Ravinia 2019, Issue 6, Week 11

for her monetary and emotional beneficence, Tchaikovsky dedicated his Fourth Symphony to “my best friend,” Nadezhda von Meck. The Symphony No. 4, written between May 1877 and January 7, 1878, portrayed Tchaikovsky’s triumph over the ill fortunes of Fate. He once divulged that the work’s model was Beethoven’s Symphony No. 5, whose opening notes depicted “Fate knocking at the door.” Tchaikovsky sym- bolized Fate in his Symphony No. 4 with a mi- nor-key brass and woodwind fanfare. This om- inous gesture returns throughout the opening movement and again in the finale. The canzona bows under the oppressive weight of destiny, but the famous pizzicato Scherzo adds some levity. Tchaikovsky wrote a letter to Meck that offers rare insight into the residual effects of the mar- riage crisis, his creative thought process, and the programmatic meaning behind the Symphony No. 4. “You ask if the symphony has a definite program. Ordinarily, when asked that question concerning a symphonic work, I answer, ‘No, none whatever.’ And in truth it is not an easy question. How can one express those vague feel- ings which pass through one during the writing of an instrumental work which in itself has no definite subject? It is a purely lyrical process, a musical confession of the soul that, filled with the experiences of a lifetime, pours itself out through sound, just as the lyric poet pours him- self out in verse. The difference is that music is an incomparably more delicate and powerful language in which to express the thousand vari- colored moments of the spiritual life … “The introduction is the germ of the entire sym- phony, the idea upon which all else depends. This is Fate, the inexorable force that prevents our hopes of happiness from being realized, that watches jealously lest our felicity should become full and unclouded—it is Damocles’s sword, hanging over the head in constant, un- remitting spiritual torment. It is unconquerable, inescapable. Nothing remains but to submit to what seems useless unhappiness. Despair and discontent grow stronger, sharper. … So life it- self is a persistent alternation of hard reality with evanescent dreams and clutching at happiness. … This, approximately, is the program of the First Movement. “The Second Movement expresses another phase of suffering. It is the melancholy that comes in the evening when we sit alone, and weary of work, we try to read, but the book falls from our hand. Memories crowd upon us. How sweet these recollections of youth, yet how sad to realize they are gone forever … “The Third Movement expresses no definite feelings, rather it is a succession of capricious arabesques, those intangible images that pass through the mind when one has drunk wine and feels the first touch of intoxication. …They are out of touch with reality; they are wild and strange. “The Fourth Movement: If you truly find no joy within yourself, look for it in others. Go to the people. See—they know how to make the best of their time, how to give themselves up to plea- sure! A peasant festival is depicted. No sooner do you forget yourself in this spectacle of others’ joy, than the merciless Fate reappears to remind you of yourself. … Here one sees the existence of simple, deep joys; enter into them and life will be bearable. “This, dear friend, is all I can tell you about the symphony. Of course what I have said is neither clear nor complete. This follows from the very nature of instrumental music, which does not submit to detailed analysis. ‘Where words cease, there music begins,’ as Heine said.” Variations on a Rococo Theme, op. 33 Scored for two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, two horns, strings, and solo cello Tchaikovsky formulated well-defined appraisals of older composers: Bach provided good enter- tainment in his fugues, Handel was a fourth-rate hack, Haydn composed melodies with remark- able fluency, and Beethoven often languished in verbosity. But Mozart was “the Christ of music, in whom are quenched all his predecessors, just as rays of light are in the sun itself.” Tchaikovsky viewed Mozart from an idealized, 19th-century perspective: he led a tragically short life of child- like innocence and inspiration that produced the most sublime works of musical art. A prolonged discussion surrounding the influ- ence of the Classical Mozart on the Romantic Tchaikovsky continued through correspon- dence with his patron Nadezhda von Meck. The aesthetic goals of the two composers seemed at opposite poles, a fact Tchaikovsky admitted to Meck: “You say that my worship for Mozart is quite contrary to my musical nature. But per- haps it is just because—being a child of my day—I feel broken and spiritually out of joint, that I find consolation and rest in Mozart’s mu- sic, wherein he gives expression to that joy of life which was part of his sane and wholesome temperament, not yet undermined by reflection. It seems to me that an artist’s creative power is something quite apart from his sympathy for this or that great master … dissimilarity of tem- perament between two artists is no hindrance to their mutual sympathy.” Only two of Tchaikovsky’s compositions reveal a direct musical affinity to the great Classical mas- ter: the Variations on a Rococo Theme for cello and orchestra, op. 33 (1876), and the Orchestral Suite No. 4, op. 61, known as “Mozartiana” (1887). He composed the “Rococo Variations” for Wil- helm Fitzenhagen, a prominent German cellist who was a faculty member at the Moscow Con- servatory and concertmaster of the Russian Im- perial Musical Society, director of the Moscow Musical and Orchestral Society, and cellist in the Russian Musical Society string quartet that pre- miered all three of Tchaikovsky’s quartets. Fitzen- hagen gave the premiere in Moscow under con- ductor Nikolai Rubinstein on November 30, 1877. Fitzenhagen oversaw the publication of a cello– piano version of the variations in 1878. Without the composer’s consent, he introduced numer- ous alterations to the score, rearranging several variations and omitting one. When the tamper- ing was discovered, Tchaikovsky and his pub- lisher, Peter Jurgenson, were livid. However, the composer later sanctioned some of these emen- dations, and both versions of the Variations on a Rococo Theme—Tchaikovsky’s and Fitzen- hagen’s—are still in print. (The Fitzenhagen edition is being performed this evening.) This piece begins with an orchestral introduction, Classically balanced in its phrasing. The solo cello enters with a moderato semplice theme ac- companied lightly by strings. Several variations contain built-in cello cadenzas. The final varia- tion also functions as a virtuosic coda. Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1888) Nadezhda von Meck RAVINIA MAGAZINE | AUGUST 12 – AUGUST 18, 2019 102