The Fifth International Symposium on Traditional Polyphony ...

The Fifth International Symposium on Traditional Polyphony ... The Fifth International Symposium on Traditional Polyphony ...

06.05.2013 Views

464 NEW TENDENCIES IN THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY GEORGIAN CHANTING TRADITION BAIA ZHUZHUNADZE (GEORGIA) ong>Theong> goal of the present paper is to analyze the published collections of Georgian hymns, namely the liturgy rite published at the junction of the nineteenth-twentieth centuries. In my research I tried to determine what influence these redactions had on the evolution of Georgian sacred music and what is the value of each of these collections today. I have chosen the following authors’ redactions: Benashvili, 1886; Benashvili (undated); Klenovsky, 1896; Ippolitov-Ivanov, 1899; Arakchiev, 1905; Paliashvili, 1909; Historical processes, the country’s political and cultural orientation, have always been reflected in the evolution of Georgian national musical thinking. ong>Theong> idea, firmly established in the philosophy of culture, is quite correct in maintaining that separate cultures cannot be viewed as completely closed systems and there is no such thing as a “sterile” culture, entirely protected from the influence of other cultures (Tsurtsumia, 2005: 212). In a number of cases the influence of one culture on another is rather forceful, especially when it is prompted by the cultural policy of the conquering country. Culture expresses a nation’s self-consciousness as “a conscious subject” (Scheller). Obliterating its traditions from the nation’s memory means losing its national self-consciousness. This is why conquering nations carried out cultural annexation alongside political annexation. In the nineteenth century Georgian Orthodox ecclesiastical chanting experienced strong pressure of cultural annexation from Imperial Russia. It is clear that Georgia’s almost 200-year-long presence within the borders of the Russian Empire greatly influenced its chanting tradition. It was these historical processes taking place at the turn of the nineteenth-twentieth centuries that caused the formation of new chanting traditions in Georgian sacred music, whose analogues can be observed in the history of Russian chanting in the period covering the seventeenth-nineteenth centuries. In the 1880s and 90s Europized specimens of Georgian hymns started to emerge. During these years quite a few Georgian and Russian musicians tried to change Georgian three-part chants into four-parts. ong>Theong>ir first attempts were failures and received harsh criticism from society. Of the publications of this period the most noteworthy is Andria Benashvili’s collection Kartuli Khmebi (Georgian Voices). Kartuli Khmebi is one of the first printed collections. It came out in 1886 (Melikishvili’s printing-house, Tbilisi). In the first part of the collection the rite of St John the Chrysostom’s liturgy is printed, – so-called plain mode, the other half of the collection includes folk songs. We also have a manuscript version of Andria Benashvili’s collection. When comparing them, we can see that it differs from the printed version by the unusual movements of the bass part which jumps by fourths and fifths. Such movements match elements of functional European classical harmony, giving the Georgian chant some European flavor. In the manuscript collection there are adscripts put down before the equitenia for the female choir. In Benashvili’s manuscript collection, apart from the Kartlian-Kakhetian mode chants of St John the Chry–

New Tendencies in the Nineteenth-Century Georgian Chanting Tradition 465 sostom’s liturgy rite, there are chants of the Imeretian-Gurgian mode as well; it also includes a minor requiem and the liturgy of the First Sacrifice. For many years Andria Benashvili was the precentor of the Kutaisi Episcopal choir. It is his activities as a precentor that this collection may be associated with. ong>Theong> hymns of the Imeretian-Gurian mode are also plain specimens and their bass part, similar to the Kartlian-Kakhetian mode, is after Benashvili. Concerning the redactions published at the end of the nineteenth century special mention should be made of the liturgy rite of St John the Chrysostom (Kartlian-Kakhetian mode), made four-part by the Russian musician/composer Nicholai Klenovsky; in this specimen the national features of Georgian chanting have completely disappeared. At the turn of the twentieth century new redactions edited by Georgian classic composers appear. Namely, the three and four-part variants of St John the Chrysostom’s liturgy rite (Kartlian-Kakhetian mode), recorded by Dimitri Araqishvili and Zacharia Paliashvili, which in fact, are original works, reworked by the composers. Georgian composers’ activities in the sphere of chanting resulted in the emergence of the non-canonical layer of chants in Georgian sacred music. ong>Theong> Georgian classic composers’ free, creative approach to hymns has been brought out by the musical analysis I have carried out. All the four authors’ redactions, present in this paper, are original sources, each of them possessing its own specific parameters. I think that the differences between these sources can be revealed more distinctly on the example of one hymn. I have selected six variants of one of the liturgy hymns Shen Gigalob (I am chanting to you), presented in the Georgian collections mentioned above. Let us first discuss the specimens of the plain mode ong>Theong> difference between Andria Benashvili’s Kartuli Khmebi and the manuscript collection is in the bass part. In the bass part of the hymn Shen Gigalob of Benashvili’s manuscript collection, as in the bass parts of all the hymns in this collection, the influence of the classic European harmony can be noticed (ex. 1). ong>Theong> hymn consists of the following stanzas: A, A, A 1 , B, B (contracted, serving as a linking structure), and C (finishing structure) (ex. 2). Five stanzas end in reiterated cadences. ong>Theong> terminating cadence ends on the unison A. I have compared Andria Benashvili’s top voice of the plain mode with the first voice of Nicholai Klenovsky’s Shen Gigalob. ong>Theong> analysis revealed the resemblance between these two top voices (ex. 3). In Klenovski’s and Benashvili’s variants the top voices coincide with each other including the B stanza. After the B-stanza the verbal text is distributed on Klenovski’s material, accordingly, the terminating stanza is different. In Klenovski’s variant, as in all other specimens he made four-part, the ratio of the harmonizing con– sonances in the vertical is great. In the verbal text the syllables are shifted, for instance, the syllable lobt is moved to the end of the stanza. Klenovski repeats the phrase ghmerto Chveno twice and after that comes – da gevedrebit ghmerto chveno. Klenovski’s specimen ends in G 5/3. I have compared the canonical top voice in Dimitri Araqishvili’s and Zacharia Paliashvili’s collections Kartuli Galoba (vol. 3). ong>Theong> stanza structure of the ornamented and plain specimens coincide with each other: A, A, A 1 , B, B (constricted linking structure), c (ending structure). In Z. Paliashvili’s and Araqishvili’s variants B-linking structure does not occur (this stanza coincides with the same stanza of the plain mode). Like the plain specimen all the stanzas terminate in the D-A final

464<br />

NEW TENDENCIES IN THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY<br />

GEORGIAN CHANTING TRADITION<br />

BAIA ZHUZHUNADZE (GEORGIA)<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> goal of the present paper is to analyze the published collecti<strong>on</strong>s of Georgian hymns, namely the<br />

liturgy rite published at the juncti<strong>on</strong> of the nineteenth-twentieth centuries. In my research I tried to determine<br />

what influence these redacti<strong>on</strong>s had <strong>on</strong> the evoluti<strong>on</strong> of Georgian sacred music and what is the value of each<br />

of these collecti<strong>on</strong>s today.<br />

I have chosen the following authors’ redacti<strong>on</strong>s: Benashvili, 1886; Benashvili (undated); Klenovsky,<br />

1896; Ippolitov-Ivanov, 1899; Arakchiev, 1905; Paliashvili, 1909;<br />

Historical processes, the country’s political and cultural orientati<strong>on</strong>, have always been reflected in the<br />

evoluti<strong>on</strong> of Georgian nati<strong>on</strong>al musical thinking. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> idea, firmly established in the philosophy of culture, is<br />

quite correct in maintaining that separate cultures cannot be viewed as completely closed systems and there<br />

is no such thing as a “sterile” culture, entirely protected from the influence of other cultures (Tsurtsumia,<br />

2005: 212).<br />

In a number of cases the influence of <strong>on</strong>e culture <strong>on</strong> another is rather forceful, especially when it is<br />

prompted by the cultural policy of the c<strong>on</strong>quering country. Culture expresses a nati<strong>on</strong>’s self-c<strong>on</strong>sciousness<br />

as “a c<strong>on</strong>scious subject” (Scheller). Obliterating its traditi<strong>on</strong>s from the nati<strong>on</strong>’s memory means losing its<br />

nati<strong>on</strong>al self-c<strong>on</strong>sciousness. This is why c<strong>on</strong>quering nati<strong>on</strong>s carried out cultural annexati<strong>on</strong> al<strong>on</strong>gside political<br />

annexati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

In the nineteenth century Georgian Orthodox ecclesiastical chanting experienced str<strong>on</strong>g pressure of<br />

cultural annexati<strong>on</strong> from Imperial Russia. It is clear that Georgia’s almost 200-year-l<strong>on</strong>g presence within the<br />

borders of the Russian Empire greatly influenced its chanting traditi<strong>on</strong>. It was these historical processes taking<br />

place at the turn of the nineteenth-twentieth centuries that caused the formati<strong>on</strong> of new chanting traditi<strong>on</strong>s<br />

in Georgian sacred music, whose analogues can be observed in the history of Russian chanting in the period<br />

covering the seventeenth-nineteenth centuries.<br />

In the 1880s and 90s Europized specimens of Georgian hymns started to emerge. During these years<br />

quite a few Georgian and Russian musicians tried to change Georgian three-part chants into four-parts. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>ir<br />

first attempts were failures and received harsh criticism from society. Of the publicati<strong>on</strong>s of this period the<br />

most noteworthy is Andria Benashvili’s collecti<strong>on</strong> Kartuli Khmebi (Georgian Voices). Kartuli Khmebi is <strong>on</strong>e<br />

of the first printed collecti<strong>on</strong>s. It came out in 1886 (Melikishvili’s printing-house, Tbilisi). In the first part of<br />

the collecti<strong>on</strong> the rite of St John the Chrysostom’s liturgy is printed, – so-called plain mode, the other half of<br />

the collecti<strong>on</strong> includes folk s<strong>on</strong>gs.<br />

We also have a manuscript versi<strong>on</strong> of Andria Benashvili’s collecti<strong>on</strong>. When comparing them, we can<br />

see that it differs from the printed versi<strong>on</strong> by the unusual movements of the bass part which jumps by fourths<br />

and fifths. Such movements match elements of functi<strong>on</strong>al European classical harm<strong>on</strong>y, giving the Georgian<br />

chant some European flavor.<br />

In the manuscript collecti<strong>on</strong> there are adscripts put down before the equitenia for the female choir. In<br />

Benashvili’s manuscript collecti<strong>on</strong>, apart from the Kartlian-Kakhetian mode chants of St John the Chry–

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!