A word about Cappella Romana’s Tikey Zes: The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom before I review it

“Although there now exist polyphonic choral settings of the Divine Liturgy by composers representing nearly the full cultural spectrum of Eastern Orthodoxy,” writes Cappella Romana‘s Artistic Director Alexander Lingas in the liner notes of their new recording, Tikey Zes: The Divine Liturgy of St. Chrysostom,

those produced by Greek American composers remain little known. Indeed, Orthodox Christians from Europe or the Middle East visiting Greek Orthodox churches of the United States are frequently surprised or even scandalized to hear the Sunday Divine Liturgy sung not by cantors employing Byzantine chant, but by a mixed choir singing harmonized or polyphonic music that is often accompanied by an organ. Viewed from such an outside perspective, Greek American liturgical choral music would seem to be little more than a peculiar — or, as some critics of polyphony would maintain, an ill-judged and extreme — instance of inculturation. While there can be little doubt that ideologies promoting cultural adaptation (or even assimilation) to prevailing cultural norms have influenced the development of liturgical singing in Greek America, emphasis on these aspects of its history can all to easily lead to facile dismissals that ignore its many complexities of provenance and expression.

Wow, that’s a mouthful for a CD booklet, isn’t it? And yet, there it is. As one tasked with reviewing this particular disc, I feel that I must unpack this a bit to give the recording proper context for people who may not be familiar with the issues to which Lingas refers. This is going to be rather subjective and impressionistic, but I think it all has to be said before I can write my review.

Who gets the final say of what constitutes what something “should” sound like? What is “authenticity”? What’s “authentically” American? What’s “authentically” Orthodox? What’s “authentically” “authentic tradition” or, more specifically, “authentic sacred music”? Can something be “authentic” to the “lived experience” of some Orthodox but not others? How do you work out the question of the authority to resolve such questions? We can appeal to Tradition — but interpreted by whom? Is it up to bishops? Bishops can be wrong. Is it up to musicians? Musicians can be wrong. Is it up to “the people”, whatever we mean by that? “The people” can be wrong. How do you deal with change within a rubric of Tradition so that you are neither unnecessarily reactionary nor unnecessarily innovative?

These questions are vexing for Orthodox Christians in this country. I didn’t really understand just how vexing when I first started attending services; I had initially thought that Orthodox musical issues were largely free of strife. (Stop laughing. Seriously.) I came from a high church, or at least sacramental and liturgical, Protestant setting where the jockeying was over pride of place in the  schedule between the spoken service, the “contemporary” service, and the organ-and-choir service. The church where I was going had had the music-free service at 8:30am, the praise band service at 10am, and then the organ-and-choir service at 11:15, and the demographics basically amounted to the blue-hairs (and the Barretts) going to the 11:15 service and all the young/youngish middle/upper-class families going to the 10am service. (All of the really old people went to the quiet service.) The priest really favored the 10am service, and the musicians who played for that service were the ones who had his ear; the organist and the choir were rather treated as a necessary evil at best by most of the 10am crowd (I remember that the guy who led the praise band wouldn’t even say “hi” to people in the choir if our paths were to cross), and in all fairness, the organist tended to act like the praise band people were in the way. (Which, again in all fairness, from her perspective, they kind of were, with amplifiers and instruments obstructing traffic patterns for the choir if they were left out.) It really meant that there were two different church communities, and you were defined by which service you attended. (Ironically, as much as the 10am people thought the 11:15am people were snooty dinosaurs, the 11:15am service was really pretty “contemporary”-feeling in retrospect, or at least pretty low-church. As somebody who had been confirmed in more of a high-church context, my Anglo-Catholic instincts tended to be smiled at but ignored.)

In 2004, my second year in the School of Music at IU, I was asked to write a set of program notes for a choral performance I was singing in of Gretchianinoff’s setting of the All-Night Vigil, outlining the liturgical context of the service. I did the best I could with what I thought I knew at the time, and I included the following discussion of the a cappella tradition within Orthodoxy:

Historically, instruments have no place in Orthodox worship; organs are a recent development in some Greek parish churches in the United States, but those are generally examples of communities that have moved into pre-existing buildings that already had organs, and then simply adapted to what was there.

My first glimpse into just what disagreements there could be over Orthodox church music was when Vicki Pappas, the then-National Chair of the National Forum of Greek Orthodox Church Musicians, came to the Gretchianinoff concert. She talked to me about the notes afterward and said, “Very good on the whole, Richard, but that’s just not true about organs. Greeks love their organs, and have built many churches with the intent of having them.” That seemed quite contrary to what I had been told up to that point about a cappella singing being normative, and I wasn’t clear on where the disconnect was. Little did I know.

Last year, the Saint John of Damascus Society was asked to write a script for an hourlong special on Orthodox Christmas music that would have been aired on NPR. I wrote the script, but for various reasons the full program shrunk down to a segment on Harmonia instead. Anyway, as I was writing the segment and assembling the program for it, one of the people I was consulting with objected to Cappella Romana‘s recordings being used for some of the contemporary Greek-American polyphonic composers like Tikey Zes. “They sing Tikey’s music like it’s Palestrina,” this person told me. “Real Greek Orthodox choirs don’t sound like that. Let me get you some more representative recordings.” The problem, though, was that the recordings this person preferred weren’t really up to broadcast quality. They were more “authentic” to this person’s experience of how the music is used in church, but they were problematic to use in a setting where one needed to put the best foot forward.

Coming from an Anglican background, this struck me as an odd criticism, and it still does. My church choir in Bellevue didn’t sound anything like the Choir of King’s College at Cambridge, but I would certainly rather give somebody a King’s CD if I wanted them to get an idea of what Anglican music sounds like rather than get an ambient recording of a service of my old choir. Is it representative of what it “really” sounds like? Is it representative of what it should sound like? I can’t definitively answer either question, but it’s the ideal of sound I have in my ear for that repertoire. Whether or not the average parish choir sounds like that isn’t really the point. Still, that’s an argument that doesn’t satisfy the “lived experience” criterion.

At the same time, the presence of robed choirs and organs means that there’s some jostling that happens with people for whom the Orthodox Church’s traditional repertoire is chant, period, with opinions strongly held on both sides. There’s the issue that the Ecumenical Patriarchate issued an edict in 1846 forbidding the liturgical use of polyphonic music, and I don’t think that anybody denies that this exists, but it seems to me that there’s a good deal of disagreement about just what it means for American congregations in 2013. In any event, the fact that Orthodoxy still usually follows the one-Eucharist-per-altar-per-day canon means that you can’t split a church community along musical lines exactly, but nonetheless the solution in a lot of places is to institute aesthetic fault lines between services. Generally, what this looks like is that that Matins/Orthros is the domain of a lone cantor (or two or three) up until perhaps the Great Doxology, at which point it’s taken over by the choir. This interrupts the intrinsic unity of the services as they are intended to be served according to present-day service books, but it’s a solution. Speaking personally, I have put a good deal of time and effort over the last several years trying to become at least a competent cantor, and I’ve experienced the glory that is Orthros and Divine Liturgy being treated as a seamless garment sung in one musical idiom by the same people throughout, but I’m also not fundamentally thrown off by the presence of a polyphonic choir singing polyphonic repertoire.

While I’m thinking about it — I was surprised to discover that there is not, exactly, agreement over what exactly constitutes “Byzantine chant”. As I was taught, “Byzantine chant” indicates a particular process of composition of monophonic melodies for Orthodox liturgical text, employing a particular musical idiom with its own relationship to the text, theoretical characteristics, notational system, vocal style, and practice of ornamentation, informed by oral tradition (or, to use words perhaps more familiar to Western musicians, “performance practice”). In other words, it is not a fixed, bounded repertoire, but rather a living tradition; you can compose “Byzantine chant” for English texts by following the compositional process and sing the result with the proper style and performance practice. For English, this perspective probably prefers the work of Ioannis Arvanitis, Basil Crow, Papa Ephraim at St. Anthony’s Monastery, John Michael Boyer, and the like. This is also essentially the point of view presently taught at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology by Dr. Grammenos Karanos (more about them here).

At the same time, I’ve encountered the point of view — from both cradles and converts, people who are theoretically knowledgeable and people who aren’t — that that’s not Byzantine chant at all. Byzantine chant, according to some, actually is a fixed, bounded repertoire for Greek and Arabic; for one reason or another, so this point of view goes, a fresh setting for an English text might be a number of things, but it isn’t Byzantine chant anymore. (Either because the compositional process is imperfect for English, doesn’t work at all for English, or is irrelevant in the first place, depending on to whom one speaks.) The whole idea of formulaic composition here is set aside; it’s the melody that already exists that’s important, not the relationship of the melody to the text by way of those melodic formulae, and that melody needs to be preserved for it to still be “Byzantine chant”, even at the expense of proper formulae or orthography. This perspective would find, for example, Fr. Charles Baz’s transcriptions of the Basil Kazan Byzantine Project into Byzantine notation not just acceptable, but preferable to the work of the composers mentioned above.

And then there are still other “sides” within what I’ve outlined above. The bottom line is, there is more than plenty to argue about where music is concerned. For my own part, I try to be a specialist but not a partisan, and I think context matters. I don’t think that means “anything goes”, but to the extent that traditions of liturgical crafts have historical contexts (even Byzantine chant!), I’m not sure how much it accomplishes to pick fights. Part of the problem, as I’ve experienced myself, is that there aren’t a lot of people who are sufficiently well-trained Western musicians and Byzantine cantors, such that they can adequately participate in, or even comprehend or relate to, both contexts. There are some, but not many, and there’s generally not a lot of interest on the part of one “side” in learning about how the other “side” does things. I am able to go back and forth between the psalterion and the choir loft to some extent — I suppose I’d say I’m equally clumsy in both contexts — and I’m interested in what goes on in both, but I have my own opinions that I bring with me, certainly. (You don’t say, you’re both thinking.) I don’t like the hodgepodge of whatever random music might be thrown together that it seems to me that the choir loft can become. I don’t like a structure of liturgical responsibility that effectively tells a cantor, “We want you to cover all of the services that nobody comes to” (let’s be honest here). At the same time, if “Byzantine chant” is understood principally as “what the old guy whose voice is nasal and can’t stabilize on a single pitch, and who should have stepped down 25 years ago but didn’t because there wasn’t anybody to take his place, does before Divine Liturgy”, then that’s its own problem, one that we cantors need to be proactive about fixing. In general, we church musicians, cantors and choristers alike, need to be a lot more proactive about, shall we say, reaching across the nave and educating ourselves about our own musical heritage and where the stuff we might individually prefer actually fits in.

Okay, so then there’s the question of how an ensemble like Cappella Romana fits into this picture. As a professional choral ensemble that specializes in a particular kind of repertoire — Orthodox liturgical music in all of its variety — but one that is also led by a Greek Orthodox Christian and that has a substantial, though not exclusive, Orthodox membership on its roster, what is their role? Do they have a responsibility to follow a particular ecclesiastical agenda, even though they’re not an ecclesiastical organization? To put it one way, is their job descriptive or prescriptive? Are they a de facto liturgical choir that is only to record and perform in concerts the music that “should” be done in churches? Or, as a performing ensemble first and foremost, are they perhaps the kind of ensemble that should be exploring repertoire like Peter Michaelides, medieval Byzantine chant, Fr. Ivan Moody, and so on? Maybe they get to be the King’s College Choir, as it were, that records and performs things that would likely never be used liturgically, nor be appropriate to be used liturgically. But then, just as the Choir of King’s still sings daily services, Cappella has its “pastoral” projects, like The Divine Liturgy in English, where they are most definitely trying to disseminate an ideal of sound for churches to emulate. Alas, in some circles this argument of a two-sphere approach generates the the rather grumpy insistence that “Orthodoxy doesn’t do art”, or at the very least that art is a luxury that Orthodoxy cannot afford in in its current context in the New World. To me, that’s absurd, but as I have my own Orthodox artistic music project in the works, perhaps I’m not the most objective of critics where that point of view is concerned. At the very least, even if one is to ultimately dismiss liturgical use of the repertoire, I might suggest that Greek-American choral repertoire, not unlike the Greek idiom of vernacular music known as rebetiko, is worth understanding on its own terms at a musical and sociological level. (If you’re wondering what I mean by that, a full discussion is perhaps beyond our present scope, but I might submit that Greek American choral music, like what I understand is the case with rebetiko, can be seen as essentially a folk repertoire born in a context of emigration.) At any rate, thank God that it’s an ensemble like Cappella Romana taking it on, where the leadership and at least some of the membership have an intimate understanding themselves of the various elements at play.

And finally to the CD itself, which, because of the reasons mentioned by Lingas in the essay and what I discuss above, is in the unenviable position of not being able simply to be a recording of sacred music, but rather a recording that must be interpreted as a statement of something by people who don’t want the music contained therein legitimized, AND by people for whom this is the right music, but the wrong way to sing it. Jeffers Engelhardt, can you help me out here?

Well, to give you a capsule review (full review will be in the next post, now that I’ve got all of this stuff off my chest), if you come to the disc without needing it to be a statement of anything in particular, you will find that it is a beautifully-sung recording of some gorgeous music. The essay in the booklet about the music’s historical context is fascinating, both for what it says as well as what it doesn’t say. And yes, Cappella sings Tikey’s music like it’s Palestrina, and you know what? It sounds glorious. So, “authentic” or not, works for me.

Be right back.


12 Responses to “A word about Cappella Romana’s <i>Tikey Zes: The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom</i> before I review it”

  1. 1 Ole Kern 16 December 2013 at 7:21 pm

    Richard, I love your writing style – always worth a read. My only quip here is for you to edit out that non word “proactive” and use forward thinking something else similar. 😉

  2. 2 Nikos 17 October 2015 at 1:34 am

    I have just bought a copy of the Zes liturgy and would like to say following.

    Yes the quality of performance is tip notch as one expects from Capella Romana. RHEY are to be congratulated for adding this to their ‘portfolio’ of orthodox recordings and specifically in American context. And yes it had that ‘palestrina ‘ type sound that is not typical of Greek American choirs
    Now let us move on to the liturgy itself and hear I part company with the reviewer

    As a piece of liturgical music it is a’ workman like piece ‘ wirh some moments of beauty and reflective writing. However in general it ia pretty much of a piece with 19c western religious compositions
    It is here that I must open up and say I am a Greek orthodox Christian from currently UK and have worshipped in Greek churches in Stares as well as in Greece and UK and also extensively in Russian and other Slav churches so I am exposed to wide choice of orthodox liturgy
    I also know and love western religious music and the english cathedral tradition. And organs.
    All this said I find thiscmusic banal and wrong on many counts.
    As western religious music it is old hat and mostly in copy style reflecting nothing on the tradition it’s from and everything to hackneyed western style

    It comes from the experience of the Greek church in USA trying to fit in and feeling inferior and not understanding it’s tradition in first place due to reasons well expressed here.
    In as far as being in this tradition of Western adjustment yes it is authentic of a certain type of past Greek American experience but that this profoundly middle class respectable Anglican like church music reflects the same experience ad Rembetico music is to this Greek totally debatable. And the comment ‘we love our organs’ (ie Greek,- Americans) is not so true in the increasing number of such parishes returning to acapella byzantine chant and acapella choral with the advent of the production of superb byzantine chant inspired singing in Greek and English, something led by Romana Capella work in some respects

    I would ask any one to listen to such singing as Boston byzantine choir or the acapella michaelides superb liturgy or singing in Greece and above all to the amazing Russian and Slav tradition and Moscow chiral school of Rachmaninov or Kartalsky and see how such as Zes appear tired and old fashioned and boring,
    In addition without going into the subject ad greater length, the worship of the church and above all as voice only is not only demand from aesthetic grounds but from the orthodox understanding of prayer and liturgy itself and an aberration is as much to be supported as abuse of medication in the medical field .
    The previous reviewers betrays a very Protestant and western bias to say otherwise
    As an orthodox I do not have a personal wish in terms of liturgical style in the sense put forward by the reviewer.

    My view is not eccentric or obscure but orthodox and yes the bishops have a duty to uphold this which in USA the Greek ones have failed in previously for all sorts of reasons not valid today
    And there is a clear orthodox view.
    I am not saying single voice chant only answer. The glorious Russian tradition shows us otherwise and the acapella compositions of Greek America show us a different authentic according to lived tradition orthodox way
    Rebetiko? Well if we are going to have individual taste well this reviewer would love a Rembetico liturgy as nearer my taste and Greek lived experience and nearer people .
    Above all I do not believe such old fashioned western liturgical turgid music is the way forward for anyone who truly understands Orthodoxy
    Go and stand in Saint Sophia grerk cathedral London for superb acapella Greek style polyphony or Christ Saviour Moscow or for superb western polyphony and superb organ music of Handel and Poulenc stand in Winchester cathedral UK.
    But Tikey Zes and this school? Hackneyed, unorthodox and past it’s time even when superbly sung by Capella Romana.

  3. 3 Nikos 17 October 2015 at 2:09 am

    A superb recording in every way and such a joy as a Greek American antidote to the hackneyed and trite music of the organ and choir effort reviewed elsewhere.
    This recording teaches us what orthodox worship and in a Greek cultural context CAN be like and calls us as orthodox believers home while opening the riches to All who wish to experience it.
    Finally it calls the Greek – American choral tradition which can happily bloom and live and be renewed within this return to orthodox liturgical practice, to be equally responsive and renewed and above all send the organ and harmonium players on a deserved permanent sabbatical 😀

  4. 4 Nikos 17 October 2015 at 5:55 am

    I wish to add a final comment Re Zes liturgy.
    Hie chordal writing can be good and liturgical. I am struck at those moments when he has acapella responses etc how the whole feeling changes and how the absence of instruments convey totally different spirit.
    Quite honestly the western liturgical cathedral tradition where music is used differently illustrate the gap between art ans banal noise.
    TCHAIKOVSKY wrote commenting on the often operatic German I fluency church music of his time that it was out of context with the ritual and architecture of the church.
    When attending Holy Trinity New York main Greek cathedral I was struck how I experienced the same feelings of dissonance and musical banality.

    • 5 Nikos 21 October 2015 at 3:57 pm

      A reply to myself. But I feel it important to get a debate.
      One can look at the Zes liturgy as pure music and on that level it has its lovely moments such as the Trisagion and the. Palestrina like feel in the acapella parts. Quite beautiful and superbly sung as always!
      For the rest a work man like typical 19c mass!
      Even liturgicaly I can see that it would be fine. In a Catholic church. And loved,
      However this is a liturgy for use written by an orthodox musicologist and composer honored by church,. For the orthodox church

      I do not wish to go over what is said before regarding worship in the orthodox church and the dissonance between its liturgy and liturgical space and this. Something Tchaikovsky commented on in regard to the much more orthodox being always acapella, if germania in harmonic style, type of the singing at his time in late 19c. Russia.
      I will however use type of icons in the orthodox church to illustrate a point.
      The orthodox music is a liturgical icon and Tikey is an Italianate 19c icon at top end of market. What goes on in Buffalo NY may not be quite as artistic, but that is not point ( although i’do know Greek church in Buffalo trying to cut out organ). The point is this tradition as parallel icon is not orthodox and I would add banal when compared to tradition. And tradition is not an elderly man mangling orthros in nasal tone! It is as inappropriate as Italianate and renaissance icons and churches for orthodox whether artistic as Zes or just banal.

      It is the apogee of a past musical style. One has only to look at the blooming of acapella chant and choral work in this field in USA orthodox circles and Mr Zes has been an innovative composer of fine orthodox church music and music in general and he has my respect and all is said with respect. But all stands in contrast today with this classic Greek American hackneyed western organ use style.
      One can wonder why the slavs never went down this road nor Greeks in western Europe and I have my theories but for another time.
      Finally it is interesting that most non orthodox when presented with well dung byzantine music are always moved and say it speaks to them at different level.

      • 6 Nikos stone 24 November 2015 at 7:25 pm

        No reply surprising
        Perhaps I can say hearing music again that it has a beauty in part but that beauty is totally western. And begs all sorts of liturgical questions in Orthodoxy and congregational participation as opposed to attending a good performance,
        Sad that Greek byzantine music lacks a rachmaninov or Katalsky to bring choral beauty and tradition in equal marriage.

      • 7 Richard Barrett 11 December 2015 at 1:07 am

        Hi Nikos — thanks for your comments. What kind of reply are you looking for?

  1. 1 Review: Cappella Romana’s Tikey Zes: The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom | Leitourgeia kai Qurbana: Contra den Zeitgeist Trackback on 17 December 2013 at 1:59 am
  2. 2 Harmonia & Eno ’76 / Welcome | mostly music Trackback on 5 January 2014 at 2:21 am
  3. 3 TODAY’S SAINTS/HOLIDAY: Day of the Three Archbishops | euzicasa Trackback on 30 January 2014 at 11:11 am
  4. 4 CD Review: Cappella Romana, Arctic Light: Finnish Orthodox Music | Leitourgeia kai Qurbana: Contra den Zeitgeist Trackback on 8 September 2014 at 8:14 pm
  5. 5 Foundation for Defense of Democracies Trackback on 9 March 2015 at 8:38 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Richard’s Twitter

adventures in writing alexander lingas all saints bloomington all saints orthodox church american orthodox architecture american orthodox music american orthodoxy Antiochian Archdiocese Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America Antiochians books byzantine chant cappella romana chant church architecture ecclesiastical chant ethnomusicologists ethnomusicology fellowship of ss. alban and sergius Greece Greek greek food greekness hazards of church music international travel tips ioannis arvanitis joe mckamey john michael boyer kurt sander Latin liturgical adventures liturgical architecture liturgical music liturgical texts and translation liturgy liturgy and life lycourgos angelopoulos medieval byzantine chant Metropolitan PHILIP militant americanist orthodoxy modern byzantine architecture modern greek music music as iconography my kids will latin and greek when they're newborns my kids will learn latin and greek when they're newborns orthodox architecture orthodox architecture is bloody expensive Orthodox choir schools Orthodox Ecclesiology orthodox outreach orthodox travel pascha at the singing school Patriarchate of Antioch Patriarch IGNATIUS IV Patriarch of Antioch publishing random acts of chant richard barrett in greece richard toensing rod dreher sacred music st. vlads st john of damascus society Syriac the Bishop MARK fan club the convert dilemma the dark knight The Episcopacy The Episcopate the only good language is a dead language this american church life travel we need more american saints why do we need beautiful music in churches?

Blog Stats

  • 242,190 hits

Flickr Photos

%d bloggers like this: