Should Music Communicate Something?

Depending on the era, country or community music had many different roles. Firstly discovered by primitive people was taken as a phenomenon of sounds which were announcing something- it could have been arrival of a person (recognized by steps sounds) or first hunting songs.
Music has been formed for ages as a perfect expression tool. If a thought was not enough to describe an idea or if a speech was too direct for this purpose the only way was to introduce this in music.
As the meaning of this form of communication is so wide not just one person is included in creating it. To create any piece, composer is needed, to help people with showing the piece to an audience, conductor is needed, and finally- to show a piece and express every thought included in it, performer is needed.
To present the problem of my subject I would like to compare opinions and observations of three remarkable artists and points of view which are dependent on their specialization in music.
My first specific person is a conductor Herbert von Karajan. He was one of the most outstanding conductors of the XXth century era, leading the best orchestras in Europe, like Vienna Philharmonic, London Philharmonic and Berliner Philharmoniker with which he was connected the most-not only as a conductor but also as an artistic director. During the interview with Richard Osborne he was asked if conducting like so much else in music is a process that involves the passage of a lot of time and what is the difference between learning work on the page and on the orchestra. Herr von Karajan said: It will certainly take a great deal of time. And this is why your first attempt to conduct a great work will often end up as a disaster, because you don t know where the real points of stress are, you don t know how the piece is distributed. In this, experience helps enormously. When you conduct a symphony for the first time you may fear breakdown in every bar. ( ) It is the same with a great surgeon. He knows where nothing can go wrong, where the young man is worrying My God, if something happens which I have not calculated for . Besides of engagement and knowledge every performing artist should have while showing the piece to the public Maestro Karajan was also talking about process of interpretation in other words how to make a content of a piece more obvious for an audience and correctly understood by an interpreter in one time. We know that Michelangelo regarded the marble he worked in as his own personal enemy. And we know the experience of pianists working at the keyboard. Gieseking once told me that he was given a new short piece to learn. It was about ten minutes long and he had before him two-hour train journey. He had marvelous memory so he learnt, and went to the hall and played it. But then, he said, the shock came. The momentcome to play, the moment when you feel the pressure of the whole body on the keys that is when the real process of interpretation really begins. And so it is with the orchestra. They learn from me, and I also learn a great deal from them. Karajan was a man who had lots of discipline in his music perception. Some people were even saying he is like walking computer he could walk in 105 and sing in 120 at the same time and as he was also saying If I get it wrong, I feel it with my whole body . Hebert von Karajan completed all 9 Ludwig van Beethoven s Symphonies between 1953 and 1956 with Berliner Philharmoniker and also with Philharmonia Orchestra. It was produced by Walter Legge. Why these recordings are so important in performance s history. Things like LP record or stereo was just happening then. Despite the worse technical possibilities the quality of sound was unique. We can only imagine how Beethoven wanted his symphonies to sound but from the historic facts we know he was not typical classical composer. He was living between two era- classic and romantic. Both of the periods had huge influence on his music which makes his pieces especially symphonies such an unique thing. In one of the interviews Karajan was asked if a young maestro in intensive care may not conducted a very effective Beethoven Seventh symphony. Karajan answered: No, because in the case of the Beethoven Seventh, he may not have learnt that quick music sounds dull unless every note is articulated. The last movement of this symphony is certainly a case in point. When I was a young conductor in Germany it was usual to conduct finale much slower than we hear it nowadays. And I knew it was wrong, but I couldn t get out of this tradition because of the difficulty of realizing the inner content of the music . Maestro Karajan moves here also topic about traditionalism in music. Sometimes the authenticity of music is replaced with some habits. When the habit starts to be the most important thing during performance it starts to be a tradition. Karajan is known not only of his musical discipline but also of his individual style. The proof of his individuality is the breaking the tradition and conducting Finale from Beethoven s Seventh in faster tempo. That s why his Beethoven s Symphonies are such a remarkable recordings.

In second argument I would like to show music as an expression tool from performer s view. The artist I ve chosen is one of the most remarkable violinists of XXth century David Oistrakh. Born in Odessa, pupil of Pyotr Stoliarsky he fastly became one of the most recognizable violinists. He was a winner of several violin competitions, for example Queen Elizabeth Violin Competition in Brussels or 1st Henryk Wieniawski International Violin Competiton in Warsaw. Many famous composers were dedicating him their pieces. One of them was Dmitri Shostakovich who had written for him two violin concertos and sonata. No one can argue about his technique and musical knowledge as he wasn t just violinist but also viola player, chamber musician, teacher and a conductor. That is why it is so important to also know his point of view if it comes to music expression and interpretation. In Conversations with Igor Oistrakh by Viktor Jusefovich the son describes his father I must first of all say that you shouldn t think that father only collected his own records. His record collection contains virtually all the outstanding violin interpretations in the last decades. And not just violin interpretations. David Oistrakh tried to make tape recordings of all compositions which interested him, or to get hold of the corresponding record. ( )Father called the tape recorder his note book. He always had it with him and there was hardly a day when he didn t listen to two or three recordings . Mr Oistrakh was very musically-engaged person and tried to also discover other possibilities of interpretation he didn t like treating interpretation like an exact reproduction of what author said which marked his recordings as very authentic and individual. There were many opposers of this philosophy as people were afraid of making any innovations to not to lose the real meaning of the piece. David s son, Igor, said: They probably start with a fact which they themselves cannot dispute: the composer has put in his score neither more nor less than what he intended to say. I can t agree with this view, just as my father couldn t agree with it . David Oistrakh wasn t creating different versions of interpretation to show virtuosity. He was working completely opposite. He wanted to show a piece in such an easy to interpretate way that even non-musical person would understand and start liking this kind of music. As he once said I am trying to live up to my vocation as an artist and hope to open rich world of music which makes everyday-life more beautiful . One of the most significant recording David Oistrakh made was Cesar Franck Violin Sonata in A Major. He changed the tradition of interpretation in this piece and played it without the slightest mannerism. As his son commented: The allegretto poco mosso sounds without the slightest touch of sweetness to the timbre. And what an extraordinary contrast he achieves, exactly through this simplicity in the passage where the fascinating proud, pathetic theme of the preceding third movement occurs again in the finale . Most of the people were treating this piece as an extremely romantic but they are forgetting about fact, Franck was a master of classical form. He was organist and completed the most recognizable chorals or organ sonatas. He was creating religious music which formally wasn t romantically complicated. But, as Ann Abor is saying in her book: The music material and style was new .David Oistrakh was connecting romantic expression with classical simplicity in this piece and that was the most original thing about his recording. He could have communicated more complicated musical things to the people much more clearly. He was the true music speaker.

The other character in music which is as important as a conductor and performer is the person who creates the piece composer. The composer I would like to talk about in my third argument is Dmitri Shostakovich the major composer of Soviet Russia. These times were really complicated period in Russian s history. Main commander of the country Joseph Stalin was not only the superior of the whole country but also a god of communistic system in XXth century Russia. Every form of art was deeply censored and created only for political reasons. Of course, the only theme they could have was propaganda of positive things about communistic system, the bad influence of western culture and politics and omnipotence of Soviet Russia. In this system Dmitri Shostakovich was born and was living. As an artist creating in regime times he was forced to composing pieces for propaganda needs as a military marches or even soviet jazz presented in Jazz Suite. Besides these compulsory forms he had to regularly write, he was creating also much more complicated forms which weren t politically correct. Esti Sheinberg is writing in his book about Shostakovich s style: The domain of Shostakovich research was so loaded with political and ideological considerations that even works which sincerely aspired to be purely analytical could not entirely avoid ideological preconceptions . The pieces of Shostakovich are giving us the image of living under repressive regime, when a word, move or even a thought is not compeletely free. Any criticism included in Dmitri s compositions was of course wisely encrypted. The members of party were seeing just a first layer of a piece and weren t musically experienced enough to go further. The music system of political opposition in Dmitri Shostakovich s compositions could have four forms: Irony, grotesque, parody and satire. Once again, Esti Sheinberg is talking about the role of these means. Irony is meta-thought, a meta-form of all comic genres.While the Dantesque lasciate ogni speranza leads humans through the gates of hell, the abandonment of both hope and despair leads towards the inescapable solution that eventually achieves humour. (...) Satire obviously belongs to the first kind of irony, i.e to the satirical one, it can express existential irony, too. Parody and grotesque, whilist still being liable to be used as satirical devices, can equally be embodiments of the second (Romantic) and third (Existential) kinds of irony. In other words, Shostakovich used every form of laugh to critisise the Russian system and not being recognized as an opponent. There wasn t of course just laugh in his music. Some moments were in deep sorrow which symbolized the author couldn t bare the regime around him. Rhytmically complicated pieces were always including the knocking theme which pointed at composer s mental fright that any time, someone could have knock to his door and have a very right to arrest him for his musical criticism of politics. The piece which includes both laugh and sorrow is 4^th Movement of Dmitri Shostakovich s Symphony no.5. It begins with rhythmical march, the partiture is covered with brass massive parts and is starting with timpanist solo. It starts in d minor, really majestic, energetic. Then the middle part is coming and is staying in the key centre of F Major. The tempo is slowing down and on the main plan strings are coming which makes the piece floating. After the middle part majestic march theme is coming back but at the end it modulated to D Major. The key changes as well as the tempi changes symbolizes the author s every feeling if it comes to the country he lived. First d minor march symbolizes powerful Russia, military march. Then the real composer s feeling are coming sorrow and unsureness about the system around him, feeling in danger all the time. Then the theme is coming back again, in quiet version which is a reminesence the regime always will be there. And it ends in a major key which is literally smiling through clenched teeth to not be in danger anymore.

The three things of music expression given below from the point of view of a conductor, instrumentalist and a composer are describing the forms of communication through the music. Herbert von Karajan wanted to communicate the composer s feelings by knowing his history and with using his theoretical knowledge and experience, David Oistrakh wanted to make a contact even with non musical people which spreads the classical music form to the different audience and making it much more popular and Dmitri Shostakovich wanted to communicate the cruelity of a system to the next generation and to the world which he couldn t have done straight in a speech because of the risk. What was the common thing in these three forms of musical speech. They wanted to go further with interpretation and with performance to prove that music is as effective form of communication as a word or a speech so they have used new techniques which weren t used before. It was quite shocking for a society but it was very remarkable for a history of music as the other ways of music s authenticity during performance were discovered. Three people I mentioned in arguments are undoubtedly the icons of XXth century history of music not only if it comes to the new techniques of spreading the theory of music but also if it comes to their musical thoughts and fresh music interpretations. Music actually can discover much more if a person is engaged enough to understand it. It can also hide much more things as it is not that direct as a speech or word is which helped to describe some skipped historical facts. Music is definitely needed as one of the communication s tools and is equally effective as a speech or a word.