Roslavets, Nikolai Andreevich

Nikolai Andreevich Roslavets was born in the city of Surazh, Chernihiv province in the family of a railway employee. Surazh as the place of birth is indicated on the personal card of Roslavets, filled out by the composer himself and stored in the archive of Universal Edition, which published the composer's works in the 1920s ^[4] . The same data appear in the published curriculum vitae of 1919. Later, accused by "proletarian musicians" of "class alienation" and "hostility to the proletariat", Roslavets consciously changed his official biography, subjecting it to multiple edits. In particular, the district center was replaced by the deaf village of Dushatin, and the social status of the tsarist official serving in the railway, which threatened to automatically be enrolled in the "deprived people", belonged to the poorest peasantry. As a result of such stylization, dictated by the need for social protection, an official version of the biography of Roslavets appeared, published in 1924 by the magazine "Contemporary Music" ^[5] . In military service certificates, Roslavets is recorded as “a peasant of the Gordeevsky volost of Surazh district”.

Relatives of Roslavets were wealthy: his grandfather owned an "excellent carpentry workshop" - this fact was also not mentioned in the composer's official biography published in 1924. The future composer and his father were petty officials, often moving from city to city - their service depended on the plans and projects of the railway. The posts held by them corresponded to low ranks, which did not give the right to personal and, especially, hereditary nobility. The surviving photographs depict an intellectual, a fellow in a jacket of a railwayman, bending over a book, playing his own violin ^[6] . Some Soviet musicologists uncritically took it on faith and mechanically reproduced the facts of the stylized official biography of Roslavets, following the composer's intentionally stylized biography — it even came to the publication of photographs of the church in which the composer could be baptized if he were born in Dushatin ^{[ 7]} .

Incorrect biographical information found distribution in the West. Including in the works of Detlef Goyova (1934-2008), a staunch propagandist of Roslavets. Detlef Goyova was harassed by the leadership of the Union of Composers. His influential enemies - Tikhon Khrennikov and former associates of the "proletarian musicians" succeeded in this. Not the last role in this belonged to the magazine "Soviet Music", especially the critic, speaking under the pseudonym "Journalist". This critic at the same time managed to expose the dissident musicologist Axel Goyova, who lived in the GDR, confusing him with his brother, Detlef Goyova, who was declared an anti-Soviet. Detlef Goyova was denied entry to the USSR for many years, and copies of his articles, which he sent to his colleagues, were arrested by Soviet customs. Because of this ban, Detlef Goyova had to rely on secondary sources, often containing incorrect information. In particular, in some publications of Goiova there were speculations about the “Ukrainian” origin of Roslavets. Uncritically circulated in journalism, they served as the basis for the distribution of one of the fictions about the composer. Understanding the danger of such speculation and faced with all kinds of impostors, the only surviving relative of the composer, EF Roslavets, entrusted Marina Lobanova with an authentic reconstruction of the biography and works of Roslavets, as well as their publication ^[8] .

Having moved with his family to Kursk in the late 1890s, Nikolai Roslavets entered the music classes of Arkady Abazy , was engaged in playing the violin and piano, the elementary theory of music and harmony; From 1902 to 1912 he studied at the Moscow Conservatory in the class of Ivan Grzhimali (violin), as well as Sergei Vasilenko (free composition), Mikhail Ippolitov-Ivanov and Alexander Ilyinsky (counterpoint, fugue, musical form). He graduated from the Conservatory with two diplomas (breaks in classes were explained by exacerbations of tuberculosis and treatment in southern Russia). The graduate work of Roslavets - the mystery "Heaven and Earth" by Byron (1912) - was awarded a large silver medal, and its author - the title of free artist .

December 13, 1917 elected the first chairman of the Council of workers, soldiers and peasants' deputies of the city of Yelets . In the early years of the revolution, Roslavets became the director and teacher of the music school in Yelets .

The post-revolutionary years saw the peak of the composer's social activities. Along with Leonid Sabaneev , Vladimir Derzhanovsky , Nikolai Myaskovsky , Eugene Braudo and others, Roslavets was one of the leaders of the AFM - the Association of Contemporary Music , which developed the principles of pre-revolutionary "modernity", propagandizing the best achievements of new music and maintaining contacts with the West. Roslavets was one of the organizers of the trade union of composers, and was the editor-in-chief of the journal Musical Culture. He taught in Yelets, Kharkov and Moscow, worked at the State Publishing House .

In the 1920s, Roslavets became the object of fierce persecution by “proletarian musicians”, primarily representatives of the Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians (RAPM) and the Students' Production Team of the Moscow Conservatory (PROKOLL) : in articles by V. Bely, L. Kaltat, L. Lebedinsky and other publicists he was declared the representative of "bourgeois decadence", "alien", "hostile to the proletariat" composer, then - "formalist" and so on. In 1927, fearing reprisal, Roslavets handed the suitcase with manuscripts to his brother, who lived in Ukraine. In 1936, the brother's family was repressed; all manuscripts perished. After the beginning of open political processes in the country, Roslavets was ranked as a "pest", a "Trotskyist" and in 1930 was accused of patronizing the "Association of Moscow Authors", "exposed" in the "propaganda of light music" and "the dissemination of counter-revolutionary literature." “The Roslavets case”, initiated by V. Bely, A. Davydenko, V. Klemens, Yu. Keldysh, S. Korev, M. Koval, Z. Levina , G. Polyanovsky, A. Sergeev, B. Shekhter and others, ended with a “purge”, which meant an actual ban on working in the profession. Accused of “right opportunism”, “trade in ideology”, etc., Roslavets was forced to admit the committed “political mistakes”.

In 1931 - 1933 he worked at the Tashkent Musical Theater. In 1933, the composer returned to Moscow, where he was in poverty and was subjected to constant humiliation: Roslavets was not able to get a permanent job, he was dismissed from all positions as a person who was “cleaned up”, did not pay fees for piecework. The composer was accepted to the Muzfond, but not to the Union of Composers. According to the testimony (to which there is no evidence) of Roslavets’s favorite pupil, P. Teplov, in 1938 Roslavets’s repression was being prepared - he was supposed to be shot or sent to the GULAG , which the composer's enemies spoke of as a fait accompli.

In 1939, Roslavets suffered a severe stroke, leading to temporary loss of speech and partial paralysis. The composer died after a second stroke. He was buried at the Vagankovsky cemetery . The composer's grave was destroyed; in 1990-1991 it was restored by the efforts of E. Roslavets, M. Lobanova and G. Dmitriev, and subsequently destroyed again. All the protests of M. Lobanova, directed to the Moscow authorities, Arkhnadzor and metropolitan journalists, remain to this day inconclusive ^[9] .

Roslavets is one of the largest innovators in the history of musical culture of the 20th century, the creator of the “new sound organization system”, the “synth chord” technique ^[10] . Starting with V. Karatygin, music critics called Roslavets “Russian Schoenberg, ” but already in 1914 Myaskovsky criticized this superficial assessment, emphasizing the originality of Roslavets’s style. In the Roslavets system, the development of chromatics is combined with fairly strict rules reminiscent of the principles of dodecafony. However, Roslavets came to them independently of Schoenberg’s school, the “new sound organization system” differs in many respects from the serial technology, allows great flexibility and freedom. The formation of the harmonic ideas of Roslavets is reflected in his works as a student, that is, refers to an earlier period than the experiences of the "classics of dodecaphone". On the establishment of the Roslavets style, by his own admission, a significant influence was exerted by the late compositional principles of Scriabin . Having quickly gained creative independence, Roslavets further criticized Prometheus for "schematism." At the same time, Roslavets inherited Scriabin's harmonic principles and even a terminological system; a mediator in the transfer of these ideas was a friend of Scriabin and Roslavets - Leonid Sabaneev ^[11] . The “New System” crystallized in the early chamber vocal and instrumental compositions of Roslavets, her “classical” samples are presented in “Sad Landscapes” (1913), “Three Works for Singing and Piano” (1913), First String Quartet (1913), First Violin sonata (1913), “Four Compositions for Singing and Piano” (1913-14) and others. Roslavets’s discoveries in the field of tinting and redness are much ahead of time, both in chamber compositions and in the symphonic poem “At the Time of the New Moon” (presumably , 1912-beginning of 1913).

Like many representatives of the “classical avant-garde,” Roslavets was distinguished by a thirst for a new one, freedom and experiment, a radical renewal of forms and, at the same time, a need for a “new law”. Roslavets' early policy statements show a clear resemblance to futuristic manifestos; the composer was friends with K. Malevich since childhood, was closely associated with V. Kamensky, A. Lentulov and others, was published in futurist magazines, the covers of his compositions were drawn up by futurists. At the same time, the composer did not fit into this circle, which Malevich emphasized at one time. The successive connections of Roslavets with symbolism and modernism with its spicy decorativeness are obvious. The stylistic ambiguity determined in many respects the further evolution of the composer's work. It was most noticeable in the choice of verses: until 1917, Roslavets turned to the poetry of Blok , Bryusov , K. Balmont , P. Verlaine , Vyach. Ivanov , M. Voloshin , N. Gumilyov , Igor Severyanin , D. Burliuk , V. Kamensky , E. Guro , K. Bolshakov, V. Gnedov , later - to the poetry of F. Sologub , Z. Gippius and others.

After 1917, the composer's attention was largely focused on the problems of neoclassicism, including the Stravinsky style. The principle of experimenting with style, changing style masks and roles remained alien to Roslavets, who consciously built a single individual style without foreign inclusions (allusion-retrospectives were used by Roslavets in later works as a kind of background for the composition with a distinctive symbolic connotation); the irony that colored the work of the “musical Proteus” did not attract him either. However, Roslavets, having passed the stage of protest against the "old school", came to the assertion of a "new academism" and even called himself in some cases a "neoclassical". The credo of the composer is expressed by the words: “I am a classic, having passed the art of all our time, perceiving everything that was created by humanity. I [...] conquered everything and say that I have no gap in the line of development of musical art. Through the medium of my students and through their students I want to approve a new system of sound organization, which replaces the classical system ” ^[12] .

It is the paradoxical synthesis of innovation and academicism, the tendency to violate the canon and at the same time to strict organization that determined the composer's creative personality, many features of his style. Shrewdly highlighted this unity in the music of Roslavets L. Sabaneev: “Roslavets has his tectonism, his mathematics in musical creativity brings him closer to academics. This is an original and unparalleled type of innovator-academician. He is not interested in emotion as such. For him, music is not at all the language of feelings, but the expression of an organized psychic world. He is not interested in emotion in itself, but in comparing it in musical fabric with others, “organizing emotions”, which inevitably accompanies the organization of sounds. Roslavets is a true master of sounds, who loves his skill, as a specialist, a worker loves his craft. He will not write in vain and by accident not a single note, not a single phrase. Everything is thought out and worked out to the last degree ” ^[13] . Roslavets’s contemporaries were especially struck by the fact that he did not call himself a composer, but “an organizer of sounds”. Slenderness, accuracy, logical completeness of his system, consistency in the implementation of compositional ideas, the analytical orientation of creativity caused both admiration and fierce attacks on his style.

In the 1920s the composer devoted much effort to “monumental propaganda” in music. Along with the cantata “October” (1927), songs and choirs, he created a grandiose canvas of the symphonic poem “Komsomoliya” (1928) - a masterpiece of 20th century music that fell under ideological prohibition, delayed its publication for many decades (published by the largest music publishing house Schott Musik International specializing in publishing world classics). At the same time, the composer continued to work on the “new system”, extending its ideas to rhythm, form, counterpoint, and created his own method of teaching composition. During these years, Roslavets changes the genre system and enlarges the compositional scale, which is especially noticeable in the First Violin Concerto (1925), chamber-instrumental and vocal compositions. The texture and harmony are noticeably highlighted, which includes elements of various historical systems, including the classical one. Developing his system, emphasizing its synthesizing character, Roslavets comes to the discovery of mixed harmonic techniques, the ideas of which will form the basis of many musical concepts from the beginning of the 1960s.

The decline in creativity and the cessation of social activities Roslavets affected the artistic level of works of the 1930s. (including the pantomime ballet “Buttermilk” (Cotton) and other compositions on an oriental theme written in Tashkent). Nevertheless, compositional mastery is also distinguished by the later work of Roslavets, especially chamber-instrumental compositions. The apical manifestations of the “new sound organization system” in its late phase include the Chamber Symphony (1934–35).

Soon after the composer's death, his apartment was searched by representatives of “organs”, accompanied by former “proletarian musicians,” who seized the composer's manuscripts. Fortunately, the widow of Roslavets managed to hide part of the legacy that she later transferred to the TsGALI (now: RGALI). Some manuscripts of the composer were preserved by his beloved pupil, composer Pyotr Vasilyevich Teplov (now in the State Central Museum of Musical Culture named after M.I. Glinka ). According to Teplov, the composer's enemies, who pursued Roslavets during his lifetime, after the composer's death hunted for his manuscripts and destroyed them. In 1967, the composer's niece, Efrosinya Fedorovna Roslavets, took the first steps to rehabilitate her uncle, thanks to which it was possible to establish that the composer was not subjected to political repression. This important step - the refusal to perform the works of Roslavets was justified by the fact that it was allegedly a "repressed enemy of the people" - did not improve the situation: they continued to hush up the work of Roslavets. In 1967, an employee of the Museum of Musical Culture. M. I. Glinka , Georgy Kirkor , refused to get acquainted with the file cabinet by E. Roslavets, calling Roslavets music “hostile to the people” and accusing the composer of “ties to international Zionism” ^[14] . An absurd but essentially dangerous accusation was based on propaganda by representatives of the Jewish music school conducted by the AFM, including L. Sabaneyev, an ardent enemy of the Soviets and a close friend of Roslavets. Accusations of “Zionist activity” have also been constantly confronted since the late 1970s. M. Lobanova, a researcher and publisher of Roslavets, who, in turn, was persecuted, including for family ties with one of the founders of the state of Israel. In the same 1967, according to the testimony of EF Roslavets, the leading functionaries of the USSR Union of Composers Vano Muradeli , Anatoly Novikov and Tikhon Khrennikov refused to accept and help ^[15] . The negative attitude towards Roslavets, significant for the official circles of the Union of Composers of the USSR, was expressed in the following sentence settings: “Roslavets is an enemy”, “a composer whose music is not worth the paper on which it is written”, “Roslavets’s grave should be destroyed” ^{[16 ]} .

On December 27, 1980, a concert was held at the Chamber Club of M. Milman with an opening statement by M. Lobanova, one section of which was dedicated to the music of Roslavets; According to one of the concert organizers, E. Denisov , the leadership of the USSR Union of Composers refused to hold a concert entirely dedicated to the composer. After the first publication of the original theoretical concept of Roslavets, based on archival materials ^[17] , in 1984 a report by M. Lobanova on the musical and theoretical system of Roslavets announced in the program of the international conference “Musica nel nostro tempo” (Milan) was disrupted: leading functionaries of the Union of Composers of the USSR accused the traveller not to travel abroad of "illegal ties with the West." Soon, attempts were made to dismiss Lobanova from the Moscow Conservatory, depriving her of her scientific degree and the right to teach, as well as the use of punitive psychiatry with a diagnosis of “sluggish schizophrenia” ^[18] .

In 1989, E. Roslavets appealed to the Moscow Composer Organization with a request for reconstruction and publication of the heritage, as well as restoration of the grave of the composer, officially entrusting these tasks to M. Lobanova. In 1990, after a long struggle, including with criminal structures, thanks to the assistance of the head of the Moscow composer organization, George Dmitriev, the grave of Roslavets was restored according to the plan of M. Lobanova, authorized by the composer's niece. Recently it turned out that the restored grave of Roslavets was again destroyed, - Russian-American pianist E. Dubovitskaya told M. Lobanova, who examined the burial place of Roslavets according to the plan authorized by E. F. Roslavets published in the monograph by M. Lobanova. Apparently, the relevant documents were destroyed, up to and including entries in cemetery books, etc. It is hoped that M. Lobanova’s appeals to the Moscow authorities, Arkhnadzor and metropolitan journalists will find a proper response and Rososlav’s grave will be restored again ^[19] .

In 1989, the publishing house "Music" published the collection "Nikolai Roslavets. Compositions for Piano ”(edited by N. Kopchevsky), unfortunately, reproducing many typos of lifetime editions. The preface to the collection, written by Yu. Kholopov , provoked indignation by E.F. Roslavets. In letters dated January 28, 1990, addressed to the director of the State Central Museum of Musical Culture named after M. I. Glinka, as well as the director of the publishing house “Music” and the editor-in-chief of the magazine “Soviet Music”, the composer's niece protested against “insulting speculation”, slander, and discredit of the relatives of Roslavets. EF Roslavets was particularly concerned about false information about the work of Roslavets and the state of archival materials: from her point of view, discussions about the chaotic state of archival materials and negligent relatives could justify the possible theft of Roslavets’s heritage and its further falsifications. After the refusal of publication in the USSR and Russia, one of the letters of E. Roslavets, who closed access to his personal materials in the State Central Museum of Musical Culture named after M. I. Glinka, was first published in Germany in 1993. ^[20] Foreword by Yu. N. Kholopov, a little later comparing “the terrible era - the collapse of Russia in the 1990s”, “decay, immoralism, unprincipledness and the cult of profit »In the conditions of Russian democracy of the B. Yeltsin era with the Third Reich ^[21] , met with extremely sharp rebuff from N. I. Khardzhiev in a letter to M. Lobanova dated December 5, 1990 ^[22] .

The desire to create new myths, without understanding the old ones, negatively affected a number of Russian publications of the late 1980s - early 1990s. about Roslavets. Characteristic is the assessment given to one such article about Roslavets, appeared in the journal Musical Life, by Roslavets’s beloved student, composer Pyotr Vasilyevich Teplov in a letter to M. Lobanova from 01.19.1991: “Essay is a completely conscientious compilation of materials from Moscow archives and information from individuals who somehow or ever knew N. A. during life (including me, and a lot). The good thing is that there was another publication about N. Roslavets. But, unfortunately, not without major distortions and omissions. The most significant is the complete absence of any mention of the RAPM. About her truly tragic role in the last 15–20 years of her life, N. A. I don’t think that this obvious distortion lies with Belodubrovsky’s conscience. I am convinced that this is the “work” of the editorial board and, in the first place, its editor-in-chief, the successor V. Bely ” ^[23] .

In 1989, M. Lobanova was found in the archives of the score of the first violin concert of Roslavets, which was declared lost, including in the thesis by A. Puchina about this work, performed at the Moscow Conservatory under the direction of E. Denisov in 1981. By order of the publishing house “ Le Chant du Monde »E. Denisov was going to orchestrate the clavier of the First Violin Concerto, published in 1927, but the opening of the score crossed out these plans. Soon after the world orchestra premiere of the composition, performed by T. Grindenko under the direction of F. Glushchenko, (Moscow, November 18, 1989), an article appeared in the Russian Musical Newspaper ^[24] , containing false information about the author of the archival opening. Later, the newspaper published a refutation, apologizing to M. Lobanova ^[25] . In 1989, the planned world premiere of Roslavets’s symphonic poem “At the Hours of the New Moon”, reconstructed by M. Lobanova, was disrupted: the prepared, painted, and paid material disappeared without a trace from the Soviet Music Propaganda Bureau. The world premiere of the poem performed by the Radio Saarbrücken Symphony Orchestra conducted by H. Holliger on June 14, 1990 in Saarbrücken took place in the absence of the author of the reconstruction, which the Foreign Commission of the USSR Composers Union once again refused to issue a passport, despite the official invitation of B. Schott und Söhne (now Schott Musik International).

In the context of increasing interest in Roslavets, caused by the discovery of previously unknown works and the publication of his legacy, which made it possible to talk about the “revival of Roslavets,” a distant attitude toward the composer was found, including among his compatriots - composers of the modernist wing: for example, in an extensive discussion, on the opening of the heritage of Russian musical avant-garde (Heidelberg, November 1, 1991), V. Suslin categorically spoke about creativity Roslavetz as "not having the slightest difference to him" Firsova underlined that music Roslavetz, unlike Schoenberg's creativity, it "does not care" ^[26] .

According to the Kommersant-Daily newspaper, Vladimir Pikul , when he was editor-in-chief of the Moscow publishing house Soviet Composer (later the Composer), helped in 1991 to publish her uncle’s works in B. Schott und Söhne. According to Vladimir Pikul, he received a commission of 33,500 DM for his help, which he spent on the education of his children in Germany. When Tikhon Khrennikov found out about this, he considered that Vladimir Pikul illegally appropriated 33,500 DM, which should belong to the USSR Composers Union. On May 6, 1991, at the initiative of T. Khrennikov, the Union of Composers of the USSR referred the matter to the prosecutor's office of the Frunze District Department of Internal Affairs. The accusation of “misappropriation of public funds” in foreign currency in the absence of a moratorium on the death penalty threatened Pikul with the most severe penalties, up to and including execution ^[27] . Subsequently, the case was dismissed for lack of corpus delicti. In March 1992, the case was reopened at the request of the Union of Composers. By that time, Pikul had lost his place (Grigory Voronov (1948–2008) became his successor, but won 2 trials. Contrary to court decisions, Pikul was not reinstated because his position was “reduced.” In the end, Pikul He claimed compensation for “serious moral and material damage” and sued Tikhon Khrennikov ^[ 33] for DM 33,500.

In 1991, the left-wing pro-Soviet publishing house Le Chant du Monde, part of the so-called “ VAAP family” ^[29] , announced seven compositions by Roslavets supposedly completed by Alexander Raskatov : the vocal cycle “In Memory of A. Blok”, a symphonic poem “During the New Moon,” “Music for the String Quartet,” Sonata No. 1 (1925) and No. 2 (1926) for viola and piano, piano sonata No. 6 and “Chamber Symphony” (1926), as well as arrangements for baritone and drums of the song "Knock!".

In fact, the vocal cycle “In Memory of A. Blok”, the symphonic poem “During the New Moon” were completed by Roslavets himself. In the archival materials for the Sixth Piano Sonata there is no end, which excludes its authentic reconstruction. “Music for the String Quartet” - a fictitious name: Roslavets never wrote, was not going to write such an essay. The Sonata No. 1 (1925) announced in the program “Le Chant du Monde” for viola and piano is, in fact, a sketch that Roslavets refused to complete. The original viola sonata No. 1, erroneously called “Le Chant du Monde” “sonata No. 2”, was completed by Roslavets in 1926. The surviving draft did not need to be completed: the viola sonata No. 1 was reconstructed and published by M. Lobanova. The original Sonata No. 2 for viola and piano was not created in 1926, as indicated on the Le Chant du Monde list, but in the 1930s. and also does not need to be completed at all: like other works, it was published by M. Lobanova. The Chamber Symphony (1926) on the list of Le Chant du Monde is, in fact, a sketch that Roslavets refused to end. The sketch does not allow authentic reconstruction of either the cycle or its individual parts; the composition used by A. Raskatov is also doubtful: the harp and piano are not indicated in the particello layouts, and six percussion instruments are completely alien to Roslavets’s style. For 18 instruments, the genuine Chamber Symphony of Roslavets (1934-1935) was written - a smaller composition is indicated in the 1926 sketch.

Concealment of information about the actual nature and condition of the materials underlying “Roslavets’s works completed by A. Raskatov” led to incredible confusion and greatly complicated the study and propaganda of the composer's heritage. Many misunderstandings arose in connection with the viola sonatas of Roslavets: for example, on the Roslavets. Musique de chambre ”(Harmonia mundi, LDC 288 047) were recorded, contrary to the claims of the publishers, not the Alto Sonatas No. 1 and 2, but the aforementioned“ completed ”sketch of 1925 and the Sonata No. 1, completed by Roslavets himself and, contrary to the statements in the booklet, who did not need to be completed, on the CD she was mistakenly named "Sonata No. 2". Information on the reconstruction of the symphonic poem “At the Hours of the New Moon” and other works of Roslavets spread in journalism. So, in an article by Gerard McBurney in ^[30] it was said that A. Raskatov had completed the poem In the Hours of the New Moon, allegedly on the basis of an incomplete sketch of the score; in fact, the reconstruction of the work completed by Roslavets himself was carried out by M. Lobanova on the basis of an almost complete set of orchestral voices - the missing ones were made up on the basis of the musical score. At the request of E. Denisov, M. Lobanova advised A. Raskatov on the creative work and archive of Roslavets. The false information about A. Raskatov’s reconstruction of the poem “At the Clocks of the New Moon” was repeated in an article by Anna Ferenc ^[31] , and in the booklet of Calan McDonald (Calum McDonald) to the Hyperion CD (CDA 67484), which linked the recording of the poem “At the Clock of the New Moon” "Performed by the Scotland Air Force Orchestra conducted by Ilan Volkov with the name of Raskatov, - in fact, the recording was based on the reconstruction of M. Lobanova. In addition, in the text of the booklet by Kahlan Mac Donald, the world premiere of the poem "At the Darkmoon" in Saarbrücken was deliberately mistakenly associated with the name of Raskatov. On January 30, 2009, a decision of the Hamburg Court (GZ: 1004 / 08JB01 GK: 175) prohibited the sale of the Hyperion CD (CDA 67484) with a booklet containing the above false information. According to findings, Hyperion Records, Ltd. changed the data on the poem "At the Clock of the New Moon" on her website, naming the author of the reconstruction - M. Lobanova; Recently, the text in the booklet for the Hyperion CD (CDA 67484) has been edited accordingly.

Erroneous information about the life and work of Roslavets contains other sources, like the site https://web.archive.org/web/20060914140753/http://home.wanadoo.nl/ovar/roslavetz.htm.%7B%7B%D0 % BD% D0% B5% D1% 82 AI 2 || 16 | 02 | 2016}}

To date, the main works of Roslavets (many of them for the first time) have been edited by M. Lobanova (including in her reconstruction, “During the New Moon,” Piano Trio No. 2, Violin Sonata No. 2, etc.) by Schott Musik International; M. Lobanova did not receive a fee for all her reconstructions. The conceptual basis of the publication is an authentic recreation of Roslavets’s heritage. A significant part of it reproduces works previously stored in archives and in need of editorial training. The other part is based on materials for works completed by the composer himself and allowing for authentic reconstruction. When reprinting works that saw the light during the life of the author, typos were corrected. The publishing program is far from over: many essays are being prepared for publication.

The search for materials prepared by M. Lobanova for publication was largely complicated not only by the state of Roslavets manuscripts stored in archives, but also by archival processing: frequent incorrect or controversial attributions and dating, etc. (see details in cit. book of M. Lobanova). Significant difficulties are still represented by the “promotion” of Roslavets manuscripts from one archive to another, then from the repository to open access and, finally, to the publication. So, many works of Soviet composers, previously listed in the libraries of the Union of Composers and the Music Fund, were subsequently transferred to the State Museum and Music Museum (State Museum of Musical Culture named after M.I. Glinka), which M. Lobanova learned about, searching for and preparing works by Roslavets for execution on Moscow Autumn and Heritage festivals and related publications. After entering the MCCMC, these materials lay for many years in the repository and only after appropriate processing, description and preparation became available to visitors to the manuscript department of the MCCMC. For this reason, the publication of the genuine “Chamber Symphony” (1934/35) was delayed for a long time: wanted by M. Lobanova in 1988-1989 for performance at Moscow festivals and then planned for publication by B. Schott und Söhne, in agreement with the Moscow publishing house and archive, this score of Roslavets, overgrown with legends, rumors and speculation, was released relatively recently ^{[ when? ]} (Kompositor International (Mainz) 51581).

The concept of “New Moon” and, accordingly, the poem of Roslavets, have acquired cult significance in the last decade, as evidenced by the musical-visual dramatization of E. Kloke “During the New Moon,” carried out in the summer of 2000 in Germany as part of EXPO 2000, as well as a concert cycle The Basel Symphoniette led by Fabrice Bollona (March 21-23, 2009, Basel, Geneva, Zurich), united by the program subtitle “New Moon”, within the framework of which Roslavets’s poem was performed. The composer's work and the pirate portal “Pirate Bay”, which offered users several works of Roslavets, including the poem “During the New Moon,” directed by H. Holliger, did not pass by.

Roslavets works are recorded on numerous records, disks, many radio programs, concerts, festivals were devoted to his work; The Third Russian Chamber Music Festival (Hamburg, 2012) was focused on Roslavets's work. Among the performers of Roslavets are violinists Daniil Austrikh, Tatyana Grindenko , Alina Ibragimova, Mark Lubotsky , pianists Alessandra Maria Amara, Marc Andre Amelen , Julia Bochkovskaya, Irina Emelyantseva, Anna Zasimova, Maria Lettberg , conductors Ilan Volkov, Fedor Konstantin Glushchenko, Fedor Glushchenko , Heinz Holliger , Fabrice Bollon, Trio Fontenay, Serafim Trio, Hub-Quartet, Moscow Contemporary Music Ensemble (IASM), New Music Studio, etc. Since 1993, the Roslavets Trio ensemble has existed in Moscow.

• Symphony c-moll (1910s); Kompositor International (Mainz) 51585
• "In the hours of the New Moon", a symphonic poem (c. 1912-1913); SCHOTT ED 8107
• "Heaven and Earth", the Mystery of Byron (1912)
• String Quartet No. 1 (1913); SCHOTT ED 8126
• Sonata for violin and piano No. 1 (1913)
• Three Etudes for Piano (1914); SCHOTT ED 7907
• Sonata for Piano No. 1 (1914); SCHOTT ED 7941
• Sonata for Piano No. 2 (1916); SCHOTT ED 8391
• Sonata for violin and piano No. 2 (1917); SCHOTT ED 8043
• Five Preludes for Piano (1919-1922); SCHOTT ED 7907
• String Quartet No. 3 (1920); SCHOTT ED 8127
• Piano Trio No. 2 (1920); SCHOTT ED 8059
• Sonata for violin and piano No. 4 (1920); SCHOTT ED 8044
• Piano Trio No. 3 (1921); SCHOTT ED 8035
• Sonata for Cello and Piano No. 1 (1921); SCHOTT ED 8038
• “Man and the Sea”, a symphonic poem according to Baudelaire (1921); lost
• Meditation, for cello and piano (1921)
• Symphony in four parts (presumably, Symphony No. 1) (1922); score fragments
• Sonata for Cello and Piano No. 2 (1922); SCHOTT ED 8039
• Sonata for Piano No. 5 (1923); SCHOTT ED 8392
• Concert for violin and orchestra No. 1 (1925); SCHOTT ED 7823 (score); SCHOTT ED 7824 (clavier)
• Chamber Symphony (unfinished, 1926, known in the free version of A. M. Raskatov )
• Sonata for viola and piano No. 1 (1926); SCHOTT ED 8177
• “October”, cantata (1927)
• Piano Trio No. 4 (1927); SCHOTT ED 8036
• Sonata for violin and piano No. 6 (presumably the 1930s); SCHOTT ED 8431
• Sonata for viola and piano No. 2 (1930s); SCHOTT ED 8178
• Buttermilk (Cotton), pantomime ballet (1931-1932)
• “Uzbekistan”, a symphonic poem (1932); fragments preserved
• Chamber symphony for 18 performers (in 4 parts, 1934-1935); Kompositor International (Mainz) 51581
• Concert for violin and orchestra No. 2 (1936); Kompositor International (Mainz) 52700
• String Quartet No. 5 (1941); SCHOTT ED 8128
• 24 preludes for violin and piano (1941-1942); SCHOTT ED 7940

• A.M. Abaza. “Music”, 1915, No. 208, p. 70-71
• Friendly answer Ars. To Abraham. “Music”, 1915, No. 219, p. 256-257
• "Lunar Pierrot" by Arnold Schoenberg. “Towards New Shores”, 1923, No. 3, p. 28-33; him. per., introduction and comments by M. Lobanova: “Dissonanz” 61 (1999), pp. 22-27
• Nick. A. Roslavets about himself and his work. "Contemporary Music", 1924, No. 5, p.132-138; him. Per .: Gojowy D. Neue sowjetische Musik der 20er Jahre. Laaber 1980, S. 395-400
• Where are the Russian composers? “Bulletin of the Artists”, 1925, No. 4, p.2-3; him. per. and comments by M. Lobanova: Dissonanz 52 (1997), S. 12f.
• About pseudo-proletarian music. "On the ways of art." M., 1926, p. 180-192; him. per. and comments by M. Lobanova: Dissonanz 49 (1996), S. 4-10
• "Back to Beethoven." “Rabis”, 1927, No. 49 (91), pp. 3-4; him. per. and comments by M. Lobanova: Dissonanz 49 (1996), S. 4-10
• Soviet music. “Rabis”, 1927, No. 43 (85), pp. 7-8
• “The organizer of sound” [Letter from N. A. Roslavets dated December 28, 1924 to Juvenal Slavinsky]. Publication and commentary by M. Lobanova. Musical Newspaper, 1990, No. 6 (20), p. 4

• Avraamov A. Friendly open letter to composer N. Roslavets. “Music”, 1915, No. 215, p. 192
• Braudo E. "Organizer of sounds." N. Roslavets. "Bulletin of the Artists", 1925, No. 12, p.14
• Sabaneev L. Russian composers. II. N. Roslavets. The Paris Bulletin , March 31, 1926
• Kaltat L. On the genuine bourgeois ideology c. Roslavets. “Musical education”, 1927, No. 3/4, p. 32-43; him. (abbreviated) transl.: Gojowy D. Neue sowjetische Musik der 20er Jahre. Laaber 1980, S.377-388
• Bely V. “Left” phrase about musical reaction (regarding the article by N. Roslavets “Back to Beethoven”). "Musical education", 1928, No. 1, p. 43-47; him. Per .: Gojowy D. Neue sowjetische Musik der 20er Jahre. Laaber 1980, S. 371-376
• Myaskovsky N. Collection of materials in two volumes, vol. 2. M. 1964
• Karatygin V. Selected articles. L., 1965
• Gojowy DNA Roslavec, ein früher Zwölftonkomponist. Die Musikforschung 22 (1969), S. 22-38
• Gojowy D. Sowjetische Avantgardisten. Musik und Bildung 1969, S. 537-542
• History of music of the peoples of the USSR, vol. 1. M. 1970
• Slonimsky N. Music since 1900. 4th edition. NY 1971
• Gojowy D. Neue sowjetische Musik der 20er Jahre. Laaber 1980
• Lobanova M. L'eredità die NAR ne campo della teoria musicale. Musica / Realtà 12 (1983), p. 41-64; Hungarian Per .: Magyar Zene, 1987, No. 3, 230–243
• Lobanova M. Found manuscripts of N. Roslavets. "Soviet music", 1989, No. 10, p. 32
• Lobanova M. On the legacy and scientific integrity. "Soviet music", 1990, No. 10, p. 113-116
• Lobanova M. Almost a detective story. Musical Newspaper, 1990, No. 4 (18), p. 8 (reprinted in The Russian Musical Newspaper, 1990, No. 5, p. 4
• Wehrmeyer A. Studien zum russischen Musikdenken um 1920. Frankfurt / Main usw .: Peter Lang, 1991, S. 139ff.
• Gojowy D. Sinowi Borissowitsch im Keller entdeckt. Sowjetische Musikwissenschaft in der Perestrojka. Das Orchester 39 (1991), H. 11, S. 1224
• Gojowy D. Wiederentdeckte Vergangenheit. Die russisch-sowjetische Avantgarde der 10er und 20er Jahre rehabilitiert? - In: Neue Musik im politischen Wandel. Veröffentlichungen des Darmstädter Instituts für Neue Musik und musikalische Erziehung, Bd. 32. Mainz 1991, S. 9-22
• Internationale Musik-Festivals Heidelberg 1991 und 1992. Russische Avantgarde. Musikavantgarde im Osten Europas. Dokumentation - Kongressbericht ". Heidelberg 1992
• McKnight Ch. Nikolaj Roslavets. Diss. Cornell Univ., Ithaca / NY, 1994
• Lobanova M. Nikolaj Roslawez. Biographie eines Künstlers - Legende, Lüge, Wahrheit. “Visionen und Aufbrüche. Zur Krise der modernen Musik 1908-1933. " Hrsg. von W. Gruhn ua Kassel 1994, S. 45-62
• Lobanova M. Der Fall Nikolaj Roslawez. Die Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 1995, Nr. one; S. 40-43
• Lobanova M. Nikolaj Roslavetz - Ein Schicksal unter der Diktatur. “Verfemte Musik. Komponisten in den Diktaturen unseres Jahrhunderts. Dokumentation des Kolloquiums vom 9.-12. Januar 1993 in Dresden. " Hrsg. von J. Braun, HT Hoffmann und V. Karbusicky. Frankfurt / Main usw .: Peter Lang, 1995, S. 159-176; 2. Auflage: 1998
• Lobanova M. Nikolaj Andreevič Roslavec und die Kultur seiner Zeit. Mit einem Vorwort von György Ligeti. Frankfurt / Main usw .: Peter Lang, 1997
• Hust chr. Tonalitätskonstruktion in den Klaviersonaten von NA Roslavec. Die Musikforschung 54 (2001), S. 429-437
• Lobanova M. "Das neue System der Tonorganization" von Nikolaj Andreevič Roslavec. Die Musikforschung 54 (2001), S. 400-428
• Lobanova M. Passion for Nikolai Roslavets. Russian Musical Newspaper, 2002, No. 10, p. 7
• Lobanova M. Mystiker • Magier • Theosoph • Theurg: Alexander Skrjabin und seine Zeit. Hamburg 2004, S. 189-232
• Lobanova M. Nicolaj Roslavec und sein tragisches Erbe. Musikgeschichte in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Mitteilungen der internationalen Arbeitsgemeinschaft an der Universität Leipzig ”, H. 10. Leipzig 2005, S. 241–272
• Gojowy D. Musikstunden. Beobachtungen, Verfolgungen und Chroniken neuer Tonkunst. Köln 2008
• Lobanova M. Nikolai Andreevich Roslavets and the culture of his time. - St. Petersburg: Petroglyph, 2011 .-- 352 p. ISBN 978-5-98712-059-0

• Silver Age Silhouette ... Nikolai Roslavets - biography
• Nikolai Roslavets: an exciting page of Russian music
• (eng)
• (English, German)
• (German)