Talk:Aleksandr Lokshin

On the music

Someone has obviously taken a lot of trouble over this bio article. Subsectioned for ease of reading and formatted. Will be good to add a section about the actual music itself. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:54, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

About a calumny

Mr Galassi has written the following (Revision of 02:30 6 May 2012):

"After Stalin's death Lokshin was accused by Alexander Esenin-Volpin of being an informer for the Soviet secret police NKVD-KGB, responsible for the arrests of a number of Moscow students, who were incarcerated in GULAG, including Esenin-Volpin himself ..."

The bold text is a calumny, an invention of Mr.Galassi.

7 May 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalex1812 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Aalex 1812 (son of the composer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalex1812 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

You are acting inappropriately, ber WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:COI. Wikepedia is not a forum, it has strict neutrality rules, and it doesn't care whether Lokshin is guilty or not. He is a composer, ñot a defendant in a trial, and his dirty laundry cannot be emphasised like that. --Galassi (talk) 19:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

As to the accusations they are neither proven, nor disproven, and they have never been formal. Some people believe Lokshin, some don't. Period.--Galassi (talk) 19:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

tive

I am goimg to speak about contributions by user Galassi at 12:43, 8 May 2012‎ (-327). 1. Using term "reputation" (in a title) is not neutral and has an apriori negative shade which does not correspond to Wikipedia principles. 2. It is absolutely impossible to ignore the historical fact that Lokshin's Requiem has been performed at the closing of IV Conference "Resistance in Gulag" (2002). This performance has been mentoned in press many times and presents an essential episode in Lokshin's story. By ignoring this episode the whole article about Lokshin becomes biased. 3. When referring to NYtimes , user Galassi writes: Lokshin was accused by Alexander Esenin-Volpin of being an informer for the Soviet secret police NKVD-KGB, responsible for the arrests of himself and Vera Prokhorova, However,in the referred to article in NYtimes the whole sentence has another meaning "Lokshin, who was officially censured alongside Shostakovich and Prokofiev in 1948 and later accused of being an informer by former gulag prisoners (accusations which Lokshin denies and have never been proven true)" By deleting the words "accusations which have never been proven true" user Galassi leads the reader to misunderstanding of composer's biography.Aalex1812 (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Multiple problems in this article

• 1. The article is written by the subject's son in violation of WP:COI.
• 2. It contains a great deal of OR (WP:OR).
• 3. It serves as a means to rectify a rumor against the subject circulating in Russia.
• 4. It gives undue weight to accusations against Lokshin, detrimental to the intended subject of the article: his musical activities.--Galassi (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Information on these accusations was published in open sources, first of all, in the program notes to the concert of the American Symphony Orchestra under direction of Leon Botstein where Symphony No. 4 of Aleksander Lokshin was performed. Secondly, these are the reviews to this concert, for example, the article of Steve Smith in the New York Times. Thus, all this can not be referred to as simply 'rumours' circulating in Russia. But the most important thing here is that in all these sources it was unambigously pointed (see the article by Steve Smith) that these accusations were "accusations which Lokshin denies and have never been proven true". This is very important and in any case can not be ignored. But you, Galassi (or Lute88, or savchuk, or Roman, which name do you like the most?), removed this sentence and made the sense of this passage biased. Moreover, together with citing to the mentioned article of Steve Smith you changed the text to "responsible for the arrests of a number of Moscow students, who were incarcerated in GULAG". This change can not be interpreted as a mistake, but only as a calumny for which you may bear criminal responsibility.

Further, as for WP:RS and WP:OR. Do you think that the article in the New York Times is not a reliable source? Or the letters of Maria Yudina, Boris Tischenko which were published several times in different books (for example, letters of Yudina collected and edited by A.M.Kuznetsov were published by ROSSPEN in 2006-2011, letters by Boris Tishchenko were published in "N.Ya.Myaskovsky, M.V.Yudina, R.B.Barshai, B.I.Tischenko, T.I.Apraksina et al on the composer A.L.Lokshin", Moscow, Dialog-MGU, 1998, in "A.L.Lokshin as a composer and a teacher", Moscow, Compozitor, 2006, and also, for example, in "Ein unbekanntes Genie, Der Symphoniker Alexander Lokschin", Marina Lobanova & Ernst Kuhn, eds., Verlag Ernst Kuhn, Berlin, 2002, p. 164, in German). I think that all these sources are as reliable as possible. As for the concert where Symphony No. 1 "Requiem" was performed by the P.I.Tchaikovsky BSO under direction of Rudolf Barshai in 2002, there are a lot of newspaper articles that confirm this historical fact. All other facts are taken from reliable openly published sources. So I think that accusations in WP:RS and WP:OR by you are purely demagogic.

Further, as for WP:COI. It is absolutely false, that the whole article was written by the composer's son. It is easy to confirm this by browsing the edit history, there are a lot of people that have no connection to Aalex1812 and participated in creation of the text. According to the rules of Wikipedia (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI) the editor who may have a conflict of interest may perform non-controversial edits by

1) Removing spam and reverting vandalism

5) Making edits that have been agreed to on the talk page

6) Adding citations, especially when another editor has requested them

So the reverting the phrase connected to the calumny you inserted in the article is allowed by the rules. Aalex1812 simply made the corresponding text consistent with the article from the New York Times, nothing more. Another edits concern to adding citations and documents to protect the calumny. All this is also allowed. In any case, I fully agree with all the changes made by Aalex1812 and think that none of them violates WP:NPOV. On the contrary, it is you, Galassi, who does not follow WP:NPOV. So even if Aalex1812 made some changes not agreed on the talk page, it is necessary to discuss these changes. And I do not object to them (so here the item 5) works until appearing real constructive objections and further detailed discussion). But all must be discussed not in demagogic manner of Galassi (it seems to me that you, Galassi/Roman, are not an angel and are making a lot of controversial edits in the corresponding articles in Wikipedia, I'm sure you know what I mean), but in detail. It is desirable that instead of saying something too general like "it contains a great deal of ..." concrete parts of the text are pointed at that should be improved. In the latter case the discussion is constructive.

Finally, concerning the "undue weight" given to accusations. Let us count exactly what part of the text is devoted to this matter. It numbers in my opinion not more that 5 (!) sentences, namely, two sentences in the second paragraph of the section The Zhdanov purges and three sentences in the section Addendum. The rest part of the main text (excluding cited documents that are very important in many aspects, in particular, to show the contexts of Aleksander Lokshin's biography) is not connected to accusations directly. So I can not agree with this "undue weight". I agree that the whole text should be of course enlarged in the aspect connected with Lokshin's music (for example, by inserting the full list of works, currently it is available only by the hyperlink at the end of the article to the site maintained by Onno van Rijen). But more than 3/4 of the text is devoted to Lokshin's musical education, Lokshin's music, musicians who performed this music, conditions of these performances, etc., i.e. namely to composer's musical activities. Another thing that the time when Lokshin created his genial music was rather gloomy, but all this is objective situation and is not connected to "rectifying a rumour" and "protecting against accusations". --IlyaVR (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

About Calumny by user Galassi

I am sure that a user who has posted a calumny in the article about the composer cannot take part in further editing of the article.Aalex1812 (talk) 20:10, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Answers to user Galassi

1. The article is not written by me. I do only take part in editing it.

2.The article does not contain OR at all.

3. The rumor mentioned by user Galassi does not circulate in Russia any more. The authority of Elena Bonner,Dimitry Schostakovich, Rudolf Barshai , Semen S.Vilensky, Dimitry Bykov, Alla Bossart, Maria Judina, Boris Tischenko stopped it.See e.g.http://www.sem40.ru/famous2/m1007.shtml and http://old.mospravda.ru/issue/2012/05/04/article31511/ 4.User Galassi contradicts himself. It was namely he who deleted the words : "accusations which have never been proven true" when referring to NYTimes.Aalex1812 (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I've cleaned up format. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Lokshin's Rehabilitation

http://intoclassics.net/publ/5-1-0-303Aalex1812 (talk) 16:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC) I cannot understand why the reference to the memoirs by Naum Korzhavin (which I have posted on May 10, 2013) has been deleted. Korzhavin's memoirs were published in a well-known Russian Publishing House, Korzhavin was a close friend of Volpin and his memoirs have never been challenged by Volpin. Memoirs by Olga Adamova-Sliozberg (who also was a close Volpin's friend) also were published in a well known Russian Publishing House and also have never been disputed by Volpin. The English-speaking reader of Wikipedia when reading the article about Lokshin will be disoriented being deprived of the abovementioned texts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalex1812 (talk • contribs) 06:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Olga Lvovna Adamova-Sliozberg. A WAY. (Moscow:Vozvrashchenie, 1993, p. 188-9)

<<On August, 1st, 1951 I have been forty nine years old. Emka Mandel , Alik Volpin (Yessenin), Valia Gerlin [the wife of J.Aihenwald and the daughter of “Gorb”– A.L.] and Jura Aihenwald came on a visit to me. They brought a small bottle of port as a gift. I have absolutely forgotten that Alik cannot drink. We poured a half of the small bottle and drank to my health. Then Alik wanted to make a second toast. It was summer time, one window had been broken, and always when four or five persons of exiled gathered the «vertuhai» (agents of the Secret Police) darted about under the windows . So, the toast was lifted by Alik. - I drink, - he told loudly creaking ,- I drink for that Stalin has died! My visitors disappeared in a moment as if a wind has blown them off. Only Alik and I remained. — Shut up! You are ruining me as well as yourself ! Shut up! — I am a free person, — answered Alik gravely, — and I say that I want. I drink for that Stalin has died! I wished to clamp his mouth and had somehow knocked him on lips. Therefore he ,very pliably, fell down to the floor and grew a bit more silent, but, as before, accurately and separately repeated: — I drink for that Stalin has died. I am a free person, you do not dare to clamp my mouth. I have knocked him on his lips again, and he continued to repeat the toast, but more and more silently. In panic horror I had started to simply beat him on lips, on cheeks, anywhere, and he continued to mutter the same. At last he rose and told me: — I despise you as the Secret Police, — and had left. Then immediately returned Mandel, Valia and Jura. It appears, they had ran under the windows and guarded, whether “vertuhai” will appear or not, but those had not appeared. They had seen how Alik went out. They watched where he went, and, having been convinced that he goes home, ran to me. On the next day Valia came to me and had told that Alik was not at work and when she had visited him she saw that he was laying beaten, with such black eyes and lips that it is impossible for him to go to work. — Vavka, — I said, — go to him, carry to him, from me, the yesterday's pie which he has not eaten, and ask him to forgive me. Valia had executed the commission and returned with a small volume of verses by Lermontov which was sent by Alik to me as a gift with an inscription: «to dear Tigra Lvovna [a joke – Tigress , daughter of Lion – A.L.] who beats the cap fits». But, unfortunately, the incident had not been settled yet. In about five days after that he had recovered and went back to work. His school [Volpin taught mathematics] was located close to a sewing studio, where I had been the chief of shop. Quite often he used to come to me after the work hours, and we used to go home together. Having seen that he is safe and sound, I shouted to him from apart: — Hi! You have come! Well, you are not angry about me? A loud answer through all shop had followed: — Really, do you think, that this rascal Stalin could set us at variance ? One can imagine my reaction. For a long time I did not sleep at night and waited for reaction of the Secret Police to Alik's words. No reaction followed. Somehow I shared the fear with one of the co-workers. She told me: — All of us have heard his words, but we have agreed to be silent, as though we did not hear anything. What good there were my girls!>>

NAUM KORZHAVIN. IN TEMPTATIONS OF A BLOODY EPOCH, V.2. (MOSCOW: ZAKHAROV, 2006, P. 464-467)

<<Alik [Volpin] has got to Karaganda after prison and a mental hospital. About why he has got to prison, he told so: — There came to University a foreign delegation (it seems, the French students; precisely I do not remember). I packed myself with them. Well, I showed them much, and told something at the same time ... The word "told" Alik significantly underlined. Naturally ,Alik had commented only those things which were hidden , and that among thoughts which Alik shared with foreign visitors, there was no one permitted or tolerant by the regime , there can not be a doubt at all. He had no others (except as in science), and to express the thoughts he does not share Alik is simply incapable. So there had been reasons for which he was arrested. One such adventure at that time was enough for this purpose. And there were many of them : the system at which we lived, he did not accept absolutely and expressed this fact openly. And not only to foreigners. By the way, foreigners did not appear in his dossier at all (which can easily be explained: one cannot cause them as witnesses), recitation (including well-known "Raven") and [anti-Soviet] statements appeared only, but what from what has gone — who can know? …. Once, leaving from us after a friendly junket where we had argued with him about something , he suddenly began to shout loudly: — Long live to a biological warfare! Naturally, he did not want and did not thirst anything similar, but newspapers and radio were full of damnations to Americans who develop the bacteriological weapon and almost do apply it in Korea. Here Alik also shouted something contradicting the general shout, to that everyboby has had enough of it . But for this reason all that he had shouted was absolutely clear to the first comer, and unlike any other anti-Soviet talks could revolt him sincerely. It was dangerous. It was required to shut immediately to him the mouth, despite of his unique individuality.>>Aalex1812 (talk) 07:08, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Aleksandr Lokshin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070103004145/http://rudolfbarshai.com/index_files/lokshin.htm to http://rudolfbarshai.com/index_files/lokshin.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060911063607/http://home.wanadoo.nl/ovar/lokshin.htm to http://home.wanadoo.nl/ovar/lokshin.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

BSO

The list of Lokshin's works includes many items decribed as being "for BSO". Would I be correct in presuming that this is a partial translation of the Russian expression "для большого симфонического оркестра" (for large symphony orchestra)? If so, I propose changing "for BSO" to (simply) "for orchestra" throughout, as this is the usual, default way of describing works for symphony orchestra in English (with other types -- chamber orchestra, wind orchestra, etc. -- being noted specifically as such). -- Picapica (talk) 17:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)