Symphony No.4 'Arabescata' - Einojuhani Rautavaara

MDR Sinfonieorchester conducted by Max Pommer

I - : 0:00
II - : 3:13
III - : 8:18
IV - : 11:19

Rautavaara's Fourth Symphony was written in 1962, being written in a totally serial language, it is the first and only Finnish symphony that is completely in that style. At first, he did not call it a symphony, at that time the conventional title of symphony was not well seen. Two years later he gave the title of the fourth symphony to a new work. Six years later he made a revision but it did not satisfy him. That is why in 1986 he removed the work and instead incorporated the original "Arabescata" into his symphonic cycle giving him the number four. It is divided into four movements without tempo markings, only roman numerals. Its title refers to the sound arabesques that form the purely dodecaphonic constructions.

As the Symphonies No.1 and No.2 of Rautavaara stand in sharp distinction from other, so do the composer's Third and Fourth Symphonies. Whereas Rautavaara's Symphony No.3 is a serial composition, its chromaticism is only partial; the composer employs tone rows and variants to select the pitches, but leaves the melodic contours to be composed in a fashion closer to that of tonal music. In his Symphony No.4, however, Rautavaara sought to take serialism as far as he was able in 1962, the year of its composing. Clear beyond argument is the influence of those members of the avant-garde found mostly in Germany, notably those surrounding the Darmstadt school.

The first and third movements are entirely dodecaphonic, both within the sections and, in the case of the third movement, within its component subunits as well. In the final movement is found an intriguing symmetry tying together random rhythmic impulses. For the second movement, Rautavaara employed notation constructed on graph paper, an image prompting the beginning of each of its five continuous sections. The symphony is the shortest of Rautavaara's cycle, closely followed by the second.

The first movement has a totally serial structure. It opens with a percussion figure, marking the first of repeated appearances made by a large and varied battery of instruments. Both the figure and its rhythmic character, dynamics and timbre, are controlled by the formation of dodecaphonic series. Winds, strings, and brass join in growing volume and a gong introduces a striding brass motive that concludes with tuba and horn.

The second movement is divided into five sections that are interpreted without interruption. The origin of the theme is a drawing made in graph paper, which numerically is converted into musical notes. A music that we could call technical, very dehumanized. It opens with a burred passage for trumpet, then piano and vibraphone figures all pass quickly before the introduction of thudding drumbeats foreshadowing a threnody for strings both high and low, coming just past the movement's halfway point. Piano, trumpet, and percussion gradually rise in intensity as the movement concludes.

The third movement continues as in the first its serial character. In this movement, serialism extends to the smallest details. Follow the technical procedures developed by Webern. A growing cacophony is fed by angry percussion, leading toward a climax that falls away for a quiet ending as a solo violin is heard in a meandering melody.

The last movement has a symmetrical structure. Random rhythms appear in it. An instrumentation with great percussion intervention, produces a special but difficult to assimilate sound sensation.It opens with a clashing chord and a battery of drums and pizzicato strings. Hushed upper strings are heard next over plucked double basses. The texture thickens and a brass choir emerges from the massed instruments. Rustling activity returns as a massive crescendo begins and grows, bright and strident, into an angular, dissonant chord. As the chord diminishes, the work ends with soft percussion.

Picture: "Crucifixion" (1999) by the American artist Jeffrey Ackerman.

[fransmeersman]

To my surprise I do find this short symphony not annoying or tiresome. I experienced the created atmosphere not as unpleasant, even fascinating.

[charlottewhyte]

very unusual composer, 1st time I have ever heard his works.

[ronaldbwoodall]

This "symphony"(?) sounds to me like only an annoying attempt to display some orchestral effects without consideration for meaningful content. "Technical" and "dehumanized" indeed; a robot would enjoy it more. I actually do appreciate and enjoy Rautavaara's later symphonies - 5 through 8 - I'll leave the others to others.