A Revelation of Mahler: Vänskä’s Interpretation Shines in ‘Resurrection’ Symphony

Review published at Seen and Heard International

Mahler performances run the gamut interpretatively.  Leonard Bernstein famously pushed an approach that was cosmic in scale, yet also probed the human condition.  Rafael Kubelik’s approach was rustic and humane. He grounded his performances in Mahler’s abundant references to nature.  There are also the modernists interpretations: Conductors who see Mahler the same way they might think of Schoenberg or Webern — as harbingers of music’s new path in the 20th century.  Boulez fits this category well. 

It’s time we add a new — and perhaps unexpected — musical lens through which we can listen to Mahler: the Finnish composer Jean Sibelius.  Fellow Finn and conductor  Osmo Vänskä’s nearly-complete Mahler cycle with the Minnesota Orchestra divides opinion.  And I confess I haven’t heard much of it outside of the Fifth Symphony.  So I was curious to hear what the maestro might do with Mahler’s epic Second Symphony — ‘Resurrection’ — as a guest conductor with the Seattle Symphony.  I was not disappointed.   

There is a famously reported exchange when Gustav Mahler met Jean Sibelius.  It goes something like this: The two master symphonists conversed in 1907.  Sibelius remarked how much he admired the logic and structure of the symphonic form.  This is consistent with what we, as his listeners, can appreciate.  Over his seven symphonies, Sibelius continuously distills and sharpens his approach.  But in response to his fellow composer’s observation, Mahler reportedly said, “A symphony must be like the world; it must embrace everything.” 

The ‘Resurrection’ Symphony perfectly reflects Mahler’s mantra.  As he chose to wrestle with life and death — heaven and human purpose — the composer seems to have no choice but to throw everything into the mix.  The work calls for an enormous orchestra, offstage brass, a chorus, and two vocal soloists, all folded into more than 80 minutes of weighty music crafted with the aim of answering the unanswerable questions of life. 

For Vänskä, a noted Sibelius interpreter, perhaps these unwieldy elements are part of the appeal. Is there any sense to be made from music that aspires to be everything?  In his first of a two-concert performance of ‘Resurrection’ with the Seattle Symphony, he absolutely tried and the approach worked most of the time.  Vänskä in a way “deconstructed” the work in a Sibelius-like manner, and treated Mahler’s fragmentary motives as building blocks to be re-assembled for the rapt audience.  This approach had many advantages.  Super pianissimo passages weren’t interludes to be glossed over, but were necessary connections for the symphony’s many explosive climaxes, for example. 

Vänskä’s interpretation was supported by his smartly chosen tempos.  Under the direction of a different baton, the harrowing first movement could have proceeded at a pace that wrung out every last ounce of tension.  And perhaps the second and third movements could have been a little less analytical.  But that would not have been as effective in exposing Mahler’s structural intentions.  Vänskä’s approach was.  And as a result, the final movement is a revelation, especially in its first half, which reintroduces and further develops many of Mahler’s ideas from the previous four movements.  And then, aided in large part by Vänskä’s subtle approach, it all comes to a moving close with the help of Joseph Crnko’s always steller Seattle Symphony Chorale, and Mané Galoyan and Jennifer Johnson Cano as vocal soloists. 

Once Vänskä, orchestra, chorus and soloists arrived at this point I couldn’t help but think about the meticulous way, in a much shorter time, Sibelius in his Seventh Symphony achieves the same effect.  The ‘Resurrection’  Symphony is still cosmic in scope, but Vänskä’s approach helped me understand why Mahler bristled at the idea of imposing extra musical descriptions on the work.

Vänskä’s vision for the work is only as good as the orchestra’s willingness to go along.  What a joy then it was to see our hometown orchestra pressed to the limit and rise to the challenge laid out by a great conductor like Vänskä.  The performance rippled with purpose.  Conductor and musicians seemed to be imploring audiences to stay invested in this great ensemble.  After years of plague, music director dust-ups, and wholesale staffing changes audiences need a reason to care again.  Vänskä’s ‘Resurrection’ outclassed the performance led by Giancarlo Gurerro that inauspiciously opened the Dausgaard years, and it may be one of the most gripping, thoughtfully conceived Mahler performances by the Seattle Symphony and its chorus in the last 20 years.