Opinions on Perosi's liturgical choral works
  • ELapisardi
    Posts: 31
    Hello everyone! I have been lurking silently for years, but this is my first post to the forum. I am a graduate student in sacred music at Duquesne University and am currently working on a research project on the liturgical choral works of Lorenzo Perosi. A search of prior forum discussions indicates that a number of you are using Perosi's works, but some additional information on the place of his music in present-day parish life would be very illuminating and extremely useful for my project.

    If you currently or previously have used any of Perosi's compositions, I would appreciate your response indicating which works(s), the reasons you selected them, and any further observations on his compositions, particularly within the context of the liturgy. Conversely, if you would not consider utilizing his works, I would also be interested in hearing from you.

    Thank you very much for your help! I deeply appreciate the wealth of knowledge and expertise shared by the members of this forum.
    Thanked by 1MariaRist
  • DougCowling
    Posts: 3
    Perosi's music was a favourite of the young St. John XXIII. "Il Natale" was considered the Italian "Messiah"
  • ELapisardi
    Posts: 31
    Thank you for your comment, Doug. Have you used any of Perosi's liturgical compositions, especially the motets or mass settings? I have been translating many of the principal Italian biographic sources, but am hoping to also include some discussion of Perosi's works in 21st century American parishes.
  • MariaRist
    Posts: 17
    We have a somewhat new schola and are trying to build repertory. I tuned into Perosi's works because of another schola in our diocese that had made use of these pieces when they first began, to accommodate their small numbers. Most of the motets we sing are SATB/a capella. But from time to time, we do not have enough voices to pull that off. What I like about the Perosi works I found is the flexibility of having beautiful pieces that do not require four-part harmony. We don't do much work from late composers, but Perosi's composition style is compatible with our usual classical selections. We have incorporated two of Perosi's pieces into our repertory this past year. The first is Laudate Dominum for two voices. So far we have just used it at weddings and other special Masses where we didn't have a choir, with just a cantor singing the top part, and that is lovely. We hope to do it as a duet either with soloists or the women's or men's voices of the choir. The second is his Ave Maria, which we just debuted last weekend as our final Marian offering for October. We had tenors and basses sing the two parts, primarily because we are stronger in the men's section this season. Here is a rehearsal video our pastor took:
    https://www.facebook.com/StsPeterAndPaul/videos/1165590426866696/

    Eventually our women can sing this also and will add it to our wedding offerings. In both cases the music was pretty easy to learn, and the organ part complements the voices well. I plan to explore more of his music in the future. Thanks for starting the discussion, and I look forward to hear more from others.
  • tsoapm
    Posts: 79
    Via Wikipedia I recently learnt that Bartolucci had harsh things to say about him.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Bartolucci (and others) have been critical of Perosi because his music became so wildly popular that many choirs, including, from what I've been told, the Capella Sistina, hardly bothered to learn anything else. Except Yon's Gesu bambino.

    I was born a very long time after Perosi died, and I was only 10 when Bartolucci was dismissed in 1997, but I have a feeling that if more choirs had actually been singing real polyphony rather than the warmed-over, Romanticized pseudo-Palestrina of Perosi, the "treasury of sacred music" might not have been jettisoned so readily after the Council.
    Thanked by 2francis M. Jackson Osborn
  • tsoapm
    Posts: 79
    Writing from Italy, and only as a chorister, I can say that we’ve sung his ‘Ave Maria’, ‘O Sacrum Convivium’ and ‘O Salutaris Hostia’. Not with any great regularity though. Maybe we’d sing the Ave more if someone hadn’t, apparently, told us to lay off Marian stuff during Mass.
    Thanked by 1MariaRist
  • stulte
    Posts: 355
    I went and listened to some of his Mass settings on YouTube and find they have a certain quality I can't quite put my finger on. On the one hand, there is a certain appeal to them. They seem very (almost stereotypically) Italian (yet, I can't explain how) and almost give this nostalgic sense of a time when all was great in the Church. Yet, he's no Palestrina by any stretch. That's clear looking at his cadences and overall musical flow. There's a sweeping dramatic aspect that's on the sentimental side. I hate to say it, but I can see how he's a pre-cursor to the guitar music of the 1970s with that last quality.
  • CGM
    Posts: 683
    We used the "Missa in hon. beati Ambrosii" for the Baptism of the Lord in 2015, a very pleasant neo-modal piece for high voices (women) + low voices (men) + organ.
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,465
    There is so much Perosi, that whatever choir ir group of singers you have, you can usually find something useful. I don't think he is a great or especially inspired composer, however he did and does fulfill a need in the church music repertory.
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 2,046
    My Schola does quite a bit of Perosi, as well as the other Italian Caecilians around him (Cervi, Ramella etc.), just because there's a lot of 1-2 part pieces with organ there. We've done the Missa Te Deum Laudamus (really a stretch for us to do well), Alma redemptoris and Tantum ergo a 1, Ave Maria, Ave Maris Stella, Justorum animae a2.

    For me, there's a very nice blend of nobility and sentiment in Perosi's music. It's well put together, and melodic without being cheesy.

    Here are my issues with it: First, Perosi doesn't understand rhythm very well. He doesn't apply the rhythmic lessons of chant and polyphony in the way that Brahms did. (He's not the total failure at rhythm that Martin Dumler was.) Second (related to the first), his musical pacing can be a little laid back. I don't find him dramatic enough, not as dramatic as Josquin certainly. The ideas aren't terribly memorable. He' a 2nd-rate composer (don't get excited; in a world where 10th-raters have careers, that's high praise), and like most 2nd-raters, he's more dependent on good performances, which he generally doesn't get. I'd love to hear a crack early music choir like Pomerium take a crack at Perosi (totally un-HIP, I know; I suspect that the Italian groups who have recorded him do it "correctly") (Digression: have you heard the Montani recording of the "Arcadelt" Ave Maria? It's amazingly ponderous.)

    Catholic choirs have never done only first-rate composers. They've almost never had first-rate singers. There was no Golden Age. You do what you can do. And in that context, Perosi is quite a valuable guy.

  • ELapisardi
    Posts: 31
    Thank you all for your insightful comments and observations! They will be a great addition to my research project's final chapter on perceptions of Perosi in the twenty-first century.
  • irishtenoririshtenor
    Posts: 1,296
    Speaking for myself, I would absolutely love to see your final paper. Sounds just great!
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,465
    I wonder if anyone has heard the large scale orchestral oratorios and masses that he was really known for in his day.
    All we seem to hear are these little pieces, which surley are not representative of what he can do.
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 2,046
    There are Italian recordings.

    Among others...
Add a Comment