Rachmaninov’s Second Chance

What some people consider as failure could cause many to decide to quit or to give up their dreams and aspirations. The road to success is not usually a straight path without bumps and errors, but it is rather a crooked one, with some uncertainty and faults.

What would have happened if many composers had based their success upon one of their pieces or upon one of their performances? What if they had quit after an “unsuccessful” act? Although the most famous and prevalent composers – that are also very well remembered – did not just stop, some of them did get discouraged and slowed down for a bit.

Sergei Rachmaninov, one of the greatest composers, was born in 1873 and began his relationship with music at an early age. As the years went by, he became well-known for his virtuosity as a pianist and composer. He was very successful for his famous Prelude in C-Sharp Minor, but he struggled at the premiere of his first symphony, Symphony No. 1 in D minor.

He composed this symphony in 1895, and it premiered in March 1897. The symphony was conducted by Glazunov, and according to the article written by Geoffrey Norris about the Russian composer’s life, the symphony was considered a disaster. It was even compared to a symphony on the Seven Plagues of Egypt and did not receive good feedback. Rachmaninov himself described the piece as “weak, childish, strained, and bombastic,” and critics said that not only was the music bad but that the performance itself was too.

In a way, Rachmaninov blamed Glazunov and said that he did not feel anything as a conductor. In a letter, Rachmaninov wrote the following about Glazunov: “I am amazed how such a highly talented man as Glazunov can conduct so badly. I am not speaking now of his conducting technique (one can’t ask that of him) but about his musicianship. He feels nothing when he conducts. It’s as if he understands nothing”. Rachmaninov struggled so much after that performance. He had worked on that symphony for such a long period of time, and it did not have the success that he had expected. It was a disappointment, and he did not seem to handle it very well. Later on, Glazunov was also accused of being drunk during that night, and although that was never verified, sources say that it was very likely to have been the case because his pupil, Shostakovich, said that Glazunov would have a hidden bottle behind his desk and often drink during his time at the conservatory. Either way, it seems as if there was a lot of chaos that contributed to a poor performance, which affected the young composer and caused him to “slow down.”

This situation affected Rachmaninov in a way that he did not have any significant compositions for the following three years. Fortunately, his music journey did not stop, and he continued to grow. As he kept learning and expanding his knowledge, he was able to work in broader and more concise compositions; he also got a job as a conductor and developed his skills significantly.

Some years later, he premiered his Second Symphony, which was received very well and helped him regain his confidence in his skills as a symphonist. There were some similarities between both symphonies, but the second one – according to critics – was better elaborated. And the article by Geoffrey Norris says that his Second Symphony “display[s] his fully-fledged melodic style, his opulent but infinitely varied and discerning use of the orchestra, and a greater confidence in the handling of large-scale structures.” The symphony was magnificent and unveiled a better representation of the sublime talents of this composer.

Rachmaninov’s Second Symphony took a different turn and brought him faith and motivation. Despite the “less” successful performance and the negative feedback that he had, we are lucky that he had did not kill his dreams and conviction as a composer and musician but guided him through a path of knowledge and perseverance and gifted the world with his matchless and inspirational music.

#mus130b