The premiere in Moscow was cancelled as a result of official criticism against it and the period of national mourning that followed the death of Sergo Ordzhonikidze.

At the dress rehearsal there was a so-called "discussion" of the work, which consisted of the fact that some of the performing orchestra members behaved incredibly arrogantly and declared that this was "not music" at all, that it was "nonsense", that it was "100% formalism", etc.

like that.The symphony was criticised in an article in Soviet Art, written by the Russian musicologist Daniel Zhitomirsky five days after a rehearsal in which he had been present.

[4][8] Zhytomyrsky accused Lyatoshynsky of formalism, and described the symphony as an "empty and far-fetched work" that made an "imposing and complex sound" in which "constant ups and downs, multi-meaningful thunderous climaxes reflect the author's claim to depth of thought".

The official reason for the cancellation was that the concert would have taken place during a period of national mourning for Sergo Ordzhonikidze,[11] the politician regarded by the public as the driving force behind the industrialization of the Soviet Union, who had died suddenly on 18 February.

[5] In April 1941, two months before the German invasion of the USSR, a concert was held at the Kyiv Philharmonic, when Lyatoshynsky conducted the Second Symphony and a number of his other works.

He noted that he met with few problems, apart from having to use a cramped rehearsal space in Odesa, and that bad weather in Lviv meant the audience was smaller than expected.

[15] The symphony's perceived faults were described in an official government statement:[10][11] The anti-national formalist direction in Ukrainian musical art appeared first of all in the works of the composer B. Lyatoshynsky.

The piece is disharmonious, cluttered with unwarranted thunderous sounds of the orchestra, which depress the listener, and in relation to the melody, it is a symphony and colourless.Lyatoshynsky wrote afterwards to Glière, "As a composer, I am dead, and I do not know when I will be resurrected.

[19] The darkest of his five symphonies,[10] it is a complex work that, in the opinion of the music historian Anthony Phillips, reflects "the individual's often conflicting relationship with reality".

This history of early critical opinion and the consequences of the symphony reflect the general situation in that period of Ukrainian culture, when each new work was judged by its effectiveness in the promulgation of the canons of Soviet Realism.

Censors were not satisfied with Lyatoshynsky's success in portraying a complex and eccentric reality and a generally insulting atmosphere throughout the symphony, a work turbulent, nervous, filled with deep pain and flashes of protest, yet, equally clearly, showing the composer's love of life and his ideal of artistic and ethical responsibility to his own people.Lyatoshynsky's First Symphony, with its dynamic finale that conformed with emerging Soviet expectations in large-scale orchestral works,[21] is more tuneful than the Second, and more influenced by the style of the Russian composer Alexander Scriabin.

[1][23] Lyatoshynsky used the bass clarinet to obtain a distinct orchestral sound, and in combination with the bassoon, a grimly dramatic effect is produced.

[5][10] In the Andante, the troubled nature of the first movement returns, whilst a tune attempts to lift the listener's spirits as the end of the symphony is approached.