From: s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA])
Subject: Shost's 4th Symphony (SNO/Jarvi on Chandos) FULL DETAILS FROM THE CD
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:14:58 EST


        DMITRI SHOSTAKOVICH (1906-1975)
        
        Symphony No. 4 in C minor Op.43 (1936)
        
          I - Allegretto poco mederato - Presto (27:28)
         II - Moderato con moto (8:55)
        III - Largo - Allegro (24:44)
        
        DDD 
        
        Total Timing = 61:20
        
        SCOTTISH NATIONAL ORCHESTRA
        Leader, Edwin Paling
        
        NEEME JARVI, Conductor
        
        (CHAN 8640)  
        
        * A Chandos Digital Recording
        * Recording Producer: Brian Couzens
        * Sound Engineer: Ralph Couzens
        * Assistant Engineer: Ben Connellan
        * Editor: Tim Oldham
        * Recorded in the City Hall, Glasgow on 5-9 Feburary 1989
        
        
        
             In  his twenties, Shostakovick tried to reflect Soviet  life 
        and matters of the moment in his music. The revolution, which had 
        his  wholehearted  support, was the major theme  and  his  Second 
        Symphony,   the  October,  (1927)  was  written  for  the   tenth 
        anniversary  of  the  Revolution  when he was  only  21.  It  was 
        simultaneously premiered in four Russian cities and was at  first 
        enormously  popular  in  the Soviet Union.  The  Third  Sympohony 
        (1929),  the  May  Day, is very much the  musical  equivalent  of 
        poster  art:  garish  colours,  overstated  and  relentless,  yet 
        effective and utterlky sincere. But it was much less  successful, 
        for  already the first tremors of the approaching stormclouds  of 
        "Socialist Realism" were beginning to form.
             The  work  that confirmed Shostakovich's stature  with  both 
        Russian and international audiences was the opera Lady Macbeth of 
        Mtsensk,  which was produced in January 1934 and quickly  notched 
        up 200 performances. Its popularity continued in the USSR but  it 
        was  eventually to be Shostakovich's undoing, and indirectly  the 
        undoing of the Fourth Symphony.
             Up to the mid-1930s Shostakovich was essentially a  composer 
        for  the  theatre  and  for the  cinema,  writing  against  tight 
        deadlines  and in an idiom which contrasted extremes  of  emotion 
        and  often  resorted  to  the  bizarre  and  the  grotesque,  but 
        nevertheless   was  capable  of  simple  affecting  melody   when 
        required.  His Second and Third Symphonies were  written  against 
        this  background: they were both fevently  dramatic  illustrative 
        pieces of the moment. No one, least of all the composer  himself, 
        could  have  imagined that he would become known as  one  of  the 
        century's major symphonists.
             The   Fourth   Symphony  is  the  turning  point   in   this 
        development, a divide signalled by two totally different factors. 
        The first is Shostakovich's discovery of the composer Mahler  and 
        his reaction to this influence. While the Fourth Symphony in many 
        ways  grows  from  what  he had done  in  the  Second  and  Third 
        Symphonies, it was also informed by the "symphonic" character  of 
        the  opera Lady Macbeth. (indeed the interludes from that  opera, 
        themselves, make a concert work which bears comparison with these 
        early symphonies.)
             The  second  factor  which bears on the  importance  of  the 
        Fourth  Symphony  in Shostakovich's output was  an  ominous  one: 
        Shostakovich's  condemnation  in  an editorial  in  Pravda  after 
        Stalin  had  attended a performance of Lady  Macbeth  in  January 
        1936. The dogma of socialist realism was quickly promulgated, and 
        it was a time of real danger for Shostakovich, who was still only 
        30  and used to being in the forefront of artistic  developments. 
        He  suppressed the opera and his ballet Bright Stream,  and  much 
        later  the  Fourth Symphony, which was to remain unheard  for  25 
        years.
             As  early as March 1936 the British press could report  that 
        "Shostakovich has, indeed, incurred the displeasure of the rulers 
        of Russia". In the Shostakovich file in the BBC written  archives 
        there  is an exchange of telegrams from the Summer of 1937  which 
        very  muchg  gives  the  flavour of  the  times.  The  Australian 
        Broadcasting   commission  asks  for  exact   information   about 
        Shostakovich's official standing in Russia asking if his music is 
        banned.  The  BBC  replied "believed  again  persona  grata  with 
        authorities subject to good musical behaviour".
             In  an  article  published  in  November  1934  Shostakovich 
        revealed that he had already composed part of the first  movement 
        of  the Fourth Symphony, but had put it aside for the moment.  In 
        Spring  1935  he  participated in a colloquium  on  the  symphony 
        organised  by the Union of Soviet Composers, and soon  afterwards 
        announced he was again working on his Fourth Symphony which would 
        be  his "composers credo". But it was only in the Autumn that  he 
        set  to  work  in earnest and completed  it  the  following  May. 
        Writing  in  May 1935 he had remarked that  "both  formalism  and 
        eclectism  are the worst enemies of Soviet musical culture",  yet 
        by  the time the symphony was completed he had been condemned  on 
        both  counts. It is probable that the dark and ultimately  tragic 
        third movement was composed after his fall from grace.
             The  Symphony went into rehearsal for its first  performance 
        in  December.  That performance never  took  place.  Shostakovich 
        withdrew the work, and less than a year later reappeared with his 
        Fifth  to mark the twentieth anniversary of the revolution,  with 
        it's well-known tag "A Soviet Artist's Reply to just  Criticism". 
        It had a popular success, and Shostakovich succeeded in regaining 
        his official standing. The Fourth Symphony remained unheard until 
        December  1961 when the first performance took place  in  Moscow, 
        and  it was first heard in the west at the Edinburgh Festival  in 
        1962  and  in London at a Promenade Concert in July 1963.  It  is 
        remarkable that so substantial a score by a major composer should 
        have bee suppressed for so long.
             Shostakovich   writes  for  a  huge   orchestra,   including 
        quadrupal  wind, with, additionally, 2 piccolos, E flat and  bass 
        clarinets;  expanded  brass - with 8 horns and two  tubas  -  and 
        extras  which  include two harps and substantial parts  for  both 
        xylophone  and  celesta. Because of its scale, the  listener  may 
        best  approach the first movement as a succession of  contrasting 
        musical images, and if Shostakovich had given the work some title 
        such  as  "Scenes from the Revolution" we should  doubtless  have 
        little diffulty in accepting his programme. There is no programme 
        other  than our deduction that it represents a  subjective  inner 
        world in turmoil.
             The  music is placed about three huge climaxes, one each  at 
        the  beginning, middle and end. The tormented opening  orchestral 
        screams give us an idea of its composer's state of mind, and this 
        presages  a typical grimly marching rythm which  accompanies  the 
        first  theme  on the brass. This theme is  eventually  tamed  and 
        becomes  a  burlesquing  idea on piccolo  and  E  flat  clarinet. 
        However  the  fool is most often played by solo assoonm  in  this 
        movement always ambivolent between sorrow and ridicule. The brass 
        theme   continues  to  attempt  a  return  only  to   fail.   (In 
        Shostakovich's music it finally succeeds in more civilised  guise 
        in  the finale of the Fifth Symphony.) The  contrasting  episodes 
        not only include the extremes of range of various instruments but 
        also, for example, a contrasting romantic string line which later 
        becomes  a  phantom waltz. In mid-movement the  strings  suddenly 
        launch  into  a  presto unison on the violins  which  becomes  an 
        amazing fugue entirely with running quavers. A frightening series 
        of eight progressively louder detached chords on muted brass  and 
        timpani  has  the  force of the three great "blows  of  fate"  in 
        Mahler's  Sixth Symphony without actually ressurecting the  first 
        theme  which appears to be their objective. The music now  sweeps 
        on into the closing section with an extended cor anglais solo,  a 
        solo violin and two final cries of protest punctuating the uneasy 
        mood.
             Compared  to  the  turbulence of the  first  movement,  what 
        follows,  with  its  passages for just strings  or  woodwind  and 
        calling  for  the  heavy  brass only at  the  climaxes,  has  the 
        character of a genial scherzo. The effect is not too far  removed 
        from the landler movement in Mahler's symphonies, Two basic ideas 
        are presented alternatively: the opening music by violas followed 
        by an idea which may be recognised as the germ of the first  idea 
        in the subsequyent Fifth Symphony. At the end, the muted violins' 
        demi-semiquavers flicker into silence accompanied by a  pattering 
        of percussion, harp and pizzacato basses, a clicking effect  that 
        he was to use again in his last symphony 35 years later.
             We  do not have individual dates for the composition of  the 
        movements  of this work, but the solemn tread of a funeral  march 
        with  which  the finale opens surely post-dates the  terror  that 
        Shostakovich  must have felt on being denounced as  a  formalist. 
        Yet  this is actually a fast movement, and soon the main  allegro 
        is launched, working up to a climax with his often-used technique 
        of  constant  repetition  of a simple figure, yet  on  the  whole 
        creating a positive and optimistic mood. This suddenly gives  way 
        to what is in effect and extended interpiated interlude: a  naive 
        series  of dance movements, that might have strayed from  one  of 
        his  theatre  scores  or ballets, and  includes  many  delightful 
        ideas, such as a waltz, Five separate movements can be  discerned 
        though  they  are  not  marked in the  score,  and  this  is  all 
        developed  over so long a span for the listener to believe it  is 
        now  the main matter of the music. But all too soon, two  timpani 
        disrupt  the music, shattering the peaceful atmosphere, and in  a 
        remarkable coup de theatre plunge us back into the funeral march. 
        Finally  in  hushed  coda the muted strings  and  quiet  woodwind 
        sustain  a tonic chord of C major over a long timespan while  odd 
        fragments  are  heard from timpani, celesta, muted  trumped:  the 
        effect  is of inconsoloble tragedy. In all life there  is  death, 
        and never more so than in the Soviet Union of 1936.
        
        (c) 1989 Lewis Foreman

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard A. Muirden, System Administator, Wesley College :)
E-Mail: ram@lionet.wesley.OZ.AU, s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU, ram@tintern1.?? 
----------------- Fanatic of Shostakovich and "Star Trek" ---------------------