# Prokofiev Symphony No.2 - Anyone?



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

After an exhausting day at work I thought I would sooth my frazzled nerves with headphones and a symphony.

I have lately been working through Hydan's Symphonies with great pleasure but thought I'd go for something different yesterday evening. Not being able to decide I chose Prokofiev's 2nd when I happened upon it in the pile.

Easing back on the sofa, bathed in warm ambient lighting I hit the play button on the remote with a sense of sublime anticipation. I realised I had made a mistake when the the first blast of brass exploded in my ears. The explosions did not stop for 35 minutes or so. Of course I could have changed to another recording, but I remained optimistic things would change for the better. They didn't.

Now I realise there is a time and place for _all_ things and on another day I might have greeted this symphony with more enthusiasm. However, I think it will be sometime till I revisit.

Is there anyone out there who likes / enjoys this work? In the liner notes Prokofiev is reported to have wanted to create a symphony as _hard as steel and iron_. I can only say that to my mind (and ears) he succeeded. Ouch!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

When I first heard it (at about 16), my reaction was similar as my other Prokofierv experiences were the 1st and 5th symphonies, R&J, Lt. Kije, 1st Piano Cto., etc. It was jarring to the extreme, but over time Ive gotten to appreciate it.


----------



## Guest (Nov 16, 2017)

I give you my word of honour that I am not attempting to high-jack your thread but I saw the words "Prokofiev", "No. 2", and "frazzled nerves" and thought you might be interested in hearing Prokofiev's Violin Concerto No. 2... specifically the second movement (the andante assai which begins at the 12:30 mark) -






This is one of my favourite pieces of music played by one of my favourite violinists... and one who is destined to be considered one of the all time greats...

Hope that this is of interest and benefit... in not, sincere apologies for crashing the thread...


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I like it a lot, the second movement is a little thorny in places. Its an ambitious symphony, but over all works for me. The coda is my favorite part of it, that closing chord is very haunting.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

The word I would use is "exhilarating".


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Nereffid said:


> The word I would use is "exhilarating".


I certainly find his piano concertos exhilarating to be sure. Maybe I need to devote a little more time to Symphony No.2.

No doubt I'll re-visit - but only in the fullness of time.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Prokofiev was very much in an _enfant terrible_ phase when he composed the 2nd symphony. After all, he had started the series wearing a powdered wig with Number One. But he achieved very near perfection with Number Three, the one composed using leftover material from The Fiery Angel--here we have the enormous energy but coupled with a much cooler, controlled approach; Prokofiev finding his voice. Three times does the trick.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I really like Prokofiev's Second. The variations (2nd movement) are brilliant.


----------



## Guest (Nov 16, 2017)

Yes, I like it too, but I tend not to play it if I'm in need of soothing!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I like Prokofieff Sum #2, but it certainly is harsh and raucous in many places....big theme and variation mvt is very interesting...this is Prokofieff in his Soviet industrial strength mode....Le Pas D'Acier is another one....musical equivalent of tearing up sheet metal...lol!!


----------



## R3PL4Y (Jan 21, 2016)

I really like this piece. There is a lot to listen for and discover in the variations movement.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

This symphony is amazing! It's my second favorite symphony by Prokofiev. The dissonances and strength in this work are invigorating. This is the type of 'noise' I really like: it's somewhat chaotic but is organized at the same time. The 2nd mov. doesn't have much noise at all.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KRoad said:


> After an exhausting day at work I thought I would sooth my frazzled nerves with headphones and a symphony.
> 
> I have lately been working through Hydan's Symphonies with great pleasure but thought I'd go for something different yesterday evening. Not being able to decide I chose Prokofiev's 2nd when I happened upon it in the pile.
> 
> ...


May I suggest giving a Rachmaninov symphony a try. Much mellower but with somewhat of a Mahlerish flare at times, so it seems to me on only a first listen. I have set on order though.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

I have always hated this piece. Relaxing, it ain’t


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I really listened to Prokofiev’s 2nd for the first time today. Ung. It wins the loudness sweepstakes for sure. I found some of the orchestral effects interesting, but hardly enough to make up for the general level of pain. The second movement, theme and variations, probably deserves a second listen.

I'm reminded of this quote from a review of a piano recital: "Prokofiev wouldn't grant an encore. The Russian heart may be a dark place, but its capacity for mercy is infinite." -- James Huneker, NY Times, 1918


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

My catalog shows I have it on Naxos but I can’t say I remember anything about it. Now that I think on it I haven’t connected with any of his symphonies, not even the “Classical.” I enjoy the various suites far more so far.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Interesting how perceptions differ, I took to the first movement right away, which I find full of orchestral color and intensity, to me that is vintage Prokofiev right there. 

The beginning and ending of the second movement are sublime, its the theme and variations section that slows things down too much for my tastes at times and I find can over stay its welcome, (this is the part I referred to as 'thorny'). However its grown on me and I like it now, but its still my least favorite aspect of this work. 

By the way the structure of this symphony was inspired by Beethoven's op. 111.


----------



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

My favourite Prokofiev symphony and probably in top half-dozen Prokofiev works. I was immediately attracted by its unusual structure and its 'industrial' premise behind the content.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

The second half has a beautiful theme. The first half is a difficult listen. 

Prokofiev himself is reported to have said that he didn't 'understand' his own Symphony no2. My personal view is that he was new in Paris at the time and was in Stravinsky's shadow. He tried to beat Stravinsky at his own game by writing a work aimed at shocking the audience.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

20centrfuge said:


> The second half has a beautiful theme. The first half is a difficult listen.
> 
> Prokofiev himself is reported to have said that he didn't 'understand' his own Symphony no2. My personal view is that he was new in Paris at the time and was in Stravinsky's shadow. He tried to beat Stravinsky at his own game by writing a work aimed at shocking the audience.


Several musicologists concur in the view that the second shows Prokofiev still working under the influence of Stravinsky, and following up his own Stravinsky-aping Scythian Suite. I find the first movement to be wonderful film music depicting at some length the epic battle between King Kong and Godzilla; it also works for the assault upon Gondor by a vast army of orcs, trolls, the Nazgul, and maybe a couple of balrogs. Chaos and Dark Night. The second movement is, IMHO, merely OK. But if we regard the second symphony as necessary throat-clearing in order to clear the passage for the composing of the (my view) magnificent third symphony, then the effort was worth it. Prokofiev's third can be perhaps likened to Beethoven's third in its giant step towards a more authentic Prokofievan symphonic language.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

I agree, Strange Magic, the third is magnificent, one of my favorite works by Prokofiev.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

The 2nd is my least favorite of the 7. I've heard all of other six in concert, but never the poor no. 2. It's a tough nut to crack and looking through the score, the orchestral parts aren't too much fun or rewarding.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

20centrfuge said:


> I agree, Strange Magic, the third is magnificent, one of my favorite works by Prokofiev.


agree completely... Prokofieff Sym #3 is a fine work; his sym #s 5,6,3 are my favorites.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Several musicologists concur in the view that the second shows Prokofiev still working under the influence of Stravinsky, and following up his own Stravinsky-aping Scythian Suite. I find the first movement to be wonderful film music depicting at some length the epic battle between King Kong and Godzilla; it also works for the assault upon Gondor by a vast army of orcs, trolls, the Nazgul, and maybe a couple of balrogs. Chaos and Dark Night. The second movement is, IMHO, merely OK. But if we regard the second symphony as *necessary throat-clearing in order to clear the passage for the composing of the (my view) magnificent third symphony*, then the effort was worth it. Prokofiev's third can be perhaps likened to Beethoven's third in its giant step towards a more authentic Prokofievan symphonic language.


The third is an opera suite. It's wonderful - as an opera suite. Can you really hear it without recalling the settings and plot of the Fiery Angel? The second stands on its own. The fact that Prokofiev didn't understand the second, as 20centrfuge points out, is a good sign. He aspired to that state, believing that once a composer understands his own logic he is creatively dead.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> The third is an opera suite. It's wonderful - as an opera suite. Can you really hear it without recalling the settings and plot of the Fiery Angel? The second stands on its own. The fact that Prokofiev didn't understand the second, as 20centrfuge points out, is a good sign. He aspired to that state, believing that once a composer understands his own logic he is creatively dead.


I certainly can hear it without associating it in any way with The Fiery Angel. Prokofiev was in the habit of constantly jotting down melodies and themes that came to him and then using them wherever seemed best. Nothing ever went to waste--a model of musical thrift and recycling. He did the same thing in composing the excellent 4th symphony--commissioned by the Boston Symphony for its 50th anniversary--turning immediately to material from The Prodigal Son as a ready source of raw material. From this material he also fashioned the _Symphonic Suite_, opus 46 bis, and _Six Piano Pieces_, opus 52. To call the powerful, even noble, 3rd symphony an "opera suite" is a bit much, as would it be to name the 4th a "ballet suite".


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I feel 6 and 2 are Prokofiev's strongest symphonies. They are the most densely packed with good ideas and the most original, 5 is not far behind these, 3 and 4 are both very good with some excellent parts but a little bit of padding and a little bit of watered down Prokofiev, 7 is beautiful but watered down, 1 is ok but sounds more like a student work than a real symphony.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> I certainly can hear it without associating it in any way with The Fiery Angel. Prokofiev was in the habit of constantly jotting down melodies and themes that came to him and then using them wherever seemed best. Nothing ever went to waste--a model of musical thrift and recycling. He did the same thing in composing the excellent 4th symphony--commissioned by the Boston Symphony for its 50th anniversary--turning immediately to material from The Prodigal Son as a ready source of raw material. From this material he also fashioned the _Symphonic Suite_, opus 46 bis, and _Six Piano Pieces_, opus 52. To call the powerful, even noble, 3rd symphony an "opera suite" is a bit much, as would it be to name the 4th a "ballet suite".


You got me! I _would_ call the Fourth a ballet suite. I have no problem with Prokofiev's working methods. Nevertheless, I find all of these works made from recycled material inferior to their counterparts conceived from scratch. My favorites among the symphonies are those tdc chose above, except that I rate the Fifth equal to 2 and 6.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

It took me a while to come to appreciate the 1st mvmt, but the 2nd mvmt which is Theme and Variations was really good for me. It was so vivid that I came up with a story for it, eventually incorporating it into a short story I wrote a number of years ago. It's deeply psychological for me, and narrative.

This variation alone is in my top 5 works of his, for me personally. I call it the night/weeping variation:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> You got me! I _would_ call the Fourth a ballet suite. I have no problem with Prokofiev's working methods. Nevertheless, I find all of these works made from recycled material inferior to their counterparts conceived from scratch. My favorites among the symphonies are those tdc chose above, except that I rate the Fifth equal to 2 and 6.


Are you ascribing cause and effect to Prokofiev's use of recycled material for those two symphonies and your holding them inferior to their companions? What of a parallel universe wherein you didn't know of the origins of the 3rd and 4th? Is Beethoven's 9th actually recycled _Choral Fantasy_: a _Symphonic Fantasy on a Fantasy_? Or is it just coincidence? But anyway, we're all Proko-lovers here! .


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Are you ascribing cause and effect to Prokofiev's use of recycled material for those two symphonies and your holding them inferior to their companions? What of a parallel universe wherein you didn't know of the origins of the 3rd and 4th? Is Beethoven's 9th actually recycled _Choral Fantasy_: a _Symphonic Fantasy on a Fantasy_? Or is it just coincidence? But anyway, we're all Proko-lovers here! .


If I didn't know the origins and had never heard the opera, I think I would still have known immediately that the Third derived from a stage work. Likely the Fourth as well. I think the music of the Third is great but don't hear in it the overall unity of purpose or teleology of the Fifth or Sixth. I think one can tell it wasn't conceived as a symphony, if that makes any sense. I just listened to the Third this afternoon and thoroughly enjoyed it.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

One of my favourite symphonies by any composer! So interesting to listen to, there's so much going on at all times. A truly fascinating work.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> If I didn't know the origins and had never heard the opera, I think I would still have known immediately that the Third derived from a stage work. Likely the Fourth as well. I think the music of the Third is great but don't hear in it the overall unity of purpose or teleology of the Fifth or Sixth. I think one can tell it wasn't conceived as a symphony, if that makes any sense. I just listened to the Third this afternoon and thoroughly enjoyed it.


You present strong evidence indeed for the existence of clairvoyance, and I salute your gift! I myself would never be able to tease out the two works as derived from stage works :tiphat:.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> You present strong evidence indeed for the existence of clairvoyance, and I salute your gift! I myself would never be able to tease out the two works as derived from stage works :tiphat:.


Not really! The beginning of the Third sounds like the opening of an operatic scene. It's a structural thing - the way it introduces characteristic isolated motives, (like the eerie triplet figure) before stating a main theme, which is not Prokofiev's standard practice; It sounds like scene-setting, not exposition. Also, the more diffuse formal design is a give away, being unlike his usual clear sonata forms. Then there are those demonic glissandi in the scherzo, which reek of extramusical inspiration. There are plenty of signs requiring no special powers to hear.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I find his 5th symphony the most individual overall and densely packed. The sixth had some great moments, maybe his most original, but I feel i is dragged for too long. I find his first to be very original. For me his other symphonies don’t have the clear ideas as 1, 5 and 6 or are just not interesting to me overall.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> Not really! The beginning of the Third sounds like the opening of an operatic scene. It's a structural thing - the way it introduces characteristic isolated motives, (like the eerie triplet figure) before stating a main theme, which is not Prokofiev's standard practice; It sounds like scene-setting, not exposition. Also, the more diffuse formal design is a give away, being unlike his usual clear sonata forms. Then there are those demonic glissandi in the scherzo, which reek of extramusical inspiration. There are plenty of signs requiring no special powers to hear.


I am enlightened. Are there other examples you can cite of symphonies so obviously derived from stage works?; it can't be just Prokofiev. Or can it?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

There must be many, but I can't think of any right now. Hindemith's Mathis der Maler went the other way, from symphony to opera. Anyway, I think it has to do with a trait of Prokofiev you noted early on in the thread: That he didn't think of themes and even whole movements as determined for a particular work or purpose, but could readily recontextualize anything. 

Anyway, I realize my preference for works conceived from the beginning as symphonies is just a personal prejudice and that one might just as well prefer the other kind for the way they shake up expectations and give rise to new formal patterns.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

The first movement, rather like several other contemporary works by Prokofiev such as the Scythian Suite, does seem rather relentless, but the following variation movement more than makes up for it and has some moments of sheer beauty in it that looks forward to Prokofiev in the late 1930s. Several posters seem to have been rather dismissive about the next symphony, the Third, because its themes have been derives from his opera The Fiery Angel. I think this is quite wrong; they have been developed symphonically and represents a considerable refinement of an opera that I find fascinating, but perhaps a little too unhealthy for too regular watching!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

manyene said:


> .... Several posters seem to have been rather dismissive about the next symphony, the Third, because its themes have been derives from his opera The Fiery Angel. I think this is quite wrong; they have been developed symphonically and represents a considerable refinement of an opera that I find fascinating, but perhaps a little too unhealthy for too regular watching!


I agree totally...#3 is a fine symphony, very coherent and well-developed, albeit dark and creepy in many ways. very fascinating work, I place it very near Prokofieff's finest- #s 5, 6.


----------



## Guest (Nov 20, 2017)

manyene said:


> Several posters seem to have been rather dismissive about the next symphony, the Third, because its themes have been derives from his opera The Fiery Angel. I think this is quite wrong; they have been developed symphonically and represents a considerable refinement of an opera that I find fascinating, but perhaps a little too unhealthy for too regular watching!


Several? I found only one and I wouldn't have said Edward was dismissive, though he did value it less than those symphonies not derived from other material.


----------



## bilahn (Jul 8, 2014)

I love it - but you have to be in the mood and have an open mind. The first movement is the most violent music I have ever heard - dystopian and machine like in its headlong and unrelenting dissonance and complexity. Yet it has discernible melody. The sheer audacity is amazing. 

The second movt could not be more different - calm and consoling and truly mesmerizing. 

One problem is that it is VERY hard to pull off. Most performances are just a racket. I recommend the recording by Neeme Jarvi and the Scottish Symphony. 

The Third symphony is similar, tho not QUITE as insane, and is also very much worth hearing.

I often thing of what might be the worst possible symphonic program in terms of an audience (altho I would love it). 

The violence of the Prokovief 2nd followed by the utter bleakness of the Sibelius 4th! If they didn't run out screaming from the Prokofief, they would all kill themselves after the Sibelius!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I love the symphony, one of my very favorites, especially the first movement.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Nevermind … I already said it a couple of years ago.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

bilahn said:


> The violence of the Prokofiev 2nd followed by the utter bleakness of the Sibelius 4th! If they didn't run out screaming from the Prokofiev, they would all kill themselves after the Sibelius!


I would love that concert program - too totally different kinds of emotional starkness. I find the Sibelius incredibly beautiful, psychological, unforgiving in its sparseness. I once tried to listen to the Prokofiev but couldn't make it past the start of the variations. I actually didn't mind it all that much, I just wasn't really in the mood for it like the OP. I ought to give it another try now that my ears are more accustomed to modern music. I've heard Prokofiev referred to as a "neoromantic," which is evident in a few works and his long, sinuous melody lines. But works like this, the 3 War Sonatas, the 2nd Piano Concerto are pure modern brutality, albeit contrasted with passages of lyrical reprieve. I like it all. Don't think I've heard anything by him that I've really disliked.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ...But works like this, the 3 War Sonatas, the 2nd Piano Concerto are pure modern brutality, albeit contrasted with passages of lyrical reprieve.


Although there are moments of modern brutality in those piano pieces, I wouldn't put them in quite the same category as Symphony No.2. Symphony no.2 is an anomaly.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I find the 2nd a little disappointing. I like it well enough but find myself frustrated that Prokofiev didn't do a bit more with his ideas, didn't take them further.


----------

