I have been reading the sleeve note with the original Columbia LP of Karajans account of the Fourth Symphony and Tapiola with Philharmonia Orchestra. Very interesting notes by Malcolm Macdonald. Here is a sample.

'The symphonies of Sibelius are the expression of a tremendous personality in its every variety of mood. But after the first two, which were clearly and highly successfully addressed to the concert hall, the remainder, as at present known to us, share one characteristic almost throughout : for whatever forces they may be scored, they are intimate music--the composer is setting down his thoughts on paper, with immense conviction, but with little apparent concern for whether their performance is overheard by an audience or not, and none at all for any 'effectiveness' of the conventional sort'.

Mr Macdonald goes on to say that 'the tendency reaches its extreme in the fourth symphony'. We must remember that Sibelius was still very much alive at this time and having praised Karajans recording may well have seen Macdonalds notes for himself.
I am wondering just what forum members make of this, 55 years on.
Was Sibelius unconcerned at playing to the gallery?--kp

I'd say yes and no.

I would think the main reason anyone composes music is to have other people hear it. I think we can all be pretty sure that Sibelius did not intend on writing music for only his own ears to hear. He wrote for the public and promoted his music just as much as anyone could expect.

But, I think there is a difference between allowing the public to hear and the public to understand. There's no doubting Sibbe wanted the worl to hear his 4th, for example, but he also knew he was not writing another concert blockbuster like Finlandia or the first two symphonies. He must have known the 4th was strange, dark and mysterious; he had to know this music would challenge the average listenermore than amuse. But he did want the average listener to hear it!

I think this is typical of an artist. Artists seek to express themselves and have their inner-most thoughts and feelings on display for people to react. There is no such thing as an artist who isn't into self-expression and a little bit of the limelight.

But also typical of artists is a desire, I think, to provoke, arouse, challenge, confuse his or her public. Remember, it's a reaction that artists are seeking. I think Sibelius was going through rough times in his life and he wanted to let the world know through his music. Sibbe doesn't hide very much in the 4th...if he wanted to hide behind his music, he could have written another 2nd.

Long story short, Sibelius, like any other artist, wants and needs his audience. But Sibbe was an envelope-pusher much like Stravinksy...he wants you to hear, but whether or not you understand...well...that's YOUR problem, not his.

Tapkaara wrote:

Artists seek to express themselves and have their inner-most thoughts and feelings on display for people to react.

... and I believe that Sibelius wanted people to react honestly to his music, which was always honestly written, devoid of effect for the sake of effect.

Sibelius never shied away from criticism, especially self-criticism, making many major revisions of his works throughout his life. Through this process I think we see that his primary concern was always to have the piece exactly as he wanted it and exactly right, regardless of how it would be received by the public. It is this very integrity that secures his place as one of the greatest composers of all time.

Interesting points here... I can grasp what Macdonald wishes to convey, but the reactions from Tapkaara and Kurki are incontrovertible and clearly expose the logical flaw concealed within the elegant prose.

Tapkaara wrote:

Artists seek to express themselves and have their inner-most thoughts and feelings on display for people to react.

...I can think of some composers in whose case I would very much rather that they had kept their thought to themselves...

Tapkaara wrote:

whether or not you understand...well...that's YOUR problem, not his.

...applies not only to the symphonies but also, perhaps more so, to the smaller works. Just think how the critics love to savage the piano music and chamber works - and, as I've said before, I bet most of those critics have not devoted much of their precious time to listening to these pieces. Not with a copy date and pay cheque waiting!

Andrew mentions composers who should have kept there thoughts to themselves. Is this a veiled reference to the Karlheinz Stockhausen thread?

I can see Mr. Macdonalds point regarding the first two symphonies. In these fine works, Sibelius had done for Finland what Dvorak had done for Bohemia and Grieg for Norway, and they slot into concert programmes with ease. But at the turn of the century, musical nationalism was not enough and Sibelius who was well aware of the trends in music at this time from Debussy and Schoenberg to Stravinsky and Bartok, knew that for his art to develop on a universal scale, he must meet the challenge of symphonic composition in new and radical ways.
Sibelius confessed that even his smallest piano pieces represented his innermost self. Unlike many composers, Sibelius remained true to himself, he never jumped on any bandwaggons for short term popularity. Colin Davies, when asked just what Sibelius meant to him replied 'Look in the mirror'. Sibelius of course was acutely aware of his standing in various parts of the musical world, which he divided up into two groups, those that understood the fourth symphony and those that did not!
In his symphonic journey, Sibelius kept steadfastly to expressing truth in music as he saw it. In the fourth, Sibelius explored the dark side of the human spirit and he must have surely known that in spite of the work being his greatest composition to date, it was hardly going to be 'box office'. With the fifth, Sibelius wrote a truely 'Festival' symphony that has become very popular. With the sixth, a model of restraint and purity of utterence, Sibelius moved a momentous step further along his own straight and narrow path. In the seventh, the final synthesis--one of the last fully effective words in the long and glorious history of the symphony.
Sibelius could write an heroic finale with the best of them, but he was never bombastic, his symphonies were all born from a deep static well of imagination and his music is unconcerned with 'box office' but with the deepest aspirations of the human spirit.--kp
_________________________
On Saturday September 20th this post was awarded the Forum's first "Mark of Excellence" by the Administrator. See

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

thread for an explanation of this feature of the Forum.

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

Thankyou Kurkikohtaus, I feel very honoured to be the first recipient of the 'Mark of Excellence', and particuarly on this, the 51st anniversary of the death of Jean Sibelius.--kp

Congratulations to Kullervopete!