Julián Carrillo 2nd symphony from Toccata

[Sharkkb8]

A recording of the 2nd Symphony [1907] of Julián Carrillo is to be released by Toccata 6 Nov.  Don't see it yet at Amazon UK.

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8829349--julian-carrillo-orchestral-music

https://smile.amazon.com/Orchestral-Music-Orquesta-Sinfonica-Potosi/dp/B08JLXYGZ6/ref=sr_1_14?dchild=1&keywords=Julián+Carrillo&qid=1601935148&s=music&sr=1-14-catcorr

Toccata:  "Although the Mexican composer Julián Carrillo (1875–1965) came to be remembered as a pioneer in the science of acoustics, the music he wrote in the first part of his career has a late-Romantic opulence and spaciousness that was very much of its age. Here his powerful and dignified Second Symphony, which sits somewhere between Bruckner and Rachmaninov, is joined by two early pièces d'occasion and excerpts from his grand historical opera of 1910, Matilde, or Mexico in 1810, which marked the centenary of the Mexican War of Independence."

[Alan Howe]

This is an extremely beautiful work - with the exception of much of the scherzo which seems to descend into motiveless, sardonic cacophany at various points, and all this in the context of what is otherwise a very euphonious work. Perhaps someone can follow the composer's logic here - I can't. Perhaps I'll get used to it, but at present it just seems to me to blow a hole (not to say a rather indecent raspberry) in the overall conception. Not like Wagner, Bruckner or Rachmaninov at all, which is how the work is billed. It's as if Strauss at his most modernist has walked on stage only to walk off again when the finale strikes up.

Still, I suppose three movements out of four isn't a bad return. But that Scherzo sticks out like a sore thumb...

[Mark Thomas]

You're absolutely spot on, Alan. It's a really rather grand, lovely work spoiled by the completely anachronistic Scherzo. For my second and third hearings I just didn't play the track and enjoyed it as a three movement symphony, and that would be my recommendation to anyone approaching the piece.

[Alan Howe]

This is very odd, isn't it? Don't get it at all.

[terry martyn]

I have his First which is decent enough, but I have listened online to this one and I can do without it. I never managed to like Strauss´s Alpine Symphony and this is far inferior stuff.   I wonder what the early philistine Hanoverians would have made of it

[Alan Howe]

Funnily enough, I was put in mind of the Alpine Symphony too - and, as I said before, I'm surprised that Strauss wasn't mentioned in the brief list of influences mentioned in the blurb for this release. An interesting and enjoyable symphony, but a badly flawed one.

[Ilja]

It's really the first minute or two of the scherzo (which isn't really a scherzo anyhow) that may be slightly offensive to some, and I am assuming this section is based off of Mexican folk music (which often uses surprisingly complex rhythic and melodic structures). Then again, it sounds like a conscious "musical conflict" of the type heard in Tchaikovsky's 1812, where two or three themes battle it out and one prevails. After that bit, it becomes very engaging, though.

[Alan Howe]

It's not the opening that sticks out, but rather the way it later descends into pointless dissonance.

[Ilja]

I don't know about "pointless" - but without any background knowledge (and I'm listening to Spotify) it's difficult to say anything useful. Musically it does make sense to me though - different sensibilities, surely.

[Alan Howe]

Oh, quite. It doesn't make any sense to me, though - certainly not in the context of a work in which there are no other instances of the same thing.

[Ilja]

Oh, quite. It doesn't make any sense to me, though - certainly not in the context of a work in which there are no other instances of the same thing.

Having listened to the symphony again twice on Spotify, I'm beginning to wonder whether we've been listening to the same thing. There is incidental use of dissonant chords throughout the work that I hear, most notably (but very mild, early-Ives-esque) at the end of the 2nd movement. But it's all very careful. The scherzo, after a rather hectic beginning, sounds rather unadventurous to me. There is another short section around the 5:30 mark, but it's not even really dissonant. And I will maintain that the symphony works for me in its totality.


But following our exchange I've been thinking about how I don't mind "ugly"* music very much if it's at least interesting. Carrillo's symphony is a good example of one of the many ways in which art music tried to extricate itself from the quagmire the Austro-German schools got themselves into around WW1. That's long been framed as an inevitable march towards post-WW2 serialism, but personally I find the immediate post-1918 period uniquely interesting because of the diversity of these experiments, both tonal and non-tonal.


Of course, no one likes to listen to stuff that is only ugly. But only pretty music can also be problematic - a good example is the Lauber symphonies, which should have hit all the right notes but which I found supremely unengaging.


* defined as: conflicting with one's present aesthetic sensibilities.

[Alan Howe]

I don't mind 'ugly', but can't see how it fits with the rest of the symphony. It doesn't work for me, so we'll have to part company there.

I think part of the problem is how the symphony is being marketed, i.e. as being in the mould of Wagner, Bruckner and Rachmaninov. For example, there is no such 'blot' (to be perjorative about the matter) in Rachmaninov 2, which is almost exactly contemporary with Carrillo 2. If more had been made of the parallels with Richard Strauss, I would have been forewarned - and probably more sympathetic!

[Ilja]

But honestly, I'm curious whether we're listening to the same thing - I simply hear hardly any dissonances in the scherzo (and more at the end of the slow movement). Could it be that there are different versions floating around somehow?

[eschiss1]

how'd we get to talking about the immediate post-WWI period? Did he revise his 1907 2nd symphony after 1918? Also, I'm sure Medtner, at least, would disagree with Alan about lumping Rachmaninoff in with Bruckner, as iirc he was very negative about some of his (Medtner's) friend's later music, harmonically speaking especially (the opening of the finale of the 3rd symphony, I think, was one example, with those alternating tritones...)

[Alan Howe]

The point, Eric, was made in the advertising blurb for the release - not by me:

<<Although the Mexican composer Julián Carrillo (1875–1965) came to be remembered as a pioneer in the science of acoustics, the music he wrote in the first part of his career has a late-Romantic opulence and spaciousness that was very much of its age. Here his powerful and dignified Second Symphony, which sits somewhere between Bruckner, Wagner and Rachmaninov, is joined by two early pièces d'occasion and excerpts from his grand historical opera of 1910, Matilde, or Mexico in 1810, which marked the centenary of the Mexican War of Independence.>>
https://toccataclassics.com/product/julian-carrillo-orchestral-music/    (emphasis added)

As for the dissonances, they may not be great in the grand scheme of things, but they're pretty obvious (in this context). It also seems curious that both Mark and I came to the same (negative) conclusion...