Concerning the Question of Interpretation of Sergei Prokofiev’s Piano Compositions
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In this article an analysis of performing interpretations of Prokofiev’s piano compositions is carried out from the positions of a hermeneutical approach. Interpretation is examined as a means of existence for the musical composition demanding an active creative co-participation of the performer in the recreation of the composer’s artistic conception. Special importance is attributed to the question of the boundaries of interpretation: the necessity of penetration into the innermost semantic strata of the performed composition, the aspiration towards the comprehension of the composer’s conception and the infeasibility of willful treatment of the musical text. The notion is elaborated on that the character of interpretation, its adequacy and convincing qualities depend not only on the musician’s professional level, but also on the magnitude and significance of the personality of the performer. The assertion is made that the analysis of various interpretations of any particular musical composition makes it possible not only to define the performer’s spiritual reference points and value preferences, but also the spiritual atmosphere of the society in which he or she is artistically active, as well as the demand for certain moods or meanings which the composer’s music conveys. The presumption is expressed that the active interest in the music of Prokofiev on the part of performers is stipulated by the character of the intense historical situation in the world creating the feelings of alarm and blight: in Prokofiev’s music especially attractive for musicians are the aspiration towards light, self-assuredness and optimism. The renditions of the piano compositions by Svyatoslav Richter, Maria Grinberg, Emil Gilels, Marta Argerich, Nikolai Petrov, as well as by contemporary pianists, Andrei Gavrilov, Evgeny Kisin, Daniil Trifonov and Grigory Sokolov.
Keywords: Sergei Prokofiev, piano compositions, performer’s interpretation, composer’s conception.
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. Gordon G. B. Emil' Gilel's. Za gran'yu mifa [Emil Gilels. Beyond the Myth]. Moscow: Klassika-XXI, 2007. 171 p.
3. Del'son V. Yu. Fortepiannoe tvorchestvo i pianizm Prokof'eva [The Piano Compositions and Piano Technique of Prokofiev]. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1973. 287 p.
4. Martynova S. Iz perepiski Prokof'eva [From Prokofiev's Correspondence]. Sergey Prokof'ev: Pis'ma. Vospominaniya. Stat'i [Sergey Prokofiev: Letters. Memoirs. Articles]. Moscow, 2007, pp. 148–178.
5. Mendel'son-Prokof'eva M. A. Vospominaniya o Sergee Prokof'eve. Fragment: 1946–1950 gody [Mendelssohn- Prokofiev M. A. Memoirs of Sergei Prokofiev. Fragment: 1946–1950]. Sergey Prokof'ev. Vospominaniya. Pis'ma. Stat'i [Sergey Prokofiev. Memoirs. Letters. Articles]. Moscow, 2004, pp. 5–226.
6. Ovchinnikov M. O romanticheskikh tendentsiyakh v interpretatsiyakh fortepiannykh proizvedeniy S. Prokof'eva sovetskimi pianistami [About the Romantic Tendencies in Interpretations of Prokofiev’s Piano Works by Soviet Pianists]. Moskovskiy muzykoved [The Moscow Musicologist]. Issue 2. Moscow, 1991, pp. 78–88.
7. Safonova T. V. Metafizicheskaya sostavlyayushchaya v tvorchestve S. S. Prokof'eva [The Metaphysical Component in the Works of Sergei Prokofiev]. Saratov: Saratov State L. V. Sobinov Conservatory, 2011. 156 p.
8. Fomina Z. V. Avtor kak problema teoreticheskoy refleksii v kul'turnom prostranstve postmoderna [The Author as an Issue of Theoretical Reflection in the Cultural Space of the Post-Modern Era]. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya [Present-Day Issues of Scholarship and Education]. 2012. No. 3. URL: http://www.rae.ru/fs/.
9. Fomina Z. V. Filosofiya muzyki [The Philosophy of Music]. Saratov: Saratov State L. V. Sobinov Conservatory, 2011. 208 p.
10. Chemberdzhy V. N. XX vek Liny Prokof'evoy [The 20th Century of Lina Prokofiev]. Moscow: Klassika-XXI, 2008. 336 p.
11. Shnitke A. G. Slovo o Prokof'eve [A Few Words about Prokofiev]. Besedy s Al'fredom Shnitke [Conversations with Alfred Schnittke]. Moscow, 2005, pp. 209–214.
12. Eko U. Otkrytoe proizvedenie [Ecco U. An Open Work]. St. Petersburg: Akademicheskiy proekt, 2004. 384 p.
13. Giroud V. Nicolas Nabokov: a Life in Freedom and Music. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. 584 p.
14. Khait J. To Sing or Not to Sing: the Signification of Operatic Mode of Utterance in Sergey Prokofiev’s Betrothal in A Monastery. Art of Music. Theory and History. 2017 № 16, pp. 21–44.
15. Manzoni S. Music and Literature at the Time of Soviet Union. Art of Music. Theory and History. 2017. No. 16, pp. 207–211.
16. Morrison S. Prokofiev: Reflections on an Anniversary, And A Plea for a New Critical Edition. Art of Music. Theory and History. 2017. No. 16, pp. 5–20.
17. The Leonard Bernstein Letters. Ed. by Nigel Simeone. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013. 606 p.