Symphony No. 3 (Lyatoshynsky)

Criticised by the Soviet authorities on ideological grounds, the composer was forced to rework the symphony, and to remove the subtitle of the finale.

This work in the first edition made a deep but slightly gloomy impression on me, and I imagined the author as a withdrawn, strict, and dismal person.

"[5] Despite this, shortly after the premiere, the Union of Composers of Ukraine condemned the work as "anti-people" and called it "formalistic rubbish that needs to be burned.

"[1] The composer was forced to rework the symphony, and remove the subtitle, in order for the work to be performed in public again.

[3] The choice of venue was deliberate—as after the symphony had been "approved" in the Russian SSR, the composer could no longer be persecuted for this work in Kyiv.

After the performance of the symphony in the new edition, the attitude towards it suddenly changed, and it was dubbed a significant work for Ukrainian symphonic music.

[11] Lyatoshynsky used polyphonic techniques for presenting and unfolding the material: themes are superimposed on each other, transformed, and complicated by imitations, canons, and fugato.

It follows what the musicologist Andrew Burn has described as a "turbulent, impetuous forces of destruction" and is heard on low flutes and bassoons.

The initial fast tempo returns, and the ideas of the introduction are developed in such a way as to suggest a great struggle is taking place.

[15] Gordiychuk described the revised finale as being characterized by "festive and picturesque straightforwardness of the plan, largely devoid of the drama that marked all the previous parts of the work".

The symphony concludes by gaining momentum, culminating in the joyful return of the folk music heard in the first movement, amid the sound of bells.