This year, La Monnaie Symphony Orchestra's concert at the beginning of the month of November will not include a requiem, but rather three symphonic works which constitute a tribute to the victims of some of the biggest human catastrophes of the 20^th century: the siege of Leningrad, the bombing of Hiroshima and European fascism. This eclectic programme associates a little known work by Georgian composer Giya Kancheli, one of the great works by Polish composer Krzysztof Penderecki and the extraordinary Symphony No. 7 by Russian composer Dmitry Shostakovich, in an intense and committed concert conducted by Leo Hussain.

You are presenting a very special requiem programme this year: instead of a requiem mass, a varied programme of non-liturgical works. What prompted this choice?
When Peter de Caluwe and I came up with the programme for this 'requiem concert', our first intention was not to make a political declaration, but rather to present some of the many fabulous 20^th century works which exude the same contemplative spirit. First, we chose Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7, which is basically a sort of requiem: this work conveys a very important message about the harsh reality of war. I also wanted to present Krzysztof Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima, an innovative work which disregards the limits and is also in keeping with the spirit of a requiem, associating a profound message and a powerful impact. Between these two difficult works, we placed a piece which is easier to listen to yet has the same emotional impact: Giya Kancheli's Sevda Nateli 'Bright Sorrow' Requiem for the 40^th Anniversary of the Victory over Fascism. These three works make up an incredibly powerful programme at both dramaturgical and musical level, whose stylistic differences are very fascinating to me.

Why did you choose this work by Penderecki?
Krzysztof Penderecki's Threnody is a historical milestone in the development of contemporary music because it inaugurated a new approach. This work from 1960 earned Penderecki a name on the international scene. It is basically a scream lasting ten minutes, with very beautifully structured musical writing for fifty-two strings. The size of this string ensemble probably explains why this work is rarely performed. In my opinion, this work – with its intense colours and marked expressionism – is the musical counterpart of Edvard Munch's painting The Scream.

What was it about Kancheli's work which appealed to you?
Kancheli's Bright Sorrow is a peaceful and deeply moving spiritual work which is not too demanding for the listener. It is characterised by a simple tonal language in the best sense of the term, with very direct resonance. It is a beautiful and gentle prayer for two young soloists and a children's chorus, accompanied by an immense orchestra which intervenes very sparingly. This is an extremely meditative lyric work which evolves slowly and whose spirituality invades the auditorium. One may clearly say that it is tonal; moments of great discord give it its rhythm and structure. It is often compared to works by Arvo Pärt due to its direct tonal language.

The main work on the programme is of course Shostakovich's Leningrad Symphony.
Yes, this epic piece says so much about the human condition. It has been performed in so many ways, as a tribute to Russia for resisting the Nazis and as a total condemnation of all forms of totalitarianism. One may consider it as a reflection on war or a description of the mood in the world at this precise time in history. But in fact, the message inherent to this symphony is of little importance – not more than the question as to whether this work was composed with a programme, or if the programme was added afterwards. It is such a universal and powerful work.

Did you not say that there were no political declarations in this concert programme?
Yes, it is indeed a political declaration, but that was not our starting point. A concert programme with three works of this type inevitably takes on a certain political complexion. Music is not only a source of entertainment; it always conveys a meaning. And the horrors of war are unfortunately still relevant in today's world.

Do you consider these works to be representative of the second half of the 20^th century?
I do not dare to say so. The second half of the 20^th century is so vast and led to so many different movements that a programme which would be representative of this period would last at least two months. But in my eyes, it does contain some determining trends of the 20^th century as well as very different musical languages. There is no doubt that the 20^th century has been the richest from a musical point of view. It left us with a corpus of fascinating and impressive works, in which much still remains to be discovered.

Interview by Reinder Pols