Sunday, March 17, 2013

The Case of Sergei Prokofiev

Sergei Prokofiev (1891 - 1953) is an important 20th century Russian composer that I have said almost nothing about on this blog. In my mind he ranks after Stravinsky and Shostakovich but I haven't listened to a lot of his music in recent years. Time to have another listen, I think!


Yesterday Norman Lebrecht published a review of two new books on Prokofiev: one about him and his wife Carolina Codina, a Spanish soprano and the other of his diaries from 1924 to 1933. We learn a few interesting things: both Prokofiev and his wife were Christian Scientists, he was rather a nasty fellow, both to his wife and everyone else, and he was a savage critic of other composers.

Prokofiev was a child prodigy, taking up both piano and composition when very young, inspired by his mother, a music-lover and pianist. At five he wrote his first piano piece and at nine, attempted an opera. Like Shostakovich, though of an older generation, he studied at the St. Petersburg Conservatory. Let's listen to an early piano piece, the Sarcasms, op 17, written when he was twenty-one:


Certainly virtuoso, certainly powerful, but, cubist harmony notwithstanding, not terribly enjoyable to my ears. Let's listen to another early work, his first piano concerto from 1914. Here is a very capable young pianist (and young orchestra) with the first movement:


And I have to say that leaves me a bit cold as well. A great number of notes, but not doing very much. Let's listen to the first movement of the second piano concerto. This is Yuja Wang with Charles Dutoit conducting:


Now that is a completely different kettle of fish! Far more interesting: themes with real character, great build-up, expression and drama. Well-worth your time. Let's look for something that is not for piano. How about a ballet? Diaghilev commissioned several from Prokofiev. The first successful one was Chout (The Buffoon), premiered in 1921, in which we can hear the acerbic and absurd humor that seems characteristic of Russia--we find it in the writer Nicolai Gogol and Shostakovich as well. Here is the symphonic suite from the ballet:


Speaking of the symphony, Prokofiev composed seven, of which the Fifth is the most popular. Let's have a listen. Here is David Oistrakh conducting the Moscow Philharmonic. The symphony was written in one month in 1944:


I think we should hear one more piece, the Piano Sonata no 7. Here is the third movement Precipitato by Glenn Gould:



Norman Lebrecht ends his review by saying of Prokofiev that "He was not a very nice man, at all. Just a very great composer." I can't quite agree with that. There are very, very few great composers and I don't quite think Prokofiev is one of them. He is a pretty good composer, though.

17 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ​I think I remember a recent post of yours where you say you aren't especially interested in sarcasm in music (or the Russian 'grotesque'). Perhaps this explains why you are lukewarm towards Prokofiev? His music is more consistently sarcastic than just about anyone, even in the most lyrical moments there are strong hints.

    I don't think most people would call Prokofiev, the man, a saint, but to single him out as a terrible person likely has more to do with trying to sell some books now that all his diaries are being released in English. Basing his criticism of other composers on notes in his diaries is a bit unfair, he was publicly a champion of a great many (including Ravel). I certainly wouldn't take the hypocritical, self righteous Mr Lebrecht's word for it (even if he is correct on a number of issues)!

    One note- Prokofiev's 5th symphony is one of the most popular, but the 1st is by far the most popular of his symphonies (the "Classical").

    But what about the many works more popular than the ones you've listed- Romeo and Juliet, Peter and the Wolf, Cinderella, the 3rd piano concerto, the two violin concerti, the flute sonata, and others?

    I say Prokofiev was not only one of the greatest composers ever, but also THE greatest of the 20th century. Stravinsky is a close 2nd, but his output was much less consistent (especially after moving to the United States). Shostakovich and Bartok I would jointly award 3rd place.

    None of the 20th century composers could touch Prokofiev's melodies. He is truly the Tchaikovsky of the 20th century. Shostakovich (and I love him) is generally like Prokofiev devoid of good melody, although he did stumble upon something great from time to time, like in the 8th string quartet, which he understandably reused a few times... brief as it is. Bartok, similar story.

    The first two works you post were written when he was still a student, very young. Yet they are still fantastic, not sure how you can be left cold by them! The performances, while technically fine, are not the best, neither of which show understanding of that Russian grotesque rhythm. I'd recommend Richter any day for that.

    But enough from me. Just listen to these two pieces-

    ​http://youtu.be/UddTqdSs9fc?t=8m55s (starting here at the last piece​ [8:55]​, but they're all fantastic)

    and

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul1LTaGkFiw

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. prokofiev is one of my favorite composers but stravinsky is like inarguably much much more influential and important when discussing the 20th century

      Delete
  4. Let's try this again... Part 1-

    I think I remember a recent post of yours where you say you aren't especially interested in sarcasm in music (or the Russian 'grotesque'). Perhaps this explains why you are lukewarm towards Prokofiev? His music is more consistently sarcastic than just about anyone, even in the most lyrical moments there are strong hints.

    I don't think most people would call Prokofiev, the man, a saint, but to single him out as a terrible person likely has more to do with trying to sell some books now that all his diaries are being released in English. Basing his criticism of other composers on notes in his diaries is a bit unfair, he was publicly a champion of a great many (including Ravel). I certainly wouldn't take the hypocritical, self righteous Mr Lebrecht's word for it (even if he is correct on a number of issues)!

    One note- Prokofiev's 5th symphony is one of the most popular, but the 1st is by far the most popular of his symphonies (the "Classical").

    But what about the many works more popular than the ones you've listed- Romeo and Juliet, Peter and the Wolf, Cinderella, the 3rd piano concerto, the two violin concerti, the flute sonata, and others?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Part 2-

    I say Prokofiev was not only one of the greatest composers ever, but also THE greatest of the 20th century. Stravinsky is a close 2nd, but his output was much less consistent (especially after moving to the United States). Shostakovich and Bartok I would jointly award 3rd place.

    None of the 20th century composers could touch Prokofiev's melodies. He is truly the Tchaikovsky of the 20th century. Shostakovich (and I love him) is generally like Prokofiev devoid of good melody, although he did stumble upon something great from time to time, like in the 8th string quartet, which he understandably reused a few times... brief as it is. Bartok, similar story.

    The first two works you post were written when he was still a student, very young. Yet they are still fantastic, not sure how you can be left cold by them! The performances, while technically fine, are not the best, neither of which show understanding of that Russian grotesque rhythm. I'd recommend Richter any day for that.

    But enough from me. Just listen to these two pieces-

    http://youtu.be/UddTqdSs9fc?t=8m55s (starting here at the last piece [8:55], but they're all fantastic)

    and

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul1LTaGkFiw

    END

    ReplyDelete
  6. I do recall saying Prokofiev was not one of my favorites, but I don't think it was for the reasons you mention. I am a fan of the Russian grotesque! You make a powerful argument and now I recall that once before you were suggesting that Prokofiev doesn't get his due.

    I think that we get to the truth by discussion and dispute, so let me take another run at Prokofiev, starting with the examples you cite.

    And thanks, Nathan!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am one of those who is left cold by most of Prokofiev's music. With my kids I listen frequently (almost every day!) to his Peter and the Wolf, but I cannot say that there is even one of his pieces that has ever really stirred or impressed me. I don't understand why he is so highly regarded; I'd take Shostakovich or Stravinsky first, not to mention Britten or Messiaen or ...

    Mind you, I don't particularly like Tchaikovsky either, so perhaps I am unredeemable!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I find myself listening more to Prokofiev than I did years earlier. As I found in my Bachtrack investigation re: Bartok, Prokofiev is at the top of 20th C composers behind only Shostakovich (who had twice as many symphonies) in terms of this year's concert listings. I find his Symphonies 5, 6 and 7 quite interesting with more depth than I surmised earlier. But I can't agree with Mr Shirley ranking him above Stravinsky merely because Strav had a falling off in the US as a senior citizen. (And I think some of Strav's US compositions are holding up pretty well.) Strav with the Rite and the development of neoclassical music must rank the most lastingly significant 20 C composer whether you like the music or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rite of Spring will always be a favorite of mine.

      Delete
  9. Since this quite early post I became very enthralled with Prokofiev, partly because of Nathan's advocacy. I am a huge fan of his piano concertos and piano sonatas especially. Not quite as great a composer as Shostakovich or Stravinsky, but very fine in his own right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yay! Happy to hear this. Whatever shortcomings in his personal life, he was a genius composer. His works shine.

      Delete
  10. The writer of this review of Prokofiev isn’t very well versed in Prokofiev (by his own admission). Almost randomly, it seems, he says Prokofiev should be ranked behind Shostakovich and Stravinsky. But where are the great piano sonatas by Stravinsky and Shostakovich? If you go to any music conservatory in the world—from the Far East, to Europe, the Americas, really anywhere—you will see students and faculty engaged in the music of Sergei Prokofiev. He also was master of large scale orchestral works, chamber pieces, almost any genre you can think of. Prokofiev is second to no one in all of the 20th century. I just wanted readers to consider this opinion. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes this is true. You can’t undo brilliance. Too many of us have learned & performed his piano pieces & understand his style & brilliance. Then we go to the theatre & appreciate his greater works. He was divinely inspired. Lina knew this too. I’m not sure she wanted her husband’s name ever dragged through the mud.

      Delete
  11. The writer of this post, me, did not set out to "review" Prokofiev, but merely to offer an appreciation. If the anonymous writer of this comment would care to reveal his or her identity I might be willing to continue the discussion. Otherwise...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Prokofiev is a great, like Stravinsky & all of the brilliants. To compare & rank is mindless. I’m not sure you spent enough time with the works to truly appreciate them. I hear brilliance & yet you look for a personal preference? Have you studied the modern era & do you love composers individualistically breaking new stylistic ground? Then learn to appreciate what is as it is.

    I don’t agree with the characterization of Prokofiev. To take letters to a spouse & have portray that person is misleading. These letter may be the way Prokofiev expressed himself. If you wrote down spats with anyone (rude driver on street, coworker, family member) & had them in writing, & people read them, of course you would be judged on such a limited scope. Perhaps they were not matched well on personality. Women (I am one) also go through changes every month, which some commonly describe as ups & downs, & peripause & menopause. These maybe were not understood & added greater strain. The pressures of composing were quite real & difficult for many composers. Lina as a perceived westerner was perhaps viewed suspiciously. She missed the west and wanted to get back. Prokofiev understood his motherland and yearned for this culture. Couples stop connecting. Prokofiev wrote his emotions down. Let’s not judge either Lina or Sergei Prokofiev. Why? Theirs was a love. If he was “awful” why did her live endure for him? He was wrong to violate his marriage vows. Likely he yearned to be understood by a Russian woman who he understood better because of their common upbringing & culture.

    Again, where is the context? You have a Spanish opera singer & a Russian composer. You have a genius introvert who goes inside himself to write expression & a performer who must connect to an audience & outwardly express. Could be as simple as an introvert & extrovert having very different needs.

    Hot & cold don’t always make warm. Sometimes the hot may scorch & the cold remains numbing & frigid. Letters between spouses dealing with the pressures of worldwide polarity could show the same polarity in their relationship. Prokofiev loved his homeland & missed it. Lina was western styled in comparison. Spanish, living in the US, moving to please Prokofiev & then not feel as though she fit in to the system.

    I have utmost respect for both.
    The polarity of the times & the political pressures of the world had an affect on their relationship & correspondence. Prokofiev wanted to be a fish in the water, & Lina felt like a fish out of water.

    That would be like taking the arguments if your life & having that portray you.

    Prokofiev was a genius. Genius cannot tolerate the elementary often. It just dwells at another level & has no interest in being at lower levels & wasting time there.

    Even if letter are furnished by family or kids, they still are like a photograph. It doesn’t capture much but words between spouses that arent getting along. We don’t know what really happens between spouses. It’s not uncommon to have discord. Often reactions & words have their origin in acts unseen.

    You can’t judge a dance by a photograph. You can’t even experience it. It is best to experience Sergei by his music, & Lina for her love for Sergei, her children & even those who guarded her. She was an extraordinary woman.

    Yes, we can like Lina love Prokofiev’s music & celebrate & keep loving the good. That is what she did. It’s extraordinary what she did & her perseverance. Maybe Lina & Sergei were victims of worldwide division. They survived each alone but were divided because of the pressures around them.

    Either way, we can understand both in an untenable situation if we try.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sorry for typos & incompete ideas & sentences. Typing it all on a little phone & proofreading little.

    ReplyDelete