Leo Hussain, the main conductor of the George Enescu Philharmonic Orchestra, returns this week to the ensemble's desk. The proposed program includes Symphony Concertante in E minor for cello and orchestra, Op. 125 by Serghei Prokofiev and Symphony No. 5 in C sharp minor by Gustav Mahler. In the position of soloist, performs cello player Ștefan Cazacu. Between practice rounds, conductor Leo Hussain offered us an interview:

This week, you are returning to the conductor's desk of the "George Enescu" Philharmonic Orchestra. I would like to start with a couple of questions about the program you will be conducting. For the opening, you will present Symphony Concertante for cello and orchestra by Serghei Prokofiev. The piece was dedicated to the renowned Mstislav Rostropovich, back then still a young cello player. For the concerts in Bucharest, you are collaborating with Ștefan Cazacu, who is also a young cello player. What are your thoughts about this piece and about this collaboration?

Well, it's not just that it was dedicated to Rostropovich, but in a way, he also contributed significantly to the composition of this piece. It's a well-known fact that Prokofiev initially composed a cello concerto that wasn't very well received. After meeting Rostropovich, the two collaborated closely to reconfigure this piece. Prokofiev would ask him for suggestions, ideas, sometimes even naked him to write fragments of the cello score himself. For a young musician like Rostropovich, it must have been an incredible and unforgettable experience to have such an intense collaboration with such an important figure in the Russian music scene.

Of course, it's a joy to work with young soloists. It's always a pleasure. In a way, the collaboration gains a distinct energy. But we are still dealing with a piece that was, in essence, created around a big cello player. I think, to an extent, this explains why Symphony Concertante has a special charm for all cello players. It's a score that's rarely performed due to its technical difficulties, but also because it is hard to incorporate it coherently in a concert program. But I am eagerly awaiting conducting it. It's my first time for this piece.

And it's the first time I'm working with Ștefan Cazacu as a soloist. I have collaborated with him before in the context of the orchestra, but this is the first collaboration in this formula, conductor - soloist. But we know each other pretty well, and have for a few years.

Next in the program is Symphony No. 5 by Mahler. The composer himself has stated that he incorporates his entire life into his symphonies. What are your thoughts about this piece?

The musical motif that opens Mahler's symphony is well-known and can be heard multiple times during the piece. I think it's quite obvious that he took inspiration from the destiny motif in Symphony No. 5 by Beethoven. But I don't think Mahler tried to write a piece shaped after Beethoven, just adopted this famous motif from that work.

Symphony No. 5 was composed during an extremely dramatic time in Mahler's life. Just a couple of months previously, he was on death's door, and while composing this piece, he fell in love with Alma and married her. The entire symphony follows this arc: it starts with profound suffering, existential in nature. The first part is basically a funerary march, but not the usual one, classic; it's stormy, troubled, full of the terror felt by someone one breath away from death. Then it passes through the famous Adagietto, which is actually a love letter for Alma, and in the end, we reach what is probably the lightest and happiest music that Mahler has ever written. Of course, the finale of Symphony No. 4 is also full of light, but that piece is about divine happiness. Here, at the end of Symphony No. 5, is presented a humane and earthly happiness. From an emotional standpoint, Mahler was very innocent, in a way… I'm not saying this as an insult towards him, quite the opposite, it's a compliment. He was very earnest and honest with himself. He always had an open heart, with his emotions on his sleeves. His music reflects the dramatic states of mind he was experiencing. From this perspective, Symphony No. 5 is an honest, naive piece of direct beauty, and I think this endless sincerity is clearly felt by the public.

How are you approaching this challenge of conducting a musical piece that has become a hit, like the part Adagietto from Symphony No. 4?

For me, the key is integrating Adagietto in the context of the big picture of the symphony. There are musical pieces that are taken out of context and performed separately, like it happens with "Dance of the Knights", for example, which everyone recognizes, being part of the "Romeo and Juliet" ballet by Prokofiev. I believe it is important for these recognizable fragments to be put in the larger context of the piece they belong to, so that during a listening, they are felt as a natural progression of the musical discourse.

In the case of Adagietto, it is, of course, great that Visconti used it in the movie "Death in Venice", but that context made us instantly associate the piece with a feeling of melancholy or with degradation, instead of youthful love. And Adagietto is actually about love. And I think, in a way, that this is also a challenge for the orchestra - to perform Adagietto from a fresh perspective, not thinking of the emotional weight characteristic of Visconti's movie.

I have observed, listening to the earlier practice round, the unusual placement of the instruments on the stage. I particularly mean the sitting of the contrabass players in the center-back. I'm guessing it's not just a pragmatic solution…

During the weeks I come to conduct here, I like to experiment with the orchestra's placement. I started with a Mahler symphony a year or two ago - I placed the double basses at the back, right in front of me, as they do, for example, at the Musikverein in Vienna. But I didn't do it to imitate that model. I simply felt - and this is something completely personal - that when the double basses were placed to the side, it was difficult for them to contribute enough to the sound of the ensemble.

When the double basses are placed all the way back, their sound supports the whole orchestra. In addition, the brass players, who usually sit against the back wall, don't always feel comfortable; they often feel that the sound they are making is too loud. If we bring them a little further forward, they have a different kind of freedom in their playing.

We are still experimenting. Of course, it's a change that's not comfortable for all musicians, especially those used to a certain setup. But, from my perspective, there is a benefit in terms of sound. It's more difficult for us, but the sonic result is warmer and more unified.

You are the main conductor of the "George Enescu" Philharmonic Orchestra, and you have known the ensemble for many years. How would you describe this orchestra's particularities?

This is a question I receive often, and I find it interesting that my answer changes to an extent from one week of collaboration to another. But there is one thing that I have always appreciated and that has remained constant: this orchestra truly performs from the heart. This also means that, if the musicians don't like something, they tell me immediately, which I wholeheartedly appreciate. The emotions are always let out, and this way of creating music captivates and entertains me. I have come to appreciate this attitude more and more as our collaboration has evolved.

I think the orchestra has developed greatly in the past five to six years. Of course, this is also due to the maestro Cazacu and the high quality of the guests, be they soloists or conductors. But this progress comes mainly from inside, from the musicians. It is obvious that they are not satisfied just to come here, to read some scores and check some concerts before the weekend. They are truly passionate about what they do and that is truly something special.

Credit photo: Marco Borggreve