ia_2010_julie_d

=D. Analysis (500-650 words) Tips]=

I)  ** Historical Significance ** The historical significance of the life of the composer Dmitri Shostakovich is obvious in that his livelihood and actions depended on the totalitarian dictator, Josef Stalin. We can see how Stalin not only ruled the masses with an iron fist but also the intelligentsia who were building Russian culture of the time. However, it is even more important and historically significant to consider the music of Shostakovich, created in order to find a balance between promoting Stalin’s rule and revealing the hardships faced by the people due to said rule. Perhaps now, the importance of this topic has increased due to the recent ‘re-Stalinisation’ of the Moscow metro station and the endorsement of a manual for history teachers portraying Stalin ‘as an effective crisis manager who industrialised the Soviet Union and led it to victory against Hitler.’   [1]. This ‘re-Stalinisation’ has been fought for particularly by Stalin’s grandson as well as being somewhat endorsed by the Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin

//II) // ** Analysis ** The evidence that Shostakovich was successful in telling modern audiences about circumstances under Josef Stalin’s Rule is shown through looking at the individual works, most notably, the war symphonies. For example, although it is written at times when Stalin was telling the Russian masses   “Life has become better comrades, life had become merrier”   [3] , the Fourth symphony bears ferocious, tragic, grinding’[4]  //(Translation)// theme; this was Shostakovich trying to represent the “Nightmare of repression”[3a, film]. However, due to the criticism he had received after his opera Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk and the fear for his life he then experienced, he retracted this symphony, afraid of Stalin’s reaction. This shows us the extent to which Stalin had an impact on the culture in censoring the artists who were all terrified: //between 1934 and 1939////, Stalin’s purges// //it is estimated that over// //twelve million were killed, on top// //millions surviving in the forced labour camps or the thousands of politicians who// //were a threat or who// //had either been involved in the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917////.//

// The labour camps were well under way and the principle fear of all Russians by 1937 therefore Shostakovich subdued his inner feelings and wrote the Fifth Symphony with strong, happy themes at times when the second (industrial) Five-Year-Plan was ending and the third was commencing. The composer states: // ‘What happens in the Fifth. The rejoicing is forced, created under a threat…It’s as if someone was beating you…saying “your business is rejoicing”’  [5  ]. This symphony was crucial for his destiny after his opera and whilst the rejoicing was ‘forced’, the soviet opinion, the one that decided all, was that that Shostakovich had ‘seen the light’[6].

Just as Shostakovich hid his true feelings the in the Fifth, the Seventh Symphony, with its tragic, then aggressive tones, themes and motifs to demonstrate the effect of war Leningrad where after the German Invasion in 1941, water and sewage had been stopped and famine was raging; “My Seventh symphony is inspired by the tragic events of 1941, to our struggle against Fascism, to our future victory over the enemy and to my native city of Leningrad I dedicate this piece” [7] had said the composer. In ‘Testimony’, he links the tragedy of Leningrad directly to Russia’s dictator, ‘The Seventh … [is] not about Leningrad under siege, it’s about the Leningrad that Stalin destroyed and Hitler merely finished off’ [ 8]. Just as in the eighth where the tension within the music has assumed a more ‘vivid and tragic form’[9a – film], he writes of ‘totalitarianism and the pitiable human soul trying to hide from it’[ 9 ]. The only evidence showing the opposite opinion that Shostakovich was not successful in telling of Stalin’s rule is the perhaps rather cynical view that it is too difficult to read politics within music, Laurel Fay, the writer who famously disputed Volkov’s ‘Testimony’ has argued that his music is far more significant than his life, and that reading political situations from it reduces its artistic value. It could also be argued that Shostakovich never intended to give a negative interpretation of Stalin’s rule considering the fact that he joined the Communist Party in 1960 //III) // ** Different Interpretations ** The fact that he did join the communist party led many musicologists and writers to believe that he was merely a puppet for Josef Stalin. However there is more evidence to suggest that this was a result of political pressure, his son has said that ‘   the event reduced Shostakovich to tears ’[9b – Shostakovich reconsidered]. It is impossible to conclude clearly considering the supposed inaccuracy of ‘Testimony’, Memoirs which have been accredited by many friends of the composer. In my opinion, an accusation of cowardice on the behalf of the composer is nothing more than a gross exaggeration of fear which he had for his life.

Word Count: 778

[1] Kishkovsky, Sophia. 2009. Re-Stalinization of a Moscow Subway Station. The New York Times [internet] 27 August. Available at:< __http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/world/europe/28iht-moscow.html?emc=tnt&tntemail0=y__> [Accessed 4 October 2009] [2] Shostakovich Against Stalin: The War Symphonies. 2005[DVD]. Universal Music Operations. [3] Rappaport, Helen., 2000. Joseph Stalin: A Biographical Companion. ABC-CLIO Ltd. [4] Dermoncourt, Bertrand., 2006. Dimitri Chostakovich. Arles: Actes Sud. « Feroce, tragique, grincante » [5] Volkov Solomon., 1979. Testimony : The Memoirs of Shostakovich. Great Britain: Hamish Hamilton Ltd. //[6]// //Shostakovich Agains//t Stalin: The War Symphonies. 2005[DVD]. Universal Music Operations. [7] Shostakovich Against Stalin: The War Symphonies. 2005[DVD]. Universal Music Operations. [8] Volkov Solomon., 1979. Testimony : The Memoirs of Shostakovich. Great Britain: Hamish Hamilton Ltd. [9] Shostakovich Against Stalin: The War Symphonies. 2005[DVD]. Universal Music Operations.