Can a century-long philological controversy be solved with a call of heads or tails? Probably not. Still, tossing a coin can be as good as any other way to make a temporary decision about, say, the internal structure of a symphony. Indeed, it was with a figurative flip of the coin that conductor Iván Fischer settled on which internal movement to play first during his recent rendition of Mahler’s Sixth Symphony at the Staatsoper Unter den Linden. The order of these two middle movements has always been a hotspot for debate. Given that both options – Scherzo first, Andante second, or vice versa – have had their reputable supporters, Fischer choosing spontaneously, mid-performance, is as good a solution as any.
One thing we can be sure of is that the symphony opens with a customary sonata-form movement, whose two main themes reflect the stylistic contrast that is typical of such form. However, Fischer’s approach to the first motif – rightfully martial and tenacious – didn’t find a corresponding shift in the exposition of the second motif, commonly referred to as the ‘Alma theme’. While too much rubato risks turning it into corny melodrama, powering through it with a firm pulse also took away some of its charm. In general, Fischer placed emphasis on the double basses and brass, providing necessary volume but occasionally drowning out other sections. With an Allegro that usually takes more than 20 minutes, the audience has quite some time to get familiar with the themes – meaning that so much of the musical discourse depends on nuance and elaboration of the material. As grand and energetic as it may have sounded, Fischer’s more rigid interpretation didn’t fully hold up.
This tireless march came to a partial halt with the second movement – Fischer opted for the Andante – which proceeded with typical Mahlerian flair. Unhurried and pensive, solo instruments came to the foreground, especially the oboe, horn and harps. Together with violins, they originated the distinctive sound of the movement, so often elevated to the high register and meditative. Lingering on harmonic suspensions, Fischer conveyed a beautiful sense of longing.
Reprising the brisk pace of the first movement, the Scherzo started with the pedal again on volume and stamina. This time, though, the impetus was mellowed by the rhythmic fluctuations of the score, which sounded danceable and almost courtly. By accentuating the staccati and melodic leaps, the Staatskapelle camouflaged themselves as a refined, perky salon orchestra – except for the moments when an orchestral tutti would remind the audience that we were, indeed, listening to Mahler.
The last movement of the symphony famously poses quite a few challenges for conductors. Its length and structure are not easy to manage, especially considering that it is supposed to close the entire piece. Here, Fischer achieved some interesting timbral effects, especially with the numerous different percussions. Rather than singling them out as a peculiar touch of colour, he included them in a larger context, highlighting the modernity of Mahler’s instrumentation. A certain tendency to wander off throughout the movement was arguably due to the score’s frequent mood shifts, and didn’t undermine an overall good performance.
