Shostakovich: which one is your favourite amongst his works?

[ahinton]

For the avoidance of doubt, you are saying that it is worth reading (as you have done), aren't you?

For the avoidance of doubt, no! - not even for any very momentary entertainment value that it might offer! That it was published as far back as 1933 (although reprinted more than once thereafter) put it in historical context and that it has a foreword by Sir Walford Davies might be seen as implying a kind of antediluvian and myopic attitude, but the book's title is its real giveaway.

[visualnickmos]

It's impossible to say a favourite; I like it all. but yesterday I trawled out a vinyl box set of the symphonies; Eurodisc/Melodiya, with various Soviet orchestras and Russian conductors, but WOW! The 15th conducted by Maxim S. is stunning, amazing, real "blow yer socks off" stuff. And the quality of the recording is a marvel to behold (as all in the set are) especially when one considers the general hit-and-miss nature of Soviet-era recordings.

One of my all-time greats, this whole set.

[kea]

If I had to pick a favourite? Not hard. Waltz No. 2 from the Suite for Jazz Orchestra. (Possibly not under that name, but you know this piece, believe me.)

I should explain I suppose. I have listened to a lot of Shostakovich over the years: most of the symphonies (only 2 and 3 still remain unheard), all of the string quartets, concerti, and piano music, most of the remaining chamber music, and some of The Nose, along with selections from film and ballet scores. My conclusion from all of this listening was that Shostakovich was a musical genius of exceptional fluency, who never quite grew up. His music holds a certain fascination for me, but nonetheless I find most of it—including some quite celebrated pieces—to be trivial, crude, manipulative, repetitive and often written quite thoughtlessly with very little revision if any. Long stretches of his works feel like first drafts or hackwork—"marking time" until he gets to the bit he really wanted to write—and while Shostakovich's first drafts and hackwork may be the inspiration of many a lesser Soviet composer, he was clearly capable of better, but perhaps too frightened or insecure to actually try most of the time, and didn't seem to have much of a talent for self-criticism. (From what I've read he seems to have been one of those perennially depressed "everything I do is rubbish" composers, of whom I've known several; such a perspective doesn't lend itself well to objective insights into one's own work, and most of the people that surrounded him were either uncritically adulatory or critical on political rather than artistic grounds which can't have helped.)

Nevertheless, Shostakovich definitely has his moments. While the harmonic/melodic world of his music is pretty formulaic and causes a lot of pieces and themes to sound more or less similar to one another (major and minor triads whose roots are a semitone apart... diminished fourths and fifths... octatonic scale fragments... intentionally over-emphasizing the third scale degree...), Shostakovich can write a cracking tune when he puts in the effort, one that may not necessarily be "hummable" in the populist way but which suits the character of the music so naturally that it seems hard to imagine a note being changed. (For example, the main "tune" of the Thirteenth Quartet or that delightful waltz in, I think, the first movement of the First Symphony, which are as great as melodies in their own way as is e.g. the slow movement of the Second Piano Concerto.) He was without a doubt one of the greatest composers of """light""" music—I would rate him just below Chaikovsky, Berlin and Johann Strauss in that category, and above Poulenc or John Williams, though some may obviously disagree. And while triviality, manipulation, crudity, banality, etc, may seem like negative attributes to apply to serious music, Shostakovich occasionally manages to turn these to his advantage, generally in order to produce music of an unsettled (and unsettling) nature evoking the sort of neverending, soul-eroding, constant-glances-over-one's-shoulder existence in Soviet Russia. First among these works that benefit most from the bleakness, repetitiveness, greyness of Shostakovich's "serious" moods I would place the 14th Symphony—at least when the singers attack the notes with great crispness and clarity of pitch, and use little vibrato—along with numerous passages in other late works (e.g. the ending of the 15th symphony, parts of the 11th, several movements of the 15th quartet, etc), and a cluster of works written around the Second World War of which the ones I listen to most often are the Second Piano Trio and Third Quartet. There are also some other individual movements, some of which have already been singled out for praise (e.g. the very non-humorous scherzo of the Tenth Symphony and its relation to one of Shostakovich's idées fixes, the "forced rejoicing" scene from the start of Boris Godunov)

Of course Shostakovich also wrote some music that I do not find to have these qualities to such a degree or even at all. The Second Quartet is an example, as are parts of the Fourth Symphony (not a work I find very unified or convincing as a whole, but with some very striking passages), the Piano Sonata No. 1, and some of the Preludes Op. 34. (The more highly celebrated Preludes and Fugues have never done much for me. Actually, that's a lie. The fugues annoy me, with their unceasing uniformity, paucity of contrapuntal invention and harmonic arbitrariness. But they've never done much positively for me. >.>) Probably more that aren't coming to mind right away. I would probably enjoy more of the songs, but I haven't heard any of them to date. Ultimately though... Waltz 2. His light music is full of waltzes, lots of them similarly catchy and melodious, yet somehow Waltz 2 reaches a new level of catchiness that makes all the others fade into the background, without being noticeably different from any of them. It has that quality of the inexplicable that we usually ascribe to genius. It's the kind of piece that transcends genre or style boundaries, and I expect it will show up in a thousand years as a folk song with the music ascribed to Trad. or Anon. along with Brahms's Lullaby, the Ode to Joy and the Blue Danube. If we've not gone extinct by then.

[Nick Armstrong]

Interesting and challenging post, kea - my avatar seems particularly apt by way of response! And welcome! to the Forum by the way. I agree with some of what you say, know what you mean by some, and disagree with some - but that's not the point. Thanks for crafting a thought-provoking reaction to the DSCH oeuvre

[BBMmk2]

Seconded, Cali! If there were a prize, on this forum for best first post, I think this would be a strong contender. So detailed and well thought out, thank you Kea. I think we have another JLW here!!

[teamsaint]

Splendid first post indeed Kea. Welcome, and keep it up !!

I find the apparent or actual banalities in DSCH a source of endless intrigue.

He really is one of those composers that one could spend a lifetime studying.

Incidentally, does anybody have the new Ashkenazy "Stepan Razin" disc?

[Stanfordian]

Hello KIa,

You say: (major and minor triads whose roots are a semitone apart... diminished fourths and fifths... octatonic scale fragments... intentionally over-emphasizing the third scale degree...),

I cannot understsand a word of the above.

[kea]

I'm glad you were able to find some sense in that post—I'm still not sure about it. I'm not sure I have a coherent or logically consistent view of Shostakovich, when it comes down to it—for a composer I don't seem to like, I've listened to a lot of his music, much more than some composers I like quite a bit, and I criticise him for relying too much on formulas when one of those formula pieces (the Third Quartet, which even some Shostakovichians have considered too "stereotypical") ranks quite high on my list. And I do have a bad habit of stating value judgments as facts so I should emphasize that all my value judgments are, in fact, value judgments and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Thanks for the welcomes I suppose—I imagine some of you may have seen me around as amw (formerly dyn) on r3ok/AMF/the wretched hive of scum and villainy sometimes referred to as GMG. In all honesty the only Radio 3 programme I have much interest in is Hear and Now, but I do like music in general, so hopefully won't be thrown out for that :'(

Interesting and challenging post, kea - my avatar seems particularly apt by way of response!

I'm not so good with face recognition... is that DSCH smiling? No wonder he always looks so grouchy in official photos—his smile is creepy! :o :D

Hello KIa,

You say: (major and minor triads whose roots are a semitone apart... diminished fourths and fifths... octatonic scale fragments... intentionally over-emphasizing the third scale degree...),

I cannot understsand a word of the above.

I imagine you do understand, however, that Shostakovich sounds like himself—if you hear some of his music on the radio you can figure out it's Shostakovich pretty quickly rather than (e.g.) Schoenberg, Sibelius, Stravinsky or Schumann. Those terms are just some of the ones musicians use to explain some of the Shostakovich "fingerprints", things he does that identify him to an alert listener. If you don't know music theory probably best to just skip over them.

[Roehre]

..... In all honesty the only Radio 3 programme I have much interest in is Hear and Now, but I do like music in general, so hopefully won't be thrown out for that :'(

and welcome back (though I sometimes find quite interesting items in other programs, like TtN, CotW, EMS [or what is left of it...], and some of the Afternoon on 3 and the Evening concerts consist of more interesting music than the eternal war horses or the bleeding trunks elsewhere).

[Beef Oven!]

No wonder he always looks so grouchy in official photos—his smile is creepy! :o :D

That photo doesn't show what he's doing. That could be a shot of his 'SFBF'. The smile is all about context.

[Nick Armstrong]

I'm not so good with face recognition... is that DSCH smiling? No wonder he always looks so grouchy in official photos—his smile is creepy! :o :D

Just a trifle.... lopsided perhaps...



I've reverted to an earlier avatar with slightly more natural smile...

(Beefy: would love to know what 'SFBF' is... )

[Sir Velo]

I didnt know Dimi knew Sid James....

[Stanfordian]

Hello Kea, Thank you that is much clearer.

Clearly you can choose whatever you want but I admit to being surprised that out of the many hours of Shostakovich’s wonderful music you select the Waltz No. 2 from the Jazz Suite. It's certainly a fine work but not one generally considered to be one of his most serious; possibly a middle-of-the-road piece.

That reminded me that a few years ago I had been watching Gianandrea Noseda rehearsing Shostakovich with the BBC Philharmonic at the BBC Studio 7 in Manchester. After the rehearsal I said to Gianandrea that I had especially enjoyed one of the Shostakovich film scores (I think it was King Lear) that he had been conducting. He couldn’t understand why I had singled out the film score for special praise instead of one of the great Shostakovich symphonies that he had also been rehearsing.

[ahinton]

A thought-provoking post indeed, Kea - for which many thanks - and I broadly endorse Caliban's response to it. I do not understand your choice of favourite at all but, whilst that's not the only point on whichI'd find mysle fin disagreement or less than full agreement with you, you make some interesting points. As to those "fingerprints", surely Stravinsky has several and Sibelius likewise? I know what you mean about DDS's, though. Nearly four decades since his untimely death, he really does still inspire controversy, enthusiasm and ample conversational cross-currents of all kinds!

What do you make of the Sixth Symphony? (a work which, until relatively recently, tended all too often to be somewhat overlooked)...

[Stanfordian]

Just a trifle.... lopsided perhaps...



I've reverted to an earlier avatar with slightly more natural smile...

(Beefy: would love to know what 'SFBF' is... )

It certainly looks as if Britten has Shostakovich by the b**ls but I'm unsure if the Russian is liking it or not.