BACK TO CLASSICS.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20291, 28 April 1934, Page 8

BACK TO CLASSICS.

Shakespeare Season in Russia. TSCHAIKOWSKY REVIVAL. There is a tolerably well authenticated anecdote to the effect that some time ago a delegation of young, ardently Red “proletarian” writers paid a visit U Stalin. One of the authors proffered the Com munist leader his latest book, and Stalin inquired how long its writing had taken. Expecting, perhaps, to be praised foi “Bolshevik shock tempo in ‘ literature,’ the author named an extremely short period of time, whereupon Stalin, so the story runs, handed the book back with the remark that nothing worth while could have been composed in such a short time, adding that it would be a goou idea to study Shakespeare and othei classical authors, and to take more time about it before he rushed into print Whatever may be the precise facts oi which this anecdote is based, there is an unmistakable change in the Soviet attitude toward the classics, Russian and foreign. Some years ago it was the fashion among younger Soviet intellectuals to look with pitying condescension on anyone who was so hopelessly old fashioned and “petty-bourgeois” as to admire the productions of the Art Theatre. The aesthetics of the future it was insisted, could be found only in the curious gyrations and vibrations and manifold producer's tricks which were to be found in the Theatre of Maierhold More recently the intensively and aggressively propagandist play held the centre of attention; and art was habitually defined as “a weapon of class war.’ The Class War. Neither of these tendencies lias disappeared. Meierliold has his devotees and there are earnest-minded youn*. Communists who like to mix heavy draughts of “class war” with theii drama. But there has recently been a marked swing to the classics, which h reflected in the theatre, in the concert hall, and in the tone of Soviet criticism At no time, at least since the revolution, has Moscow been able to see sc many of Shakespeare’s plays as arc being offered during the present season “Romeo and Juliet” i 3 to be shown, a bit incongruously, in the Theatre of tht Revolution, which hitherto specialised ir melodramas strongly tinged with Com munist propaganda. The State Jewish Theatre, which plays excellently in Yiddish, is to try its hand at “King Lear.” “Twelfth Night” is to be seen in the Second Art Theatre, and “All’s Well That End* Well” in the New Theatre. Officers and soldiers of the Red Army will be shown two historical plays “Henry III.” and “Henry 1V.,” in theii special theatre? In addition to this tht Kamernv Theatre proposes to present a compound spectacle, made up of excerpts from Shakespeare’s “Antony and Cleo patra,” Bernard Shaw’s “Caesar anc Cleopatra,” and Pushkin’s poem, “Egyptian Nights.” Bernard Shaw, who has hitherto been rather neglected in Russia as a drama tist (although his enthusiastic reaction# after the brief visit which he paid to the Soviet Union in 198 J were extensively reported in the Soviet Press) is represented this year by “The Devil’s Dis ciple”; and one of the junior brandies •f tlie Art Theatre will endeavour to interpret the gonial character of Mr. Pickwick in a play based on “Tlie Pickwick Papers.” Another Moscow theatre is presenting a dramatised version of bits of Balzac’s “Corpedie Humaine.” Maxim Gorky. Several works, old and new, of Maxim Corky, who is a sort of Soviet dramatist laureate, are being shown, and will le shown later in the season. Among a number of other Russian classics plays which are included in this season'? repertory are three works by Ostrovsky (tlie Art Theatre is presenting his “Talents and Admirers”) and a play “Eugene Bazarov,” based on Turgeniev’* "Fathers and Sons.” The dramatised representation of Gogol’s “Dead Souls,” which was pro bably the best production of tlie past season, is again appearing at the Art Theatre. A similar spirit of increased regard for tlie classics is visible in the musical field. Not long ago Tscliaikovsky was in high disfavour; his music was supposed to embody’ pessimism, petty-bourgeois waveriYig. and other emotions quite unworthy of the proletariat. But 1933, which happens to mark the lapse of forty’ years since the composer’s death, has witnessed a veritable orgy of Tscliaikovsky on the concert stage With the thoroughness that often clia anniversary, almost every tiling that Tscliaikovsky wrote, including obscure and little known early’ works, is being played. The compositions of the distinguished .’o m poser-pianist Sergei Rachmaninov who has lived abroad since tlie Revolu lion, were barred from Soviet concert halls for many years. Now they may ffgajn be rendered. Still another sign of tlie times is the tendency to omit the long lectures on tin* “ideological” content and significance of composers winch in past seasons have performances. Tlie character of these leetuies mav be judged from the fact that the speaker on one occasion majlo a serious effort to expound certain alleged tonal peculiarities of Mozart’? music on the ground that the composer was perpetually wavering between the two contending social classes of his time, the declining aristocracy and tin rising bourgeoisie.