02 July 2012

Titbits about Celibidache and his reunion with the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra in 1992


With the imminent release of the DVD and Blu-ray of the historic reunion of Celibidache and the Berlin Philharmoic Orchestra in 1992 on Euroarts, it is perhaps the right time to take a look at some titbits about this event which aroused much interest in the muscal world.

Celibidache's last concert with the Berlin Philharmonic before he left this orchestra was on 29 November 1954, in Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra. A few days before that, on 25 and 26 November, Celi had conducted Brahms' German Requiem to great acclaim from the public and critics alike. However, according to Klaus Lang, in The Karajan Dossier, "behind the scenes there were violent diasgreements between orchestra and conductor, as Celibidache -- the meticulousness of whose rehearsals bordered on the fanatical -- accused the players of incompetence and total lack of discipline". This would lay the foundation for Celi's inability to realise his dream of succeeding Furtwängler. Between the end of WWII and the death of Furtwängler on 30 November 1954, Celibidache gave at least 414 concerts with the Berlin Philharmonic, compared to Furtwängler's 222 and Karajan's mere four. Those were difficult years in post-war Germany and Celibidache had managed to help the Berlin Philharmonic to restore its former high artistic standard. Thus, no one will find it hard to envisage that Celibidache was sorely disappointed when Karajan was appointed Furtwängler's successor. He left Berlin and its world famous orchestra.




Some would ask why Celi did not return to conduct the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. In an interview with the veteran BPO intendant Wolfgang Stresemann in April 1978, Klaus Lang noted the following conversation, again in his book The Karajan Dossier. He asked Stresemann, "You continued to work with the Romanian maestro when you were intendant of the Berlin Radio Symphony Orchestra (*)...... Why is it that, ever since Celibidache and the Philharmonic parted company, he's avoided the orchestra?" (*from 1956-1959)

Stresemann's answer was like this:
"You know, I'm not familiar with the background of all this, since it wasn't until 1955 that I returned to Berlin. Immediately after the war Celibidache did a great deal for the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra, but I've been told that he expected to be appointed Furtwängler's successor. He was no doubt very disappointed by Karajan's appointment and, although, I may be wrong, I think he now feels a kind of love-hate relationship towards the Philharmonic. He's often attacked the orchestra in public, which isn't exactly helpful and which is why I believe concerts with him would immediately be fraught with tension. I think it's much better if he comes to the Philharmonie with other orchestra -- as he now does on a regular basis. That he's an exceptional conductor has never been in any doubt." (pp. 132-133).

The ice was finally broken in 1990, thanks to the then German President Richard von Weizsäcker who wrote a letter on 9 November 1990 to Celi congratulating him on the success of his recent Japanese tour with the Munich Philharmonic, and sincerely asking him to consider a reunion with BPO. He added that, "It would be a real feast for me, for the Orchestra, for Berlin and the whole musical world". What a compliment!

Celi replied on 22 November 1990 and in the letter he wrote: "Thank you very much for the invitation to conduct the Berlin Philharmonic after a long time. It is my great honour to accept the invitation."

The time and venue were then fixed to be on 31 March and 1 April 1992 at the Grosser Konzertsaal, Schauspielhaus Berlin. As Philharmonie Berlin started its renovation in April 1992, the concerts could not be performed there. This would be a benefit concert for children in Romania. That time slot was originally allocated to a benefit concert by Leonard Bernstein, but as he died on 14 October 1990, the German President was quick in thinking of the perfect replacement.

Celi asked for 6 rehearsal sessions for the single work in these two concerts, Bruckner's Seventh Symphony. So much rehearsal time was unusual for a work the BPO was so familiar with, but they were ready to oblige him this time. In fact Barenboim had just recorded this symphony with the BPO in the preceding month. The result was fruitful to both however, with final mutual understanding evolving from the initial skeptical exchanges.

The rehearsal scene was depicted in some detail by Klaus Umbach in his book Celibidache -- der andere Maestro (pp. 83-86). During the first rehearsal on 27 March 1992, orchestral members described it as " a marathon". To get an idea of why they said so, Celi spent half an hour to rehearse the G#-G-F# tremolo of the first violins in the first 11 bars. He would not take any "Nebula" or wishy-washy tremolo, and he wanted very clear, very precise and very quiet ones. Umbach remarked that Celi rehearsed not only Bruckner, but also his infamous art of cold shower. One example was, on their first notes, Celibidache told the double basses they were like "a women's orchestra in Florida" and "Thin, so thin".

On the second day, he said, "You are wonderful, but not symphonic". Things became a little better in the third rehearsal when Celi said, "This time it is symphonic. But merely a false drama. Transparency is the ultimate aim. You should listen to each other." Then he wanted the Berliners to know what his Munich Philharmonic players' "deutsches Vibrato". 

On the fourth rehearsal day, there was "trust" and Celi would mutter "thank you". During the break, he said, "I'm very reassured that there is spontaneity. See how they react, a direct translation of what I tell them. Much is indeed unusual of them, but even if not everything works out, it will be a wonderful concert."

The concert did turn out very well. And the rest, as they say, is history.

26 June 2012

Please, stop these unfounded accusations on Bruckner

Anton Bruckner has been plagued by too many nasty stereotypes even till this day. Many of these labellings were based on a mixture, of varying proportions, of misunderstanding, misinformation, prejudice or simply a mindless spreading of the rumour. This will influence not only people's impressions of his personality, but also opinion and appreciation of his music. Fortunately many of these wrong labels have been disputed against in books and journal articles in recent years, but while we think that the situation is improving, here comes a remark by Norman Lebrecht linking Bruckner with anti-Semitism. 

On page 40 of his book published in 2010, Why Mahler?, Lebrecht writes: “Mahler calls Bruckner his 'father-in-learning', overlooking his repeated disparagements of Mahler’s Jewishness. It is the price he has to pay for having a mentor.”  The word "repeated" when coupled with "disparagements of Mahler's Jewishness" makes a very strong accusation. If this statement were quoted repeatedly in future, what it implies would have become "truth" to many. Some would say that it is no big deal, as Bruckner was already a dead man more than 100 years ago. If this is the case, where are the values we are holding dear to our heart: respect and justice?



Mr Ken Ward, Editor of The Bruckner Journal, has made great efforts to analyse Lebrecht's accusation in a scholarly manner and found that it is basically unfounded. I have high respect to Mr Ward who has taken so much time and trouble to bring us the evidence. His well evidence-based article, Bruckner, Mahler and Anti-Semitism, appears in the current issue of The Bruckner Journal and it can be read online here (hosted in Mr John Berky's website).

I sincerely appeal to you to read this article and help stop the rumour. We should treat Bruckner with the respect that he deserves.

17 June 2012

My frugal photography gear for travel

Happy Father's Day.

We had a happy family gathering today involving three generations. The semi-buffet lunch was really nice. An occasion to take some pictures as well. My son Andrew just came back from the UK last night and he has recently taken up an interest in photography. However our choice of photography gear differs. He is a DSLR man (in Canon) through and through, although he can't afford more than 2 lenses (one used) at this moment. I have more diversified choices. We talked about what gear I used when I travelled to Jeju, Korea last month.

As I'm not young anymore, weight consideration is of paramount importance now. I remember quite well my heavy camera bag, weighing more than 10 pounds, in my younger days, an act often ridiculed by my wife. Now I become lazier and aim at light weight even if that means some compromise in image quality (IQ), or so it seems. I reckon that even if not all lenses are created equal with some better than others on measurement, what really matters is the quality of the pictures and it is not necessarily in direct proportion to the accepted quality or price of the lens one uses.

Although good lenses are never too cheap, I've always maintained that frugality is not impossible in one's choice of photography gear: I've never taken to the foolish habit of showing off one's exotic lenses -- the "see what I got" superiority complex. Andrew asked me to post my choice of gear for travel in this blog, and here it is in the following picture.




The list of gear from left to right in the picture above:
1) Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED (465g)
2) Nikon D5100 body and Nikkor 45mm f/2.8P (560g + 120g)
3) Panasonic Lumix G3 with Lumix Leica DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH (200g for the lens)
4) Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6 (761g for the G3 body + lens)
Total: 2106g

This 2.1kg set serves my purpose and pocket well. It covers the 35mm camera equivalent of focal lengths from 18mm to 36mm (zoom), 50mm (prime), 67.5mm (prime) and 90-400mm (zoom). And it contains 2 bodies. Low-light scenes can be tackled with the f/1.4 normal lens.

As Jeju is well known for its beautiful natural scenery, a good wide-angle lens is a must. This Nikon 12-24mm zoom was bought together with my D70 when they were first released many years ago, and has been a stellar performer as far as wide angles are concerned. I have thought of acquiring the Lumix 7-14mm f/4 ASPH before, but since no filter can be attached to it because of the bulging front lens and it is not cheap, I may as well use my well-tried Nikon zoom.

I chose D5100 because of its tiltable LCD and its middle of the road specifications and price. It also fits the DX format of the 12-24mm zoom. The 45mm f/2.8P lens is not only cute but also sharp and has the lovable "footprint" of old lenses. Although it is manual focus, automation in metering is still possible because it is a "P" lens. I may change it for an autofocus lens in my next trip, using the cheap but very good Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8G instead (not much heavier at 185g).

The micro 4/3 system is chosen for its light weight. The IQ of the "Leica" 25mm f/1.4 lens is excellent. The tele-zoom is particularly handy given its feather weight compared with similar zooms for any DSLR system. For comparison the NIkon AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED weighs 745g alone, almost as much as this micro 4/3 lens together with the G3 body. The much coveted AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII is 1540g in weight and costs significantly more.

The total cost of this set is still less than what one would pay for the new D800 body alone.

Oh I forget to mention that this set has an all-weather mini backup in the form of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 which my wife carries. This camera has proven to be very handy both in rain and in snow.