Spring Symphonies, No 69 - Schumann: Symphony No 1 "Spring"

Schumann was born in 1810 in Zwickau in Saxony. Mendelssohn was born in 1809 in Hamburg.  their lives and their fates seemed entwined and both were giants of the period after Beethoven.  Mendelssohn premiered this symphony in Leipzig on 31 March 1841.  Mendelssohn died in 1847 at the age of 38 - Schumann was a pall bearer at his funeral.  Schumann died 1856 at the age of 56.  Two of the brightest sparks in European music snuffed out before either could rightly have said to have reached their middle periods.  What music they might have composed.  

It is most likely Schumann died from either syphilis or mercury poisoning, though had been prone to bouts of severe mental health difficulties since his 20s.  Mendelssohn died from a series of strokes perhaps brought on from over-work combined with a genetic predisposition.  Both composers captured life written large in their symphonies - solemnity and vigour were in equal balance is their symphonies.  Both knew the bitter weight of the grieving - the deaths of siblings hit them dramatically.  Both, once married, had large families - Schumann’s had 8 children and the Mendelssohn’s five.  Both worked themselves to the point of illness.  It is highly likely that Mendelssohn had an affair with the great singer Jenny Lind - in that at least they differ (as far as we know). 

Much as I love the work of Mendelssohn, it is to Schumann’s symphonies that turn for the more vivid depiction of life’s ups and downs.  He has in music a capacity for joy which is unconfined and filled with lyrical freedom and invention, delivered with great orchestral exuberance: these things make him a unique symphonic voice. 

To think Schumann's life ended in that sea of troubles brought on by a cycle of illness and madness.  And yet he opened his symphonic account with all the panache of Haydn, drama of Beethoven, charm of Mozart and a wicked daring all of his own.  This symphony is hardly a symphony at all from one angle.  I recall a TV programme where the late Jeffrey Tate described it as a series of songs.  His was a most mellifluous account  of it too.  But Schumann yields great things from great interpreters too - I imagine his symphonies are partially a reflection of the curator as well as the composer.  Tate was right in his approach but the symphony has more depth than he implies - even if it is low in calories, it is strong in it’s refreshing effect.

Schumann opens his symphonic account with a fanfare - beloved by so many composers including his compositional bed-fellow Mendelssohn.  As it rings out a proclamation, the fanfare it turns into a series of stumpy statements for full orchestra which almost rhetorical but full of depth and intrigue.  He finishes off the first lap with a rocking rhythm of uncertain direction. A flute picks up the thread, such a gentle moment after a rocky start.  Who else could combine all these incidents with such certainty and aplomb.

The pace quicks with more interjections from full orchestra until the whole sky is ablaze and trombones, of all things, drop in the jolliest most optimistic tune in all music.  This is glorious but yields not to darkness but to a playful second subject which winds and wanders beguiling on its way. The return to the first subject repeat is just sweet: all speed without haste and utterly sunny and bright.  It is a sound world - I think - pinched from Beethoven’s Pastoral - clever string writing brave and bold woodwind writing and tremendous energy from judicious use of brass and timpani. 

The development section contains the most wonderful life-enhancing music - closer acquaintance has you wondering at the delicacy of touch (a triangle makes the music even lighter).  This is like Mendelssohn’s fairy music but it tales us into symphonic form.  The drama here (it is so exciting) does all the things a classical work should do in standard sonata form but my word, it is so stylish and he delivers without a hint of light and dark. This is all sunlight and glory. The full orchestra is worked hard and I imagine the coda tests a few.  This end piece demands precision and with that comes deeper pleasure.  One is compelled to smile at this simple act of joyful of expression.  The coda does contain little contemplation a noble moment of thanksgiving (from Beethoven?). Eventually the music sinks into a gentle sleep - with the flute passing the baton to the trumpets somewhat boisterous conclusion - Schumann providing what sounds like the ending of an opera overture to round things off.

The second movement is a certainly a fine song, Tate was right.  I don’t want to give you the idea that this is saccharin - far from it.  Schumann at this stage in his career was imbued with that most personal and unforced utterance which makes all of his slow movements memorable and deeply moving.  It’s melody is well garnered with soft colouring and memorable variety.  There’s something conversational about the orchestra the flow of melody never stops, and every device he knows decorates and illuminates aspects in the repeat - pizzicato strings and all.  The music does take a dark turn - with all the vigour of the same movement’s descent in Beethoven’s Fourth symphony but with none of the blunt force trauma. Schumann though - in this work - diffuses every situation he creates. When the winds take over the lead the music is softer, gentler and somewhat more compelling.  This leads to a coda of great calm and the horns lull us to an abstracted version of the tune which lays it’s head on the pillow and drifts off until the scherzo interrupts!

In that TV programme Tate ran one movement into another at every transition - I think this is generally a good thing especially in Schumann and Brahms (though the practicalities of the concert hall often prevent it).  This scherzo starts as boldly as the last movement was calming.  Its a four-square dance but it hints at Schumann’s skill energising the music with syncopation and orchestration and shorten notes.  The Trios is are games of hide and seek where dynamics are the main thing but it also has some of the colour and vitality of the finale.  Any cleverness is well hidden - it is mostly well established techniques - it’s the material and it’s colours that dazzle.

The final movement opens with a flourish which might open a duet in an operetta between a bombastic count and coy lady with a fan. A rising summons is followed by a coy interplay almost conversational.  The two characters alternate in a somewhat courtly style but one can tell that Schumann has more up his sleeve. The repeat is rarely played but it’s well worth doing. The bridge to the repeat is so sweet and graceful realised I wonder if some miss the chance for humour here.  There is a tad of Beethoven’s determination to oppose and some of Mendelssohn’s resolve to move forward in this movement amongst the heavy sighs and witty ripostes.  After the repeat things heat up, Schumann piles on the orchestral interplay and superb effects of building layers - up through the gears he repeats essentially the same phrase…to a standstill, just when we thought the drama was upon us.  Horns valiantly and slowly usher in a flute which drops us with aplomb into the recapitulation. Much of the original material is repeated.  I find it is the energy that Schumann generates from the slightest material which is most surprising at first.  The material isn’t so slight to the seasoned listener: it’s all part of a bigger and better plan.  But he coda weaves all the threads quickly and with zeal - the effect is heart quickening and smile inducing.  This modest symphony in so many ways - is able to delight entrance, excite and surprise us. And it’s three companions do much the same.

The title is the composer’s for a change.  He was grateful to a poet for the inspiration and gave each movement a Spring related title.  More over that opening fanfare beats out the same rhythm as the poem’s opening lines.  Both poet and poem are not in wide circulation though Schumann’s symphony is still played regularly on the continent.  It is though not heard often enough in the UK.  It didn’t get it’s Proms debut until 1908 and has only been heard there three times since 1992. Perhaps some feel it is too winsome.  One can imagine the cynics bleating that it’s a rather “knowing symphony” - this is tosh, it is big hearted, clever and ingenious.  I hope it is played more and more - along with it’s siblings because half an hour with Schumann enriches the heart and dazzles the musical sensibilities.

Here's Karajan - in audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuBDGAHBedo

I wrote about the order of the symphonies and the great Second Symphony here : http://mindpoke.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/spring-symphonies-3460-schumann.html

And the marvellous Third Symphony here: http://mindpoke.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/spring-symphonies-1130-schumann.html