Concerning Sergei Prokofiev’s Manner of Working on his Musical Compositions (on the Material of the Composer’s and His Contemporaries’ Statements)
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article examines the particular features of Sergei Prokofiev’s artistic thinking, which reflected on his manner
of working on his musical compositions. This type of angle of research has been founded on the rich literary
heritage: statements of the composer himself, as well as observations of Prokofiev’s creative process by his
contemporaries. The author of the article systematizes the techniques used by Prokofiev when creating his musical
compositions, basing herself on a formula of the compositional process suggested by psychologist L.L. Bochkaryov.
The three stages of work on the musical material formulated by the researcher (“exposition” – “development” –
“recapitulation”) correlate harmoniously with Prokofiev’s statements about his own process of composition. At the
same time, attention is chiefly focused on the second stage – the “development.” in his grouping the techniques
of this stage, the author of the article reveals two leading principles of composition: the visibly logical and the
sensuously instinctive. They disclose both the architectonic and the content-based sides of the emerging musical
material. The sources that had been studied made it possible to arrive at a conclusion: the composer’s technique of
composition was founded on detailed preliminary work, based on minute planning of the future opus. Comparable
demands were likewise exerted by Prokofiev on the producers, who commissioned theatrical and film music from
him. A musical composition was begun only when Prokofiev clearly envisaged the plan, the content-based side of
the composition and its primary musical material.
Keywords: Sergei Prokofiev, creative process, principles of artistic thinking.
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Blok V. M. Metod tvorcheskoy raboty S. Prokof’eva: issledovanie [The Method of Prokofiev’s Compositional Work. A Research Work]. Moscow: Muzyka, 1979. 140 p.
3. Bochkaryov L. L. Psikhologiya muzykal’noy deyatel’nosti [The Psychology of Musical Activity]. Moscow: Klassika-XXI, 2008. 352 p.
4. Boyarinseva A. A. Sergey Prokof’ev: vizual’nyy opyt i osobennosti khudozhestvennogo myshleniya [Sergei Prokofiev: A Visual Experience and the Features the Artistic Thinking]. Muzykal’naya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya [Musical Psychology and Psychotherapy]. 2009, No. 1, pp. 30–37.
5. Dolinskaya E. B. Teatr Prokof’eva: issledovatel’skie ocherki [Prokofiev’s Theatre. Research Essays]. Moscow: Kompozitor, 2012. 376 p.
6. Klimovitsky A. I. O tvorcheskom protsesse Betkhovena: issledovanie [About Beethoven’s Creative Process: A Research Work]. Leningrad: Muzyka, 1979. 174 p.
7. Malysheva T. F. «Slovo o Prokof’eve» A. G. Shnitke [“A Word about Prokofiev” by Alfred Schnittke] Tvorchestvo Al’freda Shnitke. K 65-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya: uchyonye zapiski Saratovskoy konservatorii im. L. V. Sobinova [Alfred Schnittke Music. Towards the 65th Anniversary: Scholarly Notes of the Saratov State L.V. Sobinov Conservatory]. Issue 2. Saratov, 2000, pp. 64–71.
8. O Prokof’eve: I. Yaunzem, A. Ermolaev, G. Vishnevskaya, G. Rozhdestvenskiy [About Prokofiev: I. Jaunsem, A. Yermolaev, G. Vishnevskaya, G. Rozhdestvensky]. Sovetskaya muzyka [Soviet Music]. 1961, No. 4, pp. 123–128.
9. Prokof’eva M. Iz vospominaniy [From Memories]. Sovetskaya muzyka [Soviet Music]. 1961, No. 4, pp. 91–104.
10. Prokof’ev S. S. Avtobiografiya [Prokofiev S. S. Autobiography]. Second Edition, Supplemented. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1982. 600 p.
11. Prokof’ev S. S. Dnevnik [Prokofiev S. S. Diary]: in 2 Books. Paris: sprkfv, 2002. Book 1. 812 p.; Book 2. 850 p.
12. Prokof’ev S. S. Materialy, dokumenty, vospominaniya [Prokofiev S. S. Materials, Documents, Memoirs]. Second Edition, Supplemented. Moscow: Muzgiz, 1961. 707 p.
13. Prokof’ev S. S. i Myaskovskiy N. Ya. Perepiska [S. S. Prokofiev and N. Ya. Myaskovsky. Correspondence]. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1977. 599 p.
14. Prokof’ev o Prokof’eve: stat’i, interv’yu [Prokofiev about Prokofiev: Articles, Interviews]. Edited by V. P. Varuns. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1991. 285 p.
15. Prokof’ev S. S. Stat’i i materialy [Prokofiev S. S. Articles and Materials]. Second Edition, Revised and Supplemented. Moscow: Muzyka, 1965. 400 p.