nusach

[Ethan bdm <ethan_bdm...>]

Hi all,

I, too, do not like the term "new American nusach," to describe the music

of Debbie Friedman, Jeff Klepper, etc.   Let me see if I can be clear
about why.  The term nusach does have a specific definition beyond simply "a
melody to which a piece of liturgy is sung during a prayer service." 
Nusach pertains to musical mode.  Nusach is a specific musical mode used  to
sing a part of the liturgy during a specific prayer service.  Indeed,
nusach is not, in essence, a melody at all, instead it is a relationship of
notes in a scale which can then form many melodies within a particular
nusach.  And, of course nusach varies: across location, across time, and for
different observances.  

To the extent that this is what nusach is, Friedman, Klepper and the like
are not writing nusach.  This is not a value judgement.  I am not saying
anything about the "correctness" of their music or whether it is
appropriate for use in worship.  However, it is not nusach.  Not because it is 
new,
but because their liturgical music is not written in one particular
musical modality.  

This is not to say, as Adrian suggested, that a "new American nusach,"
could not be written over time.  I certainly believe it could.  However,
nusach being a technical term, it seems incorrect to label the vast array of
contemporary, Jewish, liturgical music being written today all as nusach
of any kind. 

l'shalom,

Ethan Bueno de Mesquita
ethan_bdm (at) betham(dot)org

Adrian A. Durlester wrote:
>The term "new" is the whole point. Slowly, the style of this
contemporary music 
>may come to replace the "traditional nusach" of t'filla. Is it
inconceivable 
>that, several centuries from now, Jewish musical scholars will be
debating the 
>origins of the so called "kleppereise" "friedmanish" "cotlerian" perhaps
even 
>"gershonian"  styles of nusach?
>
>You speak of the "correct nusach" as if it were mi-Sinai, and we both
know that 
>is not the case. The liberal Jewish movements are, to some degree,
reshaping 
>and re-arranging the traditional t'fillot. It is not at all surprising
then 
>that
>new musical modes may become the underlying nusach of this new liturgy.
Good 
>songwriters strive to make their music match the intent of the text.
Does not 
>traditional nusach do the same? What makes one superior to the other?
>
>Just because something is more fun doesn't mean it isn't classic or 
>traditional, either.
>
>Now, that being said, I have a great affinity for the so-called
"traditional" 
>nusach, and wish more songwriters were familiar with it and worked it
into 
>their music (as some are.) In so doing are they not creating a "New
American 
>Nusach" ?
>
>And on the subject of Jewish folk music:
>Is not Torah cantillation the ultimate "folk melody" ? For it served to
help 
>people learn the text even when they didn't know how to read it, or what
it 
>meant. And is that also not the goal of the nusach? If the contemporary
music 
>being used and written serves this purpose during t'filla, then it is,
by 
>definition, nusach.
>
>Just my two shekels,
>
>Adrian
>
>On Tuesday, March 03, 1998 13:38, QuelliPG [SMTP:QuelliPG (at) aol(dot)com]
wrote:
>> I don't like the term "new American nusach" at all.  Nuschaot refer to
>> specific musical modes.  When a service is chanted, a specific mode, a
>> specific scale is used for each section of the service and specific to
the
>> day
>> and time of day.  There are contemporary songs and liturgical settings
which
>> fit within each mode, including some of Jeff and Debbie's and others'
>> including my own.  To call all contemporary liturgical settings "new
Amer.
>> nusach" implies that they all fit in a particular musical mode and
also that
>> they are interchangable with traditional nusach.  While in many places
they
>> ARE used in place of traditional nusach, they do not necessarily
reflect the
>> correct nusach.  In more traditional synagogues, they would be
reserved for
>> non-traditional settings (youth service, family retreats, etc.)  They
are
>> great educational tools for teaching people the words and in many
cases the
>> meanings of the prayers.  And yes, they are usually more fun to sing
than the
>> traditional melodies.  But they are NOT nusach.
>>
>> On another topic, one of my pet peeves is the way people sing Adon
Olam.  I
>> used to think it was fun to sing it to all kinds of irreverent tunes,
>> especially since its iambic pentameter rhythm allows it to fit easily
to
>> almost any tune.  But after studying the text with a rabbi friend in
Detroit
>> a
>> few years ago, I am no longer able to do that.  And when my kids sing
it to
>> the Gopher's rouser (go U of M) at their day school or to Gilligan's
Island
>> theme it drives me crazy!  This prayer is a strong declaration of
faith in
>> God.  The first half speaks of God as all powerful, all-knowing,
creator.
>>  THe
>> second half speaks of a personal God who is protector, refuge in 
times of
>> need, etc.  It is a powerful message that God is and can be both
things at
>> the
>> same time.  I'm working on a melody that reflects these 2 moods/images
of 
>God.
>>
>> Does anyone else have either a great melody or an opinion on this???
>> Raquel (singer/songwriter/music teacher/Jewish educator/occasional
cantorial
>> soloist/etc. etc.  sorry I never introduced myself)
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1323189982 ; 03 MAR 98
13:41:54 UT
>Received: from SANTACLARA01.POP.INTERNEX.NET by smtp.betham.org
>     with SMTP (1.0); 03 MAR 98 13:41:45 UT
>Received: from shamash.org ([207.240.86.25])
>          by santaclara01.pop.internex.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2
>          release (PO203-101c) ID# 0-34792U7500L7500S0) with SMTP
>          id AAA12084 for <ethan_bdm (at) betham(dot)org>;
>          Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:41:31 -0800
>Received: (qmail 5623 invoked from network); 3 Mar 1998 21:37:39 -0000
>Received: from shamash.org (207.240.86.25)
>  by shamash.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 1998 21:37:39 -0000
>Received: (qmail 20925 invoked from network); 3 Mar 1998 21:09:39 -0000
>Received: from plains.nodak.edu (134.129.111.64)
>  by shamash.org with SMTP; 3 Mar 1998 21:09:39 -0000
>Received: from prodmgr.nodak.edu (prodmgr.fch.ndsu.NoDak.edu
[134.129.120.224])
>       by plains.NoDak.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA01119
>       for <hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org>; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 15:12:23 -0600 
> (CST)
>Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 15:12:21
-0600
>Message-Id: <01BD46B6(dot)C36043A0(dot)durleste (at) plains(dot)nodak(dot)edu>
>Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 15:12:18 -0600
>Reply-To: hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org
>Sender: owner-hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org
>Precedence: bulk
>From: "Adrian A. Durlester" <durleste (at) plains(dot)NoDak(dot)edu>
>To: "'hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org'" <hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org>
>Subject: RE: Jewish Folk Music?
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4128
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
>