sign in sign up
<<
Home , Nikolai Myaskovsky, The Story of a Real Man

00 00

PROKOFIEV O D

1948 A Y L

N I R O P A H S

Y K S V O

00 00 K S A Y M

O L L E

P  C L O

1948 N

A L    H   I P FOREWORD

When deciding what to record for my debut CD, I felt it was very important to find a His response, however, was only one amongst the many theme that meant a lot to me. My relationship with Russian culture began with my different reactions to this apparent dichotomy, first teacher, Marina Logie, whose father is the great Russian-Romanian cellist demonstrated in the huge output of , artists and Vladimir Orloff. This relationship was strengthened further when I began having writers of this period. lessons with the Russian cellist Leonid Gorokhov. Not only is he helping me to achieve I cannot express the true depth of this culture in so few the quality of playing I aspire to, but he has also introduced me to many aspects of words, not only because I will never be able to appreciate it Russian culture, including music, literature and art. Thanks to him, I have made many fully as a non-Russian, but also because that which makes it Russian-speaking friends, inspiring me in turn to start learning Russian with Olga so special is its intangible, all-encompassing nature. Scott. This complex and wonderfully expressive language gave me a deeper understanding of Russian culture. I began to appreciate the immense value of great art, I would like to thank Mary and David Bowerman and Alexander music, and literature in Russian-speaking countries, and discovered the link which Van Ingen for making this recording a reality; Leonid exists between the ‘Russian soul’ and the spiritual virtue of art. I perceive Russian Gorokhov for deepening my understanding of music and of culture, its literature, art and music as a huge web of interconnecting subtleties, the cello, for encouraging individuality in thought and in together forming vast natural structures. play, and for being a great inspiration and role model to me; Alison Rhind for providing so much help Nature plays a vital role in Russian music: folk-songs born of Russian soil are ingrained and understanding; Stephen Goss and Irina within every Russian-speaker I have met so far. These folk-songs, as I understand them, Walters for teaching me so much; Hazard are often a combination of respect and love for mother earth, the acceptance of the Chase and Sibylle Jackson in particular, for power of fate, and the unbreakable bond with a higher realm. I strongly feel that each their continuous support; Petr Limonov for of the pieces on this CD reflect these themes, along with subtle Russian irony, and a being a wonderful partner in music and melancholic perception of the transient beauty of the world. in life; and last but not least, my The Soviet Era imposed new characteristics on this lyrical style, shifting the focus onto parents, Ido and Daniela van der enforced optimism, state-induced patriotism (often bordering on isolationism) and Heijden, for being endlessly supportive Socialist Realism. The pieces on this album are in many ways a response to the decree and without whom I would never have issued by the Communist Party on 10 February 1948, which further restricted had this life in which I receive so composers’ freedom of expression. Prokofiev’s Sonata for Cello and Piano reflects the much joy. amalgam of the Russian soul in the light of these new stylistic ‘requirements’ superimposed upon it. TRACK LISTING IN THE SHADOW OF 1948

The Soviet-era works for cello featured on this disc may seem united in style to (1891 –1953) listeners today, since they are all richly lyrical and share a conservatism that IN C, O P.119 (1949) avoids any clearly modernist gestures. The Prokofiev, Myaskovsky and Shaporin were 1 I Andante grave 11’46 also the fruit of the composers’ collaboration with , whose 2 II Moderato 05’04 talent and energy catalysed them into writing for cello, and his direct intervention 3 I II Allegro, ma non troppo 07’54 is probable in the most virtuosic passages. Even so, these pieces would have been YURI SHAPORIN (1887 –1966) perceived as highly disparate at the time of their composition, from the close of FIVE PIECES FOR CELLO AND PIANO , O P.25 (1956) the 1940s through to the mid 50s. The original Soviet audience would have been 4 I Prelude 02’57 well aware of the divergent paths the three composers had followed, and the 5 II Valse 04’46 different ways in which they had overcome or circumvented recent troubles. 6 I II Intermezzo 03’48 The troubles in question began in January 1948, when Communist Party officials 7 IV Aria 06’41 headed by Andrey Zhdanov began to examine and question the work of composers 8 V Scherzo 01’59 who seemed to be flirting with Western musical trends (this was an early low point (1881 –1950) in the Cold War). By 10 February, the initially vague and arbitrary accusations had CELLO SONATA NO.2 IN A MINOR , O P.81 (1948) congealed into a Party Resolution that declared the six leading Soviet composers to be ‘formalists’, meaning that they were supposedly preoccupied with innovations 9 I Allegro moderato 09’39 10 I I Andante cantabile 06’10 in the form, the technical aspects of composition, at the expense of the socialist 11 I II Allegro con spirit o 06’19 content that was expected of them. At the head of these six composers were Shostakovich and Prokofiev, whose modernist leanings were always at odds with (1855 –1914) the Socialist Realist mainstream, but had sometimes been tolerated. Next in order PRELUDE IN B MINOR , O P.11 N O.1 (1885) (arranged for cello & piano) of importance was Myaskovsky, a surprising choice, since he had abandoned his 12 Moderato 03’33 modernist elements in the early 1930s. For all three, this was a huge fall from Total time: 70’42 grace, since just a year earlier, they stood seemingly secure at the very top of the Soviet music hierarchy, with strings of awards and honours to their names and Produced and engineered by Alexander Van Ingen hefty fees in their bank accounts. Edited by Alexander Van Ingen and Claire Hay Mixed & mastered by Alexander Van Ingen While Prokofiev and Myaskovsky found themselves in disgrace, Yuri Shaporin’s Recorded on 12th –13th & 16th –17th January 2017 in the Music Room, Champs Hill, West Sussex, UK career was in no danger. He was one of the few significant Soviet composers who Graphic design by Atelier Müller Lütolf, Bern, Switzerland Photographs © 2017, Chris Gloag Executive Producer for Champs Hill Records: Alexander Van Ingen Label Manager for Champs Hill Records: Joanna Wilson had never been tempted by , and of his own accord wrote in a style that of 19th-century Russian salon-music idioms, even looking as far back as Glinka. could almost be taken for some late 19th-century Russian petit maître, a cocktail of This audibly Russian music would have done him no harm at the time, since the Borodin, Tchaikovsky, and Rimsky-Korsakov. In 1948, Zhdanov even selected 1948 Resolution steered composers away from cosmopolitanism and back to their Shaporin as an ally in his attack on formalism, and Shaporin consented, although national roots; but this need not be interpreted as significant, since the he had no relish for the damage this was likely to cause in his personal relations movement remains within the general stylistic spectrum Myaskovsky had already with his ‘formalist’ colleagues. His career, it should be said, instantly benefited established for himself. The second movement continues the lyrical character of when Shostakovich and Myaskovsky lost their positions in the Conservatoire, the first, but offers the cello some passages of passionate declamation. The because their former composition students were now transferred to Shaporin. finale’s anxious moto perpetuo provides a clear contrast, but through all the Each one of the disgraced composers took the blow differently. Prokofiev was at bustle, Myaskovsky manages to introduce more elegiac material looking back to first defiant and in what was supposed to be his letter of repentance, he actually the beginning of the sonata, and also includes a more optimistic lyrical theme argued back at his accusers. This led to a second humiliation, when his new , that seems rooted in the Francophone world of Fauré, Franck and Poulenc. , was rejected in the autumn of 1948, even though Prokofiev 1949 was not a strong year for Soviet music. Most of those criticised as formalists had chosen a patriotic subject, and had made an effort to write in the more either produced trifles in their disorientation, or simply remained silent. Even accessible and melodic style that had been demanded by the authorities. When composers who had not faced criticism in the Resolution were reluctant to put even this failed, he began to despair. Myaskovsky took a different approach, their heads above the parapet, in case they failed to second-guess what was completely ignoring all requests for a letter of repentance. He excused himself on required of them. Myaskovsky’s Cello Sonata stood outside this timidity as a grounds of illness from most of the denunciatory meetings. He had probably beautifully crafted and earnest piece, and it quickly won recognition as the best contributed more than any other individual in shaping and establishing musical instrumental work of the year – by a long mark. Shortly after its premiere, given Socialist Realism, whether through his own pieces, through his teaching or through by Rostropovich, it was nominated for a Stalin Prize. The authorities agreed in his ceaseless work in evaluating others compositions for awards. He understandably principle, but decided to lower the prize to the second-class level, thus halving felt that his great efforts had been repaid with perverse ingratitude. the prize money Myaskovsky was to receive. Even so, the money was still at a Myaskovsky’s Second Cello Sonata, written in 1948, shows no clear signs that the level ordinary Soviet workers would take decades to earn, and Myaskovsky intended it as an act of repentance, and in no works of the period did he returned to the ranks of the most highly paid members of the cultural elite. The seem to be currying favour with the authorities, in contrast to the patriotic or official message was forgiveness, but the reduction to the second class marked Stalinist film scores Shostakovich was writing. The Cello Sonata may be more the fact that he had only produced a small-scale work (and perhaps to indicate transparently melodic than many of Myaskovsky’s works, but its predominantly that he should not become over-confident). elegiac tone and its abundance of moderately slow music remain true to his When Prokofiev embarked on his own Cello Sonata in 1949, Myaskovsky’s sonata habitual mode of expression. The winningly beautiful opening theme is an updating of the previous year was one of his models. The two composers had been close friends since their youth, and they maintained a profound mutual respect that was For a composer of Prokofiev’s stature, something more monumental than a cello never eroded by their disagreements over musical matters. Prokofiev, the sonata was needed as an occasion for official forgiveness and reconciliation. This international musical celebrity, would chide his friend for his conservatism, for finally came in 1950, when he produced the grand oratorio On Guard for Peace . It following the teachings of Conservatoire professors too dutifully. They shared much contains a striking lullaby section that depicts a child who is able to sleep of their educational background as composers: Myaskovsky was a pupil of Lyadov peacefully because Stalin remains vigilant in the Kremlin, working through the and Rimsky-Korsakov, while Prokofiev had also studied under Lyadov but rebelled night. Despite the Cantata’s clear and correct ideological message, Prokofiev against what he saw as his teacher’s pedantry. But now, when conservatism was the almost failed to pick up a Stalin Prize, because the awards committees still order of the day, Prokofiev needed to fall back to those useful Conservatoire detected some vestiges of ‘formalism’. But since they agreed that the work was precepts. nevertheless ‘a step in the right direction’, the acceptable compromise was to Prokofiev’s Cello Sonata bears the imprint of these external pressures. He chose to award Prokofiev a second-class prize. add an epigraph, a well-known phrase from Maxim Gorky: “Man! – How proud the Shaporin’s Five Pieces , Op.25, were written in 1956, at a time when the acrimony word rings”, which even the least literary Soviet citizen knew through textbooks of of 1948 was almost forgotten, and itself has been denounced at the the period. In keeping with this epigraph, the cello begins powerfully and almost 20th Party Congress. By that stage, Shaporin had finally seen the staging of his heroically, in its low register. The second, lyrical theme introduces a touch of opera The Decembrists , whose composition had stretched out over a quarter classicism and hints at a polonaise rhythm. There is also, wisely, a Russian element century. While Shaporin’s music was never a problem, the politically sensitive signalled by a quotation from the composer’s own Alexander Nevsky, one of his libretto had to be rewritten thirteen times. In these cello pieces, also written for more demotic works. In the second movement, Prokofiev avoids the style of his Rostropovich, Shaporin seems to have been inspired by both Prokofiev and many grotesque scherzos, creating instead a more benign playfulness, with some Myaskovsky: the Prelude strikes an epic-heroic tone recalling Prokofiev’s opening folkish humour, while the central episode focuses on a strikingly beautiful lyrical passage, while the final piece, Scherzo , seems to be a spin-off from Myaskovsky’s theme. The finale is suitably life-affirming, with its graceful main theme and a finale, developing its moto perpetuo idea. Shaporin’s natural gift for melody and heart-stopping lullaby. Yet despite the formal transparency and abundance of his solid technique never fails, and he is equally convincing in the folksy Russian melody, it is hard to detect a spirit of compromise, since Prokofiev retains his style of the Intermezzo as he is in the Aria , an expansive lyrical piece whose individualism and complexity, sometimes reaching philosophical depths. The melancholy beauty almost reaches the level of Tchaikovsky. epigraph might seem like a mere sop to the authorities, but the music prompts us to interpret it seriously, as an affirmation of the composer’s continued confidence © Marina Frolova-Walker in his artistic powers in spite of the humiliations of 1948. It is difficult to imagine what beautifully crafted piano miniatures, one of which, the Prelude from his Three course 20th-century classical Pieces , Op.11, we have recorded alongside larger works written by his famous music could have taken had pupils. Anatoly Lyadov fulfilled Born in 1855, Lyadov studied composition in with Rimsky- Diaghilev’s commission to write Korsakov and, in the course of his life, managed to lose his position in the The Firebird for the 1910 Ballets Conservatory twice: first, in 1876, as a student, he was expelled for poor Russes season (the delay on attendance; years later, in 1905 (by then a professor, a teacher of Myaskovsky Lyadov’s part led to an and Prokofiev, among others) he left to show his solidarity with his former invitation to the then mentor Rimsky-Korsakov, who had been fired for his liberal political views. Young completely unknown Igor Sergei Prokofiev, who studied harmony in Lyadov’s class, described his lectures Stravinsky); some historians as “dry”, and admitted to “never having tried to connect his lessons with my even doubt that he accepted the compositional plans”. According to Prokofiev’s Autobiography, Lyadov applied a commission in the first place. method which only allowed his pupils to use a very limited amount of chords to Few could doubt, however, harmonise a given melody. However, Lyadov’s “sharp eye” did not let any Lyadov’s skill as an orchestral mistakes in 4-part exercises go unnoticed, and his students progressed rapidly. composer: his tone poems Baba Yaga and Kikimora , written just Outside his harmony classes Lyadov was anything but conservative – he a few years earlier, exhibit organised a concert to commemorate Mussorgsky’s life and works, conducted virtuosic handling of orchestral performances of ’s First and Second , and was colour and an imaginative actively involved in the musical life of Saint Petersburg right up until his death approach to harmony. Despite in 1914. His Prelude in B minor, composed in 1885 and arranged for cello and this, his orchestral output piano the following year, is marked by naturalness, humbleness and sincerity of remained scarce, and the main expression, economy of texture, unmistakable “Russian-ness” of the melodic body of his work consists of material and a complete absence of sentimentality. © Petr Limonov LAURA VAN DER HEIJDEN cello

Born in England in 1997 as the youngest daughter of a Dutch father and a Swiss mother, Laura van der Heijden’s first public performance as a cellist was at the age of nine with the Jupiter Chamber Orchestra. From 2005 to 2014 Laura was a student at the Royal College of Music Junior Department, and since 2008 has been studying with the renowned British-Russian cellist Leonid Gorokhov. In October 2016 Laura began her Bachelor’s Degree in Music at St John’s College, Cambridge, while continuing to perform during her term breaks. Laura has already made a name for herself as a very special emerging talent, captivating audiences and critics alike with her insightful and faithful interpretations. Having won many prizes and awards from an early age, her breakthrough came in 2012 as the overall winner of the BBC Young Musician Competition, with a “mesmerising” performance of Walton’s Cello with Kirill Karabits and the Northern Sinfonia at The Sage, Gateshead. She was soon invited to appear with many leading UK orchestras, such as the Philharmonia, BBC Philharmonic, Royal Philharmonic, European Union Chamber and English Chamber orchestras. In September 2014 Laura was awarded the Landgraf von Hessen Prize at the Kronberg Academy’s prestigious international masterclasses. In 2015, the London Mozart Players named her their first ever Young Artist in Residence. A year later she was chosen by the Orpheum Stiftung in Switzerland, a foundation encouraging and assisting exceptionally talented young instrumental soloists. Under this umbrella she appeared in recital with Fazil Say at Zürich Tonhalle in September 2016. In the past few years, Laura has given her debuts in Holland, Germany, New Zealand, and Australia with the Melbourne Orchestra in the opening concert of the inaugural BBC Proms Australia, conducted by Sir Andrew Davis. Laura participated in the 2017 “Cello Unwrapped” series of concerts at Kings Place London, performing the Schumann with the Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. PETR LIMONOV piano

Laura’s myriad chamber music Born in Moscow in 1984, Russian-British pianist Petr Limonov performances have included started playing the piano at the age of five. A year later he collaborations with Tom Poster, entered the prestigious Moscow’s Central Music School, where Huw Watkins, Fazil Say, Petr he studied under the guidance of Siavush Gadjiev, Valery Limonov, and Krzysztof Piasetsky and, later, Andrei Pisarev. After winning Chorzelski. She regularly First Prize at the Nikolai Rubinstein International participates in chamber music Piano Competition (Paris, 1998) he started giving courses, as well as masterclasses concerts throughout Europe and , with David Geringas, Ralph supported by the Vladimir Spivakov International Kirshbaum, and Miklós Perényi. Charity Foundation. He went on to study with Laura plays a 1780 cello by Hamish Milne and Alexander Satz at the Royal Joseph Hill, loaned to her by the Academy of Music (London) on a full scholarship, Boileau family, and is an followed by a year at the École Normale de Ambassador for both the Prince’s Musique de Paris Alfred Cortot, where his teachers Foundation for Children & the were Ramzi Yassa and Wolfram Schmitt-Leonardy. Arts and Brighton Youth In 2010 Petr returned to London to Orchestra. commence his postgraduate studies at the Royal College of Music with Dimitry www.lauravanderheijden.uk Alexeev, obtaining his Masters degree in 2012. During his studies Petr took part in masterclasses given by Alfred Brendel, Stephen Hough, Cristina Ortiz, Vitaly Margulis and Stephen Kovacevich; whilst in RCM he also studied conducting under Peter Stark. In November 2013 Petr made his conducting début at Cadogan Hall with the London International Chamber Orchestra, directing works by Glazunov and Rachmaninov. a “ a r . p d . . p u P s a s e i

r m t e a r n v

p L e “ t l i , i c H m c

a i i u t s o

é n

j n m o

e o e u

a v t a é ,

s i

u t s a l e n a e v r e s n e y

c

c m s i e

i s u

n o

i n m c r n c é

c e e d r r i a s é o t m u t y é a x a

e c p

b r l h a i e l s e e r s i f , m n

a

p g u i e l t … n u n e e s t . ” ”

“ P m E w L a L b B R F a l i H R E O H a G t H L I c w a h a n h n e o e a a u p n x n

e y o o a a e n a o R i w u b p

e s

o u t n t l t

r p d d s g r q o l y m T H l s 2 e r h o w r t r a l e

n r g a e

u l x m a h a

i

i A l p a 0

r i p , z A “ e . c o b v a

f a s , e

a d P t e p

o e C l 1 S r

, e c i ; a l a r f r a o

b

n v i

e

a D r e e

r u d a v o

y 7 a o d o n l D S m i r a T e f o q n M x t e s n n n l

n m a , f o ’

d t V 2 n A u t r r u e

E

k

o u F e c c t o

t l u r

E h a N

0 i k

i n l y e i M e s r n e t e

m

b s n s

a d r n m n e a i 1 ’ H c ( s n i t d s G

c g e s c s r a p g c e s e i ’ n h d c e C 4

o t

o s o a

h ”

s r r o e p ” r h i d l c C w n

e h a

o y , t a

s l n w

n e y

m l a e

H l e

T a l r i e r H n u a a t d a i o

n C a c n o e

r a

V t r h

a a r a y b

e c l e a c C l a v n b M x t h n - a r l b B

u e l t p u a d l o . i n e e o a i d t d r l c s

e

u c j u d n r e s

p k o

e n s

n g n t f o d

t h f s , o i m o t s e B n . - , e h a e n h u i

d e c n , s e g a s

i c m t

n a

s e

l a e s e e e n m q u H C ) n

a h n W h a N r t n d

i r f t

r s

D u c k e n , e i v i n n D , o s e V w v h i B d e

i

v s t

e c c

- e

g e c f n a a r J e e o a t

L B a a r H o F i o ) o

l h l m h n e t t n e t c t

n i r y l , s B i

C n r l i a o , a

p

a e n e c

o c a

( a

d ’

o

o ( B

i s l n , K r l a r p R o w l B s n t c P

T l

B t i

r y d

f e C a a ,

B u e s r o D u h e b i u B

b r i ,

s o i s d f

b

t o t t

i r e l s

n P e r e n e e , C e R I j , r a l f h h i H o l s m

n k

a c

u o i

s s n e n

r e a

t e

i s U a c 2 P a

c a t e b s r r a r g c t s h d

P Q h - d e c a m 0 l k d r K h o . ) e A s e l s i o i e c a c u a . 1 e , o

e

r

k e e

u

a m i l m a a f d a o t 4 G

e l H l t L d o l s t t n 3 l r f z d a

, s r a b i

i t t r i e e a e d n l , i n e e n s a g g t r t .

photograph: Bill Knight “ “ “ “ “ A F M B E W s A t r w T T B F S . m T e . h L p h a h h l a s o A . o o u R p S i a I s s u e O i e e t s r q n e s i U o O r h C

k r I

s i k u r R S é t m i s S O

c

t A t H - m R l . ’ w e p A e . t e o S s K b ” e ” n r l d N

V

É a a i A a a s a m r S a t

A o g n ë e e y

, b d E n

f i n

I

u

& e O r y n

d b g F a L L v s r s t

a

l a s s A

’

i O e h a

i s K c

w

t l d S B r e M

i c a

w i R n v e i v A a

a A L n t e e f e s g c n

p h E c i N l

r I

. n C l d t H

e y w . p .

N u u . e . E

d

a E r i . ” t f A r n s o t

s T h i e L t h p e g n

c

L

- e t L

e r r e o t e w S

r e a E r h

O f i f l f f m n A r o

l e l o f o e a o

g o

p r m Ë c w l l w & m

r e l o i t e

N i e a i s l r F n a

s l e

s d a n r t S P n g o e s e i f n

o c f n s r u I n l . f - e

g CHRCD113 y l ” e k A c g s

r

h n r n r

i b s N a c t

o a

a h c i c w f O t s l e e a a u a m n l . t m l r n ”

o

e c b i o

l e o o f i , a t f h r “ “ P M S T G R C l b c G e r i s M e n h t o h a o e a a r O R n a u

y m E a i a c r c r t s g c t s e d h O F h m h u D

h c p t i l e

m i e t Y a h l c m o K e s o T n y i

t A .

s p a t

p

a O

o N i a i u h o i n G s i n

n h i s

n

n f i F n E i u s G o g r t d o

n

d t d g h l E I t

d R

n y o u U e i h

, d E e W e n a t

v e n

r e

e , t h L p V n ’ k – m

o n s

h n e m Y

i o s i r n u s .

e

V e n c A d

t e b R n n a c a S e g a s s a o e d K t r n h

A t m

i s d n d e e c e a o

s C

r e e d s e

t f

p b i f

b r

i

, i n H t i n y i i h o t

u n s h g a f h

a n M i i t d a

e t e n n n s

s t h s

a

r g d

o s A t

d e v i o l h

n e i p b

a i t n n N n s e s e l h u n e g c i

m w s e x I a m i t

e s t a

a

s

N e

h c e h . T

CHRCD064 t

t

. i o a e c

. h O h w . n 2 ” l o d ” r e a o

i

F 0 m

t t m t t u l h h

F

h i i r m s e k

e c r s

u s e

o

i – i o f v c

w n u m i t h e f u f g i h i p t t t h n e h h l e e , s “ “ “ T p S T f N p d I w R S Y S o

h h h i a i o o o O U w A m n r s n o e e t

n n o s F

i C K p r ’

d n o t i t a u E S l Y o

H

e I

n y c l n t r P t n A d r a

l

l r h f s M e i s y ,

a I p e u

e t e b

d h T i c u o d l G

A m e d l e

d e f O n o y

l U

s N

e a b y

e n t , l c m

s h e s

l i L l I e c t w n e

a e e a Y o I s e N g

a v

i t t n n M A t i l

e o r a O n h l p d i

s o

b a s K y t

e i

s V h e h l n g e n u r i r e f i t s g a

o c p n s o

h d C

z c t

w a r S i

h v i e m E a i t t o a n i e f i h i r n n L n r

a e o d t e m b g u a , n n o L

m o

i

t o

c a G n O t t a s e s s l o h

o e

. e i s

t

s ”

t u r , l h W w t y c v

m n h e a e CHRCD144

e i a d s e

O n i a s l d h n

s

y e n q R a e e

d . r y f u ” d

i t K u c a

a

t a r b r S l h t t l i y h i t e s

y e a t . r s ” “ “ “ G N D W T p h o A . s . l a F e . . o h a e n n e . . m a E A A n a t r e n O a l d v h f y O a

s e T r N

f o e

b R e d e i a t r A o r

n R l s a

i I m r l K o n a . s e c i C e . E G . s c i e . r a

a S .

g t . H e k w L s

M n E n e

h

t b

U i

n

a c h i A F

t a d u n R R e r . e m e E g e O s g ”

s e r y t O - y a N e s o

K c r e

R o o

z n a a n o W r s E U f u i

t n r g t

r n p l e r V S u a d g

y D L

e e

t l n r i

C

I g h l A r n e r R G

n f o O e U e c t g o u N e o c I h

o

r L d v o : i d p T r m r D d e e

d I m

e S b r e e a e

N r y m y l K n f

n v i

o w

b o f c e t i A r & i r o e o u h n m n a Y

r g e l d e

r o k a i A i h y e s P s n f r n . t

d CHRCD120 ” t t I t p c . p o h h e A o ”

e a s i w b a

N

t c e t e

n o h I O

r t

o u i h h r l d a d e v e