Composer: Jean Sibelius
Works: Symphony No. 1 in E minor, Op. 39 (1899), Symphony No. 5 in E flat, Op. 82 (1917)
Performers: London Symphony Orchestra/Sir Colin Davis
Recording: BMG RCA RED SEAL 74321680172
Label: BMG
Jean Sibelius, one of the titans of late Romantic music, occupies a distinctive niche within the pantheon of symphonic composers. His First Symphony, emerging in a tumultuous 1899, reflects both the burgeoning nationalism of Finland and the emotional turbulence of a composer still in the throes of self-discovery. In contrast, the Fifth Symphony, composed in 1917 amid World War I and significant personal challenges, manifests a more pronounced clarity and expansive nature, encapsulating a shift towards the modernity that would define his later works. Sir Colin Davis, a venerable interpreter of Sibelius, leads the London Symphony Orchestra in this recording, offering an exploration of these two symphonic landmarks that oscillates between grandeur and a more elusive, ethereal quality.
Davis’s interpretation of the First Symphony is one that leans heavily into the lush, sweeping gestures characteristic of Sibelius. The orchestral sound is rich, with strings that swell and recede in a manner reminiscent of natural landscapes emerging from the Finnish earth. However, this approach can veer into what one might term a “mushy” attack, where the incisive clarity of thematic statements is occasionally obscured. For instance, the opening movement’s Allegro moderato, which should be marked by a visceral urgency, instead unfolds with a languorous quality that softens the dramatic tensions intrinsic to its thematic material. The brass, while resplendent, often take their time to “speak,” sacrificing some of the urgency that can propel the listener through the work’s narrative.
In contrast, the Fifth Symphony, particularly its famed “swan” theme in the finale, benefits from Davis’s expansive interpretation. The melodic lines, while occasionally submerged in a wash of orchestral sound, gain a majestic resonance under his baton. Yet, the brisk tempo taken in the theme can feel slightly at odds with the reflective nature of the music. The final moments, where the brass are meant to soar, risk being engulfed by the orchestral texture rather than standing out. This recording captures the timpani’s rolls with clarity, yet they often feel fractionally behind the beat, contributing to a sense of aural haze that can detract from the music’s dramatic impact.
The sound quality of the recording itself merits attention. The engineering captures the orchestra’s full dynamic range, allowing the listener to appreciate the textural intricacies of Sibelius’s orchestration. Yet, the engineering choices seem to favor a certain lushness that can soften the edges of the performance. A comparison with notable interpretations, such as those by Sir Alexander Gibson or the recordings of the Helsinki Philharmonic under the baton of Osmo Vänskä, reveals a starkly different approach. Gibson’s interpretations, for instance, while not lacking in warmth, maintain a fierce clarity and drive that propels the listener forward, enhancing the sense of unfolding drama.
Davis’s Sibelius is undeniably grand and authoritative, embodying a vision that seeks to present the music as a natural phenomenon, growing organically from the orchestral fabric. Yet, this interpretation may not fully resonate with those who seek a more incisive engagement with Sibelius’s symphonic language. The lushness and expansive swell of sound, while appealing to some, can obscure the rhythmic vitality and thematic clarity that are the hallmarks of these works. The listener is left to navigate a landscape that, while beautiful, occasionally lacks the clarity and direction found in more assertive interpretations. Thus, this recording stands as a significant, if somewhat flawed, contribution to the Sibelius discography, one that invites appreciation while also sparking debate about the nature of interpretation in the context of these monumental symphonies.
