# If Tchaikovsky lived until 1940, whom would he be the most proud or critical of?



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

This is something of a teaser yet hypothetical. But then again, it goes to some facts about Tchaikovsky not just as a composer, but also as a teacher, critic, confidant, and friend. Tchaikovsky was not one who minced words (he was especially critical of Arensky's choice of Marguerite Gautier as a source for his orchestral fantasy and we know how he felt about the Russian Five). And yet, at the same time, he was supportive (Kalinnikov springs to mind, but he also encouraged people like Glazunov, Rachmaninoff, Taneyev).

This thread is really about how Tchaikovsky would have felt about the younger generations of composers, some of whom he knew, or heard about, or rather, and here's the hypothetical, some of whom he might have known had he lived longer (taking into account the historical developments of Russian music during and since the Russian Silver Age, the Futurism of the 1920s through the early 1930s, Stalinism and the Soviet officialdom of the 1930s (like the Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians or RAPM), and so forth). The latter part is speculation, but taken into account the great man's reputation and his way of thinking (and again even in the context of Russian History). He was a progressive-minded giant of Russian music, but how he might have felt about the music of, say, Scriabin, Stravinsky, the Russian Futurists (like Roslavets, Mosolov, Lourie, Obukhov, Popov).

So what are your thoughts about this?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

The great master of melody would have been particularly proud of Rachmaninoff, Myaskovsky, Prokofiev and Shostakovich.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Why leave out Stravinskij?


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Sloe said:


> Why leave out Stravinskij?


I ran out of room.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Had Tchaikovsky lived to the 20th century I think he'd have become Aaron Copland. The two had a lot in common besides homosexuality, which played a large part in Tchaikovsky's psychoses that created his ultra-romantic form of music. While still not accepted, homosexuality was less punished in the 20th century than the 19th. Even Russia made it "legal" in the 20th century.


----------



## Beet131 (Mar 24, 2018)

The full blossoming of the Russian Romantic tradition starting with Tchaikovsky reached its zenith with Rachmaninoff. Unlike Arensky who sounded way too much like Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff was much more original. And although Rachmaninoff carried the torch of Tchaikovsky's romantic spirit, he expanded the range of Romanticism to new horizons. I have always felt that Rachmaninoff's 2nd, 3rd and 4th Piano Concertos eclipsed Tchaikovsky's 1st, as well as his 2nd and 3rd. I wouldn't characterize Rachmaninoff as a better composer than Tchaikovsky, but a brilliant natural conclusion to the tide of Russian Romanticism.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Beet131 said:


> The full blossoming of the Russian Romantic tradition starting with Tchaikovsky reached its zenith with Rachmaninoff. Unlike Arensky who sounded way too much like Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff was much more original. And although Rachmaninoff carried the torch of Tchaikovsky's romantic spirit, he expanded the range of Romanticism to new horizons. I have always felt that Rachmaninoff's 2nd, 3rd and 4th Piano Concertos eclipsed Tchaikovsky's 1st, as well as his 2nd and 3rd. I wouldn't characterize Rachmaninoff as a better composer than Tchaikovsky, but a brilliant natural conclusion to the tide of Russian Romanticism.


I suggest Medtner as the coda of Russian Romanticism rather than Rachmaninoff. And I wonder what Tchaikovsky would have made of Roslavets, in particular. So very Russian in idiom but expressed in post-Romantic terms.


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

larold said:


> While still not accepted, homosexuality was less punished in the 20th century than the 19th.


On the other hand, Tchaikovsky's high social standing shielded him from whatever persecution he might have otherwise faced. While homosexuality was nominally outlawed on paper, Russian aristocracy were remarkably tolerant of it in private. Tchaikovksy's homosexuality was a matter of common knowledge among Russian elites, and he had very little to fear for it. The same cannot be said of Copland and mid-century American homophobia.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Clearly, all those early avant-garde 'futurist' guys wouldn't sit well.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Orfeo said:


> I ran out of room.


better that then out of air


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Pat Fairlea said:


> I suggest Medtner as the coda of Russian Romanticism rather than Rachmaninoff. And I wonder what Tchaikovsky would have made of Roslavets, in particular. So very Russian in idiom but expressed in post-Romantic terms.


Well, Bortkiewicz can be considered as the coda of Russian Romanticism as well (and even Gliere come to think of it or even Rakov).

I think Roslavets would be among those Tchaikovsky may find understandable, even praise-worthy, yet intriguing. Like Blumenfeld's later works, Roslavets' is indeed post-Romanticism, but with the idiom that's accessible yet original.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I voted for Shostakovich but think I definitely should have voted for Prokofiev. Whatever, I think Tchaikovsky would have recognised quality and greatness. Prokofiev's inheritance of the Russian ballet tradition would have swing it for him.


----------



## id0ntmatter (May 8, 2018)

I feel like Rachmaninoff would be the main one because he mostly stayed true to the values of Romanticism. In fact he was probably the last of his kind around the 1930s. The others he would be proud of just for being Russian I feel, but that's just me.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

id0ntmatter said:


> I feel like Rachmaninoff would be the main one because he mostly stayed true to the values of Romanticism. In fact he was probably the last of his kind around the 1930s. The others he would be proud of just for being Russian I feel, but that's just me.


One can say the same thing about Glazunov (and the fact that he held the St. Petersburg Conservatory together during Russia's turbulent, volatile period).


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I think Tchaikovsky would have sided with Glazunov and Rachmaninoff for the rest of the 20th century for their "stabilizing" presence in the modernist scene. Conversely, I think he honestly would have hated Prokofiev the most, both musically and personally. If Stravinsky managed to have kept Tchaikovsky or even Rimsky-Korsakov a little bit longer in his life, as a real mentor, I think he wouldn't have written the music he did, at least not until much later. But Prokofiev couldn't care less who was teaching him or mentoring him. He was a real rebel, more than Stravinsky. Like Glazunov, Tchaikovsky would have recognized how brilliant Prokofiev really was, but that would have made the resentment at his arrogance and toxicity even more. Glazunov and Prokofiev had a very mutually cold acquaintanceship even though they respected each other as being geniuses in their own right.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I think Tchaikovsky would have sided with Glazunov and Rachmaninoff *for the rest of the 20th century for their "stabilizing" presence in the modernist scene*. Conversely, I think he honestly would have hated Prokofiev the most, both musically and personally. If Stravinsky managed to have kept Tchaikovsky or even Rimsky-Korsakov a little bit longer in his life, as a real mentor, I think he wouldn't have written the music he did, at least not until much later. But Prokofiev couldn't care less who was teaching him or mentoring him. He was a real rebel, more than Stravinsky. Like Glazunov, Tchaikovsky would have recognized how brilliant Prokofiev really was, but that would have made the resentment at his arrogance and toxicity even more. Glazunov and Prokofiev had a very mutually cold acquaintanceship even though they respected each other as being geniuses in their own right.


Do you think that would apply to Scriabin and even Myaskovsky as well?

Your assertion of Prokofiev is well taken (though his friendship with Myaskovsky, known for his introversion & elusiveness, was kind of a blessing, perhaps in disguise). I do think that Stravinsky was quite as bad and as big of a rebel in his own right (he dismissed the older generations of composers esp. Russians in his later years).


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

At the very least, a supreme craftsman like Tchaikovsky would have admired the cosmopolitan career Prokofiev managed to have. Breadth of output and mastery of all the major classical genres surely would have been a requirement for Tchaikovsky’s admiration, and of the composers listed here Prokofiev is rivaled only by Shostakovich in meeting that standard (with Glazunov, Gliere, and arguably Rachmaninoff earning honorable mentions).

More importantly, Prokofiev came closest to being perceived in the west as a composer first and a Russian second, something Tchaikovsky aspired to his whole career. Neither composer was fully successful in this, but it was not for lack of trying. It was a constant source of frustration for Tchaikovsky, anyway, that westerners imagined Russians to be one big family and that (to cite an example from above) one can assume Tchaikovsky would have automatically had some admiration for any Russian composer simply by virtue of being Russian. (I can’t think of any contexts where one would say that of French or American or German composers.) I doubt Prokofiev would have differed much from Tchaikovsky on that count.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Eschbeg said:


> At the very least, a supreme craftsman like Tchaikovsky would have admired the cosmopolitan career Prokofiev managed to have. Breadth of output and mastery of all the major classical genres surely would have been a requirement for Tchaikovsky's admiration, and of the composers listed here Prokofiev is rivaled only by Shostakovich in meeting that standard (with Glazunov, Gliere, and arguably Rachmaninoff earning honorable mentions).
> 
> More importantly, Prokofiev came closest to being perceived in the west as a composer first and a Russian second, something Tchaikovsky aspired to his whole career. Neither composer was fully successful in this, but it was not for lack of trying. It was a constant source of frustration for Tchaikovsky, anyway, that westerners imagined Russians to be one big family and that (to cite an example from above) one can assume Tchaikovsky would have automatically had some admiration for any Russian composer simply by virtue of being Russian. (I can't think of any contexts where one would say that of French or American or German composers.) I doubt Prokofiev would have differed much from Tchaikovsky on that count.


Very well argued.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Eschbeg said:


> At the very least, a supreme craftsman like Tchaikovsky would have admired the cosmopolitan career Prokofiev managed to have. Breadth of output and mastery of all the major classical genres surely would have been a requirement for Tchaikovsky's admiration, and of the composers listed here Prokofiev is rivaled only by Shostakovich in meeting that standard (with Glazunov, Gliere, and arguably Rachmaninoff earning honorable mentions).
> 
> More importantly, Prokofiev came closest to being perceived in the west as a composer first and a Russian second, something Tchaikovsky aspired to his whole career. Neither composer was fully successful in this, but it was not for lack of trying. It was a constant source of frustration for Tchaikovsky, anyway, that westerners imagined Russians to be one big family and that (to cite an example from above) one can assume Tchaikovsky would have automatically had some admiration for any Russian composer simply by virtue of being Russian. (I can't think of any contexts where one would say that of French or American or German composers.) I doubt Prokofiev would have differed much from Tchaikovsky on that count.


Another reason, though perhaps of lesser force, for Tchaikovsky to appreciate Prokofiev would be for Prokofiev's breadth and fecundity to remind Tchaikovsky of his ideal, Mozart. While there may be little overlap in the personalities of Mozart and Prokofiev, P can be seen as the 20th century Mozart, and I think T would have sensed the similarities.


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

For sure. It was remarked above that Tchaikovsky would have appreciated the composers who "stayed true" to Romanticism, but whatever Tchaikovksy's own allegiances to Romanticism might have been were at least equaled if not exceeded by his affinity to the preceding era.


----------

