Sinfoniekonzerte

...Placing Shostakovich’s massive Symphony No. 8 after the Beethoven was perhaps a curious choice. While the ultimate victory over fate could be one possible interpretation of the Beethoven, the Shostakovich is at best a journey ending in uncertainty, if not a tentative respite from indescribable tragedy.

Haenchen’s interpretation of the Shostakovich reminded me of one of the most memorable lines from Michael Tilson Thomas’ Keeping Score documentary series. While describing what goes wrong with many interpretations of Tchaikovsky’s oft-performed Symphony No. 4, Tilson Thomas said: « People just bash the hell out of it. » Perhaps Haenchen wanted to avoid the same mistake in the Shostakovich.

The first movement begins with anguish and desolation, before leading to passages of increasing frenzy and violence. In this performance, the opening attacks in the lower strings were surprisingly restrained; the entrance of the violins were almost noble and eloquent. The absolutely shattering climax of this movement, normally terrifying (and even dangerously loud) was also restrained. This was a rather surprising approach to music which describes horror and destruction.

The second movement was the most effective of this evening’s performance, with appropriately heavy-footed strings and excellent woodwind swells. Consistent with the first movement, Haenchen restrained the normally ferocious and coldly mechanical string writing in the perpetuum mobile third movement but nevertheless gave us terrifying stabs from the lower strings. The fourth movement passacaglia, usually interpreted as a desolate and almost lifeless landscape, seemed to flicker (albeit weakly) with life. By giving the fourth movement a greater sense of animation, the contrast transitioning to the seemingly optimistic final movement was somewhat blunted.

While many of Shostakovich’s symphonies contain music of great violence and conflict, effective interpretations do not necessarily need to focus on these elements. However, some of his most terrifying and anguished music (for example, the first movement climax and the transition between the third and fourth movements) is found in the Symphony No. 8, and it is difficult to imagine a convincing performance without these elements properly acknowledged. Although Haenchen’s interpretation presented the validity of a more subdued approach, this music was not given the opportunity to fully express the horror and catharsis written into it.
Derek Ho

www.resmusica.com, 24.4.2006

La phalange belge a fort judicieusement remisé Mikko Franck, son inconstant directeur musical, pour faire appel au chef d’orchestre allemand Hartmut Haenchen. Peu médiatique, ce musicien est pourtant l’une des baguettes les plus compétentes de notre époque et il sait passer, avec excellence, du lyrique au symphonique : s’imposer dans une symphonie de Haydn, un opéra de Puccini ou une pièce de Berg. L’approche de Haenchen se situe dans l’esprit actuel des interprétations du compositeur russe : des tempi amples et une grande importance accordée à la gradation narrative. Le chef d’orchestre ajoute l’essentiel : une tension dramatique et un gros travail sur les dynamiques. Il prend son temps pour imposer les climats nécessaires à cette symphonie de guerre ; une fois la machine en marche, cette vision s’avère aussi implacable que puissante. Au diapason de cette direction, l’orchestre livre une prestation de très haut vol. L’homogénéité et la projection du son sont superlatives alors que certains solos s’avèrent magnifiques : le cor anglais à la fin du premier mouvement et le basson dans le dernier mouvement. Les cuivres se régalent dans les mouvements centraux tandis que les percussions se déchaînent.
Jean-Pierre Tribot