After "O Kyklos" (The Circle), Theodorakis next composed the Suite No. I for piano and orchestra in five parts: allegro, allegro - andante con moto, andante sostenuto, allegro, and calmo.
The orchestration was typically Theodorakean: strings, tympani, and woodwinds. The composition, inspired by Cretan musical elements, was the answer the composer had been seeking in his quest for an aesthetic path. Commenting on the idea that inspired the work, Mikis has said: "Crete is a music that advances on rhythms of steel. The rhythms support high in the air me- lodic schemes, embroidered on an endless multicolored canvas. And, suddenly, now you hear a scream, and th en a sigh. The blood, excited, quickly waters the flowers in vine-props and then feeds on love in the feasts."
It was his Cretan inheritance, his "Greekness," that would not leave him, even while writing in the Western scales.
* * *
Mitropoulos was in Paris at that time, and Mikis called on him and to show him the composition. Mitropoulos took an immediate interest in Mikis and told him that, since 1953, when the State Department had prohibited Mikis from performing in America, he himself had spoken to various people about his case.
Mitropoulos took the suite and studied it carefully. Impressed, he sugge:sted a few possime changes from a conductor's point of view. Then, their conversation proceeded from the piece at hand to the musical problems in Greece, in general. Mitropoulos urged Mikis to go back to Greece. He felt that alI the Greek musicians studying abroad were needed more at home, where they had a valuable contribution to make.
With a view toward possible collaboration together, Mitropoulos asked Mikis to meet him in London, where he would be working, when he had some works for him to perform. Mikis, however, had promised the Suite to Andreas Paridis, who conducted it in Athens, in April, 1957, with the State Orchestra and Jean Viguet at the piano. It was not received weIl by the Athenian critics. But it won a golden award for the young composer at the Moscow Music Festival.
* * *
On May 7, Economidis, with whom Mikis had never stopped corresponding while in Paris, wrote a very warm letter:
"The creator, beyond his own Truth, which he expresses as he himself perceives it, must await his vindication with the passage of time, and even this is uncertain. ... That is why l avoided writing to you anything about your last work, Suite No. I. Neither the general clamor (never in my experience as a manager have l received so many cutting letters, with especially the critics in the lead) nor my own opinion, whatever that might be, is of any real importance.
l believe that young people Iike yourself should not concern themselves with replying to the critics. l consider it a weakness and therefore would never have done it myself. But this is a matter of personaI judgment, and, since you decided to do so, you acted rightly. ... l congratulate you, however, for your faith in your own beliefs. This is a great virtue. Therefore, continue on your path and my wishes are always with you."
I n his reply, Mikis admitted his great obligation to his mentor, and, at the same time, declared his future plans vis- à-vis Greece. Then he gave his opinion on critics:
"'As far as the Greek critics are concerned, my views are diametrically opposed to yours. I'll tell you why. You start with the premise that you are dealing with true critics, but l am positive that they are no more than charlatans."
He vowed to return to Greece and fight, adding, "The work will give the answer".
© George Giannaris: Theodorakis. Music and social change. Allen & Unwin London, 1972
p.s. G.W. 2002: Concerning crtitics, nothing has changed...
see also: Guy Wagner
|
You are here:
