
TISCHENKO: Yaroslavna, Op. 58 (1974). Symphony No. 3,
Op. 36 (1967).
Symphony Orchestra and Choir of Leningrad Maly (Mussorgsky) Opera and Ballet
Theater/Alexander Dmitriev; Kirov Opera and Ballet Chamber Orchestra/Igor
Blazhkov.
Northern Flowers NF/PMA 9931/9932 (2 disks) (F) (DDD) TT: 120:57
BUY
NOW FROM ARKIVMUSIC
Socialist Realism goes trendy. Russian composers under the Soviet czars
generally found themselves in awkward and even dangerous situations. They
were largely cut off from Western Modernism, except for brief periods of "thaw." For
the hacks, this posed little hardship. Nevertheless, any risk
seemed to involve considerable political risk. The infamous Zhdanov decree
denounced
the greatest artists in the country, including Prokofiev, Shostakovich,
and Khachaturian. Weinberg's father-in-law was murdered by the secret police.
Khrennikov continued the idiocy against such lights as Gubaidulina, Denisov,
Firsova, and Suslin. The government committed all of this in the name of
Socialist Realism, a doctrine so ill-defined, one never knew whether one
had violated its tenets until after the fact. It was less an aesthetic
principle than a political tool. Despite the tons of blather dumped in
the Soviet press, the only consistent point remains that music should be
based on popular or folklorist sources. Even then, a party lickspittle
could get into trouble simply by picking the "wrong" subject,
as happened to one Vano Muradeli sent into a twenty-year internal exile
for writing an opera about Stalin's "Greatest Friend," Grigoriy
Ordzhonikidze. According to Galina Vishnevskaya, the poor schnook had no
idea that Stalin had liquidated the GF and didn't like reminders of the
fact.
Composers reacted to the situation in various ways. Some wrote mainly for
themselves, with no hope for publication. Others did their own thing and
damn the consequences: they usually wound up in internal exile or absolutely
denied musical work. Some, like Prokofiev and Shostakovich, tried to walk
the tightrope, stumbling occasionally, but hoping for "rehabilitation." Most
wrote as best they could to the expectations of their employers and held
their breaths.
Boris Tischenko (born 1939) studied with, among others, Galina Ustvolskaya
and Shostakovich. The latter held him in some esteem. You can hear late
Shostakovich, Ustvolskaya, and even Prokofiev in Tischenko's work. However,
there's a strong folklore base. Nevertheless, Tischenko's incorporation
of Western devices and techniques from the Sixties and Seventies interests
me the most. It's usually "extra" or a surface jolt on an essentially
conservative idiom, like a Rolling Stones logo pinned to a tux or the white
adult who appropriates hip-hop slang to appear "with it." But
despite the surface, the music really takes an older viewpoint. It is less
an exploration than Shostakovich, let alone Ustvolskaya, of new horizons.
Still, no one but a polemicist commands, "Thou shalt be progressive." Giving
Tischenko points or taking them away solely on the basis of this or that
device makes as much sense as buying a car for its paint color. How well
does the music succeed on its own terms?
Yaroslava, a ninety-minute three-act ballet, tells the main story of the
Song of Igor's Campaign -- a mixture of the Song of Roland and the Odyssey -- also the basis of Borodin's Prince
Igor. Tischenko's take on the story
differs from Borodin's portrait of gallant heroism. Igor, against the advice
of his beloved Yaroslava and other level heads and despite bad omens, decides
to fight the Polovtsi. He wins his first battle against a smaller force.
In the second battle, however, the Polovtsi kill all his men and take him
prisoner. He escapes and returns to his city, chastened. Tischenko gets
a lot of credit for unusual (and successful) orchestral textures. He uses
the chorus to tremendous effect. Shostakovich adored this ballet and saw
its initial production three times. There's a powerful sequence in the
third act that describes the second battle, and the finale -- a chorale
that seems to pray over the fields of the dead -- manages to be bleak,
human, and sane all at once. The music clearly describes the action. Yet
there's an awful lot of padding, whether for the demands of the choreographer
or not, as well as an over-reliance on solo instrumental recitative. This
would probably have made a better film score.
The earlier Symphony No. 3 shows the ballet's strengths and weaknesses
in more concentrated form. Novel textures, unusual ideas, and fundamental
seriousness of purpose abound. Lacking a plot, nevertheless, the music
seems to have been composed to a program, although program implies a story.
A succession of pictures is more like it. Tischenko tends to describe rather
than to narrate. One feels very little narrative (or even general forward)
impulse in this music, in spite of the strains and stresses of a lot of
notes and some compelling moments. It's as if an athlete has jerked and
pressed a very heavy weight above his head and then put it back down exactly
where he found it. The whole thing, despite its wanderings, seems static.
I look in vain for a symphonic argument or even the sense of journey and
transformation.
The sound, from the composer's tapes of the mid-Seventies, is surprisingly
good, if a little bright and in-your-face. The performers serve the music
with commitment.
S.G.S. (April 2007)
|