The best solution to the 'Finale Problem'

[ahinton]

I've always felt that the "Finale Problem" is little more than a widespread "everybody says so so it must be true" myth.

I agree entirely; indeed, this kind of thing reminds me of the venerable Richard Ingrams' oft-used phrase "it must be true - I read it in The Daily Telegraph". The most satisfactory answer to the thread topic (from the composer's point of view, at least) is surely therefore not to begin a finale by considering how to solve an allegedly omnipresent problem that is perceived to be unique to finales - and, if I may say so, I can speak from personal experience!...

In terms of organic growth, the best ending from the Romantic era is that of Bruckner's 5th Symphony - no contest.

Is there - or indeed can there be - such a thing as a "best" in this regard? - and why in any case would or should there be a "contest" for one? That said, the finale of Bruckner 5 is undoubtedly a very powerful contender in 19th century symphonic writing - so much so, in fact, that it might have exerted quite some impact on the composer had he been able to hear it when it was hot off the press rather than not at all (other than in his own head, of course)...

[Alan Howe]

Lest we lose focus, may I remind members of the remit of this topic:

<<I'd like to ask the forum what you think is the best, most satisfying and innovative, solution to that burden of the nineteenth-century composer: the wretched 'Finale problem'. We can all recall unsungs that didn't do so well, but who do you think made a good job of it - at least, whose finale 'belongs' most to the work it is part of?>>

[JimL]

Anybody plumping for Rufinatscha 5?

[Alan Howe]

Well, it's certainly a magnificent work - and it has a magnificent finale. Dating from sometime between 1846 and 1852 (it's apparently impossible to be more precise), it contains material of a type which had never before been heard in symphonic music and is certainly a satisfying whole, with no obvious weaknesses.

[Syrelius]

The finale of Berwald's Sinfonie Singulière. The restless energy, the short reminiscences from the earlier movements, fitted in perfectly, and the triumphant ending, all sums up to a perfect way of ending the symphony, in my opinion.

[Leea25]

I have always found the finale to Kalinnikov's first symphony tremendously exciting. I like the way he references all the other movements in it, sometimes quite subtely. I also like the way that the theme which opens the movement (after the brief reference to the first movement) degrades into a sort of ostinato. I think ending the piece with the main theme from the slow movement is brilliant!

[allison]

I vote for the finales of Taneyev Sym No. 2, St. Saens Sym no. 3, Beethoven Piano Cto No. 5, just because I am standing up waving my arms or "playing" the organ or piano when they happen!

[JimL]

The problem is there is no single "best" solution to the finale problem.  Appropriate finales depend heavily on what has preceded them, not?  When you have a serious, minor key symphony or concerto there are a number of different approaches to take - lighten things up a bit (e.g. Tchaik S 4, Beethoven S 5), stay serious as a heart attack (e.g. Rufinatscha S 5, Schubert SQ 14) or various permutations of the above (e.g. Brahms S 1, Mozart PC 20).  One of the most effective finales I've encountered, believe it or not, is the wonderful finale to Hiller's 3rd Piano Quartet.  Where you've had two initial movements of a serious, somber, perhaps even tragic demeanor, and an intermezzo of a decidedly melancholy character, you end up with a vehement march, in the major key, but with all kinds of minor inflections (flatted 6ths, etc.) and loads of tension that resolves in a triumphant peroration.  One problem that always seems to arise is with those individuals who level the accusation that a finale "overstays its welcome", a diatribe that I've heard leveled at more finales than any other movement.  It does seem to be true that composers (and others) seem to take cuts out of more finales than any other movement, not?

[jerfilm]

I can't resist one more.  And "sung" too.   Dvorak Cello Concerto in a.   The ultimate finale, written after  the work was "done" and a tragic death occurred which inspired the new, much, much longer coda......it's hard to beat that one.

Jerry

[chill319]

I can think of many satisfactory finales in 19th-century symphonies, but if one wants to raise the bar to the level of Bruckner 5 -- which is to say to a finale that not only is in balance with the previous movements but that carries forward and completes their argument in a way never before achieved -- then I, too, will point to Draeseke 3 as the work that instantly comes to mind. I'll go out on a limb and say further that, despite Bruckner being one of my best-loved and most listened-to composers, Draeseke accomplishes his miracle with subtler means than Bruckner employs in his cathedral-like Symphony 5. Just a personal opinion.

[JimL]

I can't resist one more.  And "sung" too.   Dvorak Cello Concerto in a.   The ultimate finale, written after  the work was "done" and a tragic death occurred which inspired the new, much, much longer coda......it's hard to beat that one.

Jerry

You mean b.  The A Major Cello Concerto is neither finished (by the composer) nor sung.

[eschiss1]

A work needn't use cyclic techniques (or even more than a hint of recall of earlier movements- in this case, a hint in its scherzo) - to qualify, I'd say - and I'd nominate Stenhammar 2, though written early in the 20th century, as a good competitor here...

[jerfilm]

Yes, Jim - b minor.   Thanks.  A lapse of an aging mind.......

Jerry

[JimL]

Actually, for anybody who's heard the Dvorak A Major Concerto in its orchestrated form, it is rather unusual in that it ends quietly.  Perhaps that's a bit off-topic.

[Ilja]

Allow me to nominate a work that is definitely unsung: Richard Hol's Second Symphony in D minor, Op. 44. A very tight, well-balanced work.