When Skriabin returned to Russia in 1911 and undertook an extensive Russian concert tour in the winter of 1911/12, he found his music widely accepted and acclaimed. It continued to exercise an important influence on a number of Russian composers throughout the early years of the Modernist period. Even major figures, including Prokofiev and Stravinsky, came under his spell until they were able to find their own original voices. We do not normally associate Prokofiev’s music with the sensuous style of Skriabin, but some early pieces, such as the symphonic poems Dreams (1910) and Autumn Sketch (1910) and the Ballade for Cello (1912), do reflect something of his studies of Skriabin’s early works.

Skriabin’s influence on the young Stravinsky is most clearly manifest in the latter’s Four Studies for piano (1908), one of which appears to be modeled on Skriabin’s Op. 42 No. 2.¹ Stravinsky visited Skriabin in October 1913 and heard him play his last three Sonatas, which Stravinsky afterwards declared to be “incomparable.”² Later Stravinsky expressed an aversion to the music of Skriabin.

The examples in the present chapter from works of composers whom Skriabin influenced demonstrate either aspects of Skriabin’s style in new contexts or typical Skriabin harmonic complexes voiced so as to produce new and original effects. Ivan Vishnegradsky, now remembered mainly for his experiments in microtonal music, also wrote music for the traditional keyboard which contains some superficial aspects of Skriabin’s style.³ Vishnegradsky’s harmonic vocabulary was conservative, but his two Preludes Op. 2 (1916) demonstrate many of the procedures common in Skriabin’s works. In bar 2 of Prelude No. 1 (Example 3-1) the pedal (F-sharp) produces a suggestion of F-sharp harmony in the right hand over a C triad in the left; and the use of the flattened supertonic, C, produces a familiar tritone root progression leading to the cadence (bars 2-3). Prelude No. 2 hardly moves away from the tonality of G, but it is interesting for the nontraditional ways in which that tonality is expanded (Example 3-2). The first five bars divide the octave into symmetrical major 3rds with triads on G, B, and E-flat, followed by whole steps as far as bar 7. Bars 17 and 18 then combine a semitone transposition with intervals taken from a whole-tone scale. At bar 27 a lengthy buildup on D prepares the way for a return of the opening material. The first part of this climax, as far as the middle of bar 29, includes a complete octatonic scale over the pedal D. Unlike octatonic passages noted in Skriabin—where the harmony includes a minor 3rd, a diminished 5th, and an added 6th from the root—the passage here consists of notes from two semitonally related alternating diminished 7th chords (marked “a” and “b”) decorating a dominant pedal D, which is not itself part of the scale.⁴

The greater harmonic complexity achieved by some of Skriabin’s followers may be seen by comparing Examples 2-19 and 2-21, from the late works of Skriabin, with Example 3-3a from the slow movement of the piano Sonata No. 2 Op. 7 by Vissarion Shebalin. The last contains a harmonic complex at bar 29 in which no fewer than ten pitches may be said to have a harmonic status, five of which also appear as passing tones. As so often in Russian music there is a dominant-7th cum augmented-6th ambiguity; the pitches of the opening E chord are rearranged to form an augmented 6th on D at the end of the bar.⁵ The first part of Example 3-3b shows harmony notes as open and passing tones as black. Unlike Skriabin, the composer here includes the perfect 4th from the root at the beginning, and this assists in the smooth transition to the D root at the end of the bar. It will be seen that Shebalin’s harmony, while complex, is less radical than the examples from Skriabin. A simple progression underlies this passage, which is distinctly tonal.

The next illustration, taken from Piano Sonata No. 3 by Nikolai Miaskovsky, shows how elements drawn from Skriabin may be combined with the more linear Russian style often associated with Prokofiev. The second subject (Example 3-4a) has many features in common with works by Skriabin: the alternation of 4ths and tritones between the bass and the next higher voice; the building of the treble and tenor around a dominant-structured 7th on G, as far as the beginning of bar 42; the way in which the music moves toward the typical sound of an altered dominanttype chord at key places, as marked; and the ambiguous manner in which a chord is associated with its tritone opposite. At the same time the style differs from that of Skriabin inasmuch as the complexities surrounding the opening G chord are more linear than vertical, and the astringent sound is due largely to the combination of independent lines (see chapter 5).

Alternative interpretations of the chords in bar 40 are shown in the music reduction (Example 3-4b). The enharmonic respelling of this passage, when it is repeated a semitone higher at bar 46, reveals yet a third possibility: a Skriabin-like progression of augmented 6th chords in the right hand over an independent bass, Example 3-4c (shown transposed for easy comparison with Example 3-4b). This passage reveals even greater ambiguities (based on dominant and augmented 6th type chords) than normally found in Skriabin, presented here in a manner original to Miaskovsky.

Joseph Shillinger’s Op. 12 No. 1 reflects the influence of Skriabin in a rather different way. The first subject makes use of dense, complex chords which are basically dominant-type harmonies with added notes and have distinct octatonic tendencies (Example 3-5a). The insistence on 5th progressions in the bass is unlike Skriabin and considerably modifies the effect. It should be noted, however, that along with the threefold tonal bass sequence, which proceeds in whole steps (Example 3–5b), the composer has drawn attention to a series of major 3rds, emphasizing them mainly by duration (the roots of the other harmonies are stated for no more than an eighth note). These major 3rd steps are typical of procedures in some of Skriabin’s late works, such as the Dances Op. 73, and in this context they mitigate the otherwise strongly tonal leading of the bass. Both the tonal sequence and the major 3rd steps appear to lead back to the E-flat of the beginning, but both are left incomplete when the opening material returns a tone higher at the end of bar 3.

The music of the middle section (Example 10-2) moves through two steps of descending minor 3rds (bars 7, 10, and 13), a procedure again reminiscent of Skriabin. The harmonies of bars 41-43 and 47-52 (Example 3-6a) are identical in structure (though not in layout): each consists of a dominant minor 9th with added notes which themselves form a diminished triad but also bear chromatic neighboring-tone relationships to the main chord. In the three lowest staves of Example 3-6b the pitch content of the first two chords is identical, and so is that of the next two; only the root changes as the bass moves. Shillinger here provides a most literal application of procedures familiar in Skriabin’s works. Because of the prevailing octatonic coloring, however, the feeling of harmonic progression, when the bass moves a tritone, is minimal.

One of the most gifted Russian composers of the Modernist period was Aleksandr Krein. His Sonata for piano Op. 34 makes new and original use of harmonic devices adopted from Skriabin. The opening chord (Example 3-7) is basically a dominant-structured 7th on G with added notes making up the octatonic scale. When Skriabin adopted the octatonic scale, as at the beginning of the Prelude Op. 74 No. 3 and bars 5-8 of No. 5, he usually abandoned the dominant chord sound. Krein, however, has retained the dominant harmony in the lower texture in a way which is reminiscent of (though not quite the same as) Skriabin’s earlier works. The most striking thing about this chord is that Krein uses it as a reference, returning at structurally important points throughout the Sonata (see fuller discussion of this work in chapters 8, 9, and 12). The first four bars are entirely octatonic, based on the chords of E and G. Only the passing D-sharp at the end of bar 2 is outside the scale.

The first subject of Krein’s Sonata extends from bar 17 to bar 46 and has a minor 3rd transposition at bar 25 and a major 3rd transposition at bar 31. The melody of bars 17-24 is constructed around the recurring A-sharp (Example 38). It has the potential of being harmonized as B minor but is also compatible with the octatonic scale, and the placing of the A-sharp lends a modal sound.⁶ As the composer develops the tune and expands its range, he uses a complete octatonic collection; the major 3rd transposition at bar 31 involves a switch to a neighboring scale. The melody prompts many corresponding octatonic moments in the harmony, most notably the reference chord which reappears at the main climax, in bar 36, and at the end, in bar 45. The interaction of harmonic and melodic elements in Krein’s style, which is again typical of Skriabin, is illustrated by his use of the A-sharp and C-sharp pitches in the first subject. The whole texture of bars 17-24 is framed between the A-sharp modal center of the melody and the harmonic C-sharp in the bass, and the same pitches are prominent in the tune in bars 38-40. At bars 42-46 they are brought together in the melody in association with B, which is the pitch center of the whole Sonata, and the three are ingeniously reconciled harmonically in the bottom and highest notes of the reference chord at the end of bar 45.

Krein skillfully exploits the characteristics of the theme: he finds a way of making the A-sharp rise without its becoming a leading tone, and an alternative way of making it a modal center without treating it as a traditional tonic. Krein’s solution is to harmonize the melody in a typically Skriabinesque fashion, with altered dominant-type chords on G and C-sharp (bars 17-21). By adopting Skriabin’s use of a descending left-hand arpeggio, Krein keeps the listener uncertain of the root of the chord in bar 17. But the A-sharp turns out to be a minor 3rd, or an appoggiatura resolving to the major 3rd, and the added 6th E, in the alto, remains to become a minor 3rd when the bass descends to C-sharp—before moving to the major 3rd again on the third beat, a procedure typical of Skriabin.⁷ The C-sharp basis of the harmony remains until bar 19, where it is again clouded by the minor 3rd; it involves more passing formations than one would find in Skriabin. The harmonizing of the A-sharp (bar 18) as the added 6th of the C-sharp chord gives it harmonic stability while allowing it to retain a certain measure of independence (another Skriabin hallmark), and this assists in its function as a modal center. At the beginning of bar 20 it seems the A-sharp may again have to rise to accommodate itself to the E chord, but this time it is the harmony which gives way and so the modal character of the melody is retained, as the B-flat becomes a stable note and for a moment the clouding effect of the minor 3rd is removed. By contrast, when the melody is repeated, the harmonization of the A-sharp in bar 24 presents it as an appoggiatura, supported by the F-double sharp, and so it has to rise to B at the end of the bar. The B is then exploited as a link to the minor 3rd transposition which follows.

This passage also reveals the influence of the other main stream in Russian music—the linear style often associated with Prokofiev. It is evident in the frequently chromatic movement of the bass and in the smooth voice leading which bridges the gaps between moments of harmonic clarification.

A detailed discussion of the second subject, which begins at bar 47 (Example 3-9), will be more appropriate in later chapters. However, in dealing with Krein’s development of elements found in Skriabin’s works, several things are worthy of attention. First is the tritone transposition, at bar 51, of the material of bar 47 and the return to that material an octave higher at bar 55. A second is the added 6th, D, in the middle of the group of three eighth notes in bar 47. Although— tucked away in the alto and sounded together with the rest of the chord—it seems unlike Skriabin’s usage, there is in fact a connection because of its tonal implications. There are two reasons for its tonal importance: it appears in a dominant 7th chord; and it has linear associations with the suggestion of a B-flat triad, which is evident in the treble at the beginning and end of bar 47 and at the commencement of bars 48 and 49. B-flat, of which this is the first hint, is another important pitch center of the Sonata. It emerges fully, in the same octave, at the start of the middle section in bar 85 (Example 7-16).

A third point that illustrates the influence of Skriabin is the chord at the beginning of bar 50 (Example 3-9). Taking either the D or the bass A-flat as the theoretical root produces two chords of identical structure. The following C-natural is a major 3rd in relation to A-flat and a minor 7th in relation to the D. However, unlike procedures in Skriabin, neither the D nor the A-flat supports a dominant-structured harmony, and the C sounds like the true root. The effect may be compared with Skriabin’s Op. 59 No. 2 in that a semitone movement of a single note reveals an unexpected dominant-structured chord (see Example 2-27). As in the final resolution of Skriabin’s chord (bar 54), Krein’s bass D/A-flat maintains a certain independence from the harmony above. Similar effects can be found in Szymanowski, where harmonic techniques derived from Skriabin are sometimes combined with greater linear independence of the bass.⁸ The simultaneous sounding of the A-flat and the D with the chord above makes this look like a purely harmonic collection, but the effect is really that of a verticalization of a linear device. The A-flat and the D (E-double flat) focus attention on the following C-sharp (D-flat) by reason of their 5th and minor 2nd relationships (see Examples 23 and 2-4), while the dominant 9th on C above also stands in a kind of “interrupted” relationship to the same note.

A fourth point of interest is at bar 101 (Example 3-10), where the pitch collection makes up a typical Skriabin complex. Skriabin’s placing of the minor 7th in the bass with the tritone above (Example 2-1) preserves the dominant coloring and ensures that the complex texture is heard in relation to a single root. Krein, by avoiding the tritone in the lower texture and separating the C-flat chord, has achieved a genuinely bichordal effect—used here for structural purposes, as B and B-flat are both important pitches in this section of the Sonata.⁹

A fifth point concerns the A-flat in bar 49. The accentuation and metrical placing of this note are similar to those of the A in bar 3 of Skriabin’s Prelude Op. 74 No. 1 (Example 2-12). Skriabin, however, never made use of the added minor 6th in this way (it was sometimes used by Roslavets, as at the end of the first of his Two Poems [1920], Example 3-13a). The A-flat of bar 49 of Example 3-9 is anticipated in the previous bar, first as part of a chromatic descent from the minor 3rd of the chord (here written as an A) and then in the short rising whole-tone line in the bass, both of which slightly disturb the local pitch center of B-flat. The A-flat in bar 49 seems to hover between being an appoggiatura to the major 3rd of the local pitch center, F, and an appoggiatura to the 5th of the C chord in which it appears. The long-term association in Krein’s Sonata is with the D-flat (C-sharp) chord in bar 51.¹⁰ Like the added 6th in the Skriabin example, it has a rather mournful sound because of its ambiguous relationship to the dominant and tonic harmonies.

The most important avant-garde composer in Russia during the Modernist period was undoubtedly Nikolai Roslavets. In his early works, he was the one closest in style to Skriabin, and he did more than any other composer to develop that style and direct it into new channels of his own devising. Dating and identifying the early works of Roslavets present problems. For many years he had difficulty in finding a publisher, and dates of publication do not reflect the time of writing. Three Compositions, marked “1914,” show Roslavets making his first tentative experiments with sets (see chapter 13). Two Poems, published in 1920, are much nearer to the Skriabin of around 1910 and were probably composed some time between that date and Three Compositions.

Poem No. 2 (1920) (Example 3-11a) is the closest to Skriabin of all Roslavets’s works. The piece is in two parts: the second commences at bar 21 with a tritone transposition of the opening, in which the notes are to a large extent a rearrangement of those used at the beginning. Roslavets has inserted a cadenza-like passage marked “animato” (not shown) into the second part and has added a five-bar coda, which allows him to return to the pitch and material of the opening. Minor 3rd movement in the bass is common, and tritones outline the melody at the beginning (Example 3–11b), in bars 7-8, and in the tenor of bar 25 (not shown in the reduction). One feature which appears in the music of Skriabin before 1910 is the distinctly tonal G, C-sharp, F-sharp cadence with which the first half closes into the second and the corresponding passage at bars 42-45.

The harmony is also derived from Skriabin. The chords throughout the first part consist of French 6ths in the left hand, with the exception of only the second half of bars 6, 7, and 14. To these basic chords 5ths, major 6ths, and minor 9ths are added in the upper texture, and occasionally the unresolved minor 3rd is prominent, as in the treble of bars 5 and 12. The second half is similar, with the exception of the cadenza, which is like Skriabin in its fragmentary piano writing and consists entirely of dominant-structured minor 9ths. A constant Skriabin-like feature of the harmony is the placing of a tritone in the bass in such a way that its upper note is also the bottom note of a minor 7th. This is particularly clear when the layout is like that in bars 1 and 11, but it is also true of the first half of bars 6 and 8 and other similar places. Unity of melodic and harmonic content is suggested by the constant tritones in the left-hand chords and their frequent occurrence between key points in the higher parts.

Two features depart from Skriabin’s normal practice: the relatively complex chord on which the piece ends; and the number of 5th and 4th progressions in the bass. The latter should not be regarded as reactionary elements; they have a stabilizing role and became increasingly important in Roslavets’s music as his style grew more complex. The pitch chart (Example 3-12) examines 22 different harmonies from the first half of the composition. The second column reveals a fairly level density of pitches per chord throughout. The bottom row indicates the number of times each pitch is used, and the two final columns show the number of pitches that move out and in as the harmony changes. Although this piece is based on Skriabin’s technique, it is already moving toward a more consistently equal use of the twelve notes than happens with Skriabin. (These statistics will be of further interest when dealing with later developments in Roslavets’s style in chapter 13.)

The harmonic technique of the first of the Two Poems shows a considerable advance on the second, but Roslavets has carefully constructed it on similar lines to form a satisfactory pair. The music reduction (Example 3-13b) shows some of the more interesting features. It is again in two parts, with the second, at bar 17, beginning with a tritone transposition of the first, so that many of the notes are a rearrangement of those at the start. Again there is a five-bar coda, and the first half closes cadentially into the second, though with less tonal effect. This time the bass does not return to the opening E-flat at the end but concludes on the triton A. All this is very similar to procedures in Skriabin, but Roslavets has ingeniously combined the right-hand part from bar 1 with the A/G from the bass of bar 17 in the right- and left-hand parts of the coda (Example 3-13a). The bichordal effect of the layout in bars 1 and 17 and the coda suggests that the composer is making a play on four chords related in a series of minor 3 rds—somewhat after the manner of the two tritones of Skriabin’s Op. 63 No. 2 but not so consistently followed through in the remainder of the composition.

The harmony is again derived from Skriabin, with complex dominant-structured 9ths and added notes. Of 50 such chords, 29 have the diminished 5th and 15 the augmented 5th, both usually in addition to the perfect 5th, and 20 have the added 6th. There are seven cases of the major and minor 3rd in combination, fourteen of the major and minor 7th, and 22 of the major and minor 9th. The pitch charts (Examples 3-14a, b) show a slightly greater range of harmonic density than in the second piece, a fairly consistent rate of pitch changes from chord to chord, and free use of all twelve notes. In each half the most complex chords come near the middle. Relatively unornamented dominant-structured chords occur at the beginning and end of both parts and serve for repose and stability.

In significant ways Roslavets has departed from the style of Skriabin. Tritones are sparingly used between key points in the high treble, in the movement of the bass, and between the bass and the next higher note. Dominant-type chords are used in bars 1 and 2, 17 and 18, and in the coda, but, by avoiding Skriabin’s layout of the lower texture, Roslavets has considerably reduced the dominant resonance elsewhere. The chord in the first half of bar 9, for instance, is a transposition of the one on the last beat of bar 1; but, whereas the Skriabin-like layout of the latter preserves the dominant sound, the 5ths arrangement of the former produces a radically different effect. This may be regarded as an extension of Skriabin’s frequent voicing in 4ths.

Conspicuous 4ths occur between key points in the treble in the opening of each half and shortly before the end. In the bass 4ths, 5ths, and 2nds predominate at bars 3-4 and 7-16 and at corresponding places in the second half. In the treble these occur at moments when the tension is beginning to subside or at times of relative repose. In the bass they are often associated with moments of highest tension, widest vertical range, and greatest dynamic force. Harmonic and melodic unity is suggested by the fact that the 9th chords, which are the basis of this piece, are predominantly major 9ths and so contain the double 5th (root-5th-9th).

The first of Three Compositions (1914) (Example 3-15) is a highly complex and concentrated piece compared with Two Poems, discussed above, but it still demonstrates Roslavets’s debt to Skriabin: (1) There is the practice of rearranging the notes of a chord for structural purposes. In this case it does not involve tritone transposition of the root: the first chord in bar 10 has the same root and pitch content as the second chord in bar 1 and serves to mark the beginning of the last section, which otherwise is only loosely connected with the opening. (2) Minor 3rds, tritones, and diminished 7th formations are in evidence throughout. A particular Skriabin pattern is the tritone, which occurs near the beginning of bar 7, with the minor 7th above now transferred to the treble (G, C-sharp, B). (3) The familiar tritone contained in a perfect 5th is again the structural basis of the whole piece (A-flat in bar 1, D in bars 6 and 7, and the final G). This combination of 5th and tritone persists also in the individual chords (see chapter 6 for a general view of this formula in Russian music). (4) There is a tendency to dissolve melody and meter into a general fluctuation of harmonic color. This is achieved here by the frequent changes of time signature, by the rests at the beginning of bars 1 and 4 (which appear to commence with a beat of 6/8 time), and by allowing the recurring bass pattern in bars 12 and 13 to proceed across the bar line. The rests in bars 5 and 9 also serve to confuse the metrical pattern. (5) The frequent melodic use of tritones is matched by the inclusion, in every chord of the first and last sections, of two tritones forming a diminished 7th—except in the final chord, where they form a French 6th.

Roslavets follows Skriabin in using unity of harmonic color as an alternative to tonal unity. In this field, however, he departs from Skriabin in that the prevailing harmony is no longer dominant-structured. Only three chords are dominants, and all have a residual functional value.¹¹ The last chord in bar 3 and the one in bar 5 occupy cadential positions, and the E chords in bars 10 and 11 draw attention to the bass A in the same measures. This use of dominants to create a local pitch center is not generally associated with Skriabin but is found in the work of other Russians, including Prokofiev and Miaskovsky: it is possible in this piece because of the move away from reliance on dominant-structured chords for general coloring.¹²

Three Compositions, of 1914, by Roslavets marked a turning point in compositional technique in Russia, which will be dealt with further in chapter 13. The most significant long-term development of Skriabin’s work took place outside of Russia, and this is mentioned in chapter 14. In the meantime attention must be given to the other mainstream development in Russian music—the work of Prokofiev and the linear style with which he is often associated. This subject is taken up in the next two chapters.