Lauda Sion Sequence - adapting Commonwealth English text to the plainchant

GerardH

There's nothing like a bit of last-minute vernacular plainsong adaptation.

In the Commonwealth we are saddled with a very unfortunate translation of the Lauda Sion sequence in the lectionary. While it is beautiful poetry, the meter doesn't match the Latin original. While the Latin is mostly 8.8.7 trochaic, this text is 8.8.8 iambic.

With no rubric allowing substitution of a better translation, I have attempted an adaptation of the plainchant to this text. Preserving the stress pattern of the melody primarily, I mostly handled the different meter by omitting a note at the start and adding a note at the end of each phrase. Other phrases lent themselves to different treatment.

The text I am adapting can be found in the middle column starting on page 7 of this pdf.

Please find my adaptation and gabc code attached.

Any glaring errors? Inconsistency in treatment of phrases? Suggested difference of treatment? I'd be interested to hear forum-members' thoughts.

N.B. Discussion centred around "just sing it in Latin" or "use a different translation" (unless supported by non-USA rubrics) is not welcome.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Gerard,

Thank you for your valiant effort.
The tune of the Lauda Sion is designed for the Latin text, and the text for the melody; people who know neither the Latin text nor the chant will not be as disturbed as I was in reading it, but I doubt whether they will be able to sing it because, even as hard as you've worked to accomplish something usable, you've put the acCENT on the inCORRect sylLABle. That's partly because you're trying to fit an iambic text to a trochaic tune. You are not alone, by any means, in trying to do such a thing, but I'm never persuaded that it works. I suppose you could try a different note substitution pattern, say, by removing a different note, elsewhere in the line, instead, and having two notes on a syllable, thusly:

SING would get two notes.
THE would get two notes.

and so on.

Richard Mix

We feel for you. Looking at Ecce panis, did you consider

Be(ih)hold(i) the(g) bread(h) of(f) an(d)gels(e) (;) sent(e) For(g) pil(g)grims(g) in(g) their(g) ban(h)ish(f)ment(g)

You've already got the capital letters showing line breaks, so the barlines aren't adding information for the poor singers who are going to need to make phrasing decisions that may or may not respect rhymes: "sweetly sing (,) The praises" is surely a quarter bar instead of a half.

tomjaw

@CGZ

The tune of the Lauda Sion is designed for the Latin text, and the text for the melody;

The melody of the Lauda Sion is probably the original melody of the far older sequenceLaudes Crucis, although this melody is used in several of the Adam of St. Victor sequences. St. Thomas reused the meter and music for his new sequence.

I can write a lot more about this subject having set several of these type of sequence.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Tom,

I stand corrected, partly. If I've understood you, St. Thomas used the meter and music, and designed a text to go with it, so

and the text for the melody

is true.

I would like to have the time and energy to learn more about Adam of St. Victor and his sequences.

tomjaw

The Adam of St. Victor sequences mostly follow a meter of this type, A,A,B,B,C,D,C,D,E,E etc. The Laudes Crucis is one of over 70 Sequences that are attributed to Adam. Looking at the Laudes Crucis you will see that the melody follows the melody of the Alleluia of the Feast of the Holy Cross. So this may be the origin of the melody.

This melody was used for around 7 of the 70 Sequences, of varying lengths, they deleted music to fit. Trinity Sunday and Sunday within the octave of the Ascension use the same melody. Other sequences had their own music but can be sung to various melodies.

The Lauda Sion is two verses shorter than the Laudes Crucis, so St. Thomas did some editing... but basically followed the meter / melody.

If you can read French these books will tell you more than you ever want to know,

https://archive.org/details/lesprosesdadamd00aubrgoog/mode/2up
and
https://archive.org/details/prosesdadamdesai02adam/mode/2up

GerardH

you've put the acCENT on the inCORRect sylLABle

Chris, I don't think you've compared my adaptation to the Latin original. Show me an example where my emphasis is on the wrong syllable.

Looking at Ecce panis, did you consider

Be(ih)hold(i) the(g) bread(h) of(f) an(d)gels(e) (;) sent(e) For(g) pil(g)grims(g) in(g) their(g) ban(h)ish(f)ment(g)

Richard, thank you for the suggestion, but I don't agree with this approach, which does violence to the English text. Having sung in Anglican choirs I can say that respecting English punctuation or scansion in plainsong does not require additional barlines. I have gotten rid of the capitalisation instead (which is usually my preference anyway). Thank you for the serious consideration, though.

I suppose the interplay comes down to violence to the text or violence to the melody. Everything is a compromise. In the end I have made no changes to the notes, since no better options were suggested. Please see attached my final version (until I revise it again).

I may report on the success post- Corpus Christi.

...people who know neither the Latin text nor the chant will not be as disturbed as I was in reading it.

In my case, the people know neither.

ServiamScores · Screenshot 2023-06-06 at 9.09.41 AM.png

I confess I find myself rather disoriented by your adaptation. To me (and I promise I mean this respectfully) it seems to lose the savor of the original. If I sing, LAU-da SI-on (SAL)-va-TO-rem... etc. and then your adaptation, and try and conduct them both as though I were in front of a schola, I find the emphases completely different, and they would need to be conducted with a completely different chironomy / pattern. I find this renders me quite ill-at-ease. You could have done more justice to both melody and chosen translation. I've rendered the first two phrases as an example of what I mean.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories