Ralph Vaughan Williams

*  Symphony No. 1 'A Sea Symphony'

Joan Rodgers, soprano; Christopher Maltman, baritone; Bournemouth Symphony
Chorus & Orchestra/Paul Daniel
Naxos 8.557059  Total time: 63:54

Summary for the Busy Executive: More than worthy.

Vaughan Williams's Sea Symphony (the composer started numbering his
symphonies only with the fourth) is a curious hybrid, like a platypus.
Mainly, it stands -- along with Parry's Job and Elgar's Apostles --
firmly in the tradition of the late Romantic British oratorio.  However,
it's also a true symphony with a first-movement sonata-allegro, a song-like
second, a scherzo third, and a poetically and musically visionary last
movement.

The craft of the work is tremendous, even at the relatively mundane level
of finding texts that would fit into the musical scheme.  The passages
come, for the most part, from the obscure corners of Walt Whitman's
poetry, which obviously means that Vaughan Williams knew it quite well.
I doubt if many read Whitman much these days, except for other poets and
serious readers, but at one point he *was* Modern Poetry -- a way out
of Tennysonian and Browningesque conventions, if not cliches.  "Advanced,"
mainly English-speaking, composers of the early part of the century set
him a lot, and this symphony was not even Vaughan Williams's first "go"
at Whitman.  The irregular beat of Whitman's verse, the ever-changing
phrase lengths, make musical setting difficult.  Indeed, many early
composers rewrote Whitman to force his wilder rhythms into hymnodic
strait-jackets.  Occasionally, Vaughan Williams has trouble getting in
all the words but for the most part comes up with a "natural" fit, and
furthermore he uses the text Whitman actually wrote.  He seems to have
lived with the words for a long time.

The symphony poses huge challenges, both interpretative and technical,
for the orchestra and choir.  The very opening is one of the great
orchestral strokes in the literature -- a syncopated fanfare and the
unaccompanied chorus declaiming, "Behold, the sea itself," with the
orchestra coming in with a roar on the word "sea." It's as if a great
curtain lifts and you suddenly see an immense ocean on the other side.
The counterpoint is busy, in the way of late Romantic orchestral writing,
though certainly less busy than Strauss's.  Paul Daniel tends to give
an efficient, rather than penetrating reading (the first two movements
especially), although he has his moments in the important finale.
Nevertheless, in any account, the chorus must carry the symphony, since
it shoulders the brunt of the communicative work.  The symphony has a
message, conveyed through the words.  Consequently, a listener must be
able to pick up what the singers talk about.  Soprano soloist Joan Rodgers
does well enough.  Christopher Maltman has allowed the beginning of
several annoying vocal habits to creep into his singing -- scooping and
swooping to notes and aspirating attacks for no good reason, either vocal
or interpretive.  Perhaps they're bad habits he contracted from opera.
Nevertheless, these have not yet destroyed his musical line, and he is
one fine communicative singer, with much of the subtlety you find in a
great Lieder performer.  Simply put, he knows how to recite poetry.  But
the chorus is the real star and leads this account from good up to the
front rank.  I've heard Boult's Decca (mono) and EMI (stereo) recordings,
as well as Previn, Andrew Davis, Haitink, and Thomson.  Paul Daniel has
the best chorus by far.  For one thing, you can actually understand their
texts.  Their diction and rhythm are superb.  At times, particularly in
the third-movement scherzo, "The Waves," Vaughan Williams stuffs so many
words in such a short time into singers' mouths, it becomes at times
impossible to spit them all out.  Bournemouth does better than anyone
else I've heard.  Furthermore, the a cappella passages, almost always
at a dynamic just this side of hearing, are rock-solid and fill you --
as the composer intended -- with a sense of awe.  Absolutely thrilling
work.

My one serious complaint concerns the engineering.  Achieving a balance
of forces poses a huge challenge.  You run the danger of having the
orchestra cover up the chorus and of both covering up the soloists.  On
this recording, you can hear everybody, but the engineers have painted
a rather crude sonic picture.  No balance like this exists in real life.
The soloists seem to have been recorded not only on separate mikes but
in a completely different studio.  They're incredibly forward, practically
singing in your ear, while everybody else remains on stage.  Obvious
electronic fakery.  I've heard other performances with a more natural
balance and the requisite clarity, so it's not impossible.

My favorite interpretation remains mono Boult with Isobel Baillie and
John Cameron, even though the forces aren't as sharp as others.  Boult
invests the work with a depth and real love that not even he reached
in his stereo remake.  That said, this account is at least as good as
anybody's other than Boult's, and it's a bargain disc besides.  Hail
Naxos!

Steve Schwartz