh was once described by Wagner as ‘the apotheosis of the dance’ –
though the conductor Sir Thomas Beecham had to put his own slant on that. He
said, “well, what can you do with it, it’s like a load of yaks jumping about.”
As Elvis Costello once said, talking about music is like dancing about architecture.
It’s essentially intangible - but what I’d like to do today is to try to burrow
into some of those intangible connections to consider how Beethoven can seem to
convey to us the deepest associations between the processes of music and the
processes of life and of living. And this might help to show why we think of him
as a revolutionary, producing music that inspires idealism the way few others
could dream of.
Daniel
Barenboim often says that music is like God because you can’t describe it – you
can only describe the effect that it has. There’s no music more associated with
Barenboim than Beethoven. Last year you might have caught the series he
performed at the Proms with the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra of the complete
Beethoven symphonies. At the end of the Ninth Symphony he zipped off to the
Olympic Stadium and took part in the opening ceremony of the London 2012 games
– he was one of eight great humanitarians who carried in the Olympic flag
together (pictured). They were dressed all in white, and shortly afterwards I interviewed
him and he said he’d felt like a carnation. Barenboim has written and spoken
extensively on the links between musical expression and life itself, and of
music’s role in society as an art that can encapsulate the deepest and most
universal of human processes. His book Everything
is Connected is all about this.
Barenboim
says that “Beethoven’s music is universal – it speaks to all people”. The
question is, why? How can it be that pieces written for a western classical
orchestra some two hundred years ago can communicate so vividly with such a
range of people today? And this music really does.
We
hear frequently that Beethoven is “revolutionary”. But I wonder why he strikes
us that way. His inner strength, of course, is unmistakeable. We know that in
1802 he went through a tremendous personal crisis while he was living in
Heiligenstadt, just outside Vienna. He had to face the fact that he was losing
his hearing, and for a man who lives body, heart and soul for music, this was
the worst thing that life could do to him. In his most famous document, the
Heiligenstadt Testament – part will, part explanation, that he wrote for his
two brothers – he said: “Such things brought me to the verge of desperation,
and well-nigh caused me to put an end to my life. Art! art alone
deterred me. Ah! how could I possibly leave the world before bringing forth all
that I felt it was my vocation to produce?”.
But
Beethoven’s essential strength, the revolutionary quality, if you like, is not
really biographical, at least not solely. Yes, he had huge personal battles to
overcome and much tragedy in his life. His ideals are certainly reflected in
his works, in some more directly than others. His only opera, Fidelio, for instance, is about a devoted
wife who disguises herself as a man to infiltrate a political prison and save
her husband from its dungeon. But Beethoven doesn’t ever seem to have been
involved with politics beyond his intellectual interest. And of course his
deafness, which set in when he was only about 28, would probably have prevented
him getting involved even if he had wished to. He had great social and
political ideals, though, and he certainly felt the injustices of the world: he
was a cantankerous, troubled individual, yet one who, under that facade, felt
an enormous compassion towards humanity.
I
heard a theory recently – from the great pianist Murray Perahia – that the real
meaning of the so-called ‘Moonlight’ sonata may be something beyond our usual
assumption that the publisher added the title for effect. Instead, it’s
possible that this heading refers to the so-called ‘children of moonlight’, a
term that described the spirits of the unfortunate, the outcasts, people who
were denied the sunlight of the Enlightenment – hence the polarity of sun and
moon. These spirits would sing of their suffering to the world through the
medium of the Aeolian harp, which is played by the wind. Apparently there is
good circumstantial evidence to support the theory and it is much in tune with
Beethoven’s spirit, to say nothing of the concept fitting the music to
perfection.
So
perhaps there Beethoven could consciously have matched image to musical
content. But what about the subconsciously revolutionary qualities in the music
of his symphonies? And why can they seem revolutionary even to us today? In Beethoven’s time, this music would have
sounded not just new, but shockingly new. The overt sense of conflict, the struggle
between primal, motivic themes vying for supremacy, sparks flying through the extremities
of his contrasts, all that would have sounded incredibly radical around the
turn of the 18th into the 19th century. Beethoven was not
remotely easy listening for those accustomed to graceful minuets in the
background to accompany their dinner. And especially not just after the French
Revolution.
But
now? We’ve had Mahler, we’ve had Schoenberg, we’ve had Stravinsky, we’ve had,
for goodness sake, Stockhausen and Boulez and John Cage. Why does Beethoven
still inspire feelings of idealism, and even of political idealism, to ears and
minds that have been exposed to so much else?
There
are several levels to this. For a start, tonight’s two symphonies are totally
different from one another; each is unique. But then, so is every other
Beethoven symphony. And so is every single one of his 32 piano sonatas and each
of his string quartets. And so on. Beethoven doesn’t repeat himself – the
structures of no two works are exactly the same, and each one has not only an
individual form but an individual soundworld, an atmosphere that is entirely
its own.
For
instance, No.6 is the only Beethoven symphony in five movements and the only
one in which three of the movements run through without a break. As for the
individual soundworld, the spread-out, lyrical, tranquil melodies of the Sixth
Symphony could scarcely be further away from the elemental punch and drive of
the Seventh. This sense of constant reinvention, the need to push the
boundaries further and further, is just one reason to consider Beethoven not only
an innovator but, beyond that, a revolutionary. (And luckily we don't need Fantasia's Pastoral Symphony animation, pictured right, to push its own boundaries any further in this case...)
Now,
there wasn’t so much that was new about the idea of a Pastoral Symphony by
1808. Or so you might think. Yet the way Beethoven approaches the idea is entirely new. Vivaldi’s The Four
Seasons is probably the work’s most famous forerunner. Vivaldi gave us an
extremely pictorial set of concertos with direct sonic depictions of birds
twittering in spring, the rain driving down in the summer storm, the skaters
weaving around on the ice in winter. Then there was Haydn, with his oratorios
The Creation and The Seasons; yet he largely serves his texts: the musical
pictures are developed to match the images that the singers evoke.
Beethoven’s
difference is that although the symphony may sound pictorial, that isn’t the point of it. Beethoven wanted to
evoke not images, but the feelings associated with them. He provided a brief guide for the programme
at the world premiere, with the words: “Pastoral Symphony, more an expression
of feeling than painting.” This puts him in a musically pioneering strand with
the world of romanticism, where feeling was at the forefront. Yet it’s almost
as if he looks forward by about a hundred years towards the symbolist movement,
in which emotion and image are completely fused and nothing can be taken at
face value.
I
think this was true, in a different way, for Beethoven. For instance, he used
to take long walks on which he’d jot down themes he thought of, some inspired
by nature - and in 1803, scribbling a melody suggested by the sight of a river,
he wrote "The greater the river, the more grave
the tone." Those words could suggest that he’s not thinking of what he
sees, but of what more that image
suggests to him in terms of association, and metaphor, and his emotional
response to that.
But
there are processes inside the fabric of the music itself that while entirely
abstract can still produce some startling results when you look at them in
detail. To me, the second movement of Beethoven’s Seventh Symphony represents a
special summit of achievement. I’d like to draw on Barenboim’s idea that the
processes of life and music are connected to show you why I think this music
strikes us as revolutionary, at that deep, abstract level. As Barenboim says,
we can’t describe music itself; we can only describe the effect that it has,
and what I’d like to describe is the effect on us of Beethoven’s music’s inner
processes and how they can well be said to mirror the processes of human thought,
interaction and society.
So
I’m going to talk us through the second movement of Beethoven Seven with a few
images in mind suggested by a story that obviously has nothing to do with its
creation - but that mirrors something about the way its extraordinary structure
operates and the impression it makes on us.
It started as one person making one small gesture. But it sprang out of a situation of bleak injustice, and one basic, fundamental thought. A situation as bleak as Beethoven’s first chord and a thought about human rights – segregation is wrong - that is as primal as the rhythm Beethoven sets up for his main theme.
The
very first chord progression when those low strings come in is tonic to
dominant, dominant to tonic. It’s the most fundamental harmonic progression you
can get. The theme is scarcely a melody – it is a motif, a rhythm, strong and
memorable and simple, and it is fundamental to the whole movement.
Next,
Beethoven begins to bring in the other sections of the orchestra one by one: voice
after voice takes up the motif. The voices that have already sung it move on to
a counter-melody, a more elaborate thought that illuminates the basic thought
by the way it sounds together with it. Others are taking notice, recognising,
adding their voices, joining in. The idea is growing in sophistication.
The
movement – a good word for it - continues to grow. The thoughts become more
elaborate, further voices are drawn in from different parts of the orchestra,
or different parts of society if you like, and the rhythm begins to move on
too: to the basic pulse we now add a doubling of pace in the lower instruments
and gradually the woodwind sidle in almost without us noticing. And, of course,
a big crescendo, a great groundswell of support, is beginning.
Now
triplets come into the accompaniment so you get a two against three rhythmic
effect that sets up a sense of differing forces in friction against one
another, adding even more to the tension. The woodwind and brass are making
their presences felt, so the central motif assumes the character of a fanfare,
and the drums come in as well, but not always at the obvious moments – this
adds to the unsettling effect of this growth. It is unpredictable, you don’t
know where it’s going to go. Yet still, the entire orchestra is united in
proclaiming a fundamental truth and its consequences, with everyone pulling
together, which is the only way people can rise up and effect a revolution...
Ah
– what happened? The movement ran out of steam. A decrescendo and it’s come to
a halt. What now? An idealist is needed, with a new sense of direction. A
Martin Luther King, perhaps, with a dream of a better world, powered by the
underlying motif that segregation is wrong. Beethoven’s motif, the essential
idea, is very much present now as a pulse, a heartbeat, underneath the lyrical
melody that now begins. Other voices echo the song of the clarinet – and all
the time there’s that tension in the background of that three against two
rhythm.
It
should be as simple as a major scale down and up. But it isn’t. There’s an
interruption, an obstacle, and now what happens? Back comes the melody that
started as counterpoint to the first idea; now there’s a new counterpoint
against this one, and faster still than triplets, as if to say it’s going to be
more complicated than we thought. And the fundamental theme is almost buried in
the form of quiet pizzicato under the complication of what it’s spawned, as the
strings keep on discussing and bickering, as strings tend to, while the
woodwind try to preserve a trajectory of eloquence.
Of
course someone has to come along and explore the small print. The legalities,
the intellectualisation of the nature of that injustice. In music, that means
we have to have a fugue. New motifs and counterpoints and off-beat rhythms
complicate matters considerably...as we know, the lawyers always win.
...Now
the original idea returns in a strong statement, together with its ideal-world dream
and an argument – a tug-of-war between major and minor – that presents a
continuing struggle, a perpetuated situation with nobody ready to give in. "We
can change this!" "No you can’t!" In human terms it’s at this point that sometimes
people get shot for their ideas.
So
what’s happened to our basic idea? It seems to be pushed out into a corner – on
upper woodwind, surreptitious, then passed down, whispered along from section to
section, suppressed, through the lower woodwind until it reaches pizzicato. It’s
going underground. The theme seems to have lost the battle. But that doesn’t
change the truth of it. And in the last bars a resurgence is promised and left hanging
in mid air: it will return. The human condition is the same, injustice remains
injustice, and likewise, the final chord is the same as the one at the start.
This is the most extraordinary structure. Beethoven builds up a great climax
near the beginning, then deconstructs it, suppresses it, yet proves that those ideas
must ferment and rise again.
You can take this idea or leave it - I offer it to you as one possible way of looking at the matter, and just one of many different ways. But to me, it seems to work.
And this, I believe, is how Beethoven helps us all to change the world.
You can take this idea or leave it - I offer it to you as one possible way of looking at the matter, and just one of many different ways. But to me, it seems to work.
And this, I believe, is how Beethoven helps us all to change the world.
