 Argumentaire (allemand/anglais) à l’appui, les deux interprètes invoquent leur droit à aborder cette œuvre célébrissime différemment d’autres musiciens, cependant inoubliables pour certains. Ainsi, des libertés sont prises quant au phrasé, aux nuances, à l’ornementation, visant à davantage de spontanéité, correspondant à une approche censément plus vivante (lebendig), plus fluide (beweglich). En cela réside le premier paradoxe : pourquoi graver une œuvre qui sera dès lors condamnée à une certaine immuabilité ; pourquoi, par cohérence, ne pas avoir enregistré ce cycle dans le cadre d’un concert public, plus proche de l’atmosphère revendiquée de la shubertiade impromptue ? Tout n’est pourtant pas à rejeter dans cette démarche, encore faut-il que l’essentiel soit préservé si l’insistance sur le détail est à ce point mise en avant : la liberté doit conforter l’acquis, non suppléer une carence. Le comédien ne doit pas escamoter le chanteur : côté voix, timbre précisément, certains aigus appuyés ne sonnent pas toujours agréablement, l’aspect déclamatoire volontairement recherché s’opérant parfois au détriment de la mélodie. Quant aux nombreuses ornementations, on ne pourra s’empêcher d’en trouver certaines absolument gratuites, voire incongrues. Une tentative qui n’atteint pas complètement son objectif et qui pourrait être reconduite avec plus de simplicité, sinon d’humilité. (Alain Monnier) Franz Schubert‘s two major song cycles based on texts by Wilhelm Müller (1794–1830) were milestones in music history. Whoever dares to “reproduce them in performance” is treading in the footsteps of giants. As Markus Schäfer puts it: “through previous interpretations by distinguished artists, these cycles have not only become extremely popular; they have acquired an almost untouchable aura”. In conversation, Markus Schäfer and Tobias Koch remind us that these songs’ status was not as monolithic as it has become. “Due to their audacity and sheer energy, the effect was initially almost frightening in Schubert’s closest circle of friends”, Schäfer explains. “It comes as no surprise that Franz von Schober, for one, did not like any of them except Der Lindenbaum.” Although Schubert/Müller’s “Winterreise” seems to stand out in music history a monument – the very birth of art song – Schäfer and Koch do not regard this cycle’s content as straightforward or definitive. “The questions the cycle leaves open are more numerous than the direct answers it provides. Winterreise is thus a work of our time”, Koch affirms. “At any rate, my personal approach as a performer is to ask questions, leaving the answers up to the listeners. Perhaps that is why so much in this recording seems to be unusually alert: in motion, in flux. ……… We diverge from what is familiar, as well as from the ‘Urtext’, in a multitude or striking musical details: we introduce other notes, different embellishments, interpolated recitatives, additions, rests, transitions, unexpected turning points. In Schubert’s sketches for Winterreise we found certain relations he had originally foreseen among keys, and we apply that knowledge in this recording. Music lovers of our time would find early 19th-century performance customs quite strange; modern-day concert hall recitals are purportedly designed to reflect ‘objective’, ‘functional’ criteria. We, as historically informed performers, call the current approach into question. We plead in favour of the listening habits of Schubert’s day: more spontaneity, more individuality, an emphasis on the unique role each musical moment can play for interpreters and for the audience. We have allowed ourselves to insert our own musical comments: plenty of improvisation, and generally a more free-handed approach to the historical material to which we have access. As performers, this puts us in a state of blissful suspension.
|
Catalogue 
