MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK — MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL X, LJUBLJANA 1974 UDK 78.03 (497.12) Ramovš THE STYLISTIC ORIENTATION OF PRIMOŽ RAMOVŠ Andrej R i j a v e c (Ljubljana) The title of the present article appears to be reasonably clear. Still, from the very beginning one could take completely relative courses if one questioned conceptions such as "style", "orientation" or "stylistic orientation", conceptions which have been over and over again but neither completely nor satisfactorily defined. As many authors, so many variants, be it one consults Yugoslav lexical literature where in the Musical Encyclopaedia (Muzička enciklopedija) under the entry "style" one reads that "style in music is the totality of creative traits which distinguishes the activity of one composer from the activity of others"1 be it that one consults such a standard reference work as Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart; here under "Definition" one finds: "Der Stil einer Komposition ist eine unterscheidende Eigenschaft, die die Eigenart der Kräfte, welche eine Musik gestaltet haben, darstellt"; a little further it is conceded that style can be considered also in a "purely objective sense", i. e. it can be defined through concrete structural characteristics.2 Or, for example, Enciclopedia della musica, Ricordi: "Stile — L'insieme dei caratteri che concorrono a definire l'individualita di un artista creatore, di un'opera, di un periodo".3 In his Harvard Dictionary of Music Willi Apel disposes of the problem with the help of Webster's dictionary — "Distinctive or characteristic mode of presentation, construction or execution in any art",4 whereas Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians apparently evades this tricky question. And so on and so forth. The theoretical points of departure for this subject thus appear to be unsolved and this could logically lead to the conclusion that it is really futile to pursue this task, for if the initial criteria are not clear and solid what can be then said about the superstructure! Still, in spite of inadequate "tools" let us set to work so that we 1 Vol. 2, Zagreb 1963, 644. 2 Bd. 12, 1965, 1302. 3 Vol. 4, Milano 1964, 290 4 Cambridge, Mass. 1958, 714. 80 keep in mind the fogginess of stylistic epitheta, which means that stylistic labelling will be used only as an auxiliary means of presentation. Finally, to open problems is more important than to close off solutions, for due to the characteristic stylistic development of Ramovš's personality the present article might at the end, despite its theoretical deficiencies, turn out to be a contribution even to this, seemingly weaker, point of the theme in question. Modern scientifically oriented psychology of behavior has already proved that verbal articulation of impressions and of what has been intelectually attained has not only a descriptive but also a cultivating quality; which means: the richer our vocabulary the more differentiated our sonorous experiences and musical thinking.5 Whereas the first half of the theme as formulated might be questionable any doubt about the choice of the composer Primož Ramovš seems to be superfluous. He is known to be the leading living Slovene composer, and belongs to one of those forming the summit of modern and even avantgarde Yugoslav musical trends. Hardly is there a festival of contemporary Yugoslav music where his compositions would not be prominent. The ever-increasing quantity of his compositions has been accompanied by successes abroad, and his name represents an efficacious and at the same time a worthy "export product" in the repertoire of many a Yugoslav soloist and ensemble. At the same time it should be emphasized that he is a composer who has become and remained modern without "serving abroad", a composer (and this is the key to his selection) who represents a most continuous personification of all those efforts and ideas advocated between the two wars by composers such as Slavko Osterc, Josip Slavenski, Miloje Milojević and a few others. Because of his importance and repeatedly proven musical qualities Ramovš is interesting both as a Slovene as well as a Yugoslav composer. And it is precisely Ramovš's inner development, the development of his stylistic searchings which is all too little known. The analysis of the latter is worth the effort for it will give an answer to the theme formulated in the title: it will draw attention to the phases of Ramovš's development and to the pluralism of his stylistic orientation, of which the most recent stage cannot be adequately defined even through a most loose application of traditional stylistic labels.6 Which demands a revaluation of stylistic conceptions and causes doubt about encyclopaedic entries, especially when treating later and the latest music written in this century, which again does not negate the reasonableness of this article. Primož Ramovš was a pupil of Slavko Osterc; perhapse his most successful, at least in the field of composition. Just before the end of Ramovš's Ljubljana studies the occupation came — in spring 1941, 5 zfmth (Zeitschrift für Musiktheorie), Jg. 3, 1972/2, 18. 6 Cvetko D., Zum Problem der Wertung der neuen Musik, International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music, Vol. IV., No. 1, 1973, 10. 6 Muzikološki zbornik 81 only to be followed soon by the death of Osterc. Had it not been that way, the twenty-year-old Ramovš would have probably gone to Prague as many before him... Coincidences, the niceties of which belong into the composer's biography, led the young Ramovš to the summer course "per gli stranieri" in Siena, to Vito Frazzi, an admirer of Richard Strauss. The first contact with a foreign country was rather disappointing, both as regards the general musical level and the "belcantistic" stylistic orientation. His "stile patologico", as they labelled it, found no place here. Next, he spent two years of private studies with the neoclassically thinking Alfredo Casella in Rome; here, with his innate dispositions, he worked on the early scores of Stravinski, Prokofiev and Hindemith. All this, as well as the previous strict Osterc's school which always encouraged creative independence, made a successful start possible. This point is characteristically reflected in the Third Divertimento for string orchestra (1943), from its neoclassical clarity of form to the sublimated dancing lightness of the quick movements, from the tonality of language to the typically (neo)baroque falling ostinatos, from the captivating, sometimes slightly lyrical but always jovial flow of sound to the characteristic motoric motion. The most extensive composition of Ramovš 's neoclassical phase is his Third Symphony (1948). In the search for additional, generalizing stylistic coordinates one could i in connection with the march episode of the Presto speak of analogies with the more "daring" Prokofiev or "naturalistic" Shostakovich. A kind of bucolic lyricism is still present. However, dramatic intensifications and erruptions of sound, so typical of the composer's newest works, cause more and more surprise. The concluding movement contains an exquisite stylistic treat which, considering Ramovš s present orientation, is all the more surprising: the victorious, dorian conclusion with salient wind, brass and timpani is a striking example of the hymnal socialist realism. After this digression two, nowadays already classical, scores come to the fore: the Sinfonietta (1951) and Musiques funebres (1955). The former is stylistically purer than for example the Third Symphony and certainly more dissonant than the previously mentioned Divertimento which represents a more tender, suite-like variant of Ramovš's neoclassicism. It must have been under the influence of his Italian studies that in spite of everything he did slightly deviate from Osterc. Here, in the Sinfonietta, this temporal traditionalism begins to crumble. Many a well-known trait has remained: in form, in echoes of indefinable folkloricity, which reminds of hindemithian neoclassical playfulness (Vivace), in the neobaroque motoric flow, and last but not least, in passages near to neat dance episodes in Prokofiev's "Romeo and Juliet" (not to mention the typical harmonic progresssions) as reflected for example in the second trio of the already mentioned third, Vivace movement:7 82 There is more linearity in the movement of the voice-parts; tonality no longer rests on chords by thirds but, taking into account other intervals, especially seconds and fourths, revolves around a chosen tonal centre. The already exploited traditional language forces Ramovš to quit the tertian system. In harmony, this is reflected in chords by fourths. Still, in the Sinfonietta they are not "real", for one actually has to do with doubled "barren" fourths and fifths MODERATO (J--52) con sord a- ¦A A ^ con sord pizzC^'empre) 7 Sinfonietta, score, DSS (Društvo slovenskih skladateljev) 708, Ljubljana 1965, 59. 83 that bestow for example a static, pastoral, although non-programmatic, character on the second movement.8 FODERATO (} = 66) 8 Jb., 41—42. Though aesthetically successful, in Musiques funebres Ramovš's compositional crisis is even more pending. Neobaroque is only the fifth movement, in the form of a ciaccona, which means that the composer is more or less abandoning traditional forms. The motoric, perpetuum-mobile-like pulsation is still present, but it operates always with the same, only quantitatively, changing intervals (especially seconds), mostly in a field of equal, functionally detached half-tones. "Barren" intervals are there too as well as chords by fourths, both in the role of islands of peace within more dissonant harmonies, immanent supporters of Ramovš's dramatic vein. Only a little, and even these will be forsaken — being all too neutral and inexpressive.9 Searching and groping for the unknown, in the following years Ramovš does not write symphonic works. Abstract pondering and theoretical advocacy, the latter very often only a camouflage of one's creative impotence, is not to his liking, So, he writes chamber compositions. These kinds of analogies, from the past and the present, are at hand and significantly characterize Ramovš, as a practical musician. During these searchings a stylistic branch springs up which in the last instance, in spite of its own "hopelessness", temporally coincides with a composition that helps Ramovš to further productive years. At the beginning of this backwater stands the Sonatina for French horn and piano (1959), which represents the final farewell to traditional tonality. Here, an enlarged and complicated sonata form copes with atonality, whereas obsolete dodecaphonic principles are present in the Variations for piano (1960) and Con-. MOLTO LARG0(J=44) sempre sempre tras t s for piano trio (1961).10 Only a step and Ramovš too will enter 9 Musiques funebres, score, DSS 462, HG (Hans Gerig) 683, 42—43. 10 Contrasts for violin, violoncello and piano, DSS 279, Ljubljana 1966, 2. ¦ 85 the waters of exceedingly intelectualized composing.11 Pentektasis for piano (1961) is his first and last totally organized composition. He himself had to convince himself about the sense and non-sense of this system, of its possibilities and its limitations. The fact that four years earlier Pierre Boulez had inscribed his name in music history with his famous lecture "Alea" was for Ramovš irrelevant. More interesting is the fact that Ramovš gave up all efforts in this direction at a time when extolling of schematic serial principles was definitely over also in Darmstadt.12 It was during this period that external coincidences helped Ramovš to overcome this cul de sac, without making a pilgrimage to Darmstadt or some other avantgarde centre in West Germany, of which neither the theorizing aptitudes nor the compositional results were much to his liking or close to his aesthetic ideas. The "salvation" was to come from elsewhere; it came with the helpful shock Ramovš experienced in contact with new Polish music and the propitious zephyr that began to blow in Yugoslav music wdth the birth of the Zagreb Biennale and other similar festivals. A visit to the Warsaw Autumn in 1960 only gave the last impetus to forces already latent in his musical striving. In Ramovš s idiom one can thus follow a development commencing with an evergreater evasion of tonality, continuing through a shorter, natural episode of atonality, dodecaphony and total organization only to ascend the world of new sound. On the transition between the two worlds, yet within the main current of his development, stands the Concerto for violin, viola and orchestra (1961), the first visible result of his visit to Warsaw "although the technical traits characteristic of his recent works are not yet discernible".13 The stylistic crisis spoken of in Musique funebres is even more evident in this Concerto, as it is bounding with the past, and symptomatic of the future as well as reflecting Ramovš's simultaneous ato-nally-dodecaphonic activity.14 It is already in the above mentioned Sonatina that the lyrical note/had vanished and that the composition liad changed into an atonal (though not athematic), arabesque-like and perhapse slighty dull motoric flow of sound. A similar motoric flow is also in the Concerto; it is still continuous, still an imperative that "prosecutes". Nevertheless, one passage in the score forecasts the qualitative change which is to affect this neobaroque motoric pulsation: it will become "disoriented" and, turning into a swarming layer of sound, enrich Ramovš's means of expression.15 Additional 11 Karkoschka E., Über Exaktheit in Musikanalyse, zfmth, Jg. 4, 1973/2 3 12'Dibelius U., Moderne Musik 1945—1965, München 1966, 222—225. 13 Petrić I., Primož Ramovš, Koncertni list Slovenske filharmonije 1969/70, 7, 5. 14 Cf. the incipit of the viola on page 3 of the Concerto for violin, viola and orchestra, DSS 187, Ljubljana 1964. 15 Ib., 52. 86 CLNE VL VLA VLC ^ ffo^g^rdffifc* ^'Ć&Č&ČE: Ä fcfe^j^pgiEffp. VL \ rrfr f fr^b^ fa- f- r mfa-f- f t> #r ^itr r rr-f^— |Š) i ¦ i i s—^—• g ' ' '—"' ..............••' ' 1 VLC ^^~ ~"^~^ CB VL VLA VLC CB ^ggefeggg^g ^g^glg^fegi l^fe^lli h»- r f ^ fa -f- fi fa+. ?. *fa *. t: f: *L¦L>LL. 4L