Lyubov A. Kupets’s scientific contributions

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (4)


Music of the Soviet Era as Public History (Based on Materials of the Arzamas Website)
  • Article
  • Full-text available

June 2024

·

41 Reads

Art & Culture Studies

L.A. Kupets

This article is devoted to the phenomenon of Soviet music as presented in the Russian‐language educational project Arzamas (2015–2023). Posted in the public domain of the Internet, the materials on the Arzamas website fully fit into the interdisciplinary discourse of public history. In this article, the author selects and from the perspective of cultural recycling analyses an array of materials of the Soviet period presented on the website: from folk and Soviet mass songs, gypsy and classical romance (including romance in cinema) to jazz, symphony, ballet, and break dance. The article traces how the authors of different genre materials interpret selected works and the historical and cultural profiles of their creators from the point of view of postmodernity. Special attention is paid to the principles according to which the website forms a musical image of the Soviet period for the modern audience (which statistically consists of Millennials and, if taking into account the Arzamas Children’s Room, the next two generations — Z and Alpha). The author of this article makes a conclusion that what is meant by Soviet music in the Arzamas project is compositions created from the 1920s to the late 1960s (early 1970s) and listened to by different social groups. The dominant type of a musical composition is a song in various modifications. Soviet music (mostly non-academic) is treated as an integral part of the country’s history which emotionally accurately reflects political and cultural changes. In such a context academic music becomes a peripheral phenomenon: only two composers are highlighted — Sergei Prokofiev and Dmitri Shostakovich — but shown as victims of the Soviet system.

Download

«ГЕРОЙ НЕ НАШЕГО ВРЕМЕНИ»: ДЖАКОМО МЕЙЕРБЕР В РОССИЙСКИХ ЭНЦИКЛОПЕДИЧЕСКИХ НАРРАТИВАХ КОНЦА XIX – НАЧАЛА XXI ВЕКА

April 2024

·

2 Reads

·

1 Citation

Music Journal of Northern Europe

The article analyzes the receptions of Giacomo Meyerbeer in Russia using the example of a corpus of encyclopedic publications ranging from the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary to Wikipedia. The longitudinal analysis demonstrates both the normative perception of the composer's figure in a certain era, and the transformation of his image in a various historical and cultural context. During this period of time, the Russian image of Meyerbeer changes dramatically: from the genius whose operas everyone knew and loved, to a forgotten minor character, whose music is absent for the modern Russian public. В статье анализируются рецепции Джакомо Мейербера в России на примере корпуса энциклопедических изданий начиная с «Энциклопедического словаря Брокгауза и Эфрона» и до Википедии. Лонгитюдный анализ демонстрирует как нормативное восприятие фигуры композитора в определённую эпоху, так и трансформацию его образа в разном историко-культурном контексте. За этот промежуток времени русский образ Мейербера резко меняется: от гения, чьи оперы знали и любили все, – до забытого второстепенного персонажа, музыка которого отсутствует для современной российской публики.


“New Ballet Criticism” (1993–2003) About “Soviet” Ballet: Forms of Cultural Recycling

December 2023

·

14 Reads

Problemy Muzykal noi Nauki / Music Scholarship

In post-Soviet Russia ballet criticism, similar to opera criticism, has an almost 30-year-old history, but the period perceived as the brightest and most significant is the first period, spanning the 1990s and the early part of the first decade of the 21st century. For this New Ballet Criticism (as it has been labelled by Vadim Gaevsky), as a part of New Russian Music Criticism (as defined by Olga Manulkina and Pavel Gershenzon), a number of features have become normative: provocative styles and titles, a demythologization of works and of choreographers, the use of comparisons with mass culture in narratives, and ironic subtext. Similar to opera, political discourse has become important in ballet receptions of that time. Reviews of Soviet-era ballet productions (as well as other types of performance) often refer to the main elements of Soviet mass art — Soviet films, as well as symbols of the totalitarian culture, such as sculpture and ideological materials. The styles and headlines exploit numerous Sovietisms that are familiar and recognizable by the audience. Just like in opera reviews, the recent “Soviet” element in ballet receptions is synthesized with Soviet mass culture and fashionable trends in the country via the cult of Western cinema and the influence of domestic and foreign literary, scholarly and epistolary texts. But unlike opera criticism, ballet narratives clearly record the diversity of genres of “Soviet” ballet (ranking Sergei Prokofiev and Dmitri Shostakovich among them); ballets since 1961 have been interpreted as a transformation of the “Soviet” element under the influence of George Balanchine’s choreography; the concept of “Soviet choreography” also implies the unreachable, for example, in the embodiment of heroic moods and the creation of mass scenes. Four forms of cultural recycling in ballet receptions are identified: recycling, recycling à la ballet, double recycling and quasi-recycling.