Serge Prokofieff and his orchestral music — A Reader’s Guide

(0 User reviews)   1427
In Category - Music History
Biancolli, Louis, 1907-1992 Project Gutenberg 2015 Not confirmed
Prokofiev, Sergey, 1891-1953; Prokofiev, Sergey, 1891-1953. Orchestra music Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 21,499
Reading time 94 min
Text sections 3

The source record for Serge Prokofieff and his orchestral music — A Reader’s Guide measures this digital text at 21,499 words, 1 hr 34 min estimated reading time, and 3 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 20.2 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Prokofiev, Sergey, 1891-1953,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Louis Biancolli's 1953 monograph on Prokofieff's orchestral music, drawing on the composer's own classification of his creative lines and including detailed analysis of the Fifth Piano Concerto, with excerpts from Prokofieff's interviews and Soviet criticism.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.6/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

dullness of sitting and drumming one thing over and over,” Prokofieff wrote, “mother hurried to keep me supplied with new pieces so that the amount of music I studied was enormous.”

This exposure to music continued when the family moved to Moscow. There Prokofieff attended the opera repeatedly and soon developed a taste for composing for voice himself. One of these early efforts was submitted to the composer Taneieff, who advised the family to send their son to Reinhold Gliere for further study. This early attraction for the theatre was later to culminate not only in several operas of marked originality but in numerous scores for ballet and the screen. To the end Prokofieff never quite lost his childhood passion for the stage. One has only to hear his music for the “Romeo and Juliet” ballet and the opera, “The Love of Three Oranges” to realize how enduring a hold the theatre had on him.

Emboldened by Taneieff’s reaction, the eleven-year-old boy next showed him a symphony. Prokofieff himself told the story to Olin Downes, who interviewed him in New York in 1919 for the “Boston Post.” Taneieff leafed through the manuscript and said:—“Pretty well, my boy. You are mastering the form rapidly. Of course, you have to develop more interesting harmony. Most of this is tonic, dominant and subdominant [the simplest and most elementary chords in music], but that will come.”

“This,” said Prokofieff to Mr. Downes, “distressed me greatly. I did not wish to do only what others had done. I could not endure the thought of producing only what others had produced. And so I started out, very earnestly, not to imitate, but to find a way of my own. It was very hard, and my courage was severely put to the test in the following years, since I destroyed reams of music, most of which sounded very well, whenever I realized that it was only an echo of some one’s else. This often wounded me deeply.

“Eleven years later I brought a new score to Taneieff, whom I had not been working with for some seasons. You should have seen his face when he looked at the music. ‘But, my dear boy, this is terrible. What do you call this? And why that?’ And so forth. Then I said to him, ‘Master, please remember what you said to me when I brought my G-major symphony. It was only tonic, dominant and subdominant.’

“‘God in heaven,’ he shouted, ‘am I responsible for this?’”

Prokofieff was scarcely thirteen when another distinguished Russian composer entered his life—and again by way of an opera score. Alexander Glazounoff was so impressed by a work entitled “Feast During the Plague” that the boy was promptly enrolled at the St. Petersburg Conservatory. That was in 1904. There he remained for ten years, among his teachers being Liadoff, Tcherepnin, and Rimsky-Korsakoff. From them he absorbed much of the prodigious skill as colorist and orchestrator that later went into his compositions, besides a thorough schooling in the nationalist ideals of Russian music.

At the same time he was already feeling the urge to express himself in a bolder and more unorthodox style of writing. This rebelliousness was later to lead to controversial clashes over several of his scores. By the time he left the Conservatory in 1914, Glazounoff knew that Prokofieff had wandered off into paths of his own. Yet he arranged for a trial performance of Prokofieff’s First Symphony. This proved crucial, for it attracted the notice of an influential group of vanguard musicians and, perhaps even more important, a publisher. Yet, when he graduated, it was not as composer but as pianist, that Prokofieff carried off first prize. Shortly after his graduation, Prokofieff’s father died, and when the First World War broke out later that summer, he was granted exemption from military service because of his widowed mother.

During the war years Prokofieff composed two works that would appear to be at opposite extremes of orchestral style—the “Classical Symphony” and the “Scythian Suite”. One is an unequivocal declaration of faith in the balanced serenity and suavity of the Mozartean tradition, and the other rocks with an almost savage upheaval of barbaric power. Over both, however, hovers the iron control and superb sureness of idiom of a searching intellect and an unfailing artistic insight. The two works represent two parts rather than two sides of a richly integrated personality.

Louis Biancolli opens his study of Prokofieff's orchestral music by reprinting the composer's own 'Creed,' a four-part classification of his creative lines: classical, innovation, toccata or motor element, and lyrical. Prokofieff explicitly rejects 'grotesque' as a label, preferring 'Scherzo-ness' with gradations of 'Jest,' 'laughter,' and 'mockery.' This framework, rather than a chronological biography, structures the book's approach. Biancolli, a New York music critic and author of The Analytical Concert Guide, wrote the volume for radio members of the Philharmonic-Symphony Society of New York, a context that shapes its tone and assumed audience.

Prokofieff's Own Categories as Analytical Lens

The book's most distinctive feature is its reliance on Prokofieff's self-analysis. The composer's 'Creed' is presented verbatim, dividing his output into four lines: classical (including neo-classical works like the Classical Symphony), innovation (from early harmonic experiments to Scythian Suite and The Gambler), toccata or motor element (citing Schumann's influence), and lyrical (which Prokofieff claims was long overlooked). Biancolli uses these categories as chapter headings, organizing discussions of individual works under them. This structure means the book is less a chronological survey than a thematic taxonomy, one that privileges the composer's own voice over external critical judgments. The excerpts show Biancolli quoting Prokofieff extensively, including an interview where the composer describes his method: 'I am always on the lookout for new melodic themes. These I write in a notebook, as they come to me, for future use.'

The Fifth Piano Concerto: A Case Study in Detail

Biancolli devotes substantial space to the Fifth Piano Concerto, reproducing Prokofieff's own movement-by-movement analysis from a Boston Transcript interview. Prokofieff emphasizes that the work is 'entirely on the melodic,' with five movements containing at least four themes each, yet the entire concerto lasts 'over twenty minutes.' He insists there is 'actual development of the themes, but this development is as compressed and condensed as possible.' The composer explicitly denies a program and rejects the term 'march' for the second movement, cautioning against 'vulgarity or commonness.' Biancolli then juxtaposes this 'mild and dispassionate self-appraisal' with the 'slashing commentary' of Soviet biographer Nestyev, who describes the toccata as having 'bold jumps, hand-crossing, and Scarlatti technic in highly exaggerated form' and 'monstrous extremes.' This contrast—between Prokofieff's measured technical description and Nestyev's ideological critique—reveals the book's layered perspective.

Biancolli's Role as Intermediary

Biancolli does not present himself as an original analyst but as a compiler and interpreter of Prokofieff's own statements and contemporary criticism. The excerpts show him quoting the composer at length, including a description of the Fifth Concerto's structure: 'The piano always has the leading part which is closely interwoven with significant music in the orchestra.' He also includes Nestyev's hostile Soviet reading, which condemns the 'machine-like Toccata' as 'athletic' and 'acrobatic.' This editorial choice gives the book a documentary quality, allowing readers to compare Prokofieff's self-image with external reception. The dedication to 'Radio Members of the Philharmonic-Symphony Society of New York' suggests an audience of concertgoers seeking program-note-level insight, not specialists. Biancolli's prose is clear and unobtrusive, letting the composer's voice dominate.

Readers should approach this book as a curated collection of primary sources—Prokofieff's own classifications, interviews, and contemporary reviews—rather than a comprehensive biography. Biancolli's framework of the four creative lines provides a useful entry point, but the excerpts are incomplete; the full text likely covers more works and includes additional critical voices. The book's value lies in its preservation of Prokofieff's own analytical language, which offers a rare glimpse into how the composer understood his own music.

There’s something touching in how Biancolli preserves Prokofieff’s own quiet pride in his “five lines” of composition, as if the music itself were a personal diary. It reminds me of an old companion on my shelf, Shakespeare and Music — Edition Insights, which lingers on similar private connections between a maker and their craft. Strange, how these scholarly guides become like letters from another era.

There are no reviews for this eBook.

0
0 out of 5 (0 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

How did this book work for you?

Your answers remain private and are stored only in this browser.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

Where are you in your reading?

2

How did the book work for you overall?

3

Is this a title you would suggest to others?

4

What was the reading difficulty like?

Related eBooks