Dmitri's Dacha

[Mirror Image]

I'm not sure DS disliked the 12th symphony, per se, but, according to Volkov's book - Shostakovich claimed that he sort of lost his way midway thru it - he  started with one idea, then changed horses in midstream, so to speak...it lost direction. Whether Volkov is accurate or not, who knows?? but that assessment of the piece sounds pretty accurate to me - it comes off as "unfocused".

But how much of Volkov's book on Shostakovich is actually factual? Not that this has much to do with the quality of a piece of music. Like I said, it's not a favorite work, but I don't downright hate it as some people appear to here.

[BasilValentine]

But how much of Volkov's book on Shostakovich is actually factual? Not that this has much to do with the quality of a piece of music. Like I said, it's not a favorite work, but I don't downright hate it as some people appear to here.

There is no way to know how much is authentic, which is why no statement in Testimony uncorroborated in other sources can be assumed to be the words of Shostakovich or to reflect his beliefs.

[Mirror Image]

There is no way to know how much is authentic, which is why no statement in Testimony uncorroborated in other sources can be assumed to be the words of Shostakovich or to reflect his beliefs.

I never read the book myself, but it always raised an eyebrow from me. Speaking of books, I have been enjoying reading this one:

[Heck148]

There is no way to know how much is authentic, which is why no statement in Testimony uncorroborated in other sources can be assumed to be the words of Shostakovich or to reflect his beliefs.

Right, it's a fascinating read, but the authenticity is certainly open to question.

[BasilValentine]

I never read the book myself, but it always raised an eyebrow from me. Speaking of books, I have been enjoying reading this one:

Fanning also wrote a monograph on the 10th symphony (The Breath of the Symphonist) that is pretty good. And he edited at least one other collections of essays on Shostakovich.

[relm1]

But how much of Volkov's book on Shostakovich is actually factual? Not that this has much to do with the quality of a piece of music. Like I said, it's not a favorite work, but I don't downright hate it as some people appear to here.

I agree with you.  I quite enjoy No. 12 as an effective communist populist work.  I don't see it as propaganda but populist.  It is somewhat shallow though a shallow work from a great composer.  I believe Volkov should be dismissed.   He fails on too many tests to be taken seriously as a reliable source.   I think Shosty is much more complex than Volkov portrays him to be. 

[Mirror Image]

I agree with you.  I quite enjoy No. 12 as an effective communist populist work.  I don't see it as propaganda but populist.  It is somewhat shallow though a shallow work from a great composer.  I believe Volkov should be dismissed.   He fails on too many tests to be taken seriously as a reliable source.   I think Shosty is much more complex than Volkov portrays him to be.

You're probably right about Volkov. Shostakovich's own personality and his complicated musical persona can't be pinned down by some mere anecdotes that may or may not have been said.

[Heck148]

I agree with you.  I quite enjoy No. 12 as an effective communist populist work.  I don't see it as propaganda but populist.  It is somewhat shallow though a shallow work from a great composer.  I believe Volkov should be dismissed.   He fails on too many tests to be taken seriously as a reliable source.   I think Shosty is much more complex than Volkov portrays him to be.

I don't know about Volkov...a lot of his things are corroborated by other musicians and acquaintances of DS, but much seems rather dubious, as well.

[BasilValentine]

I don't know about Volkov...a lot of his things are corroborated by other musicians and acquaintances of DS, but much seems rather dubious, as well.

Well, that is the sad part, isn't it? There might be authentic gems in there, thoughts and anecdotes that are recorded nowhere else, but they can't be trusted because the overwhelming case for fraud was made within a year of its publication and never refuted.

[BasilValentine]

I'm not sure DS disliked the 12th symphony, per se, but, according to Volkov's book - Shostakovich claimed that he sort of lost his way midway thru it - he  started with one idea, then changed horses in midstream, so to speak...it lost direction. Whether Volkov is accurate or not, who knows?? but that assessment of the piece sounds pretty accurate to me - it comes off as "unfocused".

That story apparently goes back to Lev Lebedinsky, one of the principal gossip-mongers on whom Volkov is thought to have relied for
Testimony by those who think the book is a fraud. Laurel Fay has suggested that Lebedinsky's facts are sort of correct but that the time frame is off. She says there was indeed an earlier version of the 12th in piano score the summer of the year before its premiere, but that Shostakovich almost surely created the familiar version well ahead of time and not in a four-day rush. A sketch for the earlier version apparently had music from Satires (op. 109) interpolated on its page 26, and this probably accounts for Lebedinsky's claim that the 12th was to be a Lenin satire. Sounds to me like Lebedinsky made a hash of several imperfect recollections.

I have to agree with Violadude and Mahlerian about the quality of the 12th. I too think it is the least of the symphonies, although there is evidence that it had some mass-appeal among the proletariat. What is painfully funny about the genesis of the work is that for years Shostakovich had deflected inquiries about his future composition plans by claiming that he was writing a symphony about Lenin — a cheap and easy way to convince anyone who cared that the composer was at work on something grandiose and thoroughly patriotic. He did this after the success of the 5th, but then followed through with a 6th symphony that had nothing to do with it. Seems he painted himself into a corner and finally had to actually produce this mythical and long-forecast Lenin symphony. The result is ... understandably underwhelming.

[relm1]

Well, that is the sad part, isn't it? There might be authentic gems in there, thoughts and anecdotes that are recorded nowhere else, but they can't be trusted because the overwhelming case for fraud was made within a year of its publication and never refuted.

Volkov claimed that all of the meeting notes he took were signed by DS indicating an authenticity.  He only produced examples of these signatures from interviews and documents dating decades before Volkov claimed.  He never produced a single document from the 1970's when he claimed DS was shaping his memoirs with Volkov's assistance.  Irina also claimed DS was in very bad physical shape when Volkov claims to have conducted all the interviews.  In short, she claims he was a very minor visitor during a time when she never left DS's side rather than a trusted confidant.  Tishchenko also believed the book was a fabrication using preexisting material as if it were new and embellished, contrived material.  In short, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence and Volkov never provided the evidence he claimed he had. 

I would love to read "A Pitiful Fake: About the So-Called "Memoirs" of D. D. Shostakovich (1979)   Letter to the editor of Literaturnaia gazeta written by Tishchenko and six other composers if anyone can find it.  Searching google hasn't turned up the letter.

[Mirror Image]

I would love to read "A Pitiful Fake: About the So-Called "Memoirs" of D. D. Shostakovich (1979)   Letter to the editor of Literaturnaia gazeta written by Tishchenko and six other composers if anyone can find it.  Searching google hasn't turned up the letter.

I'd love to read this as well. It would be a fascinating read for sure.

[Mirror Image]

I always found this an interest observation:

"To me he seemed like a trapped man, whose only wish was to be left alone, to the peace of his own art and to the tragic destiny to which he, like most of his countrymen, has been forced to resign himself."  Nicholas Nabokov on meeting Shostakovich in 1949 in New York.

[Heck148]

I always found this an interest observation:

"To me he seemed like a trapped man, whose only wish was to be left alone, to the peace of his own art and to the tragic destiny to which he, like most of his countrymen, has been forced to resign himself."  Nicholas Nabokov on meeting Shostakovich in 1949 in New York.

there's alot to be said for it - of the 3 great Russian composers of the 20th Century - Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofieff, DS is the one who remained in Russia throughout his life, and experienced first hand the cosmic, devastating events that afflicted that nation -
Did any nation suffer a more brutal fate in the 20th century than Russia?? China, Poland, perhaps, but Russia is right in there. DS lived thru it all - the First World War, the Revolution, the Stalin years of terror, WWII, the Cold War...Shostakovich, IMO, consciously or not, tried to express this experience in his music - a huge topic, of course, no one person could hope to encompass it all - but he nonetheless tried...his works can be long, sprawled out, episodic..dark, brooding, gloomy, horrifically violent and stormy; humorous, tho always with a sardonic twist; triumphant, tho always with a dark undertone...

[PerfectWagnerite]

Not to be morbid but reading this conversation between DSCH and Slava breaks your heart:

[Karl Henning]

Nice to see the Dacha hopping. For the moment, I'll just add my appreciation for violadude's and Heck's thumbnail surveys.

[vandermolen]

Not to be morbid but reading this conversation between DSCH and Slava breaks your heart:

Yes, a moving story and I can understand as Symphony 4 IMHO is the greatest of them. Rostropovich tells the story that Shostakovich used to phone him and say 'come over here immediately!' - Rostropovich would turn up - Shostakovich would then, pointing to a seat, say 'sit down there' - Rostropovich sat down. Shostakovich didn't say anything else at all until, after some time, he'd say 'ok you can leave now'.
He just wanted Rostropovich to be with him. I find it a very touching story.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Yes, a moving story and I can understand as Symphony 4 IMHO is the greatest of them. Rostropovich tells the story that Shostakovich used to phone him and say 'come over here immediately!' - Rostropovich would turn up - Shostakovich would then, pointing to a seat, say 'sit down there' - Rostropovich sat down. Shostakovich didn't say anything else at all until, after some time, he'd say 'ok you can leave now'.
He just wanted Rostropovich to be with him. I find it a very touching story.

I don't know the life stories of these 2 gents...why was Slava allowed to leave but Dmitri had to stay?

[vandermolen]

I don't know the life stories of these 2 gents...why was Slava allowed to leave but Dmitri had to stay?

I think that Slava was more politically outspoken than Dmitri but this may not be the main reason.

[vandermolen]

OK - Slava sheltered the writer Solzhenitsyn who was in disgrace with the regime and spoke out on behalf of political dissidents. His touring abroad was restricted - so he left the USSR.