The current exhibition at Tate Modern (Rodchenko and Popova: Defining Constructivism, until 17 May) is rich in cultural reference, apart from any reference to music. Here we have Popova collaborating with theatrical producers and designers, Rodchenko working alongside film-makers and poets (especially Mayakovsky), and everyone in a headlong dash away from easel work towards sculpture, and even architecture. It was a time of quite glorious redefinition of life and culture, taking in anything and everything. Why is music kept apart?
It wasn’t that the musicians themselves were silent. The new Soviet authorities had a liking for opera, hoping that such an obvious art form would appeal to the masses. Well-known operas were ridiculously recast with new libretti. Tosca, for example, with the action shifted to Paris in 1871, became The Battle for the Commune; Les Huguenots became The Decembrists (after the early 19th-century revolutionary movement); and Glinka’s A Life for the Tsar was reworked as Hammer and Sickle. At the same time composers were encouraged to explore modes of expression compatible with the prevailing revolutionary mood. Thus the new generation of Russian composers — among them Kabalevsky, Shaporin, Shebalin, Myaskovsky and Shostakovich — found themselves composing ‘Hymns to Lenin’ and programmatic symphonies on the problems of the steel industry.
Nor were the artists oblivious to the power of music. Kandinsky had experimented with musical paintings, but eventually fell out of favour and had to go into exile. Rodchenko even used the terminology of music: ‘Line is the sole essential element in a work of art. Colour, tone, texture and surface could all be eliminated as mere decoration.’ Every element in that list could have been handed to a composer and found perfect favour. Melody (or line) was seen as the perfect answer to the problem of how to make music more relevant to the struggle of the masses — it was assumed they would understand and react emotionally to melody, just in the way Rodchenko believed they would react to his painterly lines.

Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in