Ukrainian vocal school of the 1950s-1970s in the personal memoir writings the sociocultural and artistic aspects

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of Music

Ukrainian vocal school of the 1950s-1970s in the personal memoir writings the sociocultural and artistic aspects

Hennadii Kabka Ph.D. in Art Studies, associate

professor, Department of Solo Singing

Oxana Kazantseva-Kabka

Lecturer, Department of Bandura

Abstract

vocal art opera creativity

The paper attempts to consider the personal writings of the figures of 1950s-1970s Ukrainian vocal art from the standpoint of contemporary art research. Personal writings of Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko, Kostiantyn Ohnievoi, and Klavdia Radchenko reveal cultural and historical processes of the era. The inclusion of personal writings allows to avoid schematizing while portraying the iconic cultural figures, it facilitates the immersion into the spiritual, cultural, and historical contexts of their personal life stages, comprehension of their motivation for certain acts, clarifies the individual characteristics of the artists upon some time distance, as well as their role on the context of the development of culture. The study of the personal texts of the artists from the same creative environment and institution--Kyiv Opera--enables one to draw a general perspective of the creative process within the leading opera company of the time, to observe the role of their creativity in the context of development of Ukrainian vocal art. By highlighting their life stages and creative development, the complex of their individual traits that at the same time is characteristic of their circle becomes evident. The lead singers of the Kyiv Opera of the 1950s-1970s in their writings pose a perplexing question to the researcher: whether the era shapes the artist or the artists change their times with their professional performance. This existential and philosophic rhetoric of the personal writings by Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko, Kostiantyn Ohnievoi, and Klavdia Radchenko became the basis for getting an insight into their creativity, studying the real fabric of the cultural era, and overall cultural history of Ukraine.

Keywords: text of culture, personal text of culture, vocal culture of Ukraine, Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, Yevhenia Myroshnychenko, Kostiantyn Ohnievoi.

Анотація

Геннадій Кабка Кандидат мистецтвознавства, доцент кафедри оперного співу, Національна музична академія України імені П. І. Чайковського

Оксана Казанцева-Кабка Викладач кафедри бандури, Національна музична академія України імені П. І. Чайковського

Українська вокальна школа 1950-х -- 1970-х в особових текстах мемуарного характеру: соціокультурний та мистецький аспекти

Здійснене дослідження особових текстів діячів українського вокального мистецтва 1950-х -- 1970-х років є спробою розглянути культурно-історичний процес з погляду мети, потреб і завдань сучасної культурологічної і мистецтвознавчої науки, що реалізується через особливості самопізнання та професійної реалізації Б. Гмирі, Б. Гнидя, Л. Лобанової, Є. Мірошниченко, К. Огнєвого та К. Радченко. Ці джерела звільняють від схематизму зображення знакових діячів культури, чим допомагають сучасному досліднику глибше проникнути в духовний та культурно-історичний контекст життєвих етапів, зрозуміти мотивацію тих або інших вчинків, уточнити індивідуальні характеристики митця відчуженого часу, його ролі в контексті розвитку культури. Вивчення особових текстів групи митців, які творили у той же час та у тому ж творчому колективі -- Київській опері, уможливлює створення загальної картини творчого процесу у провідному оперному колективі країни того часу, розуміння ролі їхньої творчості в контексті розвитку українського вокального мистецтва. Також проникнення в етапи їхнього життєвого шляху та творчого становлення виявляє сукупність індивідуальних рис як ознаки певного творчого середовища. Вивчаючи творчість провідних співаків Київської опери 1950-х -- 1970-х років, часто важко зрозуміти: чи час формує митця, чи майстер змінює час завдяки своєму високопрофесійному мистецтву. Тож у цій філософсько-екзистенційній за природою риториці особові тексти діячів вокального мистецтва (Б. Гмирі, Б. Гнидя, Л. Лобанової, Є. Мірошниченко, К. Огнєвого та К. Радченко) склали основу для вивчення реальної тканини культурної епохи, збагнення таємниці творчості, культурної історії країни.

Ключові слова: текст культури, особовий текст культури, вокальна культура України, Борис Гмиря, Богдан Гнидь, Лілія Лобанова, Євгенія Мірошниченко, Костянтин Огнєвой.

Introduction

Actualization of personal writings--written sources originating from a certain person--as a reflective texts about the art product, art process, or the context of their emergence is based on the memoir nature of these texts (memoirs, correspondence, diary entries, recollective interviews, etc.) These sources fulfill their potential--both historical and art--in the intertextual discourse. Being sporadic and multidimensional (as they encompass various narratives, including artistic and socio-political), the layers of senses these texts provide, reanimate the vision of the cultural and artistic processes of the era that may have been missed by the present-day researchers. Introduction of the personal writings by the prominent figures of 1905s-1970s Ukrainian vocal culture-- Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko, Kostiantyn Ohnievoi, and Klavdia Radchenko--in the cultural and historical context provides additional legitimization to the results of their professional activity as operatic leads. Multidimensionality of their personal writings adds to the objective assessment of events and gives impetus for various interpretations of history and their personal life stories. A comprehensive study of theses texts ensures the understanding of the multitude of aspects in the vocal component of Ukrainian culture engulfed in the discourse of the “vulgar sociology” of the era. Thus, it enriches the knowledge about the cultural and art environment of Ukraine during the Soviet rule.

Literature Review

In art history, the problem of memoir writings of the artists was indirectly addressed only as a component of the theory of epistology (Marianna Kopytsya) while the information they provide was partially used for the conceptualization of the Ukrainian schools of vocal performance (by Valentyna Antoniuk, Bohdan Hnyd, Tetiana Mykhailova, and others). Personal writings were incorporated into the studies on Ukrainian opera (Yurii Stanishevskyi) and into the commentaries on the source studies (correspondence and diaries of Borys Hmyria, correspondence between Borys Lyatoshynsky and Reinhold Gliere, diaries of Nathan Rakhlin, memoirs of Veniamin Tolba and Bohdan Hnyd). With the insufficient level of research of personal writings in musicology, certain useful parallels may be drawn with historiography, where memoirs become a basis for creating a multidimensional cultural and historical portrait of a person (publications by Tatiana Golovina, Philippe Lejeune, Irina Neverova, etc.). The same approach was fruitful in literary studies as well, where genre variants of personal writings received particular attention (Mikhail Bakhtin, Tetyana Hazha, Mariia Zubrytska, Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe, Juri Lotman, Valeriia Pustovit, etc.) The personal writings of the figures of 1950s-1970s Ukrainian vocal culture often cross the edge of the permitted and taboo within the cultural paradigm of “vulgar sociology.” These texts become available to a researcher posthumously, thus, unlike the published texts of the same author, they are devoid of formalities and are not redacted in accordance with the official cultural doctrine. The Soviet cultural landscape practically omitted the personal writings of the 1950s-1970s vocal art figures. During the era, “any singer appeared in periodicals as an individual of no gender, age, or distinctive personality. Everyone, without exception, was listed preceded by their titles; any more or less known soloist would be labeled as `renowned,' `master,' etc.” (Moskalets, 2012, p. 385).

Aim of the paper

The paper aims to determine the components of artistic and socio-historical discourses in the personal writings of the prominent figures of Ukrainian vocal art within the language and communication patterns of Ukrainian culture of the second half of the twentieth century.

Results and Discussion

A significant part of the personal texts mentioned in this paper functions in the discourse of musicology. The epistological component of musicology may be divided into the following subgroups: the context of the history of music (reconstruction of notable events, of the life milestones of famous artists); interpretation of the musical text (reflection on the operatic parts, vocal chamber pieces, etc.); the context of vocal methodology (a technical component of vocal art that indicated the characteristic features of Ukrainian vocal school). These and other factors may be traced in both the diaries (by Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, and Klavdia Radchenko) and in the handwritten remarks in the scores from the Borys Hmyria's personal archive. Yevhenia Miroshnychenko and Kostiantyn Ohnievoi in their memoirs outline Ukrainian vocal school as a phenomenon of national culture.

The theoretical and methodological legacy of Borys Hmyria is of particular interest. Despite being sporadic and scattered throughout the pages of scores that supplemented Hmyria's explication of his vocal method that he provided in his correspondence, it testifies to Hmyria's missionary role in promoting Ukrainian vocal art. Borys Hmyria focuses on the emotional and spiritual factors in vocal imagery and roles, he perceives vocal performance as a spiritual process that is repeatedly mentioned in his personal texts.

The personal memoir texts reveal a number of main components of musical performance that will be outlined with a generalization of the leading techniques of developing vocal performance mastery. All the mentioned artists lived and creatively evolved within one circle and institution--the Kyiv Opera. After ending their performing careers, all of them (except Hmyria) worked at the Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of Music.

A special relationship with the mentor and teacher always was a pillar in a vocal performer's professional training and development. This relationship was based on unconditional respect and trust in the mentor, and not only in his pf her performing skills but also the personal traits. For instance, the students in the class of Yevhenia Miroshnychenko felt themselves as kindred spirits, as the successors of the tradition, adherents of the principles of a distinct vocal school. Miroshnychenko reminisces that during the time of their studies with Maria DonetsTeisseyre, “...the vocal performance students grouped around their teacher. It was a common occurrence to see Maria Eduardivna [Maria Donets-Teisseyre] in the center of the circle, surrounded by respectful students. The authority of the teaching vocalist was incredibly high. Any familiarities were simply not allowed” (Kabka, 2005a; 2005b; 2006a; 2006b).

Borys Hmyria gives a similar account in his letters. Reflecting on the methodological foundations of his teacher Pavlo Holubiev, who was one of the founders of the twentieth-century Ukrainian vocal school, he states, “.I studied with Holubiev, a well-known teacher. However, I also had Bagadurov's textbook back at home, where a number of vocal pieces were actualized and illustrated by the citations of the prominent world singers. Therefore, I checked my teacher's every word, nevertheless trusting in him infinitely. My teacher demonstrated his teaching school on me... For all my life, I had one and only teacher, and now he visits me every year. I am proud of my loyalty.” (Hmyria, 2010, p. 136).

In her memoirs about Maria Donets-Teisseyre, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko notes that even after graduation from the academy of music, when she became an independent artist of her own right, she always willingly attended the classes with Donets-Teisseyre, shared her times of joy and sorrow with her, asked about her health, and told her about her plans for the future. She recollects, “.My unforgettable, wise, attentive teacher and loyal friend-- Maria Eduardivna. an outstanding singer. Now, when I am a teacher myself, I stick to her methods of vocalists' training, complementing it with my own experience as a performer. I remember her 80^th birth anniversary when almost all the great singers trained by her gathered together in Kyiv. Maria Eduardivna was paid so many respects and appreciation, so many kind, sincere, grateful words he received! Ivan Kozlovsky, her former performing partner, was one of the guests. It was with him that I sang the duet of Violetta and Alfredo. By the way, Kozlovsky is an ardent dancing partner. I encountered many wonderful pedagogues at the Academy of Music. For example, V. S. Tolba, a brilliant conductor. With him, I prepared a very complex part of The Queen of the Night in the opera studio's staging of Mozart's The Magic Flute. It was a true school ofvocal performance and mastery of Mozart's style” (Shvachko, 2001).

She continues: “I owe Maria Eduardivna for having faith in me; thanks to her vocal training and guidance that she provided me with, I was able to fulfill myself as a singer, as a personality, and further on as a teacher. Maria Eduardivna used to say that `when one opens his mouth in the theatre, that should be for singing.' I clearly got the idea that I should smile to everyone. I felt that there was slandering all around me, and it was predominantly female singers who did that. I tried to avoid this. Obviously, Maria Eduardivna warned me that there will be jealousy in the theatre. Some have their green light, and some do not. I used my time in the theatre only for my creative development. I listened a lot, looked and observed who does what and how” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 4).

Instead, renowned teachers always felt responsible for their students, considered their creative needs and performing range, delicately pointed out at their talents and skillfully guided their development and self-realization. Personal texts of a memoir nature corroborate this. According to Borys Hmyria, his teacher Pavlo Holubiev never gave him unambiguous directives and never claimed any absolute truth. Instead, he followed the natural development of his student's talent, aptly guiding his creative personality. His teaching style was aimed at an active and initiative individual.

Violetta Votrina, one of Maria Donets-Teisseyre's students, recollects in this regard, how “she greeted a student with a kind word, welcoming glance, and tried to overcome her constraints, relax the muscles of the throat in order to achieve right sound-production and help her students get a clear idea about what is happening to the vocal cords during singing. He specifically focused on studying vocalises and the pieces by ancient composers. She developed the natural timbre” (Votrina, 2001, p. 49). Yevhenia Miroshnychenko also states that for her “Maria Eduardivna's school. was for all types of voices” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 5) that seems nonsense. Yet, she explains her vision of this process: “Why my students are different from the students from other classes? The objective of my method is a focused, concentrated, vivid sound, broad message, breathing, and clarity of the sound tone. My students also learn to think, they must develop their fantasy, figurative thinking. If there is no calling to be an artist, one should not be performing” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 5). Miroshnychenko's former students testify that there was always a busy, professional, free atmosphere in her classes. She had a nourishing sense of humor, as if “not noticing” some small faults in the singing of novices in order to strengthen their self-confidence. Still, with the talented students, she was rather exigent.

Kostiantyn Ohnievoi in his memoirs notes that, “establishing the psychological contact ensured further compliance with methodological guidance aimed at developing an artistically perfect performance; voice-leading and system of breathing helped in this. Everything was subordinated to the stylistic organization of musical space.” The memoirs of Kostiantyn Ognevoi were recorded by Hennadii Kabka in the 1990s. Hennadii Kabka is a graduate of Ognevoi's class in the Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of Music.

This suggests some generalizations often outlined in personal memoir writings. In the Ukrainian vocal performing school of the second half of the twentieth century, the new principles of teaching classical opera singing and chamber singing were formed. They were based on “creating a character,” training a performer psychologically and physiologically, active involvement in the overall musical discourse of the material used; understanding the integrity of the vocal art, first and foremost, through the deep integral analysis of the artistry and style of the text.

For the Ukrainian performing school, with its lively, emotional perception and interpretation of the musical pieces, acknowledging the stage image as a result not only of the quality singing was an important milestone. The performer is able to convey the sense of the part to the audience only as a result of synthetic combination of the sound, gestures, facial expressions, psychological mood, and appearance. Personal writing of memoir nature often illustrate this acknowledgment. For instance, Lilia Lobanova comments her own performances or that of her colleagues in the following manner: “And so, I had my baptism by fire. I sang the part of Odarka. Not bad, in general, I captured her character but there is still a lot to work... I sang averagely. In the first duet, my voice has dropped in the first bars, then it smoothened, yet, in the middle register, some notes have disappeared. Undoubtedly, I was very much worried. I performed the prose better than at the rehearsals. The show was on a roll, it was a success” [diary entry, 19.05.1963, the part of Odarka, Zaporozhets za Dunayem (A Zaporozhian (Cossack) Beyond the Danube) by Semen Hulak-Artemovsky]. Alternatively, the entry on 17.03.1963: "... I did very good, the voice sounded perfectly. Nadia Kudelia sang for the first time but I do not like her, though she is visually the best page than anybody else. The sound of her voice is uneasy, it shakes. She is not devoid of performing talent. Dima [Dmytro Hnatiuk] did not sing well, he screams and raises his tone. He is not accurate to the rhythm. The show is not well-organized, and the cast is not fitting. Only sweet memories are left from our cooperation with Tolba.”

Yevhenia Miroshnychenko gave equally comprehensive evaluation when she prepared a romance, an aria, or an opera part. She recollects, “.I pondered on the part for a while. I realized... that I need to understand what initiated the plot for this opera. I liked to borrow some elements of acting from the cinema or theatre actresses. Sometimes my interpretation of the character differed significantly from the director's but my confidence in these characters made the directors accept my interpretation... And I had a naturally good imagination; for that reason, I often heard and read good reviews, highly acclaiming my building a character as an actor” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 5).

The personal memoir texts by Borys Hmyria, Bohdan Hnyd, Lilia Lobanova, Klavdia Radchenko, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko, and Kostiantyn Ohnievoi draw attention to the problem of associating thinking in vocal performing. I. e., Borys Hmyria often involves imagination for a clearer understanding of the features of the image created. He writes, “.Any artist, painting a landscape, group portrait or simply a portrait, always stresses the main point in the painting for him. And the audience has to guess this `point.' Every opera has numerous parts. There is main, leading part, and there are secondary. Still, every one of them has its `core' that has to be decoded. I see my life in a part or a role, when I find this `red threat.' Then I contemplate on what is the leading drive for my character, if my appearances correspond to his nature, and apply all of this to my `dimensions.' In some time, the character solidifies, and during the rehearsals in the class it is perfected, so it is presentable on stage. I study the next and preceding parts during the rehearsals of the mise en scenes. I do not purposely learn them. At this stage, many creative problems are solved, for instance, if an actor will be able to capture the attention of the audience, to make it emphasize the hero of the opera” (Hmyria, 2010, p. 142). It is also a well-known fact that during the formative stage of his creativity, Feodor Chaliapin was an ideal of bass voice for Hmyria. Recording of Chaliapin prompted the student of technical school to professionally study singing.

In Lilia Lobanova's diaries, the reflection on willpower, performer's potential, and aspirations that result in active efforts to achieve the planned result and peak performance are often. In this regard, Yevhenia Miroshnychenko remarks that “being a creative personality, it is sometimes better to underestimate than overestimate yourself.” Her teacher Maria Donets-Teisseyre emphasized on numerous occasions: “In order to become a singer, the good voice and musical talent are not enough. This is a required minimum but what is the most important is... mind... willpower, patience, hard work, and vocal pitch that has to be developed in oneself” (Yehorycheva, 1990, p. 87-88). Yevhenia Miroshnychenko recounts how Maria Donets-Teisseyre enriched the basic vocal training with a creative element.

The artists of Ukrainian vocal school always closely followed the interpretation of the composer's idea encoded in the musical text. Lilia Lobanova stressed on the significance of discovering and knowing the largest possible number of musical pieces and specifics of their performing techniques and meaning. Kostiantyn Ohnievoi in his memoirs writes that “. every sound of the piece performed and even the exercises should have a certain musical sense. As there is not a word that does not convey some thought, likewise, there should not be a sound without some emotion” (Yehorycheva, 1990, p. 87-88). He put particular emphasis on the clear functioning of elocution. Almost every student from Kostiantyn Ohnievoi's class was professionally trained to produce the sound of the required timbral tone that was both emotional and right in regard to sound-producing and sound-leading. This enabled a consistent development of students' creativity and acting skills. In his work on students' voice training, Kostiantyn Ohnievoi considered it crucial to choose a vocal repertoire correctly, with the adequate use of the phonetic potential of vowels and consonants. In particular, he mentioned that “.at the first stage of training one should opt for the Italian repertoire, for Ukrainian and Russian folk songs” (Yehorycheva, 1990, p. 87-88).

His teaching convictions were rooted in the concept of Italian singing that uses Italian vowels, which aid in right sound-producing. On the contrary, “performing Ukrainian and Russian songs that are based on well-familiar musical intonations helps to perceive the naturalness, freedom of the vocal cords, to reveal individuality. Besides, Italian repertoire helps to consolidate skills of forming the singing tone” (Yehorycheva, 1990, p. 87-88). Analyzing Ohnievoi's own impressive results in vocal performance and pedagogy, it should be noted that he was an unquestionable authority for his students. Being simultaneously a wonderful musician, artist, actor, and refined educator, he treated his students with remarkable kindness and interest.

One of the key elements of the Ukrainian vocal school is an inextricable bond of artistic understanding, interpreting the piece with impeccable singing technique. In this respect, Borys Hmyria notes that “...unlimited use of vocal cords, the performance of all elements of the piece with ease, starting from the easiest and up to the most complicated passages, the skills to effectively present the potential of the voice-instrument are the foundation for the original interpretation of any musical composition” (Yehorycheva, 1990). The principle of self-control and the ability to wisely manage one's body are the pillars for achieving the artistically full timbre of voice. Borys Hmyria frequently stipulated this in his personal writings. In his remark and commentaries to the musical pieces, the singer often turns to the problem of breathing: “It is an issue of utmost importance. While performing, I use over ten kinds of vocal breathing. I think that the formula `The art of singing is the art of breathing' should be slightly adapted, namely: `The art of singing is the art of exhaling.' And this may be achieved only by breathing training. The Italians write that those who experienced the deepest depths of the sea and the bluest skies have mastered belcanto, using all kinds of breathing in order to convey the role” (Hmyria, 2010, p. 134).

In his personal texts of memoir nature, Bohdan Hnyd concentrates on teaching the breathing techniques as well. In his eponymous book of memoirs, Bohdan, Hnyd recreates the atmosphere in the vocal class at the Lviv Academy of Music during the 1950s. He analyses the creative approaches of different teachers from whom he learned. In Hnyd's opinion, the main problem in developing the right breathing technique is “.combining relaxed, easy sound-producing and inner concentration on achieving the artistic objective. The position of the larynx that should be low” (Hnyd, 1997, p. 309).

Yevhenia Miroshnychenko in her memoirs specifically mentions the control over sound when the intonation is formed, as well as right phrasing and clear articulation while singing deeply, meaningfully, emotionally, and “without tension in the cords.” These principles, as it is known, were implemented in full in her own performing school.

Kostiantyn Ohnievoi often remarked that “it is impossible to teach singing only on the basis of one's own sense. The formation of a sound should be conscious, a singer should know his natural disposition, the traits of his own vocal cords, as all the vocal cords are different” (K. Ohnievoi, personal communication, the 1990s).

Borys Hmyria in his personal texts often singles out not only the operatic component of singing but also the vocal chamber one. It is common knowledge that he was a true master of chamber performance. The vocal chamber pieces performed by him were full of true lyricism and drama, and his voice is an illustration of the high culture of vocals. The singer untiringly worked on breathing and other elements of vocal technique. He always emphasized “.his `trust' in scientific and musical-pedagogic knowledge about singing, because for all his life he was a practical experimenter with the nature of human voice” (Prystalov, 2008, p. 15). This meticulous and diligent work on his own voice and constant perfection of the techniques and imagery was incredibly fruitful. The sound of his voice attracted with the purity of his soul and his sincerity, as the result of which the audience unconditionally trusted every word he sang.

Summarizing the observations on the methodological principles of the best members of the Ukrainian vocal school that were scattered in their personal writings, it should be noted that, on the one hand, they were deeply rooted in the traditions of national singing, language, elocution; on the other hand, they represent one of the fines European schools that synthesized and creatively rethought the achievements of global vocal art.

In his personal texts, Borys Hmyria often addressed the problem of interpretation of a musical piece. He frequently exemplifies the solutions he found with vocal chamber music. The most vivid illustration is his polemics with the Sovetskaya Muzyka (Soviet Music) journal regarding Hmyria's performance of Songs and Dances of Death vocal chamber cycle by Modest Mussorgsky. In late 1958, this periodical published (No. 11, p. 88) the note signed “E. D.” It claimed that in his recorded performance of Mussorgsky's cycle, Hmyria deviated from the composer's context in the romances Lullaby, Serenade, and Field Marshal. The album was recorded in July 1965. Hmyria writes about this to his teacher Pavlo Holubiev: “.The note in Sovetskaya Muzyka is quite thorny and obliging. I immediately wrote a letter to Yuriy Keldysh, who is an editor of this periodical, asking to inform me about my specific `faults.' However, I never received a reply. I should write him once more. The case is that the author of the note, who signed only with his initials, did not know any other version except Pavel Lamm's. However, there is a version by Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, in which I have more trust. Hence, I performed the entire cycle according to it. I am surprised by the critics' ignorance!” (Hmyria, 2010, p. 592).

On singer's request, the editorial board of the journal sent him additional scores examples and explications. Upon studying these materials, Hmyria completed his article “A polemics with the criticism.” The manuscript is dated January 1959. Unfortunately, the response article was not published. In his response, Hmyria suggests that “. it was rejoicing that the critic so scrupulously considered the performed pieces. I hoped to be in the critical limelight and receive valuable corrections. However, this was not the case. First of all, I should explain my choice of the version of Songs and Dances of Death to perform. The author of the article considers Pavel Lamm's version to be the composer's one and only version, which he quotes. Still, I chose Rimsky-Korsakov's version for a reason. As it is known, the great composer performed an outstanding work after Mussorgsky's death by editing almost all the musical pieces of his friend, because he knew their features in detail as a result of listening and discussing them..„My personal opinion, similar to that of many others, is that Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov provided the most authentic version of Songs and Dances of Death. I am convinced that in his version he aimed not for the `considerable and unjustified changes of the composer's text' as the reviewer claims but on the contrary, to cherish and restore the harmonious flavor of Mussorgsky's genius. Likewise, my objective is to recreate the musical text and the composer's ideas with utmost precision” (Hmyria, 2010, p. 591). Further on, Borys Hmyria consistently and scrupulously provides arguments to his point and suggests the critic's ignorance. As for the true identity of E. D, H. Prynts, a museum curator of Hmyria's Apartment-Museum, who compiled Hmyria's memoirs and authored an introductory chapter to it, states that it was L. Kirichenko, a daughter of Aleksey Kirichenko, a Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Borys Hmyria convincingly interprets Five romances for bass [Five Romances on Verses by Dolmatovsky for bass and piano], a vocal chamber cycle by Dmitri Shostakovich [the original is in the collection of the B. Hmyria Fund], of which he was the first performer. Marianna Kopytsya analyses the manuscript and concludes: “„he worked in several directions: on the changes in poetic texts, on the details of the performing nuances (dynamics, agogics, syntax, etc.). In the last two romances he did tessitura and tonal nuancing” (Kopytsya, 2009, p. 256). In addition to a large number of performer's notes in the manuscript, many of Hmyria's personal texts and memoirs (his correspondence with Shostakovich, diaries, etc.) cover the preparation for performing this iconic piece by Shostakovich. It is known that “„his comprehension of this musical text was that deep and detailed that he worked on it since November 1954 (first Shostakovich's letter to Hmyria is dated November 11, 1954) until May 16, 1956 (the date of first performance)” (Kopytsya, 2009, p. 256). The reason behind the extended period of time between first receiving the score and until the first concert performance is the singer's extensive touring and pensive work on the cycle. Sadly, as Marianna Kopytsya remarks, “„ the detailed information from Borys Romanovych [Hmyria] to Dmitri Dmitriyevich [Shostakovich] he provided in his letters on the nature of each of the romances and necessary corrections has not survived. Those close to the Shostakovich family recollected the composer's habit of destroying the `written proofs' of any of his creative or personal relations; probably this was not without the reason” (Kopytsya, 2009, p. 257).

Unfortunately, in the 1988 publication of the facsimile variant of the cycle scores (Muzychna Ukrayina publishing house), Shostakovich's manuscript with Hmyria's editor's remarks was not represented correctly. These deficiencies were eliminated in the 2006 monographic work: Prynts, H., Kopytsya, M., & Tsymbalista, N. (2006). Hmyria i Shostakovych [Hmyria and Shostakovich]. Kyiv: Lohos. This collective monograph presents a facsimile variant of the score of the cycle for voice and piano. The scores of the romances were provided in color print with all the corrections and commentaries Hmyria had made. Marianna Kopytsya elaborated detailed tables and grouped the musical and literary corrections of the famed singer in all five romances; they highlight the features of the poetic text, of the notation orthography, and its dynamic and agogic detalization (Prynts, 2006, p. 176-180).

In Hmyria's memoirs, there are the following recollections about the interpretation and further recording of this instrumental chamber cycle by Shostakovich. In fact, “„ recording was performed in Shostakovich's presence; he always attended Hmyria's Moscow concerts and, obviously, he could not miss such an event as recording of his own romances” (Prynts, 2006, p. 181). Lev Ostrin, who was Hmyria's longtime concertmaster, recalls, “During the recording, D. Shostakovich sat by my side, by the grand piano, and turned the score sheets; he called me on the telephone and asked for that beforehand. During the most intense episode in the `Day of Tiffs' song, when there were the words `„They are whispering, whispering: this love is not worth a thing...,' Dmitri Dmitriyevich suddenly broke down and cried: `I„ do not know what happened to me'” (as cited in Prynts, 2006, p. 181-182).

Borys Hmyria mentions his recording of Five Romances for Bass by Shostakovich in his letter to his teacher Pavlo Holubiev on March 12, 1956: “I have recorded Shostakovich's `Five days' in Moscow. I first listened to myself in these romances and I do not share your pessimism. Shostakovich is ecstatic” (as cited in Prynts, 2006, p. 182). This cycle is mentioned in the letter on March 17, 1956 as well. Namely, the singer notes: “„ after the recording was made, I often try to objectively recreate Shostakovich's `Five days'. I am getting used to it and I think that with certain tempo changes and thoughtful and skillful performance it, once again, could be an illustration to the saying that `there are no bad musical pieces-- only bad performers'” (as cited in Prynts, 2006, p. 182). Analysis of Hmyria's personal writings in the context of musical interpretation of the pieces demonstrates his mindful and responsible approach to the choice of the works for his repertoire. The range of performed pieces allowed him to accentuate all the important register of his creativity: historical and cultural situation of the era, biographical factors, and the art processes, which affected this choice.

Creative, gifted personalities are often prone to mood swings that affect their creativity. What constitutes a stable psychological characteristic of a Master-Creator is a constant urge for creation, a constant pressure, and more or less distinctive unconscious anxiety. The deeply rooted urge for sophisticated beauty, as psychologists suggest, often causes psycho-physiological fatigue and, eventually, poor adaptation to social norms. The Creator often balances between the two states--relaxation that turns into tension and catharsis that is changed by joy. This dual state becomes a manifestation of neuroticism, pointed out as a psychological trait of a true Master by Igor Savchuk in the context of the artists' mode of existence during the modern and postmodern times (Savchuk, 2005).

The complex understanding of performing as an interpretation, interpretative variant (Moskalenko, 2013) reveals the dialogic nature of this phenomenon in the context of the contradiction in the interpretations between composer and performer. Within this understanding, the concert performer hermeneutically deciphers the concealed composer's idea. The performer's text of the musical piece is his professional ability to recreate the musical source of information that captures the composer's uniqueness in the form of an artistically integral system. V. Moskalenko proposes to delineate three dimensions of the musical piece that interact in the process of the concert performance of music: notation, imaginary sound of the piece, and how the piece sounds in reality. All three represent the vocal performer from a different angle (Moskalenko, 2013).

Notation is a coded text. The process of reading and performing this text launches an intensive co-creating between a composer and performer. Moskalenko defines a musical work as a phenomenon that “...manifests itself in the social art practice, the integrity of which lies in the interplay of ideal imaginary sound and an endless multitude of interpretations.„” (Moskalenko, 1994, p. 22). Eventually, the very concept of interpretation as a recreation of the composer's thought captured in symbols applies more to the qualitative, stylistically convincing process of reading the musical piece, while the phenomenon of the Performer-Creator addresses the transcendental and existential spirit of a person, who is able to guide the audience to a cathartic revival, which is usually omitted in the academic publications.

It is the Master-Creator in the latter systemic understanding of the transcendental nature of concert performance that becomes a universe of musical performance in himself, or, according to Egyptian mythology, “a God on earth.” Obviously, the “earth” would be the ideal process of musical performance that mirrors the established norms of a certain era, style, or composer (for instance, the ideal performance of the classical composers during the beginning of the century may significantly change by its end). The ideal sound is a special type of the live text of the musical piece. Ideal sound is a collective concept. It is a result of repeated perception of the symbolic meanings of the music and generalization of different “viewpoints.”

The transcendent field of joint creativity suggests that the audience as if immerses in the sound of music in certain point of time and space. This only substantiates our ideas about the transcendental in concert performing. In this process, the audience connects to the unexplainable sphere of creativity. The ideal performer often struggles to verbalize the ideas he nevertheless conveys on stage. Besides, hardly any of great lead singers successfully explained in their personal texts that (conventionally) transcendental tempo-rhythm that aids in creating deeply convincing image on stage.

Only an experienced audience may trace the transcendental in performing creativity; when this process is initiated, the textual and stylistic inaccuracies are not relevant anymore. The audience is immersed in this “whirlwind” of performer's and composer's creativity and accepts the performer's interpretation. Igor Savchuk notes that “.freedom reveals itself to the Master in the new dimension as a direct feeling, without any foreign conditions. Eliminated human sensations, inner world of the individual that is recreated in art opts for equivalence of art, science, philosophy” (Savchuk, 2005, pp. 4, 53). He states that the artist in the process of creativity becomes equal “.to the universe in itself, with his personality serving as a mediator for all other possible worlds” (Savchuk, 2005, p. 178).

These association may be corroborated by the legacy of two renowned lead singers of Taras Shevchenko Kyiv State Opera and Ballet Theatre--Lilia Lobanova and Yevhenia Miroshnychenko--in particular, by their personal writings. The stage performance and pedagogical creativity of these two outstanding figures of Ukrainian vocal school highlights different approaches to the art of vocal performing and is highly valuable for understanding Ukrainian musical history during the discordant twentieth century.

Both Lobanova and Miroshnychenko were very gifted in regard to their professional skills: they had their individual timbre, vocal pitch, perfect memory, imaginative thinking, acting skills, and other abilities that enabled them to perceive the circumstances of music and stage scenes pictured by the composer. They created unmatched stage roles both in the national and global classical pieces, as it is typical for highly professional talented artists.

Both singers were fortunate right from the start of their careers. Their mentors and teachers were the founders of Kyiv vocal school: Prof. Clara Broon (L. Lobanova) and Prof. Maria Donets-Teisseyre (E. Miroshnychenko). They expressed their sincere gratitude to them for all their life.

Yevhenia Miroshnychenko confessed that, “.Maria Eduardivna sensed that I had a talent. In the class of vocals, I was disciplined. Besides, I repeated everything like a `monkey.' Everything she said was a law for me. Maria Eduardivna set a high standard for me, which is the basis for vocal art” (Kabka, 2005b, p. 8). Lilia Lobanova provides equal reminiscences in her diary entry of October 29, 1959: “.On October 27, I attended the funeral of Clara Isakivna Broon. My famed teacher has died. She was a pure soul, great connoisseur of opera art. Only recently she attended my show Demon on July 2, 1959, after that I have not yet performed Tamara. This time I sang better that on that occasion but she did not hear and will not hear that”.

In addition to the voice teachers, the education of Miroshnychenko and Lobanova was greatly complemented by the input ofthe directors, conductors, and older generation of singers of the previous era: Veniamin Tolba, Yakiv Karasyk, Yukhym Lishanskyi, Oleksandr Kolodub, Mykhailo Hryshko, Zoia Gaidai, Ivan Patorzhynsky, and many others.

Yevhenia Miroshnychenko reminisces, “. I was incredibly lucky that I know the theatre as a true depository of culture. We were the creations of great mentors, directors, and conductors. They made true artists out of us. At present, unfortunately, this does not happen anymore” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 5). Veniamin Tolba in particular made a great contribution to Miroshnychenko's development. She recollects, “I first met Veniamin Tolba when we worked on the part of The Queen of the Night in Mozart's The Magic Flute staged in the Opera Studio of the Kyiv State Tchaikovsky Academy ofMusic. We were so young and inexperienced, and the presence of such a musician prompted us to do our part equally diligent as the famed conductor. We always felt fear and awe but not because he was a strict person. On the contrary, he was very kind and soft-spoken. We were anxious that we will not be able to perform according to his corrections. Because of this process we started working with full dedication and our subsequent life in art helped us to fill the gap in knowledge: we learned something new during each stage and orchestra rehearsal, during the shows conducted by demanding, caring, and affable Veniamin Saveliyovych” (Miroshnychenko, 2009, p. 266).

Veniamin Tolba highly regarded Lilia Lobanova's talent. In his memoirs, the conductor writes that, “.about her, everything was in harmony: her personality, her voice, her stage performance, her skills... She had all the richness of vocal performing means. Particularly impressive was her ability for legato in cantilena (a true belcanto), and she could always draw out the tone (extremes of the high register), that is always the evidence of great mastery” (Tolba, 1986, p. 133). For Tolba, Lilia Lobanova was a perfect performer of Verdi: “.Aida! What a skillful performance ofAida. Lobanova's voice sustained it [physical demands of the part], sounding playful, at ease. Is not this a sign ofgreat performing mastery!” (Tolba, 1986, pp. 135-136).

However, the stage and creative talents of Lobanova and Miroshnychenko belonged to very different types. Lilia Lobanova represented the so-called first type of artists-performers--an intellectual type. She created a stage role based on an elaborate concept she contemplated on. She analyzed every play or concert and focused more on the performance techniques than on the imagery of the piece. She always clearly envisioned the concept of the role, as it was proposed by the director or conductor, and improvised only within the permitted limits. Her diary entry on November 4, 1959, illustrates that: “.Bolshoi Theatre. Prince Igor, I sang Yaroslavna. Terrible anxiety. Prologue went smoothly. The upper C was clear and all right but I was shaking, my voice did not obey me and sounded flat. I sang through crying very well, and the audience applauded a lot.”

Yevhenia Miroshnychenko represented another type of artist, who creates a role based on unconscious, intuitive feelings. The artists of this type emotionally perceive the general idea of the musical piece that was suggested by the composer, then they pass it through themselves and their vocal potential, and in the end, the audience is stormed with a whirl of sincere feelings. This emotional component in Yevhenia Miroshnychenko's creativity is evident in her personal writings and in the memoirs of her colleagues who regularly communicated with her during her time in the Department of Solo Vocal Singing of the Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of Music.

Unlike Lobanova, Miroshnychenko took little interest in the technique of singing when she performed on stage. For her, the main point in acting was creating an image, a role, and performing techniques were secondary, as she already perfected them. In her interpretations of the role, Miroshnychenko did not dwell on the whole range of its intellectual potential; however, with her intuition, she convincingly “organized” her existence on stage, which was organic and justified. Her considerations on the vocal chamber music seem plausible: “.What is a romance? It is a small play, a micro play. A romance is always lived through instantly, with a microscopic demonstration of a storm of emotions. One has to have great confidence, in order for the audience to believe you and be content. One has to be an outstanding artist with bright imagination and fantasy” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 5).

From the critical reviews in the press, the charismatic stage persona of Miroshnychenko is well-known. She always projected extraordinary energy and emotional waves on the audience that immediately aroused empathy, fascinated, and made a lasting impression. She recollects her favorite role of Lucia from the eponymous opera by Gaetano Donizetti: “.I worked on the role of Lucia for all my life. On each show of Lucia I conveyed slightly different imagery, I never acted and sang in the exactly same manner. Some partners even were offended by this, as I constantly kept them in suspense.” (Kabka, 2006b, p. 4). In addition, she tended to the extremes in recreating emotional states. For the artist of this type, the performing period is usually longer than with the `intellectual' type. Perhaps, that was the reason why Yevhenia Miroshnychenko performed in Kyiv Opera for over forty years. She also toured and taught extensively, training a constellation of famous operatic singers of the present day. She was daring in her creative ideas and projects, being involved in the socio-political life of Ukraine as well. Her aspirations, sympathies, and suggestions on how to solve the problems of Ukrainian culture were often neglected by the authorities; for that reason, during the last years of her life, there was a lot of disappointment, apathy, sorrow, and deadlock feelings for her.

Evidence of this is the dramatic story with the opening of the Small Opera theatre in Kyiv that never welcomed the audience in the format envisioned by Miroshnychenko: “...There was even unofficial directive not to receive this singer [Miroshnychenko] as a visitor, even by the deputies, in order to never finish this long-term construction. Her life's work was slowly and steadily destroyed: first, they cut down the budget, then they removed her director, and she was left on her own to fight this monster of arbitrariness” (Verhelis, 2009, April 29).

Lilia Lobanova sang in the Kyiv Opera for 22 years. She would have sung longer, however, the theatre administration of the time forced her to leave despite being in her prime. In connection to her personal tragedy, it should be noted that during the late 1960s, the change in the socio-political situation of the state directly influenced voice art. The performers of the “Khrushchev period” were substituted with the protegees of the new leaders: first Petro Shelest and then Volodymyr Shcherbytsky. After her dismissal from the theatre, Lilia Lobanova lost her voice; even her educational activity (she was a professor at the Kyiv Music Academy for 18 years) did not bring her joy. Her creative Self was ruined. Her parting from theatre deeply wounded the singer.

Lilia Lobanova and Yevhenia Miroshnychenko evolved through all the stages of professional development and became the universes of vocal performance. Each in her own manner, they created a transcendental field of vocal performance that remains unsurpassed to this day. The best proof of that are the video and audio recordings of their performances.