29 March 2013
'Mache dich mein Herze rein', sung by Thomas Quasthoff.
An attempt at
reproducing a performance Bach might have heard proves less than authentic
regarding the truths of the work itself.
This performance was something of an extreme in period
practice, and while it was worth experiencing, it didn’t capture the greatness
of this masterpiece.
Apparently replicating the conditions of a 1729 vespers
performance arranged presumably by Bach himself, there was a thought-provoking
sermon before part two, and congregational hymns before each part. This conceit
worked until the end, when not only was there another hymn, but a motet also,
which while beautiful quite ruined the supreme finality of the Passion’s ‘Wir
setzen uns mit Tränen nieder’.
Even if this gross artistic blunder was actively approved,
rather than endured, by the composer, that would be no reason for repeating the
mistake now.
Listening to a back-slapping celebration of
historically-informed performance on BBC Radio 3 today, I could appreciate that
the effort to perform works as the composer might have expected to hear them
has been beneficial; but in this Passion, at least, there are surely various
satisfying ways to perform it, and the larger, more romantic performances of
old take the work more seriously.
This is the grandest, most solemn artwork in our tradition.
Listening to it with reduced forces (choral, vocal and orchestral) gives a
sense of lightness and vigour more appropriate to the Messiah. Contemplating
the meaning of Jesus’ death – avoided entirely in Handel’s masterpiece –
brought out the weightiest side of Bach, and this should be reflected in
performance.
Perhaps a faster Passion, timewise, is considered sensible.
But this avoids the challenge to the conductor and performers, for the great
slow Passions of old recordings do not seem to take longer than the faster
versions. It’s one of the oddities of music.
This Passion got off to a terrible start, with an opening
chorus that sounded light and chaotic, whereas when done differently it can be
overwhelming, and yet somehow, magically, not so overwhelming that the rest of
the work suffers in comparison.
Certainly the rest of the work was an improvement in this
performance, and generally the solo arias and recitatives did benefit from the
intimacy of the setting.
My feelings were mixed over the chorales. The setting made
sense of them: the sense of a congregation was clear. But they were treated
perfunctorily, whereas in better performances they add cumulatively to the
Passion’s effect.
And what is that effect? The sermon helpfully highlighted
Jesus’ basic passivity. He is not a tragic figure in the usual sense – as he
says, he could escape his fate anytime he wanted to.
The mystery of this fate, whether his sacrifice is needed,
his anguish both in Gethsemene and on when crucified, are captured both in the
apostle’s text and in the surrounding enhancing meditations, but most of all in
the music.
So the effect is tragic, powerfully so. But there is also
hope, most wonderfully expressed in arias such as ‘Mache dich, mein Herze,
rein’.
What hope there might be, after such passively accepted
cruelty, whether necessary or not, is mysterious to me. But I think it is the
central mystery of the Christian faith, and in addressing it directly, and so
wonderfully, this Passion is the most effective expression of that faith, so
far as I have experienced.
With a work of such importance, I should not overly complain about how badly
this well-intentioned, interesting performance served it. The piece seems to me
indestructible, and in any particular hearing criticism takes second place to
grateful experience.