Stenhammar's symphonic cantata, The Song (''Sangen'') is his last major work and this is its first recording. The orchestral interlude that prefaces the second part has been recorded, once by Tor Mann (Radiotjanst RA118) and again by Blomstedt and the Stockholm Philharmonic (Swedish EMI SCLP1072). It is a noble and at times inspired piece which will appeal to readers who love their Elgar. Indeed, Stenhammar occupies a not dissimilar place in Swedish music to that of Elgar in this country and suffered a comparable neglect in the decades immediately after his death in 1927 at the early age of 56. He also has something of the dignity and nobility of Elgar as well as the gentleness and reticence of Faure, though this is less evident here. Yet his sensibility is distinctly Scandinavian and his personality, though not immediately assertive, becomes more sympathetic as one comes closer to it. Save for this present work, only minor pieces such as the magical score for Tagore's Chittra, were to follow.
The Song was commissioned in 1920 by the Swedish Academy of Music to mark its 150th anniversary. Stenhammar chose as his poet, a fellow-composer and friend, Ture Rangstrom but the work did not come easily to him. At first he was unhappy with the text Rangstrom produced but then ideas began to flow, and the first part—to my mind, the finest—was produced by the late summer of 1921.
Then despair took hold and inspiration dried up, and he turned to Nielsen for moral support. The great Danish composer wrote to him, ''Begin with long half-notes, as dry Cantus firmi, as wooden beams that form the basic structure of the house . . . You are a master of counterpoint, put it to good use! Remember that not only are you—quite incontestibly, Sweden's number-one man, and that you therefore owe that country a great deal; but you ought, for your own sake, to really do your best. You shouldn't wait for moods.'' Its performance in Gothenburg the following year must have been quite an occasion: Stenhammar conducted The Song in the second half while Nielsen conducted his Helios Overture and Hymnus Amoris before the interval.
In his scholarly essay, well illustrated with both photos and lavish music examples, Dr Bo Wallner describes the first half as ''a great fantasy'' where four different sections can be discerned. It strikes me as Stenhammar at his best and most individual: the choral writing is imaginatively laid out and the contrapuntal ingenuity never seems contrived but always at the service of poetic ends. There are some felicitious orchestral Serenade. The second half of the cantata, to quote Stenhammar's letter to Nielsen, ''turned out to be grandiose, a separate piece. And I think it is quite a success.'' It is more homophonic but no less masterly, a lively choral allegro in the style of Handel—diatonic, yet ingenious and imposing. The Song did not meet with much success and subsequent performances have been rare. For most readers it will be new, as it was for me, and I can't imagine it being better served than it is by the artists listed above. The solo and choral singing is superb and the whole performance has the total commitment one would expect from these fine choirs and orchestra. The superbly engineered recording does them full justice.'