To the Editors:
Donald F. McCabe’s response (April 1991) to Samuel Lipman’s review of The New Shostakovich (February 1991) overlooks a central problem of Shostakovich’s art. One need only consider the exuberant, puckish, and inventive Symphony no. 1 (1926) to relish what the composer might have produced had he not suffered the meddling of crass ideologues. To suggest that the political climate of Stalinist Russia somehow spurred the hapless composer on to greatness not only relies upon an over-estimation of his later, tormented work, but reiterates the usual, tiresome emphasis of the political conditions of artistic production over aesthetics.
While Shostakovich’s work did indeed flourish to some degree despite Stalinist tyranny, I suspect that because of that tyranny his work did not flourish to its full potential. And, I should add, it hardly matters whether his work was a straight or ironic response to Stalin’s bullying; either way the bullying, and not the composer’s artistic instincts, prompted the response. If anything, Stalin’s reign of terror can only be credited with having harassed and embittered one of the most gifted composers of this century.
Richard H. Branyan
The University of Tennessee
KnoxviIle, TN