(Original posted on June 9, 2006)
I’ve been listening to Einojuhani Rautavaara (1928- ), specifically his Symphonies No. 3, 7, and 8, Piano Concertos No. 2 and 3, and others. The NAXOS website offers extensive audio samples, making it convenient to encounter unknown composers. One can explore based on public reputation or browse as if randomly opening an encyclopedia.
So, in my endeavor to listen to various Neo-Romantic, Neo-Simplicity, and Minimalist works, I initially followed information about composers like Pärt, Górecki, and Adams, and in doing so, I eventually arrived at Rautavaara.
Due to my lack of knowledge, I wasn’t aware that Rautavaara is perhaps the most renowned composer from the Nordic countries. Moreover, his sound world is quite, or rather, very much to my liking. While wishing I had discovered him sooner, I also feel a complex emotion, thinking that perhaps it was good that I was able to keep my distance from the “Symphony No. 7 boom,” as I’m not fond of trends. Furthermore, I became more interested in Rautavaara’s personal musical history than his position in the stream of music history movements like Neo-Romanticism or Neo-Simplicity.
He underwent a considerably romantic stylistic change around the 1970s. However, even in the severe serial sounds of his early works, I can feel harmonies that have the flavor of the present Rautavaara. This makes me think that he has forged a stubborn sensibility in a good way. Incidentally, it’s something I also felt when I previously listened to Sculthorpe’s music: when faced with a composer who expresses lyrical or personal romanticism, I feel the urge to trace their compositional trajectory. Perhaps this is a desire stemming from my own desperate wish for musical self-renewal.
Taking this opportunity, I intend to explore many of Rautavaara’s other works, as well as the works of other Nordic composers.
Postscript: From Serialism to Tonality ~ What Flows Beneath the Surface
(Postscript added on May 15, 2025)
To reiterate, when thinking of Rautavaara, many people may have the image of a relatively accessible contemporary composer, known for his later works incorporating bird calls and possessing a grand, beautiful sound. However, tracing back his career, there was a period in his early years when he was deeply involved in twelve-tone technique and serial music. The superficial musical language of his early works and later works is completely different, so much so that at first glance, one might not believe they were written by the same composer. While his early serial works possess a certain strictness and rigidity, his later works feature clear melodies and chords and are filled with lyrical and vast sounds.
Let’s consider why his style changed so dramatically, and whether there exists some common “Rautavaara-ness” flowing between the works of these two different periods.
Looking at Rautavaara’s stylistic changes from the perspective of how he selected and mastered certain “techniques” and “theories” for his own expression, I believe interesting insights can be gained. For example, the following points can be cited as commonalities behind the major shift from the early serial period to the later tonal period.
A. Strong Commitment to Sound and Ability to Construct Texture
Serial technique is a method of strictly composing pitch, rhythm, etc., based on numerical series. However, even in his early period, it seems Rautavaara had a strong interest not just in mechanical manipulation, but in the sound itself that was born from it. The texture created by his unique layering of sounds and combination of instruments is characteristic even from his early period. This is true in his later works as well; while using clear chords, Rautavaara’s orchestration is always unique, creating acoustic spaces with transparency and depth. Perhaps the sensibility for meticulously handling sound particles and layers cultivated in the early period led to the rich texture of the later period.
B. Awareness of Form and Ability to Construct the Entire Work
Rautavaara’s works, even those with different surface sounds, often share a consistent strong sense of form. His music feels constructed based on a certain “order” and “logic.” In the serial period, the pitch series supported this logic, but in the later period, he chose freer forms and structures that followed his own inner musical flow. However, the ability to maintain the integrity of the entire work and make it sound like a unified whole has been consistent since the early period. I believe this demonstrates a fundamental compositional stance of seeking musical inevitability from within chaotic sound.
C. Constant Yearning for “Mysticism” and “Transcendence”
One of the important elements in discussing Rautavaara’s works is the mystical and somewhat transcendent atmosphere that flows consistently through his music. Even in his early serial works, there are moments that evoke an introspective and cosmic sound, not merely a random collection of sounds. In his later works, by using beautiful melodies and grand chords, this mysticism is expressed in a way that resonates more directly with the listener’s heart. The themes range widely, from the fusion of human and nature (birds) in “Cantus Arcticus” to the introspective and mythical worldview appearing in his operatic works. Regardless of technique, it can be said that Rautavaara always aimed for music that touches the spiritual world beyond daily life or the origin of the world.
D. Latent or Manifest Awareness of Melody
In serial music, “melody” in the traditional sense is often fragmented. However, in Rautavaara’s early works, it is possible to sense a kind of melodic “presence” within the pitch relationships extracted from the pitch series. In his later works, this melodicity fully blossoms, becoming a comfortable “song” to the listener’s ear. However, his melodies are not merely easy to understand; they possess a unique sense of floating and unpredictable beauty. This suggests that the keen sense of pitch relationships cultivated in the early period may be connected to his unique melodic writing in the later period.
──Viewed in this way, Rautavaara’s stylistic transition appears not merely as following trends or pandering to the audience, but as a result of flexibly selecting various techniques as tools to realize his own inner musical vision. Perhaps serial technique and tonal language were simply different means for him to shape the essence of music he pursued, such as “sound,” “form,” and “mysticism.” Rautavaara’s work teaches us anew the importance of listening to the underlying thought and aesthetic sense of a composer, rather than being bound by superficial style, to understand what the composer is trying to express. By listening and comparing his early and later works, one can sense the composer’s individuality that transcends technical differences and the diverse expressive possibilities that music possesses.
