CÉSAR FRANCK
- SYMPHONY IN D MINOR
AN
INKTRODUCTION
by
Michael Anthonio
Strongly discouraged in its time, this only symphony by César Franck has subsequently become the most often performed (and also recorded) French symphony throughout the world, alongside (recently) Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique. It was recorded by almost all big-name conductors, including Furtwängler, Toscanini, Stokowski, Klemperer, Karajan, Bernstein, Munch, Monteux, and Guilini. It is a great work and also represents one of the peaks of French symphonies in the Nineteenth Century.
The
man
Belgian by birth, César Auguste Franck (1822-90) was
primarily a composer of sacred music (Remember Panis Angelicus?)
and organ works. He spent most of his life as a composition teacher
and organ improvisation deviser. He was a deeply religious man and
it is reflected in his works. His other major works include a symphony,
a (sort of) piano concerto, a violin sonata, a string quartet and
a quintet. Besides, he also wrote tone poems, two operas, five oratorios,
four piano trios - however they are seldom heard nowadays.
His musical style is quite conservative, looking back to classically oriented composers, especially Bach. However, he was also impressed with the issue of cyclic composition, originated in Beethoven's Piano Sonata Op. 13 and developed further by Franz Liszt (in piano music and tone poems) and Richard Wagner (in opera). It is a method of composition in which themes are developed from short melodic phrases, then manipulated and expanded throughout the whole composition to bind the work together. That is more evidently presented in this symphony, which is indeed the landmark of cyclic symphonies, and followed by his pupils, better known as la Bande à Franck.
Historical
background
For some reasons, the nineteenth century France
disliked the concept of symphony. There were particularly no great
symphonies between Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique (1830) and
this symphony of Franck. So, what possibly inspired Franck to write
a symphony, you may ask. The successes of Saint-Saëns' "Organ" Symphony
(No. 3, Op. 78) and Symphonie sur un chant montagnard français
by Vincent d'Indy (Franck's pupil) in 1887 did it. Franck's symphony
was completed in 1888 and dedicated to Henri Duparc.
The work was given its premiere by the orchestra of Paris Conservatory on February 17, 1889, about a year before Franck's death, and conducted by d'Indy. It was a disastrous performance. The audience proved to be very cold, and the majority of his fellow-composers disliked it. Charles Gounod is even noted to make this famous remark "It is the assertion of impotence pushed to the lengths of dogma." Even until this day, people's reactions seem to be divided into two classes. The first one is, like myself, the people who think it is a great work and love it very much, and the other is the people who completely loathed it.
Franck's
words
Strangely, Franck seemed to be oblivious of his listener's
attitudes. He even said to his friend Paul Pojaud, "What a lovely
sound it makes! And what a splendid reception it had!" while leaving
the hall of the first performance.
On another occasion, Louis de Serres asked if they symphony had been inspired by any poetic idea. Franck replied "No, it is just music, nothing but pure music. At the same time, while I was composing the allegretto, especially the first phrases of it, I did think - oh, so vaguely - of a procession in the olden times." Then, aware of the novelty of the work, he added, "I have been very daring, I know; but you wait till next time, I shall go much farther in daring then!"
This next passage is his precise and detail statement about the symphony, recollected by Pierre de Bréville. "The work is a classical symphony. At the end of the first movement there is a recapitulation, exactly as in other symphonies, for the purpose of more firmly establishing the main subjects, but here it is in an alien key. Then follow as andante and a scherzo. It was my great ambition to construct them in such a way that each beat of the andante movement should be exactly equal in length to one bar of the scherzo, with the intention that after the complete development of each section one could be superimposed on the other. I succeeded in solving that problem. The finale, just as in Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, recalls all the themes, but in my work they do not make their appearance as mere quotations. I have adopted another plan, and made each of them play an entirely new part in the music. It seems to me successful in practice, and I fancy you will be pleased!"
The
work
You might have been wondering why people at that time
dislike the work very much despite the composer's claim that it was
a classical symphony. The answer lies in the fact that it is a controversial
work. At the same time, it is both traditional and unorthodox. The
complains of the people, according to Tovey in his famous Essays
in Musical Analysis, is because it is far from their expectations
of classical symphony. In addition to that, according to Vallas, the
writer of the autobiographical César Franck, one may
find weakness in both detail and conception, such as the superfluously
extreme recapitulation of the introduction in the first movement,
grossly overloaded orchestration and non-effective use of woodwind.
However, as described by Vallas, they can be explained by relating
them to the organ, since the whole orchestration clearly derived from
registration on the organ.
The
failure was also in some ways caused by the English horn solo in the
second movement, which startled many at that time. A professor at
the Conservatory was even noted to ask this question to d'Indy "But
my dear sir, who ever heard of writing for the English horn in a symphony?
Just name me one symphony by Haydn or Beethoven that uses an English
horn! There! So you see: your Franck's music may be whatever you please,
but it will certainly never be a symphony!" without knowing that
Haydn (right) actually used a pair of them in his "Philosopher" Symphony
(No. 22). Franck's use of English horn also predated by some five
years Dvorák's use of the same instrument in the slow movement of
his most famous symphony, "From the New World" Symphony (No. 9).
The symphony itself is cast in three movements, an odd item the late nineteenth century. However, there are several good reasons why he did that. First, the old French symphonies of late eighteen century consisted of three movements, so it is not surprising that Franck, who from the beginning tended towards the past, wanted to revive that ancient custom. Moreover, the cyclic unity that he built works better with the somewhat circular three-movement than with the squared-off four-movement. However, as we will see later, Franck did include all four movement types of standard symphony in his, as the second movement can be seen as a combination of slow movement and scherzo.
I.
Lento; Allegro ma non troppo.
This first movement is an expanded version of sonata-allegro,
with two distinguished tempos (Lento and Allegro ma non
troppo). It begins with a variant of a type of phrase that had
fascinated composers for more than a century, as Beethoven used it
in his F major Quartet, Op. 135 (where he wrote Muss es sein?
("Must it be?") over the notes), Wagner in his Ring of
the Nibelung (as the questioning theme of Fate) and Liszt as the
main theme of his Les Préludes. This phrase forms a sort of
a questioning effect, which continues insistently until the arrival
of the Allegro. Here, the opening phrase (the question) is
transformed into an energetic, aggressive principal theme.
Then, in different key, the whole process is repeated note for note. Tovey pointed out that although this twice alternating changes between Lento and Allegro is recognizably influenced by Beethoven's B flat Quartet, Op. 130, it occupies a quite different world, so it is no wonder that critics who expect anything like the latter are disappointed.
The second Allegro also brings us the soaring second subject, which subsequently culminates in a grand third (closing) theme, a bright standout in this movement. It is also the first evidence of the symphony's heroic character. The development continues in the Allegro.
The recapitulation brings back the Lento-Allegro trade-off. However, this time the main theme of the Lento is given in grand fortissimo by full orchestra, while trumpets answering in canon. Tovey admired this recapitulation very much; he even stated that it was a perfect example of the sensitive handling of extensive recapitulations. Surprisingly, it is also very classical. The movement ends with a positive-sounding coda, as if to answer the question with a blaze of affirmation.
II.
Allegretto
The second movement is, as Tovey pointed out, more
a dance rather than a lyric. Combining slow movement and restless
Scherzo with characteristic Franckian modulations, it tries
to redouble the growing optimism started in the end of first movement.
Orchestral-speaking, this is also the most colorful movement of the
whole, and the form can be considered a modified rondo.
It starts with soft plucking of the harp and strings. Then, above them, the melancholy melody of the outlaw English horn is launched. As the movement continues, that melody is in turn given to a clarinet and horn in unison. After a repetition, then comes the first trio, which, according to Tovey, is Schumannesque in style.
After another repetition of the English horn melody and a break, we hear a new theme on strings, which is perhaps best described as "nervous strings", actually a variation of the main theme (the theme of the harp and plucked strings). A second trio, warmer than the first, yet also Schumannesque in style follows immediately, with the "nervous strings" played as a background. Then the English horn melody comes back, and leads to the coda.
The coda consists of the two themes of the trios played alternately. In the end, the theme of the first trio concludes the movement in a warm glow of quiet happiness.
III.
Allegro non troppo
This finale is, as described by Tovey, festive, effective,
and leisurely. The form is a somewhat original version of sonata-allegro
form, despite of the cyclic form applied. After a six-bar introductory,
the opening theme is launched in cellos and bassoons. This is one
of the most thematically rich themes of all.
Throughout the movement, themes from first and second movements are recalled as part of the unifying process, most notably the English horn theme of the second, which appears in all three sections of it in grandiose form, and the question theme of the first, mostly near the end of the recapitulation. However, on the former Tovey expressed his only regret of the whole symphony, as he says that "The artistic danger of the combination is that innocence may break through in a disconcerting form of bad taste: the saint (referred to Franck) does not really know what the world understands by its formulas."
The
coda is magnificent. Recalling themes of the first movement, it closes
with the theme of the finale in a big way, "which can be interpreted
as an affirmation of faith after doubt and perplexity, or a message
of triumph over adversity, or indeed the triumph of good over evil,"
wrote David Cox in A Companion to the Symphony, a very
effective way to describe it.
Recommended
Recording(s)
One of the most wholly successful recordings of this
fantastic symphony is the 1961 Chicago Symphony Orchestra under the
great Pierre Monteux. Given its age, the sound is actually still pretty
good. However, it is the interpretation that reigns supreme. The tempos
are perfectly balanced, especially in the Lento-Allegro trade-off
in the first movement. Franck himself didn't give any indications
how it should be played. Monteux chose perfect tempi for building
momentum, and the result is very exceptional. The texture of the orchestration
is clearly visible, and the brass is played wonderfully, loud enough
to indicate the climaxes, but without being overbearing.
This recording appears in two different CDs, one is the RCA Monteux Edition Vol. 8 (61967) coupled with Franck's orchestrated Pièce héroique in B minor and d'Indy's Istar, and the other is RCA Living Stereo (63303) coupled (somewhat oddly) with Stravinsky's Petrushka.
Bibliography:
1. L. Vallas, César Franck, trans. H. Foss, Oxford Univ. Press, NY 1951.
2. E. Mordden, A Guide to Orchestral Music: The Handbook for Non-Musicians, Oxford Univ. Press, NY 1980.
3. P. Stedman, The Symphony, Prentice Hall Inc, NJ 1979.
4. E. Downes, Everyman's Guide to Orchestral Music, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1976.
5. D. F. Tovey, Essays in Musical Analysis: Symphonies & other Orchestral Works, Oxford Univ. Press, London 1981.
6. D. Cox, The Symphony in France, in A Companion to the Symphony, ed. R. Layton, Simon & Schuster Ltd., London 1993.
7. César Franck Symphony in D Minor in Full Score, Dover Publications, Inc., NY 1987.
8. J. Nicholas, The Classic fM Guide to Classical Music, Pavilion Books Ltd., London 1997.
|
Click to Return
to the Classical Index!... or Visit the Inkvault archives! |
772:
21.8.2000 ©Michael Anthonio
 |
Explore the Flying Inkpot
| Concert Reviews |
Bit deadish: