Arkadi Zenziper.

There is something unexplainably haunting about Russian music. Despite centuries of Russo-European cultural exchanges, everything Russian still retains an aura of mystery that defies interpretation. It was therefore a privilege to have two Russian artistes lead the Malta Philharmonic Orchestra (MPO) in a concert of Russian music.

Of course recent political events have made us very wary of Russia, but amidst all the political turmoil, culture proves to be the best medium to understanding this rich and vast country. The concert featured the music of three Russian giants, each of whom reacted differently to their homeland.

Conducted by Alexander Chernushenko, with Carmine Lauri as orchestra leader, the MPO was in top form. The concert opened with a little-known work, Mussorgsky’s Dawn on the Moscow River (which is in reality the Prelude to Mussorgsky’s unfinished opera Khovanschina). Mussorgsky represents the typical 19th-century troubled genius, whose self-doubts did much to slow down his creative process. Yet all the works he has left us are masterpieces in their own right.

Zenziper gave a technically-polished and musically-intense performance

This very short Prelude is typical of the composer’s nationalistic style, which combines Russian melodies and textures with the Western medium of the orchestra. I must admit the performance of this piece left me cold, and I found it lacking in musical direction. The unforgiving acoustics of the Mediterranean Conference Centre (MCC) did little to help the music, and any warmth of tone was lost.

Next up was Rachmaninov’s Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini, one of the most iconic piano works from the Russian repertoire, for which the MPO was joined by pianist Arkadi Zenziper. The work is a blend of pianistic virtuosity, orchestral colour and beautiful, heart-wrenching melodies such as only Rachmaninov can create.

Zenziper gave a technically-polished and musically-intense performance, despite the decidedly unhelpful acoustics. I hate to keep harping on this point, but the MCC is totally unsuited for orchestral concerts, and everything always sounds distant and thin. Zenziper managed to communicate despite this setback, and there were moments of great beauty.

A pity there were a couple of uncertain moments which marred the performance, but musicians are human like the rest of us, and one cannot deny that Zenziper is a fantastic musician. Even in the most technically-demanding passages (and there are plenty of them in the Rhapsody) he managed to interpret the music effortlessly. The fact that he struck a chord with the audience was easily apparent from the rapturous applause that he received at the end. Zenziper was also kind enough to regale us with two encores, the Preambule from Carnaval and part of the Arabesque op. 18, both by Schumann.

The second half was taken up by Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 5, a powerful and challenging work that still makes me feel uneasy every time I hear it. Written in what is arguably the composer’s darkest period (following the official denouncement by Stalin’s government), the work was labelled by critics at the time as ‘a Soviet artist’s reply to just criticism’. This is a work of great complexity and I did not feel that the interpretation was consistent throughout. There were moments of beauty and power, as well as some very fine playing, but somehow it lacked direction.

The opening movement was hurried which, despite being effective in the opening motif, makes the rest of the movement sound rushed. Chernushenko is a steady conductor, but this tended to stifle the music in more lyrical passages.

The second movement worked better. This buoyant Allegretto is a scherzo in all but name, and the steady rhythmic motor worked to the music’s advantage. The trio section also had Carmine Lauri playing a short solo which he performed impeccably.

The string section came to the fore in the third movement, the emotional core of the whole symphony and crucial to the whole symphony. Once again, it felt fragmented and failed to engage consistently.

The last movement was taken at a breakneck speed and, although somehow the orchestra held together, it allowed little time for detail. Thus, there was not enough time for a proper build-up to the finale, and despite some powerful playing from the brass section, it felt like it was over too soon. It would be unfair to say that the symphony was disappointing, but rather that there were too many missed opportunities.