Mass in F

[Charles Z.]

The BBC is now playing the Mass in F. Someow I've never gotten around
to hearing this work before. Very interestingly, it has the solemn
specific feeling of the B Minor Mass about it, rather than a cantata,
showing that Bach had a special style reserved for a mass. Yet another
wonderful masterpiece with some achingly beautiful chromatic writing.

Where does it end !?!!

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Charles Z.
The BBC is now playing the Mass in F. Someow I've never gotten around
to hearing this work before. Very interestingly, it has the solemn
specific feeling of the B Minor Mass about it, rather than a cantata,
showing that Bach had a special style reserved for a mass. Yet another
wonderful masterpiece with some achingly beautiful chromatic writing.
Where does it end !?!!

Sorry, but the Mass in F major was pulled mostly from Cantata sources.
However, the Kyrie may have been an original composition. The four
short Masses that Bach wrote were mostly pulled from his Cantatas. 83%
of the movements from the Missa are from known Cantata precedents. He
made alterations on many of these movements, but they weren't composed
from scratch.

Still, I am a great admirer of the Missas. Latin is a much more
musical language than German. Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Jimmy Boy

[Sybrand Bakker]

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

This is the old prejudice that generations and generations have been
repeating over and over again, without even evaluating the poetry, and
comparing it the other similar poetry of the same time.
Did you ever evaluate the poetry of Telemann's Passions or of the
so-called Brockes Passion?
Did you ever evaluate which theological themes the cantata poetry is
discussing?
Actually, in the context of it's time, there is nothing wrong with the
poetry of Bach cantatas. That we don't like it anymore, and do not
subscribe anymore to the religions concepts of Orthodox Lutheranism is
a completely different story. Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

This is the old prejudice that generations and generations have been
repeating over and over again, without even evaluating the poetry, and
comparing it the other similar poetry of the same time.
Did you ever evaluate the poetry of Telemann's Passions or of the
so-called Brockes Passion?
Did you ever evaluate which theological themes the cantata poetry is
discussing?
Actually, in the context of it's time, there is nothing wrong with the
poetry of Bach cantatas. That we don't like it anymore, and do not
subscribe anymore to the religions concepts of Orthodox Lutheranism is
a completely different story. Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.
Sybrand Bakker

This old prejudice started with Spitta as near as I can tell.
Considering that Bach is probably the greatest musical genius who ever
lived, I feel that saying the poet wasn't in Bach's class is hardly a
harsh criticsm. Just a fact, we didn't have a Shakespere or Goethe to
pair with Bach's talent. I have read many books on the subject of
Bach's Cantatas. Many of the librettos are less than stellar. If you
wish examples, I could provide many. When Bach had a good text, he
produced great Cantatas.

Also, I understand Othodox Lutherianism and can study the texts for
content. However, I have to lean to native and fluent German speakers
to evaluate the artistic merit of Bach's librettos. As near as I can
tell, sometimes he had good ones and other times he had lesser ones.
The cycle of chorale Cantatas probably were a result of his problem of
finding suitable texts.

As a native speaker, you can probably speak better on the quality of
the texts. I am only repeating what I have read from different
sources. Personally, I find German somewhat difficult to sing at
times. I would prefer one of the Romance languages for singing.

Regards,
Jimmy Boy

[pilo_]

X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.
Sybrand Bakker

Um, he's expressing an opinion. Relax. Your authority does
not extend to dictating the tastes of others.

[John Briggs]

Post by pilo_
X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.

Um, he's expressing an opinion. Relax. Your authority does
not extend to dictating the tastes of others.

Except that he's barely expressing an opinion - rather parrotting
conventional ideas without thinking.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by John Briggs

Post by pilo_
X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.

Um, he's expressing an opinion. Relax. Your authority does
not extend to dictating the tastes of others.

Except that he's barely expressing an opinion - rather parrotting
conventional ideas without thinking.
--
John Briggs

So what is your "learned" and unconventional opinion?

Jimmy Boy

[John Briggs]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by pilo_
X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.

Um, he's expressing an opinion. Relax. Your authority does
not extend to dictating the tastes of others.

Except that he's barely expressing an opinion - rather parrotting
conventional ideas without thinking.

So what is your "learned" and unconventional opinion?

Look, I'm no friend on Sybrand - I'm as ready to criticise him as the next
man - but he's right on this one.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by pilo_
X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.

Consequently, dismissing the poetry in
the fashion you did, is both unfair and unjustified. Quite likely,
when you really studied the subjects I mention above, you wouldn't
post this negative comments. They are fully unjustified.

Um, he's expressing an opinion. Relax. Your authority does
not extend to dictating the tastes of others.

Except that he's barely expressing an opinion - rather parrotting
conventional ideas without thinking.

So what is your "learned" and unconventional opinion?

Look, I'm no friend on Sybrand - I'm as ready to criticise him as the next
man - but he's right on this one.
--
John Briggs

You need to read more carefully. I said in the original post:

"... Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music. "


Bach was easily one of the greatest musical geniuses who ever lived.
The poets who wrote the texts to Bach Cantata's were at best talented
amateurs.

Are you telling me that these collection of poets are among the
greatest of all time?

I don't think so.

Jimmy Boy

[Sybrand Bakker]

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Bach was easily one of the greatest musical geniuses who ever lived.
The poets who wrote the texts to Bach Cantata's were at best talented
amateurs.
Are you telling me that these collection of poets are among the
greatest of all time?

Did you seriously study this poetry?
Did you try to identify where the imagery of this poetry is coming
from?
Did you try to identify the theological themes in this poetry (for
instance 'Am Abend, das es kuehle war' or 'Buss und Reu, knirscht das
Sundenherz entzwei'?)
Are you aware of the current verdict of German literature researchers
on those poets?
Are you aware that this is a very great chance Bach himself
contributed to this poetry?
So why are you posting opinions you can't sustain?

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[John_Sturmond]

X-No-Archive: Yes

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Did you seriously study this poetry?
Did you try to identify where the imagery of this poetry is coming
from?
Did you try to identify the theological themes in this poetry (for
instance 'Am Abend, das es kuehle war' or 'Buss und Reu, knirscht das
Sundenherz entzwei'?)
Are you aware of the current verdict of German literature researchers
on those poets?
Are you aware that this is a very great chance Bach himself
contributed to this poetry?
So why are you posting opinions you can't sustain?

So why don't you give him a chance to ANSWER
before you go off half-cocked?

What an arrogant, holier-than-thou twit you are.

Does anyone like you? Besides your mother?

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Bach was easily one of the greatest musical geniuses who ever lived.
The poets who wrote the texts to Bach Cantata's were at best talented
amateurs.
Are you telling me that these collection of poets are among the
greatest of all time?

Did you seriously study this poetry?

Of course not. The texts of Bach's Cantatas are only

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Did you try to identify where the imagery of this poetry is coming
from?
Did you try to identify the theological themes in this poetry (for
instance 'Am Abend, das es kuehle war' or 'Buss und Reu, knirscht das
Sundenherz entzwei'?)

This is from Picander. One of the better poets Bach had at his
disposal. However, the text is from the St. Matthew's Passion. I was
only talking about the Cantatas.

The entire text is:

Buß und Reu
Knirscht das Sündenherz entzwei,
Dass die Tropfen meiner Zähren
Angenehme Spezerei,
Treuer Jesu, dir gebären

English translation:

Repentance and remorse
gnash my sinful heart in two,
that my teardrops
might bring forth sweet spices
for you, faithful Jesus

This is some of the best which Bach had to work with. The quality of
the Cantatas are another matter.

I will give a counter example the opening chorale from BWV 126:

Erhalt uns, Herr, bei deinem Wort,
Und steur' des Papsts und Türken Mord,
[Und steur' Satans und Teufels Mord,]*
Dei Jesum Christum, deinen Sohn,
Stürzen wollen von seinem Thron.
("Erhalt uns, Herr, bei deinem Wort," verse 1)

It doesn't need a commentary. Just an illustration that Bach Cantata
texts were sometimes good and sometimes bad. I would never group the
Passions with the Cantatas.

Another example from the Cantatas is the beginning of BWV 199( English
translation):

"My heart is swimming in blood because the hatching of my sins makes me
a monster in God's holy eyes."

This is one of Bach's better Cantatas. However, the compressed
presentation of radical images one upon the other seems turgid and even
ridiculous. It hardly deserves to be enshrined as one of the pinnacles
of German poety, which can be said about Bach music.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Are you aware of the current verdict of German literature researchers
on those poets?

Why not name these poets?

Wiemar: mostly Salomon Franck and secondly Georg Christian Lehms
Koethen: Christian Friedich Hunold
Leipzig: Christiane Mariane von Ziegler and Christian Friedich
Henrici( Picander )

Of these, Franck is often considered to be the best of Bach's text
writers. Picander maybe next but only 9 Cantatas survive which Bach
used. The vast majority of the surviving Bach Cantatas had texts which
were written by other poets. These poets are considered lessors to
Franck and Picander. Consequently, Bach's Cantata texts were written
by less than the best of which he had available.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Are you aware that this is a very great chance Bach himself
contributed to this poetry?

Of course.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
So why are you posting opinions you can't sustain?

Why are your arguments nothing but smoke and mirrors? You have
provided little supporting information to your suppositions. You throw
out a few rhetorical questions and then assume you have made your
point.

Jimmy Boy

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Bach was easily one of the greatest musical geniuses who ever lived.
The poets who wrote the texts to Bach Cantata's were at best talented
amateurs.
Are you telling me that these collection of poets are among the
greatest of all time?

Did you seriously study this poetry?

Of course not. The texts of Bach's Cantatas are only

The texts are only of interest to me because Bach set them to music.
If I want religious guidance I study the Bible. I am not interested in
studying poetry except when I am required. My studying of the texts
of the Cantatas has never been a main focus merely an ancillary result.
However, it doesn't mean I am ignorant of the quality of Bach's text,
simply uninterested.

Jimmy Boy

[Charles Z.]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Charles Z.
The BBC is now playing the Mass in F. Someow I've never gotten around
to hearing this work before. Very interestingly, it has the solemn
specific feeling of the B Minor Mass about it, rather than a cantata,
showing that Bach had a special style reserved for a mass. Yet another
wonderful masterpiece with some achingly beautiful chromatic writing.
Where does it end !?!!

Sorry, but the Mass in F major was pulled mostly from Cantata sources.
However, the Kyrie may have been an original composition. The four
short Masses that Bach wrote were mostly pulled from his Cantatas. 83%
of the movements from the Missa are from known Cantata precedents. He
made alterations on many of these movements, but they weren't composed
from scratch.
Still, I am a great admirer of the Missas. Latin is a much more
musical language than German. Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.
Jimmy Boy

Large parts of the B Minor Mass were also from earlier cantatas. But in
reworking materials for a Mass, Bach somehow added a sort of special
mystical quality. Also he could choose movements that reflected what he
was trying to express. I still maintain that the B Minor and F Masses
have a certain painful, reflective and unique feeling that is somewhat
different from what comes through in his Lutheran music.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Charles Z.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Charles Z.
The BBC is now playing the Mass in F. Someow I've never gotten around
to hearing this work before. Very interestingly, it has the solemn
specific feeling of the B Minor Mass about it, rather than a cantata,
showing that Bach had a special style reserved for a mass. Yet another
wonderful masterpiece with some achingly beautiful chromatic writing.
Where does it end !?!!

Sorry, but the Mass in F major was pulled mostly from Cantata sources.
However, the Kyrie may have been an original composition. The four
short Masses that Bach wrote were mostly pulled from his Cantatas. 83%
of the movements from the Missa are from known Cantata precedents. He
made alterations on many of these movements, but they weren't composed
from scratch.
Still, I am a great admirer of the Missas. Latin is a much more
musical language than German. Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's weren't
on par with his music.
Jimmy Boy

Large parts of the B Minor Mass were also from earlier cantatas. But in
reworking materials for a Mass, Bach somehow added a sort of special
mystical quality. Also he could choose movements that reflected what he
was trying to express. I still maintain that the B Minor and F Masses
have a certain painful, reflective and unique feeling that is somewhat
different from what comes through in his Lutheran music.

The early scholars of Bach thought that the short German Masses to be
parody works and didn't regard them very highly. The Mass in B Minor
was always highly revered by these same critics. The process in which
Bach created his Mass in B minor was different. There was much more
reworking of the "parody movements" and more original material was
created explicitedly for the work. The Missa's are almost entirely
parody works. The overall quality and structure of the work is
monumental. Perhaps the only weakness in the Mass is the bass aria "Et
in Spiritum Sanctum". The Luthern Bach interpreted this as an
individual profession of faith. Normally, this section is spoken in
mass( not pun intended ) by the congregation. A large choral movement
would have been more appropriate.

Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime. The reason Bach was writing a Catholic Mass was
to curry the favor of the King Fredirick. He wanted the King to help
him with his personal problems with the town council. Bach sent the
first two sections to the King as a demonstration of his skills. He
then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.


Jimmy Boy

[John Briggs]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Charles Z.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Charles Z.
The BBC is now playing the Mass in F. Someow I've never gotten
around to hearing this work before. Very interestingly, it has the
solemn specific feeling of the B Minor Mass about it, rather than
a cantata, showing that Bach had a special style reserved for a
mass. Yet another wonderful masterpiece with some achingly
beautiful chromatic writing.
Where does it end !?!!

Sorry, but the Mass in F major was pulled mostly from Cantata
sources. However, the Kyrie may have been an original composition.
The four short Masses that Bach wrote were mostly pulled from his
Cantatas. 83% of the movements from the Missa are from known
Cantata precedents. He made alterations on many of these
movements, but they weren't composed from scratch.
Still, I am a great admirer of the Missas. Latin is a much more
musical language than German. Also, Bach's Cantata libretto's
weren't on par with his music.

Large parts of the B Minor Mass were also from earlier cantatas. But
in reworking materials for a Mass, Bach somehow added a sort of
special mystical quality. Also he could choose movements that
reflected what he was trying to express. I still maintain that the B
Minor and F Masses have a certain painful, reflective and unique
feeling that is somewhat different from what comes through in his
Lutheran music.

As they *are* Lutheran music, that statement is particularly fatuous.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The early scholars of Bach thought that the short German Masses to be
parody works and didn't regard them very highly. The Mass in B Minor
was always highly revered by these same critics. The process in which
Bach created his Mass in B minor was different. There was much more
reworking of the "parody movements" and more original material was
created explicitedly for the work. The Missa's are almost entirely
parody works.

Umm - you do know that Bach largely assembled his B Minor Mass rather than
wrote it? The Kyrie and Gloria *are* a Lutheran Mass.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The overall quality and structure of the work is
monumental. Perhaps the only weakness in the Mass is the bass aria
"Et in Spiritum Sanctum". The Luthern Bach interpreted this as an
individual profession of faith. Normally, this section is spoken in
mass( not pun intended ) by the congregation.

You may have to explain this mysterious statement. Why do you suppose Bach
might have been thinking of what you consider to be a 'normal' Mass?

Post by j***@yahoo.com
A large choral movement would have been more appropriate.

Of course, Bach's choir consisted of about 4 or 5 soloists...

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime.

That's probably because it was unperformable liturgically by anyone! Quite
apart from its length, the absence of one of the invocations in the Agnus
Dei would have been a problem for Roman Catholics.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The reason Bach was writing a Catholic Mass was to curry the favor of the
King Fredirick.

You seem awfully certain that Bach was writing (at any stage) a Catholic
Mass. Compiling one from existing Lutheran pieces isn't the most
straightforward of approaches.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He wanted the King to help him with his personal problems with the town
council. Bach sent the first two sections to the King as a demonstration
of his skills.

Well, no. He sent the first two sections because they constituted a
Lutheran Mass. This may seem an odd gesture to a Catholic king, but the
Dresden court was Lutheran - and more to the point, so was the Royal Chapel.
Bach expected it to be performed there.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.

You seem awfully certain of the answers to questions which still perplex the
best minds. It is now thought that the most likely answer is that Bach
complied the existing sections, and then completed the Mass Ordinary,
because he saw himself in the tradition of composers from previous
centuries. He was thinking of his place in music history, and summing up
his life's work. He never expected it to be performed.

[Sybrand Bakker]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 18:29:37 GMT, "John Briggs"

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He wanted the King to help him with his personal problems with the town
council. Bach sent the first two sections to the King as a demonstration
of his skills.

Well, no. He sent the first two sections because they constituted a
Lutheran Mass. This may seem an odd gesture to a Catholic king, but the
Dresden court was Lutheran - and more to the point, so was the Royal Chapel.
Bach expected it to be performed there.

He submitted those two sections to obtain the honorary title of Court
Composer, which he eventually got, without the Mass being performed.

Bear in mind, with exception of the Credo, all movements of the
Ordinary were regularly sung in Latin in Lutheran services in Leipzig,
during Bach's lifetime.

Also bear in mind, the king, which was August III,'the Strong' of
Saxony, so NOT Friedrich of Prussia, employed Johann David Heinichen,
who was Lutheran.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.

You seem awfully certain of the answers to questions which still perplex the
best minds. It is now thought that the most likely answer is that Bach
complied the existing sections, and then completed the Mass Ordinary,
because he saw himself in the tradition of composers from previous
centuries. He was thinking of his place in music history, and summing up
his life's work. He never expected it to be performed.

I agree with Mr. Briggs Bach completed the Mass, as an exercise.
Many parts of it are also written in the 'stile antico', the prima
prattica, of Palestrina etc. Just to note the thesis of Christoph
Wolff, from 1968, if I recall correctly, deals with the stile antico
in Bach and discusses large parts of the B-minor Mass.
Christoph Wolff, in his Bach biography, considers the B-minor Mass to
be Bach's *last* work, so NOT the AoF.

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[John Briggs]

Post by Sybrand Bakker
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 18:29:37 GMT, "John Briggs"

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He wanted the King to help him with his personal problems with the
town council. Bach sent the first two sections to the King as a
demonstration of his skills.

Well, no. He sent the first two sections because they constituted a
Lutheran Mass. This may seem an odd gesture to a Catholic king, but
the Dresden court was Lutheran - and more to the point, so was the
Royal Chapel. Bach expected it to be performed there.

He submitted those two sections to obtain the honorary title of Court
Composer, which he eventually got, without the Mass being performed.

Yes, although he intended (and expected) it to be performed.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Bear in mind, with exception of the Credo, all movements of the
Ordinary were regularly sung in Latin in Lutheran services in Leipzig,
during Bach's lifetime.

Yes, although not at the same time, of course. And the Credo could be
'chanted' in Latin by the choir on certain occasions. (And there is some
evidence of Bach performing polyphonic Credo settings.) It seems that the
Osanna, Benedictus and Agnus Dei would only have been chanted (not sung
polyphonically).

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Also bear in mind, the king, which was August III,'the Strong' of
Saxony, so NOT Friedrich of Prussia, employed Johann David Heinichen,
who was Lutheran.

He was Elector Friedrich August II of Saxony, but (confusingly) King
Augustus III of Poland.

Post by Sybrand Bakker

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.

You seem awfully certain of the answers to questions which still
perplex the best minds. It is now thought that the most likely
answer is that Bach complied the existing sections, and then
completed the Mass Ordinary, because he saw himself in the tradition
of composers from previous centuries. He was thinking of his place
in music history, and summing up his life's work. He never expected
it to be performed.

I agree with Mr. Briggs Bach completed the Mass, as an exercise.
Many parts of it are also written in the 'stile antico', the prima
prattica, of Palestrina etc. Just to note the thesis of Christoph
Wolff, from 1968, if I recall correctly, deals with the stile antico
in Bach and discusses large parts of the B-minor Mass.
Christoph Wolff, in his Bach biography, considers the B-minor Mass to
be Bach's *last* work, so NOT the AoF.

[Tom Hens]

Sybrand Bakker <***@sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote...

<snip>

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Bear in mind, with exception of the Credo, all movements of the
Ordinary were regularly sung in Latin in Lutheran services in Leipzig,
during Bach's lifetime.

To add: in the hymn books in use in Leipzig during Bach's tenure, the text
of the Ordinary was printed in two columns, with the Latin side-by-side
with Luther's German translations. So everybody in the congregation (well,
everybody who could read, anyway) would have been as familiar with the
Latin version as the German one.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
Also bear in mind, the king, which was August III,'the Strong' of
Saxony, so NOT Friedrich of Prussia, employed Johann David Heinichen,
who was Lutheran.

August was also someone who as the ruler of an officially Lutheran country,
Saxony, had nominally converted to Catholicism for political purposes, so
he could be elected King of Poland. He wasn't really in any position to
impose petty rules about adherence to one Christian sect or another.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by John Briggs
Umm - you do know that Bach largely assembled his B Minor Mass rather than
wrote it? The Kyrie and Gloria *are* a Lutheran Mass.

I think I mentioned this later.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The overall quality and structure of the work is
monumental. Perhaps the only weakness in the Mass is the bass aria
"Et in Spiritum Sanctum". The Luthern Bach interpreted this as an
individual profession of faith. Normally, this section is spoken in
mass( not pun intended ) by the congregation.

You may have to explain this mysterious statement. Why do you suppose Bach
might have been thinking of what you consider to be a 'normal' Mass?

The Lutheran mass was just the first two sections. The five section
Mass is what I consider a normal Mass.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
A large choral movement would have been more appropriate.

Of course, Bach's choir consisted of about 4 or 5 soloists...

If he ,as you say, didn't intend on a performance, how can you say that
it was for only 4 or 5 soloists? Look as one the movements in the
Magnificat - Omnes Generationes. Can you imagine this being performed
by soloists?

I don't think Bach intended his chorales to be only 4 or 5 soloists.
This has been a recent assertation by certain scholars. I have argued
this ad nauseum.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime.

That's probably because it was unperformable liturgically by anyone! Quite
apart from its length, the absence of one of the invocations in the Agnus
Dei would have been a problem for Roman Catholics.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The reason Bach was writing a Catholic Mass was to curry the favor of the
King Fredirick.

You seem awfully certain that Bach was writing (at any stage) a Catholic
Mass. Compiling one from existing Lutheran pieces isn't the most
straightforward of approaches.

It was not a compilation. He reworked much of the source materials
extensively and added other movements as needed. There was overall
form and design - not just a cobblestone of his greatest hits.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He wanted the King to help him with his personal problems with the town
council. Bach sent the first two sections to the King as a demonstration
of his skills.

Well, no. He sent the first two sections because they constituted a
Lutheran Mass. This may seem an odd gesture to a Catholic king, but the
Dresden court was Lutheran - and more to the point, so was the Royal Chapel.
Bach expected it to be performed there.

Your explantion doesn't explain why he sent the Missa to the King. The
reason had to do with something about trying to please the King.

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.

You seem awfully certain of the answers to questions which still perplex the
best minds. It is now thought that the most likely answer is that Bach
complied the existing sections, and then completed the Mass Ordinary,
because he saw himself in the tradition of composers from previous
centuries. He was thinking of his place in music history, and summing up
his life's work. He never expected it to be performed.

I think my explantion to be reasonable. The time frame in which he
started to finish the B Minor Mass coincided with the known events. He
received his appointment before he completed the Mass. Why he
completed the Mass is complete speculation. It is also possible he was
sending latin works to Dresden to be performed and was receiving
renumeration. This would be a more practical reason. I think the idea
that "Bach saw his place in music history" very speculative. His music
had passed from fashion. He probably realized that the next generation
didn't find his music appealing. He was quickly becoming forgotten.
In this enviroment, he took up the unfinished Mass and completed it.
It appears to be one of the few pieces he wrote that didn't have a
distinct purpose. This is why it is my belief that he wanted to use
the Mass Ordinary to curry favor with the King. This would be the
motivation to start such a large project. Why he completed it, is
unkown. However, I have read much conjecture on the subject.

I was expecting some comments. The whole "history of the Mass" is a
controversial subject.

Jimmy Boy

[John Briggs]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs
Umm - you do know that Bach largely assembled his B Minor Mass
rather than wrote it? The Kyrie and Gloria *are* a Lutheran Mass.

I think I mentioned this later.

You didn't, actually.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The overall quality and structure of the work is
monumental. Perhaps the only weakness in the Mass is the bass aria
"Et in Spiritum Sanctum". The Luthern Bach interpreted this as an
individual profession of faith. Normally, this section is spoken
in mass( not pun intended ) by the congregation.

You may have to explain this mysterious statement. Why do you
suppose Bach might have been thinking of what you consider to be a
'normal' Mass?

The Lutheran mass was just the first two sections. The five section
Mass is what I consider a normal Mass.

But a polyphonic Mass Ordinary has nothing to do with a 'congregation'.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
A large choral movement would have been more appropriate.

Of course, Bach's choir consisted of about 4 or 5 soloists...

If he ,as you say, didn't intend on a performance, how can you say
that it was for only 4 or 5 soloists? Look as one the movements in
the Magnificat - Omnes Generationes. Can you imagine this being
performed by soloists?

I don't need to imagine it - if you mean BWV 243, I'm listening to a CD
where Paul McCreesh uses only 5 soloists, SSATB (Archiv 469 531-2).

Coming back to the B Minor Mass, the Osanna in Excelsis and Dona nobis pacem
are for double choir SATB/SATB. The Kyrie and Gloria are SSATB (one re-used
section SATB), as is the Credo. The Sanctus is SSAATB. There are
solos/duets for S1, S2, S1/S2, S1/A, S1/T, A, T, B. Modern performances
tend to cheat by using four soloists - they use a Mezzo who can do both S2
and A (and a four-part choir, which sometimes divides oddly!) How Bach
would have disposed eight singers in a complete performance is anyone's
guess.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
I don't think Bach intended his chorales to be only 4 or 5 soloists.
This has been a recent assertation by certain scholars. I have argued
this ad nauseum.

The chorales are intended for larger forces - the chorales of the St Matthew
Passion sound wonderful with eight singers.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime.

That's probably because it was unperformable liturgically by anyone!
Quite apart from its length, the absence of one of the invocations
in the Agnus Dei would have been a problem for Roman Catholics.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The reason Bach was writing a Catholic Mass was to curry the favor
of the King Fredirick.

You seem awfully certain that Bach was writing (at any stage) a
Catholic Mass. Compiling one from existing Lutheran pieces isn't
the most straightforward of approaches.

It was not a compilation. He reworked much of the source materials
extensively and added other movements as needed. There was overall
form and design - not just a cobblestone of his greatest hits.

Let's see, shall we? The Kyrie and Gloria are the Missa of 1733. The Credo
(Symbolum Nicenum) has probably been re-worked, but is conceived as an
independent work. The Sanctus is adapted from one of 1724, and in a
separate manuscript. The last part (Osanna/Benedictus/Agnus Dei/Dona Nobis
Pacem) was new.

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He wanted the King to help him with his personal problems with the
town council. Bach sent the first two sections to the King as a
demonstration of his skills.

Well, no. He sent the first two sections because they constituted a
Lutheran Mass. This may seem an odd gesture to a Catholic king, but
the Dresden court was Lutheran - and more to the point, so was the
Royal Chapel. Bach expected it to be performed there.

Your explantion doesn't explain why he sent the Missa to the King.
The reason had to do with something about trying to please the King.

Yes, of course. But he was pleasing him with a Lutheran Mass. (The Gloria
is the Lutheran variant.)

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by j***@yahoo.com
He then started to finish the Mass in hopes it would lead to an
appointment from the King. Anyway, he received his sponsership from
the King before he completed the Mass. This explains why he used
previous material in an effort to speed the completion. However, it
doesn't explain why he completed the Mass after he no longer needed it.

You seem awfully certain of the answers to questions which still
perplex the best minds. It is now thought that the most likely
answer is that Bach complied the existing sections, and then
completed the Mass Ordinary, because he saw himself in the tradition
of composers from previous centuries. He was thinking of his place
in music history, and summing up his life's work. He never expected
it to be performed.

I think my explantion to be reasonable. The time frame in which he
started to finish the B Minor Mass coincided with the known events.
He received his appointment before he completed the Mass.

1736. Long before he finished the Mass. The Credo could have been performed
(in some form) in the late 1730s.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Why he
completed the Mass is complete speculation. It is also possible he
was sending latin works to Dresden to be performed and was receiving
renumeration. This would be a more practical reason. I think the
idea that "Bach saw his place in music history" very speculative.
His music had passed from fashion. He probably realized that the
next generation didn't find his music appealing. He was quickly
becoming forgotten.

He was looking back, not forward. He performed the Kyrie and Gloria of
Palestrina's Missa sine nomine in 1742.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
In this enviroment, he took up the unfinished
Mass and completed it. It appears to be one of the few pieces he
wrote that didn't have a distinct purpose. This is why it is my
belief that he wanted to use the Mass Ordinary to curry favor with
the King. This would be the motivation to start such a large
project. Why he completed it, is unkown. However, I have read much
conjecture on the subject.

He completed the Mass in about 1749.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
I was expecting some comments. The whole "history of the Mass" is a
controversial subject.

But some things are clearer than others.

[Sybrand Bakker]

Post by j***@yahoo.com
I think the idea
that "Bach saw his place in music history" very speculative. His music
had passed from fashion. He probably realized that the next generation
didn't find his music appealing.

Composers in that time didn't compose for posterity. The first
composer to think about posterity was Mozart, maybe Beethoven.
That we have so many works at all by Bach is for 2 reasons
- The Thomasschule wasn't interested in it, and allowed it to go to
the family
- Both Wilhelm Friedemann and Carl Philipp Emmanuel were composers,
and tried to put their fathers music to their own use.

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[Tom Hens]

Post by j***@yahoo.com
The early scholars of Bach thought that the short German Masses to be
parody works and didn't regard them very highly.

They didn't "think" that, it's a demonstrable fact. The only parts for
which no extant parody source exists are BWV 233/2 and /3, and BWV 234/1
and /3, but even those are clearly not original compositions but parody
from lost works.

<snip>

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Normally, this section is spoken in mass ( not pun intended ) by the
congregation.

"Normally"? Do you by any chance mean "in the church I happen to belong
to"?

Post by j***@yahoo.com
A large choral movement would have been more appropriate.

Too bad you weren't around at the time to offer Bach this sound advice.
What an idiot he must have been.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime.

If by "interesting" you mean "something that has been pointed out in just
about every booklet that comes with any LP or CD recording, and just about
every program booklet for any concert performance, for at least several
decades now", you are of course absolutely correct.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Tom Hens
snip

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Normally, this section is spoken in mass ( not pun intended ) by the
congregation.

"Normally"? Do you by any chance mean "in the church I happen to belong
to"?

I mean in the Catholic Churchs I have been in.

Post by Tom Hens

Post by j***@yahoo.com
A large choral movement would have been more appropriate.

Too bad you weren't around at the time to offer Bach this sound advice.
What an idiot he must have been.

I think you miss the point entirely. The issue is Bach Lutherean
interpretation versus the Catholic point. It is salient that this
movement has the text of " I believe in one holy catholic church. You
must be somewhat ignorant about the theological implications of Bach's
music. Also, I am not the first to notice this point.

Post by Tom Hens

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Interestingly, the Mass appears to never have been perfomed by Bach
during his lifetime.

If by "interesting" you mean "something that has been pointed out in just
about every booklet that comes with any LP or CD recording, and just about
every program booklet for any concert performance, for at least several
decades now", you are of course absolutely correct.

You are breaming with sacarsm. I am obviously not as brillant as you
are. It is intresting to me that he sent such effort on a work which
may not have had a performance in mind. Bach seems to be a very
practical person to me. It looks to be out of character for him to
work on a purely theoretical work.

Jimmy Boy

[Ben Crick]

Post by Charles Z.
I still maintain that the B Minor and F Masses
have a certain painful, reflective and unique feeling that is somewhat
different from what comes through in his Lutheran music.

The Masses of Bach are Lutheran. The congregational parts of the Mass
do not deal with matters in dispute at the Reformation, and the Mass
continued to be said or sung as before in Lutheran churches.

Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Ben

[Charles Z.]

Post by Ben Crick

Post by Charles Z.
I still maintain that the B Minor and F Masses
have a certain painful, reflective and unique feeling that is somewhat
different from what comes through in his Lutheran music.

The Masses of Bach are Lutheran. The congregational parts of the Mass
do not deal with matters in dispute at the Reformation, and the Mass
continued to be said or sung as before in Lutheran churches.
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...
Ben
--
_ __________________________________________
/ \._._ |_ _ _ /' Orpheus Internet Services
\_/| |_)| |(/_|_|_> / 'Internet for Everyone'
_______ | ___________./ http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington on sea, Kent CT7 9TD (UK)
Acorn RPC700 Kinetic RO4.03 and Castle Iyonix X100 RO 5.06 Ethernet
* Having truth decay? Brush up on your Bible.

I stand corrected.

[Simon Crouch]

Post by Ben Crick
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine" - are
you thinking of another document?

Simon.

[Ben Crick]

Post by Simon Crouch
Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine" -
are you thinking of another document?

No; I was thinking of paragraph 11 of Pius X's /Motu Proprio/ 1903.
It gives instructions that settings of the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo,
Sanctus, Benedictus, Agnus Dei should be composed as continuous
pieces, and not be split up clause by clause, each clause being a
complete musical composition on its own.

Beethoven's Mass in D conforms to this; Bach's Mass in B minor
does not.

The recension I have is in Burns, Oates and Washburne, /Catholic
Church Music,/ 1933. I don't have the full text; only snippets
and summaries.

Sorry not to be more precise.

Ben

[John Briggs]

Post by Ben Crick

Post by Simon Crouch
Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le
Sollecitudine" - are you thinking of another document?

No; I was thinking of paragraph 11 of Pius X's /Motu Proprio/ 1903.
It gives instructions that settings of the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo,
Sanctus, Benedictus, Agnus Dei should be composed as continuous
pieces, and not be split up clause by clause, each clause being a
complete musical composition on its own.
Beethoven's Mass in D conforms to this; Bach's Mass in B minor
does not.

Yes, but he doesn't mention either Bach or the B Minor Mass.

[Simon Crouch]

Post by Ben Crick

Post by Simon Crouch
Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine" -
are you thinking of another document?

No; I was thinking of paragraph 11 of Pius X's /Motu Proprio/ 1903.
It gives instructions that settings of the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo,
Sanctus, Benedictus, Agnus Dei should be composed as continuous
pieces, and not be split up clause by clause, each clause being a
complete musical composition on its own.
Beethoven's Mass in D conforms to this; Bach's Mass in B minor
does not.

Take note of para 22: The settings of the Gloria & Credo should also be
relatively short. That's Beethoven (& Mozart and many more) dealt with!

Pius's intention was to ensure that the mass was a liturgical act rather
than an excuse for a concert - his paradigms were the gregorian chant and
renaissance polyphony.

Post by Ben Crick
The recension I have is in Burns, Oates and Washburne, /Catholic
Church Music,/ 1933. I don't have the full text; only snippets
and summaries.

Full text at, for example, http://adoremus.org/MotuProprio.html

Simon.

[Tom Hens]

Post by Simon Crouch

Post by Ben Crick
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine" -
are you thinking of another document?

I think Ben Crick was merely referring to this ultra-reactionary pope's
condemnation of masses where the liturgical parts are broken up into
separate musical movements, as in the B-minor Mass. This means it can't be
used as a practical piece of Roman Catholic church music. But its sheer
length already assured its impractibility, anyway.

[John Briggs]

Post by Tom Hens

Post by Simon Crouch

Post by Ben Crick
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine"
- are you thinking of another document?

I think Ben Crick was merely referring to this ultra-reactionary
pope's condemnation of masses where the liturgical parts are broken
up into separate musical movements, as in the B-minor Mass. This
means it can't be used as a practical piece of Roman Catholic church
music. But its sheer length already assured its impractibility,
anyway.

Not to mention its slightly unCatholic text.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by John Briggs

Post by Tom Hens

Post by Simon Crouch

Post by Ben Crick
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le Sollecitudine"
- are you thinking of another document?

I think Ben Crick was merely referring to this ultra-reactionary
pope's condemnation of masses where the liturgical parts are broken
up into separate musical movements, as in the B-minor Mass. This
means it can't be used as a practical piece of Roman Catholic church
music. But its sheer length already assured its impractibility,
anyway.

Not to mention its slightly unCatholic text.
--
John Briggs

The structure of Bach's Mass in B Minor is based on the Roman Catholic
mass text. However, Bach's organization of the 27 movements reflects
his Protestant background. The traditional Catholic mass contains 5
major sections, while the movements in Bach's mass are grouped into 4
sections:

Catholic mass
Kyrie
Gloria
Credo
Sanctus (includes Osanna and Benedictus)
Agnus Dei

Bach's B-Minor Mass
Missa (includes Kyrie and Gloria)
Symbolum Nicenum (Credo)
Sanctus
Last section (Osanna, Benedictus, and Agnus Dei)

As shown above, Bach combined the Kyrie and Gloria into the Missa,
according to the common practice of that time. He renamed the Credo as
Symbolum Nicenum according to Lutheran tradition. Finally, the Osanna
and Benedictus, which appeared in the Sanctus section of the Catholic
mass was removed from the Sanctus by Bach and placed in the last
section of his mass. In summary, the text used in the B-Minor Mass is
the same as the traditional Catholic mass text, except that Bach
modified the grouping of individual movements. The original order of
individual movements,are retained.

reference: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~tan/bachbminor/struct.html

On the other hand, Wolf argued that the Mass was not a Catholic Mass,
but a universal one. He later goes on to suggest that maybe Bach was
writing for posterity. I don't agree with this but at this point it is
all a matter of conjecture.

On a side note, Bach taught Latin to the school boys. I might have
expected a few more Latin works from him.

Jimmy Boy

[John Briggs]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by John Briggs

Post by Tom Hens

Post by Simon Crouch

Post by Ben Crick
Pope Pius X in his /Motu Proprio/ of 1903 was particularly harsh
in his criticism of the Mass in B minor; so was the b minor a
"Roman" mass? hardly...

Um, Pius X didn't mention the b-minor mass in "Tra Le
Sollecitudine" - are you thinking of another document?

I think Ben Crick was merely referring to this ultra-reactionary
pope's condemnation of masses where the liturgical parts are broken
up into separate musical movements, as in the B-minor Mass. This
means it can't be used as a practical piece of Roman Catholic church
music. But its sheer length already assured its impractibility,
anyway.

Not to mention its slightly unCatholic text.

The structure of Bach's Mass in B Minor is based on the Roman Catholic
mass text. However, Bach's organization of the 27 movements reflects
his Protestant background. The traditional Catholic mass contains 5
major sections, while the movements in Bach's mass are grouped into 4
Catholic mass
Kyrie
Gloria
Credo
Sanctus (includes Osanna and Benedictus)
Agnus Dei
Bach's B-Minor Mass
Missa (includes Kyrie and Gloria)
Symbolum Nicenum (Credo)
Sanctus
Last section (Osanna, Benedictus, and Agnus Dei)
As shown above, Bach combined the Kyrie and Gloria into the Missa,
according to the common practice of that time. He renamed the Credo as
Symbolum Nicenum according to Lutheran tradition.

"Symbolum Nicenum" is just the Latin name for the Nicene Creed - as opposed
to "Symbolum Apostolorum" for Apostles' Creed.

Post by j***@yahoo.com
Finally, the Osanna
and Benedictus, which appeared in the Sanctus section of the Catholic
mass was removed from the Sanctus by Bach and placed in the last
section of his mass. In summary, the text used in the B-Minor Mass is
the same as the traditional Catholic mass text, except that Bach
modified the grouping of individual movements. The original order of
individual movements,are retained.
reference: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~tan/bachbminor/struct.html
On the other hand, Wolf argued that the Mass was not a Catholic Mass,
but a universal one. He later goes on to suggest that maybe Bach was
writing for posterity. I don't agree with this but at this point it
is all a matter of conjecture.

The Lutheran Gloria has the interpolated word "altissime". There are
supposed to be three invocations in the Agnus Dei. Now, "Agnus Dei qui
tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis" is a da capo, making it a trifle
difficult to count, but there is definitely an "Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata
mundi," missing before "Dona nobis pacem."

Post by j***@yahoo.com
On a side note, Bach taught Latin to the school boys. I might have
expected a few more Latin works from him.

No, he didn't teach Latin - that was one of the bones of contention with the
City Council.

[j***@yahoo.com]

snip...

Post by John Briggs
The Lutheran Gloria has the interpolated word "altissime". There are
supposed to be three invocations in the Agnus Dei. Now, "Agnus Dei qui
tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis" is a da capo, making it a trifle
difficult to count, but there is definitely an "Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata
mundi," missing before "Dona nobis pacem."

Post by j***@yahoo.com
On a side note, Bach taught Latin to the school boys. I might have
expected a few more Latin works from him.

No, he didn't teach Latin - that was one of the bones of contention with the
City Council.

It was part of his job description. Apparently he at some time pawned
this job off to a junior associate. The Town Council used this fact to
say that Bach was lazy! This may seem incredible to us, but people
back then were probably much harder working than we are today. Still
Bach was well versed in Latin.

Jimmy Boy

[Sybrand Bakker]

Post by j***@yahoo.com
It was part of his job description. Apparently he at some time pawned
this job off to a junior associate. The Town Council used this fact to
say that Bach was lazy!

And they were right in saying so. The Town Council wasn't interested
in having a Kapellmeister around, they only wanted a singing teacher.
Nothing more, nothing less.
To the duties of the Cantor belonged
- third in rank of the School
- teaching music
- teaching Latin
- teaching Catechism
- by turns, maintaining the order in the School

Bach dropped Latin and Catechism very soon after his arrival.

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[j***@yahoo.com]

snip

Post by Tom Hens
I think Ben Crick was merely referring to this ultra-reactionary pope's
condemnation of masses where the liturgical parts are broken up into
separate musical movements, as in the B-minor Mass. This means it can't be
used as a practical piece of Roman Catholic church music. But its sheer
length already assured its impractibility, anyway.

Church services in the Ukraine can easily run over 2 hours. Also, the
congregation spends much of the time standing because there are no
pews.

Western Catholics are getting soft ;-)

Jimmy Boy

[Charles Z.]

Re why Bach completed the B Minor Mass, he might have done it for
personal reasons, for a sense of completeness, of artistic fulfillment,
as his most complete testament to God, or all of these. An artist's
first repsonsibility is sometimes to the work istelf, and only
secondarily to its eventual function in the world. I do not claim this
is why he did it, only put it forward as a possiblility.

The sculptures of the east pediment of the Parthenon in the British
Museum in London were created to be placed high above the ground in an
architectural niche where they would never be seen from behind. Now
that they can be seen from behind, it is evident that in many cases the
carving detail was carried out far beyond what was necessary for this
purpose, for the sculptor's or the master sculptor's own satisfaction,
sense of completeness or possibly religious motive.