How do people know....

[Karl Henning]

I hate it. Music that requires a thorough knowledge of history and of a composer's biography in order to be understood is not music at all, but a kind of whodunnit in sounds. 

Tee-hee!

You know, all this cloud of extra-musical stuff may be part of why the Eleventh only lately made its way into my musical favor.  But, of course, I stand by the principle, and especially in the case of this symphony:  either it works, in the concert hall and without liner notes, or it doesn't.

My interest in Shostakovich's biography — any composer's biography — (so far as I can judge, myself) is motivated by interest in the cultural history. That is, I find the historical background of interest, without requiring close correspondences between this event in the composer's life and those thirty-two measures of short score : )

[Karl Henning]

When I first heard it (I don't remember where, exactly, but surely somewhere in commercials, rip-offs or ringtones), I thought it was a 'happy' tune. I then had to learn that G minor is supposed to be sad.

Likewise, if I had to choose one of the two adjectives, I characterize that theme as cheerful rather than as sad. One of the "nailing Jell-O to the wall" aspects of this pin the label onto the music game, is that the emotional suggestion in measure 1, may be quite distinct from the emotional suggestion in measure 16.

Music is so rich; why need the branding be so simple?

[Florestan]

You know, all this cloud of extra-musical stuff may be part of why the Eleventh only lately made its way into my musical favor.  But, of course, I stand by the principle, and especially in the case of this symphony:  either it works, in the concert hall and without liner notes, or it doesn't.

My interest in Shostakovich's biography — any composer's biography — (so far as I can judge, myself) is motivated by interest in the cultural history. That is, I find the historical background of interest, without requiring close correspondences between this event in the composer's life and those thirty-two measures of short score[/font] : )

+ 1 on both paragraphs.

Music does not have to be understood. It has to be listened to. - Hermann Scherchen

[Florestan]

Likewise, if I had to choose one of the two adjectives, I characterize that theme as cheerful rather than as sad.

I say, at times cheerful, at times sad --- that elusive bittersweetness (is this a word?) which is a trademark of Mozart's genius.

As for myself, I hear in the last movement of the 40th symphony a loud laughter: the laughter that no doubt (     ) Mozart would have burst into when asked about the meaning of the symphony. 

One of the "nailing Jell-O to the wall" aspects of this pin the label onto the music game, is that the emotional suggestion in measure 1, may be quite distinct from the emotional suggestion in measure 16.

Precisely.

Music is so rich; why need the branding be so simple?[/font]

Oh, but that's a natural human trait: to simplify the complex (and viceversa)... 

[Gurn Blanston]

Let's take one of the most famous symphonic movements, the first from Mozart's G minor Symphony --- there is not a single hint Mozart left us about its meaning. Still, I ask you all: what is it about? I am very curious about your thoughts, gentlemen. TIA.

It's about 7'30" in g minor. Not more nor less (depending on repeats taken, of course).

[Opus106]

I say, at times cheerful, at times sad --- that elusive bittersweetness (is this a word?) which is a trademark of Mozart's Schubert's genius.

There -- it's all set.

[Florestan]

It's about 7'30" in g minor. Not more nor less (depending on repeats taken, of course).

(* chortle *)

[Karl Henning]

Brilliant Scherchen quote, thanks, Andrei!

[Fafner]

Thank you for bringing us to this (potential) can of worms! : )

Such a parallel is certainly "not something the composer could openly declare";  and your post invites me to go back to such sources as I have, to see how plausible the theory may be . . . one need only invoke Ian MacDonald's The New Shostakovich to recall the fictionalizing lengths to which the "musico-cryptography" can be taken.

Part of the trouble in Shostakovich Studies these days being, that since many of the tall tales (a) are at least plausible and (b) make for good story, a certain amount of it has already been "absorbed" as Washington-confessed-to-chopping-down-the-cherry-tree 'fact' by enough program note writers, that the waters may already be rather muddied.

(Of course, the citation of the Revolutionary funerary song is incontrovertible.)

I think this has to be seen at several levels:

Did Shostakovich himself intend this parallel to the Hungarian uprising?  Maybe, maybe not. This is just speculation and we cannot even fully trust what  Shostakovich himself had to say about his intentions.

Was he aware that such connection could be made and did it influence him creatively? Most likely. This was recent news and he was a sensitive person. There is no way it would leave him unaffected.

Would at least some of  the audience in the late 50's in the Soviet Union and its satellites make that connection? Hell, yeah. As someone who was growing up during the late communist era in the Eastern Europe, I can testify that the audience would find political allegories even when there in fact were none to be found.

I hate it. Music that requires a thorough knowledge of history and of a composer's biography in order to be understood is not music at all, but a kind of whodunnit in sounds. 

Shostakovich's music can very well be appreciated and enjoyed on its own terms.
Knowledge of the history, his relationship with Stalin and all the extra-musical stuff just adds another layer of understanding. It is not necessary to enjoy the music, but it certainly gives you some insight.

[Florestan]

There -- it's all set.

Oh, yes, I do agree. It is my firm conviction that Schubert, not Beethoven, is the true heir of the Mozartian spirit.

[Karl Henning]

It's about 7'30" in g minor.

Oh, no, no, no, Gurn — not all that seven and a half minutes is in g minor! : )

[Karl Henning]

Was he aware that such connection could be made and did it influence him creatively? Most likely. This was recent news and he was a sensitive person. There is no way it would leave him unaffected.

Lt Columbo says, Just one thing more, sir : )

I really think that question entirely presumptuous.  I agree that he was aware of the news; probably agree that it "could not leave him unaffected." I strenuously deny that this requires any effect upon the symphony.

[Karl Henning]

. . . I strenuously deny that this requires any effect upon the symphony.

Particularly an artist of the phemonenal artistic disclipine of Shostakovich.

[Florestan]

Brilliant Scherchen quote, thanks, Andrei!

Anytime I feel inclined to philosophize about music (and as you might have noticed, it's not an infrequent occurrence  ) that quote brings me back to my senses. 

As someone who was growing up during the late communist era in the Eastern Europe, I can testify that the audience would find political allegories even when there in fact were none to be found.

I testify to it, too. ( I am Romanian, born in 1972 ).  Truth be told, in my country the political allegories were the norm back then, especially in literature, drama and cinema. Someone who has not lived during that era of Romanian history would be at a loss understanding much of the Romanian books, plays and movies between 1975 and 1989. 

Shostakovich's music can very well be appreciated and enjoyed on its own terms.

Of course. That's the mark of a truly great artist.

Knowledge of the history, his relationship with Stalin and all the extra-musical stuff just adds another layer of understanding. It is not necessary to enjoy the music, but it certainly gives you some insight.

Yes.

[Florestan]

Question: how can one protest against totalitarianism by music?

I mean, in novels, plays, movies one can openly or disguisedly (note to self: post this in the "25 Adverbs" thread  ) say Stalin is a blood-thirsty monster and Ceausescu an illiterate tyrant --- but how does one translate it in sounds?

[Opus106]

I mean, in novels, plays, movies one can openly or disguisedly (note to self: post this in the "25 Adverbs" thread  ) say Stalin is a blood-thirsty monster and Ceausescu an illiterate tyrant --- but how do one translate it in sounds?

The composer can in any way he or she wishes, but you find out about it (only?) when a) it's literal, a mimicry, in some way; b) the composer explicitly matches motifs with ideas, or c) you are very good at reading between the staves, so to speak. The success rate with the last one can be a bit iffy at times.

[Karl Henning]

Would at least some of  the audience in the late 50's in the Soviet Union and its satellites make that connection? Hell, yeah. As someone who was growing up during the late communist era in the Eastern Europe, I can testify that the audience would find political allegories even when there in fact were none to be found.

I testify to it, too. ( I am Romanian, born in 1972 ).  Truth be told, in my country the political allegories were the norm back then, especially in literature, drama and cinema. Someone who has not lived during that era of Romanian history would be at a loss understanding much of the Romanian books, plays and movies between 1975 and 1989. 

As someone whose family lived most of their lives in the Soviet Union . . . I can relate a joke (which cannot be new to either of you chaps) I learnt while I sojourned in St Petersburg:

If there are four Communists in the room, there are at least five opinions represented.

[Florestan]

The composer can in any way he or she wishes, but you find out about it (only?) when a) it's literal, a mimicry, in some way;

Not even the most imaginative Romanian composer could have mimic Ceausescu's speeches, trust me... 

b) the composer explicitly matches motifs with ideas,

Yes but then again you'd need the programme to figure it out, if and only if it escaped censorship (a very unlikely hypothesis)

or c) you are very good at reading between the staves, so to speak.

That's pure rhetoric, nobody is very good at that... 

[Florestan]

As someone whose family lived most of their lives in the Soviet Union . . . I can relate a joke (which cannot be new to either of you chaps) I learnt while I sojourned in St Petersburg:

If there are four Communists in the room, there are at least five opinions represented.

There are three qualities in this world that can work together only two of them at the same time: honest, intelligent and communist. 

(the latter being actually no quality at all...  )

[Cato]

Hah! On second thought I concede Stravinsky might have been right, after all... 

That was precisely my first thought when I came across this topic!

"How do people know..."  In some cases it is just an unprovable impression: "knowing" is not involved.

e.g. I have always thought that the finale of Prokofiev's Sixth Symphony is a sly protest, unconscious or otherwise, against the murderous dictatorship of Stalin.

Can I prove that empirically?  No, but I can say: listen to it in the context of the late 1940's in the Soviet Union!

Otherwise, there is that Stravinsky quote!