# Boris Godunov - Mussorgsky's or RK's orchestration?



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I saw Boris Godunov at the Met today.

Excellent production. Beautiful minimalistic staging with period costumes. Very good stage directing with the chorus moving harmoniously in and out and adding lots of local color. Impressive scenes of violence. Excellent singing from the entire cast, mostly Russian, with the only big name being Rene Pape in the title role. Rene was outstanding, very convincing in his mad scene and death scene.

This is a very good production of a great opera, I hope it comes out on DVD/BluRay.

But instead of just posting a blurb about it in Current Watching, I thought I should propose a slightly different question about it.

I have at home a DVD of the Rimsky-Korsakoff orchestration. Not only 
RK changed the score a lot and added music of his own, he also altered the sequence of scenes - in his supposedly improved version, Boris' death is the last scene.

Today I saw at the Met the Mussorgsky orchestration, considered to be rough, less harmonic, less melodious, and less accessible. In Mussorgsky's version, the Holy Fool is the one who ends the opera, and Boris' death is followed by the scene with Dimitri marching towards Moscow.

I know that Rimsky-Korsakoff didn't do this out of arrogance, but rather, out of genuine interest for helping his alcoholic friend Mussorgsky. But regardless of his noble intent, I believe that what he did is preposterous.

First of all, I actually like *a lot* better the Mussorgsky orchestration. This opera is violent, there is torture, killings, oppression, evil and corrupt politicians. This is not the place for touching melody. I know that Mussorgsky was practically an amateur and not a very skilfull orchestrator, but in my humble opinion, he got it exactly right in Boris Godunov. His score matches perfectly the raw emotions of the opera, while RK's doesn't. 

And furthermore, putting Boris' death at the end is the conventional ending that RK thought to be proper like in every other opera, but it then makes of this opera the story of the man Boris Godunov.

Putting Dimitri's march to Moscow at the end and the Holy Fool with the last word, lamenting the sort of Mother Russia and pointing to the fact that the more it changes, the more it remains the same, makes of this opera something much beyond the story of of man, but rather, a historical arc about a country. That's a much more significant and interesting ending, which also matches a lot more the intention of the composer - he wanted to compose a historical opera, a profoundly Russian opera, not just an opera about a ruler with a sinful past, ruined by guilt. This also exists in the opera, and contributes to its greatness, but this opera is *really* great because of its historical force, its comment on the nature of power.

So, bravo Mussorgsky, and Rimsky-Korsakoff, stay away please. This masterpiece doesn't need any help.

Opinions?


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I agree with you. Moussorgsky revised/expanded BG himself and presumably was happy enough with the results at the time. Although I was aware that RK had later took it under his wing I had no idea that he felt the need to mess about with the ending - bad move: the opera is much better served where the final scene hints at the seismic repercussions of Boris's death and would have infinitely more impact than ending the opera with the death of Boris itself. Although a fan of RK some of his own operatic work could have done with an editor's pencil. A classic case of 'physician heal thyself'?


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Yes, Mussorgsky reworked it. He added the Lithuanian scene (because the producers said he needed more soprano music and a love story, LOL), and I saw it for the first time yesterday and loved it. It's a good addition. The Met version yesterday got elements of all three of Mussorgsky's version. They did a good job selecting the best parts, and the bulk of it was his third version.

I'm glad that you agree with me about his versions being superior to RK's, in another forum people kept insisting that RK's orchestration is superior and I just can't see it.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

In hindsight I have to admit that my agreement is provisional simply because I have never heard RK's results so I can't judge on the musical aspect. The mere fact that he replaced the ending is enough to convince me that I wouldn't enjoy it as much anyway. Are most conductors inclined to stay totally faithful to either of Moussorgsky's versions or have they been known to incorporate any elements of RM's musical changes but without changing the scene sequence of either version?


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

elgars ghost said:


> In hindsight I have to admit that my agreement is provisional simply because I have never heard RK's results so I can't judge on the musical aspect. The mere fact that he replaced the ending is enough to convince me that I wouldn't enjoy it as much anyway. Are most conductors inclined to stay totally faithful to either of Moussorgsky's versions or have they been known to incorporate any elements of RM's musical changes but without changing the scene sequence of either version?


As far as I know conductors either adopt the entire M orchestration or the entire RK orchestration without mixing up the music. Where they can play around is with the order of the scenes which profoundly impacts on the general meaning of the opera. As is often the case with others works with multiple versions and even those with one version, conductors and directors sometimes pick scenes or arias from different versions, skip some parts, etc.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Almaviva, had M lived longer do you think there might have been some scope for a follow-up? The 'False Dmitris' saga and the rise of Mikhail Romanov seems to be quite sustainable as a storyline.


----------



## westonmike2004 (Oct 30, 2010)

'As far as I know conductors either adopt the entire M orchestration or the entire RK orchestration'. Ther are may orchestrations (2 by Rimsky, Shostakovich - too heavy orchestration in hte latter. etc) At the Bolshoi. it has long been the tradition to perform a mixture of either of Rimsky's versions with the St Basil scene orchestrated by Ippolotov Ivanov. This necessitates a trimming of hte Kromy scene to remove the duplicate music. The first studio recording of the work by Golovanov uses a mixture of Rimsky, Musorgsky (1872) and Ippolotov-Ivanov

To correct an earlier posting, the 1868 version was expanded in the 1872 version to include the Polish and not Lithuanian scene
Khovanshchina and Boris were to form a tryptich on Russian history. The third work was never composed. 
The saga of the False Dmitri was picked up by Dvorak (Dmitri)


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth (Apr 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> _I saw Boris Godunov at the Met today.
> So, bravo Mussorgsky, and Rimsky-Korsakoff, stay away please. This masterpiece doesn't need any help. Opinions?_


Lucky you!
That production will be broadcast on a MET live Saturday matinee on 12 March 2011.
http://www.operainfo.org/

http://www.operainfo.org/broadcast/operaMain.cgi?id=89&language=1

Otherwise I can only say I have two Boris-es: (1) Abbado with Mussorgsky's 1872; (2) Karajan with Rimsky's version.
http://www.amazon.com/Mussorgsky-Ko...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1288543703&sr=1-1
(discount reissue) http://www.amazon.com/Mussorgsky-Bo...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1288543703&sr=1-2

http://www.amazon.com/Mussorgsky-Boris-Godunov-Modest/dp/B000GUJZTG/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_i

And for me *Karajan-Rimsky* wins hands down!!!


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

elgars ghost said:


> Almaviva, had M lived longer do you think there might have been some scope for a follow-up? The 'False Dmitris' saga and the rise of Mikhail Romanov seems to be quite sustainable as a storyline.


Definitely. The story (in real History) evolves pretty rapidly, with Dimitri killing Boris' son, enslaving and raping his daughter, and getting killed three years later. Top opera material!


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Sebastien Melmoth said:


> And for me *Karajan-Rimsky* wins hands down!!!


In what way exactly? Rimsky-Korsakoff's version may be easier on the ears, but does it have the same dramatic impact?


----------



## Agatha (Nov 3, 2009)

Almaviva - thanks for sharing your thoughts with us!



> dramatic impact


the impact is huge! I am russian and not as experienced as you to compare RK ans M orchestrations so will talk only about "impact". Somewhere here on LC I saw somebody was saying "what is it with russians, and their obsession with "Mother Russia"". Thought indeed, what is it with us that it is so painful to see violence scenes in Boris! Guess the genius of Mussorgsky produced such an effect.

Would the opera be worse if there was no Polish scene? Mnishek is the only female role, otherwise it is masculine opera, which is true. At that time there was no place for women in politics, at least not in Russia - dark and cruel.

I too hope to see it on DVD, to be able to listen to music and orchestration and not to be swarmed by emotions.

I saw the live broadcast of the opera in HD in a local theater on October 23.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Agatha said:


> Almaviva - thanks for sharing your thoughts with us!
> 
> the impact is huge! I am russian and not as experienced as you to compare RK ans M orchestrations so will talk only about "impact". Somewhere here on LC I saw somebody was saying "what is it with russians, and their obsession with "Mother Russia"". Thought indeed, what is it with us that it is so painful to see violence scenes in Boris! Guess the genius of Mussorgsky produced such an effect.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your comments, and congratulations for the stupendous art of your home country.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Rimsky thought that many of Mussorgsky's harmonies were too crude and unfortunately bowdlerized them with more academically correct ones,thus making the opera seem smoother and more conventional. But unfortunately, he missed the point of these "crude" harmonies altogether. 
Rimsky's orchestration is very effective, but it's too slick and euphonious,and it waters down the stark and rugged power of thew original.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Moussorgsky had never finished an opera*...he never finished anything*, he was a drankard. Probably you saw the Dmitri Shostakovich ending...

Martin Pitchon


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Moussorgsky had never finished an opera*...he never finished anything*, he was a drankard. Probably you saw the Dmitri Shostakovich ending...
> 
> Martin Pitchon


I still like him better. Nice drunkard.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Better than who? Than Rimsky-Korsakov....No possible! I can't believe that! Is this a j-o-k-e?

Martin


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Better than who? Than Rimsky-Korsakov....No possible! I can't believe that! Is this a j-o-k-e?
> 
> Martin


No, it's not a joke. I've seen both versions, and I prefer Mussorgsky's orchestration. Maestro Gergiev apparently agrees with me. So, you think that anybody who has a different opinon than yours must be telling a joke?


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Gergiev is an *******. Every single opera I had played by him I replaced them by an older versions: Melik Patchayev, Svetlanov, etc. His versions are always with fails. He decided to publish a double version of Boris, double price, no success...a real failure.

I am part of a Russian group, nobody likes Gergiev, an exception is his DVD for Ruslan and Ludmila, Ludmila is awesome, it is Anna...But his War and peace is awful (Prokofiev)...I prefer the French Version.

Martin Pitchon....a Russian music freak.


:trp:


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Gergiev is an *******. Every single opera I had played by him I replaced them by an older versions: Melik Patchayev, Svetlanov, etc. His versions are always with fails. He decided to publish a double version of Boris, double price, no success...a real failure.
> 
> I am part of a Russian group, nobody likes Gergiev, an exception is his DVD for Ruslan and Ludmila, Ludmila is awesome, it is Anna...But his War and peace is awful (Prokofiev)...I prefer the French Version.
> 
> ...


I own the Ruslan and Ludmila DVD, it's on my unwatched pile, and since I'm a big fan of Anna's, I think I'll enjoy it.

I don't know, Gergiev has accomplished a lot in terms of projecting the Mariinksy as a world class opera house again.

Maybe he's not the best conductor... but he is a strong advocate for the Russian repertoire, one can't say he doesn't profoundly know the repertorie, so the fact that he prefers Mussorgsky's orchestrion of Boris Godunov can't be discarded. I'm just saying, I'm not alone in muy preference.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth (Apr 14, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> _Gergiev is..._


When Boulez and Abbado are gone (which could be any time), Gergiev will remain with Levine as the greatest living conductors.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

*Honestly*

I haven't listened to Moussorgsky-alone version, is it so good? What are the differences, does Boris die or just finishes when th fool tals to the people? (I think I've heard that)...I have listen to the Shostakovich version and I didn't like it...

Martin Pitchon, willing to learn.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

*The real Mussorgsky's version*

Is it the 1872 version? If it is this one I have it...

Martin, desoriented.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> I haven't listened to Moussorgsky-alone version, is it so good? What are the differences, does Boris die or just finishes when th fool tals to the people? (I think I've heard that)...I have listen to the Shostakovich version and I didn't like it...
> 
> Martin Pitchon, willing to learn.


Boris dies, but his death is not the last scene. The fool ends the opera in the next scene, after Dmitri appears, marching towards the capital.

I haven't listened to the Shostakovich's version, and I believe you when you say you didn't like it, because in spite of my love for Shostakovich (I think the man just can't be wrong, he is *so* good!!), Boris Godunov in its original state is also so good that it can't be improved upon.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Is it the 1872 version? If it is this one I have it...
> 
> Martin, desoriented.


Yep, the Met version was basically the 1872 version, with some really minor and subtle differences.

Here is what the 1872 version is, according to sources:

"The Revised Version of 1872 represents a retreat from the ideals of Kuchkist realism, toward a more exalted, tragic tone, and a conventionally operatic style - a trend that would be continued in the composer's next opera, Khovanshcina [Almaviva's ed - I like Khovanshcina even better than Boris Godunov]. This version is longer, is richer in musical and theatrical variety, and presents the title character in a more sympathetic and tragic light in the central Terem Scene. It contains the conventionally operatic Polish act (Act 3), which concludes in a love scene not found in Pushkin's drama, as well as the novel final scene of anarchy (the Kromï Scene), also a departure from Pushkin. This version has made a strong comeback in recent years, and has become the dominant version."


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

So we're agreed, then - Moussorgsky revised it himself in the way that a car engine gets an oil change and a retune. If the engine ain't actually broke then don't get Rimsky Autos to fix it!


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

elgars ghost said:


> So we're agreed, then - Moussorgsky revised it himself in the way that a car engine gets an oil change and a retune. If the engine ain't actually broke then don't get Rimsky Autos to fix it!


Exactly!:tiphat:


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

*I loved Pushkin's play*

I loved Pushkin's play, even if I read a translation because my Russian is still too poor.

Martin Pitchon


----------



## westonmike2004 (Oct 30, 2010)

*If you are interested in Russian opera*

Anyone here seriously interested in Russian opera and the great recordings from the Golden Age (forget the palid modern and western recordings) should visit http://www.aquarius-classic.ru/?ver=eng
Here you can find great rareties including Gromoboy (Verstovsky), Morozko (with Pirogov coming soon), Maid of Pskov (Pirogov, Nelepp). Esmerelda (Dargomyzhsky)
These will teach you how Russian opera should be performed by some of the greatest (and unduly neglected) artists of the 20th century

To order contact Andrei Rozantsev at : [email protected]

A live Lemeshev concert from 27 November 1948 to be issued around Christmas


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Be careful, people think you're a spammer.

Martin


----------



## Herkku (Apr 18, 2010)

Could someone explain to me, why Gergiev is so bad? I fail to see his shortcomings.

BTW I think Ruslan And Lyudmila and is as boring as Sadko, apart from Anna, of course!


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

LOL

Martin


----------



## scytheavatar (Aug 27, 2009)

Herkku said:


> Could someone explain to me, why Gergiev is so bad? I fail to see his shortcomings.


The consesus on him seems to be that his conducting has deteriorated in recent years, thanks to him packing his schedule too tightly and stretching himself too thin. In any case his conducting has always been in the mold of Bernstein/Solti of being flashy and exciting but often crude and over the top.


----------



## Herkku (Apr 18, 2010)

scytheavatar said:


> In any case his (Gergiyev's) conducting has always been in the mold of Bernstein/Solti of being flashy and exciting but often crude and over the top.


So, now we are attacking Bernstein and Solti, too! Bernstein may have been a bit flashy, but Solti, at least in my mind, did leave an admirable recorded legacy.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

you don't mention Dmitri Shostakovich orchestration...

Martin


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> you don't mention Dmitri Shostakovich orchestration...
> 
> Martin


True, I forgot that he did it too. But I have never heard it. Is it good?


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

*Shostakovich*


```
True, I forgot that he did it too. But I have never heard it. Is it good?
```
It's not bad but I prefer R-K. Shostakovich is XXth century, R-K was a "friend" of Modesto...Not so friend ( I read the story) but contemporary..

Gergiev is considered by "us" the Russian opera lovers as not as good as the formers conductors: Melik-Patchayev, Svetlanov, etc. Whenever we can we buy the oldies ones...The ones I had on LP again.

http://www.amazon.ca/Boris-Godunov-...r_1_19?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1293048537&sr=1-19

is a great version

Martin


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Here is a DVD of the 1869 Boris, but does anybody know if it is the Rimsky version or the actual Mussorgsky version.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

In case anyone is interested, there are a 7 or 8 different orchestrations of Boris. They are discussed in this article.


----------



## peeknocker (Feb 14, 2012)

That is a useful article. Thanks. All the different orchestrations and combinations of orchestrations that I have heard are of interest. Some of the material added to the 1874 revision are certainly weak as compared to the original version and distract from the central drama about Boris' tortured conscience. I don't really think Mussorgsky or the subsequent orchestrations/arrangements ever fully resolved the problem of balancing the two competing narratives of Boris and Grigoriy. But that is part of its fascination. "Boris Godunov" is the "Smile" album of classical music. So many musical ideas and plot devices, so many pieces of the puzzle that never adequately fit together. In some ways, "Khovanschina" is a whole lot simpler (perhaps because he didn't live to finish it, let alone complicate it further with subsequent additions). As for orchestrations, on an idealistic level I prefer the composer's original orchestration, no matter who he may be; but on the evidence of my ears I incline toward the Rimsky-Korsakov version and so far as I am acquainted with both composers consider him to be the more substantial of the two.


----------

