Under a deceitful title, Thomas Forrest Kelly offers us a compilation of articles dedicated to oral and written transmission in chant. I call it deceitful because nothing in this title tells us that the book is actually focused on documenting a long controversy about the origins of plainsong, and not on the study of the transmission of chant in general, as could be expected by an unaware reader.
The debate was begun by Leo Treitler in 1974 by applying the theories of Milman Parry and Albert Lord on the oral transmission of Homeric epic to the genesis of plainsong. This paper generated an intense discussion among specialists, reflected in a series of articles that appeared between 1974 and 2004 in periodicals such as The Musical Quarterly, Journal of the American Musicological Society, The Journal of Musicology, Early Music, and Journal of the Plainsong and Medieval Music Society, and in books dedicated to the topic. These articles are the ones Forrest Kelly compiles in this publication. They are reproduced in impeccable facsimile, though some photographic images were affected in the process. They also are organized and ordered intelligently. The book contains works by authorities such as Leo Treitler, Charles Atkinson, Mary Berry, Nino Albarosa, Lance Brunner, David Hughes, Kenneth Levy, László Dobszay, Emma Hornby, Edward Nowacki, Susan Rankin, and Theodore Karp.
The title of this paper is taken from Dobszay’s article, “The Debate about the Oral and Written Transmission of Chant.” This title would have given the reader, in my opinion, more clues about the content of the book. However, by reading these articles it can be perfectly understood why Forrest Kelly prefers not to use terms such as “plainsong” or “Gregorian chant” in the book’s title, since these terms are part of the controversy. What is put in doubt is whether or not something that could be properly called Gregorian chant really exists, and whether or not styles such as the Paleofrankish chant or the Old Roman chant come from a written tradition, that is, whether or not an archetype exists, nowadays unknown for this kind of music.
As editor of the series Music in Medieval Europe by the publishing company Ashgate, Forrest Kelly writes a preface for the series and an introduction summarizing the general intentions and the content of this specific publication. Turning his attention to the topic of chant, the author reproduces on the next 114 pages texts updating the current advances in this topic, tackling points such as notation, analysis, and performance of plainsong. These articles also allow him to create the atmosphere for the controversy ahead, by examining, in the light of the most updated information, the restoration work led by the monks of the Solesmes Abbey, the role played by the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music in Rome, the Dom Eugène Cardine Gregorian semiology school and its contributions to the topic, accent theory in the Paleofrankish repertoire, and attempts at enclosing plainsong’s performance within the frame of the movement of historical interpretation.
On page 115 the controversy per se begins. This will last for an interminable 333 pages. It is a difficult, complex, and excellent debate, demanding to the reader, with many specialist voices raised in unusual depth, providing loads of evidence (documents, treatises, manuscripts, comparative analyses of repertoires, structural analyses of music, etc.) supporting both the theory that plainsong was essentially an oral practice largely spread in medieval Europe, gradually written in scrolls as music writing was invented (defended by Leo Treitler), and the theory that argues that when writing began there was already a complete repertoire with definitely established versions, and that the moment of instability of oral transmission came long before its being written on paper (a theory mainly supported by Kenneth Levy). Among the casualties in this battlefield there is, in the first place, the innocent legend of Gregory the Great conveying to his scribes the music whispered by the Holy Spirit. Then there are other casualties such as the theory of accent in Paleofrankish chant and the centonization theory. The articles also repeatedly tackle many interpretation problems of the neume in the campo aperto notation. This notation represents undoubtedly one of the most fascinating moments in music writing.
We are, then, in the presence of a book for specialists. We do not recommend at all its reading to those who only want a brief encounter with a topic that is frequently of remarkable aridity for those who are not totally immersed in the details of this discussion.
One of the most remarkable aspects of this book is that it is limited to articles in English, since the topic has also been tackled by distinguished musicologists in other languages. But as an editor, Forrest Kelly skillfully hurdles this obstacle, deftly focusing on the debate in journals and books for English-speaking readers. He even reproduces a remarkable article by Edward Nowacki, dedicated to commenting on and expanding Helmut Hucke’s seminal work Gregorianischer Gesang in fränkischer und altrömanischer Überlieferung published in German in the Archiv für Musikwissenschaft in 1955, a work that shows that the issue of oral and written transmission in plainsong was a concern much previous to the work of Treitler and his colleagues. Within his very long text, Nowacki fully translates and inserts Hucke’s article in English, including its original examples, making comments related to the program Hucke had foreseen to elucidate through musical analysis many of the problems that have arisen within the controversy.
Book not suitable for beginners.
--------
[Review length: 910 words • Review posted on August 25, 2010]