compiled from a series of messages on the Yahoo Prostopinije Group
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: chantermt-at-aol.com
Subject: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Music Commission
& the MCI
Using the Psalm-Tone in the Inter-eparchial Music Commission editions (as well as those issued by the Metropolitan Cantor Institute)
In Carpatho-Rusyn plainchant (i.e., prostopinije), texts which are not appointed to specific melodies in the eight-tone system are often chanted to what is called (for convenience) the "psalm-tone."
There are several different forms of this tone. The one which is used most often in the Mukachevo dialect of the chant has two phrases. The first phrase is sung totally on "do." The second phrase has a reciting tone of "re" with a cadence of "ti-do." In general, this cadence is applied on the last two syllables of the second phrase of the text. The first phrase is indicated by being flush left on the margin; the second phrase (or the final phrase, if there is more than two phrases of text) is indicated by a heavy indent; the note "ti" in the cadence is indicated by the syllable in italic bold text.
Example One:
Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit,
— Now and ever and forever. Amen.
This results in the last accent falling on the return to "do."
Sometimes, however, the last accent of the line will NOT be the last syllable. When that occurs, there will be more than one syllable sung to the last "do." For example:
Example Two:
You stretch out the heavens like a tent.
— Above the rains you build your dwelling.
In this case, the word "your" is sung to the note "ti;" but BOTH syllables of the word "dwelling" will be sung on the note "do."
It is important to understand that the drop of the minor third (the interval from "re" down to "ti") does not make an accent. The final accented syllable in the line will always be sung on the note "do"---the only difference is that there may be more than one syllable sung on that note.
The purpose of this flexible use of the psalm tone is this: that no word will be sung with an accent or emphasis falling on an unaccented syllable.
Using Psalm 103 in its "chanted" form from the Office of Vespers, one can see that most of the couplets of the psalm will be in the first form exemplified above. The examples of the second form will also be noted here with an asterisk (*).
Bless the Lord, O my soul!
— Lord my God, how great you are,clothed in majesty and glory,
— wrapped in light as in a robe.You stretch out the heavens like a tent.
— Above the rains you build your dwelling.*You make the clouds your chariot,
— you walk on the wings of the wind;you make your angels spirits
— and your ministers a flaming fire.You founded the earth on its base,
— to stand firm from age to age.You wrapped it with the ocean like a cloak:
— the waters stood higher than the mountains.*At your threat they took to flight;
— at the voice of your thunder they fled.They rose over the mountains and flowed down
— to the place which you had appointed. *You set limits they might not pass
— lest they return to cover the earth.You make springs gush forth in the valleys;
— they flow in between the hills.They give drink to all the beasts of the field;
— the wild asses quench their thirst.On their banks dwell the birds of heaven;
— from the branches they sing their song.From your dwelling you water the hills;
— earth drinks its fill of your gift.You make the grass grow for the cattle
— and the plants to serve man___s needs,that he may bring forth bread from the earth
— and wine to cheer man___s heart;oil, to make his face shine
— and bread to strengthen man___s heart.The trees of the Lord drink their fill,
— the cedars he planted on Lebanon;*there the birds build their nests;
— on the treetop the stork has her home.The goats find a home on the mountains
— and rabbits hide in the rocks.You made the moon to mark the months;
— the sun knows the time for its setting. *When you spread the darkness it is night
— and all the beasts of the forest creep forth.The young lions roar for their prey
— and ask their food from God.At the rising of the sun they steal away
— and go to rest in their dens.Man goes out to his work,
— to labor till evening falls.How many are your works, O Lord!
In wisdom you have made them all.
— The earth is full of your riches. *There is the sea, vast and wide,
with its moving swarms past counting,
— living things great and small.The ships are moving there
— and the monsters you made to play with. *All of these look to you
— to give them their food in due season. *You give it, they gather it up;
— you open your hand, they have their fill.You hide your face, they are dismayed;
you take back your spirit, they die,
— returning to the dust from which they came.You send forth your spirit, they are created;
— and you renew the face of the earth.May the glory of the Lord last forever!
— May the Lord rejoice in his works!He looks on the earth and it trembles;
— the mountains send forth smoke at his touch.I will sing to the Lord all my life,
— make music to my God while I live.May my thoughts be pleasing to him.
— I find my joy in the Lord.Let sinners vanish from the earth and the wicked exist no more.
— Bless the Lord, O my soul.
And again:
You made the moon to mark the months;
— the sun knows the time for its setting. *How many are your works, O Lord!
— In wisdom you have made them all.Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
— now and ever and forever. Amen.
With a bow each time:
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!
— Glory to you, O God! (Three times)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: "Johanna Katchen" <katchen-at-mx.nthu.edu.tw>
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Music Commission
& the MCI
The explanation given by Professor Thompson should be quite useful for those who have little or no experience with this type of chant and wouldn't otherwise know how to go about it. In that respect, such detailed work is needed. And certainly a unified way of doing things is better than chaos.
However, I hope there will still be room for experienced cantors to apply some slight variation, to stress a different word occasionally if that somehow fits better. It's always been the case that there were slight differences in singing even in neighboring towns.
I would like to add a bit to the comments on using the chant in English, again using Psalm 103. The second phrase does not always start on "re." For example, in
He looks on the earth and it trembles;
— the mountains send forth smoke at his touch.
in the second line I would sing the the on "do" and go up to "re" for mountains. This is related to the amount of time each syllable gets, which depends on whether you have a content word or a function word and the stress pattern of the word. That is, the word the is a function word, not important. The first syllable of mountains, a noun, takes a primary stress, and in the chant this syllable gets about twice the time as the other syllables until the stressed syllable of the last word (as JT mentioned in dwelling). That is, the first stressed syllable of the first content word is longer in each line (as is the last).
Now this works for the first 4 lines.
Bless the Lord, O my soul!
— Lord my God, how great you are,clothed in majesty and glory,
— wrapped in light as in a robe.
But then what do we do with the following?
You stretch out the heavens like a tent.
— Above the rains you build your dwelling.
Do we stress "You" or do we stress "stretch?" I would choose "stretch" because in succeeding lines you have verbs make, founded, wrapped, and so on, which I would also stress. The "You" is repeated, but the rest changes, and in the English pattern of contrastive stress, in a series we stress what is different, not what is the same. That is, we have to look at the whole discourse to decide which content words to give prominence to, and here to be consistent in that the structure is repeated, so we should repeat a similar interpretation of that structure, here stressing the verbs.
In the next line the second syllable of "above" is stressed in speech, so a- is on "do" and -bove is on "re" and longer.
Another variation is to end the last line with "mi, re, do," but we don't want to do this every second line. It works at the very end, as in "Glory to You, O God", along with slowing down, and it's especially nice if you have some people harmonizing. (You O God, "mi re do.") It can occasionally be done within the text if it seems this is an important phrase. I would use it near the end, in the couplet
Let sinners vanish from the earth and the wicked exist no more.
— Bless the Lord, O my soul.
and put O my soul on "mi re do."
Now the next thing I say may be a little controversial. When we sang Psalm 103 in the past, we used four lines to a unit. When I heard the couplet version for the first time in Pennsylvania at the end of March 2005 for Easter, it struck me as too sing-songy, too repetitious.
Couplets work for shorter pieces of text, but this psalm is rather long. I would also argue that the repetitiousness might have the same effect on the congregation as praying the rosary has on some people--their minds wander. However, with a four-line unit, you have to pay more attention, you may start to see the larger meaning of the text since you are looking at larger units, AND there is more room to interpret the text with feeling. That is, while we still follow the "do re ti do" pattern, there is still room to give stressed syllables of important words a little more emphasis, to use slight pause at punctuation, for the cantor to really feel what the words mean and to somehow convey that to the people singing with him/her.
So even what on the surface seems like a simple chant has a lot underneath. Prof. Thompson has provided us with the much-needed guidance for Step 1, but each cantor still has the role of interpretation. We shouldn't just parrot the text and chant or, as my father says, don't sing like you're chopping kapusta! We have the job of transmitting God's words and wonders and should take some time to study our texts and music and decide in minute detail how we will interpret them, with the help of the Holy Spirit.
Johanna Katchen
Professor of English and Linguistics
National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan
Reader/Cantor, Holy Trinity Orthodox Church, Taipei
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: chantermt@aol.com
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Musi...
In a message dated 5/31/2005, katchen@... writes:
"So even what on the surface seems like a simple chant has a lot underneath. Prof. Thompson has provided us with the much-needed guidance for Step 1, but each cantor still has the role of interpretation. We shouldn't just parrot the text and chant or, as my father says, don't sing like you're chopping kapusta! We have the job of transmitting God's words and wonders and should take some time to study our texts and music and decide in minute detail how we will interpret them, with the help of the Holy Spirit."
I respectfully disagree with Prof. Katchen's assessment.
This is not at all about the cantor's interpretation. In a reading from Holy Scripture, where the cantor/reader is the only person chanting, that sort of nuance would be paramount. But in a Rusyn or Galician parish worshipping in English, this is about the body of the faithful being able to sing TOGETHER in a way that makes sense of the English language. The psalm tone--unique to the two Carpathian groups among the Eastern churches--is primarily a vehicle of congregational song. Unlike other jurisdictions, where the psalmody or the beginning prayers would be chanted by a reader, the psalm tone permits a combination of the traditional "alternation" of text [done in the old country between the men's and women's sides of the church; achieved lately through alternating "sides" of the church, or at least through the alternation of cantor and faithful] with the vocal participation of the entire gathered assembly.
This is one example (among many) of the need for the cantor's ministry to be "transparent." The focus cannot and should not be on the cantor's "interpretation" of the text of Psalm 103--it should be on the chanting/praying of the text by the faithful, led by the cantor, with a minimum of fuss and a maximum of correct rendering of the English text.
It should also be said that Prof. Katchen's suggestion about "varying" the psalm tone is, in fact, a conflation of two DIFFERENT forms of the tone: the Mukachevo version (first phrase, "do;" second phrase, "re, ti-do") and the Preshov version (first phrase, "do;" second phrase, "re, mi-re-do.") This is a perfectly legitimate variant (used, of course, in the parishes of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of Johnstown)---but it is important NOT to mix different versions of the tone in the same psalm. It is also important that a congregation know exactly what is expected of them.
Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: "Johanna Katchen" <katchen-at-mx.nthu.edu.tw>
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Musi...
Professor Thompson,
My ignorance on mixing chant types.
Perhaps I did not make myself clear what I meant by interpretation. I was talking about the very minute aspects. None of us can ever sing exactly like another person, even if we try. Some people will be a little slower, some will just naturally spend a split second longer on a syllable. Moreover, the music paper can never show you everything. As many have said, just because you see a series of quarter notes does not mean that every one gets exactly the same amount of time. The English language is a stress-timed language. To sing every syllable with the same timing would make your chant sound like Indian or African English, not native speaker English.
Of course, we have to be transparent so the people can sing along. If we are using natural-sounding English, it will be easy to follow. I was referring to congregational singing, not one lone chanter. But the cantor still has to practice ahead of time to know where to stress his words within the given chant and how to sing in phrases, not just individual words. I in no way meant the style of Greek psaltists, just parish cantors leading the singing.
I did not mean to offend.
Respectfully,
Johanna Katchen
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: chantermt-at-aol.com
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Musi...
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Dear Professor Katchen:
YES! <G>
Thank you very much. Even with different angles of approach, we're very much concerned with the same things:
(1) accuracy of use of the language;
(2) insistence on pre-service preparation by the cantor;
(3) understanding the concept that the meaning (not just the words) is paramount.
In no way did I take offense. This kind of exchange of ideas is what the prostopinije list is about. I apologize, too, if I came off as even more didactic than normal---the medium of email has a gift for adding "starch" to the most innocent of comments.
Prof. Thompson
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005
From: Timothy Woods <jtcatholic-at-earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Musi...
In my own experience at the parish level, any chanting is always a much more prayerful experience when the cantor is faithful to the printed page, especially in regard to rhythm. To the experienced cantors who used to sing, and perhaps still sing in the Old Slavonic, and to cantors who learned the tones without the use of noteheads which provide indication of rhythm, I can almost understand their desire to have some "freedom of interpretation". But now that we are moving forward with chants which are expressed as clearly as possible in modern notation, it is truly important that we learn to sing what is on the page, not what is "in our heads", so that the people can sing in full voice and not have to worry if they are going to suddenly "stick out" because the cantor arbitrarily decided to change a rhythm.
Individual practice of the chants to be sung is absolutely necessary, and not just ten minutes before the liturgy.
Tim Woods
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005
From: "stephen_r1937" <stephen_r1937@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: The psalm tone in publications of the Inter-Eparchial Musi...
As Prof. Katchen made clear in her last post, she was primarily concerned with the level in interpretation that is not normally conveyed in notation. It would be one thing for the cantor to "vary" by arbitrarily singing a line of recitative, on quarter-notes according to the book, with some syllables arbitrarily lenghtened to half-notes and others arbitrarily shortened to eighth-notes, and expect a congregation to follow such a lead. However, recitative *demands* interpretation and variation on a subtler level, just as we do in ordinary speech. If you sing all syllables to *exactly* equal notes, you will end up sounding like one of those half-intelligent computers in science-fiction movies--or like chopping kapusta. The congregation will not sing that way, and there is no reason for the cantor to attempt it.
On the other hand, if the cantor is singing alone--as I expect will be necessary from time to time--it seems to me that a greater degree of variation is not only permissible but desirable, to avoid monotony. I find myself doing this more or less instinctively--not mixing the "re-ti-do" Uzhhorod cadence and the "mi-re-do" Preshov cadence, but using a bit more pronounced rhythmic variation and sometimes even elaborating, for example, the Preshov cadence to "do-re-mi-re-do." Obviously this too can be overdone, but especially with simple tones of this sort too little variation can be soporific. In such a case the psalm tones function more like the Epistle tone, which as Prof. Thompson observes calls for more variation to express the meaning of the text adequately.
I also agree with Prof. Katchen about the intonation of the second phrase--I too usually move to re only at the first *stressed* syllable. I suppose this is one of those things one picks up by osmosis.
The psalm tones were not written out in chant books; only in very recent times have they been anything other than a purely oral tradition. If nowadays we are setting these things forth in print, it is because the unsettled nature of modern life does is not conducive to extensive reliance on oral tradition. At the same time, the vast number of texts of the Byzantine rite makes it impractical to print everything under staff notation, so various ways of marking texts must be employed, and total uniformity is scarcely possible. Even when the text is fully notated, one should sing the words and not just the notes; somewhere between arbitrarily departing from the book and mechanistically producing one identical note after another, there is the golden mean.
And I don't think anyone will disagree about the necessity of preparation and practice.
Stephen