How do you feel about music originally conceived 
                for one instrument being arranged for another? Franck’s Violin 
                Sonata for cello is one example. If you don’t mind then this Shostakovich 
                Cello Sonata written originally for violin will not bother you. 
                It was the master’s last will and testament as it were, and so 
                cellists would like to claim it as well as fiddlers. But I’m not 
                so sure. Textures originally conceived as mostly treble-orientated 
                are now differently balanced for example in the second movement. 
                The Allegretto the opening seems to have lost its wittiness and 
                ghostly humor by being somewhat sluggish in tempo and at least 
                an octave lower. 
              
 
              
Surely there is enough for cello not to warrant 
                such arrangements. This one is by Daniil Shafran. Nothing is said 
                about him in the booklet notes but he was born in Leningrad in 
                1923 and is well known especially in Russia as a virtuoso cellist. 
                I must add that it is mostly a very fine piece of work and obviously 
                done from the heart. But as Stravinsky often said "Do we 
                need it?" 
              
 
              
The other works by Shostakovich are miniatures. 
                The elegiac Moderato of 1934 is in the style of the eloquently 
                lyrical extracts we hear in the ‘Gadfly’ incidental music. The 
                Adagio of 1951 is in a similar vein and was (to quote John York’s 
                booklet notes) "lifted from one of Shostakovich’s ballet 
                suites by Lev Atovmyan, and presents a glamorous theatrical big 
                tune". 
              
 
              
The Shostakovich sonata lasts over half an hour 
                and the two by Schnittke last about 23 minutes and 15 minutes 
                each but seem to be even more portentous and weighty due to their 
                elegiac and tragic nature. This is despite the fact that they 
                appear somewhat detached from reality and conventional formal 
                structures. Having said that, the 1st Cello Sonata, 
                in which Schnittke found his real musical self is in three movements: 
                Largo, Presto (which acts as a scherzo) and a closing Largo, is 
                not a totally unexpected form. The opening Largo could be seen 
                as an introduction to the much longer Scherzo which in turn burns 
                itself out and dissipates its energies into a finale. This is 
                a threnody, which is the length of the first two movements put 
                together. 
              
 
              
The Second Cello Sonata, written after Schnittke 
                had had a series of heart attacks is a valedictory work which 
                is as elusive as is it fragmentary. It was written just before 
                the equally elusive 3rd Piano Sonata. Perhaps one might 
                be put in mind of some of the last works of Britten, say the 3rd 
                String Quartet, except that Schnittke is totally pessimistic even 
                nihilistic in outlook and in final result. Its five movements, 
                the longest at no more than four and a half minutes, make up what 
                might be considered a suite. It begins with an introductory section 
                marked ‘senza tempo’, leading into an Allegro, then comes the 
                longest movement, a Largo, followed by another even briefer, fleeting 
                Allegro relaxing into a kind of desiccated Lento. It is here that 
                I, for one, cannot cope with this music any more. It probably 
                speaks with great reality and is certainly penetrating and uncomfortable 
                but as in all late Schnittke there is little else to add. When 
                does it ever smile? I can’t help but feel that its totally inward-looking 
                nature achieves little more than generating sympathy. And yet 
                and yet … perhaps we are too close to it to judge. Something nags 
                away at me that this is probably great music and I am somehow 
                missing the point. 
              
 
              
Certainly these pieces could not have better 
                advocates than John York and Raphael Wallfisch. York is a very 
                fine musician first and foremost. His regular work on contemporary 
                music is a quiet and vital part of out cultural life, little recognized. 
                Raphael Wallfisch is a great cellist and they both believe in 
                this music and transport the bare notes on the page into something 
                beyond time and space. Recording quality, of this generously filled 
                disc, is first class. 
              
 
              
Quite an achievement by all concerned. 
              
 
              
Gary Higginson