Alastair Macaulay reviews Rattle’s anthropologically eclectic concert
NewsOur critic got distracted last night by the conductor’s political homilies.
Barbican Hall, April 23, 2023: by Alastair Macaulay
Simon Rattle, Britain’s most prestigious classical musician this century, took the opportunity on Sunday 23 (Shakespeare’s birthday) to address the Barbican Hall audience about the recent swingeing cuts made by the Arts Council and by the BBC. He had long been programmed to conduct the London Symphony Orchestra in Mahler’s Seventh Symphony; the recent resurrection of the BBC Singers (“one of the greatest choruses in the world”) from the BBC’s proposed proposed deletion had prompted him to add them in Poulenc’s “Figure humaine” as the concert’s second half. It was the BBC Singers who delivered the world premiere of “Figure humaine”, when the score was smuggled out of occupied France.
He addressed the audience twice. Before the Mahler, as if encouraging the symphony’s audience not to leave before the Poulenc, he said “If you know ‘Figure humaine’… you will want to hear it again. If you do not know it, this is simply the greatest piece of music you have not heard. It is one of the most extraordinary pieces of unaccompanied choral music of all time.”
Then at the end of the interval, he returned to talk politics. Referring to swingeing cuts made by Britain’s two largest supporters of classical music, the Arts Council and the BBC, he said “There’s a kind of dishonesty about many of the decisions. George Orwell would recognise the language. ‘Refresh the administration’? ‘Reimagine the art form’? They’re two pieces of news-speak that mean the opposite of the actual words. But you can all choose your own…. So many of the problems are rooted in an ignorance about what this art form entails. And, more worryingly, there seems to be a stubborn pride in the ignorance…. We’re in a fight, and we need to ensure that classical music remains part of the beating heart of our country and of our culture.”
The two halves of Rattle’s concert both exemplified the higher achievements of the culture he meant. Mahler’s Seventh can be heard many ways. Its unorthodox structure has five movements; its vast soundworld includes shrieks, birdsong, cowbells, a string quartet, and an anthropologically eclectic array of dance and march rhythms. Rattle joined all this extravaganza to a larger sense of classical form. The symphony emerged as a vast arc of imagination, a psychologically journey into changing dream terrain now spectral, now poignant, so that its final entry into joyous daylight becomes startling, even surreal.
Mahler and Poulenc face in opposite directions. The light textures, poignant harmonies, and piquant metres of Poulenc’s unaccompanied 1943 cantata feel bracingly clean, stingingly fresh. The French words, by Paul Eluard, cover imagery and feeling both dark and bright; the final movement gradually accelerates as it approaches the culminating word “Liberté!” By the time that word has been uttered (a soprano top E suddenly lifts the final syllable into a new kind of heroic ecstasy), the idea of liberty has emerged in many senses and moods.
The BBC Singers sang the music as if to demonstrate their need for existence, with exemplary musical lucidity, every harmony movingly weighted. Here’s hoping they now work towards even brighter French diction. I always want to give Poulenc singers the exercise of the closing lines of his song “Montparnasse”: “Tes yeux ressemblent tant à ces deux grands ballons qui s’en vont dans l’air pur à l’aventure.” Every syllable must register communicatively.
Rattle was of course right in every respect. Today’s philistines are directly and demonstrably the legacy of Margaret Thatcher.
Jeez. Give it up for goodness sake!
Radio 3 began on what has proved to be a steep decline when Blair’s friend, John Birt, took over. [Now it’s relentlessly telling anyone still listening to ‘relax’, with the kitsch language of ‘calming music’. Meaning crystallises in the space between the music and the listener.
I was there last night, too. I found Rattle’s speech convincing and sincere. There was none of the usual grandstanding associated with figures of elevated artistic stature making political statements. And it wasn’t really a political statement – the man is simply trying to give his contribution in saving BBC Singers, a superb vocal ensemble, and many other music organizations accross the UK which are currently under political attack, and this has to be appreciated.
Your reviewer forgot to mention Rattle’s reference to Sir Peter Hall and his mischievous remark over lunch more than 40 years ago that it will be Rattle’s turn one day to be at the receiving end of political attacks and sneers. This is how he started his short speech, creating a sense of both self-depreciation and dark humor, but also provided a frank assessment of gravity of the current situation.
Mr. Lebrecht, for all of us who love music (or at least claim so), it is time to stop with sneers and cheap politicking. BBC Singers, the ensemble which gave the world a premiere of Poulenc’ Figure humaine during WWII as a powerful symbol of resistance against Nazism is under threat of extinction. We should all support those who fight for it.
Leaving the concert, I overheard a couple of other attendees commenting that the ensemble’s annual budget is 1.5% lower than Gary Lineker’s BBC salary. A sad and shocking statement to the society we live in and another reason to support Rattle’s efforts.
Rattle would carry more weight with me, if he came clean about his huge earnings over the decades. For him to criticise the Government, when he has presumably earned many multiples of British orchestral players’ salaries – unchallenged – is distasteful.
The more that Arts Council money is placed largely in the hands of an elite few (i.e. conductors and soloists): the less there is to go around.
It’s not rocket science.
Rattle is the reason why lots of LSO concerts sell as well as they do and get the recording, tv broadcast gigs that they do. What you’re suggesting is the equivalent of saying that Meryl Streep, Beyoncé, Jack Nicholson, Lionel Messi, Gareth Bale or Novak Djokovic shouldn’t earn a few million dollars a year and that they should just earn a tiny fraction of that so that everyone else earns the same. That’s called communism and the fact that so many musicians (and sportspeople) fled communist countries might tell you why that idea doesn’t work.
I’m sure Mr Rattle would agree (without the need for personal snooping that you’re calling for) his earnings are more than 6 figures- considerably less than many professional sportsmen worldwide who are not as famous or as accomplished in their field as he is in music, and doesn’t do half the amount of unpaid community outreach and mentoring work he does, but more than the earnings of many famous dancers and stage actors in Britain, who are box office draws and whose performances help pay the salaries of admin, security and front of house staff.
You rather miss the point that what you call ‘the elite few’ – ie those who excel in their art form – depend on the orchestral players, stage managers et.al, and of course those of us who go along to listen. [When you want to see a specialist expect to see a doctor who is a member of an elite.]
Please don’t bring Gary Lineker into it. Compared to similar figures in the U.S., he is vastly underpaid at $1.5 million. The more important point is that the cost of the BBC Singers is negligible and it was laughable that they were proposed for elimination over such a tiny sum.
But that just goes to show how underpaid the BBC Singers are and how much they are giving audiences at modest costs. Can I watch a football/soccer match without Lineker’s commentary and presenting? Yes. Is he a pleasant and enjoyable analyst and presenter to watch and listen to on tv even if there’s no match? Yes. Can we listen to the Poulenc and other choral pieces if the BBC Singers were absent from the stage? Lineker is lovely and all, but he’s not essential to a football match. The BBC Singers are vital to whatever choral piece is on the programme. I’m not disagreeing with you but merely looking at the position of the BBC Singers and other performers facing cuts. (And yes, I agree that in America, tv presenters get paid an awful lot for turning up to smile, wear free smart clothing, and chat about sport using research and footage collected by other people- something which my friends do for free over lunch or in the pub).
Bore off Rattle and bu**er off back to Germany
That he finds Germany better in various ways and therefore wants to live there and that he sincerely wants the UK to do better are not contradictory. It is, in fact, a very common sort of position for many expatriates from developing countries residing in developed ones. You are simply beginning to see it more from British people as well.
Rattle needs to start disclosing his earnings, over the years.
I have just about had enough of reading about stupendously well-paid conductors berating Governments about a failure to invest in the arts: when some of these individuals have swallowed such a disproportionately high percentage of the available money.
In 2018, the Daily Mail reported that Pappano had taken home over £800,000 in base salary and appearance fees.
When men trouser this much money – as though it were their God-given right – they create the appearance of needing to be bribed to do their jobs.
Some of us are forced to work for almost nothing, because these individuals go off with so much of the moolah.
I suggest that they sell some of their own property and donate the money to the BBC to support orchestral musicians under threat, if they are so deeply upset about recent events.
It is good that world class musicians choose to speak out in support of UK arts at times like this.
NL you have a choice to focus on nit picking, and disagreeing on points of detail, or to promote a common message.
In so far as your voice carries any weight, why not use it in a supportive way for the wider good ?
Hmm…….orchestras still seem to to rely on the unquestionably Capitalist pyramid structure of financial reward….where Mr Big names his enormous fee (per rehearsal/concert or as annual contract salary) and the musicians scuttle about playing hundreds, no, thousands of notes per concert (yes, 1st violins I mean you) and then are paid a humdrum pittance. Sometimes I wonder if these podium maestri ever take a minute to honestly reflect upon the imbalance from which they themselves garner all the glory and bask in fat financial rewards. Then go lecture the public about fairness. At least Gary Lineker used to actually get his boots dirty on the field and score a few goals.
The point is not what some footballer earns; top musicians come up from the basic level, having worked hard as musicians and having what it takes to get to the top of the pyramid. Plenty of conductors and singers around the world and around the country who could earn more doing something else, and undoubtedly ease of travel has meant that those at the top have to be offered competitive fees – but the point is quality of performance to offer rewarding experiences to audiences, as well as inspiration to that minority of younger people willing to put the work in.
I think we’ve gotten used to it and would be quite surprised and even disappointed to have a concert in Rattle’s last season with LSO as chief without a speech. Totally expected, and he’s not wrong. I wasn’t free to attend last night’s concert, but Figure humane will be performed again at the Proms by the BBC Singers at the LSO’s 27 August concert (Mahler 9th this time) and broadcast on tv for those who can’t attend in person. Looking forward to it!
News-speak?