Your Eminence!
Reverend Fathers, Brothers, and Sisters!
I would like to begin my address with a quote from the speech of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus’ at the II International Congress of Choir Directors and Singers of the Russian Orthodox Church. “With regret, I must state,” His Holiness says, “that although singing is an important and integral part of the divine service, this part often remains on the periphery of attention… Issues of church construction, spiritual education, and youth upbringing are undoubtedly important, but we must also care about ensuring that the structure of church services is maintained at a proper level in our churches, because the heart of Christian life is, above all, the Divine Liturgy.”
The holding of today’s international conference in Almaty is intended to be a response to the call of our Primate to the clergy and Orthodox community to pay greater attention to liturgical singing, to take its significance in church life more seriously, and to make efforts toward its development. Undoubtedly, improving the level of performance mastery and enhancing the quality of choral sound directly depends on the professionalism and strong desire of the leaders—the choir directors. Therefore, special attention at our event will be given to the practical aspects of the choir director’s work.
Today, the history and theory of church singing have been thoroughly studied, and a detailed analysis of musical material and its characteristics has been conducted. However, the specifics of the work of the “performer”—the choir director—and his “instrument”—the church choir, their practical interaction, choirmaster techniques, and regional peculiarities remain insufficiently explored.
In his address, Metropolitan Alexander touched on a number of current topics that require careful study and the adoption of specific solutions. Indeed, one of the primary tasks is to restore the genuinely ecclesiastical spirit to the singing in our churches. Competent performance, from the standpoint of musical science, must necessarily be combined with centuries-old liturgical traditions. In my communication with choir directors and singers, I constantly emphasize the importance and necessity of preserving the singing heritage passed down from previous generations. It is wonderful that such renowned ensembles as the Synodal Choir under the direction of Alexey Puzakov and the choir of the Epiphany Cathedral in Yelokhovo, led by Alexander Mayorov, primarily focus on continuing the best performance and repertoire traditions of the past. During the course of the conference, we will have a unique opportunity not only to listen to the reports of our guests from Moscow but also to observe examples of their interaction with singers, their conducting techniques, and their manual and mnemonic practices.
The work of a choir director is indeed an ecclesiastical service, and as such, it is founded on both musical and liturgical education. A choir director, whether in a cathedral or in a small parish church, must necessarily be a competent liturgist, knowledgeable in the structure of the service, well-versed in the principles of the liturgical cycles, and able to properly identify the primary theme of the day. For instance, if a Sunday coincides with one of the twelve major feasts of the Theotokos, the main theme remains the Resurrection (as a “Little Pascha”), while the secondary theme would focus on the Theotokos. For a professional choir director, preparation for a service begins long before the rehearsal, during which the hymns for the upcoming service are learned. Careful study of the liturgical particulars and the theological content of the texts to be performed, along with the meticulous process of penetrating their meaning and essence, is an integral part of the choir director’s work. Only under such conditions can the choir director truly grasp the meaning of the hymns and convey the spirit and message to the choir singers.
It is important to emphasize that a choir director’s focus should not only be on the main hymns of the All-Night Vigil or the Liturgy but on all parts of the service. Unfortunately, it is sometimes observed that while a choir director may pay close, detailed attention to hymns such as “O Gladsome Light” or “A Mercy of Peace,” they may completely neglect the quality of the stichera or troparia. Such an approach creates an aesthetic dissonance and negatively impacts the worshippers’ experience of the service. It must be remembered that the changeable parts of the All-Night Vigil—stichera, irmoi, and troparia—contain the essential theological meaning of the feast being celebrated. Some may be surprised, but I must stress that even the quality of performing the small litanies, which rhythmically break the services into logical parts, demands the attention of the choir director. The ability to perform texts, including recitative hymns, which are especially numerous during the All-Night Vigils, is currently, unfortunately, at a low level of performance. Therefore, rehearsals must devote equal attention to both the fixed and the changeable parts of the service. Singers must thoroughly learn the system of the eight tones and be able to freely use it, while a choir director, especially a beginner, must master the most commonly used repertoire and the principles of performing standard hymns.
Regarding methods of conducting a choir, two historical methods have emerged: vocal direction and hand direction. In choir directing, both methods are used, with hand direction techniques based on specific elements of conducting, modified according to the peculiarities of ecclesiastical performance. If the singers are not very familiar with the singing tradition, a detailed demonstration and clear manual technique are necessary, and as the singers become more proficient, the demonstration can become more concise, focusing primarily on the rhythmic foundation of the chant. The conducting technique of the choir director should be practical and scientific; there is no need to invent one’s own “language.” Every movement should have a clear purpose. Experience shows that a mismatch between the hand movements and the musical image disrupts both the performer’s and the listener’s understanding of the character of the music. Incorrect or poorly refined gestures from the choir director hinder the singers, and excessive or unjustified gesturing can confuse the parishioners in the church.
The renowned church composer and choir director P.G. Chesnokov once said, “A choir is an assembly of singers, whose sound is a well-balanced ensemble.” In line with this remarkable definition, I would like to draw necessary attention to a common mistake – turning the choir director into a “lead singer.” What happens is that the director, while conducting the choir, performs one of the parts, and inevitably, getting carried away, begins to sing louder than the other choir members. As a result, the director not only stands out against the rest of the choir but also loses the ability to adequately perceive the overall choral sound – the ensemble collapses. Under such an approach to conducting, there can be no talk of balanced sound among the choir parts and individual voices. Such a manner of leading the choir not only disrupts the harmony of the choir’s sound but often leads to a folklorized, coarsely rustic style of hymn performance. One might object – what if the choir consists of a very small group of singers and every voice is indispensable? My answer is: in such cases, the director may sing, but only quietly, carefully monitoring the intensity of their own voice. The director must control their emotions and avoid trying to compensate for the choir’s deficiencies by raising their own voice.
In the practice of choir direction, there is indeed a solo tradition of performing sacred hymns, particularly in small rural churches. In such cases, there is a duality – the “director-soloist,” and the quality of the liturgical music entirely depends on the individual singer. However, we are discussing the presence of a choir, the work of which must adhere to its own rules and principles.
Speaking of volume, I regret to say that in my visits to churches in Kazakhstan and my acquaintance with parish singing, I have noticed in several cases a tendency towards loud, even shouting, in the execution of hymns. This is not about the need to fill large church spaces with sound. These choirs were using excessive volume even in relatively small churches. When seeing a forte or fortissimo marking in the score, one should not resort to what the Trullan Council and the Typikon describe as “disorderly shouting.” Truly prayerful singing does not allow for sound effects aimed at impressing those present in the church with the power and volume of the voices. Restraint and delicacy are required, both in fortissimo and in pianissimo. The same rule applies to harmonic tonality – major and minor keys. The asceticism of church music demands that we avoid both sentimentality and sweetness, as well as brashness in performance. Singing during the service must not turn into a refined emotional or soulful entertainment. While the aesthetic side is certainly important, it should not overshadow the inner, spiritual aspect.
For a person aspiring to understand visual art, it is essential to develop a “trained eye” – a visual experience acquired by viewing a large number of works by great masters. Similarly, one who wishes to grasp church music and understand the subtleties of liturgical singing on a professional level must develop a “trained ear” – the experience of engaging with the finest examples of Orthodox musical art. Both the choir director and the singers need this “listening experience” – a wealth of interaction with the best Orthodox music, both ancient and modern. The renowned German composer Robert Schumann once said, “A child cannot grow up healthy on sweets, cookies, and candy. Spiritual nourishment, like physical food, must be simple and wholesome. The great masters have already provided such nourishment; adhere to it.” This “listening experience” is needed to navigate through the vast array of both ancient and contemporary works, to form a repertoire, and to distinguish truly beautiful hymns from tasteless compositions. We, as choir directors, must not only hone our skills but also develop and refine our taste through thoughtful and careful acquaintance with works of sacred music from different styles, eras, and genres. We must understand secular choral and operatic art, Byzantine and Russian chant, and the works of both domestic and Western European classical composers.
I cannot fail to say a few words about repertoire. Typically, a parish choir is not a fully professional ensemble. From a choral director’s point of view, such a choir is far from a perfect instrument, and it is not suited for performing complex musical works. However, an experienced choir director, by carefully selecting the repertoire, can still achieve their goal – to fill the church with the spirit of grace-filled prayer, even with a “weaker” choir. Today, we observe a great diversity in the genres of church singing – alongside the works of well-known Russian composers, which have been firmly rooted in the liturgical life of our Church since the Synodal era, one can also hear Byzantine or Znamenny chants. On one hand, this richness of melodies and chants provides great freedom for creativity within choral groups and for the development of both choir directors and singers. On the other hand, if used incorrectly, it can turn the liturgy into a set of concert numbers or, through its unusualness, and sometimes even exoticism, confuse the minds and hearts of parishioners who have been nurtured in certain established traditions. Imagine an ordinary parish church during the Matins of Great Saturday, with the singing of the troparion “The Noble Joseph…”. If, instead of the familiar “Bulgarian Chant,” something entirely different is heard – even something pleasant to the ear – how will the congregation react? This also applies to the irmoi “The Lord is My Helper and Protector” or “The Red Sea Waters,” the stichera of Holy Pascha, and many texts of the Triodion and the Great Feasts. The reaction of the majority of parishioners would likely be negative. There are certain compositions, chants, and melodies that have become an organic, integral part of the liturgical tradition of Russian Orthodoxy. In my view, it is unacceptable to abandon the Octoechos in its current and familiar forms, which took shape in the 19th century in St. Petersburg and Moscow. What may be seen as triviality in secular music becomes a necessary quality in liturgical music, where tradition is valued and required.
Alongside the challenges of forming a repertoire, choir directors often face the question of how a particular hymn should sound: whether the ensemble in its current composition can competently perform the piece, and what nuances—such as tempo, volume, and tessitura—should be considered. In my opinion, the most common mistake is the mismatch between the composition and the characteristics or abilities of the ensemble. This is not always due to a lack of professionalism. For example, consider a choir made up of eight musically educated individuals with good vocal abilities, and then the director decides to perform works by D. Bortnyansky, A. Vedel, or S. Rachmaninov, whose textures are designed for a large choir of more than 20 people. As practice shows, the result will likely be hurried, shrill, and far from the reverence required for church singing. Therefore, before suggesting a hymn for rehearsal and inclusion in the repertoire, the choir director must have a clear understanding of the size of the ensemble for which the composer wrote, what performance characteristics were intended in the original edition, and it is essential to realistically and objectively assess the capabilities of the choir. Unjustified ambitions should be avoided. The number and professional training of the choir must always be considered when selecting pieces. It is far better to sing something simple, “traditional,” with quality, harmony, and coordination than to unpleasantly surprise the faithful with musical experiments.
Another relevant issue is the musical inconsistency and eclecticism of singing during the Divine Liturgy and All-Night Vigil due to the lack of harmonic unity and the mixing of genres. During one service, it is not uncommon to hear both classical-style composer works with elements of baroque, unison “Only-begotten Son,” the Cherubic Hymn in monastic chant, and a “Byzantine” Zadostoynik. Undoubtedly, such questionable diversity does not contribute to creating a prayerful atmosphere. However, melodic unity should not be achieved at the cost of narrowing or impoverishing the repertoire. Different compositions may be present in the Liturgy and All-Night Vigil, but the main focus should be on maintaining a meaningful, musical, and tonal unity.
It is important to exercise caution in favoring certain chants or compositions, labeling them as canonical and truly spiritual, while declaring others as non-liturgical. We should not frame the issue as allowing the works of some composers while rejecting those of others. Every composition must be considered independently of the author’s name. The name of a renowned composer should not overshadow the content. Even among the most famous church composers, there are works that are clearly weak from a liturgical perspective, while among lesser-known composers, one can sometimes find true masterpieces.
In conclusion, I would like to say that the key to mastering the art of choir directing lies in years of diligent study of traditions and mastering the specifics of this craft. “Talent is certainly a great quality in a person, but one must work tirelessly throughout life with the mind, heart, and hands,” said F.I. Shalyapin.
Let me wish all of us fruitful work, blessed success, and creative inspiration! Thank you for your attention!
Main
Login or register, to write a comment!
Your comment has been successfully added and is currently being reviewed by the site administration