Scriabin: the symphonies.

[Alan Howe]

We should probably experience it in its intended setting, during the apocalypse, played through immense speakers attached to airships.

I'll take The Messiah in that scenario any day . Less is definitely more.

Scriabin's thought processes were immensely complicated, even tinged with solipsism. "I am God," he once wrote in one of his secret philosophical journals. He embraced Helen Blavatsky's Theosophy. In London he visited the room in which Mme. Blavatsky died. Scriabin considered his last music to be fragments of an immense piece to be called Mysterium. This seven-day-long megawork would be performed at the foothills of the Himalayas in India, after which the world would dissolve in bliss. Bells suspended from clouds would summon spectators. Sunrises would be preludes and sunsets codas. Flames would erupt in shafts of light and sheets of fire. Perfumes appropriate to the music would change and pervade the air. At the time of his death, Scriabin left 72 orchestral-size pages of sketches for a preliminary work Prefatory Action, intended to "prepare" the world for the apocalyptic ultimate masterpiece.
http://www.scriabinsociety.com/biography.html

[eschiss1]

*shudders!!!!!!!!!* please, Bach (any of a large selection of choices from his output) over that Handel work but as you say, back to Scriabin...

[Alan Howe]

Has anyone else bought the Pletnev recording of Symphony No.1?

[Amphissa]

I've looked at it several times and passed each time. Given Pletnev's personal proclivities, which I find abhorrent and disgusting, I've not bought any of his music for years. And I'm not likely to purchase anything with his name on it in the future.

That said, there is a 2012 broadcast recording of Pletnev conducting the same orchestra, playing Scriabin's 1st Symphony, but with different vocalists and in a different country. So it is not the same recording used by Pentatone. I have this in my archive and would be willing to upload it to UC, if you are interested.

[Alan Howe]

I'd forgotten about that issue. Perhaps I'll stick with Muti, then...

[eschiss1]

I'm guessing it would be -way- offtopic to ask if one's referring to political views of his or to very serious charges (not yet proven or even perhaps even raised? in court) of the sort that have - it's true - also caused me to look at recordings conducted by Johannes Somary (including some I already have in my collection) with a 2nd-thoughtful eye/ear ...

[Mark Thomas]

Let's not stray into those distasteful issues here.

[Ilja]

But I seem to remember that Pletnev was exonerated in court?


To return to Scriabin's First Symphony, I am particularly enamored of Golovschin's rendition on Naxos. He's a bit 'rough around the edges', but I greatlly prefer that to Muti's overly smooth version which doesn't befit the music at all. And Agafonov in particular puts in a fine effort.

[Ilja]

I have given this some thought, but I am extremely sceptical of the whole "Scriabin as a madman" thing. What I do think is that he was extremely adept at marketing, and niftily played into the Belle Epoque's taste for eastern philosophy, eroticism, the irrational, and gigantism. Scriabin dabbled with theosophy, Nietzsche and a whole list of other things without actually fully committing to anything. Also, I guess that his reputation as a loose cannon allowed him to get away with certain personal indiscretions that other people might have faced grave repercussions over.  But while Scriabin was very succesful in his day in Russia, France and Belgium, particularly this eroticism made him few friends in places such as Britain and, after the Revolution, Russia itself. Adrian Boult dismissing Scriabin's music as 'evil' is a case in point. It is no coincidence that such dismissals were the strongest in cultures which frowned upon sensualism and overt sexual themes, and Scriabin's supposed madness helped to bring about the rejection of his music on moral grounds.

[eschiss1]

Looking at the Proms archives, the performance schedule of the symphonies seems to be about as Ilja says - symphony 1 performed at the Proms in 1916, 1921, and 2010; symphony 2 in 1921 only; symphony 3 in 1918, 1921 and 2010; symphony 4 is something of an exception, performed in 17 events from 1921 to 2015 (I don't think I see quite as huge a gap as for the others...); and Prometheus performed 7 times from 1918 to 2014 (with a gap between 1922 and 1966). Also some of the piano sonatas and other works, and the piano concerto, listed...

[Amphissa]

Scriabin and Rachmaninoff were classmates, of course, studying at Moscow Conservatory under Arensky and Taneyev. His piano concerto and first symphony were redolent with Russian romanticism, but he had a musical wild streak even in school. As a result, Arensky refused to sign off on his degree. And because of his small hands, although he was successful on the concert stage, he would never become a great virtuoso. His 1st Piano Sonata was a "cry against God, against fate." He was extraordinarily frustrated by this "handicap" -- so much so that he damaged his right hand trying to play Balakirev's Islamey and Liszt's Réminiscences de Don Juan.

I guess what I'm getting at is that he may have, psychologically, been impelled toward ever more extreme directions as a way to differentiate himself from the crowd of "good but not great" performers and composers.

I say this with absolutely no scholarly support for my hypotheses, since I've never read a biography or in-depth review if his work. So, feel free to trash these ideas.

[eschiss1]

Can anyone suggest an excellent Scriabin biography (hopefully as good in their opinion as imhonesto Walker's Liszt biography and Beaumont's "Zemlinsky" both are - big, in-depth, expansive, covering many topics relevant to the composer's life yet managing to say some interesting, important, detailed things about each (sometimes also new, with extensive author research, in the case of both the biographies I mentioned)? Those have become among my touchstone music biographies, I think, not because they're perfect (of course not)  but because of the many things they do seem to accomplish. Anything reasonably similar on Scriabin's life? )

[adriano]

Golovanov and Svetlanov are, in my personal opinion, the greatest Scriabin interpreters. Golovanov is wild, as usual, and Svetlanov more moderate in tempio and dynamics. More "modern" and less "traditionally Russian", but very fascinating are Kitajenko and Segerstam. Kitajenko's 1992-1994 RCA recordings are now available as a SONY bargain box. This does not mean, that Muti and Ashkenazy's renderings are unacceptable: I still like to relisten them and compare. All these 5 versions I have in my collection can fit particular and momentary moods I feel when I decide to listen music by Scriabin.

[Ilja]

Eric, the problem with Scriabin is that most of what's been written about him is compromised by personal or political prejudice. Of course, so are most other biographies, but Scriabin's polarising role makes it a larger problem than usual. Boris de Schloezer's (his brother-in-law) biography fully continues Scriabin's myth-making, for instance, as does (to a lesser extent) Faubion Bowers' biography of 1969. The second is a good read, but De Schloezer can be insufferably syccophantic at times. Hugh MacDonald's biography of the late 1970s is more draped around the madness thesis, but - in my opinion at least - takes that far too much for granted and is unclear as to what such 'madness' actually means. Interestingly, instead of condemning him MacDonald argues (IIRC, it's been a while) that such madness was (to some degree) a positive force, without which the mercurial compositions of Scriabin's later life would have been impossible.

Because of all these complications and the rejection by the Soviet regime during the Stalin years, the number of biographies had remained fairly small - and tiny compared to the numerous (more technical) works about Scriabin's music that have been published from the 1960s onwards. An interesting third category is offered by Anatole Leikin's The Performing Style of Alexander Scriabin (2011), which focuses on his performances in relation to his compositions for piano.

[chill319]

@eschiss and @ilya. Re biography: Horowitz once claimed (in connection with a story about his uncle) that Scriabin resigned from teaching at the Moscow conservatory in protest against institutionalized anti-Semitism there. If that is correct it is noteworthy, albeit hard -- perhaps impossible -- to square with the waxed-moustache dandy who appears in so many CD portraits.

Regarding the piano concerto (another thread here that search has not uncovered): If you are open to old-style Russian pianism (the kind with shoulders) and know Bashkirov (with Richter and Gilels one of the few pianists Sofronitsky actively promoted) you will want to listen to his superlative performance of the Scriabin concerto on YouTube. Here is a performance at once focused more on formal cohesion than dreamy wallowing yet totally at home with the nuanced, expressive elasticity that Sofronitsky brings to phrasing. As with all Bashkirov recordings, the range of tone colors is remarkable, too.