Shostakovich's Symphony 11

The composer we studied this week was Dmitri Shostakovich, who wrote many works, including his Symphony 11, which was the specific work for this week.  Looking at the symphony through an historical lens of socialist realism creates an interesting, if not controversial, background to the piece.  Soviets wanted to use music for propaganda, so it needed to meet certain criteria: have a happy ending, be about and for the Common Man, use folk material, and above all, glorify the motherland.  After an article was written about Shostakovich’s opera Lady MacBeth of the Mtsenk District, (presumably by Stalin) it would be safe to think that Shostakovich would want to write something to please the government.  His Symphony 11 is based on the events of January of 1905, “The Eve of Bloody Sunday.” 

Knowing the historical background of the composer and his country creates a deeper connection to the symphony; however, it is not needed.  Shostakovich wrote in such a way that, when I listened to it the first time without any knowledge of the history, I still connected with the piece.  It was dark and real.  He used percussion in ways we have not heard in the works we’ve studied thus far.  The timpani sounded like a battle drum, or an execution march in the final movement.  Before learning about the piece, it sounded like a battle going on, then an execution march, followed by the quiet after death.  The piece is amazing before knowing the history behind it, and then it’s even more interesting after learning about the history.

This symphony follows the rules for what music was supposed to be like during the Soviet rule.  There are a plethora of Russian revolutionary songs used throughout the symphony.  “The Prisoner” is used in the first movement, starting at pickup to measure 16.  In the fourth movement, measure 140 has the song “Varshivianka” as its melody.  The symphony itself was written for the Common Man, with its use of these songs, and with the ease of listening to it.  It creates emotion within the listener, and was very well received.

This work has similarities to some of the other orchestral work we’ve studied thus far in the semester.  Shostakovich’s use of Russian revolutionary songs throughout the piece is similar to Stravinsky’s use of Russian folk songs throughout his Rite of Spring.  Both Symphony 11 and Copland’s Lincoln Portrait were written as nationalistic pieces, yet both have been looked at controversially for what their composers may have actually meant with the work; Copland for communist tendencies, and Shostakovich as not actually a nationalistic piece.

This piece, however, is a great example of the use of “place” that we have been discussing all semester long.  Knowledge of place behind the composer and piece gives more to the listener and studier.  After hearing about the conditions of Russia during the Soviets and Stalin ruling, I was able to understand better the underlying pain throughout the piece.  When we learned about the ultimate fear that Russians felt every day, including Shostakovich, it made me understand why he wrote such a nationalistic symphony, yet it could be argued that there are underlying tones not cohesive to the nationalistic outlook.  This is the same when you look at national governments and their influence on classical music.  Where composers are and what is happening in their world, greatly influences their music.  Copland is another example of this, like I talked about earlier.  When his work was supposed to be played at a president’s inauguration, the government stepped in and said that, because he may be communist friendly, his work should not be used for the event.  The government has the power to interfere with music just as much as everything else.  Roosevelt influenced music with the New Deal and WPA Music Program.  Much of the same thing happened in Soviet Russia, with Stalin being able to dictate the music and control the musicians through fear.