CONSTANTIN TRINKS FINDS THE GREATNESS IN BRUCKNER’S FIFTH SYMPHONY
Maria Ioudenitch (violin), Vancouver Symphony Orchestra/ Constantin Trinks (conductor): Music of Mendelssohn and Bruckner, Orpheum Theatre, October 17, 2025.
Previous appearances of German conductor Constantin Trinks with the VSO have been a great success, bringing forth both strong interpretations and an inspired response from the orchestra. So far, he has performed the 9th Symphonies of both Dvorak and Schubert, as well as Tchaikovsky’s 5th. This time, it was one of the far-reaching masterpieces of 19th century symphonic and contrapuntal writing: Anton Bruckner’s Symphony No. 5.
Trinks has established an enviable reputation in Europe as a Wagner conductor, and has also received strong acclaim in his recent Mozart debuts at both the Royal Opera House Covent Garden and Glyndebourne, and in Strauss operas. As a sideshow to these commitments, his orchestral concerts come across as wonderfully fresh, allowing him to transfer his acknowledged clarity of articulation, sense of style and dramatic development, and awareness of nuance to this genre. While the VSO is not really a Bruckner orchestra, nor is it used to playing works of 70 minutes in length, it did a fine job in all departments here. Moreover, Trinks achieved the ultimate objective: the performance left absolutely no doubt as to the greatness of this work or its transcendent reach. The appetizer was an alert and tight-knit performance of Mendelssohn’s Violin Concerto with young American-Russian violinist Maria Ioudenitch.
The first two movements of the symphony were excellent: clean, powerful and sensitive. One noticed the care in getting the string ‘swells’ exactly right in the soft pizzicato opening. The initial brass statement was decisive and the allegro moved forward with an unerring balance and sense of dynamic contrast. Attention was devoted to coaxing expressive narrative out of the winds – the ‘human’ voice – to set alongside the ‘uncontrollable force beyond’ as embodied in the brass. The fact that the latter was often given a threatening, elemental quality, especially in their menacing cross-rhythm passages, suggested the strangeness and uncertainty of the journey. The upper violin line was strongly etched and contrapuntally aware, and the horns – sometimes an area of undernourishment for the orchestra – were quite splendid. The overall sound was rounded and integrated and the architectural shape of the movement was compelling.
The Adagio was as fine, the conductor bringing a rich, emotional response to its lyricism. The movement’s quiet opening, again pizzicato, brought forth very sensitive oboe playing, conveying just the right degree of vulnerability. The presentation of principal cantabile theme – led by the cellos – was rich and deeply-felt, while the climax of the movement achieved a resplendent radiance. The antiphonal brass sections were unerringly balanced. Trinks obviously feels this music deeply! Perhaps the key was that the motion throughout was so clearly defined, yet the reading always preserved a sense of mystery too. It was only at the very end, in the slow, quiet passage for violins and winds, that concentration may have faltered slightly. I certainly came away thinking that this movement is more of a masterpiece than I had previously thought.
The final two movements unfortunately invite more qualification. I thought the Scherzo was too quick, so that, instead of a layered building of its energy to a climax, what mainly stood out were its sequential timpani punctuations. The speed also made the transition to the slower Ländler and Trio slightly awkward, and the subsequent development a little diffuse. I acknowledge that the tempo for a Bruckner scherzo may be a matter for debate, since it is often thought of as a rustic, open air depiction of frolicsome peasants. This depiction may fit, say, the popular 4th and 7th symphonies, but I think the Scherzo of the 5th is more analytically than descriptively conceived. After all, its intriguing opening string motive is a variant of the oboe theme that begins the Adagio, and both movements are in D minor. To me, it seems that maintaining the unity and integration within the work is a more important priority than conveying its boisterous rusticity, and a slightly more tempered molto vivace still can pay dividends in detailing.
The finale at over 20 minutes is always forbidding: a grand double fugue of bewildering complexity and reach. Trinks managed the restatement of the opening themes of the first two movements excellently, but the problems began when confronting the fugue. There are so many little dancing phrases in the strings that have to be articulated cleanly, and the temptation is to press forward with them. Unfortunately, patience is the only solution here since their relatively innocuous advance conceals the subtle organic building of the full musical structure underneath.
I think some of the fugal sections might have been paragraphed better in this performance, and there is no doubt the string counterpoint sometimes came out as too jaunty at the quick speed chosen. I did note some orchestral fatigue. Even the famous ‘double thwack’ on the timpani towards the end seemed less decisive and communicative than it might be, even though that is the beginning of the ascent to the heavens. However, in spite of these limitations, Trinks and the orchestra still managed to will everything together, and the ending turned out as moving, powerful and transcendent as one always expects from this great symphony. A possible reason for why the result was so fulfilling is that the conductor had explored so many emotional corners earlier in the work that they could all come into majestic focus in the coda. This performance definitely left its mark, defining one of the orchestra’s memorable adventures and, possibly one for the conductor too, since he happened to reveal that he had not much experience conducting the work. If this was among his first takes on the piece, it was a splendid start.
The opening Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with young violinist Maria Ioudenitch revealed the musician’s technical command over the piece without however revealing the work’s full beauty. She offered a strong, tight-knit treatment, which was impressive in itself, but which also lacked a degree of lyrical involvement in the first two movements. In the first movement, she did not fully invest in its moments of reverie, while the lovely Andante turned out more pretty than heartfelt. The violinist also tended to accentuate certain phrases in a way that was not necessary. The finale was the triumph here, full of dazzling playing, motion and spirit. Trinks’ accompaniment was wonderfully attentive throughout.
© Geoffrey Newman 2025