Tsurtsumia: The Value Orientation of 20th-Century Georgian Music 511

L’itinéraire spiritueldeScelsirappelleles expériencesdel’écrivain et musicien H.H. – un personnage du récit DieMorgenlandfahrt (VoyageenOrient, 1932)deHermann Hesse. Le »chemin-voyage« qu’ilaentrepris,est lié, moinsaudéplacementréeldansl’espace géo- graphiqueoriental, qu’auvoyageaufonddeson âme. Il s’agit donc de la recherchedela connaissance la plusprofonde, du savoir et de l’initiation.Unpèlerinageversl’Orient, c’est »une pénétrationaufonddes choses et desfaits,dansl’émergence de la vie, auxorigines vives«20.Scelsi, de même que le personnage H.H.,effectueunpèlerinageàlarecherche de la connaissance et de l’illumination àtraversdes culturesetdes traditions religieuses du monde et toutes lesmanifestationsdespiritualité, de mystique et de transcendance. L’effet de ce pèlerinagefut le ›réveil spirituel‹ quieut pour conséquencelarenaissance de Scelsi en tant quecompositeur. L’aspiration de Scelsiétait, ce quelui-mêmeaavoué,d’atteindre la transcendancedel’existence, et constituaitune épreuvereligieuseindividuelle.Même si sonunivers idéelpeutparaîtrenaïfàcertains, il estévident que c’étaitquelque chosede profondément et sincèrementvécu. Sa manièredevoirlemonde étaitadéquateàlaconcep- tion d’ouvertureetdedialogueentre l’Orient et l’Occident,dansl’esprit»d’un nouvel humanisme« eliadien et de l’idée »d’unhomme intégral«21,entantque résultat d’uneren- contre entrel’Occidentetl’Orient.

Rusudan Tsurtsumia () The Value Orientation of 20th-Century Georgian Music

Theproblem of value orientationof20th-centuryGeorgianmusic is linked with thecon- tent of music, whichisverypainfulfor anypost-Soviet culture. In the20thcentury, Georgiaturned into an arenaofchangeofdifferent politicalsystems.Thisisthe reason why peopleresidinghere at varioustimes assignedthe status of truthtodifferentvalues. As is known, valueisanaxiological category,implying an evaluative attitude.Valueswere notdiscussedinthe former . TheGeorgianphilosopher Niko Chavchavadze wasthe first in theSovietempiretopublishin1984abookinRussian, entitled Culture andValues1.Hewritesthatvalue exists where there is asubject whichrecognizes it as such.Value is adynamic,variabledimension.However,there arevaluesthatare never antiquated.The GeorgianmusicologistGiviOrdjonikidze notesthataphenomenoncon- sideredtobeavalue in oneperiodmay turn into an anti-value in anotherperiod.2

20 Ibid. 21 Cf. PiotrZowisło,recenzjaksia˛z˙ ki:Erich Fromm, DaisetzTeitaro Suzuki et Richard De Martino, »Buddyzmzen ipsychoanaliza«(1995), dans: Nomos 18 –19(1997), p. 224–225. 1 Niko Chavchavadze, KulturaiTsennosti (Culture andValues),Tbilisi 1984. 512 Musik des 20. Jahrhunderts

Before2 passingontomyprincipaltheme,Ishall make abrief introduction forthe readers whoare notacquaintedwiththe historyofGeorgianmusic. 1. Thenew Georgianprofessionalmusic took shapeatthe turn of the19thtothe 20th century. TheGeorgianschoolofcomposerswas setuponthe same principleas other19th-centuryEuropeannationalschools –Polish, Greek, Hungarian, Russianand Norwegian. This principleiswellknown:implementation of European experience on national soil,i.e.creationofanationalschoolofcomposersonthe basisofEuropeanmu- sicallogic andwithaccount of thepeculiaritiesoftraditional musicalthought. 2. TheEuropeanmusical developmentbythistimeiscommonknowledge.But Ibe- lievelittleornothing is knownabout thedevelopmentthatEuropeanmusic experienced in . There wasatraditional music–polyphonicfolk/peasant musicwithcom- monregularitiesand oldGeorgianprofessionalmusic or polyphonic church chantswhich existedasfar back as the11thcentury in form of three-part vocalpolyphony,according to historical sources3.There wasanoriginalsystembased on itsown laws of musicalorgan- ization. It hadits ownspecificintonation, peculiar,largely variable meter, itsown diatonic scale-harmonic functional system, with original cadenceformulae, accords, modulations, etc; allthishas been preserved to thepresent day. Apartfromthisthere wasone more source –Georgianurban folklore,which,like all urbancultures, waspolygenetic:one branch wasGeorgian-Persian, andanother of Georgian-Russian-European origin. From the19thcentury Georgia founditselfwithinthe Russianempire. This eventhad twosides.Obviously,Russianimperialpolicywas negative,being directed to deliberate- ly changingGeorgia’s demographic situationand to substituting Russianculture for Georgian. Thus,co-religionist Russia abolishedthe 15 centuries-oldautocephaly of the Georgianchurch, prohibited divine serviceand Georgianchantinginthe native language; theGeorgianlanguagewas banned at school andsoon. But, on theother hand,contact with Russianculture enabledGeorgianculture to realizethe country’shistoricaleffort to gain access to European culture.Musical-culturallifeofEuropeanstyle commenced by public concerts andopera performances.The OperaTheatre,openedin1851, hosted an Italiancompany that staged by Donizetti,Verdi,Rossini andMeyerbeer. At the same time,Italian,Polish, German andRussianmusicians laid thefoundationofprofessio- nalmusical educationinGeorgia. ThefirstGeorgianteachers, singers, instrumentalists andcomposersappeared. Tbilisiwas oneofthe musicalcenters in thesouth of theem- pire.The city wasvisited on toursbyWieniawski, AntonRubinštejn, Rachmaninov; Èaj- kovskij enjoyedspecial respectand affection; in the1880s he visited Tbilisifive timesto conductthe premieresofhis ownoperas. Thelegendary Šaljapinbegan hiscareeratthe TbilisiOpera Theatre.4

2 Givi Ordjonikidze,»Problema TsennostivMusike« (The ProblemofValue in Music),in: Sovetskaja Muzyka 4(1988), p. 55 –66, here:p.56. 3 Seefor example IoanePetrisi, Ganmartebai Prokles DiakhosisadaPlatonurisa Pilosopiisatvis (Commen- tary on thePhilosophy of Prokle Diadochoses andPlato), in: Works,ed. by Shalva Nutsubidze,Tbilisi 1938.See about it:NinoPirtskhalava, »Ioane Petritsi’s Philosophy andGeorgianPolyphony«, in: Pro- ceedings of theFirst InternationalSymposiumonTraditionalPolyphony,Tbilisi 2003,p.119 –226. Tsurtsumia: The Value Orientation of 20th-Century Georgian Music 513

From4 thesecondhalfofthe 19th centuryon, theGeorgiancommunity wasswept by national-liberationideas.Georgianpublicfigures, knownunder thenameofTergdaleulni (those whohad drunkthe waterofthe Tergi-Terek,asobriquet foryoung Georgians who hadreceivedhigher educationinRussia), ledbyIliaChavchavadze, setthemselvesthe task of reviving national self-consciousness among thepeople. It wasIliaChavchavadzewho publishedhis article»TheGeorgianFolkSong« in the Iveria newspaperin1886.5 In it, Chavchavadzediscussedthe provenance (inmodernterminology –typology)ofGeorgian polyphonic music. ComparingGeorgianmusic with »oriental« and»European«music,he concludesthatitresembles neitherofthemand that it is aphenomenon»standing apart« (distinctive)and »self-created«.Against this background,the idea of establishing anational ’s musicallanguageand of creating aGeorgianopera acquired specialsignif- icance,uniting thefirstclassical composersofGeorgianmusic:Meliton Balanchivadze, DimitriArakishvili,Viktor Dolidze, Niko Sulkhanishvili andZakariaPaliashvili.Paliash- vili realized this idea in hismonumentaltragicopera Abesalom andEteri.Similarly to Wagner’s Tristanund Isolde,itisbased on an old legend andusesanabsolutelydistinctmu- sicallanguage; it tellsusabout tragic andelevatedlove. By combining traditionalGeorgian andEuropeanmusical categories Paliashvilicreated amusical language adequatetothe national consciousness of hisgeneration(early20thcentury). Genetically, this language is linked to themusical thinking of theethnos, at thesametimebeing afruit of integrationof national Georgian andEuropeanelements. Such synthesisbrought aboutessential changes in Georgiantraditional musicalconsciousness:the naturalscale of sounds wasreplacedby atemperedsystem, tonalrelations developed parallel to modal, classical-romanticchords andmodulationtechnique alongsidetraditional chords, cadencestructuresand modula- tions. Thechoralscene is thetragicculmination of theopera and, in my opinion,itisa brilliantexample of transformation of thefolk-form ›Zari‹ or ›Lament‹ into . Theprincipaltheme of thecomposersofGeorgianclassical music: love of fatherland,his- toricalpast, thepeople’slives,legends andtraditions–typical themes of romanticart –are realized in typicalgenresaswell. Theromanticism of this musicisfed by national sourc- es –bothofmusical andnon-musicalprovenance.Therefore it maybesaidthatnational- romantic valuesconstitutethe priorityatthe first stageofdevelopment of Georgian music (until the1920s). Thesevalues–commontomankind–are foundinall cultures, whilethe originalityofrenderingthemisensuredbythe peculiaritiesofmusical realization. Theso-calledSovietperiodofGeorgianmusic commenced in 1921. 6 Followingthe Revolution in Russia,Georgia wasindependent forfouryears.Itwas at this period –in 1919 –thatthree Georgianoperaswere staged at theTbilisi OperaTheatre:Paliashvili’s Abesalom6 and Eteri,Arakishvili’s Legend aboutShotaRustaveli andDolidze’s Keto andKote.

4 Shalva Kashmadze, Tbilisis Operis Teatri (The TbilisiOpera House), vol. I,Tbilisi 1951;Archil Mshvelidze andSamusikoGanatleba Sakartveloshi, TheMusical EducationinGeorgia,Tbilisi 1979. 5 Ilia Chavchavadze, »Kartuli XalxuriSimgera«(TheGeorgianFolkSong),in: Selected Works,vol. I, Tbilisi1986,p.57–62. 6 Formoresources on 20th-century Georgian musicsee:GiviOrdjonikidze, AgmavlobisGzisProble- mebi (The Problems of AscendingWay), Tbilisi1978; Istoria GruzinskojMuziki (The HistoryofGeor- gian Music),ed. by Gulbat Toradze, Tbilisi1997; Gulbat Toradze, KartuliMusikis Gza XX Saukuneshi 514 Musik des 20. Jahrhunderts

But, unfortunately, theshort-lived independenceended with theannexationofGeorgia by BolshevikRussia andthe victoryofSovietpower.The Bolshevikimperialregimeturned to be much crueler than themonarchyhad been.The 1930sand 1950swere especiallyhard when theofficial totalitarian ideology begantotakeshape,withits aestheticdoctrine: Socialist Realism. It demandedart to become amouthpieceofthe officialideology.From that period, Georgianmusic begantoreflectthe Soviet wayoflifeand thinking.Atthe first glance,thisdid notbringabout aradical changeinthe ordinarycourseofGeorgian art music: in 1923,Paliashvili’s second , Daisi,was staged.Thisisalyrical-dramatic operawithalove dramaagainst thebackdropofeverydaylifeand patrioticscenes. In 1926, thepatriotic opera Daredjanthe Wily,commenced in 1896 by MelitonBalanchivadze, was completed andstaged.Following themastery of theforms andgenresofEuropeanvocal music, Georgian composerstookupthe formsand genres of instrumental music. In the beginning, i.e. the1920s,small pieces were written, andfromthe 1930sthe first sym- phonies, instrumental concerts andsymphonic poems. Some of them were even awarded theState Prize. However,the majorityofthese workshaveretainedonlyhistoricalsignifi- cance. Thefirstrealsuccess is linked with thenames of Shalva Mshvelidze andAndria Balanchivadze(thelatterwas theson of MelitonBalanchivadze, theGeorgiancomposer, andbrotherofthe worldrenownedchoreographer GeorgeBalanchine).These were thefirsttoimpartspecificallyinstrumentalcharacter to thenationalsongintonation. Theperiodofthe 1940sto1950built thematurityofGeorgiansymphonic music. Since that time Georgianmelos,scale-harmony andpolyphony naturallygrewintothe large formsofsymphonic dramaturgy.The composersmakeskillfuluse of theEuropeanlogic of ›pure‹, ›absolute‹ musicinconveying theirartisticconception. Butthe question is:whatwas this artistic conception like anddid thecomposer have therighttodisplay hisartisticwillinhis ownwork? Theofficial culturalpolicyrested largelyongenresconnected with words, thelatterfacilitatingrevisionofthe contentof music. Ithink that this wasalsoresponsible forthe newgeneration, from the1920s on, to give priority to genres of instrumental music, whilefromthe 1940sthe symphonyac- quired thesignificance of the›epochal genre‹.But time showedGeorgiancomposersthat »inSovietculture there were generallynospheres hidden from theParty’s biased atten- tion«7.Socialist realismdemandedart to be »nationalinform« and»socialistincontent« andtoreflect»harmonious,sunny,orderedreality filledwithconfidenceinabrightfu- ture«8 –inaword, ›conflict-less reality‹.Toachieve this,the expressiveness of musical

(The WayofGeorgianMusic in the20thCentury), Tbilisi1997; XX Saukunis 20–50-iani TslebisKartuli MusikisIstoriisNarkvevebi (Essaysonthe HistoryofGeorgianMusic in the20s and50s of the20thCen- tury.Proceedings of ScientificWorks of TbilisiState Conservatoire),ed. by RusudanTsurtsumia, Tbi- lisi 2004; XX Saukunis 60–90-iani TslebisKartuli MusikisIstoriisNarkvevebi (Essaysonthe Historyof Georgian Musicinthe 60sand 90softhe 20th Century. ProceedingsofScientific WorksofTbilisi State Conservatoire),ed. by RusudanTsurtsumia, Tbilisi2004; andRudusan Tsurtsumia, XX Saukunis Kartuli Musika:TvitmkopadobadaGirebulebitiOrientatsiebi (20th CenturyGeorgianMusic:the Individualityand Value Orientation),Tbilisi 2005. 7 Mark Aranovsky, »SimfoniaIVremia«( andTime),in: Russian Musicand XX Century,ed. by theGosudarstvennij Institut Iskusstvoznania, Moscow 1997,p.303–370,here: p. 344. Tsurtsumia: The Value Orientation of 20th-Century Georgian Music 515 language8should notgobeyondthe limits of theclassicist-earlyromanticstyle,and should protectitselffromthe harmfulinfluenceofthe ›formalistic-decadent‹ trends of 20th-cen- tury Europeanmusic.Formal(external-superficial) links with folk musicwere enough for censorship to determine whetheraworkwas good or bad. Suchaclose relationshipwith folklore even provedbeneficial forGeorgianinstrumentalmusic.The humoremanating from folk music(though,Sovietcitizenshad nothingtobejoyfulabout against theback- ground of mass repressions), brightlyrics, andelemental danceinGeorgianmusic created awholegallery of vividscherzo-typeimages. However, it wasmuchmoredifficultfor acomposer to realizeasignificantartisticidea. There wasawell-knownGeorgianphilosopher,Merab Mamardashvili. In hisview(which Iconcurwith) totalitarian ideology hasawell-developedmechanism forcreating»afield that destroysthinking« andwhich givesshape to aspecificstructure of »linguisticfield«.9 Theactionofthisdistinctive mechanism didnot by-passSovietmusical thinking either. That part of Soviet musicwhich metthe officialstate order wasinthe destructivelan- guagefield. Thecustomerdid notoverlook asinglefactofdeviation from theestablished norms. Themostacceptablemusical language includedrhythmic-melodic structures that hadmoved from simplesongs to major forms, acquiringthe function of landmarksof specific›socialistcontent‹. This language wasopposed to theexpressionofindividualwill, forthe semanticsofalanguagestemmingfromamasssongimmanentlycarried thepa- thos of asocialist-collectivisticworld view.Itwas this pathos that distinguishedSoviet from non-Soviet music, creating its›specificcontent‹. It permeatedlaudatory cantata-orato- rios andfestive overtures, enteringthe first,and especiallyfourth, movements of Soviet . Theparadigm, clear-outinclassical symphoniesand acquiringhere theform of aconcetual cliché,was consideredexemplary–onlyformally(outwardly) wasdramaturgy basedonmovementsfromthe initialquasi-dramaticcollision to thefinale of apotheosis. Thecontent structureofSovietmusic is an interestingtopicper se.But here Ishall only saythatthiscontent is notsingle-valued.Onthe contrary,ithas amulti-layeredstructure. In thefirstplace Ihaveinmind›pure‹instrumentalmusic,which carries with it atech- nique of composition–the method of theso-called ›doublecoding‹ or ›two languages‹. This principlewas forced on gifted Soviet artists, composers, stagedirectors by necessi- ty –reflection of tworealities in onework. One›reality‹ is,asGiviOrdjonikidze putit, art directed at the»façade well-being«ofsocialism,orone directed at values acceptable to the officialauthorities.10 Theother ›reality‹ is that createdbythe author’s artistic will,express- ingvaluescherished by thecomposer.Thiswas aroadofcompromises traversedbyall who survived therepressions of the1930–1950s. Amongthemwas Dmitrij Šostakoviè too,11 as wellashis Georgianfriendand like-mindedcomposer Andria Balanchivadze. Thelatter wascastigatedataParty meetingofTbilisi StateConservatoire in 1949,duringaregular

8 Iuri Kremliov, OèherkipoMuzikalnojEstetike (EssaysonMusical Aesthetics), Moscow 1957,p.56. 9 Merab Mamardashvili, SaubrebiPilosopiaze (Talks on Philosophy), Tbilisi1992, p. 7–9. 10 Givi Ordjonikidze, Tanamedrove KartuliMusikaEstetikisa da SociologiisShukze (ContemporaryGeor- gian Musikinthe LightofAestheticsand Sociology), Tbilisi1984, p. 360–366. 11 This is referredtobyMarkAranovsky in hisessay »MuzikalnyeAnti-utopii Shostakovicha«(The musicalAnti-utopiasofShostakovich),in: Russian Musicand XX Century,Moscow1997, p. 213–250. 516 Musik des 20. Jahrhunderts ideological›purge‹,for thealleged ›formalistic‹ (thisincomprehensibletermwas used to denoteanideologicallyunacceptableartisticevent)character of hisFirst Symphony. It was only by amere chancethatBalanchivadzewas spareddismissal from theConservatoire. Balanchivadze’sFirst Symphonywas writtenin1944. Thesemantics of theimagesand thecharacter of transformation(from thelyrical-genretoheroic) clearlysuggest that it is devotedtothe War. In thefirstpartofthe symphony we come across Šostakoviè-like rhythmic-melodicfiguresaswellasGeorgianmelodic structures andchords. But, on the whole, this is Balanchivadze’sstyle.After all, thefinale must have been unacceptable to theofficial line, foritisnot of thestandardapotheosischaracter.Its first,longsection is aprayer forthe soulsofthose whohad died in theWar –apeculiar requiem; this is suggested by thechoralbeginning of theGeorgiantraditional chant type,gradually moving to atragicculmination builtonthe intonation of lament andweeping,and the second shortersection –finale filledwithconfidenceinvictory.Even this apotheosis finale failed to save thecomposer from hard criticism. Incidentally, amongthe authorsofthe symphonies of 1930s–1950s, Balanchivadzewas theonlycomposer whopersistently vio- latedSovietstereotypes of thesymphony. HisSecondSymphony(1959)alsoendswith ashort Largo, illuminatedlikeaprayer.Notwithstanding allthis, thebestcreations of Georgianmusic of the1920s–1950s –the symphonies, instrumental concertosand quar- tets by Andria Balanchivadze, Shalva Mshvelidze,AleksiMachavariani, Otar Taktakish- vili,Revaz Lagidze, David Toradze, SulkhanTsintsadzeand others –reflectthe universe imprintedbynationaltraditionsasopposed to enforced socialistvalues. From the1960s,Georgiancomposerswere given theopportunity to writewithout an officialorder.Thisfacthas an interestingsocio-psychologicalexplanation,which Icannot deal with here.Thisisaseparatetopic.Chrušèëv’speriodof›thaw‹was followed by Bre©nev’s yearsof›stagnation‹,whenthe ideologicalpressure again increased. In the1970s,the local politicaladministrationinGeorgia –moreprecisely,its first chairmanEduardShevard- nadze–showed, forsomereasons,moreloyalty to culture andart.Inaword, beginningin the1960s Georgianmusic,aswellasSovietmusic in generalwas given access to theex- perienceof20th-centuryworld music. Forthe composersthiswas notonlyfamiliarization with thenew technology.Itwas an opportunity foreachtocreatehis/her ownartistic pictureofthe world, to distribute over it thechiaroscuro at his/her ownwill, to have ad- equate reflection, individual-subjectivemusical ideas(e.g. to conveyearlier unacceptable, psychologicallyacute or ›meditationally‹,emotional content) andimplement it also in an individualized form.Whatunder conditions of totalitarian ideology wasconsideredadeadly sin-realizationofsubjective-individualized artistic will,turned,asofthe 1960s, into the greatest value. This of course does notmeanthatworkswerenow (until theend of the1980s) no longer writtenaccording to an officialorder.The main pointisthatthe newtimes gave theartistachoiceand achancetoavoidcompromisesincreativity. That is why the 1960s–1980swere theyears of an upsurgenot only of theGeorgiancinema(Otar Ioseliani, Tengiz Abuladze,Eldar Shengelaia andothers) andtheatre (Mikheil Tu manishvili,Robert Sturua,Temur Chkheidze, andothers),but yearsofadvance of Georgianmusical culture as well. Georgianmusic wasenrichedbySulkhan Tsintsadze’s lyrical-psychologicalquartet music, SulkhanNasidze’s tragic symphoniesbased on anovel interpretationoffolklore Vincis: Zur zeitlichen Organisation der Form 517 images;NodarGabunia’s ›quasi-folkloricity‹ of vocal-instrumental fable, IosebKechak- madze’ssonorousand colorful choral music; andGia Kancheli’s grotesque andreligious- mystical images.Thismusic also contains thevalue that theGeorgianethnosdeveloped historically: itsown philosophy of heaven andearth,death andlife, wisdom andfalsehood. On theone hand,thismusic is broughttogetherbythe pointofviewonwhatismoral, beautiful, tragic,uglyand base.Thatiswhy,inlisteningtothismusic afeelingisbornin thenon-Georgianlistenerofsomething else,new,unknown,which is recognitionofthe musicalstyle of Georgiancomposers–asanartistic-aestheticfact. On theother hand,this musicisorientedtohuman valuesthatare recognized by anyculture.Ibelieve that therein lies itsprincipalmerit. The20thcentury completed oneimportant historical stageofdevelopmentofnew Geor- gian classical music. Duringthiscentury-old modernmusic historyGeorgiancomposers hadtoexist in controversial, complex socio-politicalconditions. Nevertheless,itprov- ed feasible forabasicallyindividualartistic-aestheticphenomenontobecreated –adistin- guishedGeorgianschoolofcomposers, an original musicalstyle,imbuedwiththe heritage of traditionalculture andintegratedatthe same time with worldmusical culture.Owing to theobscurity of thepicture,Ithink,itistoo earlytotalkabout newtrendsinthe 1990s. However,itmay be said that major musicalforms (suchasopera,ballet,oratorioand sym- phony)havebeendrasticallydiminished. At present Georgianmusical culture is in hard times. Lifefor seven decadesinthe Soviet empire deprived it of immunity of existenceunder conditions of modern civilization. Enough time haspassedsince thecollapseofthisempirefor us to see that theso-called ›freeworld‹, whichsomepeoplelivinginthe Soviet zone looked to with hope, andsome with fear,has itsown difficulties.These difficulties stemfromthe contradictorycharacter of this interrelationshipofcivilizationand culture,posingthe problem of ecology. Since the1990s, Georgianmusical culture hasfaced newdifficulties,the main beingthatof adapting to thenew socio-politicalenvironment.

Claudia Vincis (Basel) Zur zeitlichen Organisation der Form in Igor’ Stravinskijs Octuor pour instruments àvent (1918–23) und Concerto pour suivi d’orchestre d’harmonie (1924)

Es istallgemein bekannt, dass Stravinskijs Poetik seit demBeginnder 1920er Jahreauf der Vorstellung einesordnenden kompositorischen Willen gründet: Die›tonale‹ Ebene, die strukturelle Anwendung von Instrumenten unddie durchein harmonisches,melodisches