diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/50226-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50226-0.txt | 2483 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 2483 deletions
diff --git a/old/50226-0.txt b/old/50226-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index d4dd9b4..0000000 --- a/old/50226-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,2483 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Serge Prokofieff and his Orchestral Music, by -Louis Biancolli - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Serge Prokofieff and his Orchestral Music - -Author: Louis Biancolli - -Release Date: October 15, 2015 [EBook #50226] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROKOFIEFF AND HIS ORCHESTRAL MUSIC *** - - - - -Produced by Stephen Hutcheson, Dave Morgan and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - - - - - SERGE - PROKOFIEFF - _and_ - HIS ORCHESTRAL MUSIC - - - _By_ - LOUIS BIANCOLLI - - Written by - LOUIS BIANCOLLI - - (Author of “The Analytical Concert Guide” and co-author, with Robert - Bagar, of “The Concert Companion”) - - and dedicated to - the - RADIO MEMBERS - of - THE PHILHARMONIC-SYMPHONY SOCIETY - OF NEW YORK - - - Copyright 1953 - THE PHILHARMONIC-SYMPHONY SOCIETY - of NEW YORK - and - LOUIS BIANCOLLI - - - THE PHILHARMONIC-SYMPHONY SOCIETY - OF NEW YORK - 113 West 57th Street - New York 19, N. Y. - - [Illustration: Serge Prokofieff] - - - - - _A COMPOSER’S CREED_ - - -_The principal lines which I followed in my creative work are these:_ - -_The first is classical, whose origin lies in my early infancy when I -heard my mother play Beethoven sonatas. It assumes a neo-classical -aspect in the sonatas and the concertos, or imitates the classical style -of the eighteenth century, as in the Gavottes, the_ Classical Symphony, -_and, in some respects, in the_ Sinfonietta. - -_The second is innovation, whose inception I trace to my meeting with -Taneieff, when he taunted me for my rather “elementary harmony.” At -first, this innovation consisted in the search for an individual -harmonic language, but later was transformed into a desire to find a -medium for the expression of strong emotions, as in_ Sarcasms, Scythian -Suite, _the opera_ The Gambler, They are Seven, _the Second Symphony, -etc. This innovating strain has affected not only the harmonic idiom, -but also the melodic inflection, orchestration, and stage technique._ - -_The third is the element of the_ toccata _or motor element, probably -influenced by Schumann’s Toccata, which impressed me greatly at one -time. In this category are the Etudes Op. 2, Toccata, Op. 11, Scherzo, -Op. 12, the_ Scherzo _of the Second Piano Concerto, the Toccata in the -Fifth Piano Concerto, the persistent figurations in the_ Scythian Suite, -Le Pas d’acier, _and some passages in the Third Piano Concerto. This -element is probably the least important._ - -_The fourth element is lyrical. It appears at first as lyric meditation, -sometimes unconnected with melos, as in_ Fairy Tale, _Op. 3,_ Réves, -Esquisse automnale, _Legend, Op. 21, etc., but sometimes is found in -long melodic phrases, as in the opening of the First Violin Concerto, -the songs, etc. This lyric strain has for long remained in obscurity, -or, if it was noticed at all, then only in retrospection. And since my -lyricism has for a long time been denied appreciation, it has grown but -slowly. But at later stages I paid more and more attention to lyrical -expression._ - -_I should like to limit myself to these four expressions, and to regard -the fifth element, that of the grotesque, with which some critics are -trying to label me, as merely a variation of the other characteristics. -In application to my music, I should like to replace the word grotesque -by “Scherzo-ness,” or by the three words giving its gradations: “Jest,” -“laughter,” “mockery.”_ - - SERGE PROKOFIEFF - - - - - SERGE PROKOFIEFF - - - _By_ - LOUIS BIANCOLLI - -It is given to few composers to become classics in their lifetime. Of -these few Serge Prokofieff was a notable example. At his death in Moscow -on March 4, 1953, he was a recognized international figure of long -standing, a favorite of concert-goers the world over, and in almost -every musical form, whether opera, symphony, concerto, suite, or sonata, -a securely established creator. Only two contemporaries could seriously -dispute Prokofieff’s dominant position in world music—his own countryman -Dimitri Shostakovich and the Finnish Jean Sibelius. There were those who -placed him first. His passing was mourned inside and outside Russia by -all who respond to fastidious artistry and the strange wizardry of -creative genius. Prokofieff had come to belong to the world. While his -musical and cultural roots were firmly planted in the land of his birth, -he had achieved a breadth and depth of expression that communicated to -all. In the vast quantity of his output there is something for everyone -everywhere—for the child, for the grown-up, for the less musically -tutored, and for the most sophisticated taste. Serge Prokofieff is -distinctly deserving of the word “universal.” His music knows no -boundaries.... - - * * * - -Serge Prokofieff was born on April 23, 1891, in an atmosphere of music -and culture at Sontsovka in the south of Russia, where his father -managed a large estate. He seems to have begun composing almost before -he could write his own name, thanks to the influence and coaching of his -mother, an accomplished pianist. At the age of five he had already put -together a little composition called “Hindu Galop,” and there is a -photograph of the nine-year-old boy seated at an upright piano with the -score of his first opera, “The Giant.” Prokofieff himself has given us a -picture of the boy and his mother in their first musical adventures -together:— - -“One day when mother was practising exercises by Hanon, I went up to the -piano and asked if I might play my own music on the two highest octaves -of the keyboard. To my surprise she agreed, in spite of the resulting -cacophony. This lured me to the piano, and soon I began to climb up to -the keyboard all by myself and try to pick out some little tune. One -such tune I repeated several times, so that mother noticed it and -decided to write it down. - -“My efforts at that time consisted of either sitting at the piano and -making up tunes which I could not write down, or sitting at the table -and drawing notes which could not be played. I just drew them like -designs, as other children draw trains and people, because I was always -seeing notes on the piano stand. One day I brought one of my papers -covered with notes and said: - -“‘Here, I’ve composed a Liszt Rhapsody!’ - -“I was under the impression that a Liszt Rhapsody was a double name of a -composition, like a sonata-fantasia. Mother had to explain to me that I -couldn’t have composed a Liszt Rhapsody because a rhapsody was a form of -musical composition, and Liszt was the name of the composer who had -written it. Furthermore, I learned that it was wrong to write music on a -staff of nine lines without any divisions, and that it should be written -on a five-line staff with division into measures. I was greatly -impressed by the way mother wrote down my ‘Hindu Galop’ and soon, with -her help, I learned something about how to write music. I couldn’t -always put my thoughts into notes, but I actually began to write down -little songs which could be played.” - -Prokofieff also recalled how much his mother stressed the importance of -a love for music and how she tried to keep it unmarred by excessive -practising. There was only a minimum of that hateful chore, but a -maximum of listening to the great classics of the keyboard. At first the -lessons between mother and son were limited to twenty minutes a day. -This was extended to one hour when Prokofieff was nine. “Fearing above -all the dullness of sitting and drumming one thing over and over,” -Prokofieff wrote, “mother hurried to keep me supplied with new pieces so -that the amount of music I studied was enormous.” - -This exposure to music continued when the family moved to Moscow. There -Prokofieff attended the opera repeatedly and soon developed a taste for -composing for voice himself. One of these early efforts was submitted to -the composer Taneieff, who advised the family to send their son to -Reinhold Gliere for further study. This early attraction for the theatre -was later to culminate not only in several operas of marked originality -but in numerous scores for ballet and the screen. To the end Prokofieff -never quite lost his childhood passion for the stage. One has only to -hear his music for the “Romeo and Juliet” ballet and the opera, “The -Love of Three Oranges” to realize how enduring a hold the theatre had on -him. - -Emboldened by Taneieff’s reaction, the eleven-year-old boy next showed -him a symphony. Prokofieff himself told the story to Olin Downes, who -interviewed him in New York in 1919 for the “Boston Post.” Taneieff -leafed through the manuscript and said:—“Pretty well, my boy. You are -mastering the form rapidly. Of course, you have to develop more -interesting harmony. Most of this is tonic, dominant and subdominant -[the simplest and most elementary chords in music], but that will come.” - -“This,” said Prokofieff to Mr. Downes, “distressed me greatly. I did not -wish to do only what others had done. I could not endure the thought of -producing only what others had produced. And so I started out, very -earnestly, not to imitate, but to find a way of my own. It was very -hard, and my courage was severely put to the test in the following -years, since I destroyed reams of music, most of which sounded very -well, whenever I realized that it was only an echo of some one’s else. -This often wounded me deeply. - -“Eleven years later I brought a new score to Taneieff, whom I had not -been working with for some seasons. You should have seen his face when -he looked at the music. ‘But, my dear boy, this is terrible. What do you -call this? And why that?’ And so forth. Then I said to him, ‘Master, -please remember what you said to me when I brought my G-major symphony. -It was only tonic, dominant and subdominant.’ - -“‘God in heaven,’ he shouted, ‘am I responsible for this?’” - -Prokofieff was scarcely thirteen when another distinguished Russian -composer entered his life—and again by way of an opera score. Alexander -Glazounoff was so impressed by a work entitled “Feast During the Plague” -that the boy was promptly enrolled at the St. Petersburg Conservatory. -That was in 1904. There he remained for ten years, among his teachers -being Liadoff, Tcherepnin, and Rimsky-Korsakoff. From them he absorbed -much of the prodigious skill as colorist and orchestrator that later -went into his compositions, besides a thorough schooling in the -nationalist ideals of Russian music. - -At the same time he was already feeling the urge to express himself in a -bolder and more unorthodox style of writing. This rebelliousness was -later to lead to controversial clashes over several of his scores. By -the time he left the Conservatory in 1914, Glazounoff knew that -Prokofieff had wandered off into paths of his own. Yet he arranged for a -trial performance of Prokofieff’s First Symphony. This proved crucial, -for it attracted the notice of an influential group of vanguard -musicians and, perhaps even more important, a publisher. Yet, when he -graduated, it was not as composer but as pianist, that Prokofieff -carried off first prize. Shortly after his graduation, Prokofieff’s -father died, and when the First World War broke out later that summer, -he was granted exemption from military service because of his widowed -mother. - -During the war years Prokofieff composed two works that would appear to -be at opposite extremes of orchestral style—the “Classical Symphony” and -the “Scythian Suite”. One is an unequivocal declaration of faith in the -balanced serenity and suavity of the Mozartean tradition, and the other -rocks with an almost savage upheaval of barbaric power. Over both, -however, hovers the iron control and superb sureness of idiom of a -searching intellect and an unfailing artistic insight. The two works -represent two parts rather than two sides of a richly integrated -personality. - -The revolution of February, 1917, found Prokofieff in the midst of -rehearsals of his opera “The Gambler,” founded on Dostoievsky’s short -novel, to a text of his own. Production was indefinitely suspended -because of the hardships and uncertainties of the social and political -scene. Actually it was not till 1929 that the opera was finally -produced, in Brussels, Prokofieff having revised it from the manuscript -recovered from the library of the Maryinsky Theatre of Leningrad. When -the October Revolution had triumphed, Prokofieff applied for a passport. -His intention was to come to America, where he was assured a lucrative -prospect of creative and concert work. The request was granted, with -this rebuke from a Soviet official:— - -“You are revolutionary in art as we are revolutionary in politics. You -ought not to leave us now, but then, you wish it. We shall not stop you. -Here is your passport.” - -Prokofieff proceeded to make his way to America, following an itinerary -that included Siberia (a small matter of twenty-six days), Hawaii, San -Francisco, and New York, where he arrived in August, 1918. A series of -recitals followed at which he performed several of his own compositions, -and the Russian Symphony Orchestra featured some of his larger works. - -A picturesque and revealing reaction to both Prokofieff’s piano-playing -and music was that of a member of the staff of “Musical America” who was -assigned to review the visitor’s first concert at Aeolian Hall on -November 20, 1918. - -“Take one Schoenberg, two Ornsteins, a little Erik Satie,” wrote this -culinary expert, “mix thoroughly with some Medtner, a drop of Schumann, -a liberal quantity of Scriabin and Stravinsky—and you will brew -something like a Serge Prokofieff, composer. Listen to the keyboard -antics of an unholy organism which is one-third virtuoso, one-third -athlete, and one-third wayward poet, armed with gloved finger-fins and -you will have an idea of the playing of a Serge Prokofieff, pianist. -Repay an impressionist, a neo-fantast, or whatever you will, in his own -coin:—crashing Siberias, volcano hell, Krakatoa, sea-bottom crawlers! -Incomprehensible? So is Prokofieff!” - -A commission for an opera from Cleofonte Campanini, conductor of the -Chicago Opera Company, was to result in what ultimately proved to be his -most popular work composed for America—the humorous fairy-tale opera, -“The Love of Three Oranges.” Campanini, however, had died in the -interim, and it was Mary Garden, newly appointed director (she styled -herself _directa_!) of the Chicago company, who undertook the production -of the opera in Chicago in 1921. Its reception in Chicago and later at -the Manhattan Opera House was scarcely encouraging. Almost three decades -were to pass before a spectacularly successful production, in English, -by Laszlo Halasz at the New York City Center gave it a secure and -enduring place in the active American repertory. - -Prokofieff next went to Paris, where he renewed ties with a group of -Russian musicians and intellectuals, among them the two Serges who were -to become so helpful in the development of his reputation as a dominant -force in modern music. These were Serge Diaghileff and Serge -Koussevitzky. For Diaghileff he wrote music for a succession of ballets, -among them “Chout” (1921), “Pas d’Acier” (1927), and “The Prodigal Son” -(1929). Considerable interest was aroused by “Pas d’Acier”, which was -termed both a “labor ballet” and a “Bolshevik Ballet” by various members -of the press both in Paris and in London, where the work was given in -July, 1927. It was a ballet of factories and firemen, of lathes and -drill-presses, of wheels and workers, and it brought Prokofieff the -dubious title of composer laureate of the mechanistic age. - -Koussevitzky had begun his celebrated series of concerts in Paris in -1921. This proved a perfect setting for the newcomer. Again and again -the programs afforded him a double hospitality as composer and pianist. -Koussevitzky introduced the Second Symphony and when he later took up -the baton of the Boston Symphony, Prokofieff was among the first -composers invited to appear on his programs in either or both -capacities. In 1929, on the fiftieth anniversary of the Boston Symphony, -it was to Serge Prokofieff that Koussevitzky went for a symphonic score -to commemorate the occasion. The resulting work was Prokofieff’s Fourth -Symphony. It was not till 1927 that Prokofieff, absent from his homeland -for nine years, decided to return, if only for a visit. Of this period -away from home, Nicolas Nabokov, who knew Prokofieff well, had this to -say in an article written for “The Atlantic Monthly” in July, 1942:— - -“From 1922 until 1926 Prokofieff lived in France and travelled only for -his annual concert tours. In Paris he found himself surrounded by a -seething international artistic life in which the Russian element played -a great part, thanks mainly to Diaghileff and his Ballet. Most of these -people were expatriates, in various degrees opposed to the new regime in -their motherland. Prokofieff had too close and too profound a relation -with Russia to lose himself in this atmosphere. He kept up his -friendships with those who stayed in Russia and those who were abroad by -simply putting himself, in a certain sense, outside of the whole -problem. It was interesting to watch how cleverly he succeeded in this -position. There was nothing strained or unnatural about it. He earned -the esteem of both camps and the confidence of everyone. From a -production by the Ballet Russe of his latest ballet, Prokofieff would go -to the Soviet Embassy, where a party would be given in his honor, and at -his home you would find the intellectuals arriving from Russia, among -them his great friend, Meyerhold, Soviet writers, and poets. - -“In 1927 he dug out his old Soviet passport and returned for a short -while to Russia. As a result of this first trip came his ballet ‘Pas -d’Acier’. This was Prokofieff’s greatest success in Paris. It coincided -with a turn in French public opinion toward Russia, with the beginning -of the Five-Year Plan, and the increasing interest in Russian affairs -among the intelligentsia of Western Europe. For several years to come -Prokofieff kept up the dual life of going to Russia for several months -and spending the rest of the time in Paris, until finally the demands of -his country inwardly and outwardly became so strong that he decided -definitely to return and settle in Moscow.” - -Prokofieff had again visited America in 1933. In New York, within the -space of a few days, he performed his Fifth Concerto with Koussevitzky -and the Boston Symphony, and his Third Concerto with Bruno Walter and -the Philharmonic-Symphony. So many references have been made in these -pages to Prokofieff as his own soloist, that perhaps a few balanced -words from Philip Hale on the subject may be appropriate at this point. -After having heard him several times in Boston, the late critic and -annotator, declared:— - -“His pianistic gifts are unusually great; there was reason for his being -recognized in America primarily as a pianist and only later on as a -composer. Though possessed of all these exceptional attainments, -Prokofieff uses them within the rigid limits of artistic simplicity, -which precludes the possibility of any affectation, any calculating of -effect whereby an elevated style of pianism is sullied. In any case I -have never heard a pianist who plays Prokofieff’s productions more -simply and at the same time more powerfully than the composer himself.” - -Prokofieff’s return to Russia opened a new and active chapter of his -career. Almost overnight he began to identify himself with the ideals of -Soviet musical organizations insofar as they were concerned with -education and the fostering of a community feeling of cultural -solidarity. The attraction of the theatre was stronger than ever, and -soon he was composing operas, ballet scores, incidental music for plays, -and music for films. Indeed, the composition that virtually reintroduced -him to the Russian public was the striking score for the film -“Lieutenant Kije.” This delighted one and all with its pungent wit and -satiric thrusts at the parading pomp and stiffness of the court of Czar -Paul. Less successful was the first performance in Moscow in 1934 of a -“Chant Symphonique” for large orchestra. This drew the reproach that it -echoed “the disillusioned mood and weary art of the urban lyricists of -contemporary Europe.” - -Another composition of this period was a suite prepared by Prokofieff -from a ballet entitled, “Sur le Borysthène.” Interest attaches to this -ballet because of a significant verdict pronounced by a Paris judge in -Prokofieff’s favor. The ballet had been commissioned by Serge Lifar and -produced at the Paris Opéra in 1933. The contract had stipulated one -hundred thousand francs as payment for the work. Only seventy thousand -francs were paid, and Prokofieff sued for the remainder. Lifar contended -in court that the unfriendly reception accorded the production proved -the ballet was “deficient in artistic merit.” The court’s judgment, -rendered on January 9, 1934, read in part: “Any person acquiring a -musical work puts faith in the composer’s talent. There is no reliable -criterion for evaluation of the quality of a work of art which is -received according to individual taste. History teaches us that the -public is often mistaken in its reaction.” - -Prokofieff made his last trip to the United States in February, 1938. In -several interviews with the press he laid particular stress on how -Russia provided “a livelihood and leisure” for composers and musicians -of all categories. Later, the League of Composers invited him to be -guest of honor at a concert devoted entirely to his music. Prokofieff -was to have made still another visit to America late in 1940 on the -invitation of the New York Philharmonic-Symphony Society. The invitation -was accepted, but Prokofieff never came. The reason given was that he -could not secure the required visas. Prokofieff was to have conducted a -series of concerts with the Philharmonic-Symphony. The Society -accordingly asked another distinguished Russian composer to direct the -concerts, a Russian who had not set foot in his native land since the -Revolution—Igor Stravinsky. - -Prokofieff was again at work on an opera—“The Duenna”—when his country -once more found itself at war with Germany. Both the opera and a new -ballet, “Cinderella”, were immediately shelved, and Prokofieff dedicated -his energies and talents to expressing in music the determination of the -Soviet people to resist the Nazi invasion and join in the world struggle -to crush Fascism. Instead of light operas and fairy-tale ballets, he now -composed a march, two war songs, and a symphonic suite “1941,” a title -which explains itself. As the war dragged on with its deadening weight -of horror, and its unprecedented drama of resistance, the feelings it -gave rise to inspired Prokofieff to compose an opera based on Tolstoy’s -monumental historical novel, “War and Peace.” America learned of its -completion on January 1, 1943 in a communication that conveyed New -Year’s greetings “to our American friends on behalf of all Soviet -composers.” - -The opera caused Prokofieff considerable trouble because of its -unparalleled length. Cuts and revisions were made, scenes transposed and -replaced, and yet Prokofieff was never quite satisfied with the work. -Excerpts were performed in Moscow, and again the music of Prokofieff -became a bone of lively contention between those who thought he had -captured the spirit of the novel and those who thought he had not. There -was general agreement, however, that Prokofieff had written a -magnificent and stirring tribute to Russian valor and patriotism. -Together with his music for the films “Ivan the Terrible” and “Alexander -Nevsky”, the new opera offered an impressive panorama of Russian -history. There are in “War and Peace” eleven long scenes and sixty -characters. The work was much too long for a single evening, and when it -was finally produced in Moscow in 1946, only the first part was -performed. A stage premiere had been promised in Moscow as early as -1943, but technical difficulties caused its postponement. Plans for a -Metropolitan production for the season of 1944-45 also had to be -abandoned. - -In 1945 Prokofieff composed his Fifth Symphony, which is considered by -many critics the greatest single achievement of his symphonic career. -Prokofieff has himself spoken of it as “the culmination of a large part -of my creative life.” The symphony was warmly received both in Russia -and in America. It has generally been assumed that it depicts both the -tragic and heroic phases of the world crisis and an unshaken confidence -in final victory over Nazi barbarism. Prokofieff himself would provide -no clue to its program other than that it was “a symphony about the -spirit of man.” - -When Germany was at last defeated, Prokofieff’s pen was again busy -celebrating the event. This time it was an “Ode to the End of the War”, -scored for sixteen double basses, eight harps and four pianos. In 1947 -Prokofieff composed his Sixth Symphony, and it was shortly after its -first performance that the Central Committee of the Communist Party -issued its stinging denunciation of certain tendencies in the music of -Prokofieff and six other Soviet composers. The occasion of the official -rebuke was a new opera by Vano Muradeli, “Great Friendship.” This work -was found offensive as a distortion of history and a false and imperfect -exploitation of national material. Having disposed of Muradeli, the -Committee concentrated its attack on the Symphonic Six—Shostakovich, -Prokofieff, Khatchaturian, Shebalin, Popoff, and Miaskovsky. - -“We are speaking of composers,” read the statement, “who confine -themselves to the formalist anti-public trend. This trend has found its -fullest manifestation in the works of such composers [naming the six] in -whose compositions the formalist distortions, the anti-democratic -tendencies in music, alien to the Soviet people and to its artistic -taste, are especially graphically represented. Characteristics of such -music are the negation of the basic principles of classical music; a -sermon for atonality, dissonance and disharmony, as if this were an -expression of ‘progress’ and ‘innovation’ in the growth of musical -composition as melody; a passion for confused, neuropathic combinations -which transform music into cacophony, into a chaotic piling up of -sounds. This music reeks strongly of the spirit of the contemporary -modernist bourgeois music of Europe and America, which reflects the -marasmus of bourgeois culture, the full denial of musical art, its -impasse.” - -Like the other six composers, Prokofieff accepted the rebuke and made -public acknowledgment that he had pursued paths of sterile -experimentation in some of his more recent music. He declared that the -Resolution of the Central Committee had “separated decayed tissue from -healthy tissue in the composers’ creative production,” and that it had -created the prerequisites “for the return to health of the entire -organism of Soviet music.” - -Prokofieff’s _mea culpa_ was first contained in a letter addressed to -Tikhon Khrennikoff, general secretary of the Union of Soviet composers. -It had been Khrennikoff, who, in a semi-official blast at these -“tendencies” had first hurled the charge of “formalism” at Prokofieff -and his colleagues, Khrennikoff evidently had in mind certain patterns -and formulas of the more extreme innovations of modern music, like -Arnold Schoenberg’s twelve-tone row and the many flourishing European -schools of atonality, dissonance, and startling instrumental groupings. - -“Composers have become infatuated,” said Khrennikoff, “with formalistic -innovations, artificially inflated and impracticable orchestral -combinations, such as the including of twenty-four trumpets in -Khatchaturian’s ‘Symphonic Poem’ or the incredible scoring for sixteen -double-basses, eight harps, four pianos, and the exclusion of the rest -of the string instruments in Prokofieff’s ‘Ode on the End of War.’” - -In pleading guilty to the charge of formalism, Prokofieff attempted to -explain how it had found its way into his music:— - -“The resolution is all the more important because it has demonstrated -that the formalist trend is alien to the Soviet people, that it leads to -the impoverishment and decline of music, and has pointed out with -definitive clarity the aims which we must strive to achieve as the best -way to serve the Soviet people. _Speaking of myself, the elements of -formalism were peculiar to my music as long as fifteen or twenty years -ago. The infection was caught apparently from contact with a number of -Western trends._” - -The spectacle of one of the world’s most cherished and gifted composers -making apologetic obeisance to political officialdom was hardly a -comfortable one for observers outside Russia. The non-Communist press -pounced righteously on the Central Committee’s resolution as an -arbitrary invasion of the sacred province of art. Charges of -irresponsible government interference with the free workings of creative -endeavor were widely made, and even writers who had been at least -culturally sympathetic to the accomplishments of Soviet art and -education waxed indignant over the episode. Many wondered why -Prokofieff, of advanced musical craftsmen of our time perhaps the most -classical and even the most melodious, should have been singled out at -all. This bewilderment was perhaps best expressed by Robert Sabin, of -the “Musical America” staff:— - -“His music is predominantly melodious, harmonically and contrapuntally -clear, formally organic without being pedantic, original but unforced—in -short an expression of the basic principles of classical music. - -“Many of the phrases in the Central Committee’s denunciation are -fantastically inappropriate to Prokofieff’s art. Prokofieff has never -espoused atonality. He is eminently a democratic composer. Peter and the -Wolf is loved by children and unspoiled adults the world over. His music -for the film Alexander Nevsky and the cantata he later fashioned from it -have been enormously popular. His suite Lieutenant Kijé, originally -composed for another motion picture, charmed audiences as soon as it was -heard, in 1934. On the contrary, among contemporary masters Prokofieff -is precisely one whom we can salute as being close to the people, able -to write music that is equally appealing to connoisseurs and less -demanding listeners, a man who understands the musical character of -simple human beings. - -“Perhaps the outstanding psychological trait of Prokofieff’s music has -been its splendid healthiness. His Classical Symphony of 1916-17 bounds -along with exhilarating energy and spontaneity; and in his works of the -last decade, 1941-51, such as the ballet, ‘Cinderella’, the String -Quartet No. 2, and the Symphony No. 5, we find the same fullness of -creative power, the same acceptance of life and ability to find it good -and wholesome. Prokofieff belongs to the company of Bach and Handel in -this respect—not to that of Scriabin and other composers whose genius -had been tinged with neurotic traits and a tendency to cultism.” - -Nothing deterred by this unprecedented official spanking, Prokofieff -went about his business, which was composing. The demands and -necessities of this post-war period of reconstruction in Soviet life -drew him deeper and deeper into the orbit of its community culture. A -large proportion of his music became markedly topical and “national” in -theme and orientation. Yet for all the strictures levelled at his music, -and Khrennikoff was to scold him yet once more for “bourgeois -formalism”, Prokofieff, in most essentials, followed the unhampered bent -of his genius. Ballet music, piano and cello sonatas continued to show -that preoccupation with living and exciting form that in the best art -can be dictated only by the exigencies of the material. It is possible -that towards the very end Prokofieff had found a new synthesis that -brought to full flower the abiding lyricism of his nature. That he was -now determined to achieve an emotional communication through a lyrical -simplicity of idiom about which there could be no mystery or confusion -is clear. How much of this was owing to any official effort to -discipline him and how much to the inevitable direction of his own -creative logic it must remain for later and better informed students to -assess. - -The Seventh Symphony would seem to be a final testament of Prokofieff’s -return to this serene transparency of style. The new symphony was proof -conclusive to the editors of “Pravda” that Prokofieff “had taken to -heart the criticism directed at his work and succeeded in overcoming the -fatal influence of formalism.” Prokofieff was now seeking “to create -beautiful, delicate music able to satisfy the artistic tastes of the -Soviet people.” - -Prokofieff’s death on March 4, 1953, the announcement of which was -delayed several days perhaps because of the overshadowing illness and -death of Premier Stalin, came with the shock of an irreparable loss to -music-lovers everywhere. A chapter of world music in which a strong and -fastidious classical sense had combined with a healthy and sometimes -startling freshness of novelty, seemed to have closed. Dead at -sixty-two, Serge Prokofieff had now begun that second life in the living -memorial of the permanent repertory that is both the reward and the -legacy of creative genius. It is safe to predict that so long as the -concert hall endures as an institution, a considerable portion of his -music will have a secure place within its hospitable walls. - - [Illustration: _The picture of him with his wife and two children was - taken when he was living in Paris._] - - - - - THE MUSIC - - - - - SYMPHONIES - - - “_Classical Symphony in D major, Opus 25_” - -“If we wished to establish Prokofieff’s genealogy as a composer, we -would probably have to betake ourselves to the eighteenth century, to -Scarlatti and other composers of the good old times, who have inner -simplicity and naivete of creative art in common with him. Prokofieff is -a classicist, not a romantic, and his appearance must be considered a -belated relapse of classicism in Russia.” - -So wrote Leonid Sabaneyeff, and it was the “Classical Symphony” more -than any other composition of Prokofieff that inspired his words, as it -has the pronouncements of others who have used this early symphony as an -index of the composer’s predilections. Yet it is dangerous to so -classify Prokofieff, except insofar as he remained loyal to a discipline -of compression and a tradition of craftsmanship that seemed the very -antithesis of the romantic approach to music. Nor was Prokofieff -interested in imitating Mozart or Haydn in his “Classical Symphony.” -Whatever has been written about his implied or assumed intentions, he -made his aim quite explicit. What he set out to do was to compose the -sort of symphony that Mozart might have written had Mozart been a -contemporary of Prokofieff’s; not, it is clear, the other way -around—that is, to compose the sort of symphony he might have written -had he, instead, been a contemporary of Mozart’s. - -The symphony was begun in 1916, finished the following year, and first -performed in Leningrad on April 21, 1918. Prokofieff conducted the work -himself when he appeared in Carnegie Hall, New York, at a concert of the -Russian Symphony Society on December 11, 1918. The occasion was its -American premiere, and the “Classical Symphony” speedily became a -favorite of the concert-going public. And no wonder! It is music that -commends itself at once through a limpid style, an endearing precision -of stroke, an unfailing wit of melody, and a general salon-like -atmosphere of courtly gallantry. - -I. _Allegro, D major, 2/2._ The first violins give out the sprightly -first theme, the flutes following with a subsidiary theme in a passage -that leads to a development section. The first violins now chant a -second theme, friskier than the first in its wide leaps and mimicked by -a supporting bassoon. Both major themes supply material for the main -development section. There is a general review in C major, leading to -the return of the second theme in D major, the key of the movement. - -II. _Larghetto, A major, 3/4._ The chief melody of this movement is -again entrusted to the first violins after a brief preface of four -measures. “Only a certain rigidity in the harmonic changes and a slight -exaggeration in the melodic line betray a non-‘classical’ feeling,” -wrote one annotator. “The middle section is built on a running pizzicato -passage. After rising to a climax, the interest shifts to the woodwinds, -and a surprise modulation brings back the first subject, which, after a -slight interruption by a recall of the middle section, picks up an oboe -counterpoint in triplets. At the end the accompaniment keeps marching on -until it disappears in the distance.” - -III. _Gavotte: Non troppo allegro, D major, 4/4._ This replaces the -usual minuet in the classical scheme of things. One senses a scherzo -without glimpsing its shape. The strings and the woodwinds announce the -graceful dance theme in the first part, which is only twelve measures -long in a symphony which lasts, in all, as many minutes. In the G major -Trio that follows, flutes and clarinets join in sustaining a theme over -a pastoral-like organ-point in the cellos and double-basses. A -counter-theme is heard in the oboe. The first part returns, and the -movement is over in a flash. - -The Gavotte was a widely used dance form in the music of the eighteenth -century. It was said to stem from the Gavots, the people of the Pays de -Gap. Originally a “danse grave”, it differed from others of its kind in -one respect. The dancers neither walked nor shuffled, but raised their -feet. The gavotte was supposedly introduced to the French court in the -sixteenth century as part of the entertainment enacted by natives in -provincial costumes. - -IV. _Finale: Molto vivace, D major, 2/2._ A bright little theme, -chattered by the strings after an emphatic chord, serves as principal -subject of this movement. A bridge-passage leads to a two-part second -subject, in A major, the first part taken up by the woodwinds in a -twittering melody (later passed to the strings), the second a -counter-theme for solo oboe. The material is briefly and lucidly -developed, and a recapitulation brings back the first section, with the -woodwinds assuming the theme over a web of string pizzicati. A miniature -coda follows, and there is a sudden halt to the music, as if at the -precise, split-second moment that its logic and breath have run out. - - - _Symphony No. 5, Op. 100_ - -Of Prokofieff’s subsequent symphonies it is only the Fifth thus far that -has established itself with any promise of endurance in the concert -repertory. The First, composed in 1908 and not included in the catalogue -of Prokofieff’s works, may be dismissed as a student experiment. The -Second, following sixteen years later, proved a stylistic misfit of -noisy primitivism and even noisier factory-like mechanism. The Third, an -impassioned and dramatic fantasy, dating from 1928, drew on material -from an unproduced opera, “The Flaming Angel.” Prokofieff also tells us -that the stormy scherzo movement derived in part from Chopin’s B-flat -minor Sonata. The symphony was first performed in Paris on May 17, 1929, -and carries a dedication to his life-long friend and colleague, the -composer Miaskovsky. “I feel that in this symphony I have succeeded in -deepening my musical language,” Prokofieff wrote after his return to -Russia and when the work had received its initial performances there. “I -should not want the Soviet listener to judge me solely by the March from -‘The Love of Three Oranges’ and the Gavotte from the ‘Classical -Symphony.’” According to Israel Nestyev, Prokofieff’s Soviet biographer, -the Third Symphony was “something of an echo of the past, being made up -chiefly of materials relating to 1918 and 1919.” - -With the Fourth Symphony we come to what might be termed Prokofieff’s -“American” Symphony. This was composed in 1929 for the Fiftieth -Anniversary of the Boston Symphony. Much of the music harks back to the -suave and courtly style of the “Classical” Symphony, without its uniform -elegance of idiom, however. It was certainly a change from an explosion -like the “Scythian” Suite, that had fairly rocked the sedate and -cultivated subscribers of Symphony Hall out of their seats. - - * * * - -It is the Fifth that constitutes Prokofieff’s most ambitious -contribution to symphonic literature. It is a complex and infinitely -variegated score, yet its composition took a solitary month. Another -month was given over to orchestrating the work, and somewhere in between -Prokofieff managed to begin and complete one of his most enduring film -scores, that to Eisenstein’s “Ivan the Terrible.” The fact is that -Prokofieff had been jotting down themes for this symphony in a special -notebook for several years. “I always work that way,” he explained, “and -that is probably why I write so fast.” - -Composed during the summer of 1944, the Fifth Symphony was performed in -America on November 9, 1945, at a concert of the Boston Symphony -Orchestra under the direction of Serge Koussevitzky. Five days later, -under the same auspices, it was introduced to New York at Carnegie Hall. -Prokofieff had himself directed the world premiere in Moscow in January -of that year. At that time Prokofieff, asked about the program or -content of the symphony would only admit that it was a symphony “about -the spirit of man.” The symphony was composed and performed in Moscow at -a time of mounting Soviet victories over the German invaders. It seemed -inevitable that a mood of exultation would find its way into this music. -To Nestyev the symphony captured the listeners “with its healthy mood of -affirmation.” Continuing, this Soviet analyst declared that “in the -heroic, manly images of the first movement, in the holiday jubilation of -the finale, the listeners sensed a living transmutation of that popular -emotional surge ... which we felt in those days of victories over Nazi -Germany.” - -In four movements, the Fifth Symphony is of basic traditional structure, -despite its daring lapses from orthodoxy. The predominant mood is heroic -and affirmative, at times tragic in its fervid intensity, sombre -recurringly, but essentially an assertion of joyous strength, with -momentary bursts of sidelong gaiety reserved for the last movement. A -terse and searching analysis of the Fifth Symphony was made by John N. -Burk for the program-book of the Boston Symphony Orchestra. It reads: - -“I. _Andante._ The opening movement is built on two full-voiced melodic -themes, the first in triple, the second in duple beat. Contrast is found -in the alternate rhythm as both are fully developed. There is an -impressive coda. - -“II. _Allegro marcato._ The second movement has earmarks of the -classical scherzo. Under the theme there is a steady reiteration of a -staccato accompaniment, 4/4. The melody, passed by the clarinet to the -other woodwinds and by them variously treated, plays over the marked and -unremitting beat. A bridge passage for a substantial wind choir ushers -in (and is to usher out) the Trio-like middle section, which is in 3/4 -time and also rhythmically accented, the clarinet first bearing the -burden of the melody. The first section, returning, is freshly treated. -At the close the rhythm becomes more incisive and intense. - -“III. _Adagio. 3/4._ The slow movement has, like the scherzo, a -persistent accompaniment figure. It opens with a melody set forth -_espressivo_ by the woodwinds, carried by the strings into their high -register. The movement is tragic in mood, rich in episodic melody. It -carries the symphony to its deepest point of tragic tension, as -descending scales give a weird effect of outcries. But this tension -suddenly passes, and the reprise is serene. - -“IV. _Allegro giocoso._ The finale opens _Allegro giocoso_, and after a -brief tranquil passage for the divided cellos and basses, gives its -light, rondo-like theme. There is a quasi-gaiety in the development, -but, as throughout the symphony, something ominous seems always to lurk -around the corner. The awareness of brutal warfare broods over it and -comes forth in sharp dissonance—at the end.” - - - _The Sixth Symphony, in E-flat minor, Opus 111_ - -In a letter to his American publishers dated September 6, 1946, -Prokofieff announced that he was working on two major compositions—a -sonata for violin and piano and a Sixth Symphony. “The symphony will be -in three movements,” he wrote. “Two of them were sketched last summer -and at present I am working on the third. I am planning to orchestrate -the whole symphony in the autumn.” - -The various emotional states or moods of the symphony Prokofieff -described as follows:—“The first movement is agitated in character, -lyrical in places, and austere in others. The second movement, -_andante_, is lighter and more songful. The finale, lighter and major in -its character, would be like the finale of my Fifth Symphony but for the -austere reminiscences of the first movement.” - -How active and productive a worker Prokofieff was may be gathered from -other disclosures in the same letter. Besides the Symphony and Sonata, -he was applying the finishing touches to a “Symphonic Suite of Waltzes,” -drawn from his ballet, “Cinderella”, his opera, “War and Peace” (based -on Tolstoy’s historical novel), and his score for the film biography of -the Russian poet Lermontov. Earlier that summer he had completed three -separate suites from “Cinderella” and a “big new scene” for “War and -Peace”. No idler he! - -The first performance of Prokofieff’s Sixth Symphony occurred in Moscow -on October 10, 1947. Four months later, on February 11, 1948, the -Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union issued its -resolution denouncing Prokofieff and six other Soviet composers for -their failure to “permeate themselves with a consciousness of the high -demands made of musical creation by the Soviet people.” The seven -composers were charged with “formalist distortions and anti-democratic -tendencies in music” in several of their more recent symphonic and -operatic works. It has been assumed that the Sixth Symphony was among -the offending scores which the Central Committee had in mind. While it -was not placed under the official ban, it did not figure subsequently in -the active repertory. To Leopold Stokowski, who conducted its American -premiere with the New York Philharmonic on November 24, 1949, in -Carnegie Hall, we owe the perceptive analysis of the Sixth Symphony that -follows:— - -I. “The first part has two themes—the first in a rather fast dance -rhythm, the second a slower songlike melody, a little modal in -character, recalling the old Russian and Byzantine scales. Later this -music becomes gradually more animated as the themes are developed, and -after a climax of the development there is a slower transition to the -second part.” - -II. “I think this second part will need several hearings to be fully -understood. The harmonies and texture of the music are extremely -complex. Later there is a theme for horns which is simpler and sounds -like voices singing. This leads to a warm _cantilena_ of the violins and -a slower transition to the third part.” - -III. “This is rhythmic and full of humor, verging on the satirical. The -rhythms are clear-cut, and while the thematic lines are simple, they are -accompanied by most original harmonic sequences, alert and rapid. Near -the end a remembrance sounds like an echo of the pensive melancholy of -the first part of the symphony, followed by a rushing, tumultuous end.” - -Mr. Stokowski has also stated that the Sixth Symphony represents a -natural development of Prokofieff’s extraordinary gifts as an original -creative artist. “I knew Prokofieff well in Paris and in Russia,” he -writes, “and I feel that this symphony is an eloquent expression of the -full range of his personality. It is the creation of a master artist, -serene in the use and control of his medium.” - - - _The Seventh Symphony, Opus 131_ - -At this writing the Seventh Symphony has yet to be heard in New York. -Its American premiere by the Philadelphia Orchestra has been announced -for April 10, to be followed by its first performance in Carnegie Hall, -by the same orchestra, on April 21, with Eugene Ormandy to conduct on -both occasions. The work was composed in 1952 and performed for the -first time in Moscow on October 11, 1952, under the direction of Samuel -Samosud. It is a comparatively short symphony as the symphonies of our -time go, lasting no more than thirty minutes. For Prokofieff the -orchestration is relatively modest and the division of the symphony is -in the four traditional movements:— - - I. Moderato - II. Allegretto - III. Andante espressivo - IV. Vivace - -From first note to last it is a transparent score, lyrical, melodic, and -easily grasped and assimilated. Recurring themes are readily identified. -“The harmonic structure could hardly be called modern in this _anno -domini_ 1953,” writes Donald Engle, “and the scoring is generally open -and concise, at times even spare and lean.” - -The overall impression is that the music has two inevitable points of -being, its beginning and its end, and that the symphony is the shortest -possible distance between them. Such, in a sense, has been the classical -ideal, and thus we find Prokofieff completing the symphonic cycle of his -career by returning once more, whether by inner compulsion or outer -necessity, to a classical symphony. - - - - - PIANO CONCERTOS - - - _Concerto No. 1, in D-flat major, Opus 10, for Piano and Orchestra_ - -Prokofieff’s first piano concerto was his declaration of maturity, -according to Nestyev. It followed the composition in 1911 of a one-act -opera, “Magdalene” that proved little more than an advanced student -exercise for the operatic writing that was to come later. That same year -Prokofieff completed his concerto and dedicated it to Nicolai -Tcherepnine. Its performance in Moscow early the following year, -followed by a performance in St. Petersburg, served to establish his -name as one to conjure with among Russia’s rising new generation of -composers. The work suggested the tradition of Franz Liszt in its -propulsive energy and strictly pianistic language. But it revealed the -compactness of idiom and phrase, the pointed turn of phrase, and lithe -rhythmic tension that were to develop and characterize so much of -Prokofieff’s subsequent music. The Concerto brought a fervid response, -but not all of it was on Prokofieff’s side. “Harsh, coarse, primitive -cacophony” was the verdict of one Moscow critic. Another proposed a -straitjacket for its young composer. On the other side of the ledger, -critics in both cities welcomed its humor and wit and imaginative -quality, not to mention “its freedom from the mildew of decadence.” A -particularly prophetic voice had this to say: “Prokofieff might even -mark a stage in Russian musical development, Glinka and Rubinstein being -the first, Tschaikowsky and Rimsky-Korsakoff the second, Glazounoff and -Arensky the third, and Scriabin and Prokofieff the fourth.” Daringly -this prophet asked: “Why not?”[1] - -Prokofieff was his own soloist on these occasions, and it was soon -apparent that besides being a composer of emphatic power and -originality, he was a pianist of prodigious virtuosity. “Under his -fingers,” ran one report, “the piano does not so much sing and vibrate -as speak in the stern and convincing tone of a percussion instrument, -the tone of the old-fashioned harpsichord. Yet it was precisely this -convincing freedom of execution and these clear-cut rhythms that won the -author such enthusiastic applause from the public.” Most confident and -discerning of all at this time was Miaskovsky, who, reviewing a set of -Four Etudes by Prokofieff, challengingly stated: “What pleasure and -surprise it affords one to come across this vivid and wholesome -phenomenon amid the morass of effeminacy, spinelessness, and anemia of -today!” - -The First Piano Concerto was introduced to America at a concert of the -Chicago Symphony Orchestra on December 11, 1918. The conductor was Eric -De Lamarter, and the soloist was again Prokofieff himself. - -The Concerto is in one uninterrupted movement, Prokofieff considering -the whole “an allegro movement in sonata form.” While the music ventures -among many tonalities before its journey is over, it ends the way it -began, in the key of D flat major. One gains the impression, though only -in passing, of a three-movement structure because of two sections -marked, respectively, _Andante_ and _Allegro scherzando_, which follow -the opening _Allegro brioso_. Actually the _Andante_, a sustained -lyrical discourse, featuring, by turn, strings, solo clarinet, solo -piano, and finally piano and orchestra, is a songful pause between the -exposition and development of this sonata plan. When the _Andante_ has -reached its peak, the _Allegro scherzando_ begins, developing themes -already presented in the earlier section. One is reminded of the -cyclical recurrence of theme adopted by Liszt in his piano concertos, -both of which are also in one movement, though subdivided within the -unbroken continuity of the music. - - - _Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Opus 16, for Piano and Orchestra_ - -The Second Piano Concerto of Prokofieff belongs to the lost and found -department of music. It was written early in 1913, that is, two years -after the First Concerto, and performed for the first time, with -Prokofieff at the keyboard, on August 23 at Pavlovsk, a town not far -from St. Petersburg. A performance, with the same soloist, took place at -a concert of the Russian Musical Society on January 24, 1915. Early the -following month Prokofieff left for Italy at the invitation of Sergei -Diaghileff, who liked the Concerto and for a while even toyed with the -possibility of using it for a ballet. On March 7, 1915 Prokofieff, -through the intervention of Diaghileff, performed his Second Concerto at -the Augusteo, Rome, the conductor being Bernardino Molinari. The -reaction of the Italian press was pretty much that of the Russian -press—divided. There were again those who decried Prokofieff’s bold -innovations of color and rhythm and harmony, and there were those who -hailed these very things. There was one point of unanimity, however. One -and all, in both countries, acclaimed Prokofieff as a pianist of -brilliance and distinction. - -Now, when Prokofieff left Russia for the United States in 1918, the -score of the Second Piano Concerto remained behind in his apartment in -the city that became Leningrad. This score, together with the orchestral -parts and other manuscripts, were lost when Prokofieff’s apartment was -confiscated during the revolutionary exigencies of the period. Luckily, -sketches of the piano part were salvaged by Prokofieff’s mother, and -returned to him in 1921. Working from these sketches, Prokofieff partly -reconstructed and partly rewrote his Second Piano Concerto. There is -considerable difference between the two versions. Both the basic -structure and the themes of the original were retained, but the concerto -could now boast whatever Prokofieff had gained in imaginative and -technical resource in the intervening years. Thus reshaped, the Second -Piano Concerto was first performed in Paris with the composer as -soloist, and Serge Koussevitzky conducting. The following analysis, used -on that occasion, and later translated by Philip Hale and extensively -quoted in this country, was probably the work of Prokofieff, who was -generally quite hospitable to requests for technical expositions of his -music. - -I. _Andantino-Allegretto-Andantino._ The movement begins with the -announcement of the first theme, to which is opposed a second episode of -a faster pace in A minor. The piano enters solo in a technically -complicated cadenza, with a repetition of the first episode in the first -part. - -II. _Scherzo._ This _Scherzo_ is in the nature of a _moto perpetuo_ in -16th notes by the two hands in the interval of an octave, while the -orchestral accompaniment furnishes the background. - -III. _Intermezzo._ This movement, _moderato_, is conceived in a strictly -classical form. - -IV. _Finale._ After several measures in quick movement the first subject -is given to the piano. The second is of a calmer, more cantabile -nature—piano solo at first—followed by several canons for piano and -orchestra. Later the two themes are joined, the piano playing one, the -orchestra the other. There is a short coda based chiefly upon the first -subject. - - - _Concerto No. 3, in C major, Opus 26, for Piano and Orchestra_ - -Prokofieff did not begin work on his Third Piano Concerto till four -years after he had completed the first version of his Second Concerto. -This was in 1917 in the St. Petersburg that was now Petrograd and was -soon to be Leningrad. However, a combination of war and revolution, plus -a departure for America in 1918, and the busy schedule that followed, -delayed completion of the work. It was not until October, 1921, in fact, -that the score was ready for performance, and that event took place at a -concert of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra on the following December 17. -Prokofieff was again the soloist, as he is once more his own annotator -in the analysis that follows. - -I. The first movement opens quietly with a short introduction, Andante, -4-4. The theme is announced by an unaccompanied clarinet, and is -continued by the violins for a few bars. Soon the tempo changes to -Allegro, the strings having a passage in semiquavers which leads to the -statement of the principal subject by the piano. Discussion of this -theme is carried on in a lively manner, both the piano and the orchestra -having a good deal to say on the matter. A passage in chords for the -piano alone leads to the more expressive second subject, heard in the -oboe with a pizzicato accompaniment. This is taken up by the piano and -developed at some length, eventually giving way to a bravura passage in -triplets. At the climax of this section, the tempo reverts to Andante, -and the orchestra gives out the first theme, ff. The piano joins in, and -the theme is subjected to an impressively broad treatment. On resuming -the Allegro, the chief theme and the second subject are developed with -increased brilliance, and the movement ends with an exciting crescendo. - -II. The second movement consists of a theme with five variations. The -theme is announced by the orchestra alone, _Andantino_. - -In the first variation, the piano treats the opening of the theme in -quasi-sentimental fashion, and resolves into a chain of trills, as the -orchestra repeats the closing phrase. The tempo changes to Allegro for -the second and the third variations, and the piano has brilliant -figures, while snatches of the theme are introduced here and there in -the orchestra. In variation Four the tempo is once again _Andante_, and -the piano and orchestra discourse on the theme in a quiet and meditative -fashion. Variation Five is energetic (Allegro giusto). It leads without -pause into a restatement of the theme by the orchestra, with delicate -chordal embroidery in the piano. - -III. The Finale begins (Allegro ma non troppo, 3-4) with a staccato -theme for bassoons and pizzicato strings, which is interrupted by the -blustering entry of the piano. The orchestra holds its own with the -opening theme, however, and there is a good deal of argument, with -frequent differences of opinion as regards key. Eventually the piano -takes up the first theme, and develops it to a climax. - -IV. With a reduction of tone and slackening of tempo, an alternative -theme is introduced in the woodwind. The piano replies with a theme that -is more in keeping with the caustic humor of the work. This material is -developed and there is a brilliant coda. - - * * * - -It was Prokofieff’s Third Piano Concerto that launched a young Greek -musician by the name of Dimitri Mitropoulos on a brilliant international -career. Mr. Mitropoulos had been invited to Berlin in 1930 to conduct -the Berlin Philharmonic. Egon Petri, the celebrated Dutch pianist, was -scheduled to appear as soloist in the Prokofieff Third. But Mr. Petri -was indisposed and no other pianist was available to replace him in time -for the concert. To save the situation Mr. Mitropoulos volunteered to -play the concerto himself. The result was a spectacular double debut in -Berlin for the young musician as conductor and pianist. Engaged to -conduct in Paris soon after, Mr. Mitropoulos again billed Prokofieff’s -Third Piano Concerto, with himself once more as soloist. This time he -was heard by Prokofieff, who stated publicly that the Greek played it -better than he himself could ever hope to. Word of Mr. Mitropoulos’s -European triumphs reached Serge Koussevitzky, who immediately invited -him to come to America as guest conductor of the Boston Symphony -Orchestra. It is no wonder that Dimitri Mitropoulos often refers to this -concerto as “the lucky Prokofieff Third.” - - - _Concerto No. 5, Opus 55, for Piano and Orchestra_ - -Before concerning ourselves with Prokofieff’s Fifth Piano Concerto, a -few words are needed to explain this leap from No. 3 to No. 5. A fourth -piano concerto is listed in the catalogue as Opus 53, dating from 1931, -consisting of four movements, and still in manuscript. A significant -reference to its being “for the left hand” begins to tell us a story. -Prokofieff wrote it for a popular Austrian pianist, Paul Wittgenstein, -who had lost his right arm in the First World War. Wittgenstein had -already been armed with special scores by such versatile worthies as -Richard Strauss, Erich Korngold, and Franz Schmidt. Prokofieff responded -with alacrity when Wittgenstein approached him too. The Concerto, -bristling with titanic difficulties and a complex stylistic scheme that -would have baffled two hands if not two brains, was submitted for -inspection to the one-armed virtuoso. Wittgenstein disliked it -cordially, refused to perform it, and thus consigned it to the silence -of a manuscript. - -Maurice Ravel, approached in due course for a similar work, was the only -composer to emerge with an enduring work from contact with this gifted -casualty of the war. However, he too had trouble. When completed, the -Concerto was virtually deeded to the pianist. Wittgenstein now proceeded -to object to numerous passages and to insist on alterations. Ravel -angrily refused, and was anything but mollified to discover that -Wittgenstein was taking “unpardonable liberties” in public performances -of the concerto.... Perhaps it was just as well that Prokofieff’s Fourth -Piano Concerto remained in its unperformed innocence—a concerto for no -hands. - -It was not long before the mood to compose a piano concerto was upon -Prokofieff again. This became his Fifth, finished in the summer of 1932 -and performed for the first time in Berlin at a Philharmonic Concert -conducted by Wilhelm Furtwängler. Prokofieff was the soloist. It is -interesting to note that the program contained another soloist—the -gentleman playing the viola part in Berlioz’s “Childe Harold Symphony,” -a gentleman by the name of Paul Hindemith. There was a performance of -the Concerto in Paris two months later. - -When the concerto and the composer reached Boston together the following -year, Prokofieff gave an interviewer from the “Transcript” both a -description of the way he composed and an analysis of the score. About -his method Prokofieff had this to say:— - -“I am always on the lookout for new melodic themes. These I write in a -notebook, as they come to me, for future use. All my work is founded on -melodies. When I begin a work of major proportions I usually have -accumulated enough themes to make half-a-dozen symphonies. Then the work -of selection and arrangement begins. The composition of this Fifth -Concerto began with such melodies. I had enough of them to make three -concertos.” - -His analysis follows:— - -“The emphasis in this concerto is entirely on the melodic. There are -five movements, and each movement contains at least four themes or -melodies. The development of these themes is exceedingly compact and -concise. This will be evident when I tell you that the entire five -movements do not take over twenty minutes in performance. Please do not -misunderstand me. The themes are not without development. In a work such -as Schumann’s ‘Carnival’ there are also many themes, enough to make a -considerable number of symphonies or concertos. But they are not -developed at all. They are merely stated. In my new Concerto there is -actual development of the themes, but this development is as compressed -and condensed as possible. Of course there is no program, not a sign or -suggestion of a program. But neither is there any movement so expansive -as to be a complete sonata-form. - -I. _Allegro con brio: meno mosso._ “The first movement is an _Allegro -con brio_, with a _meno mosso_ as middle section. Though not in a -sonata-form, it is the main movement of the Concerto, fulfills the -functions of a sonata-form and is in the spirit of the usual -sonata-form. - -II. _Moderato ben accentuato._ “This movement has a march-like rhythm, -but we must be cautious in the use of this term. I would not think of -calling it a march because it has none of the vulgarity or commonness -which is so often associated with the idea of a march and which actually -exists in most popular marches. - -III. _Allegro con fuoco._ “The third movement is a Toccata. This is a -precipitate, displayful movement of much technical brilliance and -requiring a large virtuosity—as difficult for orchestra as for the -soloist. It is a Toccata for orchestra as much as for piano. - -IV. _Larghetto._ “The fourth movement is the lyrical movement of the -Concerto. It starts off with a soft, soothing theme: grows more and more -intense in the middle portion, develops breadth and tension, then -returns to the music of the beginning. German commentators have -mistakenly called it a theme and variations. - -V. _Vivo: Piu Mosso: Coda._ “The Finale has a decidedly classical -flavor. The Coda is based on a new theme which is joined by the other -themes of the Finale.” - -Summing up his own view of the Concerto, Prokofieff concluded:— - -“The Concerto is not cyclic in the Franckian sense of developing several -movements out of the theme or set of themes. Each movement has its own -independent themes. But there is reference to some of the material of -the First Movement in the Third; and also reference to the material of -the Third Movement in the Finale. The piano part is treated in -_concertante_ fashion. The piano always has the leading part which is -closely interwoven with significant music in the orchestra.” - -After this rather mild and dispassionate self-appraisal, it comes as -something of a shock to read the slashing commentary of Prokofieff’s -Soviet biographer Nestyev:— - -“The machine-like Toccata, in the athletic style of the earlier -Prokofieff, presents his bold jumps, hand-crossing, and Scarlatti -technic in highly exaggerated form. The tendency to wide skips à la -Scarlatti is carried to monstrous extremes. Sheer feats of piano -acrobatics completely dominate the principal movements of the Concerto. -In the precipitate Toccata this dynamic quality degenerates into mere -lifeless mechanical movement, with the result that the orchestra itself -seems to be transformed into a huge mechanism with fly-wheels, pistons, -and transmission belts.” - -To Nestyev it was further proof of the “brittle, urbanistic” sterility -of Prokofieff’s “bourgeois” wanderings. - - - - - VIOLIN CONCERTOS - - - _Concerto in D major, No. 1, Opus 19, for Violin and Orchestra_ - -Although composed in Russia between 1913 and 1917, Prokofieff’s First -Violin Concerto did not see the light of day till October 18, 1923, that -is to say, shortly after he had taken up residence in Paris. It was on -that date that the work was first performed in the French capital at a -concert conducted by Serge Koussevitzky, who entrusted the solo part to -his concertmaster Marcel Darrieux. The same violinist was soloist at a -subsequent concert in the Colonne concert series, on November 25. It is -said that the work was assigned to a concertmaster after Mr. -Koussevitzky had been rebuffed by several established artists, among -them the celebrated Bronislaw Hubermann, who relished neither its idiom -nor its technic. This attitude was shared by the Paris critics, who -expressed an almost uniform hostility to the concerto. Prokofieff’s -arrival in Paris had already been prepared by his “Scythian Suite” and -Third Piano Concerto. The new work must evidently have struck Parisian -ears as rather mild and Mendelssohnian by comparison. In any case, the -Violin Concerto did not gain serious recognition till it was performed -in Prague on June 1 of the following year at a festival of the -International Society for Contemporary Music. The soloist this time was -Joseph Szigeti, and it was thanks in large part to his working -sponsorship of the Concerto that it began to gather momentum on the -international concert circuit. Serge Koussevitzky was again the -conductor when the work was given its American premiere by the Boston -Symphony Orchestra on April 24, 1925, and once more the soloist was a -concertmaster—Richard Burgin. - -The D major Violin Concerto shows the period of its composition in its -frequent traces of the national school of Rimsky-Korsakoff and -Glazounoff. Despite the bustling intricacies of the second movement, it -is not a virtuoso’s paradise by any means. Bravura of the rampant kind -is absent, and of cadenzas there is no sign. Neither is the orchestra an -accompaniment in the traditional sense, but rather part of the same -integrated scheme of which the solo-violin is merely a prominent -feature. - -I. _Andantino._ The solo violin chants a gentle theme against which the -strings and clarinet weave in equally gentle background. There is a -spirited change of mood as the melody is followed by rhythmic -passage-work sustained over a marked bass. The first theme returns as -the movement draws to a close, more deliberate now. The flute takes it -up as the violin embroiders richly around it. - -II. _Vivacissimo._ This is a swiftly moving scherzo, bristling with -accented rhythms, long leaps, double-stop slides and harmonics, and -down-bow strokes, “none of which,” Robert Bagar shrewdly points out, -“may be construed as display music.” - -III. _Moderato._ More lyrical than the preceding movement, the finale -allows the violin frolic to continue to some extent. Scale passages are -developed and high-flown trills give the violin some heady moments. The -bassoon offers a coy theme before the violin introduces the main subject -in a sequence of staccato and legato phrases. There are pointed comments -from a restless orchestra as the material is developed. Soon the soft -melody of the opening movement is heard again, among the massed violins -now. Above it the solo instrument soars in trills on a parallel line of -notes an octave above, coming to rest on high D. - - - _Concerto in G minor, No. 2, Op. 63, for Violin and Orchestra_ - -Composed during the summer and autumn of 1935, Prokofieff’s second -violin concerto was premiered in Madrid on December 1 of that year. -Enrique Arbos conducted the Madrid Symphony Orchestra, with the Belgian -violinist Robert Soetens playing the solo part. Prokofieff himself was -present and later directed the same orchestra in his “Classical -Symphony.” Jascha Heifetz was the soloist when Serge Koussevitzky and -the Boston Symphony Orchestra first performed the new concerto in -America. - -Twenty-two years had elapsed since Prokofieff had composed his first -violin concerto in D, so comparisons were promptly made between the -styles and idioms manifested by the two scores. Apart from the normal -development and change expected over so long a period, another factor -was emphasized by many. The G minor concerto marked Prokofieff’s return -to his homeland after a long Odyssey abroad. He was now a Soviet citizen -and once more a participant in the social and cultural life of his -country. - -The new concerto revealed a warmth and lyricism, even a romantic spirit, -that contrasted with the witty glitter and grotesquerie of the early -concerto. The old terseness, rigorous logic, and clear-cut form were -still observable, though less pronounced. There were even flashes of the -“familiar Prokofieffian naughtiness,” as Gerald Abraham pointed out. But -the new mood was inescapable. “So far as the violin concerto form is -concerned,” wrote the English musicologist, “Prokofieff’s formula for -turning himself into a Soviet composer has been to emphasize the lyrical -side of his nature at the expense of the witty and grotesque and -brilliant sides.” - -The daring thrusts, the crisp waggishness, the fiendish cleverness and -steely glitter seemed now to be giving way to warmer, deeper -preoccupations, at least in the first two movements. “The renascence of -lyricism, warm melody, and simple emotionality is the essence of the -second violin concerto,” writes Abraham Veinus. The earlier spirit of -mockery and tart irreverence was almost lost in the new surge of -romantic melody. - -I. _Allegro moderato, G minor, 4/4._ The solo instrument, unaccompanied, -gives out a readily remembered first theme which forms the basis of the -subsequent development and the coda. The appealing second theme is also -announced by the violin, this time against soft rhythmic figures in the -string section. Abraham finds a “distant affinity” between this second -theme and the Gavotte of Prokofieff’s “Classical Symphony.” - -II. _Andante assai, E-flat major, 12/8._ The shift to frank melodic -appeal is especially noticeable in the slow movement. Here the mood is -almost steadily lyrical and romantic from the moment the violin sings -the theme which forms the basic material of the movement. There is -varied treatment and some shifting in tonality before the chief melody -returns to the key of E-flat. - -III. _Allegro ben marcato, G minor, 3/4._ In the finale the old -Prokofieff is back in a brilliant Rondo of incisive rhythms and flashing -melodic fragments. There are bold staccato effects, tricky shifts in -rhythm, and brisk repartee between violin and orchestra. If there is any -obvious link with the earlier concerto in D it is here in this -virtuoso’s playground. - - - - - SUITES - - - _“Ala and Lolly”, Scythian Suite for Large Orchestra, Opus 20_ - -It has been supposed that, consciously or not, Prokofieff was influenced -by Stravinsky’s “Sacre de Printemps” in his choice and treatment of -material for the “Scythian Suite.” Both scores have an earthy, barbaric -quality, a stark rhythmic pulsation and an atmosphere of remote pagan -ritualism that establish a strong kinship, whether direct or not. In -each instance, moreover, the subject matter allowed the composer ample -scope for exploiting fresh devices of harmony and color. Another point -of contact between the two scores was the figure of Serge Diaghileff, -that fabulous patron and gadfly of modern art. Stravinsky had already -been brought into the camp of Russian ballet by this most persuasive of -all ballet impressarios. Soon it was Prokofieff’s turn. Diaghileff’s -commission was a ballet “on Russian fairy-tale or prehistoric themes.” -The “Scythian” music was Prokofieff’s answer. The encounter with -Diaghileff had occurred in June, 1914. With the outbreak of war later -that year, an unavoidable delay set in, and it was evidently not till -early the next year that Prokofieff submitted what was ready to -Diaghileff, who liked neither the plot nor the music. To compensate him -for his pains Diaghileff did two things: The first was to arrange for -Prokofieff to play his Second Piano Concerto in Rome, an experience that -proved profitable in every sense. The second was to commission another -ballet, with the injunction to “write music that will be truly Russian.” -To which the candid Diaghileff added:—“They’ve forgotten how to write -music in that rotten St. Petersburg of yours.” The result was “The -Buffoon,” a ballet which proved more palatable to Diaghileff and led to -a mutually fruitful association of many years. - -What was to have been the “Scythian” ballet became instead, an -orchestral suite, the premiere of which took place in St. Petersburg on -January 29, 1916, Prokofieff himself conducting. More than any other -score of Prokofieff’s, the “Scythian Suite” was responsible for the -acrimonious note that long remained in the reaction of the press to his -music. “Cacophony” became a frequent word in the vocabulary of invective -favored by hostile critics. Prokofieff was accused of breaking every -musical law and violating every tenet of good taste. His music was -“noisy,” “rowdy,” “barbarous,” an expression of irresponsible -hooliganism in symphonic form. Glazounoff, friend and teacher and guide, -walked out on the first performance of “The Scythian Suite.” But there -were those among the critics and public who recognized the confident -power and proclamative freedom of this music, and so a merry war of -words, written and spoken, brewed over a score that Diaghileff, in a -moment of singular insensitivity, had dismissed as “dull.” Whatever else -this music was—and it was almost everything from a signal for angry -stampedes from the concert hall to an open declaration of war—it was -emphatically not dull! Even the word “Bolshevism” was hurled at the -score when it reached these placid shores late in 1918. In Chicago, one -critic wrote: “The red flag of anarchy waved tempestuously over old -Orchestra Hall yesterday as Bolshevist melodies floated over the waves -of a sea of sound in breath-taking cacophony.” Dull, indeed! - -Of the original Scythians whose strange customs were the subject of -Prokofieff’s controversial suite, Robert Bagar tells us succinctly: - -“First believed to have been mentioned by the poet Hesiod (800 B.C.), -the Scythians were a nomadic people dwelling along the north shore of -the Black Sea. Probably of Mongol blood, this race vanished about 100 -B.C. Herodotus tells us that they were rather an evil lot, given to very -primitive customs, fat and flabby in appearance, and living under a -despotic rule whose laws, such as they may have been, were enforced -through the ever-present threat of assassination. - -“There were gods, of course, each in charge of some aspect or other of -spiritual or human or moral conduct—a sun god, a health god, a heaven -god, an evil god and quite a few others. Veles, the god of the sun, was -their supreme deity. His daughter was Ala, and Lolli was one of their -great heroes.” - -Prokofieff’s Suite is based on the story of Ala, her suffering in the -toils of the Evil God, and her deliverance by Lolli. The suite is -divided into four movements, brief outlines of which are furnished in -the score. - -I. “_Invocation to Veles and Ala._” (_Allegro feroce, 4/4._) The music -describes an invocation to the sun, worshipped by the Scythians as their -highest deity, named Veles. This invocation is followed by the sacrifice -to the beloved idol, Ala, the daughter of Veles. - -II. “_The Evil-God and dance of the pagan monsters._” (_Allegro -sostenuto, 4-4_.) The Evil-God summons the seven pagan monsters from -their subterranean realms and, surrounded by them, dances a delirious -dance. - -III. “_Night._” (_Andantino, 4-4._) The Evil-God comes to Ala in the -darkness. Great harm befalls her. The moon rays fall upon Ala, and the -moon-maidens descend to bring her consolation. - -IV. “_Lolli’s pursuit of the Evil-God and the sunrise._” (_Tempestuoso, -4-4._) Lolli, a Scythian hero, went forth to save Ala. He fights the -Evil-God. In the uneven battle with the latter, Lolli would have -perished, but the sun-god rises with the passing of night and smites the -evil deity. With the description of the sunrise the Suite comes to an -end. - - - _Orchestral Suite from the Film, “Lieutenant Kije,” Opus 60_ - -The Soviet film, “Lieutenant Kije”, was produced by the Belgoskino -Studios of Leningrad in 1933, after a story by Y. Tynyanov that had -become a classic of the new literature. The director was A. Feinzimmer. -For Prokofieff, who supplied the music, it represented the first -important work of his return to Russia. The music belongs with that for -“Alexander Nevsky” and “Ivan the Terrible” as the most effective and -characteristic Prokofieff composed for the Soviet screen. From that -score Prokofieff assembled an orchestral suite which was published early -in 1934 and performed later that year in Moscow. Prokofieff himself -conducted its Parisian premiere at a Lamoureux concert on February 20, -1937, when, according to an English correspondent, it “made a stunning -impression.” Serge Koussevitzky introduced it to America at a concert of -the Boston Symphony Orchestra on October 15 of the same year. - -The film tells an ironic and amusing story of a Russian officer, who -because of a clerical error, existed only on paper. The setting is that -of St. Petersburg during the reign of Czar Paul. The Czar misreads the -report of one of his military aides, and without meaning to, evolves the -name of a non-existent lieutenant. He does this by inadvertently linking -the “ki” at the end of another officer’s name to the Russian expletive -“je.” The result is the birth—on paper—of a new officer in the Russian -Army, “Lieutenant Kije.” Since no one dares to tell the Czar of his -absurd blunder, his courtiers are obliged to invent a “Lieutenant Kije” -to go with the name. Such being the situation, the film is an -enlargement on the expedients and subterfuges arising from it. There are -five sections:— - -I. _Birth of Kije._ (_Allegro._) A combination of off-stage cornet -fanfare, military drum-roll, and squealings from a fife proclaim that -Lieutenant Kije is born—in the brain of blundering Czar. The solemn -announcement is taken up by other instruments, followed by a short -_Andante_ section, and presently the military clatter of the opening is -back. - -II. _Romance._ (_Andante._) This section contains a song, assigned -optionally to baritone voice or tenor saxophone. The text of the song, -in translation, reads:— - - “Heart be calm, do not flutter; - Don’t keep flying like a butterfly. - Well, what has my heart decided? - Where will we in summer rest? - But my heart could answer nothing, - Beating fast in my poor breast. - My grey dove is full of sorrow— - Moaning is she day and night. - For her dear companion left her, - Having vanished out of sight, - Sad and dull has gotten my grey dove.” - -III. _Kije’s Wedding._ (_Allegro._) This section reminds us that -although our hero is truly a soldier, like so many of his calling he is -also susceptible to the claims of the heart. In fact, he is quite a -dashing lover, not without a touch of sentimentality. - -IV. _Troika._ (_Moderato._) The Russian word “Troika” means a set of -three, then, by extension, a team of three horses abreast, finally, a -three-horse sleigh. This section is so named because the orchestra -pictures such a vehicle as accompaniment to a second song, in this case -a Russian tavern song. Its words, as rendered from the Russian, go: - - “A woman’s heart is like an inn: - All those who wish go in, - And they who roam about - Day and night go in and out. - Come here, I say; come here, I say, - And have no fear with me. - Be you bachelor or not, - Be you shy or be you bold, - I call you all to come here. - So all those who are about, - Keep going in and coming out, - Night and day they roam about.” - -V. _Burial of Kije._ (_Andante assai_.) Thus ends the paper career of -our valiant hero. The music recalls his birth to a flourish of military -sounds, his romance, his wedding. And now the cornet that had blithely -announced his coming in an off-stage fanfare is muted to his going, as -Lieutenant Kije dwindles to his final silence. - - - _Music for the Ballet, “Romeo and Juliet,” Opus 64-A and 64-B_ - -As a ballet in four acts and nine tableaux, Prokofieff’s “Romeo and -Juliet” was first produced by the Bolshoi Theatre in Moscow in 1935. -Like many standard Russian ballets, the performance took a whole -evening. Prokofieff assembled two Suites from the music, the first -premiered in Moscow on November 24, 1936, under the direction of Nicolas -Semjonowitsch Golowanow. The premiere of the second suite followed less -than a month later. - -Prokofieff himself directed the American premieres of both Suites, of -Suite No. 1 as guest of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra on January 21, -1937, and of Suite No. 2 as guest of the Boston Symphony Orchestra on -March 25, 1938. Serge Koussevitzky and the Boston unit introduced the -Suite to New York on March 31 following. - -After a trial performance of the ballet in Moscow V. V. Konin reported -to the “Musical Courier” that Soviet critics present were “left in -dismay at the awkward incongruity between the realistic idiom of the -musical language, a language which successfully characterizes the -individualism of the Shakespearean images, and the blind submission to -the worst traditions of the old form, as revealed in the libretto.” - -Fault was also found because “the social atmosphere of the period and -the natural evolution of its tragic elements had been robbed of their -logical culmination and brought to the ridiculously dissonant ‘happy -end’ of the conventional ballet. This inconsistency in the development -of the libretto has had an unfortunate effect, not only upon the general -structure, but even upon the otherwise excellent musical score.” - -Critical reaction to both Suites has varied, some reviewers finding the -music dry and insipid for such a romantic theme; others hailing its -pungency and color. Prokofieff’s classicism was compared with his -romanticism. If we are prepared to accept the “Classical” Symphony as -truly classical, said one critic, then we must accept the “Romeo and -Juliet” music as truly romantic. The cold, cheerless, dreary music “is -certainly not love music,” read one verdict. Prokofieff was taken to -task for describing a love story “as if it were an algebraic problem.” - -Said Olin Downes of “The New York Times” in his review of the Boston -Symphony concert of March 31, 1938:—“The music is predominantly -satirical.... There is the partial suggestion of that which is poignant -and tragic, but there is little of the sensuous or emotional, and in the -main the music could bear almost any title and still serve the ballet -evolutions and have nothing to do with Romeo and Juliet.” - -Others extolled Prokofieff for the “fundamental simplicity and buoyancy” -of the music, finding it typically rooted in the “plane, tangible -realities of tone, design, and color.” Prokofieff himself answered the -repeated charge that his score lacked feeling and melody:— - -“Every now and then somebody or other starts urging me to put more -feeling, more emotion, more melody in my music. My own conviction is -that there is plenty of all that in it. I have never shunned the -expression of feeling and have always been intent on creating melody—but -new melody, which perhaps certain listeners do not recognize as such -simply because it does not resemble closely enough the kind of melody to -which they are accustomed. - -“In ‘Romeo and Juliet’ I have taken special pains to achieve a -simplicity which will, I hope, reach the hearts of all listeners. If -people find no melody and no emotion in this work, I shall be very -sorry. But I feel sure that sooner or later they will.” - -In the First Suite which Prokofieff prepared for concert purposes, there -are seven numbers, outlined as follows:—1) “Folk Dance”; 2) “Scene”; 3) -“Madrigal”; 4) “Minuet”; 5) “Masques”; 6) “Romeo and Juliet”; and 7) -“The Death of Tybalt”. Perhaps the most significant and absorbing of -these is “Masques”, an _Andante marciale_ of majestic sweep and power, -which accompanies the action at the Capulet ball, leading to the -unobserved entrance into the palace of Romeo and two friends, wearing -masks. One senses a brooding, sinister prophecy in the measured -stateliness of the music. Searing and incisive in its pitiless evocation -is “The Death of Tybalt”, marked _Precipitato_ in the score. Both street -duels are depicted in this section, the first in which Tybalt slays -Mercutio, the other in which Romeo, in revenge, slays Tybalt. Capulet’s -denunciation follows. This First Suite is listed as Opus 64-A in the -catalogue of Prokofieff’s works. - -The Second Suite, Opus 64-B, also consists of seven numbers:— - -1) “_Montagues and Capulets_”. (_Allegro pesante_). This is intended to -portray satirically the proud, haughty characters of the noblemen. There -is a _Trio_ in which Juliet and Paris are pictured as dancing. - -2) “_Juliet, the Maiden_”. (_Vivace_). The main theme portrays the -innocent and lighthearted Juliet, tender and free of suspicion. As the -section develops we sense a gradual deepening of her feelings. - -3) “_Friar Laurence_”. (_Andante espressivo_). Two themes are used to -identify the Friar—bassoons, tuba, and harps announce the first; -’cellos, the second. - -4) “_Dance_”. (_Vivo_). - -5) “_The Parting of Romeo and Juliet_”. (_Lento. Poco piu animato_). An -elaborately worked out fabric woven mainly from the theme of Romeo’s -love for Juliet. - -6) “_Dance of the West Indian Slave Girls_”. (_Andante con eleganza_). -The section accompanies both the action of Paris presenting pearls to -Juliet and slave girls dancing with the pearls. - -7) “_Romeo at Juliet’s Grave_”. (_Adagio funebre_). Prokofieff captures -the anguish and pathos of the heartbreaking blunder that is the ultimate -in tragedy: Juliet is not really dead, and her tomb is only that in -appearance—but for Romeo the illusion is reality and his grief is -unbounded. - -Prokofieff’s original plan was to give “Romeo and Juliet” a happy -ending, its first since the time of Shakespeare. Juliet was to be -awakened in time to prevent Romeo’s suicide, and the ballet would end -with a dance of jubilation by the reunited lovers. Criticism was -widespread and sharp when this modification of Shakespeare’s drama was -exhibited at a trial showing. All thought of a happy ending was promptly -abandoned, and Prokofieff put the tragic seal of death on the finale of -his ballet. - - - - - CHILDREN’S CORNER - - - _“Peter and the Wolf,” An Orchestral Fairy Tale for Children, Opus 67_ - -As early in his career as 1914 Prokofieff made his first venture in the -enchanted world of children’s entertainment. This was a cycle for voice -and piano (or orchestra) grouped under the general title of “The Ugly -Duckling,” after Andersen’s fairy-tale. It was not till twenty-two years -later that he returned to this vein and achieved a masterpiece for the -young of all ages, all times, and all countries, the so-called -“orchestral fairy tale for children”—“Peter and the Wolf”. - -Completed in Moscow on April 24, 1936, the score was performed for the -first time anywhere at a children’s concert of the Moscow Philharmonic -the following month. Two years later, on March 25, 1938, the Boston -Symphony Orchestra gave the music its first performance outside of -Russia. On January 13, 1940, the work was produced by the Ballet Theatre -at the Center Theatre, New York, with choreography by Adolph Bolm, and -Eugene Loring starring in the role of Peter. Its success as a ballet was -long and emphatic, particularly with the younger matinee element. -Prominent in the general effectiveness of Prokofieff’s work is the role -of the Narrator, for whom Prokofieff supplied a simple and deliciously -child-like text, with flashes of delicate humor, very much in the animal -story tradition of Grimm and Andersen. - -By way of introduction, Prokofieff has himself identified the -“characters” of his “orchestral fairy tale” on the first page of the -score:— - -“Each character of this Tale is represented by a corresponding -instrument in the orchestra: the bird by the flute, the duck by an oboe, -the cat by a clarinet in the low register, the grandfather by a bassoon, -the wolf by three horns, Peter by the string quartet, the shooting of -the hunters by the kettle-drums and the bass drum. Before an orchestral -performance it is desirable to show these instruments to the children -and to play on them the corresponding leitmotives. Thereby the children -learn to distinguish the sonorities of the instruments during the -performance of this Tale.” - -The characters having been duly tagged and labelled, the Narrator, in a -tone that is by turns casual, confiding and awesome, begins to tell of -the adventures of Peter.... - -“Early one morning Peter opened the gate and went out into the big green -meadow. On a branch of a big tree sat a little Bird, Peter’s friend. -‘All is quiet,’ chirped the Bird gaily. - -“Just then a Duck came waddling round. She was glad that Peter had not -closed the gate, and decided to take a nice swim in the deep pond in the -meadow. - -“Seeing the Duck, the little Bird flew down upon the grass, settled next -to her, and shrugged his shoulders: ‘What kind of a bird are you, if you -can’t fly?’ said he. To this the Duck replied: ‘What kind of a bird are -you, if you can’t swim?’ and dived into the pond. They argued and -argued, the Duck swimming in the pond, the little Bird hopping along the -shore. - -“Suddenly, something caught Peter’s attention. He noticed a Cat crawling -through the grass. The Cat thought: ‘The Bird is busy arguing, I will -just grab him.’ Stealthily she crept toward him on her velvet paws. -‘Look out!’ shouted Peter, and the Bird immediately flew up into the -tree while the Duck quacked angrily at the Cat from the middle of the -pond. The Cat walked around the tree and thought: ‘Is it worth climbing -up so high? By the time I get there the Bird will have flown away.’ - -“Grandfather came out. He was angry because Peter had gone into the -meadow. ‘It is a dangerous place. If a Wolf should come out of the -forest, then what would you do?’ Peter paid no attention to -Grandfather’s words. Boys like him are not afraid of Wolves, but -Grandfather took Peter by the hand, locked the gate, and led him home. - -“No sooner had Peter gone than a big gray Wolf came out of the forest. -In a twinkling the Cat climbed up the tree. The Duck quacked, and in her -excitement jumped out of the pond. But no matter how hard the Duck tried -to run, she couldn’t escape the Wolf. He was getting nearer ... nearer -... catching up with her ... and then he got her and, with one gulp, -swallowed her. - -“And now, this is how things stand: the Cat was sitting on one branch, -the Bird on another—not too close to the Cat—and the Wolf walked round -and round the tree looking at them with greedy eyes. - -“In the meantime, Peter, without the slightest fear, stood behind the -closed gate watching all that was going on. He ran home, got a strong -rope, and climbed up the high stone wall. One of the branches of the -tree, round which the Wolf was walking, stretched out over the wall. -Grabbing hold of the branch, Peter lightly climbed over onto the tree. - -“Peter said to the Bird: ‘Fly down and circle round the Wolf’s head; -only take care that he doesn’t catch you.’ The Bird almost touched the -Wolf’s head with his wings while the Wolf snapped angrily at him from -this side and that. How the Bird did worry the wolf! How he wanted to -catch him! But the Bird was cleverer, and the Wolf simply couldn’t do -anything about it. - -“Meanwhile, Peter made a lasso and, carefully letting it down, caught -the Wolf by the tail and pulled with all his might. Feeling himself -caught, the Wolf began to jump wildly, trying to get loose. But Peter -tied the other end of the rope to the tree, and the Wolf’s jumping only -made the rope around his tail tighter. - -“Just then, the hunters came out of the woods following the Wolf’s trail -and shooting as they went. But Peter, sitting in the tree, said: ‘Don’t -shoot! Birdie and I have caught the Wolf. Now help us to take him to the -zoo.’ - -“And there ... imagine the procession: Peter at the head; after him the -hunters leading the Wolf; and winding up the procession, Grandfather and -the Cat. Grandfather tossed his head discontentedly! ‘Well, and if Peter -hadn’t caught the Wolf? What then?’ - -“Above them flew Birdie chirping merrily: ‘My, what brave fellows we -are, Peter and I! Look what we have caught!’ And if one would listen -very carefully he could hear the Duck quacking inside the Wolf; because -the Wolf in his hurry had swallowed her alive.” - -To Prokofieff’s biographer Nestyev “Peter and the Wolf” represents a -“gallery of clever and amusing animal portraits as vividly depicted as -though painted from nature by an animal artist.” Certainly, this -ingenious assortment of chirping and purring and clucking and howling, -translated into terms of a masterly orchestral speech, is the tender and -loving work of a story-teller patient and tolerant of the claims of -children, and awed by their infinite imaginative capacity. - - - _“Summer Day,” Children’s Suite for Little Symphony, Opus 65-B_ - -Five years after completing “Peter and the Wolf” Prokofieff returned -once again to the children’s corner. This time it was a suite for little -symphony called “Summer Day.” Actually the suite had begun as a series -of piano pieces, entitled “Children’s Music,” that Prokofieff had -written and published shortly before he turned his thoughts to “Peter -and the Wolf.” The chances are that it was this very “Children’s Music” -that precipitated him into the child’s world of wonder and fantasy from -which were to emerge Peter’s adventures in the animal kingdom. It was -not till 1941, however, that he assembled an assortment of these piano -pieces and arranged them for orchestra. Credit for their first -performance in America belongs to the New York Philharmonic-Symphony, -which included them on its program of October 25, 1945. Artur Rodzinski -conducted. At that time Robert Bagar and I were the society’s program -annotators, and the analysis given below was written by him for our -program-book of that date. - -I. “_Morning_” (_Andante tranquillo, C major, 4-4_). An odd little -phrase is played by the first flute with occasional reinforcement from -the second, while the other woodwinds engage in a mild counterpoint and -the strings and bass drum supply the rhythmic anchorage. In a middle -part the bassoons, horns, ’cellos and (later) the violas and bass sing a -rather serious melody, as violins and flutes offer accompanying figures. - -II. “_Tag_” (_Vivo, F major, 6-8_). A bright, tripping melody begins in -the violins and flutes and is soon shared by bassoons. It is repeated, -this time leading to the key of E-flat where the oboes play it in a -modified form. There follows a short intermediary passage in the same -tripping spirit, although the rhythm is stressed more. After some -additional modulations the section ends with the opening strain. - -III. “_Waltz_” (_Allegretto, A major, 3-4_). A tart and tangy waltz -theme, introduced by the violins, has an unusual “feel” about it because -of the unexpected intervals in the melody. In a more subdued manner the -violins usher in a second theme, which, however, is given a -Prokofieffian touch by the interspersed woodwind chords in octave skips. -As before, the opening idea serves as the section’s close. - -IV. “_Regrets_” (_Moderato, F major, 4-4_). An expressive, -straightforward melody starts in the ’cellos. Oboes pick it up in a -slightly revised form and they and the first violins conclude it. Next -the violins and clarinets give it a simple variation. In the meantime, -there are some subsidiary figures in the other instruments. All ends in -just the slightest kind of finale. - -V. “_March_” (_Tempo di marcia, C major, 4-4_). Clarinets and oboes each -take half of the chief melody. The horns then play it and, following a -brief middle sequence with unusual leaps, the tune ends in a harmonic -combination of flutes, oboes, horns and trumpets. - -VI. “_Evening_” (_Andante teneroso, F major, 3-8_). Prokofieff’s knack -of making unusual melodic intervals sound perfectly natural is here well -illustrated. A solo flute intones the opening bars of a pleasant -song-like tune, the rest of which is given to the solo clarinet. Still -in the same reflective mood, the music continues with a passage of -orchestral arpeggios, while the first violins take their turn with the -melody. A middle portion in A-flat major presents some measures of -syncopation. With a change of key to C major and again to F major, the -section ends tranquilly with a snatch of the opening tune. - -VII. “_Moonlit Meadows_” (_Andantino, D major, 2-4_). The solo flute -opens this section with a smooth-flowing melody which rather makes the -rounds, though in more or less altered form. The section ends quite -simply with three chords. - -This transcription departs but slightly from the piano originals, and -when it does so it is because the composer has obviously felt the need -of a stronger accent here or some figure there, unimportant in -themselves, which might serve to bolster up the Suite. - - - _March from the Opera, “The Love of Three Oranges”, Opus 33-A_ - -It was Cleofonte Campanini, leading conductor of the Chicago Opera -Company, who approached Prokofieff early in 1919 for an opera. -Prokofieff first offered “The Gambler”, of which he possessed only the -piano part, having left the orchestral score behind in the library of -the Maryinsky Theatre of Leningrad. The offer was put aside for a second -proposal—a project Prokofieff had already been toying with in Russia. -This was an opera inspired in part by a device prominent in the Italian -tradition of Commedia dell’Arte and based, as a story, on an Italian -classic. The idea excited Campanini, and a contract was speedily signed. -The piano score was completed by the following June, and in October the -orchestral score was ready for submission. Preparations were made for a -production in Chicago, when Campanini suddenly died. An entire season -went by before its world premiere was finally achieved under the -directorship of Mary Garden. This occurred on December 30, 1921, at the -Chicago Auditorium, with Prokofieff conducting and Nina Koshetz making -her American debut as the Fata Morgana. A French version was used, -prepared by Prokofieff and Vera Janacoupolos from the original Russian -text of the composer. Press and public were friendly, if not -over-enthusiastic. - -Less than two months later, on February 14, 1922, the Chicago Opera -Company presented the opera for the first time in New York, at the -Manhattan Opera House, with Prokofieff himself again conducting. This -time the critics were far from friendly. One of them remarked waspishly: -“The cost of the production is $130,000, which is $43,000 for each -orange. The opera fell so flat that its repetition would spell financial -ruin.” There were no further performances that season. Indeed it was not -till November 1, 1949, that “The Love of Three Oranges” returned to -American currency. It was on that night that Laszlo Halasz introduced -the work into the repertory of the New York City Opera Company at the -City Center of Music and Drama. The opera was presented in a skilful -English version made by Victor Seroff. The production was “an almost -startling success,” in the words of Olin Downes. “The opera became -overnight the talk of the town and took a permanent place in the -repertory of the company. This was due in large part to the character of -the production itself, which so well became the fantasy and satire of -the libretto, and the dynamic power of Prokofieff’s score. An additional -factor in the success was, without doubt, the development of taste and -receptivity to modern music on the part of the public which had taken -place in the intervening odd quarter of a century since the opera first -saw the light.” - -Prokofieff based his libretto on Carlo Gossi’s “Fiaba dell’amore delle -tre melarancie” (The Tale of the Love of the Three Oranges). Gozzi, an -eighteenth-century dramatist and story-teller, had a genius for giving -fresh form to old tales and legends and for devising new ones. The tales -were called _fiabe_, or fables. Later dramatists found them a fertile -source of suggestions for plot, and opera composers have been no less -indebted to this gifted teller of tales. Puccini’s “Turandot” is only -one of at least six operas founded on Gozzi’s masterly little _fiaba_ of -legendary China. The vein of satire running through Gozzi’s _fiabe_ has -also attracted subsequent writers and composers. It is not surprising -that Prokofieff, no mean satirist himself, found inspiration for an -opera in one of these delicious _fiabe_. - -In view of the great popularity which “The Love of Three Oranges” has -won in recent seasons in America, it may be of some practical use and -interest to the readers of this monograph to provide them with an -outline of the plot. I originally wrote the synopsis that follows for -“The Victor Book of Operas” in the 1949 issue revised and edited for -Simon & Schuster by myself and Robert Bagar. “The Love of Three Oranges” -is divided into a Prologue and Four Acts. - - PROLOGUE - -SCENE: _Stage, with Lowered Curtain and Grand Proscenium, on Each Side -of Which are Little Balconies and Balustrades._ An artistic discussion -is under way among four sets of personages on which kind of play should -be enacted on the present occasion. The Glooms, clad in appropriately -somber roles, argue for tragedy. The Joys, in costumes befitting their -temperament, hold out for romantic comedy. The Empty-heads disagree with -both and call for frank farce. At last, the Jesters (also called the -Cynics) enter, and succeed in silencing the squabbling groups. Presently -a Herald enters to announce that the King of Clubs is grieving because -his son never smiles. The various personages now take refuge in -balconies at the sides of the stage, and from there make comments on the -play that is enacted. But for their lack of poise and dignity, they -would remind one of the chorus in Greek drama. - - ACT I - -SCENE: _The King’s Palace._ The King of Clubs, in despair over his son’s -hopeless defection, has summoned physicians to diagnose the ailment. -After elaborate consultation, the doctors inform the King that to be -cured the Prince must learn to laugh. The Prince, alas, like most -hypochondriacs, has no sense of humor. The King resolves to try the -prescribed remedy. Truffaldino, one of the comic figures, is now -assigned the task of preparing a gay festival and masquerade to bring -cheer into the Prince’s smileless life. All signify approval of the plan -except the Prime Minister Leander, who is plotting with the King’s niece -Clarisse to seize the throne after slaying the Prince. In a sudden -evocation of fire and smoke, the wicked witch, Fata Morgana, appears, -followed by a swarm of little devils. As a fiendish game of cards ensues -between the witch, who is aiding Leander’s plot, and Tchelio, the court -magician, attendant demons burst into a wild dance. The Fata Morgana -wins and, with a peal of diabolical laughter, vanishes. The jester -vainly tries to make the lugubrious Prince laugh, and as festival music -comes from afar, the two go off in that direction. - - ACT II - -SCENE: _The Main Courtroom of the Royal Palace._ In the grand court of -the palace, merrymakers are busy trying to make the Prince laugh, but -their efforts are unavailing for two reasons: the Prince’s nature is -adamant to gaiety and the evil Fata Morgana is among them, spoiling the -fun. Recognizing her, guards seize the sorceress and attempt to eject -her. In the struggle that ensues she turns an awkward somersault, a -sight so ridiculous that even the Prince is forced to laugh out loud. -All rejoice, for the Prince, at long last, is cured! In revenge, the -Fata Morgana now pronounces a dire curse on the recovered Prince: he -shall again be miserable until he has won the “love of the three -oranges.” - - ACT III - -SCENE: _A Desert._ In the desert the magician Tchelio meets the Prince -and pronounces an incantation against the cook who guards the three -oranges in the near-by castle. As the Prince and his companion, the -jester Truffaldino, head for the castle, the orchestra plays a scherzo, -fascinating in its ingeniously woven web of fantasy. Arriving at the -castle, the Prince and Truffaldino obtain the coveted oranges after -overcoming many hazards. Fatigued, the Prince now goes to sleep. A few -moments later Truffaldino is seized by thirst and, as he cuts open one -of the oranges, a beautiful Princess steps out, begging for water. Since -it is decreed that the oranges must be opened at the water’s edge, the -helpless Princess promptly dies of thirst. Startled, Truffaldino at -length works up courage enough to open a second orange, and, lo! another -Princess steps out, only to meet the same fate. Truffaldino rushes out. -The spectators in the balconies at the sides of the stage argue -excitedly over the fate of the Princess in the third orange. When the -Prince awakens, he takes the third orange and cautiously proceeds to -open it. The Princess Ninette emerges this time, begs for water, and is -about to succumb to a deadly thirst, when the Jesters rush to her rescue -with a bucket of water. - - ACT IV - -SCENE: _The Throne Room of the Royal Palace._ The Prince and the -Princess Ninette are forced to endure many more trials through the evil -power of the Fata Morgana. At one juncture the Princess is even changed -into a mouse. The couple finally overcome all the hardships the witch -has devised, and in the end are happily married. Thus foiled in her -wicked sorcery, the Fata Morgana is captured and led away, leaving -traitorous Leander and Clarisse to face the King’s ire without the aid -of her magic powers. - - * * * - -Typical in this “burlesque opera” is Prokofieff’s penchant for witty, -sardonic writing. This cleverly evoked world of satiric sorcery is -perhaps far removed from Prokofieff’s main areas of operatic interest, -which were Russian history and literature. The pungent note of modernism -is readily heard in this music, though compared with the more dissonant -writing of Prokofieff’s piano and violin concertos, it is a kind of -modified modernism, diverting in its sophisticated discourse on the -child’s world of fairyland wonder. If, as Nestyev says, the work is “a -subtle parody of the old romantic opera with its false pathos and sham -fantasy,” it is primarily what it purports to be—a fairy tale, as gay -and sparkling and wondrous as any in the whole realm of opera. - - * * * - -The brilliant and bizarre “March” from this opera has become one of the -best known and most widely exploited symphonic themes of our time. It -comes as an exhilarating orchestral interlude in the first act at the -point where the straight-faced Prince and his Jester wander off in the -direction of the festival music. The “March” is built around a swaying -theme of irresistible appeal that mounts in power as it is repeated and -comes to a sudden and forceful halt, as if at the crack of a whip. - - - - - Footnotes - - -[1]I quote from Nestyev’s biography, translated by Rose Prokofieva and - published in this country by Alfred A. Knopf (1946). - - - Special Booklets published for - RADIO MEMBERS - of - THE PHILHARMONIC-SYMPHONY SOCIETY - OF NEW YORK - - POCKET-MANUAL of Musical Terms, - Edited by Dr. Th. Baker (G. Schirmer’s) - BEETHOVEN and his Nine Symphonies - by Pitts Sanborn - BRAHMS and some of his Works - by Pitts Sanborn - MOZART and some Masterpieces - by Herbert F. Peyser - WAGNER and his Music-Dramas - by Robert Bagar - TSCHAIKOWSKY and his Orchestral Music - by Louis Biancolli - JOHANN SEBASTIAN BACH and a few of his major works - by Herbert F. Peyser - SCHUBERT and his work - by Herbert F. Peyser - *MENDELSSOHN and certain MASTERWORKS - by Herbert F. Peyser - ROBERT SCHUMANN—Tone-Poet, Prophet and Critic - by Herbert F. Peyser - *HECTOR BERLIOZ—A Romantic Tragedy - by Herbert F. Peyser - *JOSEPH HAYDN—Servant and Master - by Herbert F. Peyser - GEORGE FRIDERIC HANDEL - by Herbert F. Peyser - RICHARD STRAUSS - by Herbert F. Peyser - -These booklets are available to Radio Members at 25c each while the -supply lasts except those indicated by asterisk. - - - - - Transcriber’s Notes - - ---A few palpable typos were silently corrected. - ---Retained transliteration of foreign names, including “Prokofieff” - rather than the currently-more-common “Prokofiev” - ---Copyright notice is from the printed exemplar. (U.S. copyright was not - renewed: this ebook is in the public domain.) - - - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Serge Prokofieff and his Orchestral -Music, by Louis Biancolli - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROKOFIEFF AND HIS ORCHESTRAL MUSIC *** - -***** This file should be named 50226-0.txt or 50226-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/2/2/50226/ - -Produced by Stephen Hutcheson, Dave Morgan and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |