Prokofiev 2nd concerto : Halfway between West and USSR.

The piece I’m going to study is Prokofiev’s second concerto in G minor opus 63. It’s a piece I have played multiple times and I was always intrigued by how disturbing but fascinating it was at the same time. That is why I decided it would be interesting to dwell further into the context of piece.

Sergei Prokofiev was born on April 23rd of 1891 in Ukraine. He was soon revealed to be a prodigy and began studying in 1904 at the Saint Petersbourg conservatory. Following the October 1917 revolution, Prokofiev went into exile for the United States, not to flee but to find a favorable climate for his works, then later, went to Europe. In 1932 Sergei Prokofiev who was then in Brussels created his sonata for two violins, interpreted by the violinists Robert Soetens (1897-1997) and Samuel Dushkin (1891-1976). Prokofiev appreciates their interpretation, and then learn that Dushkin had just commissioned a violin concerto from Igor Stravinsky (1882-1971). Prokofiev, by rivalry, began to compose in haste his Second Violin Concerto in G minor for Robert Soetens.

This second concerto was created on December 1, 1935 in Madrid with the Madrid Orchestra under the direction of Enrique Fernandez Arbos (1863-1939) with Robert Soetens as soloist and dedicatee. Prokofiev awards Soetens the exclusive right to perform the work for one year. This tour of nearly forty concerts which led the composer to Spain, Portugal as well as Algeria and Tunisia was one of his last before his return to the USSR, and thus marks a turning point in his life. This concerto for violin was therefore one of the last works that Prokofiev wrote before returning officially in the USSR in 1936.

Michael Steinberg (1928-2009), a music critic, describes this concerto as “classical, modern, rhythmic and lyrical” (1996, p. 354) because we discover two different inspirations, one Western and one Soviet. In this context, we will ask ourselves how this second concerto marks a transition in the work of Prokofiev.

In order to demonstrate that this work is a work of transition in the music of Prokofiev I will first study the imprints of Western modernity in the writing of this concerto, and secondly, the more classical elements of this concerto which could reflect the influence and submission to the dictates of the music of the Stalinist regime.

From an early age, still a student at the conservatory, Prokofiev showed a great interest in western contemporary music. He discovers the music of Claude Debussy, Richard Strauss, or Arnold Schoenberg during contemporary music evenings organized by the avant-garde movement Russia.

This movement set itself the mission of radically breaking with traditions and codes established. It asserts the modernity, dynamism and industrialization of an increasingly urban world. Prokofiev’s compositions are like him, fiery, daring, rhythmic and ambitious.

Prokofiev lived in Paris from January to March 1935, at 5 rue Valentin-Hauy in the fifteenth arrondissement when he composed the first movement of this second violin concerto, inviting Robert Soetens every week to show him and play the pages he had composed, asking him for his impressions.

Robert Soetens, in his unpublished Memoirs tells us about the process of writing this concerto:

"I saw every note, every measure come out of his pen. He took a keen interest in this work,

was amused by the difficulties and finds hardly agreeing to modify something,

asking to register bow slurs for the phrasing, and fingerings avoiding the ports of voice

of bad taste ". (Jacqueline Morand-Deviller, Mélomane n°68, p6)

Prokofiev is then influenced by the musical context which surrounds him during the composition of this first movement, including the composers Francis Poulenc, Maurice Ravel or even Igor Stravinsky, his greatest rival, trying to compose more innovative works than his own.

This second concerto in G minor begins with an eight bar solo by the violinist, exposing the first mysterious theme, unaccompanied, the orchestra resuming the modulating theme to number 1 to then reach a climax during the octavas of the violinist. Prokofiev somehow breaks with the tradition of orchestral introductions and accompaniment from the first bars.

He attributes to his concerto a modernism from the outset, breaking with the classical traditions of the concerto.

From the beginning of the movement, Prokofiev plays with the rhythms, indeed, the first bars of the first theme, each time it is repeated, suggests a 5/4, misleading the listener, due to the slurs that only change every five beats, with the downbeats falling on the first and the third beat.

I can observe in this first movement, the Allegro moderato, modern sounds, typical of Prokofiev. The composer indeed uses large non tonal intervals, very distant and which, to the ear of the listener, suggests a free and flexible interpretation, which is not the case. Indeed, the performer is subject to the uncompromising and precise rhythm and pulsation of this work, with an orchestral accompaniment that leaves him very little freedom

Moreover, this pulsation is changing during the first movement, in sonata form.

The development of the two themes at number 11, brought by a bridge embellished with a set of questions and answers between the soloist and the orchestra, is written in two parts (108-120; 80-90 at the hall note), in which we can distinctly identify these two themes. The development of the first theme is virtuoso and technical. The composer is clearly playing with driving energy in this movement through the doubles fast eighth notes which give an impression of perpetual motion, this effect accentuated by the ascending and descending chromaticisms that can be found at number 3 or 11. This could remind the listeners of the industrialization, the cadences of the modern machines so admired by the avant-garde movement.

It’s also possible to notice the use of a mute at number 18, which recalls the modernity of this writing, because no composer, apart of the modern period, used one in the soloist part of a concerto.

The main tonality is G minor, it is a tonal syntax that works by sequences often non-functional. Indeed, the large deviations as well as the frequent chromaticisms confuse the tonality and the ear therefore creating an unconventional harmony. Many dissonances are also unresolved.

Prokofiev uses an asymmetrical writing in the accents he has, it creates a feeling of dynamism, power and surprise for the listener.

The composer surprises us with his coda in pizzicati and chords, reusing a slight memory of the first theme, much softer. This movement culminates in a G major chord without a third, in pizz, leaving the listener unsatisfied, waiting for a sequel because the main element is missing for the movement to actually feel complete.

It’s in 1933, after realising that there is only a place for Stravinsky in Occident and that his work doesn’t have as much success that Prokofiev decides to go back definitely to the URSS. Prokofiev realizes that the Soviet Union represents a real counterweight and competitor to the West thanks to its rapid development and tens of millions of viewers. Many concert halls are being built all over the country, and many orchestras are being formed. He accepts Marxist ideology and even promotes it.

His decision to return to the USSR is motivated by a certain nostalgia and opportunism, he finally has the feeling of being acknowledged. The composer must then adjust his music with a strong character and predominantly modern to the ideas of the Soviet Stalinist regime. His writing style begins to change. The composer claims a “new simplicity”, a return to melodies simple and understandable. This new lyricism would then be accessible music for the Soviet people and conform to the expectations of the Stalinist Regime, joyful music and accompanying the “path towards the radiant future” (resolution of April 23, 1932 on the “restructuring literary and artistic organizations”). Any music considered formal, modern, is reserved for the Western bourgeoisie, and therefore censored by the Union of Composers. Prokofiev becomes an official composer of the regime in 1936.

Prokofiev composes the first movement in sonata form, returning to classic musical forms. I can identify the exposition of a first theme in G minor then, the exposition of a second theme in B flat major, the relative of the main key. It’s possible to hear in the development some parts of the themes as well as brilliant virtuoso passages. The reexposition is more confused, the themes still recognizable but modified, the two intertwining and providing a sense of mystery to the listener.

Michael Steinberg used the word “classical” to describe this concerto, unlike others 20th century composers like Stravinsky with neoclassicism and Schoenberg with dodecaphonism which “reinvented” the classical style.

The concerto consists of three movements inspired by the usual classical structure of the concerto: a fast first movement, a slow and melodic second, and a third, bright and fast.

The orchestration of the concerto, completed in Baku, Azerbaijan is simple. It leaves a lot of room for the violinist, unlike his first concerto composed in 1917 for example, more avant-garde and in which the orchestration is more extensive and takes up more space, forming an integral part of the concerto.

Thus, this second violin concerto in G minor is indeed a “classical, modern, rhythmic and lyrical” concerto. It can therefore be classified as a transitional work in Prokofiev’s music. This concerto marks a break between his early Western avant-garde works, such as his first concerto for violin (1917), completely modern and his works composed after 1935 in the USSR, such as his ballet Roméo et Juliette (1935-1936) or even Pierre et le loup (1936) written in the style of"new simplicity".

**Bibliography : **

• Steinberg, M. (1998), The Concerto: A Listener’s Guide,. New York: Oxford University

Press.

• Thériault Brillon A. (2015) Revue littéraire et interprétation du concerto pour violon no.2

de Prokofiev, Intermezzo

**Webgraphy : **

• Morand-Deviller, J., Quand Robert Soetens créait Prokofiev,

https://www.maisondelaradioetdelamusique.fr/article/quand-soetens-creait-prokofiev

• Pressnitzer G. L’art des fausses provocations,

https://www.espritsnomades.net/musiques/serguei-prokofiev-symphonie-classique/

• Sergei Prokofiev,

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergue%C3%AF_Prokofiev

• Martin-Chevalier, L. Lénine, Staline et la musique,

https://collectionsdumusee.philharmoniedeparis.fr/exposition-lenine-staline-et-lamusique.aspx

• Futurisme russe,

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurisme_russe

• JourdainA.,Serge Prokofiev,

http://www.pianobleu.com/prokofiev.html

• Beyne B. Notre Dossier Prokofiev (3) : les Concertos,

https://www.crescendo-magazine.be/notre-dossier-prokofiev-3-les-concertos/

• Galaïda A. Prokofiev, un compositeur russe en quête d’universel,

https://fr.rbth.com/art/culture/2016/04/22/prokofiev-un-compositeur-russe-en-queteduniversel_58723

• Robert Soetens,

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Soetens