The comments above on the texts are interesting, particularly the comments pointing out that they are "obnoxiously patriotic and embarrassingly jingoistic" and "Hitler must have loved it". The texts are, in fact from the Bible, the Book of Revelation, Chapter 19.
This is the first time I've heard the whole of this piece. I've read that the reason it is neglected is because it is regarded as being too jingoistic. I'm not so sure about that. My impression is that it is dominated by ff. The first movement in particular has the chorus singing in full throttle virtually throughout. There is no subtlty, no interplay of pp, mf and ff. As you would expect, it's well scored and elaborately scored with a double choir, but it lacks moments of repose and reflection to offset the sounds of triumph.
Alright. The text, particularly translated into English, is obnoxiously patriotic and embarrassingly jingoistic. Hitler must have loved it. But the music is no more bombastic than say the "Halleluja" chorus, although that potboiler is, thankfully much shorter. Or Beethoven's 9th. Much longer... Brahms shows his mastery of counterpoint and even evidences an amazing command of the orchestra's resources. Musically, I like it. I might prefer softening the chorus a bit, however. That full bore fortissimo has a fanatical and nearly religious fervor that makes me squirm. In all, I don't care for the emotions that music like this is supposed to arouse. It's dated and rather clumsy emotionally. But that doesn't mean that the music is not good. Perhaps some gifted poet might write a more appealing text, some day. And an adventurous conductor soften the fanatic elements and render this music more palatable.
The comments above on the texts are interesting, particularly the comments pointing out that they are "obnoxiously patriotic and embarrassingly jingoistic" and "Hitler must have loved it". The texts are, in fact from the Bible, the Book of Revelation, Chapter 19.
If you'd told me this was Handel...
This is the first time I've heard the whole of this piece. I've read that the reason it is neglected is because it is regarded as being too jingoistic. I'm not so sure about that. My impression is that it is dominated by ff. The first movement in particular has the chorus singing in full throttle virtually throughout. There is no subtlty, no interplay of pp, mf and ff. As you would expect, it's well scored and elaborately scored with a double choir, but it lacks moments of repose and reflection to offset the sounds of triumph.
Bach revisité, accents beethovéniens... Ce n'est évidemment pas du grand Brahms.
Alright. The text, particularly translated into English, is obnoxiously patriotic and embarrassingly jingoistic. Hitler must have loved it. But the music is no more bombastic than say the "Halleluja" chorus, although that potboiler is, thankfully much shorter. Or Beethoven's 9th. Much longer... Brahms shows his mastery of counterpoint and even evidences an amazing command of the orchestra's resources. Musically, I like it. I might prefer softening the chorus a bit, however. That full bore fortissimo has a fanatical and nearly religious fervor that makes me squirm. In all, I don't care for the emotions that music like this is supposed to arouse. It's dated and rather clumsy emotionally. But that doesn't mean that the music is not good. Perhaps some gifted poet might write a more appealing text, some day. And an adventurous conductor soften the fanatic elements and render this music more palatable.