Military Review

Stalin and Shostakovich - brothers in arms

22
In our country, which is less and less burdensome with education, household historical disputes are increasingly in this vein: "Stalin is a bloody bastard and a freak!" - “You're lying, carrion!” Freak himself! ”


Some kind of utter lie of the staff historians contributes to this a lot, and I want to break one such: that Stalin de mastered the great Soviet composer Shostakovich. In fact, it was just the opposite: he festered him with his sensitive hand!

The false story was based on the article of 1936 of the year in Pravda, “Muddle instead of music,” criticizing Shostakovich’s opera “Katerina Izmailova” (“Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk County”). The article came out without a signature, others called it the author of Stalin, but her text, far from the extremely recognizable Stalinist catechism style of presentation, obviously does not belong to him. Although the story informs that it was he who gave the word “confusion” - and it seems to me that the editorial staff simply stated in his own words his theses, why there was no signature. They considered it awkward to sign with Stalin, very sensitive to his articles, to put another name under the retelling of his thoughts, too.

Now about the text itself. Liberal critics, accustomed to the fact that our public is no longer looking at the original source, called it "monstrous political separation." But he, for all his criticality, does not violate the framework of the genre at all, not a word about politics at all:

“From the very first minute, the listener is stunned at the opera by a deliberately incoherent flow of sounds. Scraps of melody, the beginnings of a musical phrase drown, break out, disappear again ... If the composer happens to get on the track of a simple and understandable melody, he immediately rushes into the jungle of musical confusion, as if frightened. Expressiveness is replaced by a mad rhythm ... "

I dare say that it absolutely coincides with what I experienced while listening to this really dislocated opera, whose most important task it was to embody Shakespeare's “dislocated age”. But for Shakespeare, behind those words of Hamlet goes: "O cursed spite, that I was born to set it right!" (Approximately: "And I have to straighten it!"). The lot of high art is to correct this dislocation with its harmony, to heal it spiritually, and not just to reflect it. But Shostakovich didn’t set such a task, unlike Mussorgsky or Verdi, whose brutal plot of the opera can be said with the words of Baratynsky: “A spirit of pain heals a song”.

But further in that article it is even more important: “This is all not from the talentlessness of the composer, not from the inability to express simple and strong feelings. This is music, deliberately done by a “collar”, so that nothing resembles the classical operatic. This is music that is built on the same principle, according to which left-wing art in general denies realism, clarity of image, natural sound of the word in the theater ... The ability of good music to seize the masses is sacrificed to petty-bourgeois formalistic attempts to create originality by means of cheap original writing. This is a game of abstruse things that can end very badly ... "

And here, along with the Soviet rhetoric of those years, deep thought passes in a concise form as yet unwritten by Thomas Mann’s novel “Dr. Faustus”. His hero Adrian Leverkun, a gifted composer who is something very close to Shostakovich, by the same welter and complete detachment from the need to “seize the masses” comes to a complete collapse. He is ruining both himself and his gift - and the baby Nepomuk, who has become friends with him, who, as it were, personified the naive German people who fell victim to fascism. One of the meanings of this novel is that the arrogant detachment of the spirit from the flesh, the high creator from the "low" people, leads to inevitable mutual death.

In Mann, this truth is already an afterthought, when Soviet cannons are beating on Berlin, in which a fictional biographer appends the story of the late Leverkjun. But Stalin seemed to have foreseen this plot, having done everything to prevent Shostakovich from falling into Leverkuynovsky draft, but to become the great composer of the country!

In 36, he is 30. He is already a lively composer, author of music for the “Bug” of Mayakovsky, four “trial” symphonies, an “all-Union” “Song about the counter” - and this abstruse “Katerina Izmailova”. But still not the first value against the background of such luminaries as Prokofiev, Glier, Myaskovsky.

And so Stalin, a regular at the opera and theater, grabs him with his watchful eyes from the other "young and early", seeing in him such a gift, still littered with fashionable "leftism" that cannot be missed. He makes his own on him, which is hardly understandable to someone next to him, and in the form of this article gives him a very serious creative advance. It does not matter that the article with a minus sign: the fact that the authoritative press has attended to the young talent puts it in a certain strategic reserve. No “battle of the tyrant with the composer,” which is now lying, does not smell: what's the point, in the midst of the sea of ​​affairs in the country, to fight this chick? On the contrary, Stalin, in the spirit of his slogan "Cadres decide everything!", Wants to make him a firebird - as did Tupolev, Korolev, Lavochkin and many others, which the current government is no longer engaged at all.

And to the arrogant, but still with the thin, like a young potato, the skin of the composer, probably distressed, and flattered by that article, comes to its distinct meaning. And he, not with the ease of dude, but by voluntarily breaking his still dairy ridge, changes to what the leader expects from him. And in a new way for himself, he writes his 5 th symphony, the first of its already classical ones, where the nested essence goes back to the clarity that is characteristic of great masters. The life of the country splashes around in it, and at its premiere, our common people, who were then attending concerts, applauded 40 minutes, which is much more liquid pops of aesthetes on Katerina Izmailova!

Our liberal, utterly crazed critics write: “Shostakovich was pre-compiled to compose the 5 th symphony!” Yes, any composer on the planet would have died of happiness if someone had pressed him to such music!

In response to this already indisputable and original Soviet masterpiece, immediately recognized in the world as the best example of those years, Stalin himself writes in Pravda: “The business creative response of a Soviet artist to fair criticism ...” And then each Shostakovich opus, “dowry” Stalin to the world standard, becomes an event of the cultural life of the world. In the 1940 year, when he nevertheless had not yet written his greatest things, he was awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor, and a little later with the Stalin Prize.

However, how could some newspaper article act so deeply on a composer gifted by God? But now she was able to - such was the price of the word, for which she was sometimes paid with her head, and faith in a leader who, like God himself, did not sin with many words.

But Stalin, by no means a pure esthete immersed in the 30 in a deadly race with Germany, clearly needed the art of Shostakovich not for itself, but for some higher goals. And here again his visionary is highlighted, otherwise I can not name him, a genius. In the besieged Leningrad, Shostakovich, already a classical realist, wrote his greatest 7 th symphony, which served our victory over the Nazis no less than the Battle of Stalingrad.

From the strangled city, he gives the world the news that not only our victorious spirit is not dead - but it is also the spirit of great music, completely lost by fascism. And for the whole world there is no longer any choice that still flashed at the beginning of the war: to whom to help, Germany or the USSR? Only the country with such a creator as Shostakovich, with such a torn from the blockade music, which Hitler did not have, was ordered by God to help! And Hitler's propaganda, that the Russians are savages and enemies of civilization, worthy only of slave yoke, is bursting to an enormous extent with the help of Shostakovich.

In Leningrad, the premiere of the 7 Symphony 9 in August 1942 of the year is broadcast by radio and street loudspeakers - which was also heard by the enemy. And there are memories of the Germans who fought there: that day they felt they would lose the war ... The symphony score, like a strategic cargo, flew to the USA by a military plane, its triumphal first performance in New York was broadcast by all North and Latin America radio stations.

And she became our bold trump card in the most fierce battle of the creation of the world, the outcome of which, according to our and hostile generals, was decided on a spiritual level. At the same time, this most victorious music in the world is not easy, like “Katerina Izmailova”, reflected the horrors of the fascist invasion. Sounding all over our country, with its inscrutable power, it helped to overcome difficult military and post-war adversities. That's where Stalin, as a real prophet, has been tagged with that supposedly diverse article in Pravda five years before the war!

His gratitude to the creator who justified all expectations, the real brother of armswho helped recapture fascism was generous. Under Stalin, Shostakovich received high awards every year, including the Order of Lenin, five Stalin prizes and so on. In relation to him the tough, but completely consonant cruelty of the era, the leader, who knew how to achieve everything with his whip and carrot, used only carrot. And Shostakovich, with his widest range, from folk music to cinema to sophisticated fugues, which became the musical face of the country, did not lead one iota. With all the turmoil of that time, denunciations and squabbles, no less than they are now, he answered the Motherland, which had placed him on the highest pedestal, with the purest creative coin. After 5, the “classical” and 7, “blockade”, already all his symphonies, to the last 15, all his music truly helped our people to live and build, raising our spiritual brand over the whole world.

Why all this collapsed later - is another song and mystery. Why did the other great powers collapse with their equally great creators? This is what we would have to unravel now - and find how to be reborn on a memorable yet basis, to defeat the present war of the worlds, how we were able to defeat fascism with Stalin and Shostakovich. But with the current lie in all pores, with the negative selection, with which the new Shostakovich, Tupolev, Korolev we have no more space, it is not so easy to get to the clue.

Stalin did not restrict the freedom of Shostakovich, who became close to him on the spiritual, higher even than the party level, in any way. And the first formal restriction came to him already under the cult of the smaller and non-musical god Khrushchev. The one who is more “ideologically close” to our current history, existing in Western grants, forced Shostakovich to join the CPSU in 1960 in the year: it’s necessary for a “common cause”. But in fact, Khrushchev, not possessing the breadth of the forerunner, tried to pull the party under him, which, under the Stalin cult, still served the whole country, and under it all our culture.

For Shostakovich, a “non-party communist” who faithfully served the country without such a bridle, this formal bridle became a distressing sign of distrust. However, having left the formalism for a long time to the point, he somehow demolished this will of the one who, desecrating the vengeful cult of Stalin, could not resist, so as not to defile this favorite of the previous titan.

Our present musicologists, led by the émigré Solomon Volkov, who wrote such nonsense, went in an even worse way, “no one suffered for his music more than Shostakovich”. Moreover, even Western musicians called the book by Volkov “The Testimony”, which became a copyright by Shostakovich for our musical mold, deceitful and incompetent. And this mold, which we see in all cultural media, wants to make our great composer not the winner, flourishing from the Stalin submission, but some kind of dull outcast with a fig in his pocket.

But he wasn’t such, he was absolutely modern in our era, an optimist who had the courage to carry his wounds healing songs through all her dramas and tragedies. It was our sound track to the future, in which we, having changed our forerunners and fell into the pit of oil freebies, did not go. And in order to justify the disgraceful fall, let us now crush and run a curse, how much in vain is the native history and its creators!
Author:
Originator:
http://roslyakov.ru/cntnt/verhneemen/noviepubli/stalin_i_s.html
22 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ruslan67
    Ruslan67 25 June 2013 06: 21 New
    +7
    All the same, liberals should not be engaged in the FSB but the SES fool
    1. My address
      My address 25 June 2013 06: 42 New
      +2
      Accurate. Brief Funny phrase.
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 25 June 2013 07: 47 New
        +1
        Good morning! He noticed cool about SES !!
    2. pensioner
      pensioner 25 June 2013 07: 46 New
      +2
      !!!!!!!!!!!!!! +++++++++++++++
  2. Denis
    Denis 25 June 2013 06: 28 New
    +2
    On the contrary, Stalin in the spirit of his slogan "Cadres decide everything!" wants to make him a firebird - as did Tupolev, Korolev, Lavochkin and many others, what the current government no longer does
    He did it, but at what cost ?!
    Like a combo, requests in the "Notre Dame de Paris" of various funny freaks from stolen children. The mouth will be cut open and sewn up so that he always smiles or is kept in a jug so as not to grow
    Shostakovich also grabbed grief in full
    In relation to him, the tough leader, but completely in tune with the cruelty of the era, the leader, who knew how to achieve everything with his stick and carrot, used only gingerbread
    Not always gingerbread, not always!
    And the 7th blockade symphony of his is strong!
    Even for those who know classical music like me, i.e. doesn't know at all
    1. Gari
      Gari 25 June 2013 14: 54 New
      0
      And here is Stalin, a regular at the opera and theater- and who dares to call Stalin not cultural ???

      grabs it with his sharp-sighted gaze from other "young and early" ones, seeing in him such a gift, still littered with fashionable "leftistism", which cannot be missed.
      Here is an example of a multifaceted Leader - First of all, he understands the importance of opera and theater and in general Culture,
      the keen look had and noticed talents in the theater, and in sports, and in the army and in the administrative apparatus
      The more I become acquainted with his work, the more I admire the Leader.
  3. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 25 June 2013 06: 29 New
    +1
    Gospad liberals, you gobels laurels do not give peace? So do not worry, smart people have put you on the board for a long time with fascists.
    1. S_mirnov
      S_mirnov 25 June 2013 12: 05 New
      +2
      As a rule, people use the term "Liberal" - without understanding at all what it actually means. Like they explain on TV _ They say that all the bad are Liberals, and all the Good are those who are for stability._
      So the terrible bugbear of Liberalism wanders around the country.
      But in fact, "Liberalism proclaims the rights and freedoms of every person as the highest value and establishes them as the legal basis of the social and economic order. At the same time, the ability of the state and the church to influence the life of society is limited by the constitution. The most important freedoms in liberalism are the freedom to speak publicly, the freedom to choose religion, freedom to choose their representatives in fair and free elections. In economic terms, the principles of liberalism are the inviolability of private property, freedom of trade and entrepreneurship. In legal terms, the principles of liberalism are the rule of law over the will of rulers and equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of their wealth, status and influence. "
      Pretty utopian picture, right?
      So try in our country to find the Liberal!
      And one more thing, so that they wouldn’t try to write me down in some sort of TV categories, I’ll say battle — I hold communist convictions.
      Here is another good article found, read to anyone interested:
      http://rupolitika.ru/statiy/vladimir-istarhov-dlya-chego-diskreditiruyut-ponyati
      e-liberalizm /
  4. George
    George 25 June 2013 06: 36 New
    +3
    Hello all.
    From the strangled city, he gives the world the news that not only our victorious spirit is not dead - but it is also the spirit of great music, completely lost by fascism. And for the whole world there is no longer any choice that still flashed at the beginning of the war: to whom to help, Germany or the USSR? Only the country with such a creator as Shostakovich, with such a torn from the blockade music, which Hitler did not have, was ordered by God to help! And Hitler's propaganda, that the Russians are savages and enemies of civilization, worthy only of slave yoke, is bursting to an enormous extent with the help of Shostakovich.

    In no way do I want to belittle and belittle the role of music, but in my opinion the author has turned down. It is naive to believe that the Angles and Americans decided to help us after hearing Shostakovich.
    And as for the savages, just look at the museums of our world-famous classics, which the "highly civilized" Germans turned into pigsties.
  5. riding
    riding 25 June 2013 06: 51 New
    0
    Quote: Denis
    Like comic requests in Notre Dame Cathedral of Paris, various funny freaks from stolen children.

    This is probably about the comprachikos from Hugo's novel "The Man Who Laughs". Stalin knew the geniuses of his era very well, respected any talent and knew how to direct it to the benefit of the country. It is not worth comparing Stalin with medieval businessmen, the scale is different.
    1. Denis
      Denis 25 June 2013 07: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: koni
      It is not worth comparing Stalin with medieval businessmen, the scale is different
      What comparisons are there ...
      respected and knew how to direct it to the benefit of the country
      He only sent it very hard, a conversation about that
      Although one of the aircraft designers said that several chief designers with their design bureaus on one project could only work in prison
      Tu-2 aka ANT-58 (they say they called it with sarcasm according to the article number) it turned out to be a great car, but still in prison
      1. lapis lazuli
        lapis lazuli 25 June 2013 23: 38 New
        +1
        Quote: Denis
        Tu-2 aka ANT-58
        It is a pity that the war was not up to him, showed himself later
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 25 June 2013 12: 32 New
      0
      Well yes, more ...
  6. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 25 June 2013 06: 55 New
    +3
    The destiny of high art is to straighten this dislocation with its harmony, treat it spiritually, and not just reflect it.

    Stalin found time for theater and cinema, even in the most difficult wartime new theaters were opened, films were made. And the songs of the war years? He perfectly understood that art was no less important weapon than tanks and planes.
    The current leadership cannot be reproached with a great love for art, all the more so in the desire to lead art and direct it towards solving state problems. Contemporary art is unlikely to strive for harmony.
    Maybe here it is worth looking for the reasons for the current state of society?
    1. My address
      My address 25 June 2013 07: 07 New
      0
      Totally agree. About DAME everything is clear, child of iPhones. But when and where did GDP sing and play our song? Aglitsky heard.

      In the "pluses" you did what he could. Whoever can, let him do more.


      And the question you have put sooo interesting.
    2. Mr. Gambu4aS
      Mr. Gambu4aS 25 June 2013 09: 57 New
      0
      Come on, look at how Pugachikha and Rasputina jump on the stage, and you say that now there is absolutely no art left, you don’t understand anything in contemporary art, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will be delighted to watch current concerts with male people on the stage and praise LAD and GDP , for the fact that the current leaders gave Russian art such a flourishing that no great state dreamed of!
  7. My address
    My address 25 June 2013 06: 55 New
    +3
    You know, an interesting article. Stalin, as a real leader, knows what is needed, and he achieves this in an optimal way. It is not bad to show in smart, collective, ANALYTICAL, short essays his attitude towards creative individuals - writers, designers, etc. Show the full range of relationships. I read a lot, but only memoirs, where there is no general analysis of Stalin’s attitude, only special cases.
  8. George
    George 25 June 2013 07: 13 New
    +3
    My address
    By the way, there is a book called something like "Interesting cases from the life of great people."
    I read there one episode about some cultural figure (I won't say now, I have to look for a book) who was at a big reception with Stalin. So, Joseph Vissarionovich walked around the guests, talked, asked about needs and requirements. Well, many began to mumble: "Yes, I would have a service car, etc., etc.". When Stalin approached this man and asked, "Do you need anything from me?" He asked for an autograph and that's it. And after a while he had what he did not ask for, but what he needed.
    Here is an episode.
    1. Ruslan67
      Ruslan67 25 June 2013 07: 37 New
      +4
      You forgot to indicate a surname - S.V. Mikhalkov request
  9. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 25 June 2013 08: 17 New
    +2
    And there is nothing unusual in the fact that the "liberals" are trying to portray Shostakovich as a fighter and a victim of the tyrant Stalin. The casket is opened simply: by means of lies, forgery and other abominations, turn one of the greatest sons of Russia into a scared and persecuted, who has become a puppet for the tyrant. Yes could he write such an amazing thing as the 7th Siege Symphony slave. No, it could only be done by a real PATRIOT and ASSOCIATE OF THE LEADER. Honor and glory to him. You want to take away one more of our Hero, but x..n in your teeth. And remember the venal skins of the words of one of the greats: "... if you shoot into the past with a pistol, you can get a return shot from a cannon ... "
    1. Denis
      Denis 25 June 2013 09: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      "liberals" are trying to make Shostakovich a fighter and a victim of the tyrant Stalin
      Of course, he was not a fighter against Stalin, but he grabbed a little of the fun of that time. Not turma, in creativity. With "Lady Macbeth ..." times, this is possible at any time.
  10. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 25 June 2013 08: 17 New
    +1
    And there is nothing unusual in the fact that the "liberals" are trying to portray Shostakovich as a fighter and a victim of the tyrant Stalin. The casket is opened simply: by means of lies, forgery and other abominations, turn one of the greatest sons of Russia into a scared and persecuted, who has become a puppet for the tyrant. Yes could not write such an amazing thing as the 7th Siege Symphony slave. No, it could only be done by a real PATRIOT and ASSOCIATE OF THE LEADER. Honor and glory to him. You want to take away one more of our Hero, but h..n in your teeth. And remember the venal skins of the words of one of the greats: "... if you shoot into the past with a pistol, you can get a return shot from a cannon ... ". And I remember one of the fables of" grandfather Krylov "-... ah Pug, to know she is strong that barks at an elephant ... and mattress grants need to be worked out!
    1. stroporez
      stroporez 25 June 2013 08: 52 New
      +1
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      And there is nothing unusual in the fact that the "liberals" are trying to portray Shostakovich as a fighter and a victim of the tyrant Stalin. The casket is opened simply: by means of lies, forgery and other abominations, turn one of the greatest sons of Russia into a scared and hunted, who has become a puppet for the tyrant
      well, that's not news. I think everyone knows how Chekhov treated the "intelligentsia" --- and here's the news --- they enlisted him in their ranks wassat I think and Shostakovich write in opposition to Stalin Schaub to raise the status of liberoids .............
  11. Uzoliv
    Uzoliv 25 June 2013 09: 45 New
    +1
    It was an interesting time.
    As part of the ideological education of composers, compulsory courses were introduced on the “scientific activity” of Stalin. After many years, the composer's friend Isaac Glickman recalled:
    “... A teacher was sent home to him for“ instruction ”. I just lived with Dmitry Dmitrievich when he was not without excitement waiting for the arrival of a mentor.
    At the appointed hour, the bell rang and a man of respectable age appeared in his office, trying, it seemed to me, to win over the neophyte Shostakovich. However, the conversation on general topics was not glued. Talking about the weather quickly exhausted itself.
    Dmitry Dmitrievich with an emphasis on a serious mine on his face prepared to listen to the instructions and recommendations of an uninvited guest, who fully understood the importance of the mission assigned to him. Of course, Shostakovich is a famous composer, but he made big ideological and creative mistakes. In order for the mistakes not to be repeated, it is necessary to raise his ideological level, to which he - the mentor - will do his best in every possible way. The visitor carefully examined the office, praised its device and then, in a soft form, even with a guilty smile, expressed surprise that he did not see the portrait of "Comrade Stalin" on the walls of the office. The surprise sounded like a rebuke. Dmitry Dmitrievich was embarrassed, began to walk around the room nervously and blurted out that he would certainly acquire a portrait of "Comrade Stalin."
    "Well, that's good. Now let's get down to business, ”said the pacified mentor.
    At the end of the visit, we discussed an unexpected situation. The fact is that Shostakovich was obliged from time to time to show the mentor the summaries of the works he studied ”
  12. misham
    misham 25 June 2013 10: 03 New
    -1
    Bullshit ................... All ingenious was created under the guidance and with the personal participation of the Leader.
    We must instruct Comrade Gundyaev to add Joseph to the face of saints.
    Flies separately cutlets separately. the author somehow does not mention A.A. Zhdanov - a faithful Stalinist and his role in post-war Soviet culture.
  13. krez-74
    krez-74 25 June 2013 10: 55 New
    +1
    Article put a plus!
  14. Bokdan1700
    Bokdan1700 25 June 2013 11: 45 New
    -1
    Not a single Russian Orthodox person glorifies Stalin. He destroyed our people, our faith, our Church. He destroyed my great-grandfather (10 years without the right of correspondence) - for nothing !!! Vile !!!
  15. Galina
    Galina 25 June 2013 14: 24 New
    +1
    Wonderful article. I have long been thinking about the fate of the famous creators of the Soviet era: Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Sviridov and others (I take only composers). Significant figures: ideology, Stalin, freedom, lack of freedom - how their genius correlated with many realities of that time. Yes, in the same way as the genius of Mozart, Haydn, Chopin, Liszt and many other geniuses of previous eras, the 20th century, both in Europe and in Russia. It is enough to read monographs about the great artists of the past. It’s just that in our difficult time it becomes important to evaluate the past, and through it the present processes, ideals, and the choice of the future. And then the struggle of opinions begins, everyone wants to record a genius in their camp, it all depends on the position and nationality of the authors of the studies - the difference is huge. And then often the truth fades into the background. And I want at least some kind of objectivity, truthfulness.
    Therefore, the article and the author - thanks. More to such research.