1771 – The Music part 1 - Know me by my symphony

Hob	Key	NC	HRL	Instruments
52	c	52	50	2 Oboes, Bassoon, 2 Horns & Strings Horns in C alto, C basso
42	D	53	52	2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns & Strings

In this year of quiet living, his last one for perhaps the next thirty years, there was no real shortage of things for Haydn to do. Among those were the composition of two memorable symphonies, with one of them, the c minor, having been called one of the premier works of the era of dramatic symphonies. And also called just the opposite!

Now firmly ensconced in its position as the actual number 52, this one has bounced around on the dating front for quite some time. For a while it was considered to be the last of the 'Sturm und Drang' works, but scholarship has now placed it earlier than some true gems like #45-47, none of which will show up until next year. In addition to being placed in the dramatic category, this is likely to be the c minor symphony which Carpani later described as being a church symphony. There are only two to choose from, and #78 from 1782 has a better documented history, and the tone isn't suitable for church, even in light-hearted Vienna!

As the dating of #52 bounces around, so does the reception in the 21^st century (really, just a holdover of the 20^th century in this case). We come again, for different reasons, to the point where generally, the musicologists aren't too pleased with this work, yet it is very popular by all accounts. As it should be. The opening movement is very spacious, leading out with a mysterious-sounding unison by the band, then moving into a second idea which plays out mainly in the strings. This movement uses the horns in C alto, with nice results as they always seem to soar above the rest. The entire movement has an interesting orchestral sound which is both full and yet transparent. This is yet another argument in favor of period instrument ensembles using a reasonable approximation of the proper number of players for which it was composed. The second movement has been described as characterless by those who know more than I do about such things. I find it to be a nice contrast to the high-energy of the opening. It has abrupt changes of pace, then back again which give the whole a large scale sense of rhythmic disruption. Again we are mainly being carried along by the strings, staying much in the lower registers, but occasional and surprising outbursts from the winds keep things moving along nicely. Here we see the hornists have switched to the C basso crooks, and they underlie much of the movement with the tonal color of the horns blended into the bass line. Landon describes the movement as a 'stately Spanish Dance', and overall it seems to evoke that atmosphere.

The 'leaden' minuet, 'one of the worst he ever wrote', to quote the experts, is none of those things, really. As always with Haydn, it makes much of little. The horns in C basso remain, and we have the minuet proper presenting a discussion between them and the violins. The second half presents a series of off-beat figures (forzati for those of you who know more than I do about such things) which in turn make up the main figure of the trio. From there we are back to the Finale: Presto. The nervous-sounding violins leading the way with the winds hanging on, until midway when the horns (in C alto again) take over. It is a fine ride and a suitable ending for a very good symphony. To get back to the earlier theme of the musicologists, the main complaint seems to be virtually identical to what we heard back with #39, that the outer movements and the inner movements are too different. They say different in quality, but I don't buy that. They are different in mood, and so they present a big contrast. #39 is very dramatic in its outer movements and very galant in its inner ones. #52 doesn't turn to galant for its stylistic inspiration, but it does seem to abandon Sturm und Drang altogether, and perhaps this is the source of consternation. Where the irony lies for me, the same people present the contemporaneous German critics as being out of touch (to put it nicely) with what Haydn was doing, but the way I read their writings, the modern 'critics' follow in their footsteps. Maybe it's a brotherhood thing... In any case, this is a work you should listen to and decide for yourself. I predict you will like it just fine!

It is unlikely we will have such a difference of opinion with our other 1771 symphony, #42 in D major. The opening movement starts out like an opera aria with the violins presenting the opportunity (acciaccatura) and the entire band taking off with a songlike melody, with the 'singing' gaining elaborateness as it goes along. All this at a very brisk pace, I might add. Landon calls it a sort of musical joke, and it seems to be, rather like the instruments mocking singers for the things they can/can't do. The overall brilliance of the entire movement is due to the choice of key. D major is the 'best key' for violins and many wind instruments too. Haydn exploits the fact to great effect. The entire first movement is imbued with bright tone color. This is a movement which could have been the overture to an Italian opera buffa, and perhaps the composition of Le pescatrici the previous year had taught Haydn something. There is absolutely no element of formal stiffness in this work anywhere, most certainly not in the opening movement! It is relaxed and humorous, using opportunities as they arise to give a great buffa feel to the music. A close listen will show you, this is a breakthrough sort of movement which will open doors to later works.

The second movement, Andantino e cantabile, has a beautiful melody carried mainly in the strings, with just a touch of winds here and there to add some interesting tone color. It sounds like an old song we all should know, but it is actually original music composed after older models. Haydn has learned how to write music that evokes other music to the point where the listener feels comfortable with it. This is the famous movement where he crossed out several measures in the autograph and wrote in the margin "for too learned ears". And that is just the thing, he was trying for music we would like and be comfortable with, and certainly he succeeded here. In contrast, the minuet is damned near jolly! It is led by the horns in this case, being mainly for winds. Which leads to the trio, where the lead is taken over by the violins. And what are they playing? Wind parts! Trumpet calls and trills played by the violins make up the main theme, and then we are back to the minuet proper. It is a lovely bit of nonsense, overall one of Haydn's finer efforts in the minuet department.

The Finale has its own brand of humor. As described by Gretchen Wheelock in her brilliant book, Haydn's Ingenious Jesting With Art (pg. 126):

Symphonies 42, 46 & 66 are the only finales [actually] marked Scherzando…. Scherzando is more than a performance direction: audible in each [of these finales] are surprising interruptions and miscontinuations, reversals that frustrate closure, the stasis of repeating fragments seemingly lost in time, and the recasting of thematic materials in unexpected settings.

Along with a host of other elements, these things are typical of Haydn's style, not just at the turn of the decade but well before this time and for a long time afterward. For me, when I listen to this movement, every time I think I know where it's going, it goes somewhere else. This is the height of entertainment, in my opinion. I strongly commend this work to your close attention. Jettison your received knowledge of S & D and listen with fresh ears. I think what you hear will be overtones of the future!

Next time we will take a look at the Opus 17 quartets. Replete with their own brand of moving forward.

Thanks for reading!