Anacreontic staccati

The third important place of referential density is the passage in bars 60–69.

Music example 2.9. Shostakovich, Preface, bars 60–69.

The text set in this excerpt is from the second part of Preface: “Such a pref-ace could have been written not only to the complete edition of my works, but also to the complete edition of the works of very many other composers, Soviet as well as foreign.” The marker of this place is first of all the articulation in the voice part. This is the only place in Preface where Shostakovich writes staccato dots for the singer. The effect is amplified by quaver pauses in order to ensure that syllables in the bisyllabic words очень, очень [very, very] are detached from each other.

By 1966 Shostakovich had written a vocal work with a similar use of this device, i.e. even staccato notes sung at repeated intervals: Satires op. 109, to the words of Sasha Chorny. It is possible to find similar passages in two songs of the cycle: “Пробуждение весны” [“Awakening of Spring”] and “Крейцерова соната” [“Kreutzer Sonata”].

Music example 2.10. Shostakovich, “Awakening of Spring”, bars 46–50.

Music example 2.11. Shostakovich, “Kreutzer Sonata”, bars 61–66.

Both songs deal in some way with the problem of sexuality, although treat-ment of this theme was very atypical for Soviet culture in the 1960s. The verbal part of “Awakening of Spring” depicts in a rather naturalistic way a picture of the narrator’s environment (governed by rather simple physiological instincts) in the month of March – the screaming cat, the abnormally fast growth of a cactus, the main hero asking “Whom should I fall in love with, damn it!” – is a clear parody of high-style Russian poetry praising the coming of spring. Shos-takovich answers that by parodying the musical part of Rahmaninov’s song Весенние воды [Waters of Spring].

The “Kreutzer Sonata” deals with the same theme but in a different man-ner. It shows an unnamed middle-class male character sitting in his rental apartment and feeling bored. The way out of boredom is illuminated by the exciting sight of the laundress Fyokla washing the window. Her thighs in

par-ticular are of great interest to the unnamed male character. It all ends in a frivolous scene:

Квартирант и Фекла на диване.

О, какой торжественный момент!

“Ты – народ, а я – интеллигент, – Говорит он ей среди лобзаний, – Наконец-то, здесь, сейчас, вдвоем, Я тебя, а ты меня – поймем...”

Lodger and Fyokla on a couch.

Oh, what a solemn moment!

“You are common people and I am intelligentsia,

– says he while kissing her, – Finally, here, now, together We will understand each other...”

If “Awakening of Spring” profanes love by reducing it to a purely hormo-nal, physiological level, “Kreutzer Sonata” goes even further. Its message in the Soviet state is nothing but open blasphemy, mocking the holy idea of the Soviet state itself: Marx and Lenin’s doctrine of the clash of social classes as a driving power of historical progress.

The use of the motive described above in Satires is in fact a direct quo-tation itself. The source is a Russian anonymous folk song Чижик-Пыжик [Chizhik¹⁵-Pyzhik]:

Music example 2.12. Folk song Chizhik-Pyzhik.

There are several versions of the text, but the most well-known is the fol-lowing:

Чижик-пыжик, где ты был? Chizhik-pyzhik, where have you been?

На Фонтанке водку пил. I’ve been drinking vodka on Fontanka¹⁶. Выпил рюмку, выпил две — Drank a glass, drank another one – Закружилось в голове. And my head went spinning around.

Стали чижика ловить, They try to catch chizhik Чтобы в клетку посадить. and put him into a cage.

Чу, чу, чу, чу, Hush, hush –

Я из клетки улечу. I will fly out of the cage.¹⁷

15. Чижик is the Russian word for a linnet bird.

16. A river in Saint Petersburg.

17. Other existing versions of the text can be divided into two categories: so-called “versions for children”, where the text is stripped of any problematic elements, as well as different kinds of “versions for adults”, where harsh and even obscene elements are brought to the fore. Shostakovich most likely knew some of the latter ones very well.

As we can see, there are two main motives in the text. One is getting in-toxicated through alcohol consumption, and the other is achieving a certain freedom, the latter being a direct result of the former. Thus, all sources for the polygenetic quotation in Preface can be seen as belonging to a certain Ana-creontic tradition: daring humour based on the praise of drinking and sexual freedom.

However, this song had another meaning for Shostakovich in the 1960s.

Chizhik-Pyzhik is a tune one can easily play on the piano with one finger, and in the Russian musical tradition, it has become a symbol of pianistic simplic-ity. Since the middle of 1950s Shostakovich had started to become increasingly concerned with the condition of his right hand. Several years after the composi-tion of Preface he wrote to Isaac Glikman:

Сам я не могу их играть. С правой рукой дела обстоят плохо. Не играет даже чижика. (Shostakovich 1993, 296.)

I myself cannot play them [referring to Tsvetaeva songs op. 143]. Things are bad with my right hand – it cannot play even the “Chizhik”.

Here the reference to Chizhik-Pyzhik is not a reference to Anacreontic vi-rility – on the contrary, it is a musician’s bitter acknowledgement of his own pianistic (and therefore creative) impotence. In this context, the Chizhik-ref-erence in Preface can also be seen as a longing for lost freedom, most of all the pianistic freedom that enables the freedom of expression. Incidentally, we can also speculate that Preface, a piece written especially for the concert of 28 May 1966, where Shostakovich was to perform as a pianist for the first time after a long break, was intended as a “flying out of the cage” of pianistic disability, proving to the whole world as well as to himself that he could still be a perform-ing pianist. Most importantly, this is yet another clear instance of the ambigu-ity presented by a polygenetic quotation.