who asked the first question? - International Research Center For ...

243perspective, can provide more useful information. So, here is the major part of the pointsof differences between Nuristan polyphony and secondal polytonal sutartines, togetherwith brief comments from the h istorical perspective (see comments in square brackets):(1) Nuristan polyphony is primarily drone type polyphony, while there is no dronein the Lithuanian s econdal polytonal sutartines. Drone polyphony is present in Lithuania(called “collective sutartines”), but without secondal dissonances, and heavily influencedby late European professional music. [Drone is definitely the most characteristic featureof European traditional polyphony, so according to this feature Nuristan polyphonyshows closer ties to the ancient European tradition of polyphony than secondalsutartines].(2) Canon is the dominating type of polyphony in sutartines while in Nuristanthere are hardly any traces of it. [Although hailed as one of the most archaic types oftraditional polyphony, canon is hardly found in any of the European polyphonictraditions. Therefore this feature also speaks about the closer ties of Nuristan polyphonyto the ancient European tradition of polyphony than sutartines.].(3) Polytonality is a “trademark” of the unique secondal sutartines. Secondalclashes in Nuristan polyphony and the two melodic centres are organized within onetonality. [As I have already mentioned earlier, the brilliant use of polytonality by theLithuanians at least few centuries before Ives, Bartok or Stravinsky, is absolutely uniqueand does not fit either the features of ancient European polyphony, or the characteristicfeatures of the polyphonic traditions - archaic or even contemporary - from any otherparts of the world.](4) Sutartines were traditionally performed by women only, while Nuristanpolyphony is performed both by women and men (separately and even together). [Thisfeature is not so easy to classify, as in many European traditions women are the mainsingers of the polyphonic styles, although the examples of such important and archaicpolyphonic traditions, as Georgians from Caucasia and Laberi from the Balkans, suggestthat singing by both women and men must be the most archaic characteristic of ancientEuropean polyphony.](5) In sutartines the number of performers is strictly limited by the tradition,allowing only two, three, or four performers. In Nuristan the number of performers is notlimited, so bigger and not so strictly organized groups can participate in singing. [Verystrict organization of the singing group by numbers is more of a later trait, notcharacteristic for ancient European polyphonic traditions, and polyphonic traditions areusually oriented towards the inclusiveness of the whole community.](6) Lithuanian sutartines is a two-part polyphony, while Nuristan polyphony ismostly three-part. [This is a very interesting feature, and I am going to discuss this issueseparately very soon.].(7) Lithuanian sutartines is an example of a cappella singing, while in Nuristanmusical instruments (most prominently the archaic harp wadzh and the percussion) oftenaccompanies polyphonic singing. [According to this feature I believe that sutartinesshows closer connections to the ancient European polyphonic traditions, which aremostly a cappella.](8) There are several well-defined styles of sutartines in Lithuania (including thecanonic, heterophonic, and drone types) while there is generally only one style oftraditional polyphony in Nuristan. [Heterophony, as I tried to show, is more a result of the