As he began his protracted convalescence, Myaskovsky's greatest worry, aside from his health, was how he would support himself. His weakened physical condition left him effectively housebound throughout the winter of 1931–2. At the insistence of his doctor, he took extended leave of absence from the conservatoire and relinquished most of his duties at Muzgiz, staying on only as an advisor to the editorial board. He had been thinking of leaving both institutions for some time, but his illness decided matters. His overwhelming desire, he told Asafiev, was to distance himself from everything – the mere thought of having a conversation with Muzgiz's director Verkhotursky ‘sickened’ him. Nonetheless, he needed to earn money somehow. For the time being, he had little choice but to try to eke out a living as a freelance composer. Although Myaskovsky's position was undoubtedly difficult, it was by no means hopeless. Over the previous two years he had successfully performed a delicate balancing act, managing to maintain good professional relations while making minimal concessions to circumstances. The reluctance of the senior management of the conservatoire and of Muzgiz to dispense with his services, notwithstanding the staff purges at both institutions, is noteworthy. Although his work was not being performed, he could not complain of any lack of willingness from Muzgiz to publish it, as he told Prokofiev. He had also managed to avoid becoming the target of a campaign of public vilification by VAPM, even if the handful of mass songs and marches that he had produced hardly constituted persuasive evidence of thoroughgoing artistic and political ‘reform’. VAPM's stranglehold on musical life persisted (the government concert agency seemed in a state of paralysis and even the radio ensembles had virtually ceased performing contemporary repertoire of any interest), but there were grounds for cautious optimism that an improvement in conditions might be imminent.

In spite of the oppressive climate of the Cultural Revolution, state financial support for the arts had grown appreciably over the last two years. When the new arts directorate Glaviskusstvo was set up in 1929, it announced a range of initiatives – including competitions and prizes, subsidised exhibitions, and commissioning schemes – which significantly augmented artists’ potential sources of income. These measures were prompted by the pragmatic acknowledgement that the arts could not thrive without state patronage, now that the last vestiges of private patronage had disappeared.