By Waldemar Hille

First Symphony and was hailed everywhere as a
Of the highest artistic achievements of a young
a the young socialist republic when, unexpected-
ung struck. Pravda, the official Communist Party
» Wrote an editorial titled Confusion (or ‘“‘Muddle’’)
ra Music. The editorial was a strongly worded criti-
che ent dealing with Shostakovich’s opera ‘Lady
Metime. Mtsensk’’ (or ‘Katerina Ismailova,’’ as it was
i i Called). The opera had been playing for about
ic i Packed houses and general approval of the
Myself Cs in Soviet Russia and the European continent.
tit Ebnt oH and heard a San Francisco opera production
ive years ago (in Les Angeles at the Shrine audi-
nd it impossible to accept this article as a
Ik Critique. it was evidently written by someone not
mei mn the art of music, but nevertheless one deeply
eand a. the arts and their impact upon Soviet mo-
. ure generally. Scathing musical criticisms had,
oe before, but this was a Pravda editorial.
«bist of the article seemed to be to nip in the bud
ist, Wrong tendencies” in an admittedly highly gifted
RtLen; fore Continuing we should recall something else
iin said:
“Our 4
Bene: roustion has freed the artists from thé op-
oth ese all too prosaic (pre-socialist) conditions. It
€ Soviet State their protector and customer. But,
b fo »-We are Communists. We must not stand by idly
arms and let chaps develop at will. We must
Process . . . Art belongs to the people . . . It goes

Saying that in this sphere (of the arts) it is absolute- .

— to ensure larger scope for personal initiative
Nal inclinations, full play for thought and imagin-

~ 1 and content.”

tig Viet government evidently felt that at this time
» With the fascist German threat on their. borders,
ee organized terrorist gangs of fifth columnists
ould ae in the land, it was necessary to see that the
ale aaa to aid rather than possibly hinder pub-
and 1 “his was no time to “‘stand idly by with folded
at ae cuaos develop at will.” They were also cogni-
their own Soviet art critics, while swearing to the
ot realism, were praising this work of Shos-
tind 9 ch (in Pravda’s opinion) indulged in “‘the coars-
Roig Sralism and tickled the perverted taste of the
live an d urthermore, there was in this opera little of a
Be ulding quality.
. = Saeed and dialogue which followed was in-
ings oa and extensive and was carried on with many
SS Of ae the government and the composers’ col-
st fe and Leningrad. This was an unprece-
SS in any country and demonstrated how
ialist Vviets viewed the role of culture and the arts_
Or State.
ae. the relative silence of Shostakovich was a
in ij aod sense he was not really silent. He was
5 Quiet Ussions of his Leningrad Composers’ Collec-
), Probie, undramatic way to find constructive answers
Ald com <S that had been raised. Shostakovich contin-
H SAtisgi., | 114 did not present any of his works unless
idee, “* him as being a product worthy of his new
th Symmppeitment, With this in mind he discarded his
ldney jp, NY as being too gloomy.

-~ “Mkelstein, in his book Composer and Nation,
0
0 Und
')) ee this criticism (In Pravda — and its
= © remarkable leap in Soviet music it even-

Ne

tually helped to bring about, one must see that it wasn’t
what the West and its press made it out to be... ‘an un-
couth political interference with art,’ but it was part of a far-
reaching discussion of musical directions.”

He classifies these under three main headings:

1. To recapture the past classic heritage, and combat
the ‘‘modernist’’ narrowness of forms and technique.

2. To improve communication between composer and
the people. For this there was recommended the creation of
melodies, of human images which draw upon and are linked
to the common fund of the people’s culture.

3. With thesé conquests, the composer, as the agent
through which life itself could seem to have written his
works, should produce musical forms responsive to the real
world,. expressing the triumph of a new view of life and hu-
manity.

Finkelstein also finds some fault with the criticism,
which I basically agree with. For example, he holds that it
was a mistake to downgrade subjective feelings, such as a
sense of sorrow at the war dead, and to say they are synon-
ymous with bourgeois decadence. Also, there was the rather
mechanical classification of all experimental. music of the
West as decadent. There was a failure to‘see the trees for
the forest (to turn a metaphor). This however, has been
largely remedied, so that today all great artists who make

contributions to world humanism are honored by the Soviets.

It is impossible to deal with all of Dmitri Shostako-
vich’s life in this allotted space, but we must.say that the
presentation of his Fifth Symphony heralded a renewed ac-
clamation. By the time he came out with his Seventh, the
“Leningrad Symphony,” he was as much a national hero
and as well known internationally as Stalin or Timoshenko.
The ‘Leningrad’ was ‘‘program music’’ written about the
war, starting in the first movement with the peaceful life
before the assault, going into the fantastic nazi war theme,
and concluding with a lament for the dead. It was composed
under fire, written in bomb shelters, and its message
reached millions of people with its direct emotional appeal

Left: At Madison Square Garden, April 4, 1949.5
Below: A group of Soviet composers, iam
(I. to r.) Shostakovich, T. Khrennikov,
Aram Khachaturian, A. Novikov, D. Kabalevsky.

haron Carville

as ~~ as its dramatic and propagandistic-ideological im-
pact.

Perhaps the true greatness of a human being is his or
her ability to grow, to develop, to learn from experience
in life. And perhaps the same thing may be said of a nation
ora people. I say this in relation to the Soviet view and prac-
tice of culture. In this there was perhaps no one who con-
tributed more than Shostakovich. We may safely say that he
did for music in the young Sovie state what Maxim Gorky,
for example, did for literature. And what he did for the So-
viets he also did for us and the rest of humanity. His life and
work demonstrates on the one hand that no individual, or
individual work, should be regarded as sacrosanct, but must
be found to be relevant to its times, to society, and must
show an enlightened responsibility toward humanity.

As an epilogue, here are a few quotations from Shosta-
kovich’s pen:

“There can be no music without ideology.’’ (From an
interview with the New York Times. )

“The old composers, whether they knew it or not, were
upholding a political theory. Most of them of course were
bolstering the rule of the upper classes. Only Beethoven
was a forerunner of the revolutionary movement.’’ (Same
interview. )

“Not that Soviets are always joyous or supposed to be.
But good music lifts and heartens and lightens people for

work and effort . . . But I have almost never heard that any-

one has said that our Soviet symphony should simply give
pleasure (entertainment) .”’ (From a collection of essays. )

And, finally, a quotation from The Power of Music.

‘We decidedly stand for innovation, for the search for
new forms and for bold experimentation, but the goal must
by all means be a more perfect reflection of the new and
progressive in our life, which can no longer be expressed in
the old way. We must seek for means of expression that are
more forceful and striking than the old ones. We must ex-
periment without drifting away from life. We must seek
short-cuts to the heart of the people.”

international News Photo