Taize is wonderful if you have a good cantor that can carry the descants above the chant. They are repetitive, but that's the beauty, I think. The music transcends the mortal into a purely spiritual realm, but has to be done correctly, otherwise it can be like nails on a chalkboard.
It depends on the particular piece. Some wear better than others. There are many ways to vary texture with them, without resorting to gimmickry. Overall, I believe they work very well in Catholic liturgy if chosen and executed with discernment and care.
I did a beautiful Laudate Dominum and it worked quite well with just the organ. The children's choir did the drone while an adult lyric soprano did the descants and it was exquisite.
Gavin - Hah! That's exactly what I was thinking.... I did once go to a Taize workshop, but I was, like, ten years old. So I honestly don't remember much about how it is supposed to be done. My guess is minimal, soft instrumentation. But can it be done acapella?
I typically don't repeat them over and over and over like they're supposed to be done.
If a piece is in four parts with a verse (sung over the refrain) and a descant, I'll do it three times: - Melody only - Four Parts w/verse - Four Parts w/descant
Often it makes a decent quick motet with little/no rehearsal time necessary.
The purpose of a Taize chant is to meditate upon the text, so whatever you do in practice should foster that.
My own preference is for a capella performance, though I also accompany when appropriate to the setting or chant. I prefer to prepare variations (one part, four parts, Latin text, English text, instrument, accompanied, unaccompanied, altered harmony), and do each variation in a set of three - Trinity?
One thing I do enjoy about Taize is that one can make it heterophonic. Ask one part of the choir to chant the Latin while another does the English. Some hum, some chant. You can be as creative as you like, and it still works. I've even asked vocalists to improvise on it, with great effect.
Personally, I don't like Taize very much. I find it boring. But I do use it when appropriate for those who get something out of it.
I liked to use Taize chant before I had SEP for the Communion. They were easy, the congregation knew them and I've been to Taize, and have experienced the meditative qualities mentioned above. What I did was use the refrain which was close to the proper refrain of the day and then add the verses, in English, to a simple tone. It worked very well, and yes, it worked a cappella too. The repetition helped the congregation participate and many are in four parts, which made the choir happy. Sometimes we would begin the chant, process for Communion and return to sing the verses. Then we would follow with a motet.
When I use them, I go about it much the same way that MatthewJ describes. Quick and easy motet. Some can be good starter pieces for choirs.
Too many repetitions and it dies in the context of the mass, IMO. 4-5x and more might work best for confession services, adoration, processions(?), retreats, etc.
I have two or three Taize books that came with the choir I direct and would look through them to find the refrains. They were very loosely related, but I tried. For example for Corpus Christi the refrains is something like "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood..." and there is a refrain "Eat my flesh, drink my blood, come to me and never be hungry." It wasn't perfect, but it ended up being a segue into what we do now with the SEP and the Father Weber Chants and at the time, I didn't know what else to do.
Yes, I agree Osborn. For my situation, it was a beginning, but I don't think it was a bad place to start. We rarely use it now. We've graduated to a meat, potato and veg diet, but I'm still cutting the portions into bite sized pieces. It will require work to move on to the next stage.
I don't agree that Taizé music is "pablum." It's meant for a particular style of worship that is contemplative yet communal from beginning to end. In my opinion, it clashes with other music in a (non-Taizé) Mass because the whole contemplative mood and setting need to go with it: lots of candles, ample silence before and during the liturgy, retreat-like atmosphere. In a parish Mass it can seem simplistic, boring, or pointlessly repetitive, whereas in its proper context it can be very effective, affective, moving, inspiring, community-building, prayerful, evocative...
You can sing Taize in the morning, but you cannot sing Vespers in the morning? You can sing Taize during Communion, but you cannot sing Vespers during Communion?
I love Taize. Case closed. It's meditative, spiritual and easy to sing. I see no problem with using it as a communion hymn, or meditation hymn, and then come in at the end with a joyous and triumphant recessional. I also use it for Offertory (although I hate the idea of that hymn sandwich, so I play a lot of instrumentals here). If people are falling asleep during a long communion, then they have no idea what communion is all about. But, that's just my small, very humble opinion.
I've called it "Burt Bacharach does chant," but that is perhaps unfair to Burt, who I like. Taize sounds schmaltzy, and increasingly so the more I hear it. It seems to me to be yet one more (Protestant) thing to push aside the (Catholic) propers. That said, it is probably better than 90% of the music you might hear on any given Sunday Mass, but even that is something of a problem: Chant-averse pastors might allow it, and then say "Ok you trad cranks, you got your Latin, that's as far as we go."
Gavin - I wish we had a long Communion procession. By the time we introduce whatever it is we're singing.... the procession's almost done! That's why I'm thinking Taizering them would be good because we could do the MatthewJ version... short, but very sweet. :-)
Bgeorge, the thread welcomed opinions, and I disagree with yours, which is fine. However, I'm curious if you can clarify your claim that Taize is "schmaltzy". What, to you, are the characteristics of "schmaltz" that this music (really more of a performance practice than a repertoire) possesses?
I ask because I usually define "schmaltz" as triple meter and melodic chromaticism. I thought this was a common understanding, but Taize has none of these traits. If anything, the repertoire has strong musical ties to traditional common-practice hymnody, again, something few would identify as "schmaltz".
Taize is Protestant??? Oh my. Better tell that to the editors of the Catholic Book of Worship III, before they get working on number IV. (CBW III is Canada's "official" hymnal, brought to you by our friendly, neighbourhood CCCB.) CBW III is fully Taizered.
I'm really hesitant other than my little poem above to comment further in this thread, but Taize came down the pike via a GIA unveiling of the yellow volume without any of what we now call "vetting." And among its strongest proponents was the ubiquitous Sr. Toolan. It used Latin in addition to the English version of the Berthier "mantras" (which was also considered a marketing plus at the time.) But the implication of a Catholic pedigree seemed quite strong at the inception, though accounts of Br. Roger's movement and, as Gavin says, monastic and ecumenical were publicized. Taize was soon at LAREC, NPM's, everywhere. But we should look at whatever proportion of its influence has taken root in our parishes with new eyes and ears. If newly (or closeted) composed ordinaries, psalters, and propers are now subject to ecclesial review by the local see, then shouldn't other sources (explain how to me "Taize" differs from "Hillsong" in terms of ecumenical and ecclesial outreach) be subject to the imprimatur/nihil obstat processes?
PurpleSquirrel - do you have a hymn board? We don't announce anything music - everything is posted and the people know to look - it took a little time, but so much nicer than having an amplified voice blaring out. We also begin the Communion chant/music, as soon as the priest consumes.
I also do not use a hymn board. The former director always made a big deal out of it...."the offertory song is "song, song", on page 56 of the hymnal. Please join the choir as we sing".....it used to drive me absolutely bonkers. When I took over, I found somebody to make a couple of beautiful wall hymn boards for either side of the altar, and told the people we would no longer announce. It's been so much nicer and the mass isn't interrupted so blatantly.
Yes we have, and use, a board. I may try not announcing and see how it goes. I think that's a good idea, especially as I always feel like I'm interupting when I announce the Communion music, as we also begin as soon as the priest consumes. However, our congregation is not trainable in that the majority of them are just passing through. But I'm still willing to try.
Taize music is quite nice and easy to render. However, I have avoided it mainly because in my own experience, those who use it have used it primarily to replace Gregorian Chant, which has been my first love for liturgical music. Since I cannot do Gregorian Chant in my parish setting, I am using the Simple English Propers and also the Meinrad Tones. They work well in our tiny parish in NW Indiana.
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.