Dmitri's Dacha

Started by karlhenning, April 09, 2007, 08:13:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

karlhenning

#400
Thought I might as well import this here.

A virtual neighbor attributed a dubious quote to Shostakovich, thus:


QuoteAs Shostakovich, Britten and Hindemith as well as other great composers said almost fifty years ago, 12-tone composers can't write a whistleable tune that one can remember when exiting the concert hall.

Of course, this is arrant sock-puppetry; and, why, no, the fellow who offered this "quotation" has not offered a source document (surprised?), even when invited to; after all, if Shostakovich did actually say such a thing, it would be of genuine interest to know just what he said, when, and what the context was.

I took the opportunity to check through my books for any quotes which might even distantly support such a flippant interpretation. Thus:


======================================

If I had been a bit better organized, I could have arranged to post those citations in chronological order at the outset.

As it is, though, I chanced upon comment spanning his career; and in particular a neat distribution over three decades later on.  Thus, we have this warm endorsement of Berg (whose Wozzeck was obviously a strong example to Shostakovich for Ledi Makbet) in late 1935:


Quote from: Fay, p.88In his high-profile role as model young Soviet composer during the year leading up to the condemnation of Lady Macbeth, Shostakovich had been candid about the influence the music of such contemporary composers as Berg, Schoenberg, Krenek, Hindemith, and especially Stravinsky had exerted on his development, especially in the three years after completing Conservatory. Just a few weeks before "Muddle Instead of Music" appeared, Shostakovich commiserated with Sollertinsky on the recent death of Alban Berg: "His passing grieved me no less than you. The deceased was a genius. I am convinced that sooner or later he will be appreciated."

We have a pitiful picture of Shostakovich as Stalin's "cultural ambassador" in New York in 1949, the year after the Zhdanovshchina, the denunciations at the Congress of Soviet Composers in April 1948; Shostakovich was a newly shaken man, having been dismissed from his professorships at both the Moscow and Leningrad Conservatories as of 1 Sept 1948:

Quote from: N. NabokovWhen, after several trying and ludicrous speeches, his turn came to speak he began to read his prepared talk in a nervous and shaky voice. After a few sentences he broke off, and the speech was continued in English by a suave baritone. In all the equivocation of that conference, Shostakovich's speech was the least direct. Written in the style of the Agitprop speeches, it was quite obviously prepared by the 'party organs' in charge of the Waldorf-Astoria conference, on the Soviet side of the picture. In it these 'organs', through their mouthpiece Shostakovich, condemned most Western music as decadent and bourgeois, painted the glories of the rising Soviet music culture, attacked the demon Stravinsky as the corrupter of Western art (with a dig at Prokofiev) and urged upon the 'progressive Americans' of the conference the necessity of fighting against the reactionaries and warmongers of America and . . . and admitted that the 'mouthpiece' (Mr Shostakovich) had itself often erred and sinned against the decrees of the Party.

I sat in my seat petrified by this spectacle of human misery and degradation. It was crystal clear to me that what I had suspected from the day that I heard that Shostakovich was going to be among the delegates representing the Soviet government was true: this speech of his, this whole peace-making mission was part of a punishment, part of a ritual redemption he had to go through before he could be pardoned again. He was to tell, in person, to all the dupes in the Waldorf conference and to the whole decadent bourgeois world that loved him so much that he, Shostakovich, the famous Russian composer, is not a free man, but an obedient tool of his government. He told in effect that every time the Party found flaws in his art, the Party was right, and every time the Party put him on ice, he was grateful to the Party, because it helped him to recognize the flaws and mistakes.

After his speech I felt I had to ask him publicly a few questions. I had to do it, not in order to embarrass a wretched human being who had just given me the most flagrant example of what it is to be a composer in the Soviet Union, but because of the several thousand people that sat in the hall, because of those that perhaps still could not or did not wish to understand the sinister game that was being played before their eyes. I asked him simple factual questions concerning modern music, questions that should be of interest to all musicians. I asked him whether he, personally, the composer Shostakovich, not the delegate of Stalin's government, subscribed to the wholesale condemnation of Western music as it had been expounded daily by the Soviet press and as it appeared in the official pronouncements of the Soviet Government. I asked him whether he, personally, agreed with the condemnation of the music of Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Hindemith. To these questions he acquiesced: 'Yes," he said, 'I completely subscribe to the views as expressed by . . . etc. . . .' When he finished answering my questions the dupes in the audience gave him a new and prolonged ovation.

We have a snapshot during the much more composed period after Stalin's death, from 1959 and the early 60s:

Quote from: Fay, pp.214-15Another theme raised repeatedly during their American visit [22 Oct - 21 Nov 1959], according to an account attributed jointly to Shostakovich and Khrennikov, was the Soviet attitude toward dodecaphony, with the (preposterous, so they claimed) allegations that not only was it not performed in the Soviet Union but Soviet composers were officially forbidden to compose dodecaphonic music and, therefore, were denied artistic freedom. The opening of channels for cultural exchange had ushered in a new era of cultural competition. On his return from Italy and France the previous year, Shostakovich had reported that "the leading French masters are deeply troubled about the future of music in the West. They are troubled by the dissemination of false 'avant-garde' trends — like the notorious dodecaphony or 'concrete music' — among their youth. This still-born art gains no recognition from the broad public, it attests to the ideological impasse, the crisis of bourgeois culture." Such phrases, coupled with tributes to the adherents of genuinely "progressive" music responsive to the needs of the broad listening public, figured increasingly in Shostakovich's lexicon, as mouthpiece of official Soviet aesthetic policy.

In an interview given to a Polish journalist during the Warsaw Autumn Festival but published subsequently in Sovetskaya muzyka, Shostakovich preached at length of the perils of dodecaphony, which he felt had unreasonably monopolized the programs of the festival:

Quote from: Dmitri DmitriyevichI am firmly convinced that in music, as in every other human endeavor, it is always necessary to seek new paths. But it seems to me that those who see these new paths in dodecaphony are seriously deluding themselves. The narrow dogmatism of this artificially invented system rigidly fetters the creative imagination of composers and deprives them of individuality. It is no accident that in the entire legacy of Schoenberg's dodecaphonic system there is not a single work that has gained wide acceptance.... Dodecaphony not only has no future, it doesn't even have a present. It is just a "fad" that is already passing.

Soviet music, he asserted by contrast, was evaluated not by its degree of experimentation or by its deviation from tonality but by whether it was good, that is, whether it was rich in substance and artistically consummate.

This is not the place to debate the Soviet failure to acknowledge the aesthetic "inevitability" of the Second Viennese School and Serialism. In hindsight, the stance, though dogmatic, seems considerably less wrong-headed and regressive than it was thought to be in the West. At least in Shostakovich's case, it should not be assumed that he was ignorant of the musical styles he was condemning. Nor can it be taken for granted that the official line he was obliged to toe was completely alien to his real preferences and convictions. Shostakovich was an exceptionally sensitive and literate musician. In Warsaw, in America, and on his frequent foreign jaunts, he was provided with ample opportunity to meet composers, listen to their music, and assess the international picture. He stocked up on recordings whenever he traveled.

His son Maxim has recalled that scores sent by composers or musical organizations could always be found in their home and that Boulez's Le marteau sans maître, the late works of Stravinsky, and a couple of pieces by Xenakis were among the works he admired. In March 1959, as it happens, Shostakovich presented his old friend Shebalin with a score of Le marteau for his birthday. Denisov recorded in a diary entry for 1957 Shostakovich's private comments about his dislike of the music of Schoenberg and his feeling that Messiaen's Trois petites liturgies were rather saccharine. After having been singled out in one of Shostakovich's speeches as the "arch-representative of 'decadent capitalist culture,'" Karlheinz Stockhausen subsequently received a private letter from the composer professing admiration for his music and encouraging him to visit. Still, if his tastes in music were more catholic than his sometimes strident rhetoric might suggest, Shostakovich nonetheless favored more conservative contemporary idioms, the music of Benjamin Britten, for instance. His distaste for dry, inepressive music and his opposition to composition by rational system of mathematical formula were genuine. Direct engagement with his listener, the need to connect through his music with ordinary people remained a central concern for Shostakovich.

And from 1968-ish, when things had been calm enough, for long enough (and the composer was old enough) that you can almost hear Shostakovich breathing more freely:

Quote from: Laurel FayCritics remarked on the novelty in form, language, and technical means in the new quartet [the Twelfth], on the composer's unique ability to remain himself while exploring new horizons. There was, indeed, a great deal here that was new and unexpected for Shostakovich's music, not least of which was the considerable dependence on twelve-tone rows for its thematic material, within a broadly tonal context. This was not the cutting edge in Soviet music. Though revered as its elder statesman, a living legend, by now Shostakovich was no longer seen as a pioneer. From the late 1950s through the years of official bluster by the leadership of the Union of Composers—including Shostakovich himself—proclaiming the dangers of dodecaphony and alien avant-garde styles, genuine interest among Soviet musicians in the contemporary trends filtering in from the West had increased steadily, especially among young composers and performers. So had the volume of homegrown "experimental" scores. Shostakovich was not oblivious to these developments. Composer Nilolai Karetnikov even credited him with lending his support and authority to overcome the resistance of the orchestra of the Bolshoi Theatre, one of the most conservative bastions of musical tradition, to the staging of Karetnikov's twelve-tone ballet score, Vanina Vanini in 1962.

Shostakovich's adaptation of aspects of twelve-tone writing was not an aesthetic volte-face. Isolated examples of twelve-tone rows had already appeared in Seven Verses of A. Blok and in the Second Violin Concerto. His propensity for chromatic melody writing was longstanding. Queried by Tsyganov about the serial elements in his Twelfth Quartet, the composer is said to have commented: "They can also be found in Mozart." In an interview concerning young composers that appeared just before the Twelfth Quartet received its initial screening, Shostakovich's comments highlighted the consistency of his present practice with his lifelong principles:

Quote from: Dmitri DmitriyevichAs far as the use of strictly technical devices from such musical "systems" as dodecaphony or aleatory is concerned ... everything in good measure. If, let's say, a composer sets himself the obligatory task of writing dodecaphonic music, then he artificially limits his his possibilities, his ideas. The use of elements from these complex systems is fully justified if it is dictated by the concept of the composition.... You know, to a certain extent I think the formula "the end justifies the means" is valid in music. All means? All of them, if they contribute to the end objective.

As I said earlier, the picture is richer, better nuanced, and more artistically acute than any matter of Shostakovich snapping his fingers in disdain at music that you don't leave the hall a-whistling.

PS/ Note the Nabokov citation is found in the Elizabeth Wilson book.

Brian

#401
"impotent late heir to a traditional hostility towards true originality...feeble mixture of compositional facility and helplessness. Shostakovich, unjustly reprimanded as a cultural Bolshevist by the authorities of his home country...[has] a taste for tastelessness, a simplicity resulting from ignorance, an immaturity which masquerades as enlightenment, and a dearth of technical means."
- Theodor Adorno, Philosophy of Modern Music

EDIT: from the very same page:
"the triumphant meagerness of Benjamin Britten"
"the fame of Sibelius [is] an exceptional case of critical ignorance"

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

#402
Observation
a) George Antheil heavily copied parts from D. D.'s Piano concerto #1/Lento in his Symphony No. 6, Larghetto. Te Larghetto almost begins the same as Dmitris PC. But I don't care, Antheil composed it a most beautiful way, I adore it.

Question
b) How can the thread of the best 20th century composer sink down to GMGs page 6?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

BTW: Finally! I'm reading the Shostakovich book of Krzysztof Meyer (I'm at the Sym. 9 era) - very good book - and will keep the 12-tone question in mind, I let you know if I find a quote.

Found a wonderful 11th Tocsin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYSNJr4-1kk (Jang Yun-Sung/ KBS Symphony Orchestra)

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Are both the same recordings? I have the second one, and I cannot praise it high enough.



Opus106

Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on March 15, 2011, 10:33:41 AM
Found a wonderful 11th Tocsin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYSNJr4-1kk (Jang Yun-Sung/ KBS Symphony Orchestra)

Thanks for the link. The actual Tocsin was a bit fast for my taste, and I could barely hear the "bell" (in-ear, plain-vanilla headphones). I nevertheless found it an exciting build up to the finale. I just wish the 'I-want-to-shout-bravo-first-or-clap-as-soon-as-the-sound-stops' guy would have waited for a few more seconds. >:(
Regards,
Navneeth

Dancing Divertimentian

Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Quote from: Opus106 on March 16, 2011, 12:45:43 AMThanks for the link. The actual Tocsin was a bit fast for my taste, and I could barely hear the "bell" (in-ear, plain-vanilla headphones).
Too fast - I think you mean from 14:00 onwards.. Yes, true. Haitink is slower here and he used my favourite timing.

QuoteI just wish the 'I-want-to-shout-bravo-first-or-clap-as-soon-as-the-sound-stops' guy would have waited for a few more seconds. >:(
Oh yes, what a coward. I thought "Where is the asian restraint"?

karlhenning

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on March 16, 2011, 07:56:48 PM
Yes.

The first image is the reissue.

Which means, come to think of it, that the Sixth I have on the Decca reissue (coupled with the Twelfth) is a duplicate.

Brahmsian

Looking forward to the next installment of the Petrenko recordings of Shostakovich's symphonies, coming out March 29th:

[asin]B004KDO2GG[/asin]

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

#409
Quote from: ChamberNut on March 18, 2011, 07:20:04 AMLooking forward to the next installment of the Petrenko recordings of Shostakovich's symphonies, coming out March 29th:
A quick look on Amazon reveals, he already did the big tunes, 5 and 8-11. Usually I like Sanderling/Berlin - slower tempi-, in case of 11 Haitink/Concertgebouw. Is there a reason why I should try Petrenko? TIA.




My local library has the 2nd one. Are those the same recordings?

karlhenning

Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on March 20, 2011, 09:26:45 PM
A quick look on Amazon reveals, he already did the big tunes, 5 and 8-11.

But, wait a minute . . . that means that Nos. 4 & 7 are yet to be released.  I'm not surprised that these were not in the 'first wave': they are pieces for which excellence of execution depends greatly on how well the orchestra trusts the conductor, and the degree to which the conductor understands the demands he can make of the band.

As to the two images, the upper is the outer sleeve, the lower is the booklet cover.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Quote from: ChamberNut on March 18, 2011, 07:20:04 AMLooking forward to the next installment of the Petrenko recordings of Shostakovich's symphonies, coming out March 29th:[asin]B004KDO2GG[/asin]
Hmm, I've already seen the CD in Saturn, Dortmund, but didn't buy.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

DSCH motif in Symphony No. 15? Where? Never realized it's also there...

Brian

Quote from: Apollon on March 22, 2011, 06:06:34 AM
But, wait a minute . . . that means that Nos. 4 & 7 are yet to be released.  I'm not surprised that these were not in the 'first wave': they are pieces for which excellence of execution depends greatly on how well the orchestra trusts the conductor, and the degree to which the conductor understands the demands he can make of the band.

The next volume, incidentally, will be Nos 6 and 12.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

http://shostakovi.ch/film/en/

QuoteHere you can see the list on 34 films which music he composed for. You can also watch 23 public-domain vids and 2 ones with Japanese subscriptions.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Did Kurt Sanderling ever conduct Symphony No. 11 and is it available on CD?

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

#416
Ugh. Crawled through Youtube searching for a nice SQ8 performance - my first steps into the chamber music world. Accidentally clicked a wrong link. OK, it's not André Rieu, but anyway, it's hard to stand ;).

http://www.youtube.com/v/K1T2uPhQgLE

BTW.



Oh noes.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

People. Shostakovich as a part of the GMG username is NOT mandatory here. Just wanted to let you know ;)

Philoctetes

Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 03, 2011, 07:25:17 AM
People. Shostakovich as a part of the GMG username is NOT mandatory here. Just wanted to let you know ;)

I wish all the jackasses would go back to their original screen names.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Philoctetes Dmitriyevich Shostakovich would be fine.

Best regards,
a jackass.