Editing Dmitri Shostakovich (section)

== Orthodoxy and revisionism ==
{{further|Testimony (Volkov book){{!}}''Testimony'' (Volkov book)}}
{{Image frame|content=<score sound="1">
{
\override Score.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f
\relative c' {
  \clef treble
  \time 4/4 d es c b
} }
</score>|width=300|caption=Shostakovich represented himself in some works with the DSCH motif, consisting of D-E{{music|flat}}-C-B.}}Shostakovich's response to official criticism and whether he used music as a kind of covert dissidence is a matter of dispute. He outwardly conformed to government policies and positions, reading speeches and putting his name to articles expressing the government line.{{sfnp|Wilson|2006|pp=369–370}} But it is evident he disliked many aspects of the regime, as confirmed by his family, his letters to Isaac Glikman, and the satirical [[cantata]] "[[Anti-Formalist Rayok|Rayok]]", which ridiculed the "anti-formalist" campaign and was kept hidden until after his death.{{sfnp|Wilson|2006|p=336}} He was a close friend of [[Marshal of the Soviet Union]] [[Mikhail Tukhachevsky]], who was executed in 1937 during the [[Great Purge]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mc Granahan|first=William J.|date=1978|title=The Fall and Rise of Marshal Tukhachevsky|url=https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a510945.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200318080217/https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a510945.pdf|url-status=live|archive-date=18 March 2020|journal=[[Parameters (journal)|Parameters, Journal of the US Army War College]]|volume=VIII|issue=4|page=63}}</ref>

It is also uncertain to what extent Shostakovich expressed his opposition to the state in his music. The [[Historical revisionism|revisionist]] view was put forth by [[Solomon Volkov]] in the 1979 book ''[[Testimony (Volkov book)|Testimony]]'', which claimed to be Shostakovich's memoirs dictated to Volkov. The book alleged that many of the composer's works contained coded anti-government messages, placing Shostakovich in a tradition of Russian artists outwitting censorship that goes back at least to [[Alexander Pushkin]]. He incorporated many [[Musical quotation|quotations]] and [[motif (music)|motifs]] in his work, most notably his musical [[musical cryptogram|signature]] [[DSCH motif|DSCH]].<ref>This appears in several of his works, including the ''Pushkin Monologues'', Symphony No. 10, and String Quartets Nos 5, 8 & 11.</ref> His longtime musical collaborator [[Yevgeny Mravinsky]] said, "Shostakovich very often explained his intentions with very specific images and connotations."{{sfnp|Wilson|1994|p=139}}

The revisionist perspective has subsequently been supported by his children, Maxim and Galina, although Maxim said in 1981 that Volkov's book was not his father's work.<ref>{{cite news|title=Shostakovich's son says moves against artists led to defection|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/14/world/shostakovich-s-son-says-moves-against-artists-led-to-defection.html|access-date=31 March 2017|work=[[The New York Times]]|date=14 May 1981|quote=Asked about the authenticity of a book published in the West after his father's death, and described as his memoirs, Mr. Shostakovich replied: 'These are not my father's memoirs. This is a book by Solomon Volkov. Mr. Volkov should reveal how the book was written.' Mr. Shostakovich said language in the book attributed to his father, as well as several contradictions and inaccuracies, led him to doubt the book's authenticity.}}</ref> Volkov has further argued, both in ''Testimony'' and in ''Shostakovich and Stalin'', that Shostakovich adopted the role of the ''[[yurodivy]]'' or [[holy fool]] in his relations with the government.

[[Maxim Shostakovich]] has also commented on ''Testimony'' and Volkov more favorably since 1991, when the Soviet regime fell. To Allan B. Ho and Dmitry Feofanov, he confirmed that his father had told him about "meeting a young man from Leningrad who knows his music extremely well" and that "Volkov did meet with Shostakovich to work on his reminiscences". Maxim has repeatedly said he is "a supporter both of ''Testimony'' and of Volkov."<ref>Ho–Feofanov 1998: 114. The quotes come from a recorded conversation between Maxim Shostakovich and Ho & Feofanov (19 April 1997).</ref> Other prominent revisionists are [[Ian MacDonald]], whose book ''The New Shostakovich'' put forward further revisionist interpretations of his music, and Elizabeth Wilson, whose ''Shostakovich: A Life Remembered'' provides testimony from many of the composer's acquaintances.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gerstel|first=Jennifer|date=1999|title=Irony, Deception, and Political Culture in the Works of Dmitri Shostakovich|journal=Mosaic: An Interdisciplinary Critical Journal|publisher=University of Manitoba|volume=32|issue=4|page=38|jstor=44029848}}</ref>

Musicians and scholars including Laurel Fay<ref>{{harvp|Fay|2000|p=4}} "Whether ''Testimony'' faithfully reproduces Shostakovich's confidences ... in a form and context he would have recognized and approved for publication remains doubtful. Yet even were [its] claim to authenticity not in doubt, it would still furnish a poor source for the serious biographer."</ref> and [[Richard Taruskin]] contested the authenticity and debate the significance of ''Testimony'', alleging that Volkov compiled it from a combination of recycled articles, gossip, and possibly some information directly from the composer. Fay documents these allegations in her 2002 article "Volkov's ''Testimony'' reconsidered",{{sfnp|Fay|2002}} showing that the only pages of the original ''Testimony'' manuscript that Shostakovich had signed and verified are word-for-word reproductions of earlier interviews he gave, none of which are controversial. Ho and Feofanov have countered that at least two of the signed pages contain controversial material: for instance, "on the first page of chapter 3, where [Shostakovich] notes that the plaque that reads 'In this house lived [[Vsevolod Meyerhold|[Vsevolod] Meyerhold]]' should also say 'And in this house his wife was brutally murdered'."{{sfnp|Ho|Feofanov|1998|p=211}}