The Operas of Sergei Prokofiev

AbstractWhen Sergei Prokofiev chose to adaptWar and Peacefor the Soviet opera stage in the 1940s, he faced both operatic conventions and Soviet ideological demands that ran counter to the philosophy and structure of Tolstoy’s sprawling masterpiece. Prokofiev’s early decision to split his opera intoPeaceandWar, making the first a romantic love story of individuals and the second a collective story of the people’s love for Mother Russia, marked a major divergence from Tolstoy. This article explores how Prokofiev reworked Tolstoy’s philosophy of love and human connection to make his opera acceptable for the Soviet stage. Moving away from Tolstoy’s family ideal inPeace, with its basis on intimate sibling bonds, Prokofiev shifted the family toWar, turning it into a national Russian family of Father Kutuzov, Mother Russia and their children – the Russian people. The opera uses choral glorification of these heroic parents to foster on a national scale the type of intimacy Tolstoy had advocated in the home.

Download Full-text

The General Intonation in the Performance of “Boris Godunov” of Vsevolod Meyerhold — Sergei Prokofiev

ICONI ◽

10.33779/2658-4824.2019.2.036-048 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 36-48

Author(s):

Ivan D. Porshnev ◽

Keyword(s):

Communist Party ◽

Collaborative Work ◽

Central Committee ◽

Semantic Content ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

Soviet State ◽

History Of ◽

Centennial Anniversary ◽

The Creation ◽

Boris Godunov

The article dwells upon the process of the artistic cooperation between Vsevolod Meyerhold and Sergei Prokofi ev by the example of their collaborative work on Alexander Pushkin’s play “Boris Godunov.” The preparation for the actualization of the conception had started long before the main rehearsing period — in 1934, after the issuance of the edict of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the VKP(b) (Communist Party) “Concerning the Foundation of the All-Union Pushkin Committee in connection with the centennial anniversary of the death of Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin.” The performance was supposed to have become the appropriate response to the festivities of the Pushkin jubilee, but it never got round to being performed at that time. The peculiarities of the interpretation of the drama in the dialogue of the two Masters are examined on the basis of the materials connected with the history of the creation of the performance and the music to it. Analysis is made of the semantic content of the musical numbers (“The Song of the Lonely Wanderer” and the “Songs of Loneliness”), which carry out the function of the through leit-motifs and indirectly characterize Boris Godunov and the Pretender, and also play an important role in the formation of the “general intonation” of the performance. The conclusion is arrived at that the “politically saturated” production of Vsevolod Meyerhold and Sergei Prokofi ev touched upon the prohibited “territory of meanings”: the denoted implication unwittingly projected itself on the personal fate of the ruler of the Soviet state.

Download Full-text

Piano Concertos for the Left Hand by Ravel and Prokofiev: Two Answers to One Order

OPERA MUSICOLOGICA ◽

10.26156/om.2020.12.4.004 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 67-91

Author(s):

В.И. Чернышов

Keyword(s):

Significant Contribution ◽

Maurice Ravel ◽

Musical Language ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

Piano Concerto ◽

Left Hand ◽

Left Handed ◽

Piano Literature ◽

The One ◽

Piano Concertos

Пианист Пауль Витгенштейн, желая расширить и обновить свой концертный репертуар, внес в XX веке существенный вклад в фортепианную литературу для левой руки. В 1929–1930 годах он заказывает фортепианный концерт сначала Морису Равелю, а затем Сергею Прокофьеву. Это оказалось возможным благодаря наследству, полученному пианистом после смерти отца — сталелитейного магната Карла Витгенштейна. Если Равелю удалось, хоть и не полностью, удовлетворить потребности заказчика, то Прокофьеву было вовсе отказано в исполнении его музыки. Одной из главных причин неудачи Прокофьева можно считать творческий кризис конца зарубежного периода, когда композитор находился в поисках нового музыкального языка — «новой простоты». В статье прослеживается и сравнивается судьба этих произведений; устанавливаются причины сравнительной невостребованности концерта Прокофьева исполнителями; анализируется композиция, фортепианная фактура и техника, оркестровка. Освещены биографические факты из жизни Пауля Витгенштейна, а также непростые отношения между заказчиком и композиторами. In the twentieth century, the one-armed pianist Paul Wittgenstein made a significant contribution to piano literature for the left hand, which was due to his wish to broaden and update his concert repertoire. In 1929–1930 he ordered a left-handed piano concerto first to Maurice Ravel and then to Sergei Prokofiev. It was possible through the inheritance that Wittgenstein received after the death of his father, the steel magnate Karl Wittgenstein. While Ravel was able to meet the client’s needs, though not completely, Prokofiev was completely denied the performance of his music. One of the main reasons for Prokofiev’s failure might be the creative crisis of the end of the foreign period, when the composer was in search of a new musical language — “the new simplicity”. The article traces and compares the destiny of these piano concertos, specifying the reasons for the relative lack of demand for Prokofiev’s left-handed concerto on behalf of performers. The article also analyzes music, piano texture and technique, form, orchestration of the lefthanded concertos. Special attention is paid to biographical facts from Paul Wittgenstein’s life, as well as uneasy relationship between the client and the composers.

Download Full-text

Prokofiev, Soviet Influence, and the Music World in Stalinist Central Europe

Rethinking Prokofiev ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190670764.003.0022 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 405-422

Author(s):

David G. Tompkins

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

Soviet Union ◽

Central Europe ◽

The United States ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

The West ◽

Central European ◽

The Soviet Union ◽

Red Army ◽

Definition Of

In the aftermath of World War II, the Red Army as a symbol of power was supported in many other arenas so as to counteract the rival influence of the United States on Central Europe. The Soviet Union brought new urgency to these efforts from 1948, with music—and culture more broadly—providing a case for Russia’s attractiveness and superiority with respect to the West. This chapter discusses the nature and scope of Soviet influence in the Central European music world through the examples of East Germany and Poland, and through the prism of the music and persona of Sergei Prokofiev. After his return to the USSR in 1936, Prokofiev, along with Shostakovich, became associated with the very definition of what made music Soviet and thus worthy of emulation. And even more than Shostakovich, Prokofiev and his music functioned as powerful but malleable symbols that could be appropriated by all Soviet actors for their own ends.

Download Full-text

From Film Score to Art Music and Back

Rethinking Prokofiev ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190670764.003.0011 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 173-192

Author(s):

Julia Khait

Keyword(s):

Musical Theater ◽

Film Music ◽

Art Music ◽

Compositional Techniques ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

Film Scores ◽

Film Score ◽

Stylistic Evolution ◽

History Of ◽

Ivan The Terrible

Sergei Prokofiev was one of a few composers who worked equally successfully in the fields of film music and art music. His scores for Alexander Nevsky and Ivan the Terrible are as significant for the history of film music as are his operas and ballets for musical theater. He approached film projects with the same creative rigor as his stage and symphonic works. And so we must think of his film scores not as a separate enterprise but, rather, as one of the various theatrical and dramatic genres at which he tried his hand. While the operatic features of his music for Alexander Nevsky and Ivan the Terrible have become widely recognized, Prokofiev’s other film scores can also be placed in a broader context of the composer’s output. The cross-connections between genres can be traced at different levels, from common themes and literary ideas and similar stylistic evolution, to shared compositional techniques and borrowings of musical material from one work to another.

Download Full-text

Sergei Prokofiev and Levon Atovmian

Rethinking Prokofiev ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190670764.003.0008 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 107-125

Author(s):

Nelly Kravetz ◽

Rita McAllister ◽

Laura Brown

Keyword(s):

Later Life ◽

Close Friend ◽

Soviet Period ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

Soviet Culture ◽

Return Home ◽

Ivan The Terrible

The name of Levon Atovmian is largely unknown. Yet he was a most important and influential figure in the development of Soviet culture: a musical impresario, company director, bureaucrat, publisher, editor, and arranger, as well as close friend and confidant of many distinguished Soviet composers. His role in Prokofiev’s later life cannot be overestimated. He played a leading, practical part in the composer’s return home in 1936. He promoted the commissioning of some of the most significant of Prokofiev’s later works, and arranged for piano all of his Soviet-period operas, oratorios, and ballets. He and Prokofiev exchanged an extensive professional and increasingly personal correspondence for over twenty years. The chapter is based on unique materials, including his memoirs, given to the author by Atovmian’s daughter. It explores their correspondence, and reveals the circumstances surrounding the discovery of Atovmian’s arrangement of an oratorio based on Prokofiev’s music for Ivan the Terrible.

Download Full-text

Goleizovsky (Goleizovskii), Kas’ian Yaroslavich (1892–1970)

Routledge Encyclopedia of Modernism ◽

10.4324/9781135000356-rem67-1 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Nicoletta Misler

Keyword(s):

Early Childhood ◽

Emotional Expression ◽

Mutual Understanding ◽

Sergei Prokofiev ◽

Visual Artists ◽

Avant Garde ◽

Bodily Movement ◽

Visual Rhythm ◽

Music Lessons ◽

Bolshoi Ballet

A Russo-Soviet choreographer, dancer, and artist, Kas’ian Goleizovsky was exposed to various art forms from early childhood: dance at the Bolshoi ballet school; fine and applied arts at Moscow’s Stroganov Institute; and music lessons with the celebrated violinist David Krein. This broad education enabled him to perceive dance in terms of line and color, to integrate costume and choreography, and to infuse visual rhythm, emotional expression, bodily movement, and musicality into his artistic explorations. His collaborations with avant-garde visual artists such as Petr Galadzhev, Anatolii Petritsky, and Boris Erdman, and with composers such as Boris Ber, Matvei Blanter, and Sergei Prokofiev were always distinguished by strong mutual understanding. A pre-postmodern choreographer, Goleizovsky moved among very different systems and types of dances, including classic, eccentric, variety, ballroom, and music hall.

Download Full-text