Rodion Shchedrin’s Concertos for Orchestra: Concerning the Problem of Interpretation of the Genre
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article examines the peculiarities of the innovative rendition of the genre of the Concerto for Orchestra in the
musical legacy of Rodion Shchedrin. The composer creates his own version of the orchestral concerto, modified in
the course of such stylistic trends as neo-folklorism and post-modernism. The predominating features of Shchedrin’s
Concertos are in the putting into practice of Russian subject-matter and programmatic features, which in many
ways define the dramaturgical profile of the compositions and the principles of their compositional organization.
The composer’s genre sources for the concertos turn out to be the baroque concerto grosso, the romantic symphonic
poem and the symphonic pictures by Russian composers. The depictive-musical development in Shchedrin’s
concertos is realized on the basis of single-element and multielement dramaturgy. In the monodramaturgical
concertos (“The Chimes” and “Khorovods”) the freely interpreted principle of monothematicism in interaction with
variant-variational development leads to the emergence of resultant contrasts, in particular, to the genre-related
transformations of thematicism. The concertos with the single-element dramaturgy (“Mischievous Chastushkas,”
“Early Music of Russian Provincial Circuses,” and “Four Russian Songs”) are characterized by a reliance on a
quasi-suite means of organization of compositions, as well as by contrasting juxtapositions of non-conflicting
types.
Keywords: Rodion Shchedrin, Concerto for Orchestra, instrumental concerto, neo-folklorism, Concerto Grosso,
monodramaturgy, monothematicism.
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. Korobova A. G. Sud’ba fenomena i ponyatiya “zhanr” v muzykal’noy kul’ture noveyshego vremeni [The Destiny of the Phenomenon and the Concept of “Genre” in the Musical Culture of the Contemporary Times]. Problemy muzykal’noj nauki [Music Scholarship]. 2013. No. 1, pp. 233–237.
3. Rodion Shchedrin: materialy k tvorcheskoy biografii: sbornik retsenziy, issledovaniy i materialov [Rodion Shchedrin. Materials for a Creative Biography: Collection of Reviews, Studies and Materials]. Edited by E. S. Vlasova. Moscow: Moscow State P. I. Tchaikovsky Conservatory, 2007. 488 p.
4. Sinel’nikova O. V. Montazh kak printsip muzykal’nogo myshleniya R. Shchedrina: avtoref. dis. … kand. iskusstvovedeniya [Mounting as a Principle of Rodion Shchedrin’s Musical Thinking: Thesis of Dissertation for the Degree of Candidate of Arts]. Moscow, 2004. 33 p.
5. Sinel’nikova O. V. Rodion Shchedrin: konstanty i metamorfozy stilya [Rodion Shchedrin: Constants and Metamorphosis of Style]. Kemerovo: Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts, 2013. 314 p.
6. Tarakanov M. E. Tvorchestvo Rodiona Shchedrina [The Works of Rodion Shchedrin]. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1980. 328 p.
7. Kholopova V. N. Put’ po tsentru. Kompozitor Rodion Shchedrin [The Path Along the Centre. Composer Rodion Shchedrin]. Moscow: Kompozitor, 2000. 310 p.
8. Shabunova I. M. Orkestrovaya stilistika epokhi barokko v muzyke XX veka (na primere zhanra concerto grosso) [The Orchestral Style of Baroque in the Music of the 20th Century: On the Example of the Concerto grosso]. Problemy muzykal’noj nauki [Music Scholarship]. 2012. No. 1, pp. 226–230.
9. Auner J. H. Schoenberg’s Handel Concerto and the Ruins of Tradition. Journal of the American Musicological Society. 1996. Vol. 49. Issue 2, pp. 264–313.
10. Mauskapf M. Collective Virtuosity in Bartok’s Concerto for Orchestra. The Journal of Musicological Research. 2011. Vol. 30. No. 4, pp. 267–296.
11. Menke J. Sound, Process and “Skeleton” – On the First Movement of Handel’s Concerto Grosso op. 6 No. 1 in G major. Musik Und Asthetik. 2007. Vol. 11, pp. 54–68.
12. Stuhr-Rommereim J. An Interview with Rodion Shchedrin. Choral Journal. 1992. Vol. 32. No. 9, pp. 7–14.
13. Thomas H. First Performances: Liverpool, The Philharmonic Hall: Rodion Shchedrin’s Oboe Concerto. Tempo. 2011. Vol. 65, pp. 57–58.