The Second Violin Sonata is one of the most popular works by Alfred Schnittke, and it is one of my favourite pieces by him (alongside his First Symphony, First String Quartet, First Hymn, Second and Third Violin Concerti, Three Madrigals, etc).  I discovered Schnittke's music in April 1969 at an underground concert given in the Gnessiny Institute in Moscow by Alexei Liubimov (piano), Boris Berman (piano), Lev Mikhailov (clarinet) and a few string players. This half-forbidden concert organised by Alexander Ivashkin was supposed to be a whole festival, but it was cancelled at the last moment by the authorities. The concert was split into three parts. The first two of these parts, being dedicated to the music of the Soviet avant-garde, consisted of compositions by the likes of Edison Denisov, Tigran Mansurian, Valentin Silvestrov, Viktor Ekimovsky and Kuldar Sink etc. At the end of the second part there was a performance of Schnittke’s  ‘Serenade for five musicians’. This very cheerful and funny piece, entangled with hundreds of short quotations, sounded very different from the rest of the program. The final part of the concert was made up with the music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern, played for the first time in Brezhnev's Soviet Union. All of this music was a very important and most influential discovery for me.

Since then I tried to attend all events with music of this kind. But these events were very rare. However, it wasn’t long before I had the chance to hear Schnittke’s Second Violin Sonata played by Mark Lubotsky and Liubov' Yedlina at another underground concert in the Medicine Workers' Club. I remember that they also played the piece a little later in the Maly Hall of the Moscow Conservatory.

The editor Evgeny Barankin from ‘Sovetsky Kompozitor Publishers’ managed to print 1000 copies of the Sonata as a separate edition. This was a great achievement, given a quite unfriendly atmosphere in 1976. At that time I was working for ‘Sovetsky Kompozitor Publishers’ and I remember Barankin saying that he would be forbidden to print the piece if he was to leave the dedication to Lubotsky and Yedlina, who had just emigrated to the West. He telephoned Schnittke and they decided just to indicate Christian names in the dedication (‘Dedicated to Liuba and Mark’). I am lucky to have this edition.  It is a pity that the Sikorski’s edition of the sonata is an exact reprint of the Soviet one because I suspect that it has at least a few misprints in it.

In 1990 the first book about Schnittke was published: Kholopova V., Chigariova E. Alfred Schnittke: His life and creative work. Moscow, Sovetsky Kompozitor, 1990 (Холопова В., Чигарёва Е. Альфред Шнитке. Очерк жизни и творчества, Москва, Советский Композитор, 1990). The Third Chapter discusses the period 1966-1973, and here we can find a section entitled ‘Second Violin Sonata’, pages 56-60. Here I give this section complete in my own translation with some of my comments.

“The Second Violin Sonata begins with a deafening, like a shot, g-minor piano chord (sfff). At the same time, it was the eradication of a distilled conception of style and the beginning of a new line of creative life, not just in Schnittke’ work but in Soviet music of that period as a whole – the line of polystylism. Schnittke was the first among his friends who felt a strong necessity for such ways in music, ways that would broaden the musical world.”

DS:

• This is not completely true; he was not the first, nor was he alone. Gustav Mahler had already used non-sterile and banal elements in his music, followed by Alban Berg, Charles Ives, Igor Stravinsky, Bernd Alois Zimmermann, John Cage, Luciano Berio etc. In Soviet music it happened with Dmitri Shostakovich, who was not entirely sterile, for example his First Piano Concerto (1933) or the Eighth String Quartet (1960). The idea of ‘polystylism’ had already been represented by Rodion Shchedrin – Second Piano Concerto (1966), Boris Tchaikovsky – Second Symphony (1967) by Sofia Gubaidulina – Piano Sonata (1965), by Edison Denisov – ‘Silhouettes’ (1969) and especially by Arvo Paert –  ‘Collage on theme BACH’ (1964), ‘Pro et contra’ (1966), Second Symphony (1966) and ‘Credo’ (1968). Schnittke himself named many of these examples in his article "Polystylistical Tendencies in Contemporary music" (1971).
• In the same year as the Second Violin Sonata, Schnittke wrote another strongly polystylistic piece ‘Serenade for five musicians’ (1968). But other works of the same period e.g. ‘Dialogue’ for Cello and seven players (1965), First String Quartet (1966), Second Violin Concerto (1966), ‘Pianissimo’ (1968), Double Concerto for oboe, harp and string instruments (1971), were the examples of a rather pure style. But Schnittke attributed all his music before 1968 to being student works, composed while studying the music of Stockhausen, Boulez, and Pousseur etc.
• Schnittke has stated: “The Second Violin Sonata of 1968 contained some non-sterile, banal elements, but these also occurred in the First Violin Sonata of 1963 as well.” (A. Ivashkin. Conversations with Alfred Schnittke, Moscow 1994, page 49).
• Schnittke has already used stylistic confrontations and many-storied constructions of collages in his early opera ‘The Eleventh Commandment’ (1961-2), which so far has never been staged. This is an opera about the pilot Clod Iserly who took part in atomic bombing, and in it, Schnittke attempted to divide the ‘positive’ (tonal, sweet as syrup, Orff-like) and the ‘negative’ (connected with atomic bomb: 12-tone, atonal). Schnittke, later noted that this usage of the 12-tone technique in a ‘negative’ way was the main defect of the work. (Ivashkin. Conversations, page 51).
• Another source of polystylism was cinema and theatre music. Up to that time Schnittke had already written music for ten films, and his score to the cartoon film ‘Glass Accordion’ (1968) actually became the basis for the Second Violin Sonata (see for details: A. Ivashkin. Alfred Schnittke, Phaidon, 1996, pages 110-111). The piece was practically re-written for different media (the same happened later with his First Concerto Grosso and his First Symphony).
• The passage “…ways that would broaden the musical world” is perhaps a little vague. It could be interpreted as “…ways that would create great diversity and depth in the sound-world of contemporary music”, or “…ways that would bring back an audience for the works of contemporary composers”. Perhaps both interpretations are implied here.

“The one-movement Second Violin Sonata (1968, dedicated to Mark Lubotsky and Liubov' Yedlina), despite its disturbing sharpness and contrast and the new type of technical difficulties it contained, was to be one of the most performed works by the composer played in philharmonic as well as in student's concerts. Oleg Kagan (together with Vassily Lobanov) achieved the peak of masterly performance, playing the piece at Schnittke’s fiftieth birthday celebration.”

DS:

• The Moscow premiere with Lubotsky/Yedlina was the most striking one along with a performance by Kagan/Lobanov. I also have a tape with a Kremer/Gavrilov performance, which is very powerful and convincing.

“Many musicologists have responded differently to the work.  Analytical articles by M. Tarakanov, Yu. Butsko, V. Karminsky and S. Savenko are available (Тараканов М. Новая жизнь старой формы // Советская Музыка 1968 №6; Буцко Ю. Встречи с камерной музыкой// Советская музыка 1970 №8; Карминский В. Проблема полистилистики в современной музыке: дипломная работа – Московская консерватория, 1975; Савенко С. Портрет художника в зрелости// Советская музыка 1981 №9)”.

DS:

• I think that all of these sources together with some words by Schnittke himself are summarised in this chapter.

“The sonata has a sub-title that reflects its concept and whole circle of Schnittke’s musical ideas: ‘Quasi una Sonata’. This name  echoes Beethoven’s famous ‘Sonata quasi una Fantasia’ (or Moonlight Sonata). By using this subtitle, Schnittke wanted to show that his Sonata is in opposition to Beethoven’s ‘Sonata quasi una Fantasia’. Beethoven tried to ‘wash out’ the contours of classical sonata form in a Romantic way. Schnittke’s ‘Quasi una Sonata’, on the contrary, torn apart by its contradictions in such a way that it is unable to become a sonata. Here, Schnittke is interested with extreme freedom of expression. This is a report on the subject of how difficult it is to repeat the pattern of classical form today. This sonata exists as three movements just as in classical sonata style, but here everything is different as if it has been corroded (eaten) from inside. However, as Schnittke has said, we have a chance to create a pluralistic style, which will combine the search of sonata and quasi-sonata principles.”

DS:

• We can argue with the statement about Beethoven trying to ‘wash out’ the sonata form in a Romantic way. Not a ‘washing out’ but a highly creative development of the principles of sonata form, presented with great diversity by never repeating the same structural pattern.
• This statement about ‘three movements’ refers to the words spoken by Schnittke himself. However, this contradicts an earlier sentence describing the piece as a ‘one movement work’. Inside the structure of the sonata we can find hidden cyclic forms, a few movements mixed together: a Sonata Allegro movement, a slow movement, and even Rondo Finale – exactly as in the tone-poems by Franz Liszt. We can also find a fourth movement (Scherzo) if we want, but Schnittke mentioned only three movements.
• The belief in a pluralistic synthesising style was very strong in the music from the 60’s through to the 80’s. This is one of the main influences on the development of polystylistic ideas. In the 1970’s Schnittke stated: “Dissatisfaction with all sorts of techniques and all that the contemporary music field is doing, forced the necessity to find something new. This new way of composing has to contain all that I already know, and it would be polystylistic, not in a way where the different styles are compatible, but where the elements of different styles and techniques are plastically joined together” (Quoted from the article by Svetlana Kalashnikova: Universality and  – laconicism? // Musical Academia, No.2, 1999, p.84).

“Schnittke understands classical form as composition with a harmonious combination of all elements: discords resolve onto concords, smooth melodies, symmetrical constructions and so on. However a contemporary composer, who reflects a world torn apart by contradictions, can't limit himself with this. In the third movement of Berio’s Sinfonia, Schnittke sees “a precise correspondence between fleetingness and 'transience' of musical material, and deliberate incompleteness of form”.  In his own work he was trying to find unity between form and content and an establishment of co-ordination between the ideas of disharmony and a fight to the bitter end as well as finding an antagonistic way of presenting musical material. Because classical form here is ‘corroded from inside’, a new semantic logic appears in dramatic form, like weaving a plot (story telling) using different musical means.”

DS:

• Soviet musicology likes to speak about ‘form and content’ as two different, though connected subjects. This is not entirely correct. Schnittke himself would not support such a division.
• I don't think that here in the West they use the category of ‘content’ in music in the same way. In the USSR it was a very important term that means “a reflection of the reality, ideas, feelings and moods in musical works with its artistic sound images. Content embodies itself in a musical form. The union of form and content is indissoluble, but content is of a primary significance. Denial or derogation of content leads to formalism.” (Quoted from: The Encyclopaedic Musical Dictionary, Moscow, 1966, p.480.
• Everybody in the USSR including Schnittke was taught in this way. ‘Formalism’ was the most terrifying label, threatening composers with punishment and repression. All Soviet musicology was focused more on ‘content’ rather than ‘form’, limiting itself with a superficial literary description of music. They began to explain a form with the categories of a character or mood. The skill, culture and criterion of analysis were lost.
• Schnittke could not support this point of view, and he speaks about it very clear (e.g. in his article ‘In memory of Philip Herschkovitz’).
• By mentioning the ‘dramatic plot’ or ‘story telling’ the authors are possibly attributing the piece to the category of program music or a kind of music theatre, but I think that the ‘program’ of this music is purely musical.

“The polystylistical method here is ramified and includes quotation and allusion under conditions of collage. Collage is a result of the main idea, which is a demonstration of the uncompromising struggle.”

DS:

• So now we know ‘what it is about’.

“Quotations are used here in two different ways: ‘the quotation of technique’ and ‘the adaptation of foreign text’ (or the music of another composer). The ‘quotation of technique’ (the original term given by Schnittke himself) in the sonata is shown by the introduction of a G-minor chord, functioning as a leitmotiv, at the beginning of the piece. This is a technique used in tonal composition. The ‘quoted’ tonal chord is confronted with an atonal discord by the Principle of collage. He used ‘adaptation’ or ‘re-telling’ of a foreign style with his own musical language by quoting from Beethoven’s fifteen piano variations with fugue Op.35 (a few bars from the ‘so called Prometheus-theme’ were taken) near the end of the sonata, just before the coda.”

DS:

• In my Soviet edition it is on pages 28-29 (three octaves ff repeated 10 times). It quotes b.11 from “Introduzione col Basso del Tema” using the same melodic position, the same position in the bar and the same dynamics, but the bass is changed transforming the quoted phrase into "BACH" motive!

“The most striking example of collage is connected with the method of allusion, or as Schnittke calls it "a stylistic hint to the facets of non-fulfilled promise". In this sonata we can find the allusions to Classical and Romantic music of the past – Beethoven, Brahms, Liszt – and in the same way the ‘BACH’ monogram is used. The effect of allusion is achieved because of the traditional chorale texture; classical chords (including the diminished seventh chord), which are stressed by slow tempi, low register, and quiet dynamics. Such a distinctive ‘collage-like’ representation of the ‘allusive’ material is important for the dramatic scheme within the sonata, as this ‘positive’ material enhances a sense of conflict of the work.”

DS:

• We can also speak about the allusions to Wagner, Bartok, Stravinsky and the Second Viennese School, as well as to Lutoslavski or Penderecki with their use of clusters and graphic scores.
• Diminished chords as well as octaves in the texture are examples of a fresh and original usage of so-called ‘forbidden’ means in the contemporary music of ‘purist’ styles (Second Viennese School, Boulez etc.). Composers return to them, as to the means in which they are able to create some sort of shocking effect.
• Andrei Volkonsky has already used diminished seventh chords in their strikingly uncovered form in his highly influential setting of poems by Garsia Lorca – ‘Mirror Suite’ for voice and five instrumentalists (1960).
• Schnittke developed the idea of  ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ musical material in his First Symphony. He often liked to speak about this.

“ ‘Stylistic allusion’, is a very effective technique, resulting in distinctly obvious semantic conceptions once the style alluded to is recognised. Compared to precise quotation it is much more flexible and has more harmonious co-ordination with the general corpus of a piece. Here we have less danger of ‘literature in music’ that is to say the substitution of a musical expression with a simple registration of fragments from alien styles.”

DS:

• This is possibly a good point of view, but it always depends on who is using the technique and how it is used.

“There are examples from earlier periods in music history of composers using great contrast to widen the scale of possibilities in musical expression and logic. For example:  “Mannheim School Composers’, like Mozart and Beethoven, already combined ‘fanfares’ and ‘sighs’ into one musical theme, overcoming the aesthetic of ‘single-affection’ and creating a new integrity with the employment of ‘multi-affection’. In Schnittke’s hands   polystylism, fraught with danger of eclecticism, did not disband his musical language but, on the contrary, it created more capacious idea of stylistic wholeness. Consequently, the first two chords of his Second Violin Sonata taking material from the stocks of tonal and atonal music, actually make the work uniquely individual, just like the combination of passionate chords and compassionate sighs at the beginning of Beethoven’s Fifth Piano Sonata (Op.10 No.1).”

DS

• Actually these two chords work exactly as tonic-dominant contra-position in tonal music.

“Speaking about the specifics of the sonata, Schnittke mentioned about the preservation of some Classical features: three-part construction, contrast of the principal theme (with more definite expression) with a secondary theme (more free in its form). The musical material is typical of a contemporary sound-world: sharp, convulsive and on the edge of the oscillogram. It is presented, not as long, extensive themes, but as laconic impulses: the single loud chord, the ‘BACH’ monogram, the quotation from Beethoven, quasi-quotations of other Classical music styles, and even the rests (see the supplement).”

DS:

• The supplement (page 317) offers a detailed scheme of the structure of the piece. We will return to it later.

“In the Sonata three dramatic centres are fighting against each other. The first two highlight the indissoluble opposition of an angry and strong will against a shouting disharmony (the G-minor piano chord, against the abundance of discordance). The third is the antithesis of the first two: it is a positive, harmonious ideal taken from a past culture (a chorale harmonisation of the ‘BACH’ motif in the piano part, and the separate tonal chords). In that way the philosophical dilemma of harmony-disharmony is introduced into the work, and it is resolved in a highly strung way, with an unprecedented tension of passions.”

DS:

• I remember Schnittke speaking about his First Symphony, when, in quite the opposite way, he attributed all quoted material as having a ‘negative’ association. It was only the material he used in the slow third movement (a beautiful image created with multi-voiced strings –the attempt to speak at last with his own language) he ascribed as being ‘positive’.

“The beginning of the sonata is almost like an ‘instrumental theatre’: after the first shot-like piano chord, the following incredibly long silence (about six seconds) creates a background of growing tension in which an equally forceful chord enters – the complete discordance, the live disharmony itself (see the example).”

• The rests at the beginning of the sonata are incredibly striking, but their effect is very similar to the rests in the piano piece ‘Expectation’ (or ‘Waiting’ – I am translating from Russian) by John Cage (1952).

“The world of disharmony is shown in many musical images: in motion without tempo, in the fragmented/convulsive sound impulses, in ‘inarticulate’ clusters, uncontrolled glissandi around fixed notes etc.

To counterbalance this, the quiet, harmonious chords enter from deepness of the piano with harmonisation of the ‘BACH’ motif (see the example).

DS:

• The ‘BACH’ motif, used by J.S.Bach as a subject in the final unfinished fugue of his ‘Art of the Fugue’, became a sort of obsession in music of both 19th and 20th centuries for composers such as Schumann, Liszt, Reger, Piston, Casella, Busoni, Honneger, Schoenberg, Webern, Paert, Denisov, and many others. In fact it is difficult to find any work by Schnittke that doesn’t have a reference to the ‘BACH’ motif.

“The general climax occurs in the coda, where the fight of the first two elements reaches ecstatic power. Here the angry g-minor chord is repeated alternating with discordant chords, 28+14+18+8+46 times!"

DS:

• This section (it doesn’t matter if we class it as a Coda or not) definitely begins a page earlier (quasi allegretto) with repetitions of the G-minor chord: 1-2-5-3 (first four numbers of Fibonacci's Row!) interrupting the fast ‘chaotic’ movement based on the ‘BACH’ motif. To be precise, the repetitions of the g-minor chord in the Allegretto section are interrupted with exactly the same dissonant chords (played p, subito), that we have already heard at the very beginning of the Sonata proportionally: 28-33-14-26-18-21-8-10-46 times. It would be interesting to know if this sequence has any mathematical logic or if it was created with a pure spontaneous sense of balance.

*Note: the closing phrase of the violin is a special kind of ‘acoustic dialogue’. Schnittke explains: “At the end of the Second Violin Sonata, when the violin plays its sharp zigzags, it is possible to hear the echoes in depths of the piano, on the background of a dying piano cluster. These are ‘responses’ of the piano strings to the notes of the violin. (…) A second echoing grand piano (with the lid open and sustain pedal pressed) should be placed near by, enforcing the resonance of the first piano." (New musical material? // The birth of sound image, Moscow, 1985, page 218 – Новый материал музыки? // Рождение звукового образа, Москва, 1985, с. 218)”

Without the composer saying a word, this contemporary Sonata confirms quite clearly that even the most beautiful ideal of the past cannot balance and quieten the great anxieties of this present time. Today’s society has no rights to be satisfied with an old period of rest that existed sometime ago.”

DS:

•  These are just nice words. Nothing more!

“The sharply conceptual Second Violin Sonata was not only a musical achievement, but it signifies Schnittke’s breakthrough into the ‘open space’ of the today’s most profound moral and philosophical problems and the most eternal human concerns. In his article Yuri Butsko sagaciously stated: "The Second Violin Sonata, I think, displays new qualities of the composer’s personality. However, they arise much more in sympathy than in professionalism; a ‘professionalism’ that has already been proved many times.”

“THE SUPPLEMENT: About Second Violin Sonata (page 317)

According to the composer’s opinion, the sonata is a one-movement work of a closed three-part cycle: the first part being constructed in sonata form with an incomplete recapitulation, and the third part has a rondo-like structure with some contrast invasions.

The Scheme of the form is as follows:

I part
     Introduction         - from Senza tempo, b. 1;
     Principal theme   - from piano clusters, p.5, repeated on the violin – Senza tempo, p. 6;
     Transition             - Allegretto, p. 7;
     Secondary theme  - from Moderato, p. 9;
     Closing theme  - from Moderato, p. 11;
     Development section - from diminished seventh chord Senza tempo, p.14;
     Transition theme  - Allegretto, p.18;
 Intro theme     - from Allegretto, p.19;
 Recapitulation of the Principal theme - from pft cluster Senza tempo, p.20;
 (No recapitulation of the Bridge, Secondary and Closing themes);
II part,
 Slow movement  - from ‘BACH’ motif in Vln, Senza tempo, p. 24;
III part, Finale
 Main theme   - Allegro, p.26;
 1st contrast invasion - from 3-note motive (quotation of 15 variations by Beethoven);
 2nd contrast invasion - theme of intro, p. 31;
 Transition to coda  - quasi Allegretto, p. 33
   Coda - Allegretto, p.34”

DS:

• Here we have been offered important and quite rare evidence from the composer himself. The first statement being of particular interest: “a closed three-part cycle: the first part being constructed in sonata form with an incomplete recapitulation, and the third part has a rondo-like structure with some contrasting invasions.” It is not absolutely clear if the following formal plan was written by the two musicologists or by Schnittke himself. We therefore do not know if we should take this as the truth or if we have the right to argue if we disagree.
• Definition of form is a very difficult area even in traditional music. But it becomes much more difficult in music of a contemporary avant-garde nature.  An analyst of music has to have strong and clear criterion for doing such a job, but who can posses such a thing for the music of such original, experimental and innovative qualities? Throughout my life I have only met two people who could do it properly and they were my teachers: Yuri Kholopov and Philip Herschkovitz. However, even I found faults in some analytical works of the former, and I have to admit that the wonderful analytical tools of the latter were, on the whole, only suitable for tonal music. So it is not a great shame if somebody can come to understanding that his “analysis skills are a little poor”.
• Not only can a musicologist get things wrong, but also a composer himself can misinterpret the form of his own piece. Firstly, he composes music following not only his knowledge and clear ideas but also his subconscious impulses and free fantasy. Secondly, a composer can forget what he was really doing while composing. And finally, the composer is not always going to be greater at analysing music than someone who is known primarily as a music analyst. By looking back at his own work he can form views on his compositional processes and these can give us a clearer idea about the piece. He can be helpful to us, but at the same time, he can confuse our own analysis. I think this is what could have happened with the text quoted above.
• The concept of Sonata Form is as follows: A principal theme establishes the main key. A secondary theme destroys it introducing a new contrasting tonal sphere. A development section rebuilds the first key step by step. This leads to a recapitulation that re-establishes the main key for both principal and secondary themes. From an opposition we came to unity. This basic principle came from Baroque sonata form and was first developed by Mannheim School composers and then by Haydn and Mozart, reaching its peak with the music of Beethoven. It was then simplified by the Romantics and developed again by Mahler and the composers of the Second Viennese School. Sonata form continues to be used in contemporary music as a great tool for creating lengthy composition with a strong and clear organisation.
• In the case of so called ‘atonal’, ‘twelve-tone’ or ‘aleatoric’ music, it is very difficult to speak about the establishment of main or subsidiary key, thus the concept of sonata form is losing its sense. But we still have two opposing musical ideas, and a conflict between them can create a structure in which we can find the features of Sonata form.
• Schnittke said: “I think that an inherent following of sonata form prevails in most of my works, but there are endless deviations. For example, in my First Cello Concerto there is no evidence of a recapitulation: it’s better to say, that the form is destroyed at the point of recapitulation, because the beginning of the recapitulation is that edge to which it is possible to stretch a sonata form, but not further. While composing the piece I knew that I was writing a sonata form, but as I reached the beginning of the recapitulation, I realised I had to do something different. Sonata form is absent in the Fourth Violin Concerto and in the Fourth Symphony, but it appears in the Third Symphony: however, in the second movement it is questionable. In the Symphony there are some factors that go beyond sonata form principles: the interaction of many different themes, the falsity of the themes themselves (that is to say, of their borders) and the fictitious nature of the material of the principal theme (it is as to be a principal theme, but the material of the subsidiary theme is of more importance). The exact functions of sonata form (of principal and secondary themes) are overturned. In the Second Symphony there is no sonata form at all. The sonata in the first movement of the First Symphony begins from the moment when the conductor begins to conduct, but ‘Beethoven’ [the quotation from Beethoven’s Fifth] occurs as the false recapitulation.” (Ivashkin. Conversations, page 60-61)
• Sonata form exists in an endless multitude of different variants. Every new sonata is different, but we can always find convincing reasons to attribute a piece to being in sonata form.
• In the structural overview of the Second Violin Sonata outlined above, we can find quite a few quite strange things. The opening material has the characteristics of a principal theme as it establishes the key g-minor and is strongly constructed (‘fixed’). However, this is labelled ‘introduction’. The second ‘loosely’ constructed episode (in a ‘floating’ manner), which we can easily accept as a secondary theme is labelled the ‘principal’ theme. Next we have a section that is more or less typical of a closing theme (because of its repetitive nature), but this section is labelled ‘transition’ even though it suggests no transit and no modulation. The following section is clearly the beginning of the development section, but this is named the ‘secondary theme’. But the most controversial point is that the recapitulation has no secondary theme at all. In this case it cannot be a sonata, and because the subtitle of the piece labels it ‘Quasi una sonata’ (almost a Sonata), we can easily agree – it’s not a sonata, it’s a Fantasia!
• We can see ambiguity in every division of the sonata: it looks like one thing, but it functions like another. But there is nothing wrong in that! A similar ambiguity can be found in some sonatas by Mozart or Beethoven.
• Some earlier statements are relevant here: The Second Violin Sonata “is torn apart by its contradictions in such a way that it is unable to become a sonata”; the Sonata contains an “extreme freedom of expression”; it is “a report on the subject of how difficult is to repeat the pattern of Classical form today”; “here everything is different as if it has been corroded from inside.”
• We understand how difficult it is to create a sonata form under the conditions of atonality. But here we have something quite the opposite. The G-minor chord is present from the beginning to the end. It returns again and again in its pure form on the pages 1, 2, 9, 11, 19, 24, 25, 28, 31, 33, and 34-38. But in its hidden form we can trace it everywhere: in complex chords with a “G” in the base, in the intervals g-g#, g-f#, and simply with just the single note ‘g’.  All of these are repeated creating a solid tonic function that we can easily get tired of and welcome any dissonance – a dissonance that acts as a ‘dominant’ function. However, this salvation is short-lived and we eventually return to the ‘tonic’.
• If we forget about the scheme above and try to analyse the piece simply as we hear it, we will have something like this:

A few further returns of the opening theme (in sections M and N) suggest the defining form of the piece as a free rhapsodic form with features of SONATA-RONDO including four ‘hidden’ movements: Sonata Allegro, Scherzo, Andante and Rondo-Finale.

      15th June 2001

FRIENDS / INDEX1 / TEXTS / GALLERY / CDS / MUSIC / PERFORMANCES / ELENA / DMITRI / PHILIP / ALISSA / HOME1 / HOME3