In defense of Theilemann Schumann 3rd.

Google searching of opinions of this disc, I have discovered a thread where the overall sentiment for this recording is quite negative.

I've avoided this disc until stumbling across a first hand clearance sale copy which I purchased. This, after an agreeable German Arias, Beethoven 5 and 7th, Schoenberg and getting my hands on his Meistersinger broadcast.

The main argument against him, from what I can reduce from all the character assassination surrounding him, is that he over-interprets the work, trying too hard to out-Furtwangler his idol, Furtwangler. Much like him, Theilemans conducting is based on process of swaths of tension building and release. On this work he succeeds in drawing an exquisite reading from the Philharmonia without spot-lighting. His attempts to bring out the exuberance and youthful vigor of the rapids of the Rhine (1st movement), the introspective meandering (3rd movement) and to the glory at it's girth (finale) gives this piece the x-factor which is missing from the Sawalisch. Let's not overlook Schumann's fate as it relates to this river on how a conductor is to interpret the work. It starts off with what you're looking for in a work. If your interpretation of it suits the conductors, then it's off to a good start. I found nothing offensive to this disc, except perhaps the gaudy cover.

How does he compare to the Furtwangler's version?

Perhaps I haven't heard enough of his recordings (I only have the Schumann Second on DG), but Thielemann reminds me more of a 1950's Karajan (lean and very orderly) before he reminds me of a Furtwangler.

JV

Mr. Fogel:

Oh please, your views cannot be 'demeaned', Mr. Fogel. Even when one disagrees with them, the gentlemanly lack of willful belligerence and the exquisite modesty with which you choose to qualify them forbid almost all of us from 'demeaning' them.

regards,

Get off your higher horse.

For good reason, IMO. Thielemann conducts these symphonies as if they were written by Wagner, dovetailing phrases in a tastelessly cutesy way with no sense of the larger landscape. Put another way, he does nothing to bring out these magnificent works' natural cohesion and fairy-tale majesty. There is no sense of Schumann the slightly loopy, sentimental Romantic. There's no trace of the Schumann who saved a Schubert symphony from oblivion and had the highest opinion of that humble, private soul. There's no picturesque fantasy. It amounts to little more than two CDs of misinformed blarings from a conductor who seems to have no idea how to handle a sonata form.

Each to their own, but what you describe above is exactly what I hear. To me, you're describing Sawalisch. Give me an example of one that merits the above description.

I think Sawallisch is quite good and infinitely more idiomatic than Thielemann, but I also think Gardiner really does it right, plus his set contains that wonderful Konzertstuck for 4 valve-horns.

[...]

You don't really think the above is an acceptable way to conduct *Wagner*, do you? (Or perhaps you don't like Wagner, and don't listen to him, and so tastelessly cutesy meandering performances of his music don't affect you.) I know no composer whose music demands *more* of a 'sense of the larger landscape' (e.g., _Parsifal_, _Tristan_, etc.).

I don't like Wagner, but from what I've heard, he demands little skill with classical forms, if any.

Actually it's for two valve-horns and two natural horns in F.

Regarding 'Toots' Thielemann, it seems difficult for many to arrive at a rational assessment of his conducting skills because his overtly right-wing political stance gets in the way. Both his politics and his interpretations are products of loud-mouthed narcissistic youth; both will probably moderate with time.

On the positive side, as I have mentioned before, he is able to capture the unrestrained 'wild-stallion' agressiveness of Schumann's style quite well. There are good moments in the Second Symphony and the Konzertstuck wherein one is practically swept away by the exuberance of the music.

These moments are, of course, ruined by the willfulness of some of his interpretive decisions, which simply don't 'work.' It is difficult to understand what he had in mind by perpetrating these hiccups.

What Thielemann cannot do (at this point) is to convey any sense of nobility, uplift, or sheer beauty inherent in the music. This is where he fails to emulate Furtwangler, not to mention the other stellar conductors who (on a good day) could bring forth the uncanny feeling of moving to a higher plane.

So hang in there, Chris. Let us hope that you develop some humility and a deeper sense of purpose than you now have. In twenty years or so, we may be able to take you seriously.

I stand corrected.

Uh, I had no clue what his politics were at the time that I listened to his Schumann cycle, and I still don't.

I think you're on the mark. These aren't offensive performances. I suffered no grief listening to them. Unfortunately, that's also the absolute highest praise I could confer. If he had cared about the quality of his product, he would have worked for a few more years rather than releasing this rough, unfinished product on a major label like DG.