Customer Reviews

Wagner: Parsifal

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I don't know why people assume that this spiritual opera must be laden with ponderous tempi and a heavy-handed approach. Boulez's recording aims to give Wagner's best and most misunderstood opera a reading removed from all reverence and prejudices; like Wieland and Wolfgang Wagner building a New Bayreuth, Boulez strips away all assumptions of the piece to get at the core of the work. The result is non-romantic but thoughtful, gloriously dramatic internally and externally. Although individual moments of the Knappertsbusch or Karajan recordings might be more impressive in isolated areas, Boulez's achievement gives you a sense of the whole, focusing on the arc of the drama rather than emphasizing sensational moments. The cumulative effect is more powerful, closer to the awe-inspiring quality Wagner intended for his stage consecration than the other two versions.

Before anyone thinks of this reading as definitive, however, people should know that Boulez himself--looking back on this recording in preparation for Bayreuth's new PARSIFAL this summer--considered his reading "not flexible enough," overly influenced by his anti-authoritarian ideology. The fact is, there can be no definitive recording of any opera; the very nature of performance bars the idea of one fixed representation, no matter what any other Amazon lister may tell you. But that is the very spirit Boulez was working in when recording PARSIFAL, and his iconoclastic approach has made us rethink what this opera is and how it should work in performance. For that reason, this recording is a milestone in our understanding of Wagner and should not be undervalued.

I love this recording of Parsifal and it is refreshing to hear the opera without the drawn out broad strokes. It is tightly and quickly conducted by Boulez and the orchestra and chorus are at their finest. King as usual is superb and perhaps he was the last of the great heldentenors. Jones is hair raising as Kundry but she sings the role beautifully and her voice is captured at it's richest. What a huge voice too and her screams are real. The rest of the cast is very underrated when compared to the competition.

Boulez's tempi are criticized as being fast but I believe the timing of this recording is longer than the timings of the premiere under Levi, and that was supervised by Wagner himself.

When Boulez first went to Bayreuth to conduct Parsifal in the mid-60's it was a highly controversial choice. It was not so long after he had expressed the desire to blow up all the opera houses and here he was, setting heretical foot in the most hallowed halls of all of them. And, what's more, in the famous production by Wieland Wagner that had been the special preserve of the likes of Knappertsbusch and Krauss since its inception back at the re-opening Festival of 1951. The performances, too, were just as controversial. Too fast, too superficial, too light and the orchestra found it hard to follow his batonless beat, they said.

This recording was taken from performances a few years later at the Festival of 1970 - my first experience of Wagner in Bayreuth in the flesh, incidentally - and if there were any problems of ensemble back in 1965, they had been ironed out by then. As for the interpretation - well, yes, it certainly is radically different from the likes of Muck and Kna from previous generations. But, like all great music, there is not just one way to play Parsifal. What Boulez did is to let light and air into the textures and freshness and (in Act 2 especially) urgency into the tempi. Much of the Nature music benefits enormously. Try the passage when Amfortas is taken down to his bath or, better still, the Good Friday music - the latter sounds so 'natural' when it is allowed to flow and keep moving like this. Nor do the scenes in the Grail Castle feel short-changed - indeed, some passages like the somewhat banal hymn the knights sing as they leave in Act 1 positively benefit from a little more speed. The moments of real solemnity (as when the Grail is first revealed) do not lose any of their profundity in the clarified textures. Indeed, from the tremolo hush through the carefully tiered on and off-stage choruses to Titurel's passionate outburst, this is as moving an experience as ever. It's a bit like viewing a much-loved and newly restored painting with all the acquired patina of age removed. And Boulez understands as well as any of his respected predecessors that Parsifal is about pacing, not about tempi. Like them he gets the weight and proportions of climaxes - musical and dramatic - spot on. He is also, of course, very aware of the modernity of much of the score. For example, he makes us very aware that a passage like the Prelude to Act 3 is harmonically far more challenging and disorienting than anything in Tristan.

The singers are a little less interesting and/or novel in their approach. James King is a good but not a great Parsifal. So, too, Franz Crass as Gurnemanz (a graduate of the Bayreuth chorus, by the way). Gwyneth Jones is as dramatically committed and as unpredictably squally as ever. Stewart, once you accept a slightly more gritty sound than a London or a Fischer-Dieskau, is actually an excellent Amfortas, as convincing in his anguish as either of them. I've always felt that Klingsor was McIntyre's best part in Parsifal - he has also essayed both Amfortas and Gurnemanz - and so he proves here: not quite in the Uhde class, but very impressive none the less.

All in all, then, a fascinating reading of Wagner's last score and a refreshing counterbalance to the Knappertsbusch point of view. I'd hate to be without either but, if pushed, I'd still turn to Kna in 1951 for a truly comprehensive summation of what this piece is about.

There was a time when taking risks was normal. The 60s and 70s . At this point even sacred monsters, like Karajan, used to taken his risks. Glenn Gould was famous for his eccentricities, Karajan recorded all the Orchestral Music of the Second Viennese School, Haitink was doing a complete Mahler cycle ( yes, at this time this was something original) . And at this point another star raised : Pierre Boulez. Very well know as one of the most important and most difficult composer of his generation, his activity as a conductor of international standards began in the middle 60s. Every new recording was a milestone : A Debussy praised as very clear, a iconoclastic Beethoven (very slow) , a very " cool" Berlioz, etc. The critic was unanimous : A conductor very different , but very good. In 1966 , at a time when Boulez wasn't yet very well know , Wieland Wagner invited him to conduct Parsifal in Bayreuth. His conducting of the work was completely different from his predecessor Hans Knappertsbusch. The tempi were very fast , the sonorities very clear, and we had more drama than religious ecstasy. This recording is a testimony of a time when the individuality of the interpreter was very praised . 34 years after this recording remains as the most iconoclast of all Parsifals . I love this recording for the power of this new conception, for the engagement of the singers ( all are fantastic, even the small roles) , and for the fact it is a fantastic " souvenir" of a golden age.
Some interesting remarks: this set was recorded in 1970, the last time Boulez conducted a complete Parsifal. He will do it again this year. I'm very curious : will he maintain his conception 34 years after? In 1967 Boulez conducted a complete Tristan und Isolde in Japan, staged by the late Wieland Wagner. This was his only experience with this score. It was filmed in Black and White. It is a Must ( with Nilsson, Windgassen and Hotter). And finally: from 1976 to 1980 Boulez conducted the full Ring in Bayreuth staged by his countryman Patrice Chereau . After 24 years of a complete absence of Boulez as a Wagnerian conductor in full staged versions ( he use to conduct Symphonic concerts with some excerpts of Wagnerian operas), he remains as a reference in this repertoire.

As the Last Sane Man in Europe once said, listening to this music is like listening to an old friend talking to you about the things that have always disturbed you. Boulez has a truly unique approach here, as he does to most of the late Romantics. His reading is alternately slow and meditative, brisk and stimulating, but never in the wrong places, and one never feels that he has lost sight of the inner motive. The male leads are superb, particularly Stewart as Amfortas and Crass as Gurnemanz, and even Miss Jones gives a moving if somewhat stylized portrayal of Kundry. Although a live performance, and at Bayreuth, it seems to be taking place in neither time nor space, which appropriately mirrors one of the hidden themes of this enigmatic gesamtkunstwerk.

This is a unique approach to Parsifal, with strengths and weaknesses. The very rapid pace obscures the wonders of the fine details of the orchestration; probably only performances as slow and as well-recorded as Knapperstsbusch (1962) or Goodall (1984)can show us this incredibly rich world of micro-structures. Otherwise Parsifal may sound as if Wagner had actually written himself out, as some suggest, and not reached the top of his form, surpassing the Ring and perhaps Tristan. Some listeners, however, simply do not respond to the slower pace and will find this dramatic and exciting; one way or another your mileage may vary.

There are some superior vocal ingredients here. King and Crass are powerful voices, and Stewart is almost the only recorded Amfortas who sounds truly kingly. Gwyneth Jones is very good, even beautiful, up to about mezzo-forte and very chancy beyond. In the realm of vocal special effects, her scream at the beginning of Act III is not merely realistic, but horrific. The Bayreuth chorus, prepared for one of the last times by Wilhelm Pitz,is wonderfully clear and expresses real horror at the exposure of Titurel's body.

This is still an important contribution to knowledge. If you have the time, interest and resources for a number of Parsifals, this performance defines the some of the limits of the envelope.

Looking back on his Bayereuth debut with Parsifal in the mid-Sixties, Boulez found his conducting lacking in flexibility. Here, five years later, the same limitation exists. I have no problem hearing Parisfal sped up -- there are dramatic gains and losses to any tempo choice -- but Boulez is emotionally too detached. His singers aren't given a chance to dwell on the spiritual poignancy of Amfortas's suffering, the Grail knights' sorrow, and Parsifal's initial bewilderment that ultimately turns into inspired realization of the Grail's meaning.

Not that all is lost by any means. Boulez's cast is strong for that era, with exemplary singers like Franz Crass and Thomas Stewart carrying key roles. Gwyneth Jones is intense, but one has to get used to her peculiar timbre as she tries to find a vocal equivalent for Kundry's lacerating anguish. James King is solid and stolid, as ever. It's too bad that such a ringing Heldentenor voice was attached to such an unimaginative singer -- King is incapable of expressing Parsifal's youth and innocence at the outset, and we remain uninvolved in his interpretation throughout. Still, he has more than enough power and stamina for the role, which is saying something. The Bayreuth chorus is particularly beautiful here, singing with great sensitivity and never blaring or shouting.

In all, the controversy over Boulez's fast pacing is a dead letter by this late date, leaving us to appreciate a unique take on Parsifal, and thankfully breaking the hold that Knappertsbusch's creeping reverence had on this great work for two decades.

.........for a change. acts 2,3 are recorded complete and uninterupted on it's own cd. yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay

The singers are great and so is the recording.

Get this recording and relax. no side breaks.

lose a little atmosphere, yeah, but you gain some too with no act breaks.

.
Boulez' brisk reading here compresses this monstrous work into something manageable. Without this kind of verve, Parsifal--(and Tristan)--are just too big and sprawling. This mammoth on 3CDs is totally bonus.

See too:

Böhm's Bayreuth Tristan: Tristan Und Isolde

Boulez' St. Florian Bruckner's 8th: Bruckner: Symphony 8

Boulez' Mahler's 2nd: Mahler: Symphony No. 2 ("Resurrection")
" 3rd: Mahler: Symphonie No. 3
" 8th: G. Mahler: Symphony no. 8

Boulez' Schönberg's Moses: Schoenberg - Moses und Aron / Pittman-Jennings · Merritt · Boulez

Boulez' Webern: Complete Webern
.

I bought this because, though I cant stand Boulez the composer, I do have much respect for his podium talents, his strengths at lines and orchestral articulation. For those reasons I enjoyed his Ring Cycle, though more for reasons of study than as overall performance enjoyment.
I though parsifal would be a perfect vehicle for his strengths and a true test for him to exhibit those qualities in which him i find best.
However, this is not the case. The tempos are very fast, even faster than Kraus' 53 Parsifal, though no where near as intelligent or thought out or emotionally, aesthetically, or architectually convincing. This is really a disaster and should only be heard by those who have journeyed through the Parisfal must-have recordings such as KNA51\54\62, Kubelik, Barenboim, Solti, or even Karajan. Then you can go to this and listen to it with the proper perspective of what is happening. This really is pretty awful.
For me, Gurnemanz is one of my favourite Wagner characters, actually my favourite after Wotan, and Franz Crass gives a very uninspiring performance. But it is not his fault. How could he be expected to accumulate any sort of emotional when asked to wisp through every scene, none given any significant weight. Thomas Stewart is a very fine amfortas, and he is in very good voice. Again, he is not allowed to really build a character here as he is given no chance by Boulez. Just listen to the Morgenspracht in his entrance---one of the most sublime moments in the opera(done superbly by G.London with KNA62) Here, simply rushed despite his beautiful voice--it really is tragic that wasnt able to allow the, well, tragedy of his character develope as it should.
G.Jones is also awful, she was never good at her highest vocal levels and Kundry is mostly that so, you get that squawkish sound from her.
When the most successful part of a performance is act II, you know that it must be a pretty uninspriing version given the emotional everests of acts I and III.
Really, there is rhyme or reason for these tempos. Again, I return to Krauss 53- his were fast, but were never rushed. These are rushed and do not serve the music. Boulez wanted to make a splash-be the enfant terrible and live up too his reputation. Unfortunetly, this mars his body of work. those who seem to be giving this a good review were probably going to give it one before they ever even heard it--or they must not like this opera that much because this is just plain wrong and uninspired.
Ive said it before and Ill say it again----Monslavat is no place for an agenda( and neither is our beloved classical music for that matter, but then Boulez would lose all significance.