Latvian composer Ešenvalds’ “St. Luke Passion” released

Egils Kaljo | June 30, 2016

St. Luke Passion: Sacred Works

Latvian Radio Choir

Ondine, ODE 1247-2, 2016

Latvian composer Ēriks Ešenvalds continues to be one of the premiere choir music composers working today. His works are performed by choirs and enjoyed by audiences worldwide. Though perhaps his best known work is his choir music, his symphonic and operatic works also have achieved success.

One of Ešenvalds’ more ambitious compositional endeavors in recent years was his choral work “St. Luke Passion” (composed in 2014), a symphonic choral work based on Biblical texts from the Gospel of Luke and other sources and almost entirely in English. The 8 part work is the centerpiece of the album St. Luke Passion recorded by the Latvian Radio Choir, Sinfonietta Rīga and conductor Sigvards Kļava, and released in 2016 by the Finnish record label Ondine and produced by the Latvian Concert Agency Latvijas koncerti.

This is not Ešenvalds’ first major work on this theme – he composed the work “Passion and Resurrection” in 2005 (a work performed and recorded by the Latvian State Choir Latvija), and there are a few thematic similarities. The text for “Passion and Resurrection” was not taken from one specific Gospel, while the “St. Luke Passion” is almost entirely from the Gospel of Luke, though it also includes other texts and prayers to embellish the work.

Ešenvalds’ St. Luke Passion opens dramatically with a repeated cry of “Crucify him!” from the choir, a thunderous beginning and portent of the terror to come. The work also includes solo sections, and this performance includes the powerful voice of tenor Jānis Kurševs, who is a kind of narrator, describing the actions of Pontius Pilate, and at the same time trying to be a voice of reason against the howling mob, imploring “Why? What evil hath he done?”

Mezzo-soprano Ieva Parša is the focus of the second movement of the work, which presents the parallels, if not tragic irony, of a carpenter’s son having to bear a cross of wood. Parša’s performance, at once stately and tender, makes for a somber interlude.

The rising tension of the third movement, where Kurševs and the choir alternate ominous warnings of “weep not for me, but weep for yourselves” is followed by the majestic fourth movement, which is based on the text of the Shema Yisrael prayer, and again displays the vocal talents of Parša.

Baritone Daumants Kalniņš, perhaps best known for his vocal jazz performances, plays the role of the Prodigal Son, which is an interesting textual choice to include in this Passion, as it is otherwise unrelated to the central story. Still, as a parable taken from the Gospel of Luke, it provides a rumination on family and filial responsibility. Kalniņš’ almost theatrical performance of the arrogant and wasteful son – mockingly singing “I’ll spend my days in the drinking dens, I’ll spend my nights in the gambling dens” as he defiantly goes on his way does make for a jarring counterpoint to the central theme of the work.

The closing eighth movement – “Does that lamp still burn in my Father’s house”, based on poetry by Christina Rossetti, brings the stormy work to an almost peaceful conclusion, with the voices of the choir providing an ethereal background to the duet between Kurševs and Kalniņš. It concludes with the dreamy lament sung by Parša, with its unanswered question of “Can you hear the One who is calling”, augmented by the serene meditative singing of the choir.

The album is supplemented by a few more of Ešenvalds’ choir works, including the solemn “A Drop in the Ocean” (based on texts by Mother Theresa), and “The First Tears”, which, though not truly a sacred work, is based on the Inuit creation fable of the Raven. This expansive and tragic work, where the Raven causes the death of a whale and the girl that is the whale’s spirit, recounts the first tears cried in the world as the Raven views the results of his negligence. Though a folk story, Ešenvalds’ music and the performance of the choir give the story a resplendent, memorable poignancy, particularly in the mystical recorder performance by soloist Aleksandrs Maijers.

The final work on the album “Litany of the Heavens” is in Latvian and is based on a poem by Fricis Bārda. The work begins with a haunting recording of a man singing a Catholic Kyrie eleison chant recorded in a small church in Skaistkalne, and this recording returns throughout the work, and is balanced with the sound of water-tuned glasses to, giving it a particularly mystical quality. The strings of Sinfonietta Rīga bring an added delicacy to this reflective and contemplative work. Bārda’s poetry, about reaching for a powerful, brilliant light, is brought vividly to life with the performance and the music.

St. Luke Passion, thanks to the music of Ēriks Ešenvalds and the performances of the Latvian Radio Choir and Sinfonietta Rīga conducted by Sigvards Kļava, as well as soloists Ieva Parša, Jānis Kurševs, and Daumants Kalniņš, is a truly remarkable achievement. These sacred and spiritual works become transcendent and captivating, a reaffirmation of the compositional mastery of Ešenvalds, particularly in the sacred choral genre.

Egils Kaljo is an American-born Latvian from the New York area . Kaljo began listening to Latvian music as soon as he was able to put a record on a record player, and still has old Bellacord 78 rpm records lying around somewhere.

Shoot yourself in the foot much?

Kārlis Streips | June 25, 2016

The first thing that has to be said about the referendum held in Great Britain this past Thursday on whether or not to withdraw from the European Union is that as soon as it became clear that the “leave” side had won, the value of the British pound plummeted to its lowest point in 30 years. That is what the business world thought about the decision.

Readers, I am sure, will know that the “leave” side won by a margin of about four points, 52 to 48 on a 72% turnout. Turnout in the last presidential election in the United States was 57% percent, which is dismal for a democracy, but it does show the level of interest that there was in Britain about the issue at hand.

That said, I am equally sure that a great many, if not most of the Britons who went to the polls last week did so without much information at all. The campaign for and against membership in the EU was a series of exaggerated claims, outright lies and lots and lots of yelling and screaming. Oh, if we withdraw, the British economy will collapse right away! Oh, it we don’t withdraw, all of Turkey will move to the UK in the near future! We send endless amounts of money to faceless bureaucrats in Brussels who do God only knows what with it, and we get hardly anything back in return! Wrong, because the British economy is one of the world’s largest. Wrong because Turkey is not in the EU, and thus its citizens do not have access to the EU’s free-movement-of-people principle. Wrong because the truth is that Britain gets around 10 times more money from the EU than it pays in (for Latvia, it is a ratio of around 4:1). There were people who tried to analyze the situation rationally. A group of lawyers put out an open letter saying that they had studied all of the pros and cons, and on balance they had concluded that it would be better to stay in. No one much listened.

The lawyers, of course, were not the only ones. Withdrawal from the EU was formally and officially opposed by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the OECD, the G-7, the G-20, presidents and prime ministers from all over the world, groups of scientists, groups of cultural workers, groups of economists. Never mind. Nativism prevailed. Xenophobia prevailed. Racism prevailed. Shortly before the referendum the truly odious Nigel Farage of the truly odious United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) put out a poster reading “Breaking point! The EU has failed us all. We must break free of the EU and take back control of our borders.” Behind him on the poster was a long line of refugees — people of color, women in headscarves, a couple of turbans. The message could not have been more clear — people are invading our country, and they are not like you. They are not like us.

There was a reason why most of the world said in advance that Britain should not leave the European Union. That is the fact that there is no question whatsoever that the decision was a bad one. It was wrong. Above all it was wrong because it casts into utter doubt the world of business in Britain and in countries that do business with it. Certainly the UK can expect foreign investment to plummet. Who is going to invest in a country which may be in a totally different economic, political and trade situation two years down the line? No one. That’s the answer.

According to the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, what happens once a country decides to leave the bloc is that it must formally request the implementation of Article 50 of the treaty or, if it does not, the European Commission can implement it on its behalf. That launches a two-year process of negotiations to figure out just what kind of relationship the departing country will have with the EU once it leaves. If at the end of those two years agreement has not been reached, the negotiations can be extended with the express authorization of all other EU member states (27 not counting Great Britain), and if not, the country is out of the EU, and its economy is governed no longer by Brussels, but instead by the World Trade Organization. In practice, that would mean that each EU member state, and every other country in the world, would be free to negotiate its own trade arrangements with London. Tariffs, customs fees, import restrictions, the lot. Similarly, the UK would no longer have access to the EU’s trade agreements, of which there are a great many. It, too, would have to strike out on its own. No wonder the country’s businesses and banks are aghast.

British Prime Minister David Cameron resigned in the wake of the referendum, but postponed his resignation until October, pending the identification of a new prime minister and a new cabinet. By law, a British prime minister may not resign until such time as his or her successor has been identified. In political terms, the next head of government should probably be former London Mayor (and current MP) Boris Johnson, who was the most visible representative of the “leave” leave campaign. The problem is that Mr. Johnson is something of a loose cannon, sort of like a British version of Donald Trump, only not as vulgar. He, too, is capable of making the most astonishing claims such as, during the referendum campaign, that the EU bans shops from selling bananas in bunches of more than two or three. First of all, “two or three” is not a hard rule and, most importantly, that is simply not true. Asked once why people should vote for his Conservative Party, Johnson replied, “voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3.” Channeling Bill Clinton and his non-inhalation of marijuana, Johnson declared that “I think I was once given cocaine, but I sneezed, so it didn’t go up my nose. In fact, it may have been icing sugar.” In short, this man is something of a loose cannon, and he is going to be heading up Britain’s withdrawal negotiations with the EU? What is more, EU leaders have already made it clear that they expect the UK to start the negotiations forthwith, and October is not forthwith.

There is also the fact that the EU is not likely to be particularly charitably inclined toward Britain’s wishes in this process. The UK has always been a problem child as a member state, whether it was Margaret Thatcher banging her purse on the table and yelling about Britain’s rebate, Britain’s refusal to accept the EU’s social charter and the euro, Britain’s refusal to join the Schengen border-free zone, or the UK’s withdrawal from the European Exchange Mechanism on what has ever since been known as “Black Wednesday.” It is also true that the to-do list for the EU is already overflowing — Greek profligacy, sanctions against Russia and whether to extend them, the European Central Bank and its negative interest rates, the whole migration issue, the TTIP agreement with America. Who needs another bit of business that will probably prove to be one, big hassle?

On the other hand, there is also reason to believe that the European Commission, at least, will choose to be pragmatic about this. The EU did not want the UK to withdraw, because with all of its fussing, it has been a major partner therein. Options are not unlimited, and there will probably be no way for London to say “well, we didn’t really mean it, let’s just leave things as they are.” One possibility will be an arrangement of the type that Norway and Switzerland have with the EU — being part of the free trade bloc while not being part of the organization as such. The problem with that is that being part of the free trade bloc means accepting all of the EU’s trade regulations, of which there are a great many. A decade or so ago I visited Norway and interviewed people who wanted their country to join the EU and those who did not. Both of them told me the same thing — that most of Norway’s laws are written in Brussels, and Norway has to accept them even though it has had no part in drafting them. Is that what Britain really wants?

There is also the fact that there were parts of the UK in which people voted very much in favor of remaining in the EU. London, where the country’s economic processes are concentrated, was one, but the others were Northern Ireland and Scotland. Readers will know that Scotland held a referendum of its own a few years back on leaving the UK, with a narrow majority preferring to stay in. The leader of the governing Scottish National Party has already said that a second referendum is on the table. As for Northern Ireland, it shares an island with Ireland proper. Would one group of Irishmen have to put up border controls against another group of Irishmen?

As for Latvian interests, from the national perspective the withdrawal is no good thing, because in most cases Britain has been a staunch ally for our country’s interests. From the perspective of the almost countless Latvians who are making a living for themselves in the UK, there will now be a time of uncertainty. Until such time as the aforementioned negotiations are complete, Great Britain will remain a full member of the EU, and so the rules under which Latvians moved there and found jobs will remain in place. What will happen after that, however, is very much up in the air, and it is also true that the ugly nativism that underpinned much of the “leave” campaign may mean increased hostility among “natives” toward the “migrants.” Psychological pressure and even violence are very much not out of the question.

The bottom line here is this: a majority of voters in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland made a mistake last Thursday. It is going to take a long, long time to clean up the mess that they have created.

Kārlis Streips was born in Chicago, studied journalism at the University of North Illinois and University of Maryland. He moved to Latvia in 1991 where he has worked as a TV and radio journalist. He also works as a translator and lecturer at the University of Latvia.

American Latvian heavy metal band devote album to exiled Latvians

Egils Kaljo | June 20, 2016

Sen senie senči, an American Latvian heavy metal band, play music inspired by Latvian history and mythology (not unlike Latvian folk metal band Skyforger). Their debut album Tautas zobens was released in 2015, and, additionally, their song “Kurzemes cietoksnis” was featured on the Latvian heavy metal compilation Latvijas metals. The group returned in 2016 with their second album Trimda.

Band members include brothers Lars and Kārlis Alversons (as some may know, Lars is a long time member of American Latvian rock group Bob and the Latvians), with Lars providing vocals and bass guitar and Kārlis on vocals and guitar. The brothers are joined by Alvis Briģis (the album booklet and website is unclear as to what instrument Alvis plays).

Trimda, available as a digital download, is, as its title would indicate, an album inspired by the journey and plight of exiled Latvians. The album notes state that “these songs were written remembering how our grandparents and parents traveled across war torn Europe and the Atlantic Ocean to escape the horror of WW2”. As children of these exiles, the band members are in a unique position to present their stories, having learned about them from their families, as well as growing up in a time (late 1970s/early 1980s) when the Soviet Union was still dominating Eastern Europe (and elsewhere) and Latvian independence was remained an elusive, if not hopeless, dream.

Heavy metal is perhaps an appropriate style for telling these stories, as the aggressive guitars, fast tempos and growling vocals provide an aural picture of the terror of war and the resulting destruction and uncertain fate of refugees. For example, the song “Gājām”, begins with a mournful guitar and cello duet, signifying the difficult journey of refugees that had to abandon their homes. The song, in a style that reminds listeners of similar Latvian folk songs about the horrors of war, asks “Kur mēs bērni paliksim? Kur mēs šonakt gulēsim?” (What will happen to us children? Where will we sleep tonight?)

Besides the fear and terror of war, one emotion that is also stirred in times of war is anger, particularly at those who collaborate with the enemy, and this anger is displayed in the song “Nodevējs” (Traitor). Beginning with a thunderous drumbeat in the introduction, the song is relentless in its fury at those who betrayed their friends and country with lyrics like “Tevi uzpirka, valsti bojāja, tikai slinkoja, mantas kāroja” (You were bought, you ruined the nation, you were only lazy and greedy).

Not all the songs on the album are about war and exile – in fact, there is a song inspired by the achievements of Latvian folklore historian Krišjānis Barons (also known as the “father of the dainas”) simply entitled “Barons”. The song puts to music Barons’ heroic achievement of gathering together and publishing more than 200,000 Latvian folk songs (or “dainas”), thus preserving for all times these Latvian folk songs which were, at that time, in danger of being forgotten. The song celebrates his work – “mūsu latviešu dainas un dziesmas sirmais dievs” (the grey god of our Latvian folk songs). Also referenced in the song is 3233 – a minor planet discovered by Nikolai Stepanovich Chernykh and named KrišBarons, in honor of his achievements.

The album ends on a hopeful note with the song “Celies” (Rise), a song about how the war may be long over, but there are still many battles ahead – “Mums šodien lāpu nest, jo cīņa vēl nav galā” (We still need to carry the torch today, since the fight is not over yet). This call to action is a fitting close to the album, a reminder that the suffering of those during and immediately after the war should not be in vain.

The album booklet is meant to remind readers of an old family album, with grainy black and white pictures of the band members and others. Also, an added charming and authentic touch – the Latvian diacritic marks are made to appear like they were drawn in by hand (a memory of a time and place when one had to use a typewriter with no Latvian letters).

An engaging and riveting listen from beginning to end, Trimda is a dramatic and emotional achievement by Sen senie senči, capturing not just the intensity and ferocity of war, but also the hope and spirit of the exile community. The album, created by veteran Latvian American musicians, is a powerful poetic and musical statement, combining intense performances and vivid lyrical imagery, and is a fitting tribute to those that bore the burden of maintaining Latvian culture during those dark times.

For further information, please visit the Sen senie senči website.

Trimda

Sen senie senči
Rota Records, 2016

Track listing:

Nodevējs
Klusums
Murgos
Lēns gājiens uz Elli
Upuris
Gājām
Uzvara
Barons
Atdzimts
Celies