Mozart, Beethoven, Franck: three very different but, circumstantially, surprisingly similar composers - successively overlapping in their lifetimes, each originally from different European countries. Each was expected to be a financially viable child prodigy by their overbearing fathers (their mothers either died young or were repressed) - although only Mozart succeeded in that endeavor. Each came from a moderate-sized city and moved to the appropriate musical capital to advance professionally (in the latter two cases, the move necessitated a change of country).

Each of them had prodigious talents as children, particularly the ability to improvise, harmonize, and transpose at the keyboard. None of them became rich. All wrote great music, though each in succession wrote considerably fewer works than his predecessor. None had the recognition in their lifetimes which they truly deserved in retrospect, with the possible exception of Beethoven. But there the similarities end. Their temperaments, ambitions, struggles, methods of composition were as far removed from each other as can be.

Mozart was brash, insanely egotistical, totally self-confident (except in the last few years) with, we are told, a puerile sense of humor (Did Mozart really have TS?). Beethoven was morose, boorish, introspective, consumed with a kind of paranoia that everyone was against him and, perhaps most importantly, he was significantly deaf throughout his adult life. Only Franck was content. He had no great ambitions, enjoyed his "day job" (church organist and music teacher) and was thrilled when his music was appreciated (which happened surprisingly little). He was happily married. Of course, it can be said that great music flows only from the pen of the tortured soul, but that would be to seriously underestimate the art of men like Franck, Dvorak, Verdi to name just a few.

La Clemenza di Tito (the Clemency of Titus) is not one of the first operas which springs to mind when the name Mozart is mentioned. It is one of his few failures. It was commissioned and completed during the last half-year of his life and he worked on it at the same time as the Requiem and the Magic Flute. The original play by Metastasio was at best dull (although significantly improved in Mazzola's libretto) and very pro-establishment which did not suit Mozart's temperament. It's clear that the reason he agreed to it was purely financial - the rewards expected from the other two works were not assured with any certainty. As with the Requiem, his pupil Süssmayr was needed to fill in a lot of the detail.

The overture, however, stands alone and is vintage Mozart.

The five piano concerti of Beethoven are among the very best. The first two, of which the "Number 1" was actually written second, were considered by Beethoven himself as immature works. Nevertheless, they compare very favorably with the later Mozart concerti which had been completed about a decade earlier. There's little doubt that a large part of the evolution of the piano concerto was due to Mozart but Beethoven, with some help from instrument makers like Broadwood, took the form to a new level. Part of the change was in the size and importance of the accompanying orchestra, made possible by the louder solo instrument.

The C Major concerto was probably completed in 1798 and first performed in Prague by the composer. In spite of his own disparaging words, the concerto is a work of outstanding freshness of inspiration and beauty of melody, most effectively written for soloist and splendidly orchestrated. The orchestra used is the same as for all the concertos except No. 2 - the standard large orchestra of the time, including clarinets (relative newcomers at the time). The first movement, which starts in a rather formal style, contains much that is brilliant and much that is poetic and new. Almost the whole of the development for instance with its remote harmonies and cloudy, soft scale passages, must have sounded strange to a listener accustomed only to 18th century music. So too is the slow movement where there are remarkable indications of the path to be taken by later Romantic composers. Nothing could be jollier and more 'unbuttoned' (to use Beethoven's own expression) than the final rondo. It fairly bursts with good nature; but it is very characteristic of the thoughtful Beethoven that just before the end there is a moment of repose - a little sigh from the oboe after which the orchestra bursts in with the final chords.

Franck's compositions were little appreciated during his lifetime, though he himself was well liked and respected for his organ playing. Belgian by birth but French in every other sense, he was part of the "French School", though in a rival faction to that of Saint-Saëns (whose "Organ" symphony we presented recently) and Gounod. All the pieces by Franck which are remembered today date from the last ten or so years of his life - that is at an age that Mozart and Beethoven would already be dead. He worked on the symphony for a couple of years and seemed unaware of the cold response of the audience at the premiere. Quoth one conservatory professor: such a work could never be considered a symphony because of the use of the English Horn [second movement, especially]! It differs obviously from the more classical symphony in that it has three movements rather than four. Franck's developmental technique derives from his years in the organ loft - wide ranging modulation (progressive changing of key) is very characteristic.

The first movement is in the expected sonata form and begins with a romantic topos. The Allegro non troppo which follows uses the same material (though in differing keys), at a faster tempo and continues with new ideas. The movement continues with masterly use of counterpoint (the blending of related themes - time-shifted, inverted, etc.) including a canon (round) for the return of the main theme. The second movement combines aspects of both slow movement and scherzo and opens with a solo for English horn (a larger sibling of the oboe - pitched a fifth lower - and neither a horn in the usual sense, nor particularly English). This is followed by two contrasting trios (a trio in a scherzo or minuet-and-trio is not these days played by three instruments but is the middle section of the movement with a distinct change of character, key and sometimes time signature) and a closing section combining earlier material in counterpoint. The opening measures of the finale link the middle movement with the concluding key of D major. A hymn-like theme in the brass appears, followed by recollections of themes from the earlier movements. The coda (literally, the "tail") is a glorious summation of the major themes from the first movement followed by the finale's main theme.

Back to the Symphony Pro Musica 1996-1997 Season