WHY, Oh Why, Oh Why - We Have Work To Do!
-
As many will know, the AGO (that's The American Guild of Organists for those who may not be aware) had its national convention just this week in Houston. Of the many recitals on some of our praiseworthy instruments one event stands alone. It stands alone in the admiration and awe it excites in nearly all church musicians. It stands alone in the almost unique stature in this country of ours of those who performed this event. Indeed (and, as a nation and as a Church, we should hang our heads in embarrassment and shame), tonight's performers are the members of only no more than three similar institutions (full time boarding choir schools) in the entire US - whilst across the pond every cathedral boasts such entities in the praise of the All High God. You, some of you, may have guessed that I speak of the choir of men and boys from St Thomas' Episcopal Church, 5th Avenue, New York.
These ecstatically endowed singers did their finest this evening, the final musical event of the convention, at the Co-Cathedral of the Sacred Heart to a spell-bound audience of at least fifteen hundred souls. One was moved to tears at the ease and artistry with which one after another musical masterpiece, the work of God's own composers of music for his very own worship, was uttered forth by this band of boys and men. I could but think that the very co-cathedral in which I was sitting should have such a choir and such music every Sunday. And, so should all Catholic cathedrals, and, all catholic churches which could easily raise a few millions of dollars for just about anything they really wanted - and, no need to 'poor mouth' it: there are plenty of such well fixed cathedrals and parish churches. Why is it always the Episcopalians? I was thinking tonight that, yes, the members of the church I left may well be schismatics, some of them outright heretics, some of them outright atheists, and others who defy description, but, in spite of it all, one thing may be asserted with glaring fortitude: the just praises of the All Holy would be mightily impoverished if it weren't for the Anglicans, if they were left to Catholics.
Of course, some here might throw in that old saw that 'it's all the fault of the Irish'. May be. But, I suspect that there is far more to it than that. It seems to me that at root is a moribund culture that really just doesn't care. Why, oh why is it that our people, people and clergy of all ranks, just - don't - care! There is a deep sickness, I believe, that is at the heart of it. Part and parcel is the notion that the 'liturgist' of any particular liturgy is the celebrant priest. This is an absurdity that should be abolished. The Church expects certain standards of liturgical and musical praxis. A priest should be bound by an effective 'customary' at any and all given parishes and cathedrals. At Walsingham, for instance, it would be unthinkable for any priest to come and sing the mass any differently than that way in which It Is Done At Walsingham, or in the Ordinariate. The same should be true of every mass at every parish. A parish customary by which ALL are BOUND. And, of course, the basis of this customary is missal rubrics and conciliar admonitions about what is to be 'preserved' and what is to be 'fostered' (cf. Vat.II). The laziness of worship by Catholic people, their mumble mouthed participation, their wrethched pop-music and worse, and their Fr Ed Sullivans are a disgrace to humanity and to the Church - and to the worship of the Most High, who, methinks, deserves and needs to be taken considerably more seriously than some are willing.
Why is it that it is left for theologically challenged Anglicans to worship our heavenly Father as he should be worshipped. Yes, I know that many Anglican churches fall short of their church's reputation. But, still, the reputation signals a significant reality. Too, I realise that there are here and there in Catholicdom those places where worship is what it ought to be. Some of us on this forum struggle to make a difference. Some are blessed to have successes to encourage others. The Church at large, though, is mostly not fertile ground for such wondrous seed.
Here is the program that the St Thomas' choir of men and boys sang this evening. It was stunning -
Benjamin Sheen - Acting Director of Music
Stephen Buzard - Acting Organist
1. Libera nos, salva nos - - - John Sheppard
2. Magnificat octavi toni - - - Thomas Tallis
3. Komm, heiliger Geist, O Herre Gott (BWV 651) - - - J.S. Bach (organ)
4. Laudibus in sanctis - - - William Byrd
5. Komm, Jesu, komm (BWV 229) - - -J.S. Bach
6. Feast Song for St Cecilia - - - Bernard Rose
7. Rhapsody in D-flat Major, Op. 17, No. 1 - - - Herbert Howells (organ)
8. Sanctus and Benedictus, from Missa Trinitatis Sanctae - - - Francis Grier
9. 'Greater Love Hath No Man' - - - John Ireland
10. 'Judge Eternal' - - - Gerre Hancock
11. 'Behold, O God Our Defender' - - - John Scott
12. "I Was Glad When They Said Unto Me' - - - Sir C.H.H. Parry
Of course, I realise that any of us is but 'preaching to the choir' on this, our forum. Still it doesn't hurt to egg one another on, which is the purpose of commentaries such as this. St Thomas' Episcopal Church offers music such as this every Sunday and major feast. Nearly every Episcopal cathedral does the same, as do any parishes that have the means. This should be true of our Catholic culture, as well. God deserves no less than to be worshipped in such 'spirit and truth'. -
St Thomas' Episcopal Church offers music such as this every Sunday and major feast.
Jackson,
Since blaming it on the Irish has been ruled out of bounds, I think an entirely appropriate place to start the diagnosis is this: the much vaunted St. Thomas', New York.... has it always been this good? How did it get there? Practice and consistent repetition is certainly one reason. Another is what I think is properly called "ethos", by which I mean that Eton and Philips Exeter and Harvard and Rugby do things the way they do, excellently, because not to do so would be so shocking. No one applies to Eton because he wants an average education; no one auditions (auditions) to sing under Gere Hancock -- or his acting replacements with the intention of singing in a mediocre way. It simply wouldn't be tolerated, were it ever to occur, but by gum it wouldn't be attempted. -
Good points, Chris.
'How did they get there?'
And it's not just St Thomas' - it's every cathedral and any parish church that can even remotely follow the lead of such as these.
I think they got there because they knew that there was a 'there' to get to, and they decided, by gum, that they were going to get there - because God has it coming to him from us - because in the words of the BCP, it is 'our bounden duty and service'. And, because (as I've noted on other threads) that's what we, as the successors to the Temple Levites, are called to do. -
You've heard, I am sure, the old saw in the real estate business, that it's all about location, location, location. In the Catholic church in the U.S., it is all about leadership, leadership, leadership - or the lack of it.
-
Part of it is a perverse effect of the governance culture of the Catholic church in the US - congregants have few levers for reliable input other than the presence or absence of their bodies and the opening or closing of their mouths and wallets. (And US civil culture is premised on availability of input - it comes with, as might be said in the Midwest).
Funny, I was just reminded this morning how, if someone in the Boston area were to commend Anglican liturgical culture to area Catholics, it would not likely be received positively. (to twist an old British saw: "That sort of thing may be tolerated by the British, but we're Irish, thank God!") -
MJO, your point was illustrated very well for us one Sunday morning in the summer when my husband and I just for fun strolled past the Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran and Methodist churches in our little Long Island village. By far the best music and most active congregation was at charming St. Mary's Anglican Church----which, by the way, is probably the least financially endowed.
Sometimes I wonder if it's precisely the wealth and affluence of the Catholic Church accumulated in its golden age which has ultimately strangled our artistic enterprise and creative expression. Not for nothing, but I think the Catholic parishes in my diocese for too long have had TOO MUCH money and too many resources. They've never had to struggle for anything. It was all handed down to them, and they have have been so dulled and lulled to sleep that now they are in danger of losing it all.
There was a book written about my diocese by a woman religious some decades ago, entitled "Richly Blessed", and indeed my diocese was abundantly blessed with thousands of nuns and priests, and thousands upon thousands of flourishing Catholic families. There were beautiful convents and mother houses, a magnificent seminary, numerous gorgeous churches and schools and never any lack of $$, but after all these years, where is the harvest? Where is the flowering of Catholic culture? What happened to it all? There are three parish choirs that I know of that sing in parts and even these are not what you'd go out of your way to hear, in my opinion.
I see parishes with two organs, grand pianos, multiple rehearsal rooms, full-time staff with an office and they still cannot produce what our little choir of eight people can accomplish with a Yamaha keyboard and amp in a bare corner of a delapidated cemetery chapel. It's an amazing thing to be part of, and I wouldn't exchange our situation with all its joys and occasional hardships for a luxurious cathedral choir loft and a grand pipe organ, as tempting as that is. Often challenging, tough circumstances bring out the best in people, and maybe that is the lesson the Catholic Church will have to learn as her fortunes continue to decline. -
St. Thomas does depend on wealth, but it had a priest from England in the 1960s who was determined to make it Anglo–Catholic, so he did.Thanked by 1CHGiffen
-
Julie
I always loved the look of St Mary's as we drove from where we lived to a pier in that village....it's been about a decade since I was last there, given that my parents moved further northeast from where we grew up.
There was a regional exception to the usual in that area, but that was mostly because it was outside direct diocesan control until the mid-1970s and under the cultivation of the Benedictines.
-
Jackson,
I would take slight issue for every Episcopal cathedral doing high quality music. I can name a few that are absolutely failing. But that is a small point in your exposition, which I heartily concur.
For me, having just moved to a new place for some of the very reasons you discussed and coupled with my experience, I think it is simply will. Will on the part of the clergy to ask for and demand quality music and to tell the people why, who for in the post VII years have received more mediocrity than should be allowed. The will to support growing good programs and the will to have hope as opposed to fear. To also have experienced on some level quality music, which means the seminaries need serious help to lift up the level and to have the requisite language to communicate with the musician these issues.
It also takes a musician willing to look in those categories, which Catholicism has not supported and educated really well. But that is changing and I see so much hope from even 10 years ago. But that will take time. Exposure to great music implores us to hopefully try to reach for the skies.
To put a point on the little reply, as I was walking out with my Pastor last Sunday before his vacation, we were discussing recusant English Catholics (my Pastor is British) and in the midst of that he said to me: "Lets think about doing the Byrd Mass for 4 voices on the first Sunday of Lent next year." I dropped my teeth on the floor and then remembered why I came here. Et voila....Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
St. Mary's Anglican Church is a treasure! The pastor is wonderful; he wears a cope and biretta and Roman vestments for the Sunday High Mass and has The Hymnal 1982 in the pews. BTW, the pier and most of the beach house were washed away by Sandy, but now it looks better than ever.
The renovated St. Killian's is quite exceptional, I think. Have you seen it, LIam? It was a dramatic change, but very tasteful. My children's schola sang at a May Crowning and Mass there a few weeks ago. The people of the parish were so friendly and welcoming. It's a very dynamic parish; the Benedictines must have put down deep roots. -
Yes, I have, many times. Of course, I well remember it before that. It was my family's original parish (my 4 older sibs all attended parochial school there into the mid 1960s, though my next older sib's last few years were in OLL; I, happily, was able to attend Fdale public schools entirely). I attended Mass there when I could by choice later in high school and thereafter. The famous boys choir was still operating, but it got disbanded in the mid-1980s after a scandal with the then-organist, if memory serves.
The original church was beautifully sized. They used to festoon the altar (including the table altar in front of the old altar) with carnations at Christmas (carnations were once a Christmas flower for obvious reasons) and red roses at Pentecost.... They still have the lovely wooden creche, which when I last saw it would be placed in the narthex (old church) at Christmas.Thanked by 1JulieColl -
Liam -
I want to say just a word or two (!) about a point that Liam made up above. I certainly agree with him that 'an Anglican', or 'an English' liturgical culture is not something that should be the goal in the wider Catholic community - unless, of course, there is a parish or pastor here and there who might wish to cultivate such.
Between the lines of all I have said about Anglican worship is the ethos which distinguishes it from Catholic culture in general. It is typified by a dignified and reverent liturgy encompassing the best of Sarum-Roman-Percy Dearmer liturgical praxis, which is graced with the finest music of English and Continental provenance. It very rarely stoops to the kind of pop-music and worse that have been embraced by the Catholic Church as 'modern' (which, laughably, it isn't). What Anglicans do with their liturgical culture, others should do with theirs. Is there the Polish, the German, the French, etc., version of what Anglicans do? It would be nice, but I've yet to see it. I suspect that all of these, if they were to have mass according to their own ethnicity, it would be the Polish, the French, etc., version of mariachi or African American masses. This is a cruel joke. The same is true of our oriental communities. Going to a Viet-Namese mass, for instance, you will not be blessed with the finest truly oriental liturgical music, but with the most tasteless orientalised and debased western music. All cultures do have something to offer other than their version of the oompapa mass. Let us cultivate it, and let us witness it.
Surely, not wishing to impose Englishness upon Poles and Italians, these other ethnicities have their own Tallises and Byrds, their own RVWs and Howellses, and their own preferences from the historic continental repertory. I would like, in other words, to see the Polish equivalent of the English ethos, not the Polish equivalent of the mariachi mass. Ditto the Spanish community. Instead of the mariachi syndrome their liturgy should be influenced by the most gracious Mozarabic praxis and the music of such as Victoria.
The same goes for the Church in general. Where there are not Polish or Slavic enclaves the general praxis should logically be the best liturgical praxis of our combined historical liturgical heritage, and the music the best of pan-continental-English music.
That, basically, is that for which I plea. Every ethnicity has its own equivalent of what has come to be the Anglican standard. It's time for us to witness it and not to think that gorgeous liturgy and fine liturgical music is ipso facto Anglican liturgical imperialism. It isn't. Thinking that it is is an intellectual prevarication. Let me see what the Catholic Church's own equivalent of English praxis is.
(End of word or two.)Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
MJO
Several words: your promotion of your ideal can get in the way of itself. (A verity for many enthusiasts.)Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn -
What is 'in the way' is the stone walls and iron gates of the preferred, cultivated, and enforced imperialism of mediocrity.
All ethnic communities should be blessed with their own equivalent of the musical and liturgical register of that which is the normative ideal in Anglican worship. This normative ideal which, while not always lived up to, is respected and recognized as normative. - It is this recognition and respect for a normative ideal that, so far as I can tell is not shared by the people and ethnicities at large outside the Anglican community. I would be deliriously joyful to be corrected.
Nearly all, I think, settle for their own cultural version, equivalent, of mariachi.
The 'general', pan-ethnic Catholic community has settled for the mongrel American pop-rock-and-worse version of the mariachi mass. Cultural (actually, anti-culture) imperialism and tyranny if there ever was such. Countless are the parishes (and some cathedrals, even monasteries) at which naught else is permitted.Thanked by 1Elmar -
The Anglican church had both an insistence on use of the vernacular, and a sense of its continuity with tradition (the arms of the see of Canterbury depict a pallium). Catholics in the West (and the empires it controlled) were not able to develop a vernacular liturgy. Had a vernacular liturgy been permitted a hundred years earlier, when there was a strong nationalist movement in music, we might have
seenheard a better outcome. -
True, true, Hawkins.
And when vernacular finally made its appearance to whom did Catholics turn for music?
There are the equivalents of Tallis and Howells in today's world. But the Catholic Church, for the most part, is not interested in their work.
But you are so right! It likely would have been different if, as I have often pointed out, Vatican II had happened even a hundred years ago instead of when it did. The triumph of musical vulgarity was yet into the future. People then would not likely have countenanced it. They still knew what belonged in church and what didn't.Thanked by 1Elmar -
MJO
In other words, on the ground, your pile of argument is more likely to be a hindrance than a help. People are more likely to hit the "ignore" button (and that's if they are trying to be the churchy version of polite).
AFH
Actually, the 19th century was not that great. It was an age of penny presses, and there was a flood of crap - what we've curated out of it has been skimmed off. Rather, it would have been much better to have had broader permission in the late 17th century. (Trent permitted permission, lest people forget.)
Thanked by 1JL -
There is nothing more boring than people who like a thing because they are supposed to like it. This goes for church musicians who like traditional music because it makes them feel high brow and sophisticated as much as it goes for teenagers who pretend to like whatever crap music all their friends like because all their friends like it.
On the other hand, someone who is genuinely, authentically interested in something can communicate that numinousness easily.
I say to as a preface to -- I am of the opinion that much (no, not all, just much) of the traditional music sung by Episcopalians is.... boring. (Just as so much -- even more -- of the "contemporary" music sung by Romans is boring.)
Having spent a bit too much time with the sort of Episcopalians who love a good Bach concert but don't really believe in Jesus, it strikes me that there is a whole lot of "the right thing for the wrong reason" in Anglican worship. Good choirs, expensive organs, professional choristers are often there in the service of "this is what educated, cultured, right-thinking people do," not so much "ad majorem dei gloriam."
This is not to disparage all Anglicans. I do know many who are deeply faithful Christians. (And many of those who appreciate all the great music and solemn liturgy.)
It is just that I suspect the preservation of high-quality music within the tradition has more to do with a sense of high-society propriety than it does with devotion to Christ. -
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
-
I have a simpler approach to advocating for inclusion (though not exclusively so) of the Roman rite's treasury of music that does seem to perk at least more ears than I've found arguing entirely from documents or inherent quality: this treasury is the birthright of Roman rite faithful. They may not be familiar with it; they may not care to enjoy it once they are familiar with it; but they ought to be very careful before discarding it for everyone else. While certain ministers may have the power effectively, there's a utter lack a process for credibly claiming the *authority* to do so.
Moreover, it's gradually dawned on me over the years that the so-called optionitis of the reformed rite can be understood as a Providential mechanism to familiarise the Roman rite faithful with their birthright in a way that, while not satisfying hard advocates at either end - say, arguendo, Peter Kwasniewski vs Paul Inwood - can be quite effective.
My two pence....Thanked by 1Richard Mix -
-
Actually, it wasn't *Britannia*, just England and Wales.... Scotland is likely heading for independence*, and there's a ginormous question mark over Northern Ireland right now (it voted 55% to Remain, as it, uniquely, shares a land border with an EU country, and is fairly dependent on EU subsidies), though it would be quite foolish to assume assimilation of Northern Ireland into the Republic.....
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis
* Scotland's "Braveheart" impulses are being directed to their historical target in London, not the Continent (the "Auld Alliance" could revive...) at the moment: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-brexit-scotland-angry_us_576d059ae4b017b379f592c7?section=
-
Actually, not genuinely Papist when you consider that France was more typically at considerable odds with the Papacy during the era of the Auld Alliance (its time of closer ties to the Papacy mostly predates it) - France was not Spain or Austria in that way. But it was anti-English.( The oldest intra-European alliance is typically considered to be England-Portugal, minus the period when the Portuguese-Algarve crowns were in personal union with those of the Spains.)Thanked by 1JulieColl
-
Long ago there was a thread on anglicanmusic-l on how to define Anglican music, with suggestions ranging from Byrd (ahem) to 'music only an anglican could love', presumably the Stainer/Barnby dismissed in a single scathing breath by the Oxford History of Music. Though I will always find it hard to forgive Sir John for setting the line "there in glory, here in…boringa basementabasement," I actually prefer his "O taste and see" to RVW's and we'll be using it next week for OT 14. You can place me on the anglo-philic/phobic spectrum when I confess to wishfully reading RVW as BWV, though. ;-PThanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn -
I am reminded of an apocryphal tale from my grad school days (decades ago). It seems that Saint Mary the Virgin in NYC was going through harrowing financial straits. It was suggested that to help alleviate the financial crunch the music budget should be cut. It was recounted that the rector remarked that if they cut the music they might as well close the parish. He is said to have mused "If we must, we'll spend from the principal of the trust until nothing remains- If we must go down, let us go down in glory." Some nearly forty years later Saint Mary the Virgin continues to offer her "bounden duty and service" and serves as a beacon for many. I believe that we're faced with a mind-set.
-
Is there the Polish, the German, the French, etc., version of what Anglicans do?
German? Yes, it's called "What Lutherans Do". Mixed choirs, congregational singing, paraphrased liturgical texts (and chant melodies) that better suit the Germanic structure of the English, German, Norwegian, et cetera languages, while still including all the proper theology. To see how this kind of stuff can be applied in Catholicism with good taste, look up the Masses celebrated at Cologne Cathedral on youtube (preferably with Archbishop Joachim Meisner celebrating, the current Archbishop is noticeably less traditional).Surely, not wishing to impose Englishness upon Poles and Italians, these other ethnicities have their own Tallises and Byrds, their own RVWs and Howellses, and their own preferences from the historic continental repertory.
Tallis's and Byrd's styles come from Queen Elizabeth's desire for a Calvinistic style of music. The Italian "equivalent" would be Palastrina. The German "equivalents" would be Arnold von Bruck (the only Catholic among the German group), Johann Walter and Hans Leo Hassler, Heinrich Schütz, Samuel Scheidt, not to mention Buxtehude, Pachelbel, and J.S. Bach, and Hermann Schroeder.
Personally, I've never understood the desire to "Anglicanize" Catholic music. With some exceptions (Tallis and Byrd, and a small handful of hymns), it just sounds like substance-less posh to me (especially Hubert Parry and Rutter). -
While granting your point, Zac, one yet would challenge the ancillary assertion that the styles of Tallis and Byrd are Calvinistic. This is a gross injustice. For one thing, Calvinistic would be the utter absence of anything but the metrical psalter and the Bourgeoisesque tunes which accompanied it. Calvin would have wretched at anything resembling the musical craft and art which continued to be offered to God in English cathedrals and collegiate chapels, craft such as Byrd's Great Service, and much else.
As for Elizabeth's 'desire', it is known that she was (relative to her times and circumstances) high church, and would even admonish the priests in her Chapel Royal to 'heave it higher, sir priest' at the moment of elevation.
I do quite agree with you about the likes of Parry (assuming that you may be referencing 'I was glad' and such) as being inapt as liturgical music. Thankfully there is much else in the Anglican patrimony that is quite apt. I think that a more considered estimation of the English liturgical music tradition may be in order.
As for your tossing of Rutter into the ring. I quite agree with you. I have never seen, with Rutter, what all the fuss was about. Musical pablum!
As for 'Anglicanising' Catholic music, I spelled out rather clearly up above that I see no reason for this. It is interesting, though, that many of those who so fitfully toss this misbegotten word into the fray, do so without appreciation for the fact that the Anglican patrimony is a uniquely beautiful thing of which disparagement could arise only from some well of insensitivity to what is a spiritual glory. I would not want it, though, to be imposed on Polish Catholics, or German ones, or Spanish ones, Viet-Namese ones or any other. What I would like to see is for these people to avail themselves of their own genuine historic music, and their composers of today, and celebrate their mass with all the beauty of their own historic patrimony, their own equivalents to Sarum useage. But they don't do this. (At least I've yet to see it.) What they seem, all of them, to do is their own folksy versions of the mariachi mass. German Catholic communities are not singing Hassler or Ahrens. It falls to high church Lutherans to do that. The same goes for Poles and others. They sing not their Tallises or Howellses, but, rather, their folksy versions of the American pop-folk-rock mass, debased and thinly ethnicised Western music. If there are Polish equivalents of Tallis and Britten, I suspect it would be left to Anglicans to be singing them.
Then, there are the 'average' American not-this-or-that ethnic parishes. The American version of mariachi is the stuff of their worship. The idiotic notion that pop-rock-faux folk idioms are modern rules the day at these. The stuff of their worship should well be an amalgam of patrimonies, English, French, Italian, Slavic, and on and on. All these ethnicities have their own historic colleagues of Palestrina and Weelkes. They, I would guess, also have their colleagues of RVW and Poulenc. Such as these ought, obviously to be the stuff of American Catholic worship. Having no particular ethnicity the Americans should have the best of all. (And we haven't even mentioned the pure unadulterated Roman rite with chant in Latin or English which seems to be dismissed out of hand by more Catholics in and out of holy orders than one could count.) Instead, what do they opt for? The garbage that is churned out for them and skillfully marketed by their mendacious publishers, philistines all, the American version of mariachi. And, if someone points to a higher liturgical road, it will be said of him or her that he is trying to Anglicanise Catholic worship. Anglicans do not have a monopoly on fine music and liturgy, but (isn't it curious!) many people think that fine music and liturgy is an Anglicanisation. It isn't. It is the patrimony (and 'bounden duty') of all.
And yes, thank you, we all know that not all Anglicans are faithful to 'the Anglican paradigm', but, uniquely, they all know of it, are familiar with it, respect it, and recognize it as their own, and know in their hearts that it is what they are - even though some may en famille speak lightly of their 'high church' brethren, or their 'low church' brethren, or the parish across town which has a verger to guide the priest to the pulpit which he could not locate and get to by himself. Added to these are the genuine Anglo-Catholics who, like Roman EF and high OF sorts, keep track of where and in what cities there are safe parishes to attend mass on Sundays when travelling or on holiday.
-
Surely a ban on complex polyphonic music was seriously discussed at the Council of Trent, though not agreed. It was not just Calvin who wanted one note per syllable, and clearly Queen Elizabeth was not of this persuasion, though Edward VI may have been.Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
-
While granting your point, Zac, one yet would challenge the ancillary assertion that the styles of Tallis and Byrd are Calvanistic. This is a gross injustice. For one thing, Calvanistic would be the utter absence of anything but the metrical psalter and the Bourgeoisesque tunes which accompanied it. Calvin would have wretched at anything resembling the musical craft and art which continued to be offered to God in English cathedrals and collegiate chapels, craft such as Byrd's Great Service, and much else.
I should have clarified and said "more Calvenistic", in the vein of the bloom of metrical psalm settings that congregations could get easy grasp upon. Tallis and Byrd are two of my favorite English composers, so my point was not to make them look bad at all. Not to mention, Bourgeois (who had a falling-out with Calvin and moved back to Catholic France) writes great tunes, so great that even the Lutherans use them (Bach has done almost as many harmonizations of "Old 100th" as all of the Anglican composers put together). I don't hate or even dis-like Anglican music, I just don't see the want for putting it on a pedestal.What they seem, all of them, to do is their own folksy versions of the mariachi mass. German Catholic communities are not singing Hassler or Ahrens. It falls to high church Lutherans to do that. The same goes for Poles and others. They sing not their Tallises or Howellses, but, rather, their folksy versions of the American pop-folk-rock mass, debased and thinly ethnised Western music.
I won't disagree. But I will give my observation, that throughout history, it's not necessarily that the Germans are shunning Hassler and Schütz, it's more that Hassler and Schütz were themselves being folksy, since that's what the folks were singing: Luther-and-Friends's hymns. And that's what the Germans have done since, Bach and Hindemith included: set those for sacred, and even secular use. Most secular German folksongs didn't start appearing until later. That blur between sacred and folk music, from what I can tell, simply didn't exist on the British Isles, except for the anabaptists perhaps. (I really hope this makes sense; it's easier for me to think these things that to write them.)
I think it's also worth mentioning that instrumental music dominated western music (especially outside of Britain and Italy) as the main medium of high-art, and that even in America, that's what people wanted to emulate. Even the choral music of Mozart and Beethoven is very instrumental in nature. All of the great Americans have been, like the Germans and German-influenced, primarily symphonists (or writers of show-tunes). "Serious" composers have ambitions to write big symphonies or big symphonic film scores; choral music is treated as a stepping stone to get there, or a quaint side project. (It doesn't help that even secular choral music that gets frequently programmed contains enough gooey sentiment to fill an olympic swimming pool.) This is, of course, only what I have personally observed in my exposure to the music world, and one of many possible explanations I can see as to why sacred music has reached the state it has today. I think a possible course of action could be concert performances of today's [good] sacred choral music, which would help solidify sacred music's influence on general culture.
I'll stop now before this turns into a multi-chapter ramble. -
I suspect that MJO would be highly ecstatic to hear of the work being done in Australia. St Mary's Cathedral in Sydney has a choir 198 years old, consistently all-male since 1955, singing in the English Benedictine Tradition. All Masses include sung propers, as well as the finest hymnody and polyphony. A programme like this can hardly be sniffed at! And while it is one parish in a hundred at present, the tide is slowly, slowly turning away from the faux-pop music, and the fastest movement is among the youth.
Also, one group of Catholics who have not succumbed to the "debased and thinly-ethnicised [modern] Western music" are surprisingly the humble Tongans. While their musical tradition pre-Christianisation has been all but lost, the hymnody that they inherited from their Methodist missionaries has become deeply entrenched in their culture and cultural identity. Singing in their vernacular, and the entire congregation in harmony, it is no Palestrina or Victoria, but it is truly a work of deep love and worship, and the best that they know how to offer. To them it is a treasure that they are unlikely to give up in favour of the tasteless musical preferences of other Catholic cultures around them. -
I have never seen, with Rutter, what all the fuss was about. Musical pablum!
This illustrates your only rhetorical Achille's heel, Jackson. (I'm no Rutter apologist.)
You would dismiss out of hand an entire catalogue for its foibles rather than to delay for a more thorough examination. Would that Lot had given up on even one good soul as redeeming a whole city.
Should you defer that "What sweeter music" or "Donkey Carol" remains pablum, which I concede that pieces of the ilk of "For the beauty of the earth" do resemble, Rutter's Requiem (a clear and stated homage to his equally edited Faure) earned its stripes when championed by none other than Salamunovich, whose performance (with LMU) I took in in early 88. I disdained his "profane" use of the 1-7-5 motif as much as anyone, first glance. But after hearing it at LMU, I had the epiphany this work was not so easily dismissed.
I have conducted it three times, and there is plenty yet to mine, tho' I won't descend again. Compared to his doppelganger, Lloyd Webber, Rutter efforts closer to his idol, Mozart. They're neither first options for me, but I don't disparage the man from the work.
-
Charles -
I stand, half deservedly scourged. You are quite right insofar as you do not know what parameters were whirling about in my mind as I consigned Rutter to pablumian oblivion.
All things are relative, aren't they (and as I say that, I pray that we don't get dragged into that pit of relativism against which H.F. Benedict bad us do battle and keep vigilance).
If I had as my presumed audience persons of less musical erudition than is the presumed standard of our noble confreres on this our forum, I should not have spoken ill of a man whose music is far superior to that being performed in most of our parishes. Relative to those wonderful people Rutter is as Bach compared to what most of them settle for. Actually, when I hear Rutter's music my thoughts run more or less like this: 'hmmm. Well, it's not bad. Not quite as good as Harold Friedell. Certainly light years better than Haugen and the unfortunate drivel that's common in our churches. Yes, it's "nice" in an harmless sort of way, but why would I or anyone I know perform it. There's really nothing to it - except that it's "pretty", and some people tend to like "pretty" music - an awful lot of people like musical pablum. At least it's so much better than the musical poison which holds too many of them in thralldom.'
So, while continuing to hold that Rutter is musical pablum, I am not put off by it. I don't judge it to be worthless or bad. It's awfully nice pablum. But, still, it's pablum. Pablum which is a far sight better than what most people are doing in a lot of our churches. And we would be far better off (for 'starters') if more people performed such pablum. It's ever so greatly to be preferred than the poison and junk food music that too many people (homo sapiens, yet!) fall for and wallow in.
So, back to 'all things are relative': people who compose pablum such as this and draw unto themselves a certain register of people and musicians who think its really wonderful, are really doing us a service. Their correct function in the musical world is that of a stepping stone to real music that has something to say and which contributes something of substance to that miracle which is our western musical tradition.
The other side of this coin, though, is that people will come to be so enamoured of this sort of work that they don't venture on to meatier stuff. Like those who are so (unbelievably!) dazzled by the likes of Kinkaid that they prefer him to all others, indeed come to think him the equal of Titian. And, I'm not so sure that this analogy is not pertinent! In fact, it begets another: pablum is like pastel. Now pastels often are 'pretty', but they are not real colours, not a full blooded colour that one can get one's mind wrapped around, that really excites mind, body, and soul. It's neither is nor isn't. And that's what pablum is: it's food for babies, but not nourishment for the mature being.
I could probably write more, but many may be those who will congratulate me for stopping here (at least for now). I have a feeling that you have more company than I do in this matter, Charles. So be it, good friend. Many thanks for your challenge. I always know that if my Achilles heel is showing that you will spot it and shoot an arrow into it. Keep up the good work.Thanked by 1ZacPB189 -
Keep up the good work.
I am the vast embodiment of the axiomatic question, "Working hard or hardly working?"
For purposes of this thread's dialogues, the one query I'm not so sure that we ask each other and ourselves is what is the very nature and purpose of praise and worship? And with whom do we ask this, our pastors, our people, our constitutions, our scripture, all of the above and more?
Using the platform of "the heavenly banquet" as analogy, dining isn't merely eating, and more criteria than mere food is needed to nourish our whole "being" when dining. As difficult it may be to imagine, having a quarter-pounder at McDonald's constitutes a fine dining experience for likely millions of folks worldwide. It is noble to try to entice such folk with the promises of finer dining. But if you are fortunate to get them to play along with your tastes, and you take them to Alinea (Chicago) or the French Laundry (Napa) for the finest gastronomic expressions known to us, you will likely waste resources because your client cannot fathom exactly what she's experiencing. She will trace a path back to Mickies, or if you're lucky perhaps Olive Garden! But in the wide middle horizon lies thousands upon thousands of different dining experiences. What we "gourmets" can do is expose the masses to ingredients and dishes that are as honest as they are healthy, no matter the price point or exclusivity. Then they will either frequent fine establishments increasingly and start to change the market and demand for quality.
I've belabored the point. But for every ten "Gather us in" smorgasbord/cafeteria there is at least one "In every age (Whitaker-Sullivan)" that is crafted well and honest. What's that cliché often mentioned here a lot? Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. -
A month ago, I and a couple of hundred other mostly untrained amateurs attended a choral workshop with John Rutter. He is a good choir director, and as he explained, briefly, the genesis of each piece I came to a better appreciation of them. Each of the four hour long sessions included three pieces, talking about them, learning them rehearsing them and performing them. I think that illustrates the depth of the music, i.e. not very deep, but I don't now think he would claim that they are.
-
I think Rutter is a working musician and far, far worse than anything he has written is out there being sung every week in many places.
-
Rutter (with MacMillan and the late Tavener) appears in the last episode (no. 8) of the BBC Sacred Music series. He is a very thoughtful and articulate man and had really good things to say in the episode. That said, I still don't like his music.
Rutter is to church music, what André Rieu is to classical music. You could do much worse, but you could also do much better. -
Rutter is a working musician
I tend to think he'd receive this as high praise.
Again, I'm no Rutter apologist, but I don't see a necessity to otherwise qualify his status with comparisons that are purposely deprecating. JSBach was a "working musician" until Mendelsohn took up his cause. (I'm not equating Rutter to Bach.) As afH mentioned, an accounting of his whole career as a choral/orchestral practicioner would be fair.
There are plenty of such writers out there doing the same thing. And not to patronize them in our craft because they're "not" Tavener or Part or Lauridsen is tantamount to cutting our noses off to spite.... -
Putting my tiny oar for Rutter:
Longer ago than I want to admit, John Rutter and Jeremy James Taylor (not, for those of you on the left edge of the pond, the "easy listening" singer) combined to create The Pied Piper of Hamlin for St. John's College School, in Cambridge. This music I found, and still find, all these years later, at least thoughtful and worth listening to.
Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
O please, please, where can I order the T shirt???I'm no Rutter apologist -
I must and do admit that
When all's done and said
Whether to Rutter or not to Rutter
Depends utterly upon what one's choices are.
Than of certain musics
Rutter the choice far better is.
Than of certain others
Utter silence would a blessing be.
(I have some difficulty perceiving this 'working musician' title as excusing a preferred pandering to mediocre tastes. Which of the luminaries in our Pantheon of Apollonian masters were not 'working musicians'. Palestrina? Tallis? Weelkes? Bruckner? Monteverdi? Howells? Titelouze? Handel? Stravinsky? ??? Name one. Rutter is what he is. Some of his work is (maybe) a little better than, or on a par with, some Willan. But none of it approaches Willan's finest.) -
Gesualdo, Borodin, Ives...
-
Well,
I asked for it didn't I?
But, as oft t'is said:
The exception but proveth the rule.
And, of course,
the point was this:
That 'work' excuseth not craft that's lacking high grace.
Such heights are reached, fisrt, from endowed talent, and second, by virtue of character.
Both involve 'work' - whether there is or is not remuneration.Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
We know nothing about mediocre works that might have been written by Palestrina, Tallis, Weelkes, etc. Only the good stuff survived. It is difficult to make comparisons with "live" music being written today. You need about 300-400 years of winnowing out to make such comparisons.
Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.
Categories
- All Discussions21,509
- General Music Discussion7,776
- Job Openings1,365
- Management of Music Programs838
- Choral Matters523
- Church Documents and Rubrics513
- CMAA Notes293
- Events665
- For Newcomers: Read First24
- Sacred Polyphony531
- Hymnody840
- Gregorian Chant: General2,615
- ↳ Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis357
- ↳ Graduale Simplex55
- ↳ Semiology58
- Vernacular Plainsong681
- Anglican Use and Anglican Chant67
- Organ, Other Instruments and Repertoire418
- New Composition/Works in Progress1,232
- Recordings223
- Music for Hispanic Ministry155
- Music Education: Children207
- Music Education: General217
- News Items242
- Positions Wanted58
- General Discussion: Catholicism729
- Amusements173
- General Discussion1,009
- Opinions115