• Author / Uploaded
• Soad Khan

• Categories
• Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
• Coro
• Entretenimiento (general)
• Música

Citation preview

A HISTORICAL AND CONTEXTUAL EXAMINATION OF ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM. OPUS 29 by PHILIP REUEL CAMP, B.M.Ed., M.M. A DISSERTATION IN FINE ARTS Submined to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

Accepted

Dean of the Graduate School December. 2002

2002, Philip Reuel Camp

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation was only made possible because of the assistance and encouragement from many people. Ken Davis originally concei\ ed of a dissertation topic in the area of Russian choral music and provided immediate feedback and encouragement throughout the duration of the study. Without his direct in\ oh ement, this project would have never been started, and I will always be grateful. I am also \ er\ grateful for the encouragement and valuable input provided from other members of the committee: Wayne Hobbs, Michael Stoune, Linda Donahue, and John Stinespring. To Jonathan Witt, a best friend since childhood, and now a fellow faculty member at Lubbock Christian University who spent many hours proofreading the manuscript, I am also very thankful. To Sergei Shishkin, my Russian friend and brother, \\ ho spent countless hours locating and translating primary sources, I am greatly indebted and hopeful that we can continue to work together. To my parents, Lynn and Barbara Camp, whose faith in the Lord led to their many trips to Russia and contact \\ ith Sergei Shishkin, the words "thank you" hardly can express the appreciation that I feel for the example of faith, the encouragement, and the strong upbringing that you provided me. To my children, Landon and Lauren, who have ne\ cr known their daddy to be without doctoral work, I say thank you and I look forward to making up lost time n ith you. Finally, I will be forever grateful for the unconditional love, support, and inspiration from my wife. Tammy, who throughout her career as well as my studies has truly exemplified the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ii

ABSTRACT

v

LIST OF TABLES

\ ii

LIST OF EXAMPLES

viii

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTION Purpose and Justification Review of Related Research Method

II.

ALEXANDRE TIKHONOVITCH GRETCHANINOFF AND THE RUSSL\N POLITICAL ORDER

11

III.

THE RUSSL\N ORTHODOX LITURGY History of Russian Liturgical Singing The New Russian Choral School The Structure of the Liturgy Stylistic Restrictions Divine Liturgy Settings from the New Russian Choral School

46 46 65 71 80 85

IV.

GRETCHANINOFF ON LITURGICAL MUSIC Spokesman for the New Russian Choral School The Moskovskie TeJomo^rz Publications of 1900 The New York Essay of 1932

90 90 92 106

V.

OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SACRED CHORAL STYLE

112

VI.

OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHR YSOSTOM, OPUS 29 Analyses Summary

138 138 175

VII.

1 1 5 7

PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR PERFORMANCE OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSTOM. OPUS 29

111

179

VIII.

Concert or Liturgical Context Selection of Movements Performance Practice and Interpretation

1 SO 182 190

CONCLUSION

206

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

209

DISCOGRAPHY

214

APPENDLX

A. THE MOSKO VSKIE VEDOMOSTI PUBLICATIONS OF 1900

215

B. ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF, "BRIEF REVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX CHURCH SINGING"

246

C. REVIEWS OF GRETCHANESfOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSOSTOM, OPUS 29

271

D. THE CHORAL WORKS OF ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF

277

E. THE DIVINE LITURGY TEXT AS PRESENTED IN GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSTOM, OPUS 29 F. EXCERPTS FROM VARIOUS RUSSIAN SOURCES

283 295

IV

ABSTRACT

Known for its a cappella st>'le as mandated by the church. Russian liturgical music remained relatively undeveloped and largel\ unknown outside of Russia until the late nineteenth century when the onset of several crucial e\ents led to the development of a rich choral style that continued until the 1917 Revolution. Among many composers who contributed sacred choral works in the period, Alexandre Gretchaninoff (1864-1956) emerged as both a leading composer and spokesman for the new school. His Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Opus 29. completed in 1902. presented a more stylistically unified musical form than ever before with individual movements that were developed into unprecedented formal schemes. Although some movements from the work have been appreciated and performed in English translations b\ American choirs through most of the twentieth centur\. including "Our Father." "Come. Let I's Worship." and "Only Begotten Son," a close examination of the original work, focusing on issues of performance practice relating to its historical and contextual status, reveals greater aesthetic merit than has been recognized. For the contextual examination, se\ eral primar\' sources were discovered, translated, and analyzed. An article submitted by Gretchaninoff to the Moskovskie Vedomosti (.Moscow daily newspaper) in 1900 generated responses from his opponents in the form of a published debate that included two subsequent articles by the composer defending and elarif\ ing his position. The articles are presented in their entirety, along with an essay written h\ the composer in 1932 that is hou.sed in the New \oTk Public Librar\ for the Performing Arts, titled "Brief

1932 that is housed in the New York Public Librar\- for the Performing .Ans. titled "Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing." The translated primar>sources provide valuable information concerning details of performance practice, the perspectives of both Gretchaninoff and his critics on liturgical music, the development of Gretchaninoff s sacred choral style, and the reputation of Gretchaninoff as a composer and spokesman for the new Russian choral school. Finally, a thorough re\ iew and representational analysis of the Second Liturgy' is presented in context of later prerevolutionary works. This study culminates with practical suggestions for performance of the Second Liturgy springing from examination of the historical and contextual status of the work.

VI

LIST OF TABLES

3.1

The Divine Liturg\'

7^

3.2

The Divine Liturgy Settings of the New Russian Choral School

88

6.1

General Harmonic Scheme of the Second Liturgy. Opus 29

177

7.1

Morosan's Scheme for a Concert Performance of Tchaikovsky's Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41

184

Suggested Performance Scheme for Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy. Opus 29

186

The Choral Works of Alexandre Gretchaninoff

278

7.2

D.l

VII

LIST OF EXAMPLES

5.1 "Behold the Bridegroom Comes" Opus 58. No. 1. Measures 1-6

119

5.2 "Thou. Who Clothest Thyself with Light" Opus 58, No. 9, Measures 8-12

120

5.3 "In Thy Kingdom" Opus 58, No. 3. Measures 14-18

121

5.4 "The Lord is God..." Opus 58, No. 10. Measures 26-31

122

5.5 "Blessed is the Man" Opus 59. No. 2. Measures 1-4

124

5.6 "The Great Doxology" Opus 59, No. 9. Measures 80-85

125

5.7 "Blessed is the Man" Opus 59. No. 2 Measures 74-79 5.8 "To Thee. The Victorious Leader." Opus 59. No. 10 Measures 1-4

127

5.9 "The Augmented Litany," Opus 79. No. 6 Measures 55-61

132

126

5.10 Conclusion of the Liturgy, Opus 79, No. 15 Measures 54-57 5.11 "Trisagion Hymn" Opus 79, No. 4 Measures 9-23

135

6.1 Solo Chants, Choral Response at Beginning of Great Litany

140

6.2 Choral Responses from the Great Litany

141

6.3 The First Antiphon from Psalm 103

142

6.4 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Opening Measures

144

6.5 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Measures 32-37

145

6.6 "(ilor\... Onl\-begotten Son" Measures 38-42

146

\ III

6.7 "Come, let us worship"

149

6.8 The "Alleluia theme" from Movements #3 and -6

150

6.9 "Holy God!" from Movement #3

151

6.10 The Augmented Litany

153

6.11 Cherubic Hymn

155

6.12 Portion from the Creed

156

6.13 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 1-5

158

6.14 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 12-16

159

6.15 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 44-47

160

6.16 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 72-75

161

6.17 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 94-95

162

6.18 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 100-103

163

6.19 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 103-104

164

6.20 "It is Truly Fitting," Measures 53-56

165

6.21 "Our Father," Measures 28-32

167

6.22 "Our Father." Measures 43-54

169

6.23 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 1-5

171

6.24 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 39-52

172

6.25 "Let us fervently beseech." Measures 139-141

173

6.26 End of the Liturgy, Measures 1-3

175

7.1 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 1-5. with Addition of Dynamic Shading

200

7.2 Cherubic Hymn, Measures 17-20

201

i\

7.3 "Our Father." Measures 63-66

204

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

Purpose and Justification Alexandre Gretchaninoff' was one of the most prolific composers of choral music for the Russian Orthodox Church. Known for its a cappella style as mandated by the church, Russian liturgical music remained relatively undeveloped and largely unknown outside of Russia until the late nineteenth century. In the 1880s, the onset of several crucial events led to the development of a veryrichchoral style. The overturning of the Imperial Chapel'srightto censor ecclesiastical choral works dramatically influenced the development of Russian church music, encouraging composers of church music to express themselves more freely.^ The watershed event was Peter Tchaikovsky's (18401893) Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41, and the court case it sparked when Nikolai Bakhmetev (1807-1891), the Director of the Imperial Chapel, challenged this work that had not been submitted to the Imperial Chapel for approval. The court sided with Tchaikovsky and his publisher, P. Jurgenson. Though the a cappella requirement remained an essential characteristic of the style of the new choral school that soon developed, with Jurgenson's court victory, composers enjoyed unprecedented freedom

Variants in the spelling of the composer's name occur due to the problems of transliteration from the Russian alphabet. Throughout this document, the spelling "GretchaninofT' will be used as authorized by the composer's autobiography. Other spellings may be found in various sources, such as "Grechaninov." According to a note in the autobiography, the correct pronunciation is to accent the penultimate syllable, as in "GretchaNInoff." GretchaninofT, Alexandre. My Life. Introduction and English Translation by Nicholas Slonimsky. (New York: Coleman-Ross Company. Inc., 1952) 1. " Vladimir Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia (Madison, Connecticut: Musica Russica, Inc.. 1994. 85-86).

from censorship. An outpouring of important liturgical compositions by many significant composers soon followed, to the extent that scholars later termed the st\'le "the new Russian choral school."^ By the eariy 1900s, Gretchaninoff emerged as both a leader and spokesman for this new school. In 1899, Gretchaninoff completed his first Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus 13, and it was immediately premiered by the famous choir of the Moscow Synodal School directed by Stepan Smolensky (1848-1909). In his autobiography, Gretchaninoff recalled, "The simplicity and sincerity of the music, its lofty style and good vocal wnting instantly won the hearts of my listeners."*^ However, he later commented that "...my first Liturgy was unsatisfactory to me in many respects."^ In a dissertation on Gretchaninoffs Catholic mass settings, Bradley Holmes noted: "Grechaninov later admitted that the piece was much like the Liturgy of Tchaikovsky, adding that this realization encouraged him to abandon the style for one distinctively his own."^ Turning again to the Divine Liturgy in 1902, Gretchaninoff completed the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. The work premiered in Moscow in 1903 by the professional choir directed by Leonid Vasil'ev. Particularly known for its unusual setting of the Credo, in which the body of text is assigned to an alto soloist, the premier of the Second Liturgy received high acclaim from both critics and Gretchaninoff himself Further study of the work reveals that the Second Liturgy not only presented a more

^ Morosan 205-307. Morosan specifically devotes two chapters to the new Russian choral school. Chapter 6 discusses style, and chapter 7 discusses the problems of performance practice. •* Gretchaninoff 69. ^ Gretchaninoff 87. Holmes. Bradley .X "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic .Masses of.Alexandre T. Grechaninov" DM .A diss., Arizona State University, 1990. 28

stylistically unified musical form than ever before, but also developed indi\ idual movements into unprecedented formal schemes. Furthermore, the work incorporated the use of chant-like themes from the ancient chant tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church. Though this tendency toward chant characterized the majorit\' of Gretchaninoffs sacred music as well as the music of his contemporaries, the Second Liturgy became Gretchaninoffs first major choral work largely inspired b\ the chant idiom. As a leader for the new Russian choral school, Gretchaninoff composed thirteen smaller sacred choral works, as well as a setting for Passion Week (also known as The Seven Days of Passion), Opus 58, and All-Night Vigil (also known as Vespers), Opus 59, all for unaccompanied choir. Following the sacred cantata Kvalite Boga {Praise the Lord), Opus 65, set with orchestral accompaniment, Gretchaninoff composed a third liturgy in 1917: Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, for tenor and bass solo, chorus, string orchestra, organ, and harp, distinguishing it as the only liturgical text from the Russian Orthodox tradition to be scored with instrumental accompaniment. Throughout his career, Gretchaninoff voiced his sometimes controversial views on liturgical music, and eventually was regarded as the spokesman for the new Russian choral school. Perhaps most controversial was his belief, evident from his writings as well as a number of his compositions, that instrumental accompaniment should be incorporated into church music. In his autobiograph\, he u rites: "1 repeatedly stated, orally and in writing, that our church ritual u ould gain tremendously by the introduction

of the organ or a physharmonica into the church service."' Though a formal proposal for the use of instruments did not occur until 1917, his writings on sacred music had sparked controversy as eariy as 1900. In February of that \ear. he submitted an article on liturgical music to the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a daily newspaper in Moscow. Soon af^er, critics responded with follow-up articles attacking the positions held b\ Gretchaninoff Gretchaninoff responded, both defending and clarifying his position. In 1917, the year he completed Domestic Liturgy, Gretchaninoff officialh' proposed to the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church that it use an organ w ith liturgical music. The proposal \\ as defeated, and his popularity with staunchly traditional church officials was reduced. Even as recently as 1996, Russian writings on the subject criticized Gretchaninoff for this proposal, grouping him with those who "dare to call themselves orthodox." The Second Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 29, was pivotal in establishing Gretchaninoffs sacred choral style, which continued through the middle of the twentieth century. Though some of the individual movements from the work have been appreciated and performed in their English translations by American choirs through most of the twentieth century,^ a close examination of the overall work, particularly focusing on the issues of performance practice relating to its historical and contextual status, reveals greater aesthetic merit than has been recognized. By examinmg the ^Gretchamnoff 119-120. Q

B. Kutuzov, "Problemy russkogo znamennogo penia v sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia katolikami gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Russian Sign Singing (Znamenny Raspev) in relation to the history of revival of Gregorian Chant by Catholics], Shkola Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singmg], \ o 1, 1996, Moscow. Spass Cathedral of .\ndronic Monastery, 1996. Fxcerpt translation by Sei^ici Shishkin, edited by Philip Camp, 2001. ** "Only Begotten Son," "Come, Let us worship," and "Our Father," arc three otdretchaninofTs most famous movements from the Second Liturgy that have been performed extensively in the United States since the 1930s.

historical background of the Second Liturgy, both the rich tradition of Russian sacred music and the specific work can be appreciated on a much deeper le\el. By stud\ing the context of the Second Liturgy, we can appreciate the work for the status it maintained in the general history of Russian liturgical music as well as for the \\ a\'s it marked a growth in Gretchaninoffs compositional style, and, beyond this, in the evoh ing compositional style of the new Russian choral school.

Review of Related Research The research and publications by Vladimir Morosan have pro\'ided the most comprehensive coverage of Russian liturgical music currently available. His published dissertation cited above, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, covers the full development of Russian Orthodox Church music, from its beginnings in the tenth century through its apex just before the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Morosan's Choral Performance and his subsequent works on the subject stand as the most comprehensive sources on Russian liturgical music and, thus, are cited throughout this study. His work includes a translation of han Gardner's Russian Church Singing, vol. I: Orthodox Worship and Hymnology^ and se\ era! \ olumes from the series Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Sweeping in their scope, the Monuments series has allowed performers and scholars access to centuries of Russian music previously unavailable. The first of the series, One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music, 9SS-1988, offers

'° Johann von Gardner, Russian Church Singmy;. Volume I. Orthodox Worship ami Hvmnogrnphw trans. \Madimir Morosan (New ^'ork: St. Vladimir's Seininar\ Press. 19S0).

an 832-page anthology of 79 Russian sacred choral works as well as pertinent essa\ s.'' Other volumes in the series offer the complete sacred choral works of Peter Tchaikovsk\, Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, Victor Kalinnikov, Vasily Titov. and Sergei Rachmaninoff. For the purposes of this study, the essays and liturgy settings presented in the volumes of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff were especialK valuable.'' Only a few dissertations covering specific topics in the area of Russian liturgical music have been completed. Two dissertations that broadly cover the topic include Robert Addison Reid's "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its Assimilation into and Impact on the American A Cappella Choir Movement"'^ and Keith Dwayne Wilcox's "Russian Sacred Choral and Folk Music: A Multicultural Text for High Schools and Colleges."'"* Though both of these works approach the topic broadly, they do provide some useful information for this study. Dissertations over composers or their specific works from the period of the new Russian choral school are somewhat rare. The life and works of Sergei Rachmaninoff have been covered thoroughly; yet, dissertations over specific works by his contemporaries are virtually non-existent. However, some studies on the choral music of Gretchaninoff have been completed. Mary Smith's 1952 thesis.

" Monuments of Russian Sacred Music One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music, ed. Vladimir Morosan, ser. 1, vol. 1 (Washington, D C : Musica Russica, 1991). '^ Monuments of Russian Sacred Music Peter Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral Horks, ed. Vladimir Morosan, ser. 2, vol. 1-3 (Madison: Musica Russica. 1996); Monuments of Russian Sacred Music: Sergei Rachmaninoff, The Complete Sacred Choral ii'orks, ed. \'ladimir Morosan, ser. 9, vol. 1-2 (Madison: Musica Russica, 1994). '^ Robert Addison Reid, "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its .\ssimilation into and Impact on the American A Cappella Choir Movement" diss. University of Texas, 1983. '^ Keith Dwayne Wilcox, "Russian Sacred and Folk Music: a Multicultural Text for High Schools and Colleges" diss. University of Missouri-Kansas City, 1998.

"The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship to Russian Nationalism," ' though somewhat dated, received thorough cooperation and approval ft-om GretchaninofT himself Even more relevant to this topic is the 1949 thesis by John Seagard, "\ocal Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of Alexander Gretchaninoff," which also employed the cooperation of the composer.'^ Bradley Holmes summarized its value in his 1990 dissertation: "The most extensive discussion of Grechaninov's harmonic st\lc is John Seagard's thesis. The study describes Grechaninov's music technically, but does little to explain what makes the music viable."'^ Though Seagard's thesis may be lacking in this regard, the information revealed from interview s w ith the composer offers some brief but valuable glimpses into the composer's perspectives on liturgical music. Holmes' dissertation, "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic Masses of Alexandre T. Grechaninov," stands as the most scholarly and relevant document on Gretchaninoffs choral music, and contains summaries of the composer's sacred choral music, biographical information, and an appendix listing archival material left by GretchaninofT available from U.S. libraries and museums.

Method In examining the milieu of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturg\\ this dissertation progresses from the global perspective of Gretchaninoff s biography and the Russian

Sister Mary Nicholas Smith, "The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship to Russian Nationalism." Thesis: University of Southern California. 1952. "• John Seagard, "\'ocal Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of .Mexander Gretchaninoff," Thesis, Eastman, 1949. 'M4olmes 12.

Orthodox tradition to a focus on the Second Liturgy itself Available biographical summaries of Gretchaninoff are based on his autobiograph\' and offer no new information. However, none of the biographical sketches discuss how the social and political events of Gretchaninoff s day influenced him and his work. Gretchaninoffs memoirs delve into these influences that profound!}' affected his life, the Russian Orthodox Church, and Russian society in general. After contextualizing Gretchaninoffs work, this dissertation moves into an overview and history of Russian Orthodox liturg\, followed by a discussion of Gretchaninoff as a leading composer and spokesman for the new Russian choral school. This involves an overview of Gretchaninoff s sacred choral style in general, and an analysis of the Second Liturgy specifically. Based on the reported historical and contextual information surrounding the Second Liturgy, the final chapter gives practical suggestions for a modem-day performance of his most famous liturgy. In my examination of the Second Liturgy's context, several primary sources including Gretchaninoffs own writings were discovered, translated, and analyzed. .Xs mentioned above, Gretchaninoffs 1932 autobiography, revised by Gretchaninoff and translated into English in 1952 by Nicholas Slonemsky, provided useful information that is readily accessible. The existence of other sources has been identified and referred to by other scholars, though the actual content of these writings had not been studied. Such a source was located at the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts: a 39-page hand-written essay by Gretchaninoff on the subject of liturgical music, dated September, 1932. Though Seagard's thesis contams some information from this essav, the actual essav has never been made available in an HnuHsh

translation. Furthermore, Gretchaninoff refers to a controvers\ that resulted from the Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow daily newspaper) articles that he submitted for publication in February, 1900. Though these articles also are sometimes referred to b\ scholars, the information about them is only gathered from Gretchaninoffs reference to them in his autobiography, and the actual articles also have not been directly studied and discussed. Therefore, in thoroughly examining the context of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy, both the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications of 1900 and Gretchaninoffs 1932 essay from the New York Public Library were translated and are presented here in their entirety.

These materials, as well as other related newspaper articles, reviews, and

journal articles were translated through the assistance of Sergei Shishkin, a chemical research scientist in the city of Dubna, Russia.'^ These translations provided valuable information concerning details of performance practice, the perspectives of both Gretchaninoff and his critics on liturgical music, the development of Gretchaninoffs sacred choral style, and the general reputation of Gretchaninoff as a composer and spokesman of the new Russian choral school. Finally, the dissertation provides a thorough re\ iew and representational analysis of the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 29, as well as observations of stylistic traits consistent with his later pre-revolutionary choral works. This study then culminates with practical suggestions for a performance of the Second Liturgy,

'" English translations of the Moskovski Vedomosti anicles are presented in Appendix .X, and a translation of the entire text from Gretchaninoffs essay is presented in Appendix B. '"^ Dr. Shishkin's official position is Acting Head of Sector "l of the Scientitlc Department of Experimental Chemistry in the Flerov Laborator)' of Nuclear Reactions.

suggestions springing from this study's examination of the historical and contextual status of the work.

10

CHAPTER II ALEXANDRE TIKHONOVITCH GRETCHANINOFF AND THE RUSSL\N POLITICAL ORDER

Bom in Moscow on October 25, 1864, Alexandre Tiikhonovitch Gretchaninoff was one of eleven children, of whom only five survived childhood.' Nine years prior to Gretchaninoffs birth, Alexander II began his reign as the Tsar of Russia, and immediately brought rapid and intense changes to Russian life, generally improving the quality of life for the lower classes. Alexander II's greatest reform came in 1861 when he proclaimed the historic emancipation of the serfs. This e\ ent began the period in Russian History known as the "Era of Great Reforms." However, these changes only fueled the fire of political unrest, as various revolutionary groups staged v iolent protests throughout his reign and eventually led to his assassination in 1881 .^ According to Sandra Kay Stewart, whose dissertation focused on the life and piano works of Gretchaninoff, the personal freedom gained by the peasants did not improve their standard of li\ ing. Though land ownership was made possible to them, the land that was made available uas of poor quality, and the length of installment payments for the land was burdensome. Many peasants left the country for the promise of a better life in the cities as shopkeepers or factory workers. They remained poorly educated, however, and discontent spread among them.^

' Gretchaninoff 10. - Neil M. Heyman, Russian Histon' (New York: McGraw-Hill. 1993) 190-194 ^ Sandra Kay Stewart, "The Life and Piano Collections of Alexander (jretchaninoff' diss.. South Carolina. 1995. 11-12.

11

Gretchaninoffs autobiography makes it clear that his parents epitomized this situation, though he never characterizes them as discontent. They moved to Moscow a year before his birth fi-om the small town of Peremyshl. He describes his father as "almost illiterate," and his mother as "completely illiterate, although she \\ as greatly endowed by nature and had ambitions for self-improvement." Upon their mo\ e to Moscow, his father became a small merchant, and his income increased enough to enable him to purchase land and build a two-story house for his family."* Though neither of his parents was involved with music in a formal way, Gretchaninoff describes his parents as "innately musical." He explains that his mother sang in a soft voice while she worked, and his father enjoyed singing religious songs. In his memoirs, Gretchaninoff further remembers the deep commitment of his parents to their religious faith before recounting his participation in local choirs: My father and mother were deeply religious. Attendance at Vesper service on Saturday nights and Matins on early Sunday mornings was strictly enforced in the family. When we grew older we went to church regularly... I sang in the high school chorus, sometimes even taking solo parts. I also sang in an amateur church choir. A parochial school student used to visit us, and my father and I would join him in singing two-part religious chants.^ In an introduction to a 1949 published essay by Gretchaninoff, Rose Heylbut adds that these early experiences in church "laid the foundations for his vast knowledge of old Russian church music which was later to form so important a part of his work."''

^ Gretchaninoff 7. * Gretchaninoff 13 6 Heylbut, Rose. "Russian Masters of \'esterday," Etude bl (1949): 344

12

The year 1864 not only marked the year of Gretchaninoff s birth, but also the \ear that Alexander II introduced additional significant reforms. Ivar Spector's An Introduction to Russian History and Culture explains that these significant reforms included the establishment of local government offices to regulate education, health, and transportation, as well as judicial reform that introduced trial by jur\' and the establishment of a bar for lawyers.^ Spector added further that university tuition discounts and scholarship programs made the cost of higher education affordable to the rising middle class for the first time in Russia's history.^ According to Neil Heyman's Russian History, by 1880 there were more than 22.000 elementar\ schools with o\er a million students enrolled.^ As a recipient of such education reforms, Gretchaninoffs early experiences in school proved to be far less than ideal. When he was almost seven years old, Alexandre's father enrolled him in the public school system. Gretchaninoff describes these early school years as almost intolerable, from the rustic school facility to the company of his fellow classmates, which he describes as "rude and troublesome urchins, roughnecks, and (some of them) petty thieves," who often caused him to endure painful and humiliating punishments from the teacher in spite of his innocence. However, Alexandre excelled in

Ivar Spector, An Introduction to Russian Histor\' and Culture (New York: D. \'an Nostrand. 1949), 137-138. * Spector 138. "^ Heyman 196. Spector estimates that in 1855, the population of Russia was about 70.000,000 (Spector 131). N.S. Leonov's "Itogi XX veka" [Twentieth Cenmry Summaryl in the Russian periodical, Russkii Dom [Russian House] U\, 1999, reports that the first official census in Ru-^sia using all of the current statistical methods took place in 1X9"^ and reported a population of 165 million people. A census was repeated in 1915 reporting 183 million people.

13

all of his subjects, and "was graduated from primary school in the customar>' three years."'° Following primary school, even at his young age, his parents had planned for him to follow in his father's footsteps to become a merchant/shopkeeper. WTien a famih* friend noticed exceptional academic ability in the young Alexandre, he con\ inced his parents to send him to high school. Hoping that his son would become a medical doctor, his father consented. Alexandre again excelled, except for his difficulty with languages, specifically Latin, Greek, French, and German. His struggle with languages not only made it necessary for him to repeat a grade, but also kept him from a future in the medical profession, and would have sent him back to his father's store, were it not for what Gretchaninoff himself described as "a stroke of luck" that led him to the Moscow Conservatory of Music.'' At the age of fourteen, his parents bought a piano for his younger sister who was studying music at a boarding school. The piano was brought to the Gretchaninoff home for her to play for the family on the weekends; howe\ er, the young Alexandre spent hours every day teaching himself to play familiar folk and church melodies. Later the same year, Alexandre began taking piano lessons from a Polish girl who would eventually marry his older brother. Assisted by his future sister-in-law, the young Alexandre practiced arduously for his audition to the Moscow Conservatory in the fall of 1881.

'° Gretchaninoff 12 " Gretchaninoff 13.

14

As a student in the conservatories of Moscow and later St. Petersburg. Gretchaninoff again benefited fi-om the reforms of .\lexander II. When Alexander II began his reign in 1855, music education only had been made available to the nobilit\ and wealthy classes. Foreign teachers were hired by the tsar to teach in the homes of the wealthy: among the most famous of these teachers w as John Field (Irish composer and pianist, 1782-1837), who taught Mikhail Glinka (1805-1857), the father of the Russian nafionahst school of composers who profoundly influenced Nicholas (1835-1881) and Anton Rubinstein (1829-1894), Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), and Balakirev's circle known as the "Mighty Five."'^ However, as Stewart explains, with the significant educational reforms that took place under Alexander II's reign, music education also made significant progress. Referring to Victor I. Seroff s The Mighty Five, Stew art expounds on the developments that took place in the area of music education during the reign of Alexander II, noting that Anton Rubinstein, aided by the Grand Duchess Elena Pavolvna, the tsar's sister, founded the Russian Music Society (RMS) in St. Petersburg in 1859, which established aggressive programs for music appreciation and education, and established successful music schools, concerts, and symphony orchestras. By 1862, Rubinstein started the music conser\ atory through the RMS in St. Petersburg to prepare musicians for a career that would be accepted by society, a pri\ ilege that previously eluded musicians in Russia.'

'" M. Montagu-Nathan, An Introduction :o Russian Music (London: Cecil Palmer & Hayward, 1916) 19-20. 13 Stewart 24-25

15

These developments resulted in the establishment of two rival schools in St. Petersburg: the St. Petersburg Conservatory directed by .\nton Rubinstein, and the Free Music School, also founded in 1862 by Mili Balakirev (1837-1910). The rivalr> continued unfil 1917, when the Free Music School was disbanded, as the two schools remained at odds with each other due to Balakirev's criticism of the conser\'atory for its choice of European teachers.'"^ Balakirev not only directed the Free Music School, but also became the leader of the "Mighty Five" that also included Nikolay Rimsk\Korsakov (1844-1908), Modest Mussorgsky (1839-1881), Cesar Cui (1835-1918), and Alexander Borodin (1833-1887), all of whom remained in competition with the RMS and promoted the Nationalist school in the line of Glinka rather than the European ideals promoted by the St. Petersburg Conservatory. At times, however, the barriers between the two schools were lifted, as the St. Petersburg Conservatory employed RimskyKorsakov in 1871 as one if its instructors under Rubinstein, and Balakirev was appointed orchestra conductor for the RMS in St. Petersburg for two years before eventually being dismissed by the Grand Duchess in 1869. In 1859, Anton Rubinstein's younger brother, Nikolai Rubinstein (1835-1881), opened classes of the RMS in Moscow, and in 1866, the Moscow Conservatory was established with Nikolai as its director. Though somewhat smaller than the St. Petersburg Conservatory, the new Moscow school included on its teaching staff the young Nikolai Kashkin (1839-1920) and Tchaikovsky, who had recently graduated from the St. Petersburg Conservatory. Kashkin, who would be remembered primarily as a

'•* Stewart 25.

16

music educator and critic, established a close fiiendship with Tchaikovsky, and published in 1875 one of the eariiest textbooks in Russian on elementary music theor\, which remained as a standard textbook in Russia for over fifty years. He also left a large number of essays on music in the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a daily newspaper in Moscow. According to David Brown, Kashkin's writings on Balikirev, Bordin, Rimsk> -Korsakow and especially Tchaikovsky, make up his most significant contributions to the field." Yampol'sky's article further elaborates on the significance of Tchaiko\sk\''s work in Moscow, showing how Tchaikovsky's music established a style known as the "Moscow school" that included Taneyev, Arensky, and Rachmaninoff'^ In 1881, the same year that the young Gretchaninoff began at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, the Era of Great Reforms during the reign of Alexander II was dealt a devastating blow. On the night before Russia's first constitution was to be legislated, Alexander II was assassinated, and his son, Alexander III immediately came to power. As newly appointed tsar, Alexander III not only put an immediate halt to the plans for a constitution, but included in his primary goals the immediate suppression of revolutionary groups and the preservation of an orderly society through a restored autocracy. Spector points out that Alexander Ill's appointment as emperor came at a time of economic depression in Russia,fi^om1880-1885, which led to industrial strikes m the cities and to the impoverishment of the landowning nobility, many of whom ended up selling their estates and moving to the cities. Spector continues: "Here [the land owning

'* David Brown, "Kashkin, Nikolay Dmitriyevich," The N^M' Grove Dictionary' of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie, 2"'* ed., vol 13 (London: MacMiUan. 2001) 393-394 '" I.M. Yampol'sky, "Moscow," The New Grove Dictionary of .Uusic and .\fuMcians, ed Stanlcv Sadie, 2"^ ed., vol. 17 (London: MacMillan, 2001) 169.

17

nobility] agitated incessantly for a return to a more autocratic policy in government under a strong, reactionary ruler. Such a ruler Alexander III proved to be."'^ His policies not only were directed towards the firm establishment of the autocracy, but also against all forms of liberalism and revolution as seen in the reinstatement of restrictionsft-omthe past. Under the guise of "Russification," a policy that was enacted to remo\ e any further threat to the reign of the tsar, various ethnic and religious groups such as Roman Catholics, Protestants, and particularly Jews, all endured heavy persecution.'^ To establish and maintain Russia's status as a great power, Alexander III enacted policies to encourage industrial growth in the cities, one of the results of which was the TransSiberian Railway, decided upon in 1885, begun in 1891, and completed in 1904.'*^ The industrial expansion boosted economic growth and stability. With economic growth, however, came the growth of discontent that led to even more people demanding social and political change, and Marxist revolutionaries began to make their presence known.^^ In an attempt to curb the unrest, Alexander III instituted even stricter policies, as Spector describes further: .. .government censorship permeated every phase of life. The press and the universities, which were reorganized in 1884, were stripped of every semblance of liberty. There was outright interference with the courts, especially as regards the independence of judges and the jury system. The police exercised a supervision and operated with a license unheard of even in the days of Nicholas I. Political prisoners were regarded as having lost all rights and w ere subjected to shocking brutality. A greater contrast to the liberalism of Alexander II could not well be imagined than that presented by the absolutism of Alexander III. In 1887 a plot to assassinate Alexander III was uncovered by the police. The leaders of

'^Spector 145 '* Spector 145-146. "Spector 148. '" Heyman 212.

18

the conspiracy were executed. Among them w as Alexander Ulyanow Lenin's eldest brother.^' As a natural result of Alexander Ill's strict Russification policies designed to strengthen the autocracy, the status of the Russian Orthodox Church was highly ele\'ated. Heyman points out that the church parish schools taught about 100,000 pupils in 1881, but by 1894, the number of pupils increased to almost one million.~~ Furthermore, as Spectar notes, Alexander Ill's brutal policies against anN'thing considered to be nonRussian or anti-autocratic were even shaped by the Russian Orthodox Church: Since in Russia, autocratic government has always been closely associated with the Church, it occasions no surprise that the emperor's former tutor, Constantine Pobyedonostsev (1827-1907), Procurator of the Holy S\Tiod from 1880 to 1905. was the directing spirit behind much of the reign of terror which broke out shortly after the accession of Alexander III... In Russia his name became synon\Tnous with black reaction and religious persecution under the guise of Russification.'" In spite of the harsh persecutions enacted by Alexander Ill's policies, the strong economic growth and the peace that Russia enjoyed w ith neighboring countries set the scene for a period of rich musical development in the life of Gretchaninoff In 1881, the same year that Alexander III came to power, Gretchaninoff was admitted to the Moscow Conservatory. Since his father's business had suffered financially, Gretchaninoff paid for his expenses by tutoring and giving piano lessons to young pupils, which would occupy him throughout his years at the Moscow Conser\'atory. Though his first experience at private teaching did not prove successful, he recalls, "I had no further misadventures w ith

-' Spector 147. "' Heyman 212. "Spector 145

19

my teaching... I was appreciated and liked as a teacher: lessons did not annoy me. and 1 had more and more pupils every passing year."'^ Gretchaninoff continued his studies at the Moscow Conservatory from 1881-1890, where he studied piano with Nikolai Kashkin, and counterpoint, harmony, and form with professors including Vasily Safonow N.A. Hubert, Hermann Laroche, Anton Arensky, and Sergei Taneye\'. Moscow in the 1880s was a time and place of rich musical acti\ity and development for Gretchaninoff.

Studying piano at the conservatory under Kashkin,

Gretchaninoff remembers him as "a kind and genial man, greatly esteemed by his colleagues and students, but he was a poor teacher and paid little attention to his duties." He then explains how he received no instruction in hand position or technique, and assigned piano works that were much too difficult for him. Gretchaninoff recalls the regular routine with Kashkin: "My teacher used to come to class with a pile of newspapers, and read them, walking back and forth, while I was playing, seemingly oblivious of my presence. I did not make bad mistakes and he never noticed the minor errors."^^ In spite of this serious lack of instruction, Gretchaninoff remained determined, preparing hours every day for his lessons and his course w ork, and w as promoted to the "third grade" by his second year of study. Though Gretchaninoffs self-described "strange shyness" prevented him from establishing lasting friendships at the Moscow conservatory, he lists his classmates from the conservatory who would become w ell known in their careers, including Sergei Rachmaninoff (1873-1943), who began his

'"'Gretchaninoff 22 ''^Gretchaninoff 18-19.

20

studies at the Moscow Conservatory in the mid-1880s, and Alexander Scnabin (IS": 1915), who began his work at the conservatory in 1888.^^ Gretchaninoff describes many of the concerts in Moscow as the "greatest musical events" for him. He enjoyed the historical concerts of Anton Rubinstein in Moscow and participated as a member of the chorus in the RMS performance of Liszt's oratorio, St. Elizabeth. Gretchaninoff fiirther recalls the significance of Rubinstein's concerts: The series of historic concerts presented by Anton Rubinstein in the 1880's was of tremendous importance to my musical de\'elopment. There w ere se\ en concerts in all, the programs comprising piano works of all composers, beginning with the early Italian and French classics, and ending with Schumann and Chopin. Each program was performed by Rubinstein in St. Petersburg on Sunday night and then, on the following morning, repeated for the music students. On Monday night Rubinstein went to Moscow, and on Tuesday night he played in the large hall of Nobility House for the general public, repeating the program on Wednesday morning for the Moscow students. That same evening he would return again to St. Petersburg, with three days lef^ to prepare for the next concert. And so it went for seven weeks. Every Tuesday night and every Wednesday morning I was present in the hall, with the scores in my hands, eagerly absorbing the sounds flowing from the fingers of this great genius...'

Gretchaninoff further recounts his personal experience with Tchaikovsk>', the composer he idealized more than any other: My years at the Moscow Conservatory were coincident w ith the rise of Tchaikovsky's star on the musical horizon. Every new symphony he wrote was immediately included in the programs of the Russian Imperial Musical Society [RMS]. His songs were avidly snatched up by Moscow music lovers as soon as his publisher, Jurgenson, printed them... The orchestra for these symphony concerts was usually supplemented by violinists, cellists, and other players from the ranks of Conser\'atory students. Theory students were sometimes assigned percussion instruments to play if the parts were not too prominent. I had a chance to play the glockenspiel part in Tchaikovskv's Mozartiana, with Tchaikovsky himself conducting the orchestra. -'Gretchaninoff 21. "^Gretchaninoff 24

21

Naturally, I was nervous, but all went well. Dunng the intermission on the last rehearsal, I was talking to Kashkin, when I saw Tchaikovsky coming towards us. Kashkin introduced us. Tchaikovsky shook hands w ith me and, intending to say something pleasant (which was characteristic of his kindly nature), remarked: "These parts should always be given to young musicians. Professional players never play them as conscientiously as these younger students." I w as in seventh heaven. My friends, poking fun at me, said afterwards that I had not w ashed m\ right hand that Tchaikovsky touched, for fully a week.^^ Completing five years of work in four years time under Kashkin, Gretchaninoff took the required examinations to be admitted for graduate study. With much effort on the part of Kashkin to prepare him for the exams, Gretchaninoff w as admitted for graduate study in the area of pedagogy. Assigned to the studio of Vasily Safono\, a new teacher and recent graduate of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, Gretchaninoff continued to devote himself to music studies. After two years of arduous study under Safonov, Gretchaninoff finally received encouragement from his teacher, w ho recommended that he take composition courses. Fueled by this small commendation, Gretchaninoff enrolled in the composition courses of Taneyev and Arensky. Studying form with Taneye\', Gretchaninoff recalls how he was "crushed" when his teacher did not remark favorably on the songs that he presented to him. A clash with Arensky, with whom he studied fugue, led to an intolerable situation for Gretchaninoff, and a heated argument with the teacher in January of 1890 led to him leaving the conservatory.^^ No longer under the rules of the Moscow Conservatory, which forbade students to publish music, Gretchaninoff arranged to have three of his songs published by a local Moscow music store. Gretchaninoff paid for the publication costs himself, and not a

^^ Gretchaninoff 25 -"Gretchaninoff 26-30.

->7

single copy was sold. Later, Gretchaninoff e\en destroyed U\o of the three songs, except for Lullaby, which was included in an album of five songs, opus 1. which he described as having a "worthwhile" melody, and "written in the effective style of the then popular songs by Cui and Tchaikovsky."^° Gretchaninoff recalled his first experience in writing church music dunng this time in Moscow: By that time I had acquired considerable knowledge of church music, and a mastery of vocal writing. I composed a Cherubic Hymn for mixed choir, and handed it over to a man named Makarov, whose daughters studied piano w ith me. He volunteered to show the manuscript to a choral conductor of his acquaintance for possible performance. In due time, Makarov told me that my Hymn had been approved, and that it would be sung the following Sunday at the early morning service in the Archangel Cathedral in the Kremlin.^' Eagerly awaiting the premier of his first choral composition, Gretchaninoff arrived at the Cathedral early in the morning, only to find out in the course of the ser\ ice that his composifion had been replaced with the Cherubic Hymn of Bortniansky, "My disappointment was beyond description." " Gretchaninoffs disposition suffered immensely under criticism, thrived w ith the smallest amount of encouragement, and yet his resolve remained constant. By the end of August, 1890, he had saved enough money to travel to St. Petersburg and stay for a few weeks, hoping to receive a scholarship that would take care of the rest of his expenses while studying in the St. Petersburg Conservatory. Upon arrival in St. Petersburg, he immediately was accepted by Rimsky-Korsakov as his student in composition and ^° Gretchaninoff 32. '' Gretchaninoff 33. ^" Gretchaninoff 34.

23

orchestration, but on a provisional basis until a final entrance examination in fugue was passed. Gretchaninoff had enrolled as a student during Anton Rubinstein's last year as director of the St. Petersburg Conservatory; Rubinstein retired in 1891, and died in 1894. Gretchaninoff recalled a brief encounter with Rubinstein during a class in choral composifion with Franz Czemy, in which they had just rehearsed Gretchaninoffs chorus. In the Fiery Glow, to the text of Surikov: Suddenly the door opened and Rubinstein came in. I felt an inner tremor of mixed fear and joy in the expectation that my adored Anton Grigorievitch would hear my composition. I hoped that m\' music would please him, and that he would commend me for it. But to my distress, Czemy [the teacher], as if frightened that he might give the impression of wasting time on inconsequenfial trifles instead of doing something worthwhile, asked Rubinstein if he would like to hear the Mendelssohn chorus that we had already rehearsed. My heart stood still... I sadly gathered up my manuscript, and with a feeling of bitter disappointment, went home.^^ During his early experiences under Rimsky-Korsakov, Gretchaninoff felt jealous that he received so little attention from the teacher compared to the others in his class. An early conversation with his teacher on the subject of favorite composers gave Gretchaninoff the opportunity to reveal to Rimsky-Korsakov his natural adoration for Tchaikovsky, whom he and others in Moscow had idolized. Unaware at this time of the rivalry between the Moscow and St. Petersburg schools, the latter of which demonstrated a marked preference for Glinka and those in the "Mighty Five" to the contempt of Tchaikovsky, Gretchaninoff later realized that his outspokenness may have contnbuted to Rimsky-Korsakov's early detachment towards him. However, this early detachment soon

.13

Gretchaninoff 37.

24

faded, and Gretchaninoff recalled many encouraging moments when Rimsky-Korsako\ approved of his work. In eariy 1892, Gretchaninoff asked Rimsk\-Korsakov to ser\e as his best man for his wedding in St. Petersburg. In his memoirs, Gretchaninoff fondly recalled Rimsky-Korsakov's participafion at his small wedding, and then remarked, "He came alone, without his wife. I was too shy to invite her to my wedding."""* Gretchaninoff focused on composing for the next two years while he was studying at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, and published some songs, as St. Petersburg's Conservatory had no rules against students publishing their works. His assignment in the summer of 1892 was to complete a concert overture for large orchestra. Rimsk\ Korsakov was impressed with the work, and recommended it to the Council of the St. Petersburg Conservatory for the annual students' concert to be held in the fall of the same year. Gretchaninoff recalls: "The overture was accepted and performed with great success. Galkin, who conducted, kept the score for a later performance in Pavlovsk, where he led the orchestra beginning with the season in 1893."^'^ In the spring of 1893, he was assigned to write a cantata in one month for solo voice, chorus, and orchestra. This final project culminated in a successful premier on May 30, with the composer conducting it himself Though the critics' reviews of the work were unfavorable, Gretchaninoff explained that the critics in St. Petersburg never gave favorable reviews to anything by Rimsky-Korsakov, nor to the rest of the composers who were part of the

"^ Gretchaninoff 42 " Gretchaninoff 45.

25

Mighty Five. Gretchaninoff proudly quoted from such an unfavorable review of his cantata in the St. Petersburg Gazette: "Gretchaninoffs cantata is concerned with fine details and sonority; his music is the frame of a non-existent picture. This is the st\le of Rimsky-Korsakov himself, and his students follow him. The gentlemen of the Mighty Heap may rejoice and congratulate themselves on the acquisition of another genius, number 13, according to our count. \'er\ soon, Stasov will describe him as 'incredible, phenomenal, monumental, fundamental,' etc. Sh. [Gretchaninoffs rival class-mate] at least has a recognizable picture in the foreground." I must admit that I felt very proud reading these re\ iew s, and understandably so. I was being thrown into the same heap w ith the Mightv Heap!^^ As a recent graduate of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, Gretchaninoff finally began independent work as a composer in 1893 at the age of twenty-eight. Financial difficuhies soon took their toll, and he struggled to attain enough students to support himself and his wife, and to find enough time to compose. Gretchaninoff remembered the 1893-94 concert season in St. Petersburg opening with Tchaikovsky's new Sixth Symphony, with Tchaiko\ sky himself conducting. He described the premier that took place on October 16, 1893: "Tchaikovsky was not a good conductor, and his now celebrated symphony received but a mediocre success." He then recalled meeting with Rimsky-Korsakov about it a few days later w here the "mediocre" quality of the new symphony was confirmed by Rimsky-Korsakov's similar description of it.^^ Later the same month, Tchaikovsky was struck with cholera and died a few days later. Gretchaninoff added: "On October 25, Tchaikovsky died. The whole musical

'* Gretchaninoff 46. '^Gretchaninoff 48.

26

worid was shaken by this event. Never before or since have I w itnessed such a uni\ ersal and gripping feeling of sorrow." Following the ftineral, the Russian Imperial Musical Society performed Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony again at the next concert, w here, in the hands of a masterful conductor, according to Gretchaninoff, the orchestra "performed the work with such penetrafion and passion that many in the audience w ept, particularly during the last movement with its deeply mournful mood." Gretchaninoff further lamented the legendary composer's death: As an outlet for my sorrow, I composed an orchestral Elegy, to the Memory of Tchaikovsky. But the music did not satisfy me, and I did not try to have the work performed. Some years later... I destroyed the manuscript. Man\ years elapsed before I finally succeeded in writing a work adequately expressing my feelings for the beloved master: it was my Fourth Symphony.^^ Spending the entire winter of 1893-94 teaching, Gretchaninoff also completed his first independent composition in a large form, the String Quartet in G major, and submitted it to the Balaieff compefifion in the spring of that year. Satisfied with this first large-scale work, Gretchaninoff immediately began work on his first symphony. Finding a small country cottage for rent on the Volga, he spent the summer with his wife in this quaint country home, devoting himself to relaxation and completing the symphony. Upon his return to St. Petersburg in the fall, Gretchaninoff presented the manuscript of his symphony to Rimsky-Korsakov, who responded favorably, and offered to perform it in the upcoming season. He soon also discovered that his String Quartet had w on the Balaieff prize, and was accepted for publication along with his first album of songs,

'* Gretchaninoff 48-50.

27

opus 1. The first symphony premiered in January, 1895, under Rimsky-Korsakov's direction. It received mixed reviews, which Gretchaninoff attributed to RimkskyKorsakov's inadequate interpretafion and performance of the work. Gretchaninoffs first significant success was the large choral w ork. North and South, which premiered in March, 1895, under the direction of Theodore Becker, the chorus master of the Russian Imperial Opera in St. Petersburg who founded an amateur chorus of two hundred male and female singers. Of this work, Gretchaninoff recalls: If my symphony was hardly a success, I was compensated a hundredfold by the tremendous acclaim that my large choral work North and South recei\ed... For my text I selected a Crimean sonnet by Alexey Tolstoy, "Over an Inaccessible Cliff" This sonnet presents two contrasting pictures: a somber mountain landscape where "the enemy of the angry god, plays with storm and gale," and a joyful scene at the seashore, where roses bloom and "spring wafts the air." I succeeded in outlining this sharp contrast rather effecti\ ely, and the talented Becker interpreted my music with great understanding. The w ork w as enthusiastically received by the audience and had to be repeated. I w as recalled to the podium several times to acknowledge the applause. ^ Gretchaninoff then comments on the work of Becker, who died soon after this premier, and Melnikov, a retired opera singer who co-founded the choral school w ith Becker and died shortly after Becker: Long live the memory of these two great artists' Thanks to them, Russian choral music was enriched, and its popularity spread not only over Russia but all over the world, particularly in America where choral singing today is widely cultivated... My name is known in America through some of my songs, but perhaps even more through my secular and sacred choral w orks. Throughout the "reign of terror" that played such a significant role during the rule of Alexander III, Gretchaninoff was never persecuted since he lived a normal life in

'''Gretchaninoff 54-55 •*" Gretchaninoff 55.

2S

terms of typical Russian society and orthodoxy. In 1895, he again spent the summer in the country cottage on the shore of the Volga, where he regulariy read new spapers. He comments: The reign of Alexander III and the early years of Nicholas II were politically so uneventful that one could be absolutely certain that nothing w orld-shaking w ould happen during the four months of the vacation period. My summers, with m> regular schedule for work and rest, seemed to pass all too quickh. Still, when autumn came, we returned, not without pleasure, to city life, with its cultural atmosphere, theaters, concerts, and art exhibitions."^^ Though Gretchaninoff benefited from his leisure and growing prospenty during the 1890s, the increasing tension in the political scene had already begun, and w ould eventually explode in at least two major events that would alter the course of his life forever: Bloody Sunday of 1905 and the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Alexander III died at the age of forty-nine in 1894 from nephritis, a condition that likely resulted from injuries sustained when the imperial train w as derailed in 1888. This left his son, Nicholas II, as the next Romanov in line and the last tsar to rule o\ er Russia. Coming to power at the young age of twenty-six, history records Nicholas II as illequipped for the tremendous responsibilities as emperor. While he w as personally known for his kind, approachable demeanor, important political decisions weighed heavily on him. Decisions that needed to be swiftly made w ere often delayed, to the further detriment of the situation; however, the few decisions that were sw ifth made often proved to be costly blunders. The results of such faulty administrative decisions.

41

Gretchaninoff 56.

29

meant to strengthen Russia and the autocracy, actually strengthened the re\ olutionary groups leading to the dissolution of the monarchy in 19n. During the late 1890s, Nicholas II confinued the policies of his father: expanding industrializafion in the cities primarily through the confinuation of railroad construction: maintaining the "Russification" policy that targeted Finns and Jews, the latter of whom continued to endure extreme violence; and continuing a domestic policy that denied any attempts at a representative council or a constitution that threatened the power of the monarchy."^^ Though his early years as emperor indeed were relatively "uneventful," as described by Gretchaninoff, both foreign and domestic issues had begun to threaten Russia's security. Tension with Japan developed as Nicholas II's growing interest in the Far East opposed Japanese expansion in Asia, and culminated in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05, resulting in humiliating defeat for Russia. The conflict ended with a relafively favorable settlement for Russia due to the genius of a top diplmat, Sergei Witte, who had also served as minister of finance and spearheaded industrialization efforts, particularly in railroad construction. Following his summer vacafion in 1895, Gretchaninoff returned to St. Petersburg, where more of his songs began to be published, receiving popularity. In spite of this, a new publicafion by Cesar Cui on the subject of Russian songs left him out of the mainstream classification of composers, and to his humiliation, classified him with a group of "third-rate" composers. Gretchaninoff promptly met with Cui and performed his songs for him. Gretchaninoff recalls Cui's apologies for leaving him out of his book: "T

42

Heyman 223-227.

30

confess that I was wrong,' said Cui. 'I was equally unfair to Rachmaninoff. In the new edition of my book, you and Rachmaninoff will be given the places you deser\'e.'"^In the fall of 1896, Gretchaninoff moved to Moscow, and re-established contact with one of his former instructors at the Moscow Conservatory, Sergei Taneyev. At this point in Gretchaninoffs career, Taneyev would have a tremendous influence on his compositional style. He recounted that many Moscow composers went to him for advice, including Rachmaninoff and Scriabin, and further stated: "From that time on, I never let any of my large works be published before showing the music to him."^ In Moscow, work continued on hisfirstof three full-scale operas, Dobrinya Nikiyitch, begun in 1895 in St. Petersburg, but not completed until 1901, and premiered in Moscow in 1903. Other works included songs and piano arrangements for children, whom he taught regularly, a collection of choruses, and chamber works for a variety of media. Other notable worksfromthis time included incidental music for Stanislovsky's newly founded Moscow Art Theatre. Of these works. Tsar Theodore enjoyed tremendous success, as he recalled: "Both the audience and the progressive press proclaimed this production an epoch-making event in the history of the Russian theatre. I was proud in the knowledge that I, too, had contributed my 'drop of honey' to this achievement."^^ Other works for the Moscow Art Theatre included Death of Ivan the Terrible, Dreams, and The Snow Maiden, the latter of which included a significant

^^Gretchaninoft"57. *^ Gretchaninoff 80. ** Gretchaninoff 70.

31

amount of music as an important part of the play, but drew onh' marginal success partially due to technical staging difficulties that affected the first performance."'^ After a long break from composing church music. Gretchaninoff completed his first Liturgy, Opus 13, in 1897, followed by two choruses: Praise the Lord and The Wave of the Ocean, Opus 19, both of which employed the old chant style of the Russian church that characterized the style of the remainder of his sacred compositions. This new st\le, which generally characterized the music of the new Russian choral school. recei\ ed Gretchaninoffs attention not only in his music, but also in his essays. Gretchaninoffs two articles in the Moskovskie Vedomosti, appeared in Fcbruar\, 1900, and sparked much debate. His comments about publishing these articles reveal a glimpse of his polifical opinion as well: "The only Russian newspaper that showed interest in the problems of the Russian Church, and church singing in particular, w as Moscovskye Vedomosty. I was altogether out of sympathy with the monarchist politics of that paper, but I decided nevertheless to publish my article in this, rather than in any other paper.""*^ Feeling he was misrepresented in the "storm of disapproval" that followed the first essay, Gretchaninoff responded with a second article. The outcome of these two articles put him at the forefront of what turned into a national debate on church music, the details of which are discussed in Chapter IV. Spending the summer of 1902 in another country cottage on the banks of the Volga, Gretchaninoff composed the Second Liturgy, Opus 29, in 1902. The premier in

"Gretchaninoff 70; 75-78. *^ Gretchaninoff 72

March of 1903 featured Vasliyev's chorus, and enjoyed a tremendous success. A leading conductor of a professional choir of 180 voices in Moscow, Leonid Vasilyev's choir and a detailed descripfion of the premier of the Second Liturgy will be discussed in Chapter \' While Gretchaninoff was establishing his reputation as a significant composer in a variety of genres during this period, the political situafion in Russia continued to worsen. A constant string of events severely weakened the percepfion of the monarchy, nudging the country toward revolufion. In the war against Japan, continual military defeats weakened confidence in the imperial administration. Furthermore, the advent of industriahzafion brought the natural result of an increased population of factory workers, a group that had reached 2.5 million in the 1897 census. This rapidly grow ing group endured long hours and poor living and working conditions, setting up another potential 48

political threat. Adding to this, underground revolutionary groups began to mobilize. The first Marxist Congress took place in Minsk in 1898, the delegates of whom were arrested, causing no lasting results. However, by the early 1900s, other Marxist groups began to assemble. In 1902, Lenin published his book What Is To Be Done?, and in 1903, assembled another Marxist Congress in London. The result of this congress started two rival parties of revolutionaries that favored the overthrow of the monarchy and the organization of a socialist government: the Mensheviks who favored an extended education program to train the masses before the advent of a re\olution, and the Bolsheviks under the leadership of Lenin, who favored a forceful, abrupt deposition of Heyman 22'

33

the existing polifical power."^^ In 1901, the radical Socialist Revolutionary Party, appealing to the peasantry who sfill made up the majority of the population, resoned to terrorism against imperial officials. By 1905 they had not only assassinated several officials including the Grand Duke Sergei, the emperor's uncle and governor of Moscow, but also had become the largest political party in Russia."^° The year 1905 brought polifical unrest that had captivated the heart of Russia in both urban and rural areas, bringing the course of events to one fateful day that pa\ed the way for revolufionaries to overthrow the monarchy twelve years later. By early January in St. Petersburg, 140,000 factory workers had resorted to strikes.'^' On January 22. a single event known as "Bloody Sunday" destroyed any faith in the tsar that had still endured among the people. Up to this time, the people referred to Nicholas II as their "Little Father,"^^ and the rage of the general population had not been against him, but against his "henchmen" who actually committed the wrongs against the people and kept the tsar isolated from them.^"^ Led by Father George Capon, one of a minority in the clergy who felt that it was the church's responsibility to educate the illiterate masses and redirect their violent tendencies into peaceful ways of redressing their injustices, thousands of men, women, and children marched to the imperial palace to peacefully

'"Spector 159. '"Spector 160. *'Heyman 234. -' Marc Ferro, Nicholas II. Last of the Tsars (New \'ork. Oxford: Oxtord UP. 1993) S7. According to Sergei Shishkin, The Russian "Bat'ushka" is the very tender word for father, as used by a young child. The American English equivalent would be "Daddy " " Ferro 87.

34

address the tsar. Spector further describes the scene, which had taken place follow inii a religious service: Reverently bearing aloft portraits of the emperor and members of the ro\al famiK and singing hymns, they presented the aspect of a devout religious procession. Anything less like a revolutionary demonstration cannot w ell be imagined. Father Gapon had told them that the emperor would no doubt receive them himself and instructed them to fall upon their knees when he appeared in token of their loyalt\ and submission... With a blind obtuseness in judgment, which finds few parallels in history, soldiers and Cossacks were ordered to open fire without warning upon the assembled crowd. Estimates of the number of victims range from 70 to 500 or more killed, and 250 to 3500 wounded.^"^ A few days later, in an address to a carefully selected delegation, the tsar forgave their offences for "coming in a rebellious mob... [which] w as a criminal act."'' The tsar's actions on that day, however, had lasting effects on the Russian people, both against the autocracy and against the Russian Orthodox Church. Spector adds: No words can depict the terror and the wrath of the people over the horrors of Bloody Sunday. Those who had lost ftiends or relativ es vowed an undying vengeance, the intensity and fervency of which only increased with the passing years. Wrath also fell upon the Church, because the people were fully convinced that they had been betrayed and entrapped by its emissaries. From this time forth the workers aligned themselves wholeheartedly with revolutionary and socialist forces. "Bloody Sunday" marked a crisis in the revolutionary movement." Ferro summed up the attitude of the people toward the tsar after Bloody Sunday this way: "He forgave his people for rebelling against him. But his people did not forgive him." In the aftermath of 1905, the general strike forced Nicholas to make concessions, and he reluctantly issued the October Manifesto. The manifesto promised civil liberties

^^ Spector 163. *^ Ferro 86. ** Spector 163. " Ferro 86.

35

and a representational council called a Duma. The Duma, elected by universal \ ote, would have final approval before any law could be passed. By late 1905. the fulhimplemented October Manifesto satisfied the moderate supporters of the revolution, and though a final outburst of revolutionary activity took place in Moscow in December, it was suppressed immediately by the Russian Army.^^ Bloody Sunday deeply affected all of Russian society. Stewart points out how the consequences of this tragic day affected musicians in general: The strikes which occurred throughout the country hampered travel and communications; concerts, therefore, were difficult to arrange. The personal feelings of musicians became aligned with liberal thinking. On February 15, a letter signed by over thirty musicians in protest of the tyranny appeared in the Russian Musical Gazette... The letter was signed by Rachmaninoff, Taneye\, Gretchaninoff, Siloti, and others.^^ Rimsky-Korsakov also became involved, submitting a letter to the same publication that not only supported the views of his colleagues, but also defended the students who were involved with the strike, and called for educational reform. As a result of student unrest, the St. Petersburg Conservatory temporarily closed, and Rimsky-Korsakov was dismissed. From this time until his death in 1908, he was constantly troubled by the rigid imperial policies against him.^ The events of Bloody Sunday in 1905 also deeply affected Gretchaninoff in a personal way. He describes his experience surrounding it: Russia's ill-fated war w ith Japan in 1905 produced a \'iolent resurgence of the theretofore dormant political consciousness of the masses. Protests against the tyrannical and short-sighted polic\ of the government were voiced with increasing ^* Heyman 235-236. -' Stewart 32-33. *•" V.V. Yastrebtsev, Reminiscenses of Rimskv-Korsakov, trans. Florence Jonas (.N'cw \'oxV. Columbia University Press, 1985) 355.

36

boldness. All over Russia, there were rumblings of discontent and indignation meetings, culminating in the workers' public petition to the Tsar on Januarv 9 (22) , 1905, and the resulting blood bath on Winter Palace Square in St. Petersburg. When the news of the massacre reached Moscow, I was indignant and outraged. As an outlet to my pent-up feelings I began a collection of funds for the families of the slain workers... And I wrote a threnody for the fallen \ictims.^' To the Memory of the Fallen for Freedom was scored for a cappella choir of mixed voices. "Bloody Sunday" not only inspired him to compose a specific work directly related to the tragic events, but also indirectly led him to a shift in his overall compositional style. Close friends of Gretchaninoff while attending a political meeting at the Moscow University following the tragedy in St. Petersburg, met a **young woman of great charm" and introduced her to Gretchaninoff Gretchaninoffs immediate but lasting infatuation with her resulted in a long period of inner turmoil for him, until his eventual divorce and re-marriage to Maria Griegorievna, to whom he had dedicated many of his compositions. Gretchaninoff related this period of struggle in his life to a brief change in the harmonic style of his compositions.^^ In his dissertation over the Catholic masses of the composer, Bradley Holmes also suggests a correlation in his personal struggle and the nature of his music at the time: Grechaninov took a decided turn toward impressionism in 1907. Citing Debussy, Ravel, Strauss, and Reger as influences, he dabbled w ith new harmonic language... This time of experimentation seems to signal a certain uneasiness in

*' Gretchaninoff listed January 9 as the date according to Western Calendar. Ihe I-astern calendar used in pre-revolutionary Russia was 13 days behind the Western calendar Russia adopted the Western calendar following the Revolution. The acUial date of Bloody Sunday in Russia was Januan. 22, in the West the date fell on January 9. *•-Gretchaninoff 100. "•Gretchaninoff 100-102

Grechaninov's assessment of his own work, and indeed of his personal life. His second marriage in 1911 coincides with the end of these wanderings.^ This period of "wandering" in the personal hfe and compositional style of Gretchaninoff coincided with a period of internal wandering of Tsar Nicholas's administration. Though the elected Dumas put in place by the October Manifesto of 1905 were supposed to have terms of five years each, and the power to regulate all legislation, Nicholas refused to relinquish his autonomous power to appoint and dismiss ministers, govern domestic affairs by decree, or conduct issues as the\ related to foreign poHcy. The first Duma met in May, 1906, with the ambition of challenging major issues, but was dismissed by the tsar in less than three months. The second Duma, in 1907, suffered a similar fate, and it was not until the Third Duma, elected under strict control, that a full five-year term was actually completed. A\ oiding controversies that led to conflict with the tsar, the third Duma issued a very progressive education policy, w ith the goal of teaching all children and eliminating illiteracy completely by 1922. Furthermore, the third Duma established an "interpolation" policy that enabled them to hold governmental officials accountable for their conduct. 05 The October Manifesto, combined w ith immediate economic progress, strengthened the monarchy, appeased the moderate re\ olutionaries for a time, and weakened the radical revolutionary groups. Shortly after 1905, the Bolsheviks under Lenin became divided. However, by 1912, Lenin had further refined his radical views of revolution and Marxism, and called his supporters together for a conference in Prague.'"'

"^ Holmes 33. "'Heyman 239-242 ** Heyman 243-244.

"^S

Meanwhile, tension increased between Russia and Germany over the future of the Balkans, ripening conditions for the onset of world war. During the years immediately preceding World War I, Gretchaninoff continued his normal activities devoted to teaching and composition. His most notable work of the period was the opera Sister Beatrice, begun in 1907 and completed in 1910. The work, however, met with disapprovalfi^omthe church because of the appearance of a statue of the Madonna that was at the center of the action on stage, an act that was considered to be blasphemous due to the mixing of sacred icons with the secular stage. Sister Beatrice never premiered in St. Petersburg, and received only one successful performance in Moscow, followed by critical attacks from church officials. Gretchaninoff stated: "And so my poor Sister Beatrice was buried alive; and the score reposed on my library shelf for nearly twenty years." In the fall of 1910, Gretchaninoff moved back to St. Petersburg. He was welcomed as the composer of many songs and sacred works, and was received in the homes of aristocratic music lovers. Among those who received him was Alexander Taneyev, the uncle of Sergei Taneyev who had critiqued his work in Moscow. Further, Gretchaninoffs Credo from the Second Liturgy was so adored by the tsar that he commanded the Court Chapel to perform it every Sunday. Alexander Tanye\, w ho w as close to the imperial court, arranged for the performance and for Gretchaninoff to receive an annual pension of two thousand rubles from the tsar.

67

Gretchaninoff 110.

39

By July of 1914, Germany declared war against Russia. The people of Russia welcomed the war, hoping one of the outcomes would be a form of democracy in Russia. Spector illuminates the early perception of the Russian participation in the war: Once Germany had declared war, Nicholas II called upon all Russians to rally to the defense of their country. His appeal met with an immediate and enthusiastic response from all classes of the people, especially as the governmental policy was approved by the Fourth Duma... The participation of England and France did much to win popular support of the war in Russia... Even the radicals saw hope for the future of Russia if she took part in a war in which France, a republic, and England, a true democracy, w ere opposed to a monarchial Germany. They feh that if Russia associated herself with these countries as an ally, she too might be able in the end to secure a democratic form of government. However, within a few weeks, enthusiasm had been replaced by fear. On August 17. at the insistence of her allies, Russia disrupted original strategic war plans, and invaded Germany to ease the strain on France and England at the Western Front. Though the Russian troops outnumbered the Germans, superior German leadership and technology led to an overwhelming defeat for the Russians, completely destroying their morale. During the course of the war, the monarchy suffered serious setbacks. The Russian army suffered from a shortage of weapons and ammunition, immobility, and low morale. Nicholas's clash with the Fourth Duma intensified, yet his ministers lacked any ability to direct the war effort effectively. Finally, Nicholas himself took command of military forces in 1915. With the tsar at theft-ontmuch of the time, Rasputin, the faith healer who impressed the empress with his cures for hemophilia suffered by their son Alexis, appeared to have significant political influence, as many of his associates were

68

Spector 181-182.

40

appointed to high ministerial positions. In 1916, rumors of coups to overthrow the tsar were abundant, and Rasputin was assassinated. As a resuh of the ma\hem, Russia had suffered serious political, economic, and social damage.^^ B\ the end of 1916, average Russians experienced extreme shortages in food and fuel supplies. The soldiers at the front sensed the lack of organization and administrati\'e skills of their commanders, and the war seemed futile. The monarchy, in particular, lost practically all prestige. ''^ In the spring of 1914, the Gretchaninoffs traveled to Spain and France, returning to Moscow only days before Austrian Archduke Francis Ferdinand was assassinated, precipitating the first global war. Gretchaninoff detailed his perspecti\e of the war and the 1917 Revolution as it affected those in Moscow: The first two years of the war were indecisi\ e: defeats were followed by victories; victories by defeats. Toward the end of 1916 there was a marked deterioration of foreign affairs. Rasputin, the "Holy Man," appeared on the scene and cast a spell upon the Imperial family, particularly the Tsarina. A conspiracy was formed among men close to the Court, resulting in Rasputin's assassination. This event and the continued setbacks on the battlefront signalized the approach of Revolution. And then it struck! The news of the Revolution of February, 1917, was greeted in Moscow with enthusiasm. People poured into the streets wearing red flowers in their lapels. Strangers embraced each other w ith tears of joy in their eyes. Maria Grigorievna and I joined the crowd, but not for long... ' Gretchaninoff then rushed off to compose a national anthem, "The H\Tnn of Free Russia," to a poem by Constantine Balmont: Manuscript in hand, I went to see Gutheil [his publisher]. Without wasting any time he sent the music to the printer, and on the follow ing afternoon the Gutheil store displayed copies of m\ Hymn of Free Russia. The proceeds from the sales were turned over to the liberated political pnsoners. The Bolshoy Theatre was closed for only a few days. As soon as it reopened, my new anthem was performed... Thanks to the simple melody and fine text, my anthem soon "" Heyman 252-263 ^"Heyman 253. ^'Gretchaninoff 117.

41

became popular, not only in Russia but abroad. M\ American ftiends, Kurt Schindler and his wife, translated it into English, and it was published b\ the G. Schirmer Company. The Hymn of Free Russia w as still sung even when there was no more freedom in Russia.^ The hope of freedom experienced among the Russian people soon faded with the new revolution of the Bolsheviks in October. The eariier March Revolution which overthrew the monarchy resulted in two rival institutions of government: the Provisional Government, recognized by the Allies, and the Soviet^^ of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies (Soviet), the latter of which, Spector adds, "assumed so much authority that for all intents and purposes two governments were trying to function in Russia." "* The Provisional Government, with members who were actually responsible for the political revolution in March, issued decrees guaranteeing freedom of speech, freedom of press, universal suffrage, and the establishment of a representational assembly, among other Items.

However, with "Army Order Number T' decreed by the Soviet, rights w ere

given to soldiers to elect committee members to a Soviet or Council, and to disobey any army orders that disagreed with the Soviet. Under the auspices of Army Order Number 1, all military discipline was in disarray: officers were murdered at the hands of the soldiers, others deserted, and the entire Russian army was virtually destroyed. The internal chaos that followed in the cities provided Lenin's Bolsheviks an easy opportunit\ for their revolution, which occurred in November, and by 1918 had established the new Communist Government.^^

^-Gretchaninoff 117-118. ^^ "Soviet" literally means council. * Spector 267. " Spector 268. '"Heyman 268-291.

Gretchaninoff recalled his viewpoint of the situation from March to No\ember, 1917, and described his musical escape from the horrible situation: The intoxication of liberty did not last long. The spectre of a new and bloody revolution appeared in sight. October arrived, and in its wake came famine, cold, and the almost complete extinction of all spiritual life. In those evil days I experienced a yearning to write religious music, to forget what was going on around me.' Gretchaninoff continues in his autobiography by listing the a cappella sacred works he had composed, and then reflects: "I had exhausted all of the technical resources of choral writing a cappella. What was to be my next step? By what method could I enhance the expressive power in my music?"

The end result was the first e\er Russian liturgy set to

instrumental accompaniment: the Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, for tenor and bass solo, chorus, string orchestra, organ and harp. Gretchaninoff summarizes the horrible conditions of the time surrounding his composition of the Domestic Liturgy: I wrote this Liturgy in the autumn of 1917 during the Bolshevik uprising in Moscow. The bitterness of the Hallelujah in this Liturgy is explained by my horrible experiences during this period. Every time I hear this Liturgy the memories of those dreadful days come to mind. Peaceful citizens kept \ igil in their homes. There were trenches right in front of our house. No one dared appear in the streets. Gunfire and the sound of the cannonade broke the ominous silence. At any moment a stray bullet or cannonball might have hit our house which stood between the battle lines. The Domestic Liturgy premiered in Moscow on March 30, 1918, and enjoyed many more successful performances in the West throughout Gretchaninoffs lifetime. Gretchaninoff describes the early years in Moscow under the new Communist government as cold, hungr\, and harsh. Relief soon came through the patronage of ^' Gretchaninoff 118. '* Gretchaninoff 119. '" Gretchaninoff 121.

43

American and English friends, enabling him to tra\el. Howe\er. the harsh times in Russia took their toll on him, as he went through an entire year of depression: "Dunng the season 1921-1922,1 was in a depressed state. I could not compose, and the whole year passed without fruitful work. I impatiently awaited the coming of spring when we were to go abroad. "^° Throughout the remainder of his career in Russia, the spnng and summer months were devoted to travel, and though the new government made it less convenient to do so, he was still able to go abroad, meeting more ftiends in aristocratic circles who enjoyed his music, and supported him financially. Boris Schwarz's Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia explains that conditions of 1920's Russia caused many leading figures to emigrate. Though the New Economic Policy (NEP) of the Communist government provided some economic relief in the eari\ 1920s, Gretchaninoff permanently left Russia for Paris in 1925. The famine, the harsh living conditions, the restrictions on self-expression in the arts, and Lenin's reaction of indifference to it all made for intolerable conditions that forced many other leading figures to leave Russia as well, including Alexander Tcheripin, Rachmaninofff, Koussevitsky, Vladimir Horowitz, Joseph Heifetz, and Nicolai Medtner.^' Having made several visits to the United States, Gretchaninoff moved to the U.S. in 1939. living in New York City in 1941 until his death at the age of 91 in 1956. He continued to write about music, and to compose works in a variety of genres through the remainder of his

*° Gretchaninoff 13. *' Boris Schwarz, Music and .Musical Lijc in Soviet Russia, 1^ ed. (Bloomington: Indiana Iniversity Press, 1983) 19-20.

44

life, including both sacred and secular choral works that were both a cappella and accompanied. His music retained similar Russian characteristics of style throughout hi^ life; however, the Domestic Liturgy, composed in 191", would be the last work that he composed in the tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church.

45

CHAPTER III THE RUSSL\N ORTHODOX LITLT^GY

History of Russian Liturgical Singing In his monumental book. Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutiouar\ Russia, Vladimir Morosan discusses two common misconceptions of late nineteenth and earhtwentieth century Russian scholars: that Russian liturgical singing originated entirel> from the importation of the liturgy from the Greek Orthodox Church, and that Russian liturgical music included choral performance from its inception. Scholars generalh' agree that the liturgy for the Russian Orthodox Church began developing shortly after Prince Vladimir converted to Christianity in 988 and declared it the state religion. Further, Prerevolutionary Russian historians generally acknowledged that Russian liturgical singing originated entirely from the importation of the established liturgy from the Greek Orthodox Church. However, more recent scholarship suggests that other foreign influences also may have played a part.' The reason such influences were so easily overlooked, Morosan implies, is that the level of influence from these other Christian traditions paled in comparison to the enormous influence of the Byzantine tradition. He explains. While the original chant melodies and notation may have undergone certain changes in being transferred to a different language and different ethnic musical sensibilities, the liturgical order (including the order of singing) remained Byzantine Greek, at least as long as Greek hierarchs from Constantinople headed the Russian Church." ' Morosan, Choral Performance 3. " Morosan, Choral Performance 1.

46

Morosan further shows that Russian liturgical singing from its beginnings remained soloistic rather than choral, and concludes, "There is no conclusive evidence that ordained singers were organized into choral ensembles, and the musical function of such ensembles, if they existed... remains undetermined."^ Johann von Gardner's Russian Church Singing, from which Morosan's work originates, divides the history of Russian liturgical singing into epochs and periods, from its beginnings through the Russian Revolution of 1917.** Gardner explains that the following criteria are used in dividing the history of Russian liturgical singing into periods, which Morosan's Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia and subsequent writings discuss in detail: 1. PecuUarities of linguistic texts found in musical manuscripts. (The evolution of the language often brought w ith it the evolution of melodic content.) 2. Differences in musical style and semiographic characteristics. 3. Development and evolution (and at times, devolution) of the liturgical order. 4. Political events that affected liturgical format and the liturgical arts. The first epoch lasted from 988 unfil the mid-seventeenth century, and consisted of monophonic singing, as the chants were sung exclusively in unison or parallel octaves by soloists. The second epoch lasted from the mid-seventeenth century onward, and is characterized by the development of polyphonic choral singing. Scholars generally agree on the dates and the principal stylistic qualities of the two epochs; however, the

"* Morosan, Choral Performance 13. * Gardner 143-146. '' Gardner 137.

delineation of specific periods, dates, and style traits within the epochs has not been universally accepted.^ Gardner bases his division of the first epoch into periods on the "predominant types of singing found in extant written monuments of liturgical singing."' Gardner labels the first period "the period of origins." Both Gardner and Morosan confirm that there are no extant manuscripts from this early period that dates from 988 to the end of the eleventh century. While Gardner states that any conclusions about this early period must be based at least partly on conjecture, Morosan's findings, as summarized above, indicate that the performance of such chant was soloistic rather than choral, and infer that certain foreign and Slavic influences may have influenced the birth of Russian liturgical chant in this period.^ Gardner identifies the next period of Russian church singing as "the period of Kontakarian Singing." This period begins with the first appearance of manuscripts at the end of the eleventh century, and lasts through the end of the thirteenth century, when Kontakarian Chant disappeared. During this time, two fundamentally different types of chant emerged, each with its own unique staff-less notafion: Kontakarian Chant, which was unique to the period, and Znamenny Chant, more widely used than Kontakarian Chant, and used throughout the epoch. Both Gardner and Morosan expound on the Greek foundation that shaped the Russian Liturgy during the period. Gardner states, "In terms of liturgical practice, this period is characterized by the use of the Constantinopolitan

* Gardner 139. ' Gardner 143 * Gardner 143 ** Morosan 3, 13, 36.

48

liturgical order. Cathedrals of this time used the order of the Great Church... the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople, while monasteries employed the order of the Constantinople Monastery of the Studios."'^ hi his introductory essa\ to the antholog> of music that covers the enfire history of Russian choral music, Morosan explains that through comparative analyses of the Russian and Byzantine manuscripts, it is clear that the early Slavs copied the Byzantine musical notation that was in common use in Byzantium during the first half of the eleventh century." Gardner identifies the third period as "the period dominated by Znamenny Singing alone," extending from the beginning of the fourteenth century to the sixteenth century. All manuscripts from this period contain exclusively Znamenny Chant, and Morosan explains that the Znamenny Chant from the Kontakarian period dating back to the eleventh century remained virtually unchanged until about the fifteenth century.'' Gardner mentions that changes were made in the liturgy as the order of the Jerusalem and Mount Athos monasteries were substituted for the Constantinopolitan order.'"' Both Gardner and Morosan acknowledge the changes that took place in notation toward the end of the period. Morosan describes the changes thus: .. .by the late fifteenth century, a new technical terminology develops: new names for neumes appear in the sources, necessitating the compilation of "alphabets" (azbuki) of neumes, while the number of musical manuscripts vastly increases. Stylized hands and occasional illuminations impart to musical manuscripts a

'° Gardner 143-144 " Vladimir Morosan, "One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music: .An Introduction," Monuments of Russian Sacred Music: One Thousand Years ot Russian Church .Music, cd. \'ladimir Morosan, ser. 1, Vol. 1 (Washington, DC. Musica Russica. 1991) xliv. '• Morosan, "One Thousand Years ' xliii. ' Gardner 144

4')

fanciful, decorafive appearance readily associated with iconograph\' and architecture of the period.'"^ Gardner defines the final period in the first epoch of the history of Russian liturgical singing simply as "the period of early Russian polyphony,'' dating from the end of the sixteenth century to the middle of the seventeenth century when events "brought about an abrupt halt both to this period and the entire first epoch." Gardner further explains, "This period is characterized, first of all, by the appearance of new, heretofore non-existent notations and types of singing... which were not necessarily performed monophonically." Gardner elaborates further that this period w as the first to introduce schools for church singers, organized choirs, and textbooks on notation. ' Morosan more thoroughly discusses the changes that took place during this final period of the first epoch. He explains that all of the liturgical chants from this early epoch of Znamenny Chant may be classified into eight modes or tones, each distinguished by characteristic melodic formulas. He also acknowledges that by the sixteenth century, Russian musical notation had clearly evolved from its early Byzantine roots, and by the early seventeenth century, the entire Znamenny Chant tradition changed significantly: During the sixteenth and eariy seventeenth centuries, the tradition inherited from the Middle Ages underwent significant changes. The new melodies, created in response to evolving tastes, required a system of notation that was more reliable in specifying musical pitch. Several key efforts were directed at regulafing the vertical dimension of Russian notation, which heretofore had depended mostly on the singer's memory of the given melody. Manuscripts reveal three different methods: (1) red cinnabar marks...-a system of letters written next to neumes, which fixed more clearly the pitch level at which the '^ Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xliv "Gardner 144.

50

neume was executed; (2) the priznaki. or small black tails attached to the neumes...; and (3) the so-called Kieven or square notes, which became increasingly widespread toward the end of the century. Morosan notes that these developments led to a notational system that resembles modem staff notation, and that manuscripts from this period incorporating these features may be readily transcribed today.'^ In his discussion on polyphony, Morosan points out that the origins of liturgical polyphony may have taken place as eariy as the fifteenth century through oral tradition, though the eariiest manuscripts of polyphony are dated at the turn of the sixteenth century. He explains that the manuscripts of eariy Russian polyphony from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries reveal a rich repertoire, in two, three, and sometimes four voices,'^ though none directly resembles the rich polyphony of Europe that had 1R

developed by this time.

While Morosan admits that choral performance of the

monophonic or polyphonic chant from this early period of Russian history may have occurred, he reports that there is no evidence to support this claim. In summarizing the entire first epoch of Russian liturgical music, Morosan states the following: The roots of the Russian choral tradition are not to be found in the first six and a half centuries of Orthodox liturgical singing in Russia. So long as Russia remained an Eastern-oriented, theocentric society, fully cognizant of its Byzantine Orthodox heritage even after the fall of Byzantium, its musical development stayed within the boundaries of the Eastern Orthodox tradition. This tradition ... does not include choral singing in the Western sense of the word. Contrary to the beliefs of some Slavophile music historians, Russia before 1650 shows no evidence of indigenous cultural forces strong enough to have transfonned a Byzantine tradition of soloistic monody into a tradition of choral singing. \\ hen the change to choral singing did occur, it was due to powerful cultural forces from *' * Morosan, "One Thousand ^'ears" xliv-xlv. '^ Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlvi " Morosan, Choral Performance 26.

51

the West, where choral part-singing was already a tradition of several centunes' standing.'^ Gardner labels the second epoch in the history of Russian liturgical singing as the "epoch of Western-style choral singing," which extends from the second half of the seventeenth century through the twentieth century. In describing the period of earl\Russian polyphony, Gardner alludes to certain events that brought the first epoch to an "abrupt halt," without giving any further details on the nature of those e\ ents. Morosan discusses these events that led the Russian Orthodox Church to suddenl> abandon its ow n singing tradifion in favor of foreign traditions. However, Morosan also acknowledges that the development of eariy polyphony in the Russian tradition of Znamenny Chant opened the door for changes in the performance of the liturgy by instigating a change in the philosophy behind the performance: Liturgical polyphony opened the possibility of deriving aesthetic pleasure purely from the musical sonority, and to some extent liberated chant from the strictly semanfic domain of the liturgical text. The need to coordinate the polyphonic voices temporally enriched the rhythmic character of Russian music and transformed its expressive language. In this manner early Russian polyphony served as an important link between the medieval art of ancient Russian chant and 20

the musical art of the modem penod. By the early seventeenth century, Russia had grown as a significant political and economic power, leading to military confrontations with neighboring countries and increased contact with Western nations. Liturgical singing was one area of Russian culture most affected.'^' In his dissertation on Russian sacred and folk music, Keith Wilcox reports that the last tsar of the Riurik line died in 1598, leaving no heir. One of " Morosan, Choral Perjormance 36. ^° Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlvi. *' Morosan, Choral Performance 37.

the leading noblemen, Boris Godunov, assumed the throne and reigned for se\en \ears before his death in 1605, bringing on a period known as the Time of Troubles (16051613). During this time, various pretenders to the throne aided by Polish armies occupied Moscow. Wilcox states: "The time of Polish occupafion brought about not only political havoc, but also religious upheaval because the Poles tried (but failed) to forcibh' convert the Russians to Roman Catholicism."^^ Morosan reports that during this time, Russians heard church music of the Western style that included choral part-singing as well as organs. He states further that by the middle of the seventeenth century, the singing of Znamenny chant had reached a point of crisis, partially brought on by the singers themselves, for it "no longer fulfilled the didactic and aesthetic needs of the Russian Church. "^^ By 1652, the Patriarch Nikon (Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church from 1652-1658) instituted reforms in the church ritual and liturgies. Morosan notes that a council of "expert singers and composers" was commissioned to carry out the reforms. The group convened in Moscow in 1655 headed by the monk and scholar Aleksander Mezents.^'* In reaction to these reforms, stiff opposition by certain priests and their following led to the raskol, a schism that divided the Russian Orthodox Church into tw o bitterly opposing sides. Morosan states that the Old Believers, as the separatist group was called, retreated to the Northern frontiers of Russia, and kept alive the liturgical ^-Wilcox 41. * Morosan, Choral Performance 37. "•* .Morosan, Choral Performance 37-38. In Gretchaninoffs unpublished essay, "Brief Review ot the Development of the Church Orthodox Singing" included in the appendix, he refers to this commission as the "Council of 1667." Morosan notes that though the Council's work began in 1655, it was interrupted due to on epidemic outbreak of the plague only to resume thirteen years later

s^

singing from the past, "while the rest of Russia was left with a profound culttiral and artisfic vacuum." Morosan states further: In the three or four decades that were to follow, the musical heritage of over six hundred years would be summarily swept aside and supplanted b>' foreign art forms that would dominate the nafion's culture for the next two centuries. Znamennyi [monophonic chant]... and indigenous Russian polyphony gave way to the "harmonious and graceful art" ofmusikii, part-singing modeled after Western European polyphony."^^ Morosan reports that part-singing in the Western style first appeared in Southwestern Russia before spreading to the North, and lists Kiev and L\o\ as centers of cultural activifies that received praise from many listeners of the time. The newly imported style was termed partsny singing (from the Latin partes, meaning parts) and was performed from part-books rather than from a single complete score as in the past. In describing the music, Morosan states: Some works were Western in format, but had an internal harmonic and melodic organizafion that was either influenced by or actually based on the chant, while other works used entirely Western compositional techniques. In Russian music of the 17'^ century, both styles, the traditional and the new, developed simultaneously. The latter required heretofore unimaginable vocal skills, mastery of a new system of notation, as well as a knowledge of a new style of composition. Yet the immense number of manuscripts attest to the fact that church singers and composers were quick to assimilate the new techniques. Although officially the new style was not sanctioned until 1668, part singing was already popular during the first half of the century. ^ The first period in this second epoch of the history of Russian liturgical singing is described by Gardner as beginning in the mid-seventeenth century and continuing more than halfway through the eighteenth century, and is defined as "the period ofPolish-

" Morosan, Choral Performance 38. ** Morosan, "One Thousand "i'ears" xlvi.

54

Ukrainian influence, marked by the florid, often poh'-choral 'part'... style, as well as the simpler 'kant'... style inspired by the Protestant chorale."'^ Morosan further discusses the significant role of the kant, or "sacred kanty," though it was not a part of the liturgy. A sacred part song, the kant acted as a catalyst for the new style in the se\ enteenth centur>, and influenced genres that would later become a part of the liturgy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: the sacred concerto, the sacred trio, and chant harmonization.'^ Gardner not only comments on the shift in style, but also the shift in philosophy behind the performance of liturgical music that began this new epoch in the history of Russian liturgical singing: "Beginning with this period, liturgical singing ceases to be considered a form of worship itself and begins to be viewed as music introduced into church services."^^ Though part-singing became firmly established in the seventeenth century, Morosan adds that choral performance of Western polyphony started slowly. He writes: Available informafion indicates that, at least at the outset, the new partesnyi [same as partsny used above] style did not involve large choral ensembles. In southwestern Russia, where the style w as first adopted from Europe, it was performed as vocal ensemble music with a single voice on a part... (.. .the L'vov Brotherhood maintained only four singers for partesnyi singing as late as 1697)... With one voice to a part they w ould have been able to sing twelve-part compositions, which appear in great numbers of manuscripts from the period...^^ He notes that by the end of the seventeenth century two large organizations had been firmly established: the Tsar's Singing Clerics, numbering between eighty and one

' Gardner 145. •^ Morosan, "One Thousand "^ears" xlvii. * Gardner 145 .Morosan, Choral Performance 50.

hundred from 1680-1700, and the Patriarchal Singing Clerics, numbering forty-seven in the year 1700. However, their primary function was to sing simultaneoush' for a number of court chapels serving the extended royal family or kremlin cathedrals, and so a single performance with all of the singers in place seldom if ever occurred.'' Peter the Great's reign from 1698-1725 brought important changes not only to Russian society but also to the organization of the church and the two established choral organizations performing the liturgies for the court chapels. In previous decades, the Patriarch Nikon not only instituted significant reforms in the church liturgy, but also attempted to gain power over the imperial administration. As a backlash, Peter blocked efforts to fill the vacant position of patriarch in 1700. In 1721, Peter issued a decree that reorganized the church hierarchy. The position of patriarch was abolished and would be replaced by a governing body consisting of a committee of church officials appointed by the tsar-the Holy Synod. A year later, a layman, the Ober-Procurator, was added as a supervisor to the Holy Synod to personally report to the tsar."'^ Throughout Peter's reign, the Tsar's Singing Clerics, that had formeriy reached a membership of over one hundred, was now reduced to as few as twenty, and as many as thirty-four by the end of his reign. Their music consisted of the kants described above, performed for specific occasions. Upon the dissolufion of the position of patriarch, the fate of the Patriarchal Singing Clerics now seemed questionable at best. Having been assigned to fill in as needed to serve the Holy Synod in St. Petersburg and various other places, the group was

^' Morosan, Choral Performance 51. ^-Heyman 109. " Morosan, Choral Performance 57.

56

reassigned in 1725 to serve the Cathedral of the Dormidon in Moscow in addition to singing as needed in St. Petersburg and various other places, and renamed the Synodal Choir. By 1765, the morale, membership, and quality of performances of the S\Tiodal Choir was in serious decline, and neariy led to its complete dissolufion b\' the end of the eighteenth century.^^ Morosan summarizes both the history and the significance of the Synodal Choir: The history of the Synodal Choir through the eighteenth century, culminating in its near demise, epitomizes the decline experienced b\ churchsupported musical estabhshments at this time. In spite of its historical importance and stature, the Synodal Choir was reduced to a piuflil, subordinate position, ... Not a single prominent composer or conductor was associated w ith the Synodal Choir in the eighteenth century. Even the Choir's repertoire cannot be determined with any certainty. However, what may have seemed a misfortune for the Synodal Choir at the time turned out to be a fortunate circumstance for the future of church singing in Russia. Neglected by the authorities in St. Petersburg, the Moscow Synodal Choir escaped the ubiquitous Western influence of the Imperial Court Chapel to some degree. Having no means of culfivafing a technically oriented artistic tradifion, the Choir concentrated on maintaining the Liturgical side of its tradition, perhaps preserving some vestiges of native Russian singing style until the late nineteenth century, when it was one again thrust into a position of prominence."'^ The second period of the epoch of Western-style choral singing is defined by Gardner as "the period of Italian influence." Gardner briefly sums up the period as pertaining to the Italian style of choral polyphony. He describes the period as "relatively brief, lasting from the middle of the eighteenth century through the first third of the nineteenth century."^^ Following the death of Peter the Great in 1725, the Court Choir,

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 62-64. ' Morosan, Choral Performance 64. ^"Gardner 145.

57

formeriy the Tsar's Singing Clerics, began to receive more attention from the Empress Anna loannova (reigned from 1730-1740) in the form of an impenal decree in 1738 to establish a school for training choristers for the Court Choir.^^ By the middle of the century, the choir numbered one hundred: forty-eight men and fifty-two bo\'s. In 1763. during the reign of Catherine the Great, the Court Choir was reorganized into the TO

Imperial Court Chapel.

Furthermore, foreign composers and musicians had been

invited to serve as kappellmeisters at the St. Petersburg court, most of whom were Italian. Morosan lists the twelve foreign kappellmeisters that served in St. Petersburg from 1735 to 1806, the most notable of whom included Baldassare Galuppi, who ser\ed from 17651768, and Giuseppe Sarti, who served from 1784-1802.^^ In a discussion of the influence the Italian composers had on Russian church music, Morosan writes: The arrival of Itahan composers in Russia in the middle of the eighteenth century represents another major watershed in the history of Russian church music. The partesny style represented an adaptation of Western European composifional techniques to the musical requirements of the Russian Orthodox liturgy by composers who were, for the most part, Ukrainian by nationality and Russian Orthodox by faith (if Polish by musical training). On the other hand, the Italians who wrote music on Orthodox church texts approached the task as complete outsiders, confessionally and linguistically, and their implementation of musical style within the context of the Orthodox liturgy was entirely foreign, ^'ct, through their own compositions, and more importantly, through the Russian students they trained, the Italians exerted a profound and lasting influence upon Russian church music during the next century-and-a-half... .. .the Italians brought to Russian church music the technical and expressive arsenal of Western European music, opening up hturgical music to both positive and negative phenomena that by then had developed in the music of Western Churches. On the positive side, solemn liturgical moments and the highly poetic Orthodox liturgical texts inspired the creation of outwardly grandiose musical works... On the negative side, the sung sacred word, which had always occupied a position of central importance, oftentimes became submerged ^ Morosan, Choral Performance 58. ^* Morosan, Choral Performance 60. .Morosan, Choral Performance 59.

58

in imitative contrapuntal textures or was trivialized by nonsensical repetition dictated by the requirements of musical form."**^' Of the Russian students that were trained by the Italians, the most important was Dmitry Bortniansky (1751-1825), who was connected to the Imperial Court Chapel in some fashion throughout most of his life. After receiving his earliest training under Galuppi, he spent eleven years studying in Italy where he also composed and produced three operas before returning to Russia in 1780. There he was appointed conductor of the Imperial Chapel and the court of Prince Paul, heir to the throne. Upon Paul's enthronement in 1796, Bortniansky was appointed Kappellmeister, and in 1801, director of the entire Chapel musical establishment. Morosan further reports that the Imperial Court Chapel under his direction developed into "an outstanding choral ensemble." Bortniansky also was able to attain legal means for establishing standards in liturgical music that would last almost the entire century. By 1816, an imperial decree was issued granting Bortniansky unprecedented authority as Director of the Imperial Chapel to control and censor all music in the Russian empire written for church use."^' Morosan concludes that Bortniansky's Italian training combined with his sensiti\ ity toward the inward strengths of the Russian liturgy led him to achieve this ultimate success: In fact, Bortniansky's entire musical orientation—as a vocalist, conductor, and composer-was thoroughly Italian, and could scarcely ha\ e been otherwise in light of his training. What distinguished him from his Italian predecessors and their provincial Russian imitators was an attitude of reverence for the Orthodox liturgy and sensitivity to the bounds of good taste that should not be exceeded in church under any circumstances. On the strength of these qualities, coupled with an unquestionably well-polished compositional technique, Bortniansky succeeded

^" Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlix ^' Morosan, Choral Performance 69-71.

59

in establishing himself as sole authority and chief censor over all of Russian church music."^^ Bortniansky not only made significant contribufions to the liturgical repertoire but also in the overall development of style and performance practice. In a recent article on the history of Russian choral music, Olga Dolskaya-Ackeriy reports further on the significance that Bortniansky played in the history and development of Russian liturgical music, emphasizing his sensifivity to the rich chant tradition: Bortniansky's knowledge and experience, and most of all, his love of old chant melodies, led him to return to the rich tradition of chant-based singing. He did it in a very tactful, delicate but firm manner, and against the current of the Italianate style that was in vogue at the time. His compositions are devoid of the self-absorbed solos, a major step toward a focus on text and homogeneity of sound that became known as harmoniousness. This was a bold step in reawakening Russian humility and austerity... Boisterous and superfluous \ ocal effects were avoided and soon the [St. Petersburg Imperial Chapel] Choir developed a genuinely sacred style of singing, for the excellence of which it became known as the most respected interpreter of sacred choral music in the worid.'^^ Extra-liturgical concerts also became a focus of Bortniansky's activity, as the choir under his direction performed sacred masterworks from Western Europe, including Haydn's Creation (1802) and The Seasons (1805), Mozart's Requiem (1805), Handel's Messiah (1806), Cherubini's first Mass (1810), and in 1824, the world premier of Beethoven's Missa Solemnis. The choir also gave frequent concerts of unaccompanied choral works in palace concert halls, and in 1810 had its own concert hall erected. Choir rehearsals

•*" Morosan, Choral Peroformance 70. •*' Olga Dolskaya-Ackeriy, "Aesthetics and National Identity in Russian Sacred Choral Music: .X Past in Tradition and Present in Ruins," ChoralJournal, 42.5 (December, 2001): 15 In this passage, Dolskaya-Ackeriy quotes from Stepan Smolensky, "Pamiati D.S. Bortnianksago" [In Memory of Bortnianskyl, Russkaia muzykal'naia i^azeta (1901), 923

60

were also open to the public and became important events in the cultural life of St. Petersburg. The third period in this epoch of the history of Russian sacred music is termed by Gardner "the period of German influence." Lasting through the last two thirds of the nineteenth century, Gardner describes it as a time when the directors of the Imperial Court Chapel exercised complete control and censorship over the liturgical music that would be composed and performed. For this reason, Gardner also defines this period as the "Petersburgperiod."

As this control began with Bortniansky in 1816, the major

choral works that were performed reflect his own Viennese tendencies. Morosan acknowledges this German influence as well in describing his compositional style of music for the church. He writes that Bortniansky's style "more clearly reflects the Viennese Classical style, prevalent in Europe at the time, than Ukranian or Russian folk music.""^^ The directors of the Imperial Chapel that followed Bortniansky included Fyodor L'vov (1766-1836), Bortniansky's immediate successor who served as Director of the hnperial Court Chapel until his death; Aleksei L'vov (1798-1870). Fyodor's son and successor as director of the Chapel from 1837-1861; and Nikolai Bakhmetev (18071891), director from 1861-1883. With each successor, the control of censorship of new music for the church intensified, to the point that during .-Meksei L'vov's administration, the only works that were added to those previously approved by Bortniansk\ w ere

** Morosan, Choral Performance 70-71. ''Gardner 145-146. '" Morosan, "One Thousand dears'' I.

61

L'vov's own.

However, aside from establishing and maintaining strict control of church

choirs and censorship of new music, L'vov also set in four-part harmon\ all of the liturgical chants used in the church year and transcribed all of the chants still sung in the monasteries according to oral tradition. He also w orked to bring all church singing into uniformity, using the music and practice of the Imperial Court Chapel as a model. ^ L'vov's Obikhod,^^ pubHshed in 1848, consisted of a coUecfion of harmonized chants that were to be used in any chapel setting where a member of the Royal family was present. To ensure that this practice was adopted, among other measures, L'\ o\ began the program of training choral conductors, resulting in a drastic intensification of the stranglehold that L'vov maintained on liturgical music." This level of censorship was maintained through the directorship of Bakhmetev, discouraging any major composer from attempting to write new works, until it was abruptly lifted in 1880.^ Though Morosan indicates that the practice and enforcement of censorship under L'vov became counter-productive in the development of Russian liturgical singing, and that the chant harmonizations were often awkward for Russian choirs, Dolskaya-AckerK focuses on the accomplishments of L'vov as they related to the establishment of expressive chant singing, a distinctively Russian style trait:

*^ Morosan, Choral Performance 81. •*** Morosan, Choral Performance 79. *" Identified as "L'vov's Obikhodprostogo tserkovnoo peniia. pri Wsochaishem Dvore upotrebliaemogo [The common chants of plain church singing used at the Imperial Court]" in .Morosan. Choral Performance 80-81, 165-169. The term "obikhod" denoted one of the liUirgical chant books that contained the chants for daily use, analogous to the Latin usualis of the Roman Catholic Church. The obikhod first developed in the second half of the fifteenth-early sixteenth century. .Morosan. One Thousand Years 73" ^° Morosan, Choral Performance 165-169. ^' .Morosan, Choral Performance 81, 86.

62

When he set out to harmonize the chant in his Obikhod..., L\'ov introduced asymmetrical non-metrical singing based on the speech inflections of the text. He realized that the phrases of text set to chant were irregular in length, and that the presence of bar lines and duple or triple metric division would only defeat the purpose of transmitting the text. Not to include bar lines in those da>s was considered uncivilized, yet Lvov had the courage to stand against the current and take the first step in the right direction.^^ Dolskaya-Ackeriy also praises L'vov's accomplishments in the development of performance practice of Russian sacred choral literature: He [Lvov] also promoted the idea of seamless elasticity in singing, the use of gentle high voices elegantly supported by rich basses and the practice of doubling the bass with octavists, resulting in a warm, balanced, pyramid sound, better known as the St. Petersburg style, a direct manifestation of Russian national identity. In his Memoirs, Lvov speaks of his reverence for chant and for the inherently Russian solemn singing and its soft, w arm sound. He replaces Italian dynamic markings with such terms as slow or protracted, intensifying, and solemnly. About nuances, Lvov writes: The effect of this mass of choristers, singing with such preciseness and meticulous rendition of nuances was so stunning that I had difficulty conducting, especially duringpianissimos.

Morosan confirms that the performances of the Imperial Court Chapel Choir under Aleksei L'vov received high commendations. Though the approved compositions for liturgical performances were limiting (Only music from the Italian composers of the eighteenth century, Bortniansky, L'vov, and a very few others received official approval), performances of master works from Austria and Germany continued, both symphonic and choral. Among those who heard the choir perform. Hector Berlioz, who visited Russia in 1847, reported being "overwhelmed" by the quality of the performance. Robert Schumann in 1844, wrote, "The Chapel is the most wonderful choir that we have ever " Dolskaya-Ackeriy 16. " Dolskaya-Ackeriy 16; Primary source from A Lvov, "Zapisky Alekseia I edorovicha I vova' [Memoirs of Alexei Fedorovitch Lvov], Russkii arkhiv 4 (1884) S'^, 99.

63

had the occasion of hearing: the basses at times remind one of the low notes of an organ. while the descants have a magical sound, better than any women's \oices. The subtlest nuances and shadings are mastered to the limit, at times even with too much refinement and detail." ^ Even with the excellence in performance demonstrated b\ the Impenal Chapel in St. Petersburg, the state of choral performance and composition for the Russian Orthodox Church in virtually all other regions declined to a very low le\el until the late nineteenth century. ^^ The final period in the history of Russian liturgical singing is defined by Gardner as "the period of the Moscow school." As Gardner writes, this period "began at the \ er\ end of the nineteenth century, and is sfill confinuing today. "^^ Written as the result of lectures presented at the University of Munich between 1954 and 1972, Gardner did not have the advantage of viewing the recent history of Russian liturgical singing from a post-Soviet perspective, and took a pessimistic view toward efforts to study Russian liturgical singing after 1917: By the Russian Revolution of 1917, the art and culture of Russian liturgical singing had reached its highest stage of development. The political events of 1917 and the years following, however, effectively interrupted all further development of this art, preventing the transference and nurture of the liturgical singing tradition. There are no reliable sources that can authoritafively provide information concerning the state of liturgical singing on the territory of the USSR after 1917.^^

•* Morosan, Choral Performance 82. Morosan quotes from the Russian sources: "Berlio/ v Rossii" [Berlioz in Russia], Russkaia musykal'naia pazehi 50 (1903): 1254; Gusin and Tkachev, Gosudarst\ennaia akademicheskaia kapella, 46. ^' -Morosan, Choral Performance 83. ^^ Gardner 146. 57 Gardner 146.

64

Similarly, Morosan offers the following from a post-Soviet perspecti\ e, indicating that the refinement of the Russian choral art all came to an abrupt halt w ith the 1917 Revolution: After the Revolution, when the tide of emigration swelled the ranks of Russian choirs abroad, few representatives of the best traditions of Russian choral performance were among them. None of the leading figures associated with the Moscow Synodal School or Choir emigrated; those musicians w ho did emigrate (e.g., Grechaninov and Rachmaninoff) were not outstanding choral conductors... In Russia, meanwhile, the events of the October Revolution and the virtual destruction of the Orthodox Church in the 1920s and 1930s led to the dissolution or reorganization of all institutions engaged in the cultivation of the choral art... My personal observations over the course of several stays in the USSR suggest that, although some present Soviet choirs are outstanding in their own right, none of them embodies the best tradifions of the pre-Revolutionary choral school. Thus it has become the task of scholars to reconstruct as well as possible on the basis of available sources this remarkable chapter in the history of choral performance—seemingly so close in time to the present day, yet in many respects CO

less understood than the performance of Renaissance polyphony. The second half of Dolskaya-Ackeriy's recent essay not only confirms this notion that the pinnacle of achievement in Russian sacred choral music ended with the 1917 Revolution, but also indicates that virtually no cultivation of sacred choral music or artistry in any area has occurred in Russia since 1917. The New Russian Choral School As discussed above, the overall scope of Russian singing from the middle of the seventeenth through the eighteenth century consisted of two distinct styles. The first was the style of the Old Believers that continued the indigenous Russian forms of

'" Morosan, Choral Performance 126. "Dolskaya-Ackeriy 19-24

65

monophonic liturgical chant. The other, much more widespread of the two, consisted of partsny singing or part-singing in the Western style.^° Morosan comments further on the development of this style in Russia: "Even after a century and a half this style remained alien despite its widespread presence: both the literature and the function of choral partsinging were derived from foreign forms, fostering equally foreign performance techniques."^^ Morosan confinues to state that since church music had consisted entireK of the largely undeveloped indigenous traditional style of chant singing or the importation of foreign genres, a national choral style in Russia had not yet developed. He adds further: "A national school of choral performance could not emerge until Russian musicians, both composers and performers, came to recognize—either through instinct or through scholarly investigation—the unique characteristics of original Russian vocal forms and to develop a choral literature that embodied these forms." After detailing the early nineteenth century accomplishments of Bortniansky and the overall decline of the liturgical choral art through most of the century under the Imperial Chapel directorship of L'vov and Bakhmetev, Morosan discusses six significant events that directly led to the growth of a new and final period in this epoch of polyphonic choral singing. These factors are listed as: 1. The publication in the years 1867-69 of Reverend Dmitry Razumovsky's three-volume work, Tserkovnoe penie v Rossii (Church singing in Russia), the first major scholarly investigation into the essence and history of Russian liturgical singing.

^" Morosan, Choral Performance 75. ^' Morosan, Choral Perfornumce 75-76. " Morosan, Choral Performance 76.

66

2. The gradual growth of public concerts of sacred music, beginning in the \ear 1864. 3. The breaking of the Imperial Chapel's stranglehold on new liturgical choral composifion-the direct resuh of Nikolai Bakhmetev's unsuccessful attempt in 1880 to block the publicafion of Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Opus 41. 4. The establishment in 1880 of Archangel'sky's Choir, the first independent professional choir in Russia, which several years later came to include women's voices. 5. The appointment in 1883 of Mily Balakirev and Nikolai Rimsk\-Korsakov to head the Imperial Chapel. 6. The reform in 1886 of the Moscow Synodal School of Church Singing, together with the appointment of Vasily Orlov as the chief conductor of the Synodal Choir, and the appointment three years later of Stepan Smolensk) as the School's Director.^^ One of the results of the period of the New Russian Choral School was the development of the choral conductor. During this period, the Synodal Choir of Moscowunderwent significant reform, including increased pay and benefits for choral members and improved morale. Further, the school, established in 1830, was expanded to train boys specifically for service in the choir through an eight-year program. Among the members appointed to the Supervisory Council over the Synodal School was Tchaikovsky, who in 1886 recommended that Vasily Orlo\ (1856-1907) be appointed precentor and conductor of the choir.^"* In 1889. Stepan Smolensky (1848-1909) became the Synodal School's Director, and in 1891, Alexandre Kastal'sky (1856-1926) became Orlov's assistant conductor. Under Orlov's leadership, the first precentor to have received formal training from a conservatory, the Moscow Synodal Choir rose to unparalleled excellence, surpassing the Imperial Chapel. Serving as Director of the Synodal Choir from the late 1880s until his death in 1907, Oriov was succeeded by equally great

'' Morosan, Choral Performance 85-86. ^ Morosan, Choral Performance 100-101.

conductors he had mentored, including Nikolai Danilin (1878-1945), and Pavel Chesnokov (1877-1944), the latter of whom also composed a number of liturgical works. Under these conductors as well as contemporaries inspired by them, choral performances from composers of the new Russian choral school achieved new heights, setting new standards for performance pracfices of these works, and gaining world recognition for their performances.^^ The tremendous influence of the Moscow Synodal Choir is evidenced by the fact that Gardner defines the entire period by its influence. Gardner writes: During this period, the position of leadership in church singing shifted from the St. Petersburg and its Imperial Cappella to the Moscow Synodal Choir and Church Choir School.. .This period is characterized by the search for new ways of liberating Russian liturgical singing from foreign influences and borrowings that strongly manifested themselves during the preceding three periods of the second epoch, particularly in the third period. The new directions were marked by a return to the indigenous and thoroughly Russian canonical melodies, and the application to those melodies of the latest achievements of Russian compositional technique in conjunction with the unique feeling and spirit of folk music.^^ The rise of the Moscow Synodal Choir and School also led to the rise of other choirs under their prominent conductors. As mentioned above. Arkhangel'sky's Choir was actually one of the leading factors that brought on the style of the New Russian Choral School. Exisfing for forty-three years from 1880-1923 under the direction of Arkhangel'ky, the Arkhangel'sky Choir was also the first all-professional choir, providing the main source of income for most of the singers, and the first to tour outside of Russia. The continuity of membership in the choir, starting out at tw enty members, but soon

*^ Morosan, Choral Performance 187-191. Morosan devotes an entire chapter to the choral conductor of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. '^Gardner 146.

68

maintaining at least fifty members, averaged in duration from ten to tw ent\ years, and enabled the choir to develop a repertoire of unprecedented scope. Also, the choir became the first to replace boys completely with women, enabling the longer continuit\ of the singers as well as a more sonorous sound.^' Morosan concludes: "Arkhangel'sk}'s major contribution to Russian choral cuhure was that he raised choral singing from its position as merely a servant of church ritual to the status of an independent musical art."^'^ Of the six factors discussed by Morosan that led to the New Russian Choral School, the 1880 court case involving the Imperial Chapel stands out as the most significant. As discussed above, the Imperial Chapel's control over sacred choral music that began with Bortniansky in 1816 had intensified through his successors, particularly through Aleksei L'vov, director of the Imperial Chapel from 1837-1861, and through Bahkmetev, director of the Imperial Chapel from 1861-1883. Upon Tchaikovsky's 1878 completion of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus 41, Bahkmetev filed suit against Tchaikovsky's publisher, P. Jurgenson, charging that the Liturgy was illegitimate since it was not submitted to the Imperial Chapel for approval, though, as Morosan notes, "it was submitted to the Moscow Office of Sacred Censorship, which \enfied the correctness of the sacred text and granted permission for its publication (dated 25 September 1878).""' By ruling in favor of P. Jurgenson and Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, the Russian Senate

^^ Morosan, Choral Performance 93-94. ** Morosan, Choral Performance 95. ^' Vladimir Morosan, "The Sacred Choral Works of Pcicr Tchaikovsky," Monuments of Russian Scared Music: Peter Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral Works, ed N'ladimir Morosan, ser 2, \'ol. 1-3 (Madison: Mu.sica Russica, 1996) Ixxwii.

69

brought the monopoly of sacred music held by the Director of the Imperial Chapel to an immediate halt.^^ This overturning of the Imperial Chapel's right to censorship on all new choral works for the church was an important event that directh impacted church music. Prior to this event, virtually no significant Russian composers of the nineteenth centur>' bothered to compose music for the church, since their works would not likely meet the approval of the Director of the Imperial Chapel. Due to this landmark court case, however, composers became free to write music for the church, beginning v\ ith Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), whose Liturgy paved the way for free artistic expression and was at the center of the court case against the Imperial Chapel. Though the a cappella requirement remained an essential element in the style of the New Russian Choral School, composers enjoyed a freedom from censorship of sacred music ne\cr before experienced. An outpouring of important liturgical compositions by many significant composers soon followed.^' Morosan reports: "Altogether, the output of this 'new Russian school' of sacred choral composition numbered over forty large-scale works and between nine hundred and one thousand shorter works by twenty-eight major composers."^^ As both a prolific composer of sacred music and a writer on sacred music, scholars generally acknowledge Gretchaninoff as both a leading composer and a spokesman for the new Russian choral school.'

'° Morosan, Choral Performance 88-89. ^' Morosan, Choral Performance 88-91. ^" Morosan, Choral Performance 91. '^ Igor Bazaroff, "Alexander Gretchaninoff Dean of Russian Composers,' Russian Orthodox Journal (Dcctmhtx, 1944), 1-3; 8-10; "Alexander Gretchaninoff" Baker's Biographical Dictionary- of Musicians, S'** ed , rev. Nicolas Slonimsky; Morosaa Choral Performance 242-244.

The Structure of the Liturgy From the origin of Christianity in Russia at the end of the tenth century, the Russian liturgical order consisted enfirely of the importation of the Byzantine tradition. Though the musical settings of the texts likely became "Russified" as discussed above, the actual texts and overall order remained completely consistent w ith the Byzantine nte. As in the case of the Roman Catholic tradition of the West, the Byzantine Russian Orthodox liturgy consisted of texts that formed the Ordinary, or texts that remained unchanged regardless of the function or purpose in the context of the Liturgical year, and texts that made up the Proper, that changed according to their function in the context of the Liturgical year. However, in the Russian Orthodox liturgy, except for the sermons, all audible texts presented in the course of the service were sung, marking a significant difference from the Roman Catholic liturgy. The rites of the Russian liturgy fall into two broad categories: the All-Night \'igil and the Divine Liturgy. The All-Night Vigil essenfially consists of a combination of three separate services that are lifted from the nine offices of the liturgical day. The nine offices of the liturgical day are listed as: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Vespers Compline Nocturne Matins First Hour Third Hour Sixth Hour Divine Liturgy

^ Gardner 24. Gardner notes, "In Greek and Serbian practice certain psalnis and Old Testament readings are sometimes read in plain conversational speech."

71

9.

Ninth Hour.'^

The three offices that are combined to form the All-Night Vigil in cathedrals are the Vespers, Matins, and First Hour, celebrated on Saturday evenings and on the eve of major feasts. Morosan notes that the three offices that are the most important musicalK include Vespers and Matins of the All-Night \'igil as well as the Di\ ine Liturgy. In his essay on the subject, Paul Meyendorff notes that the All-Night \'igil, if performed in full, can last up to eight hours, but is usually abbreviated and generally lasts two to three hours.^^ After summarizing the makeup of the three offices of the All-Night \'igil, consisting of a vast array of specific psalm and hymn settings in the visual context that varies from utter darkness to dazzling light, Meyendorff concludes: Despite its length and complexity, the Vigil service remains one of the most popular services for Russian Orthodox Christians. They are thoroughly familiar with it, and they pack the churches e\ ery Saturday e\ ening and on the eve of every important feast. With its alternation of darkness and light, sober monasfic chanting and exuberant and melodious singing, the Vigil draw s the faithful into the realm of divine life, far removed from the struggles and monotony of their daily existence. Standing for long hours in pewless churches, Russian Christians draw on this liturgical tradition which has been, for many centuries, the deepest expression of their faith. The Divine Liturgy not only represented the focal point of Russian Orthodox worship, but also stood as one of the three musically significant sen ices of the Russian Orthodox Liturgy. Celebrated on Sundays and feast days, the Divine Liturgy w as often

'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 211, 342n8; Gardner 71. Gardner also provides the Russian term for each office, and notes that the fourth office of Matins corresponds to Matins and Lauds of the Western Church. ''" Paul Meyendorff, "Russian Liturgical Worship," .Monuments of Russian Sacred Music Peter Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral IVorks, ed. Vladimir Morosan, ser 2 vol. 1-3 ( Madison: Musica Russica, 1996) \x\iii. '''' Meyendorff xwvi. The Divine LiUirgy is also referred to as the I uchariM, signifying the prayers and hymns that correspond with the Communion.

preceded by the All-Night Vigil, and brought the Sunday or festal services to a climactic conclusion.

Virtually all of the texts were a standard part of the Ordinary, though a few

changing texts from the Propers also were included in isolated places, depending on the feast and context of the liturgical year. The product of many centuries of development, many features of the service began as early as the fourth century,^^ and evolved into a highly elaborate service that became commonplace by the late nineteenth and earh' twentieth centuries. According to Gardner, of the three forms of the Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great, and the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom was sung throughout the majority of the year. In contrast, the Liturgy of St. Basil was sung only ten times per year, and the Liturgy of Presancfified Gifts was sung during certain days of Lent and Holy Week, essentially consisting of the Vespers service that closes with communion. The Liturgy of St. Basil incorporates idenfical texts as the Liturgy of St. John Chrystom. except that the quiet prayers of the priest are much longer in the Liturgy of St. Basil, requiring the accompanying hymns that are sung during these prayers to be much more extensive and 80

elaborate to correspond fully with the duration of the prayers.

^^ Meyendorff xxix. ' ' Hugh Wybrew, The Orthodox Liturgy The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite (Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996) 27-45, 52-54. Though Wybrew makes a case for the origination of the Byzantine Liturgy dating to the first cenUiry, the development that took place in the fourth century shows a stronger connection to the service that the Russian Orthodox liturgy e\ cntuallv became. *" Gardner 91, 94.

The detailed structure of the Divine Liturgy, particularly for the Liturg> of St. John Chrysostom is outlined in Table 3.1. The table shows the chronology of the overall secfions of the liturgy, functions, descriptions and beginnings of texts, singers employed, liturgical actions, and brief descripfions of the musical treatment commonly emplo\ed by the early twentieth century. As the table indicates, the style of music that is employed is highly dependent on the action taking place. For instance, the Cherubic H\Tnn must be performed slowly enough so that the processions, prayers, and incensations of the clergx can all take place before the hymn has ended. Similar time considerations are necessar\ for the Introit verse, "O come let us worship" in the Enarxis secfion of the Liturgy of the Word; the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy God," also from the Enarxis; and the Communion Hymn, the paraliturgical concerto, and the Hymns of Thanksgi\'ing during the Communion Rites. Morosan summarizes the musical results from the actions that take place during these particular sections of the liturgy: "These hymns therefore lend themselves to elaborate musical treatment. On the other hand, the opening antiphons, the Creed, and the Hymns of Thanksgiving at the end [during the Dismissal secfion], which contain a large amount of text, are more suited to syllabic musical treatment."

81

Morosan, Choral Performance 21

74

Table 3.1 The Divine Liturgy 82 Overall section

Liturgy of the Word, or Liturgy of the Catechumens

Function

Text

Preparatory ntes

Special entrance prayers

Enarxis (Entrance)

Singers employed Clergy

Opening Doxology

Deacon or Priest; choir

Great Litany: Series of petitions, "Lord, have mercy" responses Collect: Brief prayer

Deacon, choir

First Antiphon: Psalm 103 "Bless the Lord, 0 my soul". generally only a few verses are included

Choir

Little Litany: Brief prayer

Deacon, Choir

Collect: Prayer with concluding doxology

Priest, Choir

Priest, silently read

Action taking Musical place 1 treatment Clergy enters intoned chant church, vests, wash hands, prepare vessels for the bread and wine, incensations Congregation Intoned chant by enters Priest; chordal "Amen" bv choir Prayer to Intoned chant; introduce the chordal "Lord, collect have mercy" responses from choir Silent recitation Prayer to precede first antiphon during Great Litany; concluding doxology {ekphonesis) is chanted aloud. Choir responds with chordal "Amen" Free musical treatment. though often to common chant tunc," major musical musical elements of the Liturgy Intoned chant; Prayer to introduce Collect "Lx)rd, have mercy" choral responses Silent recitation Prayer to precede second antiphon dunng Little Litany: ekphonesis chanted aloud, choral "Amen"

*' The table was compiled from the descriptions and tables provided from the following sources: Gardner 91-94; Meyendorff xxx-xxxiii; Morosan, Choral Performance 2\4-2\5; Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix-xcv. Information is provided for the movements of the Liturgy on a typical Sunday. For feast days, some of the content of the Liturgy would change. " Though the "antiphon" terminology was employed, by the late nineteenth century these hymns were not usually sung antiphonally. Meyendorff xxxi.

75

1

Table 3.1 Continued Overall section

Function

Text

Singers employed Choir

Action taking place

Musical treatment Both second antiphon and Monogenes: free musical treatment, major musical element of the Liturgy

Liturgy of the Word, or Liturgy of the Catechumens (continued)

Enarxis (Entrance, continued)

Second Antiphon plus Monogenes ("Only Begotten Son"): included Psalm 146,but by 19"" century, usually only Monogenes was sung Little Litany: Brief prayer

Deacon, Choir

Prayer to introduce Collect

Collect: Prayer with concluding doxology

Priest, Choir

Prayer to precede third antiphon

Third Antiphon: Luke 23:42; Matthew 5:3-12a

Choir

Precedes little entrance

Entrance Prayer

Deacon

Introit Verse: Psalm 95:6, "0 Come, let us worship..."

Choir

Immediately precedes Little Enttance Little Entrance procession of clergy with the Gospel Book; precedes Troparia

Intoned chant. "Lord, have mercy" choral responses Silently read by pnest dunng Little Littany: ekphonesis chanted aloud. Choir responds with chordal "Amen" Free musical tteatment, major musical element of the liturgy Intoned chant

Troparia: Variable hymns taken from the office of the day, to summarize theme of the day

Choir

Trisagion Hymn: "Holy God"

Choir

76

Priest silently recites the Trisagion Prayer; followed by reciting aloud from Psalm 80:I5-I6a

Free musical treatment, major musical element of the liturgy

Free musical treatment. antiphonal tradition of right and left choirs, a major musical element of the liturgy Free musical treatment. antiphonal ttadition of right and left choirs, a major musical clement of the liturgy

Table 3.1 Continued Overall section

Function

Text

Liturgy of the Word, or Liturgy of the Catechumens (continued)

Enarxis (Entrance, continued)

Trisagion Prayer

Liturgy of the Word

Liturgy of the Eucharist

The Great Entrance

Singers employed Priest

Action taking place Uttered during Trisagion Hymn

Prokeimenon from the Psalms

Priest, Choir

To precede Epistle reading

Epistle Psalm (generally only a few verses of one psalm)

Priest Priest, Choir

Reading To follow Epistle

Gospel

Priest

Sermon Augmented Litany

Priest Priest, Choir

Reading, to precede sermon Preaching

Litany for the Deceased; Litany for the Catechumens; two brief litanies and prayers of the faithful Cherubic Hymn

Priest, Choir

Dismissal of the Catechumens (actually only a formality by the late 19th century)

Choir

First Litany of Supplication

Priest, Choir

Procession of Clergy who recite prayers, perform incensation of the church and the gifts (bread and wine), place gifts on altar table and recite additional texts Kiss of peace, to prepare for the Anaphora

77

Musical treatment Silent recitation. occasionally joining choir; also recitine Psalm 80:15-16a Variable psalm sung antiphonally between choir and priest. The choir sings psalm as a responsorial refrain. Priest chants Psalm, Choir responds "Alleluia" refrain in responsorial style

Intoned chant of priest, choir responds three times with "Lord, have mercy" Intoned chant of priest, choral responses during litanies

Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy

Intoned chant of Priest, choral responses

Table 3.1 Continued Overall section

Function

Text

Liturgy of the Eucharist (continued)

The Great Entrance (continued)

Creed

Anaphora

Communion Rites

Singers employed Choir

Action taking place To prepare for the Anaphora

3 part Dialogue: "a mercy of peace"

Deacon, Choir

Immediate introduction to Anaphora

Anaphora: Eucharistic Prayer ascribed to St. John Chrysostom

Priest, Choir

Hymn of Praise-"It is meet and right to worship"

Choir

the Sanctus, "Holy, Holy, Holy"

Choir

Words of Christ from Matthew 26:26-28 Hymn of Thanksgiving, "We Praise Thee"

Priest

Hymn to the Mother of God

Choir

Second Litany of Supplication

Priest, Choir

The Lord's Prayer

Choir

Fraction Prayer ofPriest. "Oneis Holy" response

Priest, Choir

Choir

78

Final eucharistic prayer is read before altar

Celebrants offer prayers for transubstantiation of bread and wine

To mention consecrated Gifts

Preparation for the Breaking of Bread

Musical treatment Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Three short sentences making up a dialogue between deacon and choir Silent recitation with exclamations at the end of each section to signal a choral response Free musical tteatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Ekphonetic Chant of Priest Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Intoned chant of priest, choral responses Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Intoned Chant of Priest. Choral responses

Table 3.1 Continued Overall section

Function

Text

Liturgy of the Eucharist (continued)

Communion Rites (continued)

Koinonikon (Communion Hymn): Psalm 148:1 with Alleluia refrain Paraliturgical Concerto (variable texts)

Dismissal

Singers employed Choir

Action taking place Breaking of Bread

Choir

Communion of the Clergy

Invitation to the Faithful: "In the fear of God and with faith, draw near!"

Priest, Choir

Chalice is brought out

"Receive the Body of Christ"

Choir

Hymns of Thanksgiving: "We have seen the true light," and "Let our mouths be filled with Thy praise" Primitive Dismissal: Prayer behind the Ambo Hymns of Thanksgiving, including "The Many Years"

Choir

Communion of the Faithful, though by 19'*' century was not practiced Clergy returns bread and wine to prothesis table

Litany of Thanksgiving

Priest, Choir

Closing Prayer for ecclesiastical and civil authorities; Benediction

Priest

79

Musical treatment Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Free musical treatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Intoned Chant of Pnest, Choir responds "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"-Psalm 118:26a, 27a Repeats same text as reftain

Free musical treatment, a major musical clement of the liturgy

Priest

Intoned chant of priest

Choir

Free musical tteatment, a major musical element of the liturgy Intoned chant of pnest, choral responses Intoned Chant of Pnest

Dismissal of Faithful at conclusion

Stylistic Restrictions As shown above, the music that \\as performed as a part of the Divine Liturgy often served to accompany liturgical actions, a feature that greatly influenced the style of the composition. However, even by the end of the nineteenth century, other st\'listic restrictions were imposed on liturgical music by the church hierarchy. The ban on instrumental music stood as the most obvious restriction. In the first chapter of Russian Church Singing, entitled "The Essence of Liturgical Singing," Gardner immediately treats the subject of instrumental music. He states that the ban on instrumental music usually is attributed to "ascetical tendencies," and that the writings of the church fathers are often cited.^'^ Validating Gardner's point even as recently as 1995, the Archpriest Boris Nikolaev wrote that the church's exclusion of instrumental music "has its ideological basis in the Orthodoxy itself" He then described vocal music as "natural," and instrumental music as "artificial and imitative." After referring to both Old Testament and New Testament passages, he emphasized the admonitionfi^omscripture to "sing praises 'with understanding'"ft-omPsalm 47:7. " Quoting from Metallov, Nikolaev concluded that the reason that instruments were excluded was because the voice alone is "'able to express the most diverse, deep, and delicate movements of the human soul.'"

Indeed, this line of thinking was not far from

''Gardner 21-22. ** The King James Version actually uses the phrase "with understanding," which is literally how the Russian Bible reads. *^ Archpriest Boris Nikolae\, Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osno\a russkogo pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenns Chant and Hook Notation as the Heart of Russian Orthodox Church Singing]. Moscow: Vauchnaia Kniga, 1995, 29-30. "Pochemu v pravoslavnom bogosluzhenii ne dopuskaetsa instrumental"naia muzyka,"[\\'hy instrumental music is not allowed in Orthodox worship]. Excerpt trans. Sergei Shishkin, ed. Philip Camp, 2(H)2 The entire text of this passage is included in Appendix F.

80

that of St. John Chrysostom himself (ca. 347-407), as demonstrated from his wntings near the end of the fourth century: Here there is no need for the cithara, or for stretched strings, or for the plectrum, or for art, or for any instrument; but, if you like, you may \ourself become a cithara, mortifying the members of the flesh and making a full harmony of mind and body. For when the flesh no longer lusts against the Spirit, but has submitted to its orders and has been led at length into the best and most admirable path, then you will create a spiritual melody.^'' During the climax of the history of Russian choral music in the final period of the new Russian choral school, the ban against instrumental music in the Russian Orthodox Church became an issue for the first time, and was even challenged by Gretchaninoff himself, discussed in Chapter TV. As part of the debate, A.P. Golubstov pointed to the early Christian "decrees" that made instrumental music "forbidden to each Christian." He then expounded upon Tertullian's metaphor—the "organ of the human word," describing it as "the perfect instrument by its physical design." He concluded that the human voice "is more natural, more vivid..., expresses more intimately the inner state of a soul and serves as a conductor of her movements." Golubstov once again pointed to the history of the church in his final statement: "Due to those advantages, vocal performance or singing was universally recognized in the ancient church."

*' St. John Chrysostom, "From the Exposition of Psalm XLI," Source Readings in .\lusic History Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. Oliver Strunk (New ^'ork: Norton, 1965) 70. This content of this statement is similar to that of other statements recorded by Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-ca. 215), St. Basil the Great (ca. 330-379), and St. Jerome (ca. 341-420). ^^ A.P. Golubtsov, Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgika. Chast 2 Liturgica. \ Irom the readings on the Church Archaelogy and Liturgies. Vol. 2: liturgies], (Sergiev Posad: 1918) 254-257 I npubiished translation from the chapter "Instrumentarnoe ispolnenie tserkovnykh pesnopenii" [Instrumental Performance of the Church Motets], trans., Sergei Shishkin, ed. Philip Camp, 2002. The complete portion of text is included in the appendix.

81

However, Gardner's explanation seems to offer more substance than merely poiming to the arguments of early Christian fathers. He explains that the purely vocal music of the church is an inherent part of the "essence" of worship, and that those who perceive liturgical music as just another category of music, with all the "same musicalaesthefic relationships found in secular music," ha\e misunderstood the true essence of liturgical singing.

He then expounds upon the essence of liturgical singing, which by its

nature, he argues, would exclude instrumental music: Orthodox worship consists almost exclusively of verbal expression in its many forms: prayer, glorification, instruction, exegesis, homily, etc. Only the word is capable of precisely expressing concrete, logically formulated ideas. Instrumental music, on the other hand, by its nature is incapable of such unambiguous expression; it can only express and evoke the emotional element, which is received subjectively by each individual listener, thus giving rise to a variety of interpretations. But it is impossible to give such an emotional reaction a precise, logical definition. Concepts such as sadness, majesty, joyfulness, happiness, etc. are merely general and vague characterizations of emotional qualities and do not represent any unequivocal ideas that can be precisely expressed in words. The same musical form, whether a simple tune played on a fife, a complex piece of instrumental polyphony, or even a melody hummed without words by the human voice, can be supplied with texts of different content and character that will enable the same music to convey completely diverse ideas. Only the word can give musical sounds a definite, unambiguous meaning. And in worship only the word can clearly express the ideas contained in prayer, instruction, contemplation, etc.^° While Gardner's point seems to clearly and reasonably explain the church's ban against purely instrumental music without "the word," it does not adequately explain the ban against instrumental accompaniment to the vocal music. In fact, his very arguments

Gardner 22. Gardner 22-23.

82

articulated in his next statement could also effectively support the use of instruments to accompany vocal music: Thus, wordless instrumental music by itself is not suited for conve\ing the concrete verbal content of worship. It can only entertain and please the ear, evoke various emotions, and, to a certain extent, reflect the emotional content of ideas expressed by words. On the other, the word taken in conjunction with musical sounds can combine logical clarity and precision of meaning with the emotional response to verbal ideas. Herein, it seems, lies the reason why the musical element is admitted into the Orthodox liturgy only in conjunction with the word. Either the musical sounds give emotional coloration to the logically concrete contents of the liturgical texts, or the musical expression arises as an emotional reaction to the ideas expressed by the words.^' In a recently published interview from the ChoralJournal, Morosan's explanation of the essence of liturgical singing seems to take Gardner's philosophy a step ftirther. Though the question he addresses here is not specifically about the use of instruments, his general statements about performing Russian liturgical music give a rational explanation to the restriction: Chu: Are there other aspects of study necessary for performing this music well? Morosan: When it comes to performing Russian sacred music, the greatest challenge for Western musicians seems to be the understanding that singing this music is, first and foremost, prayer. It is music of worship, not music at worship (something that ornaments or decorates, like icing on the cake). The same is essentially true of Gregorian chant--it is sung worship. Somehow, this approach needs to be central, even in a concert performance. When Vladimir Minin of the Moscow Chamber Choir did a workshop here in 1988 with American professional singers, the one thing he tried to convey, using every means possible, was that you cannot sing Russian music simply w ith a well-trained throat and a curious intellect. "There's God up there," he said, pointing heavenward, "and then, there's us down here, and we have to approach the music from that perspective,"...

" Gardner 23.

83

The Western choral musician needs to understand (or perhaps, rediscover) this fundamental truth.. .^^ The idea that all Russian liturgical music is considered to be pra\'er seems to carry much significance in the exclusion of instruments. Therefore, the use of instrumental music to accompany vocal music would seem to qualify as "icing on a cake," making it "music at worship" rather than "music of worship," a notion that was recently verified b\ Morosan through personal correspondence.^^ Consequently, in Russian Orthodoxy, instrumental accompaniment might be used if the desire to please man was acknowledged. However, in an effort to present an offering only to please God-the essence of Russian Orthodox liturgical singing as described above-instruments are excluded. Morosan adequately sums up the position thus: "Singing sacred music is not about entertainment or diversion; it's about fiindamental questions of humanity and divinity, and us being raised from earth to heaven."

Many aspects of a Russian

Orthodox service are influenced by this type of reverence, demonstrated both in the pewless cathedrals where the congregations stand throughout the long duration of the services that can last several hours, and in the sustained and contemplati\ e style of the music itself

' ' George S. T. Chu, "An Interview with Vladimir Morosan," ChoralJournal 40 3 (1999): 40. 9.1 Morosan, telephone interview, 19 May 2002 "•• Chu 40.

84

Divine Liturgv Settings from the New Russian Choral School As discussed above, by ending the Imperial Chapel's power of censorship, Tchaikovsky's complete setting of the Divine Liturgy gave composers the needed impetus to compose liturgical music. As a natural course of progression, Tchaiko\'sk\'s Liturg\became not only the model for ftiture composers of the liturgy, but also a starting point for those who would further develop the genre. Though complete, stylistically unified settings of the Liturgy had existed in Russia since the beginnings of polyphony in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the visiting Italian composers and their Russian students in the period preceding Tchaikovsky did not emphasize complete liturgical settings. Morosan notes that of the Russian followers of the Italians, only three composers left one setting each of the Divine Liturgy: Maksim Berezovsky (1745-1777), Dmitry Bortniansky (1751-1825), and Stepan Davydov (1777-1825), and the only other setting from the first half of the nineteenth century was by Pyotr Turchaninov (1779-1856) whose 1842 simple Italianate setting was scored for TTB chorus. No consistency in style or structure can be observed from these settings. However, as Morosan observes, "the following hymns w ere set with some degree of consistency:

No. 1 Slava... Yedinorodniy Sine (Glory... Only begotten Son) No. 2 Priididte pokofiimsia... Sviatiy Bozhe (Come, let us worship... Holy God) No. 3 Izhe heruvimi ([Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim [also known as Cherubic Hymn]) No. 4 Simvol veri" (The Creed) No. 5 Milost mira I Tebe poyem {\ Mercy of Peace and We H\Tnn Thee) No. 6 Dostnoyno vest (It is truly fitting) No. 7 Otche nash (Our Father)

85

No. 8 Hvalite Ghospoda s nebes (Praise the Lord from the heavens).^' As the first substantial musical work for the church in a century. Tchaikovsk\''s 1878 Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41, explored new areas of expression previously untried. Morosan elaborates: Certainly Tchaikovsky's Liturgy represented a significant departure from the typical manner in which the Divine Ser\ ice was rendered musicalh in Russian Orthodox churches of the nineteenth century. On any given Sunday or feast da\' the Liturgy comprised an arbitrary concatenation of pieces by different composers, displaying neither a consistent mood or level of musical complexity, nor a logical relationship of keys. Elaborate, composed musical "numbers" alternated with simple "plain" singing, consisting of a few stock chord progressions. Tchaikovsky was certainly the first composer in his time to utilize an approach that toward the end of the nineteenth century would become the accepted standard: to treat the Divine Liturgy (and other services) as a single, continuous musical entity, setting to newly composed music all or nearly all the items—psalms, hymns, and responses—sung by the choir. Thus, in addition to setting the major "numbers," as had been done by his predecessors, Tchaikovsky was the first composer in the nineteenth century to compose music for the following items: The Great Litany Two Little Litanies between the antiphons "Alleluia" and the refrains before and after the Gospel reading The Augmented Litany The Litanies before the Cherubic Hymn (for the Catechumens and the Faithful) The Litany before the Lord's Prayer The verse "Blagosloven griadiy" (Blessed is He that comes) at the bringing out of the Holy Gifts The hymns "Videhom svet istinniy (We have seen the true Light) and "Da ispolniatsia usta nasha" (Let our mouths be filled) The Little Litany (of Thanksgiving) The verse "Btidi imia Ghospodne" (Blessed be the name of the Lord) The final doxology and the "Mnogoletstvovaniye" (The "Many 'icars")'^^

'* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxvi-lxxxvii, ^ Morosan, " Peter Tchaikovsk>" lxxx\ iii.

86

As shown in Table 3.2, the number of complete liturgy settings that Tchaikovsky's followers composed is especially significant when considering the deanh of settings in the previous century. Though it would be thirteen years before the next liturgy setting, when Arkhangelsky would publish his Liturgy. Opus 15. numerous settings were completed by the 1917 revolution. Following Archangelskv's settings from the 1890s that were patterned after Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Gretchaninoffs first Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 13, became the next contribution to the genre. Also based on Tchaikovsky's setting, as Morosan explains, Gretchaninoffs First Liturgy "did not break any new ground. It did include all the litanies and responses and the first and third antiphons, but the latter is extremely abbreviated in form; otherwise, in its musical scope and content, the work was clearly patterned after Tchaikovsky's setting."

97

Morosan, "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff," Monuments of Russian Sacred Music: Sergei Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral l^ork.s. ed. X'ladimir Morosan, Ser. 9. Vol. 1-2 (Madison: Musica Russica, 1994) 1.

87

Table 3.2 The Divine Liturgy Settings of the New Russian Choral School OS Composer Arkhangel'sky, 1846-1924 Aleksandr Chesnokov, 1880-1941 Pavel Chesnokov, 1877-1944

Gretchaninoff, 1864-1956

Ippolitov-Ivanov, 1859-1935 Kastal'sky, 1856-1926 Kompaneisky, 1848-1910 Lisitsyn, 1871-C.1919 Nikol'sky, 1874-1943 Panchenko, 1867-1937 Rachmaninoff, 1873-1943 Rebikov, 1866-1920 Shvedov, 1886-1954 Tchaikovsky, 1840-1893 Tcherepnin, 1873-1945

Number of Liturgies Composed; Opus numbers'^ Three Liturgies: opus 15 opus 33 One Liturgy: opus 8 Three Liturgies: opus 15 opus 42 opus 50 Four Liturgies: opus 13 opus 29 opus 79 opus 177 One Liturgy: Opus 37 One Liturgy One Liturgy Two Liturgies One Liturgy: Opus 31 One Liturgy: Opus 18 One Liturgy: Opus 31 One Liturgy Two Liturgies (2""^ Liturgy) One Liturgy Two Liturgies: opus 32

Year of publication 1890 1894

1898 \W2 1917 1943 1903

1909 1902 1910

i-

•

often heralded by scholars as the crowning achievements of the realm of Russian church music. Morosan writes: [Rachmaninoff s] Liturgy, written in 1910, is an entirely free composition in a richly sonorous choral style that has little thematic connection with canonical chant melodies. Guided not so much by previous models as b\ his own personal understanding and interpretation of each liturgical text, Rachmaninoff creates a large-scale a cappella choral cycle that explores numerous emotional states rangingfi-ompathos to prayerftil meditation. The Liturgy may be regarded as a culmination of the free approach to setting the ordinary of this sen ice, first essayed by Tchaikovsky. Morosan, Choral Performance, 92-93; "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff," 1li; telephone interview, 22 May 2002. ^ In some cases, composers did not provide opus numbers. Also, after 1905, the dating of works becomes very problematic, as the date ceased to be a requirement for publication It may be presumed that works in the table that appear without opus numbers were composed between 1905 and 1917. Morosan, telephone inter\ iew, 22 May 2002. "^ Morosan, Choral Performance 247-248.

88

!

1935 1S78

Rachmaninoff s Liturgy setting, Opus 31 and his All-Night Vigil, Opus 37, are

98

1

1

Though Morosan acknowledges Rachmaninoffs independent creati\ity in settmg the Liturgy, he also gives appropriate significance to Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy oj St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29, linking it to Rachmaninoff s later setting. Morosan observes: Gretchaninoffs second Liturgy... represents a marked evolution in terms of musical style and serves as an important historical link between the settings of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff... Gretchaninoff thus became the first composer in modem times to create a work that attempted to fashion the entire Di\ ine Liturgy into a single large-scale artistic and musical design... By consciously attempting, in his own words, to "symphonize" the forms of liturgical hymns, Gretchaninoff paved the way for elaborate musical settings that went beyond utilitarian liturgical use and carried Russian music into the realm of the concert stage.'^' Undoubtedly, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy setting not only served as an important historical step in the ultimate pinnacle of achievement for Russian liturgical music, but also provided poignant expression on a high aesthetic plane in its own right, \ erified b\ the many performances that individual movements have received in the United States since the 1930s.

'°' Morosan, " Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

89

CHAPTER r\^ GRETCHANINOFF ON LITURGICAL SINGING

Spokesman for the New Russian Choral School Gretchaninoff actively voiced his views on liturgical music, lea\ing behind written essays, letters, and published articles that all address the subject. Starting with a series of publications in the Moskovskie Vedomosti in 1900, a daily newspaper in Moscow, and culminating in a lecture that he prepared in 1932, Gretchaninoff avidl\ declared his perspectives on Russian church music throughout his most productiv c \ cars as a composer. As discussed below, the newspaper articles from the year 1900 pro\ ed significant. From that point onward, Gretchaninoff, as well as others, perceived himself as the spokesman for the new direction in church music' As detailed in Chapter II, Gretchaninoff joined with Rachmaninoff, Taneye\. and over thirty other musicians who signed a letter published in the Russian Musical Gazette, protesting the monarchy's "Bloody Sunday" tyranny. Soon after. Rimsky-Korsakov became involved in the protest.^ Though the protest was not directly related to musical activities, the overall political climate in early 1905 adversely affected concert performances; furthermore, Gretchaninoffs involvement could have influenced other musicians, including Rimsky-Korsakov, to become more involved.

.Morosan, Choral Performance 91. 223; Holmes 29. Stewart 32-33; Yastrebtsev 355

90

Morosan notes that Gretchaninoff led a protest in 1906 against an "unofficial censorship" imposed by the Holy Synod in an effort to regain control of pow er after their loss of it from the 1880 court case centered around Tchaikovsky's liturgy. The HoK Synod ruled that all music was to be forwarded to the Supervisory Council of the Moscow Synodal School to be evaluated before it could be published. Morosan descnbes the situafion further: "This unofficial censorship-which caused inordinate dela\ s, violated copyright with regard to unpublished manuscripts, and sometimes ended in unexplained reftisals—brought about a vigorous protest, launched in 1906 by the composer Grechaninov and joined by virtually every major composer of church music."" Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter V, Gretchaninoff felt no compulsion to continue the ban against instrumental music, and felt strongly that church music should include the organ and other instruments. With his Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, he became the first composer to score the Divine Liturgy to instrumental accompaniment.' Perhaps this alone would have been adequate in voicing his objection to the ban; however, a relatively recent publication from the Russian Orthodox Church indicates not only that Gretchaninoff made a more formal proposal, but also that the proposal would have met opposition even at the end of the twenfieth century, shown by the type of language used to describe Gretchaninoff and his cohorts: In 1917, people that dared to call themselves orthodox raised the question about the use of an organ in orthodox worship at the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church. A joint session that addressed specific questions concerning church singing was held on December 8 of that year. A[leksandr] Grechaninov proposed the introduction of the organ for use in worship. The suggestion ^ Morosan, Choral Performance 89-91 ' Gretchaninoff, My Life 119-120. Morosan, Choral Performance 244.

91

received the support of the director of the Synodal School, A[leksandr] Kastal'sky, as well as by D[mitri] Allemanov. a priest in the Orthodox Church whose so called choral works are still performed even today by church choirs. The proposal was rejected by a vote of eight to three.^ As this proposal was documented to have occurred in December of 1917. it w as certainK overshadowed by the all-encompassing event of the Bolshevik Revolution only a few weeks earlier.

The Moskovskie Vedomosti Publications of 1900 Soon after the turn of the twentieth century, Gretchaninoff arose as a leading spokesman for the new direcfion in church music. As noted in Chapter II, he first submitted his views to the public in a 1900 edition of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, which followed with rebuttals by A. Grigorov, G. Usurov, as well as the editorial staff, and culminated in a final published essay by Gretchaninoff less than a month later. Gretchaninoff recalls the events that led to this series of articles: This new style of sacred music that I adopted, as did also Kastalsky and Tchesnokov, was for a long time refused recognition by the self-appointed arbiters of Russian Orthodox church singing... Anything that did not sound like German or Italian church music seemed to them—and, alas, still seems to their disciples~as contrary to the spirit of Russian church music. I decided to launch an open attack on this fossilized attitude, and published an article under the title "On the Spirit of Church Singing." Two main ideas were brought out in this article: first, that if the music corresponds faithfully to the meaning of the text, this proves its fidelity to the "spirit" as well. According to this premise, no ftivolous melody can be properly used in church composifions, for there is no text in the sacred writings that it can possibly portray... Secondly, I pointed out in my article that the only way to write Orthodox church music in a truly Russian style is to return to old Slavonic church singing, to study it, learn to love it, and enjoy it as part of our own native folk music. Let Kutuzov, see Appendix F.

92

Itahan songs flourish in Italy; it behooves us. Russians, to cling to our ow n Slavonic modes.^ The content of Gretchaninoff s first article, published on February 23. 1900,^ expounded several points. However, the point he described in his autobiograph\ to "return to old Slavonic church singing" is not menfioned, though it is addressed in his final article written to defend and clarify his position.^ In the introductory paragraphs of the inifial article, he lists three groups that categonze "critics" of church music-admirers of the Italian style of Bortnanski, Vedel, and Sarti, and others; "the admirers of the obikhod" who admire only the simply harmonized chants or the pure monophonic tunes; and a final group who quite puzzlingly seem to admire the simple settings of the obikhod as well as the Italian style of Bortniansky, Vedel, and Sarti. In clarifying the "correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to the text's contents,"^^ he identified the "very wide choice" that composers have in setting liturgical music, "if only he correctly understands and expresses the text's meaning." Gretchaninoff ftirther stated that no formal, contrapuntal nor harmonic techniques should be branded as out of place in church music if "used sensibly and appropriately." He then identified three requirements that qualify church music as sensible and appropriate:

^ Gretchaninoff A/>' Life, 1\-11. * "A Few Words about the Spirit of the Church Motets." by Gretchaninoff was published in the February 23, 1900 edition of the Moskovkie Vedomosti, no. 53. Subsequent articles were published by the Moskovkie Vedomosti on February 26, no. 56, and February 29, no. 59. Gretchaninoffs final article was published by the Moskovski Vedomosti on March 14, 1900, no. 73 Complete translations of these articles appear m the appendix. ' The inaccuracy of Gretchaninoffs recollection of the content of the first article is likely due to the fifty-two year span that separated the publication of the first newspaper article and the publication of his autobiography in English. '" All Italics used in the quoted texts are Gretchaninoffs

93

(1) "Words should be pronounced by all voices simultaneously or, gi\en a contrapuntal work, the words should be distributed among the voices so skillftilly that the listener can absolutely follow the text." Gretchaninoff then explained that the word "Hallelujah" can often be set contrapuntally when repeated. (2) "The text should be rightly and correcth declaimed." He then pointed out common mistakes in text declamation, e\ en in the obikhod. (3) Finally, the music should correspond to the meaning of the text. He labeled this last qualificafion as the most important, and stated that if all three qualifications are met, "we will exhaust all that is required to consider a known sacred music work suitable for the church." Gretchaninoff also discussed the use of unconventional compositional techniques, stating: If many people consider any non-hackneyed technique as a heresy (for example, the use of any other manner of harmonization besides tonic, dominant and subdominant), this is only because they are not accustomed to those techniques. The more rich and vivid colors a composer has, the more \ ariety he has in the technique of musical means. However, despite how suitable and noble those techniques may be - if they are new and uncommon - the more they will be regarded as a transgression of piety by some admirers of church music. Gretchaninoff dismissed concerns about overall style in sacred music as being "so delicate and debatable that hardly even two musicians will agree in its understanding." He also defended against the criticism that some church music resembled opera, stating that often times "banal things are sung in our church" that would not even have a place in a "somewhat decent opera." Gretchaninoff concluded this initial article with the following paragraph: So, what kind of music should we consider as corresponding to the spirit of our Church? I know vulgar and noble music; overly elaborate and simple;

94

sweet and sentimental; and rigorous, serious music. If a sacred work onh fits first definifions then it is worth nothing; if it corresponds to the text, if it is simple and noble, and if words can be heard and are correctly declaimed, then such a work is worthy to be performed in the church, and that is why it is "ecclesiastical" if \ou will. But when some work is said not to correspond to the spirit of the church motets, I understand it only in one sense: it does not correspond to the text. But "the spirit," as it is usually accepted to be understood - is merely a convention, a habit.

In his autobiography, Gretchaninoff described the reaction caused b\ this first article: "My acfion aroused a storm of disapproval. My principal idea was completely misinterpreted, and I was accused of wanfing to introduce operatic style into the Russian Orthodox Church. There were other similarly absurd misinterpretations."" Part of the "storm of disapproval" referred to by Gretchaninoff appeared in a brief commentary from the editorial staff that immediately followed his article in the same issue, as well as in subsequent letters to the editor published less than a \\ eek later, on February 29, 1900. The note from the editorial staff that appeared just below Gretchaninoffs article included the following criticisms: As for the opinion of Mr. Gretchaninoff, we hope that there will be people among the admirers of our church singing that will state their opinion to confirm that there is a fourth group besides those three groups of admirers of church singing mentioned by Mr. Gretchaninoff This group is not satisfied with Bortniansky, the modem obikhod, nor with both simultaneously, but they are moved by the marvelous and are filled with the deep religious spirit of the old and ancient tunes of our church... As for the "ecclesiastical spirit," we hardly think that it is only a "convention, a habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff thinks. Having listed all of the necessary requirements for the composition of church music, Mr. Gretchaninoff, like all of our modem composers, misses the most important requirement: the religious mood, and consequentK', the sincere faith of a composer himself Church music as well as church painting requires not Gretchaninoff, My Lifel'.

95

only highly creafive talent, but also religious spirituality of that talent. One ma\ compose "corresponding music" to the secular romance words; but for the liturgical words of prayer, it is not enough; one has to be filled with the blessed power of that prayer, one has to believe in that power, one has to pra\ himself In the Febmary 29 issue, the editorial staff of the Moskovskie Vedemosti included two articles written in response to Gretchaninoffs article from Febmarv' 23. The editonal staff, idenfified as "V.G.," also presented a brief summafion of the discussion, adding that "a lot of articles and notes" had been received, and that "today we publish the two most thorough articles by A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Umsov." Another statement from the editorial staff pointed to Gretchaninoffs "letter to the publisher" that was \\ ritten in an attempt to clarify his position, but was actually used against him in the debate: We pointed out that the most important requirement in this respect that was [not] mentioned in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It is the religious mood, and therefore, the sincere faith of the composer himself Mr. Gretchaninoff, in his "Letter to the Publisher," hastened to declare that not only did he not reject that requirement, but also that he considered it to be so obvious, he preferred not to mention it at all. The editorial staff, "Mr. V.G.," then notes other points that he believes Gretchaninoff understated or overlooked. The opposifion raised by Grigorov in the Febmary 29 rebuttal to Gretchaninoffs first article affirms the statement made by V.G. of the editorial staff concerning "the most important requirement for the composifion of church motets, namely the sincere faith of the composer himself," as well as the "fourth class" of admirers of church music who admire the spirit of the ancient tunes. He confinued his criticism, "that [fourth] class deser\es our attention, though Mr. Gretchaninoff persistently ignores it, even in his Letter

96

to the Publisher published in response to the above-mentioned editorial note," and then expounded on the significance of this fourth class. He then crificized Gretchaninoff for making "inexact" and "inconsistent statements," poinfing to Gretchaninoffs observation of the requirement that church music should not be "overly elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and especially not sweet nor vulgar," yet the music must also be "extremely various in its character and nuances" to adequately illustrate the text. In this observation, Grigorov concludes: "As you can see, the text is restricted, and at the same time 'extremely various,' with the possibility of 'extremely various illustrations' to it." Though Gretchaninoffs corresponding article of March 14 does not address this point, it appears to be fairly obvious when comparing the texts of Gretchaninoff and Grigorov that the latter misinterpreted Gretchaninoffs meaning on this point: although liturgical texts are inherently restricted to some degree, they still "may be extremely various in its contents and mood," and though the music "should not be exquisite, sensual, or sentimental, and especially sweet or vulgar," it still may be set with music that possesses much variety in terms of "its character and nuances." Grigorov then summarizes Gretchaninoffs three conditions for suitable church music, and remarked thus: ...according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs opinion, if a composer observes the above requirements and gets rid of the "hackneyed techniques," then he may show all of his strength and reveal all the extent and the "nch and vivid colors" in the use of the musical means to create a work quite suitable for church performance.. Those conditions are extremely essential and serious. Howc\ er, they are not sufficient for the church motets.

97

Grigorov confinues to affirm the importance of the conditions spelled out by Gretchaninoff, but adds that these condifions only insure the "permissibility." not necessarily the "appropriateness for worship." Before listing a fourth necessary requirement for the suitability of church music, Grigorov discusses the meaning of "what is in the spirit." Though he does not presume to be able to define it exactly, he asserts. "We know only one thing for sure: 'the spirit' is not 'a convention' and 'a habit' as Mr. Gretchaninoff claims. In our opinion 'the spirit' is something stable and steadfast, and includes the ideas of virtue, of the purity of good conscience, and so on." Grigoro\ then expounds on the fourth condition that must be present in the composition of appropriate church music, which may be essenfially summed up as the prayer and faithfulness of the composer during the composition of the music, the same as listed in the editorial note that appeared with Gretchaninoffs article of Febmary 23. Grigorov states: If we restrict the requirements for church music to only three conditions, and if we are satisfied with the noble, permissible music as discussed in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article, I am afraid that the sacred music of even a talented and sincere composer would be rather a cantata on a liturgical text, but it would not represent the church motet appropriate for the performance in the orthodox temple. I am not going to state that such a composer will sinfully make his work, no, that may not happen, but he will not meet our need to pray with the reverent mood that is evoked both by the place and by our inner desire to get rid of this world's vanity, and to soar in the world of a higher joy that is devoid of the earthly senses of delights, even if innocent and noble. However, even after detailing his criticism of Gretchaninoffs article, Grigorov concludes with a hint of gratitude to Gretchaninoff, and a suggestion that Russian composers need not exhibit an extraordinary amount of faith to compose church music, as his open invitation might imply:

98

To conclude, I will say that it is comforting to think that our composers and music crifics, just like the thoughtful Mr. GretchaninofT, are beginning to pay attenfion to the almost forgotten area of church music. And maybe they would share part of their talents for the comfort and the delight of those who attend the temples and pray there. Umsov's article, included in the same publication as Grigorov's, is much more concise, though less substantive. He criticizes Gretchaninoff for "expressing his own opinion that hardly may be obligatory for the people interested in the addressed topic." He condemns Gretchaninoff for indirectly blaming Bortniansky and \'edel for the Westemization of Russian church music, and describes his reasoning about opera to be vague. He then casts some degree of blame on the conser\'atories for not training young musicians to compose in the spirit of the church, yet \\ho "belittle the sacred text to the degree of merely the ground for exercise in composition." He then digresses into a discussion of the careers and fame of church singers. No evidence was discovered that Gretchaninoff ever bothered to respond to his article. In the commentary by the editorial staff that appeared with these two articles on Febmary 29, V.G. suggests a fifth requirement that is essential in creating appropnate music for the church: Perhaps Mr. Gretchaninoff will consider as obvious another essential condition that he also did not mention, but A.I. Grigorov mentioned it in his article by inference. Here is that condifion: that church music should be predominantly national music. Could it be that the whole secret of the spirit of church music is hidden in the profoundly national character of church music in general and in Russian music specifically? V.G. then elaborates the reasons that the old Slavic church tunes, the "predominant national music," so adequately express the sentiments of the Russian people in the context of church singing:

99

But why are these ancient tunes so dear to our hearts? Why do samples of our ancient church music that are kept safe in some monasteries touch us so deeph, even when we hear them for the first time? Could the reason be that this music is not only ancient, but is our music as well? Perhaps it is because in this music, that was originally borrowed from the Byzanfine tradition, our Russian national spirit was gradually expressed over the ages, and then finally de\ eloped into that form that was predestined to cast the mould of Russian Orthodox church singing due to innate ethnical, ethical, historical, and aesthetic laws. The next statement by the editorial staff confirmed Gretchaninoffs practice of returning to the old Slavic chants in the composition of sacred music, something that, according to his autobiography, he had begun with the composifion of two chomses, opus 19. in 189S. "As the Waves of the Sea," and "O, Be Joyful in the Lord:"'^ That is why our modem composers of sacred music, who sincerely wish to grasp the spirit of the Russian church motets, must reverently meditate on and attenfively listen to our ancient church tunes, not in order to slavishly and foolishly copy them, but in order to be inspired by their lofty religious mood and strict church spirit that is so closely connected with the strict church spirit of the orthodox Russian people. Recalling the composition of the opus 19 chomses, Gretchaninoff stated that the ancient chant emphasis that he employed "set the foundation of style I developed in my later sacred writings, the style I maintained through the years up to the composition of my Oecumenical Mass."'^ The reasons for Gretchaninoffs emphasis on actual chant or chant-based motives that would predominate in practically all of his sacred music remains to be determined with certainty, though the evidence gleaned from primary sources may lead to specific conclusions. Morosan concludes that the chant-based style of Gretchaninoff originated from his correspondence with a small group of composers

'- Gretchaninoff, My Life 71, 186. '^ Gretchaninoff, My Life 71.

100

and Stepan Smolensky, the director of the Moscow Synodal School from 1889-1909 and a distinguished liturgical musicologist.'"* However, from the content of the Moskovksie Vedomosti articles, combined with Gretchaninoffs inaccurate recollection of it mentioned in his autobiography, another conclusion also may be drawn. As previously mentioned, Morosan points out that Gretchaninoff was heavih influenced to employ the ancient chants by none other than Stepan Smolensk). Though Gretchaninoff never directly admitted that Smolensky influenced his compositional style, he did state that the Moscow Synodal Choir premiered his first Liturgy, opus 13 and his two chomses, opus 19, in the autumn of 1899.'^ Morosan notes that Smolensky offered crifical advice to Gretchaninoff in the process of preparing for the performance of these works by the Synodal Choir, and adds, "After this inifial essay in sacred music... Grechaninov adopted a much more melodic, chant-oriented idiom—undoubtedly, according to Nikol'sky, as a result of'numerous discussions among Grechaninov. Kastal'sky, Smolensky, and Orlov.'"'^ It is particularly interesfing to note here that Gretchaninoffs very next sacred composifions would be the opus 19 chomses described above, composed in 1898, followed by his next major choral work-the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29, composed in 1902, both of which employed the "more melodic, chant-oriented idiom." These two works, composed in 1898 and 1902, the premier performances of the

'"* Morosan, Choral Performance 100-101. '•Gretchaninoff, AA' Life 70-71. '"Morosan, Choral Performance 230. Morosan cites .Meksandr Nikol'sky, "S A'. Smolensky i ego rol' V novom napravlenii russkoi tserkovnoi muzyki" [S. V Smolensky and his role in the new direction of Russian church music], Khoroyoe i regentskoe deki 10(1913): 151-56.

101

First Liturgy and the opus 19 chomses that occurred within one year of each other if not even in the same performance,'' and the appearance of the Moskovskie Vedomosti articles in Febmary of 1900 leads to the conclusion that all of these events were significantly linked. Thus, the last statement by the editorial staff in the Moskovskie Vedomosti of Febmary 29, 1900 not only confirmed Gretchaninoffs compositional tendenc\ to return to the ancient chants but also directly influenced him to continue his pursuit of that particular style, possibly even influencing the chant style of the Second Liturgy, Opus 29. This conclusion may be confirmed by the fact that whereas Gretchaninoff never mentions the influence of Smolensky in his autobiography, several paragraphs are devoted to the Moskovskie Vedomosti articles.

His discussion of the articles occur within the context

of the description of his initial stylistic inclination toward the ancient chants, and though he never acknowledges any influence the articles may have had on his style, the timing of his transifion to the "more melodic, chant-oriented idiom" and his preoccupation with the articles in his autobiography at least merit consideration. Though Morosan quotes a primary source that acknowledges Smolensky's influence on Gretchaninoffs style, he also confirms that Gretchaninoff had no direct experience with the Moscow Synodal School or Choir,'^ and that "some disagreement exists" on the exact level of influence that Smolensky had on composers in Moscow.^° While it may not be fashionable to give

'^ Gretchaninoff, My Life 70, 185. Gretchamnoff actually lists two separate dates for the premier of the First Liturgy. In the narrative, he explains that the premier occurred in the autumn of 189') (70). but in the listing of choral works, he lists the date as 19 October, 1898. '* Gretchaninoff, My Life 71-73. ' Morosan, Choral Performance 242. "" Morosan, Choral Performance 230.

102

significant credit for a composer's development to a contenfious joumalist, the e\idence points in this direction every bit as strongly as it does toward Smolensky in this regard. The conclusion regarding the influence that the editorial comments may ha\ e had on Gretchaninoffs style may also be confirmed by Gretchaninoffs immediate reactions, published in the March 14 issue of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, no. 73. In this final article, Gretchaninoff effecfively counters the arguments against the fourth group of admirers of church music, summarizes his intentions of the first article, counters the assertion that "the spirit is only a convenfion and a habit" by stating that it is understood by others to be a convention and a habit and not what he himself asserts, and effecti\ el\ answers other issues raised by Grigorov and the editorial staff such as the faith and prayerftil attitude that the composer must employ in the compositional process. Addressing the issue of nafional music, Gretchaninoff defends himself by stating, "Concerning the condition asserted by Mr. V.G., the demand that a composition of sacred music should be predominantly national, 1 will answer that this question is not considered in my main requirement of'correspondence' as Mr. V.G. would like to ascribe to me." He follows with an elaboration of the importance of incorporating the national tunes into church music, and even states, "I believe that our church music will reach the proper height only when it rests upon our folk art. It will get rid of the Italianization that is alien to us, but at the same time that reigns in our Church, only when our church music composers will pay proper attention to antiquity and will draw their inspiration from it." In making a case against overstating the importance of the national element in church music, Gretchaninoff states: "Nevertheless, 1 think that the requirement of nationalit\

103

hardly may be considered as obligatory (and I meant only such requirements in my first article)." He then states two primary reasons that nationalit\' should not be identified as a necessary requirement: first, that nationalism is difficult to identify; and second, that churches would have difficulty in choosing music to perform, given the lack of church music that was currently available. Thus, the actual content of the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications does not correspond to the summary he ga\'e in his 1952 autobiography, where he lists nafionalism as one of his main points in submitting his essay for publicafion: "Secondly, I pointed out in my article that the only \\ ay to write Orthodox church music in a tmly Russian style is to return to old Slavonic church singing, to stud\ it, to leam to love it, and enjoy it as part of our own native fold music..."'' This fact leads one to conclude that since Gretchaninoff inaccurately remembered the series of articles as being primarily about incorporating nationalism in church music, when in fact the point about nationalism was raised by the editorial staff and only was addressed by Gretchaninoff out of defense, the cnticisms raised by his opponents in the debate had a profound affect on his compositional style. Thus, it may be concluded that the series of publications in the Moskovskie Vedomosti of 1900 was significant in the career of Gretchaninoff, as demonstrated by the attention he gives it in his autobiography. While the exact degree of influence that it had on his compositional style only may be speculated, it is not impossible that it may have directly influenced his stylistic tendency toward the ancient chants, even affecting the style of the Second Liturgy of St. John Chn'sostom, Opus 29, composed in 1902, in uhich

Gretchaninoff, My Life 72,

104

the chant-based themes are prominent, as observed by Morosan. Though Gretchaninoff never acknowledged this influence on his style, it is evident from his memoirs that he highly desired the approval of his teachers, colleagues, and audiences. His introverted temperament combined with a deep sense of pride in his accomplishments could ha\ c kept him from admitting that these publications influenced his sty le on any le\ el, as the criticism was submitted by "laypersons." Regardless of the degree of influence on Gretchaninoffs style, the impact that the Moskovskie Vedemosti articles produced on Russian church music in general was indeed significant. In a recent article on the subject, Marina Rakhmanova states the importance of Gretchaninoff s initial publication of Febmary 23, 1900: Now I would like to go back to the above-mentioned discussion on church singing in the Moskovskie Vedomosti newspaper in the years 1900-1902. It was initiated with the famous article of A.T. Gretchaninoff, 'A Few Words about the 'Spinf of the Church Motets." That article may be viewed in a certain sense as the manifesto of the New School, and it was indeed perceived that way by his contemporaries. (Actually, Gretchaninoffs article was not the first one in that discussion, but it was that very article that "poured oil on the flames"). ^^ As Rakhmanova suggests, the publications in the Moskovskie Vedomosti certainly drew much attenfion to the subject of church music, and played a significant role in leading both musicians and non-musicians to the genre.

^' M. P. Rakhmanova, "Staroobnadchesno i Novoe napravlenie' v russkoi dukhoN-noi muzyke'T'Old Belief and TMew School' in Russian Music"], Cultural Heritai^e of Medieval Russia in the Tradition of L'ral - Siberian Old Belief Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific Conference, May 17-19, 1999. Novosibirsk: M. I. Glinka Novosibirsk State Conser\atory, 1999, trans. Sergei Shiskin, ed Philip Camp, 2002.

105

The New York Essav of 1932 Gretchaninoff wrote a significant essay on the history of Russian liturgical music that is housed in the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts.^

The first sentence of this hand-written manuscript, all of which is in Russian,

indicates that this essay was written for a speech that Gretchaninoff deli\ered. presumably to a Russian audience, or with a translator's assistance. On the back of the fourth page, the essay is dated September 30, 1932. Given the facts that the manuscnpt has many side notes that are both in the margins and on the back sides of some pages that were added with red and black pencil and with pen markings, and that all of these notes directly relate to the content of the essay, it may be presumed that the date pro\ ided on the fourth page related either the actual date that he ga\ e the lecture or the date that the essay was completed. Since the content of the first few pages, including the fourth page, deals with the early history of Russian liturgical singing, the appearance of this would seem to indicate another event related to the essay, such as the date for the delivery of the speech, as it does not pertain to any detail provided in the entire essay. From the evidence provided in his autobiography, it would appear that Gretchaninoff delivered the lecture in the United States, perhaps even in New \'ork, as he states, "Between 1929 and 1934,1 spent about three months each year in America. I made appearances in almost all the pnncipal cities in the United States, and made many new ftiends.'""* Given that Gretchaninoff permanently left Russia in 1925, and that many archival matenals are

'•' The full translation of this essay appears in Appendix B. ^* GretchaninofT, A/v Life 149.

106

located in various locations in the United States from his frequent \ isits and e\ entual immigration, it may be assumed that this lecmre was given in a major city in the United States. Though no documentation has been disco\ered to support the event of this lecture, in all probability from the evidence shown abo\ e. it occurred in a major city in the United States, possibly New York City, in September of 1932. Though much of the essay contains factual information about the history of Russian Orthodox singing that readily can be found elsewhere, portions of the essay provide interesting glimpses of Gretchaninoffs views on the subject, many of which were considered unconventional and unorthodox to the mainstream Russian Orthodox Church. As expected from a former student of Rimsky-Korsakov who was one of the "Mighty Handful," Gretchaninoff values the original Russian character of the music even from its origins, as stated in the following, "The flawless treasure of ancient Russian singing, created and maintained by the genius of Russian folk, can only be explained through the love of songs, both secular and sacred..." Though Gretchaninoff acknowledges the Byzanfine influence in the originafion of Russian church music, he also quotes Stepan Smolensky's conclusions that the '"independent essence of our tunes obviously developed from ancient times through Russian strength alone,'^' which automatically belittles the Byzantine part of our native art.'" A few sentences later. Gretchaninoff states,".. .this pure Russian choral art that came to us from hoary antiquity leaves an impression that is both tremendous and often majestic." Gretchaninoff describes the penod in the sixteenth

" Gretchaninoffs emphasis.

107

century and early seventeenth century, immediately prior to the de\ elopment of partsinging in the seventeenth century that was modeled after W^estem polyphony: It was the period of the tme golden age of our church singing. Unfortunately, it did not last long. Very soon, in the same seventeenth century, the new 'skillful musical art' began to penetrate from the West... This singing did not beautif\' these marvelous ancient melodies at all; quite the contrary, it damaged their beauty because they were harmonized by people that were not experienced in harmonization. Gretchaninoffs disdainful attitude toward the Italian influence of the late eighteenth century becomes readily apparent here: The visiting Italians played a tremendous role in the subsequent fate of our church music. Under their influence, the national face of our church music was completely lost for a long fime. The music was Italianized and the ancient Znamenny chant was consigned to almost complete oblivion. That obli\ ion was so strong, so deep, that even though the contemporary works of our Russian composers have taken on the Italian character since then, these works were respected as demonstrative of genuine Russian orthodox singing. That opinion has lasted even to the present time. He then laments over Berezovsky, a Russian composer and singer who lived from 17451777, who supposedly committed suicide after not being able to find a position in the Imperial Chapel due to the prominence of all of the Italians, though he was very talented and had trained in Italy.^^ In his discussion of the work of Bortnianksy, the greatest Russian composer to have received training from Italians, Gretchaninoff acknowledges that he was the first composer "to begin to arrange the ancient melodies for use in a choral work. His knowledge was sound in the area of harmonization and voice leading. Especially ^* Though Slonimsky confirms the suicide story in the 8 edition of Baker's Biographical Dictionary' of Music and Musicians, the commonly reported story about his suicide does not have documentary confirmation. More recent scholarship in Russia suggests that Berezovsky probably died from an illness.

108

considering.. .[the time] when composers groped their way, Bortnianks\'s arrangements testify that study of music in the West was not done in \'ain, and that we mastered composifional technique no worse than any Italian." However. Gretchaninoff soon decried the Italian influence on him, stating ".. .but the Italian nuisance \\as so great that it prevented him from wrapping them into fitting harmonic and contrapuntal clothing that would correspond to the natural melodic style." He then criticizes Bortniansky for onh' composing in the major and minor tonal system of the Italians to the neglect of the modal character of the ancient melodies. Similarly, the next section in the speech continues to praise Bortnianksy's immediate successors in their natural Russian tendencies to deal with the chants in terms of assymetrical rhythm and modality, but criticizes them for composing in the tonal system of the Italian style. In his discussion of his own generafion of composers who made up the new Russian choral school, Gretchaninoff reveals his perspecti\es about Tchaikovsky's work and identifies the overarching influence on the style of the new generation of composers of sacred choral music. In his discussion of Tchaikovsky, Gretchaninoff reveals his own partiality to the Russian nationalist school of Rimsky-Korsakov. Rimsky-Korsakov, Gretchaninoffs teacher at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, and who as a member of the "Mighty Five" rejected Tchaikovsky's style of composition in favor of the nationalist style of Glinka, remained in correspondence with Gretchaninoff until his death in 1910. Before Gretchaninoff discusses Tchaikovsky, however, Rimsky' Korsakov's influence

'^ Holmes notes that the Houghton Library of Harvard University contains fourteen autographed Icners wTitten from Rimsky-Korsakov to Gretchaninoff, dated 1898-1905. Holmes 171

109

even may be seen in Gretchaninoffs discussion of Glinka, who became ill and died before the "dream of his last days" would come tme, to be among the first to harmonize the ancient melodies in a modal fashion. Certainly. Gretchaninoff expresses admiration for the work of Glinka when he states, "Glinka's death tragically echoed throughout the halls of church singing." In chapter two of his autobiography, Gretchaninoff admits that he practically idolized Tchaikovsky during his student days at the Moscow Conser\ atory. However, in this essay, the change in Gretchaninoffs attitude toward Tchaikovsk\' is apparent by his description of Tchaikovsky's famous Liturgy: Only by the reputation of his great name as a composer can one explain the outstanding and unprecedented success that his Liturgy received—a composition that was not at all remarkable and even weak in some places. Perhaps the success of this work was also promoted by the scandal that was raised b\ Bakhmetev's lawsuit against Jurgenson, the publisher of the Liturgy... Gretchaninoffs final statements credit the members of the "Mighty Five" for laying the foundation for the composers of the new Russian choral school to build new frameworks for liturgical music. Gretchaninoff particularly mentions Rimsky-Korsakov and two other members of the group, Borodin and Mussorgsky, for having the most profound influence on the style of the new generation of composers. As discussed above, this assertion was only alluded to in his 1900 publication in the Moskovskie Vedomosti, which caused him extreme criticism. Gretchaninoff states here that though the period between Bortiansky's death in 1825 and the end of the century saw almost "no progress" in the area of church music, "new forms were created that laid the foundation for the creative work of the present day representatives of the new school of church music composition." He states that through their new innovations in their secular works.

110

"Borodin..., and especially Mussorgsky, taught contemporary composers of sacred music to deal with the modal character of the ancient melodies. They taught us how to harmonize them and how to make them contrapuntal w ithout cormpting their st\ie. spint. or nature." Listing examples from two other members of the "Mighty Handful." Rimsk\Korsakov's two operas, Mlada in 1891 and Kitezh in 1903-05, and from Mussorgsky's Boris Goudonov, Gretchaninoff concludes the entire speech by stating: Probably, I would not be mistaken to say that all of the next generation of composers of sacred music are above all indebted to those composers of secular music who actually composed few if any spiritual works, but b> their secular music influenced the development of church music. The new generation learned from these composers, and drew inspiration from their creati\ e works (Boris Goudunov). In setting the context for Gretchaninoffs sacred choral compositions, his statements about Russian liturgical music become valuable. The development of his general style becomes clearer, and his goal to correspond the music to the meaning of the text also becomes evident. The fact that he drew so much inspiration from the secular works of at least three members of the "Mighty Five" is not only intriguing, but also helps to explain Gretchaninoffs attempt to s>Tnphonize the unaccompanied choir, and even ftirther attempted to expand the style of Russian liturgical music by introducing instmmental accompaniment into Liturgy setfings for the Russian Orthodox Church. These and other style traits, prominent in his pre-revolutionary choral works that began with the Second Liturgy, are discussed in detail in Chapter V.

Ill

CHAPTER \' OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SACRED CHORAL STYLE

Though Gretchaninoff is primarily remembered for his sacred choral music as well as children's music, he composed music in pracfically every established genre. His total output included five fiill symphonies as well as other orchestral works; nine string quartets and other chamber works; many works for solo instmments and piano; o\ er fort\ collections for solo piano; six operas including three children's operas; incidental music for four plays; several cantatas, liturgies, and masses; a huge number of single-movement sacred and secular chomses; vocal quartets, duets, and works for solo voice and orchestra; and songs for voice and piano. Beginning w ith his first works that appeared in the early 1890s, Gretchaninoff continued to compose throughout his long life, even into the 1950s when he was approaching ninety years of age. Throughout his career that spanned over six decades, Gretchaninoff composed many types of choral works, both sacred and secular, a cappella and accompanied. Appendix D lists the complete choral works compiled from his own catalogue of works listed in his autobiography. As shown in the appendix, the second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus 29, was composed relatively early in his career, though he was thirtyeight years of age and had already established himself as a composer in Russia. Gretchaninoff completed the score in the summer of 1902 at his vacation cottage on the

' Inna Barsova, Gerald .Abraham, "Grechaninov, Alexandr I ikhonovich," The NVu Grove Dictionar\- of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie, 2"^ ed., vol. 10 (London: Macmillan, 2001) 32.^-326; Stewart 1.

112

banks of the Volga, and later remembered, "This idyllic existence was conduci\ e to meditation, and I felt in the mood for writingsacred music. I decided to compose a new Liturgy, because my first Liturgy was unsatisfactory to me in many respects. Gretchaninoff then recounted how he composed the music for the Creed: I felt at ease and my work progressed well. But w hen I reached the Credo, I began to wonder whether I should not write something quite different from the first Liturgy. I had two Credos: a long one, which illustrated the text in considerable detail a la Tchaikovsky, and a shorter second Credo, as a recitative. How should I write a third one? I debated the problem for a long time, and then, in a flash, an original and yet essentially simple idea came to me: to give the entire text to the alto, not to sing, but to recite, as the nuns do; w hile the choms, in a simple harmonic framework, accentuates, in worshipful whispers, the meaning of the text by repeating the words "I believe," and, towards the end, "I profess" and "I await." This Credo eventually became very popular."^ Gretchaninoff then described the successful premier, which took place on March 2, 1903. in the Moscow Nobility House by Leonid Vaslyev's large choir. In the preparation for the performance, Gretchaninoff personally rehearsed the music w ith the young boy who sang the alto solo for the Creed, to ensure that the boy sang w ith correct pronunciation of the archaic liturgical language and with the appropriate rhythmic accent. Vasilyev himself attended these rehearsals to better prepare himself for the Liturgy, specifically the Creed, which Gretchaninoff described thus: "the greatest difficulty was to blend the two independent elements of music: the free recitative of the alto and the flowing harmonies of the choral accompaniment." About the actual premier perfomiance. Gretchaninoff stated: The hall was packed to the doors, and the Liturgy had a tremendous success, particularly the Credo. The young boy w ho sang the alto part was showered w ith * Gretchaninoff, A/v Life 87. • Gretchaninoff, AA Life 87.

\\y

presents after the performance: a watch, lots of candy, and some money. The newspaper reviews were ftill of superlatives. Kashkin [Gretchaninoffs former piano teacher at the Moscow Conservatory] wTote: "Gretchaninoffs Credo, conceived in the strict church style, is a work of genius in its inventiveness, its simplicity, and its superb poetic spirit. This Credo made a profound impression, completely captivating the listener." Other reviews were couched in similar terms. In the actual review of the premier wntten by Kashkin in the Moscovskie Vedomosti three days later, general comments were made about the entire Liturg\, w hile the majority of the specific comments centered on the Creed: In hearing his new liturgy, one immediately senses that the composer freely masters both counterpoint and harmony, and furthermore, is quite capable of wrifing for a choir. When Mr. Gretchaninoff combines the spiritual quality of the ancient melodies with the general character of Russian music, he leaves a stamp that is simultaneously both individual and national, elegantly expressed through the quaUfies of unique melodic and harmonic progressions. From what we heard, the complete Liturgy is written w ith great talent, but the Creed represents an ingenious invention in its genre, through its simplicity and in the amazing poesy of its design that remains in the framework of the strictest church style. The invenfiveness of the Creed consists of the declamation of the text by a boy alto soloist on a few, mostly repeated notes, while the choir sings "vemu" [I believe] through each part, emphasizing the content of the given passage through powerful yet simple harmonic colors. This movement as a whole creates a marvelously beautifiil impression that completely captivates the listener. If we add that the performance of this movement along with all of the other movements was literally excellent, then the tremendous impact that the Creed had on the audience w ill be understandable to you; furthermore, the boy deserves great praise, as he declaimed the text very clearly and seriously. Generally, L.V. Vasiliev's Choir stands far above the ordinary pnvate choirs in regard to their vocal quality and their discipline of performance; thus, we only can rate it with first-class choirs.^ Later in his autobiography, Gretchaninoff revealed that the Creed so inspired Nicholas II that he ordered it to be sung by the Court Chapel every Sunday, and paid

' Gretchaninoff. AA Life 87-88. ^ Nikolai Kashkin, "Den' moskovskih kompositorov" [Moscow Composer's Day], Moskovskie Vedomosti, No 63, March 5(18), 1903, 4-5. trans. Sergei Shishkin, ed Philip Camp, 2002 I"he complete text from the article is presented in .Appendix C.

114

Gretchaninoff an annual pension of 2000 mbles that lasted until the 1917 Revolution.^ Though Gretchaninoff only described the success of the Second Liturgy in terms of the Creed, other movements from the work also demonstrate masterful creati\ ity. and w ill be discussed in further detail in the Chapters VI and \TI. Undoubtedly, the immediate success of the Second Liturgy further inspired Gretchaninoff to continue to compose more sacred music, resulting in an abundance of sacred works by the end of his career. The works composed on liturgical texts before his departure from Russia essentially began with the first two Liturgy settings, opuses 13 and 29, and culminated in the Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79. Following his departure from Russia, the distinct choral style Gretchaninoff developed in these liturgical works permeated virtually every sacred choral work that he composed later in his career. While many of the latter works, particularly the individual chomses, were translated into English by N. Lindsay Norden, Noble Cain, and others for perfomiance in America, the larger choral works that were composed in Russia at the very time of the greatest achievements in Russian choral music remained virtually unknown throughout the entire period of Soviet mle, with the exception of the few individual chomses lifted from the larger works that were also among those translated into English. The sacred works he composed in Russia before the revolution also include The Seven Days of Passion, opus 58, composed in 1911; Vespers, opus 59, also known as the All-Night Vigil, composed in 1912; the cantata Laudate Deum, opus 65, composed in 1914; the Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, composed in 1917; and thirteen smaller sacred

* Gretchamnoff, A A Life 107-108.

15

works that were composed from the 1890s through the end of the Russian monarchy. Following his emigration from Russia. Gretchaninoff continued to compose sacred choral music, the most notable of which included a group of "heterodox" compositions from the 1930s and early 1940s that infused the style of his Russian Orthodox heritage into accompanied settings from the Catholic liturgy,^ including the Missa Oecumenica, Opus 142, the Missa Festiva, opus 154, Six Motets, opus 155, the Mass for Women's or Children's Choms and Organ, opus 165, the Mass Et in Terra Pax, opus 166. composed in 1942; and the Mass Sancti Spiritu, opus 169. Along with these works. Gretchaninoff also continued to compose accompanied choral cantatas, a number of indi\ idual sacred chomses for a cappella mixed choms, and a Fourth Liturgy, opus 177, as show n Appendix D. Significantly, Gretchaninoff was never directly involved w ith the church or a specific church choir. As noted from his own writings discussed in Chapter IV and presented in Appendix B, Gretchaninoff was most influenced by the secular music of his immediate predecessors, receiving inspiration for his church music from the operas of Borodin, Rimsky-Korsakov, and Mussorgsky. While Gretchaninoff often used source material from the ancient Znammeny Chant, the freedom of expression inspired by the secular music of his predecessors proved a significant factor in his sacred choral style. Morosan notes, "...Grechaninov from his first essay in church music displayed less ^ Morosan, Choral Performance 92. Morosan lists the larger works and refers to the thirteen smaller sacred works composed before the Revolution. The thirteen smaller sacred works correspond to the number of sacred works Gretchaninoff lists, shown in .Appendix D. * Holmes; Joseph Yasser, "GretchaninofTs Heterdox' Compositions," The Musical Quarterlv 28 (1942): 309-17.

116

concem for the ecclesiasfical element; his approach was clearh' that of a secular musician, who, like Tchaikovsky, was 'looking in' on church music from the outside.'" Morosan further adds: By his own words, Grechaninov strived to "symphonize" the forms of liturgical singing, building upon the traditions of Russian operatic and symphonic classics. As Yuri Keldysh points out, "His choral scores are marked b\ a nchness and brilliance of sonorous colors, a variety of textures, and large scale [thematic] development.... The style of his sacred works often bears characteristics of purely concert-like splendor. Frequently one encounters broadly unfolding soloistic episodes that approach operatic arias in character."'^ Grechaninov obviously was more interested in creating new forms within the field of Russian sacred music than in restoring tradifional aesthefic relationships within the liturgy. Thus he pioneered the technique of solo recitation with simultaneous choral accompaniment, e.g., in his famous "Ferwm" (Creed) from Opus 29... From here it was but a short step to employing soloists and choms w ith instmmental accompaniment, which is what he did in Liturgia Domestica, opus 79, composed in 1917." The "richness and brilliance of sonorous colors" in the choral scores of Gretchaninoff may be observed readily in the Second Liturgy, the All-Night Vigil, and the Passion Week cycle. The Seven Days of Passion, also known as Passion Week, opus 58, is a cycle of thirteen chomses for a cappella mixed choir. The texts were selected from the prayer book containing the services for each day of the Passion Week, and consist of prayers intermingled into descriptions of the events surrounding Christ's cmcifixion and bunal. The verv nature of this work was innovative, as Gretchaninoff was the first and onlv composer from the new Russian choral school to select these specific texts for a choral

.Morosan, Choral Performance 242. '° For this quote, .Morosan cites Yuri Keldysh, Rakhmaninov i ego vremia [Rachmaninoff and His Times] (Moscow Muzyka, 1973), 385 " Morosan, Choral Performance 244

11

setting.

Furthermore, Gretchaninoff freely interpreted these texts while maintaining a

style consistent with the ancient chants, several of which use actual chants as thematic material.

The most poignant example of chant setfing from the work is from the first

movement, "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," shown in Example 5.1. as the entire stmcture of the movement is determined by the Kievan Chant melody presented in the soprano voice.

As seen in the example below, the contrary motion between the soprano

and bass lines, the pedal tone in the alto line, and the octave doubling of the bass line are consistent traits in the style of Gretchaninoff, and readily can be seen in the Second Liturgy composed a decade earlier, to be discussed in Chapter VI.

'' Morosan, Choral Performance 92-93. '^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244. '^ Vladimir Morsan, ed., "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," from Holy iVeek, Opus 58. no 1 by Alexandre Gretchaninoff, (1911; Madison: .Musica Russica, 1995).

118

Example 5.1 "Behold the Bndegroom Comes" Opus 58. No. 1; Measures 1-6 Opus 58. No. 1

Soprano

-1 ya, a,

r

aJ - Ii - Ju - ya, a] - Ii - lu AJi-nn - nyH-», »;i-an - ny

1

y»-

H

Alio

J

ya. a,

a] - Ii - lu - ya, al - Ti iii aji-jiH - nyii-*. aji-JiH • ay

il

I

7>

m^^^^m

-1—(—^

1-

I t I I

Tenor

—t-

ya, a,

al - Ii - lu - ya, al - Ii - lu aji-nH - jiyfl-a, aJi-JTB - ny J -

Basj.

Al-Ii

- lu

A;i-jiH - nyii

ya. a.

*

—

#

L —

•

—

•

—

•

-

=^=^

•

^

m -¥—^—•—9—w—1^—=:—s-

al - li lu - ya, al - Ii - lu aji-jiH - jivH - a, aji-JiH • Jiy

B_

m

r-

y*a.

t=r

3

I

y«-

i

H

Copyright 1995, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

In accordance with the style of the ancient chants, asNTiimetrical rh\1hms are often used in the absence of regular metrical patterns in the Passion Week, demonstrating correct textual declamation fitting the prose of the text in keeping with one of the points of his "Brief Review" presented in Appendix B and discussed in Chapter I\' losing such irregular metrical patterns, Gretchaninoff achieves a unique choral recitative setting of the text. Though the texture essentially remains homophonic, it is also sometimes animated by the insertion of passing tones in some voices against sustained notes in the other voices. This simultaneous declamation of the text set upon the diverse vocal parts moving against each other produces a distinct Russian style, as if the entire choir is intended to represent the sole \oice of the celebrant chanting the text, as was practiced for

19

centuries. Such writing may be seen in Example 5.2 from the ninth movement of Passion Week Example 5.2, "Thou, Who Clothest Thyself with Light" Opus 58, No. 9; Measures 8-12 «/

r'

^

f I'

^

VI BH

1_ H.

^ 3ev flCB

mert MCpT

va, na Ba, HE

ga, ra,

u r r^

311

6cn 6eH

na. Ha,

nc - po He - no

gre rp€

mf

I H

^m H.

za.

im

-M.

Vf BH

dev

mert MepT

ACB

3ev flCB

va, na Ba, Ha

rJ ga, ra.

i' J >'

s vf BH

ri

mert McpT

va, na Ba, Ha

mf

ga. ra.

^

:sr: ne - po HC - no

Ben 6eB

gre rpc

^

; 0; nc - po He - no

na. Ha,

i'

^ ^

6cn 6CH

grc rpc

-o-

:xsi

—fr~ J

H

VI BH

na. Ha,

I

-o-

^

S

cicv ACB

tfjcrt MCpT

va, Ba,

V

V

na Ha

ga, ra,

4

4 i ->

nc - po HC - n o

—o—

gre rpc

6cn 6eH

na. Ha,

English Translation: and he gazed upon Thee dead, naked, and unburied. Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

As seen in the above examples, moments of poignant lyricism set against the backdrop of dense harmonic textures supported by the very low bass lines characterize most of the chomses from Passion Week, only two of which are in minor keys. Other chomses are reminiscent of the Creed from the Second Liturgy, Opus 29, incorporating a solo voice on the body of the text supported by sustained choral textures u ith brief responses by the choir at the end of each phrase, as in the third choms, "In Thy Kingdom," that also incorporates an alto soloist, shown in Example 5.3.

120

Example 5.3 "In Thy Kingdom" Opus 58, No. 3, Measures 14-18 14

^

^

^

m

=5^^

^

J — m •

»«

^

Bla - ihc-fti plachu5hchiyi. yako Ifyi u - le - shat - li'a. BJia xe-HH ruiaTTinHH. «KO TWH y - I T - uiar • ca r^_ P

^rrk

I. '1

^- S

~::r-

a..

Po- mfa - n i . no - Ma - HH.

OH.

lF=r

a.. AH.

m

^

ai. AH.

^gl

^

Po- rhia - nf. n o - Ma - HH P X

^ nas. Hac.

nas. Hac,

^

a.. aH.

GfKJ - $poTo - cnoii:

—•—• aPo- mfa • n(_ n o • M a - HH .

-xf-

Gho spoTo - cno-

-X

-•—,.-•—

Po- mfa - m.. n o - Ma • HH P , ,

—^ —TT"

Gho - . .1 J

zsn

'"f y»8.

u V

f

Al - Ii - lu AJI - ;iH - Jiy

Al - Ii T; - lu 1.'.^ Al An - JiH - Jiy

~~

w

gif'

^ If' ' J ' t 1

H

331

y»^ I.

f

v'^ji"! ? r

r

Al - li - lii An - HH - ny

1

H

1.

Copyright 2 0 0 1 , Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

The final choms from the All-Night Vigil, "To Thee, Victorious Leader," demonstrates not only Gretchaninoffs effective use of a double choir texture, but also his tendency to set particularly joyous texts with rapidly moving parallel sixths against constant pedal tones, seen in Example 5.8. In this example, the heavy ostinato in the altos and baritones remain constant through most of the choms, that when combined with the forte dynamic and the instmction of Maestoso and sempre pesante, effectively set the scene of a triumphant march.

126

Example 5.8 "To Thee, The Victorious Leader" Opus 59, No. 10 Measures 1-4 Vzbrannoy voyev63e

To Thee, the Victorious Leader

Maestoso. J = 68 ^

^ Soprano

^

W

^

I

r r r r r

»

Vzhran - ooy BsCpaH - Hod Alto

O

5

TcDor

Soprano

yc - v6 - 3c po - 6c e - BO - AC no - 6e -

^

pi^

J

r

^ tsp e

P^

,J J

=3=3C

r r r T r cj ^

Vzbiin - noy B36paH - Hoft Bau

vo BO

g

vo - 3c BO - AC

vo - ye BO - e

po - 6e no • 6e

31

J=,

Maestoso, cJ = 68

r^;M4

ttmprt ptuutte Alto

j''"'""•

j

j

Vzbran - noy BaCpan - uoi

2

U

j

vo - ye BO - e

'i -

vo BO

j

^

^

de

po no

he 6c

AC

O

a: Tenor

•ft''''•'»« ^ Vzlxin BsCpau Vzbran B36paH /-

Bau

'^'••iSl.i! J

f - noy - uod - noy - HoA

F

1

=3= ye e ye e

vo BO VO BO

i

^

Vzbran B36paH

noy. HOfl.

xr:

VO BO

VO

3c

BO

-

temprt

i

po no

AC

pesante

—

f

i

vo BO

English Translation: To Thee, the victonous Leader of triumphant hosts... Copyright 2001, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved

12'

6e 6e

ye e

While Gretchaninoff gives brief references to the Passion Week and to the Vespers in his autobiography, he gives substantial emphasis not only to his Second Liturgy, as noted above, but also to the cantata "K\alite Boga" ("Laudate Deum"), opus 65: In my liturgies, the Passion Week Music, the X'espers, and se\eral large and complex choral works, I had exhausted all the technical resources of choral writing a cappella. What was to be my next step? By what method could I enhance the expressive power of sacred music? My first work of instmmental church music was a psalm for choms with orchestra. No Russian composer had as yet attempted a composition of this nature; while in Western Europe every composer, whether important or not, had, as a matter of course, written a Mass, a Requiem, or a Passion for voices with instmments... I repeatedly stated, orally and in writing, that our church ritual would gain tremendously by the introduction of the organ or physharmanica into the church service... The Russian Church prays daily for the reunion of the Catholic and Orthodox faiths, but this reunion is hardly possible w ithout mutual concessions. The mere suggestion of introducing the organ into the Russian Orthodox Church is a major heresy in the eyes of the keepers of the traditions. Yet the Psalmist sings: Praise God in His sanctuary'. Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet. Praise Him with the psalten- and harp, Praise Him with timbrel and dance. Praise Him with stringed instruments and organs. Praise Him upon the high sounding cymbals. Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord. Gretchaninoff then recalls his brief experiences with the worship services of the Catholic Church, and his feelings of envy that resulted from being denied the use of instmmental music in the Russian Orthodox Church. Then Gretchaninoff continues: The psalm Praise Ye the Lord, quoted above, was the first rcHgious composition I wrote with orchestral accompaniment. Later I wrote music to the '^ Gretchaninoff, A A Life 119. The italics are Gretchaninoffs, and the passage in italics ib from Psalm 150:1,3-6.

128

psalms Bless the Lord, O My Soul, and The Heavens Declare the Glor\ of God. scored for a large choms and an invisible children's choms behind the stage. These three works were later incorporated into a cantata Laudate Deum. performed for the first time on March 9, 1915, in Moscow under the direction of Serge Koussevitsky. To relieve the monotony of continuous choral singing. I later added to my cantata a psalm for tenor solo. Show Me Thy Ways, O Lord.^^ Gretchaninoff described the premier of the cantata in its complete and "final version" with the tenor solo in Bmssels on December 7, 1932, where it received favorable reviews. Since the musical score to this cantata is somewhat inaccessible,'^ the following generalizations of style can be made from the premier recording of the work b\ the Russian State Symphonic Capella.^^ The three movements of this cantata maintain a choral texture within the framework of a densely scored Romantic orchestral tapestry. Even with the employment of a hidden children's choir, the contrast of choral texture is not so prevalent here as in the earlier a cappella works; however, the overall contrast in texture is achieved to a much greater degree through the multitude of tone colors in the orchestra. Further, the tendency toward a rhythmic style is reflective of the joyous nature of the text. The use of parallel thirds and sixths does not appear to be prevalent in this setting, but rather, a tendency toward contrary motion among the voice parts. Similar to his earlier sacred works, however, Gretchaninoff employs great contrasts in both harmonic and melodic contours, the latter of which is also marked by moments of powerftil lyricism shaped by extremes in dsnamics to suit the text. Moments of homo-

'" Gretchamnoff, My Life 120. " Morosan, telephone interview, 24 August. 2002. Morosan reported that the score to the cantata Kvlalita Boga is only available in its manuscript form in Moscow. -° Valeri Polyansky, cond.. Symphony No. 3 and Cantata "Praise the Lord," by .Alexandre Gretchaninoff, Russian State Symphonic Cappella, Russian State Symphonic Orchestra, Chandos, 1999

129

rhythmic choral chant in static harmony also appear, a trait consistent with the style of his earlier a cappella works. Also like the earlier works, the prevailing choral texture is homophonic, sometimes animated with moving parts in the choir and orchestra set against the predominantly chordal texture. The Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, became the second sacred work of Gretchaninoffs to employ instmmental accompaniment, and the first and onh Di\ine Liturgy for the Russian Orthodox Church to be scored with instmmental accompaniment. As detailed in Chapter II, Gretchaninoff composed the Domestic Liturgy in the middle of the worst part of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, when trenches and gunfire were commonplace in the streets of Moscow. About the compositional process, Gretchaninoff recalls, "I decided to write a simple sacred song for a single voice with piano accompaniment, to the words 'O Holy God.' Later I added several liturgic chants to it and put them together under the ancient name Demestvennaya, that is. Domestic Liturgy."^' Over the next few years, Gretchaninoff orchestrated the accompaniment and added choral numbers to the original solos. The revised version w as performed for the first time in Paris on March 25, 1926, under Gretchaninoffs baton. Gretchaninoff comments on the work, "The bitterness of the Hallelujah in this Liturgy is explained by my horrible experiences during this period," and later adds, "Of the thirteen numbers of the new version of the Domestic Liturgy, the most effective, in my opinion, is the Litany with Threefold Responses..."" The "Threefold Responses" are from the Augmented

-'Gretchamnoff, .\/\L//f 121 '- Gretchamnoff. A/v Life 121, 123

130

Litany, in which Gretchaninoff transcribed the actual chant for the Deacon against the instmmental accompaniment, with the rhythmic choral "Threefold Response" entenng on the last syllable of text for the Deacon, shown in Example 5.9. Each of the eight responses is very similar to the seventh response shown in the example below, \\ ith only slight modifications in dynamics, harmony, and rhythm. The innovation here includes the carefril coordination between the chant of the Deacon and the choral responses. The overall style of the Domestic Liturgy closely resembles the style of his earlier a cappella sacred works, utilizing mostly homophonic choral textures with extreme contrasts in dynamics. Like the earlier works, the few joyful moments of the Di\ ine Liturgy text are also expressed with the use of rapidly moving parallel thirds and sixths set against sustained pedal tones, seen in Example 5.10, which shows the choral parts from the final measures from the work.

13

Example 5.9 "The Augmented Litany,'" Opus 79, No. 6; Measures 55-61

ra-bov pa-6oB

XOB

Bo - ihl - iji, 6o - XH • Rx

bra -u - i svti-ta- go Spa-n - H cBH-Ti-ro

P

ma k - go. Ml ce - ro

/

spo - i ! po - da - hri. aio-iiB. wa- wk-rcfX,

Gh6 To

J /

i^ j> at

n j n J

^ Gho To

1^ ^

spo - di. po - Ai • hry, Cao-Vfi,

i

rjXi

Gho Fo it

a'

M

SS

p pp

-

Gho To

-

Gho To

spo-di. po - mi

spo - di. po - mi - luy. cao-flH. ao-HM-Jiyt,

Gbo fo

spo-di, po-ifii-luy, cno-an, no-Mii-.nylJ,

Gho fo

aio-;iM, DO

MM

spo-di, po-(hi-luy, cno-oH, no-MR-ziyA,

Gho To

spo-di, po

Ai

cnO-ON. DO - MM

DO • M«-.rTyt,

^ spo - di. po - tbi - luy, cao-tm. m> • ta-rrrk.

if

V

a

M ry

U V V ^

^ Ye-shchemb-Iiin-tA o pto-do-no E • toe

Gbo To

^

MO^TDIM-CJi

O lUIO-AO-BO

h»y.

CnO-ilB, DO - MM

spo-di, po - Ai

luy..

luy.. JTfU.

English Translation: SOLO: ...the servants of God, the brethren of this holy temple CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. SOLO: Agam we pray for mercy... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. .Ml Rights Reserved.

132

Example 5.10 Conclusion of the Liturgy, Opus 79, No. 15, Measures 54-57 Alkgro ouestoso

ff •J

^

'. niDO

U'l 11Ic ga - ya

MHO

ra - X

IZ

J^ J I J

r 'II r u\

r » [g!=t=F

mno - ga-ya le • ta, na MHO - ra - a nt - Ta. ua

t2u na Ta._iu

- ^ J ;|| J

-H J

n

cjr r

nuxS - ga-ya le - ta. MHO - ra - a ne. - ra.

I J

^

*

4v_ • \

I! U ' LLLf L f L / " C J a C J C j ' C J C j : j p ^ gar- ya_

mno MHO

^

^

r

t

taTI. na

mno - ga-ya Ic - ta, na MHO - ra - a JK - Ta, na

JK

ta, Ta,

mno - ga-ya \c MBo - r a - x JK

r r if

^

ga - ya ra - a.

na Ba

ta, na Ta, Ba

mno - ga-ya le - tt. MHO - ra • a Tie - Ta,

moo - ga-ya le MHO - ra-i JK

Fy=y

£ mno MHO

-

ga ra

ya a

ta. Ta,

le /IC

-

ta, ra.

na Ha

English Translation: for many years Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

Unlike the accompanied cantata discussed above, Gretchaninoff writes very conservatively for the orchestra in the Domestic Liturgy, which generally either doubles the choral parts or provides very simple harmonic support for the soloist. The alternation of solo writing with choral fragments provides expressive contrast, and the various tone colors combined with the harmonic motion in the orchestra add to the mono-toned chants of the soloist. However, throughout many of the movements, the overall style could as well have been written for a cappella mixed chorus, with the only loss being that of the different tone colors provided by the orchestra, and the very few moments of idiomatic orchestral scoring. Example 5.11 shows an example of the instrumental writing as the orchestra accompanies the soloist on the Trisagion H\Tnn, "Holy God!" .As seen in this example, which actually demonstrates more venturesome instrumental scoring from the

133

work, shown here for organ, the instrumental writing in the Domestic Liturgy indeed remains very conservative. Of the shift from a cappella to the accompanied style in the Domestic Liturgy, Morosan writes, "By adding instruments in this work, he became the first composer to clearly indicate his intention to write nonliturgical sacred choral music, since the accompaniment violated the traditional prohibition of the Orthodox Church against musical instruments of any kind."

However, due to the conser\'ative nature of the

Domestic Liturgy in comparison to the accompanied cantata Laudate Deum, and considering Gretchaninoffs outspokeimess on the issue of adding instruments to Orthodox worship described in Chapter IV, it would appear that Gretchaninoff actually intended this Liturgy setting to be performed during worship in the Russian Orthodox Church. Furthermore, Morosan also notes that Gretchaninoff gave clear instructions for omitting certain choral responses from the litanies of the Domestic Liturgy during a concert performance.^"* Therefore, since Gretchaninoff composed choral responses to accompany the litanies exclusively for a liturgical setting, it may be concluded that he actually intended the work to be sung during the worship of the Russian Orthodox Church. This view is strengthened by the fact that Gretchaninoff formally proposed the use of instruments to the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in December of 1917, as discussed in Chapter IV.

"^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244. '•* Morosan, Choral Performance 303.

134

Example 5.11 "Trisagion Hymn" Opus 79, No. 4 Measures 9-23 Mistico

.iriii t

i J Svft-rfy

M

CBH-TNfl

' ^f Bo Bo

r

' ^

zhc xc.

Svd - tiy Caa -Tbii)

SCfi-tiy Bes-jrneft-nly, po Csa-Tufl 6c3-cMcpT-Hi>ifl, no

MM

Krcp Kpen

Svft . dy Bcs CBI -Tbifl 6C3 -

by, KMfi,

*)

*

i

f ^

Kfcp - kiy, Kpcn - KHfl

luy jryn

Svft - dy Hac.

CBR-Tfalfl

Bo - rhc Bo - xc.

English Translation: Holy God, Holy Almighty, Holy Immortal, Have mercy on us! Copyright 2002. Musica Russica. Copied with Permission All Rights Reserved.

135

Furthermore, in his dissertation on Gretchaninoffs Missa Oecumenica, Holmes argues that if the Revolution of 1917 had not occurred, the Russian Orthodox Church mi^ht ha\ e eventually accepted instrumental music.^^ Ironically, according to Gretchaninoffs o\\x\ writings, had the Revolution not occurred, the Domestic Liturgy would not have been written, though perhaps a different accompanied liturgy would have e\ entually resulted. Even so, considering the convictions held by church officials at the time of the Domestic Liturgy's inception, Morosan is accurate in stating, "By writing the work \\ ith instrumental accompaniment, however, Grechaninov eliminated the possibilit}' of its performance in the context of Orthodox worship.""^^ In summary, Gretchaninoffs overall sacred choral style essentially was based on the ancient chant, even if specific works did not literally quote specific chant tunes. In most instances, the thematic material of individual choruses resembled the ancient chants, though they actually were freely composed, using the chant as source material. Thus, Gretchaninoff typically used actual chant tunes as a starting point for thematic development rather than as a foundation for the formal structure.'^^ In accordance with his "Brief Review" written in 1932, asymmetrical rhythms were employed frequently in these works to properly set liturgical prose with appropriate textual declamation. While the harmonic motion usually was set with simple tonal progressions, great contrast was achieved with melodic movement and thematic development. He tended to employ highly organized formal patterns, with textural alternations that varied betw cen

-^Holmes 42 ^* Morosan, Choral Performance 303. '^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244.

136

polyphony, densely scored "symphonized" chords, and sections of homophonic choral recitative that was sometimes animated with passing tones. Contrasts benveen upper and lower voices, solo and choral voices, and double choirs also appear. WTiile literal musical expressions of specific words or phrases almost ne\er appear, GretchaninotT rather tends to express the overall mood for an entire section of text. Specifically, the prevalence of doubled voice parts, pedal tones, and the use of parallel thirds and sixths in brisk rhythms for texts that are joyous in nature remain common to Gretchaninoffs choral style. In short, Gretchaninoffs sacred choral style that continued throughout his long career essentially began with his sacred works composed in pre-revolutionary Russia. The general characteristics of that style, displayed in the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29, continued throughout his vast array of sacred works that were composed over the next four decades. The facts that Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy received such immediate success, and that Gretchaninoff devotes several paragraphs to this work in his autobiography to the neglect of many of his other significant choral works, prove the significance of the Second Liturgy in helping to establish his own sacred choral style as well as the overall style of the new Russian choral school.

137

CHAPTER \'I OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29

As noted in Chapter III, Gretchaninoff became only the third composer smce Tchaikovsky to compose the Divine Liturgy as a unified musical genre, setting \ irtualK all of the items from the Liturgy to newly composed music for the choir. Following Tchaikovsky's famous Liturgy completed in 1878, Archangel'sky composed three liturgies in the 1890s, followed by Gretchaninoffs first Liturgy in 1898 and the Second Liturgy in 1902. As Archangel'sky's settings were largely based on Tchaikovsky's pattern and style, Morosan notes the historical importance of the Second Liturgy in the development of the new Russian sacred choral style: "Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, Opus 29... represents a marked evolution in terms of musical st\le and serves as an important historical link between the settings of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff.. Gretchaninoff became the first Russian composer in modem times to create a work that attempted to fashion the entire Divine Liturgy into a single large-scale artistic and musical design."'

Analyses Though somewhat based on Tchaikovsky's setting in terms of the coherency of musical style, many movements from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy proved groundMorosan, "Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

138

breaking, paving the way for friture development that was brought to culmination in the two major sacred works of Rachmaninoff, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 31 (1910) and the All-Night Vigil, Opus 37 (1915). As shown in Appendix E, much of the Second Liturgy is made up of solo chants in alternation with choral responses, as in the litanies. This followed the regimen for the proper texts and form of the Divine Liturg\' as discussed in Chapter III, and followed Tchaikovsky's model in setting freely composed music to the choral responses.^ Though compared to the rest of the work, the choral responses from the litanies are musically less interesting, mostly incorporating block chords and other simple homophonic textures, to the Russian living in the early twentieth century, the addition of the freely written choral responses to the solo chant most certainly added a new dimension to the service. When the full meaning of the text is understood, and the choral responses are placed together with the solo chants as intended, the result may be aesthetically pleasing even to the non-Russian. The first movement of the Liturgy, the "Great Litany" from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, serves as such an example. Example 6.1 shows the opening of the Liturgy with the solo chants of the deacon and celebrant, followed by the choral "Amen." The solo chants for the Deacon and Celebrant are characteristic of the style for all of the solo chants: either a single note is sung for the duration of the chant (Example 6.1, Deacon), or a slight derivation in pitch

^ Appendix E presents the entire liturgy text as set in the Second Liturgy. Throughout the chapter, the liturgy text is referenced to Appendix E. ' Morosan, " Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix. Morosan notes that Tchaikovsky was the first composer to begin the Liturgy with freely composed choral responses to the Great Litan>. Prior to this time, the choral responses alternated on I-V -I progressions, before the final cadential l-I\'-\'^-I progression on the text "To Thee, O Lord," and a final progression to the major tonic chord on the ending ",\men "

139

is employed on the more important words, using the melodic formula at the approach to the cadence (Example 6.1. Celebrant). In these chant transcriptions for the soloists, the rhythms are not intended to be strictly observed, but rather are intended to show relatixe duration according to the natural syllabic stress of the text.^

Example 6.1 Solo Chants, Choral Response at Beginning of Great Litany DEACON (Stu)

Comodo.

^3= Bli - fO - - Pen 6aa - ro - aio - »ca

Gho-spo-da. To - cno-jia.

bla - go ilo • 9en &na • ro - cao - BCB

JSL 0

m

Bla - go - slo - v(, Ejia - ro • CJIO • BH

m

m

m

m

du - she mo - ya, fly - me MO - «,

Bo pOTurn |l Pimo

iimiyl

English Translation: Bless the Lord, O My Soul, Blessed art Thou... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserv ed.

After this brief antiphon, a little litany follows, and then the traditional second antiphon on the first few verses from Psalm 146 is presented with the same thematic material as the first antiphon, though voiced a fifth higher in B major, compared to the E major tonality of the first antiphon. It is interesting here that Gretchaninoff includes the second antiphon from Psalm 146, when most composers in both eighteenth and nineteenth-century practice did not set the text at all, but rather set the minor doxology that traditionally followed it as an introducfion to the tropanon, "Only begotten Son."** As the first major choral hymn in the Second Liturgy, "Glory... Only Begotten Son" also became one of the best-known works in the United States in its English

Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" \c

142

translation.^ Furthermore, this hymn also tends to be discussed most often in the few English-language summaries of Gretchaninoff s sacred choral style. For example, N. P. Brill's work praises Gretchaninoff as being one of two composers who "felt the greatness of the second antiphon.. ."^ Brill describes this movement as "free and spontaneous..." and "much more plural-voiced" than previous settings.^ John Seagard's thesis centers on five hymns from the Second Liturgy, including "Glory... only Begotten Son," and dwells on actual melodic and harmonic structures, though his work on formal schemes and stylistic devices offers a more important contribufion to the study of the \vork.'° In his brief description of the overall sacred style of Gretchaninoff, Morosan points out the strong tendency toward "chant-like" motives that became e\ident in the Second Liturgy, poinfing to "Glory to the Father... Only-begotten Son" as an example: Between [Gretchaninoffs] first Liturgy and the second. Opus 29, a noticeable stylistic change occurred: in the latter, Grechaninov appears to have "discovered" the melodic potenfial of chant-like mofives. Closer examination shows, however, that the connection between Grechaninov's motives and actual chant melodies is very slim: it is as if the composer was shown some znamennyi melodies, distilled from them a few essential rhythmic and melodic characteristics, and proceeded to write an enfire setting of the Liturgy ordinary without pursuing a closer familianty with either the sources of chant or its performance. His quasi-chant melodies, such as the almost dancelike motives used throughout "Slava... Edinorodyi Syne" (Glory... Only-begotten Son) and elsewhere in Opus 29 display a regularity of meter and periodicity of structure that is seldom encountered in genuine znamennyi chant."

' Reid, 236-237. In his survey of sixty-rv\o college and'or community choir directors, "Only Begotten Son" by Gretchaninoff was listed with a group of other sacred Russian selections that had been performed often. * N.P. Brill, History of Russian Church .Music, y5 ma pocc marc.

m=^

=C "

^

I

nc - pre HC npc

lozh noya.

^^i—i-

zzn

^=F nc - pre HC - npe -

lozh nox

m

m

d

no

vo - chc - lo

HO

BO

HC

ve

.no

BC

X-J-

chj - vny

sia.

HH - VUii

CH,

»

i r r r r m

*

no

vo - chc - lo

-

ve - chi - viy

no

BO - MC - n o

-

BC

-

MH - BUA

^ ill. cu,

-4-

^

a

~rr

-xr vo •o

a che MC

-trio no

«

ve

—* 9— chi - viy

BC

MH - BUH

rasp pacn

—*sfa. cs.

^ rasp pacn rasp pacn

—c— nly

g nly

via ca

—

sia ca

niy HbiA

I

—

(Sfa) (CI)

ci

PL. rasp pacn

my HUH

English Translation: .. .who without change didst become man, and was crucified... Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

In Seagard's analyses of "Glory to the Father... Only Begotten Son," that he inaccurately identifies as a movement from Vespers, Opus 59, instead of from the Second Liturgy, Seagard presents an example of Gretchaninoffs frequent doubling of voice parts, which he dubs as "a more or less orchestral treatment of the chorus."'^ In the "Editor's Notes" to the separately published movement by Musica Russica, Morosan states that the doubling of voices would be a feature that characterized much of the music both from Gretchaninoff and from his contemporaries in Moscow: "Like other composers works at the Moscow Synodal School (e.g., Kastalsky, Chesnokov, Nikolsky), [Gretchaninoff] used a rich palette of choral textures, ranging from stark unison (sometimes doubled in

'' Seagard 54.

14^

two or three octaves...), to 'choral symposium' in eight to twelve di\erse parts."'' .-Xs shown in Example 6.6, Gretchaninoff employs the doubling of voice parts quite frequently at moments of dynamic climax to emphasize a specific section of text. B\ comparison with the measures immediately preceding shown in Example 6.5 abo\ e. an example of the extremes in dynamic movement may be observed, as a rapid crescendo occurs from pianissimo to fortissimo, that according to the composer's literal directions, occurs within one measure. Example 6.6 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Measures 38-42 38

m fr.

^

nx:

in

zhe,. xe..

zhe,

Hri - sle

Bo

xe,

XpH - CTC

Bo

••

3"

#

zhe,

Hri - sic

B6

xe,

XpH - CTC

Bo

zhe,. xe,.

fl'T^r t ^ ^1 i

-*—t^

^

po - pra

-

viy,

ye

CMCp - TH - K) CMepTl>_ DO - Opa

smer - u - yu smcrt

-

BblA,

t

mff.

smer

•

* ^

^

5

ti - yu smcrt

i

p

po - pra

-

v\y,

ye

CMCp - TH - K) CMCprb. HO - Hpa

-

BUfl,

C

i' i ^ i 0 . i - i i U \'P -'v U J i i ' - ^ ^ ^

zhe.

Hri - ste

86

xc,

XpH - CTC

Bo

zhe, Hri - ste

36

xe,

Bo

^

XpH - CTC

zhc xe,. zhe,. xe,.

smer - U - yu smcrt p o - pra CMCp - TH - K) c M c p r b . DO - opa

ff

i f=

33:

^

T" ex

—V—

zhc,. xc..

• — #

t

smer - ti yu smcrt po - pra CMcp - TH - K) CMepTi»_ no - npa

viy, BUfi,

ye e

^—^

viy, suit.

ye c

3S

English Translation: ...(crucified) Christ God, trampling down death by death... Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. .-Ml Rights Reserved.

'^ Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Glory... Only Begotten Son," by Alexander Gretchaninoff (1902, Madison: Musica Russica, 1997).

146

•

Following this hymn, another little litany leads into the third antiphon centered on the text from the Beattitudes.^"^ This antiphon, similar in style to the pre\ious antiphons. is set to a simplified chordal texture that essentially remains on D major and B minor, with an occasional E minor chord, functioning harmonically as the tonic, submediant, and supertonic—a harmonic emphasis that remains prevalent throughout the work, particularh in the simpler movements. Following the seventeen lines from the Beattitudes that are sung on the same choral recitative that is repeated for each line of text, a concluding chordal doxology is chanted with the same chordal patterns in D major, setting up the tonality for the third movement. The third movement, "Come, let us worship," was also translated for performance in English, and has become known to American choir directors since the 1930s. Beginning with the introit verse from Psalm 95:6, this particular text served to accompany the entrance of the clergy with the Gospel Book, an action that was seen as symbolic of Christ's first appearing to his disciples. Morosan notes that due to this symbolism, accompanied by the stately blessings given by the celebrant, the mood is particularly solemn and reverent.'^ Even so, as Morosan writes, "the conventional nineteenth-century musical setting of the text that supports this rich liturgical symbolism

''• The "beatimdes" is the common title given to the passage of scripmre from Matthcu 5 3-11, as each verse begins with the phrase "blessed are..." " N. Lindsay Norden's English adaptation of "Come, and Let us Worship" was arranged by Richard Harding, and published in 1929 by The Boston Music Company '* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xc-xci.

147

consisted of a simple chordal recitative... predominantly a D-minor triad and its dominant, moving to the C-major triad and ending on its dominant. G."' In Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, the chorus begins immediately following the opening exclamation from the Deacon on the text. "Come, let us worship." in an Allegretto duple meter that may be described as an animated homophonic texture that centers on the supertonic scale degree in D major, resembling a transposed Dorian mode (Example 6.7). While some semblance of the nineteenth- century ecclesiastical style may be observed in the minor tonality of the opening chords, the prevailing style is that of a freely written, innovative movement. The tendency toward contrary motion between the bass line and the melodic theme in the soprano line represents another feature that characterizes a typical style trait of Gretchaninoff s part-writing, also shown in the example below. Seaguard claims that the melodic descent of the fourth in the soprano line in the third measure is a word-painting technique to express "fall dovvji." \et further study of the Second Liturgy as well as the other pre-Revolutionary sacred choral works of Gretchaninoff would reveal that this technique is so exceptional, that an\ rendering of it would be unintentional. While Gretchaninoff diligently attempted to set effective moods for entire sections of text, specific melodic, harmonic, or other musical schemes ucre not shaped by any one specific word; but rather. Gretchaninoffs concem tended toward formal aspects of the music itself—a trait that also will be seen in later movements from the Second Liturgy.

" Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsk>," xci. '* Seaguard 56. The literal translation of the text here is actually "fall down and bow down

148

Example 6.7 "Come, let us worship" Allegretto. "Btf

i

Soprano

i Pn - i ripH-H

fe f

Alto

)b=¥

Teoof

*

0£

0

0-

^

-rr-

df - le, po - klo - nim flH - TC,

pn

n o - KJIO - HHM

CH,

^

Pfi - i IlpH-H

HpH-H

npH

-•

ai. te. po

klo - mm

TC,

KJIO - HHM

no

m

Pfi - i

'-
-

rJ

p ^

^

^

film

sft,

i

pfi - pa

n o - KJIO - HHM

CH,

H

npH-na

R i - i - ^i - le. po - klo ripH - H

^

3cm, pfi ACM, npu

pa na

English Translation: Come, let us worship, and fall d o w n . . . Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Following this opening thematic material, Gretchaninoff again turns to a section predominantly made up of doubled vocal lines for the "Alleluia," centering on the Dominant A major chord that sets up the sustained D major tonic chord on the final Alleluia, shown in Example 6.8.

19

Two prominent stylistic traits from the overall work

may be seen from this example that also may be observed in his later choral works from the period discussed in Chapter V: (1) doubled, or in this case, tripled octaves marked fortissimo, a trait that often appears during more solemn moments of the liturgy; (2) faster moving parallel thirds or sixths, a trait that often is employed to express the sections of text that tend to be more hopeful or joyful. Furthermore, Gretchaninoff will

19

Seagard 5 5 . Seagard labels the example the "'Alleluia' figure."

149

1

recycle this exact thematic material in another portion of the Liturgy to provide unit\- to the overall work, another irmovation from the Second Liturgy. Example 6.8 The "Alleluia theme" from Movements ~3 and =6 13

;-i' ;

I

Al AJI

jsr

lu

t

Ay

JIH

i

1 H

^

Ii

lu

1

al

L

Jiy

ya,

AH

H

a,

aji

AH

'TI I m

in'O! \l''Qi

Al

Ii

lu

1

AJI

JIH

Jiy

H

33=

ni

i:

lu Ay

I

ya,

al

Ii

H

1,

aji

JIH

Jf

ya.

3

Ii JIH

^

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

After the Alleluia, the Deacon intones the text, "For thou art holy...," followed by a three part choral response from solo treble voices in a chordal texture in D major. Following the audible portion of the prayer uttered by the Deacon, the treble voices sing a slow "Amen" cadence, again temporarily tonicizing the second scale degree that sets up a repeat of the opening thematic material for the Trisagion hymn on the text, "Holy God! Holy Almighty! Holy Immortal..." that also emphasizes the supertonic chord of E minor. By the third repetition of this text, the music builds to a fortissimo climax that approaches the outer ranges of the sopranos and basses in a section that is marked maestoso (Example 6.9).

150

Example 6.9 "Holy GodI" from Movement #3 maestoso

Enghsh Translation: us. Holy God, Holy... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Two measures later, placed in the middle of this climactic section is a rapidly moving chordal chant for all voices of the choir stating the doxology on the G major subdominant chord. Next, the buoyant opening thematic material briefly returns almost in exact repetition for the final statement of "Holy God, Holy Almighty...", followed by a fma] fortissimo, maestoso climax that develops out of the same thematic material as the previous climax shown in Example 6.9. Thus, the third movement closely resembles Tchaikovsky's Liturgy in the frequent recurrence of the opening thematic matenal. particularly the use of it on the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy God

M20

Proceeding with the order of the Liturgy as presented in Table 3.1, the next section to follow was the psalm verses, known as the prokeimenon, sung in alternation 20

Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xci.

151

between the choir and a priest and serving to precede the reading of scripture. .A.fter the scripture was read, another set of psalm verses was chanted, ending with an ".\lleluia" refrain that served as another prokeimena before the Gospel reading. Morosan states that by the late nineteenth century, the Alleluia was treated as a conclusion to the reading of scripture, the psalm verses were omitted, and the three-fold repetition of ".-Mleluia" was only sung once, instead of the prescribed three times, as a refrain between the psalm verses.•^^ Thus, similar to Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Gretchaninoff employs the same format for the fourth movement, with a simple three-fold "Alleluia" choral response to the chant of the deacon who intones readings from scripture. Typical to liturgy settings of the nineteenth century, each choral response uses similar thematic material. A series of litanies that makes up the fifth movement concludes the first major division of the Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of the Word. In this movement, Gretchaninoff presents the Augmented Litany followed by the Litanies for the Catechumens and for the Faithful. For the most part, this movement is similar in style to the Great Litany, with the choral response set in alternation to the solo chant portions of text, and with an economy of harmonic motion. Here, however, Gretchaninoff rhythmically animates the choral chant with alternating entrances and rhythms from the tenor and bass \ oices, shown in Example 6.10.

"' Morosan, "Peter Ichaikovsky" xci

152

Example 6.10 The Augmented Litany 26

^rp LJ' Gbo ro

=fc

=^=P

spo - di, po - mf cno-AH, no - MH

n^^W^ Gho To

i

^ ^ luy, Gbo Jiyfi, To

'p

luy. Gho nyA, To

spo - di. po - mf cno-AH, no - MB i^marcato

^ Gho-spo-di, po-mi-luy. To-cno-jiH, no-MH-Jiyfi. Gbo /To

Spo-di, po cno-iiH, no

luy,

M

Gfao

spo-di, po - &{

ro

cno-jlH, DO - MH

jiyt.

Gbo To

spo cno Gtao-spo-di. po-mi a ^ To - cno-jiH, DO-iai

^ spo-di. pocno-jH. no-

i^nu'

spo-di. pocno-aM. no-

^

di. ilB.

hiy. Gho-spo-di. pojyTt, y ro-coojpu no-

luy. jiyft,

Gbo-spo-di, pofo - cno-in, no-

English Translation: Lord, have mercy. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The sixth movement, the "Cherubic Hymn," comprises not onh a significant part of the Divine Liturgy, but also one of the more innovati\e choruses from Gretchaninoff In its liturgical context, the Cherubic Hymn begins the most solemn portion of the Liturgy, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and accompanies many significant actions of the clergy, including the censing, the recitation of prayers, and the Great Entrance involving the transferal of the Communion Gifts to the altar table. The intonation of petitions b\ the Celebrant is echoed by a choral "Amen," an element that necessitates the interruption of the Hymn before its conclusion." In the performance notes to this separate!) published movement by Musica Russica, Morosan adds that Gretchaninoffs Cherubic

Morosan. " Sergei RachmaninofH"" K

\>3

Hymn "departs from the typical formal scheme of A. A. A'. B. found in the settings of Bortniansky, Glinka, and many others, but develops an inno\ ative structure: .A. B. A. B. C. The triumphant 'Alleluia's' at the end use thematic material found elsewhere in the Divine Liturgy-another hitherto unprecedented device.""^ This "Alleluia theme" that comprises the C section of the Cherubic Hymn as outlined by Morosan was pre\ ioush employed in the third movement (Example 6.8 above). Another significant feature of the Cherubic Hymn is the use of imitation that prevails in both the A and B theme from the opening measures (Example 6.11), a somewhat rare characteristic from the Second Liturgy as well as his later choral works from the period. The tempo marking of Lento e misterioso precisely follows the ecclesiastical requirements to allow adequate time for all of the necessary actions to take place, including the silent and audible chanting of petitions by the Celebrant.

'' Vladimir Morosan, ed.. "The Cherubic Hymn" b> Alexander GretchaninofT(1^)02, Madison: Musica Russica, 1994).

154

Example 6.11 Cherubic Hymn

English Translation: Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The Litany of Supplication presented in the seventh movement, as in the pre\ ious litanies, utilizes a chordal chant of the choir in C major. Unlike the previous litan>. the style here is chordal and static with much repetition. The eighth movement presents the most celebrated of the Second Liturgy during the time of Gretchaninoff. the Creed. Even with all of the attention it received after its premier. Norden offered it the highest praise fifteen years after its premier: "[The Creed] of Gretchaninoff. for alto solo, with a choral background of eight parts is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, that has e\er been composed in an\ countr\ at an\ time. ,.24 Example 6.12 shows a portion from the movement, demonstrating the slow 1\ moving

-•*»N.

Lindsay Norden "A Brief Study of the Russian Liturg\ and its Music " MUSIL J/ {Jujricrly 5 (JuK 1919)436.

l.V^

chordal harmon\ set against the solo voice that presents all of the text. This example also represents the style of the entire movement.

Example 6.12 Portion from the Creed

Ate Soto

vk - af - ye gfe - hP*u e • m - e rpe - xo*.

Cki D.

vo-dde-ie Bo-acpe-ce

y« a

Acrt nepr

Savoao

Team

^

m

^ «e

du Ay

IXK:

y«

»

rye

English Translation CHOIR: 1 acknowledge SOLO: (for the remission of sins.) I look for the resurrection of the dead, and... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Even a thorough examination of the Creed might cause one to question v\h\ such a simple movement was ever praised so highly. Perhaps this answer lies in the review of its premier, presented in Appendix C and discussed in Chapter V. combined with the context surrounding its inception. Performing the same work a centur\' later and from a tradition far removed from Russian Orthodoxy, the same music would not have the same significance. Morosan notes that compositions of the Creed during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries tended to be recited or sung to a simple formulaic melod> Tlic

156

earliest composed settings also invoh ed choral recitati\ es on repeated chordal pattems."' Both Gretchaninoffs recollections about the Creed and Kashkin's review of the premier indicated that no one ever had set the Creed with such a combination of inspiration and genius. This inspiration and genius was demonstrated in the actual format of designating the alto soloist on the recited monotonic chant, accompanied by the freely composed sustained chords of the choir. The novel texture that set slowh expanding harmonic motion from the choir was designed to intensify the musical phrase at particularl> poignant moments of the text, and proved highly stimulating to the Russians who heard it for the first time. Thus, this irmovative technique of solo recitation with simultaneous choral accompaniment had much to do with its original reception. Another factor that must have influenced its immediate and profound success was the outstanding qualitv of its premier. In the review of the premier. Kashkin gives as much praise to the choir and soloist as gives to Gretchaninoff, revealing that this initial performance of the Creed must have reached idyllic proportions. The ninth movement. "A Mercy of Peace," begins the Anaphora, the most solemn portion of the Eucharist when the silent prayers are read b\ the celebrant and Communion is observed. Following the deacon's exclamation, "Let us stand aright...," the choral response in B major immediately reflects the gravity of the actions taking place, as the melody emerges both in tripled octaves and in a low tes.situra before passing to the upper

•' Morosan. "Sergei Rachmaninoff" l\

157

voices that continue to the cadence on F# major to set the tonality for the rest of the movement, shown in Example 6.13. Example 6.13 ""A Mercy of Peace." Measures 1-5

Moderato. Soprano

rp^=U

SS MH

M^

Aho

^ lost aocn

^ mi MB

lost

mf

JIOCTI)

trCB

ra, pa.

^ lost

mf

AOCTh

MH

^ ^ ^ zber ra, xep P«.

dbt

Tenor

^

MH

zha xep

zher xep

T=n=

-1—n-

tvu tiva - le - ni TB7— xsa - Jie - HB

1.

znz

rvu

tva

Ic

THy

XBa

jie

^

^ tvu— liva

TBy—

ya.

XBa

ffi le jie

ni HH

^ ni RH

ya a. =IX=

yaa.

'J J L : J

;^¥i{) n o-

Bus

-

=1X1

^

}• J J N _ J J g

W MH

ra. pa,

:«=?=

^

Mf

lost

mf

MH

JlOCTh

MB

ra, pa.

zher xep

tvu TBy

tva

le

ni

ya

XBa

Jie

HM

a.

English Translation: A mercy of peace, a sacrifice of praise. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

With two additional choral responses to the Celebrant and a cadence in D^ minor, a more developed response then follows the Celebrant's final chant from this section of text. The ecclesiastical purpose of this response, on the text "it is fitting and right...." is designated to accompany the first eucharistic silent prayer that is being read by the priest at the altar.'^^ The solemnity of the moment is reflected from the stark unison octaves that state the melody in the soprano and tenor voices, leading into the fulh scored text "down to the Father, Son. and Holy Spirit" that centers on C# major (Example 6.14).

26

Morosan. "Peter Tchaikovsky" \ciii.

158

Example 6.14 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 12-16 12

m

/,

^

r ^r i I r Do

stoy CTOfi

^

^

pra npa

no HO

=R no HO

yest ccn>

i 14

po - kla no - mia

&

m

h - m.

nia

TH -ca-

li- . i po - kla no - KM

(] - sta TH - CJ

ma aa

I" r ^ r r 1 1 ^' r -M • r r ^ ^

Do flo

stoy CTOd

OOHO.

I B

pra npa

ved BCfl

rto HO

yest ecn>

po - kla no - VIA

Ot OT

•

J 01 Ot •

^

nil - li - sfa HB

m *

- TM - C J

Ot Or

4-

Vi li

^

9 po • kla n o • KJia

HB

- TH - c a

Ot Or

English Translation: It is fitting and right to bow down to the Father... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Unison tripled octaves are then employed on the text, "Trinity," centering on D- minor, resembling the previous unison theme shown in Example 6.13 both in its duration and actual rhythms, though with slightly varied melodic motion. This portion of text comes to a conclusion on F# major, after temporarily re-establishing C# major and B major in its harmonic motion. The final words of the silent prayer by the celebrant are then chanted aloud, on the text "...Singing the triumphant hymn, shouting, proclaiming, and saying:" introducing the hymn, "Holy! Holy! Holy!" For this hymn, a faster tempo with livelier rhythms are set to the treble voices that continue in F# major, until the basses and tenors join in the texture that eventually unifies to the fortissimo tripled parallel octa\ es on the text, "heaven and earth are fiill of Thy glory," ending this portion of text with a Phrygian sounding theme that rests on D# (Example 6.15). Gretchaninoff sets the next portion of

159

text, "Hosanna in the highest" with a great degree of contrast: enharmonicalK shifting from the D# to an E-flat tonality, changing the dynamic from fortissimo to pianissimo misterioso, changing the lively allegro moderato to the expansive Meno mosso, and presenting static chords in second inversion that are first sounded in the lower voices, and then echoed by the upper voices (Example 6.15). Example 6.15 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 44-47 44

MeoomosMX.

rk.

fcSdbl

1% J r J U Iii ne - bo He • 6o

i—zem H— acM

*

^

—•

^

I^m

^ ne - bo He - 60

i—zem B acM

i^si

¥

sla - vT TVo

ye

JIB

cjia - BU T B O

e

ya.B._

^

^

Iii

V sla - vl

JIB

cjia - BU T B O

i i — zem H — xu

kAi ui i l\V"i, II

Ifi

^'•''1 ^ r U ' li' ^M ne - bo ne - 6o

W;^

0^ Tvo

—0—0:2 sla - vT TVo cjia - BU TBO

Ili JIB

1 -vjj^

ye e

ya a..

m ye e

ne - bo He - 60

i—zem H— sex

Ift.

JIB-

^

mdsUriosc ^

^

o o PP

^ san can

na BB

imsunaso

i^V' '^'^'" r w ya.. a.-

O O PP

CBB

na na

san CBB

na na

san misterioso

%J i^V'i. it

:B=:!

^

PP

^ J

sli - vi Tvo - yc cna - BU TBO - e

yaB..

o o

English Translation: ...heaven and earth are full of Thy glory. Hosanna... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Next, Gretchaninoff begins a fugato on the text "Blessed is He who comes...", marked for a heavier tempo with Ancora meno mosso, and introduced in the mediumlower range of the bass section. Based on a rather long subject that adds a D to the E tonality, the fugue eventually modulates to A^ major, though not until all voices have presented an answer to the subject first presented by the basses. This texture builds to a climax on a fortissimo chordal texture in a sudden shift to F minor, on the text, "Blessed

160

IS He." The F minor chords function as a minor dominant chord progressing to B^ major to set up another enharmonic shift by changing the function of the B*' to an .V that ser\es as the leading tone for B natural, the minor seventh of the C# major chord that is sounded in the next measure (Example 6.16). finally ending this series of modulations with this dominant to tonic progression in F#. Example 6.16 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 72-75 mfdoUe

tali. ^

^''iLj

11 "''••; V o o

\T=z

san

na

CBB

Ha

m

s^

r^ V vish B Bum

full,

O

-

un

na

HHX,

0

-

CBH

Ra

wtfdoUt

I^U-^^M^^h O O

K..

SS -a.

^

O O

i tan CBB

san

na

:aH

Ha

V VI sh B BUIU

IU Ha

P

=C:

^

^

nih.

O

san

na

HHX,

O

CBH

HB

English Translation: Hosanna in the highest Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Following the choral "Amen" responses to the Celebrant's text that accompanies the offering of the Communion Gifts, the final hymn for the movement, "We H>mn Thee." is sung while the prayers are silentl> uttered by the clergy to petition for the transubstantiation of the gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ. In accordance with liturgical order, this hymn co\ers the time required by the cierg\ to offer these pra\crs at

161

27

the altar." Thus, Gretchaninoff appropriateh sets the h\Tnn w ith more musical elaboration that repeats the text, this time in B major. Again, the solemn mood is emphasized musically with sections of densely scored chordal writing that incorporates heavy doubling of voice parts in a senza misura rhythmic st> le. showTi in Example 6.17. Example 6.17 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 94-95

'f^ J J ^ J T J

f'^' t i i i r r

rf

Te 6e bU • go - $k) - vim,. Tc 6e 6;ia • ro - cno-BHM,.

Im hi

/

^

^m r r r

Te 6e bU - go Tc 6e 6jia - ro

ili^'n r

y~5=3C

Tc-fe

bU - go - da - ffm, Tc- 6e 6jia - ro • OM- PHM,

sio-^fm,.

JWTJ

!'''iVli'i"i'i

p

Te - 6e Ua - go - da - fim. Tc - 6€ Ana - ro - nt-pnu.

UIO-BHM,.

nj

r ^ ^

"'I'i'i'

Tc 6e bb - go - slo- Ofm. Te 6e 6JU - ro - cno-BHn,.

Gbo - spo - di. To - cno-HM.

'^. +«

sT i ' i ' I

Te - 6e bU - go - da - Tim. Tc - 6e 6JU - ro - AS - psn.

IXH

$

Gbo To

r Gho To

spo-di.

C210-JDI.

T

3ac xr

spo-di. aio-jQi

/

1 ^ ^ r 3r Jf C

31^

Te - 6c bla-go - slo-vdn.. Tc - 6e 6ju-ro - uio-Bmi,.

jr JT jr y^j zF^F j tf Tc - 6e bU - go Tc - 6e 6aa - ro

di-Hm. JU-pmt,

roi Gho To

spo-dL cno-juL

English Translation: We hymn thee, we gi\e thanks to thee, O Lord Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

This hymn also includes rapid textural contrasts, movingft-omthe densit\ of the full choir shown above, to harmonized upper \ oices alone, then to the low bass \ oices in unison octaves. A fiigue-like development occurs on the final section of the hymn, "and we pray imto thee, O our God." The subject, presented in the bass voices with doubled

' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xciii.

162

octaves (shown in Example 6.18). resembles the themafic material from the beginning of the movement. A comparison of Example 6.18 with Example 6.14 abo\ e show s this similarity. Example 6.18 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 100-103 700

Tempo T ^

m

P 2 soli

^I moJ- Tim^J B J J

Sl^,

H

^

^

MO - JIBM

TH

CB,

|l i ' | l il l| I i ' i

mo

lim

u

H

MO - JIHM

TH

Sf^,

ca,

j"j J I ,1 J J - i , ^ i r~r~r

s i

nw - Tim

H

MO - JIHM

ti -

TH

- si"^,

i

mo - lim

-

H

MO - JIHM

ca.

ti TH

Sta. CB,

English Translation: and we pray unto Thee, our God. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

In the development of this theme, rapid harmonic shifts ensue. The opening measures center on F major with swift chordal progressions between the tonic F and its subdominant. B''. With a gradual crescendo, the tonality quickly shifts to D major, this time w ith strong dominant to tonic movement in the bass, shown in Example 6.19.

163

Example 6.19 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 103-104 cresc. poco a poco P

103

i

*-T-

i ^

m l^^

V ?' 1HIH-

Tim .IHM Tim

mo MO

mo

.IHM

MO

q::: JTXTtUtU nash.Ham,-

^ mo MO

i

-«»nash. Ham,

mo MO

'. tl TH tl TH

rr

Tim JIHM

-#—#Tim .JIHM

tl TH

Sia. CH, si'a,

Bo Bo

nash. Haul.

zhe )KC

nash. Ham.

zhe Mce

nash. Ham.

^

^

cs.

:^te=

un

Sia, CH,

Bo Bo

Sia, CH,

B6 Bo

£ tl TH

zhe )Ke

-0

— '

-HBt^

J^ ICTT

TCK-

36 Bo

nash. Ham,

*-

^^

^J

P

P

zhe xe

nash. Ham,

English Translation: and we pray unto Thee, O our God. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Riahts Reserved.

As the crescendo continues, the harmonic center shifts to F# with the same dominant to tonic movement in the bass line as shown in the above example. Sustaining the tonality of F# to the end of the movement, the harmonic writing continues a modal tendency with the constant use of E-natural. Furthermore, at the climax. F major is briefi\ emphasized before the final cadence in F#. Gretchaninoffs setting of the Marian hymn "It is truly fitting" appears in the tenth movement, following the prescribed litiirgical order. As this hymn brings with it a more festive mood of glorification,'^ Gretchaninoff marks the tempo allegretto scmplice. further enhancing the mood w ith li\ ely eighth-note and sixteenth-note rhythms in the

Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" l\i.

164

Opening theme.

29

The light texture is somewhat imitative, with onh a few instances of

strict imitafion of the theme in certain sections. Compared to the previous movement, the harmonic writing is somewhat reserved, primarily centering on G major. The heavy use of parallel thirds and sixths (Example 6.20, measures 55-56) as well as contrar\ motion between the voice parts effecfively adds to the festive mood of the text. Example 6.20 "It is Truly Fitting," Measures 53-56 53

^m ni HH

ya

r—r ni HH

ya

^

^

Se Cc

ra pa

r Se Cc

ra pa

ni HH

ne He

P

i

^

fun,

6ez-

is

4>HM,

6e3-

HC

^

i

i

^

^

sempre Mf

ur©^

?

6ez

IS

tie

IU

4)HM,-

6e3

HC

TJie

HM

i

^

ya a

6ez

IS

tie

6C3

HC

TJie

ni HH

P

1

^ ni

ni HH

fini,.

^

pa

^

tie rnt

fim,-

Sez-

4)HM,.

6C3-

Enghsh Translation: ..than the Cherubim, without defilement... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The sudden change to the chordal, expansive style in the coda also brings an unexpected shift to E major, setting up the choral responses to the chants by the Celebrant in E major that continues unfil the last response which suddenly cadences in C major to

" Morosan adds that this theme is based on a demestvermyi chant, as identified by Gretchaninoff in the originally published score by Jurgenson, Choral Performance 244 Demestvennyi Chant, dating from the fifteenth century, did not follow the system of Eight Tones that prevailed in Znammeny chant, and quickly fell out of use by the time of the established polyphonic n-adition, though it was still sung by the Old Believers. In a telephone interview, Morosan further stated that without further research, the authenticity of the demestvennyi chant employed here is disputable, though the melodic theme contains stylistic traits of demestvennyi chant Morosan, telephone interview, 9 September 2002.

165

set the tonalit\ for the choral responses in the final litanies. Similar to the litanies, these final choral responses are chordal and stafic. as essentialh the same music is repeated twelve times for each response. With a translafion in English published in 1916. "Our Father." has been well known to college and church choir directors in the United States for several decades. '^' In Russia, the nineteenth century tradition of singing The Lord's Prayer remained in an unmetered recitative, as the entire congregation sang chordal chant that mostly consisted of simple dominant and tonic chord progressions.^ As a note to this separately published octavo by Musica Russica, Morosan remarks on the composer's highly innovati\ e setting of the Lord's Prayer: In the realm of Russian Orthodox church music "Otche nash" ("Our Father") from Liturgy No. 2 represents a highly innovative setting of the Lord's Prayer. Rather than set this text in the traditional Russian Orthodox style of simple recitative on a few changing chordal patterns, Gretchaninoff chose a much more melodic style, using motives reminiscent of znamenny chant. The resulting work is much more extended and larger in scope than any previous settings of the Lord's Prayer....^^ In contrast to the key of C major of the previous section, the famous "Our Father." is set in E^ major to form the eleventh movement to the Second Liturgy. In a form that may be diagramed as ABAC, the second statement of the A theme occurs with the greater

^^ Reid 236. see note 4 above. "Our Father" ft-om Gretchaninoffs Second Litur^- was published with an English adaptation by Arthur S. Kimball in 1916 by the Oliver Ditson Co. ^' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xiv. '" Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Our Father," by Alexander Gretchaninoff (1902; Madison: Musica Russica, 1994).

166

intensity of a higher octave, allowing for increased volume that is written into the score, and allowing for densely scored vocal parts, shown in Example 6.21. Example 6.21 "Our Father,*' Measures 28-32 28

i

9J

Molto maestoso.

^'/'! 5? lileb Xjie6

^ j iJ. / 3 ^

HTeb Xjie6

r r r nash na - sushch eam na - cym

nam diies, HEM ABecb,

^m niy HUfi

J I J.

dazhd

nam dnes, BaM AHCCb,

jiaxflk.

'.\ J J .iTTi I ilTDi a I r r 'r F = ^ Hieb Xjie6

S

X

£

^

nash na - sushch Ham na - cym

J J iJ.

E *

^

-•—0-

nash na Ham na

sushch cym

niy

dazhd_

HUfi

jiaxfli.

\i nam dneS, HaM saecit,

^ 1

i H

o - sta 0 - era

.' J i H

ijleb

nash na - sushch

XJIC6

Ham

na -

cym

ni"y HKlfl

if

5

dazhd.

i

o sta o - era

nam HAM

^ ^i BH

nam HaM

1

O

H

o o o

1—•

nam diieS, HaM SBecb,

flajKju..

m

VI BB

,H i H

i 3 'ir Jl J W

t i f f

t

I H

o 0

English Translation: Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive... Copyright 1994, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The solemn C section sets the theme in the Sopranos, strict!) imitated b\ the first nd

tenors, and supported by unison octa\ esfi-omthe altos. 2" tenors, and baritones, w ith the sustained pedal tones in the basses, all of which sing different parts of the text simultaneously. This texture confinues until all parts come together on the chordal "no izbavi nas" (but deliver us) that crescendos into the climax of the work on the text "ot lukavago.*" (from the evil one) set in parallel octaves between the sopranos and tenors, as shown in Example 6.22. The climax at measure 52 on the text "from the e\ il one" is reiterated in slow and lush expansi\ e chords marked pianissimo, showing

167

Gretchaninoffs inclination toward musical form over textual concerns, as such expressive music is employed to this least expected section of text from the Lord's Prayer. Though this movement is less aggressive harmonically with only brief instances of movement to closely related ke\s. the step-wise melodic movement, a feature borrowed from znammeny chant, and the variety in texture that is achie\ ed through octave transposition of the theme, all combined with extremes in dynamic variation makes for a highly expressive setting of this familiar text. Ending w ith another brief "call and response" section between the Celebrant and the choir, the nature of the text demands that the chants of the clergy be included between the choral responses. In addition, the effect of adding the chant that overlaps with the choral response, to be discussed in the next chapter, adds greatly to the aesthetic quality of the final measures of the mo\ ement.

168

Example 6.22 "Our Father." Measures 43-54

pocoriL

fj'''M' no HO

r IZ H3

/ *

no r II

^

S

ba 6a

i r

^

HO

i

IZ H3

>^ -

T—r no

IZ

HO

H3

ba 6a

Vl BH

Tvi BH

3i:

m

^

01OT-

nas Hac

^

lu jiy

ba 6a

BH

KB

=t 2 5=

nas Hac

(fl"

ki y* marc.

in=

I'.

VI

atempo P

fr—-J

t=

noHO-

IF .f

nas Hac

i

i H

ot-

lu

ki

OT-

Jiy

KB

ot

lu ny

ki

/ —WT~

no HO

iz H3

ba 6a

VI BH

nas nac

OT

Ka

English Translation: and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the F.vil One. Copyright 2002. Musica Russica. Copied with permission All Riuhts Reser\cd

169

Again following the prescribed order of the Di\ ine Liturg>'. GretchaninotT includes in the twelfth mo\ ement a para-liturgical concerto. Morosan describes the purpose of this movement that followed The Lord's Prayer in the Divine Liturgy: [The Lord's Prayer] was followed by the performance of an extended motet-like composition known as a "sacred concerto." on verses drawn most often Irom the Psalms, or some other musical pieces drawnft"omthe feast-day repenoire or another service, such as the All-Night Vigil: the objecfive was to till the time while the clergy were partaking of Commimion and preparing for the distribution of Communion to the laity.^^ The para-liturgical movement represented the only place that composers could exhibit fi^eedomfi*ominherent restrictions. No liturgical concems needed to be considered, and the composer even had freedom to choose the text. For this sacred concerto, Gretchaninoff chose a troparian hymn to the Mother of God that was used in the liturgy for special feast days in honor of Mary.'^ For this text. GretchaninofT emplo\ed the most extensive musical treatment of the entire work, using more venturesome means to express the text-from musically setting an overall mood for the text, to bringing emphasis to specific words and phrases. Rhythmically, the hymn emplovs much use of irregular metrical division in his use of chant-based themes that not only gives proper text inflection to the language, but also sets up interpretive emphasis on specific words of the text. Opening in G major, this through-composed hymn begins with the upper \oices in their medium to lower ranges with gentle thematic and rhythmic motion building toward

Morosan. "Peter Tchaikovsky" xciv ^ The complete text for this movement was located at the following website designed b\ the parish of St. John the Forerunner Russian Orthodox Church (Chesmenska\a), St Petcrshurg, Russia: http:' en.liturg>.ru

^0

the word "prilezhno"-the word in the phrase meaning "fervently." to create the intense mood of sorrowful pleading (Example 6.23). Example 6.23 "Let us fervently beseech." Measures 15 Moderate e comoda senza misura Soprano

Alto

Ikaor

B«s

Pi n

K B o - go K Bo - ro ^ *

^

w

T r ''t 0

cm

1

K B o - go K Bo - ro P

^'

ro - di - tsc po - AH - ne \

0

0

r r

\

^

pfi - Iczh - no npH - acM. - HO ^0

0-

r f

fb - di - tse po - AH - qe

^

pfi - lezfa - o o npH - ncM. - BO

[ ^

^

ni - nc jxi - tc - tsem, HU - HC npn - re - UCM.

tJ—?

ni-oc pfi-teHU - ne npn TC

tsem. HCM.

^

K Bo - go K Bo - ro

fo - 3i po - AH

tse

nc

pn npH

Iczh - no nt - ne pfi - Ic - tsem, OCX. - HO HU - He npn - re - ncM,

^

English Translation: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God, Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The entrance of the basses on the next secfion that calls out to .Mary, "help us. C) Lady..." adds to the imploring mood. A harmonic progression to E major unfolds under the modal veiling of C natural and D natural, while the music is marked "crescendo c accelerando.'' This speeding up of tempo directly expresses the words, "hasten, for we perish...," repeated several times. With each repetition, the music intensifies with increased tempo, dynamic variation, and alternation of textures from unison voices to fully orchestrated chords, until the first tenors and sopranos enter in doubled octaves to an almost explosive climax at measures 46-47 and 53-54. shown in Example 6.24.

171

Example 6.24 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 39-52

English Translation: hasten, for we perish because of our many sms. Copyright 2002, .Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reser\ed

172

Following this climax, the music w inds down into sustained rhythms, progressing ft-om quarter notes to half notes to tied half notes resulting in an inbuilt ritard until the isolated bass secfion sustains the very final thread of the theme in unison octaves on B. The next section spring-boards off of the B from the basses into an E minor tonalitv on the text, "Turn not thy servants away," in a style that resembles the beginning measures both rhythmically and texturally, although the tenor voice carries much of the melodv' while the other voices sustain the notes in the chord. With the entrance of the basses that sustain G on a pedal tone, G major is tonicized. As the hymn concludes, slower expansive rhythms, sustained chords that utilize much vocal doubling, and thematic movement in parallel sixths adds to the peaceftil hopeful mood expressed on the text, "for thou art our only hope" (Example 6.25). Example 6.25, "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 139-141 139

M«DO mosso. dim.

m

meno

ml. lOI, meno

ma Ma ^

df

m

p

m

DU na-dezh-du (

ma

AH By Ha-AC^K-Ay H f - ma-mr. ye H - Ma-MU, e

Ma

df nu n a - d e z h - d u AH ay H a - A c x - W f - ma-ml. B • Ma-MU,

^m J. \ •

^ .1

f

f"* - ma " • Ma ye

na na f

ml. MU,

at AH

m na Ba nu n a - d e z h - d u By Ba-flCJc-Ay

ma Ma

ml. MU,

1 - ma " - Ma

na na mr, MU,

mr, MU

df

AB

nu na-dezh-du By Ba-aex-Ay

.1 ~T,i—'I'J ma Ma

( •

ml.. MU,

n J ly

ye e

ye e

rf^,

^f

Ha

English Translation: for thou art our onh hope. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica Copied uith permission. All Rights Reserved.

173

Liturgically, the final movement of the Second Liturgy was intended for the Communion of the faithfiil and of the Clergy. This movement consists mostly of choral recitative on responsive texts to the Celebrant and Deacon, in a similar stv le to the choral responses of the litanies, though with a greater amount of text. However, Gretchaninoff provides some glimpses of free choral writing here as well, and repeats these sections throughout the final movement, providing stylistic unity to the last movement and to the overall work. Example 6.26 shows the opening chorus to the final movement, on the text, "Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord..." With only slight variation, this same themafic material reappears between secfions of chordal recitative on the doxology "Glory to the Father..." and on the last chorus, "preserve them for many years." In all three sections of this movement, the mood of hope and encouragement is enhanced with the major tonality, the allegro non troppo e molto maestoso marking that appears on the first two secfions, and the use of parallel sixths in the tenors and sopranos against the sustained pedal tones in the altos and basses in unison octaves.

174

Example 6.26 End of the Liturgy, Measures 1-3 AUegro non troppo e noito marttttm SopCIHD

Aho

Tcaor

Bass

English Translation: Blessed is he... Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Summary Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy uses several traits that were innovative not only in the development of the new genre of Liturgy settings, but also in the overall scope of Russian sacred choral music. The Second Liturgy incorporates extensive octave doubling of voice parts particularly during the more solemn moments of the liturgy, a trait that became typical of the composers of sacred music living in Moscow at the tum of the century. Parallel thirds and sixths with some use of pedal tones and contrary motion between the soprano and bass lines are often employed to express the sections of the Liturgy that have a more hopeful and joyful mood. Irregular metrical patterns and sections that are marked senza misura are freely employed to appropriately set the prose of the text, that when combined with the harmonic motion, place emphasis on particularly poignant words or syllables from the highly reverent text. Though few melodic motives

175

originate directly from ancient Znamenny Chant, much of the thematic matenal was inspired by Znammeny chant, demonstrated in the narrow range and conjunct motion of the melodic themes. The liturgical constancy of the solo and choral alternation may hav e led to a greater degree of textural contrast in the pure choral movements, demonstrated in the high degree of textural contrasts that occur between upper and lower voice parts, and between densely scored "orchestral" choral writing with heavy doubling of voice parts and pure unison writing for a single voice part. Further, in spite of traditional forms that had been employed for individual movements, Gretchaninoff tended to impose outside formal schemes from symphonic music onto several movements, even incorporating mutually shared themes between movements to bring unity to the work. Extremes in ranges for the low basses that often descends to a B^ as well as extremes in dynamics often are employed, traits that would typify the style of new Russian choral school. The harmonic style of the Second Liturgy may be generalized as using functional diatonic harmony, sometimes veiled with elements of modalism providing minor tonalities. As shown in Table 6.1, though few movements depart from their original key, many temporarily modulate to other keys before retuming to the tonic, as discussed above. In such cases, the relative minor key often prevails. In some movements, particularly "A Mercy of Peace," rapid sequences of venturesome harmonic shifts occur, though the return to the tonic of the movement also transpires, just as the eminent return to the tonic key of C major for the overall work occurs for the final movement and for most of the litanies scattered through the overall work.

176

Table 6.1 General Harmonic Scheme of the Second Liturgy, Opus 29 Movement

Tonality

Final Cadence

#1, Great Litany #2a, the First Antiphon #2b, the Second Antiphon #2c, Troparian after the Second Antiphon #2d. Little Litany #2e, the Third Antiphon #3, Come, let us worship #4, Alleluia #5, Augmented Litany #6, Cherubic Hymn #7, Litany of Supplication #8, Creed #9, A Mercy of Peace #10, It is truly fitting #11, Our Father, Only One is Holy! #12, Let us Fervently Beseech #13, The end of the Liturgy

C E B G

c

E B G

G D D F C D C E F# G E"

G D D A C D C E F= C E^

G C

G C

Though the tonic chord is usually prevalent in the indiv idual movements, the dominant chord is often understated, with a tendency instead toward the submediant, subdominant, and supertonic, each of which progress to the tonic. As shown in the table above, a loose parallel in the harmonic style of the individual movements and the progression of keys between the movements may be observed.

Four out of the thirteen

movements are written in the tonic C major, including both the first and last movement. Three movements are written in the super-tonic key of D Major, and three movements, including "Our Father" in E^, are based on the mediant key rather than on the submediant key. Perhaps to make up for the understated use of dominant chords in the individual movements, three movements are based on G major, including the penultimate movement serving as a dominant key for the return to C major for the final movement.

177

Based on Tchaikovsky's liturgy in terms of coherency of musical style, manv movements from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy proved to be ground-breaking in leading to the ultimate development of the genre to be displayed in Rachmaninoff s \9\0 Liturgy setfing.^^ In this category, the following movements contain a greater degree of free and innovafive choral writing and should be menfioned, some of which became well known in their English translafions for performances in the United States: #2, "Glory... Only Begotten Son;" #3, "Come, let us worship," that includes the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy God;" #6, Cherubic Hymn; #8, "Creed;" #9, "A Mercy of Peace;" #10, "It is Truly Fitting" (Hymn to the Mother of God); #11, "Our Father" (The Lord's Prayer); and #12, the para-liturgical concerto, "Let us fervently Beseech." In a modem-day performance of Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, these movements not only should be included, but also issues of performance practice should be considered, to be discussed in Chapter VII.

'* Morosan, "Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

178

CHAPTER Ml PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR PERFOR\LANCE OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29

To prepare for a performance of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus 29, the conductor would need to consider several issues. Taking the liturgy out of its church context for a concert performance not onlv would influence the stylistic considerations of performance practice, but also the actual selection and/or modificafion of specific movements. To do this wisely, one should seek out relevant information about the intent of pre-Revolutionary Moscow composers for their liturgical music as well as specific information about Gretchaninoffs intent for his own liturgical music. For matters of interpretation, general information about the stylistic norms of performance practice in Moscow in the early twentieth century should be studied to fully understand the expressive qualities of the music and the crucial aesthetic considerations for the performance. Further, an understanding of the historical and contextual status of Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy not only would enhance the appreciation of this particular work, but also would increase the general level of appreciation of Russian Orthodox liturgical music from the new Russian choral school.

179

Concert or Liturgical Context It would seem that any performance of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgv', the most solemn orthodox service for the observance of the Eucharist, w ould require a liturgical context. However, a thorough study of the performance practice in the earlv twentieth century and the actual intentions of Russian composers for their litiu^gy settings suggests that this supposition is not necessarily the case. Morosan notes that by the time of the early 1900s, public concerts of sacred music occurred frequently and that some liturgical compositions were premiered only in concert settings, including Rachmaninoff s Liturgy and All-Night Vigil.^ Thus, although composers certainly regarded liturgical considerations in composing sacred music, performance practice indicated that they also intended their liturgical music to be performed in concert settings. In any case, as Morosan elaborates, by the early twentieth centurv, the line that separated the concert hall and the cathedral had become blurred: ...some churches in Moscow and St. Petersburg serviced by well-known choirs posted the "repertoire" that would be sung at the upcoming service on a bulletin board outside the church. Soloists from the Imperial Opera were routinely invited to sing solos and trios in church, particularly during Great Lent and Holy Week, when such musical selections were particularly numerous and theatres w ere closed. The protodeacons of major cathedrals, who frequently had voices of operatic caliber, w ere treated as cult figures with popular followings; some cognoscenti would keep teams of horses ready outside the church, so that as soon as the protodeacon finished the Gospel reading at one church, they could dash off to another church just in time to hear another "star" protodeacon perform.'

' Morosan, Choral Performance 300-301. ' .Morosan, Choral Performance 301.

180

Conversely, Morosan also adds that by the early twentieth century, sacred concerts "served as the primary vehicle by which new sacred compositions w ere premiered and made popular." Thus, a modem-day concert performance of a Liturgv setting from the new Russian choral school would not be out of line with the thinking of Russian composers from the period. However, before the period of the new Russian choral school came to an end w ith the revolution, church officials soon reacted against this "performance" aspect of liturgical music. By 1915, opera singers were forbidden to participate in the services, and new rules were established for the performance of sacred music in concert settings. These new rules restricted any movements from the Divine Liturgy relating most directly to the Eucharist from being performed in concert halls, specifically forbidding the performance of the Cherubic Hymn, and "A Mercy of Peace" (the Anaphora), two of the more musically elaborate movements from the liturgy settings of the period. Morosan's recent recommendations for performance schemes of the liturgies of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff for a concert setting, discussed below, demonstrate a similar philosophy some eighty years later, as he not only considers aesthetic factors in his discussion but also alludes to the religious repercussions of presenting the more solemn portions of certain movements in a secularized concert setting. Performing the music of Gretchaninoff introduces more issues from the perspective of the composer's intentions relating to performance practice. With ^ Morosan, Choral Performance 88. •* Morosan, Choral Performance 301. ' Morosan. Peter Tchaikovsky 407, Sergei Rachmaninoff'}}2.

181

Gretchaninoffs outspokeimess on the subject, combined with his exceptionally long and producfive career, performers can retrieve a clearer idea of his desire and intent for his liturgical music. Seaguard's thesis, completed before Gretchaninoffs death, reports from an interview with the composer that Gretchaninoff intended his choral movements from the Second Liturgy to be performed both in the orthodox services and in concert settings.^ Furthermore, Gretchaninoffs own instrucfions about performing the Domestic Liturgy indicate that he intended it to be performed both in church and in concerts, as discussed in Chapter V. Therefore, performing Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy in either a concert setting or an Orthodox service, and either as a complete work or as indiv idual movements lifted from the work, would conform both to the performance practice of the day and to the composer's wishes.

Selection of Movements Unlike the Roman Catholic mass, with significant portions of text that were spoken, virtually the entire text of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgy was set to music, often including solo chants of the priests and deacons w ith alternating choral responses, discussed in Chapter VI. Therefore, in performing the liturgy for a concert rather than for a liturgical service, the conductor initially would face the issue of the actual selection of movements or modificafions of movements. Though a complete performance of the

* Seaguard 58. Seaguard states that Gretchaninoff personally informed him "that his anthems were intended not only for the church, but also for concert performance." Given that five of the "anthems" discussed by Seaguard are from the Second Liturgy, it is reasonable to conclude that Gretchaninoff approved of lifting the choral movements from the Second Liturgy for performance in concerts

182

Divine Liturgy would be possible, the absence of liturgical needs eliminates the necessitv' for the mulfiple repefifion of the same choral response to a mono-toned solo chant-a less musically expressive aspect of the liturgy. In his analyses of the liturgies of both Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, Morosan recommends omitting several portions from the settings for concert performances. In his discussion of Tchaikovsky's setting, he bases these recommendations on aesthetic grounds, while noting, "The nofion of 're-enacfing' this ritual in its entirety on a concert stage is patently unacceptable to Orthodox Christians."^ Specifically, he suggests that overly repetitive portions or lengthy sections of monotonic chant should be omitted, adding ".. .a concert performance should focus on the psalms, hymns, and sung prayers, Q

which contain a greater degree of musical interest." Morosan further recommends reducing or omitting brief sections that include short choral responses intended to cover liturgical actions, thereby affecting all of the litanies. His recommendation for a concert performance of Tchaikovsky's liturgy is presented in Table 7.1.

' Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 407 * Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 407

183

Table 7.1 Morosan's Scheme for a Concert Performance of Tchaikovsky's Liturgv of St. John Chn'sostom, Opus 41*' Movement Title Modification No.l

Great Litan>'

No. 2

After the first Antiphon

No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7

"Come, let us worship" Alleluia after Epistle Reading Augmented Litany Cherubic Hymn Litany of Supplication

No. 8 No. 9

Creed A Mercy of Peace (Anaphora)

No. 10 No. 11 No. 12 No. 13

We Hymn Thee It is truly Fitting (Hymn to the Mother of God) Litany of Supplication The Lord's Prayer ("Our Father")

No. 14

Communion Hymn (Psalm 148:1)

No. 15

End of the Liturgy

Include opening exclamations and choral .\men; omit rest of Litan\ Omit litanies; include "Glorv... onlv Beeotten Son" Include in its entiren Omit Omit

Include in its entiret\ Omit all except final exclamation of deacon and choral response'" Include m its entirerv Omit solo chant after "Hosanna in the Highest" and final "Amens" Include in its entirety Omit chant and choral responses at end Omit

Omit chants and responses following the first "Amen" Omit ekphonetic chant at end; include long pause at end Omit opening choral "Blessed is He..." and all of litany. Include "Blessed be the name" and "many years" omitting solo chants and choral doxology between the two.

Morosan's recommendations for Rachmaninoff s liturgy follow a similar rationale, with the same aesthetic considerafion as well as an acknowledgment of the accepted orthodox practice of performing liturgies in concert settings. He adds that some inclusion of the solo chants of the Deacon and Celebrant is necessary: "At the same time, in order to create some essential musical continuity, the editor [Morosan] believes that certain

' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix-xcv, 407-408. '"The text included is franslated thus: "DEACON; Let us love one another, that with one mind vvc may confess, CHOIR: Father. Son, and Holy Spirit! The Trmity, one in essence, and undivided'" Morosan recommends this to introduce the Creed. Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 10.

1S4

hymns and prayers should be introduced by the appropriate liturgical exclamations belonging to the deacon and/or celebrant..."'' With few exceptions, Morosan's recommendations for a performance of Rachmaninoff s Liturgy consistently parallel the recommendafions for Tchaikovsky's Liturgy. The repefitive litanies composed primariK to meet liturgical needs are omitted, as are the portions of text that directlv deal w ith the Eucharist. Thus, in Morosan's performance recommendations for the liturgies of both Tchaikovksy and Rachmaninoff, most of the solo chants and corresponding choral responses are omitted, but enough solo chants and responses are included for the purposes of "essential musical continuity," maintaining an appropriate balance between these stylistically restrained portions of the liturgy and the more musically expressive choral movements. Further, Morosan's recommendations for movement selection and modificafion still allows the text to flow in a logical sequence. A reasonable musical form results, as all of the significant choral movements are included and woven together with an appropriate selection of solo chants to present a more unified and tightly knit musical form—entirely appropriate for a concert setting. In applying the same principles of movement selection for a concert performance of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy, I would suggest the following recommendafions, shown in Table 7.2.

Morosan, Sergei Rachmaninoff 332-333.

185

Table 7.2 Suggested Performance Scheme for Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, (3pus 29 Movement Title Modification No. 1 No. 2

No. 3 No. 4 No. 5

Great Litany Antiphons

1 "Come, let us worship" Alleluia, Psalm pnor to Gospel reading Augmented Litany

No. 6

Cherubic Hymn

No. 7 No. 8 No. 9

Litany of Supplication Creed "A Mercy of Peace" (Anaphora)

No. 10

It IS truly Fitting (Hymn to the Mother of God) The Lord's Prayer

i

No. 11 No. 12 No. 13

Para-liturgical Concerto, "Let us fervently beseech" End of the Liturgy

Include m its ennretv Include first antiphon and second antiphon, Tropanan after second antiphon. Omit all litanies and third antiphon. Include in its entirety Omit

Optional: could alter solo chant to omit choral repeats Omit interruption of solo chant and choral ".A.men" in the middle Omit

Include in its entirety Omit chant of celebrant and choral "Amens" after "Hosanna in the highest" Omit solo chants and litany of supplication at end Omit No 1 lb (Only one is holy) and No. lie (Psalm 148:1) Include in its entirety Omit all solo Chants "1 believe" and subsequent choral responses. Include opening choral "Blessed IS He." "Glory to the Father..." and "this God-cherished country, the holy faith and orthodox Christians" followed by "Lord, preserve them for many years."

In following Morosan's model for movement selection based on his recommendations for the liturgies of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, only the opening chants from the Great Litany followed by the choral ''Amen" would be included in a performance of Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. However, several reasons can be given for performing the Great Litany in its entirety. As discussed in Chapter \T, a development of the choral "Lord, hav c mercy" response occurs, an expressiv e feature that should be considered lor

186

1

performance, though admittedly, the individual movement is not as musicallv significant as other movements. However, the Great Litany also presents an important feature of the Divine Liturgy—an entire movement based on dialogue between the clergy soloists and the choir. Further, this movement also unifies the form harmonically w ith the strong tonicization of C major—the key that occurs throughout the course of the work and that retums for the final movement. The second movement that contains the antiphons follows Morosan's model more closely. The litanies presented in this movement may be omitted due to their repetition and brevity. The third anfiphon presents a seventeen-fold repeat of a simple chord progression on a choral recitafive. While the inclusion of this text from the beatitudes might be significant for a worship service, this heavy repetition may be omitted from a concert performance, where such aesthetic considerations may take precedence. Following the complete performance of the third mov ement, incorporating all of the solo chants of the Deacon and Celebrant, the fourth movement may be omitted due to its brief and redundant nature, again following Morosan's model. Morosan might suggest omitting the .-Xugmented Litany in the fifth movement, consistent with his suggestions for Tchaikovsky's and Rachmaninoff s liturgies. However, here an inclusion of this movement is suggested because this movement presents a livelier choral response to the solo chants, as discussed in Chapter \T and shown in Example 6.10. An effecfive compromise would be to perform this movement without the choral repeats, necessitating an eliminafion of most of the solo chants. Though care would need to be given to alter the text of the soloist so that a logical

187

sequence results, presenting the text in this format could be done without difficult) since each statement of the Deacon from the Augmented litanv stands alone as an indiv idual prayer, shown in Appendix E. The sixth movement that presents the Cherubic Hymn should be performed as written, with the exception of omitting the interruption of the solo chant and the choral "Amen" that follows in the middle of the hymn, again following Morosan's model. This interrupfion is solely intended to meet the liturgical needs for this section of the Divine Liturgy, and, as such, should be omitted in the absence of such needs. As the Litany of Supplication in the seventh movement should be omitted due to its simplicity, brevity, and repetition, the next movement to follow is the Creed presented in the eighth movement. For Tchaikovsky's liturgy, Morosan recommends an inclusion of the introductory chant of the Deacon to accomplish a necessary harmonic modulation into the key of the Creed.'"^ As a modulation also is necessary in Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy to progress from the D major tonality of the Cherubic Hymn to the E major tonality of the Creed, the same procedure is suggested here to introduce the Creed. Thus, the ekphonetic chant of the Deacon immediately preceding the Creed, on the text, "The doors, the doors..." would be pitched on E, the key of the Creed. The ninth movement, "A Mercy of Peace," should be modified only slightly, eliminafing the solo chant in which the Celebrant offers the bread and wine with the corresponding choral "Amen" responses. This alteration not only follows Morosan's model but also eliminates an interruption of the movement, resulting in a tighter and

Morosan, "Tchaikovsky" xcii.

188

more unified whole. Thus, referring to the liturgy text presented in Appendix E. the choral setfing of "Hosaima in the highest" would lead straight into "We hymn thee." Following the hymn to the Mother of God in the tenth movement, the solo chants and responses and the Second Litany of Supplication again should be omitted due to the simplicity of style, brevity, and heavy repetition. The eleventh movement, the Lord's Prayer should be included through the "Amen" that follows "to Thee O Lord" and the chant of the Celebrant (see Appendix E). Though the English translation of this movement presents the final measures of choral responses in succession without intervening solo chants, performing the movement in Russian would require the inclusion of the solo chants of the Celebrant and Deacon to allow the text to proceed in a reasonable sequence (see Example 7.3). Furthermore, the inclusion of the solo chants in this portion of the movement makes for an aesthetically pleasing closure to the Lord's Prayer, to be discussed below. Given the brief and simplistic nature of the remainder of the movement that incorporates choral recitative on simple chordal pattems on the text "Only one is holy" and "Praise the Lord" from Psalm 148:1, these secfions may be omitted. After performing the extensive para-liturgical concerto in the twelfth movement, the more substantial choral portions from the thirteenth movement should be selected to provide closure for the work. The omissions from this movement consist of block chordal recitafives and solo chants. Though the choral portions from the final movement also remain relatively simple in terms of style, their inclusion is necessary to bring textual closure to the work, as well as thematic and harmonic finality as discussed in Chapter \'l.

189

Performance Practice and Interpretation In the pursuit of information about the performance practice of the sacred choral music of pre-Revolufionary Russia, several areas are suggested for consideration. First, a basic understanding of the history of Russian liturgical music as discussed in Chapter III would provide a framework for the performance practice, greatly enhancing the appreciafion of the work from its liturgical roots. Information relating to Gretchanmoff s individual development and his perspective and approach to the specific genre, as discussed in Chapters II, IV, and V, would impart understanding of the common stylistic attributes that the composer tended to employ. This would enhance the conductor's ability to bring out these attributes unique to Gretchaninoff and the style of the newRussian choral school, adding to the expressiveness of the performance. Further, the common performance pracfice that was in place at the fime of the work's inception should be observed to present a historically informed performance. Information about performance practice of the time may be gathered from available information about the choral tradition in general and the specific choir that premiered this work. As discussed in Chapter III, professional choirs emerged from the new Russian choral school, beginning with Arkhangel'sky's Choir. Morosan notes that the existence of professional choirs and their masterftil conductors served as "tangible 'sonorous laboratories'" for the composers who worked in close contact with them.'^ Leonid Vasil'ev, the conductor of such a private choir in Moscow, premiered Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy in 1903. Gretchaninoffs memoirs about the preparation

'•^ Morosan, Choral Performance 129.

190

for the premier of this liturgy made clear that Gretchaninoff indeed maintained close contact with Vasil'ev and his choir. This suggests that the choir performed the Second Liturgy precisely according to the composer's intenfions. Morosan notes other aspects of Vasil'ev's choir that shed more light on the premier and, by extension, on how to perform the work today. He observes that little information is available regarding the number of singers that most professional choirs employed, and that individual services seldom used all of the singers in the choir, usual Iv numbering from sixty to two hundred. However, more information is available regarding Vasil'ev's choir. Vasil'ev occasionally gave concert performances as events that employed all of his singers, which in 1909, numbered 180.'"* Since this lisfing occurred six years after the premier of the Second Liturgy, the exact number that VasiTev employed for the premier of the Second Liturgy in 1903 can only be speculated, though other evidence also shows that the size of the 1903 choir probably was v ery large. From the review of the premier written by Kashkin, it may be observed that X'asil'ev's choir performed the liturgy as a "concert of sacred music," thereby employing all of his singers.'^ Given the praise from Kashkin regarding the performance, the richness of choral sonority from this choir must have been outstanding, a trait that is more typical of a large choir. Related to the choral sonority, the issue of the ideal sound for the soprano and bass parts should be considered. Morosan notes that two choirs that serv ed as ideals of

'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 143. .Morosan cites Muzykarnyi kalendar' [Musical Calendar], supplement to Muzykal'nyi truzhennik (1909). '* See Appendix C for the full text of Kashkin's review.

191

choral sonority, the Moscow Synodal Choir and the Imperial Court Chapel, exclusiv ely used boys' voices on the treble parts,'^ which would have resulted in a verv controlled and restrained sound. However, in the early twentieth century, the issue of women's voices versus boys' voices was debated, bringing out various responses to a poll that was published in the Muzykal'nyi trushennik [Musical Worker] in 1907. Morosan quotes the following response from Kastal'sky, one of the leading composers of the new Russian choral school, who saw strengths to both sides of the issue: "'Speaking ideally, in church choirs the clear sound of male children's voices, devoid of any passionate nuances, is preferable to the timbre of women's voices. But... [with the presence of] mature and knowledgeable [women] participants, who are more capable of feeling the idea and spirit of the works being performed, the artisfic side of the performance can only gain...'" Other composers and conductors clearly stated their preference of boys' voices, shown in the following quote from Nikolai Kompaneisky: From the standpoint of musical interest boys' voices have certain substantial qualities that are preferable over women's voices. The timbre of a boy's voice, especially an alto, has a penetrating quality that makes it easier to emphasize a given voice part, [while] on high notes boy sopranos are much truer to the pitch than women. [Moreover,] boys' voices have less vibrato, and the character of the timbre is serene and devoid of passion, which is more appropnate I Q

in a religious atmosphere. In his support of the use of boy's voices, Aleksei Karasev (1854-1914) bemoaned the use of women's voices: It is highly regrettable that many mixed choirs with women's voices have recently developed the manner of singing with vibrato... The choir sings as if in a '* Morosan, Choral Performance 15" " Morosan, Choral Performance 156. Morosan cites [Letters to the Editor] "Zhenshchiny y tserkovnykh khorakh" [Women in church choirs] Muzykal'nyi trushennik 16 (1907): 5. '^ Morosan, Choral Performance 156. Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 5-6.

192

fever... Such singing, of course, cannot be conducive to the "laving aside of all earthly cares,..."—the retreat from everyday concems to which we are invited in the church. If to this one adds singing with "scoops" upward or downward, the impression is that of a bad operetta or even a gypsy chorus. The singing of boys may not always express religious feeling, but at least it does not display any secularized emotionalism in performance.'^ Morosan reports further that the renowned musicologist and director of the Moscow Synodal School, Stepan Smolensky, voiced both sides of the argument: In 1905 [Smolensky] wrote to a student of his that "of course, boys' voices are much more mobile than women's voices... But with good training there is v erv little difference between a choir with women and a choir with boys."'^ Tw o years later, however, in response to the questionnaire, Smolensky came out much more strongly in favor of women's voices, with the added suggestion that boys and young girls sing alongside mature women. "The opinion that boys' voices hav e some special beauty which does not exist in female voices is mere prejudice," he concludes.^' Responding to the same poll, both Gretchaninoff and Rimsky-Korsakov advocated their strong preference for women's voices, and wrote: Boys are incapable of the same deep feeling and inspiration of which adults are capable. Deep religious ecstasy, mysticism, the inspired prophetic word,... which so often are found in our church works,... to all these things the child's heart remains indifferent... Performance by children will always be objecfively cool, naive (granted, occasionally beaufiful in its naivete), but in most instances completely insufficient to convey the necessary mood, and inappropriate to the content of what is being performed." Morosan then adds that it is not surprising that Gretchaninoff employed Vasil'ev's Choir to premier his works, since by 1908 and possibly earlier, Vasil'ev included a mixture of boys' and women's voices on the treble parts.^^ Though one might doubt XasiPev's use

" Morosan, Choral Performance 156. .Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 10-11 ^° Morosan cites M. Stepanov, "Zavety S. \'. Smolenskogo regentu tserkovnogo khora" [.S V Smolensky's testament to a church precentor], Khorovoe i regentskoe delo 12 (l'M5). 221 *' Morosan, Choral Performance 157. Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 2-3. ^' Morosan, Choral Performance 157. .Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 3-6. '^ Morosan, Choral Performance 157.

193

of women in his choir as early as 1903, the evidence presented above would indicate that if women's voices had been an opfion for the premier of the Second Liturgy, Gretchaninoff would have preferred it. Therefore, in applying the informafion above for a modem-day performance that incorporates women's voices, the following approach is suggested here. The conductor should desire a high degree of flexibility from the soprano and alto sections. The sopranos and altos should be able to sing with the restraint of a boys' choir, particularly on the many sustained lines that often appear in high ranges and are marked pianissimo. Such a tone would conform to an aspect of performance pracfice implied by Smolensky's 1905 statement about "good training." However, on the fuller climactic passages, the treble voices should sing with the fiillness and warmth of tone color implied by Gretchaninoffs statement, but still without a heavy use of vibrato. Though other approaches to the sonority of the treble voices might also follow certain aspects of performance pracfice, the type of sound advocated here would help to maintain both tuning and balance against the low bass voices. With the extremely low range of the bass part, the tendency for an overbalance of the soprano part would occur if left alone; therefore, the soprano line, particulariy for the higher notes, w ould need to be approached with the restraint of a boys' choir sound with minimal vibrato but with warmth of tone color that results though the proper technique of vocal production. The use of bass octavists to double the bass line an octave lower has become a stylistic trait for which Russian choral music is best known. Morosan reports that until recently, the only specific guidelines for the use of octavists available were N Lindsay

194

Norden's instrucfions that accompanied most of his n-anslated editions: "It is customary, in Russian church music, for the octavo-bass to double the wntten bass when harmonically possible. This is, perhaps, the chief element in rendering music, and should be given the necessary preparafion."^^ Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy certainl> emplovs bass octavists as notated in the score, discussed in Chapter \T. Howev er, in following Norden's instrucfions, the doubling of the bass line should be employed even when it is not present in the score. Informafion about the use of bass octavists in pre-Rev olutionary Russia not only addresses this issue, but also may help to solv e problems created by an absence of exceptionally strong and/or low basses in modem-dav choirs. In Morosan's examination of this topic, the author estimates that the practice of doubling the bass voice originated with the Italian composers in the eighteenth century, who employed the vocal doubling of the bass line to parallel the Baroque European instrumental practice.^^ By the end of the nineteenth century, octavists were a common performance practice in Russian choirs, but still received more attention from writers and crifics than any other section in the choir. Morosan includes the following quotes in his discussion: V. M. Orlov says that "[the octavist] is a rather rare voice. With his low velvety sounds... [he] unites the entire choir and giv es it a great deal of beauty. Oftenfimes one such voice is sufficient for a chorus. There are [however] among them very strident [voices],... which should be controlled as much as possible.

-' Morosan, Choral Performance 152-153 Morosan notes the following, "See the editions ot Russian choral music edited by N. Lindsay Norden. published by J. Fischer & Bro." •'' Morosan, Choral Perjormance 153

195

because they are not always pleasing to the ear.""^ Similar sentiments are expressed by Kovin, who writes: A ftjll sonority of the lowest notes in a chord sung by the second basses and octavists tremendously beautifies and enhances the sound of the choir (in slow tempos). [Just as a] modem orchestra introduces lowsounding instruments into each group,... [so] in a chorus one should not disregard the number of second basses, as some choir directors are inclined to do for fear that the section will predominate over the others. One can always contain basses that are singing too loudlv' and too coarsely.^^ Perhaps the most intriguing quote used by Morosan in this discussion is from Chesnokov's manuscript of notes: Octave [doubling] is a luxury in the chorus, but one that is often used without due consideration for the proper place and time; hence, it does not produce the effect that can be achieved when it is used skillfully. Composers today, as in former times, for some reason have not paid the necessary attention to this mighty and effective element of the choir. This leaves only the conductor to bring this aspect of the choir to order, using the [octavists] in the most favorable sonorities and circumstances. With this in mind I mark all pieces for the octavists and absolutely forbid them to take liberties with their contra-octave tones.' As Morosan states in his discussion, these quotations indicate that the use of bass octavists was not only a prevalent feature of performance pracfice, but also most effective when used with discretion, determined by the actual notes written in the score and by the individual ranges and strengths of the bass voices. Morosan indicates that Iv an Lipaev. a leading crific of choral performances in Russia, "frequently singled out the misuse of

^^ Morosan, Choral Performance 154 .Morosan cites X'asily M Orlov. Iskusstov tserkovnogo peniia [The art of church singing] (Moscow n.p., 1910), p. 11. "^ Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Nikolia Kovin, Vpravlenie khorom [Choral conducting] (Petrograd: n p., 1916), pp. 5-6. Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Chesnokov. MS notebook, Chcsnoko\ Arhive, Fund 36, no. 38, Glinka State Museum of Musical Culture, Mos..m 196

octavists as a cheap device characterisfic of the more vulgar church-choir practices."''^ Ironically, Lipaev even singled out Vasil'ev's Choir in 1901, describing the bass octavists as "sometimes roaring 'as a lion after its prey."'^° Perhaps this criticism led to an improvement in both the use and quality of the bass octavists, who evidentlv performed tastefully in the 1903 premier of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy. To apply this performance pracfice to a modem-day performance, the bass line should be performed consistently solid and strong. To contradict the commonly accepted pracfice advocated by N. Lindsay Norden, the octavist pitches should not be sung when not scored by the composer. If the pitches composed for the octavists are attainable by a few second basses in the choir, they should certainly sing them w henever possible, though without forcing a tone that produces a harsh sound. However, if too few of the second basses can reach the low pitches written for the octavists, tw o options may be considered. First, the octavist pitches could be left out completely as the second basses are assigned to sing a unison line with the baritones. This would still result in a solid and warm bass sound, and though a certain degree of choral sonority would be lost, the expressiveness inherent to the music still would be manifested in an otherwise expressive performance. If the conductor greatly desires the octavist line, a second option may be employed, though it would blatantly contradict performance practice. This option would incorporate an instrument on the octavist line. By playing these pitches on an organ, for instance, the depth of sonority would be present and better choral tuning might be

" Morosan, Choral Performance 154. '° Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Ivan Lipae\, [Concert review], Russkaui muzyka I naia gazeta 10 (1901): 314-315

197

maintained, even if the technical requirement of maintaining an a cappella choir would be defied. Considering aspects of restraint combined with the warmth of tone color and depth of sonority that the premier must have demonstrated, and considering the general informafion of the performance pracfice of the fime, the goal for the choral sound for a performance of the Second Liturgy would be characterized by a "pyramid" structure that was advocated by Aleksei L'vov in the nineteenth century, as discussed in Chapter III.'' Thus, the overall choral sound should be built upon the basses singing with the fullest sound, providing the foundation for all of the other voices. A climactic section in which all voices are mdLrked fortissimo in a homophonic texture should be performed w ith the following dynamic levels to reflect this pyramid sound: "basses—//; tenors—/; altos—mf; sopranos—w/?." As such dynamic markings always represent relative volume levels, more exact dynamic markings can be indicated through the use of a numbered scale, from one to sixteen for instance, effectively doubling the number of dynamic levels between ppp andjff. The choir can number the dynamics from one, representing the softest audible sound, to sixteen, represenfing the loudest sound that can be sung well. Thus, in the same homophonic section described above, employing this numbered system of dynamics, the parts could be marked thus: "basses—14, tenors—12; altos—10; sopranos—8." Furthermore, as the sustained lines inherently require subtle gradations of dynamic shading, this numbering of dynamics also would help shape phrases and add nuances to the predominantly expansive style of the music.

" See page 63.

198

Phrasing and dynamics form a crucial area of interpretation of Russian sacred choral music, and Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy is no excepfion. As seen in Morosan's quotation from Chesnokov's The Choir and How to Direct it, sensifivity to dynamic nuances were considered of critical importance in the performance practice of the new Russian choral school: "'Composers... indicate only general nuances, and do not depict the mulfitude of minute and varied nuances that lie hidden in their compositions. Therefore extracfing all the nuances and filling them with artistic content in performance is the task of the conductor, wherein he reveals his giftedness and creativity.'""'' Therefore, with the ever-present goal of creating an effective mood for the text, the conductor should careftilly evaluate each musical phrase in terms of textual meaning and the musical expression of that meaning. Accented syllables, shown with an accent mark in the transliterated text, should also be considered. Then, appropriate gradations of dynamic nuances that extend beyond the score should be applied. As discussed in Chapter VI, Example 6.23 presents such an example of an inherent but unwritten crescendo toward the second syllable of the word "prilezhno," emphasizing this particular word that is literally translated "fervently." Example 7.1 presents the same music with the addifion of dynamic nuances written into the score on the soprano part to be applied to each of the voice parts, determined by the same considerations discussed

' Morosan, Choral Performance 287. Morosan quotes Pavel Chesnokov, Khor i upr.ivlenie tm [The choir and how to direct it], 2"^^ ed. (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Muzykalnoe lzdaterst\o. 1952) 8690.

199

above. Though subtle, the greatest crescendo would occur in the fourth measure on the downbeat, emphasizing the appropriate syllable of the word "prilezhno." Example 7.1 "Let us fervenfiy beseech." Measures 1-5. with Addifion of Dynamic Shading Moderato e comodo. senza misura,

1. Soprano

Alto

Tenor

Bass

^

I

KBo-go K Bo - ro

ID - di - tse po - OT - ne

^

i fr

c-r KBo-go

K Bo- ro P

I ^ - Tezh - no npH • Jiex - HO

ph - te npH • re

tsem, ncM,

^m

ID • di po - OT

UUU

ph - lezfa - no npH - nex - HO

tse ne

lu - ne HU - ae

i

p f i - t e - tsem, npH - TC - neM,

^

^

^m

X

m ni - ne HU - HC

K Bo - go K Bo - ro

fo - 3i

-

po - m

- nc

1^ - Tezh - no ni - ne p f i - t e - tsem. npH - ncx. • BO HU - HC npH - TC - noM,

tse

English Translation: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God, Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Related to this discussion, phrasing of the sustained vocal lines also becomes important. In these sustained phrases, singers will naturally want to insert a rest for the purpose of taking a breath at a place that they may erroneously perceive to present the end of a musical phrase. However, often fimes such places in the line are intended to crescendo into another musical phrase. Insertion of a rest would interrupt this crescendo, thereby decreasing the aesthetic and expressive quality of the music. Therefore, rests should be inserted in alternate places, or the choir should use the technique of "staggered breathing." Such an example may be seen in Example 7.2ft-omone of the more expansive movementsft^omthe Second Liturgy, the Cherubic Hymn. In this example, the

200

singers, especially the sopranos, altos, and tenors, will want to insert a breath after the fourth beat of measure 19. However, the text, the harmonic motion of the secondar>dominant E major chord progressing to A major, and the dynamic marking of forte on the downbeat of measure 20 would determine that a performance should include a crescendo to carry the line without interruption for a breath from the fourth beat of measure 19 into the downbeat of measure 20. Example 7.2 Cherubic Hymn, Measures 17-20.

ffi - (vf^-m

-

yu

TpH - cBJi-ry

-

K)

English Translation: and who sing the thrice-holy hymn to the life-creating Trinity Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The specific instructions left by the composer himself about the performance of this work also should be carefully observed in the preparation process. These instructions lie in the actual tempo performance markings added into the score. For instance, Gretchaninoff adds the marking of lente e mysterioso to the beginning of the Cherubic Hymn, the most solemn hymn in the liturgy employed to accompany

101

important acfions of the clergy related to the Eucharist. The tempo indication exactlv follows the liturgical requirement allowing adequate time for the actions to take place while the hymn is being sung, and requiring a type of sound that recentlv' was described by Morosan as "floating" and "fimeless,"^^ an aspect that can be particularly enhanced bv performing in a room with exceptionally live acousfics. In other movements, the tempo indications equally signify the specific mood of the liturgy text, adding to the expressiv e quality of the music. Further, in the performance notes to a separately published movement from the Second Liturgy, Morosan adds that the originally published edition included specific instructions written by Gretchaninoff for performing the Creed, providing valuable insight: The alto soloist should chant in a manner that is simple, without any vibrato in the tone, and should not accentuate each syllable in a choppy manner. The chanting should resemble that of a priest reciting the Gospel. Places marked by accents should be emphasized slightly, as one would do when reciting poetry; these subtle accents should coincide with the chords in the chorus. The movement of the chords should be even and calm, almost exactly to the meter and without the slightest hint of rushing (as if the chords were being 'fitted' to the chanting).^'* Another aspect that should be considered in performing the Second Liturgy would involve the employment of the solo chants. As some recordings listed in the discography demonstrate, the choral responses from the Great Litany, for instance, are often performed without the chants, but such a wholesale exclusion significantly undercuts the quality of musical expression. The damage to the logical flow of the piece is even more obvious. As Morosan writes: "...the musical impact of a composed Divine Liturgy may ^' Morosan, telephone interview 14 September 2002. '^ Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Let us fervently beseech," by Alexandre Gretchaninott (1902. Madison: Musica Russica, 2002).

2o:

be lost in a concert performance if the litany responses are faithfullv' preserved without the intervening priest's or deacon's exclamations. Nothing is more absurd than hearing eleven Gospodi pomilui's [Lord have mercy's] in a row with no ekphonesis between them."^^ However, without some research into the actual chants, non-Russian conductors may not realize that the solo chants should be included in the performance. Following the usual pracfice, Gretchaninoff does not compose the chants to be included in the Second Liturgy.

Rather, these chants were performed according to oral tradition, and

the insertion of the chants are only designated by the addition of double bar lines at the end of a phrase or choral response scattered throughout the work, as demonstrated in Example 7.3. As seen in this example, exclusion of the solo chants would not only result in a less musically expressive closure to "The Lord's Prayer," but also would leave the well-known text incomplete and illogical.

Morosan, Choral Performance 303. Morosan states that the chants "in Rachmaninoffs time would have been pertormed according to oral tradition, and therefore did not require anv musical notation on the composer's part ." Rachmaninoff 332-333.

!03

Example 7.3 "Our Father," Measures 63-66 Commodo. Ee3 pasMcpa.

[Senza misura.]

J J J J

fe^l^ J

m S I

A - mfn. A - MHHIi.

A - mfn. A - HHHb.

^

^

S

A - mfii. A - MHHb.

I

r I

du

bp - vi Tvo • ye-mu. xo - BH TBO c - My.

m

«^=8=

tfiD - vi Tvo • ye-mu. xo • BH TBO e - My.

Tc - 5c. Tc - 6e.

X

c - 6c, Te - 6c.

rr\

i-

nn-'>

I H

du ny

hp - vi TVo• ye - mu. xo - BH TBO e - My.

K

JJJJ, iJ

zsn A - fifn. A - MHHI>.

du

I H

du Ay

hp - vi Tvo- ye - mu. xo - BH TBO e - My.

Gho To

T

Gho fo

^ spo-di. cno-AH.

Gho To

S

Te - 6c, Te - 6c,

Gho fo

A A

-o-

mfn. MHHk

t==S^ spo - di cno-iiH.

ii^^ Te - 6c. Te - 6e,

=ni

A • nun. A - MMH^.

:«:

S

:«=

spo-di. cno-OT.

A A

MUHW

I

spo-di. cno-AH.

Afn.

31= 31= 31= A - iWn A - MHHK

English Translation (with insertion of solo chants): Solo: For Thine are the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Choir: Amen Solo: Peace be unto all. Choir: And to your spirit. Solo: Bow you heads unto the Lord. Choir: To Thee, O Lord. Solo: Through the grace and compassion and love toward mankind of Thine only-begonen Son, with whom Thou art blessed, together with Tliine all-holy, good, and life-creating Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Choir: Amen. Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. .Ml Rights Reserved.

Morosan's transcripfion of many of the solo chants as well as his discussions of them offer pracfical solufions to this problem.'^ When the chants are carefully prepared and performed sensitively, following the performance practice of a slight overiap between the end of the solo chant and the beginning of the next choral phrase to create a seamless 38

elasticity of sound over a texture that altemates between solo chant and the full choir, a

" Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 429-431; Sergei Rachmaninoff }Ai)'3A2. .Morosan notes: "The chanted petitions of the dceacon are rendered quite simply, in a stately recitative on a single note, without much musical elaboration." Tchaikovsky, 406-407. ^* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix

204

very pleasing aesthetic experience resuhs both for the choir and for the audience. In a practical sense as discussed above, the opening chants of the Deacon or Celebrant at the beginning of movements can assist in establishing the new tonal centers for the successive choruses.

205

CHAPTER Vm CONCLUSION

Gretchaninoffs Second Litugy of Saint John Chrysostom, opus 29. was conceived out of a rich liturgical tradifion spanning over nine centuries. The Second Liturgy was the product of a common Russian man drawn to music, beginning with his early exposure to the liturgical music of the Russian Orthodox Church. Like other Russian composers, everything about Gretchaninoffs early music education was shaped by the socio-political events and policies that resultedfi-omthe reigning tsar's administrations. These political influences also directly affected the Russian Orthodox Church throughout the nineteenth and early twenfieth centuries, thereby affecting the church's musical tradition. The overall waning popularity of Nicholas II in the early twentieth century also affected the relationship that the Russian Orthodox Church maintained with the general population, leading to the formation of radical political groups that eventually resulted in the Bolshevik Revolufion, drasfically altering all areas of Russian society. Through all of the events that led to the eminent revolution, Gretchaninoff remained a faithful member of the Russian Orthodox Church and a leader of the new Russian choral school, both acfively discussing and consistently composing church music even after the 1917 revolution. Composing volumes of piano music, songs, children's music, operas, symphonies, and many other works, Gretchaninoffs most enduring contribution consisted of his sacred choral music, designating him as one of the leading composers from the penod of

!06

the new Russian choral school. Though his contributions to choral music after his emigrafion ft-om Russia in 1925 continued to bare considerable traits of his distinct Russian style, the sacred choral works composed between 1902 and 191 ~ make up a unique category of his choral output. These particular works not only made up his most important works composed for the Russian Orthodox Church, but also firmlv established him as a distinguished composer of Russian sacred choral music. Gretchaninoffs abundant writings on Russian liturgical music offer important perspectives on the development of his sacred choral style and on performance practices of the day that should be applied not only to his own music but also to all liturgical music ft"om the period. As notedft-omprevious research, Gretchaninoffs approach to liturgical music was that of an outsider, contributing to these newly developed sacred genres out of his experience in secular music. This nofion is verified by Gretchaninoffs own writings, specifically the New York Essay of 1932, "Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing," where he states that the primary inspirations for his sacred music derived ft-om the operas of Mussorgsky, Borodin, and Rimsky-Korsakov. However, without the previous nine centuries of development of Russian liturgical singing that had recently culminated in Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, neither Gretchaninoffs sacred music nor the sacred music of his contemporaries would have been composed. Thus, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. composed during the highest point of Russian liturgical music, retains a significant status in the corpus of Russian liturgical music. He was inspired by such contrasting works as the Russian operas of the late nineteenth century and Tchaikovsky's Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 41; and

207

he was influenced to follow the ancient Russian chant style from such disparate sources as the famous musicologist and director of the Moscow Synodal School, Stepan Smolensky, and the somewhat contenfious joumalists and contributors to the Moskovskie Vedomosti. Thus, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy represents a synthesis of the many ideas and trends among both composers and crifics of sacred music. While maintaining the central service of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgy, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy expands the genre to encompass both a more stylistically unified musical form and individual movements developed into unprecedented formal schemes. For decades, individual movementsft-omthe Second Liturgy have been appreciated and performed in the United States in their English translation, although information about the history of Russian sacred choral music and the accepted performance pracfices of the new Russian choral school remained very limited. Even so, this music was appreciated as an important contribufion to the canon of choral literature throughout most of the twenfieth century. However, a thorough understanding of its contextual and historical status both in the general area of Russian sacred music and in the specific period of the new Russian choral school should significantly elevate the status of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy in the canon of choral literature.

208

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Alexander Gretchaninov". Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians, Ed. Nicholas Slonimsky, 8^*" ed. New York: Schirmer Books, 1992. Barsova, Inna, and Gerald Abraham, "Grechaninov. Alexandr Tikhonovich." Vie Sew Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tvrrell, 2"^^ ed., 20 vols. London: Macmillan, 2001. Bazaroff, Igor. "Alexander Gretchaninoff Dean of Russian Composers." The Russian Orthodox Journal 18 (December, 1944): 1-3, 8-10. Brill, Nicholas P. History of Russian Church Music, 988-1917. Bloomington, IL: Brill, 1980. Brown, David. "Kashkin, Nikolay Dmitriyevich." The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2"^^ ed., 20 vols. London: Macmillan, 2001. Chrysostom, St. John. "From the Exposition of Psalm XLI." Ed. Oliver Strunk, Source Readings in Music History: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. New \'ork: WW Norton, 1965,67-70. Chu, George S. T. "An Interview with Vladimir Morosan." Choral Journal, 40.3 (October, 1999): 35-40. Dolskaya-Ackeriy, Olga. "Aesthetics and National Identity in Russian Sacred Choral Music: A Past in Tradifion and Present in Ruins," Choral Journal, 42.5 (December, 2001): 9-24. "Dukhovny Kontsert" [The Sacred Music Concert]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 27 Mar. 1903. No 85: 4. Ferro, Marc. Nicholas LI, Last of the Tsars. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993 Gardner, Johann von. Russian Church Singing. Vol. I: Orthodox Worship and Hymnography. Trans. Vladimir Morosan. New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980. Golubtsov. A. P. Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgii. Chast 2. Liturgia [From the readings on the Church Archaeology and Liturgy. Part 2. Liturgical]. Sergiev Posad: 1918.

209

Gretchaninoff, Alexandre. All-Night Vigil, Opus 59. 1912. Ed. James Turk, Madimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 2001. —. "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," Op. 58, No. 1.1911. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1995. —. "Come, and Let Us Worship." Text adaption, N. Lindsay Norden. Boston: Boston Music Company, 1929. 1957. —. "Glory... Only Begotten Son," No. 2ft-omthe Liturgy^, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. \'ladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997. —. "In Thy Kingdom," Op. 58, No. 3. 1911. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1996. —. "Kratki obzor razvitia tserkovnogo pravoslavnogo penia." [Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing]. Unpublished essay, 30 Sep. 1932. —. "Let us Fervently Beseech the Mother of God," No. 12ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 2002. —. Liturgia Domestica, Opus 79. 1917. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Musica Russica: 2002. —. Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. 1902. Ed. Madimir Morosan. Musica Russica: 2002. —. My Life. Trans. Nicholas Slonimsky. New York: Coleman-Ross Company, Inc., 1952. —. "Neskol'ko slov o 'dukhe' tserkovnykh penopenyi" [A Few Words about the 'Spirit' of the Church motets]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 23 Feb. 1900. No 53: 3-4. —. "Only Begotten Son." Text adaptation, N. Lindsay Norden. J. Fischer & Bro., 1914. —. "Our Father," No. 11ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1994. —. "Our Father." Text adaptation, Arthur S. Kimball. Oliver Ditson Co., Theodore PresserCo., 1916. —. "Pis'mo k izdatelu" [Letter to the Publisher]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 26 Feb. P)()0: No 56. 4.

210

—. "Po povodu moei stat'i 'O dukhe tserkovnykh pesnopenyi'"[Regarding my article "About the spirit of the church motets."]. Moskovksie Vedomosti. 14 Mar. 1900. No. 73:3-4. —. "The Cherubic Hymn," No. 6ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1994. —. "The Lord is God... and The Noble Joseph," Op. 58, No. 1. 1911. Ed. \ ladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997. —. "Thou, 'Who Clothest Thyself with Light," Op. 58, No. 9. 1911. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997. Grigorov, A.I., Urusov, G. G. "O dukhe tserkovnogo penia (Po povodu stat'i A.Grechaninova)"[On the Spirit of the Church Motets. (Regarding Grechaninov's article)]. Moskovksie Vedomosti. 29 Feb. 1900. No. 59: 3-4. Heylbut, Rose. "Russian Masters of Yesterday." Etude, 67 (June, 1949): 344. Heyman, Neil M. Russian History. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993. Holmes, Bradley A. "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic Masses of Alexandre T. Grechaninov." D.M.A. diss., Arizona State U, 1990 Kashkin, N[ikolai]. "Den' moskovskih kompositorov" [Moscow Composer's Day]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 5 Mar. 1903, No 63: 4-5. Kutuzov, B. "Problemy russkogo znamennogo penia v sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia katolikami gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Singing Znamenny Chant in relafion to the history of revival of Gregorian Chant by Catholics], Shkola Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singing]. Moscow: Spass Cathedral of Andronic Monastery, #1. 1996. . Meyendorff, Paul. "Russian Liturgical Worship," Monuments of Russian Sacred Music: Peter Tchaikovsky, The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Ser. 2, vol. 1-3. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996. Montagu-Nathan, M. An Introduction to Russian Music. London: Cecil Palmer & Hayward, 1916. Morosan, Vladimir Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia. Madison: Musica Russica, Inc., 1994. —, ed. One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music: 98S-1988. Ser. 1, vol. 1. Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Washington, DC: Musica Russica, T^^^l.

11

—, ed. Peter Tchaikovsky The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 2, vol. 1/2'3. Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996. —. Telephone Interviews. 19, 22 May, 24 August, 9 September, 14 September, 2002. —. "The Sacred Choral Works of Peter Tchaikovsky." Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Peter Tchaikovsky The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 2, vol. 1/2'3. Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996. —. "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff." Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Sergei Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 9, vol. 1/2. Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1994. —, ed. Sergei Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 9, vol. 1.2. Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1994. Nikolaev, [Archpriest] Boris. Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osnova russkogo pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenny chant and hook notation as the heart of Russian Orthodox Church singing]. Moscow: Nauchnaia Kniga, 1995. Norden, N. Lindsay. "A Brief Study of the Russian Liturgy and its Music." Musical Quarterly, 5 (July 1919): 426-450. Rakhmanova, Marina. Liner notes. Trans. Philip Taylor. Gretchaninov I espers. Hoist Singers. Stephen Layton, cond. CD. Hyperion, 1999. —. "Staroobriadchestvo i 'Novoe napravlenie' v russkoi dukhovnoi muzyke" [Old Belief and 'New School' in Russian Music], Cultural Heritage of Medieval Russia in the Tradition of Ural - Siberian Old Belief. Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific Conference, May 17-19, 1999. Novosibirsk: M. I. Glinka Novosibirsk State Conservatory, 1999. . Reid, Robert Addison. "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its Assimilation into and Impact on the American A Cappella Choir Movement." D.M.A. diss.. University of Texas, 1983. Schwarz, Boris. Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia. 2"^^ ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983. Seagard, John. "Vocal Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of Alexander Gretchaninoff" M.M. Thesis, Universitv of Rochester, 1949

:i2

Smith, Mary Nicholas, Sister. "The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship to Russian NationaUsm." Thesis: University of Southern Califomia. 1952. Spector, Ivar. An Introduction to Russian History and Culture. New '^'ork: D. \'an Norstrand Company, 1949. Stewart, Sandra Kay. "The Life and Piano Collections of Alexander Gretchaninoff." D.M.A. diss.. University of South Carolina, 1995. Wilcox, Keith Dwayne. "Russian Sacred Choral and Folk Music: A Multicultural Text for High Schools and Colleges." D.M.A. diss.. University of MissouriKansas City, 1998. Wybrew, Hugh. The Orthodox Liturgy: The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite. New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996. Yampol'sky, I.M. "Moscow." The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2"^^ ed. 20 vols. London: Macmillan, 2001. Yasser, Joseph. "Gretchaninoffs 'Heterodox' Compositions." The Musical Quarterly, 28 (1942): 309-17. Yastrebtsev, V.V. Reminiscenses of Rimsky-Korsakov, trans. Florence Jonas. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

213

DISCOGRAPHY

Dimitriak, G., cond. Gesdnge Der Russisch-Orthodoxen Kirche von Alexander Gretschaninow [Alexander Gretchaninoff: Hymns of the Russian Orthodox Church]. "Moscow Kremlin" Ensemble of Soloists. CanticaDuophon, 1994. Layton, Stephen, cond. Gretchaninov Vespers. Hoist Singers. Hvpenon, 1999. Polyansky, Valery, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recording: The Seven Days oj Passion. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Chandos, 1994. —, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recordings: Symphony No. 1; Snowflakes, op. 4^, Missa Sancti Spiritus, op. 169. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symponic Orchestra. Chandos, 1995. —, cond. Grechaninov: Liturgia Domestica, op. 79. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1995. —, cond. Grechaninov: Mass Et in terra pax;' Symphony No. 2. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1996. —, cond. Grechaninov: Symphony No. 4; Cello Concerto: Missa Festiva.. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1997. —, cond. Grechaninov: Symphony No. 3: Cantata 'Praise the Lord. ' Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Svmphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1999. —, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recordings: Symphony No. 5: Missa Oecumenica. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 2000.

214

APPENDIX A THE MOSKOVSKIE VEDOMOSTI PUBLICATIONS OF 1900

The following excerpts are complete translations of the published correspondence that took place between Gretchaninoff, two lay composers of church music identified as A. I. Grigorov and G. G. Urusov, and the editorial staff of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a daily newspaper in Moscow. These edifions of the Moskovskie Vedomosti w ere located in the State Historical Public Library in Moscow, translated by Sergei Shishkin and edited by Philip Camp. This is the first complete English translation of these articles. Equivalent to the "letters to the editor" section of contemporary newspapers in the United States, the content of these articles provides much insight into Gretchaninoffs views relating to liturgical music at the turn of the twentieth century, just two years pnor to his complefion of the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. Fifty years later, Gretchaninoff would discuss the content of these articles in his autobiography. My Life. Given the significance that Gretchaninoff gives to these articles in his autobiography, it can be concluded that these publications carried much weight in the development of the new Russian choral school as well as his own compositional style. Scholars of Russian sacred music have referred to these articles based on Gretchaninoffs recollection of them ft-om his autobiography; however, a comparison between the actual articles and Gretchaninoffs autobiography reveals significant discrepancies. Consequently, observation of the actual articles leads to new conclusions about his

215

stylisfic development. For a complete discussion of the significance of the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications of 1900, see Chapter IV.

A. T. Gretchaninoff, "Neskol'ko slov o 'dukhe' tserkovnykh penopenyi" [.\ Few Words about the 'Spirit' of the Church motets], Moskovskie Vedomosti, Xo 53. February 23, 1900,3-4. In the reviews on the concerts of sacred music, we often hear or read that a sacred work is not "ecclesiastical."' It is often quite difficult to understand what the critics mean by the word "ecclesiastical," and how they would interpret the "spirit" of the church motets. Some suggest that such church music refers only to music that resembles the compositions of Bortniansky, Vedel, Sarti and so on: others consider this church music only to be music that reminds them of the obikhod; finally, there is a third group of people, who, by some miracle, manage to reconcile the ideals of obikhod singing with the music of the above mentioned masters. The first group, the admirers of semi-Italian, semi-German music of our church, is more sincere than the other two groups. They say: "We like the sweetness in the composifions of Bortniansky and Sarti. It inspires our souls, and it seems to us that the church does not need better music. Dear composers, wnte in their style; that would be good and ftilly 'in the spirit of the church.'" We may agree or disagree with these admirers but we cannot totally ignore their tastes. Of course, the prettiness and sweetness alone are not enough to illustrate the richest content of the sacred text; however, a composer cannot neglect that prettiness. ' The original Russian word translated "ecclesiastical" is "tserkovnost." from the root "tserkov," meaning "church." "Tserkovnost" literally would mean anything from or belonging to church

216

The second group is the admirers of the obikhod, specifically the obikhod arranged almost exclusively in theft-amesof the harmony on the \'\ 4^^ and 5'^ degree. " They are the so-called ascefics of our church music. According to this group of admirers, there is no need for the composition of sacred music at all. According to their opinion, all that is required is an arrangementft-omthe obikhod, or an arrangement that onlv follows this well-known pattem. It is impossible to compose music that they w ould consider in the "spirit" of the Church. While we can understand the admirers of the obikhod, the final group is an enigma for us. These people regard the obikhod as the ideal of church music, but at the same time, they regard the compositions of Bortniansky, Sarti, Vedel, and their imitators as the height of ecclesiasticism.^ What does the music of these composers and the obikhod have in common? What is the relationship between them? Nobody knows. Probably, they themselves do not know. To compose in a way that will satisfy the "churchliness" requirements of this group of experts actually may not be difficult. However, we doubt that the ambition of the serious and true composer will be satisfied in gaining such admirers. All of these amateurs and experts talk about "ecclesiasficism"^ and about "what is in the spirit" and "what is not in the spirit" of the church motets. However, they do not give definitions of these terms. It is not enough to say that something "is like" or "is not

^ Here, Gretchaninoff refers to Aleksei L'vovs Obikhod of 1848 that harmonized all of the chants using primarily the tonic, subdominant. and dominant chords, rather than the pre\ lously known Obikhod that only presented monophonic chants. See Chapter III, page 61, n49. ^ See note 1. * See note 1.

217

like" an ideal, which is often imaginary. However, this issue is so important that we must examine it. 'What do we need? What music do we really have to consider as the ideal for our Orthodox church? Where can we find a standard for churchliness and for the spirit of the church motets? Nonetheless, we have this standard and it is my deep conviction that it is the truest standard. This standard is the correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to the text's contents. The more we have that conformity in the work, the more it is in the spirit of the Church. Let us try to clarify it. The text of a sacred composition may be extremely vanous in its contents and mood. It may be solemn, meditative, mysterious, quiet, rough, gloomy, and severe; or it may be merry, cheerftil, bright, or joyous - even with many other nuances. All of this endless variety in the text requires music that is also extremely various in its character and nuances for its illustration. For example if the text states: "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept..." but a composer accompanies these words with the music of cheerful character, in fast tempo and the like - of course, it would be a mistake. It would be the same mistake if a composer took the text with joyous contents, such as: "And David danced before the Lord with all his might" and so on, and described it with the gloomy chords on lower notes, in an adagio tempo, and the like. In the obikhod, this \ cry text is accompanied with music that is almost folk dancing, and so the unknown author(s) was profoundly correct in not being scared to insult someone's religious

218

feelings by his choice of melodic character. It is so powerftil, courageous, and sincere, that in our time such a composer's acfion would seem like a heroic act, but manvreligious people would never forgive it. As an example of a mistake in respect to the inconsistency of the music to the text, a mistake with which we have become so acquainted that we do not notice, we ma> show the following. Usually the words: "We will rise up the King..." that are subordinate to the main clause: "And the cherubim..." and so on, are the continuation of the same thought usually expressed by meditafive music of a mysterious mood.^ \'et, for some reason these words are accompanied, following Bortniansky's example, bv music of cheerftil and even warlike character. Perhaps it is profitable ft-om the purely musical point of view, as a contrast to the previous mood, but we consider it to be a mistake as a technique that is out of place in this instance. It would be another matter if instead of these words, the text expressed confidence in the capture of enemies or the demand for nations to surrender to us, and so on. Consequently, a composer has a very wide choice regarding the character and the mood of the church motets, if only he correctly understands and expresses the text's meaning. If the requirement of the conformity of music to the text is fulfilled, then the other requirement will be fulfilled as well, that is, that the church music should not be overiy elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and especially not sweet nor vulgar. Why? Because the loftiness of the liturgical texts caimot provide a groundwork for that (This is

' Gretchaninoff adds the following note here: "The interruption made here bv the exclamations of a deacon and a priest does not correspond to the text's meanine " 219

the reason why chromafisms, due to their sensuality and pretentiousness, shock our ears in sacred music works). Let us consider the issue under examinationft-omthe other side,ft-omthe point of view that only considers the purely outward musical form. Do we have any contrapuntal or harmonic techniques that could be considered inappropriate in sacred music'' I think that there are no such techniques. Any musical form is fitting if only it is used sensibly and appropriately and if the following requirements are ftilfilled: First, the words should be pronounced by all voices simultaneously or, given a contrapuntal work, the words should be distributed among the voices so skillftilly that the listener can absolutely follow the text. Such forms as fiigue and even ftigatto may cause some difficulties in that regard, but those difficulties are not so excepfional that we could not use this form. If we repeat one word many times, for example hallelujah, this obstacle disappears. Second, the text should be rightly and correctly declaimed. There are many mistakes in that regard, even in the obikhod, demonstrated in the following example: In the text, "You are my Lord, the light that comes to the world" the interruption and aspiration is made after the word "light;" the resuhing pause presents an obvious error: "You are my Lord - the light; that comes to the world," and so on. Having joined these three main requirements: to clearly pronounce the words, correctly declaim them, and most importantly, the conformity of the music to the text, we will exhaust all that is required to consider a know n sacred music work suitable for the church. If many people consider any non-hackneyed technique as a heresy (for example, the use of any other manner of harmonization besides tonic, dominant and subdominant).

220

this is only because they are not accustomed to those techniques. The more rich and v ivid colors a composer has, the more variety he has in the techniques of musical means. However, despite how suitable and noble those techniques may be - if they are nev\- and uncommon - the more they will be regarded as a transgression of piety bv some admirers of church music. It is quite another matter, for instance, if a tenor forgets where he is and leads a solo on very high notes, reminding us of a very awful, sentimental romance, or if the basses cry out: "and run and run..." - it seems to them as decent and quite in the spirit of the church music... Also quite often, we hear discussions about the style of sacred music works. But 1 think that this issue is so delicate and debatable that hardly even two musicians w ill agree in its understanding. Some people say, for example, the musical style of the Western church is not suitable for our orthodox church - but what st> le do Bortniansky, \'edel and the others have according to the majority's point of view*^ Does a Russian style exist? If it does, then to what degree is it independent and how much of that very Western style may we see in it? None of these questions are even touched by the literature. Furthermore, it is unlikely that anyone could presently answer them without reflection. "It looks like opera" - is the blame sometimes being made to a sacred music work. But why should music suitable for church usage not be found in opera, especially if it is written on a lofty plot (for example, Wagner's Parsifal). And on the contrary, are not many banal things, intended only for poor taste, sung in our church? Those things do not have any place even in a somewhat decent opera, for example, the lav onte threefold

T") I

exclamafion "O Lord have mercy on us" known as Borodinsky's. or the tsar's, that musically resembles a very banal secular romance. So, what kind of music should we consider as corresponding to the spirit of our Church? I know both vulgar and noble music; overly elaborate and simple; sw eet and senfimental, and rigorous, serious music. If a sacred work only fits first definitions then it is worth nothing; if it corresponds to the text, if it is simple and noble, and if words can be heard and are correctly declaimed, then such a work is worthy to be performed in the church, and that is why it is "ecclesiasfical"^ if you will. But when some work is said not to correspond to the spirit of the church motets, I understand it only in one sense: it does not correspond to the text. But "the spirit," as it is usually accepted to be understood - is a convention, a habit. A. Gretchaninoff

From the editorial staff Given the place of this article from such a young talented composer as our Mr. Gretchaninoff, our inifial response is to rejoice that the issue of our church music has gradually come to the forefront of our spiritual interests. Then in the nearest future, wc hope to publish the interesting research on that issue from our competent music critic, G.A. Larosh. As for the opinion of Mr. Gretchaninoff, we hope that there will be people among the admirers of our church singing that will state their opinion to confirm that there is a

Literally, "belonging to church." See note 1

')->'"

fourth group besides those three groups of admirers of church singing mentioned bv Mr. Gretchaninoff. This group is not safisfied with Bortnianskv'. the modem obikhod. nor with both simultaneously, but they are moved by the marvelous and are filled with the deep religious spirit of the old and ancient tunes of our church. A.I. Grigorov repeatedlv addressed these tunes in the columns of this newspaper, show^n in No 34 of the current year. As for the "ecclesiastical spirit," we hardly think that it is only a "convention, a habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff thinks. Having listed all of the necessary requirements for the composition of church music, Mr. Gretchaninoff, like all of our modem composers, misses the most important requirement: the religious mood, and consequently, the sincere faith of a composer himself Church music as well as church painting requires not only highly creativ e talent, but also religious spirituality of that talent. One may compose "corresponding music" to the secular romance words; but for the liturgical words of prayer, it is not enough; one has to be filled with the blessed power of that prayer, one has to believ e in that power, one has to pray himself

^^3

Gretchaninoff, A. "Pis'mo k izdatelu" [Letter to the Publisher]. Moskovskie Vedomosti, No. 56, February 26. 1900, p. 4 (2). Dear Sir, I am very gratefiil for the kind offer to publish my article in your respectful newspaper. Unfortunately, several regrettable misprints slipped into the article. They considerably distorted some of my thoughts. For example, on page 3, last column, lines 16 and 17, in the phrase "Nonetheless, we have this standard and it is mv deep conviction that it is the truest standard" instead of the word 'vemoe' [truest], 'vazhnoe' [important] was printed. On the same page, line 30, instead of the word 'bodryi' [cheerful], 'dobryi' [kind] was printed. On the next page, the first column, line 8, 'not' was missed before the word 'scared' ("the unknown author was profoundly correct in not being scared..."). I have two thoughts in response to the editorial comment on my article. First, it was said that I overlooked the most important requirement for the composition of church music: the religious mood. But I will state that if a composition of sacred music does not have that religious mood, it does not meet that requirement that I consider to be the most important—the correspondence of the music to the text. Since the religious mood is always present in the sacred text, then as a matter of fact, the music must have that religious mood as well, or else that correspondence will not exist. Next, I totally agree with the opinion that in order to compose worthy music on the words of a prayer, one needs to be filled with that prayer. When you compose music on these profound and lofty texts, you must also feel yourself tuned in to such profound loftiness, but this point does not relate directly to the main subject of my article. In the article, I did not intend to address the issue of how to compose. 1 just wanted to note,

224

from my own understanding, what we should require from the w ork alreadv composed, or in other words, if possible, to establish the hallmark for works of sacred music on a better substantiated basis.

Grigorov, A.I., Urusov, G. G. "O dukhe tserkovnogo penia (Po povodu stat'i A.Grechaninova)" [On the Spirit of the Church Motets. (Regarding Grechaninov's article)]. Moskovksie Vedomosti, No. 59, February 29, 1900, pp. 3-4. 1 [Griogorov] More than once and with great attention, I have read Mr. Gretchaninoffs article "About the 'Spirit' of the Church motets".^ The sincere opinion of this young composer, who has already joined the ranks of composers of songs for the church, is very important and also may provide us with very valuable hopes. The impressive editorial note to the article redeems me from the necessity of repeating what I have already stated regarding church music and singing. The editorial staff was absolutely correct when they clearly pointed out the existence of the class of admirers of church singing that the author did not perceive, either because he did not know about that class or because of some other reason. However, that class deserves our attention, though Mr. Gretchaninoff persistently ignores it even in his Letter to the 8

Publisher published in response to the above-mentioned editonal note.

^ See N(i 53, Moskovskie Vedomosti. ' See No 56, Moskovskie Vedomosti.

1^^

That fourth class of admirers according to Gretchaninoffs reckoning, though perhaps it would be more correct to identify them as the class of ardent supponers of purity and holiness in church singing that strongly keeps devotion to the ancient tunes, believes both in their mighty chaste power and in their final triumph. However, let us not severely reproach Mr. Gretchaninoff for not noticing them until now. Indeed, they can go unnoficed because they are few in number and are extremelv meek and shy. They are rarely heard from, and do not speak much among themselv es. Even when they speak, they are without fervor and pride, without any intention of making a noise or attracting attention. They are very modest. They are people w ho simply delight in the smallest yet progressive movement toward the triumph of their hopes. Let us then tum to Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It has the flaw that was pointed out by the editorial note, and then confirmed even by Mr. Gretchaninoff himself in the abovementioned Letter to the Publisher. Not only did Mr. Gretchaninoff not mention the most important requirement for the composifion of church motets, namely the sincere faith of a composer himself, but also his article is ftill of inexact if not inconsistent statements. For example, in the beginning of the article, the author states that the text of a sacred composition is "extremely various," and therefore for its illustration, "requires music that is also extremely various in its character and nuances." But in the middle of the article, addressing the restrictions on the character of church music that does not allow anything in its sphere that is "overiy elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and especially not sweet nor vulgar," he points out quite correctly that this assumption would not correspond to a text that is always "lofty" and therefore "cannot provide a

226

groundwork for that." As you can see, the text is restricted, and at the same time "extremely various," with the possibility of "extremely various illustrations" to it. So, what kind of music is suitable for the church motets? Moreover, do the restricfions for a composer's usage of such musical resources exist? In Mr. Gretchaninoffs own words, suitable music for the church should meet the requirements of "the correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to the text's contents..., the text should be righfiy and correctly declaimed." and "the words should be pronounced by all voices simultaneously" or "given a contrapuntal w ork, the words should be distributed among the voices so skillfully that the listener can absolutely follow the text." Therefore, according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs opinion, if a composer observes the above requirements and gets rid of the "hackneyed techniques," then he may show all of his strength and reveal all the extent and the "rich and vivid colors" in the use of the musical means to create a work quite suitable for church performance. We must express gratitude to Mr. Gretchaninoff for firmly raising the important issue of the composition of church motets, and for his well-grounded intentions for lisfing the requirement of three conditions. Those conditions are extremely essential and serious. However, they are not sufficient for the church motets. Those conditions are sufficient for defining a "work" in an exclusively technical sense, and it is obvious that without them, such a work would be not only imperfect but also meaningless. The results of such a work led to the creation of "the pieces" that offend the believers; those pieces are permitted for shameless performance in the temples Grigorov adds this note, "We are a little bit confused about the meaning of the phrase "hackney techniques.'. Does the author mean the ancient and monastic tunes?"

227

that leads to great temptafion. The above condifions could be sufficient for the "appropriateness" that is permissible for the performance of such "works" in church, but they are not enough for their ftill appropriateness for worship. In mv opinion "permissibility" and "appropriateness" are quite different conceptions. The "permissible" is only tolerated, but the "appropriate" demands further reasons for existence because it maintains fiill rights. Before I explain what else is required in addifion to Mr. Gretchaninoffs three conditions for the appropriateness of church motets, I will try to find out what troubles Mr. Gretchaninoff about the amateurs of church singing - namely the uncertainty of their idea of what "is in the spirit" and what "is not in the spirit" of the church motets. Mr. Gretchaninoff himself allegedly has settled that question, having found "the standard of ideal music for our Orthodox Church." The standard consists of the same correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to the text's contents, in addition to the two conditions already mentioned. Indeed, as admirers of church singing, we cannot define exactly "the spirit" of the church motets. Is it only a series of subtle to imperceptible features that immediately distinguishes the church song? Do only the believers understand it? Or, does it have a characterisfic that announces itself to any person who is not without hearing and feeling? We do not presume to judge. We know only one thing for sure: "the spirit" is not "a convenfion" and "a habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff claims. In our opinion "the spirit" is something stable and steadfast, and includes the ideas of virtue, of the purity of good conscience, and so on.

228

I'll say more to clarify my thought. If we restrict the requirements for church music to only three conditions, and if we are safisfied with the noble, permissible music as discussed in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article, I am afraid that the sacred music of even a talented and sincere composer would be rather a cantata on a liturgical text, but it would not represent the church motet appropriate for the performance in the orthodox temple. 1 am not going to state that such a composer will sinftilly make his work, no, that mav not happen, but he will not meet our need to pray with the reverent mood that is evoked both by the place and by our inner desire to get rid of this world's vanity, and to soar in the world of a higher joy that is devoid of the earthly senses of delights, even if innocent and noble. We go to the temple, or at least, we should go there, not to admire our own virtues and talents, but to join the assembly of higher beings that secretly have communion with our trusting soul and with our most blessed zeal to have our hearts settled on "things above." In this very state of the prayerftil person, according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs article, any tenor solo that reminds us of a very awful, sentimental romance would be extremely indecent and insulting. However the proud composer's right to wrap a church song into "any form ... if only it is used sensibly and appropriately" will also ruin the great simplicity of the feelings and faith that we have just now discussed. Also, we especially value the ancient church tunes because their creators, the monks, formerly began this work with great trusting diligence and reverence, recognizing and remembering their unworthiness. This is probably why these motets are filled with the powerful and strengthening effect on the person who is listening or praving. These motets certainly correspond to "the spirif of churchliness, and they provide musical

229

forms of prayers and songs that are most suitable for the temple. However, the abov ementioned compositions may be appropriate and permissible, but at the same time they may not correspond to the church spirit. The difference is obvious. The former ones were composed with the presence of talent and deep sincere faith, but with the domination of faith, whereas the latter works may not have been composed sinfully but w ith the dominafion of the talent alone and the necessary condifions for an intelligent technical work. I dare think that I succeeded in clarifying at least partially the definition of "the spirit" of the church motets, and what music is appropriate for them. A few more words—Just as not any famous stylist is able to arrange and to wnte an acathistus, and just as not any talented poet would retell bylina'^ in the same maimer, not any talented musician is able to write appropriate church music. The acathistuses are created through deep faith that inspires the author with great power, and bylinas are narrated by folk who have a powerfiil genius for creativity. So-called enlightened people almost do not have imaginafion. In their pursuit of the knowledge proven by feelings, they have dulled their inspiration. Conversely, the imagination works in its mighty creativity through the folk that are close to the contemplation of the nature and revelation of God's Providence. These folk give very unique pictures, supported with taste as well as lively and profoundly edifying songs. The same is true with secular singing. Millions of folk singers, through their sensitive hearts, and through their artistic taste and talents,

Literally translated from the Greek akathistos, (derived from the negative prefix "a" and "kathizo,"meaning to sit dowTi) the "acathistus" is a Christian song of praise that was sung by all present while standing, and the "bylina" is a Russian epic poem.

230

have created marvelous songs of a courageously wide range that are wise in idea, fascinafing in beauty, and colossal in power. Mr. Gretchaninoff refuses to name the bra\ e author of the music for the text "And David danced before the Lord with all his might," that was accompanied with music that almost resembled folk dancing, though he acknowledges its courage, sinceritv', and power. I assure you that the courageous composer of that tune, who was not "scared to insult somebody's religious feelings," is and was represented by the orthodox Russian folk, and no one else. It is pleasant to leam how Mr. Gretchaninoff praises this pure folk tone. Furthermore, from our point of view, we agree with him that this tune is underrated and is performed ignorantly. To conclude, I will say that it is comforting to think that our composers and music critics, just like the thoughtftil Mr. Gretchaninoff, are beginning to pay attention to the almost forgotten area of church music. And maybe they would share part of their talents for the comfort and the delight of those who attend the temples and pray there. A. Grigorov

2 [Urusov] Articles about church singing seldom appear in the daily press. Thus, how much more pleasant it was to find the article on this topic written by the respectable figure in the area of church music - Mr. Gretchaninoff Unfortunately, this author touches only the surface of the subject expressing his own opinion that hardly may be obligatory for the people interested in the addressed topic.

231

For example the author states that "any form fits if only it is used sensiblv and appropriately," that "the words should be pronounced (by the choir) simultaneously," and that "the text should be rightly and correctly declaimed." Then, in mentioning the admirers' reasoning "about the style of the sacred music works," Mr. Gretchaninoff touches the names of "Bortniansky, Vedel, and the others." In this w ay he indirectly blames these composers for westemizafion, and right here points out to "the loftv plot" of Wagner's Parsifal and asks "why music suitable for church usage should not be found in an opera?" along with the accusation from some admirers that some things in the most recent works can be characterized by the expression "it looks like opera(!)." That reasoning is very vague. All of the recent wonder-workers of church music are not free of the "banality" and "chromatic sensuality" that Mr. Gretchaninoff also blames the past composers of using. "A convenfion and a habit" already has begun to accompany the works of the new composers as well, though they are blameless. We cannot suspect neither Sarti, nor Vedel, nor Bortniansky, nor especially archpriest Turchaninov in the lack of the religious spiritual motives for the creation of the church motets. There is more misery from the lack of needed spirit in the compositions of the young composers who studied in the Conservatory. But we should not blame them for the lack of spirit in their church composifions that are considerable in form, pretty, technically serious, and somefimes demonstrate talent. Even so, they belittle the sacred text to the degree of merely the ground for exercise in composition. This is the fault of the school that may not and does not want to understand the impossibility of serving two masters at the same time. The modem school graduates hordes of young men, providing

-»-5-)

them with fiill sacks of musical knowledge and abilifies to use throughout their course of life. But the existence of "the two masters" leads both a composer and a singer astray. Regarding the singers... [The remainder of the article addresses the careers of church singers.]. G. Urusov

3 [Editorial Staff, Moskovskie Vedomosti] From the editorial staff As we have foreseen, A. Gretchaninoffs article, "About the spirit of the church motets," has caused intense interest among the amateurs of our church music. We received a lot of articles and notes that confirm that. Today we publish the two most thorough articles by A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Urusov. While we express gratitude to the authors of these articles for their warm and loving attitude towards an issue that is so dear to the Russian man, we think that they and other amateurs of our church singing will point out one more important flaw among the conditions that Mr. Gretchaninoff has laid out for composers of church motets. We pointed out that the most important requirement in this respect that was not mentioned in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It is the religious mood, and therefore, the sincere faith of the composer himself Mr. Gretchaninoff, in his "Letter to the Publisher," hastened to declare that not only did he not reject that requirement, but also that he considered it to be so obvious, he preferred not to mention it at all.

233

Perhaps Mr. Gretchaninoff will consider as obvious another essential condition that he also did not menfion, but A.I. Grigorov menfioned it in his article by inference. Here is that condifion: that church music should be predominantly national music. Could it be that the whole secret of the spirit of church music is hidden in the profoundly national character of church music in general and in Russian music specifically? A.I. Grigorov is absolutely correct when, even under such mitigating circumstances, he reproaches Mr. Gretchaninoff for his article and his "Letter" that almost deliberately ignore "the class of ardent supporters of purity and holiness in church singing that strongly keeps devotion to the ancient tunes." But why are these ancient tunes so dear to our hearts? Why do samples of our ancient church music that are kept safe in some monasteries touch us so deeply, even when we hear them for the first time? Could the reason be that this music is not only ancient, but is our music as well? Perhaps it is because in this music, that was originally borrowed from the Byzantine tradition, our Russian national spirit was gradually expressed over the ages, and then finally developed into that form that was predesfined to cast the mould of Russian Orthodox church singing due to innate ethnical, ethical, histoncal, and aesthetic laws. That is why our modem composers of sacred music, who sincerely wish to grasp the spirit of the Russian church motets, must reverently meditate on and attentively listen to our ancient church tunes, not in order to slav ishly and foolishly copy them, but in order to be inspired by their lofty religious mood and strict church spirit that is so closely connected with the strict church spirit of the orthodox Russian people.

234

The analogy with the Russian church icon painting thrusts itself forward. We pointed this out in our previous note, but obviously Mr. Gretchaninoff did not pav' proper attenfion to it. Is the painting that covers the walls of our Cathedral of Christ the Savior appropriate and permissible? Yes- it is permissible and can be tolerated. But does it correspond to the spirit of the Russian orthodox temple? Of course not. But does the modern painting that corresponds to that strictly orthodox church spirit exist? \'es, it undoubtedly exists. The Kiev Cathedral presents outstanding evidence. Its walls are inspired by the exalted creative work of V.M. Vasnetsov. What is the difference between Moscow and Kiev Cathedral? In the Moscow Cathedral, talented artists painted their pictures according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs recipe. Indeed, the artistic content of those pictures "corresponds to the given biblical text's contents." Those pictures, without any doubt, are "rightly and correctly" painted, colored and lighted. A spectator can "absolutely and clearly follow" all the details of their contents. But that is all, and nothing more. They are beaufifiil museum pictures. They do not have the Russian church spirit inside because they do not have the ancient Russian national spirit. The authors of those pictures ignored the ancient Russian icons with the same neglect as Mr. Gretchaninoff obviously ignores the ancient Russian church tunes. V.M. Vasnetsov treated the works of Russian ancient icon painting quite differently. He studied it with sincere love and deep reverence. He completely filled himself with its spirit and created church icons that are immortal and completely original. They not only shine with modem technical perfection and an indisputable

235

correspondence with the biblical and prayerftil text that they embodv, but thev also are ftill of the spirit of the Russian Orthodox Church. Because of V.M. Vasnetsov, the quesfion about the church spirit of Russian religious/7flm/z>2g is completely solved. Since Mr. Gretchaninoff and other puzzlers like him ponder the definition, and quesfion the liturgical spirit in Russian religious music, perhaps it can be explained only by the fact that Russia is still waiting for her religiousmusical Vasnetsov that would within himself join both ingenious musical talent and sincere faith with deep love to the national church antiquity of Russian spiritual motets. V.G.

Gretchaninoff, Aleksandr. "Po povodu moei stat'i 'O dukhe tserkovnykh pesnopenyi'"[Regarding my article "About the 'spirit' of the church motets.". Moskovksie Vedomosti, No. 73, March 14, 1900, pp. 3-4. My article "About the spirit of the church motets" apparently has stimulated keen interest to the issue that I have raised, confirmed by the number of articles that have appeared in response. Therefore, I believe that it is necessary to clarify some misunderstandings that have occurred because of my article. Mr. Grigorov and Mr. V.G. have reproached me" because I allegedly ignore the admirers of the ancient tunes and the ancient tunes themselves. Let us see-is this really so? When I addressed in the article the admirers of sacred music, I divided them into three groups: the first one, the admirers of the semi-Italian, semi-German music of our church; the second one, the admirers of the obikhod, and the third one, people that regard

" See Moskovski Vedomosti No. 59.

236

the obikhod as the ideal of church music and at the same fime kneel before the compositions of Sarti, Vedel, Bortniansky, and others. It was not the purpose of my article to uncover the damage that those Italians, the Russian composers of sacred music who adopted the Italian style, and especiallv their unskillftil, untalented, and often very ignorant followers, caused to our nativ e art. Mv purpose was different. I wanted to shed light, at least in part, on the vague ideas that reign in the concepfions of our amateurs about what we should regard in the spirit of our church, or at least what we should consider fitting for the church, and what we should reject. In my article I suggested as a standard three main requirements: 1) the conformitv of the music to the text, 2) simultaneous pronunciation of the words by all voices (conditionally) and 3) correct recitation. This is the brief content of my article.'^ Along with my article, the editorial note was published. In that note, my groups of admirers were listed. It was said about the second group, and I do not know if this was deliberate or not, that I numbered among them the admirers of the modern'' obikhod, and that I completely missed the admirers of the old and ancient tunes. I did not discuss "the modem" obikhod in my article, and could not even do so, because I am puzzled (Mr. V.G. justly calls me a puzzler) - what could the addifion of the word "modem" to the obikhod actually mean? As everyone knows, the obikhod is the collection of the repetitive motets of the ancient tunes that are used in liturgies, vespers, dirges, and in the holiday. Lent and Easter services. If one states, "the melody from the obikhod" - it always means that the ancient melodv was in

'* See .\f(K\kovskie I edomosti No. 53.

237

view. Just as with secular folk songs, this melody was passed down through the centunes -this same melody that endured complicated hook notation (no insult intended for the respectfiil S.V. Smolensky) and that did not lose its freshness, power, beauty, or unusual originality after many centuries. One of the features of such melodies is that the composer (s) is not known. This is why they are usually referred to as the obikhod, bearing in mind an ancient melody. Therefore if one uses the expression "the modem obikhod" doesn't it look like "the modem ancient song(?l)" To make up the second group, I designated the amateurs of the obikhod, that is, the amateurs of the ancient motets, as it is clear to all who correctly understand the meaning of the word. From where does one conclude that I forgot about these admirers? And what did my respectfiil opponents have in view in classifying a fourth group of admirers? Could it be that Mr. Grigorov and Mr. V.G., being admirers of antiquity as seen from their statements, at the same time are not satisfied with the close framework in the arrangements of the ancient tunes (based on the V\ 4^^ and 5'*^ degree) that are completely enough for the amateurs of my second group?'"' Do they want to allow more breadth and variety of techniques for the arrangement of these tunes? Do they long for the appearance of modem compositions, that along with religious mood and sincere faith would be filled with love for antiquity? To my deep regret, I can answer that such admirers are very few in number, and there is no way of regarding them as a disfinct group. My purpose was to refute the

'^ Gretchamnoff notes, "The tvpical representatn e of that group of amateurs-ascetics is the respectful priest father Afonsky. In his article (No. 71) he directly says: 'We can hardly ever recogni/c as desirable and useful the compositions that were composed recently for the divine service, though they would correspond with both the contents and the text of the motet.'"

238

common opinion about "the spirit." But the amateurs mentioned above hold on to a "separate opinion." These amateurs study the anfiquity and meditate on it, some of them draw inspirafion out of it for their works; in other words, they do the very thing that Mr. V.G. wishes, within the limits of their power and degree of the talent. Others tr>' to culfivate and popularize these works. However the majority does not value the activitv of that small group, and some even make fun of them. Some "critics," for example, accuse them of- would you believe it - receiving musical education! Poor P.I. Tchaikovsky! He also was musically educated. Under what a terrible accusation he lies! In my letter to the publisher, I did not answer the note from the editorial staff (in No. 53) that discusses "the modem obikhod" and the fourth group, supposing that it was my opponents' owm personal misunderstanding, and that anyone who has read my article would realize that. It tumed out that I was wrong: they were looking for my answer on that particular point, and having not found it, they explained my silence in their own way. As I already stated, they explained it by saying that I neglected the amateurs of ancient tunes (in that case I would ignore myself) and even the ancient tunes themselves. However, from my enthusiastic response on the melody for the text "And David danced before the Lord with all his might," taken by chance from the treasury of the marvelous ancient melodies, it would be more reasonable to suggest (if anybody is interested in my taste) that I am rather an admirer of antiquity rather than a neglecter of it.

'* Gretchaninoff adds this note, 'Mr. \'.G. writes: The artists of those pictures (in the Moscow Cathedral) ignored Russian ancient and old icons with the same neglect as Mr Gretchaninoff obviously (.') Ignores ancient and old Russian church tunes."

239

Conceming the condifion asserted by Mr. V.G., the demand that a composition of sacred music should be predominantly national, I will answer that this question is not considered in my main requirement of "correspondence" as Mr. V.G. would like to ascribe to me.'^ I partially touched that question in my article when I mentioned style. For this discussion, I will add the following. Nafionality in the music is important, and perhaps it is essenfial, especially on the first steps. From history, we observe that the beginning of the flourishing of musical art in almost any country is connected w ith the fact that composers tumed to the nafional folk art—for example, Weber with his Freishutz, Glinka with The Life for the Tzar and Ruslan, Chopin, and Grieg. I believe that our church music will reach the proper height only when it rests upon our folk art. Only then it will get rid of the Italianization that is alien to us, but at the same time that reigns in our Church, when our church music composers will pay proper attention to antiquity and will draw their inspiration from it. Those who long for the renewal of our church singing will not regret that the composifions of Vedel, Sarti, Galuppi, Maurer, Esaulov, Lamakin, Bagretsov and on and on, will be considered as not meeting this nafionality requirement. Nevertheless, I think that the requirement of nationality hardly may be considered as obligatory (and I meant only such requirements in my first article) and especially at the present time and for the following reason. First, it is often difficult to decide whether a given work is national or not; second, at the present time we hav e so few desirable

" Gretchaninoff quotes \'.G. in the following note, Alaybe Mr Gretchaninott will consider as obvious another essential condition (?) that he did not mention as well . .' and so on."

240

composifions for the church that it would be difficult to decide what to perform during worship. This is why even though it is very desirable for our sacred music to be national, I would not include this requirement in the list of the necessary requirements. This is sad, but I must point out another wrong interpretation of my words. In mv phrase "the spirit, as it is usually accepted be understood - is a convention, a habit," .\.\. Grigorov omits my words "as it is usually accepted to be understood," and states, "the spirit is only a convenfion, a habit as Mr Gretchaninoff asserts.'' I did not assert that. There is a big difference between the way I understand that spirit and the way it is usually accepted to be understood. And usually it is accepted to be understood in such a way that anything that does not look like the obikhod is not in the spirit; and if it does not look like Bortniansky, so it is not ecclesiastical.'^ In my article, I wanted to point out the lack of grounds for such reasoning, and if possible, to define a more correct criterion (but not "a recipe" as Mr. V.G. understood) for sacred musical works. I completely agree with the respectful Mr. Grigorov that the spirit is something that absolutely is impossible to define because of "the intangibility of its characterisfics." In that case, how one can prove that such a work "is in spirit" and such work "is not in spirit"? It will lead only to one result - expressions like "m my opinion that is in the spirit" and "but in my opinion, that is not" will spread w idely. The critics should stand on more firm feet; that is why I suggest to exclude that word "spint" from the critics' vocabulary and replace it with something different that is more definite. It seems to me that the requirements I offer (among which the most important are: the

"' See note 1

241

conformity of the music to the text, simultaneous pronunciafion of the words and right recitation) guarantee us - at least to some degree - loftiness of the art of sacred music. It has been stated that those requirements are not enough, and that a composer must have a sincere faith. Well, how will you examine by the given composition whether its composer had faith or not? Perhaps it is possible to make a partial judgment about it, but only according to the correspondence of the composer's music to the text. For example, a composer takes the text "I believe in the only God the Father," and then expresses it with fimid sounds (pianissimo), with diffused harmony that has an unstable character (for example, with diminished seventh chords), and so on. You would agree with me that it would not correspond to the text. No, in spite of the importance of the belief of a composer in what he musically speaks - I do not see a tangible form of how we can demand the realization of that condifion. After all, it is easy to say "we need faith," but show me how to examine it. In my requirements of the appropriateness, I did not want to allow anything uncertain.

The issue I have touched is extremely important, and that is why we should discuss it peacefully while paying attention to the opinions of others, and with caution to be completely honest. It would make me happy if I were able to play even a small part in the movement to put in order everything in our church singing that we can observe todav I believe that this movement will not pass without leaving a trace, and that a happy age will come when all indecent and offensive things to the religious mood will be dnven out from our church with shame. I believe that the time will come when anyone entering

242

a temple will be confident that his religious and aesthetic feelings will not be harmed b^ this lofty art that is presented to him only there. Let us striv e for that! A. Gretchaninoff

From the editorial staff We are very thankftil to A.T. Gretchaninoff for his response that removes the primary misunderstanding between us: our talented young composer proves himself to be an ardent admirer of our ancient church motets and that he himself longs for the appearance of the sacred music compositions "that along with religious mood and sincere faith would be filled with love for antiquity." With that, he has stated everything, and we long for the same, undoubtedly as well as A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Umsov, and all of the numerous admirers of ancient sacred music singing that are not satisfied only with those melodies that survived in the contemporary edition of the obikhod, or as we say for short - in the modem obikhod. Mr. Gretchaninoff regrets that ''such admirers are very few and there is no possibility to regard them as a distinct group." In reality such admirers are much more than Mr. Gretchaninoff suggests. There are dozens even in Moscow, but according to the correct expression of A.I. Grigorov, "they all are extremely meek, almost shy. They are rarely heard from and they do not speak much themselves, and even if they speak, it is without fervor and pride, without any intenfion of making a noise and attracting attention." That

243

is why our fiery young composer did not nofice them.'" Imagine if we were able to organize a Society of Admirers of the Motets of Ancient Sacred Music; then we could make sure how many of these people, along with Mr. Gretchaninoff, make up that special but important group of true amateurs of orthodox church singing. So, our first misunderstanding is resolved completely. The second one concems the issue of the necessity of Russian national element in Russian church singing. Mr. Gretchaninoff denies that necessit), but we more than casually insist on it. However, it also seems to us that this difference in our v iew s is onlv apparent but not essential. Mr. Gretchaninoff himself longs for the appearance of the sacred music works that "would be filled with that love for antiquity". In this case, is not Russian ancient and Russian national church singing the same thing? Mr. Gretchaninoff thinks that it is difficult to distinguish the national element in music from the nonnafional. It seems to us that it is much more difficult to disfinguish music that "corresponds" to the text from the music that "does not correspond" to it. In any case, whether a melody obviously corresponds to the text or obviously does not correspond to the text, there falls dozens of other melodies that we may endlessly argue about conceming their correspondence to the text, from single words in the text to the overall meaning of the text. Thus, it is much easier to determine the national character of melodies, as at any rate, it is not difficult to ascertain either the presence or the absence of the national character in the given melody.

'^ The literal meaning of this sentence shows irony in Gretchaninoffs outspoken, "fiery nature." and the "meak and shy" nauire of this group of admirers.

244

If we ignore nafionalism in our church music, we take a risk of acknowledging melodies with pronounced foreign nuances {Italian, for example) as fitting for the Orthodox Russian worship if they correspond to the three "essential" requirements of Mr. Gretchaninoff. We do not even menfion that in our opinion the art in general should be national, nor that "the spirit" or "the style," that Mr. Gretchaninoff cannot define in the area of church music, lies in that very nafional element of art. That "spint" was found by V.M. Vasnetsov in the area of the church painting and exactly on a national ground. V.G.

245

APPENDIX B ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF, "BRIEF REVIEW^ OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX CHURCH SINGING'

The following document is a translafion of Gretchaninoffs hand-written essay housed in the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, 40 Lincoln Center Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10023-7498; phone (212) 870-1630. The location lisfing for the manuscript is: MNY* (box) Grechaninov. Though John Seaguard's 1949 thesis refers to brief portions of the essay, this is the first complete English translation of the document. The 39-page manuscript was digitally photographed by Philip Camp in New York on February 19, 2002. It was then e-mailed to Russia for translation by Dr. Sergei Shiskin. The translation was edited with the addition of annotated footnotes by Philip Camp in March, April, and May, 2002. On the back of the fourth page of the manuscript, the essay is dated September 30, 1932, probably signifying either the date that the essay was completed, or the date that the essay was read as a lecture. Much of the material in the essay provides a narrative history of the development of Russian liturgical singing that readily can be found elsewhere. However, many portions from the essay provide interesting glimpses of Gretchaninoffs views on the subject, many of which were considered unconvenfional and unorthodox to the mainstream Russian Orthodox Church. For a complete discussion of the significance of this manuscript, see Chapter I\'.

246

'fyitUf^L

uuu^

i^/

f-^-^V^ ^.a;LuU

^ ^ ^ kv.V.

\ T ^ . W ; / ^ rt^o..«^?« / : t | « j . w

Figure B. 1 Actual Title Page "Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing'"

Permission to reprint this image granted by the Music Division. 1 he New ^•oIk Public I ibrary for the Performinu .\its, .isfor. Lenox and Tildcn Foundations

!47

Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing The aim of my lecture is to give a brief historical survev of the origin and development of our church singing from its first appearance in Russia to the present. Bv necessity, such a survey that is limited to the confines of one lecture only can be sketch v. In fact, the things spoken here may serve as landmarks for those in the future who may desire an even broader and deeper knowledge through independent study. From ancient times, Russians have been known as lovers of singing. In Karamzin's History of the Russian State," we find the following interesting information taken from the accounts of Byzantine historians: "During the war of the Greeks with the Avar khan in the 6^*^ century, three strangers were taken captive. Instead of weapons, they only had psalteries and cithers. They were taken to the emperor who asked them where they were from. They responded, 'We are the Slavs. There is no iron in our land. We live quiet and serene lives and do not know wars; we enjoy music.'" These Slavs were from the Balfic Sea coast. The Byzantine historians gave the Slavs the epithet, "song-lovers." The flawless treasure of ancient Russian singing, created and maintained by the genius of the Russian folk, can only be explained through the love of songs, both secular and sacred. The secular songs were handed down from generation to generation without being recorded...

^ Nicholai Mikhailovich Karamzin (1766-1826) was a historian and writer whose greatest work was the eleven volume History oj the Russian State, that presented a dramatic account of the political repercussions of the Imperial administrations through 1613. ^ At this point, the extant manuscript continues from page two to page five. The two missing pages likely discuss the development of the secular folk songs and begin a discussion of the early liturgical melodies, perhaps by re-telling the story of the baptism of Prince Vladimir in 988.

248

According to the notes of the Metropolitan Makari of Moscow ,"* the notation monuments from the eleventh and twelfth centuries are as much from Greek as from Slavic origins. Manuscripts from this epoch also contain traces of Bulgarian wxiting. Thus, it is obvious that our ancient Znamenny chant is actually a Russified Greek chant. This jusfifies the more accurate Greek-Slavic chant label, as proposed bv' the wellknown historian of Russian liturgical singing, Priest Dm. Vas. Razumovskv.' However, I should note that some archeologists minimize the Bv-zantine influence on our Znamenny chant. For example, Priest Metallov^ has a tendency to see not only the Byzantine influence on our church singing, but also the Syrian influence. That is why he labels it Greek-Syrian chant. S. V. Smolensky' goes even farther. In his essay, "About Ancient Russian-Greek Notations," he says," I allow myself to think that the independent essence of our tunes obviously developed from ancient times through Russian strength alone, which automatically belittles the Byzantine part of our nafive art." And then about notafions: "Though the distant relafion of our Znamenny script with the Greek is without quesfion, nonetheless the relation is so weak that it completely vanishes in the mass of

*0f the two men who were distinguished as the Metropolitan Makari of .Moscow in the nineteenth century, the most prominent was Makari (Mikhail Petrovich Bulgakov, 1816-1882) who was Moscow metropolitan from 1879-1882. He wrote a nine volume history of the Russian Orthodox Church. ^ Priest Dmitry Razumovsky's (1818-1889) three volume work, Tserkovnoe penie v Rossii [Church Singing in Russia] was unprecedented in scope, and marked the first substantial work of Russian liturgical musicology. His work was a significant factor that led to the development of the new Russian choral school. Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia 85. * Priest Vasily Metallov (1862-1926) was an important historian dunng the peak of the new Russian choral school and authored Bogosluzhebnoepenie russkoi tserhi vperioddomongol'skii [The liturgical singing of the Russian church in the pre-Mongol period], Moscow: 1912, among other publications. ^ Stepan Vasil'evich Smolensky (1848-1909) was a liturgical musicologist, a pedagogue, and director of the Moscow Synodal School from 1889 who first brought the Moscow School and choir to prominence.

249

Russian musical script signs. That leads us to conclude that Russian notation dev eloped completely and independently through Russian strength." Only musicians who are specialists in archeology, as well as the Old Believers that still sing according to signs are able to understand Znamenny chant notation. As it should be with all things that relate to the worship of God, sign books have been copied with much care.^ Znamenny tunes are all monophonic. They are sung in unison, actually better described in octaves-tenors with altos in unison, and basses an octav e low er. The Old Believers sing devoutly, often with much enthusiasm and with ftill comprehension of the importance of what is sung. Though it looks poor-there are neither contrapuntal nor harmonic combinations— and though it is performed by singers that neither studied at any conservatory nor with any professor, this pure Russian choral art that came to us from hoary antiquity leaves an impression that is often both tremendous and majestic. The experts of Znamenny chant notation, S. V. Smolensky among them, claim that the melodic delicacies of Znamenny chant are lost in the transcription to the modem five-line staff notation because, according to S. V. Smolensky's writings, a reader is presented with only a cool outline of the tune instead of a "vivid picture in colors." Personally, I tend to see in this view an excessive passion for signs. I believe that by means of the modem notation system with dynamic nuance indications, everything may

" Here, Gretchaninoff added the following statement and then crossed it out: "Probably c\en now, one may hear them sung by the Old Believers in Russia if their churches have still survived

250

be written more accurately. For example, one can judge how ambiguous the sign svstem was by examining the known definifions for the signs: Common sign-proclaim it a little bit higher than a line. Gloomy sign-higher than a common sign Three-bright sign-even higher than a bright sign. The duration of Znamenny signs was never precisely defined. Because of that, the skill of reading sign books requires very difficult scholarship. It often happened that the same chant notation could be interpreted in different ways. In order to reach at least some degree of enhanced clarity, special marks were invented, or as they were called at that time, "notice words." For example, the letter "vedi" meant a high sound, "n" a low sound, and "gn" a much lower sound.^ That invention is attributed to the Nov gorod singing master Ivan Shaidurov who lived in the late sixteenth century. In actuality. Shaidurov only improved a pre-existing system. Marks were written w ith cinnabar (red dye) and were placed near the signs that were written in India ink. Cinnabar marks made the reading of signs slightly easier, yet many things were still confusing. Furthermore, no one had thought about the definifion of absolute pitch or tone. There was also a notation called "kondakarian" notation that existed unfil the fourteenth century. At the present, it is impossible to decipher kondakarian notafion, and it looks as if the clue to unlock it is lost forever. Two styles of the ancient liturgical singing of Znamenny chant should be distinguished: one is strictly regulable or great chant [bolshoi] and the other is free

' "Vedi" is the third letter of the Russian alphabet. The Russian word that means "high" begins with that letter-'Vysokyi". The same pnnciple applies to the examples ol "n" and "gn"

251

customary [obikhod] or small chant [malyi].'" Bolshoi represents the singing that was more prolonged and solemn. It was used for the singing of prokimens, antiphons, dogmatics, and so on," and the motets were sung on the eight tones.'" Motets such as Hemvimskaya, Dostoine yest, Velikoe Slavoslovie'^ and all other kinds of custoniar>' Divine Services were with malyi Znamenny chant. (Examples of great Znamennv chant. Dogmatic of 5^*^ tone "V Tchermnem More" [hi the Reed Sea]).''' Malyi Znamenny chant then went out of use and was replaced with Kiev'^ and Greek chants. In addition to Znamenny chant, the so-called demestvennoe singing also existed from the earliest times. The Greek origin of this word informs us that this kind of singing was also brought over from Greece. Demestvennoe singing was household singing, free, a kind of singing that did not follow the law of eight tones. When historians describe demestvennoe singing, they call it the most beautiful. Perhaps it was indeed beautiful; however, we cannot make a judgment from the little evidence that has survived to the present. Both melodically and rhythmically, demestvennoe singing was freer and more

'° Morosan describes bolshoi chant as the most complex melodicly; obychni or "common" chant and malyi chant employed simpler melodies. Morosan, Choral Performance, 216. " Prokeimenon are specific psalm settings used to precede a scripture reading, usually set in a combination of antiphonal and responsorial styles incorporating the reader, and the nght and left choirs. Antiphons are hymns that are sung antiphonally by two choirs alternation. Dogmatics are hymns that poetically express key doctrinal points of the Russian Orthodox Church. Gardner actually labels this "Hymns of a Dogmatic nature.^' Gardner, 28, 37, 48-49. '^ Morosan explains: "The Russian system of Eight Tones, while superficially based on the Byzantine system, is different in musical structure. Whereas in the Byzantine Octoechos each cchos is a distinctly different scale or mode, all eight Russian Tones (glas's) are based on the same tone row or gamut and are differentiated only by characteristic melodic formulae." Choral Performance, 341n7 '^ Hemvimskaya is the Cherubic Hymn; Dostoyno yest is n-anslated "It is truly fitting" and is a hymn in praise to the "Mother of God;" and Velikoe Slavoslovie is translated "Great Glorification " ^* Presumably, at this point in the lecture, Gretchaninoff either discussed these examples or performed part of it on the piano. " Kiev IS an ancient Russian city, now the capital of Ukraine.

252

elegant, and in terms of overall character, it more closel> matched the secular song, and its semeiography, or hooks, were a little different than Znamennv chant hooks.'^

The books of Znamenny chant are divided into three periods: 1) the old tme speech, from the earliest sources available dafing from the Uv elfth to the fifteenth centuries; 2) the distinct speech, lasfing about two centuries; and 3) the new true speech that followed the Council of 1667-69. The issue of those three speeches consists of the following. Semi-vowels using the "hard sign" or "soft sign"'^ of the old books had a musical sign that ftmcfioned as a note to be sung in a certain manner, but how? That secret was lost by the fifteenth century. Then, the semi-vowels were simply replaced by vowels-the hard sign by the letter 'o,' and the soft sound by the letter 'e.' Instead of s'greshihom', bezzkonovahom' ni s'tvorihom' ni bludohom' pred Tobou and so in, it was now sung 5ogreshihomo, bezzaknovahomo ni sotvorihomo ni sobludohomo pred Tobou.

The syllable 'homo' was repeated very often and that is why that singing was

called 'homovy' or 'hamovy' singing. The phenomenal style itself was called 'homonia.'

Morosan discusses "demestvennyi" singing as a style that was erroneously believed to have been intended for extra-liturgical, household use. Razumovsky was the first to suggest this view, which was uncritically supported by many writers after him, including Gretchaninoff as evidenced here. Morosan writes, "Yet, as Gardner points out in his monograph. Das Problem des altrussischen demestischen Kirchengesanges und seiner linielosen Notation (Munich, 1967), the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that demestvermyi singing was a liUirgical genre, in many instances specifically intended for feast and solemn hierarchal services." However, to be consistent with Gretchaninoffs summary of its overall srvle if not its ftinction, Morosan then adds that demestvennyi singing was not governed by the Eight Tones, and thus, achieved much more melodic and rhythmic freedom. Morosan, Choral Performance 24 The Russian alphabet has two letters that designate whether the preceding or the following sound should be pronounced hard or soft. For instance, the "hard sign" was present at the end of every noun of masculine gender. Following the 1917 resolution, the Communist government reformed the language and abolished this rule conceminc hard smns. The sentence here demonstrates the addition of syllables using the [o] \owel.

!53

Bezpopovtsy pracficed homonia for a long time, perhaps even todav if this group still exists in Russia.' One more very indecent custom was set up in that miserable time in Russia."^^ In order to shorten a service and at the same time to sing all that was required according to church regulations, singers began to sing simuhaneously: one deacon sang a motet, another deacon sang another motet, and sometimes even three deacons sang at once. One can only imagine what happened out of this! The ardent supporters of the correct order condemned this practice. Ivan the Terrible, a great lover of singing, summoned the 1559 Council that decided that when shortening the service, texts should be read instead of sung.^' But all those disgraceftil things of that epoch were terminated only by the Council of 1667, when the singers' committee that included well-known persons of that such as Alexander Mezenetz, the famous writer on the Znamenny singing alphabet, Grigory Nos, Feodor Konstanionov, and others composed the new true speech irmolog^' of Znamenny chant.^^ That is why all of the following period is called the new tme speech penod. .\t this time, singing schools were opened everywhere in Russia; for example, the well-

" Bezpopovtsy was a sect of the Old Believers that had no pnests. The word literalh means "without priest." ^" Gretchaninoff adds a note here: "The epoch of the Tatar yoke, the epoch of diminishing the number of competent and experienced singers. "' Gretchaninoff adds this note: "By the way, Ivan the Terrible was a composer. The hv-mns that he composed were published with this inscnption: 'The works of the tsar loann, despot of Russia."' ^^ Irmolog is a collection of irmos. See note 44 below. ^^ See Note 24 in chapter 3. Mezenetz authored a theoretical treatise entitled Izx'cshchcme a soglasnctshikh pometakh [a report on the most consonant markings]. This treatise was the result of the Comrmssion, and is noted by Morosan as "the last important n-eatise on neumatic notation " Morosan. Choral Performance, 38, 253.

254

known Novgorod school of Sawa Rogov^"^ where the famous Shaidurov came from, inventor of cinnabar marks; the Moscow school of Sylvester, the Domostroy author, and other schools. The first Russian composers of sacred music whose names have survived appeared at this fime. These composers include: Ivan Nos, the singing deacon who "sang" as it was described at that time; in other words, he composed music for the postnv' [Lenten] and tsvetnaya [colored] Triod, and also hymns"" for many saints; Markel Bezborody who composed music for the Psalter; Stepan Golysh; Ivan Lukoshko, and others.^^ It was the period of the true golden age of our church singing. Unfortunately, it did not last long. Very soon, in the same seventeenth century, the new "skillful musical art" gradually began to penetrate from the West. The so-called partesnoe singing on several voices appeared.

This singing did not enhance these marvelous ancient

melodies at all; quite the contrary, it damaged their beauty because they were harmonized by people that were not experienced in harmonization. Soon afterw ard, the epoch of Italian influence began and the ancient Znamenny chant receded into the background, though it was not completely forced out of the Church. As we might express it today, it simply went out of fashion. Morosan cites an anonymous mid-seventeenth century treatise that speaks of Feodor Khristianin as a famous singing teacher of Znamermy chant in Moscow, who taught about the old singinu masters of Novgorod, mcluding Sawa Rogov. Choral Performance, 16-18. The actual term used for hymns here is Stichera, referring to a type of hymn of varying content and length, usually having poetic verses between eight and twelve lines, with the same number of corresponding melodic lines. The "postny and tsvetnaya Triod" refers to a group of stichera defined by Gardner as triadikon, or a hymn in praise of the Holy Trinity, Gardner 37. Evidently, Gretchaninoff was familiar with the anonymous mid-seventeenth century treatise. "Predislovie," which mentions all of the composers that he lists. .\ portion of the treatise is translated in Morosan, Choral Performance, 17-18. See Chapter 3, page 9 for a discussion of partesny singing

!55

The harmonization of that time of the old tunes, or so-called "strochnoe penie" [lower case singing] consisted of the addition to the Znamennv' chant melody two or three melodies that were sometimes placed with it, the main Znamenny chant melodv was placed in the middle and was called "the way" (as a 'Cantus Firmus'), one melodv was higher-on top, and another was lower-on the bottom. I would sav' that in terms of harmony, this type of singing was far from perfect, as nobody was able to harmonize. The other voices simply repeated the same main melody, sometimes in thirds, sometimes in sixths, but the worst of it were the voices that somefimes sang parallel fifths and even seconds or sevenths that hardly could bring great pleasure to listeners. At the same time, however, there was something new and attractive in it. The notafion of this type of singing sfill consisted of signs. One line of signs was written above the other with different dye, cinnabar or India ink so that the singers would not get off key. However, very soon during the same seventeenth century, the five-line staff notation system from the West reached us through South Russia. Its freedom and superiority over the sign system were so obvious that it quickly replaced the signs. Since that fime, all choral scores were written exclusively with linear notes and with a clef that Still did not define the absolute pitch, but gave only the relafive pitch.

That early clef

did not use the attached flats and sharps to determine the key. Gradually, other clefs

28

The term given for the type of clef used is the "cephautny clef"

256

appeared-the alto and tenor clefs, and the accidentals were introduced in the middle of the composition and also beside the clef ^*^ At about the same time, the period of Polish influence came into both our liturgical and non-liturgical sacred music. Many compositions in the form of "psalms," "chants," "concertos," and so on appeared bearing the name "Polish art." Outwardlv, the Polish influence was reflected even in the singers' dress. That clothing-colored caftans with galloons and sleeves that folded backwards-not so fitting to the Russian tvpe, survived intact in some choirs unfil the October revolufion.^^ In the end of the same seventeenth century, the so-called "God's services" for four, five, eight and sometimes more voices were introduced (there were even "compositions" for fortv-eight voices!). Among these composifions, one sometimes could find music that mav have sounded fine, but the majority of them were a senseless conglomeration of voices and melodies of figurative constmcfion. The adoration of melodies with figurations was named "excelirovanie,"^' the word that was so characteristic for that epoch. By the way, Peter the Great, who loved church singing, sometimes participated on the basso part performance that often consisted of fast and rather difficult passages. The following comment of a contemporary testifies that such music did not give pleasure to amateur singers: "It's noise and sound that only novices like, but experts consider it to be nonsense."

''' One word with very small letters was inserted into the original manuscript here that was illegible. The last phrase at the end of the sentence, "and also beside the clef," is the translator's best guess at the actual text. ^° The reference here is to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. '' "Excelirovanie" is a contrived word that is not used in Russian. It is from the 1 atin "excel"

257

The partesnoe singing supported by Peter the Great, the paniarch Nikon, and other influenfial persons then gave way to a new passion, the passion for secular Italian music that predominated in all Western Europe. The Court orchestra emerged in St. Petersburg, and Italian composers were inv ited there as conductors. The v isiting Italians played a tremendous role in the subsequent fate of our church music. Under their influence, the national face of our church music was completely lost for a long time. The music was Italianized and the ancient Znameimy chant was consigned to almost complete oblivion. That oblivion was so strong, so deep, that even though the contemporary works of our Russian composers have taken on the Italian character since then, these works were respected as demonstrative of genuine Russian orthodox singing. That opinion has lasted even to the present time. The first Italian invited to serve as the court conductor in St. Petersburg w as Baltasar Galuppi (1706-1784).^^ Having already reached the age of sixty, Galuppi had written more than seventy comic operas that were performed with success in his homeland; so that Italian came to us and composed music for our church that was, of course, in the same style as his comic operas. His concertos were so enormously successftil that a number of imitators resuhed. Galuppi's successor who took over the duties as Director of the Court Chapel w,is Giuseppi Sarti (1729-1802). He also composed various motets and concertos for our

" Baldassare Galuppi actually livedft-om1706 to Januar>' 3. 1785. The discrepancy in dates arc probably due to the differences of the Eastern calendar system to the Western calendar system. See note 61 on Chapter II. Galuppi served as director of the Court Chapel in St. Petersburg from 1765-P68

258

church, and among other things, directed the eight-part oratorio "Tebe Boga kh\ alim" [We Praise Thee God] that was performed with great pomp near the town of Yassv in the open air, and in the presence of Potemkin.^^ The concert was performed with orchestra, three hundred singers in the choir, and with nnging bells and canon blasts included in the accompaniment. It is interesting to note here what was said in their homeland about those Italians who caused such a sensation by their music in Russia. Look at what the critic Malpurg wrote: "Today, only those who do not have taste may like the fiivolous works of such masters as Galuppi, Sarti, Scalabrini, and the like."^^ ("Otche Nash" [our Father] by Sarti).^^ One of the prominent Russian composers of that epoch was Berezovsky who lived in the middle of the eighteenth century (1745-1777).^^ Being a student of the Court Chapel Choir, Berezovky was distinguished both for his voice and for his musical abilities. First, he leamed music theory from the choir teacher Cinnis, who was Italian of course. Then, when he was twenty years old, he was sent to Italy at the expense of the " This oratorio was one of two Russian oratorios that Sarti composed for the Imperial Chapel Choir. ^* Count Grigory Potemkin maintained a private court chapel and employed Sarti as maestro di cappella. Potemkin was also a favorite courtier of Catherine the Great. Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia 65. " About the style of liturgical music composed by Italians, Morosan notes: "The sacred works written by composers such as Galuppi and Sarti for the Roman Catholic Church, were, in most instances, considerably more restrained in style than their works for the Orthodox linirgy. Sacred composition in the West was governed by distinctions between the stile antico and the stile modemo. However, no similar guidelines existed conceming writing for the Orthodox Church-the Italians w ere breaking completely new ground." Morosan, Choral Performance, 320n71. "*'• Presumably at this point in the lecture, Gretchaninoff either discussed Sarti's setting or performed part of it on the piano as an example. ^' Maksim Berezovky was a student of Galuppi and a contemporarv' of Dmitri Bortnianksy (17"^l1825), both of whom received similar eariy music education under the institutions of the Court Chapel as well as in Italy. Morosan, Choral Performance. 61.

259

government to study with the well-known pedagogue and historian. Martini in Bologna. Berezovsky brilliantly graduated from the school. He excelled with his compositions to the degree that his name was engraved with golden letters on a marble plaque in the Bologna Academy. Upon his return to Russia, since all of the high positions in the Chapel were held by Italians, he only received an insignificant position. Thus, hav ing been neglected, and finding himself in desperate need to the point of pov eny. he tragically took his own life, given up to despair, bv slitting his throat.^^ We may point to the most typical and best of his works-" Veruu" [Credo] and the concerto "Ne otv erzhi mene v starostu" [Do not reject me when I am old]. While the Italians composed sacred music for our church often w ithout any agreement of music with the text, this could not happen w ith our Russians: Berezovsky, Dekhtvarev (1766-1813) and Vedel (1767-1810) who hved after him.^^ These composers favorably differed from their Italian teachers since the Italians did not know the church Slavonic nor even the Russian language. The most prominent among the composers of the Italian epoch was undoubtedlv D.S. Bortniansky (1751-1825). He, like Berezovsky and other talented young men in the

Recent scholarship reports that in actuality, Berezovsky probably died from a fever associated with catarrhal disease. The corrmionly reported statement that he comrmtted suicide does not have historical documentary confirmation. Stepan Degtiarev served for most of his life as a serf singer, precentor, and a composer in the chapel of Count Sheremetev, and was one of the few such serfs who was recognized for his superior musical talent and finally awarded emancipation. Both Degtiarev and .Artemy Xedel' (1772-1808) were criticized in 1870 by the cntic Hermann Larosch: "...Ignorant critics fail to understand that the [Russian church] music of Sarti and Galuppi and their Russian followers [eg., Bormiansky, Vedel', Degtiarev, et al] represents the worst examples of a fallen 'Latinism'-extemal formalism without an inner warming spirit, worldly and secular content covered up with a 'churchly exterior'..." Morosan, Choral Perlormance. 66. 87.

260

fime of Elizaveta Petrovna,"^^^ was sent to improve his musical knowledge in Italv' where he leamed from the same Galuppi who in 1768 returned home to Venice after his bnef stay in Russia. While living abroad, Bortnianksy sent his works that created his reputafion to Russia. In 1779, he returned to Russia and in 1796 filled the position of director for the Imperial Court Chapel. Bortniansky appeared in between two epochs when the Italian stv le reigned verv deep and with absolute power, but also when the eyes of the lovers of church singing began to appeal to half-forgotten ancient melodies. In 1772, a decree from the Holy Synod stimulated the published editions of books of great and small monophonic Znamenny chant. Five years later, the concise customary chant book was published."^' Our dear old tunes, loved from the ancient times, were heard in our churches due to the appearance for the first time of published chant books in easy to read five-line staff notation. Bortniansky was the first to begin to arrange the ancient melodies for use in a choral work. His knowledge was sound in the area of harmonization and voice leading. Especially considering the strochnoe penie,"*^ when composers groped their way, Bortnianksy's arrangements testify that study of music in the West was not done in v ain, and that we mastered compositional technique no worse than any Italian. Natural Russian instinct helped Bortnianksy to appreciate the epic and lofty beauty of our ancient tunes, but the Italian nuisance was so great that it prevented him

40

Elizabeth was the daughter of Peter the Great who ruled the empire from r 4 l - P M "' The actual term describing this book of chants is "obikhod." Morosan notes the following: "In reference to liturgical books the term obikhod (lit. custom daily use) corresponds to the Latin usualLw however there is no equivalent term in English." Morosan, Choral Performance, 323nll. ^' Strochnoe Penei is the lower case singing described above on page eight

261

from wrapping them into fitting harmonic and contrapuntal clothing that would correspond to the natural melodic style. He appreciated their beauty, but he did not understand their modality. He knew only the major and minor tonalitv of the Italian music of the time. This explains why Bortnianksy sometimes changed melodies bv the insertion of a sharp where it seemed to him more beautifiil, or sometimes arbitrarilv changed the rhythm that led to a distortion and loss of the melodic character. So for a long, long time, our ancient tunes, an inexhaustible spring of deeply religious inspirations, could not find worthy hands for their arrangement. ("Khristos voskrese") [Christ is risen]."^^ The arrangements of Turchaninov (1779-1856)'*'^ were a step fonvard to some degree. For the first time after a long break, the ancient tunes that had been almost forgotten but were so dear to the Russian soul were heard in his simple, unpretentious arrangements. His zadostoiniki*^^ were especially successftil, and have remained so to this day. Nevertheless, Turchaninov did not figure out the modal character of the ancient tunes, and his arrangements do not exceed the boundaries of the normal major and minor tonality.

"^ At this point, Gretchaninoff likely either played or discussed this particular work listed in parenthesis as an example. See note 34 above. ** Pnest Pyotr Turchaninov, along with L'vov, Nikolai Potulov (1810-1873). and others made early attempts at harmonizing chants. As they did not recognize the melodic nature of the chant, their harmonizations are constructed so that the chant can only be performed "slowly and lugubriously." Morosan, Choral Performance, 271. ^' Zadostoiniki were a kind of irmos, or link that consisted of an initial stanza that was followed b\ a set of two or more stanzas identical to the initial stanza in meter, number of syllables, and melody I hc> functioned as connecting links between Old Testament and New Testament themes sometimes developed in humns. Gardner 40-41 262

Then, the arrangements of Potulov (1810-1873)'*^ appeared. Thev were worthy of interest because he tried to put on our ancient melodies a suit of the strictly Western style which was not altogether fitting for it. The note for note style with the use of exclusiv ely consonant triads made his arrangements monotonous and boring. The adv antage of Potulov's arrangements was that they were written in asymmetrical rhythms that stnctlv' followed the original rhythm of the melody. L'vov the son (Alexey Fedorovitch) was one of the first men that addressed free and unsymmetrical rhythm. He was the director of the Court Chapel Choir from 1837 to 1861, and author of the anthem "Bozhe, tzaria khrani" [God save the tsar]. His thought was expressed as follows—since the verbal text of church motets is always prosaic and free, then the accompanying melody should be the same: free and asymmetrical in terms of rhythm. The melody should not be pressed into the boundaries of a strictly determined meter. To illustrate his point, L'vov takes Bortnyanksy's "Otche Nash"'*^ and points to the declamatory mistakes in it and suggests a free rhythm of his own for the same text. 48

Nevertheless, I must say that his correction is also weak. Bortniansky has

"^ Nikolai Potulov was an amateur composer who taught Arkhangel'sky, the most prominent figure in choral music in St. Petersburg by the end of the nineteenth century. Stylistically, he is grouped with Metallov (1862-1926) and Solov'ev (1883-1909), who imitated the strict style of Western poKphony, resulting in, according to Morosan, "simple, amazingly dull; worse yet, they represented another infusion into Russian church music of a foreign style." (Morosan, Choral Performance. 21). His Rukovodstvo k prakticheskomu izucheniiu drevnegopeniia Pravoslavnoi Rossiiskoi Tserhi [A manual for the practical study of the ancient singing of the Russian Orthodox Church] was one of four sources from the time (as listed by Morosan) that provided additional examples of onginal chants that were not found in the Synodal chant-books, as well as helpful instruction in the rhythmic interpretation of chants Morosan, Choral Performance 252, 264. *^ "Our Father," the complete text is from Manhew 6:9-13 and Luke 11.2-4 *^ At this point, Gretchaninoff includes musical examples and discussion that are crossed out The remarks and musical examples are included here, howe\ er

263

[example of music included at this point in the essay, the text is translated: "Let thy _ kingdom come. Let thy will be done."]

^P^Z^^fffM^l^ ^ /^-^^/--.WJi^

i

L'vov suggests on the same text the following rhythm:

^m ^ ; ; ^ 2 ^ / ^ 4^?^^^ to Thee! DEACON: Let us be attentive. (The Deacon reads the appointed Gospel reading) No. 5 The Augmented Litany CHOIR: Glorv to Thee, O Lord, Glory to Thee! [repeated several times in the settmg] DEACON: Let us say with all our soul and with all our mind, let us sav: CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: O Lord Almighty, God of our fathers, we pray Thee, hearken and have mercy CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Have mercy on us, O God, according to Thy great goodness, wc pray Thee, hearken and have mercy. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Again we pray for our lord, His (Holiness, Eminence, Grace), our (Patriarch, Metropolitan, Bishop) (N.) for priests, deacons, and all our brethren in Christ. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Again we pray for the blessed and ever-memorable holy Orthodox patriarchs: and for the blessed and ever-memorable founders of this community: and for all our fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, the Orthodox departed this life before us, who here and in all the world lie asleep in Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. lyEKCOH: Again we pray for mercy. life, peace, health, salvation, visitation, forgiveness and remission of sins for the servants of God, the brethren of this holy temple. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Again we pray for those who bring offerings and do good works in this holy and all-venerable house; for those who labor and those who sing: and for all the people here present, who await Thy great and rich mercy. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. CELEBRANT: For Thou art a merciful God, and lovest mankind, and unto Thee we ascribe glory: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. No. 5b Litany for the Catechumens DEACON: Pray to the Lord, you catechumens. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Let us, the faithful, pray for the catechumens, that the Lord may have mercv on them. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: That He me teach them the word of truth. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DF.ACON: That He may reveal to them the gospel of righteousness. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: That He may unite them to His Holy, Catholic, and .Apostolic Church

187

CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Help them, save them, have mercy on them, and keep them, O God, bv Tingrace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Bow you heads unto the Lord, vou catechumens. CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord. CELEBRANT: That with us they may glorify Thine all-honorable and majestic Name: oj the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto a^cs ofj^es. CHOIR: Amen. 5c. First and Second Litanies of the Faithful DEACON: All catechumens, depart! Depart, catechumens! All that are catechumens. depart! Let no catechumen remain! Let us, the faithful, again and again in peace pray unto the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O god, by Thv grace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON.- For unto Thee are due all glory, honor, and worship: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. DEACON: Again and again, in peace, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For the peace from above and for the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For the peace of the whole world, for the welfare of the holy churches of God, and for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For this holy house and for those who enter with faith, reverence, and the fear of God, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger, and necessity, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God. by Thy grace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Wisdom! CELEBRANT: That guarded always by Thy might we may ascribe glor\' unto Thee: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. No. 6 Cherubic Hymn CHOIR: Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim, and who sing the thrice-holy hymn to the life-creating Trinity,

288

now lay aside all cares of this life. CELEBRANT: May the Lord God remember you in His kingdom, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. That we may receive the King of All, who comes invisiblv upborne by the angelic host. Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia. No. 7 The Litany of Supplication DEACON: Let us complete our prayer unto the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For the precious Gifts now offered, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For this holy house, and for those who enter with faith, reverence, and the fear of God, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger and necessity, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Hiy grace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: That the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful, and sinless, let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: An angel of peace, a faithful guide, a guardian of our souls and bodies, let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: Pardon and remission of our sins and transgressions, let us ask ot the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: All things that are good and profitable for our souls, and peace for the world. let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: That we may complete the remaining time of our life in peace and repentencc. let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: A Christian ending to our life: painless, blameless, and peaceful: and a good defense before the dread judgment seat of Christ, let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: Commemorating our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Man. with all the saints, let us entrust ourselves and each other, and all our life unto Christ our God. CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord. CELEBRANT: Through the Compassions of Thine only-begotten Son, with whom Thou are blessed, together with Thine all-holy, good, and lijc-creatmg Spirit, now and ever. and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen.

289

CELEBRANT: Peace be unto all. CHOIR: And to your spirit. DEACON: Let us love one another, that with one mind we mav confess. CHOIR: Father, Son and Holy Spirit! The Trinitv, one in essence, and undivided! No. 8 The Creed DEACON: The doors! The doors! In wisdom, let us attend! CHOIR/DEACON: I Believe in one God, the Father, the Almight\,Maker of hea\en and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of light, tt^e God of true God; Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, B>' whom all things were made; Who for us men and for ous salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnated of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. .\nd the third da\ He rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into Heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Gi\er of Life, who proceeds from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is \\ orshipped and Glorified; who spoke by the prophets. In one holy. Catholic, and .\postolic Church. I acknowledge on baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. No. 9 A Mercy of Peace (Anaphora) DEACON: Let us stand aright! Let us stand with fear! Let us attend, that we may ojYcr the Holy Oblation in peace. CHOIR: A mercy of peace! A sacrifice of praise! CELEBRANT: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you. CHOIR: And with your spirit. CELEBRANT: Let us lift up your hearts! CHOIR: We lift them up unto the Lord! CELEBRANT: Let us give thanks unto the Lord. CHOIR: It is fitting and right to bow down to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit: the Trinity, one in essence and undivided. CELEBRANT: ...Singing the triumphant hymn, shouting, proclaiming, and saying: CHOIR: Holy! Holy! Holy! Lord of Sabaoth! Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory! Hosanna in the Highest! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest! CELEBRANT: Take, eat. this is Mv Body, which is broken for vou for the remission oj sins. CHOIR: Amen. CELEBRANT: Drink of it, all of you, this is My Blood of the new covenant, which is shed for vou and for many, for the remission of sins. CHOIR: Amen.

!90

CELEBRANT: Thine own of Thine own we offer unto Thee, on behalf of all and for a!l. CHOIR: We hymn Thee, we bless Thee, we give thanks to Thee, O Lord, and >\e pray unto Thee, O our God. CELEBRANT: Especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever- Virgin Mary. No. 10 It is truly fitting (Hymn to the Mother of God) CHOIR: It is truly fitting to bless you, O Theotokos, ever-blessed and most pure and the Mother of our God. More honorable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim: without defilement you gave birth to God the Word: true Theotokos, we magnify you. DEACON: Among the first, remember, O Lord, His (Holiness, Eminence, Grace), our (Patriarch, Metropolitan, Bishop) (N.). Grant him for Thy holy churches m peace, safety, honor, health, and length of days, rightly to define the word of Thy truth. CHOIR: And all mankind. CELEBRANT: And grant that with one mouth and one heart we may praise Thine allhonorable and majestic Name: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. CELEBRANT: And the mercies of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ shall be with all of you. CHOIR: And with your spirit. No. 10b Second Litany of Supplication DEACON: Having remembered all the saints, again and again in peace let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For the precious Gifts offered and sanctified, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: That our God, who loves mankind, receiving them on His holy, heavenly, and ideal altar as a sweet spiritual fragrance, will send down upon us m return His divine grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger and necessity, let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: That the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful, and sinless, let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: An angel of peace, a faithful giude, a guardian of our souls and bodies, let us ask of the Lord.

291

CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: Pardon and remission of our sins and transgressions, let us ask of the Lord CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: All things that are good and profitable for our souls, and peace for the world. let us ask of our the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: That we may complete the remaining time of our life in peace and repentencc. let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: A Christian ending to our life: painless, blameless, and peaceful: and a good defense before the dread judgment seat of Christ, let us ask of the Lord. CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord. DEACON: Having asked for the unity of the Faith, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, let us entrust ourselves and each other, and all our life unto Christ our God. CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord. CELEBRANT: And count us worthy, O Master, that with boldness and without condemnation we may dare to call Thee, the God of Heaven, "Father," and sa\: No. 11 Our Father (The Lord's Prayer) CHOIR: Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the Evil One. CELEBRANT: For Thine are the Kingdom, and the power, and the glon\ of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. CELEBRANT: Peace be unto all. CHOIR: And to your spirit. DEACON: Bow your heads unto the Lord. CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord. CELEBRANT: Through the grace and compassion and love toward mankind of Tfune only-begotten Son, with whom Thou art blessed, together with Thine all-holv, good, and life-creating Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. No. l i b Only One Is Holy DEACON: Let us be attentive! CELEBRANT: The Holy Things for the holy! CHOIR: Onlv One is Holv! One is Lord, Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father. Amen. No. l i e Psalm 148:1 CHOIR: Praise the Lord from the heavens! Praise Him in the highest! .\lleluia! .\lleluia! Alleluia!

292

No. 12 Let us Fervently Beseech (Para-liturgical Concerto) CHOIR: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God, though we are sinful and unworthy, and call out in repentance from the depths of our souls, "Help us. O Lady, in thy tenderheartedness; hasten, for we perish because of our many sins. Turn not thy servants away empty, for thou art our only hope." No. 13 End of the Liturgy (Communion and Dismissal)'^ DEACON: In the fear of God, and with faith, draw near! CHOIR: Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord! The Lord is God, and has revealed Himself to us! CELEBRANT: I believe, Lord, and I confess that Thou art in truth the Christ, the Son i^l the Living God, who camest into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. I believe also that this is indeed Thy most Pure Body, and that this is indeed Thy Precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee: have mercy on me and forgive me my transgressions, voluntary and involuntary, in word, in deed, in knowledge and in ignorance: and count me worthy to partake without condemnation of Thy most Pure Mvsteries for the remission of sins and for life eternal. Amen. Of Thy mystical supper. O Son of God, today receive me as a communicant; for I will not speak of the mystery to Thine enemies, nor will I give Thee a kiss, like Judas; but like the thief I confess Thee: Remember me. Lord, in Thy Kingdom. Not for judgement or condemnation be the partaking of Thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body. CHOIR: Accept the body of Christ, taste the immortal spring. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia. CELEBRANT: O God, save Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance. CHOIR: We have seen the true light, we have received the heavenly Spirit, We have found the true faith, we bow down to the indivisible Trinity, It has saved us. CELEBRANT: Always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. CHOIR: May our mouths be filled with Thy praise, O Lord, that we may sing Th> glory. That it may please Thee to impart Thyself to us with Thy holy, Divine Immortal and life-creating mysteries. Observe us in Thy temple All day studying Thy truth. Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! DEACON: Having received the Divine, Holy. Pure, Immortal, Heavenly, Life-giving and Dread Mysteries of Christ, let us worthily give thanks to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. ' As the text for the final movement of the Second Liturgy is identical to that of GrcichaninotTs Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, the text translation for this movement was found on Liner notes, Grechaninov Liturgia Domestica, Russian State Symphomc Cappella, N'alery Polyansky. cond.. CD. Chandos. V)')S, 2325. The text for the chants of the Deacon and Celebrant were found on the followini: website designed by the parish of St. John the Foremnner Russian Orthodox Church (Chemenskaya). St Petersburg. Russia http://en.liturgy.ru. nav, limrg/litS.php.

293

DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. DEACON: Having asked that the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful and sinless. let us entrust ourselves and one another and our whole life unto Christ Our God. CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord. CELEBRANT: For Thou art our Sanctification, and to Tliee we give glon: to the Father. and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. CELEBRANT: Let us go forth in peace. CHOIR: In the name of the Lord. CELEBRANT: Let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. CELEBRANT: O Lord, Who blessest those who bless Thee, and sanctifiest Those who put their trust in Thee: save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance; preserve the fullness of Thy Church; sanctify those who love the beauty of Thy house; glorify them in return by Thy divine power, and forsake us not who put our hope in Thee. Give peace to Thy world. to Thy Churches, to the priests, to all in civil authority, and to all Thy people. For every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from Thee, the Father of lights; and to Thee we give glory, thanksgiving and worship, to the Father and to the Son. and to the Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. May the name of the Lord be blessed from now and for ever. May the name of the Lord be blessed from now and for ever. May the name of the Lord be blessed from now and for ever. CELEBRANT: The blessing of the Lord be upon you through His grace and love towards mankind, always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. CHOIR: Amen. CELEBRANT: Glory to Thee, O Christ our God and our Hope, glory to Thee. CHOIR: Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit Both now and always and for ever and ever, Amen. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Bless. CELEBRANT: May He Who rose from the dead Christ, our true God, though the prayers of His all-holy Mother of the holy, glorious and all-praised Apostles, of our Father among the Saints, John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, (or: oJ our Father among the Saints Basil the Great, Archbishop ofCaesarea in Cappadocia) and of Saint N (of the Temple), of Saint N (of the day), and of all the Saints, have mercv on us and save us, as He is good and loveth mankind. CHOIR: (the God-cherished great country of Russia, the holy faith and orthodox Christians)'* CHOIR: Lord, preserve them for many years. " This portion of text changed with the mlers who were in power at the time, as the rulers were identified by name in the prayer. The text that was included here in parenthesis \\as employed for the Russian State Cappella's 1995 performance of Gretchaninoffs Domestic Liturgy, and would fit both the style and the context for a modem-day performance of the Second Liturgy.

294

APPENDIX F EXCERPTS FROM VARIOUS RUSSIAN SOURCES

In examining the context for Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. opus 29. the following excerpts from Russian sources proved relevant. Each of the anicles were translated by Sergei Shiskin and edited b\ Philip Camp. The first three articles deal with the ban on instrumental music imposed by the Russian Orthodox Church, discussed in Chapter III. The period of the new Russian choral school ushered in a debate on the topic of instrumental music in the church for the first time in Russia's history. The first article by Golubtsov written in 1918 demonstrates the typical explanation for the ban against the use of instruments. The subsequent essays completed in the mid-1990s by the Archpriest Boris Nikolaev and B. Kutuzov show that both the reasoning behind the restriction and the conviction to impose the restriction among church leaders hardly changed over the course of the twentieth century. The final excerpt is from a speech delivered in 1999 b\ Dr. Marina Rhakmanova, the leading Russian scholar on Gretchaninoff. This excerpt briefl\ explains the significance of the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications of 1900. discussed in Chapter IV and presented in Appendix A.

:^^5

A. P. Golubtsov. Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgii. Chast 2. Liturgia [From the readings on the Church Archaeolog\ and Uiturg\. Part 2. Liturgica.] Sergiev Posad: 1918. 254-257.

Instrumental Performance of the Church Motets Now we will say a few words about the ancient church attitude toward the use of instruments in the performance of the church motets. .At the beginning of the Christian church, there were two ways of performance: purely vocal, and \ocal performance accompanied by instrumental music. The pagan religions of the ancient world used both ways equally. Those who are acquainted with the en\ ironment and the ceremonies of the games and religious feasts of the ancient Greeks will understand quite well the use of instrumental music in the pagan practice of the ancient world. Hebrew worship was also accompanied with instrumental music. The ancient Christian church was very suspicious of sculpture, and partiall> suspicious of painting, but it was even more suspicious of the use of instruments in the worship assembly. The church teachers stated that the Jews of the Old Testament had been allowed to accompany singing with musical instruments because God was lenient with their carelessness, faintheartedness, and the spiritual infirmit\. With that permission, God wanted to excite their sensual mind to more vivid and energetic activity. In the Apostolic decrees, instrumental music was regarded frankly as forbidden to each Christian. There was a ban on teaching the sacrament of baptism to fiddlers, harpists and lyre-players. Therefore, the performance of Krical compositions was purely vocal. Tertullian stated: "We use only one organ - a word. With a word, not

N6

with a psaltery, nor a taboret. nor a pipe we worship God." Indeed, the organ o\ human word is the perfect instrument b\ its ph\sical design. Even though a human voice does not embrace all the acts performed b\ the stringed instrument in general, it is able to create polyphonic harmony vsith the most rich and elegant consonances. Besides, a human voice is more natural, more vivid, and so to sa\. it expresses more intimately the inner state of a soul and serves as a conductor of her movements. Due to those advantages, vocal performance or singing was universall\ recognized in the ancient church. Only in the beginning of the Middle Ages, and soleh in the West, instrumental music became accepted in the church. According to scholars, the very first known organ in the West was received by Pepin as a gift from the Byzantine emperor Constantine Copronim [c. 757]. Most probably, it was a domestic instrument which was in use in Constantinople. Charles the Great received another large organ from the Byzantine Empire and gave the order to build a similar one for Aachen's church. Since that time, organs were wide spread among Western churches. They became especially known in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries as technological advances of the instrument increased. By the time of the Council of Trent.' the use of organs in church practice became so entrenched and popular that the members of the Council, while reasoning about church discipline, did not sa\ a word against the use of organ. Instead, they canonically sanctified its use, while banning the use of an\ other instrument in the church, thereby proving that other instruments pre\iousl> had been used to accompany singing besides an organ. However, this diversit\ of instrumental

' The author refers to the Council of Trent that occurred from 1 .M5-1 N-.^ thai placed restrictions on the Renaissance polyphonic stNle.

:^'7

music came much later than the use of an organ in the church practice. Thomas Aquinas stated that the church did not allow musical instruments such as the zither and psalter) to distinguish the church from Jewish practice. Uater that rule was abandoned...^ In the Greek Church, instrumental music was never accepted in worship. However, it was not an absolute attitude. There were cases when instrumental music was permitted. According to Codinus. one ma\ conclude that durinc the solemn ceremonies such as the emperor's coronation and the king's public appearances, choral chanting was accompanied by the instrumental music. We know also from Byzantine writers that after singing "longevity" to an emperor on Christmas Da\ before the end of the liturgy, the same was repeated b\ different musical instruments: "rcsonantihus organus, puae varia sunt", or "organa satis multo prostepunt", or "organis qenuo ad modicum tempus resonantibus." Nevertheless, these cases were among the exceptions. and it seems they took place only in the court chapels and in the domestic ceremonies of the Byzantine court. In the public worship assemblies of the Orthodox Church. however, singing with instruments was never introduced.

'The remainder of the paragraph digresses into the discussion aht>ui the use ot dittercni musical instmments in the West, and is omitted here.

:98

Archpriest Boris Nikolaev, Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osnova ru.sskogo pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenn\ chant and hook notation as the heart of Russian Orthodox Church sinking]. (Moscow: Nauchnaia Kni^'a 1995)29-30. Introduction Why instrumental music is not allowed in Orthodox worship Finally, singing in the Eastern Orthodox Church has one more important feature: it is not substituted nor accompanied with insu-umental music during worship. Though there is an extra-temple use of the percussion instruments (bells), this music if it can be called music - has only an external meaning and it is not worship music in the direct meaning of the word. The church-going bell calls and prepares believers for worship, proclaims the very important moments of the temple worship to the absentees, and sanctifies the air outside the temple, like the echo of the solemn temple performances. But there are no prescriptions about any special melodic turns in the Charter. The unwritten custom that excludes the use of instrumental music in worship has its ideological basis in the Orthodoxy itself Vocal music is natural music but instrumental music is an artificial, imitative one. As histor\ testifies, instrumental music appeared later than vocal music. Old Testament worship consisted of dumb sacrificial animals and dumb music. As the blessed Theodorit noted: "It was not because God was delighted in their (musical instrument's) sounds but because it \sas His intention for doing that." All of that, along with many other things were allowed in the kingdom of "shade and images" because of the hardness of their hearts (Matt. 19:8)."^ Nevertheless, even there, the ver\ best things were sacrificed to (iod (den.

^MaUhew 19:8 stales "[Jesus| said to them, 'lor >our hardness (W heart Moses allimcd >ou to di\orce your wi\es. but from the beginning it was not so.'" Revised Standard N'ersion.

299

4:4). Even though the Psalmist summons us to praise God on all musical instrumenis that were used during Jewish worship, he also admonishes all peoples to sing praises "with understanding'" that is according to the interpretation of the hallowed Aphanas\ the Great, "not with harps as the former singers did." Researchers call a human voice a string-wind instrument that embraces harmonic accords of three octaves. As professor-archpriest Metallov says. "The reason for the exclusive use of vocal music in the Orthodox worship lies in the ver> nature of the human voice that is able to express the most diverse, deep, and delicate movements of the human soul." Natural science also speaks in favor of the human voice.

Kutuzov. B. "Problem) russkogo znamennogo penia \ sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia katolikami gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Singing Znamennv Chant in relation to the histor> of revival of Gregorian Chant bv Catholics), Shkola Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singing], (Moscow: Spass Cathedral of Andronic Monasterv. #1. 1996). .

In 1917, people that dared to call themselves orthodox raised the question about the use of an organ in orthodox worship at the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church. A joint session that addressed specific questions conceming church singing was held on December 8 of that vear. A[leksandr] Gretchaninoff proposed the introduction of the organ for use in worship. The suggestion received the support of the director of the Synodal School. A[leksandr] Kastal'skv. as well as by D[mitri] Allemanov, a priest in the Orthodox Church whose so called choral works are still performed even todav b\ church choirs. The proposal was rejected by a vote of eight to three.

^(lenesis 4:4 states "and Abel brought of the firstlings of his tlcKk and of iheir tai portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and hisotTering." ' I he quotation here is taken trom I'salms 47:7.

M)()

M.P.Rakhmanova. "Staroobriadchestvo i Novoe napravlenie" v russkoi dukhovnoi muzyke"[01d Belief and New School' in Russian Music]. Cultural Heritage of Medieval Russia in the Tradition of Ural - Siberian Old Belief Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific Conference, Mav 17-19. 1999. Novosibirsk: M. 1. ^ Glinka Novosibirsk State Conservatory. 1999. . Now I would like to go back to the above-mentioned discussion on church singing in the Moskovskie Vedomosti newspaper in the years 1900-1902. It was initiated with the famous article of A.T. Gretchaninoff "A few words about the 'spirit' of the church motets." That article mav be viewed in a certain sense as the manifesto of the new school, and it was indeed perceived that way bv his contemporaries (actualK, Gretchaninoffs article was not the first one in that discussion, but it was that very article that "poured oil on the fiames"). Manv other priests, researchers, joumalists, precentors appeared in the newspaper later on: thev wrote differently and about different things.

301