- Prokofiev was one of the most significant Russian composers of the first half of the 20th century

- He studied with Rimsky-Korsakov at the St Petersburg Conservatory

- His best-known works include Peter and the Wolf and the ballet Romeo and Juliet

- Prokofiev was also a first-rate pianist and chess player

- An American reviewer described him as "a blond Russian giant … with the size and build and strength of a football guard"

- He was one of the few composers to return to Russia after the revolution

- His death in 1953 was overshadowed by that of Stalin who died on the same day

By the way, it's not quite clear why a field such as mathematics, music or chess, not requiring a sophisticated grasp of natural language to master, for that reason produces prodigies. Plumbing does not require mastery of natural language, but there are no plumbing prodigies. Obviously, this is not a sufficient condition.

[Event "Moscow"]
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1937-??-??"]
[EventDate "1937.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "Sergey Prokofiev"]
[Black "David Oistrakh"]
[ECO "B72"]

He never wrote a good opera - even if he tried 10 times - in my opinion because he couldn't take the melodrama seriously but had to ironize all the time.

He also was a musical mercenary for Stalisnism - not because he supported it but because he simply didn't care about it. Music was his life.

He is generally regarded as Stravinsky's "little brother" - meaning that he was a lesser composer. I've never understood why. Yes, Stravinsky was more inventive - but Sergei Sergeyevich was much better at writing good melodies.

His more accessible works are Peter and the Wolf, First Symphony, The Lieutenant Kijé Suite, Romeo and Juliet. He had a habit of reusing his melodies in different works.

There is a good web site for him http://www.prokofiev.org Lot's of interesting reading.

Art is for me not a competition.

It is a "language", and music has such an impact on me that the world stops, when I, for instance, hear the violinconcerts by Prokofiev. I have studied the second one in g-minor and the way you describe his bittersweet expressions in his compositions is quite remarkable in this concert. And his sense for rythm ! I love the way you are describing him, but, personally, I would like us to look at art, not as a competition, but as a miraculous way for us human beings to express ourselves.

I have heard the marvellous David Oistrach rehearsing and playing in life his first violinconcert. It was worth to be born only for these moments. I had the honour to speak with David Oistrach after one of his concerts. He was such a gentle and very modest person.

My professor Tibor Berkowitz was an assistant of David Oistrach in Moscow 1956, and he told me a lot about all these great personalities.

What is also so interesting are the different way of interpretations and let us now focus on Prokofiev.

The violinists Heifetz, Perlman, Oistrach, Stern ...
are all very different in their way of playing. I am using "present tense" as great artists never die. All of them catch Prokofiev in their own personal style and I enjoy them in their different ways. That's the great thing about it !

I recommend to listen to his pianoconcerts with, for example, Martha Argerich.

I am not at all surprised that Prokofiev was such an exellent chessplayer. He was a very precise and logic person in all what he did.

If a pupil dared to knock at his door only 30 seconds too early before his lesson, eagerly and shaking of respect, he was told:

"You are 30 seconds too early !"

This combination of exactness and bittersweet way of composing is typical for this giant among so many other giants.

The game between Prokofiev and Oistrach is great, where Oistrach manages to draw in a very difficult position. We should analyse it more. I have started to write something about the artists that you will recognize, if you take a look at this particular game.

I must stop writing about these great personalities, but my emotions carry me up to high dimensions of happiness.

"I must stop writing now, but my emotions carry me up to high dimensions of happiness."

But I love to exchange ideas, emotional and intellectual, about these great artists.

Everyone has their own taste, of course, but I find it surprising that if you like Rachmaninov (as I do myself) you wouldn't appreciate some of Prok's works which are also in a late Romantic style.

As I can see you are a music lover, then if you don't know Prok's "Romeo and Juliet" that was mentioned above by other kibitzers, perhaps you could spend a few dollars on a CD (Naxos, which is nice and cheap) and try it out. I would be surprised if you didn't like it (particularly the gorgeous slow piece at the end "Juliet's Death") - if not, you can take the CD back to the shop and curse me. (Also try Prokofievs' "Classical Symphony" - the name really says it all).

Prokofiev, like Stravinsky, had phases and particular works that are much more "modernist" and more difficult to listen to, and others that are more conventional. For Stravinsky, his ballet music for "Pulcinella" and "The Firebird" is straightforward and elegant - Naxos does a "Best of Stravinsky" that includes extracts from both.

These guys could really compose well in any style they liked!

As to Prokofiev's music, it's better to start with the easy pieces - and then, if you will, move on to the more complicated. I made the mistake of starting with Skythian Suite (which I still don't really like) but it's recommendable to start elsewhere. Even in the pieces which are not so fantastic, there are that special prokofian tone and way of blending the moods which can be quite addictive. He reused his own music on many occasions in different pieces.