Classical Music Forum banner

Dmitri Shostakovich

106K views 564 replies 167 participants last post by  scott.stucky48 
#1 ·
Here is the first of our Composer Guestbooks.

Dmitri Shostakovich was quite the interesting man, so hopefully this will be an interesting one.

As I may have stated before, I'm going to see his Symphony No. 14 in March in London.
I've never been to a live performance and I might be going alone. I'm only 16, so does anyone have some suggestions? Some etiquette or anything?

Anyways, lets hear it. What do you find interesting about Shostakovich? He outlived Joseph Stalin by a few decades, unlike poor Prokofiev who only lived one day after Stalin died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MilanStevanovich
#37 ·
You simply cannot separate those. You just can't.
You might find "LYDIA GOEHR - Political Music and the Politics of Music" interesting. It mentions a marxist view that if art is apolitical or autonomous, then it is inherently political as being apolitical is a political stance.

Edward Elgar's view that it did lead to protest is not silly or in any way completely unjustified, as you seem to allege, as it has support from various academics, musicians and former friends/family of Shostakovich.
Support from Shostakovich's family can be justified by trying to make money out of Dmitri's amazing output in the anticommunist USA. And there still is a huge outpooring of anticommunist Russia. I am not defending Russia, while I will say that Russia was far from communist. It is unjustified. The "evidence" is so tenuous and thin that it just not hold up credibly. Yes it can't be thrown out, but to hold it as evidence that it certainly happened is silly.

That Stalin was a hateful character is undeniable and in all probability most ordinary Soviet folk hated him, including Shostakovich. It is well documented that Shostakovich was not best pleased about the severe criticism he faced in the 1936 Pravda articles, and some musicologists have detected a change in style after that date. In this sense at least, his music was possibly affected by the regime under which he had to work.
Indeed. What I also find interesting is that there is so many attacks on the USSR's "oppression", yet US oppression is unmentioned - Hanns Eisler.
 
#38 ·
What I also find interesting is that there is so many attacks on the USSR's "oppression", yet US oppression is unmentioned - Hanns Eisler.
Stalin's "Blood Purge" body count has been estimated at c. 30 million. I think that is sufficient to remove the quotation marks from around the work oppression. The reason why no one (other than you) has yet opined on their politico-philosophical stance on America here is that no one else (other than you) perceives it to have any relevance on a Shostakovich appreciation thread.

As an interesting historical aside, did you know that, during WWII, the MS version of Symphony #5 by Shostakovich's countryman Prokofiev was written on staff paper that came to the Soviet Union by way of the Port of Boston?!

American oppression... please.
 
#39 ·
Stalin's "Blood Purge" body count has been estimated at c. 30 million. I think that is sufficient to remove the quotation marks from around the work oppression. The reason why no one (other than you) has yet opined on their politico-philosophical stance on America here is that no one else (other than you) perceives it to have any relevance on a Shostakovich appreciation thread.
You cannot separate politics from art.

Stalin's Blood Purge? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_purge get your info right.

And the 30 million includes deaths from war and famine FYI.
 
#40 ·
Stalin's Blood Purge? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_purge get your info right.

And the 30 million includes deaths from war and famine FYI.
Do not resort to Wikipedia as a safe reference. It is no doubt a very good project, but for such matters as are numbers and various interpretations of disputable ''facts'', I wouldn't trust it. Remember that anyone can add whatever one likes. And the administrators cannot see everything.
And also, I think Stalin's negativity and his role of one of the greatest criminals in the history of man is beyond debate. Milions of Russians (and not only Russians) have testified it. And the famine? Well, why such a famine at all? It was in greater part Stalin's guilt, wasn't it, with his industrialisation and economic revolution.

American oppression... please.
That said, I want to make it clear that USA certainly did its best to opress as much as possible. US politics were always somewhat annoying. Take Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait and Iraq, for example.
 
#42 ·
There. An ON-TOPIC paragraph.
Everything I have been saying IS on topic as it is directly related to Shostakovich.

Do not resort to Wikipedia as a safe reference. It is no doubt a very good project, but for such matters as are numbers and various interpretations of disputable ''facts'', I wouldn't trust it. Remember that anyone can add whatever one likes. And the administrators cannot see everything.
Don't use that pathetic excuse, Wikipedia is 98% as accurate as Britannica except IT gets fixed quickly, Britannica has to wait until the next Print.
And also, I think Stalin's negativity and his role of one of the greatest criminals in the history of man is beyond debate. Milions of Russians (and not only Russians) have testified it. And the famine? Well, why such a famine at all? It was in greater part Stalin's guilt, wasn't it, with his industrialisation and economic revolution.
Clearly you didn't even read it. You saw it was Wikipedia and ignored it. The "Blood Purge" isn't Stalin. I was using it as a reference to common knowledge.

And the famine? Well, why such a famine at all? It was in greater part Stalin's guilt, wasn't it, with his industrialisation and economic revolution.
Well, there are natural aspects to take into account, and international influence. Yes it was a negligent decision, but it isn't Murder. Manslaughter at most. But even at that you have to ignore the rest of the causes.

Milions of Russians
Millions? lol

I understand this... but in order for your politics to be relevant in a Shostakovich appreciation thread, it is necessary to show how your support of them is pertinent to your appreciation of Shostakovich. If you find yourself unable to make the appropriate ties, please limit the advocacy of your pre-determined positions (and the proselytism for atheism, too), to the "Members Chat" section.
It is actually stupendously obvious the connection. Shostakovich's music is accused of being Anti-communist. There are accounts of his supposed life that are unverified and very questionable. These anti-communist accusation come from anti-communists as Propaganda for Shostakovich's music to be popular in the west. If the truth about Shostakovich's political life and the country he lived and worked and reacted to isn't to do with Shostakovich, what the hell is?

American oppression... please.
So the fact that the US arrested and deported people based on Political views isn't oppression? Where planet are you on?

Shostakovich is not exceeded by any other compositional master by his ability to his ability to pen master-works, and survive, under the heavy boot of a totalitarian government. History may not see a like achievement ever again.
Heavy boot? Why add this little tid bit of propaganda? It serves no purpose.
 
#44 ·
Yes it is propaganda, because propaganda does not need to be untruthful, nor is it negative.

The difference between the "political side" (for lack of a better word... or words as it were) is that my "side" has no money or power (etc.) to gain from being right or lose from being wrong, the other side as everything to lose from if it is found that I am correct.
 
#46 ·
(Hell, I may be a Marxist, but a Stalinist I luckily ain't... :D )
Thanks! Good time for a belly-laugh!:) Yeah, I pretty much figured out that orientation myself... or (to paraphrase part of Churchill's famous epigram), you're under 25 and you have a heart.:D
... propaganda does not need to be untruthful, nor is it negative.
I believe, however, that we have to concede that over the last century or so, the word "propaganda" has accumulated some baggage that doesn't easily fit into our overhead compartment.:)
I'll tell you what... it's luggage that I wouldn't want to haul around the airport.:D
 
#50 ·
I am a Shostakovist! I absolutely love his music.

Mind you, I shouldn't, because I was born in Warsaw, and most of my ancestors have suffered from communist oppression, whereas Shostakovich's music glorifies communism.

Or does it?

No, precisely not. This is the great strength of Shostakovich. He had always managed to compose music that sounded in line with the Party's policy, but which carried a hidden message, that of showing the sad truth. He managed to express sad joy, or joyful sadness!

When you listen to Shostakovich, it's a good idea to watch one of these pictures, all exuberant, glorious, ugly, so ugly that they are beautiful:

1) Stalinian gothic architecture:



2) A Volga - the regular taxi and government car in the Soviet Union in the 1960ies:



3) A typical sculpture found at all street corners in the Soviet Union:

 
#48 ·
I've been getting a lot into Shostakovich lately; I became addicted to the first cello concerto, and I've been finding Youtube video after Youtube video of Shostakovich symphonies.

I'll be ordering the complete string quartets soon, I think, and I'm wondering where the best place to start is. It's certainly very daunting stuff; they're practically all masterpieces, all written post-fifth symphony, aren't they?
 
#52 ·
I wonder if anyone is familiar with Bernard Haitink's symphony cycle? It seems really good so far; I have the 5th and 9th symphonies.
I've not heard Haitink's 5th and 9th, but can certainly recommend his take on my personal favorite, the 8th. Even so, I prefer Mravinsky on Philips and Previn on EMI as superior interpretations.

A conductor not often mentioned in these discussions is Kurt Sanderling. I've found his Shostakovich to be quite outstanding, especially his 10th with the Berlin Symphony (f. East Berlin) and 15th, either with Berlin or Cleveland.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the 5th conducted by Rostropovich on either DG or Teldec is a "must hear", especially the finale!
 
#53 · (Edited)
5th, 7th, and Stalin

OK, I'm coming in late to this discussion, but as Shostakovich's output in the Soviet Union of Stalin is a fascinating subject to me, I feel I must add my own opinions.

In my own listening, I have found that the political climate surrounding the symphonies is not only helpful, but is vital in understanding them. In the end of the fifth, for example, how can anyone fail to recognize the oppressive nature of the repeated high A's over the "triumphal" brass theme? One of the most apt observations I've read on this passage comes from Rostropovich, who said, "Stretched on the rack of the inquisition, the victim still tries to smile in his pain. Anyone who thinks the finale is glorification is an idiot." It seems so obvious that it's a wonder Shostakovich himself didn't fall victim to the Great Purge. Despite one poster's insistance that this interpretation of the fifth is somehow "western propaganda," it seems on the contrary self-evident to me. (Note to that individual: Since you're so keen on using Wikipedia to correct people's facts, I suggest you go there yourself. Hypocrisy isn't pretty.)

Likewise how can the seventh be separated from the seige of Leningrad? Without it, some parts of it seem decidedly "anti-musical," but by placing it in its historical context, it comes into focus: The first movement depicts a city preparing for the siege in its opening theme, followed by the famous repetitive "war-machine" theme- one can almost envision the advancing Finnish and German armies approaching the city, rolling over the countryside. The second movement invokes sketches of life within the city during the early part of the seige. For me it evokes imagery of children, still oblivious to their peril, while their elders await relief that isn't forthcoming. By the end of the movement, even the playful first theme has evolved into a much darker entity, foreshadowing images of famine and starvation in the third movement, where the faint echo of the opening theme is a glimmer of hope amid the stark reality... the city is still able to resist, but perhaps not for much longer. The final movement seems to depict a winter arriving on a city that is ill-prepared for it, but a winter that brings with it a hope for the end of the seige, in the form of the "Road of Life" over the now-frozen Lake Ladoga- supplies could get in and civilians could get out. In the finale, like in the fifth, there is a repetitive, oppressive phrase over a variation on the opening theme- the city will survive, but under a stifling regime.

Of course, the above is merely my opinion and rather amateurish interpretation. I'm always open to the possibility that I could be wrong.
 
#57 ·
In the end of the fifth, for example, how can anyone fail to recognize the oppressive nature of the repeated high A's over the "triumphal" brass theme?
You must be really desperate to cite abstract musical ideas as evidence.

It seems so obvious that it's a wonder Shostakovich himself didn't fall victim to the Great Purge
I'll say, Stalin just like killing people (because he is EVIL!!!11!), and Shosta was CLEARLY (HE WROTE A PIECE WITH TRUMPET OMFG!!!!) ripping apart Stalin's DARTH VADER LIKE EVIL EMPIRE to shredds BLATANTLY and OBVIOUSLY in EVERY ONE of his pieces.

Jesus Christ.... Why don't you try to not formulate ideas based on a over stimulated imagination. Apart from your apparent lack of knowledge of the Stalinist 'regime' you also show that you based all you evidence on the one argument that it sounds like that's what it means... Come on....

under a stifling regime.
So, Alma Bernstein being on a blacklist not unlike Shosta was supposedly on (equivalent) is not a stifling regime?

All evidence to support his closet anti-communist ideas comes only from Testimony and anecdotal evidence of a similar kind. Testimony is proven false anyway.

Read 'Shostakovich Vs. Volkov: Whose Testimony?' by LAUREL E. FAY
 
#58 ·
All evidence to support his closet anti-communist ideas comes only from Testimony and anecdotal evidence of a similar kind. Testimony is proven false anyway.

Read 'Shostakovich Vs. Volkov: Whose Testimony?' by LAUREL E. FAY
All I can say to that is to read "Shostakovich Reconsidered by Allan B. Ho. That proves Testimony at least not necessarily incorrect, if not proving it firmly correct.
 
#59 · (Edited)
Yagan, at least I clearly stated in my post that my views are my opinion, rather than blanket statements that masquerade my opinion as fact.

As for Testimony, Maxim Shostakovich had publically stated that the book is essentially correct, despite some flaws in the details. Several other authors have likewise defended the book (and World Violinist has provided an excellent example).

Yagan Keily said:
I'll say, Stalin just like killing people (because he is EVIL!!!11!), and Shosta was CLEARLY (HE WROTE A PIECE WITH TRUMPET OMFG!!!!) ripping apart Stalin's DARTH VADER LIKE EVIL EMPIRE to shredds BLATANTLY and OBVIOUSLY in EVERY ONE of his pieces.
"Jesus Christ...." why don't YOU try posting something that isn't filled with ad hominem attacks and oversimplifications of opposing viewpoints into something you can easily ridicule?

So, Alma Bernstein being on a blacklist not unlike Shosta was supposedly on (equivalent) is not a stifling regime?
Do you perhaps mean Walter Bernstein? I would in no way defend the actions of the House Committee on Un-American Activities; in fact they are a blight on this nation's history. But there's a big difference between a Hollywood blacklist and death by firing squad. (Even the most conservative estimates place the number of executions in 1937 and 1938 at nearly 1,000 per day.) In fact you might be surprised to learn that my favorite treatise on American history is Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Nice attempt at diversion, though; I'll give you that.

I would have more to say on the matter, but if your earlier posts in this thread are any indicator, I'll be met with more straw-man distortions and ridicule. So instead I shall take my leave and wish you a good day.
 
#60 ·
Shostakovich Reconsidered by Allan B. Ho. That proves Testimony at least not necessarily incorrect, if not proving it firmly correct.
Most of Testimony (the bits that are not controversial in it) are just plagiarised directly from Shosta early in his life with dates removed.

As for Testimony, Maxim Shostakovich had publically stated that the book is essentially correct, despite some flaws in the details. Several other authors have likewise defended the book
So someone who needs Shosta to be popular (to make money) is promoting his fathers works in ways that keeps it popular? Amazing. And how come Shostakovich's wife's accusations on Testimony are irrelevant? There is no evidence that Volkov met (at least more than once) Shostakovich apart from Volkov's own admission, How come Volkov has refused to answer any questions about the plagiarism or the huge amounts of inconsistencies in it?

oversimplifications of opposing viewpoints into something you can easily ridicule?
I agree, they were simplified - I used simpler words! Also, try looking up the actual deffinition of ad hominem, because none of that quote of yours (of me) had any argument to the man - at all!

But there's a big difference between a Hollywood blacklist and death by firing squad.
I agree, and when there is any evidence that Shosta of under any threat of that I will come to your side. Please note, that Testimony is not evidence. It is completely unverified anecdotal evidence - it could be true, but like existence of a god, until there is actual evidence I am not going to believe it.

Also please pardon my spelling (I think I got confused with Mahler's wife), I mean Elmer Bernstein - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmer_Bernstein#Politics

(Even the most conservative estimates place the number of executions in 1937 and 1938 at nearly 1,000 per day.)
Well, the most conservative of the extreme right at any-rate. :)

" six prominent Soviet composers, all former students and friends of Shostakovich, declare that Solomon Volkov" - of course, by default, if they are Soviet composers, they are lying - so clearly this means nothing.

"Volkov saw Dmitrich three or maybe four times. ... He was never an intimate friend of the family-he never had dinner with us here, for instance.... I don't see how he could have gathered enough material from Dmitrich for such a thick book" - But is wife is also clearly biased, we should believe his son who has ulterior motives.

"Simon Karlinsky has pointed out two passages in Testimony which are verbatim or near-verbatim reproductions of memoirs previously published by Shostakovich" and " I have identified, so far, five additional extensive passages in the book which, likewise, are taken from previous- ly published Soviet sources."

"Careful comparison of the original passages with their counterparts in Testimony indicate that some significant alterations have been made. In several instances, sentences which would date the reminiscences have been altered or removed from the variants in the book."

"I wrote my Seventh Symphony, the "Leningrad," very quickly. I couldn't not write it. War was all around. I had to be together with the people. I wanted to create the image of our country at war, to engrave it in music. From the first days of the war I sat down at the piano and began to work. I worked intensely. I wanted to write a work about are days, about my contemporaries who spared neither stregnth nor life in the name of victory over the enemy" - Testimony pp. 154-155 (Apparently Shosta has an unbelievable memory) - AND "Kak rozhdaetsia muzyka" pp. 36

Yes two pages later:

"The Seventh Symphony had been planned before the war and con- sequently it simply cannot be seen as a reaction to Hitler's attack. The "invasion theme" has nothing to do with the attack. I was thinking of other enemies of humanity when I composed the theme." - Let's all just believe Shosta was senile maybe?

" Indeed, Volkov states explicitly, "This is how we worked. We sat down at a table ... then I began asking questions, which he answered briefly, and, at first, reluctantly. ... I divided up the collected material into sustained sections . . . then I showed these sections to Shostakovich, who approved my work" - Yet they are word for word from published soviet writings.

"...the first pages of seven out of the eight chapters of Testimony, the pages on which Shostakovich's inscription "Read. D. Shostakovich" is alleged to appear, consist substantially, if not totally of material which had already appeared in print under Shostakovich's name at the time of signing."

Amazing also how, when he talked with Shosta, it was... "...usually early in the morning, when the office was still empty" (p. xvii). In other words, there were no witnesses.

The book is too full of holes and other problems to be regarded as anything NEAR the memoirs of Shosta, and until ANY evidence is found that proves Testimony correct, it is merely Western propaganda.
 
#61 · (Edited)
Yagan Kiely said:
Also, try looking up the actual deffinition [sic] of ad hominem...
You previously accused me of...
a[n] over stimulated imagination...
and
[an] apparent lack of knowledge of the Stalinist 'regime'
Ad hominem, against me. Your cute little reduction (accompanied by extreme distortion) of my earlier post into "1337speak" in order to accentuate your straw-man argument on my ignorance of Stalin was a further example.

Whether you meant Elmer Bernstein or Walter Bernstein really makes little difference. The fact that my own country has a blot on its history - be it the HCUA or Joe McCarthy or George W. Bush - in no way excuses Stalin's Great Purge. (At least when McCarthy & friends held sway, we weren't executing our own citizens in droves...)

Well, the most conservative of the extreme right at any-rate.
Really? I wasn't aware that the Soviet authorities were in the business of writing western propaganda... my figure is based on the number of executions according to declassified Soviet documents: 681,692 shot during 1937 and 38. That's 934 per day on average- and a good many historians believe that the evidence released from Soviet archives is grossly understated. Oh, but let me guess; those historians are "propagandists," too?

"six prominent Soviet composers, all former students and friends of Shostakovich, declare that Solomon Volkov" - of course, by default, if they are Soviet composers, they are lying - so clearly this means nothing.
Where did I ever say that any Soviet source is necessarily lying? Again, you are constructing a straw-man argument. Do me a favor and don't put words in my mouth, OK?

In any case, I tire of this argument. Neither of us is going to change the other's mind. You are obviously an apologist/revisionist for Stalin. I get that. Stalin was a great man and Shostakovich worshipped the very ground he walked on. And I'm some brainwashed buffoon of American anti-communist reactionism.

I will hear what I hear in the music, and you will hear what you hear. Does it really even matter if one of us is "right" or "wrong?"
 
#62 ·
a[n] over stimulated imagination...
Your argument was based purely on your imagination of what it sounds like, how else do you wish me to counter your imagination than associating it with you?

"1337speak"
What the hell? 7|-|1$ 1$ 1337 $p34|<...

Where did I ever say that any Soviet source is necessarily lying? Again, you are constructing a straw-man argument. Do me a favor and don't put words in my mouth, OK?
I'm not, but that is one of the arguments in favour of Testimony, I covered it. Don't complain to me, complain to those who agree with you.

Does it really even matter if one of us is "right" or "wrong?"
WTF?! Why do you read history books (or ANYTHING for that matter), if you don't actually care if it is correct or not?

You are obviously an apologist/revisionist for Stalin.
No I'm not. Stalin wasn't a communist, he was an oppressive oaf (understatement) and a murderer, my only claim is that the situation in Soviet Russia is greatly exaggerated by the west, as is Shostakovich's closed anti-communist tendencies.

I will hear what I hear in the music, and you will hear what you hear.
You know, I don't hear anything; ergo I can't hear what I hear when their is nothing to hear.

What you are hearing in his music is very understandable (I can hear it if I try)! Corporations work on stuff like that all the time. Humans are very suggestible. Strawberry milk drinks taste 'like strawberry' because they are pink - we are merely tricking ourselves. When we are already tense, seeing a shadow of upright plank of wood can look like a murderer (I'm a assuming you see where this is going by now). When you already believe how evil (for the lack of a better word, read: laziness) Stalin is, it is very easy for someone to suggest how a dissonant repeditive section of Shostakovich's music sounds like Stalin's oppression.

Ergo, you hearing Stalin's oppression in his music is so far removed from any form or any science and it's relative scientific methods it's ridiculous. Testimony (Notice how you failed to actually address anything about Testimony?) is still way to inconsistent any full of provable errors to be of any use in addressing Shostakovich's anti-communist tendencies. I am not saying that Shostakovich is not anti-Stalin, but I am saying that Testimony and oppressive 'sounding' music is not evidence in any sense of the more.
 
#63 · (Edited)
Yagan Kiely said:
(Notice how you failed to actually address anything about Testimony?)
Notice how you failed to acknowledge anything I posted about the Great Purge (and the very real threat faced by EVERYONE who fell out of favor- including Stostakovich in 1936 after his denunciation for Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk, or do you deny this too?), or the significant differences between the situation there and that in the US during the "Red Scare?" Nor did you retract your statement that my figures were based on "far-right conservative estimates," even after I identified the source.

You should also note that I never said Shostakovich was anti-communist. I said that he was anti-Stalin. Nor did I use the word "evil" to describe Stalin. Such words are useless in the realm of history; they are oversimplifications that only serve to demonize... look at the US treatment of Saddam Hussein, for example: first we supported him, then we killed him- shades of Ngo Dinh Diem.

WTF?! Why do you read history books (or ANYTHING for that matter), if you don't actually care if it is correct or not?
Nice. "Quote mining: the act of searching literature or speech for short passages that when stripped of their context have an apparent meaning that strongly contrasts with the author's intent." Let me try:

You know, I don't hear anything; ergo I can't hear what I hear
WTF?! Why do you listen to Shostakovich (or ANYTHING for that matter), if you don't actually hear anything?

Whee, that was fun. :/

Musical interpretation will always be subjective and therefore a matter of opinion. On completely subjective matters, there is no absolute "right" or "wrong," which is why I put the words in quotes. We can only inform our opinion with facts that we subjectivley deem important.

Seriously, for someone who pretends to take the scientific method very seriously, you sure fill your arguments with logical fallacies. You sound like a creationist in an evolution forum... or at least, you use their tactics.

That's all I care to address. I disagree with you about the interpretation of Shostakovich's symphonies (your analysis of Testimony notwithstanding), and we are hardly the first to tread this path. Nor will we be the last.

My disagreements with you are far too fundamental to limit the discussion to Shostakovich, so in the interest of returning the thread to its original topic, I am ending this discussion here.
 
#64 ·
WTF?! Why do you listen to Shostakovich (or ANYTHING for that matter), if you don't actually hear anything?

Whee, that was fun. :/
Try again, your quote of me was out of it's context, my quote of you wasn't. It does matter who is right and wrong, and if you don't think it does matter then there is no point in you reading history books or anything.

Musical interpretation will always be subjective and therefore a matter of opinion. On completely subjective matters, there is no absolute "right" or "wrong," which is why I put the words in quotes. We can only inform our opinion with facts that we subjectivley deem important.
This isn't and never will be about musical interpretation. Sorry. I agree however.

(and the very real threat faced by EVERYONE who fell out of favor- including Stostakovich in 1936 after his denunciation for Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk, or do you deny this too?)
I concede that I do not know as much about the purge as the rest of soviet history. However, Shostakovich was never under any threat of his life. That is why I stopped arguing over it. You however have no excuse for avoiding what I said.

Nor did I use the word "evil" to describe Stalin. Such words are useless in the realm of history; they are oversimplifications that only serve to demonize... look at the US treatment of Saddam Hussein, for example: first we supported him, then we killed him- shades of Ngo Dinh Diem.
Dear god! Don't you read!? I said I used that for because I was too lazy to find another word....

You should also note that I never said Shostakovich was anti-communist. I said that he was anti-Stalin.
Stalin was part of the communist party, and the communist party was following Stalin's view was Communism, thus Shosta was both (though not the real communism)

logical fallacies.
Please point out one. Your accusation of an ad hominem... sadly wasn't :(

My disagreements with you are far too fundamental to limit the discussion to Shostakovich
Strange, I agree with everything else you have said.
 
#67 ·
The last of the Great Symphonists

The first thing that I would say about Dmitri Shostakovich is that he was the last of the great symphonist messengers. Music writing with discipline and form and spirit died with him. He has closed the ages. Now we are living in decadence with splashes of chaotic random splurges as modern art and electronic spitzba that passes as musik or should say Musack!
 
#68 ·
I agree that Shozzy is the last great symphonist, but the contemporary music environment is still healthy. What is composed nowardays isn't going to be Gershwin melodies and it's true that there is a lot of crap being composed at the moment, but at least some of it will inspire and perhaps move. Try James MacMillan and Salvatore Sciarrino. Shozzy did have a lot of discipline and created beautiful symphonies, so good that they can't possibly be used as templates to judge modern day composers.
 
#69 ·
I think he wrote two types of music - propaganda that was meant to please the authorities (like Symphony No.5 subtitled "A Soviet artist's reply to just criticism" and the Leningrad Symphony) and music that was from the heart (like the Violin Concerto No. 1 which could not be performed until after Stalin's death; and Symphony No. 10 and the 8th string quartet). Alot of his best music was written 'for the drawer' (to be taken out later, like the above concerto) during the Stalin years. After 1953, when Stalin died, he had more artistic freedom, but still composed some rather propagandistic works like Symphony No. 12 'The Year 1917.' A very mixed bag indeed. But a comment on this came from Bartok, who in his Concerto for Orchestra poked fun at and sent up the march from the Leningrad Symphony. I wonder what Shostakovich would have thought about this?
 
#71 ·
Shostakovich's quotes

I'm not familiar with Shostakovich's 9th yet but I do know that he quoted from other composers in his symphonies. I've just bought a recording of the 4th and on Wikipedia it says that in the final movement he quotes from Stravinsky's Oedipus Rex and the Firebird. Although I am familiar with those two pieces, I can't really hear them come through in the music. Maybe Shostakovich distorted them beyond recognition, and perhaps it is only decipherable if you can read music and actually compare the scores. Does anyone else know about the Symphony No.4 and these quotes? Is Wikipedia right?
 
#74 ·
I LOVE Shostakovich! I just bought the Decca box set of his complete symphonies conducted by Bernard Haitink. I'm going to get his violin and cello concertos at some point.

Beautiful and powerful music!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top