Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T03:34:18.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Conclusion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2017

Get access

Summary

Britten's creative relationship with Russia can, in the first instance, be placed in the context of the dissemination of Russian culture in the United Kingdom which began in earnest in the second half of the nineteenth century: in this sense, Britten and Pears should be seen as part of a much wider trend. Yet, placed in the musical context of the 1930s, the degree of Britten's admiration for Tchaikovsky was exceptional. The scores in which he appears to make reference to Tchaikovsky's music – notably The Prince of the Pagodas but also smaller-scale works such as the Third Cello Suite – suggest that this composer was the most fully assimilated Russian influence on Britten's music. On the other hand, from Britten's point of view, Tchaikovsky's ‘Russianness’ was always secondary to his melodic invention, refinement and creative temperament, and he seems to have responded to the composer's affinity to Mozart rather than his debt to Glinka. Britten's relationship with Shostakovich represents a more complex phenomenon, and the factors that contributed towards a personal friendship and limited musical convergence in the 1960s, not least Rostropovich's crucial influence and Britten's self-perception as a composer, were not identical to those which had excited his initial interest in Shostakovich's music in 1934–6; nor, by the 1960s, were they entirely related to ‘Russia’. Britten's lack of enthusiasm for Musorgsky is particularly striking in this regard. Although the friendship between Britten and Shostakovich in the 1960s may have particularly fostered creative overlap, at the start of the decade the composers’ musical language and preoccupations were already moving into similar channels; by 1970 the relationship was equally one of admiration, empathy and personal affection. Assertions of direct musical influence, as opposed to similar responses to related themes (such as the topic of death), should therefore be viewed with caution, and one must not discount other, non-Russian, sources of influence – for example Bartok – on each composer's ‘late style’.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Boydell & Brewer
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×