DMITRI SHOSTAKOVICH: SYMPHONY NO. 13

A Contextual Analysis

Nicholas Muzik

Advisor: Dr. Jonathan Saylor

February 1, 2017

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE PAGE

1. Shostakovich, Thirteenth Symphony, mvt. I, beginning…………………………………….11

2. Shostakovich, Thirteenth Symphony, mvt. I, 2 before rehearsal 5………………………….12

3. Shostakovich, Thirteenth Symphony, common pitch collection throughout………………...15

4. Shostakovich, Thirteenth Symphony, mvt. 2, rehearsal 51………………………………….16

Scores used: New Collected Works. Vol. 13 and 28. 1st Series

2

Shostakovich’s Thirteenth Symphony marked one of the last openly controversial

altercations between him and the Soviet authorities. During a period where Khrushchev's

“Thaw”1 was coming to a close and the government’s grasp on artistic integrity was being

tightened, Dmitri Shostakovich produced a texted symphony whose musical and textual content

proved volatile for the unstable political and social happenings of the early 1960s. In addition to

briefly narrating the symphony’s creation and premiere, this paper will overview some of the

social circumstances in which it was created, outline Shostakovich’s settings of the poetry, and

note the significance of the symphony’s various critiques on Soviet politics and society.

* * *

The Thirteenth Symphony sets five poems written by Yevgeny Yevtushenko.2 The

symphony was originally conceived as a tone poem using “Babi Yar” (1961) as its only text.

Additional poems, “Humor” (1960), “In the Store” (1956), and “A Career” (1957), were then

taken from Yevtushenko’s collection in Vzmakh ruik (A Wave of Hand) and added as additional

movements. The text of the fourth movement, “Fears” (not published until 1966) was

commissioned by Shostakovich and written specifically for the Thirteenth Symphony. Each of

these poems was written separately and therefore they were not intended to be a collection of

poems or to infer a unified message. Rather, the composer collected the poetry over the course of

1961-1962.

* * *

The creation of the Thirteenth Symphony was brought about by Shostakovich’s old

1 “The Thaw” was a decade-long period following Stalin’s death in 1953 in which Nikita

Khrushchev denounced Stalin’s repressive tenure and his “cult of personality.” Beginning with

literature, artists explored new forms of relatively free expression and sometimes went as far as

to offer criticism of Soviet policies/history. 2 Text of the Symphony is found in Appendix B

3

friend, Isaak Glikman. He recalls that he visited Shostakovich, who was living in Leningrad at

the time. “The foundation for the entire Thirteenth Symphony was laid in September 1961. I

brought Yevgeny Yevtushenko’s poem ‘Babi Yar’, which astounded me with its dramatic force

and strength to Dmitri Dmitriyevich…In the evening, he phoned me and said that he shared my

high opinion of ‘Babi Yar’ and would certainly write a vocal-symphonic poem to its words.”3

Within the next six months, Shostakovich completed a single-movement piece using

Yevtushenko’s poetry: Symphonic Poem, “Babi Yar” for Bass Soloist, Bass Choir, and

Orchestra, Op. 113. Throughout March of 1962 he finished the rough draft and piano score. The

orchestral score was completed on April 21. As he composed “Babi Yar,” the idea to expand this

poem into a large work began to develop. At the end of May, Shostakovich again contacted

Glikman:

I came up with the idea of writing something else, along the same lines to Yevtushenko’s

words. His little volume of poetry is making me think about writing a symphony in which

‘Babi Yar’ will be the first or second movement. When I see you, I’ll show you the

poems I asked for. This is how the 13th symphony is taking shape. Will it materialize? I’ll

have to wait and see.4

Throughout his composition of this symphonic poem, Shostakovich delayed any

communication with the poet, concerning his newest endeavors. But, when he completed the

piano score, Shostakovich phoned the poet, asking for permission to write the already existing

piece. In the words of Yevtushenko, as soon as he was granted permission to set the text,

Shostakovich responded, “That piece I mentioned...well, I’ve already finished it.”5 Promptly

after this conversation, Yevgeny and his wife met with the composer and listened to the vocal

symphonic poem. It was at this meeting that Shostakovich explained his desire to work with him

3 Shostakovich, Letters to a Friend, 173 4 Ibid., 172-173 5 Yevtushenko, I Came to You, Babi Yar…, 27

4

further, possibly developing a texted symphony. The composer told Yevtushenko, “You know, I

feel as though it needs to be expanded, intensified...Would you happen to have any other poems,

about fears for example?” This meeting instigated regular communication between the two. And

shortly thereafter, Yevtushenko presented his recently published collection of poems called

Vzmakh ruki (A Wave of the Hand). It was from this collection that Shostakovich chose three of

the Thirteenth Symphony’s texts: II. “Humour,” III. “In the Shop,” and V. “A Career.” Not

included in this collection was the text of the fourth movement, “Fears.” This was written per the

request of the composer sometime between April and July of 1962.6 Throughout the month of

July, Shostakovich rapidly completed the remaining four movements. The dates on the

manuscripts illustrate the speed in which they were created: July 5th—“Humour,” July 9—“In

the Shop,” July 16—“Fears,” and July 20—“A Career.”7

Throughout this compositional process, Shostakovich wrote to Glikman of how greatly

he was plagued to find the proper vocalist to sing “Babi Yar.” One of his top picks was the native

Ukrainian, Boris Gmyrya. The very evening that he completed the final movement on July 20,

the composer left for Kiev to meet with the prospective bassist. Because he grew up in Kiev and

had known first-hand the massacre at the Babi Yar ravine, Gmyrya was an ideal candidate to

engage with the text and sing “Babi Yar’s” premiere. Yet, two weeks after their meeting, the

composer received notice from Gmyrya that he could not perform the work due to the sensitive

and controversial nature of the text of the first movement. Boris explained, “I have consulted

with the leadership of the Ukrainian SSR concerning your 13th symphony. I was told that the

Ukrainian leadership is categorically against the performance of Yevtushenko’s poem ‘Babi

Yar’. In these circumstances, I, naturally, will be unable to take part in performing the

6 Karachevskaya, New Collected Works, volume 28, 362 7 Ibid., 362

5

symphony, which I am regretfully informing you of.”8

This initial disappointment of his desired soloist was soon paired with another

disappointment. Three days after his visit with Gmyrya in Kiev, Shostakovich travelled to

Estonia to visit Yevgeny Mravinsky and petition him to conduct the premiere of Symphony 13.

Mravinsky was a long-time, close friend of Shostakovich and had conducted the premieres of

Symphonies 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12. While Mravinsky received the score in July, his decline to

conduct it was even more elusive than Gmyrya, as he did not produce a clear response for many

months. By October, Shostakovich was running out of time and took it upon himself to ask Kirill

Kondrashin to conduct the premiere of the Thirteenth Symphony. Nearly a year before in the

previous December, Kondrashin conducted his first premiere of a Shostakovich work with the

premiere of Shostakovich’s long-awaited Symphony 4. Nevertheless, these events were met with

disappointment, as Mravinsky was Shostakovich’s favorite interpreter of his symphonic works.

Additionally, his refusal to conduct the Thirteenth Symphony was paired with his unenthused

reaction to the Fourth Symphony’s premiere back in 1961. Shostakovich interpreted these two

consecutive clashes as an act of betrayal.9

Mravinsky’s rejection of the Thirteenth Symphony is often attributed to his second wife,

Inna. This common narrative comes from the composer, Isaak Shvarts, who describes how Inna

influenced his decision not to conduct the symphony. Shvarts says that, “She put forward an

irrefutable argument for a refusal to perform the work: Mravinsky never conducted choral works.

‘You must only conduct pure music.’”10 It is often noted that this seemingly shallow excuse

came from a woman who had once worked as a Communist Party activist. While the ideological

8 Letter from Boris Gmyrya to Dmitri Shostakovich of 15 August 1962 9 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 241 10 Ibid., 242-243

6

influence of her advice may in fact be true, her advice still has merit: Mravinsky, who was

typically a symphonic composer, had not conducted a choral work in over a decade.11

Furthermore, the last time he had worked on a choral piece by Shostakovich was in 1949 with

the premiere of his symphonic cantata, Song of the Forests.12

Concersly, Mravinsky’s third wife, Alexandra Vavilina completely denies Shvarts’

account. She claims that when Mravinsky received the offer from Shostakovich, he did not in

fact refuse to conduct the work. Rather he expressed problems with the scheduling of everything.

Mravinsky and his orchestra had left on an extended tour to Canada and the United States of

America, not returning until the end of November. Furthermore, Vavilina states that his second

wife, Inna, had recently been diagnosed with a terminal illness, and he wished to devote his time

to her.13 But, at that time, he did not feel comfortable transferring this private information to

Shostakovich over the phone. Nevertheless, Mravinsky’s refusal to conduct the premiere was the

second and final blow to his long relationship with Shostakovich. While their relationship healed

significantly in the following years, it never regained its full strength.14

During the intervening months of silence from Mravinsky, Shostakovich began writing

the four-hand piano arrangement of the symphony. By August 13 of 1962, he completed the

arrangement. As was his custom with previous symphonic works—his Ninth, Eleventh, Twelfth,

and Fifteenth symphonies—Shostakovich most likely created this arrangement in order to

present it at the Union of Composers. While producing a four-hand arrangement was common

for the composer, this manuscript presents some peculiarities. For, unlike his other four-hand

11 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 241 12 Mravinsky conducted the premiere of this symphonic cantata and it received great acclaimed,

garnering a Stalin-Prize later that year. 13 Fay, Shostakovich: A Life, 233 14 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 243

7

arrangements which contain countless performance markings, either from himself or his

students, Shostakovich’s manuscript does not contain a single marking. Furthermore, the

composer’s friends and family have no recollection that the four-hand arrangement was ever

used for a performance. Maria Karachevskaya points to this oddity, remarking that, “According

to the reminiscences of Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Veniamin Basner, and Kirill Kondrashin,

Shostakovich played the symphony for them on his own using the two-hand piano score…Irina

Shostakovich did not recall the four-hand arrangement being used to play the symphony

either.”15

Nearly three months later in October of 1962, after Gmyrya and Mravinsky’s refusal to

perform the work, Shostakovich presented the symphony to four of his friends: Kirill

Kondrashin, Revol Bunin, Mieczyslaw Weinberg, and Aram Khachaturian. Before each of the

movements Shostakovich would read the poem aloud, and then proceed to play and sing the

arrangement. When he had made it through the entire work, the four of them discussed possible

soloists. For, according the Kondrashin, “It was clear that Mravinsky would conduct the first

performance in Leningrad.”16 Three days later though, Kondrashin received a phone call from

Shostakovich, asking if they could meet. The two met on September 30, and Shostakovich

informed Kondrashin of Mravinsky’s decline and formally asked him to conduct the premiere of

Symphony 13 a little of two months away.

In the ensuing weeks, the premiere of the Thirteenth Symphony was approaching quickly.

It was scheduled to be performed twice on December 18 and 20 at the Grand Hall of the Moscow

Conservatory with the Moscow Philharmonic led by Kirill Kondrashin and accompanied by the

soloist Viktor Nechipailo. While Nechipailo was initially chosen as the bass soloist, the alternate,

15 Karachevskaya, New Collected Works, volume 28, 365 16 Ibid, 365

8

Vitaliy Gromadsky ended up singing the work through a strange sequence of events on the

morning of the premiere. Irina Shostakovich, the then recently married, third wife of the

composer, describes these events:

“I was very struck by the first premiere…I had thought that once a composer has finished

a work what comes afterwards would be pure pleasure - rehearsals would start,

premieres, interviews, success, congratulations and so on. It turned out to be very

different.…The next morning, when the dress rehearsal was supposed to have taken

place, the singer who was meant to sing the solo part [Viktor Nechipailo] was suddenly

summoned to the Bolshoi [Theatre]. The choir and the orchestra turned up but there was

no soloist. Another soloist was sent for, whom the Philharmonia supplied as a stand-in.

They waited two hours for him. Then he arrived and sang, but at the rehearsal there were

people from the Central Committee department present and during the break they told

Shostakovich that he was expected at the Central Committee. Although he was told there

that the premiere would take place, Shostakovich got very worked up.17

Many speculate that the scheduled performer at the Bolshoi Theatre, who became sick suddenly,

had been told to “take ill” per Party instructions.18 Nevertheless, the entire orchestra and choir sat

and waited for the alternate soloist to show up. Gromadsky lived on the outskirts of Moscow and

did not own a phone. The conductor described the scene: “The hall is filled with bigwigs: deputy

ministers of culture, representatives of the Central Committee and other unknown people. Dmitri

Dmitriyevich is sitting with a pale face, in a state of nerves…”19 Messengers eventually found

Gromadsky, brought him to the hall, and the rehearsal started. Yet, during which, Kondrashin

received a call from the Minister of Culture, Georgy Popov, requesting that the work be

performed without the first movement. To which, the conductor answered with a simple “no.”

Popov responded, saying, “Well, do as you see fit.”20

After the brief, but successful rehearsal, Shostakovich was called into a meeting with

members of the Central Committee. Here, they informed him that the piece would be performed,

17 Shostakovich, Interview with O. Dvornichenko 18 Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 408 19 Razhnikov, Kirill Kondrashin Relates, 186 20 Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 360

9

deciding that there was greater danger to insight public curiosity by cancelling the performance

on the day of its premiere, than to let the performance continue.21

As planned, the Thirteenth Symphony was performed that night. Boris Schwarz describes

the performance:

The government box remained unoccupied, and a planned television transmission did not

take place … the entire square [was] cordoned off by the police. Inside, the hall was filled

to overflowing … The tension was unbearable. The first movement, Babyi Yar, was

greeted with a burst of spontaneous applause. At the end of the hour-long work, there was

an ovation rarely witnessed. On the stage was Shostakovich, shy and awkward, bowing

stiffly. He was joined by Yevtushenko, moving with the ease of a born actor. Two great

artists—a generation apart—fighting for the same cause—freedom of the human spirit.

Seeing the pair together, the audience went wild…. (Contrary to custom) the texts were

not printed in the programme.22

Isaak Glikman also recalls the premiere, saying, “…It is very difficult to convey in

words what went on in the hall. The music was reminiscent, along with its brilliant humour, of an

elevated liturgy. After the finale, the entire audience rose and a frenetic ovation began that lasted

forever.”23 Schwarz, who attended the premiere, describes how during the applause Shostakovich

walked on stage and bowed awkwardly. Yevtushenko soon joined him, to which the crowd

responded with wild rhythmic clapping and unified chanting of “Bra-vo Shos-ta-ko-vich” and

“Bra-vo Yev-tu-shen-ko.”24

The next morning, Pravda issued a single sentence report, poorly describing the high

success that was the Thirteenth Symphony. The following performance on December 20

continued unhindered. But soon after, as the public attention to the symphony began to wane, the

authorities banned all future performances until revisions were made to the texts of “Babi Yar”

and “Fears.” A month later in January, in accordance with the demands of the Soviet censors,

21 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 243 22 Schwarz, Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia, 367 23 Glikman, Letters to a Friend, 183 24 Schwarz, Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia, 367

10

Yevtushenko revised both “Babi Yar” and “Fears.” As Michael Mishra points out, “In typical

Soiviet fashion, the revised texts whitewashed over the specifically Jewish tragedy of Babi Yar,

substituting instead generalized statements about brotherhood and antifascism.”25 Likewise, the

problems that the censors had with “Fears” were lines that were significantly pointed at Russian

social and political justice. Even though Yevtushenko revised the text, Shostakovich did not

amend the text in the manuscript. The symphony is most-commonly performed with its original,

1963 text. These revisions are found in Appendix B.

* * *

While the first portion of this analysis has covered some of the narrative and contextual

elements of the Thirteenth Symphony, the rest will focus on Shostakovich’s engagement

between the music and the text, as well as the socio-political implications of its societal and

political critiques. Before addressing the specific musical elements though, there is a common

misunderstanding regarding the form of the work. The Thirteenth Symphony is frequently

categorized as a symphonic cantata or an oratorio. This is largely unwarranted and a

misrepresentative label, since the vocal music is predominantly symphonic in quality. The vocal

parts of the symphony are set to a bass soloist and bass choir, and except for a short moment in

the third movement, the chorus only sings in unison. While there exist small excerpts throughout

the symphony that are sung in a dialogue-like exchange,26 the soloist and choir are normally

confined to their own parts. Also, it is significant to note the unanimity of tone-color that the

bass soloist and bass chorus comprise. When the chorus doubles the soloist, the tone-color is not

25 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 243 26 The most obvious example of this is in the Anne Frank episode of the first movement where

there is a short exchange between the soloist (Anne Frank) and the chorus (her lover). This is

developed further in the second movement as well. These types of dialogues are not typical of

texted symphonies. Longman, Expression and Structure, 327-328

11

expanded, but rather merely amplified. These elements further lend the categorization to a

symphonic form, not a cantata or an oratorio.

* * *

The first movement, “Babi Yar,” of the Thirteenth Symphony opens in a solemn, dirge-

like Adagio in B♭ minor.27 In a similar approach to the first movement of his Eleventh

Symphony, Shostakovich paints very literal, programmatic images in setting “Babi Yar.”

Shostakovich engages with each historical episode that the poet presents, using the soloist,

chorus, and orchestra to represent different characters and moods that are found in the poetry.

The haunted grave that Yevtushenko describes from the beginning with words,28 Shostakovich

paints with music, opening with an oscillating low string motive, a tolling bell, and paired

trumpets that branch out with an oblique, chromatic, four-note motive. This movement, known

as the “Babi Yar” motive closely resembles a theme used by Mussorgsky in the Act II aria, “Ah,

I am suffocating,” in his 1874 opera, Boris Godunov.

“Babi Yar” motive:

Shostakovich continues using these patterns and motives until the chorus enters at rehearsal 1.

As the text progresses through each historical episode, the cinematic quality of the poem is

reflected in the music. When the narrator assumes the role of a boy being beaten at the hands of

an anti-Semitic pogrom in Bialystok, the tempo increases, the key jumps to G minor, and the

27 Whether or not Shostakovich intended this symphony to relate to this, the historical nature of

B♭ minor is one of darkness and preparation for death. Shostakovich would sometimes use the

traditional 19th century affective key characteristics. This is seen often in his string quartets. i.e.

4, 8, 12, 15, etc. Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics, 291-293 28 “Wild grasses rustle over Babi Yar…Everything silently cries here aloud, and having taken off

my cap I feel how I am slowly turning gray. And I myself am as an uninterrupted and soundless

cry about the thousands of thousands buried.” See Appendix A

12

instrumental writing converts to a percussive, oppressively violent two-step dance. Subsequently,

the chorus enters, embodying the enraged mob, assaulting the boy with harsh, speech-like

swooping. The chorus’ dynamic line swoops harshly as they sing “Blood is flowing, spreading

over the floor. Bar-counter barons commit outrages.”

Chorus line at rehearsal 5.

Baxter describes this scene: “[The] woodwinds snarl an inverted form of the “Babi Yar” theme

over a lively Jewish dance.”29 This violent pogrom scene from Bialystok continues to build until

rehearsal 9, where the music seamlessly slows and falls back into B♭ minor, reviving the “Babi

Yar” theme—this time in the violins.

After this return to the opening material, without warning at 13, the scene jumps to the

Anne Frank episode. Shostakovich sets this episode in the remote key of E major. During this

last historic allusion, it is the narrator who embodies the character of Anne Frank. While

maintaining a low dynamic, the bass soloist jumps and totters, circling chromatically near the top

of his range. Shostakovich imitates the innocence and tenderness of a young girl’s voice by

writing a very high, very soft vocal line. This high timbral change, along with a low dynamic,

lends to greater character personification of a young girl. But, just as quickly as Anne Frank

enters the scene, so does an unnamed enemy, personified by the orchestra. Jeffrey Baxter

describes this scene: “The approaching enemy is characterized by low strings, bassoons and a

bass drum in an unrelenting march (built on the x-theme and underpinned by a menacing pedal-

point B-natural). A dialogue ensues between the two characters, the orchestra being the textless

29 Baxter, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”, 3

13

enemy ‘breaking down the door.’”30 During this scene, Shostakovich quotes the Russian folk

song, “Akh, Vy seni, moi seni” (“Oh, my hay, my hay”). This melody is found in the low register

of the bassoons, trombone, and tuba. As the scene reaches its climax, an enormous, full

orchestral cadence snaps the listener back to B♭ minor, releasing the “Babi Yar” theme at

fortissimo, accompanied by flourishes in the strings and woodwinds.

As is common throughout his symphonies, Shostakovich breaks conventions and avoids

the traditional sonata-allegro form of a symphonic first movement. Rather, he organizes each

section according to the thematic arrangement of Yevtushenko’s poem. Theorists rarely agree on

the form of the first movement. In his thesis, Richard Longman analyzes the first movement as a

“modified sonata scheme,” calling the rehearsal number 1-8 the exposition, 9-16 the

development, and 21-28 the recapitulation. He then goes on to label rehearsal marks 16-21 as an

“Instrumental Climax” and 29-30 an “Instrumental Codetta.”31 On the other hand, John

Hausmann argues in his thesis that Shostakovich completely eschews the traditional sonata-

allegro form. He then goes on to distinguish the structure as a three-part musical structure,

delineated by “the poem’s distinct, almost cinematic timelines.”32 The thematic sections of these

episodic timelines found in the poem end up producing a five-part form:

A. Babi Yar: Present Day

B. Historical Episodes: Israel in Egypt, Jesus Christ, Dreyfus, Bialystok Pogrom

A. Present Day

C. Historical Episodes: Anne Frank

A. Babi Yar: Present Day

While Shostakovich does not write the first movement as a five-part rondo or sonata form, the

five thematic divisions of the poem heavily influence Shostakovich’s musical divisions. Each

30 Baxter, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”, 2 31 Longman, Expression and Structure, 330 32 John Hausmann, Shostakvoich, Yevtushenko, and Criticism, 3

14

time the text returns to a present-day perspective or references Babi Yar, there is an obvious

reappearance of the opening “Babi Yar” theme. This slightly resembles the ABA of sonata or

rondo form because of these returns, especially the large cadence after the Anne Frank episode.

While Longman and Hausmann have their own interpretations about what the exact approach to

the form is, it is clear that while Shostakovich avoids the traditional sonata-allegro form, the

musical form is linked directly to the poem.

As he does throughout Symphony 13, the first movement significantly borrows elements

from Mussorgsky’s opera, Boris Godunov. For most of his compositional career, Shostakovich

had been strongly influenced by Mussorgsky, especially his operas and songs. He once stated

that “Mussorgsky and I have a ‘special relationship.’ He was an entire academy for me—of

human relations, politics, and art.”33 Shostakovich became familiar with Mussorgsky’s work in

the late 1930s and early 1940s as he spent much time creating a new edition of Boris Godunov.

One of the key Mussorgskian features that he uses throughout the Thirteenth Symphony is the

distinctly Russian tolling bell. In Boris, the tolling bell is noticeably used in the Scene 2, Da

Zdrastvstvuet tsar Boris Feodorovich! Shostakovich utilizes this effect in each of the Thirteenth

Symphony’s movements, except for the third. Baxter describes the significance of this musical

effect, stating, “Shostakovich could well have been describing this Symphony when he described

this scene in Boris. ‘When the bell tolls, it’s a reminder that there are powers mightier than man,

that you can’t escape the judgment of history.’”34

Another Mussorgskian thematic influence is what Jeffrey Baxter calls “the x-theme.”

This oscillating motive is used throughout most of Symphony 13 and is taken from Boris

Godunov, Act I, scene ii:

33 Volkov, Testimony, 226 34 Baxter, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”, 3

15

x-theme:

An obvious demonstration of this motive is in the low strings heard at rehearsal 5. Throughout

the rest of “Babi Yar” this pitch collection is regularly heard, oscillating in the texture. The use

of Russian modes, combined with the distinctly Mussorgskian and distinctly Russian musical

language.

* * *

Emerging from the forceful and weighty first movement, Shostakovich sets “Humour” as

the Scherzo. This seemingly light-hearted and satirical dance in C major starkly contrasts “Babi

Yar.” The opening theme at 32 consists of oscillating thirds that closely resemble the first

movement of his Piano Concerto #2, Op. 102. Though at the outset, these two movements seem

nothing alike, they in fact approach the poetic material in similar ways and contain various

motivic and thematic parallels. The most obvious parallel is the tolling Mussorgskian tolling bell.

Baxter describes another parallel: “When the soloist and chorus sing of putting Humor to death,

Shostakovich interpolates the B-flat-minor music of the “Babi Yar” theme chirped by the flute

and clarinet.” 35 Also like “Babi Yar,” “Humour” contains short historical allusions. Yevtushenko

references multiple historical characters and events such as Aesop, Hajji Nasreddin, a political

prisoner, and a revolutionary soldier at the march on the Winter Palace in 1905 (the same topic

of his Eleventh Symphony). While these short episodes are less detailed than those in the first

movement, like the “Babi Yar” and its thread of anti-semitism, the second movement is tied

together through the character, Humour, who pops up throughout the poem. Shostakovich sets

35 Baxter, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”, 5

16

the spontaneity of these jaunty episodes by frequently alternating between fast-paced duple or

triple meter dances.

Lastly, the composer quotes himself in the second movement by referencing his little-

known song cycle, Six Romances on Verses by English Poets for bass and piano Op. 62 (1942).

From this song cycle of English poetry, Shostakovich inserts a self-quotation from the movement

of Robert Burn’s Macpherson’s Farewell:

Rehearsal 51. Quote from Op. 62

Like the optimistic dance at the gallows that is seen in the Burns setting, Shostakovich

approaches Humour’s beheading with a sort of sardonic, vivacious energy from 45-51. He does

this by bookending stanza five with a bright, bouncing violin solo, and flutes and clarinets that

imitate and expand the initial violin solo. This light-hearted satire dominates the entire

movement. Even from 60-70, when the brass and strings play a relentless, oppressive march,

Humour still emerges with a light-hearted simplicity, as seen in the flute solo at 71. By the end,

the entire orchestra joins in with Humour’s theme, finally acknowledging what Yevtushenko

states in the last stanza: “He [Humour] is eternal…He is a courageous man”

* * *

Shostakovich organizes the third movement, “In the Store,” using the natural divisions of

Yevtushenko’s stanzas to arrange the poem into a set of strophic variations.36 Also, unlike Boris

and the other four movements of the Thirteenth Symphony, the third movement does not use the

tolling bell effect. Set in the remote key of E minor, this movement opens with a variation of the

36 Longman, Expression and Structure, pg. 337

17

x-theme in the low strings. Shostakovich takes advantage of the stagnant pedal tone of the x-

theme in the opening 15 measures of “In the Store,” employing the cellos and basses to depict

the shuffling line of women outside in the cold, waiting to enter the market. The castanets and

wood-blocks then enter at 76, depicting Yevtushenko’s lines 6 and 7: “the rattling of their water-

cans, the clinking of bottles and pots!” Like the previous movements of the Thirteenth

Symphony, Shostakovich’s setting of “In the Store” is clearly programmatic, portraying the

poetic images with his music.

Shostakovich’s setting of “In the Store” is essentially organized into two large sections.

The first section consists of five stanzas with the additional two lines, “They have endured

everything, they will endure everything!” in E minor (to rehearsal 85); the second section

contains the remaining two stanzas (86-end). The x-theme that is first heard in the cellos and

basses continues to develop throughout the movement, showing up in the clarinet, then the high

strings, the chorus, the soloist, the harps, and celesta. The third movement remains at a relatively

low dynamic until the penultimate stanza: “It is shameful to short-change them! It is sinful to

short-weight them!,” where Shostakovich builds the orchestra from pianissimo to quadruple

forte. The movement then winds down, returning to pianissimo and ending with the cellos and

basses leading into the next movement. Unlike the transitions of the first two movements, the

rest of the symphony is played without a pause.

Lastly, it is interesting to note that the two sections of the symphony that mention women

specifically (the Anne Frank episode and the third movement) are both set in the key of E. This

key, which is abnormally distant from the symphony’s original B♭, not only distinguishes these

two sections with its tritone relationship to the opening, but Shostakovich also bridges the Anne

Frank episode with the women shuffling outside the market. This subject will be touched on

18

more thoroughly later.

* * *

“Fears” is the only poem that was specifically commissioned for Symphony 13. This

fourth movement opens with a long tuba solo that contains hints of the x-theme motive and the

same sustained, low string chord, played attacca from the third movement. The chorus enters at

95 in a hushed, speech-like statement: “Fears are dying out in Russia.” These whispered

statements commonly appear throughout the movement, almost as if they were suspiciously

questioning the validity of that statement, “Are fears dying out in Russia?” Peter Hausmann

comments on the critical nature of their statement: “Unlike the other poems used in the

symphony “Fears” does not present a critique in the sense of establishing contrasting models.

Instead, the poem focuses almost exclusively on the types of fears Soviet citizens feel, including

the fear of speaking to one’s own wife.”37 As if the frequent fears within contemporary Soviet

life were taboo, Shostakovich sets much of this movement in hushed, stagnant, melodic lines.

Even the military-like march at 110 sets the chorus at pianissimo while they sing the line, “We

weren’t afraid of construction work in blizzards, or of going into battle under shell-fire, but at

times we were mortally afraid of talking to ourselves.” This march builds over the next 47

measures until rehearsal 115 where there returns the distinctly Russian bell from the opening of

symphony. Baxter describes the significance of this return: “…the tolling bell makes its first

appearance since Movement II…It reminds the listener of the weighty statement of the first

movement and suggests, ‘This is wrong! These fears should not exist!’”38 From 115, the

movement gradually winds down and slowly returning to a transposed version of the opening

chords, now sustaining a low B♭ octave in the basses and cellos.

37 Hausmann, Shostakovich, Yetvushenko, and Criticism, 8 38 Baxter, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”, 8

19

* * *

Shostakovich transitions into the final movement, “A Career,” without pause. Emerging

from the pedal-tone B♭ in the low strings, he returns to the opening key of the symphony. But

this time he is in B♭ major. The third of this major chord appears in the flute duet that opens the

movement. This flowing, waltz duet drastically alters the mood from the previous two

movements. The finale returns to this opening waltz twice: once at 136 as a full string pizz.

section, and the other in the form of a graceful, final violin and cello duet at 156. “A Career” is

like the first two movements of the symphony, in that it contains several historical allusions and

characters. But unlike the other historical movements, Shostakovich does not set the text in an

episodic way. Rather, his setting of “A Career” consists of two sections of thematic material:

one in B♭ major and one in G major. He juxtaposes these two main sections with the B♭ minor

and G minor of the first movement. After the opening waltz, the second theme of this movement

appears in G major. Though less sardonic, it is shaped like “Humour,” as it bounces and up and

down the scales and sequences in a lively fashion. Shostakovich continues to develop this

theme, inserting it in various places throughout the movement. One of the most notable

instances of this is when he transforms the theme into a driving, motivated string fugato section

at 143. Lastly, as the movement slows down directly before the string duet at 156, the tolling

bell returns. After the duet and celesta solo at 161, the bell strikes one last time at the

penultimate measure, its tintinnabulation concluding the symphony.

* * *

The content of “Babi Yar” addresses the prevalent problem of anti-Semitism in

contemporary Russia. Yevtushenko accomplishes this by pointing out different historical

instances of anti-Semitism, associating them to the Holocaust massacre at Babi Yar in Ukraine in

20

1941, and relating them to how the Soviet government would not permit any monument to be

placed in honor the Jewish victims. Yevtushenko initially penned the poem after he travelled to

Kiev in 1961 to some friends after a dam had collapsed, killing hundreds of people. While there,

he visited Babi Yar, that “terrifying ravine,”39 which had seen one of the worst Holocaust

massacres just two decades before.

A few months into the Nazi occupation of Kiev in 1941 on September 28, a division of

the German SS posted a notice throughout the city that all Jews were to report the following

morning, to be resettled, bringing “money, documents, valuables, and warm clothing.”40

Furthermore, Jews who disobeyed the notice or civilians who attempted to hide any Jews would

be shot. Over the following two days, the Nazis and a group of local collaborators, drove out

truckloads Jews to a ravine outside the city known as Babi Yar. When they arrived, the Jews

were forced to surrender their valuable possessions, strip naked, and line up in groups of ten at

the edge of the ravine. Here, they were gunned down and their bodies fell to the bottom of the

pit. According to witnesses and the few survivors (29 survived), the Nazis did not waste bullets

on children. They were thrown into the ravine and buried alive.41 Then group after group were

forced to lay down on the dead bodies below, awaiting their execution, layering thousands of

corpses upon each other. According to Nazi records, 33,771 Jews were killed.

In the decades that followed these events, Babi Yar would soon become an icon of the

Holocaust horrors for Soviet Jews. It would also become a site of pilgrimage for both Russian

and Ukranian Jews.42 For the next fifty years, though, no monument that specifically honored the

39 Sheldon, The Transformations of Babi Yar, 135 40 Ibid., 135 41 For survivor and witness testimonies on the Babi Yar massacre, see Safarik, A Literature of

Conscience, 39. 42 Ibid., 39

21

Jewish victims was allowed to be erected at Babi Yar.43 When Khrushchev, a native Ukrainian,

was placed as the Communist Party leader in Ukraine directly after the war, he regularly turned

down proposals to honor the Jewish victims with a monument. And, like much of the press for

the subsequent years, Khrushchev denied the fact that Jews were specifically targeted at Babi

Yar because of their ethnic heritage.44

Therefore, when Yevtushenko’s poem was published in the Literaturnaya Gazeta in

1961, it struck an extraordinarily sensitive nerve in Soviet society. Not only did the poem—in

fact the opening line of the poem—criticize Khrushchev for refusing monument proposals near

the ravine, but it also criticized the Russian people. He juxtaposes their current anti-Semitism

with the bloody pogroms at Białystok. Furthermore, Yevtushenko infers that they have discarded

their principles of internationality, calling them to regenerate the revolutionary, “The

Internationale.”45

* * *

As stated beforehand, it is important to note that Shostakovich employs a distinctly

Russian musical language with his use of Russian modes, the Mussorgskian themes, and the

tolling bell effect. For a poem that identifies Jewish history and anti-Semitism, it was important

that Shostakovich used a distinctly Russian musical language because it identified the audience

of this message. Elizabeth Wilson explains this:

43 While two Orthodox and Christian crosses were installed, it was not until fifty years later in

1991 that a monument (a large stone menorah) was placed that specifically identified Jews as

victims of Babi Yar. 44 “The poem [Babi Yar] represents things as if only Jews were the victims of fascist atrocities,

whereas, of course, many Russians, Ukrainians, Soviet people of other nationalities were

murdered” See Johnson, Khrushchev and the Arts, 181-182 45 “The Internationale” was a revolutionary theme-song for the October Revolution. It contains

lyrics such as: “Let no one build walls to divide us / Walls of hatred nor walls of stone / Come

greet the dawn and stand beside us / We'll live together or we'll die alone.”

22

Yevtushenko’s poem was a direct plea to the Russian people (“Oh my Russian people, I

know you are truly internationalist”) to reject the anti-Semites who had tarnished their

good name. For Shostakovich, a composer for whom audience understanding was

paramount—he always preferred that his vocal music be sung in the language of the

country in which it was being performed—couching such a plea in a Jewish musical

language would not only have been superfluous or “missing the point,” it would actually

have attenuated the power of the message. A plea to Russians to renounce anti-Semitism

had to be done in Russian, not Jewish terms. And in this first movement, this was a point

that would be made not just stylistically.46

Unlike many of his “Jewish” works, Shostakovich does not use a Jewish folk idiom to

communicate the core of his message here. Because the poem already explicitly communicates a

“Jewish” message, Shostakovich did not need to use the altered Jewish modes, rhythms, or

pentachords that he typically uses in his “Jewish” works. In fact, the first movement of

Symphony 13 separates itself from most of his “Jewish” works because it is the only piece that

so clearly classifies itself as a critique for a specifically Russian audience.

In “Babi Yar,” Yevtushenko and Shostakovich use various historical examples of anti-

Semitism to address larger contemporary issues of Jewish prejudice throughout Russia. While

anti-Semitism had been much more unapologetic during Stalin-era Russia,47 the seeds of it were

still actively present in Russia nearly ten years later when “Babi Yar” was published. The most

obvious example of this was a collective, purposeful ignorance of these anti-Semitic tendencies

and of the history of Jewish prejudice in Russia, especially the denial of the Holocaust. The

vocalist, Vitali Gromadsky once remarked to Shostakovich concerning the content of “Babi

46 Mishra, A Shostakovich 2, 245 47 Though governmental anti-Semitism was still common before 1948—such as the financial

exploitation of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee (JAC) and the “Jewish conspiracy” in art in

1942 that insisted that the non-Russian artists (Jews) be replaced by Russians—the height of

Stalin-era anti-Semitism was most clearly seen after 1948. This was the same year that

Shostakovich, Prokofiev, and Katchaturian were denounced as “formalist” and “cosmopolitan”

by Andrei Zhdanov. This period after WWII saw a significant increase of anti-Semitism: the

trump-up charges against significant Jewish leaders; the assassination of Solomon Mikhoels; the

shut-down of Jewish writers’ unions; and the closing of many Yiddish literary periodicals. To

read more, see Jada Watson’s Aspects of the “Jewish” Folk Idiom, 51-68.

23

Yar,” saying “Dmitri Dmitriyevich, why did you choose this poem when there is no anti-

Semitism in the Soviet Union?” To which, Shostakovich replied, almost shouting, “No, there is

anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union. It is an outrageous thing, and we must fight it.”48 Often, when

critiques of Russian anti-Semitic tendencies or suppression of Holocaust events arose, the

critiques were either shut down with the argument that the Jewish problem does not exist or

published with abundant censorship. Two contemporary events exhibit this larger trend well.

The first example is the publication of Anatoly Kuznetsov’s Babii Yar: A Document in

the Form of a Novel. Since the mid-1940s, there had been many publications either referencing

and explicitly talking about the massacre of the Jews at Babi Yar. Yet, these literary pieces were

almost solely written by Jewish authors, were seldom published more than once, and rarely

received much attention.49 During the Thaw, however, three important non-Jewish authors,

Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Anatoly Kuznetsov, and Iosif Brodsky began to write about the

Holocaust and anti-Semitism. These authors also took a further step: criticizing the Soviet

suppression of the Holocaust at Babi Yar and Jewish life in Soviet Russia. While the State never

denied that many Jews were killed at Babi Yar, they refuted the fact that the Jews were killed

there because of their ethnic identity, emphasizing how Poles, Ukrainians, and Russians were

also killed at Babi Yar.50 In a speech to leading Soviet artists in 1963, Khrushchev demonstrates

the official approach to how “Babi Yar” was criticized:

What was the poem being criticised for? It was criticised because the author was unable

to truthfully to show and condemn the fascist, particularly the fascist criminals who were

responsible for the mass slaughter at Babi Yar. The poem represents things as if only

Jews were the victims of fascist atrocities, whereas, of course, many Russians,

Ukrainians, Soviet people of other nationalities were murdered by the Hitlerite

48 Wilson, Shostakovich: A Life Remembered, 358-359 49 Safarik, A Literature of Conscience, 40-44 50 While Poles, Ukranians, and Russians were killed at the Babi Yar ravine, the initial massacre

on September 29 and 30 of 1941 consisted solely of Jews.

24

butchers…There is no Jewish question in our country, and those who invent it are

slavishly repeating what other people say.51

Anatoly Kuznetsov’s novel, Babii Yar: A Document in the Form of a Novel testifies to his

experiences, growing up in Kiev.52 Though published in 1966, Kuznetsov’s novel was heavily

censored, comprising of over 300 political revisions. Amy Safarik demonstrates the significance

of this publication:

His book offers a critical perspective on the Soviet regime…. In 1969 Kuznetsov

defected to England, and his original manuscript of Babii Yar was published in Germany

under the name of A. Anatoli a year later. By italicizing the text that was previously

removed, Kuznetsov identifies the kinds of material that the censors would not allow. For

example, his text illustrates the Party’s attempt to minimize Soviet anti-Semitism. Having

analyzed the novel, Ermolaev states that “the official policy interdicted singling out the

Jews among the victims of the Babii Yar executions,” “played down the hostility shown

against Jews by Soviet citizens,” and “[concealed] the fact that a part of the local

population applauded the mass murder of the Jews and some helped the Germans carry it

out.”53

Looking back on the political climate during that time, Yevtushenko states that “After

WWII, the theme of Babi Yar completely disappeared from the pages of the Soviet press. Cold

War, Iron Curtain, mutual mistrust created [a] poisoned climate for epidemic, anti-Semitism.”54

Though the Thaw saw large steps in authorial liberty, the amount of censorship that the

outspoken authors received demonstrate the deep-rooted, anti-Semitic threads that lasted after

Stalin-era Russia.

Another example of censorship and anti-Semitic seeds in Russia arose one day before the

premiere of Shostakovich’s Thirteenth Symphony. As referenced in Irina Shostakovich’s earlier

interview, on the 17th of December, 1963, there was a meeting of artists and Party leaders,

51 Johnson, Khrushchev and the Arts, 181-182 52 Kuznetsov was 12 years old when the Germans invaded Kiev and the massacre occurred. 53 Safarik, A Literature of Conscience, 43 54 Yevtushenko, I Came to You, Babi Yar…, 6

25

discussing a new crisis.55 Two weeks earlier, in a scene that resembled Stalin’s rage against Lady

Macbeth in 1936, Khrushchev exploded into an invective outburst against the abstractionists who

had art displayed at the Manezh Gallery. Khrushchev, who was known for his particularly

conservative aesthetic, denounced the artists as “jackasses” and “parasites” who had “betrayed

the trust of the State.”56

Two weeks after these events, there was a meeting of important artists and Party leaders

in Moscow to discuss the current ideological problem. Michael Mishra describes the scene:

A meeting of artists and Party leaders was held on 17 December, the day before the

Symphony’s premiere, to discuss this new crisis. At one point, Yevtushenko confronted

Khrushchov with the subject of anti-Semitism, reciting the last two lines of “Babi Yar.”

Khrushchov retorted that “this poem has no place here,” and that, in any case, anti-

Semitism is not a problem. Yevtushenko continues: “We cannot go forward to

communism with such a heavy load as Judophobia. And here there can be neither silence

nor denial…. The whole progressive world is watching us and the resolution of this

problem will even more greatly enhance the authority of our country.”57

The tenuous confrontation between Khrushchev and Yevtushenko illustrates the type of dialogue

that was taboo in Soviet Russia. While anti-Semitism was never explicitly endorsed by

Khrushchev or his contemporaries, any criticism of Russian suppression of Holocaust events was

often met with heavy censorship.

* * *

While the Thirteenth Symphony is often understood exclusively in the context of

Shostakovich’s “Jewish” works, the content of Yevtushenko’s poetry focuses on more than anti-

Semitism. Obviously, because he was the one who collected the five poems, these other civic

55 On December 1st, Khrushchev attended a major art exhibition at the Manezh gallery, entitled

“Thirty Years of Moscow Art.” This gallery included a wing of abstract and semi-abstract art led

by the teacher Eli Belyutin. The wing of Belyutin and his student’s abstract works was not open

to the public. But, when Khrushchev and his entourage visited the Manezh gallery, they were led

into these private abstractionist art. 56 Schwarz, Music and Musical Life, 363 57 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 242

26

themes are ones that Shostakovich showed concern with throughout his life. In these five poems,

Yevtushenko addresses three other important social topics beyond anti-Semitism: the

relationship between the Ruler and the fool; the standing of women in Soviet society, and the

betrayal of artistic integrity.

* * *

The relationship between the Ruler and the fool is most obviously seen through the

second poem. The text of “Humor” is set up in a similar fashion to that of “Babi Yar.”

Yevtushenko makes references to Hadjii Nasreddin and Aesop, showing their ability to make

“Tsars, kings, [and] rulers” appear powerless. In “Humour” Yevtushenko describes how no

matter the power of any ruler, they cannot constrain Humour. Hausmann states that “The critique

relies on the contrast between rulers and ruled, between those who would control Humour for

their own ends, and those who would use Humour to escape unjust imprisonment or topple

governments.”58 Throughout his compositional career, Shostakovich had regularly employed

various levels of satire and irony in his works. From his Fifth Symphony to his upcoming 1964

film score for Hamlet, Shostakovich regularly used various sardonic musical elements. For

instance, Shostakovich sets the text of “Humour” to a bouncy, jaunty symphonic dance that

resembles his Ninth Symphony. While many people could understand the implied meaning of

satire and irony in his music, the element of humor or satire cannot be officially criticized or

censored.

* * *

The theme of betraying artistic integrity is most obviously referenced in the finale. The

premiere’s conductor, Kirill Kondrashin describes the finale, saying, “The last poem, ‘Career’

58 Hausman, Shostakovich, Yevtushenko, and Criticism, 17

27

affirms that careers are made not by those who keep silent, but by those who raise their voices

and sacrifice themselves thereby becoming immortal.”59 Here, the poem shows how Galileo’s

peer attempts to establish his own career by shunning Galileo and following the trends and

standard thoughts of his era: that the Sun revolved around the Earth. But, as Yevtushenko argues

in the second stanza, “after accomplishing his betrayal, he reckoned he was advancing his career,

but in fact he’d wrecked it.” This poem pierces directly to the heart of a problem that Soviet

Russia had been wrestling with since the dawn of Socialist Realism and the collectivization of

artist unions. The problem is that though Socialist Realism declared a world of artistic freedom

and exploration,60 the manifestation of this philosophy led to extraordinarily restrictive

censorship that at times exceeded those of the tsarist era. The sketch of Galileo introduces the

conundrum that Shostakovich had faced himself both early on in his life and more outspokenly

later in his life.61

This theme of the betrayal of artistic integrity continues as Yevtushenko concludes

Galileo’s anecdote, praising Galileo’s principled and risk-taking career. The poet then goes

further to praise other scientists and artists: Shakespeare, Pasteur, Newton, and Tolstoy. At the

mention of Tolstoy, Shostakovich breaks compositional conventions and adds to the text by

59 Wilson, A Life Remembered, 357 60 From an article on Socialist Realism in Pravda, published November 27, 1953. “One of the

worst disasters for art is standardization, however high the standard may be. To pattern all art on

one model is to obliterate individuality…and rob the artist of creative experimentation. Socialist

Realism offers boundless vistas for the creative artist and the greatest freedom…for the

development of diverse art genres, trends, and styles.” Schwarz, Music and Musical Life, 273 61 Shostakovich in fact spoke out against the close-mindedness of the idealogues of Socialist

Realism. In an address to at the Composer’s Union in 1957, Shostakovich stated, “We could

quickly overcome the many shortcomings of the recent phase if broad creative discussions would

develop productively among our composers. Unfortunately, this has yet to occur. The

development of discussion is impeded, most of all, by one of the survivals of the ‘cult of

personality’…the unacceptable method of debate…, discrediting and denigrating on party to the

debate.” Schwarz, Music and Musical Life, 301-303

28

repeating a word in question format. In the third paragraph, Shostakovich adds this word by

having the soloist question, “Lev?” and then responds affirmatively in the chorus with

Yevtushenko’s original line, shouting, “Lev!” This small interjectional change in text

communicates a significant message about the betrayal of artistic integrity. This word is

highlighted because it is the only line of repeated text in the symphony. This emphatic

affirmation of the call-and-response communicates that “Tolstoy” is indeed Leo--that is Lev--

Tolstoy, the 19th century author, not Count Alexei Tolstoy, the Stalin-era author and

propagandist. While Count Alexei Tolstoy was a strong believer in Socialist Realism and a

follower of contemporary, Soviet, artistic trends, Leo Tolstoy was an author who was famous for

his bold, civic criticism. Leo Tolstoy went as far as writing an openly critical letter to the Tsar

and criticizing various aspects of contemporary Russian life in his writing.62 Shostakovich’s

addition of this text significantly impacted the finale, opening further questions about the

integrity of artists living under the restrictions of Socialist Realism. Malcolm MacDonald

suggests that Shostakovich adds this word to juxtapose the two Tolstoys, asking the listener

whether Shostakovich is more alike to Lev or Count Alexi.63 Shostakovich had a history of

chafing with the conservative interpretation of Socialist Realism ideology, while at the same time

complying with the vision of Socialist Realism by writing scores for propaganda films,

composing nationalistic works like his Song of the Forest and Symphonies 11 and 12, and most

recently joining the Communist Party in 1960.64 This begs the question of what type of

“careerist” he was. Richard Longman suggests that the juxtaposition between Galileo and his

contemporary, as well as the addition of text presented in the finale demonstrate the struggle of

62 Leo Tolstoy to Tsar Nicholas II. December 7, 1900 63 Malcolm Macdonald, Words and Music in Late Shostakovich, 136 64 Fanning, Shostakovich: String Quartet No. 8, 17-19

29

artistic suppression and the dichotomy of his own career as a composer, saying.

I believe that the two careers are actually two facets of Shostakovich’s own creative

personality: outwardly the “People’s Artist of the USSR,” inwardly the private man with

an acute artistic conscience. There is a desperate honesty about this musical declaration, a

deliberate and undeceived irony…This finale is a statement of Shostakovich’s self-

awareness.65

Longman’s statement is furthered when you look at the Thirteenth Symphony in the

context of the Fourth Symphony. Shostakovich selected and set these poems on the heels of the

premiere of the Fourth Symphony in 1961.66 While the premiere of the long-awaited and highly

suppressed Fourth Symphony brought much happiness and revitalization to Shostakovich, its

performance also revived the history of heavy censorship of this work. Between the completion

of the Symphony in May of 1936 to the premiere in December of 1961, the Fourth Symphony

had been greatly suppressed. This censorship started when both the composer and conductor

were pressured by the censors to refrain the piece’s premiere. Shostakovich eventually pulled the

premiere one day before its first performance. For a time, there was limited circulation of his duo

piano arrangement between his students, but the Symphony remained largely untouched for the

next near decade. But, in 1946 the score arrangement was published. This did not last long, as

two years later Andrei Zhdanov, publicly denounced Shostakovich, and copies of the symphony

were banned and confiscated.67

Therefore, the Thirteenth Symphony demonstrates Shostakovich critiquing censorship

and the suppression of artistic freedom. From choosing “A Career;” which addresses the issue of

artistic duty and ideological juxtaposition; the interjectional reference to Leo Tolstoy, an artist

65 Longman, Expression and Structure, 346 66 The Fourth Symphony was originally to be premiered in 1936, but was withdrawn by the

composer on the day of the performance due to pressures from the censors and his still recent

conflict with Stalin over Lady Macbeth. The symphony was finally premiered 25 years later, on

December 30, 1961, led by Kirill Kondrashin and the Moscow Philharmonic Orchestra. 67 Mishra, A Shostakovich Companion, 240

30

who refused to be repressed during a time of high artistic suppression; and the recent premiere of

his long-censored Fourth Symphony, Shostakovich uses Yevtushenko’s poetry to speak out

against the betrayal of artistic integrity.

* * *

Another societal theme that Shostakovich addresses in the Thirteenth Symphony is the

value of women in Soviet society. This is most clearly presented in the third movement, “In the

Store.” Here, Yevtushenko places the narrator of the poem in the market, describing the smells,

sounds, and people around him. He marvels at the hard work of these women, saying, “They wait

quietly, their families’ guardian angels,” and “I sternly and quietly observe their pious hands

weary from carrying their shopping bags.”68 The climax of both Shostakovich’s setting and the

poem itself occurs with the couplet at the beginning of the seventh stanza, declaring, “It is

shameful to short-change them! It is sinful to short-weight them!” While Yevtushenko

approaches this societal critique differently than he does earlier in “Babi Yar,” the message rings

similarly. While the critique in “Babi Yar” uses negative reinforcement, calling for the

breakdown of anti-Semitic tendencies in Russia, “In the Store” highlights the hard work,

faithfulness, and worth of Soviet women, calling people to give them their due praise. Unlike the

Russian anti-Semite in “Babi Yar,” there is no named antagonist for “In the Store.”

Yevtushenko’s words undoubtedly resonated with Shostakovich because of the

connection to his upcoming revision and republication of Lady Macbeth of Means District, now

known as Katerina Izmailova. Back in 1932 when he was composing Lady Macbeth,

Shostakovich had declared his desire to compose a triptych of works, each addressing various

aspects of contemporary Russian womanhood. But within the 26 years between the opera and the

68 “In the Store” lines 14-15 and 29-30

31

symphony, he had not done so. As Richard Longman points out, “The third movement of the

symphony is virtually the only sequel to the opera in providing some sort of commentary upon

the life of Soviet womanhood.” 69 While very little points to why Shostakovich would avoid

writing on this theme, it is possible that this silence is due to the long-lasting censorship and

harsh reactions that Lady Macbeth had received since 1936. While performances of the opera

occurred outside the Soviet Union,70 the work remained forbidden in Russia.

Three weeks after the premiere of Symphony Thirteen, Shostakovich attended another

long-awaited premiere, the opening of his revised Lady Macbeth, now renamed Katerina

Izmailova. In a letter to Isaak Glikman in January of 1962, Shostakovich explained that did not

want the erotic aspects of the symphony to dominate the audience’s attention. Rather, there

should be genuine sympathy for Katerina.71 While Shostakovich did not compose any obvious

works addressing the theme of Russian womanhood between 1934-1962, both Lady

Macbeth/Katerina and Symphony Thirteen speak strongly on the subject: the opera with its

maligned and abused heroine, and the symphony with its call for acknowledgement of the work

and worth of Russian women.

* * *

Each of these themes, anti-Semitism, the relationship between the Ruler and the fool, the

betrayal of artistic integrity, and the standing of women in Soviet society, communicate a deeper

connection to Shostakovich. Whether it is the upcoming premiere of his revised opera or the

interjection of a single word that invites a complete shift in perspective, Shostakovich engaged

69 Longman, Expression and Structure, 327 70 One of the more notable performances was at the Venice Biennale Contemporary Music

Festival in 1947. 71 This was done in context of Shostakovich’s conversation with Lev Mikhailov, the chief

producer of the Stanislavsky-Nemirovich-Danchenko Musical Theatre.

Shostakovich and Glikman, Story of a Friendship, 100 + 278

32

with Yevtushenko’s civic critiques on a historical and a highly personal level.

* * *

Shostakovich’s Thirteenth Symphony stands as a pillar of great artist risk and

accomplishment. During a constantly shifting and increasingly dangerous political climate, the

Thirteenth Symphony boldly engages with and connects the themes and societal criticisms that

are found in Yevtushenko’s poetry. From the first publication of “Babi Yar” in 1961 to the

premiere of Symphony No. 13 in 1963, Khurschev and the Soviets made their disapproval

actively known, marking this symphony as one of the last openly controversial altercations

between Shostakovich and the Soviet authorities. In the following years, Shostakovich would

celebrate the Thirteenth Symphony in solemnity. The only other work that he regularly

commemorated was the work that launched him as a career composer, the premiere of his First

Symphony.72 This work’s political risk and artistic merit marks it as a landmark in

Shostakovich’s career.

72 Fay, Dmitri Shostakovich, Symphony No. 13 “Babi Yar”

33

Appendix A – Text of Symphony No. 13

By Yevgeny Yevtushenko (b. 1932)

I. Babi Yar

There is no memorial above Babi Yar. The steep ravine is like a coarse tombstone. I’m frightened,

I feel as old today

as the Jewish race itself. I feel now that I am a Jew.

Here I wander through ancient Egypt.

And here I hang on the cross and die, and I still bear the mark of the nails.

I feel that I am Dreyfus.

The bourgeois raB♭le denounce and judge me.

I am behind bars, I am encircled,

persecuted, spat on, slandered, and fine ladies with lace frills

squeal and poke their parasols into my face.

I feel that I am a little boy in Białystok.

Blood is spattered over the floor.

The ringleaders in the tavern are getting brutal. They smell of vodka and onions.

I’m kicked to the ground, I’m powerless,

in vain I beg the persecutors. They guffaw: “Kill the Yids! Save Russia!”

A grain merchant beats up my mother.

Oh my Russian people, I know

that at heart you are internationalists, but there have been those with soiled hands

who abused your good name.

I know that my land is good. How filthy that without the slightest shame

the anti-Semites proclaimed themselves:

“The Union of the Russian People.”

I feel that I am Anne Frank,

as tender as a shoot in April, I am in love and have no need of words,

but we need to look at each other.

How little we can see or smell!

The leaves and the sky are shut off from us,

but there is a lot we can do– we can tenderly embrace each other

in the darkened room!

– “Someone’s coming!” – “Don’t be frightened. These are the sounds of spring,

spring is coming.

Come to me, give me your lips quickly!”

– “They’re breaking down the door!”

– “No! It’s the ice breaking!”

Above Babi Yar the wild grass rustles,

the trees look threatening, as though in judgment. Here everything silently screams,

and, baring my head,

I feel as though I am slowly turning grey. And I become a long, soundless scream

above the thousands and thousands buried here, I am each old man

who was shot here, I am each child who was shot here.

No part of me can ever forget this.

Let the “International” thunder out when the last anti-Semite on the earth

has finally been buried.

There is no Jewish blood in my blood,

but I feel the loathsome hatred

of all anti-Semites as though I were a Jew – and that is why I am a true Russian!

II. Humor

Tsars, kings, emperors,

rulers of all the world,

have commanded parades but couldn’t command humor.

In the palaces of the great,

spending their days sleekly reclining, Aesop the vagrant turned up

and they would all seem like beggars.

In houses where a hypocrite had left his wretched little footprints,

Mullah Nasredin’s jokes would demolish

trivialities like pieces on a chessboard!

They’ve wanted to buy humor,

but he just wouldn’t be bought! They’ve wanted to kill humor,

but humor gave them the finger.

Fighting him’s a tough job. They’ve never stopped executing him.

His chopped-off head was stuck onto a soldier’s pike.

But as soon as the clown’s pipes

struck up their tune, he screeched out:

“I’m here!”

and broke into a jaunty dance.

Wearing a threadbare little overcoat,

downcast and seemingly repentant, caught as a political prisoner,

he went to his execution.

Everything about him displayed submission, resignation to the life hereafter,

when he suddenly wriggled out of his coat,

waved his hand and – bye-bye!

They’ve hidden humor away in dungeons, but they hadn’t a hope in hell.

He passed straight through

bars and stone walls. Clearing his throat from a cold,

like a rank-and-file soldier,

he was a popular tune marching along with a rifle to the Winter Palace.

He’s quite used to dark looks, they don’t worry him at all,

and from time to time humor

looks at himself humorously. He’s eternal.

Eternal!

He’s artful. Artful!

And quick,

And quick! he gets through everyone and everything.

So then, three cheers for humor!

He’s a brave fellow!

34

III. In the Store Some with shawls,

some with scarves,

as though to some heroic enterprise or to work, into the store one by one

the women silently come.

Oh, the rattling of their cans,

the clanking of bottles and pans!

There’s a smell of onions, cucumbers, a smell of “Kabul” sauce.

I’m shivering as I queue up for the cash desk, but as I inch forward towards it,

from the breath of so many women

a warmth spreads round the store.

They wait quietly,

their families’ guardian angels, and they grasp in their hands

their hard-earned money.

These are the women of Russia.

They honour us and they judge us.

They have mixed concrete, and ploughed, and harvested ...

They have endured everything,

they will continue to endure everything.

Nothing in the world is beyond them – they have been granted such strength!

It is shameful to short-change them! It is sinful to short-weight them!

As I shove dumplings into my pocket,

I sternly and quietly observe their pious hands weary from carrying their shopping bags.

IV. Fears Fears are dying out in Russia,

like the wraiths of bygone years;

only in church porches, like old women, here and there they still beg for bread.

I remember when they were powerful and mighty at the court of the lie triumphant.

Fears slithered everywhere, like shadows,

penetrating every floor. They stealthily subdued people

and branded their mark on everyone:

when we should have kept silent, they taught us to scream, and to keep silent when we should have screamed.

All this seems remote today.

It is even strange to remember now. The secret fear of an anonymous denunciation,

the secret fear of a knock at the door.

Yes, and the fear of speaking to foreigners?

Foreigners? ... even to your own wife!

Yes, and that unaccountable fear of being left, after a march, alone with the silence?

We weren’t afraid of construction work in blizzards,

or of going into battle under shell-fire,

but at times we were mortally afraid of talking to ourselves.

We weren’t destroyed or corrupted,

and it is not for nothing that now Russia, victorious over her own fears,

inspires greater fear in her enemies.

I see new fears dawning: the fear of being untrue to one’s country,

the fear of dishonestly debasing ideas,

which are self-evident truths; the fear of boasting oneself into a stupor,

the fear of parroting someone else’s words,

the fear of humiliating others with distrust and of trusting oneself overmuch.

Fears are dying out in Russia. And while I am writing these lines,

at times unintentionally hurrying,

I write haunted by the single fear

of not writing with all my strength.

V. A Career The priests kept on saying that Galileo

was dangerous and foolish.

(That Galileo was foolish ...) But, as time has shown,

the fool was much wiser!

A certain scientist, Galileo’s contemporary,

was no more stupid than Galileo. He knew that the earth revolved,

but he had a family.

And as he got into a carriage with his wife after accomplishing his betrayal,

he reckoned he was advancing his career,

but in fact he’d wrecked it. For his discovery about our planet

Galileo faced the risk alone,

and he was a great man. Now that is what I understand by a careerist.

So then, three cheers for a career when it’s a career like

that of Shakespeare or Pasteur,

Newton or Tolstoy, or Tolstoy ... Lev?

Lev!

Why did they have mud slung at them? Talent is talent, whatever name you give it.

They’re forgotten, those who hurled curses,

but we remember the ones who were cursed.

All those who strove towards the stratosphere,

the doctors who died of cholera, they were following careers!

I’ll take their careers as an example!

I believe in their sacred belief,

and their belief gives me courage.

I’ll follow my career in such a way

that I’m not following it!

English translation by Andrew Huth

35

Appendix B – Revisions of Yevgeny Yevtushenko’s Text Texts from Michael Mishra’s A Shostakovich Companion and Richard Longman’s Expression and Structure.

“Babi Yar” Original: I imagine now that I am a Jew.

Here I wander through ancient Egypt.

And here, I am crucified on the cross and die,

And still bear the marks of the nails.

….

And I become like a long, soundless scream

above the thousand thousands here interred.

I am each old man shot dead here,

I am each child shot dead here.

Revision: I stand there as if at a wellspring.

That gives me faith in our brotherhood.

Here lie Russians and Ukrainians.

With Jews they lie in the same earth.

….

I think about Russia’s heroic feats

in blocking fascism’s path.

To the tiniest dewdrop,

her whole essence and fate is dear to me.

“Fears” Original: I wish that men were possessed of the fear,

of condemning a man without proper trail,

the fear of debasing ideas by means of untruth,

the fear of exalting oneself by means of untruth,

the fear of remaining indifferent to others,

when someone is in trouble or depressed,

the desperate fear of not being fearless

when painting a canvas or drafting a sketch

Revision: I see new fears arising,

the fear of being insincere to the country,

the fear of degrading the ideas

that are truth in themselves,

the fear of bragging until stupor,

the fear of repeating someone else’s words,

the fear of belittling others with distrust

and to trust oneself excessively.

36

Appendix C – List of Dmitri Shostakovich’s “Jewish” Works Adapted from Jada Watson’s Aspects of the “Jewish” Folk Idiom

Title

Date of

Composition

Date of

Premiere

Jewish Content

Orchestration of

Veniamin’s opera

Rothschild’s Violin

1943 July 20, 1960 Entire Work: Based on a short story by Anton Chekhov about an anti-

Semite who repents on his deathbed and gives his violin

to a Jewish Musician Trio for Violin, Cello,

and Piano, Op. 67 1944 November 14,

1944 4th Movement: allegretto Contains a traditional Jewish folk dance in the fourth

movement. Some sources believe this was a ritual dance

that Jews sang as they dug their graces in the Holocaust. Uses the Jewish altered Dorian mode, “um-pa” rhythmic

accompaniment and iambic primes. Concerto for Violin and

Orchestra, Op. 77 1947-1948 September 19,

1955 2nd Movement: scherzo Uses “klezmer texture” and “um-pa” rhythmic

accompaniment. From Jewish Folk

Poetry, Op. 79 1948 January 15,

1955 Subject matter: uses traditional Yiddish and Hebrew

texts from a collection by Dobrushkin and Yinitsky. Uses of Jewish altered Dorian and Phrygian modes,

iambic prime, and “um-pa” rhythmic figuration as well

as “musicalized speech.” String Quartet No. 4 in

D major, Op. 83 1949 December 3,

1953 4th Movement: allegretto Use of Jewish altered Dorian/Phrygian modes as well as

a fusion of these modes (Alexandrian Pentachords),

features the interval of an augmented second, and “um-

pa” rhythm. 24 Preludes and Fugues,

Op. 87 1950-1951 December 23,

1952 Pr./F. no. 8 Pr. No. 14 F. no. 16 Pr. No. 17 F. no. 19 F. no. 24 Use of iambic prime, “um-pa” rhythmic figurations.

Four Monologues on

texts by A. Pushkin for

Voice and Piano, Op. 91

1952 n/a No. 1: The Fragment [In a Jewish Hut] Use of Jewish subject in text.

Concerto for Cello and

Orchestra no. 1, Op.

107

1959 September 21,

1959 4th movement: allegro con moto Use of Jewish altered Phrygian mode, “um-pa”

rhythmic figuration and syncopated rhythms. It is also suggested that the first and second movement

also contain “Jewish” musical inflections. String Quartet no. 8,

Op. 110 1960 October 2,

1960 2nd Movement: Allegro Molto Quotes the Jewish folk dance from the finale Trio no. 2.

Symphony no. 13, Op.

113 for Bass solo, Bass

Choir, and Orchestra

1962 December 18,

1962 1st Movement: Babi Yar “Jewish” subject matter. Set to a text by Yevgeni

Yevtushenko about the massacre at Babi Yar. From Jewish Folk

Poetry, Op. 79a for

Voice and Orchestra

1963 February 19,

1964 Entire Work See notes for From Jewish Folk Poetry, Op. 79

Editor-in-Chief of Song

Collection New Jewish

Songs

Published: 1970

Entire Work

37

Bibliography

Baxter, Jeffrey . Symphony No. 13, Op. 113, “Babi Yar”. 2000. Program Notes

Braun, Joachim. "The Double Meaning of Jewish Elements in Dimitri Shostakovich's Music."

The Musical Quarterly LXXI, no. 1 (1985): 68-80. Accessed September 21, 2016.

Fay, Laurel E. Shostakovich: A Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Fay, Laurel E. Shostakovich Studies. Edited by David Fanning. Cambridge, New York:

Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Fay, Laurel E. “Dmitri Shostakovich, Symphony No. 13, Op. 113 “Babi Yar”.” American

Symphony Orchestra. American Symphony Orchestra, n.d. Web. 31 Jan. 2017.

Fanning, David . "The Present-Day Master of the C Major Key." Editorial. Acta Musicologica,

2001, 101-40.

Fanning, David. Shostakovich, String Quartet no. 8. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2004.

Geldern, James Von. "Khrushchev on the Arts." Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. Accessed

January 10, 2017. http://soviethistory.msu.edu/1961-2/khrushchev-on-the-arts/.

Johnson, Priscilla. Khrushchev and the arts; the politics of Soviet culture, 1962-1964.

Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1965.

Iakubov, Manashir and Maria Karachevskaya, New collected Works. Vol. 13. 1st Series

Symphonies. Moscow: DSCH Publishers, 2011.

Iakubov, Manashir and Maria Karachevskaya, New collected Works. Vol. 28. 1st Series

Symphonies. Moscow: DSCH Publishers, 2011.

Khrushchev, Nikita. "Khrushchev's Secret Speech." Speech, 20th Congress of the Central

Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, October 10, 2016.

digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org.

Hausmann, John Peter. Shostakovich, Yevtushenko, and Criticism in the Thirteenth Symphony.

PhD diss., 2010. Louisville, Kentucky: University of Louisville.

Leibman, Ludmilla. Teaching the Holocaust through Music. PhD diss., Boston University, 1999.

71-125.

Longman, Richard M. "Expression and structure: processes of integration in the large-scale

instrumental music of Dmitri Shostakovich." PhD diss., Oxford University, 1984.

Abstract in Outstanding Dissertations in Music from British Universities, 1989, 320-

38

404.

MacDonald, Ian. The New Shostakovich. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1990.

Mishra, Michael. A Shostakovich Companion. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2008.

McDonald, Malcom. “Words and Music in Late Shostakovich,” in Shostakovich: The Man and

His Music. Edited by Christopher Norris. Boston: M. Boyars, 1982.

Safarik, Amy Kathleen. A Literature of Conscience: Yevtushenko's Post-Stalin Poetry. Master's

thesis, 2008. 37-61.

Schwarz, Boris. Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia: 1917-1970. New York, NY: W.W.

Norton, 1972. Chapter 15

Sheldon, Richard. The transformations of Babi Yar. Washington D.C.: National Council for

Soviet and East European Research, 1986.

Columbia University. Research Institute on International Change.

Shostakovich, Dmitriĭ Dmitrievich, and I. Glikman. Story of a Friendship: The Letters of Dmitry

Shostakovich to Isaak Glikman, 1941-1975. Ithca, New York: Cornell University Press,

1993.

Shostakovich, Dmitriĭ Dmitrievich, and Volkov, Solomon. Testimony: the memoirs of Dmitri

Shostakovich. New York: Harper & Row, 1979.

Shostakovich, Irina. "Chronicle: 1962." Interview with O. Dvornichenko. Life and Creative

Work of Dimtri Shostakovich. 2009. Accessed January 28, 2017.

http://live-en.shostakovich.ru/chronicle/year-1962/.

Steblin, Rita. A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries.

2nd ed. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 1983.

Razhnikov, V. Kirill Kondrashin Relates. Moscow, 1989. (in Russian)

Watson, Jada. Aspects of the "Jewish" Folk Idiom in Dmitri Shostakovich's String Quartet No. 4,

Op. 83 (1949). Master's thesis, 2008. 48-89.

Wilson, Elizabeth. Shostakovich: A Life Remembered. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,

1994. chapter 7

World Heritage Encyclopedia. "1961 Kurenivka Mudslide." World Public Library. Accessed

November 12, 2016.

Yevtushenko, Yevgeny. I came to you, Babi Yar--. Moscow: LLC Kuprianov's Publishing

House, 2006. (in Russian)