Zemlinsky Lyric Symphony NOT Mahler

Next week, Vladimir Jurowski's conducting Alexander Zemlinsky's Lyric Symphony with the LPO at the South Bank.  It will be fun to compare it with Esa-Pekka Salonen's glowing account with the Philharmonia in 2009.

There's a lot more to this symphony than often assumed. Zemlinsky himself compared it to Mahler's Das Lied von der Erde but that was wishful thinking on his part. Both use exotic themes and merge song with orchestra, but structurally and conceptually they're different. Indeed, I think the more you know both works, the more they seem to diverge. The world changed drastically in the 15 years between the two  pieces.  Zemlinsky was caught up in the fashionable esoteric circles of the post-war years like many others seeking an alternative to ruined Europe.  Much wiser, then, to discard the old Mahler canard and think about what makes the Lyric Symphony unique on its own terms.

Even in terms of Zemlinsky's output as a whole, the Lyric Symphony stands out, like a sudden effloresence blazing out in a sudden flash of glory. And what does the Lyrisches mean? Zemlinsky uses a German translation of Tagore which to Europeans in the 1910's and 20's represented "ancient eastern wisdom". Musically, too, it's daring, as if Zemlinsky's approaching iunknown shores. Debussy, Ravel, Scriabin, Szymanowski, Janáček, all adventuring into new worlds wherre mainstream western traditions don't apply. Later in  life, Zemlinsky experiments with jazz but nothing like the wild freedom that inspired the Lyric Symphony.


To assess any performance, it helps to know the piece well, and its context and background. I originally learned the Lyric Symphony from the Bernhard Klee/BRSO recording from 1982 with Duesing and Söderström. She's wonderful, but the rest doesn't really hold together so well. There are several very good recordings and one major dud. Recommended: Eschenbach, Orchestre de Paris, Goerne and Schafer. This one's based on Beaumont's lucid edition, and shines with spirituial and musical conviction. Chailly, Royal Concertgebouw Amsterdam, Marc, Hagegård, is also excellent. The ancient Gabriele Ferro recording with Nimsgern and Dorothy Dorow is worth searching for as it's gloriously over the top. You also need to know Anthony Beaumont's recording because Beaumont knows what he's doing and has insight. Orchestra and soloists are OK but don't come near Eschenbach and Chailly. The dud is Conlon, but that in itself illustrates the significance of this symphony in the wider spread of Zemlinsky's music. Conlon immersed himself in the composer's work, but the Lyrisches escapes him.

Also, read Beaumont's biography of Zemlinsky, which is the benchmark, extremely well researched and analyzed. There is another more recent book, which doesn't come remotely near in terms of quality. Not recommended, not even as an introduction. and unless you know Beaumont, you can't assess the new book properly. Beaumont's book is not at all difficult to read but is not at all superficial. It's based a real understanding of the background and sources, so is an reliable, balanced work for general background as well as for Zemlinsky. Beaumont sets the best case for Zemlinsky, man and musician in his own right. He's much more interesting than the "late Romantic" pseudo-Mahler label would suggest. The Lyric Symphony is very much a work of its time - the 1920's - and should be assessed in proper historical context. Zemlinsky, after all, was extremely well connected, and knew Schoenberg, Korngold, Schreker, Berg and so on. (LOTS on this site, and in depth about these composers and this periiod, one of my specialities)