PipeChat Digest #1385 - Thursday, May 11, 2000
 
Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral?
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral?
  by <Cremona502@cs.com>
Harmonic flutes -- more trouble than they are worth?
  by "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com>
Re: Harmonic flutes -- more trouble than they are worth?
  by "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net>
Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral?
  by <Quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral?
  by "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com>
Digest list
  by "Ron Reseigh" <RonRizzy@prodigy.net>
 


(back) Subject: Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral? From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:39:39 EDT   > Eagles Wings is not very singable if we are to sing the notes as > written not just slouching around were-ever we feel like a note shall = go. Eagles Wings is hardly difficult music. When I played for an RC church = the congregation was able to sing it perfectly well, even unaccompanied at weekday masses. Sorry. It just ain't that difficult. Its musical value is up for grabs. It's a matter of taste. I'm not nuts about it, = but there certainly is worse music out there.   I was really ticked at the video tape of one of the dedicatory recitals at =   Claremont UCC on the new Glatter-Goetz played by Daniel Roth. He did an =   improvisation and asked for two themes: an allegro and an adagio. The allegro was "Simple Gifts", the adagio was (what else) Eagles Wings. = The played a very exciting and beautiful improvisation using SG and in the middle, the theme from Eagles Wings was stated, slightly developed and = then disappeared under the re-emerging SG. I would love to have heard what he =   was thinking!! By the way, these videos are really worth having.   > And be honest, during the song how may people did you see in the > congregation singing with all their hearts? Now how many did you see just > weakly mouthing the words or not opening their mouths at all ?!? Oh, come on folks. How many people do you see singing with all their = hearts at funerals! Be real. It is very helpful and ministers to the soul, = but it is danged difficult to sing under those conditions. Methinks the judgment is a bit harsh here.   > In two conferences I attended the composer of this piece stated, "I = wish I > had never written Eagles Wings in the first place" Yes... I'm sure he cries all the way to the bank. He's probably sorry = that people hate it so much, rather than that he wrote it. More sorry he got caught, that sorry he committed the crime!~   > And that last sentence is just about how far MOST Catholics' knowledge = of > music go these days. Face it! We are living in a culturally desolate time. Since the 60's, music has been on a slippery slide toward an open lid. It's time to = flush and we are paying the price. Much as I would like to think it is, poor taste and liturgical ignorance is not the sole province of the RCs. = Clergy seem to be amazingly insulated from music, for the most part.   > The Mass of Creation is sing songy and trite. Yes. But so the the Robert Powell setting of the Eucharist that Episcopalians have been suffering with lo these many years. I call it, Missae Plastique. If the RCs had one standard, approved hymnal they probably would have only a few ugly settings (like the Lutherans and Episcopalians), but since it is possible, yea encouraged, for the hacks to =   keep vomiting these things out, there will be more. Clergy complain that =   music must be simple and whistlable (not to mention toe-tappable), so that =   their incredibly stupid congregations can learn it. RCs have been = dubbed stupid by their hierarchy.... why should they behave otherwise. = There are, of course, pockets of good music, and if the clergy would not fight = so hard, there would be more parishes with good music. RCs are plagues with =   greedy publishing companies who are raping parish treasuries in the name = of Holy Profit.   > but for a state funeral of a Cardinal ? I personally think that "state funerals" should be choral since there are most likely going to be many, many "foreigners" present. Unfortunately, = that is a very unpopular approach these days.   > how many parishes do that garbage DAILY and WEEKLY without fail and without > end????????? I really don't think this music is "garbage", although it is not my preference. Part of the resistance to good music is the resistance to joining the snobby club of elite people who shun their taste. Many = people who would like to have good music (too) are put off by this attitude. I have very little difficulty introducing "good" hymns in my RC job, but we did use music that they liked as well. These hymns are simply contemporary gospel hymns, although they are not quite as well written.     Bruce .. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com http://ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502  
(back) Subject: Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral? From: <Cremona502@cs.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:39:36 EDT   In a message dated 5/10/00 11:44:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, the_maitre@hotmail.com writes:   > What I don't understand is that all of a sudden we've deemed > >the > >music as ludicrous for a funeral. I personally saw nothing wrong with = it. > I think the problem here is that many are applying Anglican criteria to = this selection of funeral music. The mass setting for a funeral should be the =   one that is normally used at weekly mass so that the congregation is = familiar with it, especially when there is the liklihood of many visitors. Ditto = for the hymns. They should be in the repertory of the parish, even if it is a =   cathedral parish. We all must knuckle under to the desires of the = family. It's just one of those things. It is indeed unfortunate that clergy seem to have little taste or regard for music in worship, and the problem seems to intensify the higher on the hydrant they climb!   Bruce .. . . .in the Beagles' Nest with the Baskerbeagles Molly, Duncan, and Miles Cremona502@cs.com http://ourworld.cs.com/Brucon502  
(back) Subject: Harmonic flutes -- more trouble than they are worth? From: "Dave G." <dave_hat@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 22:47:53 PDT     Hi everyone,   I have a couple questions concerning the harmonic flute   (a) why bother? With properly scaled regular flute pipes can't you get = the same emphasis on fundamental that a harmonic flute is supposed to impart = to its tone? Or is the point to get a strong fundamental AND a number of stringlike weaker harmonics?   (b) if the hole is just poked in the pipe at a fixed location how can you tune the pipe since the position of the hole determines the speaking = length? Why not have a sort of adjustable collar that can "move" the hole position?   DG ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Harmonic flutes -- more trouble than they are worth? From: "Bob Scarborough" <desertbob@rglobal.net> Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 22:57:59   At 10:47 PM 5/10/2000 PDT, you wrote: > Why not have a sort of adjustable collar that can "move" the hole >position?<snip>   Keep it simple! Ice pick 'n bubblegum....   dB  
(back) Subject: Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral? From: <Quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 21:25:35 -0700   Yes, BUT ... there are more appropriate funeral hymns.   President Kennedy's funeral was also a mish-mash ... it was a LOW Mass because Cardinal Cushing had had throat surgery and couldn't chant ... Schubert "Ave Maria" , Gregorian "In paradisum", and the rest mostly forgettable (I HAVE forgotten).   From a LITURGICAL standpoint, Princess Di's wasn't much better, except for the Croft Burial Sentences. I wonder who's idea it was NOT to read the Prayer Book service for her? The Queen's? As Head of the Church, I suppose she COULD have ordered Canterbury to do what he did ...   By contrast, Churchill ... now THAT was a State Funeral.   Cheers,   Bud   Innkawgneeto@webtv.net wrote:   > Catholics do not have the corner on neglecting quality literature for > the sake of appealing to the masses. It is a problem in many many > denoms. > > I do think, however, that "Lift High the Cross" was a wonderful > conclusion. > > Neil > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org    
(back) Subject: Re: Church Music Re: What exactly WAS wrong with the funeral? From: "Noel Stoutenburg" <mjolnir@ticnet.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 02:40:32 -0500   Quilisma@socal.rr.com wrote:   > >From a LITURGICAL standpoint, Princess Di's wasn't much better, except = for > the Croft Burial Sentences. I wonder who's idea it was NOT to read the > Prayer Book service for her? The Queen's?   I understand that the Princess of Wales no longer being part of the Royal Family, there was little that HM the Queen could say about how the service = was carried out. I understood at the time that Princess Diana's brother, Earl Spenser (IIRC?) controlled the details of the service. Also, since, IIRC, = the service was held at Westminster Abbey, a Royal Peculiar, there was nothing anyone in the C of E could do about any plans for the service.   ns    
(back) Subject: Digest list From: "Ron Reseigh" <RonRizzy@prodigy.net> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 04:53:13 -0400   To whom it may concern -   Would the respective owner(s) of PipeChat please subscribe my E-Mail = address (RonRizzy@prodigy.net) to the Digest version, please? It would be *most* appreciated, as I am only checking my E-Mail once a week now, and have = lost the directions on how to do it.   Again, it would be most appreciated if one of you could do so.   Much thanks in advance, Ron Reseigh RonRizzy@prodigy.net