Customer Reviews

Sergey Prokofiev: Symphony No. 2 in D minor, Op. 40 / Romeo and Juliet, Suite No. 1, Op. 64 bis

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

It's nice to read that a lot of reviewers think this symphony is underrated. It is. rather than wishing we could hear what his reqrite would have been, one wishes we could hearwhat his other music would have sounded like had he maintained this somewhat looser, otherworldly, and impressionistic approach to composition. Sometimes (heck, often) a great creative artist reaches for a sound that echoes off distantly in their minds--Beethoven did that with his Third and it worked for him and his audiences. The rest is history.

Prokofiev generally has been underrated, a victim of 20th Century mandatory modernism of certain restricted kinds (meaning modern music had to have a surface sheen of a particular type to suit certain folks) and the patronizing any Soviet composer had to endure, including Shostakovich and Khachaturian. Prokofiev proved that a genius could, in the middle of the last century while other composers were log-jammed and caught up in theory, write mountains of memorable, wholly unique sounding music that could appeal to anyone. His melodic sense was astounding and his ability to shape-shift harmonies and tonalities mind-numbing. I've heard plenty of neo-romantic tripe that strives for, but never attains, what this great composer achieved.

This symphony, BOTH movements, is rapturous. This is a fine performance although I want to hear the Leinsdorf recently reissued on Testament. Leinsdorf was a great Prokofiev conductor.

It would not do for me to claim to understand Profofiev's second symphony when the composer famously said that he didn't understand it himself. However it must be, surely, that we're talking on different planes of understanding. What I mean for my part is that Prokofiev is a composer I take to naturally and easily as I do to Stravinsky, whereas I usually have a bit of a struggle with the more eclectic and unpredictable Shostakovich. For some reason, Prokofiev's symphonies have not established themselves to anything like the extent that Shostakovich's have, and the second in particular has a reputation for being `difficult'. It was first performed in Paris in 1925, and its first British performance was not until 40 years later. In the 1920's Parisian taste favoured Les Six (Honegger, Frank Martin etc) in what seems to me a rather superficial and ooh-la-la kind of way. When Prokofiev decided to give them something of his own on similar lines, they reacted with bafflement on being confronted with music of genuine substance, just as they had done when they misbehaved childishly at the premiere of the Rite of Spring not 15 years earlier.

These days I can't really see why anyone who can cope with the Rite of Spring, surely not much of a hurdle, should have any great difficulty with Prokofiev's second. It's noisy and vehement to be sure, but so is much of Beethoven's 7th and even the first movement of Brahms's first. One thing is for certain - you don't have to go to it, it comes to you. I personally like the way Jarvi goes about it. He doesn't pull any punches and I would not have wanted him to. It's a controlled assault on the ears and on the understanding, but it doesn't take the same kind of toll of my emotions that much of Shostakovich does, or even that much of Schubert does, or Brahms. By way of balance, the other item on the disc is the first Romeo and Juliet suite, a welcome change from the more familiar second. This is actually a later work than the symphony, but the idiom, I hardly need remind anyone, is fairly traditional, the composer showing his lovely, genuine and underivative lyric gift.

The Scottish National Orchestra, not apparently yet `royal' in 1985, acquit themselves very well indeed. The recording is pretty good too. It takes no chances with the violent orchestration in the symphony, and if I felt a slight wish that it had now and again, I suppose that playing safe was really the wisest course. The liner note, by Noel Goodwin, is one that I would call a model of its type. It is fairly brief and addressed to the general reader not to the scholar or specialist, but it has something useful and constructive to say without being platitudinous, patronising or pretentious. I would genuinely like to plug this record if I can, as this symphony still has some kind of barrier against its general acceptance. To any hesitant music-lover I would say just this - the ballet suite is music of immediate appeal and probably not over-familiar. As for the symphony, just relax and let it hit you.

To the prior reviewer: No, you are not hearing things, this work is an insane masterpiece that not only stands up to intense multiple (and repeat) listenings, but glows brighter.

Just to set the record straight: the story is that after the premiere, where the audience gave the piece a very chilly reception, Prokofiev was quoted outside the hall as saying 'neither I nor anyone in there understood a single note of what was played'. Obviously a psychotic remark induced by trauma. In fact, late in life, Prokofiev said he thought this was one of his great works. (Tchaikovsky went back and forth about his Manfred Symphony, calling it one of the best things he ever wrote, then referring to it as execrable after it had premiered, and then later recognizing again its beauty. Like that piece, nevermind the author's opinion, believe me you will be convinced of the genius of this music each time you listen to it.)

Neeme Järvi has recorded the entire cycle of Prokofiev symphonies and in doing so has gained the insights necessary to clarify much of the 'mystery' that surrounds the Symphony No. 2. Perhaps the fact that Prokofiev's 1st symphony,'Classical', was so immediately accessible, so retrospective despite its wonderful excursions into strange rhythms and tonalities, perhaps that is the reason so many find the 2nd 'difficult'. Yes, it is a strident, aggressive, acerbic work that drives forward with the kind of energy that is present in the 'style mechanique' found in Honneger's 'Pacific 231'. But it also contains some of Prokofiev's most eloquent, supple melodies as in the Andante. Hopefully there will be more frequent exposures to this work by our now more assertive young conductors, something that would doubtless increase the acceptance if not popularity of the symphony.

Neeme Järvi conducts his Scottish National Orchestra in this 1985 recording that is sonically alive and alert. The added work on the CD is the Suite No. 1 from Prokofiev's masterpiece, the ballet 'Romeo and Juliet' and Järvi pulls out all stops for a very exciting though short suite of excerpts. There are better recordings of the ballet, but the performance of the Symphony No. 2 more than recommends this CD. Grady Harp, April 06

Even Prokofiev's most sympathetic critics too often dismiss his Second Symphony as some kind of youthful aberration, or a case of trying too hard to be fashionably modern. Even granting that he took some possibly Stravinsky-influenced liberties with symphonic form (it almost feels, structurally, balletic), there is no arguing with the fact that Prokofiev's genius as a melodist, orchestrator, and dramatist practically storms through every page of too-little-known 20th Century masterwork. Järvi's vital conception of the piece is, I think, just about equal to its intrinsic power, and he manages to make even the virtuoso SNO sound pushed to their limits here and there. Not to mention the excellent Chandos sound. I suspect Sergei Sergeievich himself would have loved this disc.

The opening movement is played with characteristic barbarism though I am sure there are more ferocious recordings available.

The Theme and Variations (second movement) are performed and directed with an eye towards clarity - you can hear the details and the many different textures throughout. The tempos are slightly on the quicker side which makes for a slightly less memorable theme but gives greater direction and sense of unity to the variations.

It's unfortunate that this work is so widely under-appreciated. The fact that even Prokofiev couldn't see its inate virtues leaves me wondering if perhaps I see something that others can not. All the same, this is my favorite of Prokofiev's symphonies--I just wish I wasn't in such a minority as to that opinion.

I agree with the other reviewers of this disc. Prokofiev spent over a year on this symphony and appears to have gotten caught up in his desire to write something complex, as if this were to be a demonstration piece of counterpoint. The symphony was performed in June 1925, and Prokofiev was disappointed when it was not better received. However, the composer was about to revise the symphony but was prevented from doing so by his death in 1953. It is tantalizing to think of what the symphony may have become had Prokofiev had the time.

This performance by Neeme Jarvi is first class. The listener will probably be put off on first, second and third hearings. I have found that the more I listen, the more comprehensible the music becomes but I am hardly numbering this among my favorites. The form of this symphony is that of an opening movement followed by theme and variations. The piece this most reminds me of is the Scythian Suite and Les Pas d'acier with its strong, brassy chords. There are moments of quiet beauty in the symphony as well as the dissonant music. Curiously, the symphony ends quietly, just drifting off.

The symphony is paired with the first Romeo and Juliet suite, which could hardly be more different. This suite contains several dances, the scene between Romeo and Juliet and the death of Tybalt. As one would expect from the Scottish National, the suite is beautifully played.

So, this is a disc for those curious about the lesser known Prokofiev. It can be a rewarding journey and, for me, it was worth it.

Of the ones I've heard I have to say that I still prefer Järvi's cycle of Prokofiev symphonies to any of the competing complete cycles, such as Gergiev's superficially urgent, hurried approach - even though there is less to choose between them in the second symphony than, say, in the third. The second symphony is indeed probably the most unapproachable and difficult of Prokofiev's symphonies - and not an unqualified success as a work either even though there are some really astonishingly masterful things here that is revealed on repeated listening. This is the music of Prokofiev the iconoclastic futurist, vying with the contemporary futurist tradition for harmonic boldness and dissonance; music of `iron and steel', in Prokofiev's own words. It is relatively densely contrapuntal, which - combined with long stretches of relentless brutality - makes for what is potentially a relatively taxing listening experience at times.

Formally, the work is in two movements. The first is the most problematic, structurally and thematically, although a powerful listening experience overall. But the second - a set of variations - contains some really masterly music; it is varied and atmospheric and thoroughly inspired with some glittering textures and fabulous melodic twists and harmonies, well put together and superbly scored. The SNO is on stunning form with all the braying brass, color and both warm and chilly string sound in turns one could wish for, and Järvi leads them in a performance of real bite and power. It is, in fact, a scintillating performance and I can hardly imagine the work being better done (at least I haven't heard it better done); yes, the orchestral playing could perhaps be more refined around the edges, but this is certainly not a work that calls for that. The sound quality is full and well balanced.

For some bizarre reason Chandos has decided to couple it with the first Romeo and Juliet suite, and while Järvi certainly manages to create some magic here, it isn't really competitive (there are several choices for the whole ballet, but more importantly - no one should have to go through their lives without hearing Ancerl's selections with the Czech Philharmonic). It doesn't matter, for no one is - I hope - going to acquire this disc for the suite (or: if they did I suspect they'll quickly realize that it is no more than a light dessert to the powerful main course). Hence, this release is strongly recommended nonetheless.

Prokofiev's second symphony is one of my favourites. It is multifacetetd, full of ideas and can bring powerful emotions.
This recording certainly isnt muddy and brings out the structure very well, all the more so because it is splendidly recorded,
but it is a little cold for my liking, I prefer Rozhdestvensky's recordings for the emotion.

The Romeo and Juliet is very good.