[KenOC]

You will have a hard time defining "formalism." Some writings of the late Stalinist time suggest it's music that is "autographical," describing the composer's own thoughts, ideals, or experiences -- rather than being aimed a pleasing tractor-drivers in Kazakhstan, which all proper music should do. Composers of the time found that incorporating some folk-like music in their works was a good defense against such charges.

 

[KenOC]

But what did they mean by music serving the state? Did they require the composer to include something that had to refer to the country's folk tunes because then it would be too abstract?

Remember that the USSR was then a "dictatorship of the proletariat," a definition taken quite literally. The lower classes were in charge, not the artsy elite in St. Petersburg. Mosolov was kicked out of the composer's union for insulting waiters... Mao had a similar philosophy, referring to intellectuals as the "stinking ninth", on the presumption that one out of nine people was one.

In our own society, there are similar views. In the 1950s, Stevenson was often referred to as an "egghead" when he was running against Eisenhower. I won't get into more recent history...

 

[KenOC]

I think you need to look again at what "proletariat" means.

"The proletariat (from Latin proletarius) is a term used to describe the class of wage-earners (especially industrial workers) in a capitalist society whose only possession of significant material value is their labour-power (their ability to work)." (Wiki) Also, "The term proletariat is used in Marxist theory to name the social class that does not have ownership of the means of production and whose only means of subsistence is to sell their labour power."

You may, if you wish, continue to speculate on my views!

 

[KenOC]

I'm not sure what you're saying. Of course the USSR defined "class" in economic terms -- it was a Marxist society after all.