When I am listening to recordings, I believe that finding the one that speaks to you is important. If, for example, you’ve never heard Mahler’s Symphony No. 7, you can listen to a recording which might not necessarily move you, but then if you have someone’s advice about a recording, you can have such a different experience. It’s the same with different versions of various books, different actors that we like. For me, I never go towards just one conductor, one recording, because I find that can be too influential. I listen to as much as I can. Most importantly, I find the recordings I don’t like can be far more interesting because you discover your own interpretation through that. It’s a crucial part of the process.
Mahler is performed so much now. It’s like Puccini in the last 20 years or so – suddenly Puccini and Mahler are so overplayed. Not in a negative sense, necessarily, but that’s just a fact. I often feel with Mahler we can exaggerate too much – with dynamics, with tempi – it can be too overblown, and it sounds cheesy. Going back to the score and discovering what he wrote and not just going to our favorite Bernstein recording of Mahler but seeing what his intentions were is essential. Mahler was so clear to conductors. We have very little license to overstep the mark, because he will write in the score to the conductor. He knew how to anticipate conductors exaggerating the score, how to stop them from doing that.
Out of any of his symphonies, Mahler’s 5th is the piece that has followed me throughout my career. It was one of the first pieces I ever played in an orchestra as a clarinetist. Mahler’s 9th was the second Mahler symphony that I ever played. It was quite extraordinary to go all the way to the end of his oeuvre; a very formative experience for me because I was performing as a clarinetist, with Semyon Bychkov conducting, and I think it was one of the very first times he had ever performed that piece. Seeing a conductor grapple with a work like that and really do it well was so inspiring.
Mahler has been a huge part of my life, but also within this Mahler Orchestra context, Bruckner has been a pivotal influence, going back to when I had my own orchestra. With Bruckner and Mahler, there’s this idea that they go against each other. You either choose one or the other. There’s a lot of baggage to that, and I certainly subscribed to that feeling growing up. Traditionally there’s the idea that conductors only do one thing or the other, and both are so unique. Even though Mahler did study with Bruckner, they are very different composers, and I don’t think we should ever put them in the same box. There are certainly similarities, but like great actors, great artists, everyone is an individual, and I think that’s important to remember.
I’m conducting my first Nutcracker in December. It’s a special project for me because it’s with Symphony Nova Scotia, which is where I’m from on my Canadian side. To be returning with that orchestra is an important life moment for me. I had the opportunity of working with them for the first time some months ago for a new music workshop, and then they invited me for this. I’ve never done Nutcracker before, and I’ve always wanted to conduct ballet; it’s an art form which fascinates me endlessly, particularly as a conductor because there are many facets that we can be inspired by and influenced by. I think it’s important to say that with ballet conducting, there is a certain perception within the industry that needs to change. Which is that, as soon as you do ballet conducting, you can never do anything else. You can’t do symphonic. You can’t do opera. You’re seen as a ballet conductor.