Lutoslawski - Concerto for Orchestra

I hadn't listened to the Lutoslawski Concerto for Orchestra for ages. Truth be told, for me Lutoslawski's music starts to be really interesting only from the late 1960s onwards when his mature style flowered into arresting compositions such as Livre pour Orchestre, the Cello Concerto, Les Espaces du Sommeil and Mi-Parti.

On the one hand the Concerto is an approachable symphonic spectacular; the music is pleasingly angular, athletic and colourful. So it's certainly not a burden to listen to. On the other hand I find it lacking in a coherent overall structure. Particularly the finale fails to convince on this account. And that's a pity as it is longer than the first two movements combined.

I followed the music with Charles Bodman Rae's analysis (in The Music of Lutoslawski, Faber and Faber, 1994) in hand. The finale starts with a Passacaglia, the theme of which is 8 bars long and is repeated 18 times as it passes from the basses to the highest registers of the orchestra. In counterpoint with the Passacaglia there is a sequence of 13 episodes - mostly also 8 bars long - with contrasting material. For the most part they do not overlap with the beginning or end of the Passacaglia theme (an early example of what Lutoslawski later would call his 'chain' technique). These episodes are not variations as there is not really a relationship between them. After the Passacaglia follows a bristling Toccata, driven forward by very energetic brass. This gives way to a chorale, first in the woodwinds, then in the brass. Afterwards, the Toccata picks up again leading to a final section in which the chorale reappears fortissimo in the brass. A fast coda ends the work. One problem seems to be that there is  an abundance of thematic material in this 15 minute movement. Furthermore, the different sections - Passacaglia, Toccata, Chorale - seem to be disconnected; they come across as a sequence of brilliant but unconnected vignettes. Interestingly Bodman Rae also observes that in the Concerto only 76 of the work's 956 bars are not in some kind of triple meter. I think one can sense this rhythmic monotony over such a long musical structure. Paradoxically it may add to the sense of disjointedness.

I listened to different recordings, the most successful of which was taped by Christoph von Dohnanyi with the Cleveland Orchestra in 1989 (Decca, no longer available). It's a very taut and objective reading, the dryness of which is reinforced by a bone hard, close-miked recording from the Masonic Auditorium. Nevertheless, it's not unpleasant to listen to. The tight control suits this brilliant, sprawling music very well. The reading by Yan Pascal Tortelier with the BBC Philarmonic initially convinces, not in the least because of the attractive, meaty Chandos recording. The Intrada and the scherzo-like second movement come off really well. But sadly Tortelier is not able to keep the finale as convincingly together as Dohnanyi. I also listened to Lutoslawski's own recording, made in the late 1970s with the Polish National Radio Symphony Orchestra (Katowicze). It's a fine recording that is in itself not particularly illuminating, however. His orchestra also lacks the sparkle of their Cleveland counterparts.

The Decca recording is coupled with Bartok's Concerto (which I still have to listen to) and the question poses itself as to how the two compositions might be related. There seems to be little agreement on this issue. Paula Kennedy writes in the liner notes for the Dohnanyi recording: "However, the main influence on the work is indubitably that of Bartok. This can be heard both in the clarity and directness of the musical language, and also in such structural details as the arch form of the first movement and the chorale of the last movement (in its manner of presentation, this chorale bears a striking resemblance to the one which occurs in the second movementof Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra). The economy with which musical ideas are developed also owes much to the example fo Bartok." On the other hand, Simon Ravens in the notes accompanying the Chandos disc finds the similarities more cosmetic than real. (However, he makes the rather surprising assertion that whilst Bartok generally tried to be faithful to the character of his folk material, Lutoslawski used folk themes as merely raw material to build a large musical form. I think this is disputable). Bodman Rae essentially agrees with the observation that there is no dominant and direct influence of Bartok in Lutoslawski's Concerto: " ... if one were to draw a meaningful parallel with Bartok, it should be with Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta, rather than his own Concerto for Orchestra." Pity he doesn't elaborate this connection. Personally I would also side with the latter viewpoint. Apart from the orchestral brilliance and some anecdotal correspondences (I think most chorales resemble one another) the two compositions seem to inhabit rather different spheres of the musical continuum.