Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
How to psalmody a gradual or a hallelujah?
Let's start by asking ourselves the question: WHY psalmodying a gradual or a hallelujah?
The first answer is prosaic but realistic, and valid in 95% of cases:
The Scola does not know enough, do not know at all, she did not repeat or not often enough
And as you are wise people, you do NOT sing when you do not know or do not know enough
This is a golden rule that says liturgy gives priority to quality over quantity
at least in the liturgical CHANT
Remember, singing is a MEANS, not an end
The goal is NOT to sing, the goal is not to sing ALL, there is no OBLIGATION to sing everything
The liturgy will be valid and complete, EVEN if everything is not sung
because what makes the liturgy is what happens at the ALTAR
and if the priest fails to quote some liturgical texts, it will be annoying
if the choir fails, it will not change the face of the world and the liturgy will not be deficient
Chant is a MEANS to help souls, not a goal
if you sing the Gradual and Alleluia in a poorly maner
you will not raise, you will FEED UP the faithful, this is not the same
you will bring them to the Church backwards
Not only the goal will not be reached, but it will be downright counterproductive
Second question: Why are there two successive chants between the Epistle and the Gospel?
In the extraordinary form of the rite, we are used to it, this is normal, but PER SE?
If we consider the origin of liturgical chant, this is not that normal
You should know that at first any chant performed in the liturgy was a 'responsorial' chant, i.e. a response to a reading
This is a practice that comes from the Synagogue, where the first chant was the gradual
a psalm, sung by a cantor who ascended the steps of the Schola Cantorum,
hence the name 'gradus', i.e. gradual
This chant has been enriched over time to reach, from the 9th century onwards, the chiselled formulaes we now know
We have remains of the responsorial chant in the Messes des 4 temps:
a reading which is followed by a trait or a cantique drawn from the writing
a reading that sometimes ends up on 'dicentes' (saying), immediately followed by the trait or cantique
We also have this case in the Easter Vigil
So in the beginning, there were three readings:
ie two readings: Old Testament, New Testament, the Epistle and the Gospel
3 in all, therefore, instead of 2
in the Roman Church, until the third century
This was quickly lost. We know that from the fifth century, there were no more than two readings left in the Roman Church
By contrast, in the Carolingian Empire, things were a little different
The Gallican and Hispanic liturgies had kept three readings
And when Charlemagne decides to study the Roman Missal for the sake of Romanity
the Gallican liturgy finally incorporates the provisions of the Roman liturgy, namely two readings
Charlemagne will also bring singers to form his own cantors to the singing of the Roman Church
But things will not go exactly as planned, ie to symply adopting the chant of the Roman Church
but rather to a merger, a synthesis of the two reciprocal influences, which culminated in the directory we know today
So that from the 9th century onwards, these two songs follow each other: Gradual and Alleluia
and not without risk!
which is to bore the faithful when it is sung badly, because you still have to admit: it is relatively long
Another reason for hesitation is that in the Gregorian repertoire, the musical quality of the parts is a bit patchy
Not everything is at the same level, and you may find difficult parts, not only regarding execution, but also aesthetically speaking
less inspired pieces, simply
The Gregorian repertoire is not as inspired Scripture. It is not divine and magic in all its parts
Stages of its creation span a very long time, with different players from different cultures
what makes the somewhat disparate aspect of the directory
It is a human composition, with a lot of genius, but it must be said also, some weaknesses
Take for example the Gradual of Palm Sunday
It is 'amodal', ie it is a bit 'twisted' in its melodic line
it is a true way of the cross
To this are added reasons external to the chant itself:
Namely, that Sunday, we already had the Palm Procession (also very old, the oldest of the ceremony this Sunday)
a long trait, the singing of the Passion
so that you will not impose the faithfuls such an uninspired piece of music on top
It must be said that the whole mass is of a relatively modern structure
Well, I took an example that is a bit extreme, it's true
Overall, three quarters of gradual are designed on a fifth mode melody and show a considerable similarity between them
which facilitates the decryption
By contrast, for interpretation,
the singing of a gradual requires a good knowledge of Gregorian, high flexibility and a lot of energy
Among the five parts of the Mass, it is the most vivid, and probably the most difficult one to interpret
If you want to STICK to the liturgy
and you do not have the means to sing all parts verbatim
You have the opportunity to psalmody either the gradual or the alleluia, or even both
which is a little depressing, but not totally absurd
It brings back to the beginnings of the Church, when the responsorial chant was a psalmodic chant
Meanwhile, there were still 18 century with all the enrichment of the repertoire that we know
So it's possible but it should not turn into routine
Easiness should not turn into laziness
no, it must remain as a spare wheel
So to avoid this to become the custom, some decide to NEVER do it
They try to sing either the Gradual or the Alleluia, but never psalmody anything
Well, it's a choice.
No doubt that the solution lies in the middle and in adaptation to circumstances
while making every effort, and it is important, to work hard parts regularly
otherwise there will be no progress
Here, then all these things being drawn up and said, let's come to the point: HOW to psalmody a gradual or a hallelujah?