Symphony No. 2 (Elgar)

Edward Elgar’s Symphony No. 2, Op. 63 in Eb major, was completed February 28, 1911 and was premiered at the London Musical Festival at Queen’s Hall by the Queen’s Hall Symphony Orchestra on May 24, 1911 with the composer conducting. The symphony, which Elgar called “the passionate pilgrimage of the soul,” would be his last; the composition of a third, begun in 1933, was cut short by his death in 1934.

Dedication page to Elgar’s Symphony No. 2

The dedication reads:

Dedicated to the memory of His late Majesty King Edward VII. This symphony, designed early in 1910 to be a loyal tribute, bears its present dedication with the gracious approval of His Majesty the King.

The more personal nature of this work, however, is clear in a letter to friend and close correspondent Alice Stuart-Wortley, in which Elgar states:

I have written out my soul in the concerto, Symphony No. 2 and the Ode and you know it… in these three works I have shewn myself.

Composition & Influences

In every movement its form and above all its climax were clearly in Elgar’s mind. Indeed, as he has often told me, it is the climax which he invariably settles first. But withal there is a great mass of fluctuating material which might fit into the work as it developed in his mind to finality – for it had been created in the same “oven” which had cast them all. Nothing satisfied him until itself and its context seemed, as he said, inevitable.

These remarks, recounted by Elgar’s friend Charles Sanford Terry, shed light on Elgar’s creative process. Some sketches of Symphony No. 2 date back to 1903, a letter from October of that year indicating an idea for a Symphony in E flat to be dedicated to friend and conductor Hans Richter. The symphony was set aside during the composition of In the South, the First Symphony, and the Violin Concerto. Rejected ideas from the latter work and earlier sketches joined the material Elgar began developing in late 1910 to complete the work.

File:Elgar portrait.jpg

Sir Edward Elgar

The Second Symphony’s thematic material, like much of Elgar’s work, consists of short, closely interrelated motives which he develops via repetition, sequential techniques, and subtle cross references. Harmonically, the piece often borders on tonally ambiguous, with the composer employing musical devices such as chromaticism and, in the third movement, a whole tone scale in order to heighten the feeling of tonal uncertainty. Elgar also tends to emphasize a tonic-subdominant dichotomy rather than the more typical tonic-dominant; examples of this tendency include the C minor Larghetto’s second theme in F, and the Ab beginning to the first movement’s recapitulation. The repetition of same or similar rhythm forms an essential part of the structural backbone of the piece, much in the manner of Brahms.

Various large and small scale musical allusions, both obvious and implied, may be found throughout the work. Robert Meikle cites the Mahlerian treatment of the material in the last movement, as well as likenesses to Brahms’ German Requiem. Meikle also notes the similarities to certain aspects of Brahms’ Symphony No. 3, in particular the cyclical return of thematic material and the subdued texture which concludes both works. The motive which occurs in the first violins at rehearsal 1 of the first movement, reappearing in both the rondo and the finale, resembles both Elgar’s own so-called “Judgment” theme from Dream of Gerontius and the Dies irae. An inverted Tristan chord appears at the conclusion of the work, and Allen Gimbel illustrates many possible links between this symphony and Wagner’s Die Meistersinger, a work Elgar admired deeply. Specifically, Gimbel points out the resemblance of the motive on the last three beats of m. 2 of the first movement and the Abgesang of Walther’s Preislied from Die Meistersinger, thus linking the trials of the opera’s hero to Elgar’s desire to assert his independence as an artist.

Orchestration

The four movement symphony is scored for 3 flutes (1 doubling on piccolo), 2 oboes, English horn, 2 Bb clarinets, Eb clarinet, bass clarinet, 2 bassoons, contra-bassoon, 4 horns, 3 trumpets, 3 trombones, tuba, timpani, snare drum, bass drum, tambourine, cymbals, 2 harps, and full strings.

Formal Analysis

First Movement: Allegro vivace e nobilmente

The first movement is the longest of the four, running at approximately 17 minutes.

It is a movement fitting in character to the dedication of a King. The opening contains wide intervals in the strings and upper winds with upward leaps, thus allowing Elgar to create much expression and passion. Elgar himself described this movement as “tremendous in energy”.

It opens with its main theme in E flat major which occurs several times throughout the movement. After eight bars another theme appears which is only two measures long and following that there are two more two-measure themes.

A small bridging passage leads us to the second subject which is more of a wistful tune played by the strings. Elgar was insistent that they play the first entrance of this new subject religiously pianissimo without sacrificing the expression that he asked for. The subject is formed of a two measure theme being repeated throughout a sequence that builds from pianissimo to fortissimo. This then gives way to a soft cello theme at rehearsal 11 which is slow and has a song-like character. Throughout this section the violas have a subtle accompaniment figure consisting of a quarter note moving up chromatically to an eighth note. This figure seems unimportant; however, it later goes on to become a major part of the heroic episode at rehearsal 20, interspersed with a trumpet call which bursts through triumphantly.

These short themes are the basis of Elgar’s composition in this movement. The short themes do not leave us feeling exhausted as Elgar ties them up by closely relating each theme, resulting in a lengthy flowing development at rehearsal 24.

The opening melody of the development is made up of ghostly chromatic scales and is rather ambiguous until a slightly more clarifying tune that is easier to distinguish appears in the cellos, who stand out in this section until the transformation into what appears to be a super-development section

Elgar quickly thickens out the score and fills it with punctuating accents and six measures of downward leaps into the main theme, thus beginning the transition section back into the recapitulation. This bridging section contains a break after the first measure of rehearsal 42 which gives the audience the chance to catch its breath before plunging into the recapitulation, which follows the standard outline.

Following the recapitulation is a coda section at rehearsal 61 which brings the movement to a short calm section and then once more uproots the music with a surge of excitement into a gloriously virtuosic ending.

Second Movement: Larghetto

The second movement of the Symphony is a Larghetto funeral march in C minor. It is has become popular belief that this movement is an elegy to Edward VII, after whose death it was written. Many, including Michael Kennedy, hold the belief that it is also a more personal expression of Elgar’s grief, as he had lost close friends Hans Richter and Alfred Rodewald around the time he was working on the second symphony.

The form of the movement is a sonata form without a development, and it plays around with modalities. It opens with a seven measure C minor Introduction of soft chords in the strings, grouped into a 3+3+1 bar pattern that contrasts with the clear 4+4 grouping of the main theme funeral march. The march tread of the movement is suggested beginning at measure 8, by a series of throbbing chords on beats two and four that pulse in the string and drum accompaniment under the grave winds and brass melody. An unexpected welling of emotion is heard just before the March section closes at rehearsal 70, and a transition using a “sigh” motive (rehearsal 70) in the woodwinds, modulates to the second theme in F minor which opens with a lyrical but subdued string episode at 71. Then, as if Elgar had lost his restraint, we hear a buildup of dynamic, an increase in tempo, and more imaginative scoring leading to a triumphant F major climax in the brass, marked Nobilmente e semplice (rehearsal 76). The sigh figure is again heard in the Closing theme at 78, as if to recall earlier grief, slowly melting into the recapitulation of the C minor March theme at rehearsal 79.

The main theme is heard now against a new countersubject in the oboe, which is more of a solo lament of which Elgar, conducting, said:

I want you to imagine a great crowd of silent people, watching the passing of a beloved sovereign. Strings, you must play those semiquaver figures of yours like the sigh of an immense crowd … Oboe, I want you to play your lament entirely free, with all the expression you can get into it… It must sound as if it belonged outside somewhere.

The lyrical string second theme follows immediately at rehearsal 81, without a transition, this time in Eb, the key of the “Spirit of Delight” theme (the theme from three of the symphony). Everything follows as expected until the coda (three measures after 88) an extended V chord resolving to a warm and mournful return at 89, to C minor and an allusion to the introduction, interrupted by an unexpected crescendo in the trombones and strings, quickly silenced as the movement ends with a decrescendo to ppp.

Third Movement: Rondo

The third movement is the shortest of the four, generally running 8 to 9 minutes. Labeled a rondo by Elgar, it by no means adheres to the typical rondo archetype; Robert Meikle successfully analyzed the movement’s structure according to several different forms: two different rondos (the first ABACABA, the second ABACADABACA), a scherzo and trio, and a sonata form.

Lord Alfred Tennyson

The opening theme in C major is derived from a theme heard initially in the first movement (at rehearsal 1). Featuring a recurring two sixteenth – eighth note rhythm and a sprightly character, it is traded between strings and woodwinds in quick successive units, maintaining a sense of rhythmic unrest through offbeat accompaniment patterns and hemiolas. A second sweeping theme in C minor begins at rehearsal 93, similar in contour and rhythm to the first movement theme at rehearsal 1. Marked fortissimo and sonoramente in the strings, it is occasionally supplemented by winds and horns and punctuated by accented offbeats in the brass and timpani. This theme is then repeated piano by the first violins with interjecting woodwind solos. The opening theme returns in fragments, running through a series of harmonic sequences and building to the entrance of the third theme at rehearsal 100, which maintains the sweeping aspects of the C minor theme with the added rhythmic punch of the opening. This is followed by a return to the opening theme in earnest.

A pastoral theme appears at rehearsal 106 in the woodwinds, oscillating between a string motive related to the C minor theme, and the opening theme. Throughout this section, the timpani subtly foreshadows the coming strife with a repeated eighth note pattern played softly in the background. This action begins to intensify at rehearsal 118, with the return of the “ghost” motive from the first movement and the hammering of eighth notes in timpani, brass, high winds, and tambourine. It is a striking moment, a violent outburst in the midst of relative serenity; Elgar stated that it represented “the madness that attends the excess or abuse of passion,” and related it to the Tennyson poem detailing the experience of the corpse in its grave. The episode passes seemingly unnoticed, fading away before the recapitulation of earlier material, concluding with a triumphant C major cadence.

Fourth Movement: Moderato e maestoso

The fourth movement of the symphony, Moderato e maestoso, is in a clear sonata form. The exposition opens with the main theme in Eb; every measure has the same rhythmic pattern and the last beat of each measure ends with a downwards leap of a perfect fifth. An aggressive transitional theme at rehearsal 139 leads, through sequences, to a grandioso climax (four measures before rehearsal 142), then follows a new theme in the dominant (Bb) at 142, marked Nobilmente like the climax of the second movement.

For the most part, the development, beginning at 145, is a fugato based on the transitional theme. It modulates very little, centering for the most part around D major and B minor. It calls for extreme orchestral virtuosity and features very complex scoring. The climax of the section arrives at rehearsal 149 when the brass and percussion play a measure evoking the main theme and the trumpet hits a high B that rings out over the entire orchestra. It is an interesting bit of trivia that in the score this B lasts for only one measure, but on one occasion, Ernest Hall, a virtuoso trumpeter, held the note for two full measures and Elgar was so delighted that it has since become tradition to hold the B for the two bars.

At the end of the development, a new lyrical melodic theme leads to a return of the main theme and a modulation back to Eb major and thus the recapitulation at rehearsal 157, which is fairly standard; it brings back the same themes which remain in Eb.

The coda at rehearsal 167, marked piu tranquillo, again puts the main theme of the movement in the celli and brings back what is often called the “Spirit of Delight” motive, the theme from measure three of the symphony which is now heard in the woodwinds at a slower tempo at rehearsal 168.

The movement ends peacefully as opposed to the finale of his first symphony, and Elgar, who had premiered his Ab Symphony and his Violin Concerto to “endless ovations", is said to have been disappointed by the less generous reception of the second symphony. This could be in part because a quiet ending didn’t stir the audience into a wild show of appreciation, but more a contemplative one, and in fact, the Daily Mail gave it a warm review saying: “the symphony was received with unhesitating and most cordial warmth.”

Extra-Musical Considerations

The ruins of Tintagel, in Cornwall, England.

There is much speculation as to who inspired Elgar to write this symphony. He dedicated it to King Edward VII who died in May 1910. Many scholars believe his close friend Alice Stuart Wortley, with whom he was rumored to have a romantic liaison, was his inspiration. Others believe it was the death of his close friend Alfred E. Rodewald in 1903, as shortly thereafter, Elgar started sketching the Larghetto movement of the symphony.

Elgar told close friends that the symphony represented everything that had happened to him from April 1909 to February 1911. The people he was with and the places he visited inspired the music of this symphony. During this time, Elgar visited Venice where he admired St. Mark’s Basilica and its square. He explained that the Basilica inspired the opening of the Larghetto movement. During this time he also visited Tintagel in Cornwall in the southwest of England, where he spent time with Alice Stuart Wortley and her husband Charles. They went on many walks where his friendship with Alice grew stronger. Alice’s daughter Clare later recalled a particular walk they enjoyed in the evening sun where the lyrical beauty of the countryside and the coastline engaged Elgar. These events explain the words; “Venice and Tintagel” at the bottom of Elgar’s score.

Another known inspiration for the piece is the poem “Song” by Percy Bysshe Shelley from his 1821 collection titled Last Love Poems.

Rarely, rarely, comest thou, Spirit of Delight!

Wherefore hast thou left me now

Many a day and night?

Many a weary night and day

‘Tis since thou art fled away.

Percy Bysshe Shelley

The first line of this first stanza is written at the top of the score. Elgar said; “To get near the mood of the symphony the whole of Shelley’s poem may be read, but the music does not illustrate the whole of the poem, neither does the poem entirely elucidate the music.”

Scholars speculate about the “Windflower” influence on this symphony. According to Michael Kennedy, “Windflower” was an affectionate nickname that Elgar gave to Alice Stuart Wortley inspired by his favorite buttercup flower. It is true that they were close friends, as were the Elgar and Stuart Wortley families. Alice and Charles Stuart Wortley were music lovers and she herself was a very talented pianist. Elgar and Alice corresponded through letters; Elgar’s wife and daughter also wrote to her. The only letters of Elgar’s correspondence with her that remain intact are those that he wrote. Some experts suggest romantic feelings for Alice, although there is no evidence of any such relationship between the two. It is true that Alice spent much time with Elgar during his visit to Tintagel, and Elgar clearly admired her; however, whether he thought of her as anything more than a friend is unproven. She may have served as some form of muse for Elgar as he looked back at his time in Tintagel whilst writing his second symphony.

Early Reception

Elgar, though always prone to spells of intense self-doubt, had come to expect positive reactions to his new works. The premiere of Symphony No. 1 in 1908 was received enthusiastically by an exuberant audience and press; Elgar’s name was linked with the likes of Beethoven and Brahms, and the work was performed 82 times over the following year. Thus, Elgar was unpleasantly surprised by the much different reception given the premiere of his Symphony No. 2. The less-than-capacity filled hall responded to the new symphony, according the The Times reviewer, “with much favour, though with rather less enthusiasm than usual.”

Reasons for this perceived waning of interest could include the performance of Dream of Gerontius and the Violin Concerto earlier the same week, the presence of two other composer-conductor premieres on the program, or the high ticket prices. The emotional disconnect between an audience eager for the coronation of a new monarch and a brooding symphony in mournful commemoration of the late king may have also affected the reaction. Regardless, the lukewarm response prompted Elgar to remark to Henry Wood immediately upon exiting the stage, “Henry, they don’t like it, they don’t like it,” and complain to W.H. Reed shortly thereafter, “they sit there like a lot of stuffed pigs.” In the aftermath of the symphony’s premiere, Elgar was “despondent” and subsequently entered “one of his periods of despair.”

The reviews from that first performance were, however, generally positive. The critic from The Daily Telegraph lauded Elgar’s “firmer grip, not only of the symphonic form, but of the substance expressed within its confines.” This reviewer would also attest “there are heights here that hitherto even Elgar himself had not touched, but we are doubtful if the greater public will realise the fact immediately.” The Times critic acclaimed the work as “a great deal better than his first,” remarking that the second and fourth movements in particular “touch the composer’s highest mark.”

Leopold Stokowski

Reviews in the following year, however, were decidedly mixed. Elgar conducted the Hallé Orchestra in a November 23, 1911 performance, eliciting the critic of the Manchester Guardian to declare “Elgar’s original charm and his power of surprising us into wonder have diminished rather than grown as his craftsmanship and subtlety of fantastic variation have increased…we can hardly say that the work contains any melody in the full sense of the word. Neither can we say with confidence that it quite vanquishes the impression of coldness and hardness.” The American premiere in Cincinnati on November 24 and 25 by the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra under Leopold Stokowski was not well received, and the American correspondent to The Times had this to say regarding a New York performance on December 16: “One cannot listen to even the most eloquent pleading for nearly an hour without fatigue, and that was the first impression this music made – of restless, unpitying earnestness…not only is no concession made to the sensuously pleasing, but little regard is paid to the psychological need for contrast, for relief. It is a devotee exhorting a congregation assumed also to be devotees.”

The symphony was slow to catch on, not performed a second time by the Hallé Orchestra, generally very supportive of Elgar’s music, until 1926. The Royal Philharmonic Society performed the work in 1916 and not again until seven years later. In the wake of World War I, it did begin to stake its place in the repertoire. A concert in March, 1924, inspired The Times critic to remark upon the second movement, “one wondered whether any nobler or more beautiful funeral music has been written than this, which unrolls like some vast tapestry richly woven of purple and crimson threads.” Adrian Boult’s rendering of the piece with the London Symphony Orchestra on March 16, 1920 was received with “frantic enthusiasm,” and stirred Elgar to declare, “I feel that my reputation in the future is in your safe hands.”

Contemporary Issues

Today, Elgar’s Second Symphony has seemingly not entered the standard symphonic canon. Although Elgar is widely acknowledged as one of England’s premier composers, his orchestral music, with the exception of the Enigma Variations, the Cello Concerto, and his Pomp and Circumstance Marches, is rarely programmed outside of the United Kingdom (though the Chicago Symphony Orchestra has his Symphony No. 2 on their schedule for April, 2010). Research materials written or published after 1990 are quite difficult to locate, a clear indication of how this piece has been overshadowed by more popular symphonic repertoire.

Selected Discography

Elgar, Sir Edward, dir. 1992, 1927. London Symphony Orchestra. EMI Classics CDS 7 52560 2.

Hickox, Richard, dir. 2005. BBC National Chamber Orchestra of Wales. Chandos CHSA 5038.

Menuhin, Yehudi, dir. 1991, 1990. Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. Virgin Classics VC 7 91182-2.

Solti, Sir Georg, dir. 1980. London Philharmonic Orchestra. Decca 421 386-2.

Tate, Jeffrey, dir. 2003, 1991. London Symphony Orchestra. EMI Classics 7243 5 85512 2 8.

Sources

• Elgar, Edward. Symphony No. 2 in E flat. London: Novello and Company, Limited, 1911.

• Gimbel, Allen. “Elgar’s Prize Song: Quotation and Allusion in the Second Symphony.” 19th-Century Music 12, no. 3 (Spring 1989): 231-240.

• Harper-Scott, J. P. E. “Elgar’s deconstruction of the belle époque: interlace structures and the Second Symphony.” In Elgar Studies, edited by J. P.E. Harper-Scott and Julian Rushton, 172-219. Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press, 2007. ISBN 0-52-186199-3

• Kennedy, Michael. “Symphony No. 2 in E Flat Major, Op. 63.” In Elgar Orchestral Music, 57-64. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1970.

• Kennedy, Michael. Portrait of Elgar. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. ISBN 0-19-284017-7.

• Kent, Christopher. “A View of Elgar’s Methods of Composition through the Sketches of the Symphony No. 2 in Eb (Op. 63).” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 103 (1976-1977): 41-60.

• Lace, Ian. "Elgar – His Music: Symphony No. 2, Extended Description". The Elgar Society. http://www.elgar.org/3symph2x.htm (accessed March 5, 2009).

• Mark, Christopher. “The Later Orchestral Music.” In The Cambridge Companion to Elgar, edited by Daniel Grimley and Julian Rushton, 154-170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-521-53363-5.

• McNaught, W. “A Note on Elgar’s Second Symphony.” The Musical Times 92, No. 1296 (Feb 1951): 57-61.

• McVeagh, Diana. "Elgar, Sir Edward." In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. subscription access (accessed March 8, 2009).

• Meikle, Robert. “'The True Foundation': The Symphonies.” In Edward Elgar: Music and Literature, edited by Raymond Monk, 45-71. Aldershot, Hants, England: Scolar Press, 1993. ISBN 0-859-67937-3.

• Newman, Ernest. “Elgar’s Second Symphony.” The Musical Times 52, No. 819 (May 1911): 295-300.

• Redwood, Christopher, ed. An Elgar Companion. Derbyshire, England: Sequoia Publishing, 1982.

• Shelley, Percy Bysshe. "Song." Columbia Granger's Poetry Database. EBSCOhost. subscription access (accessed April 29, 2009).

• Shore, Bernard. Sixteen Symphonies. London: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., 1949.

• The Times. “Elgar’s New Symphony.” May 25, 1911, p. 10.

• The Times. “Elgar’s Second Symphony in America.” January 3, 1912, p. 7.

• The Times. “British Broadcast Company’s Concert: Elgar’s Second Symphony.” March 8, 1924, p. 8.

• Tovey, F. Donald. Essays in Musical Analysis Volume Two. London: Oxford University Press, 1936.

External Links

BBC Radio 3 Program Notes - Elgar Symphony No. 2

The Elgar Society - Commentary on Symphony No. 2 by Ian Lace

Naxos - Edward Elgar Biography and Works

Bachtrack - Upcoming Elgar Concerts

Template:Elgar symphonies