How to reply to objections to the Graduale Simplex
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 997
    Now I'm finishing my vernacular edition of the Graduale Simplex (in Dutch, see www.kleingraduale.nl), I'm also getting responses from influential church musicians whom I asked to review a preliminary edition. They raise a couple of objections to the project, or make clear why they think it's a bad idea to have a vernacular adaptation of the Graduale Simplex in the first place:
    - the simpler melodies of the Simplex are taken from the Divine Office, and this music isn't fit for Mass
    - the melodies of the Simplex are all of the same genre, and they miss the musical variety of the Gregorian Mass propers
    - the texts used in the Simplex don't match the texts from the Graduale Romanum
    - the Simplex uses seasonal sets of texts, taking away the musical character of particular Sundays
    - the Simplex introduces vocal participation of the faithful at moments when only the choir is supposed to sing

    In promoting my edition, I need to address these issues in a positive way, and I would appreciate your help with that. If you occasionally use vernacular chants, based on the music from the Graduale Simplex (for instance Paul Ford's By Flowing Waters, or Aristotle Esguerra's English SATB adaptations), would you like to share your experiences? What do the people in the pews say about these chants? How are the vernacular Simplex chants different from English adaptations of the Graduale Romanum (like Adam Bartlett's Simple English Propers)? How would you address the issues above when you were to publish a vernacular edition of the Simplex?

    Your thoughts are much welcomed!
    Thanked by 1GregoryWeber
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    I have not widely used the simplex, but I am familiar with it. Here's a few comments:

    All in all, this seems to be to be a situation where we must not let, as Fr. Z says, the perfect become the enemy of the good.

    Would you rather have the simplex chants, or no propers at all? That's the audience it's primarily designed for: situations where the GR propers are impossible or impractical, such as beginning to intermediate choirs, weekdays where learning another set of GR propers is impractical, or even situations where the pastor is allowing the propers to be sung, but only on condition that the congregation can join in on the antiphon.

    The Simplex isn't meant to replace or imitate the GR, it's meant to supplement it, and be a new resource unto itself.
    Thanked by 6smvanroode Paul F. Ford Earl_Grey ClemensRomanus E_A_Fulhorst GregoryWeber
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    The Church created the Simplex to lead people back to the music sung at Mass, the simplicity of the melodies will make people hunger for the musical variety of the Gregorian Mass propers, the texts are different from the Graduale Romanum so that no one confuses these singing of the two, the seasonal texts are definitely inferior to the proper texts of the Sundays toi give people security in singing and to permit them to move on with confidence to the Graduale Romanum and....when there is a choir present that can sing the Graduale Romanum, it would be silly for the people to sing the Simplex.

    But how many Masses a week are sung by the choir in your parish? 1? And how many Masses are said each week in the parish? Should they be denied the rich music of the church, especially since the Simplex was written BY THE CHURCH as a stepping stone to the great music of the Gradulale Romanum?

    How would you address the issues above when you were to publish a vernacular edition of the Simplex? Turn and ask them what THEY have published to promote the singing in the church. THE VATICAN published the Simplex. And authorized translations into English, I know 'cause I have seen them - and Dutch, too, I assume?

    Many people are going to be against you and that's good, that means that you have done something worthwhile. Congratulations on doing great work!
    Thanked by 6Earl_Grey smvanroode ClemensRomanus E_A_Fulhorst eft94530 GregoryWeber
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    1) the simpler melodies of the Simplex are taken from the Divine Office, and this music isn't fit for Mass
    2) the melodies of the Simplex are all of the same genre, and they miss the musical variety of the Gregorian Mass propers
    3) the texts used in the Simplex don't match the texts from the Graduale Romanum
    4) the Simplex uses seasonal sets of texts, taking away the musical character of particular Sundays
    5) the Simplex introduces vocal participation of the faithful at moments when only the choir is supposed to sing

    1) chant is fit for Mass; the music is secondary to the words; ergo, the Simplex is fit for Mass.
    2) the melodies of the Simplex are NOT all of the same genre, and they INCORPORATE the musical variety of the Gregorian Mass propers—yes, the genres are largely syllabic and neumatic, and only selectively melismatic; and there is more variety in the Simplex in that the Simplex uses more litanic forms to encourage the vocal participation of the faithful.
    3) the texts used in the Simplex can’t possibly match the texts from the Graduale Romanum because the latter is three times bigger than the former; but there is admirable continuity between the texts of both.
    4) the Simplex uses seasonal sets of texts, taking away the musical character of particular Sundays—yes and no
    5) the Simplex RESTORES the vocal participation of the faithful at moments when the choir usurped the singing of the assembly; the choir is supposed to sing only the verses of the processional chants and the chants between the readings.
    Thanked by 5smvanroode Gavin Ioannes Andreades Jenny GregoryWeber
  • JennyH
    Posts: 106
    Paul Ford said: 5) the Simplex RESTORES the vocal participation of the faithful at moments when the choir usurped the singing of the assembly; the choir is supposed to sing only the verses of the processional chants and the chants between the readings.

    Is this a typo, or are you serious? If serious, what are you talking about?
    Thanked by 1E_A_Fulhorst
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Very nicely put, Paul Ford!
  • E_A_FulhorstE_A_Fulhorst
    Posts: 381
    Something's wrong with the reasoning behind Response No. 1, or at least the muddy use of terms.
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    JennyF and EAF, I am serious about #5 and #1. I am talking about insights gained from my reading of James McKinnon and from decades of working with the Simple Gradual.
    Thanked by 2doneill Ioannes Andreades
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    2) by this same logic, wouldn't any sort of polyphonic propers also be out of consideration, as they also do not follow the exact musical variety of each chanted proper?

    3) The Lord giveth and the lord taketh away. So does the church. :D ie, not all that is new is bad, and not all old things are good. For example, the culture of low Masses with hymns 95% of the time, while historical, is not a goal to strive for. Some change is needed.
  • Ioannes Andreades
    Posts: 310
    If I remember correctly, aren't some of the simpler communion propers, such as Factus est repente actually taken from office responsories? To say that that there is a hard/fast distinction between mass chants and office chants seems to overlook the facts of the matter.
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963) and Musicam Sacram (1967) both called for a restoration of the use of Gregorian Chant, AND also called for the preparation of simplified typical editions. Ie. The Simplex, The Simple English Propers, The Simple Choral Gradual...

    There is also a practice where the antiphon is chanted to the same Psalm tone as the Psalm verses because the antiphon is too difficult for beginners.

    Unfortunately, the church relies too much on beginners and amateurs to provide Church music. Parishes need to pay a Liturgist/Director of Music/Organist and offer scholarships for those who are willing to study church music. A $2,000 per year scholarship amounts to paying a musician $40 per week.

    A good liturgist/music director/organist can probably do the work for a parish on 1 full day "in the office" ie preparing liturgy guides, preparing the music selection for the comming weeks, and then be paid for conducting a choir rehearsal one night during the week, and then leading the choir on the Sunday High Mass.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 997
    Thank you all for your replies. These are most helpful in writing the introduction for the Klein Graduale as well as articles on the subject.

    By the way, a full preview of the (pew) book can be seen here: http://share.snacktools.com/AB7CA9EC5A8/fzt86fq5
  • RobertRobert
    Posts: 343
    Nice looking book. Curious what you used to typeset the modern notation - Lilypond?
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 997
    Thank you. You did see it right: I used Lilypond to typeset the music.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    12 hours work for $40.
    8 Hours in the office.
    2 Hours for the 1 hour to 1.5 hour rehearsal.
    2 Hours for the warmup, the Mass and the cleanup afterwards.

    In the US we have something called minimum wage....which this sure isn't.

    Once again, this is why trained and talented Catholic musicians are often found in protestant churches.

    Is the standard of living that much less expensive in AU that this would attract people?
    Patricia Cecelia pointed out that I totally misread the paragraph above.
  • Patricia Cecilia
    Posts: 400
    frogman, I believe that hartleymartin's $2000 was aimed at his following sentence:
    A $2,000 per year scholarship amounts to paying a musician $40 per week


    The $40/week is what the Episcopal parish where I am director pays the section leaders of the parish choir, who put in three hours a week, all on Sunday morning. All but the soprano position have been filled for years by adults >40 years of age; the last time we hired a soprano, five years ago, we had to increase the amount to $50, but the vestry would only do that for the new person, not increase the existing salaries. Now that our soprano has moved on to pursuing a career in NYC, I'm having a terrible time trying to fill the position.

    The organist and I are 1/4-time employees (i.e. 10 hrs/wk, no extra pay for holy days, extra rehearsal et cetera, but stipends for weddings and funerals); we are paid at the bottom of the AGO scale for our experience and qualifications, but it's probably the best job with the best music of Catholic or Anglican parishes in the Catholic diocese (half the state).

    My home parish (Catholic) pays $125 per service for the organist to play three masses and direct the choir at one; he also has a full-time job outside of the Church because he certainly can't live on what he makes there (and it is a tiny church, so paying him that much is also a stretch). He makes for three masses about 75% of what my organist and I make for 1 liturgy, although he does get paid separately for every extra mass he plays. My pastor says he would love to have me there as choir director, but he can't afford me; so I do busman's holiday on my six Sundays of vacation a year.
    Thanked by 1hartleymartin
  • svaillan
    Posts: 39
    I have been using various versions of the simplex ("By flowing waters", Ainse, etc.) at all of our non-choir masses for a few years. I had noticed that people sang the ordinary very well (we used the same settings for long periods of time), but not the hymnody that we used in place of the propers. When I began using the simplex, it took a few weeks for the people to learn a particular antiphon, but once they had it, they were able to sing them as well as did the ordinary. We have been very pleased with the result. They seem perfect for for parishes with limited resources. The gradual is wonderful if done well, but not many places can do it well.
    Thanked by 2noel jones, aago smvanroode
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    My talk of a $2,000 per year scholarship being $40 per week was intended for certain members of the standing choir such as section leaders. A church with a bit of money to spare might have 1 or 2 choir members in each voice section to form a standing membership. The fact is that churches cannot and should not rely so heavily on volunteers on things as important as liturgy.
Add a Comment