January 30 & February 1 & 2, 2025
Atlanta Symphony Hall, Woodruff Arts Center
Atlanta, Georgia – USA
Atlanta Symphony Orchestra; Nathalie Stutzmann, conductor.
Ludwig van BEETHOVEN: Symphony No. 2 in D major, Op. 36
Ludwig van BEETHOVEN: Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67
Mark Gresham | 3 FEB 2025
This past weekend’s concerts by the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra were the second installment of its “Beethoven Project,” conducted by its music director Nathalie Stutzmann. The program featured Symphony No. 2 in D major, Op. 36, and Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67, and unlike the previous week, when the winter weather drastically limited rehearsal time, the orchestra had a complete set of rehearsals for preparation.
Portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven (1803) by Christian Horneman (Wikimedia, edited)
Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2, while still anchored in the classical tradition like his Symphony No. 1 (heard last week), hints more at the revolutionary path he would soon tread.
The symphony opens with a dramatic and lengthy “Adagio molto” introduction beginning in D major, suddenly shifting to B♭ major in 12–16, then winding its way back to D major to seamlessly introduce the vivacious “Allegro con brio” that demonstrates Beethoven’s mastery of thematic development.
The “Larghetto” that follows is among Beethoven’s most expansive symphonic slow movements, intertwining a tapestry of complex emotions. Beethoven innovatively blends a somewhat loose sonata form with a more lyrical, song-like character. The use of woodwinds in dialogue with the strings is particularly noteworthy, showing Beethoven’s interest in color and texture.
The “Scherzo” third movement introduces a playful yet sophisticated use of rhythm, something that would become a hallmark of his style. The finale of Symphony No. 2 is marked by its exuberance and structural innovation, setting the stage for Beethoven’s later works.
Fast forward to the iconic Symphony No. 5, and we witness the full bloom of Beethoven’s “heroic” period that began with his Symphony No. 3 that the ASO played last week. The opening movement’s famous four-note motif, emblematic of fate, sets a tone of intensity and struggle that permeates the entire piece.
This symphony was my first intense encounter with classical music as a child, at the age of 5 years, through a 1958 recording by Bruno Walter and the Columbia Symphony Orchestra (an ad hoc group mostly from LA Philharmonic players) on a 10” 33-1/3 RPM disc issued by Columbia Records (Columbia ML 5182)—during an era when recordings were still transitioning from 10” discs (the old 78 RPM format) to 12” LPs. So, in addition to being iconic, even in American popular culture, No. 5 holds a special personal place for me as a listener and musician.
Unlike the extended start of Symphony No. 2, the Symphony No. 5 starts with an immediate, gripping narrative that pushes forward with relentless energy.
The “Andante con moto” second movement introduces a theme of hope amidst adversity. Like the first movement, the “Scherzo,” with its intricate interplay between themes, showcases Beethoven’s mastery of development from a single motif. Finally, the segue from C minor to C major in the final movement, where the three trombones first play as part of the orchestral tutti fanfare, is not just a structural change but a profound emotional journey from darkness to light.
Comparing these two symphonies, we see Beethoven’s progression from a composer deeply rooted in the classical tradition to one who is redefining the symphonic form—just as we experienced the previous week with the contrast between No. 1 and No. 3, illustrating Beethoven’s growth as a composer from his “classical” first to “heroic” second period, and his impact on the future of music.
Fair enough, so far, for the overall planning of the “Beethoven Project.” We’ll see how the rest plays out.
But my overall response to the performance of both is that “velocity is not momentum.” Nor is it a substitute for it. Both of these works felt much too fast across the board (and I was hardly the only one to notice) within a somewhat rough-shod approach by Stutzmann, especially in the slow second movements of each, where attention to phrasing seemed sacrificed in the process of a much too hurried pace. The second movement of the Fifth, especially, a set of double variations, was additionally beset with a disturbingly abrupt ending, which should not have been. And like velocity versus momentum, unfocused bombast is not the same as focused force. The latter need not be as loud but carries far more energy and emotional persuasion. I felt a general sense of imprecision, inconsistent tempi, and, in a couple of instances, winds and strings not aligning in certain chords of the Second Symphony’s first movement, for one example. While many in the packed audience were stirred, especially by the first movement, in which some bobbed their heads with the music, I longed for something different.
All conductors have their strengths and weaknesses. From listening to all of Stutzmann’s subscription concerts in Atlanta since her tenure as music director began and a few before that, while she may be lauded elsewhere for Wagner as one of her strengths, Beethoven is not, for the most part. (I did say some nice things about a past performance of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 6 and have given her positive comments on the music of other composers, but some people seem to ignore that.)
We are now nearing the halfway point with this “Beethoven Project.” I am genuinely hoping for the best outcome for its remaining concerts, all of which Stutzmann is to conduct. We’ll have to wait and see whether those hopes are realized. ■
EXTERNAL LINKS:
- Atlanta Symphony Orchestra: aso.org
Read more by Mark Gresham.
.png){kind=logo}