Introduction:
Composers are presented with many challenges in their lifetime. Questioning if their music will be liked by the public or another piece swept under the rug, if their music will be performed, where will it be performed, if they will be able to make a living off their compositions, plus the endless time and energy devoted into their work. Composers frequently question if they will be able to survive financially publishing their work, but rarely do they question if they will survive or executed for their musical works.
Living in Soviet Russia, Dmitri Shostakovich lived his life as a composer during the first five-year plan. This cultural revolution significantly affected the production of music. Genres and elements of music were placed under categories as either acceptable, demanded, or banned by the Soviet Union. Shostakovich experienced many critical and varying reactions to his music production. There are altered responses to his Lady Macbeth before and after Stalin’s walkout, including the article “Muddle Instead of Music.” Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 4 possesses musical elements that were against the Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians (RAPM) and what Stalin wanted for music of Russia. There are many adverse responses to this Symphony as well as fellow composers’ reactions to this publication. His Jewish Folk Poetry is known as one of his riskiest pieces ever written, which I use as a turning point to answer the 2nd part of my research question: why was Shostakovich not executed or banned from composing for these compositions and what pieces saved him? Russian musicologists’ write about how Shostakovich was perceived at this time in Russia and why he survived after writing these compositions against the Soviet Union. Shostakovich’s 2nd and 3rd Symphonies are an example of Shostakovich’s well-received works, however for the sake of time and simplicity, I don’t go into deep analysis within these works. The timeline of when his pieces were performed and published greatly affected perception.
My research method is primarily score analysis. I will also be studying various articles and chapters written by Russian scholars on Shostakovich’s life and what life was like under the Soviet Regime. I will draw conclusions from these readings and find evidence from sources about how his music was perceived, as well as how pieces that were allowed and acceptable secretly denounced Stalin and his policies. My conclusion is that Shostakovich got away with writing music that depicted the terror of living in Soviet-Russia without facing the fatal consequences of dissention in Soviet Russia by balancing his usage of safe elements in melody, rhythm, and harmony, placing pieces in the drawer, and balancing his production of safe and risky pieces.
Cultural Revolution in the Soviet Union
The first five-year plan (1928-1932) was one of the darkest times in Soviet history and ended unsuccessfully. This plan laid the foundations for rationalization of agriculture and industry. The aim was to completely restructure the culture and ideological life of society. This revolution primarily focused on fighting illiteracy to improve scientific and technological development. During this ideology fight, atheist propaganda developed even further by persecuting religion, clubs, and introducing strict censorship. Under Stalin’s rule, the Soviet Union turned into an industrial and military superpower. The five-year plan also contributed to this focus on agriculture and industrialization and building military, which resulted in merciless cruelty. People who owned land or livestock were forced to join collective farms. Thousands of farmers were executed and their property was confiscated. Over five million deaths occurred from starvation and exile in 1933 alone.
This five-year plan ended with Soviet musical culture in crisis. There was complete control over musical publications (including music journals) and conservatories as well as a complete ban on broadcasting elements of light music and western jazz. Playing jazz records could lead to a fine. From this musical control, the concept of Proletarian Symphonism emerged. Proletariats were people of the working class. Proletarian Symphonism was music that contained simplistic elements, to allow a wider audience to enjoy and easily understand the music, as composers were being forced to “dumb it down.” The Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians (RAPM) was founded in June of 1923. This was a musician's creative union of early Soviet culture allowing genres such as mass songs, cantatas, song symphonies, operas, and some chamber, symphonies, and concertos. Every composition would need to go through the union and be approved. This enforced an environment of the survival of the fittest for composers. Only the greatest compliant composers could survive.
Criticism and the Response to Criticism:
Shostakovich wrote music that depicted the terror of living in Soviet-Russia yet avoided imprisonment or execution under Stalin. Shostakovich’s opera, Lady Macbeth, premiered on January 22nd, 1934, in the Mikhailovsky theater of Saint Petersburg, Russia. This opera was completed in 1932 and was set in prerevolutionary times. It presents themes of lust, loneliness, and murder. Because of these themes, Shostakovich wrote vivid and powerful music to accompany the storyline. It was also one of the first of four operas about heroic Russian women. Lady Macbeth achieved extreme popularity within only two years of the premiere. Shostakovich even complained of how tired he was of the anxieties of success. In January of 1936, a delegation of Soviet officials, including Joseph Stalin, attended the opera. It was reported that they walked out before the final act began, although there is no evidence as to what part of the opera upset Stalin. After Stalin's walk out of the opera, the article “Muddle Instead of Music” was published, claiming the reason that the opera was so awful and that Stalin walked out was solely because of the music, a direct hit at Shostakovich. This resulted in people attacking Shostakovich’s music in many ways. Even his ballet, The Limpid Stream, was also attacked. Prior to Stalin’s reaction, this ballet was well-attended and well-received.
Not only were audience reception and critical reception on the line for Shostakovich, but his friendships as well. He lost much support as friends began to distance themselves from him, in fear for their lives, although Glickman, a Soviet literary critic, continued their lifelong friendship. Shostakovich was also supported by Shebalin, a close friend of Shostakovich who was also a composer in Moscow and Sollertinsky, another close friend of Shostakovich, who was a musicologist and critic in Leningrad, although the rest of Moscow criticized, purged, disciplined, and scolded him. Shebalin was also persecuted, and his music was no longer being performed, forcing him to live in great poverty until the war began. Fear was effectively testing people's loyalty to Shostakovich. Former admirers of Lady Macbeth now criticized the work in their publications, likely out of fear. Wilson writes, “Shostakovich was deeply wounded but he retained dignity and composure, not seeking support or sympathy from anyone.” It was during this time that Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 4 was already close to completion, and he had even made outlines to his Symphony No. 5. In a letter described by Elizabeth Wilson, Shostakovich writes, “Even if they chop my hands off, I will still continue to compose music – albeit I have to hold the pen in my teeth.”
Shostakovich’s Fourth Symphony was practically a recipe for preserving his own sanity with the ongoing disputes of Lady Macbeth. This was a large work dedicated to his wife, Nina. It was completed in 1936, but the work was withdrawn in one of its final rehearsals. During their rehearsal, it was determined that the orchestra didn't understand the music and it was too dangerous to be performed, potentially being the final demolishing factor of Shostakovich. Shostakovich embraced urban popular idioms in opposition to the desired light music. Shostakovich was writing during the time where Stalin wanted Soviet composers to write music that was joyful and optimistic. Stalin wanted light music, which were short, noncomplex, orchestral pieces that could appeal to a wider context and wider audience (no symphonies or concertos). These examples are presented later in my research. Western Jazz elements, such as syncopated rhythms, polyphony, improvisation, instrumental timbres, and emphasis on the ands of beats two and four were also strongly discouraged.
Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 4 was an hour-long symphony that called for 125 musicians. He was already taking a risk with the symphonic nature of his composition and requiring such a vast number of musicians. The First movement ends written morendo, which means dying away, strongly against Stalin’s desire for a joyful piece of light music. There are relentless march beats and sudden gallops which build to loud tragedy. The end of the final movement fades down to a heartbeat pulse from the timpani and two harps, while the strings play another morendo into an endless C minor chord. Shostakovich did the opposite of what Stalin wanted by expressing the terror, fear, and frustration of living in Stalinist Russia.
The beginning of the First movement begins with the brass playing con sordino (a muted instrumental timbre that was discouraged) and the strings as well at Rehearsal 38.
Brass opening
Rehearsal 38: Strings
There is also a lot of pizzicato, another instrumental timbre, throughout the First movement, especially at Rehearsal 55.
Rehearsal 55: pizzicato
Rehearsal 16 presents immense complexity throughout all the instruments with runs of chromatic 16th notes. This complexity defeats the aspects of Stalin’s desire for light music and shows a section that is highly rhythmic, dissonant, and presents itself in a manic way, as seen and heard in most of the Symphony.
Rehearsal 16: Complex instrumental writing
Five measures after Rehearsal 72, the woodwinds and strings have slurred notes and rhythms that particularly emphasize the ands of both beats two and four.
Rehearsal 72: emphasis on and of beats two and four
It is important to note that some of Shostakovich’s musical elements were following what Stalin wanted. These factors tie into how Shostakovich built his safety net. In Rehearsal One, the strings are in unison with the main melody. Shostakovich uses homophony quite often to avoid too much polyphony. This also occurs in Rehearsal Three, Twenty-Four, and Thirty.
Rehearsal 30
Years later this Symphony was performed, and the score was very complex. The decision to withdraw its performance in 1936 was an act of casting his safety net for future risky publications.
Jewish Folk Poetry:
An example of Shostakovich’s safety net are his elements in Jewish Folk Poetry and his discreet performances. Shostakovich wrote his Jewish Folk Poetry about Solomon Mikhoels death, the chairman of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee during World War II. As Stalin pursued his anti-Semitic beliefs, Mikhoels leadership position resulted in his assassination, which was ordered by Stalin. Shostakovich had an interest in Jewish Folk Poetry before Stalin’s antisemitic campaign. He used Jewish themes in his Violin Concerto No. 1 and Piano Trio No. 2, Finale. Shostakovich wasn’t the only composer who enjoyed Jewish elements in his music. Mussorgsky was another Russian blood turning to Jewish themes. This is important to recognize that Shostakovich was not the only composer of this time who expressed an interest in Jewish themes because it shows that Shostakovich wasn’t the only Russian composer taking risks in his music and composing what he found pleasurable. He was known for his Russian identity, similarly to Shostakovich and his fame, yet Mussorgsky still turned to elements that he loved.
Shostakovich writes his Jewish Folk Poetry in B minor with major inclinations in-between. The first Jewish element he uses are high leaps as a wail lament about a child’s death. In the first example he leaps a minor 3rd, which further evokes the sadness and despair. In the second example he leaps a 4th to a high G on a sudden fortissimo in the 7th movement.
1st movement
7th movement
The beginning of the 3rd movement uses the traditional Jewish accompaniment, oom-pah, in the left hand.
3rd movement traditional Jewish accompaniment
Shostakovich also uses non-western scales with an augmented 2nd (commonly Phrygian with raised 4).
Non-western scale example.
This piece was unacceptable during its time of completion in 1948 for this to be performed with the historic decree. Jewish Folk Poetry wasn’t approved by the union of composers and was further banned from public performance but commonly played in musicians’ homes. Shostakovich was able to compose such a risky piece in Soviet Russia by hiding it, only enabling its performance in safe spaces. These hidden drawer pieces of the time could have cost Shostakovich his life but having control over the performance space tightly knotted his safety net.
What kept Shostakovich safe?
After an in-depth analysis of Symphony No. 4 and Jewish Folk Poetry, the question is raised: Why was Shostakovich not executed for this? What pieces saved him? An unknown Soviet musicologist writes that Shostakovich was special as a composer because he could thoroughly emphasize the emotions of the direct experience he was writing about. He goes on about Shostakovich’s 11th Symphony and the suspicions about it relating to Bloody Sunday, writing, “We knew what it meant…assembling in a concert hall and listening together to Shostakovich’s music gave an otherwise unavailable sense of solidarity in protest.” This compositional ability that Shostakovich possessed helped him to survive this time because he was well-respected for other works. Veteran Russian scholar Daniel Zhitomirsky writes that Jewish Folk Poetry was one of Shostakovich’s riskiest compositions considering the factors that this was published during the Black Year 1948, during the communist party’s “Resolution on Music,” and when antisemitism became official government policy. Shostakovich avoided dissention under Stalin by placing this piece in his “to the drawer” pile, that couldn’t be officially published yet, and therefore, Jewish Folk Poetry was only performed for Jews and artists.
On the other hand, Shostakovich's Second and Third symphonies demonstrated what Stalin wanted (light music). These were short, noncomplex, orchestral pieces that could appeal to a wider context and wider audience and were safely performed to the public. The Second and Third symphonies presented dense and linear counterpoint to appeal to a wider audience by means of simplicity. He wrote with free-flowing musical material and no thematic repetition or formal structure, which is why it was well received. His Second symphony was only 17 minutes in length, contributing to its appeal towards simplicity. By rehearsal 22, he demonstrates use of dense and linear counterpoint. There are various instruments playing, but only 3 voices come out. The piccolo, flute, and trombone are playing the same quarter/eighth triplet rhythm, the solo voice comes out in the horn, and the strings are playing the same consistent triplet rhythm. The section follows by a solo violin part, showing the simplicity and density of counterpoint in this Symphony.
Symphony No. 2, Rehearsal 22
Shostakovich also uses this dense and linear counterpoint in his 3rd Symphony. With all these instruments/parts, there are only two voices that come across near Rehearsal 8.
Symphony No. 3, Rehearsal 8
Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 9 was published in 1945. It was composed at the end of the war. It was highly criticized as it was being compared to Beethoven’s “untouchable” 9th Symphony. He doesn’t write a great, large, 9th Symphony to signify the end of war, mostly because he feared a large work being compared to Beethoven’s 9th. It appears more silly and not patriotic enough to Stalin. These criticisms, however, are hidden under his prestige. An example of this “silly” and “unpatriotic elements” to his 9th Symphony are shown in the example below of the recurring piccolo solo.
To further combat any anger from Stalin or the Soviet Union with his other risky pieces, he publishes his Piano Trio No. 2 in 1946 and receives a Stalin prize, placing him back in the safety net of surviving composers. During the 1936 decree, Germans and Christians were the only ones safe under control by Hitler, but under Stalin, no one was safe. Any aspect of living could change in a moment. Shostakovich could have been killed at any moment, yet he continued writing and performing music, depicting the terror and fear of living in Soviet Russia.
Annotated Bibliography
Brown, Malcolm Hamrick. Russian and Soviet music: Essays for Boris Schwarz. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1984.
Hamrick presents 16 different essays from the writings of Schwarz. This entire book spans 19th and 20th century topics, but I focused on the Soviets avant-garde section. I focused on the four essays of Shostakovich. Laurel Fay writes about the performance and reception of Shostakovich’s first opera, The Nose. Primary sources are used here to prove these points. Brown describes his Lady Macbeth and writes his own speculations on how Shostakovich’s use of overt sexual imagery and without dissonant musical idioms, caused Stalin’s walkout and its suppression in 1936. Braun also talks about Shostakovich’s Jewish Folk Poetry about Shostakovich’s individual musical style and political implications. The four essays regarding Shostakovich in this book were very helpful to my research because they talked about perception of Shostakovich’s music and referred to his Lady Macbeth and Jewish Folk Poetry that I was using as primary sources in my paper.
Fay, Laurel. A Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Laurel Fay writes this biography to show what Shostakovich’s career was like under the Soviet Union. She proves her points and arguments by referring to letters written by Shostakovich, newspaper articles, concert programs, and reviews. She talks about each of the five times that Shostakovich won a Stalin prize and how that helped build his prestige. She also talks about how Shostakovich censored himself for safety, using his Jewish Folk Poetry as evidence. This source was relevant to my paper because Laurel Fay talked about many of the pieces I was referring to and was highly focused on how after such negative reviews of Shostakovich he remained alive because of his prestige and censorization, which is a main point of my paper.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Jewish Folk Poetry. New York City: Schirmer, 1948.
Jewish Folk Poetry was one of Shostakovich’s riskiest compositions as said by Veteran Russian scholar Daniel Zhitomirsky. I use this source as an example next to Symphony No. 4 to show elements of music that were banned in Soviet Russia that Shostakovich sneaked in as his support for freedom for the Jewish people and composers. I also provide highlighted musical examples to support these ideas. I explain how Shostakovich got away with writing a piece with Jewish elements based on his “music for the drawer” pile, and in which settings these pieces could be performed.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Lady Macbeth. Leningrad: Maly Operny, 1934.
I use Lady Macbeth as an example of Stalin’s power over Soviet Russia. I emphasize the popularity that Lady McBeth had within its first two years of the premiere, and how that dramatically shifted after Stalin attended and walked out of the opera. I explain how this affected Shostakovich’s friendships, safety, caused the publication of nasty articles about him, and how his other works were attacked. I also reference other composers who supported Shostakovich and were living in great poverty, since their works could no longer be performed and how fear effectively tested people’s loyalty in Soviet Russia.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Piano Trio No. 2 in E minor. New York: Universal Music Company, 1944.
I reference Shostakovich’s Piano Trio No. 2 to show how criticisms Shostakovich received were hidden under his prestige. The publication of this piece further combated any anger from Stalin or the Soviet Union. He also received the Stalin prize, placing him back in the safety net of surviving composers. I use this piece as an example of how Shostakovich survived under Stalin in Soviet Russia, especially by winning the Stalin prize with this piece.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Symphony No. 2 in B Major. Berlin: Hans Sikorski, 2002.
Symphony No.2 demonstrates what Stalin wanted in terms of light music. This is a short, noncomplex, orchestral piece that appeals to a wider context and wider audience. I use this Symphony as an example of Shostakovich’s’ dense and linear counterpoint in 3 voices to fulfill Stalin’s demands.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Symphony No. 3 in Eb Major. Berlin: Hans Sikorski, 2002.
Symphony No.3 demonstrates what Stalin wanted in terms of light music. This is a short, noncomplex, orchestral piece that appeals to a wider context and wider audience. I use this Symphony as an example of Shostakovich’s’ dense and linear counterpoint in 2 voices to fulfill Stalin’s demands.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Symphony No. 4 in C minor. Winona: Hal Leonard, 1990.
Symphony No. 4 was a risky composition of Shostakovich’s that needed to be pulled at its final rehearsal for Shostakovich’s safety. I use this work as an example of dangerous music based on elements that Shostakovich used, such as, a long symphony, the number of musicians required, and the use of western jazz elements, such as, syncopated rhythms, polyphony, improvisation, instrumental, timbres, and emphasis on the ends of beats two and four. I provide musical examples with these sections highlighted to emphasize how risky this composition was for Shostakovich. This helps me further elaborate to my next point of how Shostakovich created works as a safety net, preventing dissension under Stalin.
Shostakovich, Dmitri. Symphony No. 9 in Eb Major. Santa Monica, California: Universal Music Publishing Group, 1945.
I reference Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 9 as another example of a risky piece, being composed at the end of war and facing the expectations to live up to Beethoven’s “untouchable” 9th Symphony. Since he didn’t write a great, large 9th Symphony to signify the end of war, it was highly criticized. I use a clip of the piccolo solo to show the silliness and unpatriotic ideas this Symphony portrayed. This piece is a great example of how these criticisms were hidden under his prestige and leads me into the example of his Piano Trio No. 2, winning the Stalin prize.
Taruskin, Richard. Defining Russia musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021.
Taruskins goal of this writing is to define Russian National Identity and prove his ideas by combining music with history and politics, as well as arguing how it’s been constructed from the Russian and Western perspective. Taruskin talks about the assumption of otherness and refers to operas, symphonies, and ballets that were products of the Soviet period. He writes about Shostakovich and how his music was so special that people could easily feel the emotions he intended and relate it to the exact experience his piece was written about. He refers to the 11th Symphony about Bloody Sunday for his support. He argues that the compositional ability that Shostakovich possessed helped him to survive this time because he was well-respected for other works, which I mention, such as Symphony No. 2., Symphony No. 3., and his Piano Trio No. 2. This source helped support my paper because it helped me respond to the second half of my research question of how Shostakovich survived writing music under Stalin, even after writing his dangerous compositions.
Taruskin, Richard. Public Lies and Unspeakable Truth: Interpreting Shostakovich’s Fifth Symphony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995; pp. 1756.
Taruskin writes about the Stalin in a romantic and heroic fashion. He talks about how the five-year plan changed the country in terms of political and economic violence to show that Shostakovich had been through a great deal and how these factors influenced his ability to write music. He proves his points by referring to history and making connections as well as analyzing Shostakovich’s Fifth Symphony. Although I don't use Shostakovich’s Fifth Symphony in my paper, his writings about the political and economic violence helped influence the beginning of my paper and helped me to be able to make connections to how Shostakovich survived writing music in Soviet Russia.
Wilson, Elizabeth. Shostakovich: A life remembered. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011.
Elizabeth Wilson talks about Shostakovich’s early successes, struggles under the Stalinist regime, and how he was recognized internationally in the 20th century. She writes about his compositional processes and how he was perceived by the people around him. Elizabeth Wilson brings us into Shostakovich’s private life and how that influenced his public image. She proves her points by referring to quotations from Shostakovich’s contemporaries as well as using direct writings and quotes from Shostakovich. This source supported my paper by helping me respond to my entire research question and how Shostakovich wrote his risky compositions as well as surviving how they were perceived. I also was able to investigate how Shostakovich was thinking and feeling during these times based on his writings. I use this source to refer to the perception of Lady Macbeth and Shostakovich’s thoughts towards these reactions, as well as his response to cancelling the premiere of his Fourth Symphony.
Comments