Norman Dee, flute, and Josephine Chan Yung, piano, are artists I have heard playing together before. Today, I was reminded that these are consummate pros, who presented a really nicely played concert. Well done!
Pièce en forme de Habanera (pour flute et piano), Maurice Ravel (1875–1937); Jeux (Sonatine pour flute et piano), Animé, Tendre, Jacques Ibert (1890–1962); Suite for flute and piano, Opus 34, Moderato, Scherzo, Romance, Final, Charles-Marie Widor (1844–1937); Hymn and Fuguing Tune, For flute and piano, George Boziwick (b. 1954); and First Sonata for flute and piano, Allegro Moderato, Adagio, Allegro poco moderato, Bohuslav Martinu (1890–1959) comprised the program.
Overall reaction?—a very good program. Close-up reaction?—maybe a little too much of a few things, as we will see later.
The Ravel was a first live hearing for me, though I am familiar with the piece from radio broadcasts. This is a slow, dance-like habanera (bum-ba-DUM-dum, bum-ba-DUM-dum), soothing, and including some very pretty trills for the flute. The opening movement of the Ibert had a brighter tempo with fuller piano writing—jaunty, veering almost into hectic. The second movement had rippling piano accompaniment and pastoral flute lines that put me in the frame of mind of a walk in the park. Is that the threat of a storm? Only a threat, with an eventual return to gentleness.
The Widor (and I’m really only familiar with him as an organist-composer) was a more traditional approach to flute/piano writing. It was slightly odd realizing this only after the fact, that Ravel and Ibert were stretching the boundaries, but that’s the way the programming went. The first movement was very pleasant, with a few lovely, soaring phrases. The second had a rhythmic piano part and fleet fingering for flute (sorry, I couldn’t resist a little alliteration). The third brought a more lush sound in the piano and more pretty phrases in the flute writing, in a very traditional sense. The Final had several distinct segments—almost like trying to cram too much into one movement. But all of the sections made sense.
While it’s always a pleasure to hear the music of living composers, and Mr. Boziwick was in the audience, I was a little befuddled by his piece. Apparently a hymn and fuguing tune usually presents the hymn tune and then the fugue portion. According to Mr. Boziwick’s introduction to the piece, his was a deconstruction that presented the hymn tune and the fuguing portion simultaneously, as opposed to consecutively. As a result, I had problems discerning the differences. If there had been an example of the original layout followed by Mr. Boziwick’s piece, it might have made a bit more sense to me.
The Martinu: Hmmm, how to say this? It had a harp-like piano opening and a more modern, but still accessible sound; brisk and bright. There were some spiky upward intervals in the flute, and the movement seemed a little long. My notes for the second movement include, “also lengthy, and seemed to wander, wanting to be too much?” The third movement had shifting rhythms that were not straightforward at all. It sounded like it was the most technically difficult writing of the concert (and to me, hearing that it is technical is not always a good thing)—but the playing was just fine. It was not everyone’s cup of tea, however, as I saw at least three audience members leave during the piece. And it was not an overly long concert.
ConcertMeister
Listen to the opening piano figure (bum-ba-DUM-dum, bum-ba-DUM-dum) here—http://tinyurl.com/khdzwza—for the habanera rhythm.
No comments:
Post a Comment