跳转至

Mstislav Rostropovich: Cellist, Teacher, Legend

作品信息

Mstislav Rostropovich: Cellist, Teacher, Legend - Elizabeth Wilson

注：原文为英文，中文翻译为机器翻译+简单校对润色，建议对照原文阅读。

此外，文末还附上了我同期读到的两份采访，以及附录中声援索尔仁尼琴的公开信。

正文

罗斯特罗波维奇转而向他的作曲老师寻求音乐刺激。他认为自己有幸成为维萨里翁·谢巴林的学生，而谢巴林本人曾师从被称为俄罗斯二十世纪音乐宗师的尼古拉·米亚斯科夫斯基。1942 年底，谢巴林被召回，并被任命为莫斯科音乐学院院长，他非常适合担任这一职务。他的高尚品德和精湛的作曲教学技巧同样受到人们的尊敬。虽然他的教学方法以俄罗斯古典传统为基础，但谢巴林力求培养每个学生的个性，因此他们的发展迥然不同： 蒂洪·赫伦尼科夫和爱迪生·杰尼索夫都是谢巴林的忠实学生，但他们在风格和美学上却代表了苏联音乐的两极。谢巴林对音乐学院倾注了全部心血，他不仅将精力花费在提高学生成绩上，也花费在寻找资金修缮校舍、鼓励音乐会活动和吸引新员工方面上。

谢巴林最大的成就是在 1943 年说服肖斯塔科维奇加入作曲系。罗斯特罗波维奇从奥里恩堡返回莫斯科后不久，科佐鲁波夫安排他与这位伟大的作曲家见面。肖斯塔科维奇无可挑剔的举止和对人的关注给年轻的斯拉瓦留下了深刻印象。直到今天他都无法忘记，当他把大衣放在教授衣帽间时，德米特里·德米特里耶维奇是如何与每一位服务员（其中大多数是没有牙齿的老太太）握手并称呼名字问候的。尽管如此，罗斯特罗波维奇还是战战兢兢地向德米特里·德米特里耶维奇展示了他的第一首钢琴协奏曲：他以极快的速度弹奏了一遍，以掩饰他对这首曲子有点“拉赫玛尼诺夫风格”的尴尬。然而，肖斯塔科维奇却对斯拉瓦留下了深刻印象，对他赞不绝口，并愿意让他上自己的配器课。

Rostropovich looked instead to his composition teachers for musical stimulation. He counted himself fortunate to be a pupil of Vissarion Shebalin, who had himself studied with the so-called patriarch of Russian twentieth-century music, Nikolay Myaskovsky. Towards the end of 1942, Shebalin was called back from evacuation and appointed director of the Moscow Conservatoire, a position for which he was eminently suited. His great moral integrity was as much respected as his consummate skill in teaching composition. While his approach was based on Russian classical tradition, Shebalin sought to foster the individuality of each student, as a result of which they evolved very differently: Tikhon Khrennikov and Edison Denisov were both devoted students of Shebalin, yet in both style and aesthetic they represented opposite polarities of Soviet music. Shebalin was totally dedicated to the Conservatoire, and spent his energy not only in raising the level of student achievement, but in finding funds to repair the building, in encouraging concert activity and in attracting fresh staff.

Shebalin’s greatest coup was to persuade Shostakovich to join the composition staff in 1943. Shortly after Rostropovich returned to Moscow from Orienburg, Kozolupov arranged for him to meet the great composer. The young Slava was enormously impressed by Shostakovich’s impeccable manners and attention to people. Even today he cannot forget how, when he left his coat in the professors’ cloakroom, Dmitri Dmitrievich would shake hands and greet by name every single one of the attendants, most of whom were toothless old ladies, and the students sitting on the benches between the different floors met with similar attention. It was with some trepidation, nonetheless, that Rostropovich showed his first piano concerto to Dmitri Dmitrievich: he played it through at an enormously fast speed to hide his embarrassment at its somewhat ‘sub-Rachmaninov’ style. Shostakovich, however, was impressed, showering Slava with compliments and willingly accepting him in his orchestration class.

事实上，我在音乐学院学习期间写了很多音乐作品，包括弦乐四重奏和第二钢琴协奏曲。随着我音乐会生涯的活跃发展，大家都认为我的人生道路显然是作为一名演奏家。然而，肖斯塔科维奇经常打电话给我母亲，告诉她我应该放弃大提琴，成为一名作曲家。我继续上作曲课，一方面是因为这对我作为音乐家的发展和拓宽视野很重要，另一方面也是因为我希望与肖斯塔科维奇和谢巴林这样的好老师保持联系。

1948 年 2 月，臭名昭著的《音乐形式主义法令》颁布，对苏联的音乐生活产生了毁灭性的影响。罗斯特罗波维奇的老师谢巴林和肖斯塔科维奇被指控“专业不称职”而被解职。这对罗斯特罗波维奇产生了决定性的影响：“法令颁布后，我完全失去了继续学习作曲的欲望。我被转到尼古拉·拉科夫的班上，但尽管拉科夫是个好老师，我还是停止了上课。亲眼目睹自己的偶像被践踏，我实在受不了。”

In fact I wrote quite a lot of music during my Conservatoire years, including a string quartet and my second piano concerto. As my active concert career unfolded, it seemed obvious to everybody that my path in life lay as a performer. Nevertheless Shostakovich would often ring my mother and tell her that I should give up the cello and become a composer. I continued attending composition classes, partly because it was important for me to develop as a musician and to widen my horizons, but also because I wished to maintain my contacts with such wonderful teachers as Shostakovich and Shebalin.

When the infamous Decree on Formalism in Music was published in February 1948, it had a devastating effect on Soviet musical life. Rostropovich’s teachers, Shebalin and Shostakovich, were removed from their posts, accused of ‘professional incompetence’. This had a decisive effect on Rostropovich: ‘After the Decree I lost all desire to continue studying composition. I was transferred to Nikolay Rakov’s class, but although Rakov was a good teacher, I just stopped going to lessons. It was too much for me to have to witness my idols being trampled on.’

1945 年 12 月，沃尔特·萨斯坎德指挥的伦敦爱乐乐团进行了演出。罗斯特罗波维奇没有参加莫斯科首演，但他喜欢重复他从里赫特那里听到的关于普罗科菲耶夫对演出评价的故事。当作曲家来到后台向艺术家致敬时，梅利克·帕沙耶夫试图打破尴尬的沉默。“那么，谢尔盖·谢尔盖耶维奇，你觉得怎么样？”普罗科菲耶夫带着真诚的笑容回答道：“不能更糟了。”这样的故事引起了罗斯特罗波维奇的兴趣，他决定学习大提琴协奏曲，以此来接近作曲家。然而，他的第一个障碍是无法获得管弦乐谱：

最终我得到了钢琴谱，并得以学习这首协奏曲。1948 年 1 月 18 日，我在音乐学院小厅的独奏节目中用钢琴演奏了这首协奏曲。我的表妹伊琳娜·科佐卢波娃为我伴奏。当然，我梦想着能让普罗科菲耶夫看看我的大提琴拉得有多好，因此我刻苦钻研这部作品。也许，谁知道呢，说不定他真的会喜欢我的演奏方式？

罗斯特罗波维奇回忆说，尽管这次演出并非一帆风顺，普罗科菲耶夫确实参加了独奏会，并给他留下了深刻的印象：

那些年，我演出时从不戴眼镜，尽管我近视……当我演奏完毕时，我看到大厅后面有一个秃头，我以为是普罗科菲耶夫。他不停地热烈鼓掌，我不停地向他鞠躬。我热情高涨，演奏了很多首返场曲，从我自己改编的《罗密欧与朱丽叶》中的“Dance of the Antillean Maidens（少女的百合之舞）”开始。第五次返场后，我走进休息室。我正准备再次登台，突然发现普罗科菲耶夫本人正不耐烦地站在我面前。由于我视力不好，我把他和我同样秃顶的朋友莫特科夫斯基搞混了，他是莫斯科大剧院的大提琴手，坐在后排。普罗科菲耶夫疑惑地看着我：“年轻人，你还准备出去多久……？”

骂完之后，谢尔盖·谢尔盖耶维奇向我表示祝贺，并对我说：“你知道，我想对这首协奏曲做一些改动。虽然这首曲子有一些非常好的材料，但结构不够紧凑。如果你愿意帮助我，我会非常感激。”听到普罗科菲耶夫这样的话，我完全疯了。那是我一生中最快乐的时刻之一。“当然，”我回答道，“我时刻准备着为您服务……无论白天还是黑夜，任何时候都可以。”

December 1945, with the London Philharmonic Orchestra under Walter Susskind. Rostropovich had not attended the Moscow premiere, but he liked to repeat a story he heard from Richter about Prokofiev’s assessment of the performance. When the composer came backstage to salute the artists, Melik-Pashayev tried to break an awkward silence. ‘Well, Sergey Sergeyevich, what did you think?’ Prokofiev replied with an ingenuous smile: ‘Nothing could have been worse.’ Such stories intrigued Rostropovich, and he decided to learn the cello concerto as a means of approaching the composer. His first obstacle came, however, when he was unable to obtain an orchestral score:

Eventually I obtained a piano score, and was able to learn the concerto. I performed it with piano in my recital programme at the Small Hall of the Conservatoire on 18 January 1948. My cousin Irina Kozolupova accompanied me. Of course I dreamed of being able to show Prokofiev how well I played the cello, and I studied the work hard. Perhaps, who knows, he might actually like the way I play?
Prokofiev did indeed attend the recital performance, and was suitably impressed — though the occasion did not pass without mishap, as Rostropovich recalls:

In those years I never wore glasses when I performed, despite the fact that I am rather short-sighted . . . When I finished playing, I saw somebody with a bald head at the back of the hall whom I believed to be Prokofiev. He kept applauding vigorously and I kept bowing in his direction. In my enthusiasm I played lots of encores, starting with my own arrangement of the“Dance of the Antillean Maidens’ from Romeo and Juliet. After the fifth encore I walked into the green room. I was about to go out on stage again, when I was suddenly aware that Prokofiev himself was impatiently standing before me. Through my shortsightedness, I had confused him with my equally bald friend Motkovsky, a cellist from the Bolshoi Theatre, who was sitting in the back row. Prokofiev looked at me quizzically: ‘Young man, how much longer are you going to go out for…?

After this scolding, Sergey Sergeyevich congratulated me, and told me, ‘You know, I'd like to make some changes in this concerto. Although there is some very good material in the piece, the structure is not compact enough. If you would be willing to help me I’d be most grateful.’ To hear such words from Prokofiev sent me into total delirium. It was one of the happiest moments of my life. ‘Of course,’ I replied. ‘I’m ready to serve for eternity . . . any time of day or night.’

罗斯特罗波维奇很幸运，因为他演奏普罗科菲耶夫协奏曲的时间恰逢苏联音乐界发生动乱之前。不到一个月后，1949 年 2 月，共产党中央委员会颁布了一项名为《关于穆拉德利歌剧〈伟大的友谊〉的法令》，指责苏联主要作曲家“形式主义和反苏”。在斯大林高压统治的最后几年里，这样的指控无异于公开羞辱，并可能导致最严重的后果。首当其冲的是肖斯塔科维奇、普罗科菲耶夫、米亚斯科夫斯基、谢巴林和哈恰图良，他们被指控为“反人民”，散布悲观主义和腐朽思想。罗斯特罗波维奇回忆起这段惨痛的经历：

他们的大多数朋友都疏远了这些失宠的作曲家。虽然我当时还很年轻，但我理解他们的巨大价值。他们是我的偶像，我知道我永远不会背叛他们，尽管在当时，年轻的演奏家和音乐家在讲坛上大声抨击和谴责他们的老师是非常时髦的事情。肖斯塔科维奇、普罗科菲耶夫、米亚斯科夫斯基和谢巴林都遭到了他们的许多同事和一些学生的无耻对待。在音乐学院组织的会议上，可以听到学生和教师发表刻薄的言论：“感谢党，我的耳朵终于被打开了。我们现在明白了，这不是音乐，而是垃圾。”不幸的是，这样的忏悔经常可以听到。法令颁布前一年，我开始出国巡演。我的职业生涯正处于重要的发展阶段。但当时我从未说过或写过一个字，对这些作曲家中的任何一位表示过哪怕是最轻微的怀疑。当然，他们对我的态度与我对他们的行为是一致的，他们也为我创作了他们的作品。

法令颁布后的几个月内，第一个为罗斯特罗波维奇作曲的被定罪的“形式主义者”是尼古拉·米亚斯科夫斯基，他的第二首大提琴奏鸣曲就是在那个时候创作的。这首奏鸣曲被视为平反之作，并获得了斯大林奖。当罗斯特罗波维奇到家里祝贺米亚斯科夫斯基时，这位作曲家在乐谱上写下了一段感人的献词：“献给姆斯季斯拉夫·罗斯特罗波维奇，来自不太配得上他的尼古拉·米亚斯科夫斯基。”

Rostropovich’s timing was fortunate, for his performance of
Prokofiev’s concerto occurred just before an event that convulsed Soviet musical life. On ro February, less than a month later, the Central Committee of the Communist Party issued a Decree entitled ‘On V. Muradeli’s opera The Great Friendship’, which accused leading Soviet composers of being ‘formalist and anti-Soviet’. In the last years of Stalin’s repressive rule, such accusations were tantamount to public disgrace, and could have led to the severest consequences. The main culprits were named as Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Shebalin and Khatchaturian, and accused of being ‘anti-people’ and disseminating pessimism and decadence. Rostropovich recalls this grim episode:

Most of their friends distanced themselves from the disgraced composers. Although I was still very young, I understood their enormous significance. They were my idols and I knew that I would never betray them, although at that time it was very fashionable for young performers and musicians to shout criticism from the tribune, and to denounce their teachers. Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky and Shebalin were all shamelessly treated by many of their colleagues and also by some of their pupils. At the Conservatoire, meetings were organised where students and teachers could be heard to make vitriolic statements:“Thanks to the Communist Party, my ears have at last been opened. We now understand that this is not music, but rubbish.’ Such confessions, unfortunately, could be heard rather frequently. One year before the Decree I started travelling abroad. I had an important career opening out ahead of me. But at the time I never so much as uttered or wrote a single word in which I expressed even the slightest doubt about any of these composers. Naturally their attitude to me was consistent with my behaviour towards them, and they wrote their compositions for me.

In the months after the Decree, the first of the condemned ‘formalists’
to compose for Rostropovich was Nikolay Myaskovsky, whose second cello sonata dates from this time. The sonata was seen as a work of rehabilitation, and was awarded a Stalin prize. When Rostropovich went to congratulate Myaskovsky at home, the composer wrote a touching dedication into the score: ‘To Mstislav Rostropovich, from the not-quite-worthy-of-him Nikolay Myaskovsky.’

1948 年 12 月，我与亚历山大·德久欣首次演奏了这首奏鸣曲。米亚斯科夫斯基带着他的朋友普罗科菲耶夫来到音乐会现场，普罗科菲耶夫来到后台说：“我也想为你写一首奏鸣曲。”普罗科菲耶夫还对我的演奏提出了一些略带批评的意见，他说：“在第三乐章中，当你在 G 弦上弹奏十六分音符时，大家什么都听不到。”说到这里，他明显停顿了一下，看到我沮丧的脸，他笑着补充道：“但是当你在 A 弦上将同一乐段演奏高两个八度的同样段落时，它听起来绝对非常精彩！”我必须说，普罗科菲耶夫的这一观点得到了验证。因为在协奏曲第二乐章的开头，大提琴在低音提琴上演奏了一个非常快速的段落。最初，大提琴在没有伴奏的情况下独自演奏，只有当大提琴演奏到 A 弦更高更清晰的音域时，乐团才开始演奏。

普罗科菲耶夫刚完成新的大提琴奏鸣曲，就邀请罗斯特罗波维奇到他位于莫斯科郊外尼古拉戈拉的别墅做客。对这位年轻的大提琴家来说，第一次拜访是一个难忘的时刻：

我和列冯·阿托夫米扬一起乘车前往。当我们驶入别墅大门时，我看到普罗科菲耶夫朝我们走来。他穿着一件覆盆子色的长袍，头上缠着一条像头巾一样的毛巾。他身后跟着一群咯咯叫的小鸡和公鸡，显然他刚刚喂过它们。“先生，您好！”他开玩笑地说。我惊讶地呆在原地，忘了下车。当谢尔盖·谢尔盖耶维奇看到我惊愕的样子时，他打趣道：“请原谅我的乡下打扮。我精心准备了这首奏鸣曲，还凭记忆学会了钢琴部分。”

当时，普罗科菲耶夫的钢琴弹得已经不那么好了，当我们通读奏鸣曲时，我惊讶于他竟然能如此迅速地忘记自己的乐曲。他弹得就像在视奏！当他弹错音符时，我甚至还纠正了他。这时，他转向我：“年轻人，这首曲子是你写的还是我写的？”

I gave the first performance of the sonata with Aleksandr Dedyukhin in December 1948. Myaskovsky brought his friend, Prokofiev, to the concert, who came backstage and declared, ‘I too want to write a sonata for you.’ Prokofiev also made some slightly critical comments about my performance, saying, ‘In the third movement when you play the spiccato sixteenth notes on the G string one can’t hear a thing.’ Here he paused significantly, and seeing my dejected face, he smiled and added, ‘But when you play the same passage two octaves up on the A string it sounds absolutely brilliant!’ I must say that Prokofiev put this observation to the test. For in the opening of the second movement of the Sinfonia Concertante, the cello starts with a very fast passage on the lower strings. Initially it plays alone without accompaniment, and the orchestra is introduced only once the cello has achieved the higher and clearer register of the A string.

As soon as Prokofiev had completed his new cello sonata he invited Rostropovich down to his dacha at Nikolina Gora, outside Moscow. This first visit was a memorable occasion for the young cellist.

I travelled down by car with Levon Atovmyan. As we drove into the gates of his dacha, I saw Prokofiev coming towards us. He was wearing a raspberry-coloured dressing gown and had a towel tied turban-like on his head. Behind him ran a batch of clucking chicks and cockerels; evidently he had just been feeding them. ‘Good day, Sir,’ he said jokingly. I was rooted to the spot in amazement and couldn’t get out of the car. When Sergey Sergeyevich saw my dismay, he quipped, ‘Pardon me for my country attire.’ I had prepared the sonata well and had also learnt the piano part from memory.

By now Prokofiev no longer played the piano so well, and when we read through the sonata I was amazed that he had managed to forget his own music so quickly. He played as if he was sight-reading! I even went so far as to correct him when he played some wrong notes. At this he turned to me:“Young man, who wrote this work, you or me?’

1948 年的法令颁布后，普罗科菲耶夫和肖斯塔科维奇都遭受了巨大的剥夺。他们的旧作无法演出，而且几乎不可能获得委托。作曲家唯一的收入来源是创作爱国主义的即兴音乐和电影音乐，而这些音乐在当时只不过是斯大林的宣传品。有一次，普罗科菲耶夫打电话给斯拉瓦，告诉他自己没钱买早餐，而且他不得不解雇他的厨师，因为他再也付不起她的工资了。罗斯特罗波维奇立即采取行动，前往作曲家联盟请赫连尼科夫帮忙。赫连尼科夫以作曲家联盟第一书记的身份礼貌地听取了意见。然后，他把穆兹冯德的一位官员莱姆佩尔特叫到自己的办公室，命令他给普罗科菲耶夫一些现金。

Both Prokofiev and Shostakovich suffered great deprivation after the decree of 1948. Their old works could not be performed, and it was next to impossible to obtain commissions. The only way for a composer to earn was to write patriotic occasional music and music for the films which at the time were little more than propaganda for Stalin. Once Prokofiev phoned Slava to inform him that he had no money to buy breakfast and would have to dismiss his cook as he could no longer pay her. Rostropovich immediately took action and went to the Union of Composers to ask Khrennikov to help out. In his capacity as First Secretary of the Composers’ Union, Khrennikov listened politely. He then called into his office a certain Lempert, an official from Muzfond, and ordered him to give some funds in cash to Prokofiev.

两位“斯拉瓦”，里赫特和罗斯特罗波维奇，于 1949 年 12 月在作曲家联盟全体会议的一场闭门音乐会上首次演奏了这首作品，1950 年 3 月 1 日，在音乐学院小礼堂的二重奏独奏音乐会上，这首作品正式公开首演。罗斯特罗波维奇知道普罗科菲耶夫此时急需用钱，于是决定为负责收购新作品出版的委员会演奏这首大提琴奏鸣曲。在苏联，并没有专门给作曲家的佣金，但可以事后支付出版和表演权的费用。罗斯特罗波维奇回忆起和亚历山大·杰久欣在涅格林纳亚街的一个房间里为负责这项决定的官员亚历山大·阿尼西莫夫演奏这首奏鸣曲。罗斯特罗波维奇知道，阿尼西莫夫对普罗科菲耶夫没什么好感。阿尼西莫夫是一名受过专业训练的合唱指挥，20 世纪 40 年代中期曾担任莫斯科大剧院的院长，1948 年法令颁布后，他立即将普罗科菲耶夫的作品从莫斯科大剧院的保留曲目中剔除。不久之后，罗斯特罗波维奇在音乐学院的走廊里拦住了阿尼西莫夫。“亚历山大·伊万诺维奇，你不觉得把普罗科菲耶夫的《罗密欧与朱丽叶》这样一部杰出的作品从保留曲目中剔除而感到羞愧吗？”“杰出？”阿尼西莫夫哼了一声。“没什么杰出的。只不过是钹的叮叮声和鼓的𠳐𠳐声！’（当然，莫斯科大剧院的导演包厢位于舞台附近，就在打击乐区的正上方！）然而，尽管阿尼西莫夫对普罗科菲耶夫怀有敌意，但他还是通过了大提琴奏鸣曲的出版发行，只是将其归入了一级“B类”，这意味着作曲家获得的报酬会更少。

罗斯特罗波维奇同样参与了普罗科菲耶夫第七交响曲的出版和表演，当时他和钢琴家阿纳托利·维杰尔尼科夫为由各种音乐家和作曲家组成的广播委员会演奏了四手联弹版本。正是通过莫斯科广播交响乐团首席指挥萨莫舒德和广播电台台长、作曲家巴拉桑扬，普罗科菲耶夫第一次被要求为广播管弦乐团写一首“儿童交响曲”。罗斯特罗波维奇和维杰尔尼科夫成功试奏了这部作品，并重复演奏了两次，成功售出了交响曲的版权。欣喜若狂的罗斯特罗波维奇匆匆忙忙买了一块蛋糕和一瓶香槟，与普罗科菲耶夫一起庆祝。作曲家因身体不适没有参加试奏，但他一听说试奏成功，就立即把乐谱上的标题“儿童交响曲”擦掉了。罗斯特罗波维奇问他在做什么，普罗科菲耶夫回答说：“既然大人们似乎都很喜欢它，我们就把这部作品称为第七交响曲吧。”

从某种程度上来说，普罗科菲耶夫的音乐引起如此多的政治争议是具有讽刺意味的。正如里赫特曾经在与罗斯特罗波维奇的交谈中感叹的那样，“仔细想想，普罗科菲耶夫的音乐具备了当局所要求的所有品质：旋律优美、曲调动听，而且通俗易懂。”里赫特一直是普罗科菲耶夫的忠实支持者，他表现出坚定的勇气，拒绝再演奏任何音乐会，直到被允许演奏作曲家的第九钢琴奏鸣曲。然而，罗斯特罗波维奇才是与普罗科菲耶夫在日常生活中关系最密切的人。里赫特回忆说，在他们演奏了大提琴奏鸣曲之后，“罗斯特罗波维奇深深吸引了普罗科菲耶夫。他完全被他的音乐迷住了。当人们看到他们在一起时，很可能会把谢尔盖·谢尔盖耶维奇误认为他的父亲——他们太像了。’ 事隔很久之后，埃米尔·吉列尔斯曾暗示罗斯特罗波维奇“依附于普罗科菲耶夫”是出于机会主义的原因，而作曲家的遗孀强烈反对这一指责：“当所有人都抛弃他时，只有罗斯特罗波维奇留在普罗科菲耶夫身边。他是我们唯一可以依靠的人。” 他们的关系建立在坚实的音乐基础之上。

The two ‘Slavas’, Richter and Rostropovich, first performed the work at a closed concert at the Plenum of the Union of Composers in December 1949, and the official public premiere was given at their duo recital at the Small Hall of the Conservatoire on 1 March 1950. Rostropovich knew that Prokofiev was in desperate need of money at this time, and decided to play the cello sonata to the committee responsible for acquiring new works for publication. Commissions to composers did not exist as such in the Soviet Union, but money could be paid retrospectively for publication and performance rights. Rostropovich recalls playing the sonata with Aleksandr Dedyukhin in a room on Neglinnaya Street for Aleksandr Anisimov, the official responsible for the decision. Anisimov was hardly well disposed to Prokofiev, as Rostropovich knew. A choral conductor by training, Anisimov had been director of the Bolshoi Theatre during the mid-1940s, and had immediately removed Prokofiev’s works from the Bolshoi’s repertoire after the 1948 decree. Shortly afterwards, Rostropovich stopped Anisimov in the Conservatoire corridor. ‘Aleksandr Ivanovich, aren’t you ashamed to have taken out of repertoire such a brilliant work as Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet?’ ‘Brilliant?’ Anisimov snorted. ‘Nothing brilliant there. It’s only dring-dring from the cymbals and boomboom from the drums!’ (The director’s box at the Bolshoi is of course situated near the stage, directly over the percussion section!) Despite his hostility to Prokofiev, however, Anisimov passed the cello sonata for publication, but allocated it into the ‘B category’ of class 1, which meant less money for the composer.

Rostropovich was equally involved in getting Prokofiev’s seventh symphony accepted for publication and performance, when he and the pianist Anatoly Vedernikov played it in a four-hand version for the Radio committee, which was made up of various musicologists and composers. It was through the conductor Samosud, chief conductor of the Radio Orchestra in Moscow, and the composer Balasanyan, director of the radio station, that Prokofiev had first been asked to write a ‘symphony for children’ for the Radio Orchestra. Rostropovich and Vedernikov auditioned the work successfully, repeating it twice, and rights to the symphony were duly acquired. A delighted Rostropovich hurried away to buy a cake and a bottle of champagne to celebrate with Prokofiev. The composer had not attended the audition because of ill health, but as soon as he heard of the successful outcome, he rubbed out the title ‘Children’s Symphony’ from the score. Rostropovich asked him what he was doing, to which Prokofiev replied: ‘Since the adults seem to like it so much, let’s just call the work the seventh symphony.’

In some ways, it was ironic that Prokofiev’s music had caused such political controversy. As Richter had once exclaimed in conversation with Rostropovich, ‘When you think of it Prokofiev’s music has all the qualities demanded by the authorities: it’s melodic and tuneful, and accessible to the people.’ Richter remained a loyal supporter of Prokofiev, and showed staunch courage when he refused to play any more concerts until he was allowed to programme the composer’s ninth piano sonata. Nevertheless, it was Rostropovich who became closest to Prokofiev on a day-to-day basis. Richter recalled that after they performed the cello sonata, ‘Rostropovich latched onto Prokofiev. He was completely entranced by his music. When one saw them together it was quite possible to mistake Sergey Sergeyevich for his father — they were so alike.’ Long after the event, Emil Gilels once implied that Rostropovich had ‘latched onto Prokofiev’ for oppor-tunistic reasons, an accusation which the composer’s widow strongly rejected: ‘When everybody else had deserted, the only person who stayed near Prokofiev was Rostropovich. He was the one person on whom we could rely.’t Their relationship was built on firmly musical grounds.

我认为这张录音中的声音并不能还原在音乐厅听到的声音。但它确实传达了当时的特殊氛围，普罗科菲耶夫的出现，以及聚集在音乐学院小厅的所有莫斯科的音乐精英。人们可以感受到我的激动（这是我第一次和里赫特一起演奏），但更多的是节日的气氛。这是为数不多的几场音乐会之一，空气中弥漫着一种难以言喻的气氛——一种浓缩的、浓郁的人类情感、巨大的期望和特殊的能量。如果有人把手帕扔进大厅，它就会悬在空中，在半空中飞行。在某一时刻，观众无法控制自己的情绪，在谐谑曲结束后爆发出掌声，谐谑曲的曲段非常出色，它精彩的上行段落听起来就像猫儿在键盘上窜来窜去。当然，这些相当老练的观众非常清楚，他们不应该在乐章之间鼓掌，但他们无法抗拒这种自发的冲动。现在，当我聆听这段录音时，仿佛投影仪照亮了我生命中这一难忘的时刻：我生动地看到了大厅里的面孔，闻到了当时的气氛。我甚至能感受到普罗科菲耶夫的香水味，他非常喜欢用香水（顺便说一句，用香水也是他教我喜欢的）。这张唱片散发出的芳香让我重温往昔。

I don’t think the sound in this recording represents what was heard in the hall.But it does convey the special atmosphere of the occasion, the presence ofProkofiev, and the whole musical elite of Moscow gathered in the Small Hall ofthe Conservatoire. One can sense my agitation (it was the first time I played with Richter), but more than that the festive spirit of the occasion. It was one of those few concerts which had an undefinable something in the air — a concentration, thick with intense human emotions, of great expectations, a special energy. If one had thrown a handkerchief into the hall it would have hung in the air, suspended in mid-flight. At one point the audience could not overcome their emotion and broke into applause after the end of the scherzo, with its brilliant upward-running passage, sounding like cats scampering up the keyboard. Naturally, this rather sophisticated audience knew perfectly well that it shouldn’t applaud between movements, but it was unable to resist the spontaneous urge. When I listen to this recording now, it is as if a projector illuminates this memorable moment of my life: I vividly see the faces in the hall, and smell the atmosphere. I even sense Prokofiev’s perfume which he loved using so much (using perfume, incidentally, was something he taught me to love). This recording has that aromatic flavour which resurrects the past for me.

罗斯特罗波维奇一直梦想着昔日的老师能为他写作，尽管他从未向肖斯塔科维奇表达过这一热切的愿望：

1945 年 12 月，我在全联盟比赛中获奖后不久后，在肖斯塔科维奇的建议下，我去了伊万诺沃作曲家疗养院。他的家人也住在那里。有一天，当我和德米特里·德米特里耶维奇的妻子尼娜·瓦西里耶夫娜一起去滑雪时，我触及了一个神圣不可侵犯的问题，我问道：“尼娜·瓦西里耶夫娜，既然你这么了解你的丈夫，请告诉我，我应该怎么做才能让他为大提琴写点什么？”她专注地看着我，说：“斯拉瓦，如果我告诉你，你必须保证不和任何人谈论这件事。”在期待这个神奇公式的过程中，我开始像一条准备扑向野味的狗一样颤抖起来。“好吧，斯拉瓦，如果你真的想让他为你写曲子，那就永远不要请求他这样做！”

读完《文化报》上的文章后，罗斯特罗波维奇的好奇心被极大地激发了，但他依然保持沉默。然后，在 7 月底，他收到了肖斯塔科维奇的明信片，邀请他演奏刚刚完成的协奏曲。他急切地希望尽快收到乐谱，于是带着钢琴师亚历山大·德久欣前往列宁格勒，与肖斯塔科维奇见面，肖斯塔科维奇当时住在城外科马罗沃的别墅里：

我于 8 月 2 日和德久欣一起从莫斯科抵达，当天晚上，德米特里·德米特里耶维奇邀请我去他姐姐玛丽亚·德米特里耶夫娜位于喀山大教堂对面五楼的公寓。在那里的立式钢琴上，他第一次为我演奏了大提琴协奏曲，然后给了我乐谱。在演奏第二乐章时，他甚至流下了几滴眼泪。他告诉我，这部作品对他来说非常珍贵。接着，他又提出了一个非常奇怪的问题，但在引出这个问题的过程中，他采取了迂回的手段。他不断地重复着“请告诉我，你喜欢这部作品吗？不，请告诉我真相，你真的喜欢吗？这对我非常重要。”简直就像在折磨我一样。我坚持向他保证，我的内心彻底被震撼了，我深深地被这首协奏曲打动。最后，他认可了我的说法，并说：“那就只剩下一个问题了。如果你真的这么喜欢它，那么请允许我把它献给你好吗？”我永远忘不了这句话。没有任何一位作曲家，哪怕是最谦卑、最没有才华的作曲家，也从来没有这样对我说过。这在我的一生中留下了印记。我当然同意了！

于是，罗斯特罗波维奇把自己锁在爱乐大厅对面的叶夫罗佩斯卡亚酒店的房间里，8 月 3 日上午，他坐下来练习。当天他练习了 10 个小时，第二天又练习了 10 个小时，第三天他练习了 8 个小时。

那天，德久欣和我去了德米特里·德米特里耶维奇在科马罗沃的别墅。每个人都很激动，我们就坐了一会儿，但我已经迫不及待地想开始演奏了。然后我生命中最伟大的时刻之一到来了。德米特里·德米特里耶维奇说：“等一下，斯拉瓦，我去给你找一个谱架。”“没必要，”我回答道。“你说什么，没必要，这是什么意思？”“我会凭记忆演奏。”“不可能，不可能！”于是，我和德久欣在钢琴前第一次凭记忆演奏了这首协奏曲。

这场首演显然是所有见证者（大部分是肖斯塔科维奇的家人）的一次非凡而难忘的体验。用肖斯塔科维奇的女婿叶夫根尼·楚科夫斯基的话来说：“聚集在这个小房间里的人们陷入了一种表面麻木的状态，尽管他们每个人的内心都燃烧着激情。他们被作曲家的意志所俘虏，作曲家坐在那里紧张地聆听着只有他一个人听过的音乐……我心想：‘如果不是上帝，是谁赋予了作者如此支配人的力量？’”至于作曲家，他在谈到自己的作品时说：“我选取了一个简单的小主题，并试图将其发展成一首乐曲。”正如罗斯特罗波维奇所叙述的：

他变得容光焕发。“让我给我的朋友伊萨克·达维多维奇 [格利克曼] 打电话。”他喊道，并立即请他马上过来。当格利克曼在路上时（他至少需要四十五分钟才能到达），我又把协奏曲演奏了一遍，只是给德米特里·德米特里耶维奇。之后我们打开了一瓶伏特加——它成了燃料。我和德米特里·德米特里耶维奇毫无抵抗之力，把它一饮而尽。在等待格里克曼的时候，伏特加逐渐被我的身体吸收了。当伊萨克·达维多维奇到达时，肖斯塔科维奇让我再演奏一遍协奏曲。我不知道当时我演奏了什么，但它可能与肖斯塔科维奇的协奏曲没有任何关系，也许它与圣桑的协奏曲混在一起了。我已经完全糊涂了，我处于一种欣快的状态，我想那就像吸毒一样。在极度的快乐中，我感觉不到自己，也感觉不到音乐。德米特里·德米特里耶维奇不停地说：“这一切简直太奇妙了。”

罗斯特罗波维奇在三天内学会这部作品的故事已成为传奇，但在我看来，更令人震惊的是他如此迅速而深刻地认同了这部新作品。大提琴协奏曲沿用了 1948 年为奥伊斯特拉赫创作的第一小提琴协奏曲的结构：四乐章拱形结构，中央慢板引出一段延长的快板，然后直接进入终曲。这首协奏曲充满了对比，但主要情绪是充满活力的，外乐章带有明显的讽刺和挖苦意味，而更具哲理的慢板乐章则表达了从安静的冥想到内心强烈的悲伤，从愤怒的抗议到全面的悲剧感等各种情绪。在这首协奏曲中，斯大林最喜欢的歌曲《苏丽珂》被巧妙地隐藏了起来，这也是其中隐藏的讽刺意味之一。罗斯特罗波维奇回忆说，有一次肖斯塔科维奇给他出了一个谜语：

“斯拉瓦，你能猜出我把《苏丽珂》的主题藏在哪里了吗？”我回答说：“德米特里·德米特里耶维奇，我以为我很了解这首协奏曲，但说实话，我没有找到它。”然后他坐在钢琴前，向我展示了在终曲中主题最后一次出现的地方，当时低音部演奏了乐句的第一部分（他在这里唱道）：“我的……在哪里……”然后在极高的音域中，伴随着短笛尖锐的叫声，继续唱道：“……苏丽珂，苏丽珂？”对歌曲的这一改编实际上是一种音乐流氓行为，在当时是非常大胆和具有挑衅性的。然而，要发现这个引用并建立这种联系几乎是不可能的；当然，如果没有人向我指出，我是做不到的。

肖斯塔科维奇早已嘲讽过这首歌，并在其讽刺作品《拉约克》（Rayok，也有人将其译作“西洋镜”或“小天堂”）中引用了这首歌的原始形式。该作品至少有一部分是在 1957 年创作的，即该协奏曲问世两年前。《拉约克》模仿了穆索尔斯基的同名讽刺作品，基本上是一部家庭娱乐作品，是对斯大林、他的意识形态专家安德烈·日丹诺夫及其小官僚愚蠢的官僚语言和简单音乐品味的猛烈模仿——正是这些人教肖斯塔科维奇如何创作音乐，让他的生活变得痛苦不堪。罗斯特罗波维奇记得，大约在那个时候，当他到肖斯塔科维奇家拜访时，这位作曲家经常一边哼着曲子，一边疑惑地看着他。直到多年以后，他才能够将这段旋律与《拉约克》中德沃伊金（日丹诺夫的化名）唱出他 1948 年演讲中的训诫的那一刻联系起来：“音乐必须美妙……”罗斯特罗波维奇承认，“当时我没有问德米特里·德米特里耶维奇他在唱什么。但现在我在想，也许他哼唱这些奇怪的旋律是在激怒我，让我问出这个显而易见的问题；但由于我的愚蠢，我没有这样做。”

Rostropovich had always dreamed of his former teacher writing for him, although he had never expressed this fervent wish to Shostakovich:

Shortly after I won the All-Union competition in December 1945, I went down to the Ivanovo composers’ retreat, at Shostakovich’s suggestion. His family were also staying. One day I went skiing with Nina Vasilyevna, Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s wife. I touched on a sacrosanct issue by asking, ‘Nina Vasilyevna, since you know your husband so well, please tell me what I should do so that he writes something for cello?’ She looked at me attentively and said, ‘Slava, only if I tell you, you must promise not to speak about this with anybody else.’ In expectation of the magic formula I started to tremble like a dog ready to pounce on some wild game. ‘Alright, Slava, if you really want him to write for you, then NEVER ask him about it!”

After reading the article in Sovetskaya Kultura, Rostropovich’s curiosity was greatly aroused, but he continued to maintain his silence. Then towards the end of July he received a postcard from Shostakovich, inviting him to perform the newly completed concerto. Anxious to receive the score as soon as possible, he travelled up to Leningrad with his pianist Aleksandr Dedyukhin to meet with Shostakovich, who was staying at his dacha outside the city in Komarovo:

I arrived from Moscow on 2 August with Dedyukhin, and that same evening Dmitri Dmitriyevich invited me to his sister, Mariya Dmitriyevna’s town flat on the fifth floor, opposite the Kazan Cathedral. On the upright piano that stood there, he played me the cello concerto for the first time and then gave me the score. As he played the second movement, he even shed a tear or two. He told me that this work was extremely dear to him. Then came a very strange question, but in leading up to it he went through terrible convolutions. It was literally as if he was torturing me when he kept repeating, ‘Please tell me, do you like this work? No, please tell me the truth, do you really like it? It is very important to me.’ I insistently reassured him that I was absolutely shaken to the core, I was so impressed by the concerto. Eventually he conceded the argument, and said,“Then there remains just this one question. If you really like it so much, then will you please permit me to dedicate it to you?’ I can never forget this. No other composer, not even the most humble or untalented, had ever addressed me like this. It set a seal on my whole life. Of course I permitted it!

Rostropovich thereupon locked himself in his room at the Evropeiskaya Hotel, opposite the Philharmonic Hall, and on the morning of 3 August he sat down to practise. He practised for ten hours that day, ten hours the day after, and during the third day he worked for eight hours. The day after Dedyukhin and I went out to Dmitri Dmitriyevich’s dacha at Komarovo. Everybody was very agitated, so we sat down for a little, but I was impatient to start playing. Then came one of the great moments of my life. Dmitri Dmitriyevich said, ‘Just hold on, Slava, I’ll look for a music stand and bring it for you.’ ‘It’s not necessary,’ I replied. ‘What do you mean, not necessary, what do you mean?’ ‘T’ll play from memory.’ ‘Impossible, impossible!’ I then played through the concerto for the first time with Dedyukhin at the piano — from memory.

This first performance was evidently an extraordinary and unforgettable occasion for all who witnessed it — mostly members of Shostakovich’s family. In the words of Shostakovich’s son-in-law, Evgeny Chukovsky: The people gathered in this small room yielded to a state of superficial numbness, although passions smouldered within each one of them. They were captives to the will of the composer, who sat there tensely listening to the music which previously he alone had heard . . . 1 thought to myself,“Who if not God has given the author such power over people?’ As for the author, he said of his work, ‘I took a simple little theme and tried to develop ie Shostakovich was overcome with delight, as Rostropovich recounts:

His mood became radiant. ‘Let me ring my friend, Isaak Davydovich [Glikman],’ he exclaimed, and he promptly asked him to come over at once. While Glikman was on his way (and he needed at least forty-five minutes to make the journey) I played the concerto through again, just for Dmitri Dmitriyevich. After that we broke open a bottle of vodka — it served as combustible fuel. For my part, there was no question of resistance, and Dmitri Dmitriyevich and I polished off the bottle between us. And while Glikman travelled and we waited, the vodka was gradually getting sucked into my organism. When Isaak Davydovich arrived, Shostakovich asked me to play the concerto again. I have no idea what I played then, but it probably didn’t bear any relation to Shostakovich’s concerto, perhaps it got mixed up with the Saint-Saéns. I had gone completely floppy, I was in such a state of euphoria, I imagine it was like being high on drugs. In my extreme happiness I had no sensation of myself nor of the music. Dmitri Dmitriyevich kept saying,“This is all simply marvellous.’

The story of Rostropovich learning the work in three days has become legendary, but even more striking, to my mind, was the way he so quickly and deeply identified with the new work. The cello concerto follows the structure of the first violin concerto, written for Oistrakh in 1948: a four-movement arch with the central slow movement leading to an extended cadenza which follows directly on to the finale. The concerto is full of contrasts, but the predominant mood is one of energetic vitality, with the characteristic overtones of irony and sarcasm evident in the outer movements, whereas the more philosophical slow movement expresses moods ranging from quiet meditation, to acute inner sadness, from angry protest to a sense of full-scale tragedy. Amongst the hidden ironies of the concerto was the subtle disguising of Stalin’s favourite song, ‘Suliko’. Rostropovich recalls how once Shostakovich set him a riddle:

“Can you guess, Slava, where I have hidden the theme of“Suliko”?’ I answered, ‘Dmitri Dmitriyevich, I thought I knew the concerto really well, but honestly, no, I haven’t found it.’ He then sat down at the piano and showed me the place where the motif sounds for the last time in the finale, when the basses play the first part of the phrase (and here he sang), ‘And where is my . . .’ and then in an extreme register with a shrill screech of the piccolo, its continuation: ‘. . . Suliko, Suliko?’ This paraphrase of the song is really a piece of musical hooliganism, very daring and provocative at the time. Nevertheless it was next to impossible to uncover this quotation and make this association; certainly I was not able to without it being pointed out to me.

Shostakovich had ridiculed this song already, using it in its original form in his ironic satire Rayok (variously translated as ‘Peepshow’ or ‘Little Paradise’), which had been composed, at least in part, during 1957, two years before the concerto. Rayok, an imitation of Mussorgsky’s satirical work of the same name, is basically a home entertainment, a ferocious parody of the idiotic bureaucratic language and simplistic musical taste of Stalin, his ideological expert, Andrei Zhdanov, and his petty functionaries — the very people who had made life a misery for Shostakovich by instructing him how he should write music. Rostropovich remembers how around this time, when he visited Shostakovich at home, the composer often used to hum a tune while looking at him quizzically. Only many years later was he able to identify the melody with the moment in Rayok where the figure of Dvoikin — a cipher for Zhdanov - sings the injunction from his 1948 speeches: ‘Music must be beautiful . . .. Rostropovich admits, ‘At the time I didn’t ask Dmitri Dmitriyevich what he was singing. But now I wonder if perhaps by humming these strange melodies he was provoking me to ask this obvious question; but through my stupidity I didn’t do so.’

胡罗克当然知道官僚主义对苏联音乐家的束缚，他告诉罗斯特洛波维奇，这次他自然会直接与文化部打交道，但与此同时，他想要罗斯特洛波维奇给他下一次访问的节目单和曲目。几个月后，罗斯特罗波维奇被叫到文化部：“你怎么敢把你美国巡演的节目单交给胡洛克办公室？你肯定知道这是我们的工作，你必须得到我们的许可才能演奏！”罗斯特罗波维奇回答说：“好吧，我演奏的音乐是器乐，没有歌词。我不知道有什么可反对的。我只是把我的正常曲目给了胡洛克。”大提琴家被训斥了一番，并被要求把他的节目单写下来。“我会打电话通知他们的。”罗斯特罗波维奇怒气冲冲地回答道。

几周后，他给文化部打电话，准备向负责人口述他的美国巡演节目单：“我想先从巴赫的《F 小调第七组曲》开始，然后也许演奏一些古典主义音乐——莫扎特的大提琴与钢琴奏鸣曲怎么样？”“好吧，你要演奏哪一首？”“第四奏鸣曲。”“很好。”罗斯特罗波维奇继续说，“我们最好来点俄罗斯的，斯克里亚宾的大提琴与钢琴奏鸣曲怎么样？”毫无戒心的官员写下了这些不存在的大提琴作品的清单，并轻率地将它们寄给了胡洛克在纽约的办公室。当这个恶作剧被揭穿后，文化部找到了罗斯特罗波维奇。“这是什么鬼？你在愚弄我们所有人吗？”但他们不得不承认失败，一位官员承认“罗斯特罗波维奇像坦克一样从我们身上碾了过去！”——这句话很快传遍了莫斯科。这次事件是大提琴家表面上遵守规则，但实际上却能智取小肚鸡肠的文化官员的众多事件之一。

Hurok was of course aware of the bureaucratic restraints on Soviet musicians, and told Rostropovich that naturally this time he would deal directly with the Ministry of Culture, but in the mean time he asked for the programmes and repertoire for his next visit. A few months later Rostropovich was called to the Ministry: ‘How dare you give the programmes to Hurok’s office for your American tour? You are aware no doubt that this is our job, you must have our permission for what you play!’ Rostropovich replied: ‘Well, the music I play is instrumental and has no texts. I don’t know what there is to object to. I just gave Hurok my normal repertoire.’ The cellist was given a considerable talking to, and told to put his programmes in writing.‘I’ll phone them through,’ replied a furious Rostropovich.

A couple of weeks later, he rang the Ministry of Culture, ready to dictate his American programmes to the official responsible: ‘I think Pll start with some Bach, the suite no. 7 in F minor, then perhaps something classical — what about a Mozart sonata for cello and piano?’ ‘Alright. Which one will you play?’ ‘The fourth sonata.’ ‘Good.’ Then Rostropovich continued, ‘We’d better put in something Russian, what about Scriabin’s sonata for cello and piano?’ The unsus- pecting official wrote down these lists of non-existent works for cello, and blithely sent them off to Hurok’s New York office. When this prank was exposed, the Ministry of Culture sought out Rostropovich. ‘What is this, are you making fools of us all?’ But they had to admit defeat, and an official conceded that ‘Rostropovich has ridden over us like a tank!’ — an expression soon repeated throughout Moscow. This incident was one of many in which the cellist was able to outwit the petty cultural officials, while ostensibly adhering to the rules.

不同寻常的是，肖斯塔科维奇向罗斯特罗波维奇展示了这部未完成的作品——这对他的作品来说是非常罕见的。在大提琴部分完成之前看到这部作品，意味着罗斯特罗波维奇可以给作曲家“一个聪明的建议”，关于在三根弦上以四度演奏双音，作曲家将其融入到了终曲。肖斯塔科维奇还向罗斯特罗波维奇咨询了用十度音程来写第二主题旋律的可行性，罗斯特罗波维奇回忆道，这种音程通常不会出现：

在这样的时刻，我似乎很幸运，因为我对肖斯塔科维奇说没问题，并且为了证明这一点，我拿起我的大提琴，非常干净自信地拉出了十度音程。事后，我对这次成功感到懊悔，因为每当我在公开场合演奏这部作品时，一到那个地方我就紧张，我不得不祈祷不要错过第一个和弦。德米特里·德米特里耶维奇建议说，他可以将低音部分交给中提琴部，但我说服他保留他最初的写法。

Exceptionally, Shostakovich had shown Rostropovich this work in its unfinished form — it was unusual for him even to speak of a composition before he had completed it. Seeing the cello part before it was complete meant that Rostropovich could give the composer ‘one clever piece of advice’, about playing double-stops in fourths across three strings, something that the composer incorporated into the finale. Shostakovich also consulted Rostropovich about the feasibility of writing the second-subject melody in tenths, an interval that does not usually feature as part of a Rostropovich remembers:

In such moments I seem to have good fortune, for I said to Shostakovich it would be fine, and to demonstrate I took my cello and played the tenths in question very cleanly and confidently. Afterwards I regretted this success, for every time I perform the work in public and arrive at that spot I get nervous, I have to pray that I wouldn’t miss that first chord. Dmitri Dmitriyevich suggested that he could give the lower voice to the violas, but I persuaded him to leave it the way he had first written it.

这并不是说，罗斯特罗波维奇的要求在任何时候都不会令人困惑。有时，他只是把问题推给学生，让他们自己去发现解决问题的办法。在这种情况下，罗斯特罗波维奇的哲学很简单——他让学生进行想象性思考，并回到乐谱上，提醒学生： 音乐素材必须符合你想要表达的情感。在家里练习时，你必须明确自己的任务。你必须能够在脑海中回放整部作品，这样你才能明白如何寻找正确的声音和色彩。例如，如果音乐传达的是悲伤的情绪，你就必须进一步定义悲伤：是温柔的悲伤、内心的紧张、惆怅、怀旧、悲痛还是脆弱？ 如果你在脑海中感受到了这种情绪，那么你就会知道如何用声音来再现它；然后，你只需检查声音是否与你的内耳所听到的一致。因此，你的任务是在音乐框架内组织声音。

This was not to say that Rostropovich’s demands could not sometimes be perplexing. Sometimes he merely shoved a student’s nose into a problem, leaving him to discover his own solutions. His philosophy in these cases was simple — he told the student to start thinking imaginatively, and referred him back to the score, reminding him: The musical material has to correspond to the emotions you wish to convey. At home when you practise, you must define your task. You must be able to play the whole work through in your head, so that you understand how to search for the right sound and colour. For instance if the music conveys sadness, you have to go further in your definition of sadness: is it tenderly sad, inwardly tense, despondent, nostalgic, grieving or vulnerable? If you feel the mood in your mind, then you'll know how to reproduce it in sound; then you have only to check that the sound corresponds to what you hear in your inner ear. Your task, thus, is to organise sound within its musical framework.

罗斯特罗波维奇在音乐会舞台上的丰富经验是他教学中的重要元素。无论是为晚上的课堂编排有趣的节目，还是在大师班上进行指导，他的目标都是培养学生将音乐会舞台视为学习和探索的场所。他的例子告诉我们，演奏时所需要的高度集中也可以产生自由的维度，让艺术家尝试色彩和音色，获得更多的空间感，从而为沉默和停顿赋予更深刻的意义。他告诉我们，在音乐会上，我们可以进入一种精神状态，从而创造出一种神奇的氛围，在这种氛围中，灵感的洞察力会使反应更加敏锐，并提出新的表达方式。舞台上会出现全新的环境：肾上腺素会带来更强的感知力，并让人敏锐地意识到表演者与观众之间存在着一条无形的纽带。音乐厅中无形的悸动是共同体验的结果——就像教堂中的会众一样，许多人都将注意力集中在同一件事上。罗斯特罗波维奇作为演奏家的个性，直接向我们展示了扩大视野、超越乐器的限制来扩展音乐思维是多么的自由。

Rostropovich’s immense experience of the concert platform was a vital element in his teaching. Whether putting together interesting programmes for class evenings or giving instruction during the masterclasses, his aim was to prepare the student to view the concert platform as a place of learning and discovery. His example showed us that the intense concentration required in performance could also produce a dimension of freedom, allowing the artist to experiment with colours and timbre and to gain a greater sensation of space, which contributed a deeper meaning to silences and pauses. In a concert, he showed us, we could enter a state of mind that allowed us to create a magical atmosphere, where inspirational insights sharpened the responses and suggested new ways of phrasing. A whole new set of circumstances comes into being on stage: adrenalin brings heightened perceptions, and an acute awareness of the invisible thread that connects a performer to his audience. The intangible frisson in a hall is the result of shared experience — of a large number of people, as in a church congregation, centring their attention on the same thing. Rostropovich’s personality as a performer directly showed us how liberating it was to enlarge one’s horizons, and to extend one’s musical thinking beyond the limitations of the instrument.

在这些日子里，他有时间反思国内最近发生的事件：他决定不能再保持沉默，并决定写信为索尔仁尼琴辩护。回到莫斯科后，加林娜起初试图劝阻丈夫不要向当局发送这样一份挑衅性文件，因为她非常清楚这样做的后果。然而，当她看到丈夫的决心不可动摇时，她全力支持他，帮助他修改了这封信。加林娜·维什涅夫斯卡娅是一位非常坚强和勇敢的女性，罗斯特罗波维奇可以把她当作自己最坚定的朋友和伙伴。10 月 31 日，他出国巡演了六周——在去机场的路上，他把四份信件的复印件寄给了精心挑选的苏联报纸。起初没有任何反应，他在奥地利和德国的音乐会巡演一切正常。当他给家里的妻子打电话时，她也报告说一切正常。后来有一天，罗斯特罗波维奇在抵达布雷根茨时，看到音乐厅外聚集了大批记者和电视摄像机，他意识到他的信肯定已经被传开了。音乐会开始前，他收到了这封信的英文和德文翻译，这证实了这一点；苏联当局似乎允许将这份文件“泄露”给西方媒体。音乐会结束后，当他回到下榻的酒店时，发现酒店外停着一辆黑色的伏尔加汽车。苏联大使馆官员正在酒店大堂等着他，并要求立即与他面谈。罗斯特罗波维奇很乐意地证实这封信确实是他写的，在接下来的行程中，官员们对他关怀备至，显然很担心他会被引诱去寻求政治庇护。事实上，他完全无意这样做，而且他的妻子和孩子都在莫斯科，他无论如何也不可能这样做。

During these days he had time to reflect on recent events at home: he decided that he could no longer remain silent, and resolved to write a letter in defence of Solzhenitsyn. After his return to Moscow, Galina initially tried to dissuade her husband from sending such a provocative document to the authorities; she saw all too clearly what the consequences would be. However, when she saw that her husband’s resolve was unshakeable, she lent him her full support, helping him correct the letter. Galina Vishnevskaya is a woman of enormous strength and courage, and Rostropovich could rely on her as his staunchest friend and helpmate. He left for a six-week trip abroad on 31 October — on the way to the airport, he posted four copies of his letter, addressed to carefully selected Soviet newspapers. Initially there was no reaction from any quarter, and his concert tour of Austria and Germany proceeded normally. When he phoned his wife at home, she too reported that everything was as usual. Then one day, on arriving in Bregenz, Rostropovich saw a huge crowd of journalists and television cameras outside the concert hall, and realised that news of his letter must have broken. This was confirmed just before the concert when he was handed translations of his letter into English and German; the Soviet authorities seemed to have allowed the document to be ‘leaked’ to the Western press. On returning to his hotel after the concert, he noted a black Volga car parked outside it. Soviet Embassy officials were waiting for him in the hotel lobby, and asked for an immediate interview. Rostropovich willingly confirmed that he had indeed written this letter, and for the rest of the trip, the officials treated him with solicitous care, clearly anxious that he would be tempted to seek political asylum. In fact, he had absolutely no intention of doing this, and in any case, with his wife and children in Moscow it would not have been possible.

很快，罗斯特罗波维奇在莫斯科以外的演出也受到限制，他无法在基辅、列宁格勒和里加等地区首府演出。外高加索的巡演给了他最大的满足感，尤其是在埃里温和巴库，他总是受到热烈欢迎。罗斯特罗波维奇对这一时期与阿拉姆·哈恰图良的巡演记忆犹新，他在哈恰图良的指导下演奏了《协奏狂想曲》。但是，无法保证他在较小的省会城市举办的音乐会不会被随意取消，即使是在他抵达之后或正在前往该城市的途中。报刊上经常没有他的演出通知，也看不到他的海报，因此他的演奏厅经常空无一人。在乌里扬诺夫斯克的一次悲喜剧中，罗斯特罗波维奇音乐会的海报被另一张宣布该镇即将举办兔子展览的海报故意遮住。然而，兔子并没有完全遮住他那相当长的名字，名字的第一个和最后一个音节明显地突出在海报的两侧。

一旦索尔仁尼琴离开他家，他就可以开始出国巡演的承诺被证明是完全没有价值的：卑鄙的迫害和羞辱仍在继续。他很快发现，对于苏联官僚来说，列宁的格言“谁不站在我们这边，谁就是我们的敌人”*可以以一种最随意的方式加以使用。罗斯特罗波维奇被中央文化委员会高级秘书德米切夫叫去，德米切夫当面引用了那句名言。“你怎么知道我反对你们？”罗斯特罗波维奇回应道，“当我演奏德沃夏克协奏曲时，我演奏得很好，你能看出我是支持你们还是反对你们吗？你们不就是需要优秀的音乐家和作家吗，不管他们是支持你们还是反对你们？”

*原文为"Who is not for us is against us."直译为：谁不支持我们，谁就是反对我们。

事实证明，歌剧院的这段时期是最短暂的喘息机会。5 月 6 日，管理层通知罗斯特罗波维奇，他已被从剧组除名，原定的演出也被取消。安西莫夫曾对罗斯特洛波维奇的天才表现出极大的兴趣，现在却冷冷地对他说：“你作为音乐家已经堕落了，我们不需要你了。”罗斯特罗波维奇一时语塞。他默默地走进剧院的庭院，独自站在拱门下，像个孩子一样哭泣。

罗斯特罗波维奇不希望当局误认为他的行为具有挑衅性，并希望让人觉得他们并非从零开始工作。第一天，他们录制了第一幕的大部分内容，之后暂停了几天，才开始录制歌剧的其余部分。罗斯特罗波维奇继续讲述：

我们原定于 3 月 28 日回到录音室，也就是我精彩的生日派对的第二天。那天早上，加林娜让我不要接电话，因为她直觉事情不对劲。电话铃一直在响，最后我拿起了听筒。是制片厂的制片人打来的： “谢天谢地，你接了。你今天不用来了，录音不会进行了。”我立刻明白，停止录制的命令来自更高的权力机构。

尽管如此，罗斯特罗波维奇还是决定亲自去找梅洛迪亚工作室的主任波赫莫夫。当他来到波克霍莫夫的办公室时，秘书们告诉他，波克霍莫夫正在忙：他正在参加一个重要会议，不能被打扰，而且今天剩下的时间都不在办公室。罗斯特罗波维奇厌倦了谎言和借口，他坚持自己的权利，闯进了波赫莫夫的办公室。“你来这里做什么？”他被问道。“我只想知道一件事：录音真的被停止了吗？是只停了今天这次录音，还是整个录音项目都停止了？”波克霍莫夫带着某种遗憾的神情，确认项目已经取消。很明显，梅洛迪亚公司已无法做出决定。罗斯特罗波维奇无法掩饰自己的真实感受，他痛苦地说：“你们给我留下了一个明确的抉择：要么永远离开这个国家，要么自杀。”说罢，他冲出办公室，砰地一声关上了门。他和加林娜都确信，这一突然转变背后一定有什么不为人知的秘密——即使在苏联，这种转变也是不寻常的——但他们直到六个月后才发现真相。原来，得知罗斯特罗波维奇将要录制唱片的消息后，作为竞争对手，莫斯科大剧院的五位首席歌唱家恼羞成怒，并制定了一个阻止录制唱片的计划。他们未经通知地来到德米切夫的办公室，并要求接见。当听到歌手们宣布他们是来履行公民义务时，德米切夫或许大吃一惊。男高音阿特兰托夫宣布：“我们是作为共产党员，而不是作为歌唱家来谴责罗斯特罗波维奇的。”虽然罗斯特洛波维奇的音乐才华没有受到质疑，但他们坚持认为，他的意识形态不纯会污染大剧院的歌唱家和管弦乐团。录音必须停止！维什涅夫斯卡娅正确地谴责了她的同事们，认为他们心怀恶意和嫉妒，决心不择手段地击退对手。在这种情况下，德米切夫无力遵循自己的本能为罗斯托洛波维奇辩护。对意识形态纯洁性的攻击是危险的：即使是高级官员也不能无视这一点。遗憾的是，这种背信弃义的行为在当时并不少见。例如，指挥家叶夫根尼·斯韦特兰诺夫经常与罗斯托洛波维奇共事，没有理由对他心怀怨恨，但他却在公开场合斥责罗斯托洛波维奇是“音乐流氓”——晚年的他对此悔恨不已。现在我们很难相信，这种非音乐性的评判会产生如此大的影响，但当局缺乏艺术理智的态度和同事们的冷嘲热讽恰恰结合在了一起，并可能会让音乐家的生活陷入痛苦之中。《托斯卡》录制的取消是压垮罗斯特罗波维奇和维什涅夫斯卡娅的最后一根稻草。于是，他们决定写信给勃列日涅夫，请求允许他们出国两年。他们立即将信（日期为 3 月 29 日）交给了德米切夫，因为他们知道德米切夫会立即转交。虽然党的机构通常很臃肿，但在需要时还是可以迅速采取行动的。几个小时内，罗斯特罗波维奇就得到了对他请求的肯定答复——这是勃列日涅夫亲自做出的决定。罗斯特罗波维奇直到最后都希望当局会恳求他留下来，但他认为当局反应如此迅速，这表明他们完全不尊重他一生的音乐成就。

Rostropovich did not want the authorities to misconstrue his behaviour as provocative, and wished it to appear that they were not starting their work from scratch. During that first day they recorded most of Act I, after which there was a pause of a few days before they were due to record the rest of the opera. Rostropovich continues the story: 

We were due back in the studios on 28 March, the day after my wonderful birthday party. That morning, Galya told me not to answer the phone, as she had an intuition that things were not right. The phone did indeed keep ringing, and in the end I picked up the receiver. It was the producer from the studios: “Thank goodness you answered. You don’t need to come in today, the recording won’t be going ahead.’ I understood immediately that the order to stop it had come from a much higher authority.

Nevertheless, Rostropovich decided to seek out the director of the Melodiya studios, Pokhomov, in person. When he arrived at his office, the secretaries told him that the director was busy: he was engaged in an important meeting and could not be disturbed, and would be out the rest of the day. Tired of lies and excuses, Rostropovich insisted on his rights, and barged into Pokhomov’s office. ‘What are you doing here?’ he was asked. ‘Just tell me one thing: is it true that the recording has been stopped? Is it just this session or the whole thing?’ With a certain air of regret, Pokhomov confirmed that the project had been cancelled. It was obvious that the decision had been taken out of Melodiya’s hands. Rostropovich could not disguise his true feelings, and remarked bitterly: ‘You have left me with a clear choice: either I have to leave the country for ever — or commit suicide.’ With that, he stormed out of the office and slammed the door. Both he and Galina were certain that something lay behind this sudden volte-face — unusual even in the Soviet Union — but they only discovered the truth some six months later. It emerged that five leading singers from the rival Bolshoi cast, angered to learn of the Rostropovich recording, had worked out a plan to put a stop to it. They arrived unannounced at Demichev’s office, and demanded an audience. The surprised Demichev was probably astounded to hear the singers announce that they were here to carry out a civic duty. The tenor Atlantov announced, ‘It is as communists, not as singers, that we have come to denounce Rostropovich.’ Although his musicianship was not questioned, they insisted that his ideological impurity would contaminate the Bolshoi Theatre’s singers and orchestra. The recording had to be stopped! Vishnevskaya rightly condemned her colleagues as spiteful and envious, determined to repel their rivals by whatever means were necessary. In these circumstances, Demichev was powerless to follow his better instincts by defending Rostropovich. An attack on ideological purity was dangerous: not even a senior official could be seen to be disregarding it. Unfortunately such treacherous behaviour was not uncommon in that period. For example, the conductor Evgeny Svetlanov, who had frequently worked with Rostropovich and had no reason to resent him, denounced him in public as a ‘musical gangster’ —a remark he would sincerely regret in later years. It is difficult now for us to believe that such non-musical judgements could have so much impact, but this very combination of a lack of artistic reasoning from the authorities and cynicism from colleagues, all too prevalent in the Soviet era, could reduce a musician’s life to misery. The cancellation of the recording of Tosca was the final straw for both Rostropovich and Vishnevskaya. There and then they decided to write to Brezhnev, asking for permission to travel abroad for two years, and they delivered their letter (dated 29 March) immediately to Demichev whom they knew would pass it on without delay. Though normally unwieldy, the Party machinery could act speedily when needed, and within hours Rostropovich was given a positive response to his request — the decision was made by Brezhnev himself. Rostropovich had hoped until the last that he would be implored to stay, but he perceived the alacrity with which the authorities reacted as a sign of their complete lack of respect for his lifelong musical achievements.

5月10日，罗斯特罗波维奇在音乐学院大音乐厅举行了一次更为公开的告别演出，音乐学院是罗斯特罗波维奇取得无数辉煌成就的地方，他在这里首演了普罗科菲耶夫的《小协奏曲》、布里顿的《大提琴交响曲》和肖斯塔科维奇的《第二协奏曲》等重要作品，创造了音乐史上的辉煌。音乐学院院长斯韦什尼科耶夫同意了这一冒险，罗斯特罗波维奇组建了一支学生乐团——他知道自己再也无法依靠任何专业乐团来履行与他的约定了。但音乐学院的精英学生们都很高兴能有机会在他的指导下演奏：例如，中提琴部的首席就是年轻的尤里·巴什梅特。他的全部柴科夫斯基曲目包括《胡桃夹子》组曲、《洛可可变奏曲》和第六交响曲。伊凡·莫尼盖蒂是他当时最年长的学生，也是柴可夫斯基大赛的夺冠热门，他担任独奏。所有在场的人都对这一感动人心的时刻记忆犹新，尤其是《悲怆》那情绪充沛、令人心碎的演奏。许多观众都泪流满面，随着最后一个音符的消逝，全场站了起来。很快，整个大厅都在高呼“不要走，不要走！”——但没有人相信罗斯特罗波维奇会很快回来。

A far more public farewell took place on 10 May at the Grand Hall of the Conservatoire, the scene of so many of Rostropovich’s triumphs, where he had made musical history by giving first performances of Prokofiev’s Sinfonia Concertante, Britten’s Cello Symphony and Shostakovich’s second concerto, to mention but a few key works. The Conservatoire director, Sveshnikoyv, gave his blessing to the venture, and Rostropovich collected together a student orchestra — he knew that he could no longer rely on any professional orchestra to honour an engagement with him. But the cream of Conservatoire students were delighted to have the chance to play under his direction: the leader of the viola section, for instance, was the young Yuri Bashmet. His all-Tchaikovsky programme consisted of the Nutcracker suite, the Rococo Variations and the sixth symphony. Ivan Monighetti, his eldest student at the time, and favourite to win the Tchaikovsky competition, was the soloist. All who were at this emotional occasion remember it vividly, in particular the passionate and heart-rending performance of the Pathétique. Many in the audience openly wept, and as the last note died away, it rose to its feet as one. Soon the whole hall was chanting, ‘Do not leave, do not leave!’ — but nobody was deluded into thinking Rostropovich would be back any time soon.

罗斯特罗波维奇还有一些告别要做。他前往莫斯科的墓地祭奠逝者，其中包括 1972 年去世的母亲，以及谢尔盖·普罗科菲耶夫。然后，他鼓起勇气去见肖斯塔科维奇，因为他深知这将是最后的离别。德米特里·德米特里耶维奇的健康状况非常糟糕，但他仍在坚持作曲。当他曾经的学生、他的音乐最热情的拥护者斯拉瓦告诉他自己不久后就要离开时，他无法抑制自己的泪水。“但是德米特里·德米特里耶维奇，我可以在那边演奏您的音乐，录制《麦克白夫人》和您所有的交响曲。”肖斯塔科维奇含泪说道：“好吧，如果要录制交响曲，那就从《第四交响曲》开始吧。”在谈话中，肖斯塔科维奇不断重复着一句谜一样的话：“斯拉瓦，如果你在那边收到一个奇怪的匿名包裹，可千万别把它扔了——说不定，里面会有一份很好的谱子呢！”罗斯特罗波维奇当时并没有盘问他。然而，这个谜题最近被解开了，肖斯塔科维奇档案馆馆长马纳希尔·雅库博夫发现了一份手稿，上面用低音谱号写出了肖斯塔科维奇最后的作品《中提琴奏鸣曲》的器乐部分，这暗示着这份作品最初可能是为大提琴（特别是为罗斯特罗波维奇）而作的。作品最后一页引用了施特劳斯的《堂吉诃德》中的一段旋律，这进一步证实了这一点。在这部作品中，大提琴代表了这位勇敢的骑士。这段引用来自施特劳斯作品中堂吉诃德去世的那一刻，他的灵魂被带入了另一个维度。当然，这段引用——连同中提琴奏鸣曲中许多来自肖斯塔科维奇本人和其他作曲家作品的引用——很可能也指的是这位垂死的作曲家本人，他在创作这首曲子时就意识到这将是他的绝唱。

Rostropovich still had some farewells to make. He visited the Moscow cemeteries to pay his respects to the dead, amongst them his mother, who had died in 1972, and Sergey Prokofiev. Then he took his courage in hand and went to see Shostakovich, fully aware that this would be a final parting. Dmitri Dmitriyevich was in very poor health, although he managed to keep composing. He could not restrain his tears when Slava, his one-time student and the most passionate champion of his music, told him that he was shortly to depart. ‘But Dmitri Dmitriyevich, over there I will be able to play your music and record Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk and all your symphonies.’ Through his tears, Shostakovich said, ‘Well, if you’re going to record the symphonies, then please start with the fourth.’ During the conversation Shostakovich kept repeating an enigmatic phrase: ‘Slava, if over there you receive a strange anonymous parcel, don’t throw it out - who knows, it might have a good score inside!’ Rostropovich did not cross-question him on this at the time. However, the riddle was recently solved when the curator of the Shostakovich archive, Manashir Yakubov, discovered a manuscript with the instrumental line of Shostakovich’s final work, the viola sonata, written out in the bass clef. This hint that the work was probably originally intended for the cello (and specifically for Rostropovich) is reinforced by the quotation in the last page from Strauss’s Don Quixote — a work in which the chivalrous knight is represented by the cello. The quotation comes from the moment in Strauss’s work when Don Quixote dies and his spirit is transported into a different dimension. Of course, this quotation — along with the many others in the viola sonata both from Shostakovich’s own work and that of other composers — probably also refers to the dying composer himself, who composed the piece aware that it would be his swansong.

附录：An Open Letter to Pravda

公开信

致《真理报》、《新闻报》、《文学报》和《文化报》总编辑的公开信

尊敬的编辑同志：

亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴大部分时间住在我莫斯科附近的家里，这已经不是什么秘密了。我亲眼目睹了他被驱逐出作家联盟的那一刻——就在他努力创作关于1914年的小说时。现在他获得了诺贝尔奖。报纸上的相关报道促使我给您写这封信。

在我的记忆中，这已经是苏联作家第三次获得诺贝尔奖了。在三次获奖中，我们认为其中两次是“肮脏的政治游戏”，但另一次（肖洛霍夫）则被认为是对我国文学杰出的世界意义的“公正承认”。

如果肖洛霍夫当时拒绝接受那些“出于冷战考虑”而颁奖给帕斯捷尔纳克的人的奖项，我能够理解我们对瑞典学院的客观性和诚实性失去了信任。但现在的情况是，我们有时会选择性地感谢诺贝尔奖，有时又会诅咒它。

如果下一次诺贝尔奖颁给了科切托夫同志[苏联作家和强硬派编辑]呢？当然必须接受！

为什么在索尔仁尼琴获奖后的第二天，我们的报纸上就出现了“X”与作家联盟秘书处代表的一则奇怪的报道，大意是全国公众（显然是所有的学者和所有的音乐家等）都积极支持把他开除出作家联盟？

为什么《文学报》只从众多西方报纸中选择美国和瑞典报纸的观点，却避开了《人道报》、《法兰西报》和《联合报》等更受欢迎、更重要的共产主义报刊，更不用说许多非共产主义报刊了？

如果我们信任某个评论家博诺斯基[菲利普·博诺斯基，美国共产主义记者]，那么我们又该如何看待博尔、阿拉贡和弗朗索瓦·莫里亚克等重要作家的意见？

我还记得，我们的报纸在1948年写了多少关于我们的音乐巨匠普罗科菲耶夫和肖斯塔科维奇的胡说八道，而如今他们都已获得了荣誉。

例如：

“肖斯塔科维奇、普罗科菲耶夫、谢巴林、米亚斯科夫斯基等同志——你们的无调性不和谐音乐从本质上与人民格格不入……当你们明显缺乏才华，却非常自命不凡地追求创新时，就会出现形式主义的把戏……我们绝对不接受肖斯塔科维奇、米亚斯科夫斯基、普罗科菲耶夫的音乐。其中没有和谐，没有秩序，并不优美动听，没有旋律。”

现在，当人们翻阅当年的新闻报纸时，会对许多事情感到难以忍受的耻辱。事实上，[肖斯塔科维奇的]歌剧《卡捷琳娜·伊兹梅洛娃》三十年来一直没有上演，普罗科维耶夫生前没有听过他的歌剧《战争与和平》的最后一个版本，也没有听过他为大提琴和管弦乐队创作的《交响协奏曲》，肖斯塔科维奇、普罗科菲耶夫、米亚斯科夫斯基和哈恰图良的作品都被正式列入禁演名单。

难道时间真的没有教会我们要谨慎地对有才华的人进行打压吗？不要以全体人民的名义说话？不要强迫人们把他们根本没有读过或听过的东西当作自己的观点来表达？我自豪地回忆起，我没有去参加中央文化工作者之家的文化人物会议，在那里，帕斯捷尔纳克受到抨击，而我本该在会上“受命”发表演讲，批评《日瓦戈医生》，实际上当时我还没有读过这本书。

1948年有禁演作品的名单。现在则更倾向于口头禁令，称“存在意见”认为该作品不被推荐。无法确定这种意见存在于何处，属于谁。比如，为什么加琳娜·维什涅夫斯卡娅[罗斯特罗波维奇的妻子]在莫斯科的音乐会上被禁止演唱鲍里斯·柴科夫斯基的精彩声乐作品，因为词作者是异议人士布罗茨基？为什么肖斯塔科维奇与萨沙·乔尔尼的作品演出几次受到阻碍（尽管文本已经出版）？为什么肖斯塔科维奇的第13和第14交响曲的演出伴随着种种困难？

显然，又是“存在意见”。是谁首先“认为”有必要将索尔仁尼琴开除出作家协会？尽管我对这个问题非常感兴趣，但还是没有弄清楚。五位梁赞的作家“火枪手”真的是在没有严肃“意见”的情况下就敢这样做吗？

显然，“意见”也阻碍了我的同胞们了解塔尔夫斯基的电影《安德烈·鲁布约夫》，我们把这部电影卖到了国外，我也有幸在狂热的巴黎人之中看到了这部电影。显然，“舆论”也阻止了索尔仁尼琴的《癌病房》的出版，而这本书已经在《新世界》[苏联主要文学期刊]上发表了。因此，如果这本书在我们国家出版，将会得到公开和广泛的讨论，这对作者和读者都有益处。

我不谈论我们国家的政治或经济问题。有人比我更了解这些。但请告诉我，为什么在我们的文学和艺术中，常常是完全不懂这一领域的人拥有最终发言权？为什么他们有权在人民面前贬低我们的艺术？

我回忆过去并不是为了抱怨，而是为了在未来，比如说二十年后，我们不至于羞愧地埋葬今天的报纸。

每个人都应有权无畏地独立思考，表达自己对他所了解的、他亲身思考过的、经历过的事物的看法，而不是仅仅用稍有不同的方式来表达他被灌输的观点。

我们一定会在不被催促和纠正的情况下走向重建。

我知道，在我写完这封信之后，肯定会有人对我发表“意见”，但我并不害怕。我们所引以为傲的才能，不应该受到过去侵袭的影响。我了解索尔仁尼琴的许多作品。我喜欢它们。我认为他通过自己的苦难寻求真理，以写出他所看到的真相，我认为在针对他的运动正在展开的时候，我没有理由隐藏我对他的态度。

1970 年 10 月 31 日，于莫斯科

Open letter

To the chief editors of the news papers Pravda, Izvestia, Literaturnaya Gazeta, and Sovetskaya Kultura.

Esteemed Comrade Editor:

It is no longer a secret that A. I. Solzhenitsyn lives a great part of the time in my house near Moscow. I have seen how he was expelled from the Writers' Union—at the very time when he was working strenuously on a novel about the year 1914. Now the Nobel Prize has been awarded to him. The newspaper campaign in this connection compels me to undertake this letter to you.

In my memory this is already the third time that a Soviet writer has been given the Nobel Prize. In two cases out of three we have considered the awarding of the prize a“dirty political game,” but in one (Sholokhov) as a“just recognition” of the outstand ing world significance of our literature.

If in his time Sholokhov had de clined to accept the prize from hands which had given it to Pasternak“for Cold War considerations” I would have understood that we no longer trusted the objectivity and the honesty of the Swedish academicians. But now it hap pens that we selectively sometimes ac cept the Nobel Prize with gratitude and sometimes curse it.

And what if next time the prize is awarded to Comrade Kochetov [Vse volod Kochetov, Soviet author and hard line editor]? Of course it will have to be accepted!

Why, a day after the award of the prize to Solzhenitsyn, in our papers appeared a strange report of corres pondent“X” with representatives of the secretariat of the Writers' Union to the effect that the entire public of the country (that is evidently all schol ars and all musicians, etc.) actively supported his expulsion from the Writ ers' Union?

Why does Literaturnaya Gazeta se lect from numerous Western news papers only the opinion of American and Swedish newspapers, avoiding the incomparably more popular and im portant Communist newspapers like L' Humanité, Lettre Française and L'Unità, to say nothing of the numer ous non‐Communist ones?

If we trust a certain critic Bonosky [Philip Bonosky, an American Com munist journalist], then how should we consider the opinion of such important writers as Böll, Aragon and François Mauriac.

I remember and would like to re mind you of our newspapers in 1948, how much nonsense was written about those giants of our music, S. S. Pro kofiev and D. D. Shostakovich, who are now honored.

For example:

“Comrades D. Shostakovich, S. Prokofiev, V. Shebalin, N. Myaskovsky and others—your atonal disharmonic music is organically alien to the people … formalistic trickery arises when there is an obvious lack of talent, but very much pretension to innovation … we absolutely do not accept the music of Shostakovich, Myaskovsky, Proko fiev. There is no harmony in it, no order, no wide melodiousness, no melody.”

Now, when one looks at the news papers of those years, one becomes un bearably ashamed of many things. For the fact is that for three decades the opera,“Katerina Izmailova” [of Shos takovich] was not performed, that S. Prokoviev during his life did not hear the last version of his opera,“War and Peace,” and his Symphonic Con certo for cello and orchestra, that there were official lists of forbidden works of Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky and Khachaturian.

Has time really not taught us to ap proach cautiously the crushing of tal ented people? And not to speak in the name of all the people? Not to oblige people to express as their opinions what they simply have not read or heard? I recall with pride that I did not go to the meeting of cultural fig ures in the Central House of Cultural Workers where B. Pasternak was abused and where I was expected to deliver a speech which I had been“commissioned” to deliver, criticizing“Doctor Zhivago,” which at that time I had not read.

In 1948 there were lists of forbidden works. Now oral prohibitions are pre ferred, referring to the fact that“opin ions exist” that the work is not rec ommended. It is impossible to estab lish where this opinion exists and whose it is. Why for instance was Gal ina Vishnevskaya [Mr. Rostropovich's wife] forbidden to perform in her con cert in Moscow, the brilliant vocal cycle of Boris Tchaikovsky with the words of I. Brodsky [a dissident Leningrad poet]? Why was the performance of the Shostakovich cycle to the words of Sasha Chyorny obstructed several times (although the text had already been published)? Why did dif ficulties accompany the performance of Shostakovich's 13th and 14th Sym phonies?

Again, apparently,“there was an opinion.” Who first had the“opinion” that it was necessary to expel Solzhen itsyn from the Writers' Union? I did not manage to clarify this question al though I was very interested in it. Did five Ryazan writer‐musketeers really dare to do it themselves without a serious“opinion”?

Apparently the“opinion” prevented also my fellow citizens from getting to know Tarkovsky's film“Andrey Rubl yov,” which we sold abroad and which I had the pleasure of seeing among en raptured Parisians. Obviously it was“opinion” which also prevented publi cation of Solzhenitsyn's“Cancer Ward,” which was already set in type for Novy Mir [the leading Soviet liter ary journal]. So if this had been pub lished here it would have been openly and widely discussed to the benefit of the author as well as the readers.

I do not speak about political or eco nomic questions in our country. There are people who know these better than I. But explain to me please, why in our literature and art so often people absolutely incompetent in this field have the final word? Why are they given the right to discredit our art in the eyes of our people?

I recall the past not in order to grumble but in order that in the future, let's say in 20 years, we won't have to bury today's newspapers in shame.

Every man must have the right fear lessly to think independently and ex press his opinion about what he knows, what he has personally thought about, experienced and not merely to express with slightly different variations the opinion which has been inculcated in him.

We will definitely arrive at recon struction without prompting and with out being corrected.

I know that after my letter there will undoubtedly be an“opinion” about me, but I am not afraid of it. I openly say what I think. Talent, of which we are proud, must not be submitted to the assaults of the past. I know many of the works of Solzhenitsyn. I like them. I consider he seeks the right through his suffering to write the truth as he saw it and I see no reason to hide my attitude toward him at a time when a campaign is being launched against him.

Moscow, 31 October, 1970.

采访：Диалог с Ростроповичем: Прокофьев и Шостакович

沃尔科夫： 你帮助了普罗科菲耶夫的工作，不是吗？

罗斯特罗波维奇： 是的。我为他抄写了一些乐谱。我给你讲一个有趣的事件。普罗科菲耶夫想让我在他的交响协奏曲中写一些大提琴段落。那几天我忙得不可开交，迟迟没有交稿。普罗科菲耶夫勃然大怒，怒道：“年轻人，你连勃拉姆斯的才能都没有！就连勃拉姆斯都能写很多钢琴练习曲，但你连给我写十六小节都做不到。”我有些愕然，心想：如果我连勃拉姆斯的才能都没有，我还怎么活在这个世界上。普罗科菲耶夫称之为——被冒犯了。正如你所看到的，他设法找到了真正可怕的事情来否定你的才能。

还有一次，他让我删除他手稿中的一些内容。乐谱在他的钢琴上，我坐下来用橡皮擦掉它们。他说现在一切都好，我就离开了。突然，普罗科菲耶夫给我家里打电话：“我没法弹钢琴了！你的橡皮屑把我的键盘缝都填满了！”

沃尔科夫： 除了音乐品味的差异之外，普罗科菲耶夫和肖斯塔科维奇在纯粹的人性方面是否存在差异？

罗斯特罗波维奇： 很难想象还有这样两个截然相反的人。

沃尔科夫： 肖斯塔科维奇在这种情况下表现如何？

罗斯特罗波维奇：他总是称赞一切：“太棒了，太棒了。”只有当他欣赏这个人是一位伟大的音乐家时，他才允许自己批评他。肖斯塔科维奇总是对我重复：“好吧，为什么，如果某人不能做得更好，为什么要批评他呢？”有时，这让我感到惊讶，在极为糟糕的演奏或作曲后，肖斯塔科维奇站起来说：“太棒了，太棒了。”

如果肖斯塔科维奇是一个人的朋友，喜欢这个人，那么他就可以更坦诚。然后他就可以用完全出乎意料的判断来震惊你，而这些判断对他来说是非常秘密的。但总的来说，他非常隐秘，非常小心。但我再说一遍，普罗科菲耶夫从未保留他的观点。绝不。因此，普罗科菲耶夫的事情就容易多了。确实，在他最善意的时刻，他总是能说出令人不快的俏皮话。

沃尔科夫：您谈到了与普罗科菲耶夫、肖斯塔科维奇以及布里顿的温情而亲密的友谊。您是否觉得永远找不到或遇到一位在实力和伟大程度上能与这三位相媲美的作曲家了？

罗斯特罗波维奇：总是期待奇迹的发生。但其概率正在下降。我从小就崇拜普罗科菲耶夫和肖斯塔科维奇。我永远是他们的学生。现在，如果我遇到一位伟大的作曲家……我就不再是年轻人了。一开始就不一样了。正如他们在国际象棋中所说的那样——“不同的开局”正因如此，直到终局，整盘棋都会有所不同。

你问我关于死亡的问题。对于某些人来说，死亡似乎是黑色的，但对我来说，它根本不是黑色的。我不惧怕死亡，因为普罗科菲耶夫、肖斯塔科维奇、布里顿对我来说依然存在。尽管他们已经死去，他们以另一种我无法理解的形式存在着，我感受到了他们的影响。

当我接到在莫斯科大剧院指挥《战争与和平》的任务时，他们希望我失败，他们只给了我三次排练机会，我注定要失败。根纳迪·罗日杰斯特文斯基说道：“不要接受这个任务，《战争与和平》太困难了，你无法想象！我只是为你担心！”

演出那天，我去了普罗科菲耶夫的墓前，我拥抱了墓碑。我请求普罗科菲耶夫帮助我。他帮助了我，我确信是他帮助了我。

我与他们交流——与普罗科菲耶夫、肖斯塔科维奇、布里顿——就好像他们还活着一样，这就是我的感受。我站在他们的立场上，站在他们现在的立场上交流。在新的、不同的生活层面上。在那里，我比在今生拥有更多的平衡——在那里，在这个边界之外。这就是为什么我不惧怕死亡。

采访：Shostakovich’s World Is Our World (1998)

MSTISLAV ROSTROPOVICH TALKS WITH MANASHIR YAKUBOV
摘录自A Shostakovich Casebook

M.Y. During the year that marked Shostakovich's ninetieth anniversary [1996], you revived Ledi Makbet Mtsenskogo uezda [Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District] in its original form in Petersburg and Moscow, and you then arranged a Russian festival of Shostakovich's work according to a program that he himself had drawn up with you years ago (after, in fact, the first big festival of his music held in Eng-land). It has now become clear that this has been as much a century for music as a century for literature. It has given us many wonderful composers. In Russian music alone, there are Scriabin and Rachmaninoff and Prokofiev.... Yet you have chosen Shostakovich once again for another big festival. Why? Why does the work of a composer who was working during the middle years of the century in a totalitarian society which was alien and incomprehensible to most people elsewhere still manage to excite not only his own fellow-countrymen but the whole world as well?
M.Y. 在纪念肖斯塔科维奇诞辰九十周年的那一年（1996 年），您在彼得堡和莫斯科以原版的形式复排了《姆岑斯克区的麦克白夫人》，然后根据肖斯塔科维奇本人多年前与您共同制定的计划（在英国举办了他的第一个大型音乐节之后），安排了一次俄罗斯肖斯塔科维奇作品音乐节。现在已经很清楚，这个世纪是音乐和文学的世纪。它为我们带来了许多杰出的作曲家。仅俄罗斯音乐就有斯克里亚宾、拉赫玛尼诺夫和普罗科菲耶夫....…然而，您在另一个大型音乐节上再次选择了肖斯塔科维奇。为什么？ 一位作曲家在本世纪中叶的一个极权社会中创作的作品，对于其他地方的大多数人来说都是陌生和难以理解的，但他的作品却不仅能激发自己的同胞，而且还能激发全世界的人们？

It seems to me that if you consider historical developments in, say, the nineteenth century or even earlier, then liberation from tyranny was evidently beginning to occur in many countries throughout the world. A new, more democratic way of life was starting to emerge….
在我看来，如果你考虑一下 19 世纪甚至更早的历史发展，那么显然世界上许多国家已经开始摆脱暴政。一种新的、更民主的生活方式开始出现……

… The plague of communism swept like a hurricane through a whole lot of countries, not only in Europe but also in Asia, Africa, South America. Totalitarianism—in its different variants—did not affect Russia alone. But I always believed that someone would eventually emerge in literature or painting whose work would convey the horrors and nightmares of our own age, in much the same way that Goya managed to capture life in Spain during his own time.
……共产主义的瘟疫像飓风一样席卷了许多国家，不仅在欧洲，还有亚洲、非洲、南美洲。极权主义——以不同的形式——并不只影响俄罗斯。但我一直相信，最终会出现一位文学或绘画大师，他的作品将传达我们这个时代的恐怖和噩梦，就像戈雅成功捕捉了他那个时代的西班牙生活一样。

But then it quickly became clear that it was only forms of terror that were new. New forms of art were not needed, and they were soon put in their place. When Meyerhold warned:“Watch out, we are about to let mediocrity rule in the arts, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater,” he ended up paying with his own life for saying so. It was a total catastrophe and people went underground, they withdrew inside themselves. Shostakovich also withdrew and went underground. But some people could not manage it, they were unable to make the necessary switch. And the Bolsheviks deported whole groups of philosophers and religious thinkers, who were sent not into internal exile but into real exile. This, too, was one of the great human tragedies of the twentieth century.
但很快人们就发现，只有恐怖形式才是新的。新的艺术形式是不需要的，它们很快就被取代了。当梅耶霍尔德警告说：“当心，我们即将让平庸统治艺术，不要把孩子和洗澡水一起倒掉”时，他最终为此付出了生命的代价。这是一场彻底的灾难，人们转入地下，退缩到自己的内心。肖斯塔科维奇也退缩了，他转入了地下。但有些人无法做到这一点，他们无法做出必要的转变。布尔什维克驱逐了一大批哲学家和宗教思想家，他们不是被内部流放，而是被真正流放。这也是二十世纪最大的人类悲剧之一。

That is why the figure of Shostakovich is so important, for he personifies an entire epoch in the life of this planet, and not only for those who lived in totalitarian countries. Otherwise people throughout the whole world would not listen to his music so much.
这就是为什么肖斯塔科维奇的形象如此重要，因为他代表了一个时代，而不仅仅是那些生活在极权国家的人们。否则全世界的人们不会都那么喜欢听他的音乐了。

M.Y. You knew Shostakovich not only as a composer but also in a personal capacity—first as a student at the Conservatory, then as a performer of his works, and, later on, when you became friends.
M.Y. 你不仅以作曲家的身份认识肖斯塔科维奇，而且以个人身份认识肖斯塔科维奇——首先是作为音乐学院的学生，然后是他作品的表演者，最后，作为朋友。

Yes, I joined his orchestration class in 1943, and we were parted in 1974 when I left Russia.
是的，我于 1943 年参加了他的管弦乐课程，1974 年我离开俄罗斯时我们分别了。

M.Y. So you knew him for more than thirty years. What would you say were his essential qualities?
M.Y. 所以你认识他超过三十年。你认为他最重要的品质是什么？

A whole book could be written about that, about our studying, our meetings, and our conversations…. But I would say his most essential quality was his deep humanity toward everything—in life, in his relationships, and in his art.
可以写一整本书来讲述我们的学习、我们的会面和我们的交流……但我想说的是，他最重要的品质是他对一切事物的深刻人性——在生活中、在人际关系中，以及在他的艺术中。

When I was a student I was not exactly shy with him, but I never dared to be too familiar, or pester him. I was full of admiration but I was afraid of taking up his time. You know, I think he had some sort of biological mechanism rather like a fish has radar which helps it sense obstacles some way off in the water, because somehow or other he could sense other people’s attitudes toward him. I was always amazed that even if we had not seen each other for a long time (after I had stopped studying), he never forgot to wish me a happy birthday, or a happy New Year.
当我还是学生时，我并不害羞，但我从不敢太过接近或打扰他。我满怀钦佩，但又害怕占用他的时间。你知道，我猜他有某种生物学上的机制，就像鱼有雷达一样，可以帮助它感知水中远处的障碍物，因为不知何故，他能感觉到别人对他的态度。我总是很惊讶，即使我们很久没见面了（在我不再做他的学生后），他也从来没有忘记祝我生日快乐或新年快乐。

In the summer of 1959 he gave me the score of the First Cello Concerto [in Ε-flat Major op. 107 (1959)], and, five days later, I went with my accompanist, Alexander Dedyukhin, to Shostakovich’s dacha in Komarovo, in order to play it to him. When I asked:“Dmitri Dmitrievich, could we possibly play for you?” he answered:“I’ll get you a music-stand, Slava.” It was one of the greatest moments in my life to be able to say:“I don’t need one!” and when I said those words, I felt my spirits soar up to the skies. His eyes grew wide, of course, but he did not fetch the stand. I played the whole thing from memory. It went well. I had never studied so much before in the whole of my life. He had handed me the manuscript only in the evening of the 1st of August, and I worked for ten hours on the 2nd, and ten hours on the 3rd. But on the 4th, I could not take so much, so I only worked for eight hours then, and I did another eight on the 5th—and then, finally, on the 6th, I went to see him. And in spite of everything, it came out well! … When I said to him“I don’t need one!” he gave me such a look, that for the sake of that look alone, it would have been worth working for another fifty hours.
1959 年夏天，他给了我《第一大提琴协奏曲》的乐谱。五天后，我和我的伴奏亚历山大·德久欣一起去了肖斯塔科维奇位于科马罗沃的别墅，为他演奏这首协奏曲。当我问道：“德米特里·德米特里耶维奇，我们能为您演奏吗？”他回答说：“我去给你拿个谱架，斯拉瓦。”这是我一生中最伟大的时刻之一，因为我能够说出那句：“我不需要！”当我说出这句话的时候，我感觉心潮澎湃。当然，他瞪大了双眼，但他最终没有去拿谱架。我凭着记忆演奏了整首曲子。过程很顺利。在我的整个人生中，我从未如此认真地练习过。他8月1号晚上才把乐谱交给我，我2号练了10个小时，3号又练了10个小时。但到了4号，我有些吃不消，所以我只练了8个小时，5号我又练了8个小时——最后，6号，我去见了他。尽管如此，演奏效果还是很好！ ……当我对他说“我不需要！”时，他那样看了我一眼，光是为了那一眼，再练五十个小时都是值得的。

When it was over, I said:“I have to go home. I’ll take the Strela’” [“Krasnaia Strela,” or the“Red Arrow,” the express train between Moscow and Leningrad] and Dmitri Dmitrievich said,“I must see you off.” So he came with me from his dacha to Leningrad. As we were walking through the old railway station building, I caught the way he looked at everything. Though it was summertime, the weather was still not yet hot, and there were enormous numbers of people either asleep or just lying around next to one another on the cold tiles of the floor. The look on his face was so full of compassion, the sight of it all made him wince. He did not notice me observing him but at that moment I realized, seeing him so moved by what was, after all, such an everyday sight, the extent to which he felt for other people. This was his true self.
结束后，我说：“我得回家了。我坐‘红箭号’（莫斯科和列宁格勒之间的特快列车）走。”德米特里·德米特里耶维奇说：“我得送送你。”于是他和我一起从他的别墅来到了列宁格勒。当我们穿过老火车站大楼时，我捕捉到了他看一切事物的眼神。虽然是夏天，但天气并不热，很多人要么在睡觉，要么只是躺在冰冷的地砖上。他脸上的表情充满了怜悯，看到的一切使他不禁皱起了眉头。他没有注意到我正在观察他，但那一刻，看到他被这种日常景象触动，我意识到他对人们的感情达到了何种程度。这才是他真正的自我。

After I had conducted Prokofiev’s Voina i mir [War and peace] at the Bolshoi Theater [in 1969], Shostakovich wrote a review for the newspaper Sovetskoe isskusstvo, but publication was held up for some time. I, of course, knew nothing about it. But suddenly he rang me up:“Slava, can you pop over, I’d like to see you.” When I arrived, he said:“I have written this article, but it has not been published and maybe it never will be, but I’d still like you to have it.” And he handed me the manuscript. He gave me that manuscript to make it absolutely clear that he had written it himself—perhaps because he usually dictated his articles or maybe somebody else wrote them for him. But in this case, every single word was written in his own hand. The article, which did appear about three weeks later, said:“Prokofiev’s War and Peace is an opera of genius.”
在我于 1969 年在莫斯科大剧院指挥普罗科菲耶夫的《战争与和平》之后，肖斯塔科维奇为《苏联报》写了一篇评论，但发表被耽搁了一段时间。我当然对此一无所知。但他突然打电话给我：“斯拉瓦，你能过来吗，我想见见你。”我到达后，他说：“我写了这篇文章，但还没有发表，也许永远也不会发表，但我还是希望你能收下它。”然后他把手稿递给我。他把手稿交给我，是想让我清楚地知道这是他自己写的——也许是因为他通常口述他的文章，或者是由别人代笔。但在这篇文章中，每一个字都是他亲手写的。这篇文章在大约三周后发表，文中写道：“普罗科菲耶夫的《战争与和平》是一部天才的歌剧。”

When I read the rubbish written by Solomon Volkov [Testimony: The Memoirs of Shostakovich], I must say I was deeply surprised to find him claiming that Shostakovich had put his own signature to the pages. For example, on Dmitri Dmitrievich’s attitude to Prokofiev: I heard him say many times:“He’s a composer of genius, this is a work of genius!” And Shostakovich once even stated in an interview that the impulse for writing his First Cello Concerto sprang from Prokofiev’s Sinfonia Concertante for cello and orchestra. It always delighted him. Whenever I was playing the Sinfonia Concertante in Moscow, Shostakovich would always come along if he was in town, and he never missed a single concert.
当我读到所罗门·沃尔科夫写的垃圾《见证：肖斯塔科维奇回忆录》时，我不得不说，我对他声称肖斯塔科维奇在书页上亲笔签名深感惊讶。例如，关于德米特里·德米特里耶维奇对普罗科菲耶夫的态度，我听他说过很多次：“他是一位天才作曲家，这是一部天才的作品！”肖斯塔科维奇甚至在一次采访中表示，他创作《第一大提琴协奏曲》的灵感来自普罗科菲耶夫的《交响协奏曲》。普罗科菲耶夫的大提琴与管弦乐队协奏曲总是令他欣喜若狂。每当我在莫斯科演奏交响协奏曲时，如果肖斯塔科维奇在城里，他总会来，他从未缺席过任何一场音乐会。

Quite often I played with the Moscow Philharmonic Orchestra, where there was a percussionist who had lost a leg during the Patriotic War [World War II]. He did not always wear his artificial limb. Sometimes he would simply tuck up his empty trouser leg and stand on his one good leg in order to hit that last stroke, which, after I have been twirling around on the cello like someone right up high in the tent at the circus, has the effect of bringing everything, with a single blow, to a sudden halt. Dmitri Dmitrievich, when he used to come to my dressing room afterward, was always so impressed by this:“Wonderful, it was so wonderful! And that final stroke, which smashes everything down and brings it all to an end…. And on top of it all, that man up there on his one leg banging on the kettledrum with such force!” The whole picture so excited and inspired him that in his First Concerto, instead of one single blow, he has seven blows on the kettledrum!
我经常和莫斯科爱乐乐团一起演奏，乐团里有一位打击乐手，他在卫国战争（第二次世界大战）期间失去了一条腿。他并不总是戴着假肢。有时，他会把空着的裤腿卷起来，用一条好腿站着，以便演奏最后一击，当我像马戏团帐篷里的人一样在大提琴上转来转去时，这一击会让一切戛然而止。当德米特里·德米特里耶维奇在演奏结束后来到我的更衣室时，他总是对此赞不绝口：“太棒了，太精彩了！最后一击，把一切都打碎了，让一切都结束了……最重要的是，那个人单腿站在上面，用力敲着定音鼓！”整个画面令他激动不已，并激发了他的灵感，以至于在他的《第一协奏曲》中，他不是只敲了一次，而是敲了七次定音鼓！

He also remarked apropos [of] Prokofiev’s Sinfonia Concertante:“How wonderful the cello sounds with the celesta!” There is just such a passage in the finale, when the main theme drops to a slow tempo for the cello while the celesta plays ornamental passages. And similarly, at the end of the second movement in Shostakovich’s First Concerto, when I am playing on the cello, the string harmonics and celesta play along with me as well. So there are things in his First Concerto which I know for sure he took from Prokofiev, because Shostakovich, in full admiration, pointed them out to me himself. To suggest antagonism toward Prokofiev is sheer nonsense, in my view. Quite simply, they composed completely, diametrically, different music because they were musically gifted in diametrically different ways.
他还对普罗科菲耶夫的《交响协奏曲》做出了如下评价：“大提琴和钢片琴的配合多么美妙啊！”结尾部分就有这样一个乐段，当主旋律的大提琴降为慢板时，钢片琴则演奏装饰乐段。同样，在肖斯塔科维奇《第一协奏曲》第二乐章的末尾，当我用大提琴演奏时，弦乐泛音和钢片琴也跟着我一起演奏。所以我确信他的《第一协奏曲》中有些东西是他从普罗科菲耶夫那里学来的，因为肖斯塔科维奇非常欣赏我，他亲自向我指出了这些东西。在我看来，他对普罗科菲耶夫抱有敌意的说法是完全荒谬的。很简单，他们创作了完全不同的音乐，因为他们的音乐天赋完全不同。

M.Y. And what do you remember about the important premières of non-cello music?
M.Y. 你对非大提琴音乐的重要首演有什么印象？

Well, the Eighth Symphony, first of all. That gave me the greatest shock of my entire life. I attended the Moscow première. I had already been his student at the Conservatory. I had been with him for rehearsals-yet I could never believe that that man sitting there was the very same one who had composed it. I could never believe it! Even though he was my teacher and I'd already got to know him quite well, I found it incredible, impossible to believe!
嗯，首先是第八交响曲。这给了我一生最大的震撼。我去了莫斯科首演。那时我已经是他在音乐学院的学生了。我曾和他一起排练过——但我怎么也不相信，坐在那里的那个人就是创作这首曲子的人。我简直不敢相信！尽管他是我的老师，而且我已经很了解他了，但我还是觉得不可思议，难以置信！

And now whenever I have a chance to hear or conduct the Eighth Symphony, I never fail to be impressed by the depth and power of the music and the genius of its creator. It reflects all the complexity of modern man in the modern world. We hardly know ourselves; we never have time to get to know ourselves. We act, and in acting quickly and thinking quickly, we never have time to stop and analyze ourselves. This is all the more the case today. Everything is getting more and more complicated and it's speeding up. In order to understand life at its deepest, you need tremendous intellectual strength. That is what Shostakovich had.
现在，每当我有机会聆听或指挥第八交响曲时，我都会对音乐的深度和力量以及其创作者的天才所折服。它反映了现代人在现代世界的所有复杂性。我们几乎不了解自己，也没有时间了解自己。在快速行动和快速思考的过程中，我们永远没有时间停下来分析自己。今天的情况更是如此。一切都变得越来越复杂，越来越迅速。为了深入理解生活，你需要巨大的智慧力量。而这正是肖斯塔科维奇所拥有的。

I always thought Shostakovich knew everything there was to know about mankind. When I was young, I was quite scared of his learning. Unlike many oth-ers, he knew not only what he liked but also what he did not like. Everything he came across was grist for the mill of his intellect. He had an immense "appetite" and superb "powers of understanding." The breadth of his perception is demonstrated by the great range of literature he draws from: from Shakespeare and Krylov, Dolmatovsky and Dostoevsky, Burns and Gogol, Pushkin and satirical texts from Krokodil ["The Crocodile," the Soviet humor magazine], Lermontov and Yev-tushenko, Rilke, Kuechelbecker, Raleigh, Sasha Chorny, Apollinaire, Tsvetaeva, Marshak, Leskov, Japanese, Spanish and Jewish poetry, Blok and Michelangelo.
我一直认为肖斯塔科维奇知道关于人类的一切。当我年轻的时候，我恐惧于他的学识。与许多人不同，他不仅知道自己喜欢什么，还知道自己不喜欢什么。他所接触到的一切都是他智力的养料。他有巨大的“胃口”和超凡的“理解力”。他从大量文学作品中汲取养分，证明了他的知识广度：莎士比亚和克雷洛夫、多尔马托夫斯基和陀思妥耶夫斯基、伯恩斯和果戈里、普希金以及克罗科迪尔（《鳄鱼》，苏联幽默杂志）、莱蒙托夫和叶夫-图申科、里尔克、Kuechelbecker、罗利、萨沙·乔尼、阿波利奈尔、茨维塔耶娃、马尔沙克、列斯科夫、日本、西班牙和犹太诗歌、勃洛克和米开朗基罗。

And similarly he draws in the whole of life-from disappointment and tragic conflict to interludes of happiness and hope. Yet, despite confronting the most dreadful aspects of human existence, descending into the dark abyss of sorrows and disaster, Shostakovich's art still remains utterly human.
同样，他也将整个人生——从失落和悲惨的冲突到幸福和希望的插曲——都融入其中。然而，尽管肖斯塔科维奇直面了人类生存中最可怕的一面，陷入了悲伤和灾难的黑暗深渊，但他的艺术仍然是完全人性化的。

Shostakovich's world is our world. For many decades my own life was inextricably part of that world, and has continued to be so, even now. To have lived at the same time as Shostakovich is a source of great joy. To have been involved in his creative life has been an immense responsibility. And to play his music has been the greatest happiness.
肖斯塔科维奇的世界就是我们的世界。几十年来，我自己的生活就是这个世界密不可分的一部分，直到现在也是如此。能与肖斯塔科维奇生活在同一时代，我感到无比喜悦。曾参与他的创作生活成为了一种巨大的责任。能演奏他的音乐是最大的幸福。