III
The Leningrad
|
War was all around. I had to be with
the people, I wanted to create the image of our country
at war, capture it in music. From the first days of
the war I sat down at the piano and started work.
I worked intensely. I wanted to write about our time,
about my contemporaries who spared neither strength
nor life in the name of Victory Over the Enemy. (1)
|
Symphony No.7, the Leningrad is a model example of
the uncertainty which can surround the meaning of the music
of Shostakovich. That the symphony is about the destruction
of Leningrad and the trials to which its people were subjected
is certain, but the identity of the enemy who caused this
destruction has for many years been the subject of much debate
and even acrimony among academics. The traditional view, both
inside and outside the old Soviet Union, was that the symphony
was the product of a patriotic artist rallying his artistic
prowess against the enemies of the Soviet State. The conflict
that is portrayed throughout the symphony, and particularly
in the first movement was believed to be the war between the
U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany. The destruction that is wrought
is the destruction brought on Leningrad during the siege of
1941 by the advancing German armies.
The view of Shostakovich as a committed socialist was one
that helped create the myth surrounding the symphony, and
was in many ways responsible for the international fame that
the composer achieved at that time. As a propaganda tool,
the symphony was used by the Allies to demonstrate the absolute
commitment of the coalition against the Axis powers in every
way possible. The score for the Leningrad was committed
to microfilm and smuggled to America via North Africa. Its
first U.S. performance was to a radio audience of millions,
under the baton of Toscannini. It was an immediate success
and there were over sixty performances in the U.S. alone over
the following year. Shostakovich himself appeared dressed
in a firefighters uniform on the cover of Time magazine
in July 1942, and this furthered the beliefs about the composer's
dedication to the Soviet State.
The circumstances surrounding the genesis of the symphony
are as heroic as is the music itself. Shostakovich was living
in Leningrad at the outbreak of war with Germany in 1941.
It is said that he immediately tried to enlist in the army
in order to serve his country, but was rejected on the grounds
of his poor eyesight. He insisted on staying in the city for
much of the siege and worked on the symphony there, before
being evacuated to Kuibyschev where he completed the work
in December 1941. The Leningrad, having previously
been performed in Kuibyschev and Moscow, had its first performance
in its eponymous city on 9 August 1942 while German soldiers
still laid siege to the city. The orchestra at this performance
included the remnants of the Leningrad Radio Orchestra - many
of its members killed on the front line - and any other instrumentalists
that could be gathered in the besieged city. The performance
was preceded by an intense barrage of German artillery positions
surrounding the city, so that the performance would go ahead
uninterrupted. The orchestra assembled in the bomb-damaged
concert hall, and their performance was broadcast throughout
the city. Shostakovich, denied the chance to fight on the
front line with his fellow citizens, provided them with a
symbol of their defiance - one which could make them proud
of the war torn and starving city in which they were trapped.
The first movement of the Seventh Symphony was initially conceived
as a complete one movement symphony in itself, and it was
only after playing it on piano for his friend and confidante,
Ivan Sollertinsky, that Shostakovich decided to extend it
into the four movement work that is the Seventh Symphony.
It is this first movement that contains the most distinct
and obvious references to conflict and destruction through
thematic interaction. The second and third movements are less
specific in relation to the external referents of war and
violence although both still contain aspects of conflict.
The final movement deals with war in a more abstract manner,
and it is only in the final bars that more concrete representation
returns, with the restatement of the opening movement's first
theme. The thematic statements and their development in the
first movement most readily lend themselves to the sort of
varying interpretations to which they have been subjected,
both by those with partisan interests, and by those who just
wished to discover the truth of what the work is about. In
relation to the actual specifics of external referents - the
extra musical content - of the work, these are obscured by
the lies and deceits of half a century. While the composer
initially gave a very specific programme for the movement,
this is contradicted by his later statements in Testimony.
|
[It] tells how our pleasant and peaceful
life was disrupted by the ominous force of war. I
did not intend to describe the war in a naturalistic
manner (the drone of aircraft, the rumbling of tanks,
artillery, salvos, etc.). I wrote no so-called battle
music. I was trying to present the spirit and essence
of those harsh events. The exposition of the first
movement (Allegretto) tells of the happy life led
by the people . . . such as was led by the Leningrad
volunteer fighters before the war . . . by the entire
city . . . by the entire country. The theme of war
governs the middle passages. (2)
|
This is in contrast with his later statements to Solomon
Volkov about the content of the Seventh and Eight Symphonies.
|
Actually, I have nothing against calling
the Seventh the Leningrad Symphony, but its
not about Leningrad under siege, its about the Leningrad
that Stalin destroyed and that Hitler merely finished
off.
(3)
|
|
Even before the war, in Leningrad
there probably wasn't a single family who hadn't lost
someone, a father, a brother, or if not a relative,
then a close friend. [. . .] I had to write about
it, I felt it was my responsibility, my duty. I had
to write a requiem for all those who died, who had
suffered. I had to describe the horrible extermination
machine and express protest against it. (4)
|
Flora Litvinova, a neighbour and friend of the Shostakovich
family during their exile in Kuibyschev later recalled his
comments on the evening when he first played the reduction
of the entire symphony for friends and colleagues.
|
Later, when Dmitri Dmitriyevich became
used to me and began to trust me, he told me directly
that the Seventh (and Fifth as well) are not only
about fascism but about our system, in general about
any totalitarianism. (5)
|
The composer is said to originally have planned entitling
the movements in the following manner.
(6)
|
I. War
II. Reminiscences
III. Russia's Vastness
IV. Victory
|
Allegretto
Moderato (poco allegretto)
Adagio - attacca
Allegro non troppo
|
Although he did not write these titles in the final score,
he is not known to have abandoned the ideas that gave rise
to these titles. The first movement in particular is representational
in the manner described. Indeed, having listened to the work
with these ideas in mind, the conflict of themes and the reworking
of these themes simply does not allow for any interpretation
of the work which ignores the programmatic aspects of the
opening and final movements to be a valid one. This, however,
does not help to guide the listener and analyst in finding
an interpretation as to what conflicts or persons the symphony
refers to.
Some have claimed that the initial idea for the symphony contained
a deceit, whereby it could have been presented to the victor
of the war, regardless of which side that may have been .
This reflects the idea that many Soviet citizens initially
welcomed the Germans as liberators from Stalinist oppression.
The Russians soon realised, however, that the Nazis were just
as cruel, if not crueller, than their own political masters,
and all was thrown into the defence of the city against the
invaders. (See thematic discussion in chapter IV.) The more
universal aspects of titanic struggle and individual tragedy
are, however, unmistakable in the context of the gigantic
scale of war and individual savagery that are characteristic
of human conflict in the twentieth century. Whatever else
the Leningrad is about, it is about war and as such,
I feel a detailed analysis of the thematic symbolism and juxtaposition
of the materials of the first movement, along with a concurrent
discussion of possible meanings is the best way to approach
a discussion of the meaning of this symphony.
|
