48
| gpmf.org
Friday and Saturday, June 19 and 20, 2015
than remarking upon its general connection with Stalin’s numbing brutality, which
hung like a pall over the period of the composer’s life when the work was conceived.
Ray Blokker offered perhaps the most sensible approach to this composition when
he wrote that it was not meant to convey any “program” or to provide the grandeur
and affirmation of the Fifth Symphony. “Instead,” Blokker concluded, “it aims at a
more modest target: that of providing sheer musical enjoyment for both musicians
and audiences.”
The influence of Mahler on Shostakovich is plainly evident in the Sixth Symphony
in its often sparse, chamber-like textures, the profound nature of its emotional
expression, and its juxtaposition of music of widely different characters. The
Symphony begins with a slow movement in two-part form to which is added a brief
concluding section that returns the opening themes. The two motives that dominate
the first section are presented in close order. One theme, played immediately by
low woodwinds and low strings in unison, is characterized by its triplet rhythms
and octave leaps. The other theme, appearing in the seventh measure in the
violins and flutes, has a fall of the interval of a diminished seventh (a progression
reserved by Bach and other Baroque composers for their most deeply felt melodies)
and a snarling trill. These two themes are masterfully combined, juxtaposed and
intertwined in the following pages without losing either their emotional intensity or
their broad lyricism. The movement’s second section largely comprises a series of
passages for instruments in soloistic combinations. The English horn is the first to
give the theme, a dirge-like strain that fluctuates between minor and major modes.
The flutes, clarinets, oboe and violins are entrusted with the sad, fragmented
melody as the section unfolds. A mournful, almost motionless plaint from the solo
horn serves as the transition to the closing pages, less a true recapitulation of the
opening themes than a
résumé
of their melodic essentials and emotional natures.
Edward Downes wrote that this
Largo
“is some of the finest music Shostakovich has
given us; one of his most thoughtful, least self-conscious, least rhetorical and most
spontaneous symphonic movements.”
The second movement is a scherzo anointed with Shostakovich’s most biting
humor. The central portion of the movement is distinguished by awkward rhythmic
syncopations and a single-pitch ostinato that hammers away incessantly in various
instruments until the return of the scherzo. The finale bursts with a bristling with
reminiscent of the more caustic strains of Prokofiev. A number of themes are
presented and discussed before the beginning of the second section, a heavy dance
in pounding triple meter. The solo violin initiates the recall of the opening themes,
which are complemented by a boisterous tune that sounds like a Slavic refugee from
a feverish Broadway show. The Symphony ends with the full orchestra hurling forth
this brash melody.
Wrote Leopold Stokowski, conductor of the American premiere of the Sixth
Symphony in Philadelphia in 1940, “In each symphony Shostakovich shows himself
to be more of a master, to be ever growing, ever expanding in his imagination and
musical consciousness. In his Sixth Symphony, he has reached new depths, especially
in the first part. Here are harmonic sequences, and several melodies sounding at the
same time, making modern counterpoint, which are of great originality and intensity
of expression. At first they sound strange and even obscure, as if the meaning was
concealed and hidden. But after hearing this music ... it becomes clear, and has
great depth of expression.”
©2015 Dr. Richard E. Rodda
