Dmitri's Dacha

[Mirror Image]

I'm inclined to chalk it up to coincidence. When I was a teenager and just joined GMG I would post all sorts of stuff accusing composers of outright theft and everyone sort of laughed at me. Great ideas come to people separately sometimes, I guess.

I didn't accuse anyone of theft, not saying you did such a thing towards me, and I think it's like you said just a coincidence. Shostakovich certainly did a lot more with the idea and it became one of the most recognized themes of the 20th Century. This little Bartok phrase wasn't a big tune and I certainly don't hear it being treated as one. In The Wooden Prince, it's merely a musical means to get to a greater idea, whereas with Shostakovich this little phrase yielded a much more substantial idea.

[Brahmsian]

I'm inclined to chalk it up to coincidence. When I was a teenager and just joined GMG I would post all sorts of stuff accusing composers of outright theft and everyone sort of laughed at me. Great ideas come to people separately sometimes, I guess.

I've learned that, unless you have a Masters degree in Musicology or are a 'so called' expert in Classical Music, bringing up musical themes/ideas that bear similarities (unless it's already been written about), it's better to not even mention it.

They'll just say 'no, you are wrong'.

[Mirror Image]

I've learned that, unless you have a Masters degree in Musicology or are a 'so called' expert in Classical Music, bringing up musical themes/ideas that bear similarities (unless it's already been written about), it's better to not even mention it.

They'll just say 'no, you are wrong'.

It doesn't really matter to me what someone who has a masters degree in musicology says to me about this, I hear strong similarities in the usage of this little motif, but as I said already, Bartok repeats the phrase over and over again whereas Shostakovich resolves it to something completely different. Shostakovich merely uses a fragment from it and it had more of a ballsy sound to it because of the way he used it, but, like Brian, said it's merely coincidental and nobody stole anything from each other. I was just curious if Shostakovich was familiar or admired Bartok's music?

By the way, if I wanted a musical analysis on this I would just call up my uncle who's a retired composer who lives in Chicago. He holds a masters in music composition. He mainly works as a copyist now.

[not edward]

Yes, I suppose expressing a positive opinion of Schnittke could get him into some trouble with the Soviet authorities.

I don't think Shostakovich was ever close to Schnittke: apparently--to paraphrase Ivashkin on the subject--they did spend some time together at a near-compulsory holiday retreat organized by Khrennikov in the '60s; neither spoke much, Schnittke being too overawed and Shostakovich disinclined to say anything to anyone. I think Schnittke's musical closeness to Shostakovich (at least after the mid-'60s) has often been overstated: I hear his musical language as more coming from Mahler, Berg, B. A. Zimmermann and even late Nono than from DSCH (Mahler and Berg were of course key influences on both composers).

Shostakovich certainly publicly praised the music of two of the other prominent figures of Schnittke's generation--however, both Denisov and Gubaidulina were students of his, and DSCH seems to have taken his responsibility to his students seriously (I'm not aware of what, if any, opinions of these composers DSCH is supposed to have expressed privately*). I'm inclined to take his praise for Denisov seriously if only because I think the last movement of the 14th symphony refers to--without directly quoting--the last movement of the younger composer's cantata The Sun of the Incas.


*It'd be interesting to collect some of DSCH's private comments from sources like Richter's conversation books, since those I've seen tend to suggest a man with considerably more wide-ranging tastes than his comparatively conservative musical language might lead one to expect: if I remember correctly he expressed clear interest (not uncritical, it has to be said) in Xenakis and the earlier works of Stockhausen and Boulez.

[Mirror Image]

I don't think Shostakovich was ever close to Schnittke: apparently--to paraphrase Ivashkin on the subject--they did spend some time together at a near-compulsory holiday retreat organized by Khrennikov in the '60s; neither spoke much, Schnittke being too overawed and Shostakovich disinclined to say anything to anyone. I think Schnittke's musical closeness to Shostakovich (at least after the mid-'60s) has often been overstated: I hear his musical language as more coming from Mahler, Berg, B. A. Zimmermann and even late Nono than from DSCH (Mahler and Berg were of course key influences on both composers).

Shostakovich certainly publicly praised the music of two of the other prominent figures of Schnittke's generation--however, both Denisov and Gubaidulina were students of his, and DSCH seems to have taken his responsibility to his students seriously (I'm not aware of what, if any, opinions of these composers DSCH is supposed to have expressed privately*). I'm inclined to take his praise for Denisov seriously if only because I think the last movement of the 14th symphony refers to--without directly quoting--the last movement of the younger composer's cantata The Sun of the Incas.


*It'd be interesting to collect some of DSCH's private comments from sources like Richter's conversation books, since those I've seen tend to suggest a man with considerably more wide-ranging tastes than his comparatively conservative musical language might lead one to expect: if I remember correctly he expressed clear interest (not uncritical, it has to be said) in Xenakis and the earlier works of Stockhausen and Boulez.

Interesting post, Edward. I could see Shostakovich digging some Xenakis since it's so violent and turbulent.

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

Bought these two 7th recordings yesterday:

I'm very interested in Nelsons Shostakovich output; I have seen him conducting the 8th in Lucerne (on Television) and it was great. Do you already have an opinion about the 7th, MI?

[Mirror Image]

I'm very interested in Nelsons Shostakovich output; I have seen him conducting the 8th in Lucerne (on Television) and it was great. Do you already have an opinion about the 7th, MI?

Yes, Tapio. Madaboutmahler (Daniel) had been inquiring to me about this recording so here's what I wrote to him about the performance: I thought the performance was quite good, but it didn't really shake my bones like Bernstein's DG performance. I would rank it much below that performance and Masur's for that matter. Interpretatively, Nelsons used some swifter tempi, which seemed to rob some of the more lyrical moments of their beauty. Nelsons is a good conductor, but I don't find this performance very distinctive. Well performed certainly but that's just not enough for me.

[Karl Henning]

Yesterday, I spent perhaps forty minutes leafing through David Hurwitz's Shostakovich Symphonies and Concertos - An Owner's Manual at the School Street Borders.  As the spirit of the title promises (and, to be sure, as one expects from Hurwitz), this is a book oriented not to experienced musicians, but to the amateur trying to make sense of It All.  It really isn't bad, all in all;  though there is the odd attitude, and the occasional trotting out of an idée reçue which prompts one, not to want to strangle Hurwitz (which would be distastefully extreme), but to leisurely bung some rotten fruit at him.  Against that, he's made some earnest attempt at illustrating the form and musical content of many of the works, which is a matter entirely different to the shallow rantage customary in many of his recordings reviews.  In some respects, really an interesting read, though from this senator's standpoint, a book I might browse at the bookstore, but not one I need on the shelf at home.

Completely forgot that I had posted this . . . .

[Karl Henning]

On Re-hearing the Tenth after 365 Days

I've just finished listening to Shostakovich's Tenth Symphony. The last time I heard it was on June 30, 2009, on my iPod, in the car on my family's return from a road trip out to Utah and the Grand Canyon. Location: somewhere on Interstate 10 in rural west Texas. Over the course of the road trip I had heard the Tenth twice (the other time was in Albuquerque), the Fifth several times in different performances, and Khachaturian's Cello Concerto on six (!) occasions. I was all Russianed out.

Then for a while I just didn't listen to the Tenth. It wasn't intentional; it just slipped the mind. I went to college in the fall and planned to give it a play to celebrate going back, but didn't have the time. Eventually I decided to save it for a special occasion. By December I decided to just wait until June 30 rolled around again. June 30 came. I listened to a CD for MusicWeb and went to bed early. Finally carved out an hour for the Tenth tonight, starring Herbert von Karajan and the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra.

I should note that my familiarity with the symphony is purely from listening; I have never seen a score.

Impressions

First of all, how'd I go this long without listening to one of my favorite pieces? I just wanted to curl up in every minute of it ... thought a few times that I could just as easily have listened to it every day for a year. (This is, of course, not actually true.) This felt like Hemingway on his first day back from a year of shaving. Or something.

The Tenth Symphony is the culmination of the "Russian Romantic" symphonic tradition; it is the apotheosis of same. Had Rachmaninov, Lyapunov, Glazunov and Bortkiewicz seen it to its grave? No, they'd merely set up this fearsome volley. This symphony is, like Tchaikovsky's Fifth or Rachmaninov's Second (much more like the latter), based entirely on a simple motif stated at the outset. The first movement is built entirely on that motif, and I was really impressed at how much of the first seven to eight minutes of the symphony Shostakovich was able to repeat at and after the climax. Except for the interjection of the flute tune at 6:00, which serves as a catalyst for the huge central upheaval and provides just a tiny bit of contrast, this movement is really just one huge arc repeated, the second statement different enough from the first to make the double-arc combine for one.

A joke I'd been repeating during my Year of No Tenth was, "There oughta be a law of orchestration stating that the piccolo is expressly prohibited unless you are Shostakovich." It grew out of my frustration at how lesser composers fail to understand how to use the instrument: an unnecessary piccolo line, only about four seconds long, tarnishes the otherwise glorious opening movement Atterberg's Eighth; Johann Strauss' piccolos drive me up the wall just as much as his gift for melodies makes me sigh with pleasure; the piccolo at the end of Dvorak's Second has a great musical idea but is just too lightweight to penetrate the texture.

There are, of course, good uses of the piccolo. The two-note part in the storm of Beethoven's Sixth. Schulhoff's Concertino. Dorman's Piccolo Concerto. And all the other examples I can think of, all of them, are in Shostakovich. The Fifth. The Ninth. Others I am forgetting at the moment. And then there's the end of the first movement here. I Googled "best piccolo solo" and all the results said, "Stars and Stripes Forever." Undoubtedly a contender. I GMG-searched for "best piccolo solo" and there weren't any results. Now the Tenth is the first. Except, of course, that it's a piccolo duo, isn't it? And it is so darn good!

I was surprised by the third movement. Basically, it has three themes, the opening string tune (which is exactly the same theme as that of the second movement, which is in turn just the opening motif of the first movement extended a bit - this is one of the most tightly argued symphonies since Beethoven's Fifth, despite its length), the DSCH theme, and that weird foreign horn call. What surprised me about this movement, coming back after a year, is that it basically just alternates between the three in whatever order it pleases, and there's basically nothing else to it. It just bounces from motif to motif the whole time and yet rather than sounding senseless or academic or hopelessly confused, it's remarkably cohesive. I was also surprised and impressed to hear the first minute of the symphony replayed almost verbatim and as originally orchestrated, providing the base line to stuff which is easier to notice. Wow!

In Rachmaninov's Symphony No 2, the finale is the first movement to feature a melody that's not based on stair-step ascending intervals: that huge sweeping romantic Hollywood tune that breaks the symphony's mold and carries it over the threshold to a happy ending. Shostakovich's Tenth pre-empts this somewhat by introducing DSCH and the horn call into the third movement - but DSCH is the real challenger to the symphony's motto, and of course it wins. He's dancing on Stalin's grave, isn't he? Emphasis on dancing; this might be the most conventional of the movements, even down to the Return of the Scary Opening Motif right before the final coda (think Tchaikovsky Four). But the Scary Opening Motif has already been defeated: it is in that melancholy, wistful sigh of the (muted?) violins which serves as centerpiece to the introduction's reprise. And then, having laid the opening motif to rest once and for all, DSCH gets up and dances on the grave.

Conclusion

I chose Karajan because the final bars on his recording sound rich and full and gloriously final; on Barshai, they seem to just taper up into the bright acoustic. The flip side of the coin is that Barshai's clarinet solo in mvt. I is much more darkly brooding. I've got Skrowaczewski, too, but don't remember it very well.

All in all, as glorious an experience as it ever was, and I'm glad this symphony is back in my listening. I would not hesitate to rank it one of the great symphonies of all time, alongside contenders like Beethoven 5 and Brahms 4. It is, to my mind, surely not just a great symphony by a Russian, but the great triumph of the fate-obsessed, heart-on-sleeve Russian symphonic tradition which began with Rubinstein and Balakirev, achieved concert-hall popularity with Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov, and reached its raison d'être in 1953, when a composer turned to this seemingly burnt-out form to create some of his most personal music - and some of his most explicitly Russian outrage against the climate in which he was trapped.

I don't particularly find it useful to see Shostakovich's symphonies as reactions to, or depictions of, or portraits of, Communism; when I first began to get "into" the Tenth, it was cool to imagine the scherzo as "Stalin himself," or the third movement as "Shostakovich versus the oppressors." Now that interpretation is not as interesting as it had been. The only serious interest it has for me is its implications for the argument that this was the inevitable product of a flexible and tortured artistic genius, and for the hope, maybe the delusion, that had Shostakovich been given free rein to write whatever he wanted wherever he wanted, such a masterwork as this would not have been lost.

Lots of fun to revisit this post.

[Karl Henning]

. . . I can't post a top ten yet because I have yet to hear many of the quartets, half the symphonies (still to go: 2-4, 8, 12-15), and Lady Macbeth, though I saw a scene of Lady on YouTube and thought it was astonishing.

Incidentally, Brian . . . hast yet heard the Fourth?

[Karl Henning]

I just went for a very long run (it is finally 60 degrees in Wisconsin!!) and listened to the 4th Symphony.  Oh wow.  That is all I can say.

How did I miss this when it was first posted?

[Karl Henning]

I seldom listen to Shostakovich. Not out of personal dislike or anything, because he composed some very good music, but I just don't find myself connecting to his music as much as I do other composers.

Shostakovich = brilliant composer. My absolute favorite of the whole lot.

Before and After . . . .

[Karl Henning]

November on Naxos:



"This recording of New Babylon, one of Shostakovich’s most inventive and truly symphonic film scores, is the first complete recording of all the surviving music from the original ‘lost’ manuscript full score and the first to use five solo string players only, as conceived by the composer. A remarkable collage of marches, can-cans, carnival music, tumultuous rhythms and musical quotations, New Babylon bristles with witty dissonance and brassy ebullience, emphasizing the film’s content rather than its visual surface. Mark Fitz-Gerald’s two previous Naxos world première recordings of Shostakovich’s film scores for Alone (8.570316) and The Girlfriends (8.572138) have been highly acclaimed."

Finally pulled the trigger on this.

[Mirror Image]

Before and After . . . .

Yeah, it's always fascinating how opinions can change...

[Brian]

Finally pulled the trigger on this.

I'll be interested to hear your reaction. I listened to the full New Babylon last year, but apparently didn't post about it here.

[Karl Henning]

Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?

[Karl Henning]

Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?

OTOH, do I need another recording of the Opus 43? I've got twelve already . . . .

[Brian]

Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?

18 months ago, when I was in England, Richard Whitehouse (the liner-note writer) bought me a pint and told me that Petrenko was in the middle of negotiations with EMI to be an exclusive EMI artist. Naxos was uncertain if the cycle would be finished before negotiations completed, or not, but the Fourth Symphony was planned as the final volume. I've just looked at the recording dates for Symphonies 2 and 15, and it appears as though No. 2 had just been recorded when we spoke (June 2011). I really haven't heard any news since, so whether they rushed the orchestra into the studio to record 4, 7, 13 and 14, or whether EMI granted a reprieve, or whether the cycle is kaput, I don't know. 

EDIT: I just asked the Liverpool Phil on Twitter, we'll see if they reply! They follow me so I could even send a DM...

[Brahmsian]

Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?

Ditto, and the remaining DSCH symphonies.

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

[DSCH 7/Nelsons]

Well performed certainly but that's just not enough for me.

Thanks MI, appreciate your opinion.

Guys, is:
[asin]B0013816GU[/asin]
technically the same recording as original release:
[asin]B000001GB2[/asin]

I wanted to download as FLAC first, but well, EUR 20 for a digital download So I'm thinking about buying an available physical release.
EDIT: The first one is available as FLAC for ~EUR 10, which is alright for me.

Hopefully its not a crappy remaster with terrible dynamics compression or something like that, but exactly the same release as the old one.