We
have
received
not
another
email
but
a
comment
that
poses
a
question.
A
certain
classical
musician
wants
to
post
the
following
comment
on
one
of
our
posts.
Rather
than
do
that
we’re
going
to
give
it
a
post
of
its
own.
Here
it
is,
slightly
edited:
Can
I
ask,
then,
because
I'm
a
classical
musician
sometimes
struggling
whether
classical
music
is
useful
or
not,
what
the
Orthodox
Church's
opinion
of
classical
music
is?
I
also
think
that
classical
music
may
not
be
as
spiritual
and
transforming
as
[Orthodox]
chant
is
but
I
think
that
it
is
a
great
gift
that
can
work
as
a
healer
in
the
psychological
sense
and
also
help
people
come
closer
to
God.
What
do
you
think?
...[L]et
us
first
look
at
the
use
of
music
in
liturgical
worship.
In
Evagrius’
time,
and
earlier,
there
were
still
pagans
in
Alexandria.
They
used
‘wild
music’
as
part
of
their
celebrations.
In
Chapter
71
of
The
Monk,
one
of
Evagrius’
most
important
ascetical
works,1
Evagrius
says
this:
On
the
one
hand,
demonic
songs
set
our
desire
in
motion
and
put
the
soul
into
shameful
fantasies;
on
the
other
hand,
psalms
and
hymns
and
spiritual
songs
ever
bring
the
mind
to
a
memory
of
virtue,
chilling
our
burning
temper
and
withering
our
desires.
We
could
reflect
on
this
remark
in
regard
to
the
concept
of
‘Christian
rock’.
Something’s
wrong.
‘If
it’s
got
a
back
beat
you
can
dance
to
it.’
That
is
what
the
pagans
were
doing
in
Evagrius’
day
and
that
is
what
Evagrius
is
commenting
on:
such
music
sets
the
desire
in
motion
… but
psalms
and
hymns
and
spiritual
songs
chill
our
burning
temper
and
wither
our
desires.
In
an
Orthodox
monastery,
the
way
the
services
are
done
is
very
important.
This
includes
both
the
actual
type
of
chant
and
its
manner
of
execution.
All
those
droning
monks
have
a
role
to
play
in
the
formation
of
the
monk
in
the
monastery:
the
very
music
is
bringing
his
mind
to
a
memory
of
virtue—a
memory
of
God—and
cooling
his
temper
and
withering
his
desire.
The
chant
is
calming
him
down,
making
him
more
serene....
Because
Orthodox
Monk
doesn’t
know
everything—well,
at
least
no
one
is
consulting
us
on
Relativity—we
are
inclined
to
quote
something
someone
told
us
Elder
Paisios
said:
‘Rock
Music
is
demonic;
Western
Classical
Music
takes
you
into
a
world
that
doesn’t
exist,
leaving
you
just
the
way
you
were
when
it
finishes;
only
Orthodox
chant
transforms
the
person.
Apart
from
this
remark
of
Elder Paisios we
do
not
think
that
the
Orthodox
Church
has
an
opinion
on
Western
Classical
Music.
We
will
give
our
own
personal
comments,
although
not
in
a
very
systematic
fashion.
Moreover,
we’re
not
musicologists
or
professional
musicians
so
we
haven’t
thought
through
these
things
systematically
or
academically.
We
also
may
have
some
of
our
facts
wrong.
Sorry.
Western
Classical
Music
is
extremely
broad.
There’s
a
big
difference
between
Satie’s
Gymnopedies
and
Wagner’s
Ring
cycle;
between
Vivaldi’s
Four
Seasons
and
Bach’s
Suites
for
Unaccompanied
Violincello;
between
Shostakovitch’s
Leningrad
Symphony
and
Rachmaninoff’s
Vespers;
between
Mozart’s
Magic
Flute
and
Rossini’s
William
Tell.
Where
do
you
begin?
One
characteristic
of
Western
Classical
Music
is
that
it
uses
rather
few
and
simple
scales,
emphasizing
not
melody
but
harmony.
By
contrast,
Rock
Music
emphasizes
rhythm,
using
very
simple
melody
and
harmony
and
sometimes
emphasizing
volume
to
go
with
the
rhythm—precisely
the
road
of
the
demonic.
Eastern
music,
where
here
we
mean
both
Byzantine
Chant
and
Far
Eastern
music
such
as
the
Indian
raga,
uses
very
many
complex
scales
emphasizing
melody
over
harmony.
Western
liturgical
music
(Gregorian
Chant)
differs
from
Orthodox
liturgical
music
in
that
it
uses
one
scale,
essentially,
from
the
eight
basic
scales
of
Byzantine
Chant
and
interprets
that
scale
in
a
way
consistent
with
the
traditions
of
Western
music:
simpler
melodies
and
an
emphasis
on
harmony,
at
least
compared
to
Byzantine
Chant.
As
a
side
note
let
us
point
out
that
Byzantine
Chant
also
uses
deeper
voices
than
Gregorian
Chant—the
Russian
bass
voice
for
the
deacon’s
parts
is
of
course
famous—so
that
Byzantine
Chant
is
going
to
have
a
different
psychological
effect
from
Gregorian
Chant.
In
general
Gregorian
Chant
would
be
a
good
thing
to
listen
to
if
you’re
tense,
agitated
or
upset.
It’s
very
soothing
and
calming.
We
wouldn’t
say
that
Byzantine
Chant
is
as
soothing
as
Gregorian
Chant.
Is
that
bad?
Well,
Byzantine
Chant
is
consistent
with
Orthodox
monasticism.
Here
there
might
be
an
opening
for
someone
to
think
about
the
difference
in
temperament
between
Roman
Catholic
and
Orthodox
monasticism.
We
think
that
this
difference
in
temperament
derives
from
a
different
psychology
of
monasticism.
In
Roman
Catholic
monasticism
there
is
a
very
heavy
influence
of
Augustine
so
that
there
is
less
of
an
emphasis
on
the
cooperative
effort
of
the
monk
or
nun
with
the
Grace
of
the
Holy
Spirit
than
there
is
in
Orthodox
monasticism.
This
Augustinian
influence,
we
think,
makes
for
a
monasticism
that
is
more
centered
on
the
monastery
as
a
foretaste
of
Heaven
(Gregorian
Chant
as
the
song
of
angels),
whereas
the
Orthodox
monastery
is
more
a
place
of
individual
spiritual
struggle
where
there
is
also
an
emphasis
on
the
role
of
Eros
for
God
in
the
ascent
to
God,
so
that
Byzantine
Chant
would
be
more
intense.
Also,
since
Thomas
Aquinas
there
has
been
a
much
greater
emphasis
on
sentimentality
in
Roman
Catholic
spirituality
than
in
the
Orthodox
Church.
This
would
be
consistent
with
a
sentimental
emphasis
in
the
present-day
execution
of
Gregorian
Chant:
that
tranquilizing
effect
can
be
seen
as
an
attempt
to
work
on
the
sentiments
or
emotions
more
than
Byzantine
Chant
in
the
Orthodox
Church.
Consistent
with
the
remark
of
Elder
Paisios
Byzantine
Chant
would
be
seen
from
this
point
of
view
as
working
not
on
the
sentiments
or
emotions
but
with
the
nous
or
inner
spirit
of
man.
So
how
can
we
give
a
reply
to
our
interlocutor?
Clearly,
by
their
fruits
you
shall
know
them
as
regards
the
effect
of
music,
even
Western
Classical
Music,
on
people.
Is
the
person
calmer
afterwards?
More
agitated?
Does
he
think
about
God?
Is
he
ready
to
pick
up
a
gun
and
start
shooting
(Apocalypse
Now,
Ride
of
the
Valkyries
on
the
helicopter
gunship)?
There
is
another
issue.
While
Western
Classical
Music
does
not
have
the
same
emphasis
on
improvisation
that
Classical
Indian
Music
does,
still
there
is
the
issue
of
the
depth
both
of
the
composer
and
of
the
conductor
or
performer.
Bach
had
depth;
did
Mozart
have
depth?
Does
von
Karajan
have
more
or
less
depth
than
Toscanini
for
the
same
piece?
We
don’t
know,
but
apart
from
all
the
other
issues,
these
things
play
a
role
in
any
evaluation
of
the
worth
of
any
particular
piece
or
performance.
There
is
also
another
issue.
Some
Western
Classical
composers
were
Christian;
some
were
not.
Inevitably
there
is
going
to
be
an
influence
of
the
composer’s
beliefs
on
his
music,
and
therefore
on
his
audience.
Does
this
mean
that
because
Satie
was
a
Rosicrucian
that
we
shouldn’t
listen
to
his
music?
We
hope
we’re
not
quite
so
schematic
about
things.
But
a
serious
and
thoughtful
person
would
think
about
whether
there’s
a
connection.
Does
the
fact
that
Wagner
was
beloved
by
Hitler
play
a
role?
We
don’t
listen
to
Wagner,
not
being
of
the
bombastic
school
of
music,
so
we
couldn’t
say.
But
a
serious
and
thoughtful
person
would
think
about
whether
there’s
a
connection.
Who
knows,
maybe
Orthodox
Monk
has
just
invented
a
new
field
of
scholarship:
the
spiritual
psychology
of
music.
1 Évagre
Le Pontique.
Traité
pratique
ou Le
moine
(Practical
Treatise
or The
Monk).
Tome I.
Introduction.
Tome II.
Édition
critique du
texte grec…
Antoine
Guillaumont
et Claire
Guillaumont.
1971. Sources
chrétiennes,
Nos 170
&
171. Paris,
France: Les
Éditions du
Cerf.
No comments:
Post a Comment