Fr. Weber vs. Fr. Kelly?

Felipe Gasper

Is it just me, or have Fr. Weber and Fr. Kelly just published resources that fill largely the same niche?

http://www.ignatius.com/IProducts/278599/the-proper-of-the-mass-for-sundays-and-solemnities.aspx

http://www.ocp.org/products/30128558

Discuss.

Kathy

I think this is happening in multiple areas, and handling the competition well is the main work of the most seasoned heads of the CMAA.

fcb

Well, one is in modern notation and the other is in neumes. So there's that.

kevinf

I do not think that neumes are necessarily an impediment. My group has spent nearly a year singing with neumes (granted its the Lumen Christi simple gradual) and many if not all find them easy to read. It takes time, teaching and patience, but then most things worthwhile are that way.

From the bourbon lands....

Earl_Grey

All of Fr. Kelly's music is set in numes on his website. The OCP publication translated them into modern notation.

http://www.saintmeinrad.org/the-monastery/liturgical-music/downloads/

I suspect that each takes a different philosophic approach to setting vernacular text if anyone can speak more to that.

Salieri

Someone here mentioned that their choir can tell, just by singing it, whether an English setting is by Fr. Kelly, Fr. Weber, Adam Bartlett, or someone else.

Ben

I can usually tell (though I haven't sung Fr. Kelly's so obviously not his). They all have unique styles.

igneus

Working on chant settings of Czech liturgical texts (currently only of the LOTH), I would rejoice if I ever had someone to compete with. Competition lets the "consumers" choose and fosters quality.

BruceL

One might mention that Frs. Samuel and Columba's dealing with rhythm is rather different. I think Fr. Samuel follows the general "old Solesmes" convention a bit more, whereas those familiar with Bartlett's good work will notice a similarity to Fr. Columba's in the use of the quarter bar to lengthen, etc. a la "new Solesmes".

Adam Wood

Yes. And Bartlett used some of Fr. Columba's work in the Lumen Christi series, and (I think??) trained with him at some point.

melofluent

From a cursory look at Fr. Weber's excerpts on CCW, I would rank the named works thus far based upon their own criteria:
1. Weber Propers- closest to chant melody emulation
2. Kelly Propers- a step up in demands for a schola than
Tie: Bartlett "Lumen Christi" and "Simple English"- affective and pedagogically accessible for both schola and congregation POV, provided one accepts the premise of congregational participation.
4. Bruce Ford "American Gradual" careful editing in modern notation
5. Paul Ford- the ground breaker volume that signaled the reorientation of repertoire programming for Mass

Salieri

the use of the quarter bar to lengthen, etc. a la "new Solesmes".

Or, more properly: a la "Vatican Edition".

RJayH457

As a very long-time student of Fr. Kelly and having some exposure to Fr. Weber’s work, I would characterize the differences in their approaches to adapting the Gregorian repertoire into English as somewhat akin the differences between the philosophies of Pothier and Mocquereau in the early Twentieth century. For Fr. Weber the melody is king and for Fr. Kelly it is the text. The obvious problem with “canonizing” the Gregorian melody rises in conflicts with English word accents (or tonic syllables) (e.g. a melodic ascent on an unaccented syllable or multiple notes over insignificant words or syllables, etc.) which can literally fight good English rhetoric. Fr. Kelly adds to the basic melodic structure pitches (from a sort of Schenkerian reduction of the original), ornaments modifying the corresponding English words in similar patterns used for the Latin with additional ornamental patterns germane to those of the melodic vocabulary of the mode in use. The ornaments and the melodic direction follow the Latin chant (in an unmodified way) only in those circumstances where they serve to enhance the English tonic words or syllables in the same way they did with the Latin text. Fr. Kelly also delineates phrase “sense” units in his melodic adaptations which reflect contemporary English rhetorical (spoken) speech patterns. Adapting this work into modern notation (Fr. Kelly’s OCP Antiphon editions) has nothing to do with anything other than attempting to make this available to a wider audience ...to musicians who would otherwise be frightened away from singing chant.
-Ray Henderson

Caleferink

Semantics and nuances aside, I think both Fr. Weber and Fr. Kelly have made tremendous contributions in this area, and for this we all should be eternally grateful to both!

ProfKwasniewski

Ray (et alia),

As one who has worked closely with Fr. Weber and knows his chant settings well, I would take exception to the statement that melody is king for him, vs. a melodic construction based on analysis of the English words. First, he offers four settings for each antiphon. The first setting is based as closely as possible on the Gregorian exemplar, but intelligently adapted for English (unlike the extreme awkwardness found in Palmer-Burgess). The second setting is a newly-composed melody that follows the English very idiomatically. The third and fourth settings use Gregorian and English psalmtones respectively. What strikes me as most wonderful about Fr. Weber's PROPER is that the first two settings in particular are always elegantly melodious and sometimes gloriously so, and yet without doing violence to the English language, a rare combination in the world of vernacular chant.

Hence, it seems untrue to suggest that we are dealing here with a forced "canonizing" of the Gregorian melody. Rather, the original melody, which is in itself a worthy work of art to imitate, is adapted every step of the way to the demands of the English, so that the result would best be described as "in the manner of" or "inspired by" the Gregorian melody. And, as I said, that's only one of the four styles offered for each text.

It also appears that Fr. Kelly's publication does not include Offertory antiphons, which is a serious lacuna, since the provision of suitable music for that part of the liturgy is sorely needed. A good chant can make all the difference in fostering a serious and prayerful preparation for the anaphora, and I have found that the Weber offertory chants are excellently suited to that more meditative function.

M. Jackson Osborn

ProfKwasniewski speaks well. I am not nearly as familiar with Fr Weber's work as I am that of Fr Columba, whose original chants are, each one, gems of textual clarity and grace. Of the relatively little I have seen of Fr Weber's work, I would have to agree with Prof K that it does justice to the text and is admirably musical in the manner of chant. There is no reason why we should not avail ourselves of the work of each, though I am admittedly biased towards Fr Columba, a disciple of whose I consider myself to be.

ProfK has brought up another potent point, namely, the sore need for offertory antihpons, as well as introits and communions. What we need, though, are musical settings of the GR texts: The Propers - a complete set of five propers for every Sunday and Solemnity:1) Introit, 2) Resp Ps for yrs a, b, c, 3) Alleluya and verse, 4) Offertory, and 5) Communion. Why is no one doing this!?

(Oh, and when providing us with Alleluyas and Verses, give us some real chant Alleluyas, either newly composed or derived from the GR. We are so tired of the predictable triple alleluya from O Filii et Filiae and other such worn out examples. A single Alleluya, different at least for each season, should be normative throughout the year. Triple alleluyas are for the Easter Vigil alone. Those working on this project (if any one actually is!) should be guided by the historic forms of the GR.)

Adam Wood

Why is no one doing this!?

The Lumen Christi Missal + Simple Gradual is very nearly there.
When the full LC Gradual is published (when? I don't know) the entire sung Mass will be accessible within the confines of a single series.

mahrt

I agree with M. Jackson Osborn that we need an alleluia with a single "alleluia" plus a melisma, rather than the three-fold alleluia so common today. The three-fold alleluia belongs to the office, where it is a modest, mainly syllabic complement to chanted psalmody. Yet the point of the Gregorian alleluia is its melisma, which creates a sense of ecstatic anticipation of the Gospel.
Some would say that the Gregorian alleluia shoud not be sung, because the congregation cannot sing it, and the rubrics require the congregation to sing the alleluia. This is a contradiction of the statement of the council that Gregorian chant has the principal place in the Roman Rite, since the alleluia is one of the most excellent of the Gregorian genres. My solution is to have the cantors intone the word alleluia, and then have the congregation repeat it, after which the choir sings the melisma; after the verse, this procedure can be repeated. This incorporates the congregation into more excellent music than they can accomplish by themselves. The intonations of Gregorian alleluias are short enough that the congregation can repeat them rote, without any notation. They are no more extensive than the usual antiphons now used with the responsorial psalm, but they are much more beautiful, not only in themselves, but because they are part of a very elegant piece with melisma.
Alternatively, the simplest Gregorian alleluias are within the capability of a congregation; a few of these could be chosen and repeated through the year, so the congregation could sing them confidently.

Salieri

There are three melismatic alleluiae (?) in the Parish Book of Chant, and from what I remember there are ones in each of the modes in the draft of the Graduale Parvum. I do think, however, that there is a problem with the use of the Gregorian alleluiae from the Graduale: that problem is the Lectionary.
Almost NONE of the alleluia verses in the Lectionary match the Graduale: so if people are used to only the verses from the Lectionary, they will be confused if those from the Gradual are sung. Also the redesignation of the chant before the Gospel as the "Gospel Acclamation" has caused much damage: The purpose of the Alleluia is to allow a time of meditation after the reading of the Epistle before the Gospel, it was merely an historical coincidence that the Gospel Procession occurred at that time (why else would a procession take place during a melismatic chant? The other processional chants (Introit & Communion) are neumatic or syllabic, hardly melismatic); now the Alleluia has become the accompaniment to the Gospel Procession, and in most churches that I've been to, the minister who reads the Gospel is at the ambo by the time the people repeat the triple alleluia: the melismatic settings to do work to accompany a procession. It has also, by the adoption of the alleluia antiphons from the Antiphonal, changed which part of the alleluia is the most important: the alleluia has gone from an almost purely musical experience to the textual one, with the verse as the more important element: I do not agree with this: the most important part of the alleluia is the Jubilus, that astonishing, mystical pronouncement of something that defies the limits of human speech, that only pure music can convey accurately. The Lectionary has destroyed this by its often over-verbose versicles.

ProfKwasniewski

This conversation has exactly illustrated why no one has attempted the nearly impossible and certainly gargantuan, if not brobdingnagian, task of putting all 5 propers into one volume or one series of volumes for the OF.

The Introits, Offertories, and Communions are a relatively stable and limited repertoire, but even so, it takes Fr. Weber's book over 1,000 pages to set them all (giving us multiple settings of each one to take into account different abilities or purposes).

Moreover, these three antiphons have a really clear and obvious role to play in the Ordinary Form. A forward-thinking pastor could say to the music director: "I want these three antiphons," and voila, Weber, or Lumen Christi, or SEP, etc., would get you there, no problem. But how many places are ready to ditch the Responsorial Psalm in favor of the Gradual or Tract? How many places are ready for a melismatic Alleluia (as beautiful as they are)? When you get into the realm of the interlectionary chants, you are suddenly in controversial territory: responsorial vs. gradual, acclamation vs. alleluia.

In any case, take Weber in one hand and Aristotle Esguerra's Modal Responsorial Psalms and Gospel Acclamations or the Lumen Christi Gradual in the other hand, and you've got a complete set of English chants for the OF. That's only two books -- not too many to handle!

If, however, someone tried to "do it all" in one project, it would end up being a multi-volume work anyhow, no matter how you slice it -- and then people would still be dissatisfied because the Alleluias would be either too melismatic or not melismatic enough, or the graduals and tracts had been omitted in favor of the responsorial psalm, etc. etc.

What this shows me is that when it comes to the music for in between the readings, we're not ready for a single "one-size fits all" solution. But for the Introit, the Offertory, and the Communion, we're ready for it: bring on the proper antiphons, either GR or Weber or the composer of your choice, and it's a done deal.

mahrt

Salieri: exactly!

"Almost NONE of the alleluia verses in the Lectionary match the Gradual." This is because the reformers have disregarded the mandate that Gregorian chant should have principal place in the Roman Liturgy. The Gradual and Alleluia are the most excellent musical pieces in the repertory and in the liturgy serve a most beautiful function as complements to the lessons. But the reform has fabricated substitute genres that have little to do with chant, even though they sometimes borrow antiphons from the Office.

MatthewRoth

The difference between the chant Alleluia and the lectionary verse is striking with the slicing of the 1st and 2nd Alleluias due to the imposition of a second reading. Yesterday for example, the text matches the traditional GR Alleluia, but the closest you could get without using the GR would be to sing the Psalm with “Alleluia” as the response. (Never mind moving this Sunday forward for no reason!)

Chris_McAvoy

I continue to think that Bruce Ford's American Gradual is the best english adaptation. The most balanced in every aspect. A good translation, good melody, good rhythm, feels like the latin, feels natural, seems authentic -

only caveat is that it is only in modern notation (sometimes an advantage), if it only existed in neume notation it would be the king. Possibly a few psalm translation texts could be made more literal too, as the 1979 Book of Common Prayer translation is not the most accurate translation. As for translation, none of the translations from the other books seem to be any more accurate, usually they are less accurate,so even there it still has an edge.

Bruce Ford remains my hero and I model my own adaptations on his. (I mostly adapt office antiphons for obscure propers of the saints IE Augustine of Hippo).

In the long term I think the hieratic english translation such as in the Palmer Burgess will make a come back. I do not personally believe any contemporary english translation is actually viable going into the future. Someday there will be a backlash against contemporary english in Catholic liturgies. I do feel Bruce Ford's work is "backward compatible" though. Meaning that you can turn the "yous and yours" to "thees and thous" add extra words rearrange it without as much effort. It has a value for creating a hieratic english Gradual.

I think Dr. William Renwicks Sarum Graduale in english is going to be good after much editing and correcting. Sadly, being that it is a pre-reformation gradual it does not fit in liturgically with almost any Church. Politics seems to dictate that it won't catch on easily outside of perhaps a Traditional Anglican or Western Rite Orthodox Monastery.

chonak

So far Bruce and I have adapted two (count 'em, two!) observances in his American Gradual into square notation: Palm Sunday and Ascension. At this rate we'll have it done in about a dozen years. :-)

Chris_McAvoy

Those are two of the best days to have them in neumes, Chonak, good job! It's so nice to see them in that format. I sing neumes much more easily than modern notation. The neumes are the old familiar friend, the modern notes are the awkward uncle from out of town that I have to let sleep over at my house and snores loudly. ;-)

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories