Composing and Chanting in the Orthodox Church … · of the Second International Conference on Orthodox Church Music ... , may serve as an interesting case study for these questions

Composing and Chanting in the Orthodox ChurchProceedings

of the Second International Conference onOrthodox Church Music

University of Joensuu, Finland4 -10 June 2007

The International Society for Orthodox Church Music

& University of Joensuu

2009

Publishers TheInternationalSocietyforOrthodoxChurchMusic (ISOCM) and UniversityofJoensuu

Editors IvanMoodyandMariaTakala-Roszczenko

Translation fromRussianintoEnglishlanguage-MariaTakala- Roszczenko

Exchange JoensuuUniversityLibrary/Exchange P.O.Box107,FIN-80101Joensuu,Finland Tel.+358-13-251-2677,telefax+358-13-251-2691 E-mail:[email protected]

Sale TheInternationalSocietyforOrthodoxChurchMusic www.isocm.com/resources/publications

JoensuuUniversityLibrary/SalesofPublications P.O.Box107,FIN-80101Joensuu,Finland Tel.+358-13-251-4509,+358-13-251-2652, telefax+358-13-251-2691 E-mail:[email protected]

Coverdesign ©Ikonifoto/VesaTakala

Photographs AchilleusChaldaeakes,KaleviKoslonen,DavidLucs, TuuliLukkala,MelitinaMakarovskaya,TheodoraMargetis, VesaTakala

TheInternationalSocietyforOrthodoxChurchMusicISSN1796-9581ISBN978-952-99883-1-0

UniversityofJoensuuISSN1456-6818ISBN978-952-219-244-8

KopijyväOyPrintedinJyväskylä,Finland2009

256

John A. Graham

“You Are the Vineyard,

Newly Blossomed”:

Contemporary performance aesthetics in Georgian Orthodox Chant

Thediscoveryofthousandsofearly20thcenturychanttranscriptionsintheearly1990sintheKekelidzeInstituteofManuscriptsinTbilisi,Georgia,helpedenergize the revivalof traditionalOrthodoxChristian liturgical singing fol-lowingthecollapseofSovietcensorshipontheChurch.Thesetranscriptionsremain relatively unknown outside of Georgia and may raise considerablespeculationamonginternationalscholarsconcerningtheearlyliturgicalmusicpracticesontheouterfringesofthemedievalByzantineEmpire.Theintroduc-tionofapre-Soviet‘found’sacredrepertoiretothesacredmusicalreadyavail-ableintheGeorgianchurchchallengednotionsofauthenticity,andsparkedcounterclaimsforthelegitimacyofGeorgianpolyphonicchant.1

Thepopularizationoftraditionalchanthascoincidedwitharevolutioninperformancepracticeaestheticsinwhichtherefinedclassicalstyleofmostmainstreamchurchchoirshasbeenabandonedinfavorofa‘neo-traditional’stylemimingtheaestheticsofGeorgianfolksingers.Yetthesenewideasaboutperformancepracticefromwithintheneo-traditionalmusiccommunityneglecttheemotionalattachmentofcongregationstotheirformerrepertories,alien-atingoldercommunitymembersandclergy.Inaddition,theneo-traditionalperformanceaesthetichasnotbeenembracedbythesecularmainstream.ThismaybebecausethenostalgiafortheidealizedsoundofGeorgianchantthattypicallyaccompaniesscenesofnationalstruggle,loss,orenduranceinmain-streamtelevisionmedia,isassociatedwiththewesternclassicalperformanceaesthetic.2InordertobetterunderstandthedifferenceIamattemptingtopointout,itwillbehelpfultotakealookatthecurrentsituationinGeorgia.

1 Theauthorwishestoacknowledgethecollaborativenatureofthisresearch,whichisbasedonconversationswithesteemedcolleaguesincludedDavitShugli-ashvili,MalkhazErkvanidze,LuarsabTogonidze,andCarlLinich.2 Forexample,thechantShen Khar Venakhiandsimilarchantsmaybeheardat leastadozen timesonanygivendayas thebackgroundmusic forshowsontelevisionconcerningpastcivilstrifeinSouthOssetiaorAbkhazia,reproductionsofhistoricalbattles,OrthodoxChristianprograms,orcommercialsaimedattour-istshighlightingthemanymedievalchurchesscatteredthroughoutGeorgia’sruralhighlandregions.

257

JohnA.Graham:“YouAretheVineyard,NewlyBlossomed”

OnacrispSundaymorninginTbilisi,Georgia,throngsofthenewlyreli-giouscrowdintodowntownchurches,someofwhichwereuntilrecentlyusedas storerooms, museums, stables, or even public baths. Among the churchchoirsthatservethegrowingdemandfordailyservices,onemayobserveare-markablediversityinage,gender,andnumberofsingers.Aquicktouroffourdowntownchurchesrevealssomestartlingdifferences:beginningatthepopu-larandcrowdedKashwetiChurchonRustaveliProspect,twomixedgender,mixed-generation amateur choirs sing a combination of classical and tradi-tionalrepertoireinanunrefined,classicalstyle.IntheAnchiskhatiChurch,3anondescriptbrickandstonebasilicarecessedseveralmetersbelowstreetlevel,atrioofmenwithreedy,unadornedvoicessingcomplexpolyphonywhilethecongregationstandsinrestful,patientattention,menontherightandwomenontheleft.ThemusicisstartlinglydifferentfromtheKashwetiChurch,asisthecongregation.

Justafewhundredyardsaway,theyoungandoldmassoutsidethelargecross-and-domeSioniCathedral,seatoftheGeorgianpatriarchsincethe14thcentury.Inside,threemixedchoirsofadozensingerseachtaketurnssingingthreeandfourvoicedrepertoirefromthelateCommunistperiod,mixedwithchantarrangementsfromtheearly20thcenturyandafewsamplesofrecentlypublishedmedieval chant. In contrast, themassivenewSamebaCathedral4acrosstheriver,aprofessionalsixty-manchoirsingsfromaninvisiblebalconywhere their voices are amplified throughout the booming space. This choirsingsacombinationofornatearrangementsofmedievalchant interspersedwithnewcompositionsbyIliaII,PatriarchoftheGeorgianOrthodoxChurch.

In theearly1990s,as theculturalandpoliticalarena in theCaucasuscollapsedintoaperiodofcivilunrest,5radicalchangesintheperformanceofchantwerenotalwayswelcomeamongsttheOrthodoxlaity.Butitwasintothis climate that theAnchiskhatiChurchChoir stagedaquiet revolution inchantperformancepractice.Withaconservatorybackgroundinwhichmem-bersoftheAnchiskhatiChurchChoirhadbeeninfluencedbythepioneeringworkofethnomusicologistEdisherGarakanidzeandhisMtiebiensemble,themembersof theAnchiskhatiChurchChoir turnedtoearly20thcenturywaxcylinderandGramophonerecordingshousedintheConservatoryarchivestodiscoverthenuancesoftraditionaltuning,timbre,andornamentation.Theyproducedseveralchantrecordingsinthemid-1990s,andeventuallybeganre-searchingandpublishingsomeofthevaststoresofliturgicalchanttranscrip-tionshousedintheKekelidzeInstituteofHandwritinginTbilisi.

3 TheAnchiskhatiChurchwasbuiltinthe6thcenturyandisfamousforoncehousingthemiracle-workingiconfromAnchi(atownincurrentNWTurkey)thatisnowhousedintheNationalGallery.4 Sameba[Trinity]CathedralwasofficiallyopenedanddedicatedonNovem-ber23rd,2004.5 GeorgiafoughttwocivilwarswithseparatistregionsSouthOssetiaandAb-khaziain1991and1993respectively.

258


Theneo-traditionalmannerofsingingchantwasnotembracedbytheentirechantcommunity,asmanypeople foundtheunrefined,nasalqualityof theAnchiskhatiChurchChoir’schantingunappealingandtoofolksyfortheaestheticsoftheliturgy.Tothiswayofthinking,thesupposedauthentic-ityofthearchivalchantmelodiesdidnotlegitimizeacompletedifferenceinperformanceaesthetic.Perhapsforthisreason,conservativechoirssuchastheKashwetiChurchchoirwereatfirstresistanttothenewrepertoire,whileneo-traditionaliststudentsoftheAnchiskhatiChurchChoirdelightedinsingingthenewstyleandnewrepertoire.

Thedebateaboutperformancepracticewassharpenedinthelate-1990sbytheemergenceofaByzantinechantmovement,whichpolarizedthoseal-readyinvolvedintherevivaloftraditionalchant.ProponentsoftheByzantinemovementarguedthatOrthodoxChristianchanthadoriginallyandproperlybeensungtomonophonicmelodiesandadvocatedadaptingtheentireGeor-gianliturgytoborrowedGreekOrthodoxmelodies.Basingtheircredentialson thedubiousscholarlyclaimthatallChristianchant traditionsshouldbesupplantedbymodernGreekmonophonicmelodies(whichhavethemselvessketchedanextraordinarilycomplexdevelopment),theByzantinechantmove-mentinGeorgiawasshortlived,andultimatelyfellvictimtoastrongbacklashfromtheGeorgianliturgicalmusiccommunity.

Ontheothersideofthedebate,scholarsandchantrevivalistsgalvanizedaroundtheneedtopublicizeandpromotethehistoryoftraditionalchanterssuchastheKarbelashvilibrothers,whohadreceivedlittleifanypublicatten-tionsincethefirstdecadeofthe20thcentury.Asaresult,recordings,articles,andpubliclecturesgeneratedawidedegreeofpublicsupportandculminatedin a Patriarchal decree in 2000 advocating for the integration of traditionalGeorgianchantintoallparishchoirrepertories.Thisdegreenotonlysignaledthe failure of the Byzantine movement, but also gave a strong boost to theneo-traditionalchantersledbytheAnchiskhatiChurchChoir,whowereputinchargeofacommissiontooverseetheeditingandpublishingofnewchant-books, and assigned with monitoring the progress of parish and monasticchoirsacrossthenation.

Performance Practice

TwoofthefirstrecordingsofchurchchanttoemergeafterthedemiseofCom-munist censorship on religious music illustrate the dichotomy between theclassicalandneo-traditionalperformancestyles:

1.“SacredMusicandChorales,”releasedby theRustaviEnsemble in1996,highlights thedynamiccontrolandblendforwhichthechoirhadbe-comeinternationallyfamousthroughoutthe1970sand1980s.Therepertoireof chant and para-liturgical hymns on this album represents four distinctsources:three-voicedadaptationsofmixedSATBchoralarrangementsbytheearly20thcenturycomposerZakariaPaliashvili,sunginclassicalstyle;chantsinheritedbyAnzorErkomaishvili(Rustavidirector)fromhisfamilyinGuria,

259

alsosunginclassicalstyle;moderncompositions,sunginclassicalstyle;andfinallyaselectionofpara-liturgicalfolkhymns,sunginafolkstyle.

2.“CelebrationHymns,”releasedbytheAnchiskhatiChurchChoirin1995isastellarexampleoftheneo-traditionalperformancestylepromotedbytheMtiebiEnsembleinthe1970s,hereappliedtosacredmusic.Thedictionisclean,temposnormalizedtobemorespeech-like,andindividualvoicesstandout from the choir in the upper voice parts, which are sung by soloists forafreerangeofornamentation.Therepertoireisentirelycomposedofchantsrecoveredfromthearchivaltranscriptionsof19thandearly20thcenturychant-masters.

Bothchoirssinginthestyleoftheirownperformanceaesthetic,anditiscuriousthatthereisverylittleoverlapintheselectionofrepertoireforthetwoalbums.Thecorrelationofrepertoireandperformancepracticeforboththeclassicalandneo-traditionalmodelsbegsexamination.

Oneoftheonlychantsthatappearsonbothalbums, Shen Khar Venakhi[YouareaVineyard](awidelypopularhymnwhoseperformancesoverthelastfivedecadeshasbeenatthecenterofboththerenewedawarenessofGeor-giansacredmusic),mayserveasaninterestingcasestudyforthesequestions.TheRustaviensembleperformanceof thehymnisdeliberatelyslow,sweet,anddelicate,whilethestraightforward,unornamentedrenditionbytheAn-chiskhatiChurchChoirisperformedatthetempoofmostliturgychants;thatistosay,atthespeedinwhichitisnaturaltosingandunderstandatext.Thesecularmainstreamsocietyassociatesthischantwithweddingsandcelebra-tionsaswellasmomentsofdeepculturalpathos,suchasthedeathofadigni-taryorthelossofabattle.6

Meanwhile, the newly religious have reclaimed the 12th century Shen Khar Venakhi text by King Demetre II as a hymn dedicated not to weddingbrides, but to the Holy Theotokos.7 Besides the subtle but not insignificantdifferencesinarrangement(discussedinExamples1and2),thefundamentalsignifierofthisreclamationbytheneo-traditionalistsisthroughperformancepractice. A curious phenomenon occurs when for example, the Patriarch’sChoirperformsinawesternclassicalstyleinpublic,butinaneo-traditionalmannerinforchurchservices.IntheperformanceofShen Khar Venakhi(andotherchantslikeit),therefore,thishymnisactivelyappropriatedtoservebothasecularnationalistandconservativereligiousfunction.

6 DuringtheRussia-Georgiaconflict inAugust,2009,Shen Khar VenakhiwasperformedbytheBasianiEnsembleandtelevisedlivebyCNNandlocalnetworks,carryingthelocalsignificationof‘WeShallOvercome.’7 Inabizarretwist,aRussianarrangementofShen Khar Venakhi substitutedthetextfortheCherubicHymn,whichhassincebecomeverypopularintheOrthodoxChurchofAmericainanEnglishtranslation.Georgiansarebaffledatthissubstitu-tionoftext,andpointtothemanyexamplesoftheCherubicHymnthathavesur-vivedsincethetranscriptionofthetraditionalchantattheendofthe19thcenturyasviableCherubichymns.


260

Shen Khar Venakhi (Ex.1),showsthevariantthattheAnchiskhatiChurchChoirsings,astranscribedbythemasterchanterVasilKarbelashviliattheturnofthe20thcentury.Shen Khar Venakhi (Ex.2),diagramsthe four-partmen’sar-rangementsungbytheRustaviensemble.8Ataquickglance,thetwovariantsappeartocontainonlysuperficialdifferences,suchasthemiddlevoiceorna-ments,doubledbass,andalternateendinginEx.2,bb.1-4,butinrealitythesesubtledifferenceshintattheirdistincttransmissionthroughthe20thcentury.

8 TheRustavivariantwaslikelyadaptedfromaconcertversionofShen Khar Venakhisungbythelargeacademicstatechoirsinthe1950s.


Example 1

261

Achantarrangementfrom1909byZakariaPaliashvili,9aGeorgiancomposerbetterknownforhisnationalistoperas,providesanimportantintermediarywitnesstotheevolutionofchantrepertoireinGeorgia(Ex.3).Closecompari-sonbetween thePaliashvili six-voicedmixedarrangement forSATTBBandtheRustaviensemblearrangementforTTBBrevealstrikingcorrespondences.Forexample,theseeminglysmalldifferencesbetweenthemiddlevoiceinEx-

9 ZakariaPaliashvili(1873-1933),acontemporaryofRachmaninoff,studiedattheMoscowConservatoryforthreeyearswithSergeiTaneyevfrom1900-1903andachievedwidespreadfamethroughthecompositionoffolkoperasAbselom da Eteri (1919)andDaisi(1923).


Example 2

262

amples1and2areseentobeidenticalinExamples2and3,indicatingthattheRustaviensemblevariantwaslikelyreconstructedfromaPaliashviliscore(ar-rowsonEx.3markthesecondvoicereconstructionbytheRustaviensemble).Forexample,inbar10,Ex.2and3,theRustaviarrangementisclearlyderivedfromthesoprano,alto,andbasspartsofthePaliashviliarrangement,andnottheoriginalKarbelashvilioriginal(smallnoteheadsinExamples2and3indi-catethepitchesthatdo not occurintheKarbelashvilioriginal).Thesignificanceofthisobservationisnotespeciallyground-breakinggiventheinaccessibilityoftheKarbelashviliArchivesduringmostofthe20thcentury,butisanindica-tionofalinkbetweenearly20thcenturyeffortstoarrangechantforwesternconsumption and the lingering classical performance practice aesthetic thathasaccompaniedthePaliashviliarrangements.


263

ZakariaPaliashvili(1873-1933),acontemporaryofRachmaninoffandstudentattheMoscowConservatoryforthreeyearswithSergeiTaneyev(1900-1903),becameamajormusicfigureinGeorgiaduringthefirstthreedecadesofthe20th century. Inspired by the vibrant compositional atmosphere in Moscow,where figuressuchasAlexanderKastalskyandStepanSmolenskywereac-tively arranging znamenny chant for contemporary performance, PaliashvilireturnedtoGeorgiain1903withavisionofcollectingandarrangingGeorgianfolk and sacred music for large chorus. He was one of the first ethnomusi-cologiststotravelintotheremotemountainregionsofGeorgia,recordingandtranscribingfolksongswiththeuseofanearlyGramophone.In1909,manyof these folksongs were published, and in 1911 he published the Liturgia, aselectionoftraditionaleasternGeorgianchantmelodiesarrangedforsix-partmixedchorus.

ThepublicationofPaliashvili’sLiturgia10provokedaccusationsofpla-giarismfrommembersoftheoralchantcommunity.VasilKarbelashvili,oneoftheleadingadvocatesforthepreservationofeasternGeorgianchant,wroteinalettertoPaliashvili,“Somehowyou’vechangedthesoulofourchant.Howhaveyoudonethis,howisitevenpossible?”11PaliashvilidefendedhimselfinaforwardtotheLiturgia publication,pointingoutthatmostofthetraditionalchantmelodiesinhisarrangementsremainedintact:

10 ZakariaPaliashvili,“Liturgicalchurch-chantfortheliturgyofJohnChryso-stom,22chantsadaptedformen’sandwomen’schorusinKartl-Kakhurimode,”Tbilisi,191111 LuarsabTogonidze,PersonalInterview,April2005.Ihavenotbeenabletocheckthissource, thoughthe letter fromVasilKarbelashvili isapparently intheKarbelashvili Archive, housed at the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate, Tbilisi,Georgia.


Example 3

264


“I left the first voice reasonably untouched except for several chants, such asRomelniKerubimta(CherubicHymn)andShenGigalobt (WePraiseThee), inwhichIlengthenedorshortenedthemelody,andre-harmonizedthesecondandthirdvoices.Inthepreparationofthesearrangements,IhavetoconfessthatIhavebeenthinkingmostlyofperformancesforlargemixedchorus,whichiswhymostofthechantsarearrangedforfive,six,orsevenvoices.IhopethatthesechantcompositionswillnotonlybefamousinGeorgia,but inRussiaaswell,wheretherearemanymixedchoirs.TothatendIhaveincludedtheRussiantextaswellastheGeorgiantext.”12

InacomparisonofExamples2and3,itisclearthatPaliashviliindeedleftthefirstvoicemelodyintact,buttookcreativelibertiesinweavingthetraditionalmiddlevoicebetweenthealto,tenor1,andtenor2parts,andfillingoutathreeoctaverangethroughsimpledevicessuchasdoublingandparallel-thirdmo-tioninthetenorvoices.Thebassisalsodoubledattheoctavewhereverpos-sible,inthepreferredmannerofRussianchantchoirsoftheperiod.

ThenatureoftheargumentbetweenPaliashviliandKarbelashviliboileddowntoadebateontheinviolabilityoftheoraltradition.Paliashviliarguedthathissix-voicearrangementsoftraditionalthree-voicedchantwouldpopu-larize chant beyond the borders of Georgia, presumably in Russia, Europe,andAmerica,wherechoirsweremoreaccustomedtosingingSATBarrange-ments.TheKarbelashvilibrothers,whowereliterallyinaraceagainsttimetopreserveandnotatetheeasternGeorgianoralchanttraditionbeforeallofthemastersdied,welcomedtheconceptofwidespreadpopularizationandsup-port.Butsacrificingtheintegrityofthemusicalstructure,melody,andsystemofharmonizationpasseddownthroughoraltransmissionwasobviouslyun-acceptable.Therefore,assomeonewithentirelydifferentaims,KarbelashvilirebukedthealtruisticundertonesofPaliashvili’sargument,notingthatchang-ingorremovingportionsofthechantmelodiesorharmoniesfundamentallychangedtheinternalharmonicstructureofthechant(oftencomparedtothetripartitestructureoftheHolyTrinity13),andultimatelyleadtothedegrada-tionofthemusicitself.

Paliashvili’schantarrangementscontinuedtohaveanimpactonsacredmusicperformancethroughoutthe20thcentury,whilethetranscriptionsoftheKarbelashvilibrothersandotherswerelockedininaccessibleSovietarchivesfortherestofthecentury.Inthe1960s,thesmallensemblesGordeloandSh-vidkatsausheredinanewerainperformancestylebyabandoningthelargechoirformatofthe1940-1950s,refiningtheirwesternclassicalvocaltechnique,and adding classical composed music to their repertories. In 1968, several

12 ZakariaPaliashvili, fromtheintroductiontoGeorgianSacredChantsofSt.JohnChrysostomLiturgy,‘Kartl-KakhuriMode’191113 IoanePetritsi,11thcenturyphilosopherandtheologian,namedthethreevoic-esofGeorgianchant:mzakhr,meaning‘tocall’,firstvoice;zhir,meaning‘second’(inMingreliandialect),secondvoice;bam,possibleancestortocurrent‘ban’whichmeansbass,thirdvoice(ertbamad inMingreliandialectmeanstocollect,toblend,toremaintogether),andlikenedthethreevoicestotheHolyTrinity.

265


membersofthedisbandedGordeloensemblefoundedtheRustaviStateen-semble,whichbecamethemostwell-knownGeorgianensembledomesticallyand internationally. Renowned for their incredible dynamic control, superbblend,andvirtuosityinuniquevocaltechniquessuchasGeorgianyodeling,theRustaviensemblewentontorecorddozensofalbums,andcommandedenormousinfluenceoverperformanceaestheticsinpopularculturethrough-outthe70s,80s,and90s.

TheperformancestylemadefamousbytheRustaviensemblehascometobeassociatedwiththetravelingSovietensembles,however,andinrecentyears,ayounggenerationofneo-traditionalistchantershasbeguntoopenlyquestiontheclassicalaesthetic.Forexample,inarecentflurryofpostsonanonlineforumdedicatedtothepopularizationofGeorgiantraditionalfolkandsacredmusic,anonymouspostersaccusedtheRustaviensembleofdeliberate-lytailoringGeorgianfolkandsacredmusictointernationalaudiencesthroughanover-emphasisondynamics,headvoice,andgimmickry.14

AnzorErkomaishvili,afolkloristandlongtimedirectoroftheRustaviEnsemble,hashimselfbeenatirelessadvocateofGeorgiantraditionalmusic,researchingandpublishingcatalogsofGramophonerecordingsfromthebe-ginningofthe20thcentury,anddirectingtheInternationalCentreforGeorgianFolklore.15TodistinguishtheseactivitiesfromtheperformancestylecultivatedbytheRustaviensembleoverthelastfourdecadesofhisdirectorship,hehadthisresponsetothecritiques:

Besides,whenalargestateensemblecomesonstage,itishardtospeakaboutauthenticity.Itwasexactlythisacademicmannerofsingingthatrousedthein-terestofyoungpeopletoournationaltreasury[offolkmusic].It isnotfairtoblame Rustavi for its singing manner; it cannot sing differently.An academicmannerofsingingisonething,andscenicperformanceisquiteanother.ThankstoRustavi’sacademicsinging,UNESCOnamedGeorgianpolyphonicsinging,“AMasterpieceoftheOralandIntangibleHeritageofHumanity.”16

Erkomaishvili defends the performance aesthetic of the Rustavi ensemblepartlyonthegroundsofitsinternationalappeal(toUNESCO),anargumentoddly reminiscent of Paliashvili’s argument to Karbelashvili in 1911, anddemonstratingthecurrencyofthedebate.ItistruethatPaliashvili’sarrange-mentshavehelpedtopopularizeGeorgianchantinternationallythroughoutthe20thcentury,andalsothattherecordingsandperformancesoftheRustaviensemblehavecontributedtoworldrecognitionthroughorganizationssuchasUNESCO.Forthesereasons,manymembersoftheonlineforumwereloathtocriticizethecurrentRustaviensemble,however,hardlyanyonewaswillingtodefendtheensembleonaestheticgroundseither.Atleastforthisgroupof

14 ThedebateoccurredinJune,2009onwww.forum.ge(Georgianlanguage)15 AnzorErkomaishvili,VakhtangRodonaia,Georgian Folk Song; the First Record-ings 1902-1914,Tbilisi2006.16 InterviewbyethnomusicologistTamazGabasoniafortheInternationalRe-searchCenterforTraditionalPolyphony,TbilisiIvaneJavakhishviliStateConser-vatory,Summer2009.

266


commentators,17the‘academic’styleofperformanceisnolongerrepresenta-tiveoftraditionalfolkandsacredmusic.

GeorgianreligiouschantisattheheartoftheOrthodoxresurgenceinGeorgia,andatthesametime,intimatelyboundupwithinstitutionssecularculture(forexample,thepublicperformanceofShen Khar Venakhi duringtheAugust,2009conflict).The issueofperformanceaestheticsand theculturalmeaningitrepresentswillremainavitalissueforaslongasGeorgianscon-tinuetosingtheOrthodoxliturgy.Shen Khar Venakhi isasalientexampleofhowonechantcancometohavemanyculturalassociationsfordifferentseg-mentsofsociety.Asaresult,theaveragesingerlearnstosingnotonlyseveralvariantsofthehymn,dependingonthecontext,butalsoseveralmannerismsofperformance.Asthehegemonicstatecultureofformerdecadesisslowlydismantled,perhapstheacceptanceofthesemultiplesignifiersisanimportantmarkerofagrowingpluralisminGeorgia.

17 Theforumhasafluctuatingmembershipofabout450individuals,manyofwhomareprobablyurbanandunder30yearsofageduetothefamiliaritywiththeinternetandaccesstointernetresources.

344

Contents

Preface....................................................................................................................5

Conference Programme.................................................................................7

Opening Addresses...........................................................................................11

TeuvoPohjolainen....................................................................................................13HEArchbishopLeoofKareliaandallFinland....................................................14HilkkaSeppälä..........................................................................................................15IvanMoody................................................................................................................16

Conference Papers..........................................................................................17

HilkkaSeppäläSinging into flames of fire. A remembrance from the Martyr Church............18

SvetlanaPoliakovaSin 319 and Voskr 27 as a Triodion set. Questions concerning thecomposition and disposition of daily hymnography.........................................32

AlbinaKruchininaО двух типах служб русским преподобным святым..................................44Concerning the two types of offices for ascetic saints......................................50

MelitinaMakarovskayaЗнаменный роспев как система певческого мышления.............................56Znamenny Chant as a system of singing shilosophy.......................................60

NicolaeGheorgițăByzantine Chant in the Romanian Principalities during the PhanariotPeriod (1711-1821)..........................................................................................65

ArdianAhmedajaMusic in the churches Arbëreshë in Southern Italy and Sicily.......................98

GabrielaOcneanuEvstatie’s Cherubic Hymn compositions - his Cherubic Hymn in Mode III.....................................................................115

JaakkoOlkinuoraThe adaptation of Byzantine Chant into Finnish...........................................142

WilhelmiinaVirolainenIntroducing Leonid Bashmakov: A Finnish composer...................................153

TimoRuottinenFinnish Orthodox church music: Three generations of contemporary composers - Our musical iconography...........................................................158

NikitaSimmons“Po Ustavu” - According to the Typicon: The rituals and singing of

the Russian Old Believers.............................................................................175BogdanDjakovic

The Modern traditionalist Milivoje M. Crvčanin (1892-1978): A portrait of a priest, diplomat and composer.................................................................191

StefanHarkovBreitkopf’s influence: A Balkan way of musical publishing...........................199

SaraPeno The Liturgical Typikon as a Source for Medieval Chanting Practice..........203JamesChater

Between Babylon and Pentecost: Why the absence of a common translation should not be allowed to impede compositional creativity..........213

OleksandrKozarenkoСакральная монодия в современном композиторском творчествеУкраины........................................................................................................220Sacred monody in the contemporary art of composing in Ukraine...............224

JopiHarriPrinciples of traditional harmonization in Eastern Slavic chant..................228

JohnA.Graham“You Are the Vineyard, Newly Blossomed”: Contemporary performance

aesthetics in Georgian Orthodox Chant.......................................................256AchilleusG.Chaldaeakes

The figures of composer and chanter in Greek Psaltic Art............................267JeffersEngelhardt

“Every Bird Has Its Own Song”: Congregational singing and the making of Estonian Orthodoxy, 1840s – 1930s..........................................................303

IvanMoodyThe idea of canonicity in Orthodox liturgical art..........................................337

345

Documents

Composing and Chanting in the Orthodox Church … · of the Second International Conference on Orthodox Church Music ... , may serve as an interesting case study for these questions