Both the Ockeghem and the Dufay pieces make use of "L'Homme Arme" a popular fifteenth century tune as their cantus firmus. L'Homme Arme is not a chant. It may be a secular tune. Is this problematic?
I can't figure out why it would be problematic for a secular song to be used as the Cantus Firmus of a mass composition, but it may have been a decision due to the intellectual movement at the time. I read that Renaissance intellectuals tried to dig up antique texts and information and use it to improve novel knowledge and perspective. Also, I read that the song was released when Constantinople had fallen to the Ottoman Turks, which Dufay lamented. The input of the "L'Homme Arme" as the cantus firmus in Dufay's piece could signify a remembrance or defense of the Eastern Church.
My first reaction is yes, it is a problem! If this is a kyrie, which is religious and directed to God, then the cantus firmus should be a chant or biblical text. Musically, of course not. The change of subject matter allows for a different musical interpretation, which I get from the pitch change between the two sections of the kyrie l'homme arme. Definitely a sign of branching out and points to a difference in thinking from previously, when chants were exclusively directed at God and exclusively religious. At the same time, I can see this as linked to the Crusades, calling upon God or thanking God for his "support" throughout. Religion and the nation, and by proxy war, have always been almost inextricably linked so a slight shift to a secular, warlike theme is not far off.
i would hope not, or at least, i don't think it's a big problem that would entirely preclude its usage. it's interesting that at this point the mass is no longer entirely in latin, which (i assume?) shows a more inclusive atmosphere in the church. religion is all about syncretism anyway. while here it's not another religion that's being swallowed and incorporated, l'homme arme is a secular tune that could only have increased the reach and popularity of the church. at the same time, l'homme arme has elements of a warning, of a cheer, and awe- doesn't seem entirely separate from what the church is trying to inculcate in its members, no? i'm not sure what the actual historical situation was like, but if i were an early renaissance priest, from a logical point of view, as long as the eventual product is devoted to God, l'homme arme is about as good as it gets.
I don't believe that the use of the secular song is a problem musically because while music is created by people for specific purposes, I do not believe that it actually sounds any different based on the inspiration for the tune. Rather, the tune itself can sound different, but in this case it does not.
Religiously, I do not believe that this is problematic because most of the monks singing the songs based on L'Homme Arme probably did not know of its original usage/inspiration. Although the reading stated that this was a "hit song," the definition of "hit song" for the time period is probably much different than that of today - there were no radio stations, mp3s, or cell phone ringtones for the masses to learn hit songs, and given that monks lived in relative seclusion, it is unlikely that they were aware of the melody's originally intended purpose.
Of course, those who would take a more purist perspective might make the argument that original intention is extremely important to a song's melody in that it colors/shapes the "intrinsic nature" of the melody, but I fail to see how this "logic" actually applies. I suppose that we can discuss this more in class today.
Initially, I also thought that this was problematic. The point of mass is to praise God and by having the Cantus Firmus be a secular song, I question the ability to effectively praise God and keep the atmosphere focused on God. This, however, raises the question of what is secular music? Is something secular only because it does not come directly from the bible or is subject matter most important. It has already been brought up that "L'Homme Arme" is reminiscent of the crusades, which is a religious subject matter. If "L'Homme Arme" is about the crusades then it makes the mass composition God focused, which is technically not secular. Which would also mean that there is not a problem with "L'Homme Arme" being the Cantus Firmus of a mass composition. I guess it all depends on the definition of secular and spiritual music.
I do not think that just because the kyrie is 'secular' doesn't mean that we've moved from early Christianity to Unitarianism.
The lyrics of the piece are simple:
The armed man, The armed man is to be feared. The cry has been raised all around.
That everyone should arm himself with an iron coat of mail.
I think that this piece can be one which arouses contemplation in the listener. Who is the armed man? Is he bad? Is he good? Why should he be feared? Should G-d be feared? Should Satan be feared? What does fear even mean in religion? What should I be fearing? The personal dialog that the song opens presents the listener with an opportunity to think about their faith. In Dufay's borrowing of the kyrie, I think that this is a fine mechanism for personal reflection.
I do think the church authorities at the time would have a problem with it because they already had a problem with all the other changes. The did not want anything that inspired sinful thoughts, or in my interpretation, anything that was too pleasing to the ear. I could not really tell a difference but I am sure the people who were singing it could.
7 comments:
I can't figure out why it would be problematic for a secular song to be used as the Cantus Firmus of a mass composition, but it may have been a decision due to the intellectual movement at the time. I read that Renaissance intellectuals tried to dig up antique texts and information and use it to improve novel knowledge and perspective. Also, I read that the song was released when Constantinople had fallen to the Ottoman Turks, which Dufay lamented. The input of the "L'Homme Arme" as the cantus firmus in Dufay's piece could signify a remembrance or defense of the Eastern Church.
My first reaction is yes, it is a problem! If this is a kyrie, which is religious and directed to God, then the cantus firmus should be a chant or biblical text. Musically, of course not. The change of subject matter allows for a different musical interpretation, which I get from the pitch change between the two sections of the kyrie l'homme arme. Definitely a sign of branching out and points to a difference in thinking from previously, when chants were exclusively directed at God and exclusively religious.
At the same time, I can see this as linked to the Crusades, calling upon God or thanking God for his "support" throughout. Religion and the nation, and by proxy war, have always been almost inextricably linked so a slight shift to a secular, warlike theme is not far off.
i would hope not, or at least, i don't think it's a big problem that would entirely preclude its usage. it's interesting that at this point the mass is no longer entirely in latin, which (i assume?) shows a more inclusive atmosphere in the church.
religion is all about syncretism anyway. while here it's not another religion that's being swallowed and incorporated, l'homme arme is a secular tune that could only have increased the reach and popularity of the church. at the same time, l'homme arme has elements of a warning, of a cheer, and awe- doesn't seem entirely separate from what the church is trying to inculcate in its members, no?
i'm not sure what the actual historical situation was like, but if i were an early renaissance priest, from a logical point of view, as long as the eventual product is devoted to God, l'homme arme is about as good as it gets.
I don't believe that the use of the secular song is a problem musically because while music is created by people for specific purposes, I do not believe that it actually sounds any different based on the inspiration for the tune. Rather, the tune itself can sound different, but in this case it does not.
Religiously, I do not believe that this is problematic because most of the monks singing the songs based on L'Homme Arme probably did not know of its original usage/inspiration. Although the reading stated that this was a "hit song," the definition of "hit song" for the time period is probably much different than that of today - there were no radio stations, mp3s, or cell phone ringtones for the masses to learn hit songs, and given that monks lived in relative seclusion, it is unlikely that they were aware of the melody's originally intended purpose.
Of course, those who would take a more purist perspective might make the argument that original intention is extremely important to a song's melody in that it colors/shapes the "intrinsic nature" of the melody, but I fail to see how this "logic" actually applies. I suppose that we can discuss this more in class today.
Initially, I also thought that this was problematic. The point of mass is to praise God and by having the Cantus Firmus be a secular song, I question the ability to effectively praise God and keep the atmosphere focused on God.
This, however, raises the question of what is secular music? Is something secular only because it does not come directly from the bible or is subject matter most important. It has already been brought up that "L'Homme Arme" is reminiscent of the crusades, which is a religious subject matter. If "L'Homme Arme" is about the crusades then it makes the mass composition God focused, which is technically not secular. Which would also mean that there is not a problem with "L'Homme Arme" being the Cantus Firmus of a mass composition. I guess it all depends on the definition of secular and spiritual music.
I do not think that just because the kyrie is 'secular' doesn't mean that we've moved from early Christianity to Unitarianism.
The lyrics of the piece are simple:
The armed man,
The armed man is to be feared.
The cry has been raised all around.
That everyone should arm himself
with an iron coat of mail.
I think that this piece can be one which arouses contemplation in the listener. Who is the armed man? Is he bad? Is he good? Why should he be feared? Should G-d be feared? Should Satan be feared? What does fear even mean in religion? What should I be fearing? The personal dialog that the song opens presents the listener with an opportunity to think about their faith. In Dufay's borrowing of the kyrie, I think that this is a fine mechanism for personal reflection.
I do think the church authorities at the time would have a problem with it because they already had a problem with all the other changes. The did not want anything that inspired sinful thoughts, or in my interpretation, anything that was too pleasing to the ear. I could not really tell a difference but I am sure the people who were singing it could.
Post a Comment