![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
last few days
Sunday morning the Pennsic camp met for the annual post-mortem. Things actually went pretty well this year, so while there were issues to discuss, it wasn't all that long and involved. And everyone there agreed that there would be no problem with my leaving on the final Friday next year to avoid the Shabbat problems, which is good to hear.
Sunday evening we had dinner with Ralph, Lori, and Mike. It was a fairly normal dinner until the plumbing rebelled. Fortunately, Ralph has plumbing clues and was able to take the kitchen sink apart and find the clog. (Diagnosis: the disposal wasn't.) Unfortunately, that can't have been a pleasant way to spend the last part of the evening. I hope they're able to get it fixed fairly easily.
Last night at choir practice we went through the repertoire, deciding what to remove from the active repertoire and what to bring back (from previous culls). I was surprised by some of the choices; I didn't know anybody actually liked "Pastime with Good Company" or "Belle Qui". No accounting for taste, I suppose. :-) But *whimper*, people wanted to kill one of my favorites, "In Pace", a lovely three-part piece that just flows wonderfully. Oh well; maybe it'll come back in a year or two. Or maybe there'll be an opportunity for a subset of us to perform it at some point.
It sounds like the choir is going to do its usual concert of Christmas music for the 12th Night event, so I get to take a couple months off again. This is fine; I don't mind the break at all.
A couple of the non-Christmas songs that are coming back, and one new one that a group member is proposing, are problematic for me. I'll continue to just sit those out. Fortunately, the choir director understands the issues and is very accommodating -- much moreso than a previous director was. I'll never understand people who say "it doesn't matter what the words are if the music is pretty". (What this usually means, in my experience, is that their own sensitivities just haven't been bumped into, and they can't appreciate other peoples'.)
Last night after rehearsal some of us went to Dave & Buster's for dinner, which meant we got to watch Chris do impressive things with Pump It Up. One song in particular was quite impressive (level 5 and fast), but I didn't note its name.
Sunday evening we had dinner with Ralph, Lori, and Mike. It was a fairly normal dinner until the plumbing rebelled. Fortunately, Ralph has plumbing clues and was able to take the kitchen sink apart and find the clog. (Diagnosis: the disposal wasn't.) Unfortunately, that can't have been a pleasant way to spend the last part of the evening. I hope they're able to get it fixed fairly easily.
Last night at choir practice we went through the repertoire, deciding what to remove from the active repertoire and what to bring back (from previous culls). I was surprised by some of the choices; I didn't know anybody actually liked "Pastime with Good Company" or "Belle Qui". No accounting for taste, I suppose. :-) But *whimper*, people wanted to kill one of my favorites, "In Pace", a lovely three-part piece that just flows wonderfully. Oh well; maybe it'll come back in a year or two. Or maybe there'll be an opportunity for a subset of us to perform it at some point.
It sounds like the choir is going to do its usual concert of Christmas music for the 12th Night event, so I get to take a couple months off again. This is fine; I don't mind the break at all.
A couple of the non-Christmas songs that are coming back, and one new one that a group member is proposing, are problematic for me. I'll continue to just sit those out. Fortunately, the choir director understands the issues and is very accommodating -- much moreso than a previous director was. I'll never understand people who say "it doesn't matter what the words are if the music is pretty". (What this usually means, in my experience, is that their own sensitivities just haven't been bumped into, and they can't appreciate other peoples'.)
Last night after rehearsal some of us went to Dave & Buster's for dinner, which meant we got to watch Chris do impressive things with Pump It Up. One song in particular was quite impressive (level 5 and fast), but I didn't note its name.
Re: The annoying thing...
We also have a few that are explicitly Christian, e.g. a Kyrie, "Psallite", a song about Mary called "Beata Progeneus", etc. (And there's some talk of bringing back an absolutely beautiful Gloria setting by Byrd.) I just don't sing these no matter how pretty the music is.
And then there are the fuzzy pieces, where the words technically aren't problematic, based on a naive reading, but everyone knows what they're really talking about. For example, "Stella Splendens" is just a song about a star -- but we all know which star. And a song that was recently proposed, from the Protestant reformation, is called something like "Praise the Lord All You Gentiles" (yes, really!), and it doesn't explicitly mention Jesus, but from context that's the lord they seem to be talking about. I've pretty much decided that I won't sing these sorts of songs either. (Yes, I know that you can read implications that aren't really there and carry this to extremes, but so far I think the author's intent and the audience's first impressions are fairly obvious in the ones I'm sitting out.)
An interesting case arises with a piece that I wrote. Years ago I wanted to compose the ordinary for a mass -- because all the good renaissance composers did, and I wanted to follow in their footsteps. This was back when I was approximately an athiest, so it was an intellectual exercise only. Still, I twitched at some of the texts (couldn't bring myself to set Angus Dei or Credo), and the only one I actually did was the Sanctus. (You'll recognize this: "holy holy holy is the lord our God...", or words to that effect.) There is nothing objectionable in the text, and near as I can tell it's not used in a Jesus-specific manner in context, so I'm ok with singing this. I occasionally wonder if I should be, and whether the fact that I wrote it (and like it) is influencing me unduly. (I mean, I'm pretty happy that the choir actually wants to sing a piece I composed.)
Re: The annoying thing...
So I guess that this would include most of Handel's Messiah, whose text for a large part is (I think) actually just the king james of Isaiah. Or, I suppose I should say, whose text is Isaiah, but the King James text.
[...]I actually did [...] the Sanctus [....] There is nothing objectionable in the text, and near as I can tell it's not used in a Jesus-specific manner in context, so I'm ok with singing this.
Well, what do you think the author intended? :-)
I'm not sure what I would do were I actively involved in a choir now. When I was in high school, I was less observant in general. In singing, I drew the line at singing christmas carols; my director was very understanding about letting me sit that out. We also did madrigals and other acappella music (usually not a problem). We'd also do major choral works (Chichester Psalms, Mozart's Requiem, Handel's Messiah, Schubert's Mass in G...). Oh, also we did some Bach Cantatas. At the time, I would sing almost anything except for the actual word 'christ' (which I'd lip-synch) (i.e. in the Messiah, "The kingdom of the world... has become... the kingdom of our lord, and of his ****, and of his ****. And he shall reign... (etc)"). I'd also be much happier when the music was in Latin, Italian, German, or some other language I couldn't understand.
In college, we did much more Jewish music, although I think we also did Schubert's Mass in grams and parts of the Messiah. I think I pretty much did the same thing as when I was in high school. (Aside: one thing that I like about Schubert's Mass in G, besides the geeky chemistry joke which I snuck in, is the way that he sorta left out things he didn't believe in the credo (or mushed them together so it's harder to follow). In the sheet music we used, there's a later composer's attempt to make it conform to the traditional credo. It's nowhere near as good (I think).)
You've taken a strong position, and one which is much more internally consistant than what I did. (Well, I was young, and didn't have as much influence on the songs which were sung.) Thank you for taking the time to explain what you do!
Re: The annoying thing...
Well, what do you think the author intended? :-)
Beats me; I didn't write those words. :-) But they are, approximately, the Kedusha. Really. Startled me the first time I heard this go by in a Christian service (somebody's wedding) after I became familiar with the Jewish liturgy.
Thanks for the Schubert trivia. I didn't know that he was editng the text while setting it to music.
You've taken a strong position, and one which is much more internally consistant than what I did.
Well, as you point out, I've worked this out as an adult in a situation where I can just leave if I like. School choirs can be different. (In fact, for one year in middle school we were all required to be in the choir. I hated it -- I enjoyed singing, but being in that choir sucked.)
I also have a theory that people who choose Judaism -- whether converts or those who return -- view these things a little more strongly than "regular" Jews. Christianity was never a real possibility for you; I explicitly rejected it. That's got to shape the world view some.
Re: The annoying thing...
<digression> Actually, there's an interesting thing: in some of the kedusha -like prayers (like right after barechu) you get the kedusha with midrashic interpretation of the text. Just an example of midrash being a fundamental part of Jewish prayer. </digression>
I didn't know that he was editng the text while setting it to music.
I don't know if he really did the editing for philosophical reasons, or just to fit the music that he wanted to use... it's got a great rolling base line, that credo... at one point, JHitchin and I sat in our Organic Chemistry lecture hall, singing "Credo in organic chemistry..." before an exam. We didn't mean to, but apparently some of our classmates got seriously freaked out because they thought that we'd set all our studying to music and were therefore going to ruin the curve or something. Whoops, another digression, and I didn't mark it.
School choirs can be different.
Indeed. Although, I have to say that my high school choral director was very cool. I'd like to think that he would've been ok with my decision, although in practice it would've meant my sitting in chorus and not singing for months at a time. What would that have done to my grades? (Chorus brought down my GPA as it was...[1])
Here's a hypothetical question for you: if you have a child, who is in a public school and who inherits your musical abilities, and who wants to be in the chorus: what will you tell your child to do?
[1] In my high school, there were 3 choral groups: Chorus, Concert Choir, and Chorale. Anyone could be in Chorus; you had to audition for CC and Chorale. Thus, Chorus was "unranked", CC was "standard", and Chorale was "advanced". "unranked" classes didn't count towards your GPA; An A in a "standard" class was worth 3.4 or something, and an A in an "advanced" was 4.0. So even though I got As in CC, they brought down my GPA...
Re: The annoying thing...
Could be. I don't actually know the origin of this one. I do know the midrash about how we're supposed to be imitating the angels in the heavenly host when we way it, so presumably there's text somewhere that attributes these words to said host.
in some of the kedusha -like prayers (like right after barechu) you get the kedusha with midrashic interpretation of the text.
So that's what that is!
Setting studying to music: love it! :-)
Here's a hypothetical question for you: if you have a child, who is in a public school and who inherits your musical abilities, and who wants to be in the chorus: what will you tell your child to do?
Ask him to sit out the Christmas show (get insistent if necessary but try diplomacy first), and that he should tell me if anything he's given to sing bothers or confuses him. If I had a kid I would want to know what he was learning in school anyway (granted that kids are resistant to sharing this), so I would hope that questions about choir music wouldn't stand out as compared to questions about algebra or biology or art classes.
The public school I went to mostly stuck to secular stuff, with the exception of the Christmas stuff. I don't know what the public schools are like these days. I had problems with that school's choir not because the songs were offensive but because they were insipid. (Also, the alto lines tended to suck, and since I wasn't a soprano I must have been an alto.)
We were never graded in choir, fortunately. (I wonder how they would go about assigning individual grades.)
Re: The annoying thing...
I think that for my classes, if you attended regularly and payed attention, then you got an A. I don't think that I knew anyone who signed up for Chorus and didn't attend and pay attention -- I mean, it was an elective; if you didn't want it, you could've had study hall or something... (One fun thing about it was that it was "E" period, which meant that it fell during lunch half the time. And that meant that rather than being 45 minutes, the class was an hour, with 30 minutes for lunch. Our director decided that that was silly, so instead on those days we had sectionals (i.e. base/tenor, alto/soprano) for 45 minutes and 45 minutes for lunch. (I'm not sure when or if he ate.))
Re: The annoying thing...
Although it reminds me that, thanks to you, I am currently not able to hear the word "hosanna" without thinking "save us" and experiencing cognitive dissonance thereby. Stupid 2000 year old mistranslation. :)
Re: The annoying thing...
Although it reminds me that, thanks to you, I am currently not able to hear the word "hosanna" without thinking "save us" and experiencing cognitive dissonance thereby.
Sorry. :-) If it helps untangle that cognitive dissonance, the relevant Hebrew is actually "hoshia na" -- so it's a combination of translation and transcription glitches, kind of. ("sh" -> "s" is common, but they also dropped a vowel somewhere along the way.)
Gloria
Gloria in excelsis Deo; Et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis. Laudamus te. Benedicimus te. Adoramus te. Glorificamus te. Gratiam agimus tibi propter magnam gloriam tuam. Domine Deus, Rex coelestis, Deus Pater omnipotens. Domine Fili unigenite, Jesu Christe. Domine Deus, Agnus Dei, Filius Patris,. Qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis.. Qui tollis peccata mundi, suscipe deprecationem nostram. Qui sedes ad dexteram Patris, miserere nobis. Quoniam tu solus Sanctus. Tu solus Dominus. To solus Altissimus, Jesu Christe. Cum Sancto Spiritu in gloria Dei Patris. Amen.
You can probably spot some of the problematic phrases in the Latin. Here it is in English:
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will. We praise You, we bless You, we worship You, we glorify You, we thank You for Your great glory: O Lord God, King of Heaven, God the Father Almighty. O Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son O Lord God Lamb of God, Son of the Father: who takes away the sins of the world, have mercy on us; who takes away the sins of the world, give ear to our prayer; who sits at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us. For You alone are holy, You alone are the Lord, You alone are high above all: Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Re: Gloria
Re: Gloria