ARNELL: Symphony No. 4. Symphony No. 5.
MusicaNova Orchestra/Warren Cohen.
Con Brio CBR27452 (F) (DDD) TT: 64:50.
BUY NOW FROM ARKIVMUSIC
A pupil of John Ireland, Richard Arnell (b. 1917) made a splash in the
Thirties and Forties and then, with a bunch of other British composers,
drowned in the neglect washed in by the change in musical fashion following
World War II. Nevertheless, he enjoyed better luck than most. Beecham
took him up and performed him fairly regularly. However, when Beecham
died, no one else stepped forward. To this day, Arnell -- if he is known
at all -- tends to be known for his scores of the Forties and Fifties,
notably the ballets The Great Detective and Punch and the
Arnell has continued to compose. Indeed, as far as I know, he's still
at it, even though he has largely fallen off the radar. However, small
stirrings have begun. Dutton Laboratories/Vocalion has embarked on what
looks like a series of his symphonies (although at a super-premium price)
in fine performances by Martin Yates and the Royal Scottish National
Arnell came to the United States in 1939 for the British pavilion at
the New York World's Fair. The start of World War II left him stranded
here for the duration, but he didn't let the time go by. He became friendly
with American representatives of then-advanced music: Virgil Thomson,
Bernard Herrmann, and Roy Harris among them. Harris's work in particular
had some influence, although Arnell never imitated.
Arnell's Fourth Symphony, in three movements, comes from 1948. That it
sounds more American than British interests me most. Without actually
appropriating specific techniques, it moves like Roy Harris's Third Symphony,
which Arnell admits impressed him mightily. It begins with a long, slow
introduction of various motives which Arnell then takes up in the following
allegro. Like Harris, the development seems "organic" rather
than by the book -- that is, you never really know which motive will
turn out the most important until the movement's end. Unlike Harris,
Arnell, despite some slight transformations, does not subject his ideas
to continuous variation. Instead, one tends to hear the same shapes in
new contexts. The end of the movement seems to come abruptly, although
the work runs a good fourteen minutes, but it makes you eager for the
slow second movement. This features a gorgeously simple diatonic theme,
slightly reminiscent of Virgil Thomson in the Forties or Henry Cowell's
Ballad. However, Arnell treats it in a manner all his own: highly contrapuntal,
Romantic to the point of lush, without stepping over. Perhaps this is
where John Ireland's influence comes in. The movement is a struggle between
light and dark, and just as you think light has won, Arnell throws in
a sinister shake before he ends in perfect peace. The finale bustles
like Piston or Mennin, and despite its brevity (each movement runs roughly
half the length of its predecessor), sums up the symphony. The themes
seem related to those of the first movement, while some of the harmonic
progressions recall the second. I simply can't get over the American
atmosphere of this symphony, beyond the superficial resemblances. It's
the spirit within -- a blunt earnestness of tone, an ocean away from
the subtle shifts of British composers of the time, like Walton and Vaughan
Williams, or the "objective" streamlining of Forties Tippett.
Furthermore, compared to Arnell's earlier symphonies, which tend to sprawl
a bit, it makes its points and gets out. A wonderful score.
The Fifth, subtitled "The Gorilla" (according to Grove), appeared
in 1957. The subtitle may be the composer's rueful own. In three hefty
movements, it proceeds mainly at a deliberate, purposeful pace, filled
with a big-hearted lyricism. Again, one feels the influence of the Harris
Third in how the symphony unfolds. Arnell doesn't write a classical work,
but one dictated by the pressure of his themes. The symphony opens with
a profusion of ideas, all essentially ascending. As the narrative goes
on, these ideas tend to merge into one another -- easily, too, since
they share the same shape. It's almost all development and overall an
increase in intensity. At about the point a recapitulation would occur
in a classical symphony, we get something similar with a reappearance
of the main ideas. However, they now appear in a more charged atmosphere
and begin to let off some of that charge. I find this the most dramatic
part of the symphony, and it carries you to a glorious end.
The second movement, unusually, combines slow movement with scherzo.
Arnell describes it as a slow movement interrupted by scherzo. My favorite
of the symphony, it begins again with upward scale fragments and wide
upward leaps, followed by a falling step. A scherzo begins, which I hear
as an update of Debussy's "Fêtes," arpeggios tenuously
connected harmonically. The orchestration is magical, especially the
string writing, which might have been influenced by Harris or William
Schuman. The manic energy of it, however, doesn't last long. A slow passage
consisting mainly of wind solos against tremolo strings brings movement
to a magical stasis. As the passage proceeds, hints of the previous scherzo
flit across the aural landscape, but they remain mere hints. Fast music
does return, however, except now the ideas of the scherzo now appear
in duple time. This becomes a quick march and the themes morph in response.
We come back to the introductory material and to another slow section,
again with wind and brass solos and duets against strings. The movement
is less about themes and their variation than about broad musical gestures.
The last movement consists of three main ideas: a slow drumbeat, reminiscent
of the slow movement of the Vaughan Williams Sixth; an ascending bass
line, which does a surprising amount of work throughout the movement;
a contrasting song-like idea. The movement begins with an inexorable
tread, set by the drumbeat. Much of it has the feel of a passacaglia,
although the bass line tends to wander freely. The ideas merge into one
another, as when, for example, the lyrical music sounds over the drumbeat.
The movement builds impressively until what I'd consider the coda, which
introduces quick "finale" music, fine in itself, but which
seems tacked on, rather than a consequence. It's as if Arnell ran out
of nerve and wanted to bring the audience to its feet. The coda may very
well do that, but when you consider the whole movement, it comes across
Cohen and the Arizona orchestra MusicaNova do alright, rather than wonderfully
well, by Arnell. I prefer Martin Yates of Dutton Laboratories, but their
disc costs one-and-a-half times this one.
S.G.S. (September 2008)