http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2006/11/19/a-journey-of-dmitri-shostakovich/

Despite its obvious cold war inspiration, "A Journey of Dmitri
Shostakovich," directed by Okasana Dvornichenko and Helga Landauer,
is an excellent introduction to the great composer's life and career.
Structured around a trip by ocean liner he made to the USA near the
end of his life in 1973, it blends together performances of his work,
excerpts from his letters and appalling evidence of how he was
hounded by Stalin and his cultural commissars.

Oddly enough, despite the obvious intentions of the directors to cast
the USSR as a kind of unredeemed failure, one of the greatest
attractions of the film is its liberal use of Soviet era kitsch.
Footage of men and women performing calisthenics under Stalin's gaze,
shipboard lectures on the glories of socialism, old agitprop posters,
etc., are actually the perfect visual complement to Shostakovich's
music, which was not afraid to indulge in patriotic and socialist
flag-waving. Indeed, this contradiction, which was at the heart of
his creativity, is something that defies easy resolution. As much as
the directors would like to recruit the great composer to a rerun of
the cold war culture wars, he remains very much as part of the legacy
of a unique experiment.

We learn that Shostakovich was very much a product of the USSR's
historical experience. As an 11 year old boy, he witnessed street
fighting between revolutionary workers and Czarist cops. Only 15
years later, he would serve as a fire warden during the siege of
Leningrad. He was always torn between writing music for the masses
that depicted broad social struggles using straightforward harmonies
and more experimental chamber works and opera that were heavily
ironic and even nihilistic. When I was first exposed to
Shostakovich's music in the 1950s, I tended to dismiss the first kind
of composition and rue the fact that he was prevented from devoting
himself fully to the more modern works. My attitude was of course
shaped by the prevailing prejudices of the time, which tended to
equate artistic "difficulty" with political freedom and private property.

It is a credit to the directors, who despite receiving funding from
the Boris Yeltsin fund, that they refrain from a one-sided portrayal
of Shostakovich as a prototypical dissident. His relationship to
Stalin was far more complex and paradoxical, mirroring in some ways
the relationship that Bukharin had to Stalin which alternated between
abject worship and open defiance.

In 1979, a posthumous "Testimony" by Shostakovich appeared in an
edited form by Solomon Volkov, a Russian musicologist. Supposedly the
composer dictated the book to him in a series of meetings from 1971
to 1974. The finished work was a typical anti-Soviet diatribe that
belonged on the same bookshelf as Solzhenitsyn et al. This was a
typical passage:

"The majority of my symphonies are tombstones. Too many of our people
died and were buried in places unknown to anyone, not even their
relatives. It happened to many of my friends. Where do you put the
tombstones for Meyerhold or Tukhachevky? Only music can do that for
them. I'm willing to write a composition for each of the victims, but
that's impossible, and that's why I dedicate my music to them all."

Eventually "Testimony" was revealed as something of a hoax by Laurel
Fay, an American musicologist who discovered numerous flaws and
inconsistencies in the work. You can find a complete account of the
debate that raged between the supporters of Volkov and Fay here, part
of a website titled "Music Under Soviet Rule". I personally have not
followed this debate as closely as I probably should, but I tend to
remain skeptical of the idea that the great composer was a secret
dissident. Why would I hold that view? Simply because the works that
were labeled simple propaganda are just too heart-felt to not be
infused with a kind of belief in the power of socialism. If you go to
the BBC Radio 3 archives, you can listen to Shostakovich's 5th
symphony online. This is the kind of work that has often been
dismissed by Western critics as second-rate musical propaganda,
especially considering its origins.

After Shostakovich came out with the opera "Lady Macbeth of Mtensk,"
a more experimental work, he came under attack in Pravda. In a kind
of apology, he subtitled the crowd-pleasing 5th symphony as "A Soviet
artist's reply to just criticism." Whatever the circumstances of its
origin, I agree with the composer's assessment that "The idea behind
my symphony is the making of a man. I saw him, with all his
experience, at the centre of the work, which is lyrical from
beginning to end. The Finale brings an optimistic solution to the
tragic parts of the first movement."

Video interview with co-director Helga Landauer.

Reply via email to