Borodin, Aleksandr (EN)

Borodin Aleksandr Porfirjewicz, *12 November (31 October) 1833 Saint Petersburg, †27 (15) February 1887 Saint Petersburg, Russian composer and chemist. He was a natural son of Fr. Luka S. Giedianov, written in the name of his butler. Borodin’s mother, Awdotia K. Antonowa, a wealthy townswoman, took care of his upbringing and education. In 1850, he passed his school final exam as an external student and started his studies at the Medical Academy in St. Petersburg. In 1856, he began medical practice in the Academy’s clinics but soon devoted himself entirely to research and teaching in the field of chemistry. In 1858, he defended his doctoral dissertation, and in 1859–62 he lived abroad, mainly in Heidelberg (he worked in E. Erlenmeyer’s laboratory); from there he made scientific trips to other German cities, also to Paris (twice, in 1859 with D. Mendeleev and I. Sechenov) and to Italy. After returning to the country, he began lecturing at the Medical Academy, where in 1864, he was appointed professor, and in 1874 – head of the chemistry department. He was a spokesman for progressive teaching methods, co-organizer and lecturer of the Women’s Medical Courses (1872–85), and co-organiser of the Russian Chemical Society. In his scientific work, he focused mainly on the polymerization and condensation of aldehydes (1863–74). In 1872, he discovered – independently of C. Wurz – the aldolase reaction. He published the results of his research in approximately 40 scientific papers in Russian, German, French and Italian journals. He appeared many times at national and international congresses, including: in Karlsruhe (1860), Speyer (1861), Kazan (1873) and St. Petersburg (1879). In recognition of his scientific achievements, he was elected a member of the chemical societies in Paris (1860) and Berlin (1872) and an honorary member of the Russian Medical Society (1883).

Borodin showed musical interests at the age of 8. Apart from a few lessons given to him by professional musicians, he mastered the piano, flute and cello on his own. Over time, he acquired the ability to play the oboe and clarinet. In learning composition, he was basically an autodidactic, educated – as he wrote – on German textbooks; later he improved his compositional technique under the supervision of M. Balakirev. After 1846, Borodin’s musical education was significantly accelerated by meetings with M. Szczyglev (future conductor, composer and teacher), the Vasilyev brothers, Piotr (violinist) and Vladimir (later famous bass player) and chamber music concerts in the house of I. Gawruszkiewicz, where, among others, N. Afanasyev, I. Pikkel, O. Gunke and A. Serov performed. Borodin participated in them from 1859, playing the second cello part in the string octet. He was familiar with classical and early romantic music, and in his contemporary compositions (for piano and chamber music), he did not really go beyond this style. Only in some works, starting with the Scherzo in B flat minor, he introduced national elements, referring mainly to Glinka and A. Gurilev, so the first contacts with M. Mussorgsky (1856) could not yet change Borodin’s creative aesthetics. An important role in this respect was played by J.S. Protopopow, a Russian pianist met in 1861 in Heidelberg, whom Borodin married in 1863; she introduced him to the works of Chopin and Schumann, accompanied him on trips to Baden-Baden for symphony concerts and to Mannheim to see Wagner’s operas, thanks to which he could learn about the works of Western European composers, which were not yet known in Russia.

After returning to the country (1862), Borodin joined The Five group and soon became one of the most original and significant Russian artists. This transformation of a dilettante musician into a composer aware of his possibilities and artistic tasks was due to Balakirev, under whose supervision the Symphony No. 1 was created, later dedicated to him and performed under his direction (4 January 1869) at a concert of the Russian Musical Society in St. Petersburg. In 1870 and 1873 – apart from insignificant, rare or lost prints from 1849 – the first editions of Borodin’s works appeared: 7 songs with his own texts (including Spiaszczaja kniażna, Piesnia tiomnogo lesa) and by H. Heine (Otrawoj połny moi pieni). In 1877, Symphony No. 2 “Heroic” was performed and published in St. Petersburg. In the summer of that year, and then in 1881 and 1885, Borodin visited F. Liszt in Weimar, who was interested in his work and highly appreciated it. There he met J. Zarębski, who played both of his symphonies with Liszt and also met him at separate music auditions. Borodin expressed his impressions of his friendly contacts with Liszt in two articles: List u siebia doma w Wejmarie (“Iskusstwo” 1883, No. 11–12) and Moi wospominanija o Listie (1878, published in 1953).

In the 1880s, he took an active part in the musical life of St. Petersburg. From 1880 he was active in the St. Petersburg Circle of Music Lovers, from 1883 he participated in the meetings of the “Belayev Circle,” and in 1883–85, he was one of the directors of the St. Petersburg branch of the Russian Musical Society. In addition, he led the student choir and orchestra at the Medical Academy and organised concerts there, often with the participation of friendly musicians, including A. Glazunov, S. Taneyev and M. Belyaev. During these years, interest in Borodin’s work increased, and Russian performances of his works multiplied – both symphonies, the symphonic painting In the Steppes of Central Asia (1880), songs, string quartets and fragments from the opera Prince Igor, on which he had been working since 1869. Presentation of the Symphony No. 1 at the festival in Baden-Baden (1880) initiated a series of foreign performances of Borodin’s works: in 1883 – among others in Leipzig, Dresden and Vienna, in 1884 and 1885 – in Liège, Antwerp and Paris, in 1886 – in Liège and Brussels at concerts of Russian music, at which Borodin was present with C. Cui. In the autumn of that year, he developed the first symptoms of heart disease, which stopped work on Symphony No. 3 and the final parts of Prince Igor. A few months later, Borodin died suddenly during a carnival ball of professors of the Medical Academy. N. Rimsky-Korsakov and A. Glazunov, who also prepared the first two movements of Symphony No. 3, completed the opera, prepared it for printing (1889) and performed it (1890).

In a conversation with Liszt, Borodin called himself a “Sunday musician” (Sonntagmusiker), composing easily and quickly, but only in his free time from work. Hence the relatively modest number of his works and the long period of their creation (Symphony No. 2 – 7 years, Prince Igor – 16 years), as well as the distinctiveness of his style (objectivity of lyric poetry, epic type of musical expression), which is an expression of the same factual and ideological-cognitive the attitude he displayed in both equally beloved fields: science (chemistry) and music.

Borodin’s compositional activity has a clear turning point: his meeting with Balakirev and his joining The Five in the autumn of 1862. The works written before that date – as he wrote to L. Mercy-Argenteau (25 October 1884) – “unworthy of attention, sins of youth,” were for him a fundamental school of compositional craft, based on Bach’s models (Sonata for cello and piano) and, above all, classical models (Quartet for flute, oboe, alto and cello, an arrangement of Haydn’s sonatas: in A major Op. 14 and in D major Op. 93) and romantic (piano Scherzo in E major, Piano Trio and String Quintet with fragments in the style of Schubert and Mendelssohn’s “Elfenromantik”). He also took native traditions into account – Gurilev and Glinka (songs from 1852–55, String Trio in G minor). The most mature work from this period is Piano Quintet, composed in Heidelberg in the summer of 1862, in which original features already appeared: a tone of calm, somehow extra-personal lyricism, close to a Russian folk song, and an attempt at an epic style, which in terms of construction was manifested as a way of shaping a (sonata) form with many themes, with a conflict-free internal drama.

Borodin fully developed this new type of musical narrative in the works of the next period, especially in Symphonies No. 1 and No. 2, deriving the thematic material from one overarching theme-idea (in Beethoven’s concept) or reducing it to the synthesising theme of the final movement. Having penetrated deeply into the spirit of the Russian national and cultural past, Borodin revived its images in generalised epic musical forms, which also constitute his stage works (Prince Igor, Mlada) and songs to his own texts, in which old folk motifs: freedom (Morie), the hero – a liberator (Spiaszczaja kniażna), a dormant force – implicitly – in the enslaved nation (Piesnia tiomnogo lesa), gave a current, political meaning. The elegiac songs to the words of Heine (Otravoy połny moi pieni) and Pushkin (Dla bieregow otchizny dalnoj) have an opposite character. He took up the characteristic tone of intimate lyricism in string quartets (the popular Nocturne from Quartet No. 2), enriching them with experience gained in the field of symphonic music in terms of form (analogous type of sonata allegro with lyrical themes), texture (fantastic elements in the Scherzos) and melody and harmony (Russian colour and orientalism, which became a permanent part of Borodin’s musical language from the piano Tarantella of 1862). A work on the border between epic and lyric poetry is the orchestral painting In the Steppes of Central Asia, which is also an interesting attempt to miniaturise the form of a symphonic poem.

Humour is also a feature of Borodin’s style, manifested especially in vocal pieces (Sierienada czetyrioch bachelorow odnoj damie, Spieś), piano pieces (Paraphrases) and stage pieces (the characters of Skula and Jeroshka in Prince Igor). A striking example of musical comedy is the opera-farce Bogatyri, which ridicules the pretentiousness and improbability of operatic situations and parodies selected fragments of music by Rossini (The Barber of Seville, Semiramide), Meyerbeer (Robert the Devil, The Prophet, The Huguenots), Hérold (Zampa), Verdi (Ernani), Offenbach (La Belle Helene, Barbe-Bleue, Bavard et Bavarde), as well as Cavos (The Blind Prince), Verstowski (Askoldowa mogila), and Serov (Rogneda). The significance of this opera, although composed in secret and performed anonymously (1867), goes beyond the historical value it has in Russian music as a comic opera, and in musical literature as a work with unprecedented use of parody techniques (approx. 60 per cent of the music is borrowed). For Borodin, it was primarily a kind of preparatory study for Prince Igor, exposing the weaknesses and shortcomings of studies of historical and national themes in his native opera, which – by adopting an attitude of ironic distance – he avoided in his work.

In Prince Igor, Borodin referred directly to Glinka’s operas; he combined the genre features of Ivan Susanin and Ruslan, creating a new and – according to B. Asafyev – “unique” pattern of historical-epic Russian opera. However, he omitted the experiences of Dargomyzhsky (The Stone Guest) and Mussorgsky (Boris Godunov) as inconsistent with his concept of epic opera, in which the dramatic development of the conflict was replaced by a sequence of clearly outlined musical portraits (individual and collective), images and genre scenes. Hence the static – in the dramatic sense – character of choral scenes and the predilection for cantilena and closed, varied aria forms, e.g. dramas, monologues (Igor’s aria from Act II), songs (Galitsky’s aria), cavatina (Vladimir Igoriewicz’s cavatina), rondo (Yaroslavny Crying). Folk material, Russian and oriental, does not appear here in crudo, as – with the exception of the songs Arabskaya melodiya – in all of Borodin’s works, but in the form of creatively processed elements: various types of scale phrases, melodic formulas from Russian lyrical and ritual songs (Yaroslavny Crying) or eastern melismas, metro-rhythmic structures derived, for example, from perennials or – in the “Polovtsian” fragments – characterised by improvised freedom of rhythm (Konchakovna’s cavatina), as well as harmonic rudiments (parallelisms, fourth-second chords) and folk polyphony. He used compositional techniques in a deliberate manner, subordinating them to the general idea of the piece. Sometimes he gave them a symbolic function, expressing, for example, the mental state reflected in the constantly dissonant sound in the song Falshyvaya nota, sleepy torpor conveyed by a series of “ear-tearing seconds” (G.A. Laroche) against the background of an ostinato fourth figure (Spiaszczaja knyazna), archaism, which is associated with tutti in unison at the beginning of Symphony No. 2.

In Borodin’s only programmatic piece, In the Steppes of Central Asia, the means of compositional technique are used to present the steppe landscape (sustainable sounds of the violin in a high register), separate national cultures (Russian theme in the clarinet and horn part, Eastern theme in the English horn part imitating the Asian surnay) and symbolise their mutual permeating (stretto of both themes in the double counterpoint of the octave). A musical work in Borodin’s understanding was not only – as he wrote in connection with Symphony No. 1 – “the result of technique, counterpoint and all those machinations that were usually considered to be the true meaning of music” (Piśma, vol. 4, p. 341); for him, it always had an ideological and cognitive value as a specific record of personality, national colour and landscape, and generalised historical and social content.

Borodin’s work found many followers and supporters. Russian and Soviet composers took their cues from it, including Glazunov, Taneyev, Kalinnikov and Myaskovsky (symphonies, string quartets), Stravinsky (Petrushka, The Rite of Spring) and Prokofiev (Alexander Nevsky, Symphony No. 5). It was also used by Western European composers, especially Debussy (Gigues and Rondes de printemps from Images, Jeux) and Ravel (Beaux oiseaux du paradis, Dafnis and Chloe), who were interested in harmonic innovations (second parallelisms, fourth-second chords, polyfunctional), exoticism, landscape orchestral colour and static form, restraint of expression and lyrical expression. Ravel’s piano piece A la manière de Borodine is proof of appreciation and admiration for the creator of this music.

Literature: Piśma A.P. Borodina. Połnoje sobranije, ed. S. Dianin, vol. 1: 1857–71, Moscow 1927, vol. 2: 1872–77 (introduction G. Chubow), Moscow 1936, vol. 3: 1878–82, Moscow 1949, vol. 4: 1883–87, Moscow 1950; Nowyje piśma, ed. W. Kisielow, W. Sibirski and A. Sochor, in: Muzykalnoje nasledstwo, vol. 3, Moscow 1970; W.W. Stasow A.P. Borodin. Jego żyzń, pieriepiska i muzykalnyje statji, Saint Petersburg 1889, French translation Paris 1893, new ed. Moscow 1954; W. Czeczott A.P. Borodin. Oczerk muzykalnoj diejatielnosti, Saint Petersburg 1890; A. Habets Borodine et Liszt, Paris 1895, English translation London 1896; J. Siewiercow “Kniaź Igor”. Muzykalnaja monografija opiery A.P. Borodina, Moscow 1898; K. Nef Die Sinfonien A. Borodins, “Schweizerische Musikzeitung” 1911 No. 25–27; J.M. Braudo A.P. Borodin. Jego żyzń i tworczestwo, Saint Petersburg 1922; W. Kahl Die russischen Novatoren und Borodin, “Die Musikforschung” XV, 1923; G.E.H. Abraham Borodin, London 1927; G. Chubow A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1933; J.A. Kriemlow A.P. Borodin, Leningrad 1934; T. Popowa A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1937, 3^rd ed. 1953, German translation 1955; N.N. Berberowa Borodin, Berlin 1938; I. Bełza A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1944; G. Gołowinskij “Kniaź Igor” A. Borodina, Moscow 1950, translation W. Dulęba, Kraków 1955; N.A. Figurowskij, J.I. Sołowjow A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1950 (contains a bibliography of Borodin’s scientific works); Ł. Sołowcowa Kamierno-instrumientalnaja muzyka A.P. Borodina, Moscow 1952, 2^nd ed. 1960; M. Iljin, J. Siegał A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1953, 2^nd ed. 1957, Polish translation Alicja Stern Warsaw 1956 (biographical story); S.A. Dianin Borodin, Moscow 1955, 2^nd ed. 1960, English translation London 1963; D. Lloyd-Jones “The Bogatyrs”, Russia’s First Operetta, “The Monthly Musical Record” LXXXIX, 1959; D. Lloyd-Jones Borodin in Heidelberg, “The Musical Quarterly” XLVI, 1960; D. Lloyd-Jones Borodin on Liszt, “Music and Letters” XLII, 1961; A.N. Sochor Borodin. Żyzń, diejatielnost’, muzykalnoje tworczestwo, Moscow 1965; I. Siemzowskij Istoki “Chora posielan,” “Sowietskaja Muzyka” XXXI, 1967; W.B. Ober A. Borodin – M[edicinae] D[octor], Chemist and Composer, „New York State Journal of Medicine” LXVII, 1967 (contains a bibliography of Borodin’s scientific works); Wospominanija ob A.P. Borodinie, in: Muzykalnoje nasledstwo, vol. 3, Moscow 1970; W.A. Kisielow Pierwaja postanowka “Kniazia Igora,” in: Muzykalnoje nasledstwo, vol. 3, Moscow 1970; W. Jakowlew Żyzń muzyki Borodina, Izbrannyje trudy o muzykie, vol. 2, Moscow 1971; G. Gołowinskij Kamiernyje ansambli Borodina, Moscow 1972 H. Swolkień A. Borodin, Warsaw 1979; M. Bobéth Borodin und seine Oper „Fürst Igor”, Munich 1982; A. Zorina A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1987; M. Ilin, E. Segal A.P. Borodin, Moscow 1989; P. Weber-Bockholdt Bylinen-Tradition bei Borodin und Mussorgskij, in: Liedstudien, W. Osthoff’s festschrift, Tutzing 1989; A. Borodin. Sein Leben, seine Musik, seine Schriften, «musik konkret» II, ed. E. Kuhn, Berlin 1992 (contains articles by B. Asafjew, A. Glazunov, M. Rimski-Korsakov et al., also list of Borodin’s compositions, his musical writings and treatises on Chemistry); S. Neef Die russische Fünf. Bałakiriew – Borodin – Cui – Mussorgski – Rimski-Korsakow, «musik konkret» III, Berlin 1992; W. Stasow Meine Freunde A. Borodin und Mussorgski. Die Biographie, published by E. Kuhn, Berlin 1993.