“Life, death. Love, no love. Hope, no hope.”

Do you remember when you heard Mahler’s music for the first time.

Dudamel: This was years ago. It is funny how I got to know Mahler’s music. My father played the trombone in a Salsa group and he was also playing with an orchestra. I remember finding the trombone part of Mahler’s Symphony No. 1 for the third trombone. I recall taking my father’s trombone and trying to play [imitates a trombone]… I was maybe 11 or 12 years old at the time, and I was playing the violin. But I remember a recording of the Symphony No. 1, I received it as a gift from an uncle. This was the first piece by Mahler that I ever listened to. It was a very special experience, because, even though I found it difficult to understand at the beginning, later when I started conducting, it was the first big piece that I conducted. It was amazing, because this was maybe three or four years later. I was 16 when I had that first experience with a Mahler symphony. So this was how I got into Mahler, listening to the orchestra playing Mahler in my home town, but especially through that recording that I received from an uncle. It was very special.

Did Mahler’s world open up to you immediately?

Dudamel: I think that the kind of atmosphere created by Mahler’s music is very special. The kinds of colors of the nature, the animals or that feeling of space that you have with Mahler are very unusual. It’s almost a kind of 3D music [laughs]. Not only do you hear things, but you feel them, feel how these elements surround you. This is what’s so special about Mahler. The first experience of this was really strange because first you listen to Beethoven and to Mozart, to the classics. Then you arrive at Mahler’s music, and to experience all these elements is very special, almost crazy. It’s like 3D music that you can see and hear coming to you.

You told me that you worked with Claudio Abbado on Mahler’s Symphony No. 5 in Caracas.

Dudamel: Yes!

Can you tell me about that?

Dudamel: I was conducting Mahler’s Symphony No. 5 for the first time in 2001, or maybe in 2000. I was conducting the first and the last movement. I was rehearsing at the time with the National Children’s Orchestra, which would later become the Simón Bolívar Symphony Orchestra. Then, in 2003, I conducted the symphony around October or November. And then I went to the Mahler competition for which Mahler’s Symphony No. 5 was the principal piece to conduct. So, I was conducting Mahler’s Symphony No. 5 and I won the competition. The most beautiful thing about that was the experience with the orchestra, especially with a German orchestra that has a Mahler tradition and a tradition of that sound. I feel like I received a gift from heaven when Claudio came to Caracas to conduct the Simón Bolívar Orchestra, performing Mahler’s Symphony No. 5. I was already familiar with his interpretation of Mahler’s Symphony No. 5 from before, but to have the chance to study the score with him was amazing. A lot of things opened up for me then. I thought that I knew the score, that I knew this piece very well – but I was mistaken. When I watched Claudio studying the score and when he told me all the details that one has to work on, I thought ‘Oh my God! This is the real world; this is the real Mahler world!’ So, this was in January 2005 and it was an amazing experience. All of these details, they are what it is all about; every note and every phrase.

Conducting Mahler is difficult and not difficult. It is difficult to find every detail, but to find the essence of the piece is not difficult, because it is always there, it is so clear. It’s like when you see somebody and you can immediately understand their personality. It was like that when I worked on this piece with Claudio. I was thinking that I knew everything about this symphony, but then I discovered the details, that this element here is related to another symphony, which could be from Symphony No. 1 all the way to No. 9. Mahler’s music follows one line, it is a complete symphony. All his music is one complete symphony.

Then I remember I went to Israel to conduct this symphony. It is a symphony that has become a part of my life. I was conducting it with the Bolívar Orchestra as part of a huge tour, during which I performed it 20 to 25 times. Later I conducted it in New York with the New York Philharmonic and in London with the Philharmonia Orchestra. So, it’s amazing.

Did he talk to you about technical aspects of conducting, how to organize some difficult parts of the symphony?

Dudamel: No, he didn’t. He was telling me, for example, about Mengelberg. I think he had copies of Mengelberg’s score, and when you see the Mengelberg scores, every bar and every note has a mark – every note, it is really crazy. Sometimes you cannot even read the score because there are so many marks. For instance, I remember the beginning of the second movement [sings], where you have a ritenuto [sings the same phrase again]. And he told me the best way to do it, which, to my knowing, he had seen in Mengelberg’s score. He said that it was too difficult to do the ritenuto [repeats the phrase] … ‘Let’s do a misurato’ [repeats the phrase slightly differently]. Having three instead of the two [sings the phrase again]. These kinds of technical elements were wonderful. So, he told me things like that. I think you can learn a lot from seeing Claudio conducting [laughs]. Because this music is to phrase, to express, and I think you have to have the ideas, but also the gestures to conduct this kind of music so freely. Of course a lot of conductors have this, but having this close relationship with Abbado was a very important thing in my life.

There was a big Mahler renaissance starting with Leonard Bernstein. Later, he was blamed for overpowering Mahler, for exaggerating. What is your approach to Mahler?

Dudamel: It’s funny, actually. It reminds of what Barbirolli once said, not about Mahler, but about Jacqueline du Pré. He said that if you don’t exaggerate when you’re young, then what are you going to do when you’re old [laughs]? So, sometimes people feel differently to others. Of course I cannot feel things like a 50 or 60-year-old conductor would because I need time for that. And time will tell me the things that I have to do.

I think all these elements in Mahler’s music, in a way, are there in a way that is perfect. It is not like a Mozart symphony where you have only forte and piano, and when you have a mezzo forte there, it’s almost like a miracle. Whereas with Mahler, you have a pianissimo in one line that is the same and a fortissimo in the other line and then subito crescendo and then subito diminuendo. These kinds of things in his music are very special. And you don’t have to exaggerate that because that is perfect. That is in the music.

I think Mahler was very passionate. I don’t think Mahler was a conductor who was distant to the music and to the passion and life of the music. Even when he was conducting opera and conducting other music, you can see these sketches of him making faces, jumping and moving and moving his hands. This is an example of how his music has to be. And as distant and as serious as his music is, I think there is a lot of passion there.

I think that there was always a child inside of Mahler that people sometimes don’t see. They only see Mahler thinking of death, they see him thinking in a tragic way. But even in Mahler’s tragic approach to life, there is this child part of Mahler, which is made up of his memories, the memories of his land and the atmosphere of where he was growing up. That is why it is very special.

One week ago, I was conducting the Symphony No. 6 for the first time and yes, it is a tragic symphony, but it is tragic in a theatrical way. It’s very theatrical. I love how Bernstein described it when he wrote in his score that it is an ‘Opera Symphonica’. With Mahler’s music it is difficult to pick one piece because they are all amazing, but I feel the Symphony No. 6 to be the most sincere. He put everything into this piece. It is very long, only symphonic, with a lot of elements that are repeated all the time. But he repeats them each time with a different color, sounding even more dramatic and tragic, even though I think that he was a happy man at the time. He was married, he had his first child, I think. He was living in Vienna, the most important place to be conducting at that time and he was the most famous conductor. He had the world at his feet. So why a tragic symphony [laughs]?

This kind of duality is always there in his music, these constant shifts between major and minor in this symphony [sings], happening all the time. This duality would stay with him for the rest of his life, culminating for example in the amazing Adagio of the Symphony No. 10, when you see all these elements, all these leitmotifs changing to the modern music. In terms of the elements present the music is very modern – the cowbells, the sound of bells all around, the cellist imitating the hammer and all that. The tonality is always important. But then you see the development of his life, culminating in the Symphony No. 10. Somebody said that if Mahler had lived for a few more years, he would have arrived at the new atonality that came after his death. It’s the same with Mozart. Can you imagine if Mozart had lived twenty years more? We will never know.

Together with Beethoven?

Dudamel: Together with Beethoven! Both Mozart and Mahler were very young. But yes, it is really tragic.

You are conducting the Symphony No. 9 now. Can you talk about your relationship to this symphony? You seem to show everything in this symphony.

Dudamel: It’s a very special kind of music, my God! It’s breathtaking, it’s like someone taking your heart and all the time you go … [gasping]. I feel this symphony is like time. It is as if somebody said ‘I will give you five minutes more of life’ and you can do with that whatever you want. When you arrive at the Adagissimo on the last page of the score, it is the last two minutes that you can do something with your life. But it is continuing from before because all of the last movement is about trying to find something. He is trying to embrace a hope that you cannot find. And you have to go, having this hope, but you don’t know if you will have this eternity after death.

The music is perfect. You don’t have to do anything. The notes are there and the indications, ‘faster’, ‘slower’, pianissimo’, ‘sostenuto’, ‘marcato’, everything. Everything is there. The only thing you can give is the energy and the vision. I love how Bernstein used to give titles to each movement. And I love the name he gave to the last movement, which he called ‘Let It Go’. You know, let it go, it is ok. This is what I have now; let’s try to suffer a little bit more. Because there is love at the end, Alma is there. It is not only his physical death, but also the spiritual death. He was not having a good time with Alma in his relationship. And the most tragic thing is that he knew that it was his fault. It is often like this with relationships. You are doing this or that wrong, and then, when the relationship finishes, you know that it was your fault. And this happened to Mahler. And you can feel it in the symphony. He is pleading ‘Please, please, I am giving you my soul!’. But nobody is listening, because he didn’t tell it to her with words. He was in his little room, writing this music and trying to say it in private, screaming. When you visit these places, these little houses where he was writing, you can feel that he was screaming ‘Please, please, I am here! I love you!’ But he was telling it to his music, to himself. This is the duality of his music. Life, death. Love, no love. Hope, no hope.

I waited a long time to conduct this symphony. I have done almost all the symphonies, and only this year I was thinking ‘Ok, I am “ready”’. Not like [puts on a mocking voice] ‘Oh my God, I am the Mahler conductor; I know everything now!’ Rather, I feel that I may be ready now to say something with this music or to try to say something to Mahler. So now I am doing this symphony a lot and will continue to do it throughout the coming tour. Of course I have done it in Gothenburg and in Caracas before, and it has become a piece that I really, really love.

If you had met Mahler, what would you have asked him?

Dudamel: I don’t know. To see him conducting or talking or walking … I don’t know. Sometimes you don’t need words with these kinds of personalities. You only have to watch and to enjoy … ‘Wow, Mahler’. It would be so terrible to ask him ‘Maestro, do you think this is in fours or in threes?’ [laughs] It’s very difficult to say what I would ask Mahler. What could I ask Mahler? Many things or nothing. But I would have liked the chance to be close to him.

What do you think Mahler wanted with his music?

Dudamel: Let me give you an example – let’s say it is like with Pablo Neruda, the famous poet. We now know his letters, not just his books. Mahler was a huge conductor of course. But let us say that his performances were like Neruda’s books, while when he was composing, it was a private thing. With his music, it’s like with Neruda’s letters. His compositions were his private letters, his love letters. Writing music was his only way of communicating with the world, through his music, his notes, his approach to music. Already with the Symphony No. 1, or even before that with his songs, he wanted to express something. In the beginning, he expressed memories from his childhood. Then he composed the Resurrection Symphony, which came too early, but it is there. And then the other symphonies. I think he was trying to show his soul, his vision of the world. Many people will say his vision of the world was political, but it was not – it was love. His music is an obsession [sings] … all these notes, always this melody! The same theme appearing in every symphony; it was like an obsession! He was saying ‘I am here! Maybe I am ashamed, maybe I am distant, but I am here! This is what my life is about, this is my soul!’ And you can interpret this in many ways. You can approach the symphonies in a tragic way or in a happy way. And you are allowed to do that. But it is very important to know what he wanted to say. ‘I am living for you, I am dying for you’ is what he wrote in his score. It’s incredible. Everything is there in his music, everything that he wanted to say. You can see that and you can feel it.

So even in his life there was this duality? One the one hand he was this powerful conductor, the director of the State Opera, he had to be a kind of tyrant to hold the orchestra together, he was firing singers, all his fights against journalists here – and on the other hand he had an incredibly sensitive personality. Did he have to navigate his life between these two extremes?

Dudamel: Look, this is probably because of the power he had. He was so powerful. He became Mahler, he became the boss. And he had a very strong personality, I think. He brought about big changes, not just in Vienna, but also for conductors. Back then, the profession of the conductor did not exist. It was the composers who were conducting their own pieces. Maybe there were a few conductors at the time, but Mahler was like the emperor of the conductors. Out of that emerged our profession, for all of us today and for the maestros of the past. He created the conductor as a maestro. It is amazing. Dealing with his intimate life, his compositions, his home life and being the most famous person … this is part of his life. If you have this kind of power, you have to deal with it. And he was dealing with it, but he was suffering a lot. All these fights, all of these problems that he was having were doing a lot of bad things to his life. But he was very strong. He was having all these problems and tensions arriving at his table, sweeping over him like a wave.

The very last question – for your first concert with the Vienna Philharmonic you conducted Mahler’s Symphony No. 1. I really admired your courage. Was it your choice?

Dudamel: Yes! We were thinking a lot about what to do. And of course it was a challenge. Mahler Symphony No. 1 with the Vienna Philharmonic! It was amazing when one of the players came up to me and said ‘You know, my grandfather played with Mahler, when Mahler was conducting’. I learnt a lot, just from the Viennese sound. It is a tradition that has developed over hundreds of years. And this tradition has been preserved, not because it is the same players, that would be impossible, but because the tradition is passed on from one player to another. Many of today’s players are pupils of the generation of musicians before them and so on. But it was amazing. What an experience!

Also, Barenboim was around. He was my soloist with Bartok’s Piano Concerto No. 1. He is also close to Mahler and he was also helping me, in a way. It is a symphony that I had conducted a lot before. It was my very first piece and I had been building on that interpretation for seven years before I conducted the Vienna Philharmonic. So, what an experience!

I enjoyed it very much!

Dudamel: You cannot image how much I enjoyed it! It was like a dream come true.

I liked so much how, during rehearsals, you even told the first violins how to use the G string in a specific section [sings]. I thought that this was exactly what they needed.

Dudamel: Yes [laughs]. Of course you have the orchestra there and they play. They have a level and so on. But sometimes you have to create the sound that you have in mind – of course with respect to the tradition and to the sound of the individual orchestra. It’s like when you have a Stradivari, you cannot push the instrument because the instrument has its own sound. But you have to do it in your own way to create the sound that you want to have with the instrument. This is the life of a conductor [laughs]!

Interview: Wolfgang Schaufler
Transcript: Agnes Vukovich
8.9.2010, Vienna
© Universal Edition

Los Angeles Glows at Dudamel’s Inaugural Concert
Anthony Tommasini, New York Times

Dudamel at Walt Disney Hall
David Mermelstein, Wall Street Journal

Listen to the a recording of the concert online, courtesy of NPR radio.