صفحة 2 من 3 الأولالأول 123 الاخيرالاخير
عرض النتائج 11 إلى 20 من 21
  1. #11
    Anton Efendi Guest

    إفتراضي Books

    Also, while it's great to have the books by Priggos, Stanitsas, Karamanis, etc., there is really no substitute for getting the works of the masters: Petros Peloponesseos, Iakovos Protopsaltes, Manuel Chrysaphes, Gregorios Protopsaltes, etc.

  2. #12
    Hakem Guest

    إفتراضي Some thoughts

    If I may add a point to this debate. I wish to comment on the terminology used on this thread: Why are we taking the Greek Byzantine to be the "real" Byzantine while the Arabic is merely "Arabized"?

    The Byzantine Empire was vast, and each part has adopted and added to what we call now Byzantine. Despite the fact that the language of this civilization was Greek as a lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean, this does not mean the modern Greek nation-state. Just as Arabo-Islamic heritage extended from Spain to China, but it does mean that all peoples were only Arabs or Muslims ...etc.

    What is now in Greece is Greek Byzantine, what we have in Antioch is Antinochian or Arabic Byzantine (since we now express ourselves in that language). We are inheritors of Byzantine culture just as the Greek nation-state is. St. John of Damascus (born in Damascus, died in Jerusalem), used Greek like we are using English now, as a lingua franca, but he was Antiochian Orthodox, a native of Greater Syria. Let us not forget that the heartlands of Byzantium were not only what is now Greece, but most importantly, Anatolia and Greater Syria.

    So, I am too not in favour of blind imitation believing that interpretation of Byzantine music from Greece is "real" or "pure" Byzantium, while Antiochian is not because it has been “corrupted” by Arabic styles. Just as the Antiochian has changed and interacted with other cultures and traditions, so did the same tradition in Greece. Nothing remained/remains the same, and therefore, contemporary Greek interpretation of music is not a standard. Each culture needs to express itself using its own aesthetic sensitivities.
    آخر تعديل بواسطة Hakem ، 29-04-2006 الساعة 00:20

  3. #13
    Anton Efendi Guest

    إفتراضي Not quite!

    I wasn't talking about Greece, so I never made the identification of Greece with Byzantine. If anything, what I'm pointing to is Turkey, or the Ottoman Empire to be more precise. While I do agree on the problem of terminology, your presentation is nevertheless problematic in some sense as well as anachronistic.

    I don't have time to elaborate, but will do so soon. But, very briefly, in terms of music, there is an issue of musical phraseology, that has nothing to do any of the issues you raise.


  4. #14
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Jul 2005

    إفتراضي A quick short point

    Hi also to be quick, I have two points regarding your reply post.

    1- Why should an Arabic chanter singing with a perfect Arabic language in an Arabic church have an "Arabicised" style?

    2- The tarab element isn't an ornament. This is the fundamental part of a piece. The creative element of tarab isn't an addition, it is at the very heart of Arabic music.

    This is why I was happy to hear Mitri el Morr singing so creatively one of his pieces. Where if you think of what he put in notation as a motif, it is the rendition of the piece that counts!
    آخر تعديل بواسطة Najib ، 28-04-2006 الساعة 23:30

  5. #15
    Anton Efendi Guest

    إفتراضي To be clear

    It's not an issue of "should" or "shouldn't". Everyone is free to do whatever they please. I am not a dogmatic purist in this regard, seeking to force homogeneity in performance.

    That said, part of my reasoning is that the music existed before Murr. Therefore, the music has its rules, and a long tradition with clear, if at one point lost, phrases and stylistic guides. I think that under the guise of cultural variety you end up losing the way (or whatever of it we can still recover) in which the people who wrote this music performed it or conceptualized it. It's the same kind of question regarding classical music. "Should" or "can" people interpret it in a variety of ways, even turning it into pop, or what have you? Sure you can! Will it be beautiful? In most cases, absolutely! Does this mean we stop performing it in the classical way, according to our research into the manuscripts, etc.? Of course not!

    So I am very weary of multicultural arguments because many times they actually rely on really problematic assumptions of their own.

    For instance, your premise of "Arab" is itself problematic. You showed on this forum the ties between Lebanese Rahbani songs and Syriac Maronite church music. Do we bill any of it as "Arab"? (This is not about Lebanon being Arab or not, it's a completely different argument. Just to be clear.) It's sung in modern colloquial Lebanese Arabic, sure. But just like you had problems with talking about "pure" Greek, or "pure" Byzantine, etc. why is it that we talk freely about "pure" Arab anything?! Isn't music in Lebanon and Syria influenced by a variety of elements (Armenian, Gypsy, Turkish, etc.) just as much as you note about Greek music and others?

    So indeed Murr's rendition was beautiful, displaying excellent vocal capabilities ('urab) and feel, and paying tribute to the tarab tradition. I never denied that, nor do I have a problem with it. Does this make it somehow more "authentic" to the (preconceived) "Arab" Church in Lebanon, rendering it "its own"? Don't you think that this, ironically, ends up reviving a nationalist outlook (in which Murr did take part in, by the way) that Hakem had a problem with?

    So for instance, despite spending the first part of his post talking about the regional melting pot, the post ends up reducing Antiochian to Arab (what happened to Syriac, for example?), and positing clearly (if not rigidly) defined cultures. It ends up defeating the entire purpose of the earlier argument in the post! If we're talking about the Ottoman or Byzantine cultural melting pots, then the arguments I'm criticizing here only contradict that outlook. In that sense, I stick with my chosen "-ized" qualifier, as it implies the addition of a particular aspect into a set built around a multitude of aspects, which we now, for heuristic purposes, label according to nationalist labels.
    آخر تعديل بواسطة Anton Efendi ، 29-04-2006 الساعة 00:33

  6. #16
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Jul 2005

    إفتراضي Since we are trying to be clear

    We need to focus on the music here away from political debates.

    This is what I understood from your postings:

    You said SEM's attempt is a step in the right direction. And you used "Arabicised" to qualify a performance. To me that means that you consider the current situation a not authentic enough situation since you can always go a step before by moving up in the hierarchy of teachers/students.

    This is like saying Abdo el Hamuli should have stuck to singing the Beste and Sharki that he heard in Istanbul rather than evolving the dor style of singing. For me the dor is authentic enough to learn, research, and reproduce.

    I too respect all attempts in producing church music, in particular, and most kind of music in general. However I consider the Arabic music to be my preferred interpretation when using an Arabic language without claiming exclusive rights on what is Arabic. And by Arabic music I mean the turn of the twenty century makamic music that had Syriac, Coranic, Persian, Byzantine/Ottoman as its rawafed. (So yes we can bill a lot of the music you mentioned above as Arab without claiming exclusivity, in fact this is why it is allowed on this forum).

    I don't see a music that needs correcting or further authentication. However I encourage people to go and research and perform authentic music. It is extremely healthy. This is one of my reasons of studying Greek language, and why I try to perform with Ottoman music groups in London.
    آخر تعديل بواسطة Najib ، 29-04-2006 الساعة 12:01

  7. #17
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2005
    Vienna, Austria


    Gentlemen, allow me to introduce a small reminder without interfering in the substantive debate concerning Byzantine/Orthodox church chant as I'm totally ignorant in this field. I will not debate the political background to the various positions exposed here because we decided once for all right from the beginning politics per se is not a matter to debate in this forum, which does not mean at any rate the people who set it up and are presently running it do not have their own political perspective nor that the very idea of creating the forum, its object, its aims and its broad policy are totally unrelated to such political perspective. But this is not the point here. The fact is that this forum is dedicated to Arab and oriental classical music and is articulated on such fundamental concepts as maqam/modal music, tarab, waslah/fasil, improvisation/ornamentation, "freestyle"/personalised/variable vocal and/or instrumental performances...etc We're interested in such musical/vocal trends as orthodox church chants only inasmuch as they are closely related to the above mentioned concepts. Notwithstanding the judgement one may have on Morr music or Dimitry Coutya's interpretations as authentic in being faithful to the shear Byzantine tradition or deviant from it under tarab influence or by their "too arabized" or "arabicized" style, such deviation, such influence and "arbization" ("arabicization") are is the very reason of their presence in this section and this forum. This is simply not the place to defend authentic shear Byzantine tradition or to promote it.
    آخر تعديل بواسطة أبو علاء ، 29-04-2006 الساعة 19:06
    أبو علاء

  8. #18
    Anton Efendi Guest

    إفتراضي Nafpliotes

    Here is what is likely the oldest ever recording of this same piece (al-yawma yawmou l-qiyama. Doxastikon Anastaseos Emera) and of Byzantine chant that we have on record (as far as I know) courtesy of the invaluable Dimitri Koubaroulis of www.analogion.com. It's by the protopsalte of the Patriarchate in the Fanar (Istanbul), Iakovos Nafpliotes, the last of the Byzantine masters.

    The recordings were made by the invaluable Orfeon Records, who around the same time were recording Cemil Bey and other masters, and without the fantastic work of the Blumenthal Brothers, all this treasure would have been lost. The recordings seem to have taken place between 1913-1918. The quality of course is archival.
    الملفات المرفقة الملفات المرفقة

  9. #19
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Jul 2005

    إفتراضي Thanks

    for the very rare file Anton.

    I'm hoping tomorrow to put the doxologia Acem Kurdi that my dad composed in the fourties.

  10. #20
    koukouzelis Guest


    إقتباس المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة zeuvs tarab
    نسمع هنا ايضا ترتيلان بصوت متري افندي المر
    الترتيل الاول اليوم يوم القيامه و فيه مزيج من اللغه العربيه و القبطيه
    اما التسجيل الثاني فاظنه في اللغه القبطيه
    احترامي للجميع
    للأسف لم أستطع الاستماع لهذه التراتيل لأني لم أتمكن من تحميلها إلى جهازي فهل يمكنك إرشادي إلى كيفية تحميلها أو ترسلها بواسطة الإيميل؟

صفحة 2 من 3 الأولالأول 123 الاخيرالاخير

قوانين المشاركة

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts