Review: Walton Symphonies Nos. 1-2, Kirill Karabits and the Bournemouth Symphony

How is it that the two symphonies of the British composer William Walton, from 1935 and 1960, have escaped my attention until now? Oh, certainly, the fault is mostly mine; I could have always listened to a recording of them. More to my point, though, is that I never did bother to listen to them because I thought them negligible and unimportant, having never once run across them in my many years of concertgoing. (Of course, what British symphonies do you ever hear regularly performed by American orchestras?)

Well, not to tarry, they are both very good. The First, completed when Walton was in his early 30s, is usually considered his masterpiece. “The claim that his First Symphony is one of the great twentieth-century symphonies is not excessive,” writes Michael Steinberg — a statement which itself seems not excessive. In four movements, the symphony is clearly modeled on those of Sibelius (the foremost living symphonist at the time), though Walton’s style here is more pent up, athletic and intense than it is dark and brooding. Walton took several years to write it and apparently had quite a lot of trouble doing so. (Stuck on the finale, he asked the advice of the composer Constant Lambert, who suggested a fugue. Walton, who was largely self-taught, admitted that he didn’t know how to write one. Lambert sent him to the article on fugues in Grove’s Dictionary and after reading it Walton produced the dazzling fugue at the center of his finale.)

Ostinatos drive the outer movements; the string section is required to leap and bound. The second movement is a biting and gritty scherzo marked Presto con malizia (with malice). The slow moment (Andante con maliconia) initially has a dazed sadness before rising to a more ominous and dramatic despair.

Perhaps Walton’s symphonies are underestimated because they remind us of others. In addition to Sibelius, the First recalls, in spots, Hindemith. The Second brings Stravinsky to mind, especially the Symphony in C and the Symphony in Three Movements (Walton’s Second is in three movements, too). But never mind, Walton makes the work his own, and it is enchantingly and elegantly scored. An angular and muscular Allegro molto is followed by a voluptuous, though still acrid slow movement (with moments of “Firebird” opulence). The finale — marked Passacaglia (Theme – Variations 1-10 – Fugue – Coda scherzando) — is a compositional tour de force, with a 12-tone theme and the orchestra put through the paces, a giant, powerhouse machine.

The current recording (on Onyx Classics) comes courtesy of the Bournemouth Symphony, home in the South of England, and its Ukrainian principal conductor Kirill Karabits, who together have made many recordings before, including the complete Prokofiev symphonies. These are confident and kinetic performances, without wasted effort and thrillingly pedal to the metal. The strings in particular deserve praise for their lean and nimble efforts in Walton’s pulsating and skittering lines. It’s all well tailored and well steered.

2 thoughts on “Review: Walton Symphonies Nos. 1-2, Kirill Karabits and the Bournemouth Symphony

  1. Hi Tim:
    I have both of Walton’s symphonies, the 1st on a Telarc CD (CD-80125) with Andre Previn conducting the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. Also on this disk are his Crown Imperial and Orb & Sceptre pieces. The performances are marvelous and the recording quality is absolutely first-rate, typical of Telarc. Walton’s 2nd Symphony is on a Naxos CD (8.553402) with Paul Daniel conducting the English Northern Philharmonia, and while quite enjoyable, doesn’t quite have the same great sonics as the Telarc. I love both of these compositions and sure wish Walton had been able to compose more symphonies.
    Paul

    Like

  2. Also, your comment, Tim, about not hearing any British symphonies regularly performed by American orchestras brings to mind something you will remember when my wife and I lived in SoCal and regularly attended PSO concerts. I asked you why the PSO didn’t perform a symphony by Elgar, or Vaughn Williams or Bax, etc., and you sent me, by email, to someone (like a program director or music selector) to ask my question. The answer I got back was that British symphonies were too heavy, dense, thick (or something along those lines) and wouldn’t sound good in the Performing Arts concert hall. That raised my eyebrow because I’m pretty sure we heard the PSO perform Mahler and/or Bruckner symphonies there and those sure aren’t light compositions and they sounded just fine to me!
    Paul

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s