ſ ： ſi* * * * * 2:1 ſ tº ſºul，
ºº º ffºſſºſ}:}}}}}}{{ºſſ.
， ， ， ！------）
i . . .*; * . ::: f . . . . . . .
U،
، ، ، ، ، ،
• • • • ſ
(）
، ، º
∞
*''，'','s'）;
∞ √≠ ≤ r ≤ .
ſºſº º *ſ*.
№ s ） { º.
. （， ， , ， ， ， ， ， ，
· · · * *pºrºſº, °, º.º.
w w. •
！ºſº#i;
ſaeſuae
ſl

sin a sº
º
P
ºuter
EUĮĮĶĶĹĹĻĻĽĮĮĶĶĹĹĻĻĽĮJĮ
#########################################∞ √）■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
È.Ř
\\
{{№Riſſ{W}{ſ}}}"||}||[[IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII|[}};
ŠŇſ
WJJJ, Nº.
USA.V.
Tºll'Innullrunninnullilullûllulitº
milliºttlini
in
area are errºr-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-
Tuninthillilullûllutilillºl



Page Missing
in Original
Volume




Page Missing
in Original
Volume


s
A SHORT HISTORY OF
RJSSIAN MUSIC
By ARTHUR POUGIN
$
T R A N S L A T E D B Y
LAWRENCE HAWARD
NEW YORK
B RE N T A N O’S

I915
Prizzted in Great Britaiz
t
º
*, * • 3.
Jº Cº-\, tº 64- * A.:
* * * * * * *-* - a t
". . i - ºf
AUTHOR’S PREFACE
THE extraordinarily rapid development of the
Russian school of music has been preoccupy-
ing the world of art for something like thirty-
five years, and has now engaged the interest
and attention of the whole of Europe. Previous
to this, it was a matter of common knowledge
that a great composer, of the name of Glinka,
had been born in Russia, and that he had left
his country two superb works : A Life for
the Tsar and Rousslan and Ludmilla. The
names of two or three other composers, such
as Serov and Dargomijsky, were also known; *
but it was not realised at that time that music
had taken such deep root in the country.
For us Frenchmen in particular the splendid
Russian cencerts organised at Paris by Nicholas
Rubinstein for the Exhibition of 1878 were a
revelation ; they made us acquainted with
artists whose names we hardly knew and of
whose works we were completely ignorant.
23{}550
V
AUTHOR'S PREFACE
From that day the young Russian school has
worked with eager activity and has forged ahead.
It has not merely asserted with regularity and
increasing emphasis its existence and progress
at home; it has also spread abroad, moving in
Germany mainly in the direction of dramatic,
and in France of symphonic, music. The
result is that the names of the musicians be-
longing to the school have been popularized on
all sides, while their works have become
familiar to everyone who cares to busy
himself with matters of outstanding artistic
Importance. )
It is not easy, however, to give a his–
torical sketch of Russian music when one
travels outside the limits of the work of these
later composers. The brilliant school of to-
day, with its strong personality, has not sprung
in a moment from Nature’s womb, and it
is interesting to see through what tentative
struggles it has had to pass before it could
actually come to birth. But it is just here
that difficulties commence. Those who would
like to undertake such a piece of research are
prevented from getting to the original sources
by general ignorance of the language. I believe
too that even in Russia there is nothing which
V1
AUTHOR'S PREFACE
could strictly be called a history of Russian
music. At the most a certain amount of work
—a good deal, in point of fact—has been done
on particular chapters of history, and on some
of the more or less contemporary musicians
who occupy an important place in it.' I make
no pretence therefore, as may be imagined, of
going sofar as to trace a history of Russian music
in the following pages. My task is, I consider,
far more modest. As the title ‘ I have given to
it indicates, it is merely an essay: something in
the nature of a series of notes for the history
which still has to be written, accompanied by
purely personal impressions. The sole aim of
these notes and impressions is to make known
in France the importance of the musical move-
ment that has been going on in Russia during
the last fifty years. However incomplete my
work may be, I hope that the perusal of it will
be of service to those who want to keep abreast
of whatever deals with the progress of music
in the different countries of Europe. I offer
my apologies in advance for such gaps and
defects as I am aware it is bound to contain.
* Essai. Historique sur la Musique en Russie.
X,
vii
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
The origins of Russian music.—Folk-songs.-Church
music. Berezovsky, Bortniansky, The Imperial
Chapel
CHAPTER II
Russian dilettantism in the eighteenth century. Royal
patrons of music.—Italian and French opera at St.
Petersburg.—The first timid attempts at opera in
the Russian tongue
CHAPTER III
A national composer: Michael Glinka, the real founder
of Russian opera.--His life and works.-A Zife for
the 7'sar, a patriotic opera.-Rouss/azz and Zud-
milla.-Glinka's claim to fame
CHAPTER IV
Two forerunners of the “Young Russian School”:
Alexander Dargomijsky, Alexander Serov
CHAPTER V
Two independent composers: Anton Rubinstein, Peter
Ilich Tchaikovsky. o . .
22
44
92
I37
1X
CONTENTS
CHAPTER VI
The “Young Russian School”: César Cui, Balakirev,
Borodin, Moussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov
Russian composers of the later generation.
CHAPTER VII
works, tendencies, and activity
CHAPTER VIII
Their
A general view of the present state of music in Russia.
—Musical critics and historians.—Distinguished
singers and instrumentalists.--The teaching of
music.—The Conservatoires.—Conclusion
INDEX .
-º-º-º:
PAGE
I88
271
3O7
327
*
A SHORT HISTORY OF
RUSSIAN MUSIC
CHAPTER I
The origins of Russian music.—Folk-songs.-Church
music. Berezovsky, Bortniansky, The Imperial
Chapel.
THE real origins of Russian music must be
looked for in music written for the Church
and in folk-song. This has been shown by one
of the most learned Russian writers on music,
Youry Arnold, in a book published in his
native tongue. Further light was thrown by
him on this question in two publications
written in German and issued at Leipzig while
he was editor of the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik,
the paper which was formally founded by
Schumann and eventually became the organ
of the Wagnerian party. The first of these pub-
lications was called Die Tomkunst in Russland
bis zur Einführung des abendlandischen Musik
und Notensystems 1 (Leipzig, 1867); the second,
1 Music in Russia before the introduction of the
Western Scale and notation.
A
A SHORT HISTORY OF
which consisted of a series of eight articles that
appeared in the paper I have just mentioned,
was entitled Die Entwickelung der russischen
Nationaloper." Arnold himself, who died in
1898, at the age of 87, was professor of musical
theory at the Conservatoire at Moscow and of
musical history at the University of that town.
He published, amongst other things, a Theory
of Musical Production, a biography of Liszt,
and some interesting Memoirs.
Russian folk-song, with its peculiar flavour
and its originality of harmony, rhythm, and
melody, has been skilfully borrowed and
turned to account by every Russian composer
since Glinka, which is one reason why the
music of the present day has so much indi-
viduality. Another Russian author, Hermann
Laroche, has described its qualities not only
with skill, but with the sort of pride that is
entirely legitimate. This is how he speaks
of those strange and characteristic popular
airs : “The melody moves in a piquant, un-
foreseen way with fantastic leaps and bounds
and graceful, decorative outlines. The har-
mony is based on a system of transparent clear-
ness with plagal and phrygian cadences that
seem to open up distant horizons to the mind.
The rhythm has a careless, leisurely stride, and
allows various kinds of movement to unfold
* The development of Russian national opera.
2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
with the capriciousness of unchartered liberty.
In all this you have a picture of the Russian
people. You see, reflected as it were in some
unknown world in little, the Russian with his
characteristically free and easy ways, his clear,
sober mind, his need of elbow-room, and his
antipathy for being shackled with any kind
of constraint. In short, if you consider the
luxuriant way in which our music flourishes,
springing, as it does, with inexhaustible variety,
spontaneously from the soil, and compare it
with the sterility of our plastic and represen-
tative arts, you will realise the depths of our
private, intimate life and the richly lyrical
gifts of our nation, which have lain concealed
beneath the poverty and uncouthness of the
earlier forms of art, I grant, if you like, that
nature in Russia is far from picturesque, that
our costumes are abominable, that our entire
method of life escapes the painter’s brush and
the sculptor’s chisel. I grant all that, as I say.
On the other hand, our folk-song is so profound
in its appeal, it is so enchantingly varied and so
perfectly new in its form, that we can look to
the future with complete confidence and face
with assurance the artistic destiny of our
country. Our national songs are a true guar-
antee of the worth of Russian music, and are
quite sufficient evidence of our aptitude for
art. But this is not the only proof we have.

3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
We can boast with pride of a great Russian
musician who was nourished on Our popular
songs and preserved their character in im-
perishable works, and by that means was able
to depict with inimitable art the minutest
idiosyncrasies of the Russian people. This
great musician and master was Michael Ivan-
Ovich Glinka.” "
Another Russian author, César Cui, who,
although a soldier, is also a composer, has
written of the folk-songs from the technical
point of view as follows: “Russian folk-songs
are usually written within a very restricted
compass, and only rarely move beyond the
interval of a fifth or a sixth. The older the
song the narrower is the range of its compass.
The theme is always short, sometimes extend-
ing no farther than two bars, but these two
bars are repeated as often as the exigencies of
the text demand. . .
“The folk-songs are sung either by a single
voice or by a chorus. In the latter case a
single voice leads off with the subject, and then
the chorus takes it up. The harmonisation of
these tunes is traditional and extremely
original. The different voices of the chorus
approach each other until they form a unison,
or else separate into chords (only the chords
* Hermann Laroche : Glinka and the part he played in
the History of Music.
4.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
are often not filled in), and, generally speak-
ing, a melody treated polyphonically ends in a
l]IllSOIl.
“The songs for a single voice are frequently
accompanied on a tiny Stringed instrument
called a ‘balalaſka —a kind of guitar with a
triangular belly, the strings of which are either
plucked or set vibrating by a glissando. As to
the songs for chorus, they are rarely provided
with an accompaniment ; when they do have
one, it is played on a sort of oboe which uses
the melody as the basis of a number of contra-
puntal improvisations which are, no doubt, not
much in accordance with the strict rules of
music, but are exceedingly picturesque.
“Russian folk-songs may be classified in the
following way as : singing games, or songs sung
on feast days to the accompaniment of differ-
ent games and dances ; ſongs for ſpecial occa-
sions, of which the wedding song is the most
popular type; street ſongs, or Serenades for
chorus of a jovial or burlesque character ; songs
of the ‘bourlaks,” or of the barge-haulers; and
songs for a single voice of every sort and kind.
“I have already said a few words incident-
ally on the intrinsic worth of these Russian
songs from the aesthetic and artistic point of
view, and I cannot help insisting on it. It
really is impossible to estimate their value
when you consider their variety, the expressive-
5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
ness of the feelings they contain, and the rich-
ness and originality of their themes. Some of
them are marked by masculine energy, by
Savage, unrestrained vehemence, or, again, by
calm, majestic dignity. Others are graceful
and attractive, and charm us by their careless
gaiety. Many are stamped with a profound
melancholy : you feel the grief in them strug-
gling to expand, the resigned submission to a
cruel and rigorous fate. Some have their
origin in the clear, untroubled pools of poetry,
and move in a serene, ideal, lyric world under a
fair-weather sky : these are they that show us
noble natures and the hearts of lovers. Others
again, with slow and stately measure, speak
with the voice of pomp and circumstance.” "
Russian folk-songs, which are interesting from
all points of view, and are a source of justifiable
pride to the Russians, were naturally bound to
form the subject of much valuable research.
A number of collections of these songs have
been published by some very distinguished
musical scholars, who have discovered the .
authentic versions, transcribed them with the
most scrupulous care, and harmonised them
with such skill and tact that their character-
istic style and colour have been faithfully pre-
served. The oldest of these collections is that
of Pratch, a well-known musician of Prague.
* César Cui: La Musique en Russie.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
It contains as many as I49 songs, and was
published for the first time in 1790; a second
edition of it in two volumes appeared in 1815.
This is the collection from which Beethoven
took the Russian themes which he used in
the quartets dedicated to Count Razoumovsky,
The composer Balakirev produced in 1866 a
collection of forty songs, and another of IOO
has been formed by Rimsky-Korsakov. I can-
not mention every publication of this sort
that we owe to Kashin, Shishkin, Klutcharov,
de Santis, Famintzin, Villebois, Prokounin,
Bernard, Melgounov, and others.
My excellent and regretted colleague, Gus-
tave Bertrand, who died young, once gave
some delightful specimens of Russian folk-songs
in two articles in the Chronique musicale for
October I and November 1, 1873. In discuss-
ing the methods of performing the singing
games mentioned above by César Cui, he gave
the following interesting details : “The per-
formance of these Russian village singing
games is unfailingly picturesque, sometimes
even somewhat scenic. The chorus, arranged
in a circle, plays the part of narrator and com-
mentator like the chorus in the drafmas and
comedies of antiquity. In the middle of the
circle are two or more peasants of either sex,
whose business it is to represent the characters
in the story—the couple in love, the husband
7
A SHORT HISTORY OF
and wife, the mother and daughter, the wicked
stepmother, and so forth ; each peasant having
to dance or act while singing the scrap of
dialogue allotted to him or her, as the case
may be. Sometimes the chorus sings con-
tinuously; in other singing games there is a
kind of leader, who recites the tale, while the
chorus merely repeats at the end of each
strophe, or adds on its own account, an ex-
clamatory remark or perhaps some brief re-
flexion. There is no rigorous code, of course,
for all this, but the moment there is any indi-
cation of action or of dialogue, the performance
of the singing game becomes partially scenic.”
Just as much care has been given by the
leaders of the young Russian school to the
study of church music, which, with folk-song,
has been one of the primary elements in the
constitution of their modern music. As far
as that goes, the two elements are readily
fused : one finds, for instance, in a very large
number of national folk-songs the form and
tonality of ancient Greek music. We have it
on the authority of Hermann Laroche that the
music of the people falls into one of three cate-
gories : the dorian mode (the scale of E without
accidentals), the aeolian or hypo-dorian mode
(the scale of A minor without the leading note),
or the hypo-phrygian (the key of G without the
F sharp).
8
RUSSIAN MUSIC
It goes without saying that music for the
Church has, like folk-song, given rise to some
interesting lines of study and to numerous
publications. Excellent editions of liturgical
music of the Russian Church, harmonised in
a variety of styles, have been prepared under the
auspices of the Imperial Chapel of St. Peters-
burg, and the Society of Collectors of old Rus-
sian Mansucripts has published in facsimile two
ancient musical grammars. Nor has there
been any dearth of historical research. Numer-
ous essays on the subject have either appeared
separately or have been inserted in the period-
ical reports of different learned societies.
Besides this, Prince Nicholas Youssipov, who
was well known for his enlightened dilettantism,
wrote in French a History of Church Music in
Russia' (Paris, 1862), which unfortunately
makes rather laborious reading, but is accom-
panied by a selection of ancient and modern
church tunes. I have also read favourable
accounts of another interesting and important
work published in Russian at Moscow (2 vols.,
1867–8) by P. Dmitri Razoumovsky, who was
professor at the Conservatoire there. Finally,
we owe to the same scholar a valuable study of
the famous church choirs at the court of the
Tsar at Moscow, of which the Imperial Chapel
* The work is incomplete, the first volume alone
having appeared.
9
A SHORT HISTORY OF
of to-day is the direct lineal descendant. We
learn from this that ever since the fifteenth
century the court at Moscow maintained a
church choir, and that in the following century,
in the reign of Ivan the Terrible (who, by the
way, was a composer himself, and is supposed
to have written at least one hymn tune), this
choir had some good material in it. “At
first,” according to Platon de Waxel, “it only
contained some thirty singers, but at the be-
ginning of the seventeenth century this number
was doubled. The whole body of them never
sang at once. They were divided into several
different choirs, each containing from twelve to
eighteen voices, who officiated in the different
churches belonging to the court. Two of these
choirs were attached to the person of the sove-
reign. The Tsar Alexis, who, like his son, Peter
the Great, was fond of singing in church, sum-
moned some musicians from Kiev, who intro-
duced modern notation into his chapel. Vocal
music in eight, twelve, and even twenty-four
parts soon had such a success that the court .
singers began to give performances outside
the palace. They learned a number of Polish
hymns, which were translated into Russian by
the celebrated Simeon de Polotsk and set to
music by the singer Vasily Titov ; they also
sang music written by Polish composers.
Under Peter the Great, a number of choirs
IO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
attached to the private chapels of members
of the Imperial family were broken up, and on
the death of that famous monarch his own
special choir of more than twenty voices,
which accompanied him in his travels and
campaigns, was likewise Suppressed. At this
point the researches of Dmitri Razoumovsky
break off, but it is nevertheless known that
the choirs of court singers continued to exist
during succeeding reigns. The celebrated
Alexis Razoumovsky was a member of the
Imperial Chapel in the days of the Empress
Anne, quitting it in 1757 to enter that of the
/ Grand-Duchess Elizabeth Petrovna. It seems
that at this period the Imperial Chapel was
already in possession of its present organisation,
while actually being the outcome of the Chapel
of the Tsars of Moscow.” "
My readers will be familiar with the im-
mense reputation of the choir of the Imperial
Chapel, the singers in which have voices of
an exceptional character and unusually wide
range, and are carefully selected from amongst
the peasants in Ukraine, the province famed
for its beautiful voices. Adolphe Adam, the
French composer, has left us his enthusiastic
testimony to the effect left on him by these
voices and by the vocal technique of the singers
* Journal de Saint-Pétersbourg, July 23–August 4,
I88I.
II
A SHORT HISTORY OF
on an occasion when he was admitted to hear
the chapel choir during a stay he made at St.
Petersburg in 1840 : “Church music,” says
Adam, “is superior to any other kind of music
in Russia, because it alone is typical, and is not
an imitation of the music of other nations,
at any rate as far as the execution is concerned.
The Greek rite allows of no kind of instrument
in the church. The singers of the Imperial
Chapel never sing any other music than that
of the church services, and they have conse-
quently acquired an extraordinary facility for
singing unaccompanied with a justness of in-
tonation of which one can have no idea. But
what gives their performances the sense of
peculiar strangeness is the character of the
bass voices, which extend from low A (three
lines beneath the bass stave) to middle C,
and produce an incredible effect by doubling
the ordinary basses at the interval of an octave
below them. . . These living double basses
never cease to be singers singing in chorus;
their voices, if heard separately, would be
intolerably heavy ; when they are heard in
the mass the effect is admirable. The first
time I heard this splendid chapel choir I was
stirred with such emotion as I had never felt
before. From the very first bars of the piece
I began to shed tears ; then, when the music
quickened up and the thundering voices
I 2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
launched the whole artillery of their lungs, I
found myself trembling and covered with a
cold sweat. The most tremendous orchestra
in the world could never give rise to this
curious sensation, which was entirely different
from any that I had supposed it possible for
music to convey. The tenor voices are far
from being as perfect as the bass, but are
nevertheless very satisfactory. The sopranos
are vigorous, and there are some pretty chil-
dren’s voices amongst the soloists. . . In
short, the Imperial Chapel is a unique insti-
tution.” "
Adam does not in the least exaggerate when
he describes the impression produced by these
singers, for Berlioz, who also had an oppor-
tunity of hearing them at St. Petersburg,
writes of them as follows: “Since the ritual
of the Greek branch of the Christian religion
forbids the use in church of musical instru-
ments, or even of the organ, the Russian Church
choirs always sing unaccompanied. The
singers of the Imperial choir wished to avoid
having a conductor to beat time for them, and
have managed to dispense with one. '
“Her Imperial Highness the Grand Duchess
of Leuchtenberg, having one day at St. Peters-
burg honoured me with an invitation to
hear a mass sung specially for my benefit in
* France musicale, July 1840.
I3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the chapel of the palace, I was able to appreci-
ate the astonishing assurance with which the
singers, when thus left to themselves, pass
suddenly from one key to another, or from a
slow movement to a quick, and to admire the
imperturbable ensemble with which they sing
even the recitatives and the unbarred music
for the psalms. The twenty-four singers,
clothed in rich vestments, were arranged in
two equal groups, which stood on either side
of the altar facing each other. The basses
occupied the places farthest from the centre,
before them were the tenors, and in front of
these came the boys—the trebles and altos.
They remained perfectly motionless and silent
with their eyes on the ground, waiting for the
moment to begin singing ; then, at the signal,
which was taken, no doubt, from one of the
leaders (though it was impossible to detect
that anyone gave them the note or indicated
the pace), they intoned one of the biggest of
Bortniansky’s motets for eight voices. Out
of the web of harmonies formed by the incred-
ibly intricate interlacing of the parts rose sighs
and vague murmurs such as one sometimes
hears in dreams. From time to time came
sounds so intense that they resembled human
cries which tortured the mind with the weight
of sudden oppression and almost made the
heart stop beating. Then the whole thing
I4
RUSSIAN MUSIC
quieted down, diminishing with divinely slow
gradations to a mere breath, as though a
choir of angels were leaving the earth and
gradually losing itself in the uttermost heights
of heaven. It was a piece of good fortune
that the Grand Duchess did not speak to me
that day, for, in the state I was left in at the
end of the ceremony, I should probably have
appeared to her highly ridiculous.” "
One of those who had most to do with the
perfecting of this chapel choir was the cele-
brated composer Dmitri Spenovich Bort-
niansky, who was born in 1751 at Gloukov,
in the department of Tchernigov, and died
on September 28 (October 9), 1825. It
would, however, be unjust not to mention
before him another very remarkable musician,
Maxim Sozontovich Berezovsky, who was a
few years his senior, and, like him, was one of
the fathers of Russian church music. Born
in the Ukraine about 1745, Berezovsky was at
an early age admitted to the Imperial Chapel,
where his beautiful voice and his gift for com-
position attracted the notice of the Empress
Catherine II, who had him sent, at her expense,
to Italy to finish the musical studies he had
begun at the ecclesiastical academy at Kiev.
In this way he went to Bologna, where he re-
sided several years, and acquired, under the
1 Les Soirées de l’Orchestre, No. 21.
I 5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
admirable tuition of the famous Padre Martini,
a great facility in writing. On his return to
Russia he produced a considerable number of
compositions for the Church, which were dis-
tinguished by feeling and formal elegance,
and busied himself with reforms which he
considered essential to introduce in the sing-
ing of Graeco-Russian Church music. We
are told, however, that his efforts in this direc-
tion were met by countless obstacles, and that
he was bitterly disappointed in consequence.
It may have been this disappointment which
drove him to commit suicide in 1777, when he
was barely thirty-two years old. One cannot
be sure of this. What one can say with cer-
tainty is that Berezovsky is nowadays con-
sidered one of the greatest composers of sacred
music his country has produced.
In discussing the vocal music of the Graeco-
Russian Church, one ought not, I think, to
pass over in silence the name of St. John of
Damascus, a well-known member of a religious
order who lived during the seventh and eighth
centuries, and was looked upon as the reformer
and systematiser of this music. It is to him
that we owe a large number of the hymns and
tunes used in the church service, and his memory
is on this account held sacred in Russia. Fétis
speaks of him as follows: “The lives of the
saints of the Greek Church, and the majority
I6
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of the writers of antiquity who have dealt
with the services and vocal music of that
Church, attribute to St. John of Damascus the
restoration of the vocal music and the com-
position of numerous hymns and psalms which
are still in use. He undoubtedly based his
work on the Typikon (the oldest book of Rules
for the Office, the original of which was in exist-
ence in his day in the monastery of Saint Sabbas),
and from it he took the Canons, the Troparia or
anthems, strophes, responses, and hymns, and
the Stichera or canticles, for which he composed
some of the tunes. The numerous manu-
scripts extant in the libraries of Europe and
the monasteries of the East prove that he is
indeed the author of the majority of these
tunes. . .”
As to Bortniansky, he is, properly speaking,
one of the glories of Russian music, and in his
way one of the most original of Russian
musicians. He, too, was a member of the
chapel choir, his lovely treble voice having
gained him admission to it when he was barely
seven years old. The Empress Elizabeth
noticed him and handed him over to the Italian
composer Galuppi (who was then Master of
the Imperial Music at St. Petersburg) to look
after his musical education. Galuppi having
left Russia in 1768, the Empress Catherine II
was unwilling that the studies of the young
17 B
A SHORT HISTORY OF
musician should remain unfinished, and sent
him to rejoin his master at Venice. Bortni-
ansky stayed some time in this town, and then,
on the advice of Galuppi himself, went to
study at Bologna, Rome, and Naples. During
his lengthy sojourn in Italy, which lasted as
long as eleven years, he began to write a con-
siderable number of compositions in the
# Italian form and style, which included church
music, sonatas for the harpsichord, and vari-
ous miscellaneous pieces." In 1779 Bortni-
ansky returned to Russia, where he was soon
appointed director of the choir, which received
the title of “The Imperial Chapel” only in
1796. He continued to keep his post until
his death—that is to say, for very nearly half
a century; and it was during this time that
he acquired the reputation which is rightly
attached to his name. “In everything
that he had produced up till his return to
Russia,” says Fétis, “he was inspired by the
Italian music of his day; it was only at St.
Petersburg that his genius was revealed in its
essential originality. The choir which he was
summoned to direct had been organised during
the reign of the Tsar Alexis Mikhailovich, but
although it had been in existence for some
1 He even had an opera, Quinto Fabio, staged at
Modena, December 26, 1778. (See Cronisteria dei Teatri
di Modena, by Alessandro Gandini; Modena, 1873, 3 vols.,
16m*.) This fact has never been noticed before.
I8
RUSSIAN MUSIC
time, the quality of the singers’ voices and the
finish of their technique left much to be de-
sired. Bortniansky sent for singers from the
Ukraine and various provinces of the empire,
choosing the best voices, and gradually training
them until they acquired a perfection of exe-
cution which had not been dreamed of before
his time. Thanks to this admirable artist,
the Russian Imperial Chapel reached the de-
gree of excellence which all foreign musicians
admire so much to-day. It was for this in-
comparable choir that he composed settings in
four and eight parts of forty-five complete
psalms, which are marked by strong character
and striking originality. He was also the
author of a Greek mass in three parts and
numerous miscellaneous pieces.”" This ac-
count may be supplemented by what Octave
Fouque says of Bortniansky in his interesting
notice of Glinka. “Amongst his works is to
be found, besides a mass and some psalms, a
suite of pieces called Songs of the Seraphim,
which, with their glowing serenity and their
clear and tranquil grandeur, are really worthy of
their title. On October 11, 1901, St.Petersburg
celebrated with pomp the 150th anniversary
of this fine musician, whom his fellow-country-
men have christened the Russian Palestrina.”
Such is the great musician to whom the Im-
* Fétis : Biographie universelle des Musiciens.
I9
A SHORT HISTORY OF
perial Chapel owes its reorganisation, its develop-
ment, and that perfection in performance which
is unrivalled in any other country; such the
composer who by his works has carried Russian
church music to its highest pitch of splendour.
The successor of Bortniansky in the Imperial
Chapel was Theodore Lvov, a very distin-
guished dilettante and the father of General
Alexis Lvov, who succeeded his father in
the post. Alexis was a violinist of exceptional
virtuosity, and a noteworthy composer of
church music as well as of several operas, but
he is chiefly famous for being the author of
the Russian National Anthem, which is so
justly popular to-day. Later on I shall have
something more to say of this interesting
musician. Theodore's name was omitted by
Fétis in his Biographie universelle des Musi-
ciens, and also by me in the supplement
which I wrote for that work. I do not think
that, as a matter of fact, he is mentioned in
any biographical dictionary published out-
side Russia. This able amateur, who died
December 14, 1836, wrote a preface for the
second edition of Pratch’s famous collection
of Russian folk-songs, in which he very
rightly brings out the indisputable affinities
between Russian folk-music and Greek music.
I should like to draw attention to one other
musician, who lived at the same time as Bort-
2O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
niansky and seems to me to deserve mention.
I mean the composer Degtiarev, who was born
at Borysov in 1766 and died in 1813. At
the age of six he showed so much disposition
for music, and had such an attractive voice, that
Count Sheremetiev, whose serf he was, became
interested in him, admitted him to his choir,
and eventually sent him to study at the Uni-
º; of Moscow. There he went on working
at music till he left for St. Petersburg, where he
became a pupil of Sarti. Some writers have
felt justified in asserting that he travelled in
Italy with Sarti. But if Degtiarev did actually
go to Italy, it was certainly not in company
with his master, for Sarti never saw his own
country again after he had once settled down
in Russia. From St. Petersburg Degtiarev
º to his native town, was placed by
Tount Sheremetiev at the head of the chapel
which he had joined as a child, and thencefor-
ward wrote a large amount of interesting church
music for it. One of the most important and
remarkable of his works is a big secular oratorio
called The Deliverance of Russia in 1612, which
is said to have been translated into Italian and
performed in several countries.
2I
CHAPTER II |
Y
Russian dilettantism in the eighteenth century. Royal
patrons of music.—Italian and French opéra at $t.
Petersburg-The first timid attempts at opera in the
Russian tongue. \
i
OUR musical life in France began more than
two centuries ago. The real foundation of
our opera goes back to the year 1671. Les
Troqueurs, the work which is rightly consid-
ered the first typical manifestation of the art of
opéra-comique, was performed at the old Opéra-
Comique de la Foire in 1753, and from that
time onwards we have seen an uninterrupted
succession both of strong, and of attractive
composers, who have held high the banner of
national music, and have never let it drop. It
must be admitted, however, that it is only for
the last hundred years—that is to say, since the
creation of the Conservatoire in 1794—that we
have possessed a school of music in the real
sense of the word: by which I mean, a group of
musicians united by the same ideals, moving
towards the same goal, professing the same,
principles, and giving musical proof of a very
real and accentuated nationalism—proof, in
22
RUSSIAN MUSIC
other words, if not of the understanding of
music, at least of a quite special manifestation
of it. It will be sufficient to recall in this
connection the names of Berton, Lesueur,
Méhul, Boieldieu, Catel, Nicolo, Herold, Auber,
Adam, Halévy, &c. This amounts to saying
that our music is entirely French, as far as style,
colour, and character are concerned, and that
it resembles neither German music nor Italian.
These two schools also had their own char-
acter sharply marked and defined, their own
kind of originality, and what one might call
their autonomy. The great and powerful
German school, full of vitality and poetry,
devoted itself mainly to symphonic music
and the oratorio ; the exquisitely delicate
school of Italy, making up with its enchant-
ing airs and graces for what it lacked in depth,
was occupied more especially with the theatre,
though by no means neglecting music for the
Church. Up till modern times, then, there
were these three flourishing and quite dis-
tinct musical schools—the German, the Italian,
and the French, the French being the youngest
and the last to arrive on the scene.
Things have altered nowadays. The Ger-
man school since the death of Weber, Mendels-
Sohn, and Schumann has disappeared, leaving
behind it nothing but a colossus, whose genius
is as uneven as it is powerful—I mean, the com-
23
A SHORT HISTORY OF
poser of Lohengrin and Der Ring des Nibelungen,
and he too is now dead. Besides, it would be
a truism to insist that a single musician, how-
ever great his worth, cannot by himself alone
represent a school. Well, who are the suc-
cessors of Richard Wagner . . For my part,
I do not know. I only see, scattered through-
out Germany, some three or four more or
less distinguished musicians : Carl Goldmark,
Richard Strauss, Humperdinck, who are surely
powerless to renew the exploits of their pre-
decessors. Their very names grow strangely
pale at the recollection of those giants: J. S.
Bach, Handel, Haydn, Gluck, Mozart, and
Beethoven.
Now look at Italy, famous for its long roll
of glorious composers: Palestrina, Scarlatti,
Pergolesi, Porpora, Piccini, Sarti, Anfossi, Gug-
lielmi, Paisiello, Cimarosa. The Italian school
surrendered its last breath with the music of
Rossini, Bellini, and Donizetti.
In Italy, too, a strong and brilliant genius,
with a steady fount of inspiration, was found in
the composer of those moving works: Rigoletto,
Aida, and the Requiem Mass. But it was pre-
cisely because he was a genius that his presence
alone was sufficient to show up the feebleness
of all that was going on around him. In point
of fact, Verdi remains a glorious exception in
the country of Palestrina, just as Wagner re-
24
RUSSIAN MUSIC
mains a glorious exception in the country of our
old friend Bach. Do not misunderstand me: I
do not assert that there are no more composers
in Germany and Italy; I only say that for the
moment at any rate, there is not, strictly
speaking, any school.
France alone remained in the breach, and
when I say this I hope I may be acquitted of
giving way to a fit of artistic chauvinism. It
seems to me that it is not chauvinism but
simple justice to recall the names of those
distinguished and glorious composers: Gou-
nod, Berlioz, David, Thomas, Bizet, Delibes,
Lalo, Guiraud, Poise, Saint-Saëns, Massenet,
Reyer, whose works have for the most part
been familiar to the world for more than half
a century. France, then, alone maintained a
school of music whose labours really bore fruit;
when, far away at the other end of Europe, a
little cloud suddenly appeared on the horizon
of that vast Russian Empire, which is the last
child born to the world of art. It was a cloud
of young musicians of actively vigorous tem-
perament, prodigious fecundity, and strikingly
individual expression, who claimed their place
at the banquet of the nations, and took it with-
out more ado, having proved from the very first
that they were worthy, and that nºe had
greater rights to it than ºf is was,
Russian school, which suddenly asserted itself,

25
A SHORT HISTORY OF
without hesitating or groping its way, and in
less than twenty-five years was spreading over
the whole of Europe and doing prodigies of
valour.
Nevertheless, this was obviously not a case
of spontaneous generation. In art, more than
anything else, incubation takes time. But the
Russians started with a considerable advan-
tage. They were able to profit by the labours
of their predecessors in Germany, Italy, and
France, and to appropriate without prelim-
inary efforts a technique which lay ready for
them to use but had taken others whole cen-
turies to develop. In this way they were
spared that long, slow, experimental period
that always precedes the formation of art that
is healthy and matured. On the other hand,
as they had lived for a long time by themselves
in retreat, and had not been mixed in the great
intellectual movement which has gone on
stirring Europe ever since the Renaissance,
they worked in silence and reserved themselves,
as it were, for the day when they should at last
feel sure and confident of the forces they had
been secretly accumulating. Then they burst
forth and appeared before the world not only
with the prestige of surprise, but with the
advantage of having, with comparative ease,
gained experience which had cost their pre-
decessors endless toil and trouble. If one
26
RUSSIAN MUSIC
remembers, the striking originality and the
individual taste which they showed in hand-
ling an art to which they contributed a new
and unexpected note; and if one thinks of the
very great facility in their work which intelli-
gent and persevering study had enabled them
to acquire, there will be no difficulty in under-
standing the success with which they were
greeted the moment they gave serious evidence
of their gifts.
Besides which, the Russians have a very deep
and natural love of music. The proof lies in
their vocal music and in those highly coloured
folk-songs of which I have had occasion to
speak. These illustrate the Russians’ innate
talent for original composition, at any rate in
this branch of music. With the advance of
their civilisation this talent of theirs was
bound to be shown on a higher and more com-
pletely artistic plane. All it needed was en-
couragement, even if it were indirect. This it
obtained; music during the last century and a
half having been cultivated and protected by
all the sovereigns who have succeeded to the
throne of Russia. The Empress Anne, the
Empress Elizabeth, the Empress Catherine,
and the Tsars Paul I and Alexander I, to men-
tion no others, did all they possibly could to
spread a taste for music, and also the practice
of it, throughout their realm. To this end they
27
A SHORT HISTORY OF
summoned the most celebrated composers
from abroad, including Galuppi, Martini (Lo
Spagnuolo), Paisiello, Sarti, Cimarosa, Boildieu,
and Steibelt, to direct the opera, to con-
duct the choir of the Chapel, and to organise
the Privy Music of the sovereign. They also
attracted, by the offer of high salaries, the
greatest singers and the most famous virtuosi
in the world. In this way they stimulated the
love of music in a nation which was naturally
gifted in this respect; and at the same time
they made musical education easy, and provided
the material means that were necessary for
securing performances. This they did so suc-
cessfully that, after a century of effort, Russian
music came triumphant out of the bonds of
infancy, and the country was startled by the
sudden appearance of a work which is looked
upon as a masterpiece. I refer to Glinka's
famous opera, A Life for the Tsar, the first
splendid indication that Russian national music
was emancipated. g
The history of Russian musical culture in
its early, amateur days is pretty well known if
taken as a whole, but its details are still exceed-
ingly obscure, at any rate for us foreigners.
Russia began her musical education with
Italian opera, for which French opera was
eventually substituted. It was, in fact, owing
to the example set by foreign composers that
28
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Russian musicians after some attempts (which
were timid rather than numerous) took stock
of themselves, and were able, a hundred years
later, to launch boldly out into music as a
career and to give proofs of their abilities.
Documents referring to this period are, how-
ever, rare, and precise information is difficult
to obtain, more especially for anyone not ac-
quainted with the language. Even Russian
works published in Russia are, I fancy, some-
what incomplete in the material they embrace.
Some of those which are not specially con-
cerned with music are little more than reper-
tories of works of all sorts which were given in
the theatres of St. Petersburg and Moscow.
Here is a list of some of them : an anonymous
Dramatic Dictionary, published in 1787, re-
published in 1881; The Foundation of the
Russian Theatre, by A. Karabanov, 1819;
Annals of the Russian Theatre, by P. Arapov,
1861 (this is a repertory which goes down to
the year 1825); Chronicles of the Theatre in St.
Petersburg, by A. Wolff, 1877, 2 vols. (this is a
continuation of the preceding work, and stops
at the end of the reign of the Emperor Nicolas);
A Historical Glance at the Russian Opera, by
V. Morkov, 1862; The Russian Theatre at St.
Petersburg and at Moscow, 1749–74, by M.
Longuinov, 1873; A History of the Opera
seen through its best Interpreters, by M. K., 1874;
29
A SHORT HISTORY OF
A Glance at the History of Music in Russia from
the point of view of Culture and Manners, by
Vladimir Mikhnevitch, St. Petersburg, 1879;
to which should be added a work published in
French by César Cui: La Musique en Russie
(Paris, Fischbacher, 1881), a work referring
especially to the period of his contemporaries
(and having in this respect some of the attrac-
tiveness of a pamphlet), but also containing
some valuable information as to the past. I
shall return to this later.—We shall have to be
content, then, with an almost superficial survey
of the chapter dealing with the early history of
music written for the theatre in Russia.
The first organised body of musicians seems
to have been formed at St. Petersburg in the
time of Peter the Great, and with the help of
Duke Charles-Ulrich of Holstein-Gottorp, his
future son-in-law. This was a small concert
orchestra, comprising a harpsichord, a few
violins, a viol d’amore, a tenor viol, a violon-
cello, a double bass, two flutes, two oboes,
two horns, two trumpets, and kettle-drums.
They played instrumental works by various
German and Italian composers : Teleman,
Keiser, Heinichen, Schulz, Fuchs, Corelli,
Tartini, Porfora, and so on. All the execu-
tants were German. The Empress Catherine
continued these traditions, but it is not until
we come to the Empress Ann Ivanovna that
3O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
we find the first attempt to give Italian opera
at St. Petersburg. This princess sent one of
her musicians to Italy to recruit and bring
back an operatic company, which arrived in
Russia in 1735 with the Neapolitan composer
Francesco Araja at its head. He was engaged
as organist of the Imperial Chapel, and lived
to carry out the duties attached to the post for
nearly thirty years. The company comprised,
amongst other musicians, the following: Pietro
Morigi (soprano), Filippo Giorgi and Cricchi
(tenors), Girolamo Bon and Mmes. Pastorla-
Piantanida, Catarina Giorgi, and Rosina Bon.
Several instrumental virtuosi, including the
violinists Piantanida and Domenico Dall’
Oglio, the violoncellist Giuseppe Dall’ Oglio
(Domenico's brother), and others, were brought
with these singers from Italy. Antonio Peres
Notti, a scenic artist, accompanied them;
also Gibelli, a machinist, Fusano, a ballet-
master, and some dancers, male and female,
including Fusano’s wife, Giulia.
Abiatare, the first Italian opera written by
Araja for St. Petersburg, was staged in 1737,
during the festivities given to celebrate the
Empress’s birthday. It was sung by Morigi,
Giorgi, Cricchi, Mlle. Massari, and Mme.
Giorgi, and was a great success. As early as
January of the following year Araja produced
a second work, Semiramide (with the principal
3I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
part taken by Mme. Piantanida), which was
equally successful. He followed it up with
several others in succession, amongst them
being Scipione, Arsace, Seleuco, Bellerofonte, and
Alessandro mell” Indie.
Italian opera continued to enjoy a success
during the twenty years since Araja had been
in control of it, when Elizabeth Petrovna, who
had mounted the throne, conceived the plan
in 1755, of creating a Russian opera. It was
difficult to carry out at the moment, but in
spite of obstacles means were eventually found
of getting together a company of Russian
singers (some of whom were of very inferior
quality), and Araja was given instructions to
set to music for them a Russian libretto,
Cephalus and Procris, with which he had been
provided by the poet Soumarakov. The work
was given during the Lent carnival, and was
sung by Gavrilo Martsenkovich, Nicolas Klu-
tarev, Stepan Rashevsky, Stepan Eustatiev,
and Mlle. Beligradsky, who was the daughter
of a celebrated lute-player, and was barely
fourteen years old. This was the first attempt
at opera written and sung in Russian. What-
ever the result, the preliminary effort had been
made, and although there was little in the
nature of a success for a long time, at any rate
the foundations of Russian opera had been
laid. Italian opera undoubtedly took the
32
RUSSIAN MUSIC
first place on all occasions, but Russian opera
followed modestly behind, and even though
the Russian company was required to produce
works the music of which had mostly been
written by Italians, and was also frequently
engaged to sing Italian operas merely trans-
lated into Russian, yet the creation of a Rus-
sian operatic company was in itself a fact of
very great significance.
Araja, after having written another Russian
opera on the occasion of Prince Peter Feodoro-
vich's marriage, returned to his own country
in 1759, laden with honours and riches by the
Empress. He was succeeded by a German
musician, Hermann Friedrich Raupach, who
in the same year put on a Russian opera,
Alcestis, and in the year following an Italian
opera entitled Siroe. Meanwhile Araja was
summoned back to Russia in 1761 to write a
fresh work; but the murder of Tsar Peter III
alarmed him so much that he hurried off again
at once to Italy. Thereupon, a fellow-country-
man of his, the composer Manfredini, was made
director of the Italian Opera, for which he
wrote the music of several ballets and of a
certain number of operas, amongst them being
L’Olympiade (1762), on Metastasio's well-
known poem, and Carlo Magno (1764).
The reign of the Empress Catherine II was
a brilliant epoch for music in Russia. She
33 C
A SHORT HISTORY OF
collected round her several foreign composers,
who, simultaneously or successively, had a
number of works staged which they had
written expressly for the Italian opera. First
of all there was Galuppi, who only remained a
short time, but scored a great success with
his Didone abbandonata (1766), and also pro-
duced his Re pastore (1767) and Ifigenia in
Tauride (1768). Then came Traetta with
L'Isola disabitata (1769), a new Olimpiade (1770),
and Antigone (1772). Traetta was succeeded
by the celebrated Paisiello, who remained
longer than the others, staying almost ten years
in Russia between 1776 and 1785. Besides
writing several cantatas and other things of
less importance, Paisiello composed for the
Court of St. Petersburg ten operas, which rank
amongst the best of his works: La Serva padrone,
Il Matrimonio inaspettato, Il Barbiere di Siviglia,
I Filosoft imaginari, La Finta Amante (written
for the meeting of the Empress Catherine and
the Emperor Joseph II at Mohilov), Il Mondo
della Luna, Niteti, Lucinda ed Armidoro, Alcide
al bivio, and Achille in Sciro. All these works
of Paisiello roused the keenest enthusiasm
amongst Russian lovers of music, and put the
crown on his career.
VIf what Fétis says is correct, Paisiello prob-
ably felt to a certain extent the influence of
the Russian national character. We may also
34
RUSSIAN MUSIC
suppose, on the other hand, that Russian musi-
cians may have taken advantage of the style of
his compositions. This is what Fétis says when
discussing Il Re Teodoro, the Opera Buffa which
Paisiello wrote and had staged in Vienna, where
he had stopped on his way home from Russia
to Italy: “At the very moment when this
fine, imaginative work was conceived, the
rumour got about at Rome that Paisiello was
showing traces of the influence of the cold
North. The source of this rumour is to be
found in the scores of Il Barbiere di Siviglia,
I Filosoft immaginari, and Il Mondo della Luna,
which, when they were transplanted to Italy,
did not seem to be characterised by the charm
that is to be found in the composer’s earlier
works. Affected as he had been by the Nor-
thern taste for something more robust than
a series of airs, which was all that the Italians
cared for, he had increased the amount of
concerted music in his scores, and had inserted
a number of structural devices and technical
effects, the value of which was not by any
means appreciated by his fellow-countrymen.”
Paisiello had hardly left St. Petersburg when
Sarti, Cherubini's master, was summoned to
take up the duties of director of the Imperial
Chapel. Sarti began by writing a Psalm and
a Te Deum, with Russian text, and then had an
Italian opera entitled Armida e Rinaldo pro-
35
A SHORT HISTORY OF
duced in 1786. He subsequently composed a
Russian opera, The Glory of the North. About
the same time he was instructed by the Em-
press Catherine to organise a Conservatoire at
Katerinoslav, modelled on the Conservatoires in
Italy. The sovereign was so pleased with the
pupils of this school, when they gave a concert
before her in 1795, that she raised Sarti to the
rank of a noble, and presented him with a con-
siderable amount of landed property in order
to keep him definitely fixed in Russia. During
Sarti’s long stay in St. Petersburg, Martini, the
composer of La Cosa rara, was invited to take
over the direction of the Italian opera, and
wrote for it an Opera Buffa, Gli Sposi in con-
trasto. After him came Cimarosa—Cimarosa
the magician, one might call him—who was
summoned to St. Petersburg in his capacity of
composer, and produced three strikingly suc-
cessful operas—Cleopatra, La Vergine del Sole,
and Atene edificata. He is also said to have
written, within the space of three years, as
many as five hundred () different pieces for
use at Court and for members of the nobility.
Russian society was very much addicted to
Italian performances, even in the reign of the
Empress Elizabeth, who, according to the
legend, mercilessly imposed a fine of fifty
roubles on any of her guests who were unable
to take part in a Court entertainment. Under
36
RUSSIAN MUSIC
the Empress Catherine II this taste developed
into a kind of frenzy. Indeed, it is quite easy
to understand how, with the composers I have
mentioned and the operas which they produced,
the means of getting the works performed
should have been gradually improved, until
they had reached a high standard of perfection.
Well-known singers and famous virtuosi, such
as Marchesi, Bruni, Millico, Puttini, Saletti, la
Todi, la Pozzi, la Gabrielli, and many others,
had been attracted by high salaries to St.
Petersburg to interpret these works ; particular
care had been taken in recruiting the orchestra
and choruses; technical study had little by little
acquired more importance, and the ensemble
had at all points become commensurate with
the efforts required of each one individually.
Now, what was gained from the point of view of
technique by the Italian opera was naturally
gained to a like extent by the Russian. Be-
sides which, the public was being educated,
the taste for music was gradually spreading,
and the progress of music as an art imper-
ceptibly began to be felt.
In addition to all this, the Empress Cath-
erine, for all her love of Italian opera, did not
neglect or forget the Russian. She even went
So far as to encourage the efforts which were
beginning to be made tentatively in that direc-
tion by writing herself the texts of five operas
37
A SHORT HISTORY OF
in Russian. The music of one of these operas
called Fedoul' was written by a Russian com-
poser, Fomin, who was the author of several
other works, The Merchants’ Court, The Fortune
Teller, Annette, The Paladin, Good-Man Koza-
metovich, and, above all, The Miller, an opéra-
comique, which was given on January 20, 1779,
and made his name extremely popular. Men-
tion must be made of a few other Russian
composers who had operas produced about the
same time as Fomin, namely: Matinsky, Boulan,
then a little later, Volkov, Alabiev, and the
brothers Titov. These operas were, however,
mere preliminary attempts, which were still
somewhat timid, and up to a point must be
regarded as exceptional. The time was not yet
ripe, and indeed many years had to elapse before
the world was to see a really national music
spring into being and flourish in the sun.
In 1803, when the Tsar Alexander I was on
the throne, Italian opera was supplanted at
St. Petersburg by French opera. Boildieu, who
had been summoned to Russia by the Emperor,
spent eight years there, during which time
he produced nine operas, which were specially
written for the Court, and had a great success.
These were : Aline, reine de Golconde, Amour et
* This opera was revived at Moscow in 1896, after more
than a hundred years, at the commemoration of the cen-
tenary of the death of the famous Empress.
38
RUSSIAN MUSIC
mystère, Abderkan, Un Tour de soubrette, La jeune
Femme colère, Télémagne, Les Voitures versées,
La Dame invisible, and Rien de trop. This does
not include the fresh choruses for Racine’s
Athalie, which he followed the example of so
many others in setting to music. Boildieu re-
turned to France in 1811 and was succeeded
by Steibelt, who wrote two French operas,
Cendrillon and Sargines.
During all this time Russian opera, but for
certain exceptions which I have mentioned,
was still almost entirely in the hands of
foreigners. Numerous Russian works were
written by Italian composers, such as Soliva
the elder, Sapienza, and above all, Catterino
Cavos, who has often erroneously been taken
for a Russian, because, although by birth and
origin a Venetian, he spent forty-two years of
his life in Russia. This composer was born at
Venice in 1775, and as a child was almost an
infant prodigy, for at the age of twelve he
wrote a cantata in honour of Leopold II,
Emperor of Austria, and when fourteen years
old was organist at the Church of St. Mark.
He settled down in Russia in 1798, and died
at St. Petersburg on April 28, 1840, after
having held an exceptionally important musi-
cal post in that town.
Although a foreigner, Cavos has claims of his
own to be mentioned in a history of Russian
39
A SHORT HISTORY OF
music. Having been appointed to the post of
musical director and conductor of the Imperial
theatres in St. Petersburg, he wrote sixteen
operas for them, as well as six ballets and the
incidental music for as many plays. It is rather
remarkable that the subject of one of his
operas, Ivan Sousanin, was precisely the same as
that of Glinka's opera, A Life for the Tsar,
which forms the real point of departure of
Russian national music, and is the first and most
striking manifestation of its character. The
following are the titles of most of his other
works: The Ruins of Babylon, The Phaenix, Elija’s
Power, The Invisible Prince, The Twelve Hours’
Reign, The Stranger, Love’s Coach, Fresh Trouble,
The Cossack Poet, The Three Hunchbacks, The
Daughter of the Danube, The Fugitive. All
these works are written to a Russian text.
Cavos also wrote a French opera, The Three
Sultanas. César Cui, who, as a critic, can
hardly be called indulgent, appraises the part
Cavos played in musical history in the following
terms : “His operas are couched in a broader
style than those of his predecessors, and are
richer both in melody and in instrumentation;
they show an obvious intention to assimilate
Russian characteristics, but they are neverthe-
less fundamentally Italian. Several of Cavos's
operas were very successful, and remained in
the repertory for some years at the beginning
4O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of the nineteenth century, but nowadays they
are forgotten.”
We are coming to the moment when the
dawn of real Russian opera—a national opera
born on Russian soil—is to glow upon the
horizon. We are about to see the strong and
striking personality of Glinka rise before us
and boldly proclaim the existence of a fresh,
vigorous, and profoundly original art in two
superb compositions. }
But before speaking of Glinka, we must
devote a few words to the attempts (one can
hardly call them efforts) of an estimable com-
poser, who was lucky enough to have talent,
but had not enjoyed the advantages of a suffi-
ciently lengthy and solid musical education to
be able to show it to advantage, and to make
the fullest use of it. The composer we mean
is Verstovsky, who wrote several operas, of
which one at least (namely: Askold’s Tomb,
which appeared in 1835) became really popular,
and won him a reputation which might almost
be called brilliant. But although Verstovsky
was decidedly gifted as far as his actual ideas
were concerned, and wrote graceful, elegant
melodies, he had not sufficient Sureness of
hand to turn his tunes to as much account as
might have been done by a skilled musician.
He was unable to develop an idea, or to
build up a piece, or to combine voices and
4.I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
instruments in such a way as to obtain the
effects essentially required by dramatic
music. He was, in fact, a distinguished
amateur rather than a musician in the real
sense of the word. Nevertheless, his Askold’s
Tomb enjoyed popularity for a long time,
and I am not sure that it is not even now
occasionally given. Amongst his other operas
were The Quarantine, The Importunate Man,
Stanislas, The Old Sorcerers, Grandmama’ſ
Parrots, The Shepherdess, and Gromoto?. He
was born in 1799; he held the post of
Inspector of Theatres in Moscow, and died
in November 1862.
César Cui writes of Verstovsky as follows:
“His operas might better be called vaudevilles.
And so, in spite of his gifts as a writer of
melodies, and in spite of the popularity which
many of them (more especially those in his
opera Askold’s Tomb) attained, Verstovskycannot
be regarded as one of the founders of Russian
opera. His music undoubtedly has a certain
Russian character about it, but at the same
time it is far from being what we mean by
operatic music. It contains no trace of the
rich contrasts, the dramatic outbursts, and the
orchestral colouring which we to-day consider
necessary : all of which qualities demand not
merely a supple, vigorous talent, but also
profound knowledge of technique.”
42
RUSSIAN MUSIC
At last we have arrived at Glinka and A Life
for the Tsar, which was going to revolutionise
musical Russia, or make a place for it, if one
may put it that way, at the concert of the
nations of Europe.
43
CHAPTER III
A national composer: Michael Glinka, the real founder of
Russian opera.-His life and works,—A Life for the
Tsar, a patriotic opera.—Rousslant and Ludmilla,—
Glinka's claim to fame.
MICHAEL IVANovich GLINKA, who, even after
the lapse of half a century, is still regarded as
Russia’s greatest composer—in fact, as Russia’s
composer par excellence—belonged to a noble
family of wealthy landed proprietors who lived
in the village of Novospasskoi (in the govern-
ment of Smolensk), which belonged to his
father, a retired army captain. He was born
in this village on May 20 (June 1), 1804, and
died in Berlin, when he was still young, on
February 3 (15), 1857. At an early age he
showed very strong tastes and an unusual
aptitude for music, which his family did not
attempt to oppose. He was endowed with a
somewhat mystical temperament, and in his
Memoirs he tells how, as a child, he was filled
with poetic enthusiasm by the services in the
church at Novospasskoi on great occasions,
and how he was enchanted more especially
44
RUSSIAN MUSIC
by the sound of bells. To such an extent
was this the case, that he used to spend hours
at a time imitating their peculiar resonance
by beating with all his might on copper bowls.
These Memoirs, written by Glinka in Russian,
were published after his death by his sister,
Mme. Shestakov, who devoted herself to his
memory with the enthusiasm of a real disciple.
They first of all appeared in one of the im-
portant reviews at St. Petersburg, and then a
very limited edition was printed off separately.
Souvorin, the publisher, brought out a com-
plete edition in 1896, which also included
Glinka's correspondence.
While still a child he found a more sub-
stantial way of satisfying his appetite for
music than by means of these makeshift bells.
One of his French biographers, Octave Fouque,
tells the story:—
“About this time Glinka's father was some-
what embarrassed financially, so that the dis-
play of luxury which habitually characterised
the daily life of the great landed proprietors
in Russia was not in evidence at Novospasskoi.
But Madame Glinka had a brother who was
better off, and who counted amongst his other
privileges that of being able to keep up a
private orchestra. When the Glinka’s enter-
tained, they used to ask their relation to send
them some instrumentalists, who either played
45
A SHORT HISTORY OF
dance music for the company or else gave a
regular concert. One evening the musicians
played a quartet by Crusel for clarinet, violin,
viola, and violoncello. Little Michael, who
was then ten years old, was extraordinarily
struck by hearing them. For two days he
could think of nothing else. He was wrapt
up entirely in his memories of this poetical
combination of instruments, living in a kind
of ecstatic dream, and only giving the vaguest
attention to his lessons. His drawing-master
noticed his abstraction and reproved his pupil
for his passion for music, which he had
ended by guessing. “What can you ex-
pect the boy replied; “my whole soul is
in music ’
“His uncle’s orchestra was the means of
giving the youthful Glinka the keenest plea-
sure. At supper time an Octet would be
heard, playing original Russian tunes, the in-
struments consisting of two flutes, two clari-
nets, two horns, and two bassoons. The softly
veiled, sonorous harmonies, and the very melan-
choly of the tunes themselves, induced an
intensely poetical mood. In a few years, when
Glinka had become a man and was about to
take up musical composition as a career, he was
to recall these national airs in which his child-
hood had been gently cradled. He wished to
become, and he was to become, the founder
46
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of a new school having its roots deeply em-
bedded in Russian soil.” " t
Glinka was thirteen years of age when his
father placed him in a school at St. Petersburg,
which was connected with a Teaching Insti-
tute recently founded for the children of the
nobility. He made good progress with his
studies, more particularly in the matter of
languages, acquiring a knowledge of Latin,
French, German, English, and Persian, with
the natural facility for foreign tongues which
Russians possess. But these studies did not
prevent him from practising the art which he
cherished above everything else. He worked
hard at the pianoforte and violin, and especially
the pianoforte, for which he had lessons from
John Field and Carl Mayer. Later on he studied
harmony under Dehn in Berlin. We shall see
to what a degree his love of music was carried,
and how intelligently he fostered it. He was
barely twenty when, finding himself somewhat
out of sorts, he departed on a journey to the
Caucasus, to take the waters. His health was
in fact precarious, and he was an invalid all
his life. As soon as the cure was completed
he returned to his father’s house at Novos-
passkoi. He tells us in his Memoirs what his
musical occupations were at this time —
“The over-intensity of the nervous stimulus
* Octave Fouque: Michel Avanovitch Glinka.
47
A SHORT HISTORY OF
produced by the action of the sulphurous
waters, combined with the multitude of new
impressions crowding on my brain, set fire to
my imagination. I took up the study of music
again with renewed enthusiasm. Twice a
week we were at home to our friends, and the
orchestra was engaged to play. I got up these
entertainments in the following way. First
of all, I made all the players, with the excep-
tion of the most efficient, rehearse their parts
separately, until there was not a single fault
or doubt about any note. This enabled me
to make a very thorough study of the great
master’s methods of orchestration. Then,
with my violin in my hand, I conducted, my-
self, and noted the general effect of the per-
formance. When it went well, I used to step
back several paces and hear how it sounded
at a distance. These are the principle pieces
which formed the repertory. To take the
overtures first, we had : Médée, L’Hotellerie
portugaise, Lodoiska, Faniska, Les Deux journées
by Cherubini(the first two being my favourites);
joseph, Le Trésor supposé, L’Irato, by Méhul;
Don Giovanni, Die Zauberflöte, La Clemenza di
Tito, Le Nozze di Figaro by Mozart ; Léonore
(the one in E major) by Beethoven; then for
symphonies we had Mozart's in G minor,
Haydn’s in B flat, and Beethoven’s in D major.
Rossini's overtures were not yet being played.”
48
RUSSIAN MUSIC
This practical way of studying instrumenta-
tion was ingenious, one has to admit, and it must
have borne good fruits. At the same time
Glinka made his first attempts at composition
by writing a few pianoforte pieces and songs.
He had hardly finished studying when he
entered the Civil Service, and obtained a post
in the Department of the Minister of Ways
and Communications. But he only kept it for
a short time. As he received a pittance from
his family, he regained his liberty, and began
to live only for and by music. In spite of his
natural timidity—one might almost say his
natural savagery—he now began to go about
into society and to associate with a set of
rich, clever, and artistic young men, which
included Prince Galitsin, Count Vielhorsky,
the brothers Tolstoy, and others. He seized
every opportunity of playing or composing,
he organised and conducted musical enter-
tainments on a large scale, and he appeared
himself as a singer and actor in operatic per-
formances : in short, he gave himself up to a
kind of frenzied dilettantism.
Prince Nicholas Galitsin, to whom Bee-
thoven dedicated his twelfth, thirteenth, and
fifteenth string quartets, was a great lover of
music, and a well-known violoncellist, and had
a general reputation as a musician. His son
was Prince George Galitsin, who was exiled
49 D
A SHORT HISTORY OF
(the story goes) on account of his advanced
political opinions, and travelled through Ger–
many, England, and France; giving concerts on
all sides, which he conducted himself, and in
which he endeavoured to popularise Russian
music, more particularly Glinka's and his own.
Finding himself in Paris in 1861, he attended
some of the first of the Popular Concerts
founded by Pasdeloup, and had a share in
their success, and when, in 1865, he was
allowed to return to Russia, he took them as
a model for the concerts of classical music
which he organised at Moscow in the hall of
the Riding School, where you could obtain
seats for twenty kopeks." Prince George
Galitsin was known as a composer of two
Masses, two Fantasias for Orchestra, numerous
songs and dances, two books of Method for
Singers, and so forth. He died on September
1872.
Count Michael Yourievich Vielhorsky, who
was born on October 31, 1787, and died on
September 9, 1856, was also a remarkable
amateur musician, and was a pupil rº Kiese-
wetter, who formed a friendship with Bee-
thoven. He was the heart and soul of the
amateur concerts of St. Petersburg, and he
and his brother, Count Matthew Vielhorsky,
an exceptionally talented violoncellist, also
* About sevenpence.
5O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
conducted concerts of sacred music. He was
fairly prolific as a composer, writing, amongst
other things, a symphony, a string quartet,
unaccompanied choral works, some songs
(which are still popular), and an opera, The
Gipsies, after the poem by Poushkin, which he
was prevented by death from finishing.
To return to Glinka, another interesting
passage in his Memoirs will show us what he
was doing at this time, and what an amount
of energy he had —
“Towards the end of August, 1829,” he
says, “the idea occurred to Galitsin, Tolstoy,
Some other young men, and myself, of giving
a public serenade on the water. We hired a
couple of boats, which we illuminated with
Venetian lanterns ; the organisers of the fête
embarked in one, the trumpeters of the regi-
ment of the Household Cavalry in the other.
On the prow of the first boat was a pianoforte,
with the help of which I accompanied and
conducted the singers. I remember the ad-
mirable effect in the songs made by Tolstoy's
tenor rcoice. The chorus from Boildieu’s
Dame blanche, “Sonnez, sonnez,’ went par-
ticularly well. After each song a flourish of
trumpets sounded from the second boat.
Trumpets with keys and valves had not been
invented by then, and the ear had not to
endure the harsh discordant sounds with
5 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
which it is harassed nowadays. A mazurka
by Count Michael Yourievich Vielhorsky,
written specially for trumpets, made a very
strong impression on me. In later years I
wrote the Slavsia 1 in A Life for the Tsar, with
the old-fashioned trumpets in my mind, and
if an orchestra could be formed similar in
constitution to the one which took part in
our serenades, I am convinced that the finale
would have a far finer effect. -
“Our serenade was mentioned in the news-
paper L’Abeille du Nord, which encouraged us
to make further efforts. We soon gave a per-
formance to Prince Kotchoubey, president of
the Imperial Council. There were sixteen of us
youngsters, our company including Bashoutsky,
Sterich, and Protassov, and we had an or-
chestra, with Mayer at the pianoforte. Dressed
up as a woman, I played the part of Donna
Anna in a translation of Mozart's Don Gio-
vanni; then I improvised at the keyboard.
“We gave another performance at the
palace of Tsarkoe-Selo. A serenade of mine
was sung, and also some couplets with chorus
which I had composed to verses by Galitsin.
Ivanov sang the couplets; the choruses were
entrusted to the singers of the Imperial Chapel,
to which Ivanov himself belonged.
“From there we went to the house of
* Song of Glory.
52
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Princess Stroganov at Marino, in the govern-
ment of Great Novgorod, at a distance of
nearly two hundred miles from St. Petersburg.
There I played Figaro in Il Barbiere di
Siviglia. . .”
But this life of simple musical enjoyment
could not last for long. Glinka felt it himself,
and considered that he ought to work more
seriously. He thereupon proposed to travel
in Italy in order to get into touch with musical
movements in that country. His father was
at first opposed to this plan, but he eventually
gave his consent. So, in the spring of 1830,
or, to be precise, on April 25, Glinka set out,
in company with his friend Ivanov, to take the
waters in Germany, and from there to cross
over into Italy.
Ivanov was the Russian singer who made
such a reputation in Italy as an Italian singer,
and became the friend of Rossini. He made
his first appearance at Paris in 1833, and the
Revue Musicale for October 5, 1833, contained
the following notice of that event : “The
Emperor of Russia has a Chapel Choir com-
posed entirely of bass voices. One of the young
men in it, having attracted attention by his
exceptional musical gifts, was sent at the sove-
reign’s expense to Naples, in order to perfect
his singing. He actually settled down to
work, was coached by a celebrated singer,
53
A SHORT HISTORY OF
and made rapid progress. But everything
he saw and heard gave him so pronounced a
taste for Italian methods that he resolved
never to return to his own country in the
North. The directors of the Théâtre-Italien,
who were passing through Naples, heard him
sing, engaged him, and took him back with
them to Paris. This bass singer of the Rus-
sian Imperial Chapel is now the tenor Ivanov,
whose pure, fresh voice made such a sensa-
tion on Tuesday in the Théâtre-Italien.” It
need scarcely be remarked that Ivanov never
had a bass voice, and that he was a tenor all
his life. But what is noteworthy is that the
Tsar Nicholas was apparently very vexed at
the singer not returning to Russia when his
leave of absence had expired. Ivanov, more-
over, never went back there, and when he had
come to the end of his career as a singer, he
retired quietly to Bologna, where he died on
July 7, 1880. He was born at Poltava in 1809.
Glinka and Ivanov, then, arrived at Milan,
where Glinka remained a year and took lessons
from Basili, the Director of the Conservatoire
in the town. He frequented the theatres, he
was present at the first performance of Bel-
lini’s Sonnambula, he made musical friends,
and he even composed and published some
pianoforte pieces, which were merely arrange-
ments and fantasias on themes by Rossini,
54
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Donizetti, and Bellini. After this he went to
spend several months at Naples, then he re-
turned to Milan, and finally he left in 1832
for Berlin. It is rather interesting to note
that the idea which was to lead him to fame
—the idea of writing “Russian music ’’—
first occurred to him while he was living in
Italy. He tells us so in his Memoirs: “As
to my attempts at composition at this time,
I look upon them as having been somewhat un-
fortunate. I was able to take a sensible enough
view of my workin this direction, but everything
which I wrote to please my friends at Milan,
and which Giovanni Ricordi most obligingly
published, merely served to prove to me that
I had not yet found my direction, and that I
should never succeed in writing in the Italian
style with any conviction. Home-sickness led
me little by little to write Russian music.”
From this day forward he was never to abandon
the idea.
At Berlin Glinka for several months had
lessons from Dehn, an excellent theorist, who
was keeper of the musical section of the Royal
Library, and a contributor to the Leipziger
Musikalische Zeitung. He learnt from him
how to write fugues and development sections,
which did not prevent him from composing
a few pieces and from thinking perpetually of
his plan of creating a Russian musical style.
55
A SHORT HISTORY OF
This, in his own words, “haunted his mind.”
One can see how it did from a fragment of
a letter addressed at this period to one of his
friends in St. Petersburg —
“I shall not be here for any length of time.
I am longing for the moment to come when
I can shake you by the hand. I have a plan
in my head—an idea. . . It isn’t perhaps the
moment for making a clean breast of it.
Perhaps, I may be afraid, if I say what it is, of
seeing incredulity stamped on your face. . .
Shall I tell you everything : . . Well, I
have a notion that I too might be able to give
our stage a work on a large scale. It is not
going to be a masterpiece—I am the first to
admit that—but on the whole it won’t be so
bad | What do you say to that The essential
is to make a good choice of subject. In any
case, it will be thoroughly Russian. Not only
the subject, but the music too, is to be Russian :
I want my beloved fellow-countrymen to feel
thoroughly at home when they hear it, and I don’t
want foreigners to take me for a braggart who
has presumed to deck himself out, like the jay,
in someone else’s finery. I begin to realise
that I may lose you by unduly prolonging a
description of something which still lies in the
womb of the future. Who knows, too, whether
I shall find I have sufficient strength and ability
to carry out what I have vowed to do . .”
56
RUSSIAN MUSIC
He did find both strength and ability enough,
and above all he found, when he returned to
his country, a number of keen young spirits,
prepared to understand him and help him,
and ready to push him along in the direction
he wanted to take. Indeed, when he had
once returned to St. Petersburg, where he
took up his quarters from that time forward,
he soon found himself in the society of men
of letters, poets, and musicians, whose intel-
lectual preoccupations afforded several points
of contact with his own ideas. There were
Poushkin, Gogol, Koukolnik, Pletnev, Joukov-
sky, and others too. They used to meet at the
house of Joukovsky, who, in his position of
tutor to the Tsarevich (who afterwards be-
came Alexander II), resided in the Winter
Palace. “There,” says Glinka's biographer,
“literary problems were warmly discussed,
and the breath of a Renaissance began to stir—
a Renaissance which was to imbue the theatre
and the novel with the characteristic traits
that marked the manners, the beliefs, and the
traditions of Russia. Glinka had a share in
the working up of a national poetry and,
amongst all these men of talent who were
animated with the same ideals as his own,
he ventured to speak of his ambition to found
a Russian opera. It is easy to imagine the
eagerness with which Glinka was greeted.
57
A SHORT HISTORY OF
The circle of New poets was filled with en-
thusiasm for this talented, vigorous, young
musician, who had resolved to shake off the
yoke of the foreigner, in order that he too
might consecrate an altar to his country.” "
It will be remembered that Glinka used the
words: “It is essential to make a good choice
of subject.” To write music with a national
character, a national subject was required.
Joukovsky suggested that of Ivan Sousanin,
which recalls one of the darkest and most
dramatic episodes in the history of the struggle
between Russia and Poland, at a time when
Poland was all-powerful. Glinka at once re-
alised what he might make of this fine story.
The epoch was 1613. The Poles, after the
death of the Tsar Boris Godounov, had in-
vaded the Russian Empire and had advanced
as far as Moscow. The whole Russian nation,
seeing the danger it ran of losing its inde-
pendence, rallied round the young Michael
Federovich Romanov, who had just been
elected Tsar. The Poles, so the story runs,
had laid a plot to carry off the person of the
youthful sovereign, and some of their leaders,
being ignorant of his whereabouts, turned to
a peasant, Ivan Sousanin, and concealing
their identity, ordered him to take them into
the presence of his master. Ivan suspected
* Octave Fouque : Michel Ivanovitch Glinka.
58
RUSSIAN MUSIC
treachery, and bravely sacrificed his own life
to save his sovereign and his country. He
pretended to be ready to obey, and having
meanwhile sent his adopted son Vanya to
warn the Tsar of the danger threatening him,
he drew off the Poles into the depths of an
almost impenetrable forest, from which they
were unable to find any way out. Then,
when the enemy discovered that they had been
tricked, the unhappy Ivan was put to death,
falling an obscure but heroic victim of his
devotion.
Glinka was struck by the grandeur and
pathos of this story, and above all by the
opportunities for local national colour which
it would provide on the stage. He also
rapidly calculated what he could do with it
from the musical point of view. He drew up
with his own hand a sketch of the plot, and
when he had reduced it to order, he asked
Baron Rozen to write the libretto for him.
The baron was secretary to the Tsarevich
and, although German was his native tongue,
he readily consented to collaborate. It is
quite easy to see how such a subject, when it
was skilfully prepared for the stage and sup-
plemented by characteristic incidents (such as
the brilliant scene in the Polish camp which
makes the second act, and the splendidly digni-
fied conclusion showing the solemn entry of the
59
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Tsar into his capital), was just such a one as
to heighten the inspiration of the composer
and to rouse the enthusiasm of a public for
which, as everyone knows, patriotism is not
a mere word. Besides, the strong interest
of the dramatic action, the intrinsic value of
the music, the splendid and original staging,
the entirely new style of the work regarded
as a whole—all this combined to bring about
a huge triumph for A Life for the Tsar (as
the opera was eventually called), when it was
put on for the first time in the Imperial
Theatre of St. Petersburg on November 27
(December 9), 1836. The cast included the
famous singer Petrov (Sousanin); Mlle. Voro-
bieva (Vanya), who was subsequently replaced
by Mme. Petrovna ; Mme. Stepanova (An-
tonida); and the French tenor Charpentier
(Sabinin),
In spite of the astonishment and the hos-
tility of a few, who were bewildered by the
new style of the work, A Life for the Tsar was
extraordinarily successful from the beginning,
and it became a really national event. Not
that the work is entirely revolutionary in
character or completely original. As a matter
of fact, it is somewhat composite, which is
not astonishing, when one remembers, on
the one hand, that it is Glinka's first pro-
duction for the stage (and for a first work it
6o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
shows amazing Sureness of hand), and, on the
other, that it was written after his return
from his long tour in Italy, in the heyday of
Bellini and Donizetti's popularity, and at a
time when the vogue of Rossini, both in Italy
and in every other country, was at its height.
It is not surprising, then, that traces of
Italian phraseology, which is precisely what
Glinka wished to avoid, are to be found—
in spite of the composer, as it were—on more
than one page of the very closely packed score
of A Life for the Tsar. This is more specially
the case in the trio of the first act, which,
incidentally, is very attractive; the principle
phrase, which is announced by the tenor,
being taken up first by the soprano and then
by the bass. Undeniable Italian influence is
also to be found in the concerted quartet in
the third act, which is enchantingly beautiful
and is constructed on splendidly broad lines.
But the essential originality underlying both
the thought and the phraseology comes out
in other parts of the score, where one can
enjoy the very individual flavour of Glinka's
style. It is to be found, for instance, in the
pretty, graceful chorus for female voices
with which the first act opens; in the vigorous
and passionate duet in the third act between
Sousanin and Vanya; in Sousanin's first scene
with the Poles, which glows with really dramatic
61
A SHORT HISTORY OF
imagination; in a charming chorus of young
girls, in five time, which ends strangely on the
dominant; and, above all, in the admirable
scene of the forest, which is the real climax
of the opera. In this scene, Sousanin, with a
presentiment that he will be put to death by
the Poles whom he has tricked, recalls his
past, and dreams of the beloved beings whom
he is voluntarily leaving in sacrificing his life
for king and country. The whole of this
long monologue (an unspeakably sad piece
of melodic writing) is exceedingly beautiful
and moving, and strikes a note of true in-
spiration. Indeed, it is animated with a
nobility of thought and an intensity of emo-
tion such as could only spring from the soul
of a great musician. This magnificent episode
leaves a deep and poignant impression, and it
is just here that the music becomes strikingly
fresh and individual in character, introducing
new and unforeseen rhythms, in both five
and seven time, which, like some of the
harmonies, take the listener by surprise and
fall on the ear with a curious yet powerful
effect. A case in point occurs in the epi-
logue where the Tsar makes his entry into
Moscow—a scene conceived with a breadth
and splendour that are really epic.
Mention must also be made of the occasional
use of Russian folk-songs, which are skilfully
62
RUSSIAN MUSIC
introduced and ably treated, and give a quite
peculiar colour and stamp to the whole work.
This device, which was of Glinka’s own in-
vention, has constantly been resorted to by
subsequent composers. It is one of the things
which gives modern Russian music its char-
acter and individuality, and helps to differ-
entiate it from the music of other schools.
In short, if the score of A Life for the Tsar is
not perhaps an actual masterpiece, we must
admit that, taken as a whole, with the tend-
encies it shows, the style which it partially
establishes and the actual intrinsic value of
the music, it has to rank as a work of the very
first order. Here, moreover, is the opinion of
One of Glinka's compatriots, César Cui, on
the subject; it is to be found in his book,
La Musique en Russie :-
“The music of A Life for the Tsar is entirely
imbued with the national feeling of Russia
and Poland. In the whole opera there is
hardly a single phrase which has more affinity
with the music of Western Europe than with
that of the Slavs. The only completely
parallel case of strong national traits, treated
on the highest possible artistic plane, is to be
found, in my opinion, in Der Freischütz. Glinka,
however, only availed himself of a very limited
number of folk-tunes to indicate the essentially
Russian character of his music : so fertile a
63
A SHORT HISTORY OF
writer of tunes, as he was, had no need to look
for his ideas anywhere beyond himself. His
own tunes, like the harmonies which he puts
to them, are strongly stamped with the
Russian character. The Polish local colour
is reproduced less faithfully and by more
objective and superficial means. Glinka ob-
tains it by the use of the strongly marked
rhythms of the polonaise and the mazurka,
which are heard as soon as the Poles appear on
the scene. The method is easy and showy, and
may satisfy a not very exacting listener, but it
is not sufficient in the dramatic episodes. One
may quite well be a Pole without constantly
humming mazurkas and polonaises. . .
“In this work, where inspiration and techni-
cal skill go closely hand in hand, Glinka has
created a completely equipped Russian school
of opera. A Life for the Tsar was born
in full armour, like Minerva, and its author
from the very first moment found a place
amongst the greatest composers. Can a musi-
cian set out on his career more brilliantly than
this If Meyerbeer had been really introduced
to the public by Robert le diable, the entry to
his career could not have made more effect
than Glinka's. In fact, are there many operas
in which, the exigencies of dramatic action and
local colour being strictly observed, one can
count as many as five-and-twenty first-rate
64
RUSSIAN MUSIC
numbers, and (to set against them) only four
or five that could be called poor The con-
trary is only too often the case: that even the
most famous composers can maintain their re-
putation if their score contains two or three
successful numbers, even though the rest of it
is full of commonplaces.”
It may also, perhaps, be interesting to quote
Glinka's own impressions when his work first
appeared before the public, and to illustrate
the nervous state of mind he was naturally in
on so momentous an occasion. He tells the
story in his Memoirs in the following words:—
“It is impossible to describe my sensations
on that evening, especially at the beginning of
the performance. My wife and I occupied a
box on the second tier, all those on the first
having been reserved for the principal State
functionaries and for the families of the Court.
The first act went well, the trio being vigor-
ously applauded. The whole of the second
act, in which the Poles are on the stage, was
played in profound silence. I had counted
on the polonaise and the mazurka, which had
been highly appreciated when they were read
over by the orchestra, and I was heart-broken
to see how coldly they were received. I went
behind the scenes, where Cavos's son, to whom
I told my impressions, said to me: “How
can you expect Russians to applaud Poles ’
E
A SHORT HISTORY OF
This remark only partially reassured me, and
I remained a prey to the keenest anxiety.
But the entry of Mlle. Vorobieva cleared away
all my doubts. The song of the orphan boy,
the duet between him and Ivan, and the
scene in G major went off admirably.
“In the fourth act, the chorus representing
the Poles fell upon Petrov with so much good-
will that his shirt was torn and he had to de-
fend himself in earnest. As to the epilogue;
the grandeur of the spectacle, the view of the
Kremlin, the crowd of actors, the massing of
the groups, the animation of the stage, filled
me with admiration. Mlle. Vorobieva was ad-
mirable in the trio with chorus, as she was,
in fact, from beginning to end in her part.”
The success of A Life for the Tsar was strik-
ing and indisputable. However, like all works
which are in radical contrast with the hum-
drum taste of the public, it did not fail to
stir up unfavourable criticism when it made
its appearance. The fact is stated by Russian
writers themselves. M. Platon de Waxel wrote
as follows on the subject :—
“A Life for the Tsar has suffered the same
fate as every other work which marks a rapid
movement in advance and opens up fresh
horizons: it has not been understood and
accepted all at once. The greater number of
objections were directed precisely against what
RUSSIAN MUSIC
constitutes the chief merit of the work—its
profound originality combined with its respect
for the traditional forms of opera. Some called
it ‘wretched, vulgar stuff'; others found fault
with it for not having broken away entirely from
the traditions of Western music, as though there
could be two kinds of musical grammar and two
methods of estimating the aesthetic value of
musical proportion and form. One thing cannot
be gainsaid, and that is, that while confining
himself within the limits of these traditions,
Glinka has succeeded in giving his music a
pre-eminently Russian stamp, and has managed
to take his inspiration from folk-songs and
the spirit which they breathe, without actually
quoting the tunes or descending from the level
of the highest planes of his art. The trans-
planting of national tendencies into the sphere
of music, which Glinka was one of the first
to accomplish, is one of the triumphs of our
century.”
In any case, whatever the critics may have
said, the public made no mistake about it.
In a very short while A Life for the Tsar
went on its brilliant and glorious career,
acclaimed and winning victories on all sides.
To such an extent was this the case, that on
December 5 (17), 1879, the 500th performance
was given at St. Petersburg, and seven years
later, on November 27 (December 7), 1886,
67
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the opera celebrated its fiftieth birthday
with its 577th performance. For this occa-
sion the work was specially remounted, the
scenery was entirely new, and even the
least important characters were taken by
singers of the first rank, like M. Stravinsky,
who played the small part of the chief of
the Polish legion, and M. Mikhailov, who
agreed to undertake the solo in the introduc-
tory chorus. The four principal parts—Ivan
Sousanin, Sabinin, Vanya, and Antonida—
were in the hands of Mm. Koriakin and
Vassiliev and Mmes. Lavrovsky and Pav-
lovsky. The performance was a kind of solemn
national festival, and it had its counterpart
in the provinces, where A Life for the Tsar was
given in every Russian town which possessed
an opera-house. At Moscow it was even
played simultaneously in two theatres. Finally,
mention must be made of two occasional pub-
lications: an interesting History of “A Life for
the Tsar,’ by P. Weimarn, who subsequently
wrote a biography of Glinka (published in 1892),
and a very vivid pamphlet by Vladimir Stassov,
which contains portraits of Glinka and his
sister, Mme. Ludmilla Shestakov, whose
name is closely bound up with his reputation,
and also an illustration of the statue of the
composer at Smolensk.
A year before the publication of the pamph-
68
RUSSIAN MUSIC
let, the town of Smolensk, close to his native
village, had put up this statue to Glinka. Its
erection was mainly due to the energy of that
fine character, Mme. Shestakov, who did every-
thing she could, after his death, to perpetuate
his name. With the help of a devoted friend,
M. von Engelhardt, she undertook a complete
edition of his works, including the full score
of the two operas, and saw it through the press.
For the erection of the statue, she had the
sympathetic and active assistance of Prince
George Obolensky, a Marshal belonging to the
nobility of Smolensk; and she was also helped
by several of the gentry of the same province,
as well as by Anton Rubinstein, who contri-
buted, out of his own purse, a portion of the
sum required for the completion of this in-
teresting and, what might really be called,
national undertaking. To raise the funds,
Rubinstein gave a concert which brought
in 5000 roubles."
A Life for the Tsar has been given in German
at Hanover under Hans von Bülow, in Czech
at Prague under Balakirev, in Italian at Milan
and London, and finally in French : first at
Nice and then at Paris at the Nouveau Théâtre
on October 19, 1896, though here, unfortunately,
the musical conditions were deplorably bad.
Just after A Life for the Tsar had made its
* {530.
69
A SHORT HISTORY OF
appearance, Glinka was appointed Choral
Director of the Imperial Chapel (not organist,
as it has been erroneously stated). Theodor
Lvov, the organist of the Chapel, died on
December 14, 1836, and his son, Alexis Lvov,
the future composer of the Russian national
anthem, succeeded to his post. His appoint-
ment and Glinka's date from January I and
2, 1837. Acting in his new capacity, Glinka
soon had to undertake a journey to Finland
and Little Russia, to look for singers for the
Chapel Choir, the membership of which was
being reorganised. This did not prevent him
from thinking of a new work and from getting
to work on it fairly quickly. Acting on the
advice of Prince Shakovsky, a popular dramatic
author of that time, he took as his subject one of
the early poems of Poushkin, Rouſslan and Lud-
milla, and begged the great writer himself to
prepare him a libretto on the basis of his poem.
Poushkin promised to do so, when his tragic
death suddenly put an end to the project.
Poushkin, it may be remembered, was mor-
tally wounded by a pistol shot in a duel at the
age of thirty-seven. He had married a young
woman who was as famous for her beauty as
he was for his brains. Unfortunately he was
not only jealous but, owing to the African
blood which he had in his veins, he was subject
to very violent fits of temper. He was mis-
7o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
guided enough to listen to an infamous story
which insinuated that unwelcome attentions
had been paid to his wife by her own brother-
in-law, Baron Georges d’Anthès, a young
French officer, serving as lieutenant in the
Empress’s body-guard, and brought up as the
adopted son of Baron de Heckeren, the Am-
bassador of the Netherlands in St. Petersburg,
who subsequently became a senator of the
French Empire. Poushkin sent the Baron
d’Anthès so insulting a letter that the inevit-
able outcome was a duel, and a very serious
one. The pistol was the weapon decided
upon, and the duel the kind in which the
adversaries choose their own time to fire. M.
d’Anthès was the first to shoot, and his bullet
wounded Poushkin mortally, without killing
him on the spot. When he rushed anxiously
towards the wounded poet, the latter, grossly
reviling him to his face, shouted to him to stop ;
it was his turn to fire, and he intended to make
use of his right to do so. M. d’Anthès went
back to his place, and Poushkin, who was
lying exhausted on the ground and losing his
blood, slowly aimed and fired. With cruel
joy he saw his adversary fall and thought he
had killed him. M. d’Anthès was, however,
only wounded. As to Poushkin, he suffered
horrible pain for four days and then expired,
after having at least the consolation of knowing
71
A SHORT HISTORY OF
that those whom he had believed guilty were
undoubtedly innocent. Baron d’Anthès was
court-martialled and condemned to be de-
graded from the ranks as well as deprived of
the right to hold a title. This sentence re-
ceived the approbation of the Emperor, but
in view of the fact that he was not a Russian
subject (having been born in France, and
having only taken refuge in Russia after being
compromised in the case of the Duchesse de
Berry when she was arrested at Nantes), he
was conducted by an officer to the frontier,
and after having had his commission taken
from him, was expelled from Russian soil.
Baron d’Anthès of Heckeren survived some
sixty years after these events had taken place,
dying in November 1895.
Poushkin, then, being dead, Glinka had to
set about some other method for obtaining a
libretto from Rousslan and Ludmilla, which
is just a fairy-story, by itself rather common-
place, but converted by Poushkin’s literary
skill and brilliant imagination into a tiny
miracle of grace and delicacy. So he asked
one of his friends, Bakhtourin, to draw up a
sketch of the opera on the lines he wanted,
which Bakhtourin proceeded to do (so we are
told in the Memoirs), in the space of a quarter
of an hour. But the sketch, as one may
readily imagine, was not entirely satisfactory,
72
RUSSIAN MUSIC
and Glinka remodelled some parts of it himself
and then had the text written by two other
friends, Nestor Koukolnik, the dramatist,
and Michael Guedeonov, a brother of the
director of the Imperial theatres of St. Peters-
burg. These two authors introduced into
the text a considerable number of Poushkin’s
actual lines. But this was not all : an officer,
Captain Shirkov by name, wrote a portion of
the first act and the words of Gorislava's
air; and finally, a school-fellow of Glinka,
N. Markovich, supplied the verses of Finn's
ballad. It was almost inevitable that the
result of so many collaborators working in-
dependently of each other should be somewhat
hybrid and wanting in cohesion. Indeed, the
libretto of Rousslan has for the most part
been pretty severely criticised, and César Cui
shows himself indulgent when he appraises it
in the following terms —
“This libretto has its defects and its weak
sides. There is nothing dramatic in it, and
there is no interest in the action, which
consists merely of a succession of scenes
of which one might very well invert the
Order, and even diminish or add to the
number, without affecting the course of the
story. Anyone who demands that the sub-
ject-matter of an opera should be interesting
and dramatic will find this one beneath all
73
A SHORT HISTORY OF
criticism. On the other hand, if we look at it
from another point of view, we shall find that
there is plenty of variety in it, and that each
scene, taken by itself, seems to invite musical
treatment. Glinka could not have done
better than to hit on a poem so much in
keeping with his own peculiar talent, which
was very pliable and well adapted for the
treatment of descriptive scenes. We have
seen that Glinka was dramatic almost in his
own despite, Owing to his being gifted with
mental vigour and spontaneity, and that he
was, above all, a musician, looking on opera as
an opportunity for writing good music of as
varied a kind as possible. It is hardly sur-
prising, therefore, that he should have been
content to accept the text of Rousslan, which,
with its strange mixture of varicoloured scenes,
reminds one of a sort of conjuror’s kaleido-
scope, and that he should even have put some of
the very best of himself into it. Indeed, while
Poushkin has given his poem an air of moral
freedom and irresponsibility, Glinka, on the
other hand, has taken his task seriously, and has
treated it throughout with the deepest feeling.”
In the opinion of the great majority of Rus-
sian critics and musicians, the score of Rousslan
is superior as a whole to that of A Life for the
Tsar. In the matter of colour, moreover, it
is very different. Whereas in the earlier work
74.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Glinka contrasted and opposed the Russian
and the Polish nationality, in Rousslan he
aimed at brilliant Oriental effects, and made
two of the characters—Prince Ratmir and
Chernomor, the magician—stand out strongly
in this respect. It goes without saying,
of course, that Russian characteristics play
a large part in the course of the work, as
one may see by looking at the first and fifth
acts, which are animated, vigorous, and highly
coloured. Here, too, Glinka utilised some
of the essential features of folk-song. The
theme, for instance, of Ratmir's splendid
recitative in the third act, and the two dance
tunes in the lezghinka in the fourth, are of
Tartar origin; the theme of Finn's ballad is
that of a genuine Finnish folk-song ; and the
exquisite chorus of “Harmonious Flowers ”
is based on a Persian air. It was on his travels
in Finland, when he was driving one day with
some friends to visit the Falls of Imatra, that
Glinka heard a postilion singing the song,
which he took down and made into a haunting
ballad. The theme of the chorus of “Harmon-
ious Flowers” was given him by the Secretary
of the Persian Embassy at St. Petersburg.
These folk-songs are handled with great
skill, and the development of the themes is
strikingly rich and individual ; so much so,
in fact, that in this case the composer's treat-
75
A SHORT HISTORY OF
ment of his material is superior to the material
itself. Besides, Glinka has taken care to draw
types and to differentiate all the characters
by a musical style and phraseology suited to
each. “Ratmir, the Oriental prince, is given
amorous, cantabile melodies; the old sorcerer
(a Finn, like all sorcerers in Russian legends)
has a ballad, the theme of which was picked
up during an excursion to the shores of
the Baltic ; Chernomor, the Caliban of the
Black Sea, is designated by a strange effect
of orchestration which exactly depicts his
dense brain and heavy, stupid, clumsy way
of thinking. Some scenes—the first, for in-
stance, and the last—have very strongly marked
Russian features. To the two sympathetic
characters, Rousslan and Ludmilla, Glinka has
allotted a number of beautiful, broadly designed
melodies, which are developed freely and
without leanings towards the methods of any
particular school.”" Finally, the rich and
exuberant melodic invention, the original and
varied orchestration, the fresh, piquant har-
monies which sometimes borrow a strange
colouring from certain Oriental scales, all
contribute to make the score of Rousslan and
Ludmilla a work of genius of the first rank.
César Cui writes of it: “We were merely
interpreters of the language of Truth when we
* Octave Fouque: Michel Ivanovitch Glinka.
76
RUSSIAN MUSIC
spoke of the high value of A Life for the Tsar.
It would be equally truthful of us to assert
that the music of Rousslam has even greater
worth. A Life for the Tsar is a work of youth
as well as of genius; Rousslan is the pro-
duct of a mature talent that has reached the
final stages of its development. Regarded as
absolute music, Rousslan is a work of the first
rank; from this point of view it will bear com-
parison with the great operatic masterpieces.
In it Glinka has marked out new paths and
opened up horizons undreamed of before his
time.” +
Notwithstanding, when the opera first
appeared on November 27 (December 10),
1842, it did not win the success it deserved.
It was too new in style, and too complex to be
grasped and appreciated by the public at the
very first. I think, however, that the coldness
of its reception has been somewhat exaggerated.
For if the first performance did, undoubtedly,
not pass off very well, owing to a tiresome
but accidental circumstance—namely, the in-
disposition of a popular singer who had an
important part and the substitution at the
last moment of a feeble one in her place—it
is nevertheless a fact that Rousslam was given
on as many as thirty-two occasions during
the first season; which is not what I should
* La Musique en Russie,
77
A SHORT HISTORY OF
call being received with cold water. The
work was very much discussed, it is true, and
some of the criticisms were unfair. But
between that and a complete failure there is
a vast deal of difference. On this very point,
moreover, I have come across, in an article in
the journal de Saint-Pétersbourg, some interest-
ing details, the veracity of which can hardly
be impugned —
“If one is to believe M. Youry Arnold
(in his Memoirs) the work was badly played at
the opening performances. Cavos, the Chapel
organist, had died two years before, and had
been replaced by Charles Albrecht, a pedantic
German conductor, who, like his orchestra,
took exceptions to some discourteous remarks
which were published by Bulgarin in his
paper, L’Abeille du Nord, and were attributed
to Glinka himself. Owing to the ill-humour of
the players the rehearsals went badly, and it
was only at the third performance that things
began to go smoothly, though even then
neither players nor singers (with the exception
of the two Petrovs) could make head or tail
of the style of the music.
“Speaking generally, one may say that there
was open opposition to the opera, even be-
fore the first performance, on the part of some
very distinguished amateurs. Count Michael
Vielhorsky, the famous patron of music and
78
RUSSIAN MUSIC
the author of songs that are still remembered,
spoke continuously of what he called ‘this
failure of an opera,’ and was more particularly
contemptuous of the fifth act, in which Glinka
allowed him to make numerous ‘cuts.” Others
were made both before and after the first
night, and this helped to make the plot of the
opera still more obscure.
“The accounts which have survived of this
first night are not always in entire agreement
with each other. Glinka in his Memoirs says
that the first two acts did not make such a
bad impression, and that it was only when the
third act was reached that the public began to
show that it was bored. The Count left the
theatre during the fifth act, and at the fall of
the curtain there were even some hisses, which
came mostly from the stage and orchestra,
mingled with calls for the author. M.
Youry Arnold, on the other hand, declares that
the signs of approval were numerous and
sustained, and that, generally speaking, the
work obtained something more than a mere
courtesy success.
“What really did spoil the performance was
the illness of Mme. Vorobieva-Petrova, the
admirable contralto of the Russian opera-
house, who was the original Vanya in A Life for
the Tsar ; for, at the last moment, she had to
hand over her part to her namesake, Mme.
79
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Petrova, a beginner, who from that day was
never heard of again. Much, too, was expected
from the waltz in the third act which was to
rouse the bulk of the public, but it was precisely
this number which was less successful than any
other. It was only at the third performance
that the celebrated singer was able to appear,
and immediately the whole of the Oriental
scene in the third act made a great sensation;
so much so that, for seventeen performances
running (three being given a week), both author
and singer had to appear each time to acknow-
ledge the applause.
“The work was played thirty-two times,
right into Lent. This indicates that it was
becoming more and more of a success ; indeed,
it was even caricatured at the Russian Theatre.
During the two following seasons it was put
on for another twenty performances, and
Rousslan only disappeared from the bills when
the Russian opera itself was transferred to
Moscow, on the arrival of the Italian troupe
with Rubini at its head.” "
It is only right to say that it was not really
until after Glinka's death that Rousslan was
at last appreciated at its proper value. It saw
the light again at St. Petersburg, at the
Théâtre-Cirque in 1859, after being left on
* Journal de Saint-Pétersbourg, November 27 (December
Io), 1892.
8O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
the shelf in silence for fifteen years, and its
success only became decisive and indisput-
able after its revival in 1864 at the Théâtre-
Marie. From that time onward it never
disappeared from the repertory, and on
November 27 (December 10), 1892, it celebrated
its fiftieth anniversary (as A Life for the Tsar
had done six years previously) with its 285th
performance. Since then both the public
and the critics have agreed in admiring it,
almost without reserve.
“The beauties in the score of Rousslam,”
writes one critic, “put it in the first rank of
lyrical operas. An epic picture of Russia in
old days is unfolded, more especially in the
first act, with such sweeping breadth of out-
line and with such original treatment on the
musical side, that one cannot find a parallel to
it in any other opera in the general repertory.
Even the big concerted numbers with chorus
in Guillaume Tell and Les Huguenots merely
deal with stirring historical episodes and
not with the poetry, the manners, and
beliefs of an entire epoch. Only the finale
of the first act of Don Giovanni is as rich in
musical ideas, as fine in style, and as complex
in form, though it has not the epic character
that one finds in the first act of Rousslan and
Ludmilla.” "
* Journal de Saint-Petersbourg.
8 I F
A SHORT HISTORY OF
The great musicians of the time, Meyerbeer,
Liszt, and Berlioz, testified to their admiration
for Glinka. When he paid his first visit to
Paris in 1844, with the purpose of making his
music known there, he read in the Revue et
Gazette Musicale for August 25 : “M. Glinka,
the most celebrated of Russian composers, and
the author of several operas which have been
given with brilliant success in St. Petersburg,
has just arrived in Paris, where he means to
spend the winter. We hope he will write and
work for the Opéra Comique.” He found
Berlioz there just when he was holding a
series of orchestral and choral concerts in the
Circus of the Champs-Elysées. Berlioz paid
his Russian colleague the graceful compliment
of putting several of his works into the pro-
grammes. Glinka himself gave a concert in
the Salle Herz, and Berlioz, wishing to make
it an opportunity of introducing him to his
readers in the journal des Débats, wrote him
the following letter —
MY DEAR SIR,--To perform your music and
to tell numbers of people that it is fresh, alive,
charming, vivacious, and original is not enough;
I must give myself the pleasure of writing a
few columns about it. I feel the necessity all
the more as it is my duty to do so.
Have I not to keep the public in touch with
82
RUSSIAN MUSIC
whatever is most remarkable, in the way of
music, going on in Paris : Be good enough,
then, to give me a few notes about yourself,
your early studies, the musical institutions of
Russia, and your compositions. By studying
your score with your help (in order to obtain
a less imperfect knowledge of it), I may be able
to turn out something tolerable, and to give
the readers of the Débats an approximate idea
of the pre-eminent position you occupy.
I am fearfully bothered with these infernal
concerts, the conceited airs the musicians
give themselves, and so on; but I shall cer-
tainly find time to write an article on a subject
of this sort. It is not often that I have any-
thing so interesting to write about.
H. BERLIoz.
One may be allowed to add that it was not
often that Berlioz made himself so agree-
able. Anyhow, one cannot doubt his sincerity
on this occasion, for he kept his word and
published an extremely flattering article on
his colleague in the journal des Débats for
April 16, 1845. He began by recounting how,
years before, in 1831, he had met Glinka at
Rome, and how at one of Horace Vernet’s “at
homes" (Vernet being then Director of the
Académie de France) he had heard several
Russian songs of his delightfully sung by
83
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Ivanov. “These songs,” he said, “struck me
very much by the character of their melodic
outline, which was most attractive and quite
different from anything I had ever heard
before.” He went on to speak of A Life for the
Tsar and then of Rousslan and Ludmilla, and
expressed his opinion of the composer’s capa-
city in the following terms :-
“M. de Glinka has presented the Russian
stage with a second opera, Rousslan and Lud-
milla, the subject of which is taken from a
poem by Poushkin. This work is fantastic in
character and half Oriental, as though it had
been written under the double inspiration of
Hoffmann and the Thousand and One Nights.
It is so different from A Life for the Tsar that
it might almost be the work of another com-
poser. The author's talent seems riper and
more powerful. There can be no doubt that
Rousslan is a step in advance, and marks a new
phase in Glinka's musical development.
“In his first opera one feels, above all things,
the influence of Italy coming through the
tunes, which are stamped with a fresh, true,
national colouring ; in the second opera, on
the other hand, with its important orchestral
part, its beautiful harmonic web and its
skilful scoring, one feels the predominating
influence of Germany. Amongst the first musi-
cians to do striking justice to the beauties
84
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of the new score must be mentioned Liszt and
Henselt, who have transcribed and written
variations on some of the most brilliant themes.
Glinka's talent is essentially supple and varied.
His style has the rare advantage of being able
to adapt itself, at the desire of the composer,
to the exigences and character of the subject
treated. Glinka can be simple and even naïve
without ever condescending to employ a vulgar
phrase. His melodies take unexpected turns,
and are built on periods which charm by their
very strangeness. He is a great harmonist, and
uses the instruments with a care and an ac-
quaintance with their most intimate resources,
which make his orchestra one of the most novel
and vivacious modern Orchestras that one can
hear. The public appeared to be entirely of
this opinion at the concert given by M.
de Glinka in the Salle Herz last Thursday.
The indisposition of Mme. Soloviev, a St.
Petersburg singer who has taken the principal
parts in the composer’s operas, prevented us
from hearing the vocal numbers announced
in the programme; but his Scherzo in the
form of a waltz and his Cracovienne were
loudly applauded by a brilliant audience. . .
The Scherzo quite carries you away; it is
full of wayward rhythms which are extremely
piquant; it is really new, and it is developed
in an unusually able way. It is more especially
85
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the originality of the melodic style to which
the Cracovienne and the March owe their
success. This distinction is a rare one, and
when a composer has, in addition, a distin-
guished harmonic style and the gift of
beautifully free, clear, and coloured orches-
tration, he has an undoubted right to claim
a place amongst the first-rate composers of his
day. The author of Rousslan is one of those
who has such a right.”
Berlioz's opinion of Glinka is undoubtedly
interesting and deserves to be quoted. The
excellent account of Glinka’s concert, given
by Maurice Bourges in the Revue et Gazette
Musicale for April 20, 1845, also makes inter-
esting reading.
I will not expatiate any more on the last
years of the composer’s life, on his new
journeys to France and Spain, or on his last
compositions which, incidentally, were not
written for the theatre. If I have already
dwelt at such length on him, it is because the
coming of Glinka marks a red-letter day in the
history of Russian music, and is the point of
departure of a new era; it is because his name
is a kind of symbol, and also because this
admirable musician is rightly considered in
his own country (and ought to be every-
where else) as the founder and creator of
Russian opera. As such he has a right to
86
RUSSIAN MUSIC
claim special attention and a place of his
OWI).
Yes, Glinka is certainly the head of a school
and the pioneer of modern music in Russia.
But his work was not all written for the stage,
and it would be unfair to forget that, apart
from the theatre, his compositions are numerous
and varied. One may quite well have a poor
opinion of the writings of his extreme youth—
those which preceded his first return to
Russia in 1834; we have seen that he held
them fairly cheap himself. But from this
moment onwards his compositions deserve
serious attention. They include numerous
songs with French or Russian words to the
number of about eighty, many of which are
exquisitely beautiful, being sometimes pro-
foundly sentimental, sometimes almost sensual;
also the music for Koukolnik's play, Prince
Kholmsky, a Tarantella for orchestra, and
Karaminskaya, an exquisite symphonic frag-
ment, full of originality. Then there are the
other symphonic works brought back from
Spain, namely: the jota Aragonese and the
beautiful Spanish overture called A Summer
Night at Madrid, as well as a few pianoforte
and other miscellaneous pieces. Amongst
these I will single out for mention a Polonaise
with chorus; a Waltz and Polonaise (in E
major) for orchestra; a Tarantella for orchestra
87
A SHORT HISTORY OF
&
with chorus and dances; a Solemn Polonaise,
written expressly for the coronation of the
Emperor Alexander II; a Hymn of the
Cherubs; a Tarantella (in A minor) for
pianoforte; and finally, some choruses for
women’s voices, written for the pupils of
the convent of Smolna and the Catherine
Institute.
It must be added that if A Life for the Tsar
is largely, on account of its subject, Glinka's
essentially popular opera, Rousslam and Lud-
milla on the other hand remains, for many of
Glinka's fellow-countrymen, the most com-
plete, striking, and lofty manifestation of his
noble genius. This beautiful work at last put
an end to the doubts and the hard words it
was subject to in its early days, and now it has
taken its rightful place in the forefront of the
repertory of Russian opera—a place which is
due to its inherent brilliance and beauty and
which no one would dream of disputing. It is
above all in Rousslan that Glinka has escaped
from the traditions of Western music, has dis-
played all his originality and power, and has
completely expressed his own personality. A
Life for the Tsar gave promise of a splendid
season to come; Rousslan and Ludmilla is
the ripe, luscious fruit itself.
It is always interesting to know the man in
the musician ; so I will borrow this character
88
RUSSIAN MUSIC
sketch of Glinka from his sister, Mme. Lud-
milla Shestakov, who, when she published
his Memoirs, completed them by adding a
º from which I quote the following
1116 S :-
“My brother had an innocently childlike,
tender, delicate, affectionate nature. He was
certainly a little capricious, and was spoilt; he
had to have everything his own way. Still,
if he had his faults, he made haste to re-
cognise them and redress them. He never
forgot a good turn or a good action. No-
thing disturbed his good nature: neither
family disputes nor the conversations at
the clubs where he happened to be. One
cannot exactly say that he was unmethodical,
but he was unable to conduct his own
affairs; anything in the nature of house-
hold matters was particularly distasteful to
him. His faults were excessive susceptibility
and distrust. He dreaded death to such
an extent that he took the most ridiculous
precautions against it, and avoided everything,
no matter how trivial, which he thought might
possibly be harmful. The slightest indisposi-
tion terrified him, as though it were a disaster.
He treated himself on homoeopathic lines, and
always kept in the house a small medicine
chest containing the most necessary remedies.
He followed Von Hahnemann's principles in
89
A SHORT HISTORY OF
avoiding scents and smells, more especially
camphor, which he looked upon as a poison.
Spices and aromatic articles were banished
from the table; at least he imagined they were.
As a matter of fact, the cook did not hesitate
to use them in the dishes which she sent up
for family consumption. One day Glinka found
a leaf of bay in his soup. Putting it on to
the edge of his plate he remarked: “I dis-
like bay leaves, either on my head or in the
soup.’”
We saw earlier in this chapter that Glinka
died at Berlin, where he had resided about a
year. In November 1900 homage was paid
to his memory in that capital, and the Tsar
Nicholas II took a suitable part in the affair,
as a letter sent from Berlin to a Paris paper
tells us : “Thanks to the munificence of the
Emperor Nicholas II, we have for several days
possessed a Glinka Museum. The owner of the
house in the Französischestrasse, in which the
author of A Life for the Tsar lived in 1856 and
died on February 13, 1857, had the property
rebuilt, and the Emperor Nicholas II offered to
present a fine monument in honour of Glinka
to the splendid new house. The monument
consists of a bust of the composer, flanked by
two figures representing Rousslan and Lud-
milla, the two heroes of Glinka’s famous
second opera; the whole thing being sur-
90
RUSSIAN MUSIC
mounted by the Russian Eagle, which produces
a splendid effect by hovering over the group.
Two memorial tablets, one in German, one
in Russian, recall the life and death of the
composer.”
9I
CHAPTER IV
Two forerunners of the “Young Russian School”: Alexander
Dargomijsky, Alexander Serov.
A “YouNG RUSSIAN SCHOOL '' exists, the mem-
bers of which have very considerable talent;
they are not, however, distinguished by mo-
desty, and they have been ready enough to
confer on themselves the hall-mark of infalli-
bility. This young school was initiated by
Balakirev, César Cui, Rimsky-Korsakov, Bor-
Odin and Moussorgsky, all of whom are dead
to-day, except César Cui, who became their
literary champion, and undertook to spread
their gospel and propagate their doctrines with
his pen. The members of the Russian school
have this much in common with the young
Wagnerian school in France and Belgium, that
they thoroughly despise everything which lies
outside their own rigid principles, and have
only the consolation of scorn to offer to anyone
thinking or acting differently from themselves.
We shall see with what patronising assumption
of superiority César Cui speaks of fine and
noble musicians like Rubinstein and Tchai-
92
RUSSIAN MUSIC
kovsky, who had the audacity or misfortune
to compose on different principles from those
which he advocated. It is true that Rubinstein
and Tchaikovsky had their revenge by writing
works which have more value and have acquired
a greater reputation than those of César Cui,
whose very real talent, however, I have no wish
to dispute.
Later on I shall have to dwell more fully on
this little brotherhood, which somewhat recalls
that of the French Romantics of the thirties.
With touching modesty it called itself “The
Powerful Group ** (Mogouchaya Koushka),
while in St. Petersburg it was named “The
Coterie ’’—a coterie consisting of a sort of
school of mutual admiration, outside which,
so far as its members could see, was no sal-
vation, and no art, in the real sense of the
word :
“No one has sense, save we and our friends alone.”
For the moment I have to deal with two
musicians who seem, each in his own way, to
have prepared the way for these somewhat pre-
sumptuous reformers, who, besides being re-
formers, were also iconoclasts : for they seemed
determined to leave nothing standing that hap-
pened to have been produced or created before
them. These two musicians, who were very
unevenly gifted and unlike each other from the
1 Or “The Invincible Band,”
93
A SHORT HISTORY OF
point of view of capacity, are Dargomijsky and
Alexander Serov.
Alexander Sergeivich Dargomijsky was born
in a village in the government of Toula on
February 2, 1813, and he died at St. Petersburg
on January 17, 1868. Beginning his career by
following to some extent in the paths of Glinka,
he enjoyed the same advantages as that com-
poser: he was born, that is to say, of a family
of rich landed proprietors, and was lucky
enough to meet with no opposition to his
desires on the part of his relations, so that he
was able to devote himself freely to cultivating
the art he loved. Fétis, who knew him per-
sonally, has left us the following interesting
information about his youth and childhood:—
“Dargomijsky was five years old when he
first began to speak; up till then his parents
believed that he would be a mute. . . From
his infancy he showed a decided taste for art,
more particularly for the stage. He made with
his own hands tiny marionette theatres, for
which he composed vaudevilles of a sort. At
seven years old he was given a teacher of the
pianoforte with whom he had incessant dis-
putes, because he was more busy composing
Sonatinas and rondos than studying the me-
chanism of the instrument. A few years later
he took up the violin, and learned to play on it
sufficiently well to make a passable second in a
94.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
string quartet. From this time he looked on
music from a different angle, and began to
understand its significance as an art. When
he was between fifteen and sixteen he wrote
several concerted duets for pianoforte and
violin as well as some quartets. Soon after-
wards, his parents realised what his true voca-
tion was, and entrusted his musical education
to Schoberlechner, a distinguished pianist and
composer, who gave him his first notions of
harmony and counterpoint. On reaching his
eighteenth year in 1831, Dargomijsky became
a Civil Servant by entering the Ministry of the
Imperial Household, but he was not prevented
by these duties from continuing to study music.
When he was only twenty years old he had a
reputation in social circles for his skill at the
pianoforte. As he could read even the most
difficult music at sight he was very much in
demand as an accompanist by the best singers,
both amateur and professional. While en-
gaged in this occupation he acquired a know-
ledge of the voice, and turned with enthusiasm
to vocal and dramatic music, for which he had
to sacrifice his instrumental studies. It was
at this time that he wrote an immense quantity
of songs, cantatas, and concerted pieces, with
accompaniment for pianoforte or for string
quartet.”
We can see from this what Dargomijsky’s
95
A SHORT HISTORY OF
early youth was like. It might be summed up
by saying that up till then he was little more
than a distinguished amateur, though no doubt
his aspirations led him higher. Soon, however,
he made the acquaintance of Glinka, with whom
he became friends. It may, indeed, have been
due to this friendship that he thought of writ-
ing, like him, for the theatre. In order the
better to follow his inclinations, and with a
view to finishing his musical education, which
he realised to be incomplete, he gave up his
post in the Government office and devoted
several years to the close study of theoretical
treatises and to carefully reading the scores of
the most famous composers. When he felt
sure of himself he set to work to write an
opera, choosing a particularly dramatic subject,
namely: Lucrecia Borgia. But he had hardly
begun his score when he abandoned the subject
to turn to another poem by Victor Hugo,
written expressly for the operatic stage : I
refer to Esmeralda, which the illustrious author
had based on his admirable story of “Notre-
Dame de Paris.”
It was in compliance with the wish of Mlle.
Louise Bertin, who was the daughter of the
editor of Le journal des Débats, that Victor
Hugo decided to write this libretto, though the
task was somewhat distasteful. The work was
given at the Opera House on November 14,
96
RUSSIAN MUSIC
1836, with Adolphe Nourrit, Levasseur, and
Cornélie Falcon in the three principal parts.
In spite of this splendid cast, the great name of
Victor Hugo, and the immense power wielded
at the time by Le journal des Débats, Esmeralda
was not a success, and Mlle. Bertin’s music
was voted very poor.
Dargomijsky set the French text to music,
and when the score was finished had it trans-
lated into Russian. He then offered the work
to the management of the imperial theatres.
This was in 1839. He made persistent efforts
to obtain a definite answer, but this was con-
tinually delayed, under one pretext or another,
until as many as eight years had elapsed.
Finally, on December 5, 1847, Esmeralda made
its appearance at the theatre in Moscow, where
its success was such that it was given four years
later in the Alexandra Theatre in St. Petersburg.
There was even a question of translating it and
transferring it to the stage of the Italian Opera
at the special request of the famous singer,
Tamburini; but the management of the im-
perial theatres firmly refused permission, as it
wished to uphold its previous decision to allow
no more works by Russian composers to be
produced in Italian.
Fétis, who had had an opportunity of read-
ing the score three years before it was produced,
wrote the following appreciation of it in a letter
97 G
A SHORT HISTORY OF
addressed to La Gazette Musicale in December
I844:—
“I can give you information with regard
to M. A. Dargomijsky, a young composer of
noble family, who has done me the honour of
paying me a visit on his way through Brussels,
and is now in Paris. He is a distinguished
pianist, and he has published in St. Petersburg
a number of vocal and instrumental composi-
tions which have been a brilliant success. But
I have been more particularly interested, or
perhaps I should say, I have been profoundly
astonished at an opera which he has composed
on a poem by M. Victor Hugo. What struck
me about the score, on the merits of which
M. Dargomijsky wished to have my opinion,
was its originality, its energy of conception
(which did not, however, mean absence of grace),
its melodic style, its piquant harmonies and
skilful modulations, and finally, the very re-
markable instinct which it showed for combin-
ing voices and orchestra. If Russia’s musical
education in the future can only be conducted
by a few lovers of the art with as much real
talent as this young noble possesses, I have no
doubt that we shall soon see her music alive
and flourishing, and bearing fruit indepen-
dently of the help of others.”
As a matter of fact, Esmeralda is a youthful
work of composite style, and is to a certain
98
RUSSIAN MUSIC
extent conceived on the model of the French
operas of Meyerbeer and, above all, of those of
Halévy, by whose genius Dargomijsky is said
to have been strongly attracted. There is
hardly a trace of originality in this first work
of his ; certain pages of it, however, are very
vivid and happily contrived, as for instance,
the curious and picturesque episode of the
procession of the Pape des fous. One may
also notice the remarkable skill which Dargo-
mijsky showed even at this time in his method
of writing for the voices, though he was un-
fortunately not able, for all that Fétis may say,
to apply it in writing for the orchestra. But I
must repeat: this was only a youthful work, in
which the personality of the composer had not
had time to make itself felt.
Dargomijsky had barely finished his Esme-
ralda when he began to write a work on a
smaller scale. This was The Triumph of
Bacchus, a kind of cantata, the subject of
which was taken from Poushkin. But this
time he met with a point-blank refusal on the
part of the theatre managers, and it was not
until a few months before his death—in 1867,
to be precise—that he had the satisfaction of
seeing a public performance of this small work
of his at Moscow. Somewhat discouraged, no
doubt, he thereupon composed, during a
period which covered several years, some
99
A SHORT HISTORY OF
hundred songs, airs, and duets, which were
published through various houses in St. Peters-
burg. Some of these songs, which are inter-
esting owing to their mood and their striking
}
melodic character, became popular and un-
doubtedly had more influence than his opera
in winning Dargomijsky a reputation as a
young man.
He did not, however, give up writing for
the theatre. But to mark his return to it, he
wanted to be inspired by a national subject;
and this he found once more in the rich
repertory of Poushkin, from whom he took
this time the enchanting legend of The
Roussalka (The Water Sprite). The poem
happened to be in dialogue form, and was cut
up into sections in a way which was con-
venient and effective from a theatrical point
of view, so that Dargomijsky, in adapting it
for the stage, merely had to put a few touches
to it, and was able to utilise Poushkin’s
splendid verse with its rich imagery practically
the whole time. Some slight cuts only had to
be made in the text every now and then, and at
the same time choruses and dances were added
in order to make the stage spectacle more
complete. “The Roussalka,” says César Cui,
“combines dramatic feeling with fantastic
colouring. The subject, whether regarded as
a whole or in detail, is admirably suited to
IOO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
opera. One also has to remember that the
poem is not, at any rate for the most part,
the work of a mere librettist submitted to the
caprice of a composer, but is quite one of the
most striking things written by the greatest
poet Russia has ever had.” Everyone is
acquainted with the poetic and mysterious
legend of Undine, the water sprite, which is
to be found in all northern countries. It is
obviously a charming subject for the stage,
and it offers the musician not merely an op-
portunity for delicate colouring, but also the
kind of incidents which, if he has any gifts,
ought to stimulate and inspire him.
Dargomijsky was inspired by it with the
happiest results, the score to which he set the
charming story bringing him fame and making
him be considered the direct successor of
Glinka. The opera was given at St. Peters-
burg on May 4, 1856, at the old Circus Theatre,
which has been rebuilt since then and has now
become the Maryinsky Theatre, the real
national theatre of Russia. Gustave Bertrand,
who had made a very careful study of Russian
music in the country itself, spoke of the work
in the following terms:—
“The Roussalka is in the repertory of all the
Russian opera-houses—at St. Petersburg, Mos-
cow, Kiev, and Odessa. Although it never
* La Musique en Æussie.
IOI
A SHORT HISTORY OF
shows traces either of the genial inspiration or
the striking originality of the operas of Glinka,
it is almost as popular as they are. From the
point of view of dramatic sentiment it is sin-
cere and often exalted, and the declamatory
recitative is truth itself; in the solos, duets,
trios, and finales, the composer has followed
the traditional forms of French and Italian
operas. The style is both conscientious and
ingenious; if it sometimes recalls the teach-
ing of the classrooms, you feel at any rate
that the classroom is a good one ; and through
all of the writing the personal temperament of
the composer as well as the atmosphere of
Russia constantly penetrates. In a word, it
is an admirable opera.”
On the other hand, César Cui blames the
composer precisely because, “like all his pre-
decessors, he has written airs, duets, trios, and
concerted numbers,” which, he thinks, “shows
his inferiority.” The members of the Young
Russian School resemble Wagner, whose doc-
trines they nevertheless warmly repudiate, in
claiming to eliminate from all operatic works
anything in the nature of an air, a set passage,
or a song : anything, in short, which can be
considered a definite entity with a character
of its own and can be detached from the rest
of the score. They must have recitative, more
recitative, and still more recitative Outside
IO2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
that there can be no operatic music, in their
opinion, and art relapses into barbarism. This
is how César Cui speaks of the score of The
Roussalka —
“On the dramatic side Dargomijsky reaches
a very high level in several of the scenes.
Looked at from this point of view the
music of the opera falls into two sub-
divisions : the recitative in the strict sense
of the term, and the separate numbers, as
the detached songs are usually called. Dargo-
mijsky’s recitative is equal to the best that has
ever been written. You may look in vain for
commonplaces or for the tiresome, conven-
tional phrases that can easily be improvised
by any hack writer. Dargomijsky was en-
dowed with the very special gift of knowing
how to fit each period or sentence with the
musical phrase best adapted to it, and how to
discover a melodic style suited to each char-
acter. With him all the words of the text and
all the details of the drama seem to be of a
piece with the music. One may presume that
none of these melodic recitatives, none of
these phrases which are so truthfully accentu-
ated, will be touched by time or oblivion, for
truth does not grow old.”"
We see from this to what enthusiasm the
writer was roused by the recitatives in The
* La Musique en Russie.
I03
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Roussalka. If we are to take his word for it,
it was precisely these recitatives that consti-
tuted the point of departure of the Young
Russian School, and gave the signal for its
preconceived doctrines, so far as dramatic
music is concerned. So that in this respect
the name of Dargomijsky and the part he
played acquired exceptional importance, on
which due stress must be laid.
This is not yet the moment for going into
the history of this school, though we shall
arrive at it before long. The last work of
Dargomijsky, however, leads us at this point
to skirt the edge of the subject. In this work,
The Stone Guest, the composer pushed his use
of recitative to its logical extreme : he used it,
that is to say, to the exclusion of everything
else, and so won the hearty admiration of the
young composers, who were dreaming of a
radical transformation of opera. “We come
to the keystone of the new school of Russian
opera,” to quote César Cui once more, “ in
Dargomijsky’s last work, The Stone Guest.
We have already seen, in our analysis of
The Roussalka, with what truth Dargomijsky
manages to portray dramatic situations. In
order to attain his end, he had even then broken
with the customary formulas, and had begun
to attach very great importance to melodic
recitative. . . A group of composers arose,
IO4
RUSSIAN MUSIC
who, owing to their peculiar gifts and their
attitude towards questions of latter-day
musical aesthetics, ended by forming a new
operatic school in Russia. These composers
held the melodic recitatives of The Roussalka
in high esteem. Dargomijsky joined them
with enthusiasm, and, soon feeling the need
of production, he composed his opera The
Stone Guest.”
All this makes up a small historical episode
which it is perhaps worth while to make known.
Dargomijsky’s enthusiasm may seem a little
excessive under the circumstances, and all the
more so since he had neither the makings nor
the temperament of a leader of a school, how-
ever distinguished he might really have claimed
to be as a composer. The truth is that the
little group of young composers mentioned
by César Cui, which included, besides him-
self, Borodin, Moussorgsky, Balakirev, and a
little later, Rimsky-Korsakov, was at the time
entirely unknown and was not sorry, there-
fore, to take shelter under the authority of a
fairly well-known name. All of them were
twenty or thirty years younger than Dargo-
mijsky, and all felt what an advantage it would
be to them to have him as the standard-bearer
of those theories of theirs which they intended
to spread and wished to impose on the public.
They rallied round him and succeeded, by
IO5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the aid of flattery and cajolery, in winning
him over to their side; and then, by making
him believe that there was no salvation for
music except in emphasizing the methods he
had employed with wise moderation in The
Roussalka, they forced him to exaggerate these
methods and to push them to their extreme .
limit. Dargomijsky, believing, in fact, that
he had become the prophet of a new religion
of music, let himself be persuaded, and ended
by yielding to the ideas with which they were
obsessed. He was, moreover, weary, feeble,
and ill at this period, and suffered cruelly from
an aneurism that caused his death not very
long afterwards; which helps to account for
his not being able, when writing The Stone
Guest, to recapture the free and glowing
inspiration which had made the success of
the preceding opera. Besides, anyone can
easily understand that the effort of imagination
needed for writing a score entirely in recita-
tive (however melodious it may be) is less
than is required from a composer, who has
to give his mind to showing that he is capable
of really musical ideas. Finally, the poem of
The Stone Guest, which Dargomijsky had gone
once more to Poushkin to obtain, had been
conceived with a view to the theatrical and not
the operatic stage; it was, consequently, much
too developed for *. The composer, by
IO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
refusing to make any kind of selection from
his material or to cut any of the verses, was
thereby condemned to be deprived in his turn
of all opportunity of development, and was
obliged to confine himself rigidly to the recita-
tive which was so insidiously recommended
to his attention.
Dargomijsky was, as I have already remarked,
ill to begin with, when he began to set to work
on the score of The Stone Guest. He had not
time to put the finishing touches to it, and
died before the whole could be completed.
Two of his disciples agreed to round it
off : César Cui undertaking to write the
conclusion of a scene that had been only
partially finished, while Rimsky-Korsakov
orchestrated the whole. The opera was not
produced until the month of February 1872,
four years after the death of the composer. T
It is hardly necessary to add that the subject
of The Stone Guest is the same as that of Don
Giovanni : the title sufficiently indicates it;
but Poushkin treated it in his own fashion,
making appreciable alterations in the story.
As to Dargomijsky, it goes without saying, I
suppose, that he had no intention of comparing
himself with Mozart or of trying to compete
with that masterpiece of his. He wished, as
someone said, not to do better, which was a
matter of some difficulty, but to do differently.
*****
Io?
A SHORT HISTORY OF
The enterprise was, however, a dangerous
One and, whatever the adherents of the young
school may have found to say about it, it did
not lead to very happy results. The Stone
Guest was received respectfully but coldly by
the public, and, as a matter of fact, it was
never really a success. Its partial admirers
console themselves by asserting that the public
is not capable of understanding works of that
sort and that kind of beauty. The burden of
their complaint is familiar and the line of
argument convenient. It is the way of those
who do not manage to please the crowd to
blame the crowd's stupidity. We need not
labour the point.
To sum up, then : Dargomijsky’s stage
career, though it can scarcely be considered
fertile, seeing that it comprises only three works,
has the peculiarity of presenting three distinct
phases. In Esmeralda, the first of these
works, the composer borrows his style from the
formal and conventional operas then in vogue
in Europe. In The Roussalka, the second of
the three, he endeavours, sometimes success-
fully, to walk in the footsteps of his fellow-
countryman Glinka, and the music takes on a
pronouncedly Russian character. Finally, in
The Stone Guest he boldly repudiates his first
two manners to adopt a third which only
leads him to moderately good results. In a
IoS
RUSSIAN MUSIC
word: Dargomijsky, so far as the great public
is concerned, is remembered and will continue
to be remembered as the composer of The
Roussalka, which should suffice to bring him,
if not fame, which is perhaps rather too strong
a term, at any rate a very well-earned re-
putation. In his work he has followed the
track so magnificently opened up by Glinka,
and has done it with an ability which no one
could dispute. That is his claim to the esteem
and the gratitude of his fellow-countrymen.
He began still another opera, Rogdana, in
the fantastic style, but he abandoned it almost
at once, and two choruses from it are practi-
cally all that is known to exist. Mention
should also be made of his three humorous
fantasias for orchestra : Kazachok, a lively
and original dance from Little Russia which
is full of colour and character, a Finnish
Fantasia, and Baba-Yaga (also known as From
the Volga to the Riga). There is also a Taren-
telle Slave for pianoforte duet. As to his
songs, which are very numerous, I have
already said that the majority are worth
attention, and that they have contributed
materially to the composer’s reputation.
It is time to deal with Serov, who occupies
an important place in the history of modern
Russian music. He owes his position not so
much perhaps to his talent as a composer as
IO9
A SHORT HISTORY OF
to the very active, or perhaps I should say
, turbulent, part which he has played in the
musical movement of the last century. His
music cannot be called first-rate, though it
would be doing him an injustice not to recog-
mise its worth. But, having a speculative
mind of a high order with a special bias
towards criticism and being essentially com-
bative by temperament, he took part with
passionate enthusiasm, and almost with frenzy,
in all the quarrels and controversies that
raged from day to day round musical topics.
This enthusiasm of his, which he brought to
bear on all subjects, and more particularly on
music, won him without doubt a higher
reputation than he could ever have acquired
by his compositions alone. He was a prac-
tised writer, and a caustic critic; he had a
high reputation in debate, he was indefatigable
in the lecture-room, and he was always ready
for any cause to step into the breach and use
his weapons alike in attack or in defence.
He inevitably drew attention to himself in
a variety of ways, and, in short, he has earned
a special place apart in the history of the start-
ling musical movement which has taken place
in Russia during the course of the last sixty
years.
Alexander Nicholaevich Serov was the son
of a barrister, and was born at St. Petersburg
IIO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
on January II (23), 1820. From his earliest
youth he showed signs of unusual intelligence
and talent in a great variety of lines. He took
up natural history; he learned foreign lan-
guages with astonishing ease, speaking not
only Latin and Russian, but French, English,
and Italian fluently; he had a pronounced
taste for the theatre, he studied design, and
above all, he adored music. He was taught
the rudiments of the pianoforte by an elderly
spinster, a relative of his, but he had no musical
education in the strict sense of the term. One
of his fellow-countrymen who became his
friend after having been the object of his
criticism, W. von Lenz, the author of the
famous book Beethoven and His Three Styles,
writes as follows in the course of a rapid study
devoted to Serov :—
“In 1834 Serov's father sent the boy to the
School of Jurisprudence at St. Petersburg.
He left it in 1840 with a second prize and at
once entered the Government service in the
Senate. When he was at the School of Juris-
prudence he took lessons on the violoncello
from Carl Schuberth, but he did not keep it
up. Schuberth and the elderly spinster at
the piano ; those were the only teachers he
ever had ; everything else he picked up for
himself. The moment he had left the school,
Serov spent his days over books of musical
III
A SHORT HISTORY OF
theory of all ages and in all languages, from
Bach, Kirnberger, Albrechtsberger, Fürck,
Catel, and Marx downwards; and he would
write out for his own use his criticism of these
writers who, to his mind, did not go far
enough and were not sufficiently philosophical
for his tastes. He was a prey to the idea of
establishing a theory of music which should
be simpler and based on surer ground than
any theory of theirs. The further he advanced
on this immense task, the more he neglected his
Government work. He was transferred to the
Crimea, where he was given the post of vice-
president of a court of justice. “I used to
write little fugues,’ he told me, ‘ during the
proceedings in court—nice little fugues. One
day when the case before us was the theft of
a horse, they wanted to have my opinion ; I
replied that I hadn’t been listening to a single
word and moved the adjournment. I was
then at work on my first opera, A Night in
May. I’ve burnt it; it was dreadful stuff l’
Serov gave up his career at the bar, to the
great despair of his father, and returned to
St. Petersburg, where we come across him
performing the duties of a newspaper censor
with an exceedingly modest income * *
The thoroughly practical way in which
Serov studied musical theory all by himself
* Le Guide musical (of Brussels), November 1, 1877.
II 2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
led to his fully developing a critical sense the
roots of which he is said to have had deeply
implanted in him. At the same time one may
suppose that this kind of very personal edu-
cation disturbed to some extent the equi-
librium of his powerful musical gifts. Indeed,
Serov, who was an ardent admirer of the most
abstract works of Beethoven’s last manner,
and was an out-and-out partisan of the doc-
trines of Richard Wagner (after having at first
mercilessly opposed them), appeared to discover
in Beethoven what anyone else might have
looked for in vain—an echo of the old Greek
modes | For these modes he felt such an
affection that he dreamed of substituting them
for the modern scale, and was quite ready to
transfer them to the theatre.
However that maybe, Serov made up his mind
that, before he would even think of writing
for the stage—he only began to do so late
in life, when he was more than forty years old
—he must propagate his own ideas and opinions
by the aid of his pen and his tongue. When
he became censor of foreign newspapers at
St. Petersburg, he was not so absorbed by his
duties that he could not find time to devote
himself seriously to the questions which he
had nearest at heart. He began by publish-
ing, in a review called The Pantheon, a series
of polemical letters which were intended to
II3 H
A SHORT HISTORY OF
refute the ideas spread by his fellow-country-
man, Oulibishev, in his work entitled Beethoven,
His Critics and His Annotators. Then he
produced an important pamphlet in which
he combated the theories launched by his
other compatriot, W. von Lenz, in his book
Beethoven and His Three Styles. All this was
undertaken to do greater glory to Beethoven’s
later manner. Besides this, Serov also col-
laborated with several other Russian news-
papers, contributed a considerable number of
critical articles to the French journal de
Saint-Pétersbourg, and from 1856 to 1860 was
one of the principal editors, if not the actual
manager, of a periodical called The Theatrical
and Musical Review. At the same time he
put his gifts as a speaker at the service of the
art he loved. It came about in this way that
during the course of the winters of 1858 and
1859 he gave a series of ten lectures in one
of the rooms of the University on the theory
of music treated from historical and aesthetic
points of view. He continued his lectures in
the spring of 1864, the subject this time being
opera. In 1865 he gave six more on the same
subject in the Conservatoire at Moscow, and
finally, in January 1870, he gave yet another
series of six, in the Artists’ Club in St. Peters—
burg, on the study of the development of
opera.
II4
RUSSIAN MUSIC
As a critic Serov was neither patient nor
indulgent. He was very positive in his ideas,
though he sometimes contradicted himself,
being by nature quarrelsome and inclined
to be inconsistent; he did not spare his words
and he was always ready to hit out at others,
regardless of being hit in return; the result of
which was that he was involved in disputes
with his colleagues throughout his life. “There
is not a single Russian writer on music,” wrote
Gustave Bertrand from St. Petersburg, “with
whom Serov has not been engaged in violent
polemics constantly degenerating into abuse.
One may be allowed to suppose that bad
temper alone was not responsible, and that the
whole thing was to some extent deliberate.
It is not the first time that one has seen young
people at the outset of their career breaking
windows to attract public attention; bigger
men than Serov had done the same. Weber,
when he was a critic, gave the composer of the
Choral Symphony a thorough shaking before he
himself composed Der Freischütz. Schumann
too pulled down the temples of his ancestors,
hoping thereby to raise the foundations of his
own chapel. Wagner carried the gift for
lyrical invective to a stage bordering on
delirium. . . Serov looked upon himself not
merely as the best, but as the only, Russian
critic. He stirred up all his colleagues in
II5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
opposition against him, he passed the most
contemptuous judgment on every musical
authority of Europe and, like the modern
Germans, he crushed, or at any rate imagined
he had crushed, the composer of Robert le
Diable and Les Huguenots by calling him a mere
mountebank and speaking of his operas as so
many flashes in the pan.” "
The odd thing is that Serov, as I have already
said, belied and contradicted himself with
imperturbable coolness and self-assurance. To
take an example: in 1856 he wrote quite
openly in the Theatrical and Musical Courier
(a paper which was founded and edited by
Maurice Rappaport), that Liszt and the other
disciples of Wagner were talking nonsense
when they declared their hero's operas to be
masterpieces. “They are laboured works,”
he remarked, “produced by a dilettante, who
certainly has plenty of talent but was no doubt
unable to finish his studies. The general im-
pression given by Wagner’s compositions is
one of unbearable tedium.” He also said that
the melodic element in his works was “very
feeble,” and that the greater part of his music
was merely “tiresome droning,” grafted on to
unpleasantly novel harmonies and pretentious
orchestration in the manner of Meyerbeer or
Berlioz. Well, in the issue of the same paper
* Le Nord, November 24, 1874.
II6
RUSSIAN MUSIC
for July 30, 1858 (only two years later), Serov,
having occasion to speak once more of Wagner,
declared that a man must be an “absolute
idiot” in music not to feel the “strong life,
the poetry, and the beauty pulsating in his
operas.” He added, with more emphasis than
politeness, “Let fools, then, stop their im-
potent raging against the immortal works of
Wagner.” It must be admitted that if his
critical articles on music, an edition of which
has been published at St. Petersburg in four
volumes, owed their brilliance to any one
quality, it was emphatically not to the con-
sistency of their ideas.
While Serov was holding the opinions quoted
above—that is to say, just when his previous
scornful contempt for Wagner’s music had
suddenly turned into violent enthusiasm—he
was at last bitten himself with a taste for the
stage. During the winter of 1860 Signora
Adelaida Ristori, the famous Italian tragic
actress, went with her company to St. Peters-
burg to give a series of performances, mainly of
Giacometti’s play La Giuditta, in which she had
a striking success. Serov, who was completely
dazzled and overcome by the powers the great
actress displayed in this piece, saw excellent
material for music in the Biblical subject of
Judith, and made up his mind that he too would
utilise it by transferring it to the operatic stage.
117
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Following the example of Wagner, who was
now his favourite model, he determined to
write his own words as well as the music of
the opera he had in his head, and he at once
set to work to do so. Nevertheless he did not
draw up the outlines of the play by himself
alone, but obtained the assistance of an Italian
poet. He then wrote the verse, which in
several places was touched up and occasion-
ally rewritten by the poet Maikov, author of
Two Destinies, Savonarola, and Confessions of
the Queen, amongst other things. When he
published the libretto of judith, Serov very
scrupulously marked Maikov’s verses with
inverted commas after thanking him for his
help in the preface. Finally he settled down
to work at the music. Being no doubt more
influential, and having better luck than Dar-
gomijsky had in his day, he was fortunate
enough to get his work accepted, as soon as it
was finished, by the management of the Russian
Opera House, where judith was produced for
the first time in May 1863, with Sariotti and
Mme. Bianchi in the two principal parts.
“Serov's style in judith,” says César Cui,
“recalls that of Wagner in his Lohengrin
period.” And again : “Serov, when writing
his first opera, had Wagner as closely as pos-
sible in view as a model, although he did not
entirely sacrifice the independence of the voice
II8
RUSSIAN MUSIC
part to the orchestra, as the German composer
does. That method would never suit a
Russian composer, and Serov himself con-
sidered it a mistake.” The score of judith
considered as a whole is very uneven, and
contains brilliant, highly-coloured passages
side by side with others of very little interest.
Nevertheless, if one remembers that it is the
composer’s first work, and above all his first
work for the stage, one may well be surprised
at the boldness and assurance of the writing.
Indeed, I do not think it would be easy to
find another case of a composer showing quite
such skill at the outset of his musical career.
If the score of judith is frequently open to
adverse criticism, one can at least point to a
certain number of passages which deserve
praise. In the first act, for instance, which is
picturesque, though it is somewhat lacking in
ideas, there is a striking prayer; in the second,
there is a long monologue for Judith which is
really beautiful, but it is followed, unfor-
tunately, by some scenes which, with their
heavy, clumsy recitatives, can barely be called
interesting. Then in the third act there is
the exceedingly powerful and effective sym-
phonic episode of the Triumphal March of
Holofernes, as well as the delightful double
chorus of female slaves with its curiously
broken rhythms, and some gracefully turned
II9
A SHORT HISTORY OF .
dances. Here again we unfortunately meet
with long melodic recitatives without any
particular point or interest, which enfeeble
the action until we come to the last chorus.
The fourth act gives us a fine air for Judith,
some dance tunes, several of which are accom-
panied by voices and are perhaps still more
attractive than those in the preceding act,
and a wild, virile song for Holofernes—a kind
of war song, full of character, written to the
following words : “We march in the scorch-
ing desert; the breath we breathe is fire; a
horse stumbles, a camel sinks to die; the
heroes alone advance to the heart of the desert.
A town, all gold, appears on the blue horizon ;
an army bars our passage thither. To arms
There are lovely women in yonder town that
is paved with gold. Let us break the foe
beneath the heels of our horses, and then in
the city we shall lay us down to sleep like
kings.” There is not much to be said about
the rest of the opera.
Taking it all round, judith, though musically
only of secondary importance, was an inter-
esting venture, coming from a composer who
was making his first appearance on the stage.
For this reason it was received, if not exactly
with enthusiasm, at any rate with attention
and sympathy. We have seen that Serov had
conceived it when he was under the influence
I2O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of Wagner’s doctrines, having just returned
from a tour in Germany, where he had met
both Wagner and Liszt. He was quite decided
about his desire to put these doctrines into
practice and he also explained his views very
decidedly, at the same time making up his
mind to write another work in a different
manner. When someone asked him why he
had chosen to make his first appearance on the
Russian stage with a Biblical instead of a
national subject, he replied that he did not
wish to appear to be walking in Glinka’s foot-
steps. When his questioner expressed sur-
prise that he had nevertheless not hesitated
to imitate Wagner —
“That’s quite a different matter,” he an-
swered. “Wagner is almost unknown in
Russia. Well, people will get to know him,
if it is only by looking at the style of judith.
Since this sort of writing is new in my country,
it does not lend itself to comparisons, whereas
the mannerisms of Glinka would at once have
been recognised. I did not want to pass by
the Caudine forks : a parallel case might have
turned out to my disadvantage. Besides, I
propose to write another opera on a national
subject, as soon as I have discovered a phrase-
ology of my own which will not permit of any
confusion between the imitators of Glinka and
myself.”
I 2 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
The work, which he was already meditating,
he lost no time in composing. It was staged
in November 1865, only two and a half years
after judith, and in the same theatre. The new
opera was also in five acts and was called
Rogneda. He went for his subject to Russian
history, or rather to a dim and somewhat
confused episode of Russian history, occurring
at a time when the people were being converted
to Christianity. He was once more his own
poet, and wrote the text of the play himself,
as he did for judith.
The main task which Serov is said to have
set himself in Rogneda was to contrast the
pagan and the Christian elements. It is
indeed on the constant opposition of these two
elements that the composer has concentrated
all his skill, and above all it is on this that the
effects aimed at in the music chiefly depend.
One of my French fellow-critics has written of
the work and its tendencies in the following
term.S :—
“In the opera Rogneda we have noticed a
curious contrast of different styles which are
linked together by sheer force of will but are
not blended. When the composer has to
express the restless passion of Rogneda and
Ruald, the tortuous methods of Wagner pre-
dominate. When he wishes to portray on the
stage the amusements of a primitive court, he
I22
RUSSIAN MUSIC
at once adopts a very simple harmonic style
with clear melodies and square-cut rhythms.
Every time the Christian element is introduced
we have a very close imitation of the broad;
style characteristic of Church music; a certain
affectation of archaism is to be noticed in
some of the religious passages and the popular
scenes; then everything becomes simple and
unaffected once more in the songs of the
women of the terem. . . One may urge that
these different styles are imposed too abruptly
on various sections of the opera, and yet one
hardly thinks of complaining of the dis-
crepancies, because each shade is always used
for a particular purpose. The constant pro-
cess of letting the music evolve naturally from
the drama itself gives the work its unity of in-
spiration. That is, in fact, the ideal at which
every operatic composer ought to aim, only, all
effort and feeling of premeditation must be
avoided. Now, when one listens to the Rogneda,
one feels that one is in the presence of a work
which bears the mark of undoubted inspira-
tion but still more of deliberate endeavour. At
least that is the general impression it gives.”
One other point to notice in the score of
Rogneda is the simultaneous employment of
certain themes of a really Russian character
* Gustave Bertrand : Les Mationalités musicales audies'
dans le drame lyrique (1872). \
I23
A SHORT HISTORY OF
with the partial introduction of harmonies,
recalling the Gregorian and folksong modes of
ancient music. By this means Serov has
obtained some curious effects. It should be
stated in addition that Rogneda had a far
warmer welcome from the public than judith.
The work made something of a sensation—
so much so, in fact, that the emperor showed
his desire to recompense the composer for
his efforts, and to reward him for his success
by making him an annual grant from the
Privy Purse of 1200 roubles." The one hun-
dred and fiftieth performance of Rogneda was
given in September 1898 at the Maryinsky
Theatre at St. Petersburg, with MM. Jakovlev,
Ershov, and Maiboroda, and Mmes. Kamen-
skaya and Gorlenko-Dolina in the principal
parts. This shows that Serov's works con-
tinue to be given in our time, though they are
far from obtaining the success of the two
operas of Glinka.
Serov wrote another opera, Vrajia Sila
(Malign Force, or The Power of Evil), in four
acts, the material of which he took from a
comedy by Ostrovsky. He had not time, how-
ever, to see the staging of the work, which
was only produced after his death. In its
form it showed affinities, up to a certain point,
with the tendencies of the Young Russian
* About £127.
I24
RUSSIAN MUSIC
School, and it was not only successful in its
day, but it still has a place in the repertory of
Russian theatres. The scenes with the populace
in The Power of Evil, and the fiendish character
of the blacksmith—a part which was admirably
played in former days by the singer Stravinsky
—found particular favour with the frequenters
of the cheaper parts of the house.
It may not be without interest to quote at
this point César Cui's opinion on the capacity
of Serov, to whom he distributes blame and
praise in more or less equal quantities —
“It is mainly,” he says, “the scenes of
national life which are endowed with pic-
turesque colouring and vitality by Serov,
whose intelligence, literary taste, and skilful
use of folksongs served him well in this direc-
tion. In fact, all the scenes with crowds in
his operas are painted in true and natural
colours. Sometimes they are lacking in musical
interest, but nevertheless they induce the
right atmosphere, so that the imagination of
the listener is easily attuned to the key of the
locality and of the episodes unfolded before
his eyes. The result is that the most suc-
cessful numbers in Serov's operas are usually
the choruses, the popular songs, and the
dances. . . . Strictly speaking, Serov did not
do much for the advancement of Russian opera.
The orchestration he employed was full and
I25
A SHORT HISTORY OF
brilliant, but much less distinguished than
Glinka's ; incidentally it was enriched with
some touches of realism characteristic of the
life of the people. If in addition to this we
credit him with his numerous attempts to
capture truth of expression both in form and
spirit (Wagner being taken as the model for
judith, while The Power of Evil followed as
closely as possible in the wake of the new
Russian school), we shall realise that his work
deserves consideration, and that amongst com-
posers of the second rank he has taken and will
maintain an honourable place in the history
of the development of Russian opera.” "
Apart from the theatre Serov only wrote a
Stabat Mater and an Ave Maria for soprano
and orchestra. There are also a few fragments
of an earlier opera than judith which was
abandoned soon after it had been begun and
was never completed. It only remains to add
that he died suddenly at St. Petersburg on
\January 20 (February 1), 1871.
Before concluding the first section of this
book I should like to say a few words about
two composers who ought not to be passed
Over in silence, although one of them was not
actually a Russian, but only lived and died in
the country of his adoption. This was Dütsch,
of whom César Cui writes as follows:– “…"
* Le Musique en Russie.
I26
RUSSIAN MUSIC
“Dütsch was a native of Copenhagen, but
he made Russia his adopted country, coming
to live in St. Petersburg in 1848, and dying
there in 1863.” He had at one time been a
pupil of Mendelssohn at the Leipzig Con-
servatoire. All through a life of hard work
he only met with sorrow and vexation, dis-
appointment and bad luck. To earn a living
he was obliged to conduct a military band, or
sometimes an orchestra in a public park. The
necessity of constantly moving from place to
place and of undertaking more work than he
had strength for, and finally the struggle with
poverty itself, combined to hamper the de-
velopment of his career as a composer, and at
the same time, by shattering his health,
hastened his death. In 1860 the public of
St. Petersburg was introduced to his opera
The Croatian Girl, which ran for seven per-
formances. It may be that that cannot be
considered a real theatrical failure : operas
which have to be dropped without hope of
revival are not played more than three times.
Still, it must be admitted that it was not a
success, and this is all the more to be regretted
as the opera shows signs of remarkable ability.
In point of fact, one can say that Dütsch is
often wanting in originality and musical
* As a matter of fact he did not die at St. Petersburg, as
César Cui supposes, but at Frankfort-on-Maine.
I27
A SHORT HISTORY OF
character. As far as its form is concerned
The Croatian Girl follows fairly closely the
generally accepted models ; in some passages
it is easy to recognise the influence of Meyer-
beer, in others that of Mendelssohn, and
several of the themes are borrowed from the
Hungarian rhapsodies of Liszt. But in spite
of these reminiscences one cannot shut one’s
eyes to its good qualities—to the vigour and
vitality which run through the entire score,
its good taste, the healthy view of art con-
trolling it, and its bright and attractive
orchestration. Dütsch's gifts are certainly
not of the kind to set him on a lofty pedestal;
his opera did nothing for the growth of lyrical
drama. But to persist in ignoring this charm-
ing work is to write oneself a partisan, for if
it did not deserve to be despised by the
public, it deserves still less to be ostracized by
musicians.”
The other composer I wanted to speak of
had no influence on the history and progress
of Russian music but was none the less
famous, and deserves to be specially men-
tioned as the author of the music of the Russian
National Anthem. I refer, of course, to
General Lvov and his well-known hymn, God
save the Tsar, which circumstances have lately
made so popular in France.
Alexis Feodorovich Lvov was born on
I28
RUSSIAN MUSIC
May 25, 1799, at Reval in Esthonia, and died
on December 28, 1870, on his estate in the
government of Kovno. His father, Theodore
Lvov, was a distinguished amateur, and was
made director of the Imperial Chapel, where
he was succeeded in the post by Alexis, who
from his earliest infancy had shown excep-
tional gifts for music. He very soon became a
skilful violinist, and he made a special study
of composition by diligently and attentively
reading the works of the great masters.
“Every moment left free to him, from the
duties of his State appointment (which, in
accordance with the traditions of the Russian
nobility, he took up when he was quite young),
were devoted,” says Fétis, “to music, for
which he had an irresistible passion. By
persevering in this way for more than thirty
years Lvov acquired a reputation both as
violinist and as composer, which he thoroughly
deserved. By honourably serving his Sove-
reign and his country he gradually rose to the
rank of major-general, and in 1836 was ap-
pointed director of the Imperial Chapel by
the Emperor Nicholas, who appreciated his
merits as a musician. In 1840 he visited Paris
and Leipzig, where his playing and composi-
tions left a favourable impression.”
Lvov wrote several operas: The Village
Bailiff, in three acts with Russian text, which
I29 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
was given at St. Petersburg; Bianca e Gual-
tiero, an Italian opera, which was also given
at St. Petersburg, when the singers were
Rubini, Tamburini, and Mme. Viardot; Un-
dine, a fairy opera in three acts with German
text, which was played at Vienna in 1846;
and The Art Needlewoman, in one act with
Russian text, produced at St. Petersburg.
He also composed a Stabat Mater ; six psalms
and twenty-eight separate Sacred songs,
written to be sung by members of the Chapel
Choir during service; three fantasias for violin
and orchestra with chorus, one of which was
built up on Russian soldiers’ songs; and a
considerable number of vocal and instrumental
works of less importance. He also published,
in eleven quarto volumes, an immense col-
lection of old chants for all sections of the
service of the Greek Church, harmonized in
four parts, with Russian text.
But the one thing which, above all others,
made Lvov's name popular throughout the
whole of Russia was the Russian National
Anthem for which he composed the music.
In his Memoirs he tells the story of its
inception in the following words —
“In 1833 I accompanied the Emperor
Nicholas during his travels in Prussia and
Austria. When we had returned to Russia I
was informed by Count von Benkendorf that
I 30
RUSSIAN MUSIC
the Sovereign regretted that we Russians had
no national anthem of our own, and that, as he
was tired of the English tune which had filled
the gap for so many long years, he wished me
to see whether I could not compose a Russian
hymn.
“The problem appeared to me an extremely
difficult and serious one. When I recalled the
imposing British National Anthem, God save
the King, the very original French one, and
the really touching Austrian hymn, I felt and
appreciated the necessity of writing something
big, strong, and moving; something national
that should resound through a church as well
as through the ranks of the army; something
that could be taken up by a huge multitude
and be within the reach of every man, from
the dunce to the scholar. The idea absorbed
me, but I was worried by the conditions thus
imposed on the work with which I had been
commissioned.
“One evening as I was returning home
very late, I thought out and wrote down in
a few minutes the tune of the hymn. The
next day I called on Joukovsky, to ask him
to write the words; but he was no musician,
and had much trouble to adapt them to the
minor cadence of the first section of the
melody.
“At last I was able to announce the com-
I31
e.--"
A SHORT HISTORY OF
pletion of the hymn to Count von Benkendorf.
The Emperor wished to hear it, and came on
November 23 to the chapel of the court choir,
accompanied by the Empress and the Grand
Duke Michael. I had collected the whole
body of choristers together and reinforced
them with two orchestras.
“The Sovereign asked for the hymn to be
repeated several times, expressed a wish to
hear it sung without accompaniment, and then
had it played first of all by each orchestra
separately and finally by all the executants
together. His Majesty turned to me and said
in French: ‘Why, it’s superb!’ and then and
there gave instructions to Count von Benken-
dorf to inform the Minister of War that the
hymn was adopted for the army. The order
to this effect was issued on December 4, 1833.
The first public performance of the hymn was
on December 11, 1833, at the Grand Theatre
in Moscow. The Emperor seemed to want
to submit my work to the judgment of the
Moscow public. On December 25 the hymn
resounded through the rooms of the Winter
Palace on the occasion of the blessing of the
colours.
“As a proof of his satisfaction the Sovereign
graciously presented me with a gold snuff-box
studded with diamonds, and in addition gave
orders that the words “God save the Tsar ’
I 32
RUSSIAN MUSIC
should be placed in the armorial bearings of
the Lvov family.” *
I will quote here a paragraph which I took
from the Gazette Musicale of August 24, 1856,
as bearing on a rather curious performance of
Lvov's hymn —
“The popular Russian national hymn by
Lvov will be sung on the occasion of the
Emperor's coronation three times over during
the firework display representing successively
the portraits of Peter the Great, Nicholas,
and Alexander II. The first time, the hymn
will be sung by a chorus of a thousand voices;
the second time by the massed choirs and by
the military bands; the third time it will be
accompanied by salvos of cannon, which will
be fired by means of an electro-galvanic
apparatus.”
Here is a translation of the words of the
Russian National Anthem : “God, save the
Tsar ! Strong and powerful, reign for our
glory; reign for the terror of our enemies,
Tsar of the orthodox faith ! God, save the
Tsar ! ”
As a final piece of information which may
be of interest, I will add that Charles Gounod,
the illustrious composer of Faust and of
Mireille, has written a fantasia on the theme
of Lvov's hymn for pedal-piano and orchestra.
Schumann in his articles has spoken en-
I33
A SHORT HISTORY OF
thusiastically of Lvov's talent as a violinist.
Berlioz too, who was not naturally much given
to praise, has given him the following very
sympathetic lines, in which he brings out the
variety of his musical gifts —
“Most musical amateurs who care about
quartet playing and the great violinists of
Europe are acquainted with this eminent
musician, who is a virtuoso as well as a com-
poser. His skill on the violin is remarkable,
and his last composition, which I heard in
St. Petersburg four years ago—the opera
Undine—the libretto of which has just been
translated into French by M. de Saint-
Georges, contains beauties of the highest
order, and is fresh and alive with all the charm
of originality and youth. Since he has been
in control of the choir of the Imperial Chapel
he has not only followed in the footsteps of
his predecessors by obtaining a perfect execu-
tion ; he has also given his attention to
increasing the choir's repertory, which is
already a large one, both by composing pieces
of Church music and by undertaking useful
and scholarly investigations into the musical
archives of the Russian Church. Thanks to
these researches he has made several discoveries
which are valuable for the history of music.”
The quotation is from No. 21 of Les Soirées
d'Orchestre. An interesting article on Lvov
I34
RUSSIAN MUSIC
may also be read in the Revue et Gazette
Musicale for October 11, 1840, over the some-
what unexpected signature of Richard Wagner.
It is, of course, to his hymn, which is really
noble, imposing, and majestic in character,
that Lvov owes his undisputed popularity.
There can be no question of his talent, but I
admit he did not make any particular contri-
bution to the progress of music in Russia.
Russian music, as we have seen, owes its
emancipation to Glinka ; Dargomijsky, by
carrying on the labours of this great innovator,
helped to establish it when it was once free ;
and even Serov was not without some influ-
ence on the trend of ideas in the direction of
a national school. We are now about to enter
on a period which is more or less contemporary
with our own. On the one side we shall find
Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky, whose alert in-
telligence told them not to break completely
and for ever with the traditions of the West,
the educational experience of which they
fully appreciated ; on the other we shall see
the members of the Young Russian School,
who were no doubt a trifle too arrogant and
had somewhat too high a sense of their own
value, but at the same time obviously pos-
sessed original gifts. It was these young men
who, with the help of concessions which cir-
cumstances and the public compelled them to
I35
RUSSIAN MUSIC
make and indeed imposed on them as it were
in spite of themselves, inaugurated a brilliant
era in Russian music, the importance and extent
of which it is still impossible adequately to
gauge.
CHAPTER V
Two independent composers : Anton Rubinstein,
Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky.
BEFoRE speaking of the group of musicians
mentioned in the preceding chapter—the group
comprising Borodin, Moussorgsky, César Cui,
Balakirev, and Rimsky-Korsakov—who took to
themselves the title of the Young Russian
School and affected the loftiest disdain for any-
one who ventured to have ideas of his own
instead of adopting theirs, I must first deal
with two composers who came in for a special
share of this school’s contempt, though they
are precisely the very men who are the honour
and glory of modern Russian Music. The
two splendid figures of Rubinstein and Tchai-
kovsky stand, in fact, in conscious pride and
strength, head and shoulders above these rivals;
and whatever the others may say, it is they who
personified the most brilliant and striking
manifestations of Russian music of their day.
The gifts of such men as Borodin, Cui, or
Rimsky-Korsakov are, of course, indisputable,
and it would be unfair not to pay them every
due ; at the same time one must admit that
I 37
A SHORT HISTORY OF
they pale before the powerful, original, and
exuberant temperament of the great musicians
whose deaths in the nineties plunged Russia
into national mourning. Both were naturally
endowed with unusual capacities, and both
produced work with inexhaustible ardour.
They left their mark on all branches of music
—operas, ballets, symphonies, quartets, songs
and works for Solo instruments on a large scale
—and they took up each branch in turn with
the same facility and the same success. They
seem, indeed, to have enlarged the bounds of
human activity; and if their compositions are
uneven they are so numerous and varied and
so remarkable when taken as a whole, that one
is ready to forgive certain weaknesses in them
for their usually happy inspiration, which de-
serves the recognition and admiration of all
who really care for what is beautiful and noble
in music. I call both of them “Independ-
ents * because, in contrast to the members of
the so-called “Young School of Russians,”
they did not trouble themselves overmuch with
preconceived theories, they avoided small sects
and miniature shrines, they always refused to
enrol themselves under a banner, and trusting
to their own powers, preferred simply to
light the way and to march straight ahead down
the road which was to lead...them to glory and
renown. Let us take the elder of the two first.
138
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Anton Rubinstein was not only a first-rate
composer, he was also indisputably one of the
greatest and most extraordinary virtuosos of
the century. I seem to see him still as he was
Some thirty years ago, when he came to play
for the last time in France. He had the body
of a Hercules, with a solid frame, huge, de-
veloped chest, and broad, powerful shoulders.
His head was square, without either beard or
moustache, the forehead was high and promi-
nent, the hair thick and black; the nose was
strong, the mouth sensual, and the eyes, which
were sunk in their orbits, had a look which,
though piercing, seemed a little vague and un-
decided. In short, his aspect was that of a
typical Slav with good-nature stamped on his
features. Such was the outward appearance
of this incomparable pianist, who astonished
the old and the new worlds and was particu-
larly appreciated in Paris, to which he was
always glad to return, as he felt that he was
thoroughly understood there and justly ad-
mired. As to his playing, it was simply pro-
digious in its virtuosity; it connoted gifts of
the most varied order and embraced the most
contradictory qualities, combining grace and
vigour, delicacy and power ; it was Supreme
in all things, it was adapted to all styles, and
it afforded his listeners moments of unforget-
table emotion. Rubinstein appropriately varied
I 39
A SHORT HISTORY OF
his methods with each composer, in order to
bring out the essential characteristics which
he understood so wonderfully ; but whether
he played Beethoven or Weber, Schubert or
Mendelssohn, Field or Hummel, Schumann or
Moscheles, Liszt or Chopin, there was always
the same perfection, the same pre-eminent
technique; for he always kept before him the
same ideals as to what really constituted in-
telligent and poetical interpretation.
This great genius, thanks to his proud en-
durance and superb vitality, continued for
nearly fifty years to charm and delight his
contemporaries, winning admiration in all
latitudes, as he visited one country after an-
other. It would, indeed, be difficult to point
to a single country in Europe through which
he did not pass, or to a single capital in this
Old world of ours (I am not counting the New)
where his magical fingers did not wake the
echoes of a piano, to the intense joy of all who
were able to hear him. He travelled from
Poland to Germany, from Germany to Holland,
from Holland to Belgium, from Belgium to
France, and thence to Switzerland, Italy,
Austria, Hungary, Denmark, Sweden and Eng-
land; and finally, he crossed the Atlantic and
made even the citizens of the United States
and of Canada marvel at him. He was always
triumphant, and was as sure of his public as
140
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of himself; at the same time he was always
kind and generous, and ready to give his
services for public charities and for the support
of musicians who had fallen on evil days.
It may be of interest at this point to refer
to the extraordinary campaign which Rubin-
stein undertook in 1885, when he organised a
series of seven historical concerts of pianoforte
music, playing the whole of the programme at
each concert himself. The number of pieces
in the seven programmes, when reckoned up,
amounts to one hundred and ninety-three, and
they represent the work of as many as thirty-
one different composers. Now, as these hun-
dred and ninety-three pieces include several
Sonatas, each consisting of four movements,
as well as a complete cycle by Schumann, which
alone contained more than twenty separate
parts, we may put the total of different items
which he played by heart without a single lapse
of memory or a shadow of hesitation, at some-
where about two hundred and forty. Within
a space of seven weeks Rubinstein gave these
seven concerts alternately at St. Petersburg
and Moscow, covering the distance of five
hundred odd miles between them twice a week;
and he repeated each concert for nothing, the
day after the recital,for the benefit of the pupils
of the Conservatoires and the various Institu-
tions in the two towns. After this he gave the
I4I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
seven concerts at Leipzig, and then, travelling
across Germany, he arrived in Paris, where he
repeated each concert as he had done in Russia,
playing on these occasions for the Association
des artistes musiciens. The concerts were sub-
sequently given (always in the same order) in
Brussels, Vienna, Berlin, Dresden, London,
Manchester, Liverpool, and Odessa. In a
word, Rubinstein during this Homeric nine-
months’ tour gaveonehundred and five concerts,
in the course of which he played by heart at
least fifteen times some two hundred and forty
pieces, or in other words about three thousand
six hundred separate items, without including
the encores which he was asked for by an in-
satiable public and never refused. It may be
added that of the 'ſ 20,000 which these con-
certs brought in, nearly £4000 was distributed
during the tour by Rubinstein in the cause
of charity.
This indefatigable traveller, this incompar-
able virtuoso who was so prodigal of his gifts,
found time to compose a dozen operas, five
Biblical dramas (or dramatic oratorios), a
ballet, several scenas for voice and orchestra,
concertos and sonatas for pianoforte, violin,
and violoncello, numerous trios, quartets, and
quintets, six symphonies, some overtures and
miscellaneous compositions on a large scale
for Orchestra, as well as almost two hundred
I42
RUSSIAN MUSIC
songs and ballads for one or two voices to
Russian, French, or German words, and many
other works which I shall not enumerate. For
five years he was Principal of the Conservatoire
at St. Petersburg, which he had founded and
organised in 1862 in the teeth of many obstacles,
and where he succeeded in collecting on the
staff such teachers as Henri Wieniawski,
Dreyschock, Davidov, Auer, Leschetizky, and
Zaremba. He also became Director of the
Philharmonic Concerts and Choral Society in
Vienna, from which he returned to take up his
duties again at the Conservatoire in St. Peters-
burg; and he founded the famous Russian
Musical Society, which has its corresponding
branches in all the large towns of the empire.
Of this Society he was both the chief conductor
and one of the five directors, the others being
Count Vielhorsky, Kologrivov, Kanshin, and ,
Stassov. Moreover, he was for over thirty years
virtually at the head of the musical movement
in Russia, which has since become so intensely
interesting. There are some who appear to be
specially favoured of the gods to be able to
retain their efficiency until they reach the
end of their labours.
Anton Rubinstein was born on November
I6 (28), 1829, at Vekvotinez, a village in the
* This date, which is often given inexactly, is taken
from the composer’s certificate of baptism.
I43
A SHORT HISTORY OF
government of Kherson in New Russia. His
father, who was a manufacturer, left the village
soon after the birth of his son to establish
himself near Moscow, where he set up a
factory for lead pencils. His mother, who was
a good musician and played the piano well,
noticing that the child always remained at her
side, alert and attentive, when she practised,
gave him his first lessons at an early age. But
the little creature was so highly developed and
made such rapid progress that she soon had to
find him another tutor, and handed him over to
Alexander Villoins, an excellent teacher and
author of a highly esteemed Method, who took
a liking to the boy and arranged for him to give
his first concert at Moscow on July 11, 1839,
before he was quite ten years old. The Mos-
cow paper, Galatea (now defunct), mentions
what Rubinstein played at this first concert of
his. There was an Allegro from a concerto by
Hummel, in which he was accompanied by the
orchestra, and also an Andante by Thalberg, and
four small pieces by Field, Liszt, and Henselt.
Two years afterwards, in 1840, Villoins being
obliged to make a journey to Paris, asked leave,
which he obtained, to take his pupil with him.
On their arrival there he brought him out at a
concert where the little prodigy performed a
variety of works by Bach, Beethoven, Hummel,
Chopin, and Liszt. Liszt, who was present,
I44
RUSSIAN MUSIC
showed keen surprise at what he had heard,
and did all he could to give the child encour-
agement. Villoins and his pupil did not return
to Russia until 1843, after having toured
through Holland, Germany, Sweden, Denmark,
and England (where Rubinstein astonished
Mendelssohn as much as he had astonished
Liszt in France), in all of which countries
the boy played with striking and consistent
success. He was even more successful in
his own country, where his younger brother
Nicholas also began to take up music.
Nicholas, who was born at Moscow in 1835
and died at Paris in 1881, was himself a very
remarkable musician, and like his brother was
an excellent conductor and a brilliant pianist.
With his headquarters established at Moscow,
as Anton’s were at St. Petersburg, he founded
in 1860 the Moscow branch of the Russian
Musical Society, which he continued to direct
until his death ; and six years afterwards he
founded the Moscow Conservatoire which, as
its Principal, he organised remarkably well.
Occupied as he was with his duties as teacher
and conductor, Nicholas only published a com-
paratively few compositions, which are not,
however, lacking in distinction. In the spring
of every year he used to give a series of concerts
at St. Petersburg. When a number of concerts
of foreign music were organised in the Tro-
I45 K
A SHORT HISTORY OF
}
cadero during the Paris Exhibition of 1878,
Nicholas Rubinstein was chosen to come and
conduct three concerts of Russian music.
The programmes were so skilfully put together
and the works sounded so well under his ad-
mirable direction that public curiosity was not
satisfied until a fourth concert had been ar-
ranged. Nicholas’s success as a conductor was
not belied when it was his turn to appear in
the capacity of pianist, and he was greeted
with tumults of applause after he had given a
masterly rendering of Tchaikovsky’s splendid
pianoforte concerto in B flat minor and a
Valse-Caprice by his brother Anton.
When Anton returned to Moscow after his
tour with Villoins, Mme. Rubinstein made up
her mind to go to Germany with her two sons,
who, in spite of their youthful years, evinced
a desire to study composition. At Berlin she
obtained an introduction to Meyerbeer, and on
his advice sent them to the celebrated teacher
Dehn, whose pupils they became for two years.
We will pass over some of the ensuing years
to find Rubinstein once more in Russia, to
which he returned in 1848. He settled down
at St. Petersburg, now that his father was
dead, and there he gave pianoforte lessons.
He had by that time written a considerable
amount, and he gave several concerts to make
these compositions known. Eventually in
I46
RUSSIAN MUSIC
1852 his first opera, Dmitri Donskoi, was pro-
duced, and was not only well received but also
won him the valuable protection of the Grand
Duchess Helena. This good and intelligent
princess foresaw what a future the young musi-
cian had before him, and invited him to pass
his Summers at her palace at Kamenoiostrov,
where he could work undisturbed. Rubin-
stein needed no pressing, and it was while
he was there that he wrote, at the instigation
of his patroness, three one-act operas: Revenge,
The Seven Siberian Hunters, and Tom the Fool,
each of which was intended to be a picture of
the manners and customs in a different part
of Russia. Of these three works only the last
was produced at the time of its composition
(May 1853), and it met with but a moderate
success. The Seven Siberian Hunters was played
at the Grand Ducal Theatre at Weimar in
1854. The German translation of the libretto
was undertaken by that admirable musician,
Peter Cornelius, the composer of the two suc-
cessful operas Der Cid and Der Barbier von
Bagdad, and the score was published not long
ago in Germany. The other operas mentioned
above, including Dmitri Donskoi, no longer
exist, having been destroyed in the fire at the
Circus Theatre.
Meanwhile Rubinstein’s gifts developed to
such a remarkable extent that some of his
I47
A SHORT HISTORY OF
fellow-countrymen planned to procure him the
means for undertaking a long tour with a view
to his perfecting himself still further and mak-
ing a reputation abroad. The Grand Duchess
Helena and the Counts Vielhorsky gave him
the requisite help, and at the beginning of 1857
Rubinstein left Russia. First of all he went to
Paris, where he made a striking impression
from the moment of his very first concert.
He gave three altogether, which were a great
success, and enabled him to bring forward
several of his more important compositions.
These included the string quartet in E minor
with its delightful, muted slow movement;
the masterly and vigorous sonata for piano-
forte and violin (op. 19); the concerto
in G major, which is an original work, full of
lovely tunes and fresh harmonies; several
minor compositions, amongst which were a
Courante, a Nocturne, a Barcanolle, and a
Valse; and finally, the symphony in B flat,
which made less impression than the com-
positions for pianoforte. The whole thing was
a great success for Rubinstein as a composer
and as a pianist. I may add that the Revue et
Gazette Musicale, after characterising the con-
certo in the above terms, went on to say:
“The orchestration is brilliant and showy,
but for all its richness it never stifles the
themes, and when it has stated an argument,
I48
RUSSIAN MUSIC
it takes up the answer with ingenious imita-
tions that give a new and unexpected char-
acter to it. We do not know whether this
is classical music; we only know that it is
inspired, and that it is also so pleasant and
attractive to listen to that it roused the
audience last night to a tumult of applause
and made them insist on numerous encores.”
From this moment onwards Rubinstein’s
career was a continual progress from one tri-
umph to another. He marched across Europe
like a victorious general, exciting the liveliest
curiosity and the wildest enthusiasm wherever
he went. The year after, he returned to Paris,
where he found the public very well disposed
towards him ; then, when he had gone back
once more to Russia, he soon became absorbed
in the work of founding and directing the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, and of organ-
ising the Russian Musical Society. He was
also very much occupied with writing numer-
ous and important compositions and with look-
ing after the operas which were being produced
in Germany as well as in Russia.
The position which he held henceforth at St.
Petersburg was of the highest importance, and,
whatever others may say, Rubinstein from this
time forward found himself vitually at the head
of the musical movement in Russia, and was
considered by everyone, except by a few who
I49
A SHORT HISTORY OF
were jealous of him, to be both a master and a
model. He had won his reputation by main
force, his skill as a virtuoso was undisputed,
his influence on musicians and the public was
-immense, and if one has to admit that as a
composer he was sometimes wild and that his
writings are uneven and open to criticism, it
is none the less true that he has produced some
remarkable and often magnificent work in a
variety of branches, and that his capacity for
production was prodigious. Fertility, as every-
one is aware, is a sign of power, and is the
special mark of healthy, vigorous temperaments.
Rubinstein, however, had enemies, or at any
rate determined adversaries in Russia itself,
who, so far from acknowledging his superiority,
seemed to kick against the pricks and always
opposed him with an energy worthy of a better
cause. These were the members of the Young
Russian School whom I have already men-
tioned as being irreconcilable, vain and proud,
as wishing completely to revolutionise music,
admitting nothingto be good which did notcome
from their side, and refusing to recognise any
musician who had the audacity to refuse to bow
the knee to them and submit to their domi-
nation. This Young School was not afraid
of making itself ridiculous by pushing its love
of paradox to the extreme of denying Rubin-
stein his musical nationality. Let it not be
I5o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
{
thought that I am joking or exaggerating.
Here are César Cui's actual words, which he
has not hesitated to print : “It would be a
grave mistake to look on Rubinstein as a Rus-
sian composer; he is simply a Russian who
composes [is it not a delightful distinction ?];
his music has affinity rather with German
music, and even when he wishes to treat
Russian themes the spirit and feeling of Russia
fail him.” It was when he was discussing Rubin-
stein’s “Russian * symphony (his op. Io?) in
the pamphlet La Musique en Russie that César
Cui, the Christopher Columbus of a new world
of music, hit on this admirable and laughable
discovery.
So that, just because Rubinstein would not
meekly consent to follow the advice of these
gentlemen, because he refused to break entirely
with the hitherto accepted doctrines and con-
sidered that one could still write good music
by sticking to the old-established theories, he
is to be put outside the pale and treated as a
stranger and intruder in his own country !
And what is to happen then Are we to sup-
press the name of Rubinstein and blot it out
from the history of Russian music simply to
please his detractors Surely this is pushing
matters a little far, a little beyond the bounds
of common sense.
Moreover, the opinions about Rubinstein,
I5 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
expressed at various times in various countries,
are often so strange and so at variance, that he
was amused himself, and used to criticise his
critics in his turn. In one of his letters to a
friend he says with some humour : “The
Jews consider me a Christian, the Christians a
Jew ; the Classics call me a Wagnerian, the
Wagnerians a Classic; the Russians say I am
a German, the Germans say I am a Russian.”
And all because he was simply an Independent,
and did not profess adherence to any school
César Cui generously devotes seventy-two
pages of his pamphlet to an analysis of the
compositions of Dargomijsky, Serov, and his
friends, the members of the Young Russian
School, and gives himself barely eight in which
to formulate hastily all he can find to say about
those two admirable musicians—Rubinstein
and Tchaikovsky. He was obliged to mention
them, their reputation forbidding him to pass
over them in silence; but I should like to
draw attention to the easy offhand way with
which he deals with them when he does men-
tion them. He begins by reproaching them
with that very fertility which contributed to
their greatness, as though fertility were a
crime. “From earliest childhood,” he says,
“Rubinstein began to compose music of all
sorts with astonishing facility. In this respect
he is the real child of the century—the century
I52
RUSSIAN MUSIC
of railways, telegraphs, and telephones. He
has written operas, oratorios, symphonies,
quartets, songs, chamber-music, &c. &c. This
versatility of his alone may suggest doubts as
to the intrinsic value of the compositions.
Vaulting ambition may o'erleap itself.”
That is sufficiently plain speaking, I think;
sufficiently summary judgment. But I should
blame myself if I did not quote such unfair
criticism in detail. It will be noticed that
each time the writer seems to grant some
quality to the musician under discussion, he
immediately adds a “but,” which negatives the
effect of the concession first wrung from him.
The passage is really quite interesting —
“Rubinstein has an abundant fount of
melody to draw upon ; but he is too often con-
tent with the first musical idea which comes
to him, whether it be good or bad, rich or poor.
At the beginning of his career his ideas were
echoes of those of Mendelssohn, and they did
not acquire a more marked individuality of their
own until later.
“Rubinstein makes experiments in harmony
which are natural and unforced; but he does
not appear to make any particular study of the
new paths open to him in this direction. More-
over, although he is very skilful in his handling
of musical form, and more especially of sym-
phonic form, he proves indifferent to operatic
I53
A SHORT HISTORY OF
innovations; he does his best to treat any
given situation on the stage, but he does not
care to employ any other means than those of
his predecessors. So far as dramatic music is
concerned he has moved neither backwards nor
forwards, and seems rather to have taken as
his motto “the happy mean.”
“Rubinstein’s orchestration is perfectly bal-
anced and sounds well; but it contains few
traces of the experiments in new and piquant
efforts and ingenious combinations of in-
struments which are so prominent in the works
of contemporary composers. Rubinstein has
shown on several occasions that he is no
stranger to what is being done in this way,
but he does not appear to take any interest
1n 11t.
“If we had to characterise Rubinstein’s
music in general terms, we should say that it
runs from the fountainhead without check or
hindrance, that it is not wanting in warmth
(though this warmth is sometimes artificial and
melodramatic), that it has breadth, but that
it is also too drawn out, and that on the whole
it shows too many signs of the hurried, un-
critical work of the improvisor. We should
add that there is a frequent absence of poetry
and depth in it, but there are plenty of common-
places, and that therein lies its principal weak-
ness. The beauties, when they do occur in
I54
RUSSIAN MUSIC
his works, are almost hidden by the obvious—
that hundred-headed hydra which the musician
in the audience finally uses up his energy in
trying to resist.”
One can see how very unjust this is, and how
under the handful of flowers, scattered in those
honeyed phrases, there lurks a nice little cluster
of thorns. But it cannot make us alter our
opinion or force us to ignore Rubinstein’s real
worth as a composer. Whatever one may say
about Rubinstein not being altogether happy
in the theatre, the fact remains that some of
his operas were strikingly and justifiably suc-
cessful. And what composer is there who has
met with nothing but triumphs
Amongst his most successful operas should
be mentioned Die Kinder der Haide (to a
German text), which was very well received
all over Germany; The Demon, which had a
very brilliant career, and was given several
hundreds of times at St. Petersburg and Mos-
cow; Die Makkabáer, which, like Die Kinder
der Haide, was written to a German text and
made a sensation in Germany; and Nero,
which was picturesque and powerful in style
and grandiose in conception. It is quite true
that Rubinstein retains the habitual operatic
framework, and that is precisely what annoys
César Cui, who is a violent and exacting
reformer : he writes choruses, airs, and con-
I55
A SHORT HISTORY OF
certed movements, and he does not lose him-
self in the endless meanderings of “melodic
recitative,” which is calculated to send some
people to sleep. But if his works are alive and
full of feeling, if they carry the listener with
them and rouse in his breast the sensations
and emotions he asks for, have they not at-
tained the end at which every work of art
should aim, and ought they not therefore to
be well received I do not mean, of course, to
imply by this that Rubinstein has written
nothing but masterpieces for the stage. Some
of his works are quite justly accused of being
tiresomely long-winded, of having much too
heavy a framework, and of being too thickly
and closely orchestrated. It is nevertheless
the fact that, when he was inspired by his
subject, as he was in The Demon, Nero, and Die
Makkabáer, his operas are worthy of the
highest praise. It may be quite true, as César
Cui maintains, that the tendency of Rubin-
stein’s writing for the stage frequently re-
sembles that of the German school (though
not of Wagner, whom he always opposed);
but for all that, he is even in this domain a
remarkable and exceptional composer.
I append a list of his dramatic works —
I. Dmitri Donskoi, produced at St. Petersburg, 1852.
2. Tom the Fool, in one act, produced at St. Petersburg,
May 1853. 3. Atevenge, in one act (never performed).
I56
RUSSIAN MUSIC
4. The Seven Siberian Hunters, in four acts, produced at
Weimar, 1854. 5. Die Kinder der Haide, in four acts, to
a German text by Mosenthal, taken from a charming short
story by Carl Beck called Janko, produced at the
Körntnerthor Theatre, Vienna, February 1861, with
Mme. Czillag and the tenor Ander (who went mad in
1864) in the two principal parts. 6. Feramors, in five
acts, to a German text by Julius Rodenberg, taken from
Moore's well-known poem Zalla Rookh, produced at
the Hof Theater, Dresden, February 24, 1863, with
Schnorr von Karolsfeld and Mme. Janner-Krall in the
cast. 7. The Demon, in three acts, to a Russian text
by Vistakov, taken from a celebrated poem by Lermon-
tov ; produced at the Maryinsky Theatre, St. Petersburg,
January 25, 1875, with Komessarievich and Melnikov,
and Mmes. Raab, Kroutikova, and Shröder in the cast,
and subsequently given abroad in German, Czech, and
Italian. 8. Die Makkabáer, in three acts, to a Russian
text by Mosenthal; produced under the composer's
direction at the Hof Oper, Berlin, April 17, 1875, with
Betz and Ernst, and Mlles. Brandt and Grossi in the
cast, and then given in Russian at the Maryinsky
Theatre, St. Petersburg, February 3, 1877. 9. Mero, in
four acts and seven scenes, to a French text by Jules
Barbier; given in German at Hambourg, November 1,
1879, with Winkelmann, Krückl, and Landau, and
Mmes. Sucher, Proshaska, and Borrée, and then in
Italian at St. Petersburg, February Io, 1884, with Sylva,
Cotogni, and Valero, and Mmes. Amelia Stahl, Maria
Durand, and Repetto in the cast, and subsequently in
French at Antwerp in 1885, and at Rouen, February 14,
1894. Io. The Merchant Kalashnikov, in three acts, to
a Russian text by Koulikov, taken from a well-known
poem by Lermontov; produced at the Maryinsky
Theatre, St. Petersburg, March 5, 1880, and forbidden
by the censor after its second performance, but taken
up again January Io, 1889. II. Sulamith, a Biblical
I57
A SHORT HISTORY OF
opera, produced at Hambourg, 1883. 12. Unter
Räubern, opéra-comique in one act, produced at Ham-
bourg, 1883. 13. Der Papagei, opéra-comique in one
act, produced at Hambourg, 1884. I4. Moses, a
Biblical opera in eight scenes, to a German text by
Mosenthal, produced at Riga, March 1894. I5. Chris-
tus, a Biblical opera in a prologue and seven parts, to
a German text by Bulthaupt, produced at Bremen, May
25, 1895. To these must be added a ballet in three
acts, Die Rebe (“The Vine”), given at Berlin; two
dramatic oratorios: Das Verlorene Paradies (“Paradise
Most "), given at the Königsberg festival, May 1863;
and Der Thurm zu Babel (“The Tower of Babel”),
given under the composer's direction, May 20, 1872, at
the Rhenish festival at Düsseldorf; and finally three
dramatic scenas for voice and orchestra—Hagar in the
/Jesert, Hecuba, and Songs and Requiem for Mignon,
a huge composition to Goethe's words from Wilhelm
Meister, which was sung at Vienna in April 1872, by
Krükl, and Mmes. Messnick and Passy-Cornet.
One of Rubinstein’s bitterest disappoint-
ments was that although he adored France he
was never able to have one of his operas per-
formed at Paris. His Nero was given at
Antwerp and at Rome in French, but he was
far from resting content with that. He would
have liked, above all, to present to the public
of Paris Die Makkabáer, or Les Macchabées (to
give it its French title), for he considered this
one of his best works. A short while before
his sudden death, he addressed the following
letter to the French editor of his score, on
the occasion of Mlle. Delna’s brilliant success
I58
RUSSIAN MUSIC
when she made her first appearance at the
Opéra-Comique —
“MY DEAR FRIEND,--I read in the papers
that the Opéra-Comique is at this moment
the possessor of one of the most beautiful con-
tralto voices that have ever been heard : I
mean Mlle. Delna's. Could you ask this young
singer if she would be so kind as to look at the
part of Leah in Les Macchabées P. It might
perhaps interest her, and in that case she could
persuade her manager to produce the opera to
enable her to create the part at Paris. I can
guarantee its success if it is properly performed.
“I should so like to see a work of mine, and
above all Les Macchabées, produced at Paris.
Is it really impossible for me to see it put
before your public I really cannot under-
stand the boycotting I have to submit to as a
composer, seeing that all my aspirations tend
towards this town of Paris, more especially, I
repeat, when it is a question of Les Macchabées.
. . . Well, well ! I must have patience, I
suppose. Perhaps it will all be different after
I am dead.—Yours ever,
“ANToN RUBINSTEIN.”
Will it all really be different, now that Rubin-
stein is no longer here Shall we see, I wonder,
Nero or Les Macchabées given one day in Paris :
Rubinstein’s work for the stage, however,
I59
A SHORT HISTORY OF
may in one sense be said only to constitute the
Smallest part of his enormous output. Let us
take the orchestral music first. There are six
symphonies, the “Ocean * and the “Dra-
matic ’’ symphony being two of them ; a
Concert Overture; the overture to Antony and
Cleopatra ; the so-called “Eroica ’’ fantasia
and two characteristic pieces, each of them
admirable in its way : Don Quixote and Ivan
the Terrible. It was a propos of the fifth sym-
phony (known as the “Russian * symphony)
and of some other works in which Rubinstein
has utilised Russian tunes, that César Cui wrote
in an offhand way : “Of all his music, this is
essentially the least successful.” He adds :
“Although he is a Russian by birth, and has
done much for the development of music in
Russia, Rubinstein is a German composer, and
is the direct successor of Mendelssohn. He
treats Russian tunes in a German fashion,
which makes a very inartistic combination.
He has grasped the exterior aspect of the
Russian tunes: that is to say, certain cadences
that they have and also their melodic contours;
but he has not understood their spirit. He
remains untouched by the poetry, the
deep and tranquil beauty of our national
songs.” Well, I agree : Rubinstein is no
doubt musically less completely Russian than
some of his colleagues, who in other respects
I60
RUSSIAN MUSIC
rank far below him. I agree that his mind has
certain affinities with the German mind; but
he is far from letting himself be absorbed by
it. His own personality remains alert and
strong, and whatever one may say of it, this
personality of his is such that, if you look at his
music from the point of view of character and
style, you could never, in my opinion, confuse
it with German music.
If this reflection applies to Rubinstein’s
Symphonic music, it also applies, and perhaps
to a still greater degree, to his chamber and
pianoforte music. Amongst the chamber
music, the works deserving special mention
are the quartet for pianoforte and wind in-
struments, op. 55; the string quartets, op. I7,
66, and 90 ; the pianoforte trios, op. I5, 52, and
85; the sonatas for pianoforte and violin, op.
13 and 19 (the latter being a masterpiece), for
pianoforte and violoncello, op. 18 and 39 (the
former of which in D is well known both in
Russia and Germany), and for pianoforte and
viola, op. 49. Then there is a class to itself
of instrumental concertos with orchestra, of
which there are five for pianoforte (the fourth
in D being a superb composition), two for
violin, and two for violoncello, the latter dedi-
cated respectively to Alfred Piatti and Charles
Davidov. All this instrumental music is
marked by freedom of character, by vigorous
I61 L
A SHORT HISTORY OF
rhythms, and generally by exuberant energy.
It is essentially original, and even if one can
point to certain faults and can sometimes
reproach the composer for being too long-
winded (this was Rubinstein’s besetting sin),
one cannot deny the brilliancy of the writing
and its nobility.
As for the music for pianoforte solo, which
comprises as many as two hundred and thirty-
eight pieces, it undoubtedly places Rubinstein in
the front rank of Russian composers. Whereas
the orchestral music, for all its fine concep-
tions and flashes of genius, was uneven and
sometimes over-diffuse, the music for piano-
forte is noticeable for its abundance of melody,
its variety of form, its grace and warmth, and
finally for its assertion of the composer’s vigor-
ous personality. The majority of the sonatas
are full of beauties, and there are many de-
lightful pieces in such collections as the Soirées
de St. Pétersbourg, the Miscellanies, and the
Album de Péterhof. His waltzes, barcarolles,
tarantelles, and songs without words are often
extremely charming, and they serve to illus-
trate the composer’s adaptable and fertile im-
agination ; the preludes and fugues, though
possibly a little too free in form, are hardly less
interesting ; and the Bal coſtumé for pianoforte
duet is so famous that I do not need to praise
it here.
I62
RUSSIAN MUSIC
I have to return for a moment to César Cui:
this time to point out the curious fact that in
his pamphlet, which is called Music in Russia,
and ought at least to justify its title, not a single
word is said about Rubinstein’s pianoforte
music, though that of some more or less obscure
composers is complacently alluded to. Anyone
unacquainted with the subject might read the
pamphlet without being in the least aware that
Rubinstein composed for the pianoforte.
I cannot pass on without referring to the
vocal music of which Rubinstein wrote such
quantities. There are the delightful Mélodies
Persanes, which have a very original character ;
the attractive collection of duets, most of
which the composer wrote expressly for Meyer-
beer’s daughters; and the long series of songs
for one or two voices, which are very popular
in Germany, and are beginning to be known in
France. Amongst these last some tiny master-
pieces are to be found.
To sum up : Rubinstein may justly be ac-
cused of having produced with too much
feverish haste, and of not having left himself
time to give his works as much pruning and
polishing as he should have done; every now
and again, too, he lapses into writing which
is clumsy and is not characterized by purity of
style; and he was sometimes rather too ready
to be content with the first idea that came
I63
A SHORT HISTORY OF
into his head. But these defects were more
than counterbalanced by some splendid quali-
ties. He had ample inspiration and a wide,
expansive temperament which made it possible
for him to take up all branches of composition,
if not exactly with equal success, at least with
an amount of capacity which always proved him
to be an original composer endowed with un-
common vigour. His music is undoubtedly
alive, picturesque, and full of warmth and
movement, and in moments of inspiration it
carries the listener along in its train and rouses
him to a high pitch of enthusiasm. It is
equally the case that for forty years and more
Rubinstein stood in the breach whether as
virtuoso, teacher, conductor, or composer; that
he was an example to others in stimulating the
musical movement in his country in the widest
directions; and that he rendered striking ser-
vices to Russian music, for it was very largely
due to his courage and energetic action that
it became known abroad and was able to take
a place commensurate with its ambitions. It
is for all these reasons and more especially, it
should be remembered, for the last, that
Rubinstein holds a peculiar and very import-
ant position in the history of Russian music.
This, however, is the man whose worth
as a composer some of his compatriots are
willing to despise, treating him as they do
I64
RUSSIAN MUSIC
with an affectation of contempt and a readiness
to deny that he is one of them. Those who
are incapable of understanding and admiring so
remarkable a musician, of whom his country has
a right to be proud, are indeed to be pitied.
Rubinstein himself showed more justice and
generosity towards these violent critics than
he ever obtained from them. In a publication
of his, Die kunst und ihre Meister, which was
issued two years before his death and appeared
in a French translation as La Musique et Jes
représentants (Paris, Heugel, 1892), he writes
as follows about the Young School –
“In the instrumental music of our Young
Russian School we see the result of the influ-
ence of Berlioz and Liszt; the same influence,
together with that of Schumann and Chopin,
is felt in their music for the pianoforte. Be-
yond and above this we note a deliberate
tendency towards nationalism. The produc-
tions of the Russian School reveal a complete
knowledge of technique and a really masterly
management of effect; at the same time they
are entirely wanting in formal design. Glinka,
who composed several orchestral pieces on
national dance tunes and songs, still serves as
a model for young Russian musicians, who con-
tinue to write for the most part on the basis of
these popular and national themes. By that
they prove the poverty of their own invention,
I65
A SHORT HISTORY OF
which they strive to conceal under the cloak
of ‘nationalism ' or under the label of ‘the
new school.’ I do not know if anything is to
come of all this in the future. I am not with-
out hope, partly because the originality of
Russian music, as shown in its melodies and
rhythms, should bring about a kind of fertili-
sation of music in general (a fertilisation which
will also be effected, I believe, by oriental
music), and partly because the great talent of
some of the representatives of this Russian
School is indisputable.”
Now that Rubinstein is no longer alive—he
died at his villa in Peterhof on November 20,
1894—and now that his reputation can no
longer throw into the shade those who were
indignant at it, perhaps hatred and envy will
die down ; perhaps his enemies will cease to
injure him in order at last to render him the
justice which is his due. However, even if
they do not lay down their arms we need not
fear that they will hurt his reputation, for,
after all, they represent no one but themselves :
that is to say, a musical coterie pure and
simple. Rubinstein’s country, which judges
men by their works, and troubles little about
petty jealousies and private prejudice, has been
fair to him on the whole, and for a long time
past has relegated much partial criticism to its
proper place. It has honoured the great musi-
I66
RUSSIAN MUSIC
cian in a fitting way, and has already raised a
statue to his memory in the enclosure of the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, which owes
its existence to him. The following account
will show what touching homage was paid to
Rubinstein on the occasion of its unveiling.
The ceremony took place on November 29,
1902, when there was a grand concert with a
programme naturally confined to his composi-
tions. This was followed two days later by a
second concert, at which The Tower of Babel
was given with the help of the pupils of the
two Conservatoires of St. Petersburg and Mos-
cow. To illustrate the imposing and, at the
same time, affecting character of this musical
ceremony, I cannot do better than quote some
passages from an interesting letter which was
written to me that very same evening by one
of my friends at St. Petersburg —
“Knowing, as I do, your admiration for
Rubinstein, I want to tell you about the
beautiful ceremony which has just taken place
in his honour at St. Petersburg. The day
before yesterday they inaugurated a marble
statue of him at the Conservatoire, the work of
the clever sculptor Bernstamm, who is well
known in Paris, and to-day a large crowd has
greeted a whole concert of his compositions
with frenzied applause. The programme was
made up of the orchestral humoreske Don
167
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Quixote, the overture to Antony and Cleopatra,
and the Biblical opera The Tower of Babel,
which were admirably given, under the direc-
tion of Safonov, the eminent director of the
Moscow Conservatoire, by the combined or-
chestras and choruses of our two great Con-
servatoires, the total number of executants
being five hundred and fifty. The most touch-
ing aspect of this huge manifestation was the
way in which the pupils of two establish-
ments fraternised together in their desire to
commemorate the noble founder of our musical
education. Two hundred and sixty-three
pupils, of both sexes, from the Conservatoire
of Moscow arrived at St. Petersburg at 6 o'clock
yesterday morning, and went straight from the
station to the Church of St. Alexander Nevsky
to pay homage to Rubinstein’s tomb. From
there they proceeded to the Conservatoire,
where they were entertained. This morning
they joined their comrades from St. Petersburg
for the final rehearsal of The Tower of Babel,
which went with a freshness and vigour which
were quite juvenile. Their enthusiasm at the
end of the concert, when, Safonov and the
soloists were called to take their applause, was
a pleasure to see. The three Jewish choruses
(three marvels, as you well know) were sung
with Superb assurance, and the great chorus
at the end was also given in a masterly fashion.
I68
RUSSIAN MUSIC
“There was another touching episode, this
time in connection with the inauguration of the
statue in the quadrangle of the Conservatoire.
The ceremony began with prayers for the dead,
the choir chanting them in the galleries above.
While the hymn Everlasting Remembrance was
being sung, the Grand Duke Constantine,
and most of the congregation after him, fell
on their knees. When they rose from kneeling
the sheet covering the statue had already fallen
to the ground, and at the foot of the marble
the Grand Duke, who is Vice-President of
the Musical Society, laid the first of the thirty
wreaths which had been brought by as many
deputations. Two delightful novelties by
Anatol Liadov were heard at this inaugural
ceremony : the one was a Polonaise for or-
chestra with a very delicate trio, the other a
‘Hymn to Rubinstein for unaccompanied
voices, which was repeated this evening by
four hundred pupils, when it was encored.
“I will end up by telling you that the season
is a good one for Rubinstein. The private
Opera of the Conservatoire has just mounted
Nero, which has not been heard for eighteen
years. It has already filled the house six
times, and The Demon is being played in three
theatres at once.”
There is plenty of literature about Rubin-
Stein for those who want to consult it. First
I69
A SHORT HISTORY OF
of all there are the biographies in Russian by
Baskin (Moscow, Jurgenson, 1886), N. Lissov-
sky (St. Petersburg, 1889), and Don Menquez
(Odessa, 1889); then there are the composer’s
own Memoirs, which appeared in Russian in
1889, in English in 1890, and in German in
1893. The numbers of the journal de Saint-
Pétersbourg for April 5 and July 11, 1889, and
for January 2, 1892, should also be referred to.
Finally, the following works may be mentioned :
Anton Rubinstein, by A. van Halten (Utrecht,
1886); Anton Rubinstein, biographischer Abriss,
by B. Vogel (Leipzig, 1888); Anton Rubinstein,
A Biographical Sketch, by A. MacArthur
(Edinburgh, 1889); Anton Rubinstein, ein
Kunstlerleben, by E. Zabel (Leipzig, 1892);
Antoine Rubinstein, by Albert Soubies (Paris,
1894); and there is a curious and interesting
pamphlet by Rubinstein himself, Music and
Musicians : Discussions on Musical Matters, of
which there is a French translation by Michel
Delines (Paris, Heugel, 1892).
The determined opponents of Rubinstein
embraced in a common dislike another great
musician, Tchaikovsky, who was his pupil, and
who, like him, ventured to follow his own
path freely instead of Swearing allegiance to
any school or coterie. This independent
attitude drew down on him the same dis-
dainful sarcasms as were launched at Rubin-
17o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
stein ; but he, too, paid little attention to
them, preferring to think only of the art he
loved, the public he respected, and the glory
he hoped to win. t
Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky was born on April
25 (May 7), 1840, at Votinsk in the government
of Viatka. He came of a good stock, his
father being a mining engineer, while his
mother belonged to an old French family of
the name of Assier, who came to Russia as
refugees and settled there after the revocation
of the Edict of Nantes. Tchaikovsky was not
intended for a musical career, as Rubinstein
was, though he is said to have begun to show
a very decided taste for music at the early
age of four. When quite a child he was given
a music-mistress to teach him the pianoforte,
but she was more or less incompetent, being
only a serf who had received her freedom.
His musical studies at that time were, indeed,
quite superficial. His father meant him to
take up the law, and sent him, when he was
barely ten years old, to the school of juris-
prudence at St. Petersburg. One can easily
realise that in such an atmosphere he had no
chance of devoting himself at all seriously to
the art which he loved and was one day to
adorn. He stayed at the school nine years,
and it was not till he had nearly come to the
end of his time there that his father allowed
I71
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the boy, no doubt as a reward, to take piano-
forte lessons with an excellent teacher named
Rudolphe Kündinger. It was only then that
he began to study music thoroughly, and it
was also at this time that his taste for it
asserted itself really strongly.
However, he had no sooner quitted the
School of Jurisprudence than he obtained a
clerkship in the Ministry of Justice, where he
had to remain as long as three years. But his
administrative duties did not take up his time
So much as to prevent him from continuing
his enthusiastic pursuit of the musical educa-
tion he had already begun. He soon became a
clever pianist, but he was too ambitious to be
content with that ; he was well aware that
one cannot be a musician, in the real sense of
the word, unless one is familiar with the
theory of music. Just at this moment Nicolas
Zaremba, a famous teacher, who also had some
reputation as a composer, opened a course on
harmony and composition at St. Petersburg.
Tchaikovsky joined his class, worked hard in
it, and distinguished himself by making rapid
progress. This was at the beginning of 1861.
The following year he had advanced so far
with his studies that he was able to gain
admission to the Conservatoire which Rubin-
stein had founded at St. Petersburg, and,
without giving up his classes under Zaremba,
172
RUSSIAN MUSIC
became the pupil of Rubinstein himself,
working with him mainly at orchestration.
Nicholas Zaremba, who was born in 1823 in
the government of Vitebsk and died at St.
Petersburg in 1879, wrote a variety of works,
of which the most important is an oratorio,
Saint john the Baptist. When Rubinstein
first retired from the post of Principal of the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, Zaremba, who
was one of the professors there, was chosen
to succeed him and was in turn succeeded at
his death by d'Asanchievsky. Like all who
approved of Rubinstein and came into contact
with him, he was scoffed at and looked down
upon by the enemies of the great musician.
About 1865 Tchaikovsky, whose education
at the Conservatoire was by that time finished,
began to devote himself to composition. The
first work which he produced in public was a
setting in cantata-form of the text of Schiller’s
famous Ode to joy, which Beethoven utilised
in the choral symphony. This cantata, which
has, I believe, never been published, was given
in the palace of the Grand Duchess Helene,
the patroness of Anton Rubinstein and of the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg. The im-
pression it made was such that Nicholas
Rubinstein, who in his turn had just founded
the Conservatoire at Moscow, thought fit to
summon Tchaikovsky, and offered to put him
I73
A SHORT HISTORY OF
at the head of one of his composition classes.
The young musician accepted on the spot,
and for eleven years he carried out the duties
attached to the post, which did not prevent
him from making several tours abroad, more
particularly in Germany and France, with a
view to improving his knowledge and familiar-
ising himself with the music that was going
on in the rest of Europe.
At the same time he gave himself up with
enthusiasm to composition, and began to give
indications of that extraordinary fertility of
his which was brought to bear on each branch
of composition in turn, and made César Cui
remark that “Tchaikovsky would have had a
brilliant career if he had only been a severer
critic of himself, and had thought out more
logically the direction he felt himself taking,
and the system on which he wanted to write.”
This reproach is not altogether unwarranted.
The most impartial critic may, indeed, accuse
Tchaikovsky of not having always been suffi-
ciently fastidious in his choice of ideas, and of
not having polished and refined them or given
sufficient thought to their setting when they
were once adopted. But before making a
criticism of this sort account would have to
be taken (as is by no means invariably done)
of the composer’s temperament, and of the
nature of his own particular gifts and qualities.
I74
RUSSIAN MUSIC
How many of all those who are marked out for
a musical career differ from each other in their
methods of composition | One, in the fever
of production and the ceaseless business of
creation, will write swiftly and, for fear lest
his inspiration should run dry at the source,
will not have patience to wait until his
thoughts have assumed a severe and chastened
aspect; another, less ready-witted and less
fertile in imagination, will see them from the
first dressed in more elaborate and elegant
attire, and will spend time in adorning them
and making them more decorative still.
Boileau’s maxim—
Take up your work a hundred times amain
To polish and repolish it again
does not apply to all musicians, whose tem-
peraments, as I have said, must vary and
must therefore involve different methods of
working. Nature shows us dark and fair, lean
and well-favoured, nervous and phlegmatic
alike. To wish to apply to one and all the
same standard and the same method of
criticism is simply stupid and unfair.
To return to Tchaikovsky : if his work was
not always on the same level and betrays cer-
tain weaknesses, it was because his hand was
less quick than his brain, and because his ideas
came so close on each other’s heels that he
I75
A SHORT HISTORY OF
could not always wait to link them and co-
ordinate them into a perfectly harmonious
whole. But when the inspiration and the
working out kept pace together and combined
to serve his needs, the results obtained were
admirable. One has only to look, for example,
at the splendid pianoforte concerto in B flat
minor, the Valse-Caprice (op. 4), the Valse-
Scherzo (op. 7), and the delicious Songs without
Words in F minor and F major (op. 5 and
op. 51), which Rubinstein included in the
programme of his famous historical concerts;
or, again, at the Serenade Mélancolique for
violin which Sarasate played all over Europe,
the sextet for strings, known as the “Floren-
tine’’ sextet, and the symphonic fantasia,
The Tempest, which is no doubt unequal, but
has power, breadth, and feeling. Mention
should also be made of the beautiful varia-
tions on an original theme (op. 19), which
was a particular favourite of Hans von Bülow,
of the Scherzo a la Russe (op. 1), which
Rubinstein often played, and of the series of
three pieces (op. 2) published under the title
of Souvenir de Hapsal. After looking at all
this can one dispute that Tchaikovsky was a
splendid musician, splendidly inspired
Some critics upbraid him for producing so
much. One might as well complain of a
beautiful tree for bearing too much fruit.
176
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Sometimes, it is true, a branch bending under
the weight breaks off and some of the fruit
falls to the ground; but how firm and full of
flavour is the fruit remaining on the tree,
ripened by the sun
Tchaikovsky’s productiveness is, in truth,
extraordinary. In a space of not more than
thirty years he composed eleven operas, music
for a fairy play, three ballets, six symphonies,
five orchestral suites (the scherzo and the con-
cluding variations of the third representing
the composer at his best), a serenade for
string orchestra, and four concert overtures,
three of which—Hamlet, Romeo and juliet, and
“ 1812 ”—might be classed with the sym-
phonic poems, The Tempest, Fatum (the score
of which was destroyed but has since been
published by Belaiev from the parts), Manfred,
and Francesca da Rimini. Then there are the
three pianoforte concertos (of which the first
in B flat minor is, of course, famous, and the
second in G, dedicated to Rubinstein, is quite
interesting), as well as numerous chamber
works, two Russian Church Services, nine
Church choruses, a Solemn March for orches-
tra, another march for military band, several
other miscellaneous compositions for orchestra,
some cantatas, about one hundred pianoforte
pieces, as many songs, some vocal duets, and
various other things which I have forgotten;
177 M
A SHORT HISTORY OF
for I am not compiling a catalogue, and I can-
not enumerate everything. But this is quite
enough to make the mind reel.
Everything is, naturally, not of the same
interest. One must pick and choose amongst
so many works of different sorts, especially
amongst those belonging to the earlier part of
his career, which only give a partial idea of
his gifts. Tchaikovsky, in fact, took some
time to throw off outside influences and to
assert those personal characteristics of his own
which afterwards came out so brilliantly. One
of his works—the pianoforte concerto in G,
for instance, which I have just mentioned—
would seem to be directly inspired by remi-
niscences of Schumann; another, or perhaps
I should say many others, will show the
influence of Liszt, who appears to have left a
vivid impression on his imagination. It was
only when Tchaikovsky was somewhere about
forty years old that he really became himself
and acquired a mastery of his own resources
and powers of self-expression. This seems to
me to apply above all to his relations with the
theatre.
The theatre is the ultimate aim of com-
posers in Russia, as it is of those in France
and Italy. The striking successes which
Tchaikovsky won in the realm of symphonic
music did not prevent him from trying his
178
RUSSIAN MUSIC
hand as an operatic composer. He had no
cause to regret his venture, for if he was not
always lucky, it cannot be said that he always
had reason to complain.
The following is a list of his works for
the stage —
I. Zhe Voyevode, produced at Moscow, 1869. 2.
Undine, 1869 (destroyed by the composer 1873).
3. Music to Ostrovsky's fairy play Sniegourochka (Zhe
Snow-Maiden), produced at Moscow, 1873. 4. The
Oprichnik, produced at Moscow, May 1874. 5. Vakoula
the Smith, in four acts, to a text by Polonsky based on
Gogol's fantastic story Christmas Eze, produced at the
Maryinsky Theatre, St. Petersburg, December 6, 1876.
6. The Maid of Orleans (Joan of Arc), in four acts and
six scenes, produced at St. Petersburg, February 1881.
7. Eugene Oniegin, in three acts and seven scenes,
founded on Poushkin's novel in verse, produced at
Moscow, 1881. 8. Mazeppa, in three acts, produced at
Moscow, 1884. 9. Oxana's Caprice, also known as
Cherevichek (The Zittle Shoes), a new version of Vakoula
the Smith, in four acts; produced at Moscow, January
27, 1887. Io. The AEmchantress, in four acts, produced
at the Maryinsky Theatre, St. Petersburg, October
1887. II. The Queen of Spades (Pique-Dame), in three
acts, to a text by the composer's brother, Modeste
Tohaikovsky, based on a tale by Poushkin; produced
at the Maryinsky Theatre, St. Petersburg, December
1890. I2. /o/anthe, in one act, produced after the Com-
poser's death at St. Petersburg, December 1893. The
opera Mandragora, which was taken up and relinquished
about 1870, survives only in a “Chorus of Insects.”
Then there are the three Ballets: The Swan Zake, in
three acts, produced at Moscow, 1876; The Sleeping
Beauty, in three acts and a prologue, produced at St.
I79
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Petersburg, January 1890; and AWuß-Cracker, in two
acts, produced in 1892. The popular Casse-Moisette
suite is based on material from this last ballet. I have
been given to understand that Tchaikovsky also wrote
recitatives for the Italian version of Auber's Domino
Noir when it was given at St. Petersburg.
Of these operas, Vakoula the Smith and
Mazeppa were, no doubt, somewhat un-
fortunate, although Vakoula had won a prize
in an open competition. But The Oprichnik
was favourably received ; The Queen of Spades,
the second act of which has some remarkable
things in it, has remained in the repertory
ever since it appeared ; and Eugene Oniegin
and The Maid of Orleans have both met with
striking success. The first act of The Maid
of Orleans is quite first rate, and Eugene
Oniegin was so popular both in Moscow and
St. Petersburg that ten years ago it had been
given over a hundred times in St. Petersburg
alone, and thus put the crown on the com-
oser’s career. The success, too, of the
ballet, The Sleeping Beauty, which contains
some charming music, has been complete.
We had an opportunity in France, a few
years ago, of judging of Tchaikovsky as an
operatic composer, thanks to the excellent
company of Russian singers who gave per-
formances of Eugene Oniegin and The Queen
of Spades. After hearing them we could
realise what very striking gifts he undoubtedly
I8o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
shows in this direction. But one reservation,
or, at any rate, one observation, must be
made about the character of the music in
these two very interesting works. We
Westerns, who expect, in Russian composers
beyond all others, to meet with originality,
picturesqueness, and a national atmosphere
differentiating them from our own musicians,
find less to interest us in Eugene Oniegin and
The Queen of Spades than when we listen to
an opera by Glinka or by Rimsky-Korsakov,
because the subjects do not permit of the
originality and picturesqueness for which we
are looking. Eugene Oniegin is, in fact, a
simple, intimate, domestic drama, while the
action of The Queen of Spades takes place in
France at the end of the eighteenth century.
In judging both these works, therefore, we
must think of Tchaikovsky not as a specifi-
cally Russian composer, but rather as an
operatic composer, pure and simple, without
reference to his nationality. That being
granted, we can do him justice and recognise
his real worth and importance. If his ideas
are not always di prima intenzione, as the
Italians say, his music is none the less dis-
tinguished, expressive (often indeed pathetic),
and always adequate to the situation. His
orchestration may not show the refinement
to which we are accustomed in the work of
I8I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
his compatriots, and indeed in his own music
apart from the theatre; but it is solid and
well put together, and it sounds admirable.
There is warmth, too, in the dialogue, and,
taking things all round, one feels that Tchai-
kovsky was familiar with the theatre and the
theatrical point of view.
I have already referred to the charming
ballet, The Sleeping Beauty. Apart from the
ballets proper, several of his operas contain
very graceful and very original dance music.
In The Snow-Maiden, for instance, there is the
clowns’ dance, and in Eugene Oniegin the lovely
polonaise and the waltz with chorus; there is a
Russian dance in The P'oyevode, and a Hopak
(the Cossack dance) in Mazeppa, and so on.
Tchaikovsky could hardly help writing suc-
cessful ballet music, for as a symphonic
writer he had the highest abilities. He could
be both impressive and brilliant, and he
showed marvellous skill in his handling of the
component parts of the Orchestra to obtain
effects of colour. He was skilful and subtle
in his use of harmony, and was able to clothe
his ideas richly ; sometimes, indeed, he did
it too richly and elaborately, so that there
was some risk of the material disappearing
from view under the embroidery. When he
was inspired, the results were of the happiest,
as I have remarked ; what he lacked was a
I82
RUSSIAN MUSIC
sense of balance and proportion, and there was
too little restraint in the development sec-
tions, which are often over long and elaborate.
But his Orchestration was lavish, brilliant,
and varied, and he got curious effects from
Some of his combinations, which were as novel
as they were unexpected. As a single illus-
tration one might take the interesting and
original finale of the second symphony; but
there are numerous orchestral works of his
which prove what peculiar skill he had in
this direction.
His chamber music is not free from faults :
it is uneven in value and is somewhat prolix;
at the same time it contains much that is
interesting. The two lovely slow movements
of the first two string quartets in D and F
are perhaps worthy of special mention. The
pianoforte trio, inscribed to the memory of
Nicholas Rubinstein, is brilliant and full of
picturesque colouring, though it is too long.
It seems to me that the “Florentine’’
Sextet, which I have referred to above, is the
best thing that he has written in this category.
In any case, it was not in chamber music that
Tchaikovsky showed his best qualities or re-
vealed his own character. His chamber works
were for the most part written in the early
part of his career, when he was still feeling
the influence of Liszt and his school; it was
183
A SHORT HISTORY OF
only later that he acquired complete posses-
sion of his own musical personality.
Where Tchaikovsky becomes really personal
and most indisputably himself is in the intimate
little pieces for pianoforte, several of which
are exquisite, and above all in the delicious
songs, which are steeped in poetical feeling
and in a mood of melancholy sometimes so
intense that it borders on the dramatic. I
have already mentioned some of the graceful,
delicately written pianoforte pieces; and as
to the songs, which are set sometimes to
Russian, sometimes to French words, they are,
for the most part, written with warmth, and
often strike a note of pathos that is as noble
as it is inspired. There are more than a
hundred of these songs, many of which have
become popular with French singers owing
to their touching simplicity and emotional
sincerity. I cannot mention all those which
are worth special attention, but I cannot re-
frain from mentioning at least one or two,
like Déception, which is profoundly gloomy, or
Oh / qui brilla d'amour, which is intensely
passionate ; or, again, the poignant Les
larmes, the curious L’Automne, and the original
Chanson de la bohémienne : then there are
N’accuse pas mom caeur, Toujours à toi, Pourquoi
tant de plaintes, j'étais une petite herbe des
champs, and O douce souffrance.
I84
k RUSSIAN MUSIC
* Tchaikovsky may not be musically so funda-
mentally “Russian * as certain of his col-
leagues and fellow-countrymen would seem to
wish him to be ; he is nevertheless a musician
of wide compass and high distinction. His
worth can be rightly appreciated by anyone
whose mind is not befogged by the petty
prejudices of sects and parties, or biassed by
the deplorable presence of jealousy.
The public in Russia regarded with an
equal respect and affection the two great
musicians, Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky, who
proudly and nobly represented the youthful
art of music, which had so suddenly blossomed
out in the great empire of the East. Their
almost simultaneous death—Tchaikovsky dying
suddenly of cholera at St. Petersburg on
November 13 (25), 1893, a year and a few
days before Rubinstein—was felt to be a
heavy blow for that art, which was by then
in the vigour of its early days.
A Russian paper contained the following
paragraph in reference to Tchaikovsky’s
death —
“France has just lost Gounod, and Russia
Tchaikovsky. The loss is not the same in
these two cases. The composer of Faust had
exhausted all that he had to say before he
died in his seventieth year; the composer of
Eugene Oniegin, who was only fifty-three years
I85
A SHORT HISTORY OF
old, was still at the height of a musical career
marked by high ideals and a prolific output.
The loss of Tchaikovsky is almost as much
felt by Russia as the loss of Poushkin or of
Lermontov.”
It goes without saying that much has been
written about Tchaikovsky since his death.
First of all, his Musical Reminiscences were
published, which consisted mainly of a series
of articles contributed by him to various
newspapers. Then Laroche issued a bio-
graphical sketch of the composer, and Kashkin
wrote at length about him in his Reminiscences.
Finally, Modeste Tchaikovsky, the composer's
brother and collaborator, undertook a very
complete biography, based chiefly on the
voluminous correspondence, which contains
much that is particularly interesting for
French readers: amongst other things some in-
dividual and sympathetic criticism on Delibes,
Bizet, Massenet, Saint-Saëns, and other French
composers, whom he greatly admired. The
Russian edition was published in three
volumes by Jurgenson, Moscow, 1900–2, a
German edition being issued simultaneously;
and an English edition, translated and edited
with a preface by Rosa Newmarch, was pub-
lished in one volume by John Lane, London
and New York, 1906. I must not omit to
mention the following, which have appeared
I86
RUSSIAN MUSIC
outside Russia: Peter Tchaikovsky, by Iwan
Knorr (Berlin, 1901); Peter Tchaikovsky, a
monograph by Karl Hruby (Leipzig, 1902);
Tchaikovsky, His Life and Works, by Rosa
Newmarch (London, 1900, reissued London,
1907); and an excellent Notice sur la symphonie
pathétique de P. Tchaikovsky, by Charles
Malherbe (Paris, n.d.).
It was for those, who throughout their lives
had combated Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky,
to endeavour to replace them, and to pave
the way for their successors in the field. It
is now time that I should deal with these
composers, and, in truth, this will not be the
least agreeable part of the task I have set
before myself; for, apart from the leaders
of the “Young School,” who are by now
almost all dead, we shall find ourselves in the
presence of a group of men who are really
“young,” hardy and adventurous, who write
with conviction, are naturally gifted, and seem
sufficiently strong to bear aloft the banner
of Russian music.
CHAPTER VI
The “Young Russian School”: César Cui, Balakirev,
Borodin, Moussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov
We have now come to the little group of
distinguished but exclusive composers, who
undertook with absolutely uncompromising
zeal as radical a reform of opera in Russia
as Richard Wagner promoted in Germany,
although they emphatically denied their in-
tention of following in the mistaken path of
the composer of Lohengrin and Der Ring des
Nibelungen. In the eyes of these reformers,
who are apparently characterized by infalli-
bility and a confidence nothing can shake, no
good operas had been written between the
death of Gluck and their own time. Meyer-
beer, although his great dramatic gifts could
not be completely ignored, was only quite a
second-rate composer, while the French school
practically did not exist, seeing that Monsigny,
Grétry, Méhul, Boieldieu, Herold, Auber, and
Halévy were barely worth mentioning; and
as to Italian opera, they were roused to
unmeasured fury by it and considered its most
I88
RUSSIAN MUSIC
illustrious practitioners as mere puppets : I
was almost saying, as musical malefactors. To
listen to them, one might suppose that the
Young Russian School had discovered every-
thing as far as operatic music is concerned,
and that before its time nothing interesting or
intelligent had ever been accomplished. There
is something really strange in the sight of these
new-comers, who owe everything to their
predecessors and would be nothing without
them and the splendid work they did, treating
them with this superb assurance and crushing
contempt. One can afford to smile at it.
Nevertheless I will not criticise their attitude
for the moment; I will simply state it, and I
will do so in the words of the proud declaration
of principles contained in that pamphlet by
César Cui to which I have already on several
occasions referred : I mean, La Musiqué en
Russie.
Cui begins by informing us of the circum-
stances in which the little brotherhood was
formed :-
“In 1856 two young musicians, passionately
devoted to their art, met at St. Petersburg.
The Russian capital being the chief musical
and intellectual centre of the country, they
took up their permanent residence there. One
of them was Balakirev, the other was the author
of these pages. Some little time afterwards
189
A SHORT HISTORY OF
they were joined by Rimsky-Korsakov, Borodin,
and Moussorgsky; and thus a little circle was
formed of friends who were drawn together
by a common enthusiasm for music. These
informal meetings of theirs gave rise from
that time onwards to most interesting and in-
structive debates, which ranged conscientiously
over the whole of the then-existing literature of
music. Criticism had a wide field to itself.
Questions of musical aesthetics were discussed,
personal points of view were exchanged,
works were keenly analysed, plans for the future
were laid and, in short, a thousand topics that
enliven the mind, develop the taste, and keep
the musical sense alive, formed the substance
of their talk. In this way the little brother-
hood ended by acquiring fixed convictions and
by forming criteria, which they applied to a
number of questions in the realm of art that
frequently lay far outside the current ideas of
the public and the press. While each member
of the group retained his own characteristics
and capacity, an ideal common to them all soon
began to be sharply defined, and an effort was
made to imprint it on their compositions.”
We have seen the point from which they
started ; we shall now proceed to consider the
end which they pursued. This, as I have
already remarked, was the reform of opera.
So far as symphonic music was concerned,
I90
RUSSIAN MUSIC
our young revolutionaries thought, perhaps
rightly, that everything had been accomplished,
and satisfactorily accomplished too, by Bee-
thoven, Schumann, Liszt, and Berlioz. I find
I am obliged at this point to make a somewhat
lengthy quotation ; my only regret is that I am
unable, in view of the limited scope of this
essay, to extend it further. There is no need
for me to insist on the interesting nature of the
matter discussed in the following lines :—
“Towards the end of the eighteenth century
Gluck undertook, with all the weight of his
authority, to restore opera to its rightful and
original position, to bring it back into the paths
of expression, and above all to establish it
firmly on a basis of dramatic truth. So long
as he was alive, his high ideal seemed to be
attained and consecrated by the Striking success
of his own works. But after his death these
fine, simple traditions melted away one by one,
and Rossini did his best, save in Guillaume Tell
alone, to reduce opera to the condition of being
mere concert music embellished with scenery
and costumes; while he absolutely sacrificed
truth of expression to brilliant vocal display
distributed indiscriminately between all the
characters: to the young cavalier of Seville,
the Moor of Venice, and the Hebrew prophet,
alike. A reaction, however, came about. It
was first felt when it crept in with the cautious,
I9I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
incomplete half-measures of Weber, Meyer-
beer, Glinka (in A Life for the Tsar), and
Dargomijsky (in The Roussalka). Then there
was a sudden change of front ending in radical
reforms to which Wagner (in the Nibelungen
cycle) devoted all his energy. It was at this
point that the Russian composers of the new
school, who had, however, as we shall see later,
very few points of contact with the great
German reformer, made their entry on the
scene with all the courage of unshakable con-
viction.
“The new school in Russia tried to insist on
certain principles of the highest importance,
one of the chief of which was as follows:
Operatic music ought always to have an intrinsic
value, as absolute music, apart from the text.
This principle has too long been neglected;
even in our time it is not by any means strictly
observed." When composers were mainly
occupied with pure melody and with writing
a voice part to suit the virtuosity of singers
(which are the infallible roads to success),
commonplaces of the most astounding and
ingenuous kind found their justification and
passed muster without difficulty. What would
have been rightly rejected as intolerable in a
piece of symphonic music was quite naturally
* The phrase seems to me, however, to be merely what
one may call a truism.
I92
RUSSIAN MUSIC
given a place in an opera. In this kind of
writing the Italians are not only supreme;
they are without rivals. They only aspire to
superficial success based on vocal gymnastics
and the use of high B flats and C sharps, and
they are in league to maintain the public
in its uneducated state by pandering to
its bad taste. Not content with wearing
the commonest tune threadbare, they insist
on displaying it in all its hideous naked-
ness without attempting to employ even a
touch of delicate harmony to soften it. The
best of their composers either copy one
another or repeat themselves in the matter
of thematic style and harmonization. By this
means they have succeeded in turning their
operas into a sort of series of bastard couples
bearing an appalling resemblance to each other.
To see what I mean, one has only to look at the
thirty-odd Italian operas of Rossini, or on the
seventy and more that Donizetti left behind
him. Each of these composers has written
two or three typical works of which the rest
are only more or less pale reproductions.
And even in their masterpieces what pages
* Not “seventy and more ” but only fifty-seven real
operas, to which must be added nine little works of the
kind the Italians call farse, which are on the same sort of
scale as our operettas. Fifty-seven alone is far too many,
no doubt ; but it is just as well not to exaggerate the
number.
I93 N
A SHORT HISTORY OF
there are of insignificant and commonplace
rubbish
“One finds a large number of composers who
are not Italians doing almost precisely the same
thing. They over-write and they think too
much about the irresistible attraction of the
scenery, the help they will get from the
technique of the executants, and the pleasure
they can always count on giving in the scenes
where the ballet is introduced." Would not
even Meyerbeer, who is one of the greatest of
operatic writers, gain a great deal if the
princesses and queens in his operas with all
their florid runs were suppressed
“The new Russian school looks at the ques-
tion from an entirely different point of view.
According to its principles, nothing ought to
stand in the way of operatic music being itself
true and beautiful music. The most seductive
means at music's disposal—the charm of
harmony, the science of counterpoint, orches-
tration with its colour and polyphony—ought,
all equally, to be pressed into service. But the
application of this principle may perhaps not
appear to be very practical. It may seem as
* This is clearly a hit at French composers, whom the
writer could hardly specify more precisely, seeing that he
was addressing French readers. So much the worse for
La Muette de Porficz, La Juive, Faust, Roméo et Juliette,
Carmen, Hamlet, Le Roi de Lahore, Sigurd, &c., who are
directly aimed at here.
I94
RUSSIAN MUSIC
though a moment of repose here and there for
the introduction of a commonplace passage,
varying in length according to circumstances,
would be much appreciated by the audience,
who would thus be saved the fatigue of having
to keep their attention too closely fixed on the
music. Not at all ! The Russian school
scorns to take advantage of such schemes,
however attractive they may look, and refuses
to make any such concessions. In this matter
nothing will induce it to change its point of
view. It will march quietly and proudly
towards the ideal to which it is summoned—
towards the living fount of intelligence,
honesty, and eternal poetry—without troubling
its head about future failure or success.”
The young Russian school, then, reverts,
according to César Cui, to the old-fashioned
formula of “Art for Art’s sake,” with contempt
for the public as their motto. The formula
was once in favour with our Romantic school,
but it has long since been abandoned, as its
inanity has been sufficiently recognised. More-
over, seeing that it is generally the public for
whom art, in the last resort, is produced, one
may be permitted to inquire, in the face of
such proud claims, what the ultimate aim
pursued may be. But, I repeat, it is easy
enough to jeer at what has been done, when
one does not come on the scene oneself until
I95
A SHORT HISTORY OF
after two or three centuries of varied effort and
accomplishment, when one can take advantage
of the accumulated results of long experience,
and has not to grope one’s way ahead, seeing
that the path has already been levelled by the
great mass of one’s predecessors. This is pre-
cisely the situation in which the new Russian
school found itself. All it had to do was to
gather the fruits that others had had so much
trouble to raise from the soil. When it affirms
in peremptory tones that it has monopolised
the conscience of artists (which amounts to
saying that all goods produced elsewhere are
stamped with downright and deliberate dis-
honesty)—when the new school does that, it
runs the risk not only of having the laugh
against itself, but also of alienating the sym-
pathy of all save a few second-rate individuals,
whose sympathy is not of much account.
All this, however, does not in any way
detract from the very real and active ability of
the members of the little brotherhood, of whom
the most prominent in the eyes of the world is
undoubtedly Rimsky-Korsakov, and the most
turbulent César Cui, while Balakirev stands at
the actual head of the school. Since Cui has
always made himself the spokesman of the
band : since it has been through him that
the public has been made aware of the
theories and ambitions of this noisy little
I96
RUSSIAN MUSIC
group, we will give him his due and deal
with him first.
The passion for music was so strong in
César Cui that he managed to cultivate it very
busily, without however neglecting the absorb-
ing workinvolved in an honourable and brilliant
military career. Cui should have a special claim
on us French, for although his mother was a
Lithuanian, his father was a Frenchman. Traces
of his father are undoubtedly to be found in
him, more particularly perhaps in the polemical
liveliness and the combative temperament
which in France are the invariable accompani-
ment of a discussion on asthetics. A sym-
pathetic and devoted biographer has told the
story of his parentage in the following words:—
“His father, Antoine Cui, was in Napoleon’s
Grand Army of 1812, and being wounded at
Smolensk and left half-frozen, he was unable
to rejoin it on retreat. Left in Russia, he
settled down there as many of his companions
did, married, and took to teaching as a pro-
fession. He acted as tutor in several well-to-
do families and finally became professor of
French at the High School at Vilna. He must
have been a man of remarkable gifts. He
learnt Polish perfectly and spoke it fluently ;
he studied the pianoforte without a teacher
and succeeded in learning enough about it to
be able to give rudimentary lessons; he
I97
A SHORT HISTORY OF
composed the music (and quite good music it
is, too) of a number of songs; he published a
Résumé of the History of French Literature ; and
although his resources were modest, he left a
reputable library behind him and a collection
of coins. His French animation, his gaiety, and
his wit made his company very much sought
after. Cui's mother, Julie Gusevitch, who
belonged to the lesser nobility of Lithuania,
was a woman of angelic goodness, full of self-
denial and living only for her children. To
her they owe not only their physical existence
but also their sense of moral values.””
César Antonovich Cui, who was born at
Vilna on January 18, 1835, entered on a
military career at an early age. After having
made excellent progress in his studies at the
Vilna High School, he entered the School of
Military Engineering at St. Petersburg. At the
present time he holds the rank of major-general
and until quite recently was Assistant-Professor
of Fortifications in the three Military Aca-
demies of the town—the Staff College and the
Schools of Military Engineering and Artillery.
Amongst his pupils have been the present
Emperor, seven grand dukes, and the famous
General Skobelev, the hero of the Russo-
Turkish war. As a writer on military subjects
* César Cui, a critical sketch by the Comtesse de Mercy-
Argenteau. (Paris, F º 1888.)
I9
RUSSIAN MUSIC
he is the author of an Abridged History of
Permanent Fortification, a Manual of Flying
Fortification, and several other works of less
importance.
Given a career of this sort and the results it
led to, Cui must have had a profound and
sincere love of music to take it up simultane-
ously, especially as it involved a busy and pol-
emical life which, after all, was not without
an interest of its own. Although music is not
actually Cui's profession, seeing that he never
tried to live on it, he studied and practised it
with sufficient thoroughness to justify his
considering himself a professional musician and
not an amateur. But for this very reason he
must not be astonished at being judged some-
what severely both as critic and composer.
Cui began to work at music with two obscure
teachers named Hermann and Dio. The
better part of his musical education he owed
to the well-known Polish composer Stanislas
Moniuszko ; the rest he picked up for himself
by his own exertions. He was barely twenty-
two when in 1857 he wrote his first opera
The Prisoner in the Caucasus, which was not
produced until 1883, twenty-six years after it
was composed. The text was taken from an
early poem by Poushkin and the work was
originally in two acts. It was only much later,
when there was a question of putting it on the
I99
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Stage, that Cui added a third act, which was
inserted between the two already written and
thereby became Act ii. When one considers
what the ideas were which were simmering at
that time in the composer’s head, one can
understand that there was an appreciable incon-
gruity in style between the new addition and
the two earlier acts, in spite of the fact that
the whole score was considerably remodelled.
The Prisoner in the Caucasus met with a cold
reception and was only given a few perform-
ances. It was produced in a French trans-
lation in the Théâtre Royal at Liège with a
certain amount of success on January 13, 1886.
But although this was the first work Cui
wrote with a view to the stage, it did not mark
his first appearance in the theatre, for, some
time before this, he had had two other works
produced. One was William Ratcliff, an
opera in three acts, which was written to the
text of Henri Heine's tragedy in a translation
by Plestcheiev and was produced on February
26, 1869. The other was Angelo, which was in
four acts and was an adaptation by Bourenin
of Victor Hugo's play. This was produced
on January 13, 1876. The reception of these
two works by the public was lukewarm.
William Ratcliff ran for eight performances and
little more was heard of it till it was revived in
I900 at Moscow. Angelo had no better luck,
2OO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
and an attempt to revive it at the Court
Theatre at Moscow in 1901 was not success-
ful. Moreover, such originality as Cui pos-
sesses does not come out strongly (however
much he might wish it to) in his operatic
music. In support of this view I will quote
the following opinion on William Ratcliff—
an indulgent one, too—written by his fellow-
critic Hermann Laroche :-
“Cui's gift for melody is not abundant.
His tunes cannot exactly be called common ;
one merely feels that they lack individuality.
One cannot point at any particular place to
plagiarism, or indicate the source from which
such and such a motive has been taken, for they
have not been stolen from anywhere ; they
have simply been suggested; and these sug-
gested ideas, which are adapted with much
taste and sense of beauty, take the place, in
Cui's writing, as in that of So many others, of
original melodic invention. But though they
lack originality, the themes in Ratcliff often
consist of lovely, singing melodies, as may be
seen by looking at the prelude to the third
act, almost the whole of the heroine Mary’s
part, and the duet between her and Ratcliff.
The male-voice parts are much less successful
than those written for soprano.”
It is somewhat remarkable that Cui, who
prides himself on being a Russian composer
2OI
A SHORT HISTORY OF
and reproaches Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky so
severely for their lack of nationality, should
of all people choose the subjects of his operas
outside Russia. While his fellow-musicians
were making use of the poems of their
countrymen, Poushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, or
Ostrovsky, Cui took his texts solely from
foreign writers. For William Ratcliff he went
to Heine, for Angelo to Victor Hugo ; Le
Flibustier, which he wrote specially for France,
he took from Jean Richepin ; The Saracen,
which was given in 1899 at the Court Theatre
at St. Petersburg, was founded on Dumas's
play Charles VII chez fes grands Vassaux, and
Mademoiselle Fift, which appeared in 1904,
was taken from a tale by Maupassant.
We have already seen (and have been told by
Cui himself) what the ambitious programme
was which the members of the young Russian
School had drawn up : we have seen that they
aimed at nothing less than the radical reform
of opera. To set about it, they adopted the
famous system of melodic recitative, Cui's
account of which we have quoted when dealing
with Dargomijsky; they also absolutely for-
bade any repetition of the words, and, finally,
they insisted on having no duets, trios, or any
* Except those of A Feast in Time of Plague (Moscow,
1901), and The Captain's Daughter (St. Petersburg, 1911),
both of which are from Poushkin.
2O2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
kind of concerted movement and, above all,
no numbers written in a definite and pre-
determined form. This doctrine of theirs
has much in common with that of Wagner,
although Cui for his part vigorously refutes the
imputation of any kind of resemblance to the
composer of Parsifal. Nevertheless, he made
considerable use of the vaunted method of
melodic recitative (which is not always so very
melodic) in his score of Angelo, and again in Le
Flibustier; but in spite of it the former was not
a success and the latter, which was produced at
the Opéra-Comique on January 22, 1894, was so
dull that it only ran for four nights.
Moreover César Cui, who has his own in-
veterate dislikes, professes to feel an entire and
profound contempt for the race of librettists.
I certainly do not propose to absolve the whole
lot of them of their sins, but I do think that
Some poetic texts of operas are not to be de-
spised and that they must have had some kind
of share in inspiring their composers. I
might mention in this connection, CEdipus at
Colonos, La juive, Les Huguenots, Le Prophète,
Lucia di Lammermoor, and Aida. But Cui is
absolutely rigid and will not listen to reason on
this subject. What he insists on above every-
thing is the necessity of having fine verse
to set. In this he is making a mistake, for it
is clear that a pathetic or powerful situation,
2O3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
even when put into poor verse, will be of more
use to an operatic composer and will have more
effect on the public than any amount of
melodious verse clothing action which is
weak and inconsistent. Anyhow, let us see
what he does. He takes Le Flibustier, a charm-
ing comedy in verse by Richepin, but with a
subject that is unsuited to music because it
is almost entirely wanting in movement and
action, everything taking place by means of
conversation and exchange of ideas between
the various characters. He puts this comedy
on his piano and proceeds to set it to
music, straight through from end to end.
But the verse happens to be alexandrine :
that is to say, the type of verse the most
hostile to music. What does that matter :
The composer goes grimly on to the end of
his task, and with his passion for melodic
recitative writes three acts of recitative and
calls it an opera ! You should ask the audience
what they make of it all and what they think
of Cui's theories | Still, there are one or two
attractive passages in the musical version of
Le Flibustier: as, for instance, Janik’s charm-
ing song in the first act, Jacquemin’s story of
the battle and, more especially, the Angelus for
two female voices, which is a really delightful
piece of melodious writing with an exquisite
accompaniment. But three acts of recitative,
2O4.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
melodic recitative too—no, that is really asking
a little too much
As a matter of fact, Cui has never been
successful with any of his operatic works,
and this want of success is probably due not
so much to the nature of his gifts as to his
unfortunate theories. He no doubt derives
consolation from the contempt with which he
regards the public. The misfortune is that
the false ideas which he strives to propagate
do a good deal of damage to music and make
converts in his own country, who are apt to
exaggerate them to a still further degree.
To illustrate this point I will quote the words
of an eminent Belgian musician, Louis Brassin,
the composer, who can hardly be ranked as a
reactionary seeing that he was one of the most
ardent advocates of Wagner’s music in
Belgium :—
“Side by side with the young Russian
school, of which Borodin is the undisputed
head, there exists a small but very active
group, professing theories of music which are
absolutely anarchical. The works produced
by this group are to some extent allied to
those of the literary decadents and, like them,
require preliminary initiation if they are to
be anything more than a dead letter. The
method of writing is peculiar, more particularly
as regards accentuation ; the form is vague
2O5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
and gives a feeling of incoherence and shape-
lessness; the harmonization is uncommonly
audacious and ruthlessly breaks the rules of
musical syntax. It is hardly necessary, per-
haps, to add that the musicians who make up
this group speak with lofty disdain of the
old composers who are the chief glories of our
art and that some of them already consider
Wagner old-fashioned.”
This is probably the best place to illustrate
Cui's personal feelings towards Wagner. We
have noted in the earlier part of this chapter
his general attitude towards such composers
as Meyerbeer, Rossini, and Donizetti. I say
nothing of the French school, which, as I have
already mentioned, does not exist in the eyes of
this savage iconoclast or is no doubt considered
by him to be of too little importance to deserve
any mention. But what is interesting is to
know the opinion the Russian musical reformer
had of the German reformer whose tendency
might at first sight be supposed to be on
similar lines to his own. We will see what Cui
thought of Wagner by quoting to begin with this
pungent criticism of his works in general –
“Wagner’s operas,” he writes, “are a
tremendous mystification to which he himself
fell a victim ; for there is every reason to
suppose that he mistook his meaningless noises
for real music, and his tedious phrases for
2O6
RUSSIAN MUSIC
heavenly melody, believing each of his notes
to be worth its weight in gold. I should like
to save my fellow-countrymen from the
dangerous contagion of Wagnerian decadence.
The man who likes his empty music has ceased
to like real music ; the man who cares for his
operas is bound to consider Glinka a composer
of vaudevilles. In fact, the desire to discover
something deep where there is really nothing
whatever can only have alarming consequences
and drive people to madness. I say this in all
seriousness and can quote examples of what
I mean. Joseph Rubinstein, the accompanist,
went mad on the occasion of the first perform-
ance of The Ring at Bayreuth, and one cannot
doubt that Wagner’s music must have had
something to do with the death of his royal
friend. So that I trust that I may end my
days without boring my readers any more by
dissertations on Wagner’s music, and I trust
equally that he will refrain from boring me any
more with his unmusical operas.”
So much for his general opinion. To come
to details, let us see what he thinks of Die
Walküre. After having analysed it at length,
he says: “I have very carefully examined not
only every oasis but even the smallest thickets
that are to be found in this sandy waste of an
opera, and, as you see, I have found little
enough, when you consider that the entertain-
2O7
A SHORT HISTORY OF
ment lasts from eight o’clock until midnight.
The complete absence of music in Die Walküre
weighs on us and induces a state of tedium
which it is useless to fight against.”
“Siegfried,” he writes, “contains a series of
interesting scenes which, however, produce a
confused impression, because they change too
quickly, are without definite form, and do
not hang together. Each scene encroaches on
the next and hides the one before. As to
lyrical or dramatic episodes designed to stir
the deeper feelings, they are few and far
between and they can hardly be called suc-
cessful. Siegfried appeals strongly to the
intellect, not much to the ear, and still less
to the emotions.”
I will finish with a sentence on Tristan und
Isolde, which may well make French Wagner-
ians’ hair stand on end, though Cui actually
preferred it to The Ring and called it the
“least unbearable" of Wagner’s operas:
“If one was to make a door grate on its hinges
for three and a half hours (the time taken
by a performance of Tristan) and was to listen
to its grating with the same devout concen-
tration as is given to Wagner’s opera, one
would get the same impression and the same
nervous stimulus.” -
I have borrowed the passages quoted above
from an interesting essay by M. Michel Delines,
2O8
RUSSIAN MUSIC
published in La Bibliothèque Universelle of
Lausanne for September 1902.
If we turn from this criticism which is
expressly directed against Wagner to César
Cui's general views, we shall be justified in as-
serting that the expression of such exaggerated
and destructive opinions undoubtedly rendered
poor service to Russian music and musicians ;
for it was bound to check their scope by bring-
ing them into false paths leading nowhere in
particular. For over thirty years he has tried
to propagate and defend his opinions in
numerous reviews : in the Nouvelliste du Nord,
the Golos, the Russian journal of St. Petersburg,
La Nedicla (The Week), and again in the
Musical Review published by Bessel, of which
he was the vigorous editor, and even in certain
French organs such as the Revue et Gazette
musicale and Le Ménestrel. It is only fair to
say that his articles have been vigorously
challenged in Russia by ardent opponents and
that the composer has perhaps suffered at
times from his critics’ want of moderation.
For, apart from the theatre, which is not his
proper sphere and where he has consequently
not been able to win success, Cui has shown
plenty of ability. He has published a
quantity of songs of which several volumes
have been issued in France, such as the Douze
Mélodies, Vignettes musicales, 20 Poèmes de
|
f
209 O
A SHORT HISTORY OF
jean Richepin, all of which contain interesting
numbers. In the collection Douze M&lodies
one might single out for mention “Je vous
aimais,” “Te souvient-il encore ??” “Ma
mignonne”; in the Poèmes de jean Richepin
three equally good songs are “Les Deux Méné-
triers” and, above all, “Les Songeants” and
“Les Petiots.” They are not always simple;
they are sometimes elaborate and even over-
elaborate ; but they contain happy ideas which
are both picturesque and original.
Moreover, Cui has written a great deal, not
only for the voice but for orchestra and also
for the pianoforte and the other instruments.
For Orchestra there are, amongst other things,
a Marche Solennelle; a Petite Suite and three
others, and some Circassian Dances which in
rhythm and orchestral colouring are very
original. For the pianoforte there are,
amongst other things, a suite, dedicated to
Liszt; four pieces, dedicated to Leschetizky;
three waltzes, dedicated to Sophie Menter;
two polonaises, dedicated to Anton Rubin-
Stein; three impromptus, dedicated to Hans
von Bülow ; two sets of twelve and six
miniatures ; a Valse Bluette ; a Valse Ca-
price, dedicated to Annette Essipov, and a
Scherzando Giocoso. For voice there are,
besides the songs, an Ave Maria for solo voices
and female chorus with harmonium, and several
2 IO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
sets of unaccompanied choruses, some of which,
like “Le reveil des oiseaux,” “La Vie,” and
“Nocturne,” are very attractive. Then there
are a Suite Concertante for violin and orchestra;
two pieces for violoncello and orchestra and
numerous small instrumentalworks; and Imust
not omit to mention an opéra-comique, The
Mandarin’s Son, which I fancy has only been
produced privately. Cui also published in 1896
a Study of Russian Song, written in Russian.
After having spoken of César Cui, it is only
natural that we should turn our attention to
his friend Balakirev, who, as we have seen, was
the companion of his youth and shared with
him the honour of being the leader and in-
spirer of the famous “Coterie,” which was
called by its partisans “The Cohort,” and in
Russia went under the name of Kouchka.
Mily Alexeivich Balakirev, who was born at
Nijny-Novgorod on January 2, 1837, is said to
have owed the better part of his early musical
education to a famous compatriot Alexander
Oulibishev, a diplomat who had served his
country with distinction while at the same
time giving serious attention to music. To
him we owe two important works on Mozart
and Beethoven, which are worth reading atten-
tively even if one disagrees with their point
of view. After having retired into private
life, Oulibishev settled down on his estate at
2 II
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Nijny-Novgorod, where Balakirev, on his re-
turn from the University of Kazan at which
he had been studying, had the benefit of his
teaching and advice. Balakirev, who had an
alert mind and was accustomed to go his own
way without being too dependent intellectually
on others, no doubt turned his relations with
Oulibishev to account in so far as technique
rather than musical aesthetics was concerned.
Even so, Oulibishev could not have had much
influence on Balakirev’s temperament and on
that strong individuality of his which even-
tually made itself felt in the clear-cut, narrow
theories that he was to propagate and so
obstinately defend.
He was barely twenty years old when he
went to St. Petersburg, where he took up his
abode for the purpose of devoting himself
entirely to the serious study of music. It
was there that he made the acquaintance of
Glinka, who showed himself very friendly to-
wards him, and his intimacy with Cui dated
from that time. He and Cui worked together
at music, and from their daily discussion of its
problems ensued that body of doctrines and
of singularly uncompromising principles which
both men soon endeavoured to disseminate as
much by precept as by persuasion.
Balakirev was, moreover, endowed with re-
markable energy and vitality. He became a
2 I2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
very able pianist, and in 1862 he conducted
in person at St. Petersburg some concerts which
he had organised with the object of making
known the works of the members of “The
Cohort.” At the same time he threw himself
keenly into the study of Russian folk-music,
in order to try to assimilate its peculiar char-
acter, and published in 1866 an admirable
collection of forty folk-songs. Shortly after-
wards the Russian Musical Society recognized
his unusual gifts as a conductor, and asked
him to be responsible for their orchestral
concerts. Subsequently Balakirev became
director of the Imperial Chapel, but was
obliged by ill-health to retire from the post
after a few years. He was attacked by a sort
of religious mania, and having become a re-
cluse, is said to have broken off relations with
Cui, Rimsky-Korsakov, and his other friends
and pupils of old days. He died at St. Peters-
burg in June, 1910.
In spite of his previously busy life, Balakirev
wrote comparatively little music. The fol-
lowing is a fairly complete list of his composi-
tions : A symphony ; an overture on three
Russian themes; an overture on the theme of
a Spanish march ; Tamara, a symphonic poem
based on some verses by Lermontov ; Russia,
a symphonic poem ; an overture, march, and
four entr’actes for King Lear; Islamey, an
2I3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
oriental phantasia for pianoforte, and several
mazurkas and miscellaneous pieces for the same
instrument, as well as a set of folk-tunes
arranged for four hands; and finally, some
thirty songs with a marked individuality of
their own. That is all.
Fertility is clearly not one of Balakirev’s dis-
tinguishing characteristics, and it will be
noticed that he did not come into contact
with the theatre except more or less acciden-
tally with his music for King Lear, which is
quite interesting in its way. He did, however,
begin an opera which was called The Golden
Bird, but for some reason, of which I am not
aware, he abandoned it. In France we are
hardly in a position to judge of Balakirev as a
composer, seeing that he is practically un-
known except by his symphonic poem Tamara,
about which opinion is very much divided,
some ranking it extravagantly high, while
others unduly depreciate it; in any case, the
performance of this much-discussed work at
our orchestral concerts has produced results
which are little more than negative.
Balakirev was skilful at arrangements and
made good pianoforte transcriptions of Glinka's
jota Aragonese, of Berlioz's overtures La fuite
en Egypte and Harold on Italie (the latter for
four hands) and of one of Beethoven’s string
quartets, this being for two pianofortes. As
2I4.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
for the interesting collection of forty folk-
Songs, the following analysis and appreciation
of the volume was written by his friend, César
Cui, who is prepared to rank Balakirev as the
chief Russian composer; which seems perhaps
excessive when one remembers Rubinstein,
Tchaikovsky, and Rimsky-Korsakov. “The
collection is a very remarkable one,” he writes,
“ and of all those that have hitherto been
made, it is indisputably the best. It only
contains forty songs, but they have all been
very carefully chosen, and all are correctly
noted down and skilfully harmonized. From
beginning to end the pianoforte accompani-
ment keeps its essentially Russian character,
and is so varied and so perfectly adapted to the
different tunes in the volume that each of
these songs, taken separately, in its miniature
fame, is in itself a real work of art. This
method of treating national folk-tunes has
found imitators, amongst whom may be men-
tioned Prokounin and, above all, Rimsky-
Korsakov, whose collection of a hundred
Russian folk-songs has recently been published"
at St. Petersburg.”
I will quote, by way of illustration, Cui's
general summing-up on his friend’s musical
gifts and personality —
“Balakirev, who is in the front rank of
* This was in 1876.
2I 5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
composers (and is a very severe critic of his own
works), is thoroughly acquainted as a scholar
with the whole of musical literature, ancient
and modern; but he is first and foremost a sym-
phonic writer. As far as vocal music is con-
cerned he has only written twenty" songs,
which have broad, simple melodies with grace-
ful accompaniments, and are often character-
ized by vehemence and passion. Lyrical feel-
ing predominates in them, for they are the
spontaneous expression, in terms of lovely
music, of the impulse of the heart. In form
Balakirev’s songs are the link between those
of Glinka and Dargomijsky on the one hand
and those of later composers on the other.”
It does not appear to me, however, that
Balakirev, in spite of the esteem in which he
is rightly held, Occupies a place in Russian
music quite commensurate with such high
praise. But I may be mistaken about this.
Let us now come to Borodin, who, as we have
seen, was considered practically the leader of
the Young School and the most gifted member
of the whole group.
Alexander Porphyrievich Borodin was born
at St. Petersburg on November 12, 1834.
“On his father’s side,” writes one of his bio-
graphers, “he was descended from the royal
* A book of ten songs published subsequently brings the
number up to thirty.
216
RUSSIAN MUSIC
family af Imeretinsky : that is to say, from
the last of the kings of Imeretia, the fairest of
those ancient realms of Caucasus, where the
flowers of the East blossom in the shadow
of the eternal snows. The kings of Imeretia
are said to have boasted their descent from
David, and to have borne on their coat-
of-arms the quarterings of the harp and
sling.”
Borodin was no more of a professional
musician than Cui. He was primarily a dis-
tinguished man of science who, after having
passed brilliantly out of the Academy of
Medicine and Surgery at St. Petersburg, where
he studied under Professor Zinin, eventually
succeeded his teacher as Professor of Chemistry
at the Academy, while at the same time he
became a Councillor of State. He contri-
buted to the columns of various Russian and
German technical periodicals a number of im-
portant papers and memoranda on chemistry
which attracted the attention of the scientific
world. Nevertheless, as he had a very strong
taste for music, he worked at it from the days
of his childhood and learned to play the flute,
the violoncello, and the pianoforte. Musical
theory he hardly acquired at all except by
reading and analysing the works of contem-
porary composers, in the performance of which
he used to take a share by playing either the
217
A SHORT HISTORY OF
pianoforte or the violoncello part at private
concerts of chamber-music.
He nevertheless began to compose at an
early age, evidently by instinct. He was only
thirteen years old when he wrote a concerto
for flute and pianoforte, and after that a trio
for two violins and violoncello on a theme in
Robert le Diable, and a little later a scherzo in
B minor for pianoforte and string sextet; none
of which has been published. It was mainly
from the year 1862 onwards that he began to
give himself seriously to composition. He was
at that time one of the group of which the
other members were Balakirev, Cui, and
Moussorgsky, and it was under the influence
of the doctrines held by his friends that his
musical nationalism began to assert itself. His
first symphony in E flat was mainly written
about then, though it was only finished some
five years later in 1867. This work was pro-
duced with a certain amount of success under
Balakirev at a concert on January 4, 1869,
given by the Russian Musical Society. En-
couraged by the result, Borodin thereupon
, meditated composing an opera, and began to
set to music a play by Mey called The Tsar’s
Betrothed. But it was not long before he gave
up working at it, though it was by that time
fairly well advanced, and he then produced a
certain number of songs, one after another :
218
RUSSIAN MUSIC
“The Sea,” “The Sleeping Beauty” (a ballad
of which the pianoforte accompaniment has
been admirably orchestrated by Rimsky-
Korsakov), “Dissonance,” “The Queen of the
Ocean,” “An Old Song,” and “My Song is
Bitter.”
Hermann Laroche, who was at that time
musical critic of the Golos, when writing in his
paper of “The Sleeping Beauty,” gave his
opinion of Borodin’s songs in the following
term S : —
“The greater part of the song ‘The Sleep-
ing Beauty' is written directed to be sung
pianissimo. The composer, no doubt, uses
only a small volume of tone because he is
discreet and has pity on his audience; unless,
indeed, it is that he is ashamed, like a man
speaking in low tones of what he dares not
mention aloud. Moreover, one might say that
in all his works he endeavours to give the
listener some kind of unpleasant sensation.
The title of one of his songs, ‘Dissonance,’
seems to be his motto. He always has to
introduce a dissonance somewhere, and often
Several, and it sometimes happens, as it does
in this song, that the music consists of nothing
else. Only once does he appear to have had
another aim, and that is in the string quartet.
One day, remembering the amount of caco-
phony for which he was responsible, he wrote
2I9
A SHORT HISTORY OF
* >
in self-justification ‘My Song is Bitter.”
This mood of penitence, however, soon passed
and led to nothing, for last autumn he pub-
lished through Bessel three new songs which
are infested with the same poison. It may
sound unlikely, but it is none the less indis-
putable, that this determined enemy of music
is not lacking in ability; for side by side with
the unhealthy, shapeless, and extravagant
music which is scattered about his works,
one may sometimes find passages which har-
monically are very rich. It is just possible,
after all, that this tendency towards the ugly
may be contrary to his innate instinct and
may only be the bitter fruit of inadequate
musical education.” Whatever grain of truth
this criticism contains, its unfairness and
exaggeration are obvious.
It was about the time when these songs
were written that Borodin thought he saw his
opportunity of appearing as an operatic com-
poser, under somewhat unusual conditions too.
Etienne Gedeonov, who was Director of the
Opera and was himself a well-known dramatic
author, had written the libretto of a fantastic
ballet-opera Mlada, which was to admit of
sumptuous accessories. Having written it he
began to make preparations for staging it, and
proposed to have the music for it composed
by the four champions of the new school,
22O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Borodin, César Cui, Moussorgsky, and Rimsky-
Korsakov. They readily entered into his
views, and undertook each to be responsible
for an act, while Minkous was to write the
whole of the music for the actual ballet. It
was Minkous who, when he was in Paris, wrote
the music for the ballet Néméa ou l'Amour
vengé, which was given at the Opera in July
1864; and was the joint-composer with Léo
Délibes of the ballet La Source, which was
given at the same house in November 1866.
When he returned to Russia he was made
Inspector of the orchestra in the Imperial
Theatre of Moscow, and later, in 1871, was
appointed Composer of Ballets for the Russian
Opera, both of which posts had been left
vacant by the death of Cesare Pugni. In this
capacity he wrote several ballets, amongst
them being Le Lys and Calcabrino.
All five composers set to work; but whilst
they were engaged in it, Gedeonov's enter-
prise came under a cloud, the theatre changed
hands, and very soon there was no longer any
question of Mlada. One of the five, however,
namely Rimsky-Korsakov, did not lose sight of
the subject for, as we shall see later, he took it
in hand by himself and produced his own Mlada
in 1892. An interesting point to notice is that
after the death of Borodin, whose allotted share
in the opera was the fourth act, (the finale of
22 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
which was roughly sketched but not scored,) it
was Rimsky-Korsakov once more who under-
took to finish and orchestrate this finale, and
had it performed and published in this version
of his.
In spite of everything, Borodin felt himself
drawn towards the theatre. The proof is that
after his abortive work on The Tsar’s Betrothed
and the disappointment of Mlada, he almost
immediately decided, whilst writing a second
symphony in B minor (a very remarkable work
in many ways, full of vitality and colour), to
settle down to work again at an opera. This
opera was Prince Igor, which was left un-
finished and was only produced after his death.
His friend, Vladimir Stassov, who became his
biographer, furnished him with the scenario
of a libretto which he thereupon remodelled
and provided with words.
The name of Stassov should not be passed
over in silence now that we are dealing with the
Group of Five. He deserves a word or two if
only because he used his pen on their behalf
again and again with Savage and uncompromis-
ing zeal. He was Director of the department
of fine arts at the Imperial Public Library of
St. Petersburg, and chief editor of the paper
The New Times ; and amongst his writings
are a monograph on Glinka (1886) and a life
of Borodin (1889). Stassov endeavoured to
222
RUSSIAN MUSIC
spread and to give his sanction to the doctrines
of the young Russian school, and took every op-
portunity of extolling them. He did this with
a kind of frenzied energy, without any regard,
let alone indulgence, for those who did not
share his views. He was violently bellicose and
headstrong in his essentially polemical writ-
ings, and as his statements were as exaggerated
in manner as in matter he obtained a quite
special reputation as a critic. To his book
On Borodin, moreover, we owe an interesting
French volume by Alfred Habets: Alexandre
Borodin, d'après la biographie et la correspond-
ance publiées par M. Vladimir Stassow (Paris,
Fischbacher, 1893). Habet's book appeared
in an English version as Borodin and Liszt,
by Alfred Habets, translated with a Preface by
Roſa Newmarch (London : Digby, Long & Co.,
1893). Stassov died at St. Petersburg in
November 1906, at the age of eighty-two.
The subject of Prince Igor, which recalls a
legendary epoch in Russian history, was taken
from a national poem, The Epic of Igor’s Army.
The author of this epic (whose identity is still
in dispute) described the principal episodes in
an expedition of Russian princes against the
Polovtsy, a nomad tribe of similar origin to the
Turks, who had invaded the Russian dominions
towards the middle of the twelfth century.
In his admirable book on the Russian Novel
223
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Melchior de Voguë writes as follows of this
heroic saga — .
“Rising above the popular poetry of the
Middle Ages we see an ancient literary monu-
ment—the prototype of all the others of that
time—The Story of Igor’s Army. This epic
symbolises and celebrates the Russians’ struggle
with the Polovtsy, the pagan hordes of the
south-east, just as the Song of Roland celebrates
that of the French with the Moors. The
anonymous poet who sings of Igor is just a
little later than our Théroulde, and can dis-
pute his claim to a share of the heritage of
Homer.”
This subject, which was very dear to the
heart of a Russian audience, was unfortunately
treated in a somewhat clumsy fashion which
did not bring out its dramatic possibilities
on the stage. However, its heroic and pic-
turesque incidents afforded the composer an
opportunity of using brilliant colours and
striking contrasts and, above all, of giving a
profoundly national character to his work.
But at this point Borodin’s musical tempera-
ment brought him into conflict with the
theories of his friends of the Invincible Band.
We have proof of this in his very interesting
correspondence, which not only gives us
information about his ideas on music, but also
shows the man himself in a most favourable
224 g
RUSSIAN MUSIC
light as a scholar, in whom delicacy of mind,
nobility of heart, conscientiousness and good-
ness, combined to win the sympathy of all who
knew him. I will quote in illustration a single
fragment of a letter addressed to his friend
Mme. Karmalina, in which he enumerates the
reasons which prevented him from indulging
his passion for music to the extent that he
could have desired :-
“As a composer I wish to remain incognito,
and am annoyed at having to acknowledge my
musical work. It is only natural. Music, for
my friends, is the main thing, the principal
occupation of their life, the end for which they
live. For me it is a rest and a pastime which
distract me from the absorbing duties that
tie me to a professorial chair. I do not take
Cui, for instance, as my model. I love my pro-
fession and my science; I love the Academy
of Medicine and my pupils. The teaching I
give is practical in character, and this by itself
takes up much of my time. I have to keep
in constant touch with both the men and
women students, because young people's work
requires close supervision. I have the in-
terests of the Academy at heart. If, on the
one hand, I want to finish my musical work,
on the other I am afraid to devote too con-
stant an attention to it lest it should react
unfavourably on my scientific studies.” Boro-
225 P
A SHORT HISTORY OF
din, I should add, was one of the most ardent
advocates of the admission of women to
higher education, and with Professor Rudniev
and Mme. Tarnovskaya founded the School of
Medicine for Women at St. Petersburg, where
he taught chemistry from 1872 onwards and
actively identified himself with its interests
until the day of his death.
But to return to the want of agreement, to
which I have referred, between Borodin’s
theories as to what should constitute operatic
music and the theories of his friends. I will
quote his correspondence once more. “It is
to be noticed,” he writes, “ that in so far as
music for the theatre is concerned, I have
always been in opposition to the majority of
my friends. Recitative is neither in my
nature nor in my character. I manage to
handle it fairly well, if I am to believe some of
my critics; nevertheless I am far more at-
tracted by melody and cantilena. I am more
and more drawn to definite, concrete forms.”
This is quite categorical, and is a very long
cry from the doctrines extolled by César Cui.
The score, then, of Prince Igor, so far from
being conceived in the form of Dargomijsky’s
Stone Guest, which Cui So much admired, is cut
up into clearly defined sections: that is to
say into airs, cavatinas, duets, trios, and so
forth. This, of course, does not detract from
226
RUSSIAN MUSIC
its strongly national character any more than
it does in the case of A Life for the Tsar.
It is a little difficult, however, to form a
perfectly exact estimate of Borodin's gifts as
an operatic composer from Prince Igor alone,
because the score was far from complete
when the composer died, and, as I have already
explained, it had to be revised and finished by
Rimsky-Korsakov, with the co-operation of his
pupil Glazounov, who was then one of the
most promising of the younger Russian writers.
Borodin had only written the music of the
prologue and the two first acts in their entirety.
With the help of his sketches Rimsky-Korsakov
was able to revise part of the second act and
put together the whole of the fourth, while
Glazounov wrote out the overture from
memory (having often heard Borodin play it)
and scored it, along with the entire third act,
including the magnificent Polovtsian march
with which it opens. In any case one can
point to many beautiful passages in the
sections which we owe to Borodin alone :
amongst others, to Vladimir's lovely cavatina,
to a duet that is quiet yet passionate in char-
acter, and to several effective choruses : that
of the young Polovtsian girls, for instance,
which is exceedingly graceful, or that of the
peasants, which is sung unaccompanied, or
again the one beginning “Descends des cieux
227
A SHORT HISTORY OF
bleus,” which is an exquisite thing. But above
all, one must rank on the same high level the
ballet music with chorus, which is entirely new
in manner and strikingly Eastern in character.
These charming and brilliant dance tunes are
rich in colour and varied movement, and are
exceedingly original both in melody and
rhythm. The orchestration too, in which the
percussion instruments are given an unusually
important part to play, is astonishingly vivid
and picturesque ; the kettle-drum, side-drum,
bass-drum, cymbals, triangle, and tambourine
being used both singly and in combination.
It goes without saying that all the rest of the
instruments take part in this gay and riotous
orgy of sound, the effect of which is quite
enchanting, as the whole thing is done with
exquisite skill and tact.
The music of Prince Igor is undoubtedly
very Russian in character, and it is this national
flavour in the music that has kept the work
in the repertory, in spite of the weakness of the
libretto, for not many years ago it was revived
with great success at St. Petersburg, and since
then it has been given both in Paris and in
London. Borodin, feeling this no doubt
himself, said: “Prince Igor is essentially a
national opera, which can only be of interest
to us Russians, who like to refresh our pat-
riotism at the fountain-head of our history,
228
RUSSIAN MUSIC
and to see the origins of our nationality revived
upon the stage.” The first performance of
the opera was given at St. Petersburg in
November 1890, three years after the com-
poser’s death, with Mmes. Olguina and Slavina,
and Mm. Melnikov, Vassiliev, Ougrinovich
and Stravinsky in the cast. The score has
been published by Belaiev with the text in
Russian, German, and French, the translations
being the work of Mme. Alexandrew and Jules
Ruelle respectively.
Borodin’s skill in handling the orchestra
does not need further proof than the ballet
music which I have mentioned. It is also
apparent once more in the very interesting
symphonic sketch to which he gave the title,
In the Steppes of Central Asia. Incidentally
this work illustrates the leaning towards pro-
gramme music which is noticeable in Russian
composers. The taste for it was inherited
from Liszt and Berlioz, their favourite models,
and after having been shared by Rubinstein
and Tchaikovsky, is seen once more in Rimsky-
Korsakov, Glazounov, Arensky and others.
Borodin’s symphonic sketch, which is in-
tensely poetical and sad in mood, is original
from the point of view of form, and is scored
in a very interesting way. The piece was
Originally intended for a performance of Living
Pictures, which was to have taken place in
229
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the theatre at St. Petersburg on the occasion
of the Emperor Alexander II’s silver jubilee,
when there was to be a series representing
different episodes in Russian history. The
composer himself wrote out the following
programme for it :
“In the silence of the sandy steppes of
Central Asia resounds the opening burden of
a quiet Russian folk-song. The melancholy
Sound of an Eastern melody and the approach-
ing steps of horses and camels are also heard.
A caravan, accompanied by Russian soldiers,
crosses the wide expanse of desert and con-
tinues its long journey without fear, trusting
confidently to the protection of its military es-
cort. The caravan winds on and on, the native
song and that of the Russians blending har-
moniously and being audible across the waste,
until at last they die away in the distance.”
Borodin, indeed, distinctly occupies a pro-
minent place in the history of modern Russian
music. Without exaggerating his importance,
one can say that he provides a personal note
and, above all, one which is characteristic of
his country and his race. As a musician he
had a complex, Subtle mind; in his harmonies
he was delicate, refined and bold, and was not
afraid to assault the ears of the audiences of his
day; he was a skilful contrapuntist; and he
handled the orchestra with distinction. His
23O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
weakness, such as it was, lay in a certain absence
of unity in conception and in a lack, which is
Occasionally noticeable, of calmness and sim-
plicity in all the nervous vigour he has at com-
mand.
In addition to the works which I have
already mentioned there are two beautiful
string quartets: one in A major, on a theme
from the finale of Beethoven’s quartet of 130,
and one in D major, with an exceptionally
attractive and original third movement, en-
titled “Nocturne’’; as well as two movements
contributed to string quartets written in colla-
boration with others. Then there is the un-
finished third symphony, which was completed
by Glazounov ; a scherzo for orchestra ; several
vocal works, which include songs and a hu-
morous Sérénade de quatre galants d une dame
for male-voice quartet ; and finally a Petite
Suite for pianoforte solo and three movements
contributed to The Paraphrases—the set of
twenty-four variations and fourteen tiny pieces
on what is known in Germany as the “Coteletten
Polka,” and in England as the “Chopsticks.”
Borodin’s death was almost tragic. It was
the last day of the carnival of 1887, and he had
invited a number of friends to an evening
party at his house. He was busy entertaining
them with his usual Sunny hospitality, and
being in high spirits he did not wait to be
23 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
asked to take part in the dancing. He also
sang and played over to his guests fragments
of the third symphony on the pianoforte.
Then, just as he had entered on an animated
conversation, he was suddenly seen to turn
pale, stagger, and fall backwards before any-
body had time to prevent him. They hurriedly
gathered round him, picked him up . . . and
he was dead.
If Borodin can be called a master of tech-
nique one cannot say the same of Moussorgsky,
that Strange, incomplete composer, musically
only half-educated, who was clumsy in the
expression of his ideas from sheer lack of
knowledge, but was endowed with a singularly
rich melodic sense, and was profoundly original
with a striking individuality of his own.
Modeste Petrovich Moussorgsky was born
at Karevo, in the government of Pskov, on
March 28, 1839. He studied music from
early childhood, and when quite young was
given lessons by a pianist of the name of Herke,
who is said to have been an excellent teacher.
But his independence of character and his
versatility prevented him from submitting to
the discipline and rules of an art which, after
all, has to be respected if one is going to
practise it seriously. Moussorgsky evidently
had a profound contempt for rules or discipline
of any sort.
232
RUSSIAN MUSIC
His life, which was ruined by drinking and
other excesses, was that of a bohemian whose
passions and extravagant love of freedom
knew no kind of restraint. When he was
thirteen years old he was admitted to the
Military School for Ensigns at St. Petersburg,
which he left as an officer at the age of seven-
teen, when he was gazetted to a regiment in
the Preobrajensky Guards; but being unable
to endure the precision and regularity of a
military life he left the army after three years.
However, as he was not rich, he had to find a
livelihood. After having frittered away several
years, which he passed partly in the country,
partly at his mother's, and partly with his
brother and sister-in-law, he began by under-
taking some dull translating work, and even-
tually accepted a government post in the
department of Civil Engineering, which how-
ever he shortly resigned. This was in 1868.
But, faced once more with poverty, he obtained
employment again under the government, in
spite of the none too pleasant recollections he
had of his former administrative work. This
time he went into the department of Woods
and Forests, a branch of the Ministry of the
Interior, and there, moving perpetually from
one office to another and always being dis-
satisfied, he passed on to the Excise Office,
after which he determined to be quit of official
233
A SHORT HISTORY OF
employment for good, and resigned his post
in 1879, in order to accompany the famous
singer Mme. Leonova on a long musical tour
in Southern Russia and the East. Mous-
sorgsky's health was by this time undermined
by poverty, illness, and debauch, and on
March 28, 1881, this extraordinary man with
his keen intelligence and strong instinct for
music, died whilst still in the flower of his
youth, on the very day on which he was to
cross the threshold of his forty-third year.
It goes without saying that throughout this
adventurous and desultory career, Moussorgsky
was continuously occupied with music. When
quite a young.man he was brought by accident
into contact with Borodin. He met him
again not long afterwards and, like him,
became a member of the Coterie of Five,
of which Cui and Balakirev were the original
founders. But whatever society he belonged
to, he always remained essentially an Inde-
pendent. If he has a place apart from the
Russian composers of his time, as we are told
that he had ; if in his isolation he escaped
from all other influences and displayed audacity
of every sort; it was not so much because he
had a specially artistic temperament, as that,
by continuing deliberately to ignore the prin-
ciples and even what may be called the ortho-
graphy of music, he became unconscious of the
234
RUSSIAN MUSIC
liberties he was taking and simply put down
his ideas as they entered his head, without
troubling to give them any particular kind of
form. In this respect one might compare the
productions of Moussorgsky to those of some
of our latter-day poets. Still, there is no
denying the superb flashes of genius in the
case of the Russian composer whose songs,
however Strange and shapeless they may seem,
often have an expressiveness and a dramatic
intensity the force of which must be universally
recognized. It would be rank injustice to
pretend that when Moussorgsky spoke he had
nothing to say ; the misfortune was that he
was too often content to stammer.
Strictly speaking, Moussorgsky was not a
musician ; he was what Berlioz has been some-
times called—a poet using musical material;
only in this case the distinction was more acute,
seeing that the musical material was singu-
larly limited. His education was so incom-
plete that he did not know how to set down
his ideas in a way to do them justice, or even
how to give shape to a simple melody for the
voice. His songs are mere sketches; they
have no logical development, and as often as
not they come inexplicably to a sudden stop
before they have barely begun. On the other
hand the musical ideas have a strongly original
flavour of their own, and frequently show an
235
A SHORT HISTORY OF
exquisite feeling for poetry and an astonish-
ingly powerful sense of drama ; they are
indeed real heart-cries of moving and often
tragic intensity.
I spoke just now of Moussorgsky's indepen-
dence, and of the various shifts to which he
was put by his difficulty in expressing his
thoughts. This can be illustrated by the
first of the Nursery set, in which the time is
changed (from 7–4 to 3–4, 5–4, 6–4, and so on)
no less than twenty-seven times in fifty-three
bars. What rhythmical sense can that make,
or what musical figure can you get from it :
And as far as rhythm goes Moussorgsky had
trouble to write correctly. For instance, in
the original edition of this song the forty-
fourth bar is in 6–4 time (which is only an
expansion of 6–8) and consists of a crochet, a
crotchet rest, a minim rest and a minim, as
though it were in 3–2 time. There are many
other similar mistakes.
What am I to say about his pianoforte
music Can one really give it the name of
music : I pick up the collection of pieces
called Pictures in an Exhibition, and endeavour
to understand them, but without success. The
music has not sense, shape, or colour ; One
cannot make head or tail of it. The notes
seem to be written deliberately without any
kind of coherent plan or sequence, just as they
236
RUSSIAN MUSIC
happen to come, in a sort of wild improvisation.
These are not mere sketches, be it noted, but
eccentric ramblings which no real musician
would have ventured to put in that form before
the public. I do not know what the out-and-
out admirers of Moussorgsky will think of me
if they read this, but I am bound to declare
that in my opinion some of these pieces lie
outside the pale of music and cannot be con-
sidered as such.
If I am told that Moussorgsky has nevethe-
less written important works, and that he even
took the theatre by storm, I shall reply that he
was not so very successful there, and that
moreover he was only able to make his music
fit for performance when others had taken the
trouble to correct it and to set it upon
its legs, if I may use the phrase. That is
what Rimsky-Korsakov, amongst others, did
for it. After all, inspiration, of which, as I
have said, Moussorgsky had plenty, is not
everything; one must also know how to make
use of it. In the case of a complex work on a
large scale, it is not enough to spin a few lovely
tunes out of one’s head, or even to utter cries
of passion and anguish ; one must be able to
co-ordinate and present one’s ideas ; one
must dress them and give them shape so that
they stand out in relief. It is no use hurling
contemptuous sarcasms on such criticism, as
237
A SHORT HISTORY OF
has been done by an enthusiastic biographer
of Moussorgsky, Pierre d’Alheim, who cannot
find abuse enough for those who are unwilling
to kneel, like him, before the genius. This
writer excuses Moussorgsky's mistakes in the
following words: “He did not want to
increase his means of expression; he simply
tried to translate into sound the Soul’s cries
which struck upon his ears from without or
rose from within himself. In very truth he
trampled on the rules and crushed the life out
of them by the sheer weight of his thought.”
That may be. Nevertheless, if someone wishes
to trample underfoot the laws of a language
in such a way as not only to be excused but
even to win admiration, he must know the
laws first and also the language he wants to
use. This is what the great composers—
Rameau, Beethoven, Wagner, for instance—
took care to do. As to Moussorgsky, he was
ignorant of the language of music, and the
mistakes he made are not the mistakes of genius
but of ignorance. If you want to write verse
and have no knowledge of Orthography, syntax,
or metre, you will not be able to produce any-
thing better than a literary monstrosity, how-
ever much poetry you may have in you. This
1.
* A more recent French biography is that of M. D.
Calvocoressi in the series Zes Mažtres de la Musique (Paris,
Alcan, 2nd ed., 1911).
238
RUSSIAN MUSIC
was the position Moussorgsky was in. He
knew nothing of musical Orthography or syntax,
and consequently could only produce works
which were wanting in form and finish.
I once wrote in a similar strain to one of my
friends in St. Petersburg, telling him exactly
what I thought of Moussorgsky, and saying
that in my opinion he was musically illiterate.
He replied as follows:–
“What you say of Moussorgsky could not be
fairer, and it explains why he is unrecognizable
in the posthumous works which have been
corrected and revised by Rimsky-Korsakov, in
whom the sense of form is very strong. This
has happened in the case of A Night on the Bare
Mountain, Khovanstchina, and the choral works.
Rimsky has also just rearranged his opera Boris
Godounov, and this new version is to be given
this winter by a company of amateurs. (It
was actually produced in December 1896)
Some have spoken of the popular character of
this composer’s music, but anyone who has
closely looked into the matter knows that not
a single musical thought of Moussorgsky has
become or can become part of the people’s
heritage, and that when his ideas clarify them-
selves and begin to look attractive, it is because
they are drawn from the people’s muse itself or
have been inspired by the essentially Russian
style of Glinka. Everything is strange and
239
A SHORT HISTORY OF
formless except what has been tidied up and
straightened out by Rimsky-Korsakov.”
There is no doubt that Moussorgsky was
exceptionally gifted, and he might have ac-
quired a great reputation in his lifetime had
he only consented to work and familiarize him-
self with the practice of his art. The constant
interest which Rimsky-Korsakov showed in
him would obviously not have been addressed
to a man of merely ordinary intellectual gifts;
moreover one can see that Moussorgsky had a
poet’s mind. But he was too much inclined
to suppose that imagination alone is sufficient
for a poet, and besides being blindly confident
in himself, he was too contemptuous of tech-
nique and of all who took the trouble to
acquire 1t.
In illustration of this I quote the following
words attributed to him by his biographer
Pierre d’Alheim, who thought, I suppose,
that he was doing a service to the memory
of his hero by thus exposing his critical
faculties. The context is Saint-Saëns's Danse
Macabre : —
“What is M. Saint-Saëns's practice He
takes down a tiny miniature from the wall,
and puts it into an enormous frame. He gets
hold of a few trivial ideas and then drowns
them in a gulf of orchestration. He calls that
a Danse Macabre. M. Saint-Saëns has thought
24O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
fit to compare this sentimental miniature of his
to Liszt’s Dies Ira with its sense of oppression
and anguish. No : it’s not “music,’ words,
the painter’s palette, or the sculptor’s chisel
that we are in want of the deuce take the
whole lot of these gentry with their foolish
ways and their fine words. Give us, instead,
Some ideas that are alive, talk to us in speech
that is alive, no matter what subject you
choose to deal with ! You won’t take anybody
in with all those pretty sounds. You have
about as much importance as a pretty woman
gracefully offering a bag of Sweets to one of
her gentleman friends ! You are a king of the
orchestra, M. Saint-Saëns, but you produce
nothing but trios, quartets, quintets, and so
on up the whole arithmetical scale | M. Saint-
Saëns an innovator I deny it with every ounce
of brain I have ; with the energy of every heart-
throb I declare I don’t believe it ! What are we
to do with this tiresome miniature-framer ??”
I need not insist any further.
An example has already been given to show
how ignorant Moussorgsky was of musical
notation ; it would be easy to prove that his
knowledge of harmony was not much deeper.
And if anyone should think that I am exagger-
ating when I speak in this way, he has only to
turn to César Cui, who was certainly not paid
to be severe on one of the members of the
24.I Q
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Band. Nevertheless this is how Cui expressed
himself on the subject of Moussorgsky, while
he was still living too :—
“This highly gifted composer appears at
times, however odd it may seem to say so, not
to be altogether musical, or, at any rate, not
to belong to the category of sensitive musical
beings. In fact, very wide gaps are to be
found in him, side by side with a number of
fine qualities. Symphonic form is altogether
alien to Moussorgsky, who is not at all at home
in working out or developing a musical situa-
tion. His modulations are too free, and
sometimes one might say that they only pro-
ceed on the lines of pure chance. When he
harmonizes a melody, he cannot give the re-
quisite continuity to the laying out of the parts,
and these parts, as he writes them, often look
quite impossible and unnatural, and produce
harmonies which only fall to pieces, and
chords which are intolerably harsh. The
critical instinct and the sense of beauty were
not always revealed to his understanding, and
his gifts assume a character of astounding
wildness, which brooks no kind of restraint.
And yet all these impetuous digressions and
extravagant Outbursts are the signs of an
abundant and vigorous vitality, and give
Moussorgsky an entirely original character
of his own.” It would be difficult to state
242
RUSSIAN MUSIC
a composer’s technical ignorance more pre-
cisely.
In point of fact, Moussorgsky's music was
only fit for public performance, as I have said,
after a friendly and experienced hand had
taken the trouble to revise and correct it.
In 1866 he wrote the symphonic work, A Night
on the Bare Mountain, mentioned above, which
was performed at St. Petersburg for the first
time in 1886 (that is five years after his
death), when Rimsky-Korsakov had re-orches-
trated it. It was about the same time that he
took in hand the first dramatic work which he
completed on a large scale, writing the text as
well as the music for it. This was Boris
Godounov, a five-act opera, the subject of which
was suggested to him by his friend Professor
Nikolsky and was based on a tragedy by
Poushkin. He had originally begun to com-
pose an opera, Salammbó, founded on Flaubert's
novel; but he never finished it, and instead,
used up various portions of it in Boris Godounov
and several of his other works. When Boris
was given for the first time in the Maryinsky
Theatre at St. Petersburg in 1874, it was not
successful because, from the musical point of
view, it was not really presentable. It was
only in 1896, fifteen years after the death of
the composer, that it became popular, when
Rimsky had revised and rearranged the score,
243
A SHORT HISTORY OF
which Moussorgsky, with his vanity and
ignorance, was quite incapable of writing in the
shape in which we have it to-day.
I should not like it to be thought that in
saying this I wish to deny the importance of
Moussorgsky as a musical personality. I do
not mean to do anything of the sort; but the
fact has to be stated that none of his compo-
sitions of any importance were able to win
their way until Rimsky-Korsakov had had a
hand in them. This is not only the case with
Boris Godounov ; the same thing happened
with his other big five-act opera, Khovanstchina,
of which he wrote both text and music (basing
the text on material supplied by Stassov), and
also with A Night on the Bare Mountain. If
Rimsky went to this trouble, it was because he
felt and knew that this extremely uneducated
musician was a genius who often had wonderful
flights of inspiration. My readers will grant
then, I hope, that in writing as I do about
Moussorgsky I am not trying to be anything
but fair towards him, and that when I say
that the score of Boris Godounov (which is
saturated with intense and characteristic Rus-
sian feeling) is very unequal, that does not
hinder me from maintaining that it is stamped
with the hall-mark of really great work, and that
some portions of it are exceptionally beautiful.
If we take the score as it stands now after
244
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Rimsky’s intervention and supervision, one
could point to many pages that do honour
to the composer. In the first act, for in-
stance, the whole of the scene with the crowd,
which is full of life and animation, with the
choruses harmonized so as to recall the old
Greek modes, is extraordinarily effective. In the
Second act one would single out the long mono-
logue of Pimen, which has great feeling and
obtains much effect from the reiterated figure
in the accompaniment; and in the third there
is the great scene of the Imperial procession
and the coronation of the Tsar, with the
shouts of the crowd, the singing of the hymn,
and the clashing of the bells. Moussorgsky
clearly had a strong sense of moving masses,
2
and there is proof of it again a little further on
in the scene of the peasants’ revolt in the forest.
The interesting song of the nurse in the fifth
scene, which makes admirable use of folk-song
material, should not be overlooked, and the
composer’s dramatic instinct comes out in
the episode of Boris’s vision. What is chiefly
remarkable in the score of Boris Godounov is
its sense of character and its general feeling
for colour; in that lies its real originality. As
to the orchestration, (which is not symphonic,
but is exactly what it ought to be,) if I mention
it, I do so in order to compliment Rimsky-
Korsakov; for anyone who is familiar with
245
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Moussorgsky is well aware he was incapable of
writing in that way.
In Boris Godounov, then, we are confronted
with a very interesting work, but one of which
we must not exaggerate the importance; above
all we need not hail it as an absolute master-
piece, as some insist on doing. Let us give
it the high and honourable place that is
due to it without attempting to deceive
ourselves.
Moussorgsky, as I have said, wrote another
opera, Khovanstchina. He did not live to
complete it, but Rimsky-Korsakov took it in
hand and orchestrated it. Some popular per-
formances were given in February 1886 by the
Musical and Dramatic Club of St. Petersburg;
it was then played at Kiev in October 1892,
and at a private theatre at St. Petersburg a
year later; and it has recently been revived and
played in Paris and London. Though less
popular than Boris Godounov the music of it is
simpler and more lyrical, and more allied to that
of conventional opera. In spite of the clumsi-
ness of the libretto, due to radical alterations
made at the last minute by the composer
when he felt his health giving way, it is not so
episodic as the earlier opera; but the religious
and political factions of Russia in the seven-
teenth century, which form its subject, afford
less interesting material to a western audience
246
RUSSIAN MUSIC
than the stirring story of the unhappy Tsar
Boris.
Amongst other works of Moussorgsky which
Ought to be mentioned are a symphonic Inter-
mezzo (which, of course, had to be rescored by
Rimsky-Korsakov before it could be performed),
the choral Defeat of Sennacherib and joshua,
the Pictures in an Exhibition, and several small
detached pieces for pianoforte; and also the
groups of songs, “Without Sunshine,” “The
Nursery,” “Songs and Dances of Death,” and
a number of single songs to words by Poushkin,
Goethe, Heine, Nekrassov, Alexis Tolstoy,
Shevshenko, Kolstov, Mey, Golenishtiev-
Koutouzov, and Moussorgsky himself. I have
spoken of the intensely poetical and dramatic
character of some of these songs; there are
others (such as “The Peepshow’’ and “The
Seminarist”) which are extraordinarily satirical
and comic in sentiment. Finally I should
add that Moussorgsky sketched the music for
a single act of Mlada (the composite opera
which I mentioned when dealing with Borodin),
and that he left fragments of two unfinished
operas, Marriage and The Fair at Sorochinsk,
both based on comedy subjects by Gogol.
We now come to the composer who was
certainly the most prominent in the little
group of reformers, and who without doubt
had the highest reputation of any musician in
247
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Russia since the death of Rubinstein and
Tchaikovsky. I mean, of course, Rimsky-Kor-
sakov (now dead himself), whose works seem
to me the loftiest and most original in all the
modern Russian school.
Nicholas Andreivich Rimsky-Korsakov was
born at Tikvin, in the government of Novgorod,
On March 18, 1844. He was a hard-working
and prolific composer, whose inspiration did not
perhaps always keep pace with his output ; but
at any rate being exceedingly gifted and having
received a sound musical education, he pro-
duced work of every sort and kind—dramatic,
Symphonic, instrumental, vocal and choral.
Like so many of his contemporaries, he had
first begun to study music as an amateur, and
it was only after he had been through the
preliminary stages of a naval officer's career
that he threw up his post, while still quite
young, in order to devote himself whole-
heartedly to the indulgence of his taste for
music.
It may be taken for granted that Rimsky-
Korsakov had even under these conditions
acquired, as I have said, a sound training in
music, seeing that he was invited in 1871,
when he was only twenty-seven years old, to
take charge of a class for composition and
orchestration at the Conservatoire in St. Peters-
burg. As he was younger than any of the
248
RUSSIAN MUSIC
other members of the Group of Five, he had
been the last to join them, and at first he
naturally enough came under the influence
of Balakirev and César Cui, as may easily be
seen by looking at his early operas. However,
his robust musical temperament saved him
from certain exaggerated forms of expression,
and, at the same time, his intimate acquaint-
ance with folk-songs and the effective use he
made of them in a variety of compositions
gave his music a very decided individuality of
its own. Then again, it has to be remembered
that when he felt sure of his powers and let
himself follow the natural bent of his fine
musical instinct, he ended by going ahead on
his own lines without troubling any more about
the principles of his good friends in the Group,
which, as we have seen, were only accepted by
Borodin too, up to a certain point. The result,
as might have been expected, was a somewhat
Striking change in the composer’s manner.
A fellow-countryman of Rimsky-Korsakov has
quoted to me a pertinent remark of his illus-
trating this very point. On the occasion of
the performance of one of his later operas, the
music of which was characterzied by remark-
ably graceful and sincere melodic feeling,
someone happened to express in his hearing a
mild astonishment at what was a comparatively
new feature of his operatic style. “Hah!”
249
A SHORT HISTORY OF
replied Rimsky, “I’ve had enough of recita-
tive. I can’t stand any more of it !” And
`... there you have César Cui buried with his
precious system alongside of him.
In 1873 Rimsky-Korsakov made his first
appearance as an operatic composer at the
Maryinsky Theatre at St. Petersburg, with
The Maid of Pskov, a work in four acts, the
subject of which was taken from a play by the
poet Mey. Although this was his first original
work for the stage, his name was already asso-
ciated with it, for on February 28 of the pre-
vious year Dargomijsky’s unfinished opera, The
Stone Guest, was produced at the same theatre,
after being scored by Rimsky with the skill that
always characterized his handling of the
orchestra. In The Maid of Pskov he made
skilful use for the first time of several Russian
popular tunes—amongst others of a delightful
melody which comes from the district of
Arzamos and is to be found as number twenty-
seven in Balakirev’s collection of folk-songs.
This is introduced into the opening scene
of the opera. Otherwise the score is not
particularly interesting, the recitative being
somewhat dry and the harmonization too
crude to be generally acceptable. The work
was given sixteen times, and was then dropped
altogether from the repertory until it reap-
peared in a revised and considerably improved
250
RUSSIAN MUSIC
version in April 1895 at the Panaevsky Theatre
under the auspices of a private musical society
at St. Petersburg. In its new form it was
taken up by the Imperial Opera houses at
Moscow and St. Petersburg, and under the
name of Ivan the Terrible was recently given
in Paris and London with Shaliapin in the
title-róle, when its picturesque qualities and
its powerful dramatic character were highly
appreciated.
Eight years passed without anything by
Rimsky-Korsakov being produced in the
theatre. He was engaged at the time on
other works of which I shall have to speak later
on ; amongst other things on a string quartet,
which won him an honourable mention in a
competition organized by the Russian Imperial
Musical Society. He also published about
this time an excellent collection of a hundred
Russian folk-songs, which he had collected and
harmonized himself. Then on January 20,
1880, he had his second opera, A Night in May,
given at the Maryinsky Theatre. In this
three-act work, the subject of which was
taken from a very popular tale, half-farce half-
fantasy, by Nicholas Gogol, the composer
struck a new note of humour and liveliness ;
the melodic vein too was freer and more
abundant than in The Maid of Pskov. The
first act was graceful and melancholy in
25I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
character, while the second was exuberantly
comic and whimsical. The third was un-
doubtedly of inferior quality; it was also too
long, and was only noteworthy for a very
attractive Slumber-song. Nevertheless the
opera as a whole was well received, and it was
admirably played by Mmes. Bichourin, Slavina
and Vielinskaya, and Mm. Stravinsky, Lodi,
Ende, Melnikov and Sobolev. A Night in
May was successfully revived in October 1894
at the Mikhailovsky Theatre, and four years
later was given at Moscow.
Only two years separate the production of
A Night in May from another work which is
perhaps the best he ever wrote for the stage.
This was The Snow-Maiden (Sniegourochka), a
fantastic opera in four acts and a prologue,
based on a play by Ostrovsky, for which Tchai-
kovsky, it will be remembered, had written
incidental music some twelve years previously.
The fairy and legendary side of the libretto,
in which humour and poetry constantly alter-
nate, was precisely of a kind to set free the
inspiration of the composer ; the result is a
score, exquisitely fresh and youthful in feeling,
with an originality of mood as well as of form,
and a picturesqueness which is not merely
romantic but is strongly Russian in character.
In fact, taken as a whole, The Snow-Maiden is
entrancingly beautiful; its only fault, such as it
252
RUSSIAN MUSIC
is, consists of a slight over-elaboration of some
of the development sections, which may be
considered the habitually weak spot of Rimsky-
Korsakov, and, incidentally, of almost all
Russian composers. Many of the individual
numbers and episodes might be quoted for
the successful way in which they hold the
attention and the sympathy of the listener :
such, for instance, as the frankly comic scene
with the King of Berendey, the delicious
episode of the Snow-maiden and her mother
on the shores of the lake, and the lovely song
of the shepherd Lel (the whole of whose part,
like that of the Snow-maiden, is quite charm-
ing); attention should also be drawn to the
astonishing finale of the first act, the prelude
to the second, and the whole of the third.
Reverie, colour, poetry, passion, humour—all
this is to be found in the music; which does
not mean that the musician as such is in any
sense in the background. He has not only
been inspired to write charming, graceful
melodies; he shows technical knowledge in
his use of harmonies which are often full of
surprising and new effects, and he proves him-
self to be an orchestrator of incomparable
skill. And here I must make one remark, and
that is, that Rimsky-Korsakov in this score has
for the first time gone against the rigid prin-
ciples of the Heap, and has completely repu-
253
A SHORT HISTORY OF
diated the system of maintaining the absolute
continuity of the musical thread. The score
of The Snow-Maiden is made up entirely of
separate numbers which are united by reci-
tatives in accordance with the traditional form
of European opera.
The score of Mlada has perhaps more
breadth. This is the fairy ballet-opera in four
acts for which Gedeonov had written the
libretto, with the idea of having it set to music
by four different composers. The scheme, as
readers of the section of this chapter devoted
to Borodin will remember, came to nothing.
In the end Rimsky-Korsakov composed the
whole of the music, and the work was given at
the Maryinsky Theatre in November 1892.
The subject, which was essentially national,
and was partly historical, partly legendary,
dealt with an epoch preceding the introduction
of Christianity to the Slavonic peoples, and
gave a picture of the life of the ancient Slavs on
the shores of the Baltic. The work is complex,
but very interesting from the musical point of
view, and some of the sections—more especi-
ally the lovely choruses and ballet-tunes—are
exceedingly attractive. The opera taken as a
whole is pleasing, picturesque, and poetical ;
it contains a fund of graceful melody, and
in the matter of modulations it shows the
hand of a master. For my own part I have
254
RUSSIAN MUSIC
obtained keen delight from reading the score,
which is original both in form and idea, and I
regret that I have to record that on the stage
it has had practically no success at all.
We now come to Christmas Eve, a fantastic
opera in four acts and nine scenes, which
was produced at the Maryinsky Theatre on
December 10, 1895. This time the composer
wrote his own libretto, going for his material
to a popular short story by Gogol, called
“Christmas Eve,” which had already been
used for three other operas. The first of
these was Tchaikovsky’s Wakoula the Smith (or
Oxana’s Caprice), which was given at the same
theatre in 1876; the second, by Soloviev, had
some success at a private theatre; the third,
set to the dialect of little-Russia by Lissenko,
obtained a certain popularity at Kiev and at
Kharkov, and for several years a version of
this, with the music re-adapted by a little-
Russian company to a fairy pantomime (also
based on Gogol), was played with success at
St. Petersburg. The score of Christmas Eve
contains some of Rimsky-Korsakov's best work.
It does not suffer from the tendency to long-
windedness which occasionally detracts from
the value of his other operas; on the other
hand, there is a certain lack of freedom and
spontaneity in the character of its melodies.
The ideas are mostly short, and often seem to
255
A SHORT HISTORY OF
need developing. Moreover the composer
in this work returned for the moment to the
tiresome principles so often referred to in
this chapter, and in his desire to keep stead-
fastly off the track of traditional opera and to
apply himself assiduously to obtaining con-
tinuity in the musical thread, allowed the
writing at times to become unnecessarily
packed and loaded. But all the symphonic part
of the opera, which belongs to the fantastic
side of the subject, is treated in a masterly way
and is as attractive as it is original. Apart
from that, several of the separate numbers are
worth mentioning : amongst others, two charm-
ing songs for tenor and two cavatinas for
soprano, one of which is couched in an affect-
ing mood of melancholy. Christmas Eve, the
cast for which included Mmes. Mravina,
Kamensky and Younossova, and Mm. Yer-
shov, Stravinsky, Koriakin, Ougrinovich and
Chouprinnikov, was very favourably received
by the public.
After Christmas Eve, which was, as I have
said, given at St. Petersburg, Rimsky-Korsakov
had two important works produced at Moscow.
The first of these was Sadko (January 6, 1898),
a legendary opera in seven scenes; the second
was The Tale of Tsar Saltan (November Io,
1900), the subject of which was taken from a
poem by Poushkin, who furnished material for
256
RUSSIAN MUSIC
so many Russian composers. The latter seems
to have roused little enthusiasm, but Sadko,
on the other hand, had considerable success
not only at Moscow but also at St. Petersburg,
where it was staged in 1901.
The Tsar’s Betrothed, an opera in three acts
and four scenes, written to a pathetic poem
by Mey, had a still more emphatic and spon-
taneous success when, after having been first
produced at the Private Opera at Moscow in
1899, it was given at the Maryinsky Theatre
at St. Petersburg in 1902 with Mmes. Adelaida
Bolska, Slavina, Nosilova and Gladkaia, and
Mm. Morskoy, Yakovlev, Serebriakov, Krant-
shenk and Antonovsky in the cast. In this
work, which went the round of the Russian
theatres, the composer abandoned to some
extent the form of opera habitual to him, as
he did in The Snow-Maiden, and adopted one
more allied to that of Western opera, without,
of course, sacrificing the Russian character of
his melody. “One might take it for a posthu-
mous work of Glinka,” One of my Russian
friends wrote to me. However that may be,
the score of The Tsar’s Betrothed is remarkable .
both in form and in content. The music,
which is in the grand style, shows real inspira-
tion, and is superbly orchestrated; not in the
manner to which Rimsky-Korsakov has accus-
tomed us in his concert music, where he aims
257 R
A SHORT HISTORY OF
at subtlety of rhythm and minute varieties of
colour; but rather with a broad eye for scenic
and dramatic effect which has made the scoring
rich and always appropriate to the situation,
and at the same time has left it sensitive and free
from over-elaboration. The strings, and more
especially the violins, have a prominent part
allotted to them, the effect of which comes out
fully in performance, and as I say they are
handled with a fine sense of richness and
sonority. This is not the place to analyse in
detail a work of this sort ; one can only point
to a few separate numbers, such as the brilliant
overture, the splendid choruses, and the lovely
ballet tunes, as being worthy of special atten-
tion.
We have not yet done with Rimsky-Korsa-
kov’s operatic output, and several other works
have to be mentioned. First of all there is
Mozart and Salieri, a small one-act opera, which
is a musical setting of the entire text of a poem
by Poushkin dealing with the supposed poison-
ing of the composer of Don Giovanni. This
was produced by the Private Opera Company
at Moscow in 1898, and since then has been
given at one of the court entertainments at
the Hermitage and also at other theatres.
The score is a little gem, and was a great
success, not only for the composer but also
for the great bass singer Shaliapin, who
258
RUSSIAN MUSIC
created the part of Salieri. Then a year
later the same operatic company produced
Boyarinya Vera Sheloga, another one-act opera,
which was written to precede The Maid of
Pºkozy. ---
After this came Servilia, a work in five acts,
which seems to have been quite a failure when
it was produced at St. Petersburg in 1902.
In this the composer returned to the mistaken
methods dear to the Heap, and more particu-
larly to César Cui, and wrote the whole thing
entirely in recitative, which the public appar-
ently found a little too tough for digestion.
It may perhaps have been somewhat discon-
certed by the subject as well; for Rimsky-
Korsakov deserted for once the national
themes, on which he had hitherto always
drawn, and took as his material for this new
work a gloomy episode in the history of
religious persecution under Nero. He re-
turned, however, to Russian popular legend
for his next opera, Kastcheſ the Immortal,
which was given in January 1903 at the Solodov-
nikov Theatre at Moscow by the Private Opera
Company. Three other operas remain to be
mentioned : Pan Voyevoda, which deals with
Polish life in the seventeenth century, and was
produced at the theatre of the Conservatoire
at St. Petersburg in October 1904; The Tale
of the Invisible City of Kitez, and the Maiden
259
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Fevronia, which was given at the Maryinsky
Theatre at St. Petersburg in February 1907;
and The Golden Cock, which was forbidden by
the Censor to be played during the composer’s
lifetime, and was only produced after his death
at the Private Theatre in Moscow in December
I909. It was also given in 1914 in Paris and
London in a version arranged by Mm. Diag-
hilev and Fokin, in which the singers sang
their parts sitting in tiers round the stage,
while the action was mimed by the members
of the ballet.
But the theatre, in spite of the number of
works which Rimsky-Korsakov wrote for it,
was far from absorbing all his energies. It
was mainly as a symphonic writer that he first
became known to his fellow-countrymen, and
he won his early reputation on the strength
of his instrumental compositions. The works
of his which fall under this heading are con-
siderable from the point of view both of
number and importance. First of all there are
three symphonies, the third of which (in
C minor) was written in 1873 and revised in
1884, while the second, which has the sub-title
Antar, shows that special and characteristic
preoccupation with the picturesque which
seems to be an inherent feature of Rimsky-
Korsakov’s gifts as a composer. It is in fact
a symphonic poem written to a psychological
26o
RUSSIAN MUSIC
programme which Rimsky claims to have
followed step by step—a proceeding which
constitutes the utmost claim on the powers of
music when there are no words to help. It
is an interesting though uneven work, with
powerful, crude harmonies and an intoxicating
exuberance of highly-coloured orchestration.
One can obtain some idea of it from the
following account which was written by César
Cui:—
“The subject is taken from an Oriental story.
Antar, a victim to the ingratitude of man, has
withdrawn into a desert. There suddenly
appears to him a gazelle pursued by a mon-
strous bird. Antar slays the bird, rescues the
gazelle, falls asleep, and in his dream fancies
himself transported to a magnificent palace,
where he is spellbound by song and dance.
The fairy guardian of the palace promises him
the three great pleasures of life, and then
suddenly he awakes up to find himself in the
desert. That is the programme of the first
part. It is an admirable specimen of de-
scriptive music. The thin dreary chords
suggesting the desert, the graceful bounds of
the gazelle, the heavy flight of the horrible
bird, expressed by sinister harmonies, and,
finally, the voluptuous abandon of the dances
—all this is on a high, imaginative plane.
Only, the theme of the dances is too brief for
261
A SHORT HISTORY OF
the scale on which they are written, and has to
be repeated too often.
“The second part, ‘The Pleasures of Re-
venge,’ is full of crude and Savage energy which
finds forcible utterance in the musical ideas as
well as in the orchestration. The third part,
‘The Pleasures of Power,’ consists of a splendid
Oriental march, decked out with arabesques
which are as attractive as they are novel. The
last part, ‘The Pleasures of Love,’ which is the
culmination of the whole work, consists of a
powerful representation in music of the poetry
of passion. It Only remains to add that, in
order to render the local colour still more
striking, Rimsky-Korsakov makes use of three
real Arab melodies, and that the theme associ-
ated with Antar himself returns in all four
parts, in spite of their very diverse character,
which gives the Symphony great unity.”
Here we see the composer borrowing Wag-
ner’s favourite device, only transferring it to
the domain of purely instrumental music.
But Wagner’s operatic music too is mainly
instrumental music if you come to think
of it.
To the three symphonies must be added
a Sinfonietta on Russian themes, in A minor ;
an Overture on Russian themes, 11, D major ;
another Overture, La Pâque russe, on Russian
church-themes; a fantasia on Serbian themes;
262
RUSSIAN MUSIC
a Capriccio espagnol ; and finally, two sym-
phonic poems, Sadko and Scheherazade (the
latter based on The Arabian Nights), and a
Conte féerique for orchestra.
Several of these works are known in France
from having been given at our big orchestral
concerts. The Capriccio espagnol is a picture
On realistic lines, somewhat crude in tone but
very interesting, and sometimes very piquantin
its orchestration, with riotous combinations of
tints that produce quite extraordinary effects.
However, I prefer Scheherezade, which seems
to me a most remarkable work. It is really
an orchestral suite, divided by the composer
into four sections, each with a different title :
“The Sea and Sinbad's Vessel,” “The Story
of the Calender-Prince,” “The Young Prince
and Princess,” and “The Festival at Bagdad.”
Each of these four sections has a definite and
distinct character of its own, and each shows
striking gifts of invention, while the work as
a whole is very original and is enhanced by
the novel effects of delicate and sparkling
orchestration which are the hall-mark of the
composer. It is, in fact, not only picturesque
music of a high order, but also exceedingly
interesting music. It has become familiar
of late years in Paris and London Owing to
its production as a ballet by M. Diaghilev’s
company.
|
263
A SHORT HISTORY OF
In Sadko the composer’s skill in scoring is
pushed to its utmost verge. Here too is a
real orgy of strange and unfamiliar sounds;
a weird medley of instrumental noises of an
astonishing intensity of colour. It is not
always pleasing. The ear would like occasional
moments of quiet and repose, and there are
unfortunately signs of undue straining after
harmonic effects, and above all Óf a tiresome
and somewhat too apparent desire to surprise
and disturb the listener. It sounds rather as
if it had been done mainly to astonish people.
In spite of all this, however, there is so much
warmth and vitality in this uncanny music,
that one cannot help being amazed at it and
admiring the extraordinary virtuosity of a
composer, who has such striking effects as
these at his command.
It is to be observed that in all this, the
characteristics of Russian music with its
colour and its strongly personal note play a
large part in the conceptions of the composer,
who has gone to refresh his ideas at the well-
nigh inexhaustible founts of Russian folk-
music. Otherwise (and apart from his dramatic
music) one might say that Rimsky-Korsakov, in
so far as the vexed question of the descriptive
possibilities of music is concerned, has, like
most other Russian musicians, been much
under the influence of Liszt and Berlioz, which
264
RUSSIAN MUSIC
inevitably leads composers in the direction of
excessive orchestration. This school tries to
get more Out of music than it can give, and
deliberately confuses the art of music with the
art of painting.
I think, as I have said, that Rimsky-Korsa-
kov’s great reputation in Russia was due at
first mainly to his symphonic music, in which
he was a past master. These compositions
of his are, in truth, quite new in character and
are full of interest, in spite of certain faults
and exaggerations, and above all they are
essentially Russian in feeling. He wrote very
little actual pianoforte music. In fact there
are only a set of variations in the form of a
suite (consisting of a valse, intermezzo, Scherzo,
nocturne, prelude and fugue) on the name
B-A-C-H ; four Morceaux (impromptu, nove-
lette, scherzino, etude); three Morceaux
(valse, romance, fugue); and six fugues.
These works are numbered op. Io, I I, I5 and 17
respectively. But the one piece of his for
pianoforte which should be singled out for its
strength and beauty, its fine proportions, its
freedom from superfluous developments and
the interesting and very skilful way in which
the composer has succeeded in establishing
his design at the beginning and in carrying it
through right up to the end, is the splendid
concerto in C sharp minor (op. 30), which is
265
A SHORT HISTORY OF
dedicated to the memory of Liszt. It is
worthy of being associated with that noble
name, for both in conception and presentation
it stands on a really high level, and is calculated
in every way to add to Rimsky-Korsakov’s
reputation.
This does not exhaust the list of Rimsky-
Korsakov’s compositions. One of his merits,
and not the least of them, was that immense
capacity for production which is characteristic
of strong men—the capacity with which
César Cui found fault so bitterly in the case of
Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky, and on which he
rightly congratulated his companion and friend.
Rimsky also wrote amongst other things a
considerable number of very individual songs ;
a cantata Svitezianka for Soprano, tenor,
chorus and Orchestra ; several unaccompanied
choruses for male and for female voices, and
others for mixed voices with Orchestral or
pianoforte accompaniment; a Serenade for
violin and pianoforte, and a concert fantasia
on Russian themes for violin and orchestra.
In the majority of his works of whatever kind
Rimsky-Korsakov has drawn largely from the
rich and inexhaustibly varied store of Russian
folk-songs and national tunes, with which he
was as well acquainted as anyone, from the
fact of having himself collected a large number
of them. And even when he did not actually
266
RUSSIAN MUSIC
quote them, he was influenced so much by
them and was so steeped in their idiom, that
his music acquired a special character, unlike
anyone else’s, which gave it quite an individual
flavour of its own. In this respect he fol-
lowed the traditions of Glinka, and vigorously
pursued the tracks opened out by the great
nationalist composer.
In fact, after the death of his two famous
predecessors, Rubinstein and Tchaikovsky,
Rimsky-Korsakov found himself virtually
at the head of the musical movement in
Russia. And this was due not only to the
number and importance of his compositions,
but also to the work done by him as a teacher
and to the high position he occupied as Pro-
fessor at the Conservatoire at St. Petersburg.
In 1896 he celebrated the twenty-fifth anniver-
sary of his appointment, and during that
quarter of a century many pupils passed
through his hands, who have since become
famous. These include such names as Gla-
zounov, Arensky, Liadov, Ippolitov-Ivanov,
Wihtol and Gretchaninov. He died on June
22, 1908. His widow (née Nadejda Nicolaievna
Pourgold), who survives him, has published
an interesting volume of his Memoirs
under the title My Musical Life. She is an
excellent musician herself, and in her youth
was a pupil of Dargomijsky, under whom she
267
A SHORT HISTORY OF
worked hard. She is known as a composer
by a pianoforte sonata and a fantasia for
orchestra on the subject of a short story by
Gogol, St. john’s Eve, and she has also made
several transcriptions of orchestral pieces for
pianoforte duet.
I have now done what I can to introduce
my readers to the founders and early leaders
of the Russian school—the men who by means
of their music and their writings, and also I
may add by their over-statements, have called
attention to the school and helped to give it
importance. I propose to bring this essay to
a conclusion by considering their pupils and
successors. I cannot deal with them in
detail. I shall try rather to take a rapid
survey of the more modern Russian composers
and musicians, and to give as impartial a view
as I can of the general condition of music in
the country. *
I should like, however, before I finish this
chapter, to mention the name of a distinguished
musician who, although he is not actually
Russian by birth, deserves to be spoken of here
because he has lived in Russia for over fifty
years and has rendered important services to
the cause of modern music in which he has
played a considerable part. I mean Edward
Napravnik, the admirable conductor at the
Maryinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg, who was
268
RUSSIAN MUSIC
born on August 24, 1839, at Beisht, near
Königgratz in Bohemia, and after having made
a mark as a student at Prague has been es-
tablished in the Russian capital since 1861.
Napravnik, who is a clever organist as well as
a first-rate conductor, has acquired a special
reputation from the ability with which he has
undertaken the performance of the works of
Russian composers at the Imperial Opera
House. He has had three works of his own
produced there : The Burgers of Nijri-Nov-
gorod, Harold, and Doubrovsky, the libretto for
the last of these three being the work of
Modeste Tchaikovsky, the brother of the
composer; and in December 1902 a fourth,
and a very successful opera, Francesca da
Rimini, was given at the theatre of the Con-
servatoire in St. Petersburg. Napravnik has
also written a number of other works, including
three symphonies (one with the title of The
Demon), a pianoforte concerto in A minor, a
Russian fantasia for pianoforte and Orchestra,
two string quartets, a festival march and six
national dances for Orchestra, as well as two
suites and three pieces for violoncello and
pianoforte, some songs and dances, and
various pianoforte solos. These compositions
are remarkably well written, but they are
somewhat lacking in vitality and real inspira-
tion. It is mainly by his admirable work as a
269
RUSSIAN MUSIC
conductor, and by the intelligent and zealous
help which he has always given with un-
stinted loyalty to his fellow-musicians that
Napravnik has reached and retained his unique
position at St. Petersburg.
270
CHAPTER VII
Russian composers of the later generation. Their
works, tendencies, and activity.
DURING the last thirty years there has grown
up, in the wake of the early founders of the
Russian school of music, a whole generation of
composers who have shown themselves ready
to reap the harvest sown by their predecessors
and willing to maintain the reputation of the
school untarnished. They may have been a
little vague, a little onesided, perhaps, as to
the direction in which they should move.
Some were inclined to listen to those who
advised them to take a hard and fast, uncom-
promising line; others were more sensible and
realised that it served no purpose to break
abruptly with the sane, established traditions
of music in the West. But all alike worked
hard, with the fixed determination of seeing
that the splendid movement, which had done
such credit to the country and had roused
both the attention and astonishment of musical
Europe, should not be allowed to be under-
mined. Many of these composers, and espe-
27 I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
cially the younger men, have proved to be
endowed with unusual vitality and have at-
tracted notice owing to the number and import-
ance of the works which they have produced.
The first of the younger generation of com-
posers to be mentioned is Alexander Glazou–
nov, the favourite pupil of Rimsky-Korsakov.
He was the son of a bookseller, and was born
at St. Petersburg on August 10, 1865. When
he was nine years old he took his first piano-
forte lessons from a teacher of the name of
Elenkovsky, under whom he began to familiarise
himself with musical theory; and in 1879 he
was put under Rimsky-Korsakov, who made
him work at fugal counterpoint and instru-
mentation. He now progressed so rapidly that
four years afterwards, when he was barely
eighteen, he made his first public appearance
with his symphony No. 1, which was such a
pronounced success that he decided to devote
his future unreservedly to the career of music.
He felt, however, that the symphony needed
re-scoring, and in the following year, when he
was touring in Germany, he had it performed
a second time, at Weimar, at one of the con-
certs of the Allgemeine Deutsche Musikverein.
Liszt, who was present at the concert, came
up to the young composer, shook him vigor-
ously by the hand, and warmly congratulated
him. Encouraged by his success, Glazounov
272
RUSSIAN MUSIC
did not let the grass grow under his feet, and
in 1889 he had his second symphony and the
Symphonic poem, Stenka Razin, produced in
Paris and conducted them himself, on the
Occasion of the Russian concerts which were
organised at the Trocadero by the publisher
Belaiev during the Universal Exhibition. In
1892 he was appointed second conductor of
the Imperial Russian Musical Society, and
eight years later he was made Professor at the
Conservatoire of St. Petersburg, of which he
became director in 1905. His capacity for
rapid production is as remarkable as his youth-
ful precocity. The following list of works,
most of which are of importance, will testify
to his voluminous output —
Eight symphonies: (No. 1 in E ; No. 2 in F sharp
minor; No. 3 in D; No. 4 in E flat; No. 5 in B flat;
No. 6 in C minor; No. 7 in F; No. 8 in E flat); two
overtures on Greek themes from the collection pub-
lished by Bourgault-Ducoudray, to whom the second
is dedicated ; a Carnival Overture, and an Omezerſure
So/ennel/e; the symphonic poem Stenka A'aziz, men-
tioned above, two symphonic pictures, Zhe Åremlin and
Spring, three orchestral fantasias, two of which are
called The Sea and Z'he Aorest, two orchestral serenades,
five orchestral suites, including Scenes de Ba//eſ and
Chopiniana ; various marches, poems, elegies, rhapsodies
and other short pieces for Orchestra; a string quintet
(one of his best works); five string quartets (Nos. I and
5 in D ; No. 2 in F; No. 3 the “Quatuor Slave” in G ;
No. 4 in A); a delightful set of five Novelettes for
273 S
A SHORT HISTORY OF
string quartet; various cantatas and a Hymn to Poushkin
for female voices; two pianoforte Sonatas and a con-
siderable number of Songs, pianoforte pieces, and duets
for violin, viola, violoncello, or horn with pianoforte
accompaniment.
In all this there is naturally both good
grain and chaff; everything is not of equal
value. But apart from the fact that several
of the works are on a high level of interest,
their number and importance imply an un-
usual temperament and imaginative power.
Moreover, Glazounov is conspicuous for his
skilful technique ; he may, indeed, be said to
have learned all there is to be learnt about
counterpoint, and he orchestrates with striking
success and ease. His music was at first
somewhat crabbed and thick, and also rather
confused, but later on it became lighter and
cleaner as the composer improved in his
methods of expression and became more sober
in his point of view. In his early days he
was inclined to follow the steep paths he had
seen Balakirev and César Cui pursue, but
nowadays, although he has lost little of his
Russian temperament, he would range himself
rather with Tchaikovsky in his later phases.
What he is still lacking in is clearness and sim-
plicity; he is fond of being complicated, and
perhaps the reason why his pianoforte music
is inferior to his Orchestral is that he tries to
274
RUSSIAN MUSIC
get too much out of the instrument. But he
has plenty of ideas and keen imagination, and
is likely to be regarded as one of the chief
figures of the modern school. It is a matter
for surprise that a composer with as much talent
and temperament as he possesses should not
have thought of trying his hand at the theatre
except in the direction of ballet. Three of his
works—Raymonda, Les Saisonſ, and Ruſes
d'amour—come into this category, and all have
been given at St. Petersburg. In these ballets
he has given evidence of that striking skill in
orchestration which, for those who know him
only in the concert room, can best be illustrated
by the sixth symphony, and more particularly
by its remarkably interesting finale.
A composer who has had an equally suc-
cessful career is Anton Stepanovich Arensky,
who was born at Nijny-Novgorod on August II,
1861. He was the son of a doctor, and at a
very early age gave indications of his obsession
for music, for when he was barely nine years
old and still ignorant of all the rules he took
it into his head to write an instrumental
quartet. He was sent to school at St. Peters-
burg, and from there he passed into the
Conservatoire, where he was a pupil first of
all of Johansen the Director, who was a Dane
by birth, and then of Rimsky-Korsakov. He
left the Conservatoire with the gold medal
275
A SHORT HISTORY OF
for composition, and at once courted publicity
with a symphony and a pianoforte concerto,
both of which were given with success at St.
Petersburg and Moscow. He was thereupon
made Professor of counterpoint at the Moscow
Conservatoire, the Director of which at that
period was Safonov, the admirable conductor
and pianist of the classical school, to whom I
shall have to return later. From that time
onwards he wrote a great deal of music of
varying degrees of merit, and won a reputation
more especially at Moscow, where he had an
opera, A Dream on the Volga (founded on a
subject by Ostrovsky, previously used by
Tchaikovsky for The Voyevode), produced in
1892, and another less important work in 1894.
This was Raphael, a small one-act opera, which
was written for the Congress of Russian
Artists. A third opera, Nal and Damayanti,
was produced in 1897 as well as a ballet, A
Night in Egypt, from which he arranged an
interesting orchestral suite. His compositions
also include a second symphony, an admirable
pianoforte trio, op. 32, (dedicated to the violon-
cellist Charles Davidov), which is written in
an interesting as well as a skilful way, and has
a delightful scherzo ; a pianoforte quintet ;
two string quartets; a fantasia on Russian
Songs for pianoforte and orchestra; three
Suites for the pianoforte, a number of attractive
276
RUSSIAN MUSIC
pieces for pianoforte Solo, several sets of songs,
and two cantatas, one of which, The Fountain
of Baktchisarai, was written to a poem by
Poushkin, and was performed at St. Petersburg
in 1899 on the occasion of the jubilee of the
great national poet. I Ought not to omit
to add that he also published a collection of a
thousand musical examples to serve as a guide
to the practical study of harmony.
Arensky, who is seen at his best in chamber
compositions and intimate vocal music, chas-
tened the exuberance of his style after a few
youthful outbursts. Much of his later writing
is allied in manner to that of Tchaikovsky;
at the same time the influence of Schumann is
manifest in his pianoforte works. This in-
teresting and busy composer succeeded Bala-
kirev as Director of the Imperial Chapel, and
held the post until 1901. He died on Feb-
ruary 12, 1906. ,
Another gifted composer is Joseph Wihtol,
who was born on July 26, 1863. Like his
friend Arensky, he was a pupil of Johansen and
Rimsky-Korsakov at the Conservatoire of St.
Petersburg, which he left in 1886 with the
gold medal; like Arensky, too, he began by
writing music that was rather thick and hazy,
but later on he clarified and lightened his style.
Amongst his compositions for Orchestra should
be mentioned La Fété Lhigo, a symphonic
277
A SHORT HISTORY OF
picture on Lettish folk-tunes, and a Dramatic
Overture which is specially interesting; another
important work is a ballad for voice, chorus,
and orchestra, called The Bard of Beverin.
Then, besides having written a string quartet
and edited a collection of ten Lettish folk-songs,
he has composed a well-written Sonata for piano-
forte, a dozen preludes and a fairly large number
of characteristic pieces for the same instrument;
he is also the author of a handful of songs to
Russian and German words, and a few small
works for violin or violoncello with pianoforte
accompaniment.
These three composers, Glazounov, Arensky,
and Wihtol, were brought up on the principles
of the Group of Five and the nationalistic teach-
ing of Rimsky-Korsakov at St. Petersburg, but
discarded them to a considerable extent in
later years, when they came more or less under
the influence of Tchaikovsky, whose eclectic
principles were taught at the musical head-
quarters of Moscow. In both phases they
endeavoured to find individual expression for
their musical personality. There is another
fairly large group of composers who remained
faithful to the Nationalistic principles and
show talent in what they have written, though
many of them are wanting in originality. This
group comprises the names of Liadov, Steher-
batchev, Sokolov, Alpheraky, Felix and Sigis-
278
RUSSIAN MUSIC
mond Blumenfeld, Kopylov, Antipov, Estafiev,
Grodsky, Gretchaninov, Scriabin, Liapounov,
and Evald. I propose now to pass each of
these composers in brief review.
Anatol Constantinovich Liadov, who was
born in St. Petersburg on May 12, 1855, and,
like Arensky and Wihtol, was a pupil of
Johansen and Rimsky-Korsakov, has a consider-
able output to his credit, but most of his
compositions are on a small scale. Among
the more important Orchestral works are an
early scherzo and a mazurka (the latter with
the title “Rustic Scene : near an Inn ''), a
polonaise in memory of Poushkin, another
polonaise written for the unveiling of a
statue to Rubinstein, and a brilliant orchestral
scherzo, Baba Yaga. His choral works include
a Hymn to Rubinstein (to which, as well as
to the polonaise, reference has been made in
the chapter on Rubinstein), and a setting of
the last scene of Schiller’s Braut von Messina ;
and for the pianoforte there are a number of
slight pieces, amongst which are some charm-
ing Arabesques and an attractive set of
Birioulki (the Russian Spillikins). Liadov also
wrote some choruses and songs, and edited
for the Geographical Society several volumes
of Russian folk-songs, three of which are for
children. He is an interesting composer, who
writes with real distinction, and he now holds a
279
A SHORT HISTORY OF
professorial chair at the Conservatoire in St.
Petersburg.
Nicholas Vladimirovich Steherbatchev, who
was born on August 27, 1853, has written even
less for Orchestra than Liadov has : a serenade
and two Idylls comprising, I fancy, all that he
has done in this direction ; but he has com-
posed numerous pianoforte pieces, (amongst
which I should mention a delightful series of
short pieces, Féeries et Pantomimes), as well as
songs to texts in Russian and German by
Alexis Tolstoy and Heine.
Nicholas Alexandrovich Sokolov, who was
born on March 26, 1858, was a pupil of
Rimsky-Korsakov at the Conservatoire in St.
Petersburg, and has held the posts of Professor
of Harmony there and at the Chapel of the
Imperial Choir. He has written a good many
interesting compositions, which include a ballet,
The Wild Swans, a Dom juan after Alexis
Tolstoy's dramatic poem, as well as an elegy
for Orchestra and two serenades for strings;
also three string quartets, a variety of works
for violin and violoncello with pianoforte ac-
companiment, numerous choruses both for
accompanied and unaccompanied voices, and
single songs.
Achille Alpheraky, who was born on July 3,
1866, has written some dozen pianoforte pieces,
and this is his sole contribution to instrumental
28O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
music; but he has also published over sixty
songs to words by Poushkin, Alexis Tolstoy,
Lermontov, Victor Hugo, Alfred de Musset,
Goethe, Heine, and others. He ought perhaps
to be considered as a dilettante, who composes
to amuse himself, rather than as a professional
IIll].S1C121).
Alexander Kopylov, who was born on July
I4, 1854, and was a pupil of Liadov, has
written a symphony and scherzo for orchestra,
two string quartets, fugues, and various pieces
for pianoforte, several choruses with and
without accompaniment, and some songs.
Except for a symphonic allegro for Orchestra
and three songs, Constantine Antipov, who
was born on January 18, 1859, has only pub-
lished studies and miscellaneous pieces for
pianoforte, though there are a good many of
these.
Estafiev, who studied at the Conservatoire
at St. Petersburg, has written, amongst other
things, an opera, The Voyevode, and a Poème
Mélancolique for orchestra, which has been
favourably received by the public.
Sigismond and Felix Blumenfeld (the former
born on December 27, 1852, the latter on
April 19, 1863) are both well-known pianists
and have published a number of works for
pianoforte as well as several songs. Felix
Blumenfeld has indeed shown himself a pro-
28I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
lific composer, having written not only songs
to words by Lermontov, Poushkin, Polonsky,
Alexis Tolstoy and Byron, and an Allegro de
Concert for pianoforte and orchestra, but also
a string quartet and a number of small piano-
forte pieces, including two Suites Polonaises, an
Etude de Concert, ten Moments lyriques, and so
on. All this, while not without an interest
of its own, is somewhat monotonous and is
lacking in character.
Boleslas Grodsky, who was born on October
29, 1865, has published over fifty works,
amongst which are several unaccompanied
choruses, a few pianoforte pieces and some
characteristic pieces for violin and violoncello
with pianoforte accompaniment.
Alexander Tikhonovich Gretchaninov, who
was born in Moscow on October 13, 1866,
studied the pianoforte at the Conservatoire
there under Safonov and then went to work
at composition under Rimsky-Korsakov at the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, which he left
with high distinctions in 1893. He has written
two symphonies, some attractive unaccom-
panied choruses and Sacred works, and a
number of very expressive songs which show
several points of affinity with Schubert; as
well as two string quartets, various pieces for
pianoforte, incidental music to several plays,
and a lyrical opera, Dobrynia Wikitich, on a
282
RUSSIAN MUSIC
national subject, which was produced with
success in St. Petersburg in 1903.
Alexander Nicholaevich Scriabin, who was
born on January 6, 1872, was not only an excep-
tionally gifted pianist—he was a pupilof Safonov
at the Conservatoire at Moscow, and in later
years became himself a Professor of pianoforte
at that institution—but was also a very interest-
ing composer who showed signs of promise in
this direction in his early days. He wrote
three symphonies (the third called The Divine
Poem), two other orchestral works, The Poem
of Ecstasy and Prometheus : The Poem of Fire,
a pianoforte concerto, a reverie for orchestra,
ten pianoforte Sonatas and numerous preludes,
mazurkas, studies and poems for pianoforte.
In the early works the composer’s style reminds
one frequently of Chopin ; in the poems, in
Prometheus, and in his other later works which
have provoked much discussion, Scriabin evolved
a new idiom based on a harmonic system of
his own to express the mystical programme
underlying his music. A colour scheme, con-
trolled by a key-board, is intended to synchro-
nize with the music in Prometheus, and in his
last work it is said that perfumes, too, are to
play a part. He died on April 27, 1915.
Sergius Michaelovich Liapounov, who is also
distinguished both as a pianist and as the
composer of a number of interesting works,
283 *
A SHORT HISTORY OF
was born at Zaroslav on November 30, 1859.
He received his early musical education at the
Imperial School of Music at Nijny-Novgorod
and completed it at the Conservatoire at
Moscow ; he then went to St. Petersburg,
where he came into close contact with Bala-
kirev, by whom he was much influenced, and
from 1894 till 1902 he was assistant Director
of the Imperial Chapel. The most important
of his compositions are a pianoforte concerto,
a symphonic poem, Hashish, a very interesting
and attractive rhapsody in three sections for
pianoforte and Orchestra, a symphony, and a
Solemn Overture on a Russian theme. In
addition to this there are numerous studies
and mazurkas, as well as a ballade, a polonaise
and so forth for pianoforte solo, which show
the influence of Liszt and Balakirev, and a
valuable collection of 265 folk-songs edited and
published by Liapounov for the Geographical
Society in 1899.
Victor Ewald, who was born on November
27, 1860, is a well-known violoncellist who has
written a quartet and quintet for strings and
three pieces for violoncello with pianoforte
accompaniment. I should also add to this
list the names of Pomazansky, who has written
songs and other small works, and Paul Ivanovich
Blaramberg, a pupil of Balakirev, who was
born on September 14, 1841, and wrote amongst
284
RUSSIAN MUSIC
other things a symphony and five operas, none
of which are of very great musical importance.
Of all the composers whom I have touched
on in the preceding paragraphs those who
seem to me to be the most accomplished and
to have most to say are Liadov, Felix Blumen-
feld and Liapounov. The majority, who are
primarily composers for the pianoforte, appear
to be directly inspired by Chopin, while some
are influenced by Schumann ; they have not
the originality and the characteristically
Russian idiom and flavour that one meets with
in the work of some of the symphonic and
operatic writers. It should be added that
these “pianistic ’’ writers persist in aiming
at novelty of effect and at complication not
only in the modulations and the harmonic side
of the music generally, but also in the structure
and design. They seem unable to write simply
and to realise the value of calm, pure melodic
outline; and almost all of them, it is to be
noticed, are wanting in a sense of balance and
proportion, often writing at interminable
length on the basis of a single formula which
is maintained unchanged throughout the whole
work. In mentioning these somewhat serious
faults I do not wish in any way to deny the
talent and the technical capacity of any of these
composers.
The above reflections remind me of a gene-
285
A SHORT HISTORY OF
ralization on the modern Russian school, which
I Once heard expressed by a colleague of mine
who is a good judge and is well up in his
subject. I was struck both by the precision
and the fairness of his opinion which he gave
me in the following words : —
“The greater number of the more modern
Russian composers seem to be under the in-
fluence of Liszt and Berlioz. They are pre-
occupied not so much with beauty of form as
with the search for the picturesque. In this
way they end by being content with cheap
effects bordering on the tricks of pure virtu-
osity, which are to be met with even in the
best pages of Liszt. Their compositions often
have elements of looseness and disproportion
about them, and they are characterized by
constant repetitions which give them an air
of improvisation. At the same time they
contain many striking qualities. When these
musicians have made the round of the Roman-
tics, they will come back to the Classics, to
Bach, Mozart, Beethoven and Mendelssohn,
and then they may give us some masterpieces.
The Russian school dates from yesterday.
Young people always prefer Lucan to Virgil;
it is only when they have reached maturity
that scholars can discern, appreciate, and love
real beauty.” It would be difficult to put the
case more deftly and eloquently.
286
RUSSIAN MUSIC
The composers whose names and works I
have mentioned above form a close and ardent
group, whose object and desire, above all things,
are to emphasize the national characteristics
of modern Russian music. If they have some-
times shown a rather childish contempt for
what was done before them and, like children,
have rejected the results of previous experience,
they are united by a common stock of theories
and precepts which constitutes the driving
force that impels them towards the end they
have in view. That is the source of their vitality,
and it is precisely this common stock of theories
and precepts which justifies the title of “school”
being applied to them. It is, of course, in-
evitable that some should have shown them-
selves too rigid in their application of certain
principles, and that others should have ex-
aggerated them ; and some have naturally
lost their way at times. But all have been
animated with the sacred flame, and all have
had that pure, unquenchable faith in the result,
which assures success in the long run. Miore
than one, no doubt, has rested by the wayside or
has “crept on a broken wing,” for all were not
equally gifted, and the weaker have naturally
seen themselves passed on the road by the
stronger. But their work, taken as a whole.
is bearing fruit, and the strong and valiant
Russian school of to-day provides us with
287
A SHORT HISTORY OF
an earnest of what the future has in store
for us.
I should add that good wishes and good
fortune are on its side. Besides having moral
encouragement, which indeed has never been
wanting, the Russian school found help of a
very efficacious and practical kind in the per-
Son of a wealthy business man who became its
Maecenas, and who was deterred by no ques-
tions of expense from advertising his protégé
to the world. This was Mitrophane Petrovich
Belaiev, the timber merchant, who was born in
1836, and in 1885 founded the publishing house
in Leipzig, on which he spent vast sums of
money in printing and propagating under the
best possible conditions the compositions of
the younger Russian composers of the day.
During twenty years Belaiev published, in his
Sumptuous and tasteful edition, some seven
hundred works, not counting arrangements—
and since his death in 1904 the publications
have been continued. He also founded the
Russian Symphony Concerts, at which the
works he published were performed, as well as
the Quartet Evenings in St. Petersburg, which
became a centre for a whole group of compo-
sers and players; and it was he who financed
the concerts of Russian music which were
given at the Trocadero during the Paris
exhibition of 1889. Am I not right in saying
288
RUSSIAN MUSIC
that the younger composers had luck on their
side :
Still, Russian music is not entirely confined
to the group of musicians I have mentioned.
Besides these there are a fair number of com-
posers in Russia whose names ought not to be
forgotten, and there are also some of an earlier
generation to whom I should like for the
moment to refer.
First, let me recall to memory those great
nobles and distinguished dilettantes, who often
played or composed themselves and who did so
much for the advancement and progress of
music in Russia, such as Count Razoumovsky
(Beethoven’s friend), the Princes Nicholas and
George Galitsin, Prince Youssipov, the two
Counts Michael and Mathew Vielhorsky,
Prince Odversky, Prince Gregory Volkonsky
and others. Some even wrote operas and had
them produced : Baron Victinghov did so, for
instance, under the assumed name of Boris
Sheel. I shall have to return to him later on.
Other amateurs also might be mentioned for
the part they have taken in musical movements
and for what they have done by cultivating
music for their own private gratification, such
as Laskovsky, Asanchevsky, Alexander Taneiev,
and Ladyjensky amongst others.
Villebois, who had his opera Natashka pro-
duced in 1863 at St. Petersburg without much
289 T
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Success, was one of these amateurs, and was
descended from an ancient family whose head
is said to have been a brave soldier and a
friend of Peter the Great. Besides writing this
opera he published an interesting collection of
Russian folk-songs. About this time too one
comes across the names of several composers
whose works were produced in the theatre.
There was Kashperoy who, after having had
two operas, Maria Tudor and Rienzi, given in
Italy, returned to Russia, when his Tempest
was produced at St. Petersburg in 1867, and
was made a Professor at the Conservatoire at
Moscow, where he died in 1894. Then there
was Santis, a well-known pianist and a pupil
of Henselt, whose four-act opera jermak was
given at St. Petersburg in 1874. There was
also Santis’s able pupil, Alexander Famintsin
or Famitsin (born at Kaluga on November 5,
1841 ; died at St. Petersburg on June 29, 1896),
who was composer, critic, and Professor of
Musical History at the Conservatoire at St.
Petersburg, where his operas, Sardanapalus
and Uriel Acoſta, were given in 1875 and 1883.
He also wrote a Russian rhapsody for violin
and Orchestra and two string quartets, and,
like his teacher, edited some Russian folk-songs.
Mme. Valentine Serov, the widow of the
composer, herself a clever musician, also wrote
an opera on the same subject and with the
29O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
same title, Uriel Acosta, which was given with
Some success at the Court Theatre at Moscow
in April 1885.
The celebrated violoncellist, Charles Davidov
(born at Goldingen on March 17, 1838; died
at Moscow on February 26, 1889), who had a
European reputation as a player, did not write
for the theatre, but was a voluminous composer
in other directions. Besides numerous works for
his own instrument he wrote some orchestral
Suites, several pianoforte quartets and quintets,
Some pieces for pianoforte solo and a number
of expressive songs which have kept their
popularity. At the St. Petersburg Conserva-
toire Davidov was, first of all, Professor of
Musical History, then Professor of the violon-
cello, and eventually the very successful
Director. Besides this he was Director of the
Russian Imperial Society of Music at St.
Petersburg. He also showed remarkable gifts
as a conductor, and for many years he gave a
number of very successful and popular chamber
concerts with Leopold Auer the violinist and
the pianist Theodore Leschetizky. Lesche-
tizky, though not a Russian (for he was born
of Polish parents at Vienna in 1831), lived for
nearly thirty years in St. Petersburg, where he
took a prominent part in the musical life of
the place not only as a virtuoso and a com-
poser but also as a teacher. One of the most
29I
A SHORT HISTORY OF
gifted of his many pupils during his stay in
Russia (where he is remembered to-day as an
eminent and hard-working musician) was Mme.
Annette Essipov, who acquired a reputation as
a pianist all over Europe, and became herself a
Professor at the St. Petersburg Conservatoire.
In 1878 Leschetizky returned to Vienna, where
he has lived ever since, and where he has
turned out numbers of well-known players,
including the most famous pianist of our
time, Ignaz Paderewsky, who has had such
a prodigiously successful career.
To return to the Russian school of com-
posers. Amongst those whose works have been
produced in the theatre in more recent days
I may mention first the name of Nicholas
Soloviev, who was born at Petrozavodsk on
April 27, 1846. He was Professor of theory
and musical history at the St. Petersburg
Conservatoire (where, as a student, he was
a pupil of Zaremba, and gained the Grand
Prix for composition with a cantata, The
Death of Samson), and was also musical critic
for one of the leading newspapers. He made
his name as a composer, first of all, with an
overture on a Russian theme and a symphonic
poem, Russians and Mongols. He then wrote
two operas: Wakoula, (based on Gogol's story
of Christmas Eve, which Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-
Korsakov and several other composers utilized),
292
RUSSIAN MUSIC
and A Little House in the District of Colomna,
which he could not get produced. But in
November 1885 a third opera, Cordelia, was
produced, the libretto of which had been
taken by Bronnikov from Sardon's fine play,
La Haine. It was a well-written work, but
was lacking in character, and only had a ſucces
d’estime. The composer has also to his credit
a certain number of expressive songs, and I
must not forget to mention that his great
friend Serov specially requested him to com-
plete and orchestrate the score of his last
opera, The Power of Evil, which death pre-
vented him from finishing himself.
Sergius Ivanovich Taneiev, who was born
on November 13, 1856, in the government of
Vladimir, is a scholarly musician and a re-
markably good pianist. He was a pupil of
Nicholas Rubinstein for pianoforte and of
Tchaikovsky for composition at the Conserva-
toire at Moscow, of which he was for a short
time Director. He first came out as a virtu-
Oso, in which capacity he has had a brilliantly
successful career. As a composer he made his
early reputation with a set of six string
quartets and a symphony. He subsequently
had a musical trilogy in eight scenes, The
Oresteia, on a libretto from AEschylus, given
at St. Petersburg in 1895. This was a very
sincere and creditable work written in a dig-
293
A SHORT HISTORY OF
nified style, but it was heavy in form and had
not very much character. Four years later a
one-act opera, The Vengeance of Cupid, was
produced. Taneiev is also the author of a
very useful book on counterpoint.
Michael Ippolitov-Ivanov, who was born on
November 19, 1859, is a distinguished com-
poser who has written several symphonic
works, including an Overture on a Russian
theme, a Sinfonietta, a charming Suite Cau-
casienne, and twelve characteristic pictures
for chorus and Orchestra, as well as some
chamber music, Several groups of Songs, and
a book on The National Songs of Georgia (in
the Caucasus). He has also composed four
operas : Ruth, produced in 1887 at Tiflis,
where at that time he was Director of the
School of Music ; Arra, produced at Tiflis in
1890; Assya, produced at Moscow in 1900,
and Goze el Uma, a four-act opera which was
successfully brought out at the Russian Opera
at St. Petersburg in 1910. Originally a pupil
of Rimsky-Korsakov at St. Petersburg, he
seems to have felt the influence of Tchai-
kovsky’s second manner, and, like Sergius
Taneiev, is what is known in Russia as an
“Occidental” composer, as distinguished
from a “Nationalist”: that is to say, his
music is not stamped with a character that is
essentially Russian except in the earlier works
294
RUSSIAN MUSIC
written under Rimsky’s influence. In 1893
he became a Professor at the Moscow Con-
servatoire and succeeded Safonov in the
Directorship of that Institution in 1906, and
since 1899 he has been Conductor of the
Moscow Private Opera. When the present
Tsar came to the throne Ippolitov-Ivanov was
Commissioned to write the official Coronation
Cantata, which was performed with great
pomp and ceremony in the Cathedral.
Michael Michaelovich Ivanov, who was born
in 1850, has the same surname as the preceding
composer but is not related to him. He is
himself a composer and a critic on the New
Times," for in Russia as in France musicians
are bitten with the irresistible desire of writ-
ing criticism as well as music. His composi-
tions, which are numerous, include a ballet in
three acts, The Vestal Virgin , three operas,
Princess Zabava, The Festival at Potiomkin, and
An Old Story, all given at St. Petersburg; a
symphony, A Night in May : Savonarola, a
Symphonic prologue ; a triumphal Overture ;
three orchestral suites; incidental music to
Medea ; a violin concerto, a Requiem, an Ave
Maria, and various songs. He was also commis-
sioned by the municipality of St. Petersburg to
write the cantata for the festival commemo-
rating the bicentenary of the capital.
* AVovoe Wreſnya.
295
A SHORT HISTORY OF
Boris Sheel (or Victinghov, to give him his
real name), was an amateur who was very
active as a composer and tried to make himself
talked about ; but his works, though numerous,
do not rise above the level of a decent medio-
crity. Three operas of his have been per-
formed : The Demon (1885), Tamara (1886),
and Don juan; and two ballets: The Tulip of
Haarlem (1887), and Cinderella (1890). He
also wrote another opera, judith, (which has
never been given), an oratorio, john of Damascus,
a symphonic poem, The Fountain of Baktchi-
sarai, and other works. He died in 1902.
Jules Bleichmann, who was born in 1868
and died at St. Petersburg in 1910, was
another amateur, who composed a Suite de
Ballet for orchestra, and a considerable number
of songs and pianoforte pieces. In 1896 he
conducted in person a new sacred work for
solo voices, chorus, and Orchestra on a larger
scale, called Saint Sebastian, which was criti-
cised with some severity; and his opera,
La Princesse lointaine, based on Edmond
Rostand’s play of that name, was produced
In 1900.
George Kazatchenko, who was born on
August 21, 1858, and was at one time a pupil
of Johansen and Rimsky-Korsakov at the
Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, is more to be
reckoned with than either of the last two
296
RUSSIAN MUSIC
composers. He has written a good deal:
amongst other things a symphony and an
Armenian Suite for orchestra, a fantasia on
Russian themes for violo and orchestra, a
cantata, The Roussalka, some choruses and
Songs and an opera, Prince Serebrany, which
was given at St. Petersburg in 1902. Kazat-
chenko also wrote the official Cantata of
Welcome, which was performed in the capital
to celebrate the visit of the President of the
French Republic in 1897. In this work, as in
Tchaikovsky’s overture “1872,” the Russian
National Anthem and the Marseillaise are
skilfully combined.
George Konius (or Conus) was born on
September 30, 1862, in Moscow, where he
became a pupil of Taneiev and Arensky. He
is a clever composer of the school of Tchai-
kovsky, and those of his works by which he is
best known are a ballet, Daita, which was
produced in his native town in 1896, a violin
concerto, some songs, and a variety of well-
written pieces for the pianoforte.
Another composer with a far higher reputa-
tion, who also belongs to the school of Tchai-
kovsky, is Sergius Vassilievich Rachmaninov,
who was born on April 1, 1873, in the govern-
ment of Novgorod. He studied first of all
at the Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, and
then at that of Moscow where he became a
297
A SHORT HISTORY OF
pupil of Taneiev and Arensky. He won the
gold medal for composition in 1892, and
almost immediately undertook an extensive
tour across Russia as a pianist, on his return
from which he devoted himself assiduously to
writing works of his own. Since then he has
frequently appeared both in Russia and abroad
as a pianist, he has held various posts as
conductor, and he has produced numerous
compositions of interest and distinction. These
include two symphonies; a fantasia, The
Rock, for orchestra; three pianoforte con-
certos ; a pianoforte trio (written in memory
of Tchaikovsky); a sonata for pianoforte
and violoncello; two suites for two piano-
fortes; several sets of short pieces and pre-
ludes for pianoforte solo, amongst the latter
being the famous prelude in C sharp minor ;
Some songs ; a cantata, Spring, and finally a
charming one-act opera, Aleko, which was
written on a subject taken from Poushkin’s
poem, The Gipsies, and was produced in
Moscow in 1893.
Another interesting pupil of Taneiev and of
Ippolitov-Ivanov at the Moscow Conservatoire,
where, like Rachmaninov, he won the gold
medal for composition, is Reinhold Glière,
who was born at Kiev on December 30, 1874.
His works include several attractive chamber
works (two string quartets, a quintet, and an
298
RUSSIAN MUSIC
octet); an early symphony; a later symphony,
Ilia Mourometz, written to a programme with
a national legendary subject; and a skilfully
orchestrated symphonic poem, The Sirens, in
which modern French influences are to be
traced. He is a musician whose career will
be watched with interest.
A composer who writes easily and freshly
is Shenck, the author of a symphony, The
Phantoms, two operettas, Phryné and Hadji-
Mourad, and an attractive ballet, Blue-Beard,
which was given at St. Petersburg in 1896.
And here I may mention the name of the
composer, Krotkov, whose Italian opera, Fiore
fatale, was produced in 1886 and was followed
in 1892 by a one-act opera, The Poet, which
was given in St. Petersburg.
More important than either of these two is
Arsene Nicholaevich Korestchenko, who was a
pupil of Taneiev and Arensky at the Moscow
Conservatoire, where he is now himself a
professor. His orchestral works, which are
numerous, include a lyric symphony; and
besides these there is a considerable amount
of vocal and instrumental music; also a ballet,
The Magic Mirror, and four operas, two of
of them being in one act : namely, The Palace
of Ice, which was played at Moscow in
December 1900, and The Feast during the
Plague, after a poem by Poushkin, which was
299
A SHORT HISTORY OF
produced at the Court Theatre at Moscow in
January 1902.
must also draw attention to an inde-
pendent and apparently anarchical composer,
Vladimir Ivanovich Rebikov, who was born at
Krosnoyarsk in Siberia in 1866, and studied
music in Berlin and Vienna. He claims that
he has thrown off every kind of influence, so
that he may the more easily follow the path
he has chosen for himself. According to a
biographer : “He wishes to free music from
the trammels of definite form and tonality in
order that it may be the faithful echo of all
the impressions of the soul and of the senses.”
Rebikov has published several sets of “mélo-
mimiques,” “psychological sketches,” and mis-
cellaneous pieces for pianoforte with such titles
as “Silhouettes,” “Parmi Eux,” “Dans leur
pays,” and also a descriptive legend, The Tale
of the Princess and the King of the Frogs. He
has also written some songs, and amongst his
works for the stage are a one-act “psycho-
logical" opera, The Christmas Tree, which was
produced at Moscow in 1903, and a later
one called Thea.
I Ought perhaps to give passing mention to
Mlle. Kashperov, the niece of the composer
whose name occurs earlier in this chapter.
She was a skilful pianist who had tempera-
ment both as virtuoso and as composer, and
3OO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
wrote several interesting works for voice and
for pianoforte.
Then there are three composers, all of
whom died young, leaving interesting works
behind them. The first is Genari Karganov,
an Armenian who became a naturalised Russian,
was appointed Professor of the pianoforte at
the Tiflis School of Music, and died in 1890.
He wrote a number of pianoforte works and
of songs to Russian words, which may be
somewhat faulty in style but have character
and individuality. The second is Gregory
Lishin, who was a pupil of Soloviev and
Rimsky-Korsakov, and died in 1888. He had
three not very striking operas produced, The
Gipsies, Count Noulin, and Don Cesar of Bazan,
and also wrote some symphonic music and the
words and music of several songs. The third
composer, who died in the flower of his youth,
just when he was giving brilliant promise
and was writing easily and rapidly, is Vassily
Sergeivich Kalinnikov, who was born on
January 13, 1866, in the government of Oslov.
He studied composition under Blaremberg in
Moscow, and his two chief works are the
symphonies in G. minor and A major, the
former of which’is a very striking composition
and has met with great success in Paris (where
it was first given under Winogradsky at the
Exhibition in 1900) and other musical centres.
3OI
A SHORT HISTORY OF
His other works include an Orchestral suite,
two symphonic sketches (one called The
Nymphs, the other The Cedar and the Palm),
some songs and pianoforte pieces and in-
cidental music to Alexis Tolstoy's play,
Tsar Boris. He was making preparations for
producing his first opera, The Year 1812,
when death cut short his labours in January
IOOI.
"ºne the composers who are still quite
young must be classed Igor Stravinsky, son of
the well-known singer. He was born in 1882
at Oranienbaum, a village near St. Petersburg,
and was a pupil of Rimsky-Korsakov. His
early compositions include a symphony, some
songs, a set of four studies for pianoforte, a
Scherzo Fantastique and a symphonic fantasia,
Fireworks (both for orchestra). His later
works, which have made him famous, are the
three extraordinarily brilliant, vivacious and
picturesquely scored ballets, The Fire-Bird
(1910), Petroushka (1911), and The Crowning of
Spring (1913); and the opera, based on Hans
Andersen’s fairy-tale, The Nightingale, which
was produced in London in 1914.
Then there are one or two operatic com-
posers whose names are barely known outside
Russia. Hardenwald, for instance, whose Power
of Love, founded on a story by Tourgeniev,
was produced at Kharkov in 1895; Pachulsky,
3O2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
whose Valerie, (also founded on a story by
Tourgeniev), was given in 1896 at Kiev,
where he is Director of the Conservatoire;
Prince Troubetskoy, whose Melusine was pro-
duced at Moscow in 1895; and Blaremberg, to
whom I have already referred as the author of
five operas. The following works may also be
mentioned here : Love Triumphant, by Garte-
vel (Moscow, 1895); The Fountain of Flowers,
by Alexander Fedorov, based on a tale by
Poushkin (Ekaterinoslav, 1896); The Miracle
of Roses, by Peter Sheerck (St. Petersburg,
1913); Miranda, by Kasanli (St. Petersburg,
1910); The Siege of Dubno, by Sokalsky; and,
finally, a tiny opera, Love’s Revenge, by
Alexander Taneiev (a nephew of Sergius
Taneiev), who was a friend of Balakirev and
Rimsky-Korsakov, and has continued to write
music in spite of the heavy duties of state
involved in his having become chief chan-
cellor. This opera was produced before the
Court at the Hermitage Theatre in March
IOO2.
ºpod Godowsky, the distinguished pianist
who was born at Wilna in Russian Poland on
February 13, 1870, deserves mention for having
made some interesting contributions (including
a sonata, studies on Chopin's Etudes, and
original studies) to the literature of the
pianoforte; and his accomplished fellow-
3O3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
artist, Vassily Sapellnikov, has published a
few pleasing trifles for the same instrument.
It may be added that Hermann Laroche, the
well-known critic, wrote some songs and some
very uneven incidental music to Alfred de
Musset’s Carmosine; that a clever amateur,
Sergius Youferov, composed several sets of
songs and some attractive pianoforte pieces;
and that Hlavatch, the conductor of the
Summer Orchestral concerts in St. Petersburg,
has had several small symphonic works per-
formed. Another conductor who has com-
posed on a larger scale is Nicholas Tcherepnin
(born 1866), who was a pupil of Rimsky-Kor-
Sakov, and has become known outside Russia
for his two charming ballets, Le Pavillon
d’Armide and Narcisse.
I will now conclude this chapter with
a list of composers who cannot be treated
in detail, but deserve to be recorded in
any account of the later phases of Russian
music. These are:—
Lissenko (born 1842), who was a pupil of
Rimsky-Korsakov and has written several
operas; Catoire (born 1861), who is of French
parentage (and betrays it in his music), but
took lessons of Liadov in St. Petersburg and
now lives in Moscow ; Dloussky, who has
written songs and, in conjunction with Werani,
an operetta, Madame Sans-Gêne ; Toushma-
3O4.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
lov, Kapry, Kouznetsov : Vassilenko (born
1872), who was a pupil of Taneiev and Ippoli-
tov-Ivanov, and has come somewhat under
French influence just as Akimenko (born 1878)
has done in his later pianoforte works; Juon
(born 1872), who is somewhat German in
style, like Steinberg, Rimsky-Korsakov’s son-
in-law (born 1883), who has written two
symphonies, and Medtner (born 1879), who
was the child of German parents in Moscow,
and has written mainly chamber music ;
Amani (born 1875), who was a pupil of
Rimsky-Korsakov, and is the author of a piano-
forte trio and various small pianoforte pieces;
Artsibouchev, who has written small works for
pianoforte and for orchestra; Shtchurovsky,
the composer of an opera, Bogdan-Khmelnit-
sky; Kadletz, who has had his ballet, Acis and
Galatea, performed in St. Petersburg; Zolo-
tarev, Malishevsky, and Spendiarov, all three
of whom have written orchestral works as
well as chamber music ; and, finally, Starsov,
Stolypin, Zybin, Donaourov, Alenev, Demidov
and Kolatchevsky, who are more or less
amateur composers of songs. In the same
category of amateurs must be placed two
composers who have recently died : Adolphe
Bariansky (died 1900), who, in spite of the
claims of a large business, became known for
his chamber works and his music for piano-
305 TJ
RUSSIAN MUSIC
forte; and Baron Vassily de Wrangel, who
wrote various songs and pianoforte pieces as
well as a one-act opera, The Broken Marriage,
and a ballet, The Daughter of the Mikado, which
was performed at St. Petersburg.
306
CHAPTER VIII
A general view of the present state of music in Russia.-
Musical critics and historians.—Distinguished singers
and instrumentalists.-The teaching of music.—The
Conservatoires.—Conclusion.
FROM what I have said in the preceding
chapter it should be possible to gain some
notion of the strength and vitality of the
musical movement going on at the present
moment in Russia, which, as I have said
at the beginning of this essay, is the only
country besides France possessing a really
national school. This movement has occurred
in the domain of theory as well as of actual
practice, thanks to the publication of a number
of critical and historical works, many of which
are of interest and importance. These publi-
cations have unfortunately been somewhat
sporadic, and they do not supplement each
other to any great extent, so that the whole of
them if collected would not give a very accurate
general survey of the present state of music
... Russia or of its origins and development;
nevertheless they indicate, more especially of
late years, an intellectual activity that is
3O7
A SHORT HISTORY OF
altogether praiseworthy and deserving of en-
couragement. Amongst the many works which
have been published I will single out for
mention the following :-
R. P. Dmitri Razoumovsky: Russian Church Music ;
Youry Arnold : Memoirs and miscellaneous articles;
Prince Nicholas Youssipov : History of Music in
Aussia, Historical and analytical Monograph on the
Violin ; Perepelitsin : Dictionary of Music, Illustrated
Aſistory of Music in Russia, Z//ustrated Historical Album
of Music; Alexander Famintsin : On the Structure and
Melodies of Russian Folk-songs, The Musical Season, The
Ancient Scale of Indo-Chinese Music and its appearance
Żm A^ussian Fol/*-song, The Mummers in Aussia, Alex-
ander Oulibishev: Zife of Mozart, Zife of Beethoven ;
Wilhem von Lenz : Beethoven and his three Manzlers ;
Platon de Waxel ; Biography of G/in/a, several import-
ant works on Russian and Portuguese music, and
critical work in the French /ournal de Saint-Petersbourg
extending over a period of seventeen years; Alexander
Roubets: Biographical Dicţionary of Russian Musicians,
of which there were two editions; Michael Petoukhov:
Systematised Catalogue of the Museum of Musica/ Instru-
ments in the Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, Russian
Popular Musical Instruments in the Museum of the Com-
servatoire ; César Cui: Music in Russia (published in
French as Za Musique en Æussie), AEssay on the ZXevelop-
ment of Russian Song, Sacchetti: History of Music,
The Region of Musical Aesthetics, A Historica/ Chresto-
mathy of Music, Manua/ of Musica/ Theory; P. Weimarn :
Alife of G/imka, Vladimir Michnevich : Short History
of Music in Aussia ; Miropolsky: Musical Educaſion of
the People in Russia and Western Europe; Vladimir
Stassov: Zife of Berodin, Zife of Glinka, Zhelenty-five
Years of Russian Music; P. A. Poelchau : A Study of
308
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Church Music ; Gabrilovich : Musical A/manacá, which
appeared for several years; Nicholas Findeisen : Zēſe of
Glinka.
To these should be added those works that
I have mentioned in the course of this volume
and various other writings by Serov, Prince
Odoevsky, Sokalsky, Dourov, Rasmadsé, Her-
mann Laroche, Kashkin, Cheshikin, Trifonov,
Khalutin, Mme. Touvygin, and others. As to
theoretical works, they have been published in
large numbers, and I shall confine myself to
mentioning (besides the older books of Huncke,
Youry Arnold, and Zarembac) the more recent
writings of Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov,
Arensky, Conus, Mme. Spassky and Taneiev.
If the musical movement in Russia is
remarkable on the creative side, it is less
strikingly so from the point of view of inter-
pretation, at any rate so far as opera is con-
cerned. One of my friends in St. Petersburg,
whose judgment I have tested sufficiently to
trust, wrote to me on this subject a few years
ago as follows:–
“We have had very few first-rate singers in
Russia. There was Joséphine Fodor (who was,
strictly speaking, of Dutch origin, though she
was brought up from the age of fifteen months
by her father in St. Petersburg where she
married the French actor, Mainvielle), and
309
A SHORT HISTORY OF
there was Mme. Schoberlechner, who was a
Russian ; and you know how fine a tenor
Ivanov was. Mme. Vorobieva-Petrova, the
contralto who created the part of Vanya in
A Life for the Tsar, had an exceptional voice,
and so had Mme. Lavrovsky, while Mme.
Leonova was, above all things, a tempera-
mental singer. Petrov, the bass, was an ac-
complished artist; Melnikov, the baritone,
had a prodigious voice but not very much
taste, and the same may be said of the tenor
Nikolsky; Korsov and Stravinsky, both good
actors as well as singers, had perhaps more
style than method. Figner, the tenor, now
singing, has more taste than voice; so have
the baritones Prianishnikov and Tartakov. As
a matter of fact, the best singing in Russia is
to be heard at the Italian Opera House, which
ceased to be a State opera in 1885, but was
subsequently reorganized and carriedºon as a
private concern without a subsidy. A Russian
singer who has become famous in Italian parts
is Mme. Boulychev; and Mme. Litvinne, as
you know from having heard her in Paris, is
extraordinarily fine in Wagner. A charming
and gifted tenor is Sobinov ; and Shaliapin, the
bass, though he took time to shape, ranks
to-day, both for his singing and his acting,
amongst the world’s greatest operatic artists,
one of his chief triumphs being the double
3IO
RUSSIAN MUSIC
rôle of Mephistopheles in Gounod’s and
Boito's operas.”
From this letter one can gather some idea
of the condition of things. I shall confine
myself therefore simply to recording names of
a certain number of singers who have occupied
or still occupy a more or less important posi-
tion in Russian opera. Amongst the tenors
are Setov, Orlov, Ende, Komisarjevsky, Mic-
haelov, Preobrajensky, and Yershov ; the bari-
tones include Artemovsky, Khoklov, and Yakov-
lev, and the basses Vassiliev, Koriakin, Chernov,
and Sariotti. Amongst the women singers are
Semenova, Mravina, Sionitzkaya, Platonova,
Pavlovskaya, Raab, Leschetizky-Friedebourg,
Kotchetova, Bichourin, Kartsev-Panaiev, Sla-
vina, Kroutikova, Adelaide Bolska and Zvia-
guina. Another great singer of the past—she
died in 1896—was Darya Michaelovna Leonova,
who created the title-rôle in Serov's opera,
Rogneda, and was greatly admired by Meyer-
beer. Elizabeth Lavrovsky, who left the stage
on her marriage with Prince Tsertelev, enjoyed
an almost equally high reputation ; like Raab
and Bichourin (who died in 1888), she was a
pupil of Nissen-Saloman, the splendid Swedish
singer who was the star of the Italian opera at
St. Petersburg some fifty years ago. Yet
another famous singer of those days was Ossim
Petrov, the Sousanin in A Life for the Tsar,
3II
A SHORT HISTORY OF
who died in 1878. A later operatic singer, who
was famous for her superb singing and acting
and had a large share in introducing French
music to Russian audiences, was Marie de
Gorlenko-Dolina. Amongst more recent con-
cert singers who deserve mention are Mmes.
Aktzery, Olenin d’Alheim, and Jerebtzova.
As to the Opera-houses in Russia : there
are, first of all, the State-supported theatres—
the Maryinsky Theatre at St. Petersburg, and
the Grand Theatre, Moscow ; then at both
St. Petersburg and Moscow there are the
Popular Theatres where nationaloperas, mainly,
are given at cheap prices. Moscow also has
Zimin’s Private Opera Company (which has
succeeded Mamantov’s), and there is a similar
institution in St. Petersburg; and numerous
other operatic organisations have been estab-
lished in various parts of the country. Many
A concert Societies, too, are now active both in
the capitals and the provinces. References
have been made in previous chapters to the
Imperial Russian Musical Society; but it stands
by no means alone in providing orchestral and
choral music. For there are the Philharmonic
Society’s concerts, Belaiev's Russian Symphony
concerts and those conducted by Siloti, Vas–
silenko and Kussevitsky; and a number of
popular Orchestral concerts are given in St.
Petersburg and other centres. There are also
3I2
RUSSIAN MUSIC
many organisations for giving chamber music
by Russian and foreign composers as well as
the concerts provided for by Belaiev.
If Russia has not produced a number of
great singers, her record in the matter of
instrumental virtuosos leaves nothing to be
desired. It would be superfluous, after what
I have already written in an earlier chapter, to
recall the exploits in this direction of Anton
Rubinstein; and some of us have not forgotten
the electrical effect produced by his brother
Nicholas, who was hardly inferior to him,
when his playing, in which vigour and delicacy
were so marvellously combined, was heard in
1878 at the Russian concerts given in the
Trocadero. The Russian pianoforte school
since those days has been noted for its re-
markable players, amongst them being Safonov
(a pupil of Brassin), Sergius Taneiev (a pupil
of Nicholas Rubinstein), Safelnikov, Siloti (a
pupil of Liszt), Bentsch, Holliday, Igoumnov,
Lavrov, Scriabin, Rachmaninov, Doubassov,
Joseph Lhevine, and Mmes. Essipov, Timanov
(a pupil of Tausig), Bertenson-Voronetz, Be-
nois-Ephron (a pupil of Leschetitzky), Kash-
perov, Terminsky, Posnansky, Yakimovsky and
Drucker (the last three all being pupils of
Anton Rubinstein). Amongst the violinists the
name of General Lvov (the composer of the
Russian National Anthem) deserves to be re-
3I3
A SHORT HISTORY OF
called, for he was a very distinguished player,
and then that of Leopold Auer, the brilliant
solo-violinist to the Court, and Professor at
the Conservatoire at St. Petersburg, though
he is really a Hungarian by birth and is only
a naturalized Russian. After these two come
Brodsky, Petchnikov (a pupil of Joachim) and
his wife, Kolakovsky, Gregorovich, Barciewicz,
Elman and Zimbalist. The famous violoncellist
Davidov, who died before his time, acquired a
European reputation, and his favourite pupil,
Veribilovich, who played with Auer in the
quartet concerts organized by the Imperial
Russian Musical Society, has also become
famous. And I must not omit to mention the
names of Zabel, the distinguished harpist who
has added to the literature of his instrument,
and of Kussevitsky, who is at the same time a
fine player on the double-bass and a good
conductor.
But neither Kussevitsky nor Rimsky-Korsa-
kov, nor Glazounov, nor Davidov (the nephew
of the violoncellist), nor Ippolitov-Ivanov has,
I think, proved superior as a conductor to the
two Rubinsteins. Safonov alone possesses the
true qualifications of a great conductor. He
has a perfect understanding of the style and
significance of the music which he interprets,
and he knows exactly how to control and
regulate his own movements; in his beat he
3I4.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
combines vigour with clearness, and he is supple
while obtaining the finest precision in detail.
The whole impression he conveys is one of
complete homogeneity and unity. I need not
refer again to Napravnik after what I have
already said of him at the end of Chapter VI,
and I will not do more than mention the
names of Galkin and Erdmansdoerfer, who were
two other conductors. Arensky also secured
a reputation for his conducting of the Moscow
Choral Society and the Choir of the Imperial
Chapel, that wonderful body of singers of
which a critic said not long ago : “I hardly
venture to speak of that incomparable choir,
which has not its like in all the world : it is
positively sublime and superhuman ; it can
command every shade of feeling and rise to
the dizziest heights.”
I must also just mention Theodore Becker
and Arkanghelsky, who deserved their reputa-
tions as conductors of choirs, being considered
in Russia superior even to Dmitri Slaviansky
d’Agrenev, who nevertheless made a successful
tour all over Europe at the head of a clever
and experienced company of singers. His
success was due partly to the delicate colour-
ing of the music which was sung, partly
to the beautiful details of the performance,
and partly also to the fact that d’Agrenev
and his choir appeared in the curious and
3I5
A SHORT HISTORY OF
picturesque Russian costumes of the six-
teenth century. An article in a number of
the Indépendance Belge, referring to the con-
certs given in Paris in 1887 by these
musicians, contains the following facts about
d’Agrenev :—
“He was originally a student at the Uni-
versity of Moscow and then a soldier, but as
he could not resist his leanings towards a
musical career, he left the army, to study
music in France and Italy. He obtained an
appointment at the Court of Naples, and was
then engaged at Berlin, and eventually at St.
Petersburg. He gave up the theatre, however,
in order to make researches into Russian music,
which was beginning to attract him. He
travelled in all the Slav countries, and in this
way collected about a thousand Russian and
Slavonic poems and tunes, a hundred of which
were epic songs in honour of the primitive
heroes of the Slavs. He then set about pub-
lishing these folk-songs, which he harmonized
appropriately and had performed in public, and
he also organized a choir to spread a knowledge
of them in other countries. He accomplished
something which was really patriotic and at
the same time very important musically, for
it amounted to rediscovering the origins of
Russian music and opening up to modern
composers the sources in which they need to
316
RUSSIAN MUSIC
plunge in order to refresh and recreate their
musical personality.”
This brings me to the question of musical
education, which occupies a prominent place
in Russia, though the State takes little official
cognizance of it, most of the work accomplished
being due to private initiative. The two great
Conservatoires of St. Petersburg and Moscow
were founded by the brothers Anton and
Nicholas Rubinstein respectively. Both are
flourishing institutions to-day, that of St.
Petersburg having Glazounov as its Director,
while at Moscow Ippolitov-Ivanov succeeded
Safonov in 1906. These are far from being the
only Conservatoires in the country. There
are others at Kiev, Odessa, Tiflis, Helsingfors,
Kharkov, Riga and so on, to the number, I
believe, of about thirty. In order to give an
idea of the sort of musical teaching given in
one of these big establishments and of the
part played in it by the Director, I will quote
from my old friend Charles Marie Widor,
Professor of Composition in the Conservatoire
at Paris, who a few years ago wrote the follow-
ing account in one of the French papers of
a visit which he had recently paid to the
Conservatoire at Moscow when on a voyage
in Russia :—
“I should like to tell you about the Con-
servatoire at Moscow, which I visited last
317
A SHORT HISTORY OF
week, as it is one of the most flourishing insti-
tutions of its sort and is organized on
thoroughly practical lines.
“In Russia there is separation between School
and State. Neither at St. Petersburg nor at
Moscow, nor at Warsaw, nor at Kiev can you
read in letters of gold on a background of
green marble : Imperial Conservatoire of Music,
nor will you find the national flag floating
above the portals. There is nothing official
about the Conservatoires, as there is at Paris,
where the Director, the committee of adminis-
tration, the professors and their staff, are all
really State functionaries, depending on Minis-
terial nomination and receiving their salaries
out of the national budget. There is, however,
an Imperial Society of Music under the patron-
age of a Grand duke or duchess, with its head-
quarters at St. Petersburg, which undertakes
the charge of musical interests throughout
the whole country and makes grants to the
schools in important centres such as St.
Petersburg, Moscow, Warsaw, Kiev, Helsing-
fors, Tiflis, and so forth. These schools and
institutions are quite free and independent
of government control; they retain their
purely private character, they dispose of their
revenue in their own way, and they perpetuate
their constitution themselves.
“Thus the Conservatoire at Moscow, which
318
RUSSIAN MUSIC
is subsidized both by the town and by the
Imperial Society, recently borrowed an enor-
mous sum of money to enable it to complete
the splendid new building where it will take
up its quarters next year." The construction
of the whole of this block has been carried
out without the troublesome necessity of sub-
mitting to any kind of official intervention.
Before ten years have elapsed the loan will
have been repaid, thanks to the resources of
the institution, which include income from
investments, donations, receipts from con-
certs, and the fees paid for board and lodging
by the 460 pupils who attend the classes.
“I was told last year by Professor Johansen,
the Director of the Conservatoire at St.
Petersburg, that there is no country in Europe
where private enterprise has more scope than
in Russia. The Moscow Conservatoire is a
striking case in point. How long will it be in
France before the recommendations of Georges
Berger in his financial report on the Fine Arts
are carried into effect When will it be un-
derstood that the library at the Paris Con-
servatoire can no longer contain its books, nor
the museum its collection of musical instru-
ments When will it be realized that in our
* This was written in 1900. The Conservatoire was in-
augurated in 1901. The Tsar contributed £40,000 towards
its construction, and Solodovnikov, a wealthy business man,
A 20,000.
3I9
A SHORT HISTORY OF
dilapidated and confined classrooms, the
professors are obliged at regular intervals to
stop lecturing, in order to have the windows
opened and some fresh air let in, preferring
to risk bronchitis rather than be asphyxiated
“At Moscow, Safonov, the Director, noticed
One day that the constant increase in the
number of students was making it impossible
to continue to do work in the old classrooms.
Owing to the trombone class, for instance,
(which could be heard from a distance), there
was no means of duplicating the harmony class,
which had outgrown its requirements, and
meanwhile the singing teachers, exasperated
by the practising of trumpets in the next
room, were threatening to resign. Safonov,
without making a fuss, and at the same time
without any hesitation, went straight off to
find an architect and discuss site, plans, and
estimates. Six months later the stone-masons
were at work, and in two years’ time a superb
building was opened with a concert-hall cap-
able of seating an audience of two thousand.
This huge hall, containing a fine Cavaillé-Coll
organ,” is 185 feet long, 65 feet wide, and 52 feet
high.
“The staff of the Moscow Conservatoire is
less numerous than ours, and consists of
barely forty professors, for in Russia a pro-
* A gift from the banker, Van Der Wies.
32O
RUSSIAN MUSIC
fessor is not forbidden to hold more than one
post. The three composition classes, (each
devoted to a special branch of study), instead
of competing with each other as they do with
us, are attended by the same pupils, according as
the turn comes for counterpoint, orchestration,
or free composition. I counted seven elemen-
tary and four advanced classes for pianoforte,
three classes for violin and three for singing.
Amongst the instruments taught are the
kettle-drums, glockenspiel, side-drum and so
on, one teacher undertaking all the instru-
ments of percussion. And I should also draw
attention to a particularly noteworthy feature
of the institution, which is that, side by side
with the purely musical instruction there is a
whole system of general education which com-
prises history, geography, arithmetic, grammar,
literature, and foreign languages.
“And now I come to the most interesting
point about the course of study, and that is
the ensemble classes. The Director is in
charge of these, and he makes himself entirely
responsible. The classes for orchestra, chorus,
and chamber music are all taken in turn by
Safonov himself, each twice a week. ‘ On
Mondays and Thursdays,’ he told me, ‘I
get together my orchestral pupils, sometimes
to work at the repertory of old and modern
music, with which they all ought to be
32 I X
A SHORT HISTORY OF
acquainted; sometimes to let our young com-
posers hear their own works and judge them-
selves of the progress or the mistakes which they
are making ; sometimes, again, to accompany
the solo singers and instrumentalists. Besides
which I surrender my stick from time to time
to a few of the ablest of the young people, and
I let these fledgelings try their hand at con-
ducting.’
“To hear their own works and to try their
hand at things is just what the students of our
Conservatoire have been clamouring for years
to be allowed to do. We have to teach these
poor young things the subtle, impalpable art
of combining sounds so as to make music, and
we try to do it by methods of persuasion, by
drawing comparisons, by reasoning with them
on paper. The whole elaborate system of
auditory sensations can only be analysed by
them with their eyes. You might just as well
give lessons in water-colour to an Institution
of the Blind.
“Ensemble classes for orchestra, chorus, and
chamber music, which are practical lectures on
the application of the higher grades of study,
are absolutely necessary for anyone who wants
to know his business thoroughly, whether he
is to be a composer or a conductor. At
Moscow, Berlin, Vienna, Leipzig, Brussels and
other places you will find them. In other
322
RUSSIAN MUSIC
Conservatoires all over the world every time a
pupil in the composition class produces a
symphonic work which the professor thinks
good enough, the parts are copied and the
orchestra plays it. What better lesson could
you possibly have then than that of experi-
ence : The other day Safonov let me hear an
exercise in simple counterpoint and a quite
respectable fugue which the chorus was work-
ing at ; that was the distinction awarded to
the winners of the two first prizes in the
class.
“Another interesting article from the official
regulations at the Moscow Conservatoire runs :
“Every year the pupils of the operatic class
have to learn at least three entire operas.
Once a year there is a public performance,
with scenery and costumes.’ Here is a list of
some of the operas performed : Fidelio, Così
fan tutte, Matrimonio Segreto (Cimarosa), Le
Nozze di Figaro, Freischütz, Iphigénie en Tau-
ride, Waffenschmidt (Lortzing), Eugene Oniegin
(Tchaikovsky), Ruth (Ippolitov-Ivanov), Raphael
(Arensky). The public performances have
hitherto been held in the huge State Opera-
house, but when the new concert-room at
the Conservatoire is ready, they will he held
there. There, too, the splendid fortnightly
concerts of the Imperial Musical Society will
be given instead of, as at present, in the
323
A SHORT HISTORY OF
elegant room at the Club of the Nobility.
These concerts, too, are conducted by Safonov
with his profound sense of style and his
Superbly authoritative readings.”
It is perhaps to this extremely practical
education that young Russian composers owe
their love of the orchestra and their precocious
skill in scoring. When they come before the
public they have already acquired some sort of
symphonic experience, due to the excellent
system of training which unfortunately is un-
known with us, and they are already familiar
with the special characteristics and uses of
each instrument in the orchestra. They are
no longer walking with their eyes shut ; they
already have a very good notion of what they
are doing.
Moreover, if orchestral music is held in
special honour in Russia, as it obviously is
from what I have stated, chamber music in the
shape of the string quartet and its derivatives,
is cultivated with equal ardour ; so that, with
opera as well, Russia possesses the three main
branches of the highest forms of music.
To sum up. The musical movement in
Russia covers a complete field; the composers
keep it going with astonishing zeal and en-
thusiasm ; the interpreters are there, thanks
to the thorough training of the Conservatoires;
and the public is ready to learn and to be
324.
RUSSIAN MUSIC
initiated in the noblest and severest realms of
musical thought. The Russian school has
profited by the preliminary studies of the three
schools of the West during the three pre-
ceding centuries. It has not been obliged to
waste time in useless and often discouragingly
tentative essays. With its very original folk-
music, which it has skilfully turned to account,
it has been able to command new musical re-
sources and to apply them with immense effect.
To-day this school is in the full flower of a
vigorous manhood and seems destined for a
glorious future. It is not too much, Surely,
to suppose that some day it may give fresh life
to the shifting shapes and ever-changing forms
of musical art, and may take its place trium-
phantly at the head of the musical nations of
Europe.
ſº, ji 23. {} i816
325
INDEX
ADAM, Adolphe, On The Rus-
sian Imperial Chapel, I I
d’Agrenev, Dmitri Slavian-
Sky, 3I 5
Akimenko, Feodor, 305
Alabiev, 38
Albrecht, Charles, 78
Alenev, 305
Alexander I, Tsar, Supports
music in Russia, 27
d’Alheim, Pierre, 238
Alpheraky, Achille, 280
Amani, 305
Anna Ivanovna, Empress,
supports Italian Opera in
Russia, 31
Antipov, Constantine, 281
Araja, Franceso, in Russia,
3 I-33
Arensky, Anton Stepanovich,
275–277, 3I 5
Arkanghelsky, 31 5
Arnold, Youry, 2 ; historical
and critical writings, I, 2,
3O8
Artsibouchev, 305
Asanchevsky, 289
Auer, Leopold, 29I, 3I4
BALAKIREv, Mily Alexeivich,
2 I I-2I 6; compositions, 2 I 3;
folk-Songs, 2 I 5
Band, The Invincible, see
Group of Five
Bariansky, Adolphe, 305
Becker, Theodore, 31 5
Belaiev, Mitrophane Petro-
vich, 288
Berezovsky, Maxim Sozon-
tovich, I 5
Berlioz, Hector, relations with
Glinka, 82–86 ; on the
Russian Imperial Chapel,
II ; on Lvov, I 34
Bertrand, Gustave, on Rus-
sian folk-songs, 7 ; On The
Roussalka, IOI ; On Serov,
II 5, I22
Blaramberg, Paul Ivanovich,
284
Bleichmann, Jules, 296
Blumenfeld, Felix, 28 I
— Sigismond, 28 I
Boieldieu, in Russia, 38
Borodin, Alexander Porphy-
rievich, 2I 6–2 32 ; Prince
Igor, 223–229 ; other com-
positions, 2 I 8–22 I, 229–23 I
Bortniansky, Dmitri Speno-
vich, I 5–2O ; compositions,
I9
Boulan, 38
Boulychev, Mme., 3 Io
Brassin, Louis, 2.05
CATHARINE II, Empress: her
operatic libretti, 37 ; Rus-
sian music in her reign, 33
Catoire, 304
Cavos, Catterino, 39, 78
327
INDEX
Cheshikin, 309
Church-music, Russian, I f. :
collections of, 9
Cimarosa, in Russia, 36
Conservatoire : at Katerino-
slav, 36 ; at MOSCOw, I45,
317–323 ; at St. Peters-
burg, I43, 317. Other Con-
servatoires, 3I 7
Conus, see Konius
Coterie of Five, see Group of
Five
Cui, César, I 97–2 II ; Operas,
199—203 ; other composi-
tions, 209–2 II ; critical
writings, 209, 3O8 ; Opinion
on:-Balakirev, 2 I 5; Cavos,
4o ; Dargomijsky’s Roºts-
salka, I oo, IO3, and The
Stone Quest, IO4; Dütsch,
127 ; folk-songs (Russian),
4 ; Glinka’s A Life for the
Tsar, 63, and Rousslan and
Ludmilla, 73, 76; Group
of Five, I 89–195 ; Mous-
sorgsky, 242 ; Rubinstein,
1 5 I—I 55, 16O ; Serov, II 8,
125 ; Verstovsky, 42 ;
Wagner, 206–208
DARGOMIJSKY, Alexander
Sergeivich, 94–Io9 ; Esme-
walda, 96–99 ; The Rous-
salka, IOO–IO4; The Stone
G-Juest, IOA—Io8; other com-
positions, 96, 99, Io9
Davidov, Charles, 29I
Degtiarev, 2 I
Delines, Michel, 208
Demidov, 305
Dloussky, 3O4
DOna Ourov, 305
Dütsch, I27
ELIZABETH PETROVNA, Em-
press, patronizes Opera in
Russian, 32
Erdmansdörfer, 31.5
Essipov, Annette, 292
Estafiev, 281
Ewald, Victor, 284
FAMINTSIN, Alexander, 290,
308
Famitsin, see Famintsin
Fedorov, Alexander, 3O3
Fétis, on Bortniansky, IQ ; on
Dargomijsky, 98 ; On Lvov,
I29 ; on St. John of Da-
mascus, I6 ; on the in-
fluence of Russian music
on Paisiello, 34
Figner, 3IO
Findeisen, Nicholas, 309
Fodor, Josephine, 309
Folk-songs, Russian, I f.;
collections edited by:—
d’Agrenev, 316; Balakirev,
2 I 5 ; Liadov, 279 ; Lia-
pounov, 284 ; Pratch, 7 ;
Rimsky-Korsakov, 2 I 5,
251 ; Villebois, 290. Other
collections, 7. See also
308
Fomin, 38
Fouque, Octave, on Bortni-
ansky, IQ ; on Glinka, 45
French music : in Russia, 8 ;
influenceonmodern Russian
composers, 285, 286, 299,
3O4, 305 ; contrasted with
German and Italian, 22–25
GALITSIN, Prince George, 49
— Prince Nicholas, 289
Galkin, 3I 5
Galuppi, in Russia, I 7, 34
Gartevel, 303
German music : in Russia,
30, 33 ; degenerate since
Wagner, 23 ; influence on
modern Russian composers,
I 5 I, I 78, 277, 285, 305
328
INDEX
Glazounov, Alexander, 227,
272—275
Glière, Reinhold, 298
Glinka, Michael Ivanovich,
44–91 ; Memoirs, 45, 47,
5 I, 65 ; A Life for the Tsar,
58–69 ; Rousslan and Lud-
%2lla, 72–88 ; other com-
positions, 87, 88
Godowsky, Leopold, 303
Gogol, Nicholas, libretti based
On his plays, I 79, 247, 25 I,
255, &c.
Gounod, Charles, fantasia. On
Russian national anthem,
I 33
Gretchaninov, Alexander Tik-
honovich, 282
Grodsky, Boleslas, 282
Group of Five : its origins,
92, 93, IO4–IO6, 188—I go ;
its principles, I O4, 191—I 95,
2O2 ; partial influence on
Rimsky-Korsakov, 249,
253, 259, and on Glazou-
nov, Arensky, and Wihtol,
278 ; Borodin breaks away
from it, 22.4—226
HARDENWALD, 3O2
Hlavatch, 3O4
Holstein-Gottorp,
Charles Ulrich of, 3o
Duke
IMPERIAL Chapel, I I–2O
Imperial Russian Musical
Society, I43, I 45
Invincible Band, see Group
Of Five
Ippolitov-Ivanov,
294, 3I 7
Italian music : in Russia,
28–38, 31 O ; degenerate
since Donizetti, 24 ; in-
fluence on Glinka, 54, 61 ;
the music of the Group of
Michael,
Five a protest against it,
I93
Ivan the Terrible, a com-
poser, Io
Ivanov (singer), 53
— Ippolitov, see Ippolitov-
Ivanov
— Michael Michaelovich
(composer), 295
Joukovsky, 57
Juon, Paul, 305
RADI.ETZ, 305
Kalinnikov, Vassily Sergei-
vich, 3OI
Kapry, 305
Rarganov, Genari, 3OI
Kasanli, 303
Rashkin, 309
Kashperov, 290
— Mlle., 300
Kazatchenko, George, 296
Kolatchevsky, 305
Konius, George, 297
Kopylov, Alexander, 281
Korestohenko, Arsene Nic-
holaevich, 299
Korsov, 3Io
Kouznetsov, 305
Krotkov, 299
Russevitsky, 312, 3I4
LADYJENSKY, 289
Laroche, Hermann, 3O4 ; on
Russian folk-songs, 2 ; on
Russian church music, 8 ;
on Cui, 20I ; on Borodin,
2 IQ
Laskovsky, 289
Lavrosky, Elizabeth, 3IO, 3II
Lenz, Wilhelm von, on Serov,
I I I
Leonova, Darya Michaelovna,
3IO, 3 II
Leschetizky, Theodore, 291
329
X 2
INDEX
Liadov, Anatol Constanti-
novich, I69, 279
Liapounov, Sergius Michael-
ovich, 283
Lishin, Gregory, 301
Lissenko, 3O4
Litvinne, Mme., 3 Io
Lvov, Alexis Feodorovich,
7O, I28–I 35 ; God Save the
Tsar, I 30–133; other com-
positions, I29
— Theodore, 20, 70, I29
MALISHEvSKY, W., 305
Manfredini, in Russia, 33
Martini (Lo Spagnuolo), in
Russia, 36
Matinsky, 38
Medtner, Nicholas, 305
Melnikov, 3 Io
Mercy-Argenteau, Comtesse
de, IQ8
Michnevich, Vladimir, 308
Miropolsky, 308
Moussorgsky, Modeste Petro-
vich, 232–247; on Saint-
Saëns, 24O ; Boris Go-
downov, 243–246; Khovan-
stchina, 246; other operas,
243, 247; other composi-
tions, 236, 243, 247
NAPRAVNIK, Edward, 268
Nikolsky, 3 Io
ODVERSKY, Prince, 289
Opera, Russian : critical and
historical works on, 29 ;
the first to a Russian lib-
retto, 32 ; early specimens
to Russian libretti, 38;
written by German, com-
posers, 33, and by Italian
composers, 32, 33, 36, 40
Opera-houses, in Russia, 312
Oulibishev, Alexander, 3O8
PACHULSKY, 303
Paisiello, in Russia, 34; influ-
enced by Russian music, 35
Paris, Russian concerts in, v,
I46, 3OI
Paul I, Tsar, supports music
in Russia, 27
Perepelitsin, 308
Petoukhov, Michael, 308
Petrov, Ossim, 60, 3 Io, 3II
Pianists of the Russian
School, 313
Poelchau, P. A., 308
Pomazansky, 284
Pourgold, Nadejda Nicolai-
evna, see Mme. Rimsky-
FCorsakov
Poushkin, death of, 70 ; lib-
retti based on his plays,
72, 99, Ioo, IoS, 202,243, &c.
Powerful Group, see Group
of Five
Pratch, collection of Russian
folk-songs, 7
Prianishnikov, 3 Io
RACHMANINov, Sergius Vassi-
lievich, 297
Razoumovsky, Alexis (singer),
I I
— Count Andreas (Beeth-
oven’s patron), 7, 289
— P. Dmitri (Professor), 9,
308
Rebikov, Vladimir Ivanovich,
3OO
Rimsky-Korsakov, Nicholas
Andreivich, 24.8—267; Me-
moirs, 267; The Maid of
Pskov, 25o ; A Night in
May, 25 I ; The Snow-
Maiden, 252 ; Mlada, 254 ;
Christmas Eve, 255; The
Tsar's Betrothed, 257 ; Mo-
zart and Salieri, 258;
Servilia, 259 ; other operas,
33O
INDEX
256, 259, 260 ; other com-
positions, 260–266; his
pupils, 267
Rimsky-Korsakov, Mme. (née
Pourgold), 267
Roubets, Alexander, 308
Royal patrons of music
in Russia in the eighteenth
century, 27
Rubinstein, Anton, I 37–
17O ; on the younger Rus-
sian composers, 165; Me-
moirs, I 7O ; Music and
Musicians, I 7o ; his operas,
I47—I 59; other composi-
tions, I48, I60–163
— Nicholas, I 45
SACCHETTI, 308
Safonov, 3I 3, 3I4, 320–323
St. John of Damascus, 16
Saint-Saëns, Moussorgsky on,
24O
Santis, 290
Sapellnikov, Vassily, 3O4
Sarti, in Russia, 35
Schoberlechner, Mme., 31 O
Scriabin, Alexander Nicho-
laevich, 283
Serov, Alexander Nicholae-
vich, I IO—I26; critical
writings, II 3–II 7 ; Judith,
II 7–12 I ; Rogheda, 122–
124; The Power of Evil,
I24, 293 ; other composi-
tions, I 26
— Mme. Valentine, 290
Shaliapin, 3 Io
Sheel, Boris, see Victinghov
Sheerck, Peter, 302
Shenck, 299
Shestakov, Mme.
Sister), 45, 69, 89
Shtchurovsky, 305
Singers of the Russian school,
3O9–3 I2
(Glinka's
Sobinov, 31 o
Sokalsky, 303
Sokolov, Nicholas Alexan-
drovich, 28O
Soloviev, Nicholas, 292
Spendiarov, A., 305
Starsov, 305
Stassov, Vladimir, 222, 308
Stoherbatchev, Nicholas Vla-
dimirovich, 28O
Steibelt in Russia, 39
Steinberg, Maximilian, 305
Stolypin, 305
Stravinsky, Fedor (singer), 3Io
— Igor (composer), 3O2
TANAIEV, Alexander, 289,
3O3
— Sergius Ivanovich, 293
Tartakov, 3 Io
Tchaikovsky, Modeste, 179,
I 86
— Peter Ilich, I 37, 171—187;
Memoirs, I86 ; his operas,
I79–181 ; ballets, 182 ;
Other compositions, I 73,
I76, I 77, I 83, I 84
Tcherepnin, Nicholas, 304
Titov, the brothers (com-
posers), 38
— Vassily (singer), Io
Toughmalov, 304
Traetta, in Russia, 34
Troubetskoy, Prince, 303
VASSILENKO, 305, 312
Verjbilovich, 3I4
Verstovsky, 41
Victinghov, Baron, 289, 296
Vielhorsky, Count Mathew,
5O, 289
— Count Michael Yourie-
vich, 50, 289
Villebois, 289
Violinists of the Russian
School, 313
33 I
INDEX
Volkonsky, Prince Gregory,
289
Volkov, 38
Vorobieva-Petrova, 6o, 66,
79, 3IO
WAGNER, Richard : Serov on,
II 6–12 I ; César Cui on,
2O6—208
Waxel, Platon de, 308 ; on
the Moscow Court choir, Io
Weimarn, P., 308
Werani, 304
Widor, Charles Marie, letter
on the Conservatoire of
Moscow, 317–324
Wihtol, Joseph, 277
Wrangel, Baron Vassily de,
306
YoUFEROv, Sergais, 304
Youssipov, Prince Nicholas,
9, 289, 308
ZABEL, 3I4
Zaremba,
I73
Zimin, Private Opera com-
pany, 312
Zolotarev, 305
Zybin, 305
Nicholas, I 72,
Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANson & Co.
Edinburgh & London
DUE
ich.
fly'TE
of Mi
Libra
V
f
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Uri
ju

„ſae
"…--+----

• • • • •، ، ، ، ،
« ， », « ! ! ！ ！
！= ?–; º ș→ +
'№ſſaeſſaeįſł####}}}}}}#######}}saeſſae
#ģğÄģ###
§§
-###########ffffffffffffffffffffff;#ț¢#fffffffff;
{#############
· · · · · * * * • • • • • • *• • • •############
###########-###ſ.
··-###############
d.|-ſaei№
±######Ķišķu###
------ ----ſae########
ģ44*！*®****、、、、、、、、、」#########
¡
º waº，...，f：##
ſae;
#:
✉ ₪
ſ!!！！!
w ºf
• • • ’ , , ,'
！
• • ► ► ► ► ► º
* *, * ?,?,！，：,
· · · · · -
Mae • k •
• • • •