Program Notes

Overture to The Marriage of Figaro, K. 492 by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (b. 27 January 1756; d. 5 December 1791). Composed in Vienna in 1785/6.

Concerto No. 5 in A major for Violin and Orchestra, K. 219 by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (b. 27 January 1756; d. 5 December 1791).   Composed in Salzburg in 1775.

Symphony No. 5 by Gustav Mahler (b.7 July1860; d. 18 May 1911).  Composed in Maiernigg in 1901-2.

            Vienna, as the imperial seat of the Habsburg Empire beginning in the mid-17^th century, was one of the most resplendent and active cultural centers in Europe dating back to the Middle Ages.  The musical history of Vienna is usually traced most significantly to the 18^th century, when the leading musical figures of the Viennese Classical style: Haydn, and especially Mozart and Beethoven, made Vienna the center of the European musical universe.  When Mozart moved to Vienna in 1781 his expectations were for greater financial success and popularity, both of which he attained, at least in part, due to the progressive reforms of Emperor Joseph II.   It was a period of artistic and intellectual freedom unmatched until Mahler’s time.   Likewise, the turn of the 20^th century marked another cultural peak in the life of the Austrian capitol.  For Mahler Vienna was his adopted home and as director of the Vienna Court Opera and the Vienna Philharmonic, he found himself at the center of a progressive cultural circle encompassing music, art, literature, and theater.

Mozart’s The Marriage of Figaro, one of the most beloved works in the operatic repertoire, received a rather cool reception when it premiered in Vienna in the spring of 1786, but the Prague audiences who heard the opera later that year were much more enthusiastic.  In fact the success of Figaro in Prague actually led to the creation of Mozart's next opera, Don Giovanni, which received its world premiere in Prague in 1787.  With the innovations realized in these two operas, Mozart singlehandedly changed the course of opera history.  The Overture to The Marriage of Figaro immediately places the audience in an energetic and ebullient atmosphere.  Figaro is an adaptation of Pierre Beaumarchais’ play entitled La folle journée, ou La mariage de Figaro.  It seems that Mozart’s overture especially captures the first of these titles, roughly translated as “The Crazy Day.”  Fast tempos, sudden dynamic contrasts, flourishes of strings and winds, and an effluence of melodic invention set the stage for a light-hearted, comic romp (not to deny some of Figaro's more serious undertones) through foibles and follies of sexual politics at an Andalusian aristocratic court.  The overture is a work of sheer orchestral brilliance without reference to specific material that occurs in the opera itself.  It prepares us for what we are about to see but it does not foreshadow.

When imaging Mozart as a performer we tend to think of him as a keyboardist, a perception due to the fact that he is largely credited with fully realizing the idea of the classical piano concerto.  He was known to be a brilliant pianist giving performances of many of his concertos during his Viennese period.  Less well-known though is Mozart the violinist.  His father, Leopold, was a leading violinist in the mid-18^th century, and is the author of one of the most famous books on violin playing of the period.  Wolfgang was undoubtedly taught to play by his accomplished father and is known to have performed on the violin by the age of seven.  Four of Mozart’s five concertos for solo violin were composed in 1775 in his hometown of Salzburg and presumably for himself as soloist. 

During this last period in Salzburg, Mozart seems to have been influenced by recent musical styles he heard in Vienna, particularly the music of Joseph Haydn.  This experience seems to have inspired a greater degree of experimentation in the late Salzburg concertos, especially in the Concerto No. 5 in A major and the excellent E-flat piano concerto, K. 271 (1777).  The opening movement of the 5^th concerto is an example of this kind of experimentation.  A bright and buoyant orchestral introduction sets up the expected entry of the solo violin, but instead of presenting one of the already heard melodies led now by the soloist, Mozart shifts gears completely, introducing the solo violin in a new slow tempo, as though skipping to the next movement.  This lovely episode completed, Mozart then returns to the mood of opening with a new, surging theme presented in the solo violin over the same accompaniment heard at the orchestra’s introduction.  Typical of Mozart, the movement abounds in melodic ideas blending lyricism, rhythmic energy, and suave yet impassioned playing on the part of the soloist.  Mozart leaves room for a solo cadenza near the end of the movement but provided no written cadenza, leaving it to the soloist to display invention and technique at his/her discretion.

The second movement is a lyrical masterpiece dominated by the melody first heard at the outset in the orchestral introduction and picked up by the soloist and extended melodically in the first long section led by the violin.  This opening portion of the movement concludes with another orchestral interlude before the solo violin returns, once again with the opening theme, but here the mood is more anxious as the pulsing accompaniment seems to follow the soloist through unexpected melodic twists and turns.  The closing section begins once again with the main theme, now presented imitatively in the violins leading to the return of the solo.  Once again a brief cadenza is the solo violin’s last appearance before the orchestra gently signals the movement’s end.

More surprises come in the Rondeau finale, marked “Tempo di Menuetto.”  Here the expected rondo form, where the opening section of music returns following interludes of new material, is enlivened by an extended section of dramatically contrasting material that has given the concerto its nickname “Turkish.”  About two-thirds of the way through the movement, at a point where the movement could easily conclude, Mozart again shifts gears, changes tempo and gives a lively episode of gypsy sounding dance music that boldly contrasts with the reserved minuet character of the rest of Rondo.  Following this episode Mozart returns to the rondo theme and a recollection of the first contrasting episode before closing on the by now familiar rondo theme.

            For Gustav Mahler Vienna was a mixed blessing.  Bohemian by birth and Jewish, Mahler was a perpetual outsider, yet it was Vienna that gave him his fame and financial success.  His work as director of the Vienna Court Opera presented great artistic opportunities in the production of operatic masterworks in one of Europe’s most influential musical capitals.  At the same time he was subjected to great personal and professional criticism due to his progressive artistic attitudes, uncompromising musical standards, and anti-Semitic attacks of the Viennese press.  In one of his life’s greatest ironies, Mahler’s obligations as conductor severely restricted his time for composing.  Most of Mahler’s work on new compositions had to be accomplished during the summer, between seasons.  The year 1901, the beginning of the 20^th century, presented Mahler with a number of challenges and opportunities.  Early in the year he suffered a near fatal hemorrhage, an experience that would affect him for the rest of his life. During his convalescence Mahler took time to study musical scores of J. S. Bach.  This renewed interest in Bach figures prominently in the style of composition Mahler explores in his Fifth Symphony.

Also that year, criticism of his performances with the Vienna Philharmonic led him to resign his position with that organization. Nonetheless, the summer of 1901 proved to be one of Mahler’s most productive.  The previous year work had begun on his new summer villa and now it was completed.  It was in this idyllic location, Maiernigg, at the edge of a forest and overlooking a lake, that work on the Fifth Symphony began.  In addition to the symphony, Mahler also composed a number of new songs.  The interest in Bach, the new songs, and his near-death experience, all can be seen as important elements in the innovations embodied in this new symphony. Until this time Mahler’s symphonies were closely tied to his songs, both melodically and textually.  The Symphony No. 5 is the first symphony Mahler wrote that refocuses interest not on explicit song-symphony relationships, but on orchestral technique and pure musical structure.  Songs do figure in the thematic structure of the music, but more abstractly than in previous symphonies.  Mahler consciously wanted to avoid composing a “programmatic” symphony and overt allusion to songs immediately suggests undesirably concrete meanings.  The songs of that summer were also different; no longer derived from the folk themes of the Wunderhorn songs, Mahler turned to the profoundly personal subject of Friedrich Rückert’s Kindertotenlieder (Songs on the death of children).

            Mahler’s Fifth Symphony marks the beginning of a new phase in his career as symphonist.  He seems to approach the form anew, commenting at the time about his own sense that he was exploring uncharted territory.  Instrumentation seems to have presented special challenges as Mahler continued to edit and alter the scoring persistently over the remaining decade of his life.  His emphasis on polyphony is also notable with complex layers of music interwoven with one another.  His admiration for Bach’s masterful technique is paid homage in this great, sprawling work.  The Fifth Symphony also explores new approaches to formal structure.  For over a century the essential form for symphonies was built around the sonata pattern, but Mahler abandons this classical model in favor of more open, episodic structures.  The five movements of the symphony are grouped by Mahler into a larger, three-part structure: Part I-movements 1 and 2; Part II- movement 3; Part III-movements 4 and 5.  The central section, the Scherzo, is the place Mahler started composing this symphony and it forms the heart of the work.  Perhaps influenced by the beauty of his summer retreat, this movement exuberantly dances and sings through an extended series of transformations at turns ecstatic, heart rending, menacing, and ultimately jubilant.  Part 1 consists of the opening “Funeral March,” which is built largely around the alternation of the alarming opening trumpet fanfare and the ensuing elegiac melody, and the second movement marked “Sturmich bewegt.  Mit grösster Vehemenz” (Stormy, turbulent. With greatest vehemence), with its contrasting lyrical, but largely restless middle section.  Part 3 begins with the famous Adagietto, one of Mahler’s most tender and expressive instrumental movements.  It is a song without words for strings and harp encompassing peaks of passionate intensity and depths of tragic despair.  After the Adagietto fades away, Mahler gradually introduces the boisterous and gleeful Rondo – Finale.  Here Mahler weaves reminiscences of earlier movements into the generally joyful and energetic mood that brings this mighty symphony to its radiant and unexpectedly jovial conclusion.
© 2008 Robert S. Katz, Ph.D.