homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » We don't sing any more (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: We don't sing any more
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't have a problem with repetition either - anyone who is half-way liturgical in their inclinations is going to have to get used to a heck of a lot of repetition ...

If anyone is Orthodox then that is even more the case as things tend to be repeated about three times (at least) in most of their services ...

'Again and again in peace, let us pray to the Lord ...'

What bothers me in charismatic evangelical circles (and I was involved with them for donkey's years) isn't so much the repetition as the content.

I don't mind repeating things again and again if they're any good. But not if they are shite.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yerevan:
As an aside, there's the interesting question of repetition. IME clergypeople and life-long churchgoers in traditional congregations want a wide repertoire and complain if they have to sing the same thing 'too often'. I on the other hand bloody love repetition, because it helps me actually learn songs, focus on the words rather than trying to struggle along with the tune etc. Its interesting and revealing that more contemporary and / or charismatic settings are often very comfortable with repetition - it makes that style easier for outsiders to engage with.

The first church I worked in after I was ordained, we always had a 5-minute music practice before the main Sunday Eucharist. We'd usually learn a new hymn, or be "revising" one we'd sung only once or twice before. More often than not, the new hymn would be more-or-less contemporary. As well as a general warm-up, this signalled to newcomers (of which we always had plenty) that:
* this church doesn't use music to exclude new people
* this church habitually does new things
* nobody here knows this song any better than I do.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Adeodatus writes:
quote:

* this church doesn't use music to exclude new people
* this church habitually does new things
* nobody here knows this song any better than I do.

Perhaps so and I do like point 3 (although point 2 likely only appeals to clergy, who get easily bored), but more importantly it signals that the parish is serious about their music and wants to get it right and have fun while getting it right. Happily, it also kills the not infrequent practice of pre-service chitchat which suggests to the outsider that everyone here knows each other.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Yerevan - my background is very similar to yours, I think. IMO people like us - unchurched as children and far more familiar with contemporary musical culture than with classical music etc. - will usually find traditional church a very alien, bizarre experience.

If we are going to become comfortable with church then the music (if indeed there is any significant musical content) has to be relevant to our cultural context.

The problem I have with this is, what does relevance mean here?

I have a similar background to both of you (working class, unchurched) though younger and female, but traditional church inc traditional church singing is what I love. I love it because it's a relatively alien experience - it feels different, set apart, holy. I like quite a few worship songs but I have a real problem with most of them because they just feel far too like pop songs to count as worship for me - their 'relevance' has sucked all the reverence out of them. For me the worship songs I like are just Jesusy pop songs and not anything I'd want to sing in church. FWIW I can't read music (though noted psalms are OK and I can pick up a tune well) and don't listen to classical music at all.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To be honest, "relevant" means it's played and you listen. That's how people interact with music in the main these days. Quite often as background.

ISTM that part of the artificiality of some modern worship material is that stylistically it's the sort of stuff you listen to, but you're expected to perform it.

The traditional church music is a genre (or indeed group of genres) all of its own, a genre specifically evolved and developed around congregational involvement. Hymns are meant to be sung by a congregation, pop/rock songs aren't. That's not to say that congregational music can't be written with modern influences and using modern instruments, but there's more to "relevance" than that, IMV.

[ 18. December 2014, 15:47: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
About the "you can't sing" I suspect we have almost all been told that at some point.

But a possible related aspect is what seems to be a modern cultural disdain for singers. I often hear instrumentalists, exclusively, referred to as "musicians" as in "let's thank the musicians and the singers."

I've been in groups where a kid who can find two chords (almost on time) on a guitar is a musician but a skilled vocalist is not because, "anyone can sing" (is what one mediocre instrumentalist scornfully told me).

If singing is disdained because "anyone can do it" then the slightest mistake puts you below zero. Of course you don't want to show off your inability to do what "anyone" can do!

One church I was in the pastor regularly turned to the choir and thanked "the musicians" meaning the choir members, not the organist only. Nice! Is his open appreciation of singing part of why the congregation in that church sang?

If singing is openly valued then people are glad to participate. If the local culture openly admires amateur instrumentalists but (quietly) disdains amateur vocalists, why would anyone want to sing and be among the disdained? Especially if at some point in their life they were told "you can't sing!" or "you sound like a frog." Told "you can't do" what "anyone" can do, most people hide.
Just thinking out loud.

[ 18. December 2014, 16:11: Message edited by: Belle Ringer ]

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... The traditional church music is a genre (or indeed group of genres) all of its own, a genre specifically evolved and developed around congregational involvement. Hymns are meant to be sung by a congregation, pop/rock songs aren't. ...

An example of form following substance, which is the right way round.

Traditional church music in the British Isles - and I say that rather than 'anglophone world' because some of the best development has originally been in Welsh - has evolved because since the Reformation, with a great boost at the time of the C18 Revival, people have wanted to worship God by singing together, rather than just listening to other people doing it. That is a good, valuable and wholesome development. It has possibly been our biggest contribution to world Christian culture.

Singing hymns the conventional way happens to have been a particularly good and very accessible way for people to do this. Different generations have stirred new ingredients into the pot.

Because that is the objective, it is entirely reasonable and right that if popular music has taken a turn that no longer enables that, our music may not be the same as popular music, may be and have to be, a slightly alien genre.


I suspect it might also be why, of the various threads that contribute to modern popular Christian music as actually sung in churches rather than bought on CDs, I reckon folk and 'sub-folk' is normally a more usefully mineable resource than any of the varieties of rock. It is more likely to meet the simple and obvious test 'is this singable?'.

Complicated polyphonic motets, however exquisite, aren't. Nor is most rock.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Kitten
Shipmate
# 1179

 - Posted      Profile for Kitten   Email Kitten   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There are some people, myself included who can sing but dislike doing so (even though I am Welsh)

--------------------
Maius intra qua extra

Never accept a ride from a stranger, unless they are in a big blue box

Posts: 2330 | From: Carmarthenshire | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Al Eluia

Inquisitor
# 864

 - Posted      Profile for Al Eluia   Email Al Eluia   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
There are very few people who can't sing, even if they have trouble pitching a tune.

You wouldn't know that from watching American Idol and similar shows!

--------------------
Consider helping out the Anglican Seminary in El Salvador with a book or two! https://www.amazon.es/registry/wishlist/YDAZNSAWWWBT/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_ep_ws_7IRSzbD16R9RQ
https://www.episcopalcafe.com/a-seminary-is-born-in-el-salvador/

Posts: 1157 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
ISTM that part of the artificiality of some modern worship material is that stylistically it's the sort of stuff you listen to, but you're expected to perform it.

The traditional church music is a genre (or indeed group of genres) all of its own, a genre specifically evolved and developed around congregational involvement.

I have trouble with the tendency of some bands to do fancy endings, forcing the congregation to stop singing for the last half of the last verse. An otherwise decent congregational piece becomes a performance piece at the end.

I'm guessing the directors aren't specifically thinking "congregation," so they go with "nice music sound." But I've never been a music director (and I don't want to be, a few have briefly mentioned the many email complaints no matter what music they do).

Seeing problems like the negative effect of adding fancy endings has made me notice and appreciate the difference between sing-along music and performance music, which has helped me do a better job choosing and leading songs for sing-alongs like at VBS or nursing homes. Someone who has never really been forced to notice the difference won't be guided by the differences.

We all learn and grow.

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
I have a similar background to both of you (working class, unchurched) though younger and female, but traditional church inc traditional church singing is what I love. I love it because it's a relatively alien experience - it feels different, set apart, holy. I like quite a few worship songs but I have a real problem with most of them because they just feel far too like pop songs to count as worship for me - their 'relevance' has sucked all the reverence out of them. For me the worship songs I like are just Jesusy pop songs and not anything I'd want to sing in church. FWIW I can't read music (though noted psalms are OK and I can pick up a tune well) and don't listen to classical music at all.

Oh sure, my comment about relevance was very broad and sweeping! I'm glad you've found a church 'style' which helps you connect with God. I suspect, though, (based on anecdote much more than evidence) that you're in a minority, and if that's the case then I think churches should reflect it in the way they do things.
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Singing hymns the conventional way happens to have been a particularly good and very accessible way for people to do this. Different generations have stirred new ingredients into the pot.

Because that is the objective, it is entirely reasonable and right that if popular music has taken a turn that no longer enables that, our music may not be the same as popular music, may be and have to be, a slightly alien genre.

I suspect it might also be why, of the various threads that contribute to modern popular Christian music as actually sung in churches rather than bought on CDs, I reckon folk and 'sub-folk' is normally a more usefully mineable resource than any of the varieties of rock. It is more likely to meet the simple and obvious test 'is this singable?'.

Complicated polyphonic motets, however exquisite, aren't. Nor is most rock.

Good point - I think the music used in church services should be accessible and singable. If one wants congregations to sing then use songs that are (a) easy to sing, and (b) of a style that most people will be familiar with.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Yerevan
Shipmate
# 10383

 - Posted      Profile for Yerevan   Email Yerevan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Pomona, there's space for a wide variety of approaches in the contemporary church, including not singing at all (I know of at least one church plant which has dropped congregational singing altogether for the sake of their unchurched-by-background attendees). I don't think all people with my background will think like I do. I just find the obliviousness of older traditional churchgoers on this issue mystifying. They seem incapable of grasping that most under-fifties have literally no experience of congregational singing, choral music, organs, hymn singing, hymnbooks etc.
Posts: 3758 | From: In the middle | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not sure it's strictly accurate to say that 'traditional' church music is necessarily akin to 'classical' music ... although certain classical composers such as Handel, Mendelsohn, Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky did certainly compose hymns and church music - or tunes that were later used for hymns or church music ...

But I get the point you're trying to make, South Coast Kevin.

The 'traditional' hymn in its current form dates from around the time of Isaac Watts who introduced them as an alternative to metrical Psalms - a move very radical in its day. Although some of the words to 'traditional' hymns go way, way back ...

J M Neale, the Victorian Anglo-Catholic hymn-writer used loads of early stuff for his hymns - adaptations of Latin and Byzantine 'troporia' and hymns from the first millenium of Christianity for instance.

However we cut it, though, if the intention is to encourage congregational singing then the hymns and songs should be singable - that doesn't apply to certain contemporary worship songs any more than it does to medieval polyphony.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I totally get that, but it can also come across as a bit patronising - as if unchurched people can't get to grips with congregational singing.

However, Wesley and other hymnwriters often used popular pub and folk tunes of the time so I have no issue with churches using modern songs. My issue is with the quality and lack of reverence. I think what we need is modern hymns with a bit of strength behind them, rather than a catchy but shallow worship song*.

*I know not all worship songs are shallow!

Edit - comment aimed at Yerevan/SCK.

[ 18. December 2014, 19:35: Message edited by: Pomona ]

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yerevan:
I just find the obliviousness of older traditional churchgoers on this issue mystifying. They seem incapable of grasping that most under-fifties have literally no experience of congregational singing, choral music, organs, hymn singing, hymnbooks etc.

Well, it's about bloody time they learned then, isn't it?

[Big Grin] [Razz]

Says Gamaliel, aged 53 ...

[Biased]

Seriously though, as with other things, I'm from a generation that has 'seen both' ... I learned both the Imperial and Metric systems at school, we learned pounds, shillings and pence and then had to unlearn them and learn the decimal system for coinage when that was introduced in 1971.

The older ones among us will remember 'Decimal Five' at this point ... with Roger McGough and Mike McGear (brother of Paul McCartney) and all teaching the nation songs to help them learn the new system ...

'You give more, you get change ...' and 'One pound is a hundred new pennies, a hundred new pennies to the pound ...'

Whatever happened to the use of song in public information programmes?

[Big Grin]

I can remember those songs after all these years ...

The thing is, coming back to the present from nostalgia land, what looked fresh and radical and contemporary back when the new choruses and worship songs were coming into vogue in the 1970s and '80s doesn't stay fresh and radical for long.

I don't know what's so 'contemporary' about so-called contemporary worship songs and choruses. They all sound like sad and sappy pop songs and lag way behind whatever is really happening in the world of 'popular music'.

Sure, it has broad appeal in a kind of MoR soft-rock or folky kind of way - and there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself ...

Perhaps I'm a grumpy old git but given the choice between a contemporary worship band approach and a trained cathedral choir - or even a hoarse village parish one - I know what I'd prefer. But I wouldn't have said that 30 years ago.

It's all relative and all to do with context.

I do think this 'relevance' malarkey is a over-used term though. What's 'relevant' to one person is likely to be completely 'irrelevant' to someone else. If we are constantly chasing so-called 'relevance' we are constantly chasing a chimera.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think part of the problem, Pomona, is that the contemporary worship scene has become just that - a 'scene' - it's become so thoroughly commercialised and marketed that you can even find Hillsongs CDs in 'secular' outlets as a sub-genre of naff mood music.

The marketisation of the contemporary worship song has effectively neutered the genre. It's produced bland, same-y, formulaic songs where there is little room for anything genuinely radical or prophetic.

That's what's so pants about it. Not the fact that it is contemporary, nor that it's popular or uses pop-song structures and tropes - but that the whole scene has been marketed out of any semblance of 'edge' or gutsiness.

It's lost its balls to the money men.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
ThunderBunk

Stone cold idiot
# 15579

 - Posted      Profile for ThunderBunk   Email ThunderBunk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No-one gets to abolish tradition. Add to it, fine. Adapt, again, fine. Behave as if it doesn't exist? No. Same with these attempts to behave as if we can have a mid-2nd-century church in the 21st century. Just not an option.

Nor is attempting to set it in stone. It's organic, and attempts to stop it from changing kill it.

Cultures have memories, and the church, among the many things it is, is a culture. It won't be bullied into forgetting itself.

--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".

Foolish, potentially deranged witterings

Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Regarding commercialisation, that happens to all forms of church music. People will pay to listen to nice tunes without thinking too much about the meaning behind the words. Whether it's Handel or gospel music, the more secular listeners enjoy it the money money can be made. The record labels know this, and I should think the artistes do as well.

For the sake of the recording industry if nothing else we need the churches to nurture a love of communal singing, since not many other organisations are doing it these days!

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I am yet to see a CD featuring New English Hymnal hymns.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106

 - Posted      Profile for Jemima the 9th     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

To be honest, "relevant" means it's played and you listen. That's how people interact with music in the main these days. Quite often as background.

ISTM that part of the artificiality of some modern worship material is that stylistically it's the sort of stuff you listen to, but you're expected to perform it.

The traditional church music is a genre (or indeed group of genres) all of its own, a genre specifically evolved and developed around congregational involvement. Hymns are meant to be sung by a congregation, pop/rock songs aren't. That's not to say that congregational music can't be written with modern influences and using modern instruments, but there's more to "relevance" than that, IMV.

Yes, yes and yes*. And the second para explains why trying to play some of it in church is really quite difficult. It doesn't seem made for recreation in any setting other than a mega-gig, and a Sunday morning church service isn't that environment. So one ends up with conversations like the one I had with our new bass man on Sunday morning, who had learned all the songs from youtube recordings of the songs, and was frustrated that we were playing things differently. I think it leads to frustration all round, really. There are people who are frustrated that we don't sound like a Matt Redman gig, and others (like me) who are worried that the perfect recreation of the songs as per album / gig make it difficult for any congregation members who don't own those albums to keep up, what with all the musical/technical gimmicks Belle Ringer refers to above.

*With the slight proviso that it's not the sort of thing I listen to, since we play power ballads - perhaps that's what our congregation like in non-religious music too - and I'm more of a rock & folk person myself. I've often thought Frank Turner's songs would make for decent congregational hymns. Apart from the words...

[ 18. December 2014, 21:56: Message edited by: Jemima the 9th ]

Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
My issue is with the quality and lack of reverence. I think what we need is modern hymns with a bit of strength behind them, rather than a catchy but shallow worship song*.

*I know not all worship songs are shallow!

Oh, I agree - plenty of contemporary worship songs are shallow and trite. Two points in defence of the people who write such songs, though:

- There were surely many low-quality songs / hymns in other eras, it's just that we've forgotten them. In the same way, the worst of today's songs will drift into disuse and the best will remain popular.

- In charismatic evangelical church services, you get the 'worship set' concept where several songs are fitted together, in kind of the same way as the various elements of a liturgical service fit together. So it can be a bit unfair, I think, to pick out a single contemporary chorus and say it's shallow or whatever; instead we should look at the theology and sentiment you get in a series of songs put together by an experienced music leader.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
I am yet to see a CD featuring New English Hymnal hymns.

Recorded collections of traditional hymns are not normally linked to a particular hymn book, but a visit to Amazon suggests that many have a CofE 'theme'. And the choice seems quite large.

I own Perfect Peace, which comprises two CDs of traditional hymns sung by the Westminster Abbey Choir. I have a few other recordings of traditional hymns too, and it wasn't hard to find them, even in pre-internet days.

[ 18. December 2014, 22:18: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Albert Ross
Shipmate
# 3241

 - Posted      Profile for Albert Ross   Email Albert Ross   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
I am yet to see a CD featuring New English Hymnal hymns.

Here's the site for you http://prioryrecords.co.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=61_82 - Priory : The Complete New English Hymnal Series

--------------------
Elegant, concise and full of meaning.

Posts: 80 | From: Thames Estuary | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vulpior

Foxier than Thou
# 12744

 - Posted      Profile for Vulpior   Author's homepage   Email Vulpior   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I have trouble with the tendency of some bands to do fancy endings, forcing the congregation to stop singing for the last half of the last verse. An otherwise decent congregational piece becomes a performance piece at the end.

At our commitment ceremony years ago, we had O Jesus, I have promised sung to the tune of the Muppet Show! The friend playing keyboard offered us a choice of endings: slightly camped up or utterly over the top; we chose the latter.

Despite the words being printed as hymn verses only those attending, a mix of churchgoers and not, were able to work out and belt out an ending that went something like:
quote:
And then in heaven receive me
And then in heaven receive me
And then in heaven receive me
My Saviour and my friend
Saviour and my friend
Saviour and my friend
Be always my Saviour and my friend.

Watching the video and listening it's quite remarkable. But then it was a well-known tune!

--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad

Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Regarding commercialisation, ... Whether it's Handel or gospel music, the more secular listeners enjoy it the money money can be made. The record labels know this, and I should think the artistes do as well.

One difference maybe - but those who know music history better than I can correct me - in the "old days" Handel, Bach, black gospel song writers etc may or may not have been paid to write but wrote what they wanted to then presented the composition, whether for mostly listening (the Messiah) or for congregational singing.

*IF* some articles I've read are correct, budding modern CCM writers are told by their secular handlers what to write, or perhaps more specifically what not to write, like OK to say "he" "Lord" "king" but avoid "Jesus" for broader commercial appeal.

Having written this I thought I should page thru my praise band notebook. Hmm. Little mention of Jesus or Christ although some have the imagery without those words - bread and wine, or pierced hands for example. Lots of "holy" and "Lord" and "love." Not that you have to use the name all the time to be a Christian song.

(Trying but not succeeding in finding one or more of the articles, not finding the right search terms. And maybe the articles I've bumped into are wrong about secular control of new sacred songs.)

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
*aside* every time I see this thread title, I can't stop thinking of this

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nobody has ever told me that I can't sing, so at least for me not singing wasn't due to any discouraging comments. It simply wasn't ever a particularly relevant feature of life, until I started going to church as an adult. I would have answered the question "why don't you sing?" in much the same way as I would answer the question "why don't you play handball?" now. There was no particular reason - I just wasn't doing it, the few times I had tried it it was sort of fun but certainly not enough to make a hobby out of it, and I had no other reason why I would be doing it.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
One difference maybe - but those who know music history better than I can correct me - in the "old days" Handel, Bach, black gospel song writers etc may or may not have been paid to write but wrote what they wanted to then presented the composition, whether for mostly listening (the Messiah) or for congregational singing.

Handel was composer-in-residence for the Duke of Chandos and paid as music master to the Royal Family. Many of his most famous works were commissions.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
There are very few people who can't sing, even if they have trouble pitching a tune.

You wouldn't know that from watching American Idol and similar shows!
With greatest respect, Al, and I know you're making a funny, but I think that attitude is actually part of the problem. I don't care for the singers on these shows either, but they can sing, if not in the way or to the quality we'd like in a professional singer. However, if people are told that the level of singing on these shows is "can't sing", then they know for a fact that they themselves definitely can't.

It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Karl:
quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.

That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.

Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.

Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I am well aware that one can buy Gregorian chant and Anglican choral music in secular outlets - that's not the problem - I don't have an issue with Hillsongs being available in 'secular outlets' per se.

The problem I have with it is the 'deliberate' level of commercialisation - as Belle Ringer has indentified. With commercialisation comes pressure to conform and to pitch things to the lowest common denominator.

I would go so far as to suggest that this is why the 'power-ballad' form has proven so popular rather than other genres of popular/contemporary music.

I have less of an issue with contemporary worship songs that derive from a folk or rock (or indie) idiom than I do with those which deploy the power ballad, build to a crescendo style.

Even then, I think that most folkie or indie influenced Christian music and worship songs are pretty substandard compared to the 'secular' models they seek to emulate.

However we cut it, though, and whatever 'style' we prefer, the fact remains that all of us - regardless of background - are effectively 'socialised' and 'habituated' into whatever the dominant style and paradigm happens to be in our particular neck of the woods.

I first encountered contemporary worship songs at Spring Harvest in 1981 - and at my university Christian Union on Saturday evenings. Prior to that, I was more than happy to go along with traditional hymns and liturgies and so on - because I was familiar with them from my school-days - from Sunday school and school assemblies (and we were a bog-standard comprehensive in South Wales not a posh boy's boarding school) ...

To be frank, my initial reaction to the worship songs I encountered was that they were soppy, sentimental and somewhat exhibitionist - people would close their eyes, sway, raise their hands ... it all looked like attention-seeking to me ...

Gradually, I was drawn into a more full-on charismatic setting and grew accustomed and acclimatised to the music style and way of doing things.

The same would have happened had I, say, headed in more Catholic direction - or a Quaker direction or whatever else - rather than the route I went down.

Perhaps I am too old, but I find myself at a loss to understand what is so 'alien' about a book with the words of the hymn printed on them ... or an organ or a choir or whatever else.

I don't see why these things should be any more or less 'alien' than some prat at the front thinking they're Matt Redman or that girl from Phatfish or whatever it's called exhorting us all to go, 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus ooh ooh Jesus -- Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, I love you Jesus ...' or whatever the latest ditty happens to be ...

More seriously, I do agree with SCK that worship 'sets' can be arranged in a way that takes people through a process or 'journey' - with a theme that develops and resolves. I've seen that done well at times and I don't have an issue with it in principle.

But it's the word 'sentiment' that worries me here ... because it seems to me that the sentiment and mood overtakes the theology far too often.

We've all seen the 'usual suspect' worship songs strung together with some cues and narrative inbetween in order to steer or manipulate people towards particular reactions and responses.

Or, conversely, a set of unrelated worship songs strung together in a set with no discernible rhyme or reason other than that the worship leader liked the tunes or was familiar with them and the band could play them ...

I think the worship 'set' approach can work - if it's properly thought through and done well.

Sadly, it so often isn't and it ends up directionless and gloopy.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This seems to be coming back to the point that we often reach in discussing these things:
(i) Think about what kind of music is usable for congregational singing. To take an extreme example, you wouldn't ask a congregation to sing Tallis's Spem in Alium but you might (if you had a sufficiently skilled and numerous choir) profitably use it as a setting against which a congregation could engage in contemplation or prayer. OTOH, you wouldn't normally have the choir belting out 'Will your anchor hold in the storms of life' (to pick a title at random) as an anthem- you'd want that as a rousing congregational experience. Same principle applies for different types of contemporary music.
(ii) Whatever you do, do it as well as you can and think about how it will work within the context of other music being used at the same service, and of your wider worship.

IMO, keep these two points in mind and you won't go far or irreparably wrong, whatever kind of music you are using.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl:
quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.

That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.

Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.

Yes, but we need to stop telling people who are able to do the first one two (or even three) of those that they "can't sing" because they can't do the fourth. Or at least the 3.5th - singing professionally outside of opera.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211

 - Posted      Profile for Laurelin   Email Laurelin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Perhaps I'm a grumpy old git but given the choice between a contemporary worship band approach and a trained cathedral choir - or even a hoarse village parish one - I know what I'd prefer. But I wouldn't have said that 30 years ago.

Of course, one can enjoy both, just as one can enjoy both rock and Bach. To coin your phrase, it's not either/or. I love both 16th century polyphony and Kate Bush. (If she ever became a Christian, what amazing worship music she might write. [Big Grin] [Smile] )

As with anything, there are some good contemporary worship people around (e.g. Sara Groves, Audrey Assad, Lou Fellingham, Iona) as well as stuff that doesn't do a thing for me. I still think that Delirious? were one of the best things ever on the Christian contemporary scene. I always found their brand of soft rock quite contemplative, with some rich melodies and thoughtful lyrics.

Not a fan of the corporate culture of Hillsong and Jesus Culture. Hillsong, however, do write some pretty good songs, although I am suspicious of their theology. Jesus Culture - meh. I've listened to quite a lot of their stuff and - yeah, I'm still meh. I also find it incredibly manipulative, and that worries me. Delirious?, twenty years ago, were HEAPS better.

I love lots of trad hymns. And there are other trad hymns that I find boring, dirge-y or I think have dodgy theology.

quote:
I do think this 'relevance' malarkey is a over-used term though. What's 'relevant' to one person is likely to be completely 'irrelevant' to someone else. If we are constantly chasing so-called 'relevance' we are constantly chasing a chimera.
As someone who sings with my church's worship band, the elusive concept of 'relevance' is not something that I'm concerned about. It's not a big priority for our worship leader either (she is really excellent, both musically and as a leader). I'm 52 and have been round the block a few times myself. I no longer care about what's 'cool' - if I ever did.

Speaking about culture, though, in general, not just Christian stuff ... I am sad that England has long lost its own musical folk culture. I visited Ireland in summer 2000 and it was brilliant being in pubs in the middle of nowhere with local people playing a session of traditional Irish music. Absolutely fantastic. I think it's so great that Ireland still has this, and I dearly wish that England did.

Singing is a wonderful thing to do, a beautiful part of being human, and creative. As Christians we have a lot to give, spiritually, because singing is a spiritual thing - in cultural terms it expresses the soul of a people, and the Bible is full of songs and God's people being encouraged to sing to Him.

--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien

Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I see what you're getting at, but I think part of the problem *is* those people who sing professionally outside opera without any formal training or (in some cases) much musical knowledge. It gives the impression that you either know how to sing instinctively or you don't, and if you don't there's not much you can do to improve matters. This is not true except for the very small number of people who are completely tone deaf.

I think programmes like 'The Voice' do help to raise awareness that singing is something that can be improved with training and practice, but the pop music industry is geared to selecting stars on their looks.

[x-post - that was a reply to Karl]

[ 19. December 2014, 09:56: Message edited by: Jane R ]

Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
I see what you're getting at, but I think part of the problem *is* those people who sing professionally outside opera without any formal training or (in some cases) much musical knowledge. It gives the impression that you either know how to sing instinctively or you don't, and if you don't there's not much you can do to improve matters. This is not true except for the very small number of people who are completely tone deaf.

I think it's more people being told that unless they can sing like that they "can't sing" that's the issue. I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.

quote:
I think programmes like 'The Voice' do help to raise awareness that singing is something that can be improved with training and practice, but the pop music industry is geared to selecting stars on their looks.

[x-post - that was a reply to Karl]



--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think it's more people being told that unless they can sing like that they "can't sing" that's the issue. I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.

Stone me! I that's the second time in a week now that I think I agree with you. Has hell frozen over or something?

[ 19. December 2014, 10:46: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]

Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't disagree with the tenor of all that, Laurelin. Even if I may disagree on the detail ... I just thought Delirious? and similar were sub-Cold Play but there you go ...

If you saw my CD collection you'd find everything from The Pogues to Bach, Arvo Part to Handel, The Clash, Sex Pistols, world-music, folk music, jazz, blues and Gospel.

I think Albertus strikes the right note.

But that doesn't stop me sounding off at times ...

[Razz]

The main point though, is that however we cut it, if we are going to have congregational singing then it should be sing-along-able.

It also has to be recognised, I think, that some Christian traditions such as the Catholics (in most countries - Poland an exception I understand) and the Orthodox aren't necessarily focused on congregational singing at all - but they still have a rich musical and choral tradition - as a visit to any monastery or convent or to a Russian Orthodox service (dig that basso-profundo!) will soon reveal.

I am interested in the idea of these 'emerging' churches which have done away with congregational singing altogether because it is so alien to their particular - presumably previously unchurched - constituency.

I'm interested to hear what they do instead.

I get the impression from what Karl: Liberal Backslider is saying about his church that they tend not to sing but do listen to the music or to other people singing ... which isn't a million miles from what the Orthodox tend to do. Full circle?

It isn't all about singing or congregational singing of course - worship isn't simply about the words we use or the way we articulate them.

Do some form of physical action comprise the worship in these new, non-congregational singing churches?

Do they 'do actions' ... in some kind of post-modernist way?

Physical actions - walking to pilgrim sites, bowing, kneeling, prostrations, crossing oneself, raising one's hands, lighting candles, venerating icons etc etc have long played a part in Christian worship - and can be found in most Christian traditions (apart from the most Reformed where sitting on one's arse and listening to sermons is about as physical as it gets) ...

Are these - or developments/alternatives to these - taking the place of congregational singing in some of the 'newer' or 'emerging' settings?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
....I think Albertus strikes the right note...

Except when I'm singing [Biased]
(Actually, I was always led to believe I 'couldn't sing'. Then I took some lessons to see if I could, and I could, after a fashion! But need to work on it again.)

[ 19. December 2014, 13:14: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Heh heh ...

A chap I knew who was an accomplished singer used to say that virtually everyone can sing, they simply need to be shown how.

He even reckoned I could sing ...

I'd still like to be one of those basso-profundo Russian deacons ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To judge from this thread, both traditional CofE worship and 'commercialised' charismatic worship are sometimes similar in at least one sense: in both cases ordinary members of the congregation prefer not to sing up too much, and would rather just listen to the 'professionals' at the front.

This is what sometimes puts me off singing in church, though - not being able to hear my own voice. It's in large congregations with modern charismatic music being played that this can be a problem. I don't know if this is to do with the type of mysic being played, the acoustics, or the number of people present.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Karl:
quote:
I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
I never said they did. What I was trying to say in my previous post was that many (most) people need training to sing solos.

Confidence is good too, though. I agree with you there. As someone else said further up the thread, the habit of listening to recorded music tends to make people more self-conscious about singing in public as well. Most of us are capable of telling the difference in quality between our own singing and (let's say) Kiri Te Kanewa's or Pavarotti's.

Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
...I would have answered the question "why don't you sing?" in much the same way as I would answer the question "why don't you play handball?" now. There was no particular reason - I just wasn't doing it, the few times I had tried it it was sort of fun but certainly not enough to make a hobby out of it, and I had no other reason why I would be doing it.

Interesting comment, thank you.

I grew singing, not daily, but around the campfire on vacations, on car trips, in Scouts. Singing was a normal activity outside church.

I have lots of friends who never listen to or indulge in music in my hearing. I go to their family Christmas, they never gift a CD or talk about swapping i-tunes. Maybe they do music at other times or maybe they have no more interest in music than in handball.

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl:
quote:
I don't think most people need training to sing in a congregation - just the confidence that they don't have to be brilliant; the mix of voices fills in inadequacies in any one individual's tone.
I never said they did. What I was trying to say in my previous post was that many (most) people need training to sing solos.

Confidence is good too, though. I agree with you there. As someone else said further up the thread, the habit of listening to recorded music tends to make people more self-conscious about singing in public as well. Most of us are capable of telling the difference in quality between our own singing and (let's say) Kiri Te Kanewa's or Pavarotti's.

Nonsense. I sound exactly like Pavarotti did in his prime. Honest.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
To judge from this thread, both traditional CofE worship and 'commercialised' charismatic worship are sometimes similar in at least one sense: in both cases ordinary members of the congregation prefer not to sing up too much, and would rather just listen to the 'professionals' at the front.

This is what sometimes puts me off singing in church, though - not being able to hear my own voice. It's in large congregations with modern charismatic music being played that this can be a problem. I don't know if this is to do with the type of mysic being played, the acoustics, or the number of people present.

At the event in the OP anyone doing anything above a sotto voce murmur would have been able to hear themselves very clearly.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Karl:
quote:
It's all part of "unless you can sing like Sandy Denny or Bryn Terfel etc. you can't sing" which I think is part of the problem. It underlies people telling me I "can't sing", for example.

That's true, but there are different types of singing. I expect what bib meant was that there are very few people who are completely incapable of singing a traditional hymn as part of a congregation, and that's true. Singing a tune as part of a group is relatively easy. Singing a harmony part is harder. Singing a solo (well) is harder still. Singing a principal role in an opera (for example, Turandot or The Queen of the Night in 'Magic Flute') is hardest of all.

Most of the people who do these reality TV shows have fairly good natural voices, but either haven't been trained how to use them properly or haven't got a good sense of pitch. Or both. They'd be fine singing in a group as they are, and after a few singing lessons most would be OK doing solos too.

I'm with Karl. As I mentioned upthread, I think the "professionalization" of church life (imported from corporate business culture) is the problem. We emphasize "excellence" rather than "giving your best"; we emphasize a "polished, professional" presentation rather than recognizing the historic role the church has played in nurturing budding talent (recognizing that a "budding" talent needs to begin somewhere-- and somewhere is not going to be polished, professional act).

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I sound exactly like Pavarotti did in his prime. Honest.

I sound like Caruso. Robinson Caruso. (My jokes are no better than my singing, see?)

[codefix]

[ 19. December 2014, 16:14: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Except, SvitlanaV2, that in traditional Anglican worship the congregation do tend to sing along with the 'professionals' as you put it - even if these 'professionals' are simply volunteer members of the local choir.

They may not sing with gusto, but they generally do sing. Which isn't always something that happens in RC or Orthodox services. It does vary though, I've visited Orthodox parishes where people sing along with the choir - and don't simply recite the required bits - like the Creed and the Lord's Prayer and the pre-communion prayer which begins, 'Of Thy Mystic Supper, O Son of God, accept me today as a communicant ...'

In fact, I've sung along with the Cherubic Hymn and other parts of the Liturgy with which I'm familiar and nobody has looked askance or taken any notice.

Coming back to Anglicanism, other than the vicar, there aren't likely to be that many 'professionals' around in your typical traditional Anglican service - unless it's in a cathedral and there'll you'll find professional choir directors and so on.

I think that the point you're making is an interesting and valid one in principle, though ... it seems to me that some forms of uber-contemporary 'emerging' style churches have gone full cycle and returned to a situation where congregational singing has been abandoned in favour of listening to a dedicated choir or music group (not necessarily professionals) who sing on their behalf.

Meanwhile, I'm quite intrigued by the issue of non-sung worship (and yes, I know that worship is't all about singing nor what we do or don't do in church) - and I may start a thread on that over on Ecclesiantics.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The other aspect, of course, is that if it's an 8am BCP service with no musicians or choir present then there is unlikely to be any music at all - it'll be a 'said' (or chanted) service with the congregation joining in the set responses as the clergy person goes 'by the book'.

I suspect that in some of the 'emerging' style churches that have been alluded to - where there is no congregational singing - then there'll be an equivalent of some kind - even if it isn't a formal liturgy as such.

I'm guessing, but I'd imagine that in some of these places they won't have any 'set response' at all but people will simply watch whatever it is that goes or - or perhaps they are given interactive things to do - like cutting things out of pieces of paper or putting pebbles in baskets and whatever happens to be in vogue in these circles ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hmm. 'Uber-contemporary 'emerging' churches' reinventing Choral Evensong? Interesting!
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools