LONG: Peter Giles on Females in Cathedral Choirs
MusiConneXions
Peter Giles is not a subscriber to this list but would like to share his
views with the list and has asked me to send it on his behalf. I do so
with apologies for continuing this thread when maybe it should be tied up
and away for now!
Peter's email address appears on the Cc line, above, should anyone wish to
contact him directly.
Respectfully,
Mary Jane Ruhl
Dear All,
Mary Jane Ruhl, of MusiconneXions, has forwarded me another bunch of recent
mail about the English cathedral choral tradition. Like a first group from
elsewhere on the net, it needs answering. Again, how I wish it didn’t! I
hope the following proves helpful. I begin with my answers to the first set.
Those unfamiliar with the exact topics on which I comment should be able to
reconstruct the Versicles on reading my Responses (sorry---a rather ‘in-joke
’!). Sorry, too, if I’ve overlooked some important point from the mail in
front of me!
So, in no chronological order---
The English cathedral all-male choral tradition is now unique. It stretches
back some thirteen hundred years, and is all that now remains of a
Europe-wide glory. Except in Britain, mainly England, religious and
political machinations have swept it away, other than in the odd corner. Its
absence leaves an aching musical void. Now, iconoclasts---either wittingly
or unwittingly---or the well-meaning but mistaken, threaten its last domain.
Even in the interests of modish politics, why must this be?
The boy’s voice varies in tone, according to the culture, and training, but
most boys sound as they should---boyish. Those much argued-over English and
Continental tonal qualities overlap considerably today.
So-called ‘hooty’ boy-tone is a misnomer. One person’s ‘hoot’ is another’s
‘beautifully-rounded timbre’. Another’s ‘superbly mature quality’ is another
’s ‘he’s-past-it-so-transfer-him-to-the-alto-line’ sound! Somebody else’s
‘focused brightness’ is another’s ‘brashly unblending’, even ‘untrained’,
tone! The subject is so subjective! Tone is concerned with the choir
director’s stylistic intention and ideal---‘Romantic’, ‘Classical’, ‘Baroque
’, et al.
The boy’s inherent singing voice and style has a character and an evanescent
beauty which is unique---the result, seemingly, of a particular kind of
muscle-tone and boy-psychology. This doesn’t stop it from being much
imitated---particularly by young women trained to sing repertoire written
for boys, instead of glorying in their characteristic, female timbre.
Pre-pubertal boys and girls sound different, instinctively. If they are
mixed in the same choir, as is so already in a few British cathedrals, their
choir director will compromise tonally, either consciously or
unselfconsciously. His resultant ‘house-style’ will be androgynous. He will
probably be proud of this! But is this greyness what we want? Is it what
such a positive tradition needs?
To sing at his best or at all, the boy needs the right ethos: a masculine
team in a masculine league. Boys dislike singing alongside girls. If the
boys go---which, of course, will happen eventually if you mix choirgirls
with them---what about the future supply of suitable men singers? See what's
happened already in most English parish churches, and mixed schools! In
Britain today, outside cathedral choirs and a tiny group of secular choirs,
scarcely a boy is singing. Indeed, the singing boy is now an endangered
species.
‘Life’s not fair, is it?’ wrote one of you. Correct! Nature knows nothing of
equal opportunity. A boy has, say, (with training) five years of fully
effective treblehood. A girl has her whole life to continue singing soprano,
if she wishes, in every vocal field, globally, except for the men's-voice
choir, and for now fewer than one hundred traditional all-male cathedral
choirs, all-told, world-wide; most of which have survived in England. So why
increase the unfairness to the boy by putting even his five fleeting years
at risk? Is it fair to extinguish or put at genuine risk a wonderful,
specialist art-form simply because it just happens to be inherently male?
Does it have no right to survive?
Some facts: The two English metropolitan cathedrals: Canterbury and York,
and almost all provincial cathedral choirs, include at least a few
lay-clerks/lay-vicars choral/songmen (ancient titles for cathedral choirmen)
who make much of/all their living in music. Most of them now have to combine
cathedral singing with something else. In the forty or so main cathedrals,
the men are full-time members of these ancient Foundations, but are now on
part-time hours and certainly part-time salaries! Except in the London
cathedrals and St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, renumeration is certainly
not good, given such a highly skilled, daily commitment. The average English
cathedral choir has sixteen boys (the choristers), and six lay-clerks (six
is the minimum for antiphonal singing in SATB harmony)---two countertenors,
two tenors, two basses. The statutes of particularly important Foundations
specify more boys and men. Their equivalents used to exist across Europe and
beyond.
‘There are instances in life where it is necessary to break with tradition’
writes one correspondent. Yes, some. But her examples are interesting. The
understandable demise of the ( ) minstrel show---a tradition of about a
century---was caused by political and sociological pressures. The fading of
the operatic and church castrati (a tradition of about three centuries)
during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century was the result of
changes in musical fashion. Only now is it fancied as being to do with
humanitarianism! Yet in losing the eunuchoid voice, the art of singing has
lost its finest ever vocal instrument. Truly, has it been worth it in a
severely over-populated world? Though there is no direct connection, if---or
when---the present moves to dismantle the unique English all-male choir are
successful---a tradition of about thirteen centuries---will that destruction
have been worth it, even in the interests of equal opportunity?
The loss of even one statutory choral service per week to some other kind of
choir is to weaken the existing tradition.
The ‘male-dominated set-up’? ‘Positive discrimination’ is fast changing the
character---some would say the integrity---of the Anglican priesthood (ie,
concerning both Apostolic succession and scriptural authority), for ever.
Whether women can become bishops or priests or not, at the present rate, in
the present climate, not only the ordained ministry but most other domains
in the Anglican church, including cathedral music, look likely to be
predominately female in the next decade or so. That is, if a powerful lobby
gets its way. Some of you, therefore, need not fret for too long!
So English cathedral music proper is a unique art-form. Unfortunately for
today, it happens to be an inherently male one.
It is surely self-evident that, in itself, this particular art-form does not
actually NEED anything except a regular supply of boys and men, and new
repertoire to add to its centuries’-old treasury. Any ‘development’ of the
tradition (a term beloved of those who would meddle with it!) can take place
within this framework.
No musical art-form which is inherently and purposely restricted in its
vocal intake and musical repertoire, and depends on these for its integral
sound, can exist at all if those restrictions---which have a positive, not
negative, function and result---are removed. To add any element which does
not fall within that essential restriction is not only misguided, but stupid
if we wish that unique choral timbre to continue working its magic. Such
meddling could be seen as artistic vandalism. This principle might commend
itself more easily if we apply it differently---such as to demand the rights
of countertenors to sing in all specialist choirs of female voices, or even
that tenors and basses must be allowed in, on the grounds that men are
suffering discrimination! There can be few people who would dare deny female
choirs their right to exist and flourish, unimpeded.
No art-form can ‘reap’ any ‘reward’ by being turned into something totally
different!
Let’s paraphrase President Kennedy’s famous dictum, "Ask not what this
art-form can do for you, but what you can do for this art-form." To some
enquirers, no doubt to their irritation (initially at least), the answer is
"Sorry, but you can do very little or nothing. Leave this particular
art-form to work its particular magic. Create a parallel but separate one.
Create a new magic".
So let’s be positive! Except for the London cathedrals, there is scarcely a
major church in that vast city which does not employ (yes, employ) women
singers of excellent standard, a few men, and no (repeat, no) boys. Many of
these churches, like St Bride’s, Fleet Street, and St Clement Danes, in the
Strand, for example, are rightly famed for their highly selective,
mixed-voice choirs---mostly professional double quartets. Such ensembles are
quite properly---to use the jargon---carefully inclusive. In the cathedral
musical world, though, surely a new role awaits girl and women singers.
(Here I hope I might find a measure of agreement with Nicola.) It would
involve exciting fresh possibilities for experimental choral work with new
repertoire, and, of course, earlier music custom-composed for female
voices---like that written by Vivaldi for the Ospedale, to take one example.
The all-female choir would not sing the daily Office, but would present
other services and events using a fresh approach. It wouldn’t involve
imitating that of the boys and men, of annexing their custom-composed
repertoire, even in a separate choral ensemble. Such an ensemble would
parallel, not metamorphose, the male choir. It would offer something new to
express the female genius, and glory in its (properly) distinctive sound
quality, rather than to seek to imitate the male tradition. A few cathedrals
seem on the edge of going down this path, though most appear to lack the
imagination, flair, and yes, determination needed.
‘When a composer has specific timbres in mind that [intention] would be
completely changed with a change of instrument or voice’, wrote one of you.
How true!
Of course English composers never hated women! Like most European composers
active before the mid-eighteenth century, they have merely written for
existing traditions, performers and conditions---including the expert
ensembles of trebles, countertenors, tenors and basses of what we now regard
as the cathedral-style choir. It is, of course, helpful to remember that
most pre-19th century non-operatic choirs throughout Europe, sacred and
secular, were all male, or from the mid-18th century were predominately so.
Only one facet of the genre has survived---the cathedral-style choir. It is
pointless to resent that survival and work for its extinction when in every
other sphere the situation is now totally transformed. It’s a waste of time
to rage over history!
The all-male cathedral choir (now merely a branch of the wider English
choral tradition) cannot be misogynous simply because women have been
excluded---any more than a Baroque ensemble is piano-hating because its
unique sound does not include that of a Steinway. Simply defined,
‘anachronistic’ means ‘out of place, historically’. Assessed in the light of
late-twentieth century ideological canons (!), the English all-male choir is
anachronistic---but no apologies are needed, any more than for early-music
ensembles and authentic instrument-use today. No need surely, to labour this
point?
Some folk ‘harp on’ about cathedral music, as distinct from other good
church music, because cathedral music, with its ‘inequalities’ (sic), is
still there---just! It’s a constant irritation to some, until ‘reformed’,
thereby transformed into current political acceptability and therefore
extinction as a unique sound made by a unique instrument.
However laudable in principle, a policy of ‘equal opportunities’ is likely
to have a disastrous effect on our choral tradition. "Democracy," wrote C.S.
Lewis, "is all very well as a political device. It must not intrude into the
spiritual, or even the aesthetic, world."
Those who clamour for all choirs everywhere to be mixed-voice---except,
presumably, for well-established, successful all-female choirs!---should
bear in mind that voice-types and individual voices, are colours. Colours
are wonderful for their contrasts, but reward careful handling. Not all go
together! Mixing all available pigments on the palette produces an offensive
brown. Say no more!
One of you explained the problems of ‘high-sounding’ and ‘low-sounding’
voices sharing the same line, succinctly and well. Another, largely
disagreeing, made some interesting points, but what is ‘blend’? One
definition is that all elements are merged imperceptibly. So, countertenors
and female altos---contraltos---sharing a line? While agreeing that high
male and low female voices can sometimes vary across the ‘gender-barriers’,
all choral blend is achieved by compromise, or even vocal sacrifice! As
described, that ‘unique timbre’ produced by mixed alto-ranged voices to
‘bring out a line that so often can be lost’, is probably largely the result
of the countertenor timbre. (A vocal line is only likely to be lost if sung
by the wrong voice-types, or because it is badly deficient in numbers!)
Though most music directors will choose to ignore this, to be correct
historically, a mixed alto line is only appropriate for repertoire known to
have been written for mixed alto lines, mostly when secular choirs were
moving slowly from all-countertenor alto lines towards all-female ones.
Today’s new repertoire, of course, can be custom-composed for mixed altos.
One countertenor correspondent writes ‘I love to sing with women’ So does
the present writer, outside the cathedral choral tradition and other
strictly countertenors-only early-music genres! He, too, likes ‘the odds’!
He’s less certain that all female altos enjoy singing with countertenors;
though, like many countertenors, they probably enjoy the fun-element and
social life!
We can all sympathise with her frustrations, but underneath it all, one
correspondent in particular seems to believe that the radical interests of
women/equal opportunities should be paramount, whatever the genre or
situation and resultant fall-out---that such interests should always come
before all other considerations. Granted, some adjustments are needed, here
and there, but radical movements don’t always have beneficial results,
long-term. New political demands and successful art-forms make uneasy
bedfellows! To take one example, throughout experienced old Europe, there is
overwhelming evidence---in cathedrals, parish churches and schools---of the
dire results of interfering on religious or secular political grounds with a
successful tradition. (Before the French Revolution there were about
five-hundred traditional all-male choral foundations in France. None
survive---though in one two places, like Notre Dame de Paris, attempts are
being made to re-establish the male choir. In most other places, all singing
seems to be led by a priest with a microphone! A few mainly secular male
choirs with boys have been established, however.)
But in Britain, mainly in England, despite the arch-iconoclast, Oliver
Cromwell, somehow we still have the original tradition---in most cathedrals
at least. Yet now a subtler roller-coaster accelerates to take it out.
Jonathan Swift, Dean of St Patrick’s Cathedral, Dublin (not Christ Church
Cathedral!), author of much including Gulliver’s Travels, gave us the dictum
"There’s none so blind as they who won’t see." *
I was particularly interested in Anthony Cartmell’s letter. I served at
Canterbury as a countertenor lay-clerk under Dr Allan Wicks for many
years---rather longer than Anthony or his brother did as choristers
(presumably, five years each, not merely "a year or two"!). At his peak,
Allan was a quite brilliant, innovative yet traditional musician and
choirmaster, and we all learned much from him. But he used to say the most
outrageous things, and sometimes do them, mostly during rehearsals (but very
occasionally during services). Many of his in-rehearsal comments could not
be repeated here! No man or boy was immune from his famed tongue and acid
wit. He could explode into rage or laughter at the inevitable problems which
occur in running a male choir, or any choir, on a daily basis. His sense of
humour was, and is, legendary.
For centuries, directors of boys’ choirs have experienced the exasperation
caused by a superb soloist’s voice ‘breaking’ just before an important
service, broadcast, or concert. Actually, it’s fairly rare, but when it
occurs, it’s all part of the ‘deal’, and good choirmasters have long learned
to cope with it well. Allan Wicks was certainly no exception, but being
Allan, would sometimes joke "If only you were girls!" with a certain
adjective before ‘girls’, and that devilish look in his eye, which at least
one chorister obviously took seriously---always a risk when jokes are made
to children! As in all choirs, in some years, one or two boys had to stop
singing before time (which merely resulted in junior boys being promoted
earlier), though I cannot recall any year during which anything like ten
boys left prematurely! Of course, every year in all cathedrals, a number
have to leave at the end of the summer term to start at their next school,
many taking their still unbroken voices with them.
The topic of the so-called earlier breaking voice and linked training
methods is too complex to get into here.
I’ve heard Allan Wicks remark, when pushed in more serious discussion, that
if girls’ voices were ever admitted to cathedrals, they would have to be in
a separate choir to the boys, and should leave at the same
age---thirteen-plus years---but this was long before the fashionable rash of
girls’ cathedral choirs in England and the resultant pressures on the
tradition itself.
Incidentally, Anthony Cartmell’s sadness at the dying out of ‘the old ways’
reads oddly after his seeming enthusiasm for such dyings out.
Oh dear, at the letter regarding Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin! One
wonders which choirs and cathedral music the letter-writers can have been
listening to! "Inconsistant (sic) voices which can’t quite reach the high
notes"? " ‘Crap’ (sic) anthems written for boys and which are so completely
boring"? Broadcast choral evensongs, and "inconsistant (sic) standard of the
cathedral choirs and sometimes within the choirs themselves"? "Bad voices
which have come to the end of their treble singing days"?
Little comment is needed on most of these astonishing assertions, though of
course some choirs are better than others, and choirs of all types vary
somewhat, year by year---even Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin!---but let’s
be clear about those so-called ‘crap’ anthems. All mainstream European
non-operatic choral music, sacred and secular, from, say the thirteenth to
approximately the mid-eighteenth century, and all English cathedral music to
the recent present, was written for choirs of men and boys. Composers of
these ‘crap’ anthems which are ‘completely boring’ therefore include
Josquin, Byrd, Palestrina, Monteverdi, Purcell, Bach, Handel, to name merely
some of the finest composers who’ve ever lived….It’s not all earlier music,
though. What about much of the work of Vaughan Williams, Britten, Tippett,
Ridout, Maxwell Davies, Tavener? All so ‘boring’!
Christ Church Cathedral choir, Dublin? Fine! But it hardly compares with
King’s, or St John’s College, Cambridge; or ChristChurch (Oxford),
Canterbury, and Westminster cathedrals; Westminster Abbey, St George’s
Chapel in Windsor Castle---and several more truly superlative traditional
choirs of boys and men. It really doesn’t match the more average English
cathedral choir, either. It’s not primarily a matter of musicality or vocal
training---factors not lacking, I’m sure, at Christ Church, Dublin. The
instrument itself is not the correct one for the genre.
The letter from Ireland seems to be promoting the transformation of all
remaining traditional, authentically and distinctively timbred cathedral
choirs, most of which are of excellent standard, into yet more all-adult,
mixed-voice chamber choirs. There’s little chance that, however good, they’
ll sound genuine for the centuries of repertoire, even if the women ape the
boys’ style. Because if there are no countertenors/male altos ("Another
problem that I have with [the] English cathedral choir is male altos") the
second essential ingredient written-for will be absent! Such transformation
will mean that a further one hundred standard-pattern, mixed-voice chamber
choirs will have been added to the many thousands, world-wide. That no boys
will be preparing to be future countertenors, tenors or basses in
cathedrals/churches (or eventually in any genre). And that an historical,
distinctive choral sound, a unique aspect of human utterance, will have been
made extinct for essentially political reasons.
Unlike most of the rest of world, in Britain, mostly in England, our
all-male cathedral choirs have so far survived gloriously. No other living
tradition of such antiquity can match this art-form’s enchantment and
splendour, nor equal its power to enrich our spiritual and musical lives.
Alan Ridout described the choir of boys and men as ‘a fragile musical
miracle’.
Some people don’t believe in miracles. Or perhaps they simply don’t like
them.
Peter Giles
Chairman
Campaign for the Defence of the Traditional Cathedral Choir
21 Wigmore Street, London W1H 9LA England
CDTCC is an organization of men and women established early in 1996 to alert
people to the dangers faced by our traditional choirs of men and boys and to
campaign actively on their behalf. It numbers cathedral and church organists
and choir-directors, lay-clerks, either currently in service or retired;
other musicians, and members of the general public across a wide spectrum.
CDTCC’s membership lists are totally confidential. This is essential for
many of those still working in cathedral music in the present political
climate.
CDTCC seeks to inform and persuade, especially those to whose trust our
great choral tradition has been committed, to keep to ancient custom. The
all-male cathedral choir is a great cultural and spiritual asset whose loss
would be immeasurable.
Please visit our web-site: http: // members. aol. com./cdtcc/
E-mail: cdtcc @ aol. com
* Polite Conversation, Dialogue 3.
Ethel Jean Saltz
wrote:
VIA friend:
>‘There are instances in life where it is necessary to break with tradition’
>writes one correspondent. Yes, some. But her examples are interesting. The
>understandable demise of the ( ) minstrel show---a tradition of about a
>century---was caused by political and sociological pressures. The fading of
>the operatic and church castrati (a tradition of about three centuries)
>during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century was the result of
>changes in musical fashion. Only now is it fancied as being to do with
>humanitarianism! Yet in losing the eunuchoid voice, the art of singing has
>lost its finest ever vocal instrument. Truly, has it been worth it in a
>severely over-populated world? Though there is no direct connection, if---or
>when---the present moves to dismantle the unique English all-male choir are
>successful---a tradition of about thirteen centuries---will that destruction
>have been worth it, even in the interests of equal opportunity
Wonderful thought. Especially now when folks like myself are
interested in gene manipulation to produce a more perfect human
product. They were the precursors of today's DNA type of thinking.
This paragraph certainly does shed another light on the whole subject
of humanitarianism.
OTOH, now that I'm a tenor and trying to expand my tenor voice, being
female, shouldn't we explore the vocal system from a combined
male/female perspective, anatomically? Find out what's common and
what's different?
E.g., I'm 70YO and just getting into the field of music. I've been in
a Temple(synagogue) choir and a college class chorus, which means I
sing for sure, 5 times a week, at least an hour each time. Because of
simply this fact, my tenor voice is changing. I can identify this
inside me. I can't discuss this with other tenors. I think that's a
shame. Why do men feel intimidated talking about physical
characteristics of any physical event with a female? And believe me,
being 70YO, I'm talking about folks around the age of my
granddaughter. I couldn't even talk to my own son about all this.
Instead of gladly being a leader to me in the class chorus, because
these young men had more music experience than I did, they tend to
even make themselves disappear even more. The few times they took
charge of themselves, the sound was wonderful, and I could profit from
it and there was one tenor voice. It seldom happened though and the
environment was non-threatening. I just don't understand this genetic
male attitude of an all-male world in every single thing.
Be-ahavah be-shalom, Queen Jean of Creekbend
Mac-Niet-Spin-Gal, 390 A.G. (after Galileo/1609)
Worlds Greatest Jewish Thinker - Spinoza-ETHICS
World's Greatest Songs - Psalms in Hebrew
World's Greatest Literature - TaNaK/Old Testament
mailto: nie...@airmail.net
Willsher
about castrati, the last paragraph that I read, then his argument became
peurile, facile, and completely demeaning to intellectual debate.
I respectfully request that the list move on to useful, and musical
rhetoric.
Take care
Peter
Willsher, Peter
E-mail Address(es):
will...@ontarioeast.net
Personal Information:
Web Page: http://www3.sympatico.ca/koko/willsher/
John Howell
>It is surely self-evident that, in itself, this particular art-form does not
>actually NEED anything except a regular supply of boys and men, and new
>repertoire to add to its centuriesí-old treasury. Any ëdevelopmentí of the
>tradition (a term beloved of those who would meddle with it!) can take place
>within this framework.
Here in the US, where the main tradition is of mixed children's choirs
(with a few very noteable exceptions), there is a new trend that threatens
an older trend!
It has long been the case that boys (as has been noted) tend to put
athletic activities at a higher priority than artistic activities. As a
result, over the past 30 years or so there have been fewer and fewer boys
taking part in choral ensembles either in schools or in churches, and many
high school choirs that used to be SATB are now SAB.
That's the older trend. The newer has been building very slowly over about
the past 20 years. Girls of middle school age (ages 11-13) are becoming
more and more interested in and active in athletic activities as well.
This is a direct result of political decisions reached in the 1960s that
mandated equal opportunity for boys and girls in school activities. It was
quite noticeable in the early 1980s, but in the past 5 years has become
more and more evident. The last year my wife directed the youth choir at
our church, it was becoming more and more difficult to schedule choir
rehearsals because of conflict with middle school girls soccer, girls
basketball, and other sports involving either girls or boys. Girls'
athletics are beginning to get as much attention at the high school and
college levels as boys', and in fact this past basketball season our
women's team did a fantastic job and filled more coliseum seats than the
men's team did!
It is wonderful, and long overdue, to see girls taking advantage of these
opportunities, but it is just one more problem for long-suffering choral
directors to deal with. Our church now has no youth choir program at all,
unfortunately.
John
John R. Howell
mailto:John....@vt.edu
Chair, Music Curriculum Committee
Virginia Tech Department of Music
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0240
Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034