Agata Sorotokin - 2015 Mitra Scholar

2014-15 Mitra FAMILY GRANT Recipient The Truth Beyond Words: A Musico-Historical Analysis of Selections from D. D. Shostakovich’s Compositions under the Stalinist Regime Agata Sorotokin, Class of 2015

THE TRUTH BEYOND WORDS: A MUSICO-HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTIONS FROM DMITRI DMITRIYEVICH SHOSTAKOVICH’S COMPOSITIONS UNDER THE STALINIST REGIME

Agata Sorotokin Mitra Family Scholar Mentors: Ms. Susan Nace, Mrs. Lauri Vaughan April 10, 2015

Sorotokin 2 Dmitri Dmitriyevich Shostakovich (1906-75) is remembered as the profound Russian composer of the Soviet era.1 This is not only due to the genius’s superhuman memory and extraordinary musical ear but also his unswerving dedication to true art in spite of the severe cultural suppression pervasive in Stalinist Russia (1925-53). Following his steadfast moral principles, Dmitri Dmitriyevich chose not to openly protest the political climate, out of concern for his friends’ and family’s safety. At the same time, whenever officials’ actions conflicted with his ethical and artistic standpoint, Shostakovich distanced himself and his music from Soviet dogma as much as he could afford to without harming his close ones. Thus, the composer’s forced ideological backing for his public works was merely a superficial means of surviving the political milieu; the shared compositions paid homage to his moral and musical integrity as much as his private works. Shostakovich did not compromise his commitment to write in accordance with his artistic principles, which he revealed through the prisms of opera, symphony, and chamber music.2 Although written under contrasting circumstances, the three compositions that this paper focuses on – the opera Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District, Symphony no. 5, and String Quartet no. 4 – all testify to the fact that Shostakovich was anything but a sell-out.

Written before Stalin’s large-scale cultural purges, Lady Macbeth (1930-32) served as a means for Shostakovich to pursue his passion for tragic opera.3 The four-act work, which is based on Nikolai Leskov’s nineteenth-century novel of the same name, questions established views on morality and justice through an exploration of passion’s extremities.4 Coloring his unconventional conclusions through musical characterization and bold compositional structure, Dmitri Dmitriyevich followed his artistic course. He refused to succumb to “musical pornography,” as he himself described the crisis of his contemporaries’ tendency to prioritize success over creative quality.5

Sorotokin 3 After a 1936 Pravda article entitled “Muddle Instead of Music” destroyed his blossoming career, Shostakovich presented Symphony no. 5 (1937), a more abstract work that essentially became his life-determining public face.6 Appeasing the authorities by creating a work that could be interpreted as propagandistic, he nevertheless remained true to his musical integrity. If viewed on a deeper level, the Fifth Symphony contains little ideology, capturing a multi-faceted world that reflected the terror of the composer’s own surroundings.

Official criticism of Shostakovich’s compositions decreased significantly in the ten years following Symphony no. 5’s successful first performance. However, the man’s moral and artistic principles were put to the test once more during Zhdanov’s devastating 1948 campaign against the most brilliant Soviet composers. Losing his musical liberties to an even greater extent than before, Dmitri Dmitriyevich could only have his propagandistic work performed until Stalin’s death in 1953. Even in such a caged position, he continued to uphold his commitment to higher art, creating his String Quartet no. 4 (1949) among other private works.7 Unlike his official compositions, the string quartet directly discloses the drama of Shostakovich’s inner world and ultimately conveys his moral integrity through music.

Although he deferred on political grounds in order to protect those dearest to him and to continue composing, Shostakovich was committed to express his true artistic voice, revealing his remarkable perception of human experience.

Shostakovich’s Moral Principles In compositions that Dmitri Dmitriyevich fully invested in, such as the three serious works explored in this paper, a direct link exists between his deep-rooted sense of compassion and the music, whose dramatic portrayal of tragedy powerfully affected listeners. Thus, a

Sorotokin 4 glimpse at Shostakovich’s character provides context for the composer’s artistic sensitivity to human emotion.

While the insightful man’s moral principles drove decisions throughout his entire life, his acts of kindness were particularly poignant during World War II and the last years of Stalinism.

Even though Shostakovich could not openly protest the Party’s attacks on innocent friends out of considerations for his family and work, he helped oppressed individuals as much as possible.

When the authorities persecuted talented writers in 1946, he privately sent aid to Mikhail Zoshchenko after witnessing the heavily criticized author’s poverty.8 Likewise, the composer helped his Jewish friends, who were in grave danger during the waves of intense anti-Semitism in the early 1950s. Recounting how Dmitri Dmitriyevich saved his father, Kurt Sanderling, from unjustly losing his position at the Leningrad Philharmonic, conductor Thomas Sanderling testifies to the composer’s generosity: Shostakovich didn’t try to promote his own career or reputation. He didn’t go in for heroic deeds, but nevertheless he knew that his reputation as a great composer could be put to use to help people quietly and practically. This was a necessity to him…morality was the salient feature both of Shostakovich’s music and of his everyday conduct.9 Natalya Vovsi-Mikhoels, whose father had been brutally murdered by Stalin’s men in 1948, also witnessed Shostakovich’s kindness. Upon the arrest of Moisei Weinberg, Natalya’s husband, in February 1953, Dmitri Dmitriyevich wrote a letter to the NKVD head Lavrenty Beria, attesting to the imprisoned man’s righteousness. Moreover, Shostakovich and his family had decided to take care of Weinberg’s seven-year-old daughter in case that her own mother and aunt were taken away. Fortunately, Stalin’s death in March prevented this imminent event, yet Shostakovich had shown his altruistic character.10 Even when he faced persecution himself, he

Sorotokin 5 worried about those who risked their safety by publicly supporting him. For instance, Isaak Schwartz, a loyal composer who studied at the Leningrad Conservatory in 1948, recalled how Dmitri Dmitriyevich had scolded Schwartz for praising his teaching: “I am most displeased by your behavior. You had no right to act like that. You have a family, a wife, small children. You should think about them, and not about me. If I am criticized, then let them criticize me – that’s my affair.”11 Shostakovich’s compassion extended beyond his family and close circle of friends in times of hardship. At the outbreak of war in 1941, Dmitri Dmitriyevich held international prestige, largely due to his Fifth Symphony’s success, and could probably avoid enlistment.

Nevertheless, he made multiple requests to join the Home Guard, driven by the need to serve his people. After receiving an official refusal from a Commissar at the local militia headquarters, Shostakovich was able to volunteer by digging ditches for military protection and serving in the Leningrad Conservatory’s firefighting brigade.12, 13 Although the Conservatory kept him away from real danger, his photograph on the building’s rooftop came to represent the resolution of the city’s artistic leaders to join the war effort.14 On top of this, Dmitri Dmitriyevich composed the militia anthem “The fearless regiments are on the march” and arranged twenty-seven songs to be performed for the soldiers.15 After living through the Leningrad siege for nearly one month, Shostakovich had written three movements of his Symphony no. 7. As the composer explained thirty years later, his main artistic goal for this work was to reveal his “love for humankind, providing support for culture, civilization, life.”16 Ordered to evacuate the city on October1, 1941, Dmitri Dmitriyevich travelled to a town called Kuybishev, which was 800 kilometers east of Moscow, along with his wife and children.17 Despite the fact that he was relatively safe, the man continued to suffer from the fact that

Sorotokin 6 millions of people died on the front and the family members who remained in Leningrad starved daily. Shostakovich captured his profound impressions of the war when finishing his Seventh Symphony, and the music sparked civilians’ courage nationwide.18 Not only did he receive a first class Stalin Prize in 1942 for the work but also the authorities allowed his mother, sister, and nephew to evacuate the Leningrad Blockade.19 With his success augmented, Shostakovich continued to be as selfless as before, which his friend and literary critic Isaak Glikman confirms: “Although he often interceded on behalf of others, he never asked for anything for himself.”20 In fact, the composer’s humanitarianism reached a global level, extending to the Soviet Union’s enemies in the aftermath of World War II. When his young son Maxim was frightened by a destitute Nazi prisoner-of-war, Dmitri Dmitriyevich explained, “He’s a victim of the War…It’s not his fault, you know that he was forced into the army and sent off to fight at the Russian front, into such terrrible [sic] slaughter...And probably he has a wife waiting for him, and they have children like you and Galya.”21 Throughout his life, especially during the Stalinist regime, Shostakovich not only supported individuals whom he knew personally but also demonstrated universal compassion, a quality which formed the backbone of his serious compositions.

The Tragedy of the Tragedian: Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District, op. 29 One of the youngest students of the Leningrad Conservatory when finishing his graduate courses in 1923 and 1929, Shostakovich had already developed a creative independence from the strict, old-fashioned musical doctrine of Rimsky-Korsakov’s tradition, which was enforced by his composition teacher Professor Maximilian Steinberg.22 Attending the weekly “Circle of Young Composers,” the teenager joined experimental composers such as Vladimir Shcherbachyov and Boris Asafiev in order to discuss modernist techniques of the West. Inspired

Sorotokin 7

by Stravinsky, Krenek, and Hindemith while still a student, Shostakovich absorbed the new, quasi-banned ideas. At the same time, he embraced elements of established tradition: “strong compositional discipline” in form and harmony. Putting this eclectic collection of musical influences to use, Shostakovich composed his First Symphony in 1925, and the widely performed work brought the teenage composer an international reputation.23 Reinforcing his principles about musical justice, Shostakovich preferred to keep his distance from the prevailing proletariat organizations of the 1920s, primarily the Association of Contemporary Music (ASM) and the Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians (RAPM).

While the ASM was not truly avant-garde in its nature, going along with Lenin’s somewhat ironic “visceral commitment to traditional high culture,” the revolutionary-minded RAPM was “antimodern” and “antifolklore,” promoting propagandistic songs as “true art.”24 Not affiliated with RAPM, Shostakovich was formerly a member of the local ASM but mistrusted the organization’s committee. Many of his colleagues participated solely out of the desire for prestigious positions. This was the case with Boris Asafiev, the formal Leningrad leader on the contemporary music scene. In his May 13, 1926 letter to the composer and theorist Yavorsky, Shostakovich complained that Asafiev did not attend the ASM’s opening concert, which included the First Symphony premiere, solely because he was not appointed chairman.25 Although Dmitri Dmitriyevich did follow his own creative vision, he nevertheless could not afford to be completely independent of the competing proletariat organizations’ influence.

From 1928 to 1931, Shostakovich primarily devoted his time to ballet and theatre, in large part to provide financially for his widowed mother.26 His works from this time period include The Golden Age, The Bolt, The Limpid Stream for ballet; The Bedbug for Meyerhold’s Theatre in Moscow; the silent film New Babylon; The Shot, Virgin Soil, Rule Britannia for TRAM

Sorotokin 8 (Worker’s Youth Theatre); and Hamlet for the Moscow Vakhtangov Theatre.27 As the young composer testified in his letters, the plotlines of these staged works were shallow; theatre and ballet were generally more prone to ideological control than music due to their less abstract nature. However, Dmitri Dmitriyevich used politically favored themes, such as the portrayal of self-indulgent bourgeoisie and flourishing Soviet industrialism, to his advantage. Having gained expertise in accompanying for the cinema as a teenager, Shostakovich not only whipped out vivid, light music such as heroic marches, foxtrots and jazz but also used his witty sarcasm when painting musical caricatures of the various capitalists.28 He went so far as to poke fun at proletarian composers, distorting their famous mass songs in his music for Hamlet, for instance, by having the flutes shriek out strident versions of the Soviet melodies.29 Ultimately, musicologist David Fanning points out that Dmitri Dmitriyevich did outwardly adhere to Lenin’s ideas but “defined ideology in music in terms not of the subject matter alone but of the composer’s attitude to it.”30 Unlike his contemporaries, Shostakovich insisted that the phrase “for the people” did not suggest debasing music for the purposes of accessibility and propaganda.

At the turn of the 1930s, when all of Russia’s remaining decentralization and multifariousness was in rapid decline, Dmitri Dmitriyevich was drawn to opera even more deeply than to ballet and theatre. The Nose, his first work in this genre, was based on Gogol’s homonymous short story. Entirely experimental in its nature, the opera’s score interwove folk instruments, such as two balalaikas, with conventional strings.31 Moreover, Shostakovich included spoken text in his writing, which was largely based on rhythm and expressionist technique rather than traditionally established linear harmony. This innovative musical-theatrical canvas prompted Dmitri Dmitrievich’s closest friend – the brilliant musicologist Ivan Ivanovich Sollertinsky – to argue that The Nose was the first “original” Soviet opera.32 However, the

Sorotokin 9 increasingly aggressive proletariat groups held a contrasting opinion. Premiered on January 18, 1930, at the Leningrad ‘Maly’ State Opera Theatre (Malegot), the composition was labeled as an “‘ugly grimace’” by the increasingly militant RAPM. 33, 34 Although this politically motivated proletariat organization lost its power to the Party’s newly established Composer’s Union two years later, the group succeeded in rousing the press against Shostakovich’s expressionist style, which it felt deviated from Soviet ideology. Refusing to promote his work abroad, the ASM also disapproved his use of avant-garde techniques, such as writing an interlude for unpitched percussion and having the protagonist gargle at the sink in one scene.35 Due to the controversy about the composer’s unconventional writing, Moscow Bolshoi Theatre cancelled its upcoming production of The Nose, but the ambitious young man was ready to try again.36 Setting a goal to create another prominent work besides his First Symphony, Dmitri Dmitriyevich began to compose Lady Macbeth in October 1930, putting the finishing touches in December 1932.37 Since Shostakovich genuinely intended to compose a more readily comprehensible work, he moderated his experiments with avant-garde technique. This moderation by no means meant that he submitted to his critics. Although the still powerful RAPM pushed Shostakovich to be more politically involved in his writing, the twenty-five year old man not only ignored this advice but also voiced his conflicting opinion in the November 1931 issue of Rabochiy i teatr (Workers and the Theatre). Exasperated by the fact that he and other theatre composers needed to limit their music to light, trite accompaniment for politically polarized storylines, he implied that quality of art and proletariat preferences did not have much in common. His viewpoint was only reinforced by the fact that the reviews in the next Rabochiy i teatr issue used the term “individualism” as a critique of his style of composition.38

Sorotokin 10 Despite these disagreements, Dmitri Dmitriyevich was still generally perceived as the rising star of the young generation at this time; even the derisive RAPM placed much value on his potential for elevating Soviet musical art. The organization’s critique reflects this as well since it was meant to shape the renowned composer’s inevitably influential future projects.

Although Shostakovich was not drawn to political plotlines, he did recognize that providing an ideology-based explanation for his thematic choices would serve as an important step towards his second opera’s acceptance. Justifying the decision to base his work on Nikolai Leskov’s Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District was not an easy task, particularly since the nineteenth century novel centered on concepts which went against propagandistic norms: coldhearted brutality and lustful passion.39 Shostakovich’s work depicts the dark story of Katerina Ismailova, a women bound in a heartless marriage to a man named Zinovy in provincial Russia. In the first act, when the laborer Sergei comes to work on her husband’s property, Katerina falls in love. Her attraction to Sergei is so strong that she murders her cruel father-inlaw and the passive Zinovy after being shunned by both for having intercourse with Sergei.

When a drunkard discovers Zinovy’s hidden corpse, he informs the antagonistic police force, which arrests Katerina and Sergei during their wedding. Now condemned to trudge toward Siberia, the newlyweds join a group of convicts. The lecherous, hateful Sergei abandons his wife for the criminal Sonyetka, who prompts him to trick Katerina. Helpless and miserable, Katerina hurls herself and Sonyetka into a nearby river, where both of them drown.40 While shaping his composition, Shostakovich took a radical approach towards the unfolding plotline, arguing that Leskov was blind to the true nature of his characters by the “nightmarish condition of pre-revolutionary Russia.”41 Whereas the novelist distanced his readers from Katerina, depicting the protagonist as a monstrous murderer whose suicide is well

Sorotokin 11 deserved, the composer intended to do the opposite. In the program booklet from the opera’s first Malegot production, Shostakovich wrote the following: Katerina is an intelligent, talented, and interesting woman. Owing to the nightmarish circumstances in which life has placed her, her life has become sad, dull, gloomy. She does not love her husband, she has no joys, no consolations. And all at once there appears the foreman, [Sergei].42 Katerina becomes the victim of the dark pre-Soviet times, suffering in a world controlled by merchants and animalistic sex beasts. Thus, the opera served as a tragic epitome of the past century, which was meant to contrast the bright promises of Soviet Russia.

Shostakovich’s insights into his protagonist’s situation present a coherent perspective that is fairly independent of political implications. With this in mind, as well as the young man’s scorn of superficial politicized themes, it appears that the portrayal of class warfare was secondary to him. Instead, he concentrates on exposing the true nature of each character in order to convey his perspective on Katerina’s fate. The composer claimed that music was key in opera, particularly when a work calls conventional moral philosophy towards serious crimes into question.43 Lady Macbeth testifies to this; through forward, bold musical language, he effectively portrays his protagonist as “a ray of light in the dark kingdom.”44 Bringing his characters to life, Dmitri Dmitriyevich pays close attention to their odious personalities. He links the darkest, most dissonant motifs to Boris Ismailov, the woman’s fatherin-law who constantly suspects her of infidelity. For instance, the musical storytelling supports the singers’ acting in the opera’s opening scene. As Boris hurls his son and Katerina down onto the ground, forcing them to kiss before they part, the wild passage in the strings and the galloping percussion color the drama. Filled with rhythmic chromaticism, the musical language

Sorotokin 12 brings a preposterous tone to the tyrant’s humiliations and highlights Katerina’s trapped conditions.45 (♫ Listen) Figure 1: Lady Macbeth

The music serves as more than a non-verbal narrator, however. Recurring musical elements of Shostakovich’s language provide connections between various parts of the plotline, thereby heightening the hopelessness of Katerina’s surroundings. Loud ostinato figures appear frequently in other tense places. These include the laborers’ molesting of the cook, Aksinya, parts of Sergei’s rape, Katerina’s vision of Boris’ apparition, the drunkard’s discovery of Zinovy’s corpse, and the couple’s arrest. Furthermore, Shostakovich showcases his brilliant use of caricature, a skill that he had mastered in his cinema days. The priest’s mindless polka in a major key right after Katerina’s first murder (♫ Listen) and the policemen’s self-centered exclamations at the end of Scene Seven (♫ Listen) exemplify the composer’s decision to turn the people in the woman’s world into “soulless […] comic-book creatures.”46, 47

Sorotokin 13 Katerina’s role directly contrasts that of the other characters. The music associated with the woman’s essence is lyrical or compassionately doleful, transforming Leskov’s protagonist from a monstrous murderer into a heroine with a tragic downfall. From Lady Macbeth’s opening measures, Shostakovich begins to reveal his attitude towards Katerina. The clarinet, which often relates to her situation along with the oboe, pours out an expressive line amidst wandering, somewhat unsettling modulations.

Figure 2: Lady Macbeth

A quintessentially Russian IV-I resolution soon signifies that the heroine who is alone on stage is a truly open, melancholy Russian “soul.” Moreover, Katerina’s arias are filled with folk-like, tonal lyricism, something entirely absent in Shostakovich’s first opera.48 (♫ Listen) Perhaps the scene following Boris’ death reveals Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s perspective most clearly. After Katerina commits adultery and murders Boris on stage, listeners expect anything but the ensuing musical material. The strings’ delicate song without words envelops the main character as she embraces her true love. Rather than placing a heavy musical burden on her conscience, Shostakovich includes an ode to romantic passion.49 (♫ Listen) Through this

Sorotokin 14 controversial but convincing peak of tenderness, the composer underscores that Katerina figures as the sole human in his opera. Furthermore, towards the end of the work, the woman’s appeal to her convicted beloved consists of an unusually extreme tessitura; Katerina invests her entire being into pleading for her husband’s support. Shostakovich’s decision to implement the soprano’s full range demonstrates how much despair has built up inside of his genuinely feeling, human character. (♫ Listen) Figure 3: Lady Macbeth

When Sergei proves himself to be as wicked as he first appeared, the heroine’s final aria signifies that she is the only potentially relatable character left in the work. Contrasting Sonyetka and Sergei’s mockery of her own naiveté (♫ Listen), Katerina sings of the rising surface of a deep lake, with both her words and the quiet supporting tremolo conveying her disillusionment with reality. (♫ Listen) Right before her murder, the cellos take up an expressive, floating line over the quiet pulse established by the harp and timpani. The music laments Katerina’s approaching death, an event that is inevitable.

While every scene contributes to the contrast between lightness and darkness, the interludes in Lady Macbeth are as laden with psychological power as the rest of the work. These harmonically ambiguous and introspective orchestral passages push audience members to reflect on what has occurred. Listeners must abandon social convention in order to understand

Sorotokin 15 individuals’ true nature in the opera. The characters who initially seem virtuous are even less human than the greatest murderer in the story, a fact that has drastic implications: society’s figureheads are not as pure as they may appear.

Initially, the reception of Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District raised Shostakovich’s prominence to an unprecedented level. After its premiere in the Malegot on January 22, 1934, the opera opened in Moscow on January 24 at the Nemirovich-Danchenko Theatre, directed by the institution’s founder.50 At the end of December 1935, the Bolshoi Theatre staged another version, and the Malegot toured Moscow to take part in a Soviet music festival that featured Shostakovich’s work among others. 51, 52 The capital boasted three concurrent, sold-out productions of Lady Macbeth at this point. While enthusiastic audiences attended over 177 performances in Russia, opera houses in Czechoslovakia, Sweden, Argentina, and the United States reinforced the composer’s fame internationally within the first two years of Lady Macbeth’s production.53 Although some prominent musicians criticized the music for its satire and crude realism – including Igor Stravinsky, who somewhat ironically labeled the opera as “lamentably provincial” – the work’s overall success appeared to be long-lasting.54 As Shostakovich reached one of the peaks of his career, Stalin began to intensify his dictatorial powers, employing his authority to assassinate his rivals, past Bolshevik leaders, in the highly publicized Show Trials.55 The Party joined by increasing its efforts to comprehensively centralize the arts. Previously focused on hounding members of the literary world, the authorities began to actively intervene in musical organizations after creating the Committee for Artistic Affairs in the January of 1936.56 That same month, Stalin attended a Malegot performance of Ivan Ivanovich Dzerzhinsky’s Quiet Flows the Don, whose storyline centered on the Russian Civil War.57 While Dmitri Dmitriyevich had largely helped the

Sorotokin 16 composer orchestrate this opera, he expressed his frustration about the music’s emptiness in one of his letters to Sollertinsky.58 However, Stalin responded positively to the ideologically relevant work, inviting Dzerzhinsky to his State Box as an explicit sign of approval.59 On January 26, the Great Leader arrived at the Bolshoi with three other officials – Molotov, Zhdanov, and Mikoyan – to see Lady Macbeth. Unfortunately for Shostakovich, the authorities’ negative reaction to his opera juxtaposed their positive reception of Quiet Flows the Don. According to Sergei Radamsky, a singer who sat close to Dmitri Dmitriyevich on that evening, the officials sat directly above the percussion and brass sections, snickering whenever the orchestra played fortissimos.60 To Shostakovich’s immense agitation, the group of four left before the performance ended, without personally acknowledging.61 Two days later, Pravda berated his opera in an anonymous article entitled “Muddle Instead of Music,” accusing the composer of ‘formalist’ tendencies.62 This term had grown to be a major insult in the context of the 1930s, signifying that an artist’s work was inaccessible to the Soviet people. Without an ideologically sound foundation, a composition could not pass the requirements of Socialist Realism – an easily understood, politically relevant reflection of contemporary themes.63 Pravda attempted to justify its claim about Shostakovich in the following manner: The composer seems to have dismissed the task of perceiving what the Soviet public seeks in music. It appears that he purposefully encoded his work, twisting the sound world to the point where it can only appeal to aesthetes—formalists who have lost healthy artistic judgment. He ignored the principle of Soviet culture: to drive away rudeness and wildness from all corners of Soviet life. […] Our theatres put in a lot of work to carefully present Shostakovich’s artistic vision. […] The actors’ talent merits laudation, and their wasted efforts bring about sympathy.64, 65

Sorotokin 17 While the overarching goal of “Muddle Instead of Music” may have been to assert the Party’s control over the musical field as a whole, Shostakovich received the greatest blow, as the leading Soviet composer of the day.66 A multitude of accusatory reviews shortly followed, including a second Pravda publication that condemned the composer’s newly written ballet The Limpid Stream.67 Both the Leningrad and Moscow Composers’ Unions organized meetings to examine the caustic criticism of Lady Macbeth, causing Shostakovich’s reputation to plummet further in February.68 Disguising their insults as a show of concern, a great majority of Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s contemporaries attacked the man’s work out of politically inspired fear or sheer jealousy of his talent. The few friends who refused to echo Pravda‘s position on Shostakovich’s music put their own careers at risk. For instance, members of the Leningrad Composers’ Union labeled Sollertinsky “the troubadour of Formalism,” and Vissarion Shebalin suffered financially since his music was stopped from being published or performed in Moscow.69 Although Shostakovich was not present at these meetings, colleagues kept him aware of the proceedings. According to his trusted friend Isaak Glikman, Dmitri Dmitriyevich understood Sollertinsky’s grave situation, advising his close supporter to agree with the Union’s standpoint if the alternative meant public shunning. The composer genuinely hoped that his close ones could avoid falling into the abyss he found himself in. However, Shostakovich scorned people’s betrayal of overarching musical standards, disgusted by Asafiev’s quick assertion that Dzerzhinksy’s Quiet Flows the Don was the quintessence of a perfect Soviet opera.70 Given that Dmitri Dmitriyevich intended to affect his listeners on a deep philosophical level, creating Lady Macbeth as a funnel for his unique artistic voice, the critics’ bitter words wounded the twenty-nine year-old man deeply. Although two of his loyal friends, Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky and Maxim Gorky, wrote to Stalin on his behalf, the composer was

Sorotokin 18 forced to accept the ineffectiveness of their intercessions; the two prominent men died the following year.71, 72 Nevertheless, in a letter to another composer, Shostakovich claimed that he refused to sacrifice his integrity, even in his currently tragic position. He claimed that he would not change his view on Lady Macbeth unless his consistently honest artistic convictions told him so.73 Despite the enveloping hardships caused by the Pravda publication, the strong-willed man kept his artistic determination. In a private conversation with Glikman, Dmitri Dmitriyevich remarked quietly but firmly, “Even if they chop my hands off, I will still continue to compose music – albeit I have to hold the pen in my teeth.”74 The Man of Double Meanings: Symphony no. 5, op. 47 In order to survive as a composer and provide fiscal support for his family, which now included a baby daughter named Galina, Shostakovich needed to create a work that would redeem him in the Party’s eyes.75 At the same time, his resolute principles put compromise of artistic quality out of the question. Taking up such a challenge, Shostakovich began his work on the Fifth Symphony, which was written between January and October 1937.76 He succeeded in creating a truly unique work of art while presenting a convincing “reply to just criticism” in official terms.77 At first glance, Symphony no. 5 is a more conservative work than Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s earlier compositions; the first movement is in strict sonata form with implicit symmetry. The work’s structure is more readily comprehensible than his preceding Fourth Symphony, which is Mahlerian in the sense that its sections consist of film-like fragments.78, 79 However, hidden beneath this classical canvas is ingenious musical innovation that is visceral in nature, as can be seen in an examination of the opening movement: Moderato.

Sorotokin 19 From the beginning, Shostakovich alters the traditional sonata form to be able to create more opportunities for contrast throughout the movement. Following the pensive, tense first subject group (♫ Listen), the second is more homophonic and otherworldly, bringing light into the anxious atmosphere. Unlike the typically slower second themes in Romantic era sonatas or the uniform counterparts of the Viennese Classical tradition, the tempo of this movement’s second subject group is faster than the symphony’s broad opening. Aided by the pulsating accompaniment, the section’s direction propels the music towards the ominous development section, thereby enhancing the movement’s overall framework.80 While the majestic dance-like rhythms in the accompanying strings and harps bring the second theme closer to earth, the extended note lengths in the floating first violins enhance the theme’s otherworldly quality. (♫ Listen) Thus, Shostakovich still maintains the contrast between the two themes in the exposition, which is an essential feature of the sonata form.

Figure 4: Symphony no. 5

Sorotokin 20 The development section begins with the piano’s entrance. Although Dmitri Dmitriyevich employs the same rhythm that predominated before the sudden transition, the irritating secco articulation in the keyboard and lower strings starkly contrasts the viola’s preceding piano espressivo line. The horns’ brash version of the first theme rides on top of the square rhythm, which undergoes diminution in the ensuing Allegro non troppo. Continuing to rise quite literally, the conflict builds as the strings climb into higher registers, and the winds blast out elements of an unrecognizably grotesque version of the first subject group. By now, the development’s march has transformed into a wild gallop that pounds the quarter note pulse into listeners. At figure twenty-seven, where the trombones declare the recurring theme in dotted perfect fourths, the sarcastic atmosphere is reminiscent of the musical caricatures in Shostakovich’s theatre music. (♫ Listen) As is typical for the composer, this frenzy takes a more tragic turn right before the recapitulation. The strings call out the opening motif multiple times as the second theme sounds from the brass section in a dramatic, Strauss-like fashion.81 (♫ Listen) Ultimately, the essence of the themes’ characters shifts radically in the development; the transformation’s magnitude highlights Shostakovich’s most major change to sonata form. Taking an unprecedented path, he creates the movement’s biggest contrast between the development as a whole and its surrounding sections.82 Enveloped by a seemingly unstoppable darkness, both subject groups react to what has just occurred, with a cymbal crash marking the beginning of the climactic recapitulation. This dramatic culmination is particularly potent, as Shostakovich has the entire orchestra sing the figure three version of the first theme in unison.83 (♫ Listen) The unified lamentation and protest against the massive forces of evil provide a stark contrast to the large, open sections of nonimitative polyphony that are prevalent in the earlier sections of the movement.84 Even though

Sorotokin 21 listeners interpret the recapitulation as one unit that juxtaposes the preceding development, Shostakovich does not diminish the contrasts within the closing section itself. Here too, Dmitri Dmitriyevich extends tradition. Instead of simply dampening the differences between the themes’ characters to bring the movement to a coherent ending, he intensifies the anxiety and lyricism of the respective subject groups. In fact, the second theme now sounds in a warm D Major, adopting a Habanera-esque lilt. (♫ Listen) Some musicologists, including A. S. Benditsky, link the possible reference to Bizet’s Carmen with the composer’s overarching celebration of unrestricted love.85, 86 Even if Shostakovich did not intend the main concept of the Fifth Symphony to be a testament to romantic affection, he does bring his listeners’ attention to life’s true beauty. Having reached the sweetest point in the symphony thus far, he seems to point out that this comforting, open character reflects how the world was before evil took over.87 The solo clarinet line at figure forty-one reinforces the intimate dolce tone but soon hushes, with the Moderato movement ending on a morendo.

Implementing changes to the traditional sonata form in order to allow for more largescale, meaningful contrasts, Shostakovich paints with a wide emotional palette. An introspective wanderer broods over the terrifying power that takes control of the musical world; his responses fluctuate between grief and nostalgic hope.

Following these unfolding dramatic events in the Moderato, the later movements present three extremely contrasting psychological states of mind. If one views the symphony as a whole, the Allegretto, Largo, and Allegro non troppo may very well be reactions to the sharp conflict in the Moderato. Functioning as a quasi-intermezzo, the second movement’s flamboyance distracts the listeners from the tension they have just been exposed to, carrying them away into a slightly limping waltz.88 (♫ Listen) Then, the third movement Largo marks the return of the wanderer.

Sorotokin 22 Testifying to Shostakovich’s brilliant understanding of pathos, the strings’ open, heartrending melodies establish an atmosphere of mourning. Unlike the wide intervals of the Moderato second theme, which carry the subject group into a space beyond this world, the breathtaking oboe solo at figure eighty-four is deeply human.89 The sorrow manifests itself in the expressive tritones and implied plagal cadences – a characteristically Russian harmonic turn – and yet these emotionally laden figures have a reserved quality due to the instrument’s high, quiet register.90 (♫ Listen) Figure 5: Symphony no. 5

When the flute solo reiterates the plaintive oboe line, the strings’ hushed tremolo clearly parallels the Orthodox Christian panikhida, a sung memorial service.91 (♫ Listen) This moment, along with the subsequent chorale lines in the strings, serves as one of the most direct references to Shostakovich’s experience of his own time. After all, the composer’s deep sense of compassion enabled him to create universally cathartic pieces of music. Exposing Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s suffering, the Largo’s introverted poignancy resonated with listeners on a profoundly personal level in the context of the Great Purge. Finally, the fourth movement Allegro non troppo follows the third’s portrayal of human hardship. The brass section’s triumphant declaration immediately

Sorotokin 23 indicates that the Finale is on the opposite end of the emotional spectrum. Replacing the Moderato’s pensive thinker and the Largo’s suffering soul, a self-assertive character emerges and, on a superficial level, transcends the symphony’s dramatic conflict.92 (♫ Listen) For Stalin’s government, the last movement’s tuneful heroism would serve as the link between Shostakovich’s composition and the authorities’ beloved Socialist Realist notions. Justifying himself as a true Soviet composer, Dmitri Dmitriyevich purposefully made room for the official interpretation of the Finale, the symphony’s overarching take-away. However, given his dedication to artistic integrity and meaningful art, it is unlikely that Shostakovich genuinely intended to leave behind the earlier movements’ tragedy for the purposes of glorifying militaristic heroism.

In some sense, Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s personal, unofficial thoughts about his work remain a mystery. Revealing non-Soviet justifications for the symphony would, at the least, antagonize the government and practically guarantee the composition’s removal from performance. All the same, deeper probing into the Allegro non troppo’s musical content reveals a probable version of the composer’s true interpretation of the Finale’s character. The secret lies in the fourth movement’s connection with the song “Renaissance” from Shostakovich’s Four Pushkin Romances, a song cycle written in 1936. Pitch-wise, the beginning of the brass’ opening line mirrors the bass’ melody, which is set to significantly ominous words: “A barbarian painter with his somnolent brush/ Blackens the genius’ painting/ Slapping over it senselessly/ His own lawless picture.”93

Sorotokin 24 Figure 6: Four Pushkin Romances

Figure 7: Symphony no. 5

With this text in mind, the Finale transforms into a “lawless picture,” where the brash fortes remind one of the evil forces from the Moderato. Thus, the ending’s pounding major chords are not nearly as inspiring as they may seem at first hearing, testifying to the fact that Shostakovich’s Symphony is much deeper than simple Soviet propaganda. (♫ Listen) Regardless of whether or not audience members understood Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s music on a level deeper than the authorities, the Leningrad Philharmonic’s premiere of the Fifth Symphony was a huge success on November 21, 1937. Underscoring that “he’s given them his answer, and it’s a good one,” the public gave a half-hour standing ovation.94 Likewise, the authorities ultimately accepted the work as the paragon of Socialist Realist superhuman strength.

Sorotokin 25 Elevated from his disgraced position overnight, Shostakovich could continue to work without as much fear of persecution, although the highly unpredictable political climate could turn against him at any moment.

Silent Soliloquies: String Quartet no. 4, op. 83 Gaining more career opportunities after returning from disgrace, Shostakovich became a full professor at the Leningrad Conservatory in 1939.95 As discussed earlier, his genuine desire to give back also played a major role in the imminent Second World War. Ironically enough, Dmitri Dmitriyevich and other composers in the Soviet Union could afford to take more musical liberties at this time since the Party’s focus centered on foreign policy. Shostakovich overtly explored more personal, tragic themes in the three symphonies he wrote between 1941 and 1945, and his other compositions served as an “In Memoriam” to the deceased.96 After the end of his family’s wartime evacuation, he decided to move to Moscow, teaching at the Conservatory as well as re-joining the Leningrad faculty in 1947.97 In fact, Stalin provided the composer, his wife, and two children with a larger apartment, easing their issues with cramped, post-war living conditions.98 Thus, Dmitri Dmitriyevich did not intensely suffer from political or social oppression in the ten years following Symphony no. 5’s premiere.

With war over, the government began to track internal affairs more closely once the West’s general attention turned away from the Soviet Union. Due to the more concrete nature of the literary art form, writers suffered from severely imposed censorship before the authorities took measures in musical circles.99 By 1948, however, the Politburo’s Minister for Cultural Affairs, Andrei Zhdanov, struck down Russia’s most original and brilliant composers.100 This political scrutiny was exacerbated by the fact that the composer Muradeli, whose anti-Georgian opera had offended Stalin personally, blamed Shostakovich among other composers for swaying

Sorotokin 26 him off of the Socialist Realist path. On January 10 through 13, more than seventy composers were forced to admit that they were guilty of relying on formalist techniques. Insisting that the “Muddle Instead of Music” article provided critique still applicable to Shostakovich’s music twelve years later, Zhdanov criticized the man’s Eighth Symphony in particular; he blamed the deeply emotional work for revealing “unhealthy individualism.”101 Unfortunately for the select few ingenuous composers of the day, Zhdanov’s ominous meeting catalyzed further attacks, harming the musicians’ careers and mental well-being. On February 10, 1948, the Central Committee released a decree, entitled “On V. Muradeli’s opera The Great Friendship,” which destroyed the reputation of Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Shebalin, and Khachturyan among others.102 The resolution’s harsh accusations closely resembled the justifications provided in Pravda‘s 1936 article. According to the Committee, Shostakovich and his colleagues relied too much on their own complex, “anti-People” musical concepts, rather than accepted classical principles.103 In other words, originality meant deviation from conformity and, thus, a danger to the Soviet public.104, 105 While the rampant criticism paralleled past attacks that Dmitri Dmitriyevich had overcome after 1936, its substantial implications placed greater, unprecedented challenges on him. Shostakovich lost his teaching positions at both Conservatories, as well as his power within the now completely centralized Composers’ Union.106, 107 Demanding public repentance, the latter organization obliged him to pledge his future commitment to Socialist Realism during April’s All-Union Congress.108 Moreover, most of the composer’s works were withdrawn from performance, with the exceptions of Symphony no. 5 and the first movement of Symphony no. 7, the Leningrad.109 Of all the denunciations that had darkened his life thus far, the “Zhdanovshchina” tested Shostakovich’s strong will most drastically.

Sorotokin 27 Besides crushing his musical status and straining him financially, the decree’s aftermath made Dmitri Dmitriyevich suffer spiritually. He received criticism from not only his colleagues, some of whom tried to shift the Committee’s accusations off their own shoulders, but also many Conservatory students who were more concerned with their image than musical justice.110 One of his few devoted composition students, the cellist Mstislav Rostropovich understood Shostakovich’s state: “For him it was a calamity that the people for whom he had written his works with his very blood, to whom he had exposed his very soul, did not understand him. He was very conscious of this.”111 An earlier pupil, Yuri Abramovich Levitin, also witnessed the emotional trauma Dmitri Dmitriyevich experienced in 1948, recalling how the man’s wife distressed over the fact that Shostakovich contemplated suicide.112 According to close friends, the composer’s deep depression mixed with a fear for his physical safety. Expecting imminent arrest, he kept a suitcase with the most basic essentials at his side. Likewise, Shostakovich stayed outside on his apartment landing at night to avoid waking his family if officials were to take hold of him.113 Coping with fear and betrayal, he was not arrested after all. However, to ensure his survival during persecution, Dmitri Dmitriyevich had no other option but to publicly obey Party directives. On March 16, 1949, Stalin himself called Shostakovich, requesting that the composer serve as a Soviet delegate in that month’s Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace at New York’s Waldorf-Astoria Hotel.114 Foreseeing Westerners’ incessant questioning about his relationship with the government, Dmitri Dmitriyevich gave two excuses: he was sick and his works were banned in his own country. As expected, Stalin quickly addressed both of these reasonable concerns. Ordering doctors to carry out a medical check-up, he himself revoked the State Committee for Repertoire’s musical censorship that had been issued on February 14.115, 116,

Sorotokin 28 117

Far from being an escape from the USSR, Shostakovich’s visit to the United States placed

him under even more emotional duress. The situation forced him to be a Soviet mouthpiece and agree with Zhdanov’s official opinions about his people’s flourishing culture and the West’s decadent style. According to the conductor Kurt Sanderling, Shostakovich later imparted that “the worst moment of his life” occurred when he condemned Stravinsky during the conference.118, 119 The émigré composer’s musical ideas had influenced Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s own works multiple times, and yet Shostakovich was now forced to denounce Stravinsky’s inspiration in order to be seen as loyal to the Party. In the last years of Stalinism, surviving as a composer in the Soviet Union meant that he needed to give up his own voice in public, but even so he would not compromise his actual artistic principles.

Dmitri Dmitriyevich could not be deterred from writing truly great classical music, but appeasing the authorities without propaganda had become impossible. To resolve this inner dilemma, he separated his serious compositions from official laudatory works, which inevitably praised Stalin and his regime.120 Immediately after his return from New York City, Shostakovich began to write his Fourth String Quartet, which he did not even attempt to have performed until after Stalin’s death.121,122 Placing the piece of chamber music “in the drawer,” he was unafraid to express his “authentic” emotions in the work.123, 124 While most of the New York Conference trip had placed Shostakovich in a nightmarish situation, he did get to hear the Juilliard Quartet’s rendition of Béla Bartók’s Quartets no. 1, 4, and 6 in concert.125 Perhaps the composer’s use of eastern European modalities prompted Dmitri Dmitriyevich to direct his artistic attention towards a folk-like mixolydian style as well.126 Predominant in his Fourth Quartet’s first movement, this mode brings an open quality to the music, which is reinforced by Shostakovich’s decision to write in the key of D – the most natural

Sorotokin 29 for string instruments.127, 128 Moreover, the lower strings hold an octave drone for over half of the Allegretto as the violins float in an improvisatory manner above them. (♫ Listen) Figure 8: String Quartet no. 4

A certain ambiguity exists despite the folk characteristics, however. Instead of being carefree, the singing lines create an unsettling aura, harmonically due to the strange parallel fourths, oscillations between minor and major throughout the movement, and the dissonance created by the drone’s shift to the supertonic. Once again, the music’s structure reinforces the underlying tension; the uncomfortable climax occurs surprisingly early, between figures three and six.129 Toward the end of the Allegretto, the general wandering makes a turn to a hymn-like passage.

The most overtly tragic moment thus far, figure thirteen reinforces that the folk-like lines are anything but free. (♫ Listen)

Sorotokin 30 Figure 9: String Quartet no. 4

By this point of the quartet, a “loss of certainty, of groundedness, even of self-belief” is implied.130 The glimpse of tragedy continues to unfold in the second movement Andantino, and its slow melancholy waltz gives way to a more plaintive, direct outcry. After the Allegretto hymn returns at figure thirty-one, expressive sighs give way to a pianissimo finish.131, 132 (♫ Listen) Figure 10: String Quartet no. 4

Sorotokin 31 Contrasting the ending of the Andantino, the third movement carries a Russian-sounding melody, which is introduced in the cello line, although the theme is played con sordino and contains few dynamic markings.133 (♫ Listen) Figure 11: String Quartet no. 4

During louder moments, such as figure forty-seven, minor seconds start to play a large role in the music’s expression. These chromatic intonations drive the final movement, which connects organically with the third through a seamless attacca.

Not restricted to a laudatory tone in his private chamber music works, Shostakovich turned to controversial themes of the day without a fear of punishment. While Zhdanov persecuted artists and scientists, Stalin intensified anti-Semitic oppression, which ultimately culminated in the 1953 “Doctors’ Plot.”134 The racial hostility affected Shostakovich’s acquaintances and the deeply sensitive composer himself, spurring him to write his song cycle From Jewish Folk Poetry in the terrifying year of 1948.135 Receiving major support from Dmitri Dmitriyevich in those years, Natalya Vovsi-Mikhoels shares her impressions of the

Sorotokin 32 composition’s moral power: “This cycle voiced what we dared not ever express in conversations.

It was an open protest by Shostakovich against the hounding of the Jews in this last five-year plan of Stalin’s.”136 The man’s heightened humanitarianism manifests itself in his Fourth Quartet as well, largely through the fourth movement’s “musical yiddishism.”137 Filled with augmented fourths as well as flattened seconds, sixths, and octaves, Klezmerlike improvised inflections are passed in the strings. The characteristically Jewish “‘um-pa’” accompaniment also makes its way into the Allegretto finale.138 Figure 12: String Quartet no. 4

Sorotokin 33 Although Shostakovich’s actual melodies are entirely his own, his decision to use Jewish modalities is not only socially bold but also musically justified, as he himself explained: “The distinguishing feature of Jewish music is the ability to build a jolly melody on sad intonations.

Why does a man strike up a jolly song? Because he feels sad at heart.”139 (♫ Listen) Indeed, a strained peak follows the expressive, “contagious” dance.140 Interplaying with the lower strings, the first violin squeals out for help, after which all four instruments cry out at figure eighty-four in a unison fff. (♫ Listen) The uncomfortable atmosphere gives way to the return of the selfassured dance. While the fourth movement is technically in sonata form, the recapitulation’s second theme is in F sharp major rather than the expected D major.141 Thus, the ending reestablishes the quartet’s overarching mood of uncertainty, even though the confident motif from the fourth measure of figure fifty-nine appears again with a protest. Finally, the plaintive hymn from the first movement and the expressively sorrowful line that had ended the Andantino recur, bringing the entire composition together. Echoing the first violin’s climbing phrase, the cello lands on a harmonic and dies away on the quartet’s highest pitch as the upper strings’ pizzicati waver below between D minor and major. (♫ Listen) Figure 13: String Quartet no. 4

Only in the last three measures, the major chord settles the key of the piece, which had literally been lost in a large portion of the quartet as a whole. Ultimately, Shostakovich integrates the

Sorotokin 34 Jewish intonations with his artistic vision: to convey a heightened sense of suffering. The fact that the hymn recurs throughout the work, interweaving with the “musical yiddishism,” demonstrates that Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s music expresses a response to tragedy that transcends one specific ethnicity. Quartet no. 4 reflects the man’s universal humanitarianism more directly than Symphony no. 5 or Lady Macbeth, although listeners could only experience the work’s poignancy after Stalin’s death in 1953.

In his serious works, Shostakovich advocated for his listeners to feel genuinely. Dmitri Dmitriyevich prompted them to look past accepted ideological norms, continuing to express vivid, authentic states of mind despite the Party’s severe political hounding. Through his compositions, he spoke directly to people’s souls, as if whispering “keep being human!” Due to the fact that Shostakovich stayed in tune with his musical and moral integrity, his works remain deeply profound; the drama of the opuses transcends time. Rather than simply rebelling against the Party, Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s music gives a voice to his people, who were forced into silence during the Stalinist regime. At the same time, the compositions unspeakably communicate the man’s vital driving forces: universal compassion and a determination to create true music.

Sorotokin 35 Notes

David Fanning and Laurel Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online (Oxford University Press, 2015), accessed April 8, 2015.

1

2

Izaly Iosifovich Zemtsovsky, interview by the author, Silk Road House, Berkeley, CA, August 11, 2014.

3

Paul Griffiths, "About Shostakovich," Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets, last modified 2012, accessed April 10, 2015.

4

Elizabeth Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 2nd ed. (1994; repr., Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006), 108.

5

Ibid, 90.

6

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

7

Griffiths, "About Shostakovich," Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets.

8

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 234.

Ibid, 265-266.

9

10

Ibid, 260-264.

11

Ibid, 254.

12

Boris Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata (Novosibirsk, Russia: Svin'in i synov'ya, 2005), 8182.

13

While Wilson asserts that Shostakovich could not enlist in the home guard due to his weak eyesight (171), Robinson has a different explanation: Trauberg, a prominent film director who had collaborated with Shostakovich for cinematic projects, had begged the manager of the Petrogradsky District militia headquarters to spare Shostakovich’s life (82).

14

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 83.

15

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 171.

16

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 85.

17

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

18

In August 1942, the besieged city’s only group of remaining musicians, the Radio Orchestra, performed Shostakovich’s Seventh Symphony under the baton of Karl Eliasberg. Since only fourteen instrumentalists had survived the winter of 1941, the conductor had to seek out other

Sorotokin 36

musically trained individuals to be able to perform; retired musicians and even soldiers joined the orchestra for the occasion (Wilson 173-4).

19

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 93-95.

20

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 199.

21

Ibid, 230.

22

Ibid, 45, 40.

23

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

24

Richard Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997), 89-92.

25

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 44, 80.

26

Ibid, 88.

27

Ibid, 84-92.

28

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

29

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 93.

30

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

31

Rosamund Bartlett, "Shostakovich as opera composer," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, ed. Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 185.

32

Ibid, 187.

33

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

34

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, xxiii, 81, 84-85.

35

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 94.

36

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 81, 84-85.

37

Ibid, 108.

Sorotokin 37

38 Bartlett, "Shostakovich as opera composer," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 187-188.

39

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 108.

40

"Synopsis Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk," The Metropolitan Opera, last modified 2014, accessed October 14, 2014.

41

Bartlett, "Shostakovich as opera composer," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 189.

42

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 500.

43

Ibid, 502.

44

Ibid, 501.

45

"Synopsis Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk," The Metropolitan Opera.

46

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 503.

47

The lyrics at the very end of act 3, scene 7 translate as “Quick, quick, quick, quick! Profit awaits us there, all of us will be able to eat up, let’s hurry!” The policemen are referencing Katerina and Sergei’s wedding, using the discovery of Zinovy’s corpse as an excuse to gain money and fill their bellies (Lady Macbeth 236-237).

48 Ibid.

49

As early as in 1923, Shostakovich expressed his views about post-marriage romantic freedom to his concerned mother: “Pure animal love . . . is so vile that one doesn’t need to begin to speak about it […] In such an instance, a man is no different from an animal. But now, suppose that a wife ceases to love her husband and gives herself to another, and that they start living together openly, despite the censorious opinions of society. There is nothing wrong with that. On the contrary, it’s even a good thing, as Love is truly free” (Wilson 94).

50

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 108.

51

Ibid, 127.

52

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 506.

53

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

54

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 110.

Sorotokin 38

55 According to Wilson, youths were urged to inform against their parents, following the lead of Pavlik Morozov, who assisted in his own father’s arrest (144).

56

Simo Mikkonen, "‘Muddle instead of music’ in 1936: cataclysm of musical administration," in Shostakovich Studies 2, ed. Pauline Fairclough (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 232-233.

57

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 506.

58

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 129, 127.

59

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 506-507.

60

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 128-129.

61

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 507.

62

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 29.

63

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

64

Irina Andreevna Bobykina, comp., Dmitri Shostakovich through His Letters and Documents (Moscow, Russia: Glinka State Central Museum of Musical Culture, 2000), 535.

65 This

excerpted passage is the author’s translation of the following Russian text: “‘Композитор, видимо, не поставил перед собой задачи прислушиваться к тому, что ждет, чего ищет в музыке советская аудитория. Он словно нарочно зашифровал свою музыку, перепутал все звучания в ней так, чтобы дошла его музыка только до потерявших здоровый вкус эстетов-формалистов. Он прошел мимо требований советской культуры изгнать грубость и дикость из всех углов советского быта. Наши театры приложили немало труда, чтобы тщательно поставить оперу Шостаковича. Талантливая игра заслуживает признательности, затраченные усилия – сожаления’” (the selection was originally found on Robinson 32).

66 Mikkonen, "‘Muddle instead of music,’" in Shostakovich Studies 2, 247.

67

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 130.

68

Ibid, 134-135.

69

Ibid, 134, 137-138.

70

Ibid, 134-135.

71

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

Sorotokin 39

72 According to David Fanning in Oxford Music Online, Stalin ordered Tukhachevsky to be killed as part of his 1937 attack on Red Army generals.

73

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 137.

74

Ibid, 133.

75

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

76

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 150-151.

77

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

78

Ibid.

79

In the context of 1936, it is not surprising that Symphony no. 4 had been withdrawn from performance before the scheduled Leningrad premiere (David Fanning in Oxford Music Online).

80

Lev Abramovich Mazel', Etjudy o Shostakoviche: Stat'i i Zametki o Tvorchestve (Moscow, Russia: Sovestkij Kompozitor, 1986), 14.

81

This is a reference to Richard Strauss.

82

Mazel', Etjudy o Shostakoviche: Stat'i, 12.

83

Ibid, 17.

84

Sergej Newski, interview by the author, San Jose, CA, September 12, 2014.

85

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 153.

86

Benditsky argues that Shostakovich made frequent references to Carmen due to his recent love affair with a woman named Elena Konstantinovskaya, who had married a man named Roman Karmen in Spain after her post-arrest rehabilitation in 1936 (Wilson 154).

87

Mazel', Etjudy o Shostakoviche: Stat'i, 19.

88

Ibid, 23.

89

Ibid, 142.

90

Ibid, 140.

91

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 530-531.

Sorotokin 40

92 Mazel', Etjudy o Shostakoviche: Stat'i, 23.

93

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 153.

94

Ibid, 151.

95

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

96 It

is significant to note that while Shostakovich’s Piano Quintet and Symphony no. 7 were not optimistic works, they nevertheless received first class Stalin Prizes in the early 1940s (Bartlett 191, Robinson 95).

97 Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

98

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 229.

99

Ibid, 232.

100

Pauline Fairclough, "Slava! The ‘official compositions,’" in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, ed. Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 267.

101

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 240.

102

Fairclough, "Slava! The ‘official compositions,’" in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 267.

103

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 163.

104

Anti-formalist critics made these assertions about the Soviet public connecting to nineteenthcentury Russian classical composers. As Robinson points out, these claims were completely unfounded; the general population much preferred mass songs to arias (170).

105 Such

criticism is bitterly ironic. In Oxford Music Online, David Fanning and Laurel Fay indicate that Shostakovich had “incidental” compositions that were extremely popular, written shortly before he was accused of being “anti-Soviet.” His official, patriotic works from this time period include Russian River (1944) and Victorious Spring (1946).

106 Fairclough, "Slava! The ‘official compositions,’" in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 267.

107

Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically, 513.

108

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 241.

109

Robinson, Muzyka byla ne vinovata, 165.

Sorotokin 41

110 Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 247-248.

111

Ibid, 251.

112

Ibid, 243.

113

Ibid, 211-212.

114

Wendy Lesser, Music for Silenced Voices: Shostakovich and His Fifteen Quartets (New Haven, USA: Yale University Press, 2011), 93, 97.

115

Ibid, 94.

116

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 246.

117

During the check-up, the doctors confirmed that Shostakovich was ill but explicitly stated that they would not pass on this information to Stalin (Lesser 94).

118

Lesser, Music for Silenced Voices, 97.

119

The Party had labeled Stravinsky a “‘traitor and enemy of our fatherland’” after he refused to welcome the Soviet delegation out of “‘ethic’” and “‘esthetic’” reasons (Wilson 274).

120

Fairclough points out that Shostakovich’s seven-movement oratorio The Songs of the Forests, which praised Stalin’s reforestation plans, won a first class 1950 Stalin Prize. Shostakovich was ashamed of the work, admitting the following: “‘I sat down one night and in a few hours dashed off something ‘with my left hand’. When I showed them [the officials] what I had written, to my astonishment and horror, they shook my hands and paid me’” (268).

121 Wilson,

Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 277.

122

Paul Griffiths, "Quartet no. 4 in D major for Strings, op. 83," Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets, last modified 2012, accessed April 10, 2015.

123

Fanning and Fay, "Shostakovich, Dmitry," in Oxford Music Online.

124

Lesser, Music for Silenced Voices, 101.

125

Ibid, 98.

126

Griffiths, "Quartet no. 4 in D major," Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets.

127

Ibid.

128

The four instruments play on open strings.

Sorotokin 42

129 Judith Kuhn, "The string quartets: in dialogue with form and tradition," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, ed. Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 45.

130

Griffiths, "Quartet No. 4 in D major," Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets.

131

Kuhn, "The string quartets: in dialogue," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 46.

132 According to Kuhn, the ending bars (Figure 3) are musically related to the third

movement of Shostakovich’s First Violin Concerto (46).

133 Kuhn, "The string quartets: in dialogue," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 46.

134

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 259.

135

Written a bit earlier than the song cycle, his Piano Trio no. 2 (1944) and Violin Concerto no.

1 (1947-1948) also reveal Jewish influences (Tentser 13).

136

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 262.

137

Izaly Iosifovich Zemtsovsky, "Shostakovich i «muzykal'nyj idishism»," Vestnik Evrejskovo Universiteta, no. 6 (2001): 18, digital file.

138

Alexander Tentser, "Dmitri Shostakovich and Jewish Music: The Voice of an Oppressed People," in The Jewish Experience in Classical Music: Shostakovich and Asia (Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014), 13.

139

Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 268.

140

Zemtsovsky, "Shostakovich i «muzykal'nyj idishism»," 22.

141

Kuhn, "The string quartets: in dialogue," in The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, 46.

FIGURES Figure 1 Dmitri Shostakovich, Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District, libretto by Alexander Preis, 1932 ed. (Hamburg: Musikverlag Hans Sikorski [Hans Sikorski Music Publishing House], 1979), 37.

Figure 2 Shostakovich, Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk, 9.

Figure 3 Shostakovich, Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk, 275.

Sorotokin 43

Figure 4 Dmitri Shostakovich, Symphony no. 5, Op. 47 (Moscow, Russia: DSCH, 1945), 12-13.

Figure 5 Shostakovich, Symphony no. 5, op. 47, 95.

Figure 6 Dmitri Shostakovich, Three Romances on Poems by Alexander Pushkin, op. 46a (Moscow, Russia: DSCH, 2006), 89.

Figure 7 Shostakovich, Symphony no. 5, op. 47, 110.

Figure 8 Dmitri Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83 (Moscow: DSCH, 2001), 3.

Figure 9 Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83, 6-7.

Figure 10 Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83, 11.

Figure 11 Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83, 12.

Figure 12 Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83, 21.

Figure 13 Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 4, op. 83, 33.

Sorotokin 44

Bibliography Bartlett, Rosamund. "Shostakovich as opera composer." In The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, edited by Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning, 179-97. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Bobykina, Irina Andreevna, comp. Dmitri Shostakovich through His Letters and Documents.

Moscow, Russia: Glinka State Central Museum of Musical Culture, 2000.

Fairclough, Pauline. "Slava! The ‘official compositions.’" In The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, edited by Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning, 259-83. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Fanning, David, and Laurel Fay. "Shostakovich, Dmitry." In Oxford Music Online. Oxford University Press, 2015. Accessed April 8, 2015. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/52560.

Griffiths, Paul. "About Shostakovich." Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets. Last modified 2012. Accessed April 10, 2015. http://www.shostakovichquartets.com/about.

———. "Quartet no. 4 in D major for Strings, op. 83." Shostakovich: The Complete Quartets.

Last modified 2012. Accessed April 10, 2015. http://www.shostakovichquartets.com/quartets/page/quartet-no-4.

Kuhn, Judith. "The string quartets: in dialogue with form and tradition." In The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich, edited by Pauline Fairclough and David Fanning, 38-69.

New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Lesser, Wendy. Music for Silenced Voices: Shostakovich and His Fifteen Quartets. New Haven, USA: Yale University Press, 2011.

Mazel', Lev Abramovich. Etjudy o Shostakoviche: Stat'i i Zametki o Tvorchestve. Moscow, Russia: Sovestkij Kompozitor, 1986.

Mikkonen, Simo. "‘Muddle instead of music’ in 1936: cataclysm of musical administration." In Shostakovich Studies 2, edited by Pauline Fairclough, 231-48. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Newski, Sergej. Interview by the author. San Jose, CA. September 12, 2014.

Robinson, Boris. Muzyka byla ne vinovata. Novosibirsk, Russia: Svin'in i synov'ya, 2005.

Shostakovich, Dmitri. Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District. Libretto by Alexander Preis. 1932 ed. Hamburg: Musikverlag Hans Sikorski [Hans Sikorski Music Publishing House], 1979.

Sorotokin 45

———. String Quartet no. 4, op. 83. Moscow: DSCH, 2001.

———. Symphony no. 5, op. 47. Moscow, Russia: DSCH, 1945.

———. Three Romances on Poems by Alexander Pushkin, Op. 46a. Moscow, Russia: DSCH, 2006.

"Synopsis Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk." The Metropolitan Opera. Last modified 2014. Accessed October 14, 2014. http://www.metopera.org/metopera/history/stories/synopsis.aspx?customid=828.

Taruskin, Richard. Defining Russia Musically. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Tentser, Alexander. "Dmitri Shostakovich and Jewish Music: The Voice of an Oppressed People." In The Jewish Experience in Classical Music: Shostakovich and Asia, 3-33.

Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014.

Wilson, Elizabeth. Shostakovich: A Life Remembered. 2nd ed. 1994. Reprint, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006.

Zemtsovsky, Izaly Iosifovich. Interview by the author. Silk Road House, Berkeley, CA. August 11, 2014.

———. "Shostakovich i «muzykal'nyj idishism»." Vestnik Evrejskovo Universiteta, no. 6 (2001): 317-45. Digital file.

Audio Recordings Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk. By Dmitri Dmitrievich Shostakovich. Performed by Galina Vishnevskaya, Nicolai Gedda, and Dimiter Petkov. Ambrosian Opera Chorus and London Philharmonic Orchestra. Conducted by Mstislav Rostropovich. Recorded April 1978. EMI, 2009, compact disc. Accessed June 2, 2015. iTunes.

Shostakovich: Symphony Nos. 5 & 9. By Shostakovich. Conducted by Leonard Bernstein. New York Philharmonic. Sony Classical, 1999, compact disc. Accessed June 2, 2015. iTunes.

The String Quartets. By Dmitri Dmitrievich Shostakovich. Emerson String Quartet. Deutsche Grammophon Disc 2, 2006, compact disc. Accessed June 2, 2015. iTunes.

The Harker School | 500 Saratoga Ave., San Jose CA 95129 OofC: 4/15 (RM)