Review

Author(s): Kevin Kopelson

Review by: Kevin Kopelson
Source: SubStance, Vol. 27, No. 3, Issue 87: Special Issue: The Occupation (1998), pp. 148-154
Published by: University of Wisconsin Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3685589
Accessed: 08-05-2015 16:07 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to SubStance.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
148 Reviews

Taruskin,Richard.Defining
RussiaMusically:
Historical
andHermeneutical
Es-
Princeton:
says. Princeton Press,
University 1997.Pp. 561.ISBN 0-691-01156-7

I'm thekindof criticwho readsepigraphssymptomatically. I also write

themsymptomatically. Forexample,byopeningBeethoven's Kiss:Pianism, Per-
version,and theMasteryof Desire (Stanford: Stanford University Press,1996)
withProust("Who would everhave detectedthattherapid,nervous,charm-
ing stylewithwhichM. de Charlusplayed theSchumannesquepassage of
Faure's sonata had its equivalent-one dare not say its cause-in elements
entirelyphysical,in theBaron'snervousweaknesses?"),I meantto implythat
mywriting styleis rapid,nervousand charming as well-and thatitexpresses
my own "nervous" sexuality. So when Richard Taruskin citesSalmanRushdie
at thebeginningofDefining RussiaMusically ("I feellikeeverything I say or do
is treatedas an allegoryofmysituation.The pointis thatI'm trying to notbe
definedexplicitly I
by thissituation."),findmyselfconsidering his own situa-
tion,treating thebookas an allegoryofthatsituation, and wonderingwhyhe
resistssuchtreatment.
Taruskinis theforemost Americanauthority on Russianmusic,whichis
quite a situation.But it's not thatsituationby whichhe's tryingto not be
defined.His other,equallymassivebooksincludeOperaandDramain Russia;
Stravinsky and theRussianTraditions; and Musorgsky: EightEssaysand an
Epilogue.Thisbook,a collectionofessays(on Balakirev, Borodin,Chaikovsky,
Glinka,Musorgsky,Prokofiev,Rachmaninoff, Rimsky-Korsakov, Scriabin,
Shostakovichand Stravinsky) thatbringspoststructuralism to bear on aes-
thetic,humanistand historicalconcerns(and kudos to Taruskinformaking
thatwelcomemove),can be paraphrasedas follows.The Europeantendency
to orientalizeRussianculture,includingRussianartmusic,is counteredby a
Russiantendencyto occidentalizeEuropeanculture-andby a Russianten-
dencyto emulateEuropeanculture.(To quoteTaruskin,Russianmusic,like
Russia itself,has "always [been]tingedor taintedwithan air of alterity-
sensed,exploited, bemoaned,reveledin,tradedon,and defendedagainstboth
fromwithinand fromwithout"[xiv].)Thetendencies areideological,butquite
real.Russiancomposersuse Europeanmeanstoconveynon-European mean-
the
ing,including meaning of Russian nationality. Western audiences fathom
-and feel-thesemeanings.YetWesternmusicologists (unfeeling formalists
who can'tfathomtruly"absolute"music,accordingtoTaruskin)denigrate the
otherwise meaningful music "itself."
As do ex-Russian for
composers, political
reasons.(I digress,butit'sa necessarydigression.)"Thecold-warStravinsky,"
Taruskinwrites,"insistednoton musicas metaphor buton 'musicitself"':
Thatis a verystangenotionindeed,"musicitself."
Itshistory
has yettobe
written,butitdoesnotseemtobe a verylongone.In thesenseinwhichthe
cold-war usedtheterm,
Stravinsky itdoesnotseemtoextend backmorethan
a decadeortwobefore usedit.Theterm
Stravinsky hasnothingtodo withthe

SubStance #87,1998

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reviews 149

nineteenth
century's music,"withwhichitis nowoften
"absolute mistakenly
interchanged; ofabsolute
fortheabsoluteness music,as Wagner(yes,Wagner)
first it,wasanabsolute
envisioned notanabsolute
expressivity, freedomfrom
(366)
expression.
I wouldn'tcall thiswriting stylerapid,nervousand charming. I'd call it com-
manding, erudite and sly. And I'd suggest it contributes to Taruskin's
preeminence.
What,then,is thatsituationbywhichhe's trying tonotbe defined?Might
itbe Hegelianism?Taruskin'sthesesand antitheses are,in fact,variationson a
themehe neveracknowledges:themaster-slave dialectic.(Thetheme:masters
need slaves to recognizethem;slavesknowmoreaboutmastersthanmasters
know about slaves; slaves resentmasters.)I fail to see, however,how
Hegelianismcouldembarrassanykindofcritic, whetherhumanist, poststruc-
turalist orbothhumanistand poststructuralist (a compoundcategory I fallinto
as well). Unless,of course,we're talkingabout a masterful Westerner who
claimsto knowmoreabout(slavish)SlavicsubjectsthanSlavicsubjectsknow
about themselves(as Taruskindoes claim),yetwho is sufficiently skillfulto
makesuch variationsthemselves(unlikethe"musicitself")as compellingas
thattheme.(The skillis rare.GlennWatkins'sPyramids at theLouvre:Music,
Culture, andCollagefromStravinsky tothePostmodernists [Cambridge:Harvard
UniversityPress, 1994], another tacitlyHegelian book, comes to mind.)A
Westerner, moreover, who is sufficientlyskillful (if not sufficiently self-in-
to the
volved) interrogate European and American tendency to emulate Rus-
sian culture,themusicin particular-yetwho doesn'tdo so. For example,I
wonderwhyCartiercopiedthecostumeDiaghilevmadeNijinskywearas the
"FavoriteSlave" in Le Paviliond'Armide (1909),his ballets russesdebut.Or why
Douglas Fairbanks Sr.,in The ThiefofBaghdad(1924),copied thecostumehe
wore as the "Golden Slave" in Scheherazade (1910). I also wonder why
Debussy's Priludea' l'Apres-midi faune(1894) recallsChaikovsky(1840-
d'un
1893).Or whyCole Porter's"I Love Paris"(fromCan-Can)soundslikehe loves
Moscow. Thenagain,wereTaruskininvestedin such questionshe'd have to
recognizethat otherWesterners-deadcomposersif not rival criticsalso
engagedin what he calls "dialogicalhermeneutics" (xxv)-fathomRussian
musicin thefullestpossiblesense.(TaruskinfaultscriticGaryTomlinsonfor
trying to dialoguewith"dead [composers]throughtheinanimatemediumof
texts"(xxi). The attackis both gratuitousand somewhatconfusing,given
Taruskin'ssimilarapproach.And perhapsChaikovskywasn'tquitedead for
Debussy.)
Chaikovskyhappensto be Taruskin'sfavoritecosmopolitancomposer,
Musorgskyhis favorite I couldn'tagreemore.My mostcherished
nationalist.
live recording, forexample,is theClaudio Abbado Khovanshchina (an opera
Musorgsky failedto complete), with the orchestration by Shostakovich (in-
stead ofRimsky-Korsakov), thenewlyfoundfinaleby Stravinsky (createdin

SubStance 1998
#87,

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
150 Reviews

1913 forDiaghilev),and linernotesby Taruskin.But I'd have perusedhis

readings of Chaikovsky and Musorgsky-along with his readings of
Stravinskyand Shostakovich-evenif I didn'tsharehis taste,forit was by
treatingthem thatI discoveredanotheraspectofTaruskin'sem-
allegorically
barrassingsituation.
What else is thereto say aboutthatsituationby which
to notbe defined?Taruskinis an ironist,
he's trying whichis finebyme. He's
Russianironistas well,whichis not--eventhoughI'm one
a stereotypically
myself.
Irony,of course, is a formof realism.And to understandRussian
realism--orTaruskin'srealism-we need to appreciatetheartificiality of the
"absolute"emotionalexpressivity he findsformalists
disparage.ConsiderYev-
geniyOnegin,an opera Chaikovskybased on Pushkin.Taruskinarguesthat
fromthe veryfirstensemble,Olga and Tatyana'sduet,the musicacts as a
"detached"mediatorofsituationsand feelings(53).

Chaikovsky"sings"hisoperainanidiomintensely redolent
ofthedomestic,
andballroom
theatrical, musicofitstimeandplace--its, nothis-and in so
doinghesituates
it,justas Pushkinsituates
theliterary intheyears
prototype,
1819-25.
Andjustas Pushkin's characters
achievetheir byvirtue
"reality" ofa
ofprecisely
multitude manipulated codes,soChaikovsky'sexpressthemselves
a finely
through calculated filter
ofmusicalgenresandconventions.(54)
And by usingstereotypicalmelodicand harmonicfigures,virtuosically
to
recombined, express characters'
passions (the "sixthiness"[sekstovost']
of
Tatyana's LetterScene in particular[55,243]-theme music I stillassociate
with an old public televisionprogramcalled The GreatAmericanDream
Machine), ChaikovskymakesPushkin'spointas well:thatpurportedly spon-
taneousfeelingsare "alwaysmediatedbytheconventions and constraints, as
oftenlearnedfromliterature as from'life,'to whichwe have adapted" (54).
Such expression-suchself-conscious realism-is, forTaruskin,the peak of
musical perfection.(Or rather,of classical music perfection: Chaikovsky,
whosemusicis bothconventional and enjoyable,was classicalin theMozart-
ean sense.) That manyfailto realizeChaikovskymasteredthisrealism,he
claims,is yet"anothermarkofthecondescension we so easilyfeeltowardthis
astonishinggenius--a condescensionthatwill richlyrepayexaminationfor
whatitcan tellus aboutourselves"(245).The themeremainsHegelian.
Chaikovskyalso recombinedfiguresassociatedwiththe orienttoward
whichRussianscondescendedin orderto suggestsomething realabouthim-
self.(Hegelreiteratedthrough EdwardSaid,authorofOrientalism.) Something
sad abouthimself. Something nega-tive.Something neitherProustnorI would
call "nervous."Thewordnegaconnotesthedegenerate, effeminate, eroticEast:
theEast thatRussiansimaginemightemasculateand enslavethem.Taruskin
first reveals the musical conventions associated with nega (sultry
chromaticism, pedal drone,melodicundulation,Englishhorntimbre)where
one expectsthem:thePolovetsianActfromBorodin'sPrinceIgor,the"Appari-

SubStance #87,1998

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reviews 151

tionof Cleopatra"fromRimsky-Korsakov's Mlada;theArabianDance from

Glinka's Ruslan and Lyudmila;the Dance of the Persian Slaves from
Khovanshchina;Rimsky-Korsakov'sScheherazade-inother words, music
Diaghilevused in thefirsttwo saisonsrusses(1909-10).Of course,negahad a
meaningforDiaghilev'saudience.
verydifferent
FortheFrench itmeantRussia,fortothemRussiawas EastandOther.The
heavyemphasison orientalluxusin his earlyrepertory was something
Diaghilevhad calculated one
coldly, couldeven Itaccounts
saycynically. for
thedisproportionate of
popularity Russian musical in
orientaliathe Westtothis
day,andforthenotionthatitwasoneofthemainmodesofRussianmusical
ifnot(nexttofolklore-quoting)
expression, thedominantone.Theployeven-
tuallyheldDiaghilevcaptive,
preventing himfrom totheWestthe
presenting
musicalartifacts
ofEuropeanizedRussia, with
beginning Chaikovsky's operas
andballets,
withwhichhepersonally identified.
ThatRussiahasalwaysbeen
despisedintheWestas inauthentic.
(182)
Taruskinthenrevealstheconventions whereone leastexpectsthem:theRomeo
andJulietOverture, written justafterChaikovsky was jiltedbyDesir6eArtot, the
only woman known to have aroused his sexual In it,according
interest. toTarus-
kin,thecomposer"usedtheorientalist tropemetonymically, toconjureup notthe
Eastas suchbutrather itsexoticsexappeal"(185).(Thesensuality ofthismusic,
oftenassociatedwiththe throbbing hornpart,is also evokedby the marked
chromatic pass betweenthefifth and sixthdegreesand by theequallymarked
Englishhorntimbreof thefirstlove theme,theone generally associatedwith
Romeo.)And giventhatChaikovsky casthimself as Romeoto Artot'sJuliet(an
identificationwithwhichDiaghilevidentified), "thetheme[is] a self-portrait,"
writesTaruskin,"anotherinstancewhere,in a manneroddlypeculiarto the
Russianorientalist strain(and one that,unhappily, can give encouragement to
essentialistassumptions), theeastwardgaze is simultaneously a lookin themir-
ror"(185).The"unhappiness" here,however, is moregeneralthantheparentheti-
cal aside wouldindicate.In additionto theunhappiness oftheanti-essentialist
whohateshearingRussiareducedtoitsorientalism we havetheunhappiness of
thehopelesslover-rendered enjoyable its
through symphonic expression.
Anotherdigression. TheWesternuse ofnegabothpredatesand postdates
Diaghilev.I'm thinking, forexample,of Debussy'sSoireedansGrenade, from
Estampes [1903],with its sultry chromaticism, pedal drone, and melodic un-
dulation.(No Englishhorn,though-thepieceis forthepiano.)I'm also think-
ing of "Stranger in Paradise,"fromKismet, whichis based on Borodin.What
prompted the use? What has it meant? What personalidentifications, ifany,
have been at stake?Once again,I wishTaruskinwereinvestedin such ques-
tions.
Thereare,ofcourse,othermodesofmusicalrealism-happiermodesthe
masteryof which Taruskindisparages for politicalreasons opposed to
Stravinsky's. Thereare otherorientalisms as well.Take Stravinsky, whoseLes
Noces (Svadebka), writtenbeforehe became neoclassical,is a deliberately

SubStance 1998
#87,

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
152 Reviews

craftedrepresentation in musicaltermsof"Eurasian"optimism.(Eurasianism
[Yevraziystvo],a fascistmovementembracedby intellectualemigresin the
twenties, held that Russia could renew itselfonly by turningaway from
Europe and towardthe primitiveformsof social organizationsupposed to
havesustainedprefeudalSlavictribesand tohavesurvivedamonginhabitants
oftheregionthatextendsfromtheCarpathiansto thePacific.)Relyingon the
Eurasian-and spurious-ethnomusicologyof PrinceNikolai Trubetskoy,
Stravinsky, accordingto Taruskin,solved the centralproblemof his Swiss
period,"thatofcreatingtheauthentic folkloreofan imaginary ur-Russia,not
the real Russia but one 'realerthanthe real'" (431). Or take Shostakovich,
whose FifthSymphonyTaruskinunderstands--andfeels-to have under-
minedtherequisiteoptimismofsocialist realismthrough itsuse ofpessimistic
conventions. TheLargo,he writes,is saturatedwiththe"intonations" ofleave-
takingand funerals,"ironicallydisguisedby the suppressionof the brass
instruments(anyone who has attendeda Soviet secular funeralwith its
obligatory lugubriousbrassquintetwill knowwhatI mean)" (530).The sup-
pression withreferences
coincides totheall-vocalOrthodoxobsequy,orpanik-
hida,to a genreoforchestral musicthatevokesthepanikhida (Stravinskywrote
one forRimsky-Korsakov in 1909),and to Mahler'sDas LiedvonderErde:the
movements"Der EinsameimHerbst"(TheLonelyOne in Autumn)and "Der
Abschied"(TheFarewell)in particular. "ThatShostakovich's movement was a
mourningpiece cannot be doubted," Taruskin "and
writes, surelywas not
doubted,thoughitcouldnotbe affirmed openly."
It hasbeensuggested thatthemovement was a memorial Tuk-
to [Mikhail]
hachevsky,MarshaloftheSovietUnionandShostakovich's whose
protector,
infamous execution-now theveryemblem oftheYezhovshchina [thepolitical
terrornamedafter the"ironcommissar" ofinternal
affairs
underStalin]and
perhapsits singlemostterrifying event-had takenplace duringthe
symphony's But
gestation. why limitits Everymember
significance? ofthe
symphony's earlyaudienceshadlostfriendsandfamilymembers duringthe
blackyear1937,lovedoneswhosedeathstheyhadhad toendurein numb
horror.(530)
NotthatTaruskin failstofeel,ortounderstand, LesNoces-ifonlyina pessimistic
mannerfascist, anti-SemiticStravinsky failedto endorse.As a non-Eurasianist
who respondsto recordings withgooseflesh and to performances withtears,
Taruskinclaimsto comprehend morethanthemusicitself."It is precisely
the
recognitionofthedangerin thework'sallure,"he writes, "theheartofdarkness
thatlurksbehindandconditions itsgravely thatso intensifies
joyousaffirmation,
reaction"(461).
For Taruskin,then,musical realism-self-conscious conventionality-
shouldlamentpast(Yevgeniy present(theLargo)and,as willbe seen,
Onegin),
futurestatesofmind,notcelebratethem.Thisis whatmakeshimstereotypi-
callyRussian,notwithstanding his oppositionto otherWesternstereotypes

SubStance 1998
#87,

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reviews 153

concerning Russianmusic(thatthemusicis essentially oriental;or essentially

folkloric; or insufficientlysymphonic, a charge often made against
Chaikovsky). L'dmerusseveutsouffrir-yet anotherembarrassing themeTarus-
kinneveracknowledges;yetanotherfamiliarconventionof whichhe seems
incrediblyunself-conscious.
Nor does he seem well aware of whatmakeshim an ironist.Taruskin
enjoysmusicalirony.And he knowsitwhenhe hearsit,as in thesuppressed
"disguise"oftheLargoor the"detached"mediationof Yevgeniy Onegin.(An
especiallydevastating instanceoccurswhenChaikovsky mocksOnegin'scon-
fessionof love witha fleeting reference to themusicby whichhe'd rejected
Tatyana.)But he's led--orleads himself-astraywhenhe definesit.For ex-
ample,he claimsthatlistenersare alwaysimplicatedin thehorrific subtexts
withwhichShostakovich is fraught: "Itis neverjustShostakovich. Itis always
Shostakovich and us [because]irony,alongwitheveryotheraspectofmean-
ing,is notsomethingthattextsmerely'contain'"(477).Trueenough.To cite
StanleyFish,ironyis "neitherthepropertyof worksnor thecreationof an
unfettered imagination, but a way of reading"(DoingWhatComesNaturally.
Durham:Duke University Press,1989,194).Unfortunately, Taruskindoesn't
citePaul de Man's Allegories ofReading. De Man comes to mind because I've
been reading situations allegorically(e.g., Taruskin as either classical
Chaikovskyor neoclassicalStravinsky, bothofwhom,likehim,denyRussian
roots)and because,in Blindness andInsight, de Man definestherhetorical trope
in a way closerto Taruskin'srealconcerns--or closerto his concernforRus-
sian realism.Irony,de Man writes,"is a relationship, withinconsciousness,
betweentwoselves... a discontinuity and a pluralityoflevelswithina subject
thatcomesto knowitselfbyan increasingdifferentiation fromwhatitis not"
and
(Blindness Insight:Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism.Min-
neapolis:University of Minnesota Press,1983, 212-13).The in
ironist, other
words,is detachedfromthecodes,genres,and conventions throughwhichhe
experiencesand articulates situationsand feelings. He pointsto hismask,yet
nevercastsitaside--muchliketheChaikovskywho "sings"Yevgeniy Onegin.
So whynotcitede Man,assumingTaruskinhas readhim?Perhapsde Manian
ironyis toooptimistic, orcomedic,forthissecretsufferer. (De Man also writes,
"At the moment[theironist]laughs at himselffalling,he is laughingat a
mistaken, mystified assumptionhe was makingabouthimself"[214].)Perhaps
de Man "himself," like Stravinsky, had been too fascistand anti-Semitic (he
wroteforBelgiannewspapersthathad beentakenoverby collaborators after
theGermaninvasion)--something thoseofus who dialoguewithhimlearned
onlyafterhe died;and a situation bywhichhe,too,would have triedtonotbe
defined.
ThefuturestateofmindTaruskinappreciateshavinghad lamented--one
corresponding to Russia's futureanterior-belongsmoreor less to theHoly
Fool (yurodiviy~)in the final version of Musorgsky'sPushkin-basedBoris

SubStance #87,1998

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
154 Reviews

Godunov.De Man, who believes thatthe ironist"inventsa formof himselfthat

is 'mad' but thatdoes not know its own madness" (216), would have heard the
fool's truth-telling(and through it, Musorgsky's) as ironic, if not comedic.
Taruskin,however, hears themas both tragicand beyondirony--an audition to
be celebratedand an analysis to be quoted at length.

Whosevoiceis this?Who getsthelastword?In Pushkin,and inMusorgsky's

earlierversionbaseddirectly
onPushkin,thevoiceoftheyurodiviy
was thevoice
ofnemesis,invokingheavenlyjudgmentonBoris.Placedattheend,afterBoris's
deathand thePretender's is tosay,aftertheapparentresolution
triumph--that
of thedrama-the negatingentropicvoiceis thevoiceofone who knowsthe
unhappyfuture, who knowsthattherehas beenno resolutionofRussia'sfate.

Thatdescription to theyurodiviy,
applies,superficially, buthisis not,in fact,
thelast"voice"thatis heard.Thedisembodiment ofhissongcontinuesafterhis
singingstopsin an orchestral postludebased on an ostinatodrawnfromthe
sighing,sixthy, semitonal"intonation"of lamentation thathad accompanied
the song at itsbeginning.The verylast phrase,in thelow strings,is a final,
rhythmically augmentedrepetition oftheostinato,a double descentfromthe
sixthto thefifth degreeoftheA-minorscale,thatsounds afterthetonicbass
notehas droppedout.The song,thescene,and theopera thusgrindto a halt
on a unaccompaniedfifth degree--that is, on thedominant,theveryemblem
ofnonresolution.

Whose voice is this?It is thevoice of one who knowstheunhappyfuture

becauseforhimitis thepast.Atonelevelofdisembodiment beyondthevisible
body on thestage,itis thevoice ofthechronicler who has pennedtheopera,
the composer-yurodiviy who sees and speaks the truth,and whose name is
Musorgsky. At a further
levelofdisembodiment itis thevoiceofthechronicle
itself,thetruth-bearing
voiceofhistory. At theultimatelevel,itis thevoiceof
Russia'sself-consciousness,a voicetranscendingpersonsand people,defining
thenation-yurodiviywhosemissionitis,earnedthrough suffering,tobeartruth
to theworld.(79-80)

Oddly enough,thefinaleStravinskywroteforKhovanshchina,unlikethefinalesby
Rimsky-Korsakovand Shostakovich, the
represents very same voice. Then again,
theyearwas 1913--beforepoliticaldemons got thebetterofhim.
Kevin Kopelson
UniversityofIowa

SubStance 1998
#87,

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Fri, 08 May 2015 16:07:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions