How on earth did Britten do it?
That's always what occurs to me when I listen to
Peter Grimes.
My rhetorical question has two limbs
The first is how a composer growing up in the inter-war years could find such a strong individual operatic voice. There were of course operas by English composers before 1945 but nothing in them could possibly have been seen to lead up to
Grimes. I think that now, from an early 21st century perspective we can see that there are elements of that extraordinary melting pot of early 20th century opera - Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Puccini, Janacek, Berg and others - threaded through the language of
Grimes, but in 1945 most of this would have been completely outside English musical discourse. It remains a miracle that an Englishman could have absorbed all of this, fused it within an native tradition and produced a masterpiece that holds the stage all over the world.
But the second limb is more personal - where did Britten the man find the means to produce such a score. I've never believed the "happy composer writes happy music - sad composer writers sad music" school of thought, but there has to be some link between the man and the music.
One of the most fascinating recordings I know is the rehearsal tape (secretly recorded, much to Britten's annoyance) of the Decca recording of the
War Requiem. Britten comes across as an affable, slightly effete prep school master directing a group of talented but inexperienced pupils. Over the years I have played in ad hoc performances conducted by such individuals. They tend to produce enthusiastic, if rough and ready performances without much in the way in excitement or energy. So listening blind to Britten rehearsing one might expect something similar - and then you get this extraordinary energy and intensity, in some cases savagery of the music. It really is hard to connect the one with the other.
It is the same with
Grimes. How could that elegant , softly spoken, reserved man have conjured up the terrifying choral outbursts as the crown hunts down Peter Grimes. The roots of creativity and inspiration are truly incomprehensible.
Grimes is not I think a perfect masterpiece. Britten himself is supposed to have said that it was
full of howlers - though I shudder to think how this notoriously thin skinned man would have reacted if somebody had pointed out one of them! Some of the music for the minor characters , such as Mrs Sedley and Hobson, can be tedious and there are times when things drag, but these are small matters. Time and time again Britten's inspiration is red hot. I've already mentioned the hounding of Grimes. Those chorus shouts of "Peter Grimes" are in a good performance among the most thrilling, and terrifying moment in the operatic repertoire, but perhaps even more notable is the mad scheme, with the offstage choir now reduced to a whisper and the low moaning of the tuba in the distance. To reduce the texture at the most critical point of the opera was a extremely courageous step, but it works!
Finally a personal recollection. I attended a concert in the Norwich festival in the early 1970s. I went to hear Stravinsky's
Firebird and
Symphony of Psalms, but sandwiched between them Peter Pears sang the Britten Nocturne. Britten was in the audience and stood up to acknowledge the applause. But shamed as I am to admit it now, not much of the applause was from me! I'd come to hear the Stravinsky and I found the Britten very hard going and uninspiring. I know better now. But at least I did see Britten in person.
There are wonderful moments elsewhere in Britten's operas - the end of
A Midsummer Night's Dream is my favourite - but I don't think that he ever quite achieved the level of consistent inspiration that he achieved in Grimes......and all in his early 30s.
