Primorsky Musical Institute in the history of the development of academic music in the Far East (1923-1924)

Matveeva Alina Igorevna ORCID: 0000-0001-5780-1843 Assistant Vice-Rector for Research, Victor Popov Academy of Choral Art, Moscow, Russia 690014, Russia, Primorsky Krai, Vladivostok, 121 Krasnogo Znameni Ave., sq. 115 krapiva_alina@list.ru Other publications by this author

There are quite a few interesting pages in the Russian history of the development of academic music, which raise a number of problems related to the preservation of traditions and their continuity. Solving these problems helps to objectify and concretize the events of the difficult period of transition from Imperial Russia to Soviet Russia. Many of these pages are devoted to the peculiarities of regional experience, which has not yet been fully included in the general system of Russian musicology. One of the important pages of such experience is the study of the activities of the regional branches of the Imperial Russian Musical Society (hereinafter RMO/IRMO). Today, the interest in the multidimensional phenomenon of RMO/IRMO is manifested by researchers of global processes that comprehend the activities of society as "a segment of the emerging cultural policy that has ensured the historical continuity of models, forms and methods of organization of music management, educational, information and educational vectors" ^{[1, p. 154]}. It is known that among the vectors of the strategic development of academic music in pre-revolutionary Russia, laid down by the RMO/IRMO, were: educational, philharmonic and educational vectors, conventionally designated by Garmash O.A. as "informational and educational, socially useful creative and educational-professional" ^{[2, p. 69]}. The implementation of the educational and professional vector was aimed at educating concert performers capable of participating in philharmonic concerts at the level of graduates of European conservatories. The proven more than 50-year-old practice of the existence of conservatories at the RMO/IRMO^[1] contributed to the formation of the national performing school.

Interestingly, during the period of Sovietization, in the new socio-political conditions, the implementation of these vectors was significantly slowed down. Today, historians note the closure of a number of higher educational institutions of the former Far Eastern Republic (DVR, 1920-1922): the People's Conservatory and school in Khabarovsk, as well as the Chita People's Conservatory "opened in the capital of the Far Eastern Republic in 1921, then in 1923 transformed into a technical school, closed in 1925 due to financial insolvency" ^{[3, p. 109]}. In Vladivostok, the logical continuation of the inertial preservation of the artistic potential of the IRMO in the new Soviet Russia was the opening of a new institution of higher musical education - the Primorsky Musical Institute (hereinafter referred to as the Institute). The opening of this university repeated the model of the organization of the conservatory at the musical society^[2], with the only difference that it was organized by members of the Rabis Union on September 19, 1923. According to the Minutes of the meeting No. 43 of the Secretariat of the Primorsky Gubprofsovet^{[3] [4, L.1]}, the opening of the Institute was authorized by a new body regulating educational institutions - the Provincial Department of Public Education (Gubono^[4]) on September 20, 1923 ^{[5, L. 12]}. The university was located in the department of the Primorsky Provincial Department of Public Education for Vocational Training ^{[5] [6, l.11]}. A contextual study of archival materials allows the fact of the appearance of the Primorsky Music Institute in Vladivostok to be comprehended as a consequence of the inertially preserved organizational work of the Vladivostok branch of the IRMO (1909-1917), which founded a music school at the Department, and then established a music school at the RMO (1917-1922). The line of continuity between the old and new eras can also be seen in solving the problems of professional training of musicians, and in the preservation of the teaching staff^[6] who worked in tsarist times, but it is corrected by the new political tasks of the Bolshevik government. Now the main goal of creating the Institute was to "spread musical education and raise its cultural level in an aesthetic direction among the working-peasant population of Primorye" (p.2.) ^{[5, l. 11]}.

Turning to this page of the history of the development of academic music in the region allows us to trace the continuity ties that have adapted in the Sovietized society, preserving the vital potential of the previous era. If in the era of the DVR they were strongly supported by professional musicians and government representatives in order to preserve the guidelines established by the IRMO, then with the beginning of the Soviet era, educational strategies, curricula and the general vector of development of the Institute, which existed only until 1924, acquired a class emphasis.

The director of the Institute was appointed "Free Artist ^[7] Zvyagin" ^{[4, L.1]}, who, as stated in the documents: "is appointed by the Gubono from persons with an educational qualification and teaching experience of at least three years. The candidate for the position of Director of the Primorsky Music Institute is nominated by the Rabis Union" ^{[6, l.13]}. A graduate of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, Isai Zvyagin (years of study 1908-1913) ^{[9, l. 1]}, by the will of fate, was the bearer of the tradition of the IRMO, which consisted of the St. Petersburg Conservatory. This means that the professional continuity of the pre-revolutionary tradition is beyond doubt.

In more detail about the composition of the staff of teachers who have achieved the opening of the Institute, as well as about the difficulties of its existence, says the Act of the survey of the Primorsky Music Institute dated 14.05.1924. According to this document, the opening of the Institute was allowed to a team of teachers in the person of: I.M. Zvyagin, E.G. Khutsieva, A.M. Polyakova, S.N. Lugarti, "for the connection of the Institute with the Rabis Union, the latter singled out comrade. Barefoot" ^{[6, l. 12]}.

The activities of the Institute were regulated not by the Charter (like the Statutes of the RMO of 1859 and the IRMO of 1973), but by a Temporary Provision ^{[6, l.11]}. If the purpose of the RMO, spelled out in the Charter of the society in 1859 was: "the development of musical education and taste for music in Russia" ^{[11, L.4]}, and in the Charter of the IRMO (called Imperial since 1873) it is spelled out: "to promote the spread of musical education in Russia, to promote the development of all branches of musical art and to encourage capable Russian artists (writers and performers) and teachers of musical subjects" ^{[13, p. 1]}, then the first lines of the Provisional Position of the Primorsky Music Institute (Chapters I, paragraph 2) immediately fix the ideologized class approach of the new government: "The Primorsky Music Institute aims to spread music education <...> among the workers and peasants the population of Primorye" ^{[7, l.11]}. In a cover letter to the Primorsky Provincial Department of Public Education dated November 03, 1923, the directorate of the Institute gives the following percentage of students: out of a total of 124 people, 85% are "members of industrial (professional) unions, or children of such" ^{[14, L.2]}. It is noteworthy that the training at the Institute was paid and the fee was charged in accordance with the salary scale ^[8] of students. According to the regulations of the Institute (Part VI, paragraph 3), "persons admitted to the Institute pay according to their property status. By resolution of the Council of the [Institute – approx. author]" ^{[6, l.15]} the conditions of admission and tuition fees were established by the Gubprofsovet ^{[13, l. 2 (ob)]}. The standard fee was 3 rubles. The following discounts were provided for trade union members: "Those receiving 17 times each. the grid is used in special technical classes – a discount of up to 50% of the normal fee. Receiving over 17 categories. – up to 25%. Tuition in collective classes for the first category is 2 rubles instead of 3 rubles." ^{[4, L.1]}, "the poorest students are exempt from fees, due to the scholarship established by the Institute for the names of the leaders of the revolution and great musicians" ^{[5, L.12 (ob)]}, also from the position of the University (÷.VI , item 3) it follows that the number of free free seats was set by the Council "with equal musical data, preference in admission is given to Red Army soldiers and trade union members and their children" ^{[6, L.15]}.

Education was carried out in a number of specialties: piano class; singing class; violin, cello and double bass class; brass and woodwind instruments class; special composition class; conducting class. There were also compulsory subjects for studying: choral singing, musical literacy and an instructor class.

According to the Temporary Position of the Institute (Part II, item 7), the subjects were divided into basic and auxiliary. There were 3 courses (stages of study) in all the main subjects at the Primorsky Music Institute: preparatory (which students can enter without training), junior year (admission according to the specified program) and senior (for admission or transfer to which "one should take an exam according to the established program") ^{[6, L. 11 (about)]}.

The term of study at the Institute was fixed (including the preparatory course), but did not exclude the early completion of courses. Training for a period of 7 years was conducted in special classes: piano, violin, cello; studied composition for 5 years; studied in special classes for 4 years: solo singing, double bass, wind instruments and instructor class; 3 years was a full course of conducting, choral singing; musical literacy was studied for one year.

The analysis of the curricula of the Primorsky Music Institute ^{[15, l. 3-9]} reveals their substantial similarity with the pre-revolutionary programs of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, established at the RMO in 1862. One of the conditions of study was "compulsory classes in the choral class for all students except orchestra members" ^{[11, p. 83]}. There is a difference in the specialties presented: a special music theory class was not opened at the Primorsky Music Institute, as well as organ classes for a special piano class. Due to the lack of developed curricula of the Institute, it is not possible to make an accurate comparative analysis. But according to the pattern of the curricula of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, which "were subjected to processing, sometimes significantly <...> however, their essence was before 1917. it remained unchanged" ^{[11, p. 83]}, and with the help of the list of Auxiliary Subjects of the Primorsky Music Institute, it is possible, for clarity, to reconstruct the curriculum (Table 1) in the specialty of solo singing in order to understand the degree of difference:

Table 1.

A comparative analysis of the submitted documents shows that, in fact, the list of disciplines of the Primorsky Music Institute has no significant differences, except for the terms of mastering individual disciplines, and repeats the time-tested educational program developed in the conservatories of the RMO/IRMO. This observation indicates continuity in the adaptation of educational models during the transition from Imperial Russia to Soviet Russia.

It is known from history that by the time the Institute was opened by the People's Art Section^[9] of the State Academic Council of the People's Commissariat of Education (hereinafter referred to as GUS Narkompros) on September 9, 1922, curricula of musical institutions were developed and approved ^{[16, L. 71-82]}, sent from the central department to the regions. The presented plans describe 3 levels of musical education and the content within these levels – three stages of musical education: school (I, II stages) – technical school (I, II stages) – conservatory. The educational level of the Conservatory contained 5 departments: scientific-theoretical, creative, performing, instructor-pedagogical. Compulsory subjects were defined for each department, and programs for each trimester were described.

The tasks of the People's Commissariat of Education were to conduct "methodological and programmatic work on issues of social education, vocational education, political and educational, research and scientific and artistic activities. Basically, the activity of GUS was reduced to the development, consideration and approval of both the fundamental issues of the public education system in the country and the main program and methodological materials along the entire line of public education; to the unification of the work of local methodological bodies; to the general guidance of the program and methodological work of the departments of the People's Commissariat of Education; to the approval of candidates for teaching positions in universities and to the general management of the training of scientists" ^{[17, p. 557]}. Today, researchers in the field of history and pedagogy of the first years of the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR characterize them as "a period of denial of all that valuable that was accumulated by the national school over a long period of its existence through the efforts of prominent Russian teachers and countless practical teachers" ^{[18, p. 95]}. "The Narkompros, it seems, was the ideological center that embodied the provisions of the "proletarian culture" that became the basis of the cultural revolution of power" ^{[19, p. 246]}.

Practice shows that the curricula prescribed by GUS were not followed at the Primorsky Music Institute. This can be seen from the inspection of the Institute by the central authorities. The document of such verification is the Act of examination of the Primorsky Music Institute dated 14.05.1924 ^{[5, l. 12]}. From the Act (p. III. Curriculum and programs) it follows that the main reason for non-compliance with the prescriptions of the People's Commissariat of Education was the lack of more recent materials, the connivance of higher authorities. "The Commission was presented with a curriculum developed by the Team based on materials from old conservatories and personal experience of the team. More recent materials, according to the statement of Comrade. Zvyagina, is not available in the center <...> According to the statement of Comrade. Zvyagina Zavgubono [A.A. Korolkov – approx. the author] has always said: "Exist for now as a private educational institution" <...> Materials have been received from the Gubprofobr, but no fixed plan has yet been developed" ^{[5, l. 12]}.

The lifetime of the Primorsky Music Institute, which preserved the traditions of musical education of the past era, lasted only one academic year (1923-1924). Already in August 1924 The All-Russian Union of Art Workers in a letter to Gubono informs about the disbandment of the Music Institute, which "in the practice of work did not create an economic opportunity for further existence on self-financing <...>. The issue of opening a Music College of the I-th and 2nd stages, subject to the provision of free premises for such, can be discussed at joint meetings of representatives of both interested parties" ^{[20, L. 86]}. The opening of the college did not take place. Following the closure of the university, the city music school was opened, which became "the core from which the entire system of state music education in Primorye later developed" ^[21].

The uniqueness of the historical situation that has developed in Primorye makes it possible to analyze both the issue of continuity of traditions and the issue of their improvement, about which M.V. Bondar writes: "The traditions of professional musical training, laid down in the 2nd half of the XIX century and improved during the Soviet period, retain their potential until today" ^{[22, p. 3]}. If the issue of continuity is beyond doubt and is confirmed by the very attempt to repeat the pre-revolutionary experience of establishing a music university under a public organization (Rabis), then the issue of improvement seems debatable both in terms of the absence of other examples of such reproduction in the Soviet era of the model of a university under a public organization, and in terms of the new practice that gave autonomy to universities in the Soviet era.

It is known that the creation of universities under the RMO/IRMO was economically ensured, with varying degrees of efficiency, by a system of public-private partnership, with the inclusion of sponsorship mechanisms.  In the new historical situation, this system turned out to be unfit for reproduction. The economic difficulties associated with self-financing have become the main obstacle in the translation of the previous model, tested in other political and economic conditions. It took time to find new solutions.

The position of V.A. Koroleva ^{[23; 25]} is quite understandable, interpreting the facts of the closure of higher music courses and conservatories of previous models (Chita, Khabarovsk) as "the destruction of the education system that has been developing for a quarter of a century", reduced "to a single and unified primary form – school" ^{[25, p.108]}. It is quite obvious that the loss of the educational levels of the college/college - UNIVERSITY did not solve the problem of training concert and performing personnel in Primorye. The opening in 1962 of the Far Eastern Pedagogical Institute of Arts in the interrupted progressive movement of the development of academic music in the region was an important milestone, which in Soviet times confirmed the viability of the potential of the educational system leading from the first Russian conservatories.

^[1]As is known, the first conservatory opened by the Russian Musical Society was the St. Petersburg Conservatory in 1862, then the Moscow Conservatory was opened in 1966 at the Moscow Branch of the Russian Academy of Music.

^[2]Thus, the model of opening a conservatory at the Musical Society (IRMO, and then Rabis), which bore fruit for more than 50 years in the St. Petersburg and Moscow branches of pre-revolutionary Russia, was also adopted at the beginning of the Soviet period in the Far East. However, it turned out to be economically not universal in the new socio-political conditions, in which the system of public-private partnership created by the IRMO was impossible.

^[3]Gubprofsovet – Provincial Council of Trade Unions.

^[4]Gubono – Provincial Department of Public Education, an authority and a structural unit in the all-Union system of the People's Commissariat of Education "in connection with the formation of the Primorsky Province by the Dalrevkom on March 1, 1923, the provincial Department of Public Education (Gubono) was created. He was subordinate to the Gubernatorial Executive Committee and the People's Commissariat of Education of the RSFSR" ^[7].

^[5]Profobr is a local management body of vocational education, subordinate to Glavprofobr (Main Directorate of Vocational Education). Glavprofobr was a part of the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR in the 1920s-1930s, it was established as part of the People's Commissariat from January 29, 1920, in Primorye, this structure appeared after the self-dissolution of the DIA and joining the RSFSR ^[8].

^[6]Modern researchers note that in the period of pre-Soviet Russia, "in different years, professional musicians, graduates of St. Petersburg (P.D. Dobrosyslov, I.N. Ustyuzhaninov, O.M. Gezekhus-Kucherova, E.G. Khutsieva, A.A. Epinatiev), Moscow (N.S. Lysenko) taught in classes at IRMO, V.A. Pudov), Paris (F. Hendon, V. Mergout) and Dresden (K. Schubert) conservatories" ^{[24, p. 191]}. Among the teachers of the Vladivostok Music School who participated in the musical life of the city both during the period of Imperial Russia and during Soviet Russia, one can note: graduates of the St. Petersburg Conservatory: Dobrosyslov P.D., Dobrotvorskaya V.A., Knauf-Kaminskaya M.F., Kudrevatykh M.N., Panafidina L.N., Chernenko Ya.

^[7]Upon completion of the full course of the higher department of the Conservatory and successful completion of internal and external (with the presence of the public) examinations, graduates of the conservatory were awarded the title of "Free Artist" ^{[11, p. 60]}.

^[8]In 1921-1922, in the RSFSR, "a new wage scale was introduced, approved at the III Congress of Trade Unions (April 1920) and containing 17 gradations (from student to specialist of the highest level)," the grid of categories did not include persons who held senior administrative positions, such as the People's Commissar of the party, etc. ^{[14, p. 180]}.

^[9]From the Decree of February 11, 1921 on the People's Commissariat for Education (paragraphs 4, 5): "The bodies of the People's Commissariat of Education are the academic center, the organizational center and 4 main Departments <...> The Academic Center or the center for general theoretical and programmatic leadership is divided into two sections: A) The Scientific Section (State Academic Council) with three subsections: a) scientific and political, b) scientific and technical and c) scientific and pedagogical" ^[8]. Thus, in 1921, the scientific and artistic section that appeared later and its activities have not yet been described. However, in the decree of October 25, 1925, this structural unit already appears in the III division of Chapter 1.