Archive for October, 2009

Seeing Music

I’m back from a short hiatus. Many thanks to Zach for keeping the ship pointed in the right direction!

As I go through this week’s reading, I see more and more evidence of a major shift in literate music from this time period. Rather than existing largely as a way to record oral tradition, the technology of notation had developed to a point where it can increasingly generate new musical techniques. Now is as good a time as any to compare where we started in this history of literate traditions, with the earliest form of neumes, to the notation of Phillipe de Vitry, with a focus on the directional flow of anatomical priority: from ear to eye, or eye to ear.

The earliest neumed music, as we have repeatedly seen, relied first on the ear, that is, on the performer’s aural knowledge of an existing oral tradition. Only secondly and subordinately do they count on information received by the eyes. The visual signs were only gestural, and not able to be read at sight by one who was a stranger to the repertoire.

How different this is from one of this week’s examples, Phillipe de Vitry’s motet Tuba sacre/In arboris/VIRGO SUM. We are now working with music on a five line, cleffed staff, with notation that imparts to the reader specific rhythmic information. Two basic components of music—pitch content and rhythmic information—are accounted for in notation. The manuscript version of this piece that Prof. Taruskin reproduces in the text* is beginning to have some real resemblances to the notation we continue to use today.

Technology engenders experimentation; which brings me to the main reason for writing this post: coloration. The tenor line in Tuba sacre/In arboris/VIRGO SUM has a funny little quirk: some of the notes are in red ink instead of black. And beneath the tenor de Vitry wrote these words: Nigre notule sunt imperfecte et rube sunt perfecte (“The little black notes are imperfect and the red ones are perfect”). As de Vitry’s contemporary readers would know, this little rule (“rubric,” or “canon”) means that a change of color means a change of rhythmic proportion, specifically by the ratio of 3:2. And although de Vitry set this out as a special rule for this particular motet, it subsequently became common practice.

Coloration is a striking example of the generative influence of which notation was capable by this time. When a scribe’s change of inkwell can so drastically alter the way music is performed, we know for sure that we are no longer in a musical world monopolized by oral/aural tradition. Neither are we, however, in a world monopolized by the visual. But as a result of this notational coming-of-age, the visual impetus in music has emerged as a true contender.

*Ivrea, Biblioteca Capitolare, MS 115, fols. 15v-16. See Vol. 1, p. 262 for the plate, pp. 263-265 for a transcription of the entire motet.

Read Full Post »

This is the exquisitely frolicsome motet referenced in the Week 5 review (although not the highest quality video clip). I’ll let Taruskin set the scene:

By now the fun and games aspect of discordia concors has so burgeoned as to invite free choice of found objects in all parts including the tenor, and the more extravagant the better. The motet [here] is one of those racy things Grocheio particularly recommends for his “feasts of the learned.” Semibreves permeate all parts. The triplum and motetus texts are descriptions of just such medieval fraternity parties as Grocheio describes, at which young literati gathered to gorge on capons and guzzle wine and nuzzle girls and despise manual labor, and particularly to praise Paris, the fount of the good life for budding intellectuals. And the tenor? It consists of a fourfold repetition, prescribed by an early use of ditto or repeat marks in the notation, of a fruitseller’s cry – “Fresh strawberries, ripe blackberries!” – possibly drawn directly “from life” as lived on the Parisian streets. (I, 236)

The spirit of this playful piece is best summed up in the last line of the triplum’s text: “… And all of this is to be had in Paris.”

[Week 5 in Review Update]: Those who checked the blog this morning will have noticed a review post for week 5 that is currently missing. (Although comments to this post pertain to the review.) I am realizing now that I must have accidentally deleted the content of the review and filled it up with this post instead. My apologies! If you have any suggestions for how to retrieve old posts, please let me know. I’m resolutely not in the mood to rewrite the review at this time, but we might get around to it next weekend, perhaps with a “Weeks 5-6 in Review” post. That should be enough time to defuse the frustration that always goes along with losing work into the electronic maw.

Read Full Post »

This kind of song ought not to be propagated among the vulgar, since they do not understand its subtlety nor do they delight in hearing it, but it should be performed for the learned and those who seek after the subtleties of the arts. — Grocheio, about the motet, c. 1300 (I, 226)

One major theme of the book so far has been the complex relationship between description and prescription as it relates to newly-developed notational styles and theories. Do theories and notations actively affect music composition, or are they the handmaiden to preexisting practices? Of course, they paradoxically do both. The relationship reminds me of that M.C. Escher drawing of two hands drawing themselves into existence (below).


With newly developed Franconian notation came a greater level of rhythmic complexity to notated music, and the motet was the first genre to fully capitalize on this potential. As Taruskin writes in reference to a motet from this era: “Such a piece was a triumph of literate contrivance, one whose craftsmanly intricacy depended utterly on the written medium.” (I, 228) Indeed, there is a playful quality to much of this music, as if composers were experimenting with novelties just because, for the first time, they could.

The hyper-literate nature of the early motets made the genre an ideal showcase for the elite, literati classes. However, the more technically complex and bound to written notation the motet became, the more out of reach it grew for those unschooled in music theory/notation, the people Grocheio endearingly labeled “the vulgar.” It’s quite the irony, therefore – as Taruskin points out – that many motet texts were pastoral love poems about shepherds and other ordinary folk. Motet singers sang earthy poetry about the exact types of people who “that kind of song ought not be propagated among.” We’re back to the questions raised initially by the trobar clus and trobar clar, the “closed” and “clear” song styles of the trouvéres. (And back to Mark’s first post on the question.) Should music be for all or for the few?

Of course, setting the tales of the shepherd lovers Robin and Marion as the lyrics for a double motet doesn’t automatically show sympathy for the “types” these ordinary folks represent. Moreover, I’m skeptical that the average listener would be able to decipher the lyrics in the first place, seeing as they are polytextually amalgamated into an impenetrably dense web of words. In this intricate, clever musical structure, Robin and Marion disappear entirely, existing only on the written page.

Read Full Post »

“Aucun ont trouvé”

In the 13th century, composer Petrus de Cruce developed a unique style of motet that exaggerated the stratification of rhythmic levels. In “Petronian” motets, the top voice (triplum) is incredibly fleet; the middle voice (motetus) uses rhythms of intermediate duration; and the low voice (tenor) plods along in longs (dotted half notes). This effect was made to be heard – the listener can clearly discern the layering of rhythmical levels according to range.

Also note the text(s): as mentioned in the previous post, polytextuality is a defining (and definingly odd) characteristic of the motet. “Aucun ont trouvé” is composed of two love poems in French. The first poem (in the triplum) is considerably longer, as that voice functions at a higher rhythmic level. And underpinning it all is the tenor, which annunciates only one single word.

Read Full Post »

The genre of the motet came about simply enough. Early practitioners added text to preexisting pieces of discant (polyphony with wordless melisma) and voila. In effect, the addition of texts – some Biblical, some glosses on Biblical passages, and some straight-up secular poetry a la trouvéres – brought the sureness and stability of language back into the polyphonic endeavor. (Remember, in the music of the Notre Dame school, the text was slowed down to such an extent as to render it abstract.) Where N.D. organum cum alio featured the free, text-less flow of voices, the motet composers, like in earlier chant, put the text front and center.

Or did they? Despite the triumphant Return of the Words to this repertory, language functions in an incredibly idiosyncratic way in the motet. One of the most bewildering features of this new genre is its juxtaposition of different texts. But not just cut-and-paste linear combinations of different poetry like we saw in the tropes. Many motets actually employ different texts in different voices at the same time (polytextuality). This is what is meant by a “double motet” (or “triple motet,” etc when additional texts/voices are combined). Furthermore, the texts in question don’t even have to be in the same language! Thus, in one motet, we might have a well-known text plus its explication at the same time.

I can think of no other instance in Western music where different texts are sung simultaneously (except opera, for dramatic reasons). In this respect, the motet is sui generis. But instead of occupying the position of a freak show in Western music, the motet was once of the most flexible, enduring, and sophisticated musical developments of its age. Its influence stretched for the next few hundred years.

How did such an enigmatic musical phenomenon come about? The problem of text is an ancient one in the history of our art. St. Augustine saw a threat in the seductive music of  his day since it distracted him from the meaning of the text. Our earliest repertory, chant, is a musical delivery system for religious texts – even when early notation adumbrated and obfuscated the melodies (neumes aren’t terribly precise), the written word stood clear on the page, unambiguous and stable. When the chant was put in the tenor and slowed down to accommodate torrents of melisma, however, the text was unseated in its central position. This might be seen as the beginning of a purely musical impulse in the Western notated tradition. In the Notre Dame school, this impulse intensified, as evinced by such pieces as “Viderunt Omnes,” which, as discussed, runs some three minutes on just five syllables of text.

The relationship between text and music has always had an ebb and flow dynamic. There have been eras, composers, genres, schools that tend towards clear declamation and others that tend towards the more purely musical (“purely musical” sounds like an unfair term. Let’s use the neutral if bland “non-texted”). This dynamic, of course, cannot be said to affect any sort of linear progression of music – it’s inaccurate to say that text was ahead in the 9th century, textlessness in the 13th, like a horse race. Rather, musics until the development of instrumental genres struck different balance betweens the poles of clear textual declamation and voice-as-sonic-matter. (Rhetorical concepts, prosody, and other linguistic elements guided the development of instrumental music as well, so even the “purely musical” isn’t entirely free from language.) The relationship between text and music has sparked a number of famous quarrels in music history, perhaps most notably the Artusi/Monteverdi scuffle: 16th century madrigals relied on the text for their meaning but did not for the most part make the words understandable in the dense web of polyphony. Seeking to rectify this, more representational, uni-directional forms such as opera were created (and with this genre, it’s fair to say that is was created.) The text was once again heard.

The double (triple) motet is a strange beast. It puts the text in the center of its organization – indeed, text is what differentiates motets from plain discant – while simultaneously undermining the importance of text by making it impossible to understand. There might be a performative element to this: motets were written for the individual performers, all of whom would of course understand the text they themselves are singing. There are also a couple of other forces at work in this genre. Double motets were enabled by notation. This sort of dense interlocking of different texts (languages!) into a polyphonic structure would have been exceedingly difficult without a way of capturing it all on parchment. It might have even been totally unimaginable in a purely oral tradition. Moreover, notational advances (Franconian notation) allowed for text and rhythm to be captured together without the ligature patterns necessary to modal rhythm. Taruskin: “It is a notation specially tailored to the requirements of motets, that is musica cum littera.” (I, 214)

Text in the double motet was clearly not meant to be heard by an audience. It provides an abstract conceptual underpinning to a piece, and is clearly legible in print but not in sound. This was a major step in the ever-increasing power and influence of written notation over musical practice.

Read Full Post »

This clip features Perotin’s 4-voice organum cum alio setting of the words “viderunt omnes.” The original chant, which appears as the sustained tenor, is slowed down to a veritable crawl here – it takes over three minutes just to intone the syllables “vi-de-runt om-nes.” In the earliest scraps of notated polyphony the chant appeared as the melody; it’s dramatic to hear what happened when this process was turned on its head and the chant was put in the lowest voice. This sort of organum isn’t at all about the intelligibility of the text, for the surface level activity of the composition consists of highly coordinated melismatic (wordless) activity in the three upper voices. A few things strike me when listening to this repertory:

– The modal rhythms (trochaic, to be precise) lend “Viderunt Omnes” a rhythmic consistency and patterned regularity unavailable to composers up until the development of this notational technology. It’s not inaccurate to say that this trochaic meter actually grooves.

– The periodicity of Viderunt is patent – it utilizes repetition to amazing effect. It’s no wonder that Steve Reich counts Perotin among his major influences.

– The three upper voices all function in the same range, frequently crossing over each other and weaving in and out of the texture. It reminds me of three birds racing through the air in play.

For more of this piece, see the Hilliard Ensemble performing a particularly juicy section (the conclusion, with final chant) here.

Read Full Post »

Week 4 in Review

This Week in Blogging: Posts for the week chronicled a number of diverse engagements with the text, from an example of the first extant piece of polyphony and a new piece of artwork, to a meditation on the role of anonymity and its relationship to orality in the early repertory. (From here on out, dear readers, we’ll be dealing with composers, not anonymous monks.) The week came to a close with a rumination on the element of creative play that really crystallized during this period. In some of the earliest polyphonic experiments and into the Notre Dame school, we can get a clear glimpse of homo ludens, “humanity at play.”

CHAPTER 5: Polyphony in Practice and Theory

  • Guido, John, and Discant (153): Inventing the staff wasn’t Guido’s only contribution to music – he also set down some basic counterpoint rules in his “Micrologus.” This practice, discant, was the same type of note-against-note (homorhythmic) counterpoint evident in the Chartres fragment.
  • Polyphony in Aquitanian Monastic Centers (156): While the earliest polyphony used preexisting chant as the melody (the highest voice), Aquitanian practitioners flipped the script, putting the chant (cantus firmus) in the tenor. The cantus firmus was then slowed down dramatically to leave room for florid melismas in the upper voice(s).
  • The Codex Calixtinus (162): A late 12th-century French manuscript with some of the earliest examples of this new sort of polyphonic music.

CHAPTER 6: Notre Dame de Paris

  • The Cathedral-University Complex (169): Paris was the undeniable intellectual and artistic hub of 12th-13th century Europe, and it was in the newly founded universities and massive cathedrals that a new style developed. Early Notre Dame polyphony alternated between two styles: discant (note-against-note) and organum (sustained tenor cantus firmus with melismatic flights in the upper voice).
  • Piecing the Evidence Together (172): The most important document shedding light on the practices, composers, and repertory of this compositional school was written by an anonymous Englishman, the so-called “Anonymous IV.” It it through this document that we learn the name of Leonin and Perotin, the two masters of Notre Dame. However, the specifics are all quite sketchy, and modern scholars still know very little about these composers.
  • Measured Music (175): This repertory featured a novel way of notating rhythm, with long or short durations indicated through ligature patterns. The rhythmic feel would change dramatically between discant and organum sections. Copula served as an intermediate rhythmic level.
  • Whys and Wherefores (183): Taruskin takes the opportunity to ask why modal rhythm was developed at this time and for this repertory. Again, the “organic fallacy” appears – we should not read the development of rhythmic notation as a progressive evolutionary step. Instead, it might have been developed as a mnemonic device (to aid in memorization). In any case, Perotin and his ilk were the first generation of composers to depend on this new notational technology.
  • Organum cum Alio (186): The polyphony discussed so far is of the 2-voice variety. In the Notre Dame school, however, more voices were added to the mix (“organum with another [voice]”). Juggling three of four parts required a level of coordination that would have been impossible without modal rhythmic notation. The section features analyses of Perotin’s Viderunt Omnes and Alleluia Nativitas.
  • Theory or Practice? (196): Johannes de Garlandia’s authoritative De mensurabili musica offers descriptions of the rhythmic modes that exemplifies the complex relationship between theory and practice. While most of the modes outlined in the treatise appear to have reflected actual practice, a few of the theoretical modes that were introduced in the text only began to appear after Garlandia described them. This is a textbook case of theory influencing practice.
  • Conductus at Notre Dame (198): Notre Dame composers added some interesting new features to the conductus genre: 1) they were settings of contemporary poems and could have been composed from scratch, not from chant; 2) they were syllabically texted.

Coming up this week: the motet!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »