# Boris Godunov--Which Version For You



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I am curious which is your preferred version (assume there is a perfect recording for each version). 

The third choice, "Mussorgsky: 1872 with select parts included from 1869," is found on a number of the "1872" CD sets that include parts of the 1869 original that were removed in making the 1872 revision.

You have to pick just one as your very most preferred.

I am not going to vote quite yet, but will tell you that after my Gergiev set with both Mussorgsky versions arrived, I listened to the 1869 once then was listening to the 1872 over and over for five days. After that I went back to the 1869 and really liked it a lot. I think 1869 may be my preferred but am not going to vote until I do some more listening and research. One thing I like about the 1869 is that it ends with Boris' death. I think the added scene on the 1872 may take away from that stunning ending. It seems superfluous as does the addition of the love interest for the pretender.

The big question to me is, "Which one did Mussorgsky prefer?" 1869 or 1872? After all, his revisions of 1872 were initiated to satisfy others, though not to say that once he set to it he didn't work to refine and improve some other parts.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

I love the Polish act. 

But I prefer the Cathedral over the Kromï.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I've only listened to the 1872 version. I bought a mint used copy of the Rostropovich recording for 4 dollars. A very nice edition!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Ok. I cast my vote for the 1869 original. Some articles I read further convinced me that 1869 is the better version. Mussorgsky wanted this opera to be different from all other operas (so I read) and I think when he had to add in the bigger female part, the music and style of it was so out of character for the rest of the opera that he made other revisions to perhaps try to blend it in. At any rate, it does not seem to be what he had intended at the outset and I don't know if he was as pleased with the revisions as with the original. But I know what sounds right to me, so I am sticking with the 1869 original, and I think there is effectively only one recording of that, unless one wants to get into the Rimsky-Korsakov orchestration (which I don't). On Rimsky-Korsakov's behalf, he did make it so the opera got out to the public and he did intend that someday the public would go back to the Mussorgsky version.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I heard the original version performed in Pittsburgh a couple of decades ago and it was lean and powerful. Loved it. But I like other versions as well.

For those interested in the nitty griity of all of the revisions and their motivations and historical background, Richard Taruskin wrote an exhaustive study in his _Musorgsky_.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

EdwardBast said:


> I heard the original version performed in Pittsburgh a couple of decades ago and it was lean and powerful. Loved it. But I like other versions as well.
> 
> For those interested in the nitty griity of all of the revisions and their motivations and historical background, *Richard Taruskin wrote an exhaustive study in his Musorgsky*.


Thanks for the tip. I just ordered a used copy off of Amazon.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Rimsky's orchestration is far more flamboyant and sumptuous sounding, but it bowdlerizes the 
opera . Rimsky frequently changes Mussorgsky's harmonies in a way which smooths out the opera and obviates of the daring, pungent ones the composer invented . 
You might call it "My Fair Boris ". Rimsky admired Mussorgsky's original talent, and the two composers were good friends , but he thought Mussorgsky's music was much too raw, primitive and technically amateurish at times .


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

superhorn said:


> Rimsky's orchestration is far more flamboyant and sumptuous sounding, but it bowdlerizes the
> opera . Rimsky frequently changes Mussorgsky's harmonies in a way which smooths out the opera and obviates of the daring, pungent ones the composer invented .
> You might call it "My Fair Boris ". Rimsky admired Mussorgsky's original talent, and the two composers were good friends , but he thought Mussorgsky's music was much too raw, primitive and technically amateurish at times .


To Rimsky's credit, so I have read, he did anticipate that the opera would eventually be accepted in Mussorgsky's original orchestration, and it appears that it would never have gotten very far but for Rinsky's orchestration. Apparently the masses were not ready for the starkness of Mussorgsky yet.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I've just recently finished the Gergiev 1869 Boris. I quite liked it but I did miss the female contributions. Onto the Gergiev 1872 version next although I have ordered the Tchakarov version.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Would Mussorgsky have made the revisions to the opera if the committee had accepted his original 1869 version? If not, then the closest we come to Mussorgsky's true intention is 1869. It is interesting, however, that some of the Polish stuff had already been drafted by Mussorgsky and then he decided not to include it in 1869.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

I love and cherish every bit of the opera including the Polish act and Kromy Forest scene. For me, Boris without them is not the full opera. Although I was a huge fan for years before first getting acquainted with the 1872/1869 version, the first time I heard it, I wept. It was the complete expression of Mussorgsky's love and despair.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I've indulged myself and ordered the Mark Ermler version which I believe has ten scenes!, yes, ten scenes, and is the most extensive version on record. There is a little duplication but if you love Boris I can't help but believe you will love this! I personally can't wait to hear it.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Barbebleu said:


> I've indulged myself and ordered the *Mark Ermler version* which I believe has ten scenes!, yes, ten scenes, and is the most extensive version on record. There is a little duplication but if you love Boris I can't help but believe you will love this! I personally can't wait to hear it.


That would be a Rimsky-Korsakov version.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Barbebleu said:


> I've just recently finished the Gergiev 1869 Boris. I quite liked it but I did miss the female contributions. Onto the Gergiev 1872 version next although I have ordered the *Tchakarov* version.


Tchakarov just arrived today. Very good!


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Florestan said:


> That would be a Rimsky-Korsakov version.


Yep. Btw I love the new avatar Flo.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I like pretty much all the versions (it may be my favorite opera). But when I'm feeling really decadent, I put on the Karajan recording, which is the conflated version with Rimsky's orchestration. It's more opera than Mussorgsky meant, but who'd want to mis any of it?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

MarkW said:


> I like pretty much all the versions (it may be my favorite opera). But when I'm feeling really decadent, I put on the Karajan recording, which is the conflated version with Rimsky's orchestration. It's more opera than Mussorgsky meant, but who'd want to mis any of it?


Apart from the decadent bit 
+ 1 .


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Opera is an entertainment to be enjoyed. If we enjoy Rimski's version I'm not going to stop listening to it because some people think you should only listen to the original. Of course, Mussoursky's has great power too in its own way. But why not have both? I have


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Recently, there is a tendency to stage "Boris" as written by Mussorgsky, and with the 10 scenes. This was the case the last time I watched the opera in the theater, four years ago.

Personally, I do prefer the original versions, but I have nothing against Rimsky's or Shostakovich's.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Here is an interesting article making a good argument for the 1869 Boris Godunov and that in revising it "Mussorgsky turned his compressed musical drama into a grandly expansive Romantic opera." So really, a good argument for both 1869 and 1872 versions.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Here is another article that lends support to the 1869 original Boris Godunov. It notes that after the 1872 revision and all the tinkering by Rimsky and others, 


> Mussorgsky's own original score had to be rediscovered through trial and error in the 20th century until now when we find the 1869 version considered a viable, some say even preferable, alternative to all of the variants that now exist.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

My Fedosoyev arrived today. The accompanying booklet and libretto has an abridged article by David Lloyd- Jones from his OUP critical edition of Boris. Interesting article that has some fascinating details. This version is Mussorgsky's own 1872 version with the following scenes. 
1. Courtyard of Novodievichy Monastery
2. A square in the Moscow Kremlin
3. A cell in the Chudow Monastery
4. An inn near the Lithuanian border
5. The Tsar's apartments in the Kremlin
6. Marina Mnishek's boudoir at Sandomir
7. The garden of Mnishek Castle
8. Assembly hall in the Kremlin
9. A clearing in the forest near Kromy

198 minutes in total. 

I am listening to Act 3 of the Tchakarov at the moment so it will be a while until I get to this. The Tchakarov is very good but I have fond memories of the Fedosoyev when I listened to my vinyl set about twenty five years ago. I am looking forward to listening to it again but I may listen to the Gergiev 1872 set first. Decisions, decisions! And the Ermler is in the post! Aargh!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Fedosoyev is an excellent recording. In "Modest Mussorgsky and Boris Godunov: Myths, Realities, Reconsiderations" it says of the Fedosoyev recording,



> The revision [1872], but with every scene in its longest possible form. Thus, the recording does not contain the St. Basil scene, but it does restore all the material from the initial version that Mussorgsky, in revision, cut from the five scenes common to both versions.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

While on the subject:

Boris Wanted: I am looking for a good performance of *Boris Godunov* with the Mussorgsky orchestration, complete, including both scenes of the Polish act, St. Basil, and Kromy Forest. 
Thirty(ish) years ago, I heard a superb Boris by the Metropolitan Opera in that version, to my mind the best ever, but could never find recordings of it, nor have they done that production since. Subsequent ones have been less satisfying. But I would like to hear this version once more, or one like it, before I die.

Any media acceptable, but if visual, I would prefer one not juiced up with stupid stuff, like as an example, projections of original Dmitri's murder in the monk's cell, or any other "business" as I have seen in different versions. The opera is structured in contrasts of plot, music and staging, so that scene, following the coronation, should be simple and stark; two men in a dark space, period.

In all these years I have been unsuccessful in my search for the above, but I'm a duffer. Clearly, there are adepts here who might guide me in this quest; my last, desperate hope.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

^ znapschatz:

Tchakarov and Semkow are both supersaturated versions (having both St. Basil and Kromy scenes as well as other material from both versions in the scenes not cut). There is at least one other like that, but I don't have my reference with me. EDIT: I think Abbado may have a supersaturated version, and the other supersaturated version is Rostropovich. Many are quite enthused with the Semkow set--check this thread:
http://www.talkclassical.com/30276-boris-godunov-cd.html

As for visual. I watched the Bolshoi video on You Tube (has English subs). It is a great production but is Rimskified.

For pure Mussorgsky, there appear to be about four on DVD. I have three of them and so can report back to you, but have only started the second of the three. Two are 1869, one is 1872. The fourth one I won't be watching as the inn is a bar with a neon girlie silhouette sign. But since you are interested in a supersaturated version, the 1872 is the one I just finished watching and it includes both St. Basil and Kromy. It also is very well done, though the 9-year-old prince hovers in the background every now and then (not bloodied anyway). To the best of my knowledge (and I have been researching this to death over the past couple of weeks), this is the only DVD of the 1872 in Mussorgsky's orchestration and it does include the St Basil and Kromy scenes:









I highly recommend this one. As I recall there are two DVDs in the set, which corresond with two You Tubes that cover the entire opera so you can check out the scenes. The DVD set is reasonably priced used and will have the English subtitles. I really like a lot of the actors in this one.






Check out Marina in this. She is wonderful!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I forgot to mention, but "supersaturated" or "conflated" means that the set has material from both the 1869 and 1872 blended together in one way or another to provide as much of everything possible from both the original (1869) and revised (1872) Mussorgsky versions. 

My personal preference is the stark and driving 1869 original, but I also like the supersaturated version. I am not so fond of the 1872 because it does not include the great scene from St. Basil where the simpleton asks Boris to murder the children (who stole his kopek) as he had murdered the tsaravitch. And I rather like the ending with the death of Boris (1869) more than with the Kromy Forest scene (1872).


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

The Ermler arrived today. I don't want to od on Boris so I'll finish the Tchakarov then listen to the 1872 Gergiev. Then I'll have a break for a couple of weeks then Fedosoyev then Ermler. I shall report back.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Barbebleu said:


> The Ermler arrived today.* I don't want to od on Boris *so I'll finish the Tchakarov then listen to the 1872 Gergiev. Then I'll have a break for a couple of weeks then Fedosoyev then Ermler. I shall report back.


This I have also to watch out for. Not good to OD on any opera.  I just bought a Roberto Devereux (Gruberova) to help keep me from ODing on Boris. But I am not going to leave Boris alone, will still be taking healthy doses of Boris.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

Florestan said:


> I forgot to mention, but "supersaturated" or "conflated" means that the set has material from both the 1869 and 1872 blended together in one way or another to provide as much of everything possible from both the original (1869) and revised (1872) Mussorgsky versions.
> 
> My personal preference is the stark and driving 1869 original, but I also like the supersaturated version. I am not so fond of the 1872 because it does not include the great scene from St. Basil where the simpleton asks Boris to murder the children (who stole his kopek) as he had murdered the tsaravitch. And I rather like the ending with the death of Boris (1869) more than with the Kromy Forest scene (1872).


It depends on how one views the opera. As a teenager, I was first introduced to it by a 78 rpm album with Alexander Kipnis as Boris in a version ending with the death scene, and that seemed right. Years later, I caught a production ending with the Kromy Forest scene and was turned around on the spot. Viewed as drama, the tragedy of a flawed ruler properly ends with the death of Boris, but as an opera that could have been titled something like "The Time of Troubles," which is how I see it, Kromy is the suitable ending. 
Death closes it off, the continuity of Russian history opens it up. Your choice.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

^ First impressions can set a strong preference. 

Right now I am still not keen on the Kromy Forest scene, but am really loving the Polish scenes. I have a new mission: To find the best Boris Godunov set for the Polish scenes, particularly for Marina's vocals, and in Mussorgsky's orchestration.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

@florestan: I just listened to your recommended Marina's boudoir scene. Excellent voice, but the first part of that act, With Marina and her entourage, is missing, and instead opens on her conversation with Rangoni. I can't tell if the ladies were cut from the production or the recording, but it's a bit of a disappointment. I haven't heard the whole thing yet, but have my fingers crossed.
I really, _really_ want it all.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

znapschatz said:


> @florestan: I just listened to your recommended Marina's boudoir scene. Excellent voice, but the first part of that act, With Marina and her entourage, is missing, and instead opens on her conversation with Rangoni. I can't tell if the ladies were cut from the production or the recording, but it's a bit of a disappointment. I haven't heard the whole thing yet, but have my fingers crossed.
> I really, _really_ want it all.


I am sorry I missed that. The You Tube is wrong. I just was at 1:01 in the second You Tube and that same point in the second DVD disk is at 13:50. There is a full 12.5 minutes missing from the beginning of the second You Tube, and the first 4.5 minutes of it is Marina with her entourage. The DVD is good.

TIMINGS:

You Tube: 1:39 & 1:08

My DVDs: 1:45 & 1:45


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

Florestan said:


> I am sorry I missed that. The You Tube is wrong. I just was at 1:01 in the second You Tube and that same point in the second DVD disk is at 13:50. There is a full 12.5 minutes missing from the beginning of the second You Tube, and the first 4.5 minutes of it is Marina with her entourage. The DVD is good.
> 
> TIMINGS:
> 
> ...


Thank you, I'm glad to learn that. Now I'm ready to pull the trigger for one on an internet retailer site. Bisy backson.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

znapschatz said:


> Thank you, I'm glad to learn that. Now I'm ready to pull the trigger for one on an internet retailer site. Bisy backson.


Enjoy it immensely. It is an excellent production!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I have a great idea. Since nobody seems to agree on what exactly is the final or definitive version of Boris Godunov, lets just get a bit supersaturated set and pull out what we don't like and make our own version of Boris. :lol:

I think I will delete the Kromy Forest scene from the end of my Tchakarov and give it a listen. 

The Polish scenes are really growing on me though, but I just can't stomach that revolution stuff so directly as in the Kromy Forest.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

In reading Richard Taruskin's Mussorgsky book, the chapter on Boris Godunov, he is making a case for the 1872 being Mussorgsky's preferred version, that Mussorgsky went at the revisions with zeal, not in reaction to the rejection of the 1869. He also says that Mussorgsky's ideas about how to present opera went through a transition, that the 1869 was exactly what would be expected of him at the time he wrote it, but that all changed shortly after. 

Rimsky was a heavy influence on Mussorgsky in making the revisions (they shared quarters for a while at this time), especially in the Kromy Forest scene where Mussorgsky borrowed musical ideas from Rimsky. One might be able to say that the Kromy scene, at least, is sort of a Rimsky-fied effect on the opera, and so while the 1872 may be (if Taruskin's analysis is correct) Mussorgsky's definitive (or preferred) version, the 1869 seems to be more purely just Mussorgsky without outside interference (of Rimsky). 

The Polish scenes seem to be more Mussorgsky's work, as he at least had the fountain scene (minus the Jesuit) composed before submitting the 1869 version. The 1869 version also sticks much more closely to Pushkin than the 1872. 

Now this is based on a first read of the 90 pages on Boris Godunov, and it was tough reading, so I may be a little off, but this is what I gained from it (among other things).


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

So I just finished the Taruskin article. After 88 pages of discussion he says that if we are to maintain the revisions were not merely for expediency and that the revised _Boris_ is the authentic masterpiece and the earlier version represents only a stage in the artist's development, we need corroboration from Mussorgsky. Taruskin then says we have such corroboration, noting that in presenting Stasov with the autograph of _Marriage_ as a birthday present in January 1873. Mussorgsky wrote in part (Taruskin quotes this part),



> How shall one please a dear one? The answer comes without the slightest hesitation, as it does to all hotheads: give him of yourself. And so I am doing. Take my youthful labor on Gogol's _Marriage_, look upon these experiments in musical speech, compare them with _Boris_, set 1868 alongside 1871, and you will see that I am giving you myself irrevocably.


So then Taruskin says that implicit in Mussorgsky's comparison of 1868 and 1871 (and not 1869) is his judgement of the first _Boris_ as representing his last stage of apprenticeship. It seems to me to say the opposite, that the 1868 _Boris_ is more representative of himself. Consider that he gave Stasov the work called _Marriage_, referring to it as his "youthful labor." If we use Taruskin's term (apprenticeship), youthful labor seems to suggests apprenticeship. And I am not sure Mussorgsky meant anything by the year 1868 vs 1869 (or 1871 instead of 1872).

For now I am sticking with the 1869 and the conflated version (mix of both 1869 and 1872), which version tends to peeve Taruskin. I will definitely have to re-read Taruskin's essay to get a better feel for it and report back.

Robert Layton, in the booklet for Gergiev's 5-CD set of both versions (1869 & 1872) notes that Stassov said the operas rejection in 1869 was extremely beneficial in that it got Mussorgsky to rework the opera. This suggests that Taruskin's interpretation of the Mussorgsky quote above is correct, but it still puzzles me that he referred to his youthful labor. Mussorgsky's original intent was to make an opera as different from other operas as possible using realistic speech melody instead of arias. That may have been his "youthful labor" vs coming around to the more generally accepted artistic standards of his day in producing the 1872 version.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Seems like Mussorgsky was ahead of his time in writing opera. This article says (my underlining),


> As Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov subsequently wrote, "The innovative nature and unusual quality of the music left the honourable committee in a quandary, and they upbraided the composer, among other things, for the lack of any significant female role..." The dramaturgy of the opera in the first version, it must be said, also drew serious misgivings from Musorgsky's friends. The critic Vladimir Stasov chided the composer for "narrowing" Pushkin's tragedy to just Tsar Boris' own personal drama.


Same article also says (my underlining),



> By June 1872 Musorgsky had written a second version of the opera - without the "Scene near St Basil's Cathedral" but with the "Polish Act" and a new final scene ("A Forest near Kromy"). By the time of the premiere (27 January 1874, at the Mariinsky Theatre) a clavier of the opera had been published, which contained the music of both previous versions. This is why there are three versions of Boris Godunov, and all by the composer.


So there is some basis for the conflated version.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Then we have some quotes from this article,



> Mussorgsky was determined to create a "Russian opera" free of European influence and he succeeded in spite of all criticism.





> ...eventually the more rugged originality of Mussorgsky's score of 1869 became the preferred format for contemporary productions of this opera.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Florestan said:


> So then Taruskin says that implicit in Mussorgsky's comparison of 1868 and 1871 (and not 1869) is his judgement of the first _Boris_ as representing his last stage of apprenticeship.


But in opposition to Taruskin's point above, the book, A History of Opera: Milestones and Metamorphoses,



> in 1866, at the age of 27, Mussorgsky acieved artistis maturity.


which of course is two years before he started _Boris_.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

As noted above in post #36:


Florestan said:


> Rimsky was a heavy influence on Mussorgsky in making the revisions (they shared quarters for a while at this time), especially in the Kromy Forest scene where Mussorgsky borrowed musical ideas from Rimsky. One might be able to say that the Kromy scene, at least, is sort of a Rimsky-fied effect on the opera, and so while the 1872 may be (if Taruskin's analysis is correct) Mussorgsky's definitive (or preferred) version, the 1869 seems to be more purely just Mussorgsky without outside interference (of Rimsky).


Then in reading _Looking Into "Boris Godunov"_ (Robert W. Oldani, English National Opera Guide #11 _Boris Godunov_) I see this footnote:


> According to Stasof, "Originally, the opera _Boris Godunov_ was to consist of only four acts and was almost completely devoid of a female element. All Mussorgsky's closest friends (including me), who rapturously loved the miracles of drama and folk-truth with which these four acts were filled, nevertheless told him every minute that the opera was not complete, that many essential things were missing in it, and that despite its great beauties, the work could seem at times incomplete. ... For a long time he [Mussorgsky] did not agree with us and finally yielded to our power only when in the fall of 1870 (sic) the Theatre Directorate refused to mount _Boris_ on stage on the grounds that there was a prevalence of choruses and ensembles and a too-sensible absence of scenes for soloists."


So it seems to me that the pure Mussorgsky _Boris Godunov_ is the 1869 version, and that the 1872 version, while still largely Mussorgsky, tends to be more of a Mussorgsky/Mussorgsky, Stasov, Rimsky, et. al., version.

Additionally:

the 1869 version spares us the Italian-style singing in the Polish scenes, which do not fit the rest of the opera (though are beautiful pieces nonetheless);

the 1869 version gives us the opera as Mussorgsky originally intended, in a musical form that was as different from other European operas as possible (and perhaps unique in the world of opera); and

the 1869 version has the St. Basil's scene (dropped for the 1872 version) with the important part where the simpleton speaks the truth nobody else dared to speak, that Boris' had the tsarevich murdered.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

Florestan said:


> As noted above in post #36:
> 
> Then in reading _Looking Into "Boris Godunov"_ (Robert W. Oldani, English National Opera Guide #11 _Boris Godunov_) I see this footnote:
> 
> ...


This is a question that had been troubling me since first getting involved with the opera; did Boris actually order the murder of Prince Dmitri. Some years ago, I was introduced to a woman who had just returned from a lengthy stay in the (then) Soviet Union, where she had been studying the history of that era, utilizing archival material not available anywhere else. Upon learning this, the first thing I said to her, literally, was, "Did Boris do it?" She replied "No," then gave me the straight poop. In brief, it turns out the deed was done by partisans of the regent, but not at his command nor approval, and they were punished for having done it. The rest was Romanov propaganda. Naturally, I was crushed. Until then, I thought the opera was history. But I got over it.

I hope this isn't a spoiler for anyone.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Right, I have read that Boris did not do it. Your post clarifies it for me. No spoiler for me.


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

like with any political crime in history of mankind, committed by a *group* of self-interest persons, then blamed on some *scapegoat*.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Zhdanov said:


> like with any political crime in history of mankind, committed by a *group* of self-interest persons, then blamed on some *scapegoat*.


Not only political, just saying.


----------



## peeknocker (Feb 14, 2012)

Here's BBC's 1984 adaptation of Pushkin's original play, with incidental music by Prokofiev.

Aleksandr Pushkin - Boris Godunov (BBC Radio 3, 21 October 1984)
http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/055ee0c75...90cd03608e3711

DOWNLOAD LINK:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/w9x2xwxk0wh6kno/Alexandr+Pushkin+-+Boris+Godunov+%28BBC%2C+1984-03-08+-+Drama+Now%29.mp3


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Here is an interesting quote from this article (my bold emphasis):



> It is worth quoting from Claudio Abbado's comments on the Rimsky edition of
> Mussorgsky's Khovanschina from the booklet accompanying Abbado's lively DG
> recording of the opera, bearing in mind that, unlike Boris, Khovanschina had
> not been completed or orchestrated when Mussorgsky died. "[W]hile very
> ...


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

More to support my assertion that the 1872 Boris Godunov is not pure Mussorgsky, but also is polluted with the ideas of Rimsky-Korsakov, et. al, is in an article M.D. Calvocoressi wrote, _'Boris Godunov' as Mussorgsky Wrote It,_ (The Musical Times, April 1, 1928, says,



> The new edition [Boris Godunov in its New Version (Oxford University Press)] proves that it was from the very time when 'Boris Godunov,' fresh from the pen of its author, was shown to the people around him that originated the tendency to interfere with 'Boris Godunov' which culminated, fifteen years after Mussorgsky's death, in the appalling 'revision' by Rimsky-Korsakov...


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

What I most like about the dramaturgy (and I have not read, nor read about, the Pushkin), is the complete lack of connective tissue between the scenes. Each takes place_ sui generis_, and no one or nothing is explaining to us that the novice is the escapee is the pretender. When time passes, there is no obligation to fill in what happens in between. It's not a lot of figuring out, but it's refreshing and adds an air of otherness to the work.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

MarkW said:


> What I most like about the dramaturgy (and I have not read, nor read about, the Pushkin), is the complete lack of connective tissue between the scenes.  Each takes place_ sui generis_, and no one or nothing is explaining to us that the novice is the escapee is the pretender. When time passes, there is no obligation to fill in what happens in between. It's not a lot of figuring out, but it's refreshing and adds an air of otherness to the work.


Quite Brechtian, I would say. *Boris* was way ahead of its time.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I am enjoying my conflated (everything from both 1869 and 1872) Tchakarov Boris Godunov. Since it includes both the St. Basil scene and the Kromy Forest scene (which in the 1872 version replaced the St. Basil scene), I have taken the liberty to delete the Kromy Forest scene, which has never agreed with me. So it seems that Mussorgsky may well have changed his mind about the Kromy Forest scene. Caryl Emerson in _Boris Godunov, Transpositions of a Russiaon Theme_, notes:



> When the opera was revived in 1876-77, the Kromy Scene was omitted as well. In a celebrated passage from his memoirs of Musorgsky, Golenishchev-Kutuzov insisted that the composer approved of, and even welcomed, this omission. Musorgsky, according to kutuzov, confessed in the mid-seventies that the Kromy Scene "slandered the Russian character."


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Here is an interesting quote from this article (my bold emphasis):


I completely agree with Abbado. My intro to Boris was through Karajan's recording, which is quite good. I liked it a lot. When I got Gergiev's recording, Boris became one of my favorite operas.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Ok. I cast my vote for the 1869 original. Some articles I read further convinced me that 1869 is the better version. Mussorgsky wanted this opera to be different from all other operas (so I read) and I think when he had to add in the bigger female part, the music and style of it was so out of character for the rest of the opera that he made other revisions to perhaps try to blend it in. At any rate, it does not seem to be what he had intended at the outset and I don't know if he was as pleased with the revisions as with the original. But I know what sounds right to me, so I am sticking with the 1869 original, and I think there is effectively only one recording of that, unless one wants to get into the Rimsky-Korsakov orchestration (which I don't). On Rimsky-Korsakov's behalf, he did make it so the opera got out to the public and he did intend that someday the public would go back to the Mussorgsky version.


All sources I've read indicate that, after Boris's initial rejection, Mussorgsky was very enthusiastic as he set about making changes and was very pleased with them. IMO, the Polish Act and the final scene blend in perfectly with the rest of the work. I would have never known they were later additions if I hadn't studied the opera. I think the 1869 version was fine, but I LOVE the additions made in the 1872 version. I do miss the Cathedral scene in '72 - just love it. I listen to both regularly.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Tchakarov just arrived today. Very good!


Is this the Rimsky-Korsakov version?


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Just ordered the Abbado for $12 bucks used.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> Is this the Rimsky-Korsakov version?


No. It is a conflation (combining) of both the 1869 and 1872 Mussorgsky versions. It does include both St Basil scene and Kromy Forest scene, so you can have it all or just choose one.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> No. It is a conflation (combining) of both the 1869 and 1872 Mussorgsky versions. It does include both St Basil scene and Kromy Forest scene, so you can have it all or just choose one.


I may have to get it. I love the St. Basil Scene.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I may have to get it. I love the St. Basil Scene.


Of the non Rimsky versions, I read that (do check the track listings before buying to be sure) Rostropovich, Semkow, and Tchakarov all include the St Basil Scene and are conflations of both 1869 and 1872. This I learned from from _Modest Musgorsky and Boris Godunov: Myths, Realities, Reconsiderations_. If you search this out on Google Books and on Amazon, between the two you will see the discography that is included in this book. You can't get all pages of the discography from one site but between the two I saw the whole discography. It discusses the different recordings in some detail. It does not include Abbado (maybe that came out later), but Abbado I am pretty sure includes both St Basil and Kromy.

But I would not be without my Gergiev set for the closest to the original 1869 and 1872 versions, though I like the Marina in Tchakarov better than in the 1872 Gergiev.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Of the non Rimsky versions, I read that (do check the track listings before buying to be sure) Rostropovich, Semkow, and Tchakarov all include the St Basil Scene and are conflations of both 1869 and 1872. I think abbado also.
> 
> But I would not be without my Gergiev set for the closest to the original 1869 and 1872 versions, though I like the Marina in Tchakarov better than in the 1872 Gergiev.


Really? The Marina in the Gergiev is the great Olga Borodina. I love her.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

I bought the Abbado Boris because it is non-Rimsky and includes the St. Basil scene. I don't know if I can buy any other recordings, because the Gergiev is so great, IMO.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I bought the Abbado Boris because it is non-Rimsky and includes the St. Basil scene. I don't know if I can buy any other recordings, because the Gergiev is so great, IMO.


Yes, one conflated version is enough if you have the Gergiev double set.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> Really? The Marina in the Gergiev is the great Olga Borodina. I love her.


I think it is a matter of personal preference for me. Maybe Olga will grow on me over time.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Yes, one conflated version is enough if you have the Gergiev double set.


I thought about adding the Basil Scene into the Gergiev 1872, but two Boris's. Can't do it.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I thought about adding the Basil Scene into the Gergiev 1872, but two Boris's. Can't do it.


Initially that is what I did, but I quickly undid it after getting the Tchakarov set. I don't know that I will often listen to the Gergiev 1872 version because I just don't care for the Kromy Forest scene.

We need to talk DVDs--I have several.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Yes, one conflated version is enough if you have the Gergiev double set.


LOL - thanks to you, I also bought the Tchakarov Boris, Khovanshchina, Prince Igor and A Life for the Tsar.

Tchakarov's Khovanshchina was the first Russian opera I bought, and I sold it some where along the way.

Also got Abbado's Khonvanshchina for the Stravinsky ending.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Initially that is what I did, but I quickly undid it after getting the Tchakarov set. I don't know that I will often listen to the Gergiev 1872 version because I just don't care for the Kromy Forest scene.
> 
> We need to talk DVDs--I have several.


I love Mussorgsky, so I love the Kromy scene, too.

I haven't gotten much into DVDs. Usually, if I buy a DVD it's because I want the audio of the performance and I will rip it to mp3. I did get the Gergiev Boris DVD which is coming today (hopefully before I leave the office, but I doubt it).


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I love Mussorgsky, so I love the Kromy scene, too.
> 
> I haven't gotten much into DVDs. Usually, if I buy a DVD it's because I want the audio of the performance and I will rip it to mp3. I did get the Gergiev Boris DVD which is coming today (hopefully before I leave the office, but I doubt it).


Gergiev DVD is well worth the watch. It is a conflated version with the St Basil scene followed by the death scene and ending with the Kromy Forest. It includes the Polish scenes and a wonderful Marina.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

An incredibly informative thread thanks to the members and the OP. This was the best sum up of the "version controversy" for me, although there were other comments about the crucial details of the Holy Fool asking the Tsar in the St. Basil scene about murdering children.



Fritz Kobus said:


> So it seems to me that the pure Mussorgsky _Boris Godunov_ is the 1869 version, and that the 1872 version, while still largely Mussorgsky, tends to be more of a Mussorgsky/Mussorgsky, Stasov, Rimsky, et. al., version.
> 
> Additionally:
> 
> ...





znapschatz said:


> This is a question that had been troubling me since first getting involved with the opera; did Boris actually order the murder of Prince Dmitri. Some years ago, I was introduced to a woman who had just returned from a lengthy stay in the (then) Soviet Union, where she had been studying the history of that era, utilizing archival material not available anywhere else. Upon learning this, the first thing I said to her, literally, was, "Did Boris do it?" She replied "No," then gave me the straight poop. In brief, it turns out the deed was done by partisans of the regent, but not at his command nor approval, and they were punished for having done it. The rest was Romanov propaganda. Naturally, I was crushed. Until then, I thought the opera was history. But I got over it.


I haven't listened to the 1869 version of Boris Godunov and I don't know if the orchestration of the finale in the Kremlin Scene is different from the 1872 version I own. I tried to switch the Kromï scene before the Kremlin a week ago and was disappointed. I didn't think the Kremlin scene finale was conclusive enough and I preferred the mournful last cry of the Holy Fool in the Forest Scene.

Maybe I would need to rethink about the "saturation" the St. Basil scene brings to the 1872 Version of Mussorgsky, but I really think that the *libretto* and the characterisation was much improved with the inclusion of the Polish Act and the Kromï Scene. The opera was less about Boris but more about the political and religious context of the historical era (according to the Russian Orthodox being upset about Catholic meddling with the character of Rangoni). If the music of the Polish Act has less to do with Mussorgsky than his acquainteances is a good discussion point for the musical coherence of the work. In terms of Storytelling, *I completely support the Polish Act with their two scenes,* as I was unable to watch the boudoir Scene on a video performance so I couldn't understand anything (besides Grigory singing like a strangled Chicken).

Both the Abbado and the Semkow versions are extremely cheap at this point, so they could be worth the look. I had made a new poll with multiple choices for the versions and alternatives of this opera, but pretty much of the discussion is already here, so please, if you don't mind go and vote there, we may keep posting our thoughs in this thread.

*Poll: Boris Godunov - The Scene challenge*


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

What is wrong with liking all of them? I have found that each version has its own unique strengths and weaknesses. I have recordings of all version expect the Shostakovich. I hope to get that some day. There is a recording that is out of print.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Once again, anyone interested in what Musorgsky preferred and his (and others') rationales for the various revisions should read Richard Taruskin's essay on the opera in his _Musorgsky_.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

I've just read through this thread and it's interesting to read all the excerpts that Sixfootscowl has dug up.

There are three reasons usually given for preferring the 1869 version:

1) The libretto is more faithful to Pushkin (due to Act 2 more closely following Pushkin's text).
2) Mussorgsky reworked the opera and produced the 1872 version only because the Imperial Theatres couldn't accept the 1869 version at the time and so 1869 is more authentic.
3) The St Basil/Red Square scene is preferred over the Kromy forrest scene.

What I find extraordinary is that the discussion here has been centred around the merits of the Polish act and the Kromy Forrest scene without any reference to Act 2 which was almost totally rewritten for the 1872 version and the spare, recit cum arioso nature of the 1869 version was replaced with a more traditional structure with songs and arias interspersed with more conversational text setting. (The 1869 version doesn't include the famous Clock Aria.)

Nor has anyone mentioned the value of breaking a lengthy, heavy opera into acts that allow for intervals, rather than the 'one act' structure of the original 1869 that was written to be performed without an interval (that means it runs for about 2 hours straight without an break).

I think it worth comparing the opera with Simon Boccanegra, another work that its composer intended to be revolutionary by having fewer set pieces and being based more on a through composed, recitative model of lyric theatre. Discussing whether the Polish act has value or not, is almost as bizarre as saying one prefers Boccanegra without the Council Chamber scene.

You may have guessed by now that I prefer the 1872 version and I voted for it in the Mussorgsky orchestration in the poll. However, I see the value in adding some of the extra material from the 1869 version and I like the Abbado version when it comes to recordings of the opera.

As to the supposed greater authenticity of the earlier version, would we say the same about Verdi's earlier versions of Macbeth, Don Carlos and the already mentioned Simon Boccanegra?

Whilst the 1869 version might be more faithful to the text of Pushkin in act two, the play doesn't end with the death of Boris, but the murder of his children and the announcement that Dimitry is the new Tsar, to which the crowd is silent, thus giving the idea that they have understood that all that has happened is that one tyrant has been replaced by another. Ending the opera with the Holy Fool's song is, therefore, more in keeping with the play.

Most people agree that there is no reason to perform the Rimsky-Korsakov version today, but that doesn't mean that going back to the 1869 first go at the work is to be preferred over Mussorgsky's wonderful 1872 reworking. Anyone who is sceptical about this only needs to listen to the Gergiev recording to hear the work in all its glory.

N.


----------



## ScottK (Dec 23, 2021)

Barbebleu said:


> I've just recently finished the Gergiev 1869 Boris. I quite liked it but I did miss the female contributions. Onto the Gergiev 1872 version next although I have ordered the Tchakarov version.


It's hard to separate the versions from the success of the individual recording or performance. I agree, I loved the Gergiev version of the original. A big part of the success, of course, is due to Gergiev. He fills it with a coarseness and drive that makes the opera and characters vibrant. Haven't listened in a while but my recollection of the featured peasant Mityukh in the first scene was that he sounded like a cross between singing and harsh speech (not saying he really did that, just created that impression) that seemed absolutely perfect! Jump ahead to the Mets present production using the same version. I was completely underwhelmed! None of the coarseness I responded to in Gergiev, in fact just the opposite....a smoothness that made it bland. Over directed and a dissapointing Rene Pape. All the years of listening to Rimsky with Ghiaurov and Christoff and Kipnis and The hybrid they say Levine came up with for the Met in'74 with Talvela, thinking that the opera has to end with Boris' death. And in this version it did and it was just a whimper.

And.....after all of that.....I've never heard a *version* I didn't like!


----------

