Ravinia 2026 Issue 3

during the summer of 1902. This suggestion intrigued Sibelius, and, before long, his mind filled with violinistic thoughts: “There’s still a part of me that hankers after becoming a vio- linist, and this expresses itself in unusual ways.” Other projects delayed preliminary sketches for the concerto until 1903. Sibelius received extra incentive when Willy Burmester, a German vi- olin virtuoso and former leader of the Helsinki Orchestra, offered to give the first performance. Burmester—who also had gently prodded Sibel- ius for a concerto in recent years—set aside time in his performing schedule during March 1904: announcements of the forthcoming premiere and dedication to Burmester appeared in print. From this point, Sibelius absolutely bungled the politics of a world premiere. Nearly destitute and desperate for quick income, the composer rashly attempted to move up the performance date. Already aware that Burmester could not rearrange his schedule, Sibelius offered the first performance to Czech violinist Viktor Nováček, a professor at the Helsinki Music Academy and clearly Burmester’s inferior as a performer. Sibelius scheduled the premiere for Novem- ber 18, 1903, but his own slothfulness caused a postponement to December 2, then again until February 8, 1904 (just one month before Burm- ester’s original date). As expected, Nováček could not rise to the technical or interpretive challenges of the violin concerto. Reviewing the premiere, Flodin spared Sibelius criticism but complained that Nováček’s “playing offered up a mass of joyless things. From time to time there were terrible sounds, and it was impossible to fathom the composer’s meaning, so great was the cacophony.” Burmester grew more determined to perform the concerto, proposing three dates in October 1904. He wrote to Sibelius, “All my 25 years’ plat- form experience, my artistry and insight will be Willy Burmeister (ca. 1900–10) placed to serve this work. Just this very fact will do much on your work’s behalf.” Unexpectedly, Sibelius withdrew his score to undertake exten- sive refurbishment, a process that dragged on needlessly for more than a year. His new Ger- man publisher lobbied hard for the revised con- certo’s debut in Berlin, with conductor Richard Strauss and violinist Karel Halíř, leader of the Berlin Court Orchestra. Sibelius consented to these arrangements. Passed over twice, Burm- ester never performed the concerto. The revisions affected the first movement most substantially. Sibelius not only removed three- and-a-half minutes of music, but also complete- ly retooled the solo material, repositioned the main cadenza, and thinned the orchestration. The Allegro moderato retains its imaginative opening: shimmering orchestral violin trem- olos create a mystical setting for the first solo entrance. Sibelius practiced advice Karl Gold- mark gave about emulating Mozart’s use of wind instruments (particularly the clarinet) in the opening section of his Adagio di molto . Wood- winds, horns, and timpani provide rich padding around the solo violin melody. The brilliant, much-condensed Allegro, ma non tanto projects a variety of influences. Its jagged, fiery opening recalls the exotic finales of the Brahms, Bruch, and Joachim concertos. A contrasting melody alternates two- and three-beat patterns, sound- ing like a Tchaikovskian polonaise. Develop- ment remains brief, then the principal melodies return in full virtuosic regalia. RICHARD STRAUSS (1864–1949) An Alpine Symphony , op. 64 Scored for four flutes and two piccolos, three oboes and English horn, one Heckelphone, one E-flat, two B-flat, one C, and one bass clarinets, four bassoons and contrabassoon, eight French horns and four Wagner tubas, four trumpets, four trombones, two tubas, timpani (two players), snare drum, bass drum, cymbals, triangle, tam-tam, cowbells, wind machine, thunder machine, glockenspiel, two harps, celesta, organ, strings, and an offstage ensemble comprising twelve horns, two trumpets, and two trombones Richard Strauss professed in the so-called “brown diary” (November 22, 1915) his immense satisfaction as “a German, to whom the sight of a magnificent mountain vista, the blue sky above it, in the radiant, warming sun, represents the summit of the attainable and the desirable. I rejoice in it: it keeps me healthy and gives me joy for work .” The mountain, as a physical man- ifestation of nature’s magnificence, towered over Strauss’s life from birth to death. Directly south of the city of his youth, Munich, lay the majestic Bavarian Alps. The mountain range provided an awe-inspiring backdrop to young Richard’s daily activities and offered a cool escape for family summer vacations, which included swimming and fishing in pristine lakes, boat rides, and high-elevation hiking. Years later, in 1908, Strauss commissioned the construction of a cottage—the Villa Strauss—in the small village of Garmisch-Partenkirchen, a short distance from Munich, allegedly funded with proceeds from his opera Salome . The archi- tect Emanuel von Seidl designed a comfortable cottage in the Jugendstil (“youth style”: the Ger- man Art Nouveau) with the Kramerspitz loom- ing over the back of the property and the Zugspi- tze, the tallest peak in Germany, visible from the front porch. Richard and Pauline Strauss occu- pied the villa until the composer’s death in 1949. Mountains—and nature in general—exerted a powerful force over Strauss the composer. “[Richard’s] love for everything, mountains and forests, meadows and flowers, for all animals was great,” sister Johanna intimated. “After his won- derful excursions, he could pour out his heart to his friends in writing, and these outpourings also fertilized his musical fantasy.” The magnetic lure of nature reached its pinnacle in Eine Al- pensinfonie ( An Alpine Symphony ), the last and longest of his 10 tone poems for orchestra. Traditional classical forms of instrumental mu- sic (sonata, sonatina, concerto, romance, over- ture, serenade, suite, string quartet, piano quar- tet, and piano trio, among others) dominated Strauss’s early compositions, as the youthful mu- sician united conventional structures with a dis- tinctively late-Romantic musical language. His aesthetic orientation changed radically in the mid-1880s after Strauss fell under the influence of several devotees of RichardWagner. Hans von Bülow, one of the foremost interpreters of Wag- ner’s music, appointed Strauss his assistant con- ductor with the Meiningen Orchestra, a position confirmed by the ducal court on June 18, 1885. Bülow offered his protégé a depth of interpre- tation from the podium unlike any other living conductor. Following a misunderstanding with Johannes Brahms over his Symphony No. 4. in E minor, Bülow resigned midway through the concert season, leaving Strauss as principal con- ductor pro tempore of the Meiningen Orchestra. The Villa Strauss in Garmisch with the Kramerspitz looming in the background RAVINIA.ORG • RAVINIAMAGAZINE 75