IF the players in the Michelangelo String Quartet made a single strategic miscalculation in their six-concert cycle of Beethoven's String Quartets, which concluded on Wednesday night in Perth, then it was in that final concert and occurred in their performance of the sixth and last of Beethoven's early opus 18 set.
Bluntly, I think they misread Beethoven's thinking in the strange introduction to the finale, where the composer writes an unusual, slow preface to the movement, entitling it La Malinconia (Melancholy) and where he seems to be considering his predicament (advancing deafness). But it's what happens next where the group stumbled in their understanding. Beethoven abruptly elbows indulgence off the park and releases a cathartic, bracing finale.
But the Michelangelos adopted a puzzlingly pedestrian approach, well-played, but not making much sense. One professional speculated that, because the group wasn't touring the series, and everything, therefore, was only being played once, the musicians possibly hadn't had the opportunity to "play it in", when changes might have come with repetition of the piece.
Fortunately, the group was back in razor-sharp form for the second half, which was given over to a monumental performance of Beethoven's colossal, six-movement, opus 130 Quartet, with the composer's original finale, the Grosse Fuge (Great Fugue) re-attached to the quartet as its finale.
And the Michelangelos powered through that finale with all the grit, abrasiveness, bloody-minded doggedness and aggression that Beethoven wrote into the music. Apart from the towering virtuosity and stamina clearly displayed throughout the performance, an abiding memory was the ferocious intensity of concentration emanating from the group in this minefield of a piece where one slip would mean disaster. Magnificent.
✶ ✶ ✶ ✶
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article