Tag: Salisbury

April 2024

This was the intriguing title of a fascinating talk by Alan Forshaw on why the ninth symphony seems to loom large in composer’s lives. Beethoven’s 9th is well known although he did attempt a tenth and he left some sketches. It was with him that the myth started and it does seem to have had some kind of effect on those who followed him. Alan played the second movement in a version with a brisk tempo by Toscanini.

Schubert was second, a composer who died tragically young but nevertheless, left a vast treasure trove of music including – nine – symphonies. It has often been suggested that he died of syphilis but medical research suggests this is not true and it is much more likely, in view of the suddenness and the symptoms, he died of typhoid fever which was common at the time. As is well known, his eighth was unfinished. We heard the first movement from the ‘Great’ Symphony – his ninth. Schubert never heard either of them before his death.

Thence to Bruckner who, as Alan reminded us, was a huge admirer of Wagner and said he only worshiped two Gods and the other one was Wagner. He can’t have heard his symphony though … Bruckner was a famous organist and it was he who played the organ at the opening of the Albert Hall. We listened to one of the movements of his ninth, of which he only completed three, and died before finishing it. There may be something in this ‘curse of the ninth’ after all.

Dvořák next who was helped in his composing career by Brahms and was very lucky to get a very generous appointment in New York which gave him plenty of time for composing. We heard a movement from the famous New World Symphony and – you’re getting the hang of this, his ninth. The symphony was hugely important in the development of American music and was discovered after his death. It was premiered in 1893 in New York. Dvořák’s house can be visited just on the outskirts of Prague by the way.

Now Mahler did believe in the curse and went to some lengths to try and avoid labelling it the ninth. No matter, the curse got him and he died the following year.

On to Glazunov who enjoyed much fame and admiration in his day, both in Russia and in the west. He found the more modern composers, and in particular Stravinsky, hard to swallow and thought Petrushka little more than orchestrated dissonance. He never got far with his ninth and we heard an extract of the piano version – perhaps the world was spared. He did however have a pupil at the Leningrad Conservatory called Shostakovich who did go on to write 15 symphonies.

Next was Vaughan Williams who also managed to complete nine and we listened to a movement from it, his ‘last tune’ as he termed it. He died a few months after its premiere in 1958. The symphony is a little unusual in having scored saxophones – perhaps reflecting Ravel’s influence with whom he studied for a year.

And so to Kurt Atterberg, not a name which is that familiar even to keen classical music fans. Swedish, he studied both music and electrical engineering and indeed, it was this latter skill that kept him employed at the Swedish Patent Institute until his retirement. Preferring harmonics to harmony perhaps. He is another composer who had a degree of fame in his lifetime but is little known or played today.

Finally to Northampton born Malcolm Arnold who was a prolific composer well known for his film scores including for example, the St Trinian movies and the Bridge over the River Kwai among many others. An accomplished trumpet player having heard Louis Armstrong play he composed many pieces and including nine symphonies. He was not a pleasant character by all accounts and had a drink problem. He had mental health issues as well. At one point he was given two years to live but manage to live on for another 20. We heard a short extract from his ninth. His musical legacy seems assured.

So is there anything in the ‘curse of the ninth’? Probably not. The idea was created by Mahler who tried to beat it by calling what was his ninth as a song cycle. Looking at the list of composers of symphonies from the nineteenth century onwards it is striking that there is a vast number who wrote a handful, just one, two or three. It is also striking that there are few who wrote between three and 9. Most therefore will compose a small number of symphonies, which consume a significant chunk of time but achieve little success and even less financial reward, and decide to stick to shorter forms.

So how to explain the cluster around nine with few either side having composed eight or eleven symphonies for example? Perhaps the reason is mundane: a modern symphony seems to have taken most composers around two years to complete and not always in a continuous burst. Allowing time between each of say, a year, means each work represents around 3 years out of a composer’s life. Allowing for a productive life of around 40 years which may also include conducting and teaching, means a serious composer of symphonies will end up at the nine or ten mark. So those who do achieve some success at the start of their careers, then go on to reach it: those who don’t stop after one, two or three.

Whatever, it was a really interesting evening and as ever a mixture of the familiar with a handful of rarely heard pieces. The chair of SRMS thanked Alan for putting together an interesting and intriguing topic.

Our last meeting of the current season is on Monday 13 May at 7:30 as usual and is on the subject of Puccini to celebrate the anniversary of his death this year.

Finally, to say we are getting on well with the 2024/25 programme which is all planned and the programme will be available sometime in the summer. For clarity, I should say August since when and if summer comes is not at all certain.

Peter Curbishley