BBC Radio 3 The Choir

[Leeds Cathedral]

Dear SSG members,

The following programme this Sunday may be of interest to SSG members regarding the state of Catholic choral singing.

2 April 2006
Sunday 2 April 2006 18:30-20:00 (Radio 3)

You can listen later via the BBC website.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/thechoir/pip/jc98o/

We were asked to contribute and I think one of the choir's recordings is included.

Claudine Tat (Mrs)

[gwyn]

Aled Jones is hosting. Who better than a Welsh non-conformist, especially if you can't get an Imam or a Mormon Elder.

[Scrummy]

This is my first reply though I've been reading all your postings for quite some time.

Having listened to the broadcast of The Choir on BBC Radio 3 I thought I had entered a twilight zone where nothing had happened in Catholic liturgical music since I pinged alonga Caribbean Our Father at my primary school in the woodland glades of deepest Birmingham.

Is it me or was it a balanced view of contemporary Catholic music?

[musicus]

Welcome to the forum, Scrummy!

I missed the programme, but I will 'listen again' via the website. One or two people who did hear it have suggested to me that it wasn't the most balanced of programmes. It would be good to read here what others made of it.

[gwyn]

Welcome Scrummy.

Big Poo !!! I forgot all about it so will 'listen again' tomorrow.

[mcb]

...have suggested to me that it wasn't the most balanced of programmes.

Not unbalanced, exactly, but certainly an incomplete account. I always find with Martin Baker that you get a fairly one-dimensional picture because of his laudable preoccupation with musical excellence. It means he doesn't usually talk about liturgical or pastoral considerations. Not, I imagine, that he doesn't believe these things matter, but more I expect because he believes them to be taken care of by some 'standard' package of assumptions as to what liturgical music is there for and what one hopes for it to achieve. It would have been helpful to hear him spell out his thoughts on these things.

Instead, his views on the current state of Catholic liturgical music come out as fairly negative, because he doesn't acknowledge that any enterprise with lower musical sights than Westminster might be getting it right in other ways. He singled out Catholic cathedrals for criticism, with the exception of Leeds, but I think the same apparent eclipsing of liturgical and pastoral aims in pursuit of (undoubted) musical excellence there too leaves some contributors to this forum with misgivings. (As in Westminster, I'm sure it's not a question of downplaying these as priorities, rather of buying into traditional unstated assumptions.)

James MacMillan was more thoughtful, I felt, and more open to recognising the need to reconcile different priorities. He talked about the need to strike a balance between the beauty of choral music and the appropriateness of giving an active role to the assembly, and about how hard it can be (and a challenge he could have ducked) to compose music which genuinely works for singing by the assembly. Where he was somewhat cryptic, I felt, was in suggesting that this is an exciting time for Catholic liturgical music. I'd like to know what he believes is about to happen!

With Martin Baker I feel I don't really know exactly where he stands because I don't know who exactly his fire is trained on (apart from the musical establishments of most Catholic cathedrals ). It's all very well complaining that there's bad music out there. I think we'd all agree. It's just not clear which music he means is the bad stuff - sometimes from what he says you'd think he means everything that's not great art music. But for me, at least, that jars so much with personal experience of what is genuinely effective as a vehicle for collective prayer that it's hard to take him seriously.

M.

[dunstan]

Where he was somewhat cryptic, I felt, was in suggesting that this is an exciting time for Catholic liturgical music. I'd like to know what he believes is about to happen!

Well, this week's Catholic Herald suggested that the Vatican are working on a document on liturgy which went under a headline of something like "Electric guitars and drumkits to be banned". JPII was never all that interested in liturgy, while Benny is quite passionate about it, so I'm looking forward to this pontificate.

As for The Choir, I missed it. But remember that it is a programme about sacred music per se rather than about music in the liturgy. So the picture painted must be viewed with reference to the intended audience.

[NigelHr]

Where he was somewhat cryptic, I felt, was in suggesting that this is an exciting time for Catholic liturgical music. I'd like to know what he believes is about to happen!

I do think there is something in the air. The church under this pope seems to be taking a hard look at the state of its musical tradition.

As I retired music teacher myself, I have always dispaired at the closed shop attitude of the catholic musical establishment. It seems that for far too long, people that could never have made an honest living composing for any other institution have deluded (and sometimes with the highest personal motives) the church into singing their weak and disposable music. What I think James M means is that the days of "compoers" such as Dean, Inwod, Foster, Jones, Haugen, Walker etc is coming to an end, and it'll be with the churches encouragement that we walk away from this. Let me be frank - I can't see these guys getting an A level let alone degree level with this quality of musical work.

I've always loved James Mcmillans operas, and can see his sense of dramatic rension transfers perfectly to our liturgy. I like writing music myself, but I know it isn't good enough for the liturgy. Liturgical music has got to be of the best that mankind can produce, not some poor soul strugling to produce something worthy.

James McMillan and Mr Baker think that the church has been misled by its musicians. Amen to that. I'm thrilled they are both contributing to showing a different way thats been obscured too long by the dross!

A strong posting yes, but there is too much of a cosy consensus. I believe in SSG and that should be part of the rebirth of catholic music, not represent a blind archaic alley with vested interests of failed composers.

[musicus]

Please remember, everyone, when naming names, that several of them post here and yet more read the posts. Do not allow your strongly held opinions (which are welcome here) to descend to personal abuse, flaming or worse (which are not). Composers are people too.

From the forum's House Rules: 1. Please post in a way that is respectful of other users. Flaming or abusing other users will not be tolerated.

Thank you.

[docmattc]

I'm not sure I agree with Martin Baker's conjecture that Catholics don't sing because there is too great a repertoire (he cites hymn books with >1000 hymns). Practically, what percentage of Laudate to we actually use I wonder? We have discussed elsewhere on this forum that Westminster have used the same Mass setting for 5 years and still have problems getting the congregation to sing it.


It will be interesting to see if something really is in the air, personally I'd take anything I read in the Herald with a large dose of (right handed) spin.

I agree that there is something of a closed shop attitude in Catholic music in the UK and it would be useful if we were exposed to more material.
There is some highly dubious music out there, but I'm not sure I'd lay it all at the feet of Inwood, Haugen [img]et%20al[/img]). Most of their music is well thought out liturgically, and very singable by the congregation as well as playable by the amateur musician. The bottom line is that most parishes have amateur choirs (if any) and amateur organists like myself who can make this music prayerful but would make a dog's dinner of "great art" music.

These composers, are producing music which is certainly current and popular. In 10 years time we may look back and decide it is no longer useful as we did with such gems as the Israeli Mass and Peruvian Gloria. A much more pressing issue is how do we reform those parishes (of which there are many) who still know only these settings, or who are aware of nothing more than the four hymn sandwich musically?

Lets not lump the composers (or more accurately compositions) of the 90s and 00s with those of the 60s and 70s

[mcb]

weak and disposable music

I think we should call a spade a spade here, Nigel. If you find objectionable all the output of all those composers writing contemporary liturgical music, then perhaps what you really appear to be objecting to in principle is the idea of congregational singing. Or is there another list to set beside the one you've given, of composers writing music for the post-Vatican II liturgy who you believe do achieve the requisite aesthetic merit in writing according to present-day liturgical norms? I'd be interested to know who you regard as a positive model in writing for the renewed liturgy.

M.

[Merseysider]

....people that could never have made an honest living composing for any other institution have deluded the church into singing their weak and disposable music.

...Dean, Inwod, Foster, Jones, Haugen, Walker...I can't see these guys getting an A level let alone degree level with this quality of musical work.

Not sure if I want to scream, cry, shout or stab someone. I certainly want to use the sort of words which would be bleeped on here. How bloody insulting can you get?

You will fine, NigelHr, that "these guys" have degrees aplenty. And if their work is to be considered unsuitable and pushed out of the church then I'll be going with it.

Musicus, surely this kind of outrageous abuse (arguably libelous) cannot be allowed on the forum. And if it is, then thank God NigelHr has retired from the teaching profession.

[NigelHr]

If you find objectionable all the output of all those composers writing contemporary liturgical music, then perhaps what you really appear to be objecting to in principle is the idea of congregational singing.

These aren't MY words
and I don't agree with them either
I'm simply highlighting the standards of much music composed for the church since 60's, and I think my post makes that clear enough.

To put it another way:
What I'm saying is look at real composers that can write for orchestras and catholic congregations and organs, pianos etc etc Good catholic examples are Mr MacMillan (hence the thread), Arvo Part (have a look yourself), Colin Mawby.
Mind you, gregorain chant isn't a bad place to start for congregational music, isn't that where the church says we should base ourselves anyway post VII. I can't remember the bit of VII where it says music should be promoted with a bias towards composers that would not be taken seriously in any other institution. (have you seen the offerings on the SSG website for example?) VII reaffirms that liturgical music is about standards, togetherness, participation etc. I contest that the church has been badly misled in this country, but the heirachy is waking up at last.

[NigelHr]

thank God NigelHr has retired from the teaching profession.

charming!

[ssgcgs]

I was intrigued by the programme “The Choir” even though it didn’t cover all aspects of debate that some of you would have liked it to. Aled Jones introduced the subject of discussion as “the health of choral music in the Catholic Church” thereby limiting it substantially. It was about a choral tradition that might be (or might have been) in jeopardy, about prejudice against the use of the choir in liturgy. But it was no more one-sided than some of the debates that have taken place on this Forum. There is ominous criticism in what Martin Baker says which, in the light of his very polarised focus on only great art music and Gregorian chant, may be dismissed by those who know more about the music that he’s sweeping aside in ignorance (and I mean that literally, not pejoratively).

When I look for inspiration to write I draw on all sorts – Tavener, Poulenc, Howells, Lauridsen (who?) and yes, Walker, Haugen, Inwood. I am in a parish alongside an amateur composer who has a greater facility for writing appealing music than I, and I draw inspiration from him too. I believe that the Catholic musical repertoire has moved on since the inferior outpourings of the sixties and seventies and does now offer something of great liturgical worth.

I should say at this point that I run the SSG Composers’ Group, but I am not supposed to be its general factotum. I claim no authority to pronounce judgement on the musical standards of the present day, and I am expressing my personal opinion here. We get a variety of people coming with a widely varying range of experience, knowledge and ability. If I believed that composing was best left solely to the experts I would not believe in the Group as I do. What I do believe, though, is that Composers’ Group should teach. It may teach through the good example of its contributors, through the services of professionals who compose or teach for a living, and through the inspiration and encouragement of those who can use their greater experience to benefit those with less. I am not sure that we always achieve that aim too well, and I would like to bring more expertise to bear on the Group.

Going back to the programme debate, it did veer towards the participation of the assembly. At this point I heard a number of comments that struck a chord with me. I could post on them in haste, but I am choosing to reflect on them….

Just one quotation from I’m not sure which contributor, referring to composing for the Catholic Liturgy “We need to take ego out of the equation.” Perhaps we should all compose anonymously, and always acknowledge our source(s) of inspiration. James MacMillan demonstrated a freedom from ego when he led our Group meeting in Leicester last June. He is passionately interested in music for the Liturgy, not his music for the Liturgy. He recognised a prayerful quality in our work even if its musical quality was not that great.

When one looks at the texts of those choral pieces played on the programme, I feel that they do not represent a body of repertoire with a wide liturgical usage (regardless of whether your church choir could tackle them technically or not). I think that the challenge for today’s composer, professional or amateur, is in setting more texts that are liturgically valid and relevant. Look no further than this Discussion Forum for ideas! The best arbiter of quality may well be the assembly itself and its response to the music, not the choral director of music. If the Church issues prescriptive norms, that will be a sad day.

I am passionate about choral music (I had to interrupt my listening last night to go out to choir). I would love to use more polyphony in the liturgy but, even so, I can see that it has its limitations.

As I was writing this, the latest postings popped up on this thread. I have just been reminded why I will not ever be the final arbiter of musical standards.

CG Sec