Gustav MAHLER: Sinfonía nº 1. Orquesta Sinfónica de Chicago; Pierre Boulez. Deutsche Grammophon 459610-2 [52'47"]

Performance: ++++     Sound: +++++

It came as a surprise to find Boulez going as far back in the Mahler canon as this fledgling blueprint for symphonic dramas to come, until I remembered that his first Mahler recording was of the even earlier cantata Das klagende Lied (Sony), made long before his project to commit «one or two» of the symphonies to disc was so much as a twinkle in DG's eye. The fearful storm that is the cantata�s legacy to the symphony's finale meets with a predictably crisp, articulate but hardly frightening response, and plainly Boulez doesn�t approve of the score's injunction «with greatest wildness»; but his fast-moving way with the movement's lyrical respite is certainly convincing on its own terms.

Boulez and Mahler join hands more easily in the earlier evocation of the composer's «days of youth», filtered through a soft lens that doesn't diffuse the details; Boulez makes us realise how many of the dynamics are quiet, how much of the symphony depends on hushed intensity (to apply Benjamin Zander's comment on the opening of the Ninth Symphony in a different context, there's plenty of yelling at pianissimo � but in this case of the healthy, outdoors variety). Best of all are the gloomy web of sound in the third movement's funeral march, the unbuttoned village-band trumpets and the special quality of the rapt quotation from the last of the Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen. For that alone I will always treasure this most fastidious of performances.

This performance opens with a true Langsam, almost as measured as Bernstein's (DG), a good minute longer than Solti's (London) or Kubelik's (DG). The offstage Fanfares are excellent, and the horns sound noble � nascent Nature is well captured. The Ging heut Morgen über's Feld melody is genial and genuinely welcoming. Orchestral detailing, inner voices � need it be said that these are clearly delineated? Pacing is assured without being too mechanical: The sense of exuberance at the heart of the music is allowed to sound. The woodwinds seem almost as if they are playing their birdcalls ad lib. The climax of the movement is very effective, if not quite as exhilarating as in Solti or Kubelik. Still, Boulez manages to invest the recapitulation and coda with the sort of sheer exuberance that (to these ears) has been missing from his Mahler recordings.

Boulez's second movement is the quickest I know of, shorter in duration even than Kubelik's -Doch nicht zu schnell it's not; yet as an evocation of peasant life or life «under sail» there is no denying that it's thrilling. Once again, Boulez has entered into the spirit of the music. The Funeral March is remarkable. Over a muted opening, the bass solo is eloquently played, and the tam-tam (which is inaudible on most recordings) is atmospheric. Boulez builds the tension quite chillingly. The «street musicians» are also muted, their more raucous interjections played down. The trio is delicately beautiful � Boulez has found the lullaby at the heart of Mahler's grotesque funeral. The «klezmer» music is not as jaunty as in some recordings: Boulez allows the pall to hang over everything. To me, this is the best recording of this movement.

A very deep bass drum (as one would expect from this source) adds to the impact of the finale. Yet, the all-important triangle is also perfectly audible � tribute both to Mahler's orchestration and Boulez's ability to clarify texture. The Sturm und Drang nature of the movement is well managed, with the various elements contesting for supremacy right up to the end. The Chicago Symphony is no stranger to this score, but under Boulez it sounds fresher than ever. It seems almost superfluous to mention that the sound is first rate: spacious, deep, and very up-front.

I've agreed with Lawrence A. Johnson in the Fanfare debate over the Boulez Mahler: His recordings, though technically immaculate, have missed so much of the essence of (my) Mahler that I rarely listen to them. But I hear more Mahler in this First than before. I think it may have to do with the more extrovert nature of the piece � despite its autobiographical genesis, this is Mahler's least personal statement. It wasn't until the Eighth (which I heard Boulez conduct in the 70s) that Mahler achieved this level of objectivity again. What seems remarkable is that Boulez the Iceman has produced such a truly Romantic triumph. Apparently Mahler has been good for him. Be that as it may, it surprises me to be able to suggest that, with the exception of Kubelik's superb «Originals» CD, this would be my prime recommendation for this symphony on disc. Now � how about the «Resurrection» from Chicago?

Pierre Boulez's Mahler will always be controversial, but here he turns in a fresh and finely detailed account of No. 1 with little to alarm even those temperamentally opposed to his «objective» approach. It helps that Boulez has been conducting in Chicago for 30 years, and these players certainly know the idiom, unlike some of the orchestras that have been recording Mahler of late. Thanks to DG's analytical recording and Boulez's own close focus, the massive Chicago sonority is less oppressive than usual: woodwinds are bright and characterful and even the obstreperous Chicago brass acquire greater civility, keeping something in reserve for the big moments. All quite a contrast to Daniel Barenboim's live Fifth (Teldec, 12/98). Boulez's introduction sets the tone - not as hushed as some yet beautifully articulate, clean and firm. Once the exposition gets underway, it is obvious that this will not be a performance with the conventional degree of give and take in tempo and phrasing. Even so, the movement as a whole is appealingly fresh, the coda thrusting home with unexpected exuberance and joy. The second movement is faster than the norm, the Landler very vigorous and lively, the Trio presenting less contrast than usual.

Aficionados of Kubelik or Bernstein may find the third movement a shade disappointing. Boulez is preoccupied with achieving finely detailed textures at the expense of Hungarian-Jewish swing and there could be more intense nostalgia in the lyric central episode which here seems redolent of the salon. The return of the march is again enlivened by the piquancy of the Chicago winds, though Boulez may be more interested in Theodor Adorno's observation that this movement contains the first examples of typical Mahler counterpoint. While the finale erupts with exemplary (controlled) attack, Boulez takes care to clarify textures, giving us the inner lines often overlooked. Inevitably the second subject is comparatively matter-of-fact when shorn of the emotive nuancing of the Mitropoulos-Bernstein tradition, but some will prefer this relatively contained approach, even if it risks making the writing sound derivative of Tchaikovsky. The final climax is adequately rousing.

And so Boulez's admirers will not hesitate, although it is worth pointing out that Riccardo Chailly finds room for a substantial makeweight � the Berg Piano Sonata in orchestral garb. After the success of this disc, the promised Boulez/Chicago Also sprach no longer seems such a provocation. For Boulez, the emotional impact of such music may be less important than its texture, orchestration and musical architecture, but, for the wider emotional palate, one can always turn to Bernstein: the naive, self-lacerating tantrums are there and so, too, is the music's quality of nobility and transcendence. Boulez has other priorities and in this work there is room on the shelves for both. Recommended.