In preparation for completing the transcription of this Easter hymn, I consulted the music director at the Saint Katherine Greek Orthodox Church in Chandler Arizona. Through a long conversation it was conveyed that the history of Byzantine liturgical music is linked distantly to that of the Roman Catholic Church, although it has embarked on a considerably distinct evolutionary path since the two separated in the 11th century (Adams-Clement, Dec 2010). Unlike its western counterpart, the Eastern Orthodox Church has not tended to adapt instruments in their services and therefore relies on various vocal textures to support the melodic material. As is the case in Gregorian Chant and Jewish Canting the repertoire of melody is different from the intensely musically trained vocalist and that of the presiding priest or father. The transcription noted here is of a Greek Orthodox Performer of Chant; Kabarnos Kavaronos. The performance took place in Hagia Sophia, originally a Greek Orthodox Church which was later converted into a Mosque and finally in the 20th century turned into a museum (Hagia Sophia Info, Dec 2010).
The piece itself is a relatively free chant, spanning the range of an octave and a fifth, comprised of approximately 19 short phrases which could be combined into nine separate longer phrases of an antecedent and consequent nature, with one long coda melody at the end. The majority of melodies, eight total, cadence on C sharp (taking into account that the piece does not follow an equal-tempered chromatic scale), whereas six melodies rest on G sharp. The rest of the phrases end on either F sharp or E sharp. In fact, C sharp is clearly a tonic in this particular mode, it occurs 34 times, with the G sharp making 23 appearances which sets up a tonic-dominant relationship. Both the F sharp and D sharp make a similar number of entries, but the F sharp is more emphasized as it tends to be held for longer durations and the D sharp tends to be a passing or ornamental note.
Melodically speaking, the mode of the chant is analogous to the western minor scale with a frequent raised seventh in ascending passages (though not always). The work does modulate in the latter portion of the recording to the sub-dominant of F sharp, which is made clear through the secondary leading tone relationship by way of the E sharp. This is also emphasized by the choral drones taking place. There is also a noteworthy climax which occurs in the eighth short phrase, this is the only appearance in the entire piece of the F double sharp, which immediately leads to the dominant note; G sharp. Incidentally, this is also the highest note in the performance as well as one of the longer in duration. Another anomaly in this section is the supporting choir which sings an A against the F double sharp giving the impression of something that sounds quite a bit like an augmented sixth chord leading to the dominant. In true dominant-tonic relationship writing, the next phrase does come home to the C sharp which is heavily emphasized through repetition on several syllables.
The vocal melodic style presents something of a challenge for notating the piece in a western staff system. There are many ornamental passages which rely on escape notes and appogiatura figures. It is also very typical for the soloist to emphasize a slow wobbling vibrato at the end of long notes. Vocal slides are very common, as are slight variations in intonation on static pitches. Of course, it should be noted that the Orthodox churches have developed their own system of notation by way of symbols above the text known as “neumes” which indicate scale degree and (to a lesser extent) duration. In fact, the proponents of Orthodox liturgical music see the neume system as far superior to the western staff system. According to the website http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org; “Because Byzantine notation is descriptive, it grants an experienced chanter the freedom to add to a melody the embellishments he has learned through oral tradition” (Stanthonys Monastery, Dec 2010). In addition, the music is largely monophonic and there is little need to indicate things such as harmony or any kind of counterpoint. It has remained therefore very elegant in its dissemination of musical material.
The two aspects of this performance which really separate it from daily liturgical music and deliver it into the realm of a piece of art-music are the range of the melody and the choir sustaining drones underneath the soloist. According to the examples on the website; http://chant.hchc.edu/# (an online repository presenting virtual learning modules for students of eastern chant), the vast majority of liturgical music performed by priests covers less than an octave and does not tend to modulate through different tonal centers. Furthermore melismas are kept relatively short so as to not disturb the text, which is of paramount importance (Rev Fr. Frank Marangos, Dec 2010). As stated above, this soloist is also supported by a choir who accompanies him with various fundamental tones, either emphasizing the tonic note (C sharp), the sub-dominant (F sharp) or the dominant note (G#). As a point of contrast, this appears to be quite different than the cantus firmus counterpoint works of the middle ages and Renaissance in the west which tended to use long drawn out text from a previously composed chant as the accompaniment for a newly written (or improvised) melody. This goes some way to further illustrate the splinter in the evolutionary development of the eastern and western chant traditions.
It remains an interesting observation that even in the most devotional of spiritual traditions there is a place for the highly trained and skilled musician. That high art which is innovative, is able to exist alongside the liturgical does offer a contrast to the conception of the conservative church dictating style. It shows that the relationship between art and religion tends to be much more alive and complicated than is often considered.
References:
Music director at the Saint Katherine Greek Orthodox Church. Interviewed by Michael Wheeler. December 1, 2010. Chandler, AZ.
“Byzantine Versus Western Notation.” The Divine Music Project. http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/music/NotationB.htm Accessed December 7, 2010.
“Hagia Sophia Information.” Hagia Sophia Museum, Istanbul Turkey.http://www.hagiasophia.com/listingview.php?listingID=18 . Accessed December 10, 2010.
Marangos, Rev Fr, Frank. “Learn Byzantine Chant.” The Wabash Center for Teaching and Learning in Religion. http://chant.hchc.edu/chant.asp . Accessed December 1, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment