Discovering The Flute Music of Mieczysla PDF

BOSTON UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS
Dissertation
DISCOVERING THE FLUTE MUSIC OF MIECZYSŁAW WEINBERG
by
ALEXANDRA STRAUBINGER CONWAY
B.M., Oberlin College Conservatory, 2006

M.M., Boston University College of Fine Arts, 2009
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Musical Arts
2017
© 2017 by
All rights reserved
Approved by
First Reader ________________________________________________________

David Kopp, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Music, Music Theory
Second Reader ________________________________________________________

Jacquelyn Sholes, Ph.D.
Full-Time Lecturer, Musicology and Ethnomusicology
Third Reader ________________________________________________________

Lynn Eustis, D.M.
Associate Professor of Music, Voice

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my first reader David Kopp for his tireless assistance as
well as Jacquelyn Sholes and Lynn Eustis for their valuable insight. Thanks as
well to all my family and friends that helped with proofreading or just
encouragement. A special thanks to Gwen Klassen, Lauren Eselson, and the
Pender Island Flute Retreat without whom I may never have encountered this
wonderful music!
iv

DISCOVERING THE FLUTE MUSIC OF MIECZYSŁAW WEINBERG
Boston University College of Fine Arts, 2017
Major Professor: David Kopp, Associate Professor of Music, Music Theory
ABSTRACT
Composer Mieczysław Weinberg (1919–1996) was a Polish Jew who
emigrated to Soviet Russia in an effort to escape Nazi aggression during World
War II. Also known as Moisei Samuilovich Vainberg, he became a close friend
and colleague of the famous Soviet composer Dimitri Shostakovich. His prolific
compositional output includes four works for flute soloist: Twelve Miniatures
(1945), Five Pieces (1947), Flute Concerto No. 1, Op. 75 (1961), and Flute Concerto
No. 2, Op. 148 (1987). The two flute concerti were written for and dedicated to
the famous Russian flutist Alexander Korneyev (1930–2010). These four works
for flute are experiencing a resurgence in interest in recent years as Weinberg’s
music becomes more well-known. This document examines how these pieces fit
into Weinberg’s compositional canon and how they were influenced by flute
playing in the Soviet Union at the time. It analyzes the works from a theoretical
perspective, explores why they have been so seldom played, and assesses how
they fit into the modern flute repertoire. This document also examines the
Russian school of flute playing, focusing on the Moscow Conservatory, where
Korneyev both studied and taught. The Russian school is then compared to
American and French traditions. The purpose of this document is to illuminate
the contributions of Weinberg and Korneyev, and to introduce this literature to
new audiences.
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................. iv
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................................vii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ viii
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix
NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION.............................................................................. xii
CHAPTER ONE............................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................ 17
CHAPTER THREE ........................................................................................................ 25
CHAPTER FOUR .......................................................................................................... 39
TWELVE MINIATURES OP. 29 (1945) ................................................................... 39
FIVE PIECES (1947) ................................................................................................... 64
CONCERTO NO. 1, OP. 75 (1961) ........................................................................... 75
CONCERTO NO. 2, OP. 148 (1987) ......................................................................... 98
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 121
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................... 122
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 123
CURRICULUM VITAE .............................................................................................. 127
vii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Breakdown of Weinberg’s compositional periods based on Elphick
................................................................................................................................... 18
Table 2.2 Weinberg’s compositional periods with selected compositions and
biography................................................................................................................ 19
Table 4.1 Key scheme of Twelve Miniatures ............................................................ 40
Table 4.2 Etude harmonic content, measures 21–48 ................................................ 61
Table 4.3 Entrance of themes in Zweiter Tanz from Five Pieces .......................... 73
Table 4.4 Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 1 ............................. 79
Table 4.4 Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 3 ............................. 94
viii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Degrees of Familiarity with Soviet Composers of Flute Music ........ 36
Figure 3.2 Degrees of Familiarity of US Trained Flutists with Soviet
Composers of Flute Music................................................................................... 37
Figure 3.3 Degrees of Familiarity of Internationally Trained Flutists with
Soviet Composers of Flute Music ...................................................................... 38
Figure 4.1, Twelve Miniatures Movement 1 ............................................................. 43
Figure 4.2, Twelve Miniatures Movement 2, 1–9 ..................................................... 45
Figure 4.4, Twelve Miniatures Movement 4, 30–33 ................................................. 49
Figure 4.7, Twelve Miniatures Movement 6, 1–10 ................................................... 53
Figure 4.9, Twelve Miniatures Movement 8, 1–14 ................................................... 57
Figure 4.10, Twelve Miniatures Movement 9, 52–57 ............................................... 59
Figure 4.11, Twelve Miniatures Movement 8, 16–20 ............................................... 59
Figure 4.12, Twelve Miniatures Movement 11, 14–15 ............................................. 62
Figure 4.13, Twelve Miniatures Movement 12, 49–56 ............................................. 63
Figure 4.14, Five Pieces Movement 1, 1–3 ................................................................. 68
ix

Figure 4.15, Debussy’s “La fille aux cheveux de lin” from Préludes, book I, 1–4
................................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 4.16, Five Pieces Movement 1, 7–11 ............................................................... 69
Figure 4.17, Five Pieces Movement 1, 36–43 ............................................................. 70
Figure 4.18, Five Pieces Movement 2, 46–61 ............................................................. 72
Figure 4.19, Concerto No. 1 Movement 1, 1–10 ........................................................ 80
Figure 4.20, Concerto No. 1 Movement 1, 15–37 ...................................................... 81
Figure 4.22, Concerto No. 1 Movement 1, 108–125 .................................................. 83
Figure 4.24, Concerto No. 1 Movement 2, 1–2 .......................................................... 86
Figure 4.26, Concerto No. 1 Movement 3, 1–24 ........................................................ 90
Figure 4.30, Concerto No. 2 Movement 1, 42–53 .................................................... 102
Figure 4.32, Concerto No. 2 Movement 1, 107–121 ................................................ 105
Figure 4.33, Concerto No. 2 Movement 1, 237–255 ............................................... 106
xi

NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION
The transliteration of Polish and Russian names in this document follows that of
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie and John
Tyrrell (London: Macmillan, 2001). In the case of Weinberg’s last name, a strict
transliteration from the Cyrillic would be “Vaynberg.” Debate continues around
a universally accepted spelling, with variations including “Vainberg” and
“Wajnberg,” the latter being the composer’s preferred version before his move
from Poland. This document opts for “Weinberg,” the spelling used by the New
Grove except in cases of direct citation. New Grove uses the first name given to
Weinberg after his immigration to Russia, “Moisey.” However, I have chosen to
use the original Polish name that he reverted to at the end of his life, Mieczysław.
There are also divergent spellings for the flutist Alexander Korneyev’s name.1 I
have chosen the version used by Melodiya in 2014 when re-releasing his
recording of the First Concerto, Op. 75, except in cases of direct citation.

1 Korneyev does not appear in The New Grove Dictionary.
xii
1
CHAPTER ONE
Life and Career

Mieczysław Weinberg was born in Warsaw, Poland on December 8, 1919.
Born into a musical family, from a very young age he often accompanied his
father, Shmuel Weinberg, to performances with a Jewish theatre group Shmuel
directed. 2 As Weinberg said,
Life was my first music teacher since I was born into a family where my
father had devoted himself to music since childhood. He was a violinist
and composer, but—how can I put it? – not on a very high professional
level. He travelled with touring Jewish theatre companies and wrote
music for them. During performances he would sit at the conductor’s
music desk, playing the violin and conducting. From the age of six I
tagged along behind him: I went to listen to all those less than top-quality,
but always very sincere melodies.3
Mieczysław was a self-taught pianist and occasionally substituted for his father
as the leader of the musical ensemble. His earliest compositions come from this
period. As Weinberg puts it:
What does writing music mean to a child? I simply took one of my father’s
music sheets and scribbled down something or other; some clefs, some
notes, without any intelligent meaning. But in this way I studied music
right from my birth, as it were. And when I wrote these “operettas” I
probably imagined myself to be a composer. But at the very beginning
there was my career as a pianist. At the age of ten or eleven I was already
playing the piano with my father at the theatre.4
After studying briefly with a local piano teacher, Mieczysław joined the Warsaw

2 Also Szmuel or Samuil (1882–1941).
3 David Fanning, Mieczysław Weinberg: In Search of Freedom (Hofheim: Wolke, 2010), 17.
4 Ibid.
Conservatory in 1933, studying under the supervision of Josef Turczyński.5
While legendary virtuoso pianist Josef Hofmann was on tour in Warsaw,
Weinberg had the opportunity to play for him. Hofmann was so impressed that
he invited Weinberg to continue his piano studies in Philadelphia at the Curtis
Institute of Music, where Hofmann was the director. Unfortunately, the outbreak
of World War II and the Nazi invasion of 1939 prevented Weinberg from ever
visiting the United States. Ultimately, Weinberg never developed a career as a
piano soloist, but went on to play in chamber ensembles and to perform his
works and the works of others for the Soviet Composers’ Union.
Fearing for their safety as the Nazis invaded Poland, Mieczysław and his
sister, Ester, fled east, hoping to reach the Russian border. Some fifty years after
the event, Weinberg recalled:
All the time during the past days the Polish propaganda had assured us
that our army was fighting successfully. But suddenly the radio broadcast
an order: since the enemy… was approaching Warsaw, all men had to
leave the city. Mother and I panicked terribly. In the morning I left
eastwards with my little sister. She soon returned to Mother and Father,
because her shoes were hurting her feet badly, but I went on.6
This was the last Weinberg heard of his parents, although he wouldn’t learn of
their fate until much later. His family was sent to the Łodz ghetto, followed by
the Trawniki concentration camp, where they were murdered in November 1943.

5 Daniel Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg: A Critical Study,” (PhD
diss., University of Manchester, 2016), 23.
Josef Turczyński was an internationally celebrated pianist and later the editor of the
Paderewski Chopin edition.
6 Fanning, Mieczysław Weinberg, 21.
Weinberg was the sole survivor. Young Mieczysław, or “Metek” as he was
known to close friends and colleagues, continued on foot, dodging German
enemy fire, and eventually meeting up with other Polish refugees.
When he set out, Weinberg had no final destination in mind. At that point,
Eastern Poland was still free. However, as he traveled, the Polish forces were
pushed further and further back. Ultimately, the reality became clear; there was
nothing left for them in Poland and they must go to the USSR. As Weinberg
remembered,
On the one side stood Hitler’s soldiers, on the other the Soviet border
troops. In that moment we were filled with gratitude, and we blessed the
Red Army which could save us from death… So: the Germans were on
one side, their machine guns pointing at the line of demarcation, where
thousands of Poles and Jews were waiting for permission to enter Soviet
territory. On the other side there were mounted Soviet border guards. I
shall never forget how mothers with their children hugged the horses’
legs, pleading to be allowed to cross to the Soviet side as swiftly as
possible. And finally it happened: an order arrived to let the refugees
enter. Some kind of troupe was organized to examine the documents, but
it was done rather carelessly, because there were so many people around.
When it was my turn, I was asked: “Family Name?”— “Weinberg” –
“First name?” -- “Mieczysław”—” Mieczysław, what’s that? Are you
Jewish?” – “Yes, Jewish” – “Then Moisey it is.”7
After this arduous crossing, Weinberg continued to the Belorussian capital of
Minsk. For the majority of his life, Weinberg suffered from ill health, reported to
be caused by spinal tuberculosis.8 This allowed him to avoid Soviet military

7Fanning, Mieczysław Weinberg, 23.
8Benjamin Ivry, “How Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Music Survived Dictators,” The Forward,
November 17, 2010, http://forward.com/culture/133209/how-mieczyslaw-weinberg-s-
music-survived-dictato/.

4
service. 9 Instead, he was allowed to continue his musical studies at the
Conservatory in Minsk, where he was funded by the state, and where he focused
primarily on composition.10 Between 1939 and 1941 Weinberg received his only
formal compositional training. He studied with Vasily Zolotaryov (1872–1964), a
famed pupil of Rimsky-Korsakov. Although his time in Minsk was relatively
short, the support of the Russian government (which had given him full refugee
status) allowed Weinberg to pursue his love of music relatively unfettered. This
period of stability came to an end when the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union
occurred in June 1941, right around the time of his final examinations.11
Due to his health, evacuation was the only option for Weinberg, but this
was not easy. His personal documents did not give him permission to leave the
city, and there was no time to apply for a permit to leave. Weinberg’s final
destination was the Uzbek capital of Tashkent, some four thousand kilometers
southeast of Minsk. As a result of continued Nazi invasions, Tashkent quickly
became home to many musicians, writers, and actors all seeking refuge from the
long-distance planes of the Luftwaffe. Weinberg's shaky legal status initially
prevented him from finding work in Tashkent, but his talents were soon realized

9 Safak Ekinci et al., “Spinal Tuberculosis,” Journal of Experimental
Neuroscience (11/12/2015): 89–90, 10.4137/JEN.S32842. Spinal tuberculosis is a form of
TB that affects the spinal column; it can cause spinal deformity and paralysis, symptoms
include back pain, fever, general malaise and stiffness of the spine. It was a relatively
common disease of the young during the period in which Weinberg grew up.
11 Ibid.
and put to use by the Uzbek Opera Theatre. He began coaching young singers,
and through the opera met a community of other displaced musicians. During
this period, he became steeped in the culture of his new home, Uzbekistan.
Weinberg also met his first wife, Nataliya Vovsi-Mikhoels, in Tashkent, to
which she had also fled with her family. Her father, Solomon Mikhoels, was a
prominent figure in the theatrical world and the head of a wartime organization
called the “Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee.” This made him one of the highest-
profile Jews in the Soviet-Union. 12 Solomon Mikhoels also held important posts
at the Uzbek Opera and Ballet Theatre, which may have helped to introduce him
to Weinberg. Marrying into this family was both a blessing and a curse for young
Mieczysław. His involvement with Solomon Mikhoels led directly to his personal
introduction to Shostakovich and, subsequently, his later imprisonment.
There are divergent stories on how Shostakovich initially became aware of
Weinberg. In an interview with Nataliya Vovsi-Mikhoels, she recounts,
Metek…gave my father…the score [of the First Symphony] to take with

him to Moscow, so that Shostakovich would listen to it. Shostakovich
liked it very much. Since it was wartime one needed a visa to enter
Moscow, and Shostakovich arranged it. …When my father brought the

12Shimon Redlich, "The Jewish Antifascist Committee in the Soviet Union." Jewish Social
Studies 31, no. 1 (1969): 25–36. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.bu.edu/stable/4466454.
In the early 1940's some two million predominantly Polish Jews came under Soviet rule.
They were singled out as an “unreliable” element in the Soviet Society and around three
hundred thousand of them were deported to the interior of the USSR. Mikhoels and two
others were approached by the Soviet regime to "forget the past" and "contribute to the
combined struggle against Hitlerism;" this was to take the form of the Jewish Anti-
Fascist committee or JAC.

6
score to Moscow, my husband and Shostakovich didn’t yet know each

other personally.13
However, according to Weinberg, the intermediary was not Solomon Mikhoels,
but Yury Levitin, who either sent or took the score to Shostakovich in person.14
Whatever the method, Shostakovich did have access to the score and was
impressed enough to send an official invitation to the Weinbergs to come to
Moscow immediately.
Although their friendship is well-documented, and Weinberg expresses
his appreciation of Shostakovich's work, Weinberg was never a student of
Shostakovich. As Weinberg recounted;
Though many people think and have even written that I was a student of
Shostakovich, I never was one. But the Shostakovich school has been
fundamental for my artistic work. …Shostakovich helped me with many
things, some of which I am not even aware of myself. It seems that he took
steps to evoke sympathy towards my music. … I consider myself to be a
happy man, because I could show my works to the finest composer of the
twentieth century. This was an honour that subconsciously, so it seems,
activated my writing of music.15
Weinberg's peaceful time as a card-carrying member of the Composers’ Union in
Moscow was interrupted by Stalin’s rise to power in the Soviet Union. Although
Stalin himself was from an Ossetian Georgian minority background, he became
suspicious and eventually openly hostile to minorities in Soviet society, in
particular the Jewish population. Decrees began to come down from the

14 Ibid.
15 Ibid, 42.
government, and terms like "sycophancy,” “cosmopolitanism,” and “anti-
patriotism" were identified as undesirable. Stalin appointed officials to purge
artists who did not conform to his ideals of Soviet communist society. All
cultural works of art were to depict the positive sides of Soviet life and optimism
about the future, in a practice that came to be called ‘Socialist Realism.' Socialist
Realism put a priority on art forms that were accessible to a broad audience,
nationalistic, and free of avant-garde tendencies. It was also around this time that
Weinberg began to receive word of the possible fate of his family in Poland,
although his suspicions would not be confirmed for many years to come.16
Weinberg's first two works for the flute were published during this
uncertain period: Twelve Miniatures for flute and piano (1945), and Five Pieces for
flute and piano (1947). In the scores there is no dedication, and it is not clear if he
had yet met the flutist Alexander Korneyev, to whom his later flute concerti were
dedicated.17 In any case, it seems that Weinberg must have been familiar with the
high level of flute playing at the Moscow Conservatory, based on the musical
and technical content of these two works.
Weinberg was spared from the formal castigation that Shostakovich
received from Stalin during this period. However, the effect of censorship on

16 Despite Mikhoels’ connections with the JAFC, information concerning Weinberg’s
family was difficult to obtain. He would eventually hear that his family was sent from
Warsaw by train from a traveling jazz musician touring in Tashkent. (Ibid, 36.)
17 This seems unlikely, as Korneyev would only have been around fifteen years old
when the Miniatures were composed.

8
Soviet composers as a whole could not be ignored. In 1948 Shostakovich (who
was at the top of the list of persecuted composers) was removed from his post at
the Conservatory. It was in this climate that Mieczysław and his wife Nataliya
received word of her father’s death. Two bodies had been found in the street in
Minsk; one of them was later identified as Solomon Mikhoels. Initially, the cause
of death was ruled a car accident, and those who had seen the uninjured bodies
were arrested to prevent them from talking. It later emerged that Stalin himself
had had a hand in the murder, and Mikhoels was given a state funeral in
Moscow.18 Nataliya later said;
Father’s fate had been decided long before his physical annihilation,
because in order to liquidate Jewish culture in the USSR, it was above all
essential to get rid of its leading representatives. But as Comrade Stalin
was not only a great theoretician but also a practical person, his main aim
was to get a maximum of profit from Mikhoels’ position as ‘Chief Jew of
the Soviet Union’.19
Immediately following Solomon’s death, the Weinberg family home was put
under the surveillance of armed guards, which continued for the next five years
and culminated with Weinberg’s arrest in 1953.20 Weinberg’s charge was “Jewish
Bourgeois Cosmopolitanism.” Weinberg later reflected upon this period,
I would say five years (referring to his time in prison), because it was for
five years that they were following me, walking behind me. I wasn’t
allowed to travel, I was under surveillance, and the militia would appear
at my place regularly, or summon me to come to them. This was worse
than prison. When they finally put me away, I sighed with relief because I

18 Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg,”25.
20 Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg,”25.
knew it was going to happen. I remember that wherever I went, two of

them would follow me, take notes and write down the address.21
Compared to the treatment of other composers, Weinberg's official punishment
was relatively light. He would later reflect,
Was it a blow with the “sword of Damocles”… It was not, because of all
the composers they hardly locked up anyone at all—well except for
myself – and they didn’t shoot a single one… For me it was hard, because
for several years they didn’t buy anything from me, but somehow I still
worked a lot for the theatre and the circus… So that if there are composers
who claim today that they were persecuted, well, it may be that some
works weren’t played and maybe some were banned. But the whole thing
was by no means as dramatic as some well-known composers would have
it; they just say that to be shocking.22
Although he downplays his incarceration, Weinberg's imprisonment must have
had a great effect on him. His perspective on his persecution would have been
influenced by his knowledge of the fate that his family suffered in Poland.
Shostakovich wrote to the authorities on behalf of his friend, and Weinberg
remembered hearing during his incarceration and interrogation, "your little
friends are pleading for you.”23 Nina Varzar, Shostakovich’s wife, helped
Nataliya set plans into motion so that in the event of her arrest, their daughter
Victoria would be placed in the care of the Shostakovich family and not sent to
an orphanage. News of Stalin’s death in March of 1953 was slow to reach
Weinberg in prison. Weinberg noted that "the KGB all of a sudden became more

21 Fanning, Mieczysław Weinberg, 61–62.
22 Ibid, 69–70.
23 Ibid, 87.

10
polite to him.”24 Upon his return from prison, Weinberg was described by a
friend in the following way:
He was shaven-headed, he had lost weight, but otherwise he was just as I

always saw him after the triumphant premieres of his works--quiet, with a
frightened beaming expression, concealing his large hands in the sleeves
of his jacket, all the time as it were cringing and quietly murmuring: “Well
then… well… it’s all right.”25
Returning to his life in Moscow, Weinberg continued to compose and to
associate with his cohort of composers in the Composers’ Union, including his
longtime friend Shostakovich. His output during the period after his
incarceration contained music in many genres that he favored in his earlier years,
including piano sonatas, string quartets, symphonies, solo sonatas, and song
cycles. It was also during this period, in 1961, that he composed his first flute
concerto, Op. 75 for flute and strings, written for and dedicated to Alexander
Korneyev.
In 1968 Weinberg separated from, and eventually divorced, his first wife.
He later married a much younger woman, Olga Rakhalskaya. 26 Weinberg
continued to suffer from spinal tuberculosis as well as Crohn’s disease
throughout the remainder of his life; these ailments were only exacerbated by the
poor conditions he endured during his imprisonment. 27 It was also around this

25 Ibid.
26 Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg,” 26.
27 Ibid. Crohn’s disease is an auto-immune condition of the colon that often causes
weight loss and poor nutritional intake in sufferers.

11
time, in the early 1960’s, that Weinberg confirmed the fate of his parents. During
a guest appearance in Tashkent, jazz musician Eddie Rosner was able to report
that the Weinberg family had been sent away from Warsaw by train.28 After this
point many of Weinberg’s compositions became an homage in commemoration
of the Holocaust, its victims and survivors.
Weinberg’s largest works (symphonies and operas) made reference to his
homeland and the suffering of his people. His Requiem, Op. 96 (1965–1967) is
clearly informed by Britten’s War Requiem (which Weinberg knew well) in its
multinational texts and decidedly secular bent. The included texts of Dimitri
Kerin, Frederico Garcia Lorca, Sara Teasdale, Munetoshi Fukugawa, and Mikhail
Dudin speak out against war.29
Weinberg’s opera The Passenger (1967–1968), perhaps his most famous and
enduring work, deals with the horrors of life in a concentration camp. The
libretto was based on the Polish radio play Passenger from Cabin Number 45,
written by Polish concentration camp survivor Zofia Posmysz. The work was
officially commissioned by the Bolshoi Theatre, but was quietly dropped once
rehearsals began. Weinberg never saw his Requiem performed nor The Passenger
staged in his lifetime. This was due, in part, to his deferential personality.
Weinberg was never one to champion his own works. He stated: "So long as I am

Fanning, Mieczysław Weinberg, 36.
28
Martin Anderson, "First Performances: Liverpool, Philharmonic Hall: Weinberg's

29
Requiem." Tempo - A Quarterly Review of Modern Music 64 (2010): 81–2. ProQuest. Web. 3
Apr. 2017.

12
writing the work interests me. When the piece is finished, it doesn't exist
anymore. Its fate is all the same to me."30
It wasn't all concert music during this period, however; Weinberg
composed scores for seventeen feature films and cartoons during the 1960s,
including the well-known Winnie the Pooh (1969) directed by Fyodor Khitruk. As
David Fanning puts it, “…from the harpsichord accompanying the opening
titles, through the delicately scored writing for harp and clarinet and the
wonderfully adaptable tune for Pooh’s songs, Weinberg matches the charm of
the narration and images to perfection. The film was deservedly an instant hit.”31
The 1970’s were a productive period for Weinberg. At the height of his
creative capabilities, and having recently completed of a number of grand
symphonies, as well as his Requiem and The Passenger, he continued to write for
films and cartoons, which relieved him of monetary concerns and helped fund a
prolific output of concert music. His divorce from Natalyia (and her resettlement
in Israel with their daughter) was not popular with the Moscow intelligentsia,
mostly because of the significance of Natalyia’s family. It is nearly impossible to
say what effect if any this might have had on Weinberg’s career. His second
daughter, Anna, by his second wife, was born in 1971, the same year he was
made an Honored Artist of the Russian Republic. He went on to receive the State

30 Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg,” 30.

13
Prize of the USSR in 1990.32 His wife Olga recounted this prolific period,
He worked every single minute, day and night. If he wasn’t sleeping, he

was working. Even in his sleep. When he was dozing off he would often
drum his fingers without realizing it, as though they were grasping piano
keys. That’s why there are no memorable data in his biography: the only
important landmarks in his life are what he composed. And if two weeks
went by after he had finished a work before starting another, then he
would fall into depression, worried that he had ceased to be a composer.33
Weinberg later confirmed this by saying;
I believe that every moment in the life of a real artist consists in some
sense of work. Interesting, persistent, endless work. Work not only at the
writing desk but also work in observation, in the absorption of sounds,
colours, motion and the rhythms of reality into oneself. I am always
working.34
Life continued on this path until August 1975. Weinberg and Shostakovich had
remained close friends throughout. Weinberg remembers the last conversation
he had with his friend:
The last time Shostakovich called me was from hospital at the beginning
of August 1975. He asked: “Do I hear that you have written a new opera?”
I had indeed just completed my one act opera Pozdravlyayem [Mazel Tov],
after the play by Sholem Aleichem and Dmitry Dmitriyevich said: “I hope
to hear it soon.”35
Weinberg continued to vent his outrage against what came to be known as
the "Great Patriotic War" in his symphonies. His Twenty-First Symphony was
explicitly dedicated to the victims of the Warsaw ghetto. As Weinberg succinctly
put it:

33 Ibid, 125–126.
34 Ibid, 126.
35 Ibid.

14
Many of my works are connected with the issue of war. Alas, this was not
my own choice. It was dictated by my fate, and by the tragic fate of my
family. I see it as my moral duty to write about the war, and about the
terrible things that happened to people in our century.36
His output continued to be prolific, with the composition of operas, a song cycle,
many symphonic works, three solo sonatas for string instruments, and numerous
string quartets.
The 1980’s are labeled by Fanning as a “Retreat into Art.” Many friends
and performers who Weinberg had become friendly with had either died or
emigrated, but Weinberg's increasingly poor health, young family, and loyalty to
his adoptive country kept him from relocating. The tide of musical taste in Russia
was increasingly turning towards the avant-garde, with the compositions of
Schnittke, Gubaidulina, and Denisov gaining increasing popularity.37
Despite all this, Weinberg’s incredible pace of composition continued. The
Second Flute Concerto, Op. 148, was his last concerto for any instrument. Like
the first one, it was dedicated to famous Russian flutist, Alexander Korneyev.
The work was originally scored for full orchestra but was later reworked into a
string orchestra version (Op. 148bis). Fanning described the concerto as:
…classically pure as, say, Richard Strauss’s late concert works, and the
mood at the outset is straightforward and pastoral. Following the practice
of his cello and trumpet concertos, just after the halfway point in the
Allegretto finale, Weinberg slips in quotations from favourite pieces in the
flute repertoire: The ‘Dance of the Blessed Spirits’ from Gluck’s Orfeo and
Euridice and the ‘Badinerie’ from Bach’s Overture (Suite) No. 2 in B minor,

37 Ibid, 144.

15
BWV 1067, alternating fragments in such a way that they seem to be

glimpsed behind an impenetrable veil. 38
After his official recognition in 1990, which was conferred at a special
ceremony at the Kremlin, Weinberg’s acquaintances observed a change in him.
His mood became increasingly somber. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991
brought an end to the subsidy of the country’s musical institutions. In an
interview published on YouTube.com and featured on the Weinberg Society
website, Irina Shostakovich and Alexander Raskatov discuss how Weinberg was
tortured by the thought that "he did not achieve everything he aimed at during
his creative career.”39 Raskatov goes on to remember how "you could feel his
loneliness and his bitterness during his last years." Weinberg continued to write
film scores, but even the work that had sustained him for so long began to dry
up, with commissions going to younger composers.
In 1992, Weinberg suffered a fall in his apartment and broke his hip.
Although he was taken to hospital for treatment, he never fully recovered.
Mieczysław Weinberg passed away on February 26, 1996 at the age of seventy-
six.40
Although Weinberg did little to promote himself or his music, his

39 Linus Roth, Irina Shostakovich and Alexander Raskatov - a Conversation about Mieczysław
Weinberg, accessed April 21, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrYWvuP6gf4.
The Weinberg society can be found at www.weinbergsociety.com.
40 Shortly before his death, he converted to the Russian Orthodox faith, which he shared
with his second wife.

16
compositions have nevertheless survived, in part through the performances of a
few dedicated friends and colleagues, and are seeing a resurgence in recent
years. Luckily, Weinberg survived to see a 1994 release of his work on Olympia
Records. Olympia continued to release many more recordings after his death,
and by now his work has a fairly extensive recording history on multiple labels.
His opera, The Passenger, has been released on DVD. Many well-known
performers have championed his works, including Alexander Korneyev,
Mstislav Rostropovich, and most recently Gidon Kremer.
Notably, in January of 2017, Kremer performed a series of concerts with
the Boston Symphony Orchestra, playing Weinberg's Violin Concerto. Each
evening he performed a different encore from Weinberg's oeuvre. This was the
first time the Boston Symphony Orchestra had ever performed a composition of
Weinberg’s.
In the years following his death, Weinberg's music is currently
undergoing a significant resurgence around the world. It is a shame that
Weinberg never lived to see many of his works performed. A new generation of
performers is continuing to keep his spirit alive by performing and advocating
for his music.

17
CHAPTER TWO
Weinberg’s Works for Solo Winds

Mieczysław Weinberg was, by any measure, a prolific composer. His
works include twenty-two symphonies, seven operas, four cantatas, forty works
for voice and piano, three operettas, three ballets, ten concerti for soloist and
orchestra, seventeen string quartets, sonatas for various instruments,
unaccompanied works for bassoon, violin, viola, and bass, six piano sonatas (as
well as other solo piano works), and a large amount of music for film, as well as
works for the circus, radio, and theatre. Flutists are fortunate to have the largest
number of Weinberg works for any wind instrument: two concerti and two
substantial groups of pieces for flute and piano. Before delving more deeply into
those works, though, we will look at Weinberg's output for solo winds as a
whole.
Daniel Elphick, in his 2016 dissertation entitled “The String Quartets of
Mieczysław Weinberg: A Critical Study,” divided Weinberg’s output into style
periods:

18
Table 2.1
Breakdown of Weinberg’s compositional periods based on Elphick41
1937–1940 Early
1944–1946 Young Mastery
1957–1963 Shostakovich’s Shadow
1965–1970 Quartet Competition
1977–1979 Post Shostakovich
1981–1986 Late Masterpieces
Although these periods refer specifically to his string quartets, the object of
Elphick’s study, I believe they can shed light on Weinberg’s compositional
output as a whole. If we apply these categories more broadly and match them
with biographical events, we can better understand Weinberg’s output over time,
including the works for flute:

41Elphick, “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg,” 34. This table was produced
as a synthesis of Elphick’s text.

19
Table 2.2
Weinberg’s compositional periods with selected compositions and biography
1937–1941 Early Studies in Warsaw and Minsk Sonata No. 1 for

Piano (1940)
1941–1947 Young Mastery Time in Tashkent and initial Children’s Songs
contact with Shostakovich in (voice and piano)
Moscow (1943)
Aria, Op. 9 (string

quartet) (1942)
Capriccio, op. 10
(string quartet)
(1943)
Jewish Songs (voice

and piano) (1944)
Clarinet Sonata, Op.

28 (1945)
12 Miniatures (1945)
5 Pieces (1947)
1948–1955 Shostakovich’s Death of Shumel Mikhoels, Moldavian
Shadow Incarceration, "Socialist Realism." Rhapsody
(1949/1952)
“Over the Border to

Past Days," for voice
and piano (1951)
1956–1977 The Golden Recovery, re-commitment to Flute Concerto No. 1,
Years composition, recognition as a peer Op, 75 (1961)
of Shostakovich, news of the death
of his family Requiem (1965–1966)
Trumpet Concerto
(1966–7)
The Passenger (1967–

1968)
Clarinet Concerto,
Op. 104 (1970)

20
1977–1980 Post- Recovering from the death of a Trio, Op. 127, for
Shostakovich dear friend flute viola and harp
(1979)
1980–1996 Late Retreat into privacy Solo Bassoon Sonata,

Masterpieces Op. 133 (1981)
Flute Concerto No. 2,

Op. 148 (1987)
As shown in this chart, Weinberg wrote for flute throughout his career.
Nonetheless, the works bear many similarities. For example, Weinberg uses the
entire extended range of the flute to highly expressive effect. He also favors the
use of distantly related chords and keys. Although his music can be understood
tonally, it often features highly chromatic content and makes frequent use of
elements such as pedal tones and recognizable thematic material, rather than key
relationships, to create structure and aural coherence. Another favorite device in
the flute works, as we will see, is movement by a semitone both on small and
large scales. For example, the Twelve Miniatures are arranged in an ascending
chromatic series from D♭ major, alternating major and minor modes, until the
penultimate movements, where the rule is broken once to ensure that the piece
ends in major in keeping with the character of a Pastorale. Dance rhythms are also
a favorite of Weinberg’s, appearing in all his works for flute. Those for flute and
piano, particularly the Miniatures, treat the flute and piano as equals and often
create a kind of playful opposition between the parts. The relationship of the
flute to the orchestra in the concerti reflects a skilled orchestrator who

21
understood the unique timbral capabilities of the flute throughout its range.
Based on the relative number of compositions, the flute seems to have
been favored by Weinberg; it is featured in more works than any other
woodwind and plays prominent parts in his symphonies, operas, and the
Requiem. Other notable works for winds include the Clarinet Sonata, Op. 28
(1945), Clarinet Concerto, Op. 104 (1970), Trumpet Concerto, op. 94 (1966–1967),
and Bassoon Sonata, Op. 133.
The clarinet is second only to the flute in its presence in Weinberg’s wind
instrument compositions. The Clarinet Sonata makes frequent use of the Jewish
Klezmer idiom. As Fanning describes it:
…all three movements, especially the central Allegretto, are marked by

wistful permeability of major and minor modes, impulsive rhythmic
outburst and invitations to the clarinet to glide up to and between notes.
Mainly restrained in its tone, the Sonata nonetheless concludes on a note
of passionate protest, with a slow finale, a feature that would become
characteristic of Weinberg’s multi-movement works.42

Similar to the First Flute Concerto and the later reworking of the 12
Miniatures for Flute, the Clarinet Concerto is scored for soloist and strings in a
three-movement format. Fanning describes the concerto as “a gem awaiting
discovery.”43 According to the publisher, Sikorski, the premiere performance
took place in March of 2012 in Heidelberg, Germany, with Nikolaus Friedrich
(clarinet) and Matthias Metzger (conductor) with the Neuenheimer Chamber

43 Ibid, 128.

22
Orchestra.44 The conventional fast-slow-fast movement configuration, along with
a rhapsodic second movement and cheeky dance-like theme for the finale, are
also similar to Weinberg’s concerti for flute. The Clarinet Sonata was premiered
shortly after its completion, in April 1946, with Vasily Getman, clarinet, and the
composer at the piano.
Weinberg’s Trumpet Concerto, Op. 94 (1966–7) was dedicated to one of
the foremost trumpeters of the twentieth century, Timofey Dokshizer.45 The
work contains three movements: Etudes, Episodes, and Fanfares. It is described
by Fanning as
…one of the finest of its kind—certainly one of the most intriguing and
elusive—since the concertos of Haydn and Hummel. Though the
movement titles suggest fragmentation and playfulness, they are in many
ways belied by the music itself, whose strong sense of continuity and
nervous tension prompted Shostakovich to dub the work (with only a
little exaggeration) a “symphony for trumpet and orchestra.”46
In this concerto Weinberg again casts the movements in a traditional fast–slow-

44 SMP media GmbH, Hamburg & SMP systems GbR, Berlin -
http://www.smpmedia.net. "CONCERTO FOR CLARINET AND STRING
ORCHESTRA." Weinberg, Mieczyslaw: CONCERTO FOR CLARINET AND STRING
ORCHESTRA | Sikorski Music Publishers. February 01, 2013. Accessed April 05, 2017.
http://www.sikorski.de/475/en/0/a/0/orchestral_music/1006580_concerto_for_clarin
et_and_string_orchestra.html.
45 "Timofei Dokshizer, Biography." Timofei Dokshizer, Biography. Accessed April 05,
2017. http://www.dokshizer.com/eindex.html. Timofei Dokshizer was born in 1921 in

Nezin Ukraine to a musical family. He received his musical training at the Glazunov
Musical Academy, Central Music School, and the Moscow Conservatory graduating in
1957. After winning the international competition in Prague in 1947, Dokshizer toured
internationally as a soloist. He taught primarily at the Gnessin Musical Institute before
moving to Vilnius, Lithuania in 1990. Timofei Dokshizer passed away in March of 2005.
46 "Mieczysław Weinberg." American Symphony Orchestra. Accessed April 05, 2017.
http://americansymphony.org/concerto-for-trumpet-and-orchestra-op-94-1967

23
fast format. The second movement begins with a brooding character familiar
from the flute and clarinet concerti. The first and final movements feature
external quotations (similarly to the Second Flute Concerto) from several pieces
from the trumpet orchestral literature, including Mahler’s 5th Symphony; the
Wedding March from Mendelssohn’s Incidental Music to a Midsummer Night’s
Dream; two of Rimsky-Korsakov’s operas, The Golden Cockerel and The Tale of the
Tsar Saltan; “Choeur des gamins” from Bizet’s Carmen; and Stravinsky’s
Petrushka. According to Fanning, “Elements of all these ideas haunt the hobbling
waltz that seems destined to provide the main material of the finale but which
somehow never gets past its nervy testing of the water. This reluctance — and
ultimately failure — to deliver emerges as the Concerto’s main narrative thread,
and the work ends in a peremptory, poker-faced dismissal.”47
Weinberg’s penultimate work for a wind instrument, the Sonata for Solo
Bassoon, Op. 133 (1981), was written for and dedicated to Soviet bassoonist
Valery Popov.48 Despite Popov's fluency with extended techniques, this four-
movement work features more traditional virtuosic writing for the instrument.

47 "Mieczysław Weinberg." American Symphony Orchestra. Accessed April 05, 2017.
http://americansymphony.org/concerto-for-trumpet-and-orchestra-op-94-1967
48 "Valery Popov." Puchner Bassoons. Accessed April 05, 2017.
http://www.puchner.com/valeri-popov/frameeng.htm. Valery Popov was born in

1937 to a musical family. Initially he studied Trumpet but switched to bassoon in 1957.
Only two years later, in 1959, he received a professional appointment in the Opera-
Symphony State Radio and Television Orchestra. After graduating from the Moscow
Conservatory in 1960, he won first prizes in international competitions in Leningrad in
1963 and Budapest in 1965. He was appointed as a faculty member at the Moscow
Conservatory in 1991, where he continues to teach.

24
As he did in the flute pieces, Weinberg writes knowledgeably for the full range
of the instrument. While some dance-like rhythms appear in the thread of this
work, none of the movements are straightforward dances, as are frequently
found in the works for flute and clarinet.
Wind instrumentalists have an unfortunate lack of repertoire from other
more well-known Soviet composers of this period, Prokofiev's Flute Sonata being
a notable exception. These pieces represent a substantial addition to the
repertoire for all of these instruments. I hope that as Weinberg’s music continues
to be discovered and rediscovered, these pieces will gain the popularity they
deserve.

25
CHAPTER THREE
Alexander Korneyev and the Russian School of Flute Playing
American flute pedagogy and repertoire have necessarily been shaped by
the history of flute playing in the United States. As American musical traditions
were forming in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston, there was an influx of
French flutists trained at the renowned Conservatoire Nationale de Paris, many
under the auspices of the great performer and pedagogue, Paul Taffanel. Well-
known pedagogues and performers such as George Barrere, Charles Molé, Léon
Jacquet, André and Daniel Maquarre, and Georges Laurent were, at different
times, principals of the major American orchestras. They helped to found a
tradition of American flute playing that was heavily influenced by their French
heritage. 49 Similarly, although it was not as highly codified and developed as the

49"Georges Barrère - New York Flute Club." The New York Flute Club. Accessed April
05, 2017. https://www.nyfluteclub.org/about/history-and-archives/past-
presidents/1944/12/Georges-Barrre/ 49 Barrere was recruited from Paris in 1905 by
Walter Damrosch to play with the New York Symphony Orchestra. “Principal Musicians
of the Boston Symphony Orchestra." Boston Symphony Orchestra Principal Musicians.
Accessed April 05, 2017.
http://www.stokowski.org/Principal_Musicians_Boston_Symphony.htm. Molé was
recruited by Wilhelm Gericke to play with the Boston Symphony Orchestra in 1887.
Jacquet was recruited by Gericke to play with the Boston Symphony Orchestra in 1896.
George Laurent played with the Boston Symphony Orchestra from 1918–1952. André
Maquarre played with the Boston Symphony Orchestra from 1898–1918.
"A Chronological Listing." Philadelphia Orchestra Principal Musicians. Accessed April
05, 2017. http://www.stokowski.org/Philadelphia_Orchestra_Musicians.htm.
André’s brother, Daniel Maquarre, played with a number of American orchestras
including the Boston Symphony (1903–1909), the Philadelphia Orchestra (1910–1918),
the National Symphony of New York (1920–1921), and the New York Philharmonic
(1923–1924).

26
Parisian school, there was, and still is, a tradition of high-level flute instruction
being carried on in Moscow. Weinberg’s pieces for flute were heavily influenced
by this community of flutists, and therefore that community bears further
investigation.
The Moscow Conservatory was co-founded in 1866 by Nikolai Rubinstein
and Prince Nikolai Petrovich Troubetzkoy.50 Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky was a
founding professor, and from 1940 onwards the conservatory has also borne his
name.
The first two flute professors at the conservatory, Ferdinand Büchner
(1866–1882) and Wilhelm Kretschmann (1882–1922), were Germans who had
trained in Germany and came to Moscow to work with the Bolshoi Theatre.51
Kretschmann was famous as an outstanding virtuoso performer and composer
for the flute. He was adamantly opposed to the Böhm system flute and continued
to play on his “simple system” flute, popular in Germany, throughout his
career.52 Bücher, on the other hand, brought the Böhm system to the Moscow
conservatory. He was the primary teacher of famous Russian pedagogue
Vladimir Tsybin, who described his teaching thus:
W. Kretschmann possessed beautiful and even sound, especially in the

low register and brilliant technique for the whole range of the flute…

50 Natalia Zhukova. The History of Flute-playing in Russia: From Joseph Guillou to Alexander
Korneev. Humanities Series. Saarbrücken, Germany: Av Akademikerverlag, 2013, 29.
51 Ibid, 30.
52 For a description of this flute type, see Nancy Toff. The Flute Book: A Complete Guide for
Students and Performers. 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 46.

27
Kretschmann didn’t take in his flute class underprepared students. He

couldn’t help to pupil to develop embouchure technique. His method
consisted in two words; play in tune, play exactly.53

Vladimir Tsybin (1877–1949) was the first Russian-born and -trained
flutist to teach at the Moscow Conservatory. Although Tsybin was born into a
musical family, his father died when he was only nine years old. He was later
sent to a military orchestra, where he learned to play flute and piccolo. At twelve
he returned to Moscow and entered the conservatory as a student of
Kretschmann’s. He quickly joined his professor in the flute section of the Bolshoi
Theatre, eventually succeeding him as principal flute. In 1907, after the death of
Ernesto Köhler (another famous expatriate flute pedagogue and performer),
Tsybin took over as principal flute of the Mariinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg.
Through his work in St. Petersburg, Tsybin spent several summers in Paris at the
time when Sergei Diaghilev presented his historic Ballets Russes. From 1910–1914,
Tsybin returned to the conservatory to study composition with Alexander
Glazunov, Anatoly Lyadov and Alexander Tcherepnin. Upon the conclusion of
his studies, he was appointed professor at the St. Petersburg Conservatory. In
1920, he returned to Moscow, where he founded his own music school in
Pushkino.54 At this musical boarding school, he took in street children and

53Zhukova, The History of Flute-playing in Russia, 32.
54Inna Staneva. “The Russian Taffanel: The Significance of Vladimir Tsybin and His
Concert Allegro No. 3.” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing,
2014. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1725125502/, 15. At the end of the second

28
trained them in music; some went on to be notable performers. In 1921, he
returned to his previous position of principal flute in the Bolshoi Theatre, and in
1923, he was appointed flute professor at the Moscow Conservatory. Considered
by many to be the founder of the Russian flute school, Tsybin was also a prolific
composer, with an output that included numerous works for the instrument.55
He had great difficulty publishing his works, and although some of his concert
pieces for flute are popular in Russia, his works are very little known outside the
Russian community. 56 His teaching style was exacting, and he emphasized
playing in tune regardless of the quality of the instrument. One of his students,
Yuli Yagudin, remembered him as "a pedagogue who knew the secrets of his
trade, and could teach them to his numerous students. Tsybin had a talent for
identifying personal strengths and weaknesses of his students and helping them
overcome their problems successfully within a short period of time."57 Tsybin is
also credited with introducing the practice of vibrato to the students in Moscow,
saying "tone without vibrato is dry and unexpressive.”58 The technique of
expressive and soloistic flute playing was popular in Paris at the time, and
Tsybin may have heard it while performing in Paris with the Mariinsky Theatre.

Russian Civil War (1917–1922) there were close to four million orphaned children on the
street.
55 His output includes a method book entitled “Flute School,” Concert Etudes, Studies,
and some concert pieces.

56 Staneva, “The Russian Taffanel,” 10.
57 Ibid, 11.
58 Ibid, 13.

29
Tsybin’s students would form the next influential generation of Russian flutists
and pedagogues. Among them was Alexander Korneyev, who would later
become a notable professor of flute and a famous performer.
Alexander Korneyev (1930–2010) graduated from the Moscow
Conservatory in 1947 under the tutelage of Tsybin. Well-known as a soloist,
many Russian composers wrote for him, including Denisov, Tatakishvili,
Vasilenko, and Weinberg. Despite being a highly honored flutist, the details of
Korneyev’s biography are disputed. In her book The History of Flute Playing in
Russia, Natalia Zhukova lists Korneyev as "the owner of the diploma of the
international competition of musicians in Geneva."59 But a search of the
competition archives does not mention him.60 Perhaps he was selected as a
participant, which in itself is an achievement for a competition of this caliber.
Competition archives confirm that he took first prize in the Prague Spring
competition in 1953.61 In an email exchange with this author on January 25, 2017,
noted Russian/Crimean flutist Denis Bouriakov remembered Korneyev as
having "great artistry and stage manners."
In seeking to understand the composer’s relationship with Korneyev and
the manner in which flute performance was taught in Moscow, it is important to

59 Zhukova, The History of Flute-playing in Russia, 36.
60 Concours de Genève. Accessed April 14, 2017.
https://www.concoursgeneve.ch/list_laureates/search.
61 "Prague Spring archive." Pražské jaro. Accessed April 17, 2017.
http://www.festival.cz/en/archives/competition_news/1953.

30
understand a bit more about the Soviet musical system at that time. In Soviet
Russia, the all-encompassing slogan “Education is Entertainment” helps to
articulate the country’s system of government patronage.62 All artistic
institutions fell under the Commissar for Education. By the same token, all
artists, including students, were in a sense employed by the government and
subject to their oversight. As part of the government’s effort to “liquidate musical
illiteracy” and make citizens “musically self-active,” all music education from the
most basic to the most advanced was free.63 As part of the Union of Soviet
Composers (which also encompassed professional performers), members were
paid salaries by the government. This could be either through secondary
appointments or directly for their compositional output. Even failed
compositions were considered to be research or “study courses,” and honoraria
would still be paid to the composer.64 Students studying at the highest level
were paid a stipend for living expenses during their course of study, and as part
of the “planned economy,” all music school graduates were promised a position
after graduation. Entrance into the conservatory system was difficult, with many
entrance examinations and only a small number of spots available each year.
Prior to official conservatory training, most students trained for approximately
four years in “musical institutes,” where they continued non-musical schooling

62 W.H. Kerridge “The Union of Soviet Composers.” The Musical Times 75, no. 1102
(1934): 1073. doi:10.2307/919586.
63 Ibid.
64 Ibid, 1074.

31
and simultaneously studied music at a high level. Only then could prospective
students be considered for entrance into the Conservatory. Regardless of their
talent, students who did not succeed at the supplemental academic examinations
would not be admitted.65 Those students who were not accepted were
encouraged to continue their study on an amateur level and to select an
alternative career. Once accepted, students would spend up to five years at the
conservatory.66 In an interview with flutist Ludmila Koliago, she described her
training in St. Petersburg and Moscow in the following way: “You can stay in
high school until grade 9 or to grade 11. I left the high school at grade 9 and at
the age of 15 had spent four years at the musical institute. We studied
mainstream subjects-history, math, languages-but there was an emphasis on
music.”67 The year that she was accepted, fifteen students applied to the flute
class at the Moscow Conservatory and only three were accepted.68
In Moscow, the Composers’ Union had its own headquarters, which
served as a meeting place for many local musicians and composers. After his
visit in 1984, British flutist Trevor Wye described the building: "The building has
rest rooms, a restaurant (composers only), a bar and a medium-size concert hall

65 Trevor Wye. “The Flute, the Hammer and the Sickle.” Flutist Quarterly XI, no. 3
(Spring 1986):27
66 Ibid, 27.
67 "Russian Flutist attends the Wildacres Flute Retreat." Russian Flutists attends the
Wildacres Flute Retreat. Accessed April 05, 2017. http://us9.campaign-

archive2.com/?u=e626cc638f84abd3a975e94ff&id=c0671136f9.
68 Ibid.

32
with a Steinway grand, and a big platform serving the need for composers to
have their music performed."69 Shostakovich was unanimously elected as the
first Secretary of the Board in 1960, and the building itself was opened in 1964.70
It still stands today, being used as a performance space, recording studio and
music library in Moscow. During Wye’s visit, Alexander Korneyev performed a
sonata at the concert hall in the union headquarters. It is likely through
Weinberg’s connections with Shostakovich and the Composers’ Union that he
came to know Korneyev.
For European and American flutists, it may be a bit difficult to understand
the conditions that conservatory students endured in the Soviet Union during
this period. Perhaps the most glaring contrast concerns the instruments that the
students played on. During his 1984 visit Trevor Wye remarked, "Mostly they
play on Uebel from GDR but hanker after any Western flute. The black market is
rife…I tried a Uebel flute and found it mechanically heavy and the sound was
hard to find." Before leaving, Wye was asked to give his impressions, which
would appear in the Leningrad Press. With regard to the flutes, he said "I told
them that I would use such a flute to poke the fire. They thanked me for my
honesty. I wrote that without better flutes standards are handicapped."71 Koliago
describes her flutes the following way, “…my first flute was made in a

69 Wye. “The Flute, the Hammer and the Sickle,” 31.
70 "The History of the Moscow House of Composers." Ìîñêîâñêèé äîì êîìïîçèòîðîâ. Accessed
April 05, 2017. http://www.house-composers.ru/history.html.
71 Wye. “The Flute, the Hammer and the Sickle,” 28.

33
Leningrad factory and was terrible…When I got to high school we bought an
East German flute. It was a yellow metal and I called it ‘my cigar’. All my
instruments were open G# and the B natural and B flat keys are reverse to what
you have.”72 In Wye's opinion, the flute playing in general was gentle-toned and
had significantly less vibrato than he had been used to.73 He also remarked on
the diversity in the flute studio, which reflected the size of the Soviet Union.
Long tones were still a part of daily practice, but instead of the French tone
exercises familiar to many modern flutists around the world, a slow chromatic
scale was the basis of the long tone practice. The Taffanel and Gaubert exercises
that are a standard part of the American and French flute training, however, also
made up a large part of the Russian curriculum. Another significant difference
was the interpretation of Baroque music, particularly that of J. S. Bach. Sheet
music was difficult to come by, although most music was published in Russia.
According to Wye, contemporary music was largely absent in the standard
Russian flute repertoire, except for a few Soviet standards. Extended techniques
popular in European and American music were not frequently taught.74

72 "Russian Flutist attends the Wildacres Flute Retreat." Russian Flutist attends the
Wildacres Flute Retreat. Accessed April 05, 2017. http://us9.campaign-
archive2.com/?u=e626cc638f84abd3a975e94ff&id=c0671136f9. Images of this instrument
and more details can be found at
Marshall, Toby. "Ode to the Uebel “Cigar” (a unique Boehm flute)." Toby Marshall.
Accessed April 05, 2017. http://toby-marshall.com/music-stuff/ode-to-the-uebel-cigar-
a-unique-boehm-flute/.
73 British flutists are known for having strong sounds and for regular use of vibrato.
74 One extended technique appears in Weinberg's flute works. Interestingly, it is one
note of flutter tongue in the 12 Miniatures, his first piece, which is part of the unlikely

34
However, Soviet compositions that are unknown in the West were part of the
standard repertoire for these students. Wye polled Russian flute students
regarding works they thought Western flutists should be familiar with, and the
following list was constructed:
GLIERE Melody and Valse for flute and piano.

GORDELY Concerto. Flute and orchestra.
WEINBERG Concerto. Flute and orchestra (The last two being recent works.)
DENISOV Concerto for flute and orchestra.
DIMITRIEV Concerto for piccolo, flute, alto flute and orchestra.
ARATUNYAN Concerto for flute and orchestra. (An Armenian composer)
KRIVITSKY Concerto for flute and orchestra.
BANCHIKOV Sonata for flute and piano. (I already heard it in Leningrad and was given
a copy).
SMOLSKY Sonata for flute and piano. (A composer from Minsk).
KREIN Sonata for flute and piano.75
The inclusion of Tsybin’s flute works was also unanimously agreed upon by the
polled participants.76 It is interesting to note the inclusion of Weinberg’s flute
concerto on this list. Although his pieces for flute and piano were composed
earlier than his concerti, it is hard to say how well-known they were in Moscow.
Korneyev had performed and recorded the First Concerto by the time of Wye’s
visit, but the dates of the premiere performances of the Twelve Miniatures and
Five Pieces are unknown. It plausible that Weinberg’s pieces for flute and piano
works were unfamiliar, even to a local audience, given Weinberg’s hesitancy to
promote his own works.

quotation from Messiaen's “Le Merle Noir.”
75 Wye. “The Flute, the Hammer and the Sickle,” 30–31.
76 Ibid, 30.

35
Thirty-three years after Wye’s visit, many of these works are still
unknown in the United States. At present, Weinberg’s works are available only
through a German division of an international publisher, Peer Music, and are
somewhat difficult to procure. Although a few works of Tsybin are available
through the International Music Score Library Project (IMSLP), none of the major
US flute music distributors carry his works.77 My personal, informal poll of
fellow American-trained flutists revealed that they were largely unaware of his
works. Moving down Wye’s list, the works of Gliére, Gordeli and Denisov are
widely available. Meanwhile, the works of Dimitriev, Aratunyan, and Banchikov
are completely absent. A search for Krivitsky revealed one performance available
on YouTube.com of a piece for flute and balalaika, but there are no entries for a
flute concerto, nor could any sheet music be found for sale. A search in the RILM
Abstracts of Music Literature returns no results for “Smolsky.” A Google search
for the same name currently reveals a Wikipedia page, but no evidence of his
sonata for flute.78 Finally, while a biography of Krein appears on the Universal
Editions web page, the page makes no mention of a sonata for flute and piano.79

77 "Category:Tsybin, Vladimir." Category:Tsybin, Vladimir - IMSLP/Petrucci Music
Library: Free Public Domain Sheet Music. Accessed April 17, 2017.
http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Tsybin,_Vladimir. Other sources searched include the
catalogues of Flute World, Carolyn Nussbaum music, Flutistry Boston, and Sheet Music
Plus.
78 "Dmitry Smolsky." Wikipedia. April 13, 2017. Accessed April 17, 2017.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Smolsky.
79 AG, Universal Edition. "Alexander Krein." Universal Edition. Accessed April 17, 2017.
http://www.universaledition.com/composers-and-works/Alexander-
Krein/composer/2517.

36
Intrigued by this information, I took the data gathered by Wye and used it
as the basis of my own informal poll.80 The respondents, who are all professional,
classically trained flutists, ranked a number of Soviet flute composers from 1
through 5 in order of familiarity; with 1 meaning "not at all familiar" and 5
meaning "I have performed extensively."
Figure 3.1
Degrees of Familiarity with Soviet Composers of Flute Music
As seen in the chart, all of the composers on Wye’s list (including Tsybin) were
relatively unknown to the respondents, despite thirty-three years having passed

80The poll was sent to professional flutists known by the author. The results below were
drawn from their 15 anonymous responses.

37
since Wye’s initial visit. Prokofiev and Taktakishvili are best known, with
Prokofiev unsurprisingly being by far the best known of the composers in the
survey. If the responses are separated by nationality and location of training, a
different pattern emerges. For those who studied exclusively in the U.S., there is
a very similar distribution as above.
Figure 3.2
Degrees of Familiarity of US Trained Flutists with Soviet Composers of Flute

Music
However, for those who studied outside the US in either Canada, Europe, or
Russia for more than a semester, the results show a greater overall familiarity
with Soviet composers, with particular increases in their knowledge of Denisov,
Weinberg, Gordely, Tsybin, and Vasilenko.

38
Figure 3.3
Degrees of Familiarity of Internationally Trained Flutists with Soviet

Composers of Flute Music
From these results we can draw the informal conclusion that U.S.-trained
flutists are at a particular disadvantage regarding familiarity with Soviet works
for flute. This may be due in part to our country’s complicated political history
vis-à-vis the Soviet Union, as well as our relative geographic distance. A more
formal and detailed poll would need to be conducted to draw any more specific
conclusions from this data, but these results support the hypothesis that U.S.
trained flutists have a very limited knowledge of and access to Russian flute
music, including that of Mieczysław Weinberg.

39
CHAPTER FOUR
TWELVE MINIATURES OP. 29 (1945)
The Twelve Miniatures for Flute and Piano was the first of Weinberg’s flute
works to be completed. Published as Op. 29, it was written during the early years
during which Weinberg lived in Moscow with Shostakovich. Composed
between November 29th and December 6th, 1945, the Miniatures were written
during a period of high compositional output, including many string quartets
and songs with piano, and directly after the Clarinet Sonata Op.28.81 Weinberg’s
inspiration is not known, although after a few years in Moscow it is likely that he
was exposed to the work of Tsybin and his students. Unlike the Clarinet Sonata,
which was premiered not long after its composition in 1946 with the composer at
the piano, there is no record of a premiere performance of the Miniatures. Later in
life, Weinberg came back to the Miniatures, arranging them for flute and string
orchestra in 1983 as Op.29bis. The Miniatures have seen a resurgence recently,
with many live performances available on YouTube.com. Two commercial
recordings of the 12 Miniatures are currently available. 82
The Miniatures are atypical of the traditional flute and piano literature.
Arranged in ascending chromatic order, beginning in D♭ major and ending in C
major, each movement has a distinct character, but there are stylistic threads that

81 M. Vaĭnberg, Zwölf Stücke Für Flöte Und Klavier, Op. 29: (Miniaturen) (New York;
Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2011).
82 See the Appendix for publication information on commercial recordings of Weinberg’s
pieces for flute soloist.

40
connect the work as a whole. The interaction between the flutist and pianist is
distinctive, with some movements featuring the flute nearly exclusively, and
others featuring the piano with only small contributions from the flute. Often one
instrument will enter a movement that is otherwise dominated by the other to
reinforce a pitch center or to re-establish a key. Although the music can be highly
chromatic, the key scheme is easy to discern:
Table 4.1
Key scheme of Twelve Miniatures
Movement Number Title Key/Mode
1 Improvisation D♭ Major
2 Arietta D minor
3 Burleske E♭ Major
4 Capriccio E minor
5 Nocturne F major
6 Walzer F♯ minor
7 Ode G major
8 Duett G♯ minor
9 Barkarole A major
10 Etüde B♭ minor

41
11 Intermezzo B minor
12 Pastorale C major
The modes alternate as the Miniatures rise chromatically, until movements 10 and
11, which proceed without pause through the end of the piece. Here Weinberg
breaks the pattern of alternating major and minor modes to allow the tonal
journey to end in C major with the Pastorale. Although each movement is
centered on a key area, the harmonies do not often function in a traditional tonal
sense. Instead, Weinberg uses a sense of “home” (the central note or harmony of
a movement) and “away” (a chromatic passage or a distantly related tonal area).
Often the idea of “home” will be juxtaposed with “away” through the use of
pedal tones or repeated harmonies. These “home” harmonies or tones provide a
sense of harmonic stability despite the use of highly dissonant and chromatic
elements. Once distant tonal territory has been reached, Weinberg often makes
use of a series of semitones to return to the original tonality or pitch center. These
opposing poles help to structure the music in the same way that a traditional
dominant/tonic relationship would in a more conventional tonal work.
The linkage of distantly related harmonies as well as the use of a repeated
note to provide coherence throughout the movement can be found in the first
movement. Entitled Improvisation, it is, as the title suggests, without meter until
the final bar. In this movement, the flute plays nearly completely alone, with the

42
piano only reinforcing the tonic harmony in the final bar. The movement begins
and ends with D♭ major, moving through many other triadic harmonies as the
movement unfolds, without reference to tonal syntax. For slightly more than half
of the Improvisation, there is a succession of seemingly unrelated chords, except
for three toward the end arranged in a chromatic descent: D♭ major; G major; C♭
m7; A minor; A♭ major; G major; E major. In what we will discover is one of
Weinberg’s signature moves, he then inserts a series of descending semitones.
This reintroduces D♭ as tonic pitch and helps to tie the movement together. We
can see the expectation of D♭ major’s return set up by a restatement of the
beginning of the opening figure, but Weinberg thwarts expectations by
introducing an E♭ minor harmony instead. This is followed by another attempt to
establish D♭ that leads to another distant harmony, B major, before the music
finally works its way back to D♭ major in the last line. This movement is a fitting
start to a very unique set of small pieces for flute and piano featuring unusual
harmonic journeys and non-traditional dialogues between the flute and piano.

43
Figure 4.1, Twelve Miniatures Movement 1
Used by Permission of Peermusic Classical GMBH

Administered by Songs of Peer, Ltd.

44
The second movement, Arietta, has a plaintive D minor melody and is
primarily for piano. Though the tonic is D, the piece features an A4 sounding
almost continuously throughout the movement, which helps to ground the
sometimes chromatic harmonies. The flute enters primarily to reinforce the
constant A and then to provide the tonic note at the end of the movement. The
simple melody introduced by the piano in the first few bars, as shown in Figure
4.2, is developed throughout the movement through the expressive use of
semitones, which serve its plaintive quality. Although the character of this
movement is overall quite mournful, a few glimpses of D major glow through
even in this short format.

45
Figure 4.2, Twelve Miniatures Movement 2, 1–9

The third movement, Burleske, in E♭ major, serves as a breath of fresh air
after the aggressive and highly chromatic first movement in D♭ major and the
plaintive D minor Arietta. The Burleske’s opening gesture is an upward E♭ major
ninth chord arpeggiated in an off-beat figure in the piano, against a soaring
dancelike melody in the flute part. Although the E♭ tonality is refreshing, the
ambiguous meter, obscured downbeat, and immediate use of a ninth chord give
this opening an unstable character that continues throughout. The movement has

46
only one main theme, introduced in the flute at the opening. The piano plays
mostly arpeggiated chords, alternating between the E♭ ninth and an A♭ major
seventh chord. At rehearsal 1, the flute melody comes back with a similar off-
beat E♭ ninth arpeggiated figure in the piano. At rehearsal 2, Weinberg breaks
this pattern by harmonizing the familiar flute melody with a descending A♭
seventh chord figure. The change in direction of the arpeggio, as well as the
change in harmony, brings variety to the melody. A rest in the piano followed by
a change in direction of the arpeggiated figure and a high point in the flute part
signal a new section of highly chromatic music at measure 39. At rehearsal 3, the
flute sustains an F over a restatement of the piano figure from the opening,
signaling a return to the E♭ sonority. Subsequent E♭ arpeggiated figures in the
flute (beginning in measure 51) are answered by quicker, isolated off-beat
arpeggiated chords in the piano, winding down the short movement to what we
expect will be a last statement of the E♭ ninth “home” chord. In a signature move,
Weinberg thwarts these expectations by giving the flute an A♭ as the last note.
These “wrong note” endings are somewhat common in the Miniatures. The
placement of this final A♭ an octave lower than the previous note and at the end
of a diminuendo makes it sound even more surprising.
The following Capriccio in E minor has a very contrasting military
character. The tempo marking, “Marziale marcatissimo", coupled with repetitive

47
snare drum-like rhythms, seen in Figure 4.3, also helps to set the character for
this movement. Like the previous movements, this Capriccio features one main
thematic idea, with the piano adding increasing harmonic and melodic
complexity through its interjections. The E minor tonality is established
unambiguously by the flute and piano in distinct registers, with the flute playing
the melody and the piano punctuating it with low secco triads. Weinberg adds
dissonance in measure 5 through a characteristic descending chromatic line in
the flute, and by replacing the piano’s low G with its neighbors F# and A. In
measure 7, the E minor triad returns, modified by a D# lower neighbor that
provides a similar effect. These secco chords continue throughout the movement,
alternately providing rhythmic stability and harmonic grounding and
destabilization. At rehearsal 1, a jagged chromatic line is added in the right hand
of the piano, while the flute ascends to its highest register so far, increasing the
tension of this climactic section. At measure 17, the opening music returns in the
flute part, now accompanied by C major seventh chords (built by adding a low C
to the original E minor triad, still secco. Trills in the right hand of the piano also
decorate this return of the opening melody. After some chromatic runs in the
flute, the opening melodic figure returns again, this time two octaves higher with
the original harmonization. This is followed by a return of the piano’s chromatic
line from rehearsal 1, accompanied by E minor and A minor triads and loud,
accented low E’s in the flute part. This last line, seen in Figure 4.4, feels like a

48
battle between the flute and piano parts which, due to the register and rhythmic
convergence, is won by the piano. This “sandwiching” of chromatic material
between more diatonic music in the outer registers will emerge as a typical
Weinberg technique.


49

The F major Nocturne contrasts in nearly every way to the dark E minor
Capriccio. A light, airy F major tonality, long sustained phrases, and placement in
the middle range for both instruments all contribute to the contrast. Unlike the
Burleske, which featured an arpeggiated ninth chord at the beginning, the
arpeggiated F major harmony at the start of this movement provides a calmer
statement of tonic. As seen in Figure 4.5, the flute melody begins with a rising
semitone figure (E♭, E, F) that becomes a recognizable motive. The piano echoes
this rising figure in the second bar with an F#, G, A figure. The use of melodic
semitones (mostly semitones here), as has been noted, is a common thread
through music of Weinberg’s music. The second statement of this opening theme
occurs at rehearsal 1 as an exact repetition in the flute with a different
harmonization in the piano, another common characteristic of these movements
and, as will be shown, a trend in Weinberg’s flute music generally. The

50
arpeggiated bass at rehearsal 1 now outlines B♭ major instead of tonic F major.
The melody in the right hand of the piano, which begins the same as in measure
1, deviates slightly to better accommodate the change in harmony. The last
repetition of the opening melody occurs at rehearsal 2 with a different
accompaniment in the piano and a return of tonic harmony, but with only F’s
and C’s in the bass against neighbor figures around the minor third (G, B♭), in
the right hand. This can be seen in Figure 4.6. Although the A that completes the
tonic triad is present, it is obscured by the presence of all its neighbors and its
secondary role in the figure. The final harmony (C, F, G, B♭) has a similar “wrong
note” quality as the end of the Burleske movement, but like the Burleske
movement, it is set up by the neighbor figure that precedes it, and incidentally is
the same chord type as the second piano chord of the Burleske.

51


52

The following Waltz movement begins with a traditional waltz
accompaniment figure that alternates tonic F♯ minor with A major ninth chords,
as seen in Figure 4.7. Unlike many of the other pieces in the set, this Miniature
contains two contrasting themes. At measure 18, a sustained C major harmony
abruptly stops the waltz rhythm, while the right hand of the piano and flute
trade melodic fragments that lead to the contrasting melody at measure 22,
played four octaves apart in the flute and piano. In measure 38, the original waltz
melody returns in the flute, with a new idea in the piano, ending at measure 43
on a shared F♯ minor harmony obscured by a sustained G in the right hand of the

53
piano. The flute then reprises the contrasting melody against a simple
descending bass line that implies an arrival at F♯ in the piano. Instead, the
“wrong note” tendency continues, and while the movement ends on the
expected F♯ in the flute, the piano plays a G♯ half-diminished seventh chord. As
seen in Figure 4.8, this harmony is prepared in the flute melody in the preceding
measures.


54

The G major Ode that follows is another movement primarily for piano.
Occurring roughly halfway through the piece, it is the emotional climax of the

55
Miniatures. Beginning squarely in G major, harmony becomes increasingly
chromatic through the first statement of the melody. This nostalgic, anthem-like
melody occurs over a descending fifth progression passing through C major at
measure 5 and arriving at F major in measure 6. Typical for Weinberg, an
identical repetition in the piano right-hand part is harmonized in a much more
chromatic way, the melody itself changing only in measure 14 to accommodate
an upcoming shift from repeated A♭’s to repeated D’s in the right hand,
preparing an eventual return to G major. The emotional tension of the movement
builds to measure 14, where wide, dramatic spacing forces the pianist to break
the chords. In measure 16, the spacing contracts, and the opening melody returns
for one last time, featuring some chromatic harmonies, before resolving
forcefully in G major with a plagal progression and the last-minute participation
of the flute in a registral expansion.
In contrast to the emotional pathos of the Ode, the next movement, Duett,
in G♯ minor, sets up a character of expectation. This movement primarily
features a sinuous flute line with interjections in the piano. Initially, the piano
interjection serves to confirm the G♯ minor tonic that the flute establishes, but
departs from the tonic at rehearsal 1 with similar figuration but slightly altered
pitches, notably G♮, as seen in Figure 4.9. At measure 15, the piano also begins
the work of reintroducing G♯ minor, which the solo flute continues through
rehearsal 3. The flute ends this movement alone, outlining the G# minor triad

56
faintly in the lowest register at an extremely quiet dynamic. This ending
establishes a sense of uncertainty, and although it does not proceed attacca to the
next movement, the final D♯ is placed in the same register as the opening C♯ and
E in the next movement, creating a sense of continuity between them.

57

The Barkarole begins with a simple 6/8 accompaniment in parallel thirds
in the right hand of the piano, giving an air of childlike simplicity. Although the

58
opening contains no chromatic pitches, the absence of bass notes and the
insistence on parallel thirds in the piano prevents a strong sense of A major tonic.
By measure 10, the music has wandered from this tenuously introduced tonality.
However, in a signature move, Weinberg reintroduces the A major music in the
original texture before rehearsal 1, adding an ostinato comprised of scale degrees
1 and 5 in the left hand of the piano before rehearsal 1. These repeated notes
provide a harmonic grounding that was lacking in the opening six measures. The
flute writing in this movement is some of the most virtuosic in the miniatures. At
measure 39 it outlines the opening Barkarole melody in octaves, with added trills
and flourishes. The conclusion of this moment features a Mixolydian G♮, or ♭7,
in the flute part against tonic and minor dominant harmony in the piano, as
shown in Figure 4.10. This Mixolydian G♮ is well prepared, having first been
introduced in measure 18, as shown in Figure 4.11, where the flute emphasizes a
G♮ after outlining a tonic triad in the previous measure. Further prominent
instances of ♭7 occur throughout the movement, notably in measure 52,
foreshadowing the flute’s G♮ three measures later.

59


Continuing the theme of contrast between movements, the tenth
movement, Etude, begins in the dark key of B♭ melodic minor. The addition of a
C on the downbeat of the first bar creates a dissonant semitone sonority from the
outset. An exercise-like quality characterizes the opening scales in the flute and

60
in the piano interlude in measure 9, which is doubled in octaves. At rehearsal 1,
the opening idea is repeated in subdominant E♭ minor, one of the few
conventional key relations found in the Miniatures. In a change of roles, the piano
begins to outline an A♭ major scale at rehearsal 2, which sets off a series of
alternating ascending and descending scalar passages and arpeggios that rise
chromatically, ending in F minor at rehearsal 3. Table 4.5 shows the frantic pace
of harmonic motion between rehearsals 2 and 3. The harmony changes nearly
every bar, often rising or falling by semitone, with only a few brief periods of
respite. The flute line resolves on F on the third beat of measure 48. The piano
then adds a pungent dissonant G♭, impelling the harmony forward to tonic B♭
minor. The movement ends with the piano rising to meet the flute in the highest
register, followed by a dramatic low attack on B♭ octaves, leading attacca into the
next movement.

61
Table 4.2
Etude harmonic content, measures 21–48
Measure Harmony

21–24 A♭ major scale in bass
25 A major
26 B♭ major
27 B major
28 C major
29 D♭ major
30 D major
31 E♭ major
32 E major
33–36 F minor
37–43 G melodic minor
44 E minor
45 E♭ diminished
46 D diminished
47 F
48 B♭ melodic minor
The Intermezzo movement again features the piano. Its key of B minor
represents the break in the major/minor alternation scheme. A syncopated bass
ostinato that leads to the downbeats, combined with related, quicker rhythmic
motives in the right hand of the piano, plus the 3/4 meter, all give a dancelike
feel at the opening, which is interrupted by changes in meter and adjustments to
the ostinato beginning in measure 5. At rehearsal 1, the music settles into a
mixture of dominant and tonic harmony, with the flute tracing ascending scale
fragments. As illustrated in Figure 4.12, the flute line culminates with a
descending arpeggiated B minor triad, coming to rest on a G♮ upper neighbor.

62
Although this non-chord tone is surprising in the moment, it returns and
resolves an octave lower in the following measure. The flute then slides
downward through three chromatic semitones to C, anticipating the pedal tone
of the final movement, providing continuity as the music proceeds attacca.

The final movement, a Pastorale, begins with a C pedal in the lowest
register of the flute, linking it with the preceding Intermezzo and now becoming
the tonic. The piano, not the flute, takes the lead in measure 2 with a simple
melody, accompanied by the low C pedal in the flute (eventually taken up by the
piano’s left hand in measure 7). While some brief moments of chromaticism in
the piano create interest, the flute sustains the tonic pedal throughout. At
measure 12, the roles reverse, with melodic activity in the flute and ostinato and
pedal tones in the piano. The original texture is restored at rehearsal 2. At
rehearsal 3, the flute presents previous melodic material in F major while the

63
piano part accompanies with figures centered on B♭. The subdominant nature of
these two harmonies lends a calm, pleasing attribute to this somewhat
disorienting combination. At rehearsal 4, the flute outlines F major and C major
harmonies against a C major melody in the piano, retaining the subdominant
flavor while returning to the tonic. A wandering scale passage in the piano
finally concludes with typical descending chromatic motion in measure 52,
directed toward the flute’s low C as shown in Figure 4.13. The piece ends
peacefully, with a decorated C major chord in the piano, accompanied by a C
major arpeggio in the flute.



64
The brevity of these twelve movements allows Weinberg to showcase the
technical and expressive range of this combination of instruments. Although the
melodies and harmonies take some unexpected twists and turns, analysis shows
mastery in preparing even the most incongruous-seeming “wrong note”, or
peculiar twist of melody, so that it sounds oddly familiar. Like so many of the
best works for soloist and piano, these pieces allow the flutist and pianist to
stand as equals on the stage, not merely as soloist and accompanist.

FIVE PIECES (1947)
Weinberg’s second work for flute, the Five Pieces for flute and piano, is
dated 1947 in Weinberg’s official catalog of works, making it his second work for
flute and piano after the Twelve Miniatures were completed in 1945.83 A number
of works from this period survive without opus numbers; some survive only in
manuscript, while others do not survive in any form. Like the Twelve Miniatures,
there is no evidence of a premiere performance of this work, and it bears no
dedication. It was published by the Soviet Composers’ Union in 1948, the same
year that Weinberg and his wife received word that Solomon Mikhoels was
murdered and the surveillance of their family began.84

83 M. Vaĭnberg, Fünf Stücke für Flöte und Klavier (1947) = Five pieces for flute and piano
(1947) (Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2015).
84 Mimi Stillman, “Into the Light: Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Five Pieces for Flute and
Piano,” Flutist Quarterly, Volume 41, no. 2 (Winter 2016): 23.

65
As a busy composer, Weinberg is known to have reworked a number of
his own pieces, republishing them later with different instrumentation. We have
already seen an example of this in the later orchestration of the 12 Miniatures.
These Five Pieces are no exception. The first and second movements, entitled
Landschaft or “Landscape,” and Erster Tanz or “First Dance,” are original
compositions, while the last three movements are all taken from other earlier
works of Weinberg’s. The longest movement of the set, Zweiter Tanz or “Second
Dance,” and the following Melodie or “Melody,” are arranged verbatim from his
string quartet pieces Capriccio, op. 11, and Aria, Op. 9, respectively. The final
movement, Dritter Tanz, or “Third Dance,” was taken from the Gigue finale of his
Orchestral Suite, Op. 26.85
Of Weinberg’s works for flute, these were the last to be rediscovered.
Flutist and scholar Mimi Stillman came across them in August of 2011, when she
met with musicologist Bret Werb of the Holocaust Memorial Museum in
Washington, D.C. in preparation for a project on the music of the Holocaust.86
Werb showed her a facsimile of a work for flute and piano that he had picked up
in St. Petersburg. Stillman was “instantly captivated by the beauty and depth of
the piece”.87 She went on to spend the next four years on a journey of
exploration, culminating with the United States premiere of the Five Pieces in

85 Vaĭnberg, Fünf Stücke für Flöte und Klavier (1947) = Five pieces for flute and piano (1947)
86 Stillman, “Into the Light: Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Five Pieces for Flute and Piano,” 21.
87 Ibid.

66
Philadelphia in 2013, followed by performances around the USA, including at
the National Flute Association Convention in 2014.88 Her CD Freedom: Works by
Weinberg, Finko and Danielpour, which features the Five Pieces, was released on the
Innova label in 2015.89
As evidenced in the earlier Twelve Miniatures, Weinberg writes
idiomatically for the flute. He takes advantage of the full range of both the flute
and the piano, and finds innovative ways to balance both in whatever range he
writes. Unlike in the Twelve Miniatures, the flute and piano have a relationship
that fulfills more traditional soloist and accompaniment roles.90 All five
movements feature both instruments, and the piano texture is thicker in general
than in the Miniatures, in many cases taking over three of the four voices of the
pre-existing string quartet texture. Some interesting parallels can be drawn
between the Five Pieces and the Twelve Miniatures, although they are quite distinct
in compositional style.
The first movement, Landschaft or “Landscape,” begins with the flute
alone, just as the 12 Miniatures did. However, the mood of this movement is
completely different. The Improvisation of the 12 Miniatures begins in a loud
dynamic with short note values and works its way from the bottom register of
the flute to the top in a short amount of time. In this “Landscape” movement, a

88 Stillman, “Into the Light: Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Five Pieces for Flute and Piano,” 21.
89 Mimi Stillman & Charles Abramovic - Freedom, Audio CD (Innova, 2015).
90 These more traditional roles are seen in other contemporaneous works such as the
Tysbin Concert Pieces and even the Prokofiev Sonata for flute and piano.

67
familiar tune is presented quietly and remains in the middle range of the flute,
giving it a more docile quality and evoking, through a particular association, a
kind of “landscape.” The similarity to the opening of Debussy’s “La fille aux
cheveux de lin” (Préludes, Book I) is striking, as we can see in Figures 4.14 and
4.15. Weinberg’s music beings a semitone higher on D5 rather than D♭5 as in the
Debussy, and leaps an octave on the fourth sixteenth note of the second measure,
before going off in its own direction. We know that Weinberg did enjoy quoting
himself and others throughout his career.91 Among the most striking examples is
his Second Flute Concerto, whose first movement is a reworking of a violin
sonata, and whose last movement features direct quotations at pitch of famous
flute melodies at the end. Debussy’s influence on flute literature through his
compositions Syrinx and the Trio for flute, viola and harp is undeniable. Who
better to emulate in a flute piece than he?


68
Figure 4.14, Five Pieces Movement 1, 1–3

Figure 4.15, Debussy’s “La fille aux cheveux de lin” from Préludes, book I, 1–4
The movement continues with a contrasting “capriccioso and rubato” theme that
provides some needed variety and serves as a springboard for virtuosity that is
again reminiscent of the Improvisation from the Twelve Miniatures, as seen in
Figure 4.16.

69

Similar to some of the longer movements in the Twelve Miniatures, this movement
is based around two contrasting themes. The opening “Debussyesque theme”
and the later “capriccio theme” both appear in fragments and multiple keys
throughout the movement. After working his way back to the opening melody in
measure 35, first on altered pitches and then finally on the original pitches,
Weinberg approaches the cadence through a series of seemingly unrelated triads,
landing on an ethereal ascending D♭ ninth chord plus a culminating G-D fifth

70
that initiates the return of tonic G major. The succession of seemingly unrelated
harmonies preceding the arpeggio is a familiar occurrence from the Improvisation
of the Twelve Miniatures. The progression of the altered flute melody, arpeggiated
harmonies in the flute, and final cadence on G major can be seen in Figure 4.17.

The next movement, Erster Tanz, or First Dance, is a short movement with
a playful character, only about one and a half minutes long. It is centered on D
minor, with two sections suggesting a secondary key area of B♭ major. It begins
in D minor with the dance melody in the piano. As the music progresses,

71
Weinberg includes more and more non-diatonic notes to create harmonic
interest. In the middle section, beginning in measure 17, the flute punctuates the
melody with low Ds reminiscent of the low C pedal in the Pastorale movement of
the Twelve Miniatures. Here, instead of independently emphasizing the tonic,
they are chord tones participating in the B♭ major cadences in the piano. This can
be seen in Figure 4.18, which shows a similar section occurring at the end of the
movement. In measure 32, the flute returns with a fragmented version of the
piano’s D minor melody from the beginning, along with chromatic scales in the
piano. The B♭ major cadences from the middle section return at measure 48, after
which the music reorients to tonic D minor by measure 53, finally coming to rest
in a series of descending gestures leading to a tonic triad in low register, as
shown in Figure 4.18.

72

The following movement, Zweiter Tanz or “Second Dance,” is by far the
longest movement of the Five Pieces at nearly six and a half minutes in length. A
transcription of Weinberg’s Capriccio Op. 11 (1943), this movement has elements
of rondo form, evidenced in the return of fragments of the opening theme
throughout the movement. However, that theme is not the only one that repeats;

73
in fact, all of the themes from this movement repeat in a dizzying array of
contrasting ideas that seem to flow from one to the other with little in the way of
modulation. Table 4.3 shows the entrances of each of the five themes throughout
the movement.
Table 4.3
Entrance of themes in Zweiter Tanz from Five Pieces
Waltz Scherzando Agitato 5/16 Folk Dance

1 15 36 49 103
29 59 59 203 243
92 169 73
157 213 191
183
237
270
As illustrated, the Waltz theme from the opening returns most often, which lends
the impression of a rondo. Although all the themes have contrasting
characteristics from the opening Waltz, the most striking is the “Folk Dance”. It
is in 5/8 meter and features a pedal tone and a characteristic repeating rhythm.
Following the first appearance of this theme, a fortissimo piano interlude at
measures 120–130 provides more harmonic and textural interest but preserves
the folk qualities by never breaking from the melody’s characteristic rhythm.

74
Weinberg transcribed the Melodie movement from his Aria, Op. 9 (1942),
also for string quartet. In contrast to the often frenetic and scattered nature of the
previous dance movement, this lyrical movement features a steady piano
accompaniment with a constant eighth note pulse, above which the melodic line
soars in both the flute and piano parts. The movement begins with a songlike
flute melody accompanied by D minor harmonies in the piano. Although
Weinberg introduces chromatic harmonies beginning on the fourth beat of
measure 4, the relative predictability of the chromatic motion in the bass line, soft
dynamic, and eighth note pulse prevent this chromaticism from adding too
much tension. There is little textural contrast in this movement, with the flute
remaining a solo voice throughout, and the piano maintaining the
accompanimental texture, occasionally presenting a melodic line in dialogue
with the flute. The descending bass line from the opening returns in measure 51,
eventually leading to a D major final chord. Although the movement ends in
major, the open spacing of the chord and the use of the extreme low register of
both the flute and the piano leave the listener without the typical uplift created
by Picardy third endings.
The final movement, Dritter Tanz or Third Dance, is surprisingly short at
only two and half minutes in length, especially when compared with the lengthy
second dance and given its position at the end of the piece. It is a playful dance
originally called “Gigue,” borrowed from the end of the Orchestral Suite No. 26

75
(1939–1945). It contains only one principal theme, which is tossed back and forth
between flute and piano without break for the duration of the movement. The
short, light articulations in both the flute and piano, coupled with the continuous
motion, give this movement a breathless quality that propels it forward to a
dramatic ending.
These Five Pieces have a unique character reflective of Weinberg’s style,
but feature elements that set them apart from his Twelve Miniatures. As they have
only recently become a part of flutists’ collective consciousness, it remains to be
seen how they will settle into the modern flute repertoire.
CONCERTO NO. 1, OP. 75 (1961)
Weinberg’s Flute Concerto No. 1, op. 75, for flute and string orchestra,
was completed in 1961, during a period of high productivity. This period,
coming after Weinberg’s surveillance and imprisonment, saw a recommitment to
his art with the production of new compositions in many of his favored genres.
His previous works for flute and piano were written before his surveillance and
incarceration; none were written during that period. This is his first flute work in
its aftermath. Unlike his earlier works for flute, which bear no dedication, the
First Concerto is dedicated to “Alexander Wassiljewitsch Kornejew.” It was
premiered by Korneyev on November 25th, 1961 in the Great Hall of the Moscow
Conservatory, with the Moscow Chamber Orchestra conducted by Rudolf

76
Barshai.92 A recording with the same performers was later issued on LP and
eventually CD. It can currently be purchased on a Melodiya compact disc.93
The Concerto bears similarities to Weinberg’s earlier works for flute in its
abrupt change of keys, use of highly chromatic harmonies, and idiomatic (if
extremely virtuosic) writing for the flute. Its dedication and premiere reflect a
new relationship between Weinberg and Korneyev that was likely forged
through their time together in Moscow and almost certainly took place at least in
part in the Hall of Composers in Moscow. This three-movement work displays
stark contrasts between the frenzied first movement, the lyrical and nearly static
second movement, and the playful, dance-like third movement. Despite a large
number of themes and considerable amounts of contrasting material, a
performance of all three movements takes only about fifteen minutes. This is
significantly shorter than Weinberg’s violin and cello concerti, both containing
four movements, which range from about twenty-five to thirty minutes in length.
This disparity in length also reflects Weinberg’s understanding of the flute’s
strengths and capabilities as a solo instrument.
The first movement showcases both the technical prowess of the flutist
and the technical capabilities of the flute. Flutes in Russia at this time were

92 M. Vaĭnberg, Konzert Nr. 1 op. 75 für Flöte und Streichorchester = for flute and string
orchestra, Klavierauszug (piano reduction). (New York; Hamburg: Peermusic Classical,
2014.)
93 Mstislav Rostropovich, Leonid Kogan, and Alexander Korneyev, Weinberg: Concertos,
Compact Disc (Melodiya, 2014).

77
mostly East German, and as detailed in Chapter Three, mechanically
substandard. One of the great marks of a professional-quality flute is its ability to
project in all ranges. Weinberg seems to be particularly aware of the potential for
balance issues when using “local” flutes even just within the confines of a string
orchestral accompaniment. The first movement features the flute primarily in its
highest range, where it is most likely to project above a string orchestra. There
are a few instances in which the flute does come down into the middle register,
and Weinberg is careful to accompany with only short articulations in the low
strings. The second movement features a long, sinuous, and soulful flute line
reaching down to the lowest notes on the instrument, where its ability to project
is the weakest. To accommodate this low register, Weinberg provides an
accompaniment of low muted strings in a repetitive texture that allows the flute
to sing out despite the handicap. The final movement exploits the instrument’s
full range, with sparse accompaniments for lower-register flute melodies and,
later on, thicker orchestrations for the same melodies, with the flute in its highest
register.
As in his earlier flute music, Weinberg does not rely on traditional forms
or harmonic structures to organize his material. In the first movement, although
the music can loosely be understood in terms of chromatic tonal harmony, the
thematic material is what ties the music together. The first movement, centered
on D minor, contains four main themes, all of which feature the interval of the

78
fourth, highlighted in each theme in Figures 4.25–4.28. This common element
helps to bring continuity to an otherwise frenetic and somewhat fragmented
movement. This movement also displays some elements of sonata form. As
illustrated in the table below, the movement can be analyzed in three main
sections. The opening A section introduces three of the four themes (“falling
fourth,” “repeated note,” and “door knocking,”) with some thematic
development. The central B section features the orchestra with the introduction
of the fourth, contrasting “legato” theme. The final A’ section reprises all four
themes, including the “legato” theme, which appears for the first time in the flute
in this section. The organization of these sections is similar to the exposition,
development, and recapitulation of a sonata form. In a departure from the strict
model, the A’ section returns with the themes in a different order, with the
“falling fourth theme” at a different pitch level than the opening.

79
Table 4.4
Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 1
Name of Theme Where it Occurs What Instrument(s) Section

falling 4th beginning flute A
falling 4th rehearsal 1/ measure 8 orchestra
repeated note rehearsal 2/ measure 16 flute
falling 4th measure 47 orch/picked up by flute in 51
door knocking measure 56 flute
door knocking rehearsal 5/ measure 73 orchestra
measure 95 Repeat
falling 4th rehearsal 6/ measure 96 flute B
falling 4th measure 102 orchestra
door knocking measure 112 flute
legato theme measure 112 orchestra
legato theme rehearsal 8/ measure 126 orchestra
repeated note rehearsal 9/measure 140 orchestra
falling 4th rehearsal 11/ measure 173 flute A'

door knocking rehearsal 12/ measure 187 introduced by orch/ flute
door knocking measure 188 orchestra
falling 4th measure 218 flute
legato theme rehearsal 15/ measure 226 orchestra
legato theme rehearsal 16/ measure 240 flute (first time)
door knocking measure 242 orchestra
falling 4th rehearsal 17/ measure 254 flute
The “falling fourth” theme is illustrated in Figure 4.19, measures 1–8.

80
Figure 4.19, Concerto No. 1 Movement 1, 1–1094

The “repeated note” theme is illustrated in Figure 4.20, measures 18–34.

94Musical examples for the concerti are displayed either in piano reduction or in full
score in order to best illustrate the analytic points and for ease of reading.

81


82
The “door knocking” theme is illustrated in Figure 4.21, measures 56–73.


83
The final “legato” theme is illustrated in Figure 4.22, measures 110–125.

The interplay between these four melodic ideas is what propels the
movement forward in constant motion. As shown above, the flute introduces the
first three themes, while the orchestra introduces the final one, which

84
subsequently appears only once in the flute. Each of the other themes appears a
number of times in both parts. The final “legato” theme is notable because it
appears first in the orchestra, after the first repeat, and after several repetitions
and some development of the first three themes. In its unusual placement, the
new theme provides some much needed contrast to the first three themes, which
are more fragmented and virtuosic in nature. The “legato” theme is also the first
instance of an extended melodic line in the entire movement. It enters very late in
the flute, measure 240, in the instrument’s highest range, marked “molto
espressivo”. This late entrance, along with the strikingly high tessitura, gives the
impression of reluctance on the part of the flutist to participate in this thematic
material. Unlike previous entrances of this theme, it is accompanied by “door
knocking” references in the violas, helping to tie together multiple themes while
heading into the climactic conclusion of this movement. The entrance of the flute
with the “legato” theme, measures 240– 253, is shown in Figure 4.23.

85

After this frenetic, scherzo-like opening movement, Weinberg provides
some much-needed contrast in the second movement. His choice of A♭ minor as
the tonal center (a tritone away from the D minor of the first movement),

86
extensive use of the low register of the flute, and exclusively quiet dynamics
project a completely different sonic world from the first movement. The string
orchestra provides a repeated, two-measure, passacaglia-like homophonic chord
progression that lasts through the entire movement, over which the flute spins a
mournful, lyrical melody. Typical of Weinberg’s style, this progression provides
a tonal grounding interspersed with striking chromaticism. An opening A♭
minor triad moves unexpectedly to F major, which initiates a cycle of descending
fifths, through a B♭ minor harmony that first resolves first deceptively, and then
to an open fifth sonority on E♭ (decorated by chromatic mediant motion and
progressing to a sixth), finally resolving to tonic A♭ minor at the downbeat of
measure 3. This all represents an elegant elaboration and adaptation of a
conventional cadential formula. A reduction and analysis of this harmonic
progression is illustrated in Figure 4.24.

87
Following the introduction of the repeating progression in the piano, the
flute enters with a highly expressive, sweeping line that consistently outlines
tonic and dominant harmonies, elaborated by an ever-changing local
chromaticism. The movement continues with ongoing repetition in the orchestral
part and near-constant eighth-note motion in the flute through m. 20, after which
the flute motion slows appreciably. As illustrated in Figure 4.25, the flute melody
winds down into its final moments beginning in m. 25, sliding downward
chromatically (in one of Weinberg’s signature moves) to the lowest possible note
on the instrument. This apparent end to the flute melody allows the orchestra to
crescendo without fear of overpowering the flute, reaching forte at measure 28
and simultaneously breaking the cycle of repetition. The orchestra then replays
and holds the open fifth on E♭, over which the flute introduces the main theme
from the next movement, which proceeds attacca.

88

Like the first movement, the third and final movement of the First Flute
Concerto is driven primarily by thematic material rather than a formal or tonal
structure. There are three main themes in this movement. The first one, the
“fiddler”, is illustrated in Figure 4.26, measures 1–8. This theme is so named

89
because it is introduced by a solo violin after being prepared by the flute at the
end of the previous movement.

90


91
The second theme, named the “wanderer,” is introduced in the flute directly
after the “fiddler” theme. It is illustrated in Figure 4.26, measures 12–23. The
name derives from its propensity for chromatic wandering. For the first entrance
of the “wanderer,” Weinberg uses a pedal D in the second violin to maintain a
sense of the D minor center of this movement, while the flute and first violin play
more chromatic passages. This technique was common in both the 12 Miniatures
and the Five Pieces during chromatic passages. The final thematic idea for this
movement I have called the “repeated note.” It is illustrated in Figure 4.27,
measures 42–57. In contrast to the more lyrical beginnings of the first two
themes, this theme uses repeated notes throughout, with a distinctive rhythm to
punctuate legato passages and help to differentiate the thematic idea aurally
from the previous two.

92


93
Although the movement’s material consists primarily of these themes,
there is an interesting interlude a little more than halfway through the
movement, where the thematic motion stops and the flutist breaks off, in
measure 191, into a passage of rapidly articulated notes later echoed by the first
violin. The “fiddler” theme is brought back by the viola twenty-seven bars later.
This articulated idea, paired with the “fiddler” theme, returns later in the
movement and provides some structure to what is otherwise just a series of
themes. The table below illustrates the succession of themes through the course
of the movement and the placement of the final coda, which contains new
melodic material.

94
Table 4.4
Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 3
What
Name of Theme Where it Occurs Instrument(s)
fiddler beginning orch/violin
wanderer rehearsal 21/ measure 12 flute
fiddler rehearsal 22/ measure 24 flute
wanderer measure 34 orch/violin
repeated note/ fragment rehearsal 24/ measure 58 orch/violin
fiddler measure 61 flute
combination of fiddler and repeated note rehearsal 28/ measure 108 orch/violin
fiddler rehearsal 31/ measure 153 orch/violin
wanderer rehearsal 32/ measure 168 flute
wanderer measure 174 orch/violin
fiddler rehearsal 33/ measure 181 orch/violin
flute and later
interlude of virtuosic articulation rehearsal 34/ measure 191 orch
fiddler measure 218 orch/violin
wanderer/fragmented measure 227 flute
Fiddler rehearsal 37/ measure 257 orch
virtuosic articulation returns rehearsal 37/ measure 257 flute

coda measure 39 driven by flute

95
This somewhat eccentric movement concludes with a flute-driven coda,
with the soloist’s line reaching up to the instrument’s highest notes, against a
lushly orchestrated backdrop of strings. Having sustained a series of chromatic
forays throughout the concerto, the music ends triumphantly on D major, as
illustrated in Figure 4.28, measures 279–320.

96

97

Administered by Songs of Peer, Ltd

98
In this concerto, Weinberg displays a deep understanding of the flute and
its capabilities as a solo instrument. Although it bears some similarities to the
pieces for flute and piano that came before it, the concerto also breaks new
territory, showing off the lyrical and virtuosic capabilities of the player. In
addition to the premiere recording mentioned earlier, there is one other
commercial recording of this work, featuring Anders Jonhall and the Gothenburg
Symphony Orchestra.95 It is my hope that as Weinberg’s music continues to
experience a resurgence in the coming years, more recorded interpretations of
this work will become available, and more audiences will have the opportunity
to experience it.

CONCERTO NO. 2, OP. 148 (1987)
Weinberg’s final piece for flute was his Flute Concerto No. 2 Op. 148,
completed in October of 1987. Like his first concerto, this work is dedicated to
“Alexander Wassiljewitsch Kornejew”. The work is scored for oboe, four
clarinets (including bass clarinet), bassoon, contrabassoon, three horns, timpani,
percussion, harp, and full strings. Weinberg later re-orchestrated it for string
orchestra as Op. 148bis. This concerto is in three movements and lasts about
twenty minutes, just a few minutes longer than the first concerto. For
comparison, both flute concerti are shorter than the three-movement Clarinet

95Anders Jonhall, Weinberg, M.: Clarinet Concerto / Flute Concerto No. 2 / Flute Concerto /
Fantasia, 2000.

99
Concerto, Op. 104, which is about twenty-five minutes long, and similar to the
three-movement Trumpet Concerto, Op. 94, which is about twenty minutes in
length. As we have already seen with the Five Pieces for flute and piano,
Weinberg was prone to integrating some of his previous works into his flute
music. The first movement of the second flute concerto, an Allegro, is a virtual
transcription of the first movement of his Sonata No. 2 for violin and piano, Op.
15 (1944)96. The other two movements of the concerto are original to the piece.
The second movement, a Largo, exhibits a brooding and mournful character that
is familiar from the first concerto and some of the Miniatures. The Allegretto
finale has a dance-like character common to many of Weinberg’s works, but in a
surprise near the ending, Weinberg slips in quotations from some of the best-
known flute melodies in the literature, specifically the “Dance of the Blessed
Spirits” from Gluck’s opera Orfeo ed Euridice, and the “Badinerie” movement
from J. S. Bach’s Orchestral Suite No. 2 in B minor, BWV 1067. This type of
quotation was not unique to the flute concerto or even to Weinberg in his milieu;
in fact, it seemed to be in fashion in Russia around this time. For example,
Weinberg had included similar types of quotation in his Trumpet Concerto (Op.
94, 1966–67) and his 24 Preludes for Solo Cello (Op. 100, 1969). His friend and

96Although the violin part does not match the flute part exactly (sometimes the flute
melody is in the orchestra or vice- versa) the two movements are nearly identical until
measure 233, at which point the movements diverge significantly. The violin sonata
makes use of double stops and pizzicatos in this final section, ending quietly with
pizzicatos. The flute concerto ends more triumphantly, with a sustained high A in the
flute at a fff dynamic.

100
confidant Shostakovich famously incorporated some quotations into the outer
movements of his Fifteenth Symphony (1971), while fellow Soviet composer Boris
Chaykovsky used quotations in his Second Symphony (1967).
Following the first movement of the Violin Sonata No. 2 nearly verbatim
until the very end of the movement, the first movement of this concerto is
organized around thematic material rather than tonal or formal structures, in a
manner similar to that of the first flute concerto. However, the calmness of the
opening “pastorale” theme, as illustrated in Figure 4.29, is in stark contrast to the
frenzied opening of the first concerto.

101

It is often heard against a dotted rhythm in the accompaniment, which outlines
the tonic triad in rising and falling arpeggiated figures that enhance the pastoral
quality of the melody. The end of this theme is a bit difficult to discern, as it often
leads directly into the next idea, but the characteristic descending octave always
signals the beginning.
The second, “anxiety” theme, shown in Figure 4.30, is quite contrasting,
with quicker note values and frequent chromatic neighbor tones. As the figure

102
shows, the flute introduces the thematic idea, which is quickly taken up by the
orchestra (here the oboe).


103
Following in the same anxiety-ridden vein, the third main thematic idea of
the movement occurs in the flute at m. 56, while the orchestra continues with the
second theme. This “descending fourth” theme is seen overlaid with the anxiety
theme in Figure 4.31.

104


105
The fourth thematic idea is again based on the idea of a repeated note;
thus I have dubbed it the “hammering” theme, illustrated in Figure 4.32. After
long lines in the first three themes, this theme dramatically alters the texture and
gives it a much more vertical, angular character.


106
These themes continue to develop though the movement, and in what
might be dubbed a “Weinbergian twist,” a new countermelody to the “pastorale”
theme appears more than halfway through the movement. This ostinato-like line
in the flute is accompanied by a dramatic change in texture and the re-
introduction of the “pastorale” theme in the viola. This juxtaposition can be seen
in Figure 4.33.

107

The ending of the first movement seems to suggest a return to the G major tonic,
with G’s and D’s in the orchestra. However, the flute ends on an A, producing a
G major ninth chord as the closing harmony. Similarly to the “wrong note”
endings in some of the Miniatures, this dissonant ninth lends an unexpected,
incomplete quality to the flute’s final arrival.
The Largo second movement sets a somber tone with a lyrical melody
introduced nearly immediately in the flute, accompanied by a running eighth
note accompaniment in muted violas. This striking texture is shown in Figure
4.34.

108


109
This allows the flute to sing out despite being in its low register. This primary
“lullaby” theme is central to the movement, occurring multiple times in both the
flute and the orchestra, always paired with its eighth-note countermelody. The
flute alone plays the secondary “tenuto” melody, seen in Figure 4.35, which
could be paired with the primary melody as related phrases, since they have
little significant contrast, unlike many other themes present in this concerto.

110


111
The movement begins in F♯ minor, but the flute’s final harmony is a C♯ major
triad. This open ending also features very quiet dynamics, increasing its
mysterious quality. Unlike in the first concerto, the second and third movements
are not meant to continue attacca. Therefore, ending on the dominant gives an
effect of incompleteness, further magnified by the G major triad articulated next
by the lower winds, and the lingering major seventh sonority at the end. This
move is not entirely unprepared. Throughout the movement, Weinberg has set
up the quality of the final harmonies with a recurring motive. The first two
instances of this motive are displayed in Figure 4.34. It is characterized by a
descending perfect fifth followed by an ascending major third, outlining a major
triad. It first appears at the end of the lullaby melody in m. 9 (preceded by a
similar three-note figure in m. 8) and is immediately echoed in the orchestra. It
occurs six more times at various pitch levels in the movement, including at the
end of the second “tenuto” theme, seen in Figure 4.35. The final two instances
occur at the very end, culminating on the C♯ and G♯ major triads described
above. These are illustrated in Figure 4.36.

112

The last movement of Weinberg’s Flute Concerto No. 2 features a
characteristic dance-like melody. The main theme, seen in Figure 4.37, strongly
evokes the feeling of dance in 2/4 meter.

113

114

The drama in this movement comes from the interplay between two themes, and
the surprising introduction of quotations near the end of the movement. A
secondary theme area, seen in Figure 4.38, is reminiscent of the “anxiety” theme
from the first movement because of its frequent use of semitones and tight
melodic contour.

115

The quotations appear simultaneously, seeming to creep in unheard. As
mentioned earlier, three melodic ideas are quoted: two from Gluck’s “Dance of
the Blessed Spirits,” from his opera Orfeo and Euridice, plus the opening of the

116
“Badinerie” from J. S. Bach’s Orchestral Suite in B minor. The “Dance of the
Blessed Spirits” theme is introduced by the flute, while the distinctive Bach
quote, a fragment, is first introduced by the clarinet before being taken up by the
flute in diminution at a different pitch level. The clarinets and bassoon then take
up the “Badinerie” theme, while the bass clarinet, muted horn, and oboe echo the
Gluck. The introduction and development of these themes can be seen in Figures
4.39 through 4.41. For clarity, material taken from the Bach quotation is
indicated in red, while material from the Gluck quotation is indicated in blue.

117


118

The oboe then restates the opening dance-like melody, bringing the piece back
on track until the flute returns, thirty-eight bars later, with a further quote from
the Dance of the Blessed Spirits, seen in Figure 4.41.

119

The movement ends with a deconstructed version of the opening melody in the
flute, and finally resolves on a peaceful G major triad.
A significantly later work than the First Concerto, the Second Concerto
demonstrates Weinberg’s continued interest in the flute throughout his career. It
focuses more on the flute’s melodic rather than virtuosic capabilities, displaying
Weinberg’s deep understanding of the instrument’s potential. The piece is
distinctively orchestrated, with a large wind section frequently engaging in a

120
dialogue with the flute soloist. In addition, the use of quotations stands out
within the flute literature.

121
CONCLUSION
Mieczysław Weinberg was a prolific composer of works for flute which
until recently were very much underrepresented in the flute music canon. This
was due to his deferential personality as well as the repression he suffered as an
immigrant and a member of a religious minority within Russia. As demonstrated
in my poll in Chapter Three, American flutists have been particularly unaware of
his works (as well as the works of many other Soviet composers) due to our
country’s complicated history with Russia and the Soviet Union, as well as the
relative geographic distance from Moscow, where Weinberg spent the majority
of his career. Through the course of this document I have examined the
composer as an individual, his compositional output for woodwinds as a whole,
his flute influences in Russia, and his works for solo flute in some detail, in an
effort to introduce Weinberg and his great works to a new audience. In recent
years since the publication of Stillman’s article in Flutist Quarterly, and as
Weinberg’s music becomes more well-known generally, more and more flutists
from around the world are performing and recording these works. In the early
months of 2017, two more commercial recordings of the works of Weinberg have
been released by Polish and German flutists, and Weinberg’s music is gracing
international concert stages with increasing frequency. I look forward to an even
greater prominence for Weinberg’s music, in particular his works for the flute, in
upcoming years.

122
APPENDIX
Commercial Recordings of Weinberg’s Flute Works
Flute Concerto No. 1

Alexander Korneyev, Moscow Chamber Orchestra, cond. Rudolf Barshai
Canada, 2014, Melodiya, RDCD 1101
Flute Concerto No. 1, Flute Concerto No. 2

Anders Jonhäll, Gothenburg Symphony Orchestra, cond. Thord Svedlund
UK, 2008, Chandos CHSA 5064
12 Miniatures Op. 29
Henrik Wiese, Elisaveta Blumina
Germany, 2012, CPO, CPO 777 630-2
5 Pieces
Mimi Stillman, Charles Abramovic
US, 2015, Innova, Innova 935
12 Miniatures Op. 29, Flute Concerto No. 1, and Flute Concerto No. 2
Antonina Styczen, Polish Chamber Philharmonic Orchestra, Wojciech Rajski
Poland, 2017, Tacet, Tacet232
Flute Concerto No. 2

Kathrin Christians, Württembergisches Kammerorchester, Ruben Gazarian
Germany, 2017, Hänssler, HC16099

123
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Audio recordings consulted for this work are listed in the Appendix.

“Alexander Krein.” Universal Edition. Accessed April 21, 2017.
http://www.universaledition.com/.
“American Symphony Orchestra — Mieczyslaw Weinberg.” Accessed April 21, 2017.

http://americansymphony.org/concerto-for-trumpet-and-orchestra-op-94-1967/.
Anderson, Martin. “Liverpool, Philharmonic Hall: Weinberg’s Requiem.” Tempo 64, no.
252 (2010): 81–82.
“Archive | Pražské Jaro | 12/5 – 2/6/2017.” Pražské Jaro. Accessed April 21, 2017.
http://www.festival.cz/en/archives/competition_news/1953.
“Boston Symphony Orchestra Principal Musicians.” Accessed April 21, 2017.

http://www.stokowski.org/Principal_Musicians_Boston_Symphony.htm.
“Category:Tsybin, Vladimir - IMSLP/Petrucci Music Library: Free Public Domain Sheet

Music.” Accessed April 21, 2017. http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Tsybin,_Vladimir.
“Concours de Genève.” Accessed April 21, 2017.

https://www.concoursgeneve.ch/list_laureates/search.
“Dmitry Smolsky.” Wikipedia, March 14, 2017.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dmitry_Smolsky&oldid=770255297.
Ekinci, Safak, Oner Tatar, Serkan Akpancar, Serkan Bilgic, and Omer Ersen. “Spinal
Tuberculosis.” Journal of Experimental Neuroscience, no. 9 (October 5, 2015): 89–
90.
Elphick, Daniel. “The String Quartets of Mieczysław Weinberg: A Critical Study.” PhD
thesis, University of Manchester, 2016. In Academia.edu Publishing,
https://www.academia.edu/28121947/The_String_Quartets_of_Mieczys%C5%82a
w_Weinberg_A_Critical_Study (accessed November 26, 2016).
Fairclough, Pauline. Shostakovich Studies 2. Cambridge Composer Studies. Cambridge;

New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Fairclough, Pauline, and David Fanning. The Cambridge Companion to Shostakovich.

Cambridge Companions to Music. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2008.
Fanning, David. Mieczyław Weinberg In Search of Freedom. Hofheim: Peermusic, 2010.

124
Fay, Laurel E. Shostakovich: A Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Frolova-Walker, Marina. Music and Soviet Power, 1917–1932. Woodbridge, Suffolk;

Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2012.
“Georges Barrère - New York Flute Club.” Accessed April 21, 2017.
http://www.nyfluteclub.orgabout/history-and-archives/past-
presidents/1944/12/Georges-Barrre.
“The History of the Moscow House of Composers.” Accessed April 21, 2017.
http://www.house-composers.ru/history.html.
“International Mieczysław Weinberg Society.” Accessed May 6, 2017.

http://www.weinbergsociety.com/.
Ivry, Benjamin. “How Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Music Survived Dictators.” The Forward,
November 17, 2010. http://forward.com/culture/133209/how-mieczyslaw-
weinberg-s-music-survived-dictato/.
Kerridge, W. H. “The Union of Soviet Composers.” The Musical Times 75, no. 1102
(1934): 1073–75. doi:10.2307/919586.
“Mieczysław Weinberg | Twórca.” Culture.pl. Accessed November 26, 2016.

http://culture.pl/en/artist/mieczyslaw-weinberg.
“Philadelphia Orchestra Principal Musicians.” Accessed April 21, 2017.

http://www.stokowski.org/Philadelphia_Orchestra_Musicians.htm.
Redlich, Shimon. “The Jewish Antifascist Committee in the Soviet Union.” Jewish Social
Studies 31, no. 1 (1969): 25–36.
Roth, Linus. Irina Shostakovich and Alexander Raskatov - a Conversation

about Mieczysław Weinberg. Accessed April 21, 2017.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrYWvuP6gf4.
Schwarz, Boris. Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia, 1917–1981. Enl. ed.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983.
Staneva, Inna. “The Russian Taffanel: The Significance of Vladimir Tsybin and His
Concert Allegro No. 3.” DMA diss., University of North Texas, 2014. In ProQuest
Dissertations Publishing, http://search.proquest.com/docview/1725125502
(accessed December, 2 2016).
Stillman, Mimi. “Into the Light: Mieczyslaw Weinberg’s Five Pieces for Flute and
Piano.” Flutist Quarterly Volume 41, no. 2 (Winter 2016): 20–26.

125
“Timothy Dokshitser. History.” Accessed April 21, 2017. http://www.dokshizer.com/.
Toff, Nancy. The Flute Book: A Complete Guide for Students and Performers. 3rd ed.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2012
“Union of Soviet Composers | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks

Online.” Accessed February 19, 2017.
http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/eng/Union_of_Soviet_Composers.
“Unknown Facts from Mieczysław Wajnberg’s Biography | Artykuł.” Culture.pl.

Accessed November 26, 2016. http://culture.pl/en/article/unknown-facts-from-
mieczyslaw-wajnbergs-biography.
Vaĭnberg, M. Fünf Stücke für Flöte und Klavier (1947) = Five Pieces for Flute and
Piano (1947). Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2015.
———. Konzert Für Flöte Und Orchester No. 2 Op.148 (1987). Klavierauszug = Piano
reduction. New York ; Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, n.d.
———. Konzert Nr. 1 op. 75 für Flöte und Streichorchester = for flute and string
orchestra. Klavierauszug = Piano reduction. New York ; Hamburg: Peermusic
Classical, 2014.
———. Zwölf Stücke Für Flöte Und Klavier, Op. 29: (Miniaturen). New York ;
Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2011.
“Valery Popov.” Puchner Bassoons. Accessed April 21, 2017.

http://www.puchner.com/valeri-popov/frameeng.htm.
“Weinberg, Mieczyslaw: CONCERTO FOR CLARINET AND STRING ORCHESTRA |

Sikorski Music Publishers.” Accessed April 21, 2017.
http://www.sikorski.de/475/en/0/a/0/orchestral_music/1006580_concerto_for_clarin
et_and_string_orchestra.html.
———. Konzert Nr. 1 op. 75 (1961) für Flöte und Streichorchester = for flute and string
orchestra score. New York: Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2007.
———. Konzert Nr. 2 op. 148 für Flöte und Kammerorchester = for flute and chamber
orchestra score. New York: Hamburg: Peermusic Classical, 2010.
“Wildacres Flute Retreat.” Accessed April 21, 2017.

http://www.wildacresflute.com/ludmila.htm.
Wye, Trevor. “The Flute, the Hammer and the Sickle.” Flutist Quarterly XI, no. 3
(Spring 1986): 23–33.

126
Zhukova, Natalia. The History of Flute-Playing in Russia: From Joseph Guillou to

Alexander Korneev. Place of publication not identified: AV Akademikerverlag,
2014.

127
CURRICULUM VITAE
Alexandra Straubinger Conway

www.alexconway.net
(917)494-4413
Education
Degrees/Diplomas
2012–2017 Doctor of Musical Arts, Boston University
2007–2009 Master of Music, Boston University
2002–2006 Bachelor of Music, Oberlin Conservatory of Music
Principal Teachers
2012–2016 Linda Toote Boston University
2007–Current Cynthia Meyers Privately /Boston Symphony Orchestra
2007–2009 Elizabeth Ostling Boston University/BSO
2005–2009 Martha Aarons Aspen Music Festival and School
2002–2006 Michel Debost and Kathleen Chastain Oberlin Conservatory
Performing
Orchestral
2016–Present Boston Lyric Opera Substitute Musician
2013–Present Bangor Symphony Orchestra Piccolo
2015 East Coast Scoring Orchestra Flute
2015 Boston Microtonal Society Flute
2012–Present Commonwealth Lyric Theatre Principal flute
2014–Present Atlantic Symphony Orchestra Substitute Musician
2012–2015 Boston Opera Collaborative
2012–Present Orlando Philharmonic Orchestra Substitute Musician
2010–Present Cape Cod Symphony Orchestra Substitute Musician
2010 Boston Pops Esplanade Orchestra Substitute Musician
2009–2012 Chicago Civic Orchestra Associate Musician
2008–Present Symphony Nova (Formerly Neponset Valley Symphony)
2007–2010 New World Symphony Semi-Finalist
2007 Boston Pops Orchestra Substitute Musician
2006–2007 Jeunesses Musicales World Orchestra

128
New England Chamber Players

June 2017 NECP at Plymouth Library Plymouth Public Library
March 2017 Wind Quintet Stella Concert Series
December 2016 Music for Guitar and Winds Loring-Greenhough House
November 2016 Music for Wind Quintet and Piano JP Concerts Series
July 2016 French Music for Winds Plymouth Public Library
February 2016 Music for Winds, Harp and Viola Loring-Greenhough House
November 2015 Fairy Tales Plymouth Public Library
October 2015 Music for Winds and Guitar Christ Presbyterian Church
September 2015 Music for Winds and Guitar Kings Chapel Boston
May 2015 A Concert for Spring JP Concert Series
May 2015 A Concert for Spring Plymouth Public Library
December 2014 Peter and the Wolf Plymouth Public Library
October 2014 Peter and the Wolf JP Concert Series
February 2014 Music for Voice, Winds, and Strings Plymouth Public Library
January 2014 Music for Solo Winds with Strings Kings Chapel Boston
January 2014 Music for Voice, Winds and Strings Boylston Place
Public Recitals and Solo Performances

April 2017 Lecture Recital on the Music of Weinberg
Boston University
March 2017 Solo Performance and Master Class at
University of Memphis
May 2015 Doctoral Solo Recital
Boston University
January 2014 Public Final Round
34th Annual Pappoutsakis Flute Competition
December 2013 Doctoral Solo Recital
Boston University
January 2013 Public Final Round
33rd Annual Pappoutsakis Flute Competition
May 2013 Doctoral Chamber Recital
Boston University
January 2012 Cantata Performance
Emmanuel Music Bach Institute
April 2009 Master’s Recital Solo Recital
Boston University
Summer 2009 Spotlight Solo Recital
Aspen Music Festival and School
February 2008 Master’s Recital Solo Recital
Boston University

129
July 2006 Solo Performance

Academie Internationale D’ete de Nice
February 2006 Senior Recital
Oberlin Conservatory
March 2005 Junior Recital
Oberlin Conservatory
Awards and Recognition

2017 Ester B. and Albert S. Kahn Career Entry Award
2016 Induction into Pi Kappa Lambda Musical Honors Society
Alpha Kappa Chapter
2016 Departmental Award Winner for Excellence Winds, Brass and
Percussion at Boston University
2014 Alternate Semi-Finalist in the Myrna Brown Flute Competition
2013–2014 Bill Grass Memorial Prize winner in 34th and Finalist in 33rd
Annual Ja mes Pappoutsakis Flute Competition
2013 Honorable Mention in the Alexander Buono International Flute
Competition
2013 Co-Founder, Executive and Artistic Director of New England
Chamber Players
2013 Semi-Finalist in New York City Ballet Second Flute/Piccolo
Audition
2010 Semi-Finalist in Portland Symphony Piccolo Audition
2010 Semi-Finalist in Rhode Island Philharmonic Piccolo Audition
2010 Finalist in Air Force Band of Liberty Flute/Piccolo Audition
2008, 2012–17 Boston University Scholarship Recipient, Graduate Assistant
2008 Participant in National Flute Association Young Artists
Competition
2005 Oberlin Conservatory Concerto Competition Finalist
2002 Mannes Preparatory Division Concerto Competition Winner
2002 Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center Young Musician's
Competition
2002 Gabriel Kosakoff Award winner for Instrumental Excellence
2001 ASCAP Ira Gershwin Award for Excellence in Orchestral
Playing
Affiliations
National Flute Association
American Federation of Musicians
Boston Musicians Association
Pi Kappa Lambda

Discovering The Flute Music of Mieczysla PDF

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Discovering The Flute Music of Mieczysla PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Discovering The Flute Music of Mieczysla PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BOSTON UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS

DISCOVERING THE FLUTE MUSIC OF MIECZYSŁAW WEINBERG

ALEXANDRA STRAUBINGER CONWAY

B.M., Oberlin College Conservatory, 2006

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Musical Arts

First Reader ________________________________________________________

Second Reader ________________________________________________________

Third Reader ________________________________________________________

encouragement. A special thanks to Gwen Klassen, Lauren Eselson, and the

DISCOVERING THE FLUTE MUSIC OF MIECZYSŁAW WEINBERG

ALEXANDRA STRAUBINGER CONWAY

Boston University College of Fine Arts, 2017

Major Professor: David Kopp, Associate Professor of Music, Music Theory

Composer Mieczysław Weinberg (1919–1996) was a Polish Jew who

emigrated to Soviet Russia in an effort to escape Nazi aggression during World

for flute are experiencing a resurgence in interest in recent years as Weinberg’s

Russian school of flute playing, focusing on the Moscow Conservatory, where

American and French traditions. The purpose of this document is to illuminate

the contributions of Weinberg and Korneyev, and to introduce this literature to

TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................................vii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ viii

LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix

NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION.............................................................................. xii

CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................ 17

CHAPTER THREE ........................................................................................................ 25

CHAPTER FOUR .......................................................................................................... 39

TWELVE MINIATURES OP. 29 (1945) ................................................................... 39

FIVE PIECES (1947) ................................................................................................... 64

CONCERTO NO. 1, OP. 75 (1961) ........................................................................... 75

CONCERTO NO. 2, OP. 148 (1987) ......................................................................... 98

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 121

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................... 122

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 123

CURRICULUM VITAE .............................................................................................. 127

Table 2.1 Breakdown of Weinberg’s compositional periods based on Elphick

Table 2.2 Weinberg’s compositional periods with selected compositions and

Table 4.1 Key scheme of Twelve Miniatures ............................................................ 40

Table 4.2 Etude harmonic content, measures 21–48 ................................................ 61

Table 4.4 Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 1 ............................. 79

Table 4.4 Entrance of themes in Concerto No. 1, movement 3 ............................. 94

Figure 3.2 Degrees of Familiarity of US Trained Flutists with Soviet

Composers of Flute Music................................................................................... 37

Figure 3.3 Degrees of Familiarity of Internationally Trained Flutists with

Soviet Composers of Flute Music ...................................................................... 38

Figure 4.1, Twelve Miniatures Movement 1 ............................................................. 43

Figure 4.2, Twelve Miniatures Movement 2, 1–9 ..................................................... 45

Figure 4.3, Twelve Miniatures Movement 4, 1–8 ..................................................... 48

Figure 4.4, Twelve Miniatures Movement 4, 30–33 ................................................. 49

Figure 4.5, Twelve Miniatures Movement 5, 1–5 ..................................................... 51

Figure 4.6, Twelve Miniatures Movement 5, 18–23 ................................................. 52

Figure 4.7, Twelve Miniatures Movement 6, 1–10 ................................................... 53

Figure 4.8, Twelve Miniatures Movement 6, 46–62 ................................................. 54

Figure 4.9, Twelve Miniatures Movement 8, 1–14 ................................................... 57

Figure 4.10, Twelve Miniatures Movement 9, 52–57 ............................................... 59