Beethoven: Violin Concerto (Cadenzas: Schnittke)
Schnittke: Violin Concerto No.3
Vadim Gluzman (violin)
James Gaffigan / Lucerne Symphony (BIS)
(scroll down for English review)
我好像評論得太多貝多芬《小提琴協奏曲》的新錄音，這次見到是配搭舒尼卡《第三小提琴協奏曲》，又忍不住想聽。Gluzman這個配搭也很明顯，因為他在貝多芬選用舒尼卡寫的「時代錯配」華彩段，當中有寫於貝多芬以後的小提琴協奏曲的片段。
先談貝多芬，此演奏仍能給我驚喜，單以Gluzman的琴技來說，我很喜歡他溫暖、揉弦闊而快，又不會把琴音揉到七零八落的發音。而在樂曲的層面，他把音符處理得很有彈性，長音會有些微的不規則起伏，有時候更會延長以突出一個特別美的瞬間。短音又不會追求絕對的規則，稍長或稍短都來得非常自然，所以是少有不讓我覺得太過機械，或者太過潔癖的貝多芬協奏曲。
通常前衛作曲家拿經典做二次創作，甚至是更差劣的惡搞時，招來的回應通常就是：放過XXX，你自己寫一首吧。舒尼卡一早就是傑出作曲家了，之前也寫過不少小提琴協奏或獨奏作品，這首《第三小提琴協奏曲》是他在貝多芬華彩段後兩三年寫的，三個無間斷樂章以小提琴的華彩段開始，四分一音（quartertone）顫音有甚強的戲劇效果，第一樂章的小提琴獨奏我覺得像在深淵的吶喊，第二樂章獨奏好像有更多的活動空間，但逐漸被管樂（這兩個樂章的樂隊只用了管樂）逼到牆角，繼而淹沒。
去到這個時候，我覺得很像貝爾格《小提琴協奏曲》，豈料第三樂章就真的是由平和的管樂旋律帶小提琴獨奏出來，雖然不是像貝爾格引用巴哈聖詠，仍和貝爾格第二樂章中死亡、然後昇華的如出一轍。不同在舒尼卡在結尾不是像貝爾格祝願死者安息，而是像馬勒後期交響曲的虛空。
I know I have been reviewing too many new recordings of the Beethoven violin concerto, but I couldn’t resist this one by Vadim Gluzman who paired it with Schnittke’s Third Concerto. It’s quite obvious that Gluzman would be using Schnittke’s “anachronistic” cadenzas with poked fun at the violin concerto repertory.
This performance of Beethoven still delighted me. As for Gluzman’s technique, I love his warm tone with a broad but in-pitch vibrato. As for his interpretation I appreciated his elasticity, the long notes were often played with minute right-hand or left-hand variations, and Gluzman would juice them in moments of heavenly beauty. The short notes were anything but mechanical, any slight lengthening or shortening were absolutely natural.
When avant-garde composers reworked, re-imagined or parodied works from the canon, the reaction was usually “Leave XXX alone and write your own piece.” Schnittke was already a seasoned composer for the violin before his iconoclastic Beethoven cadenzas. His Third Concerto was written in their aftermath and consisted of three uninterrupted movements. The first one kicked off with a cadenza that heavily featured quartertone trills for a dramatic effect. To me, the first movement might be likened to a De Profundis for violin and winds (strings only came in at the climax of the second movement). The violin solo had more room to maneuver in the second movement, but the winds eventually caught up with it and drowned it out with a cacophonic climax.
At this point I was already comparing the work with the Berg concerto. Indeed the third movement started with a very peaceful and hymn-like melody on clarinets, then winds, bringing the solo violin “back to life”. Although Schnittke didn’t quote a Bach chorale but such layout of “death and transfiguration” was obviously Berg. But Schnittke didn’t put the music to a heavenly repose like Berg did, Schnittke’s way of closing the work reminded me of the later Mahler symphonies.