Full text of "Cantors Assembly Journal of Synagogue Music"

See other formats

. Cantors Assembly . June 1985 . Tammuz 5745 • Vol XV • No 1 •

JOURNAL Of SYNAGOGUE MUSIC

Articles:

A Review and Analysis of the First Book of Canzonettes
for Three Voices by Salomone Rossi, Ebreo

Hazzanut for a Royal Occasion

Daniel Chazanoff 3
Charles Heller 59

Convention Proceedings:

Honors Convocation of the

Jewish Theological Seminary of America 76

Report of Executive Vice President Samuel Rosenbaum 89

Address: President of the Rabbinical Assembly Alexander Shapiro 100

Some Thoughts on Hebrew Diction Pinchas Spiro 105

(From the 1984 Convention)

Departments:

Record Review

Jewish Yemenite Songs from the Diwan 115

Sephardi Songs from the Balkans Ben Steinberg 117

JOURNALOFSYNAGOGUEMUS IC , VolUifieXV, NUiflber 1

June 1985 / Tammuz 5745

editor: Abraham Lubin

managing editor: Samuel Rosenbaum

editorial board: Lawrence Avery, Ben Belfer, Jack Chomsky,
Baruch Cohort, Charles Davidson, A. Eliezer Kirshblum, Morton
Kula, Sheldon Levin, Saul Meisels, Solomon Mendelson, Chaim
Najman, Emanuel Perlman, Abram Salkov, Arnold Saltzman, Moses
J. Silverman, Hyman Sky, Pinchas Spiro, David Tilman.

businessmanager : Robert Kieval

officers of the cantOrs assembly: Ivan Perlman, President; Saul
Hammerman, Vice President; Henry Rosenblum, Treasurer; Harry
Weinberg, Secretary; Samuel Rosenbaum, Executive Vice President.

journal of synagogue music ±s a semi-annual publication. The sub-
scription fee is $12.50 per year. All articles, communications and
subscriptions should be addressed to Journal of Synagogue Music,
Cantors Assembly, 150 Fifth Avenue, New York 10011.

A REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF

IL PRIMO LIBRO DELLA CANZONETTE A TRE VOCI

(THE FIRST BOOK OF CANZONETTES FOR THREE VOICES)

By
SALAMONE ROSSI, EBREO

PUBLISHED IN VENICE BY RICCIARDO AMADINO, 1589

AS EDITED BY HANOCH AVENARY
(TEL AVIV: ISRAELI MUSIC INSTITUTE, 1975)

By DANIEL CHAZANOFF

TABLE OF CANZONETTES

ITALIAN *ENGLISH TRANSLATION

1. Voi dueterrestri numi (literal) You two earthly gods

(Soprano I, Soprano II, Alto) (poetic) You two earthbound

gods

2. 1 bei ligustri erose (literal) The beautiful privet and

(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Alto) rose

(poetic) Beautiful privet and
roses

3. V'attene pur da me cruda (literal) Go away from me crude

lontano far

(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass) (poetic) Go far away from me

4. Amor fa quanto vuoi (literal) Love do as much as you
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass) want

(poetic) Love do everything to me

5. Torna dolce il mio amore (literal) Return sweet, my love
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

* Literal and poetic translations from the Italian furnished by Frank and
Barbara DiGregorio.

6. Segli amorosi sguardi
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

7. Rose gigli e viole
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

6. Voi che seguit' Amore
(Soprano I, Soprano II, Bass)

9. Cercai fuggir Amore

(Soprano I, Soprano II, Bass)

10. Seguit' Amor donno gentil e

bella
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 ,
Tenor)

11. Donna il vostro bel viso
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Alto)

12. Non voglio piu seruire
(Soprano, Alto, Tenor)

13.10 mi sentO morire
(Soprano, Alto, Tenor)

14. L'alma vostra beltade
(Soprano, Alto, Tenor)

15. Corrette amanti

(Soprano I, Soprano II, Bass)

16. Ahi chi mi tieneil core

(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

(literal) If you look at lovers

(literal) Roses, lilies and violets

(literal) You who follow me

(literal) I tried to run away, love

(literal) Follow love, gentle and
beautiful woman

(literal) Woman, your beautiful

face
(poetic) My lady, your beautiful

face

(literal) I dont want to serve

(you) any more
(poetic) Not your servant any

(literal) I feel like dying
(poetic) I am dying

(literal) Your soul, beautiful
(poetic) Your soul, my love
(your beautiful spirit)

(literal) Correct lovers
(poetic) True (honest, real)
lovers

(literal) Aw! Who has the heart
(poetic) Alas! She stole my heart

17. Scherzan intornoi pargoletti
amori
(Soprano I, Soprano II, Alto)

18. M irate che mi fa crudel amore
(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

19. Se' I leoncorno

(Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , Bass)

(literal) Play around the children

love
(poetic) Trifling with young love

or Charming children playing

around

(literal) Look that you make me

hurt, love
(poetic) Your love has caused me

pain

(literal) You are the unicorn of

The unicorn itself
(poetic) Behold the unicorn

SUMMARY COMMENTS

When broken down, the 19 Canzonettes are found in four
different vocal combinations as follows:

II.

A. Four songs combine Soprano I, Soprano II, and Alto.

B. One song combines Soprano I , Soprano 1 1 , and Tenor.

C. Eleven songs combine Soprano I, Soprano II, and Bass.

D. Three songs combine Soprano, Tenor, and Bass.

In length, the Canzonettes vary from 10 measures to 30
measures without repeats or 1st and 2nd endings.

III. Rossi used four techniques in developing the texture of the
Canzonettes i.e., counterpoint, imitation, duetting and three-
part harmony.

IV. In keeping with the work's dedication to Vincenzo I, Duke of
Mantua, the first canzonette refers to Vincenzo and Leonora,
Duke and Dutchess of Mantua as 'Two Earthly Gods."

INTRODUCTION:

Salomone Rossi became a court musician to the Dukes of Mantua in
1587. Two years later, in 1589, his first book of compositions, The First Book
of Canzonettes for Three Voices, was published in Venice by Ricciardo
Amadino. It is dedicated to his patron, Vincenzo I, Duke of Mantua.

The canzonettes are short secular part songs. However, these are not
part songs in the modern sense with three part chordal harmony. Born in
the period of the madrigal (secular contrapuntal songs) the canzonettes in-
corporate a number of textures including counterpoint, imitation, duetting,
and three-part harmony. While the 19 songs in the collection were written
for canto, tenore and basso, the voicings should not be taken literally in the
modern sense; these merely indicate the upper, middle and lower parts not
soprano, tenor and bass. In turn, the parts are dependent upon the range of
each voice. As pointed out, there are stylistic differences between Rossi's
canzonettes and part songs as we know them. In a few cases we get a glimpse
of hymn-like settings found in the Bach chorale, 100 years later.

Canzonette #1 (Voi Due Terrestri Numi) — Soprano I> Soprano ZZ>
and Alto

I. Length of the work: 23 measures

II. Structure: Binary or two part form; each section contains a
first and second ending. The first section is nine measures
long while the second is fourteen without repeats.

III. Meter: In 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: Essentially in the Mixolydian mode with G as the
tonal center one gets the feeling of G major on the cadence
endings with the intrusion of F# rather than F in the
dominant chords. Note measures 14 through 16, in the
Soprano I part which exhibit an ascending one octave scale
in the Mixolydian mode:

^miU au in,fr

14" 15 l<o

V. Three Part Harmony: In measures 9 and 10 all three parts
sing different notes on the same rhythm.

Soft'

r 'f r

flcro

UJ 1 )

VI. Duetting: In measures 11 and 12, the Soprano I and Alto
parts move first in contrasting, then similar motion on the
same rhythm.

$oWl

:z2i

flLTO

VII. Imitation: Rossi's use of imitation on the rhythmic figure
J J J"3 J3 is found in measures 4 through 6 where all
three parts are involved.

Soft'
It

=S=

HLT&

-4- ;fc

VIM. Range of the parts:

$<*.£ 9»*» fl/ro

sfeza:

Canzonette #2 (I Bei Ligustri E Rose) — Soprano I, Soprano II> and
Alto

I. Length of the work: 24 measures

1 1 . Structure: Two part form. The first section is 8 bars long and
the second section 16; both sections are repeated.

III. Meter: In 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: An unusual feature is found in the Soprano I part
from measure 9 through 11 where a scale passage begins on g#
and ends on gfy.

I n measures 15 through 20 of the Soprano I part, we find
a descending scale passage in theaolian mode (from a toa with
no chromatics), the forerunner of the pure minor scale.

-O-

r i fi' i fi' i ^.i

The wavering between modality and tonality is clearly
marked in measures one through four of the Soprano II part
which alternates in the use of g# and gh .

t) *d

S-im-

V. Chromaticism: F#is the only accidental in the work; it
appears 6 times and becomes the third of a Major V chord in
the setting of the Aoli an mode.

VI. Three Part Harmony: With the exception of the first and
second endings of both sections, only measures 8 and 9 display
blocklike chords.

VI I . Duetting: In measures 17 and 18, the Soprano I and Soprano
II parts descend together on 6ths with Soprano II on the
higher part.

9op«;r

SOfttf^.

VIM. Imitation: The three parts imitate one another in measures
14 through 18.

SufP:

"-fez

iii

^ i rrifi-.

test

Wf'.'Ji* J I.B

IX. Range of the Parts:

3F^

?se

Canzonette =3 (VattenePur Da Me Cruda Lontano) — Soprano I,
Soprano II, and Bass

I. Length of the work: 24 measures

II. Structure: In three sections of 8 measures, 5 measures and
11 measures. The first and third sections contain first and
second endings while the middle section is not repeated.

III. Meter: In 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: Even though the tonal center is g, with a signature
of one flat, the work is essentially in the Dorian mode. Half
steps between the second and third steps, and the sixth and
seventh steps of the scale are proof. Note the Soprano I part
from measure 19 through 23.

V. Chromaticism: Within the framework of the Dorian mode,
F#is used 3 times and C# twice, to strengthen the tonality
of the tonic and dominant, tones, respectively (tonal mag-
netism).

VI. Three Part Harmony: Block-like chords are nonexistent in
this setting of imitative and duetting episodes. The cadence
endings of all three sections contain the same note in all three
parts i.e., three gs at the end of the first section, three ds
at the end of the second section and three g's at the end of
the third section.

VII. Duetting: Measure 15 provides an example of duetting in
thirds. Note the Soprano I and Soprano II parts.

Amuu

fotvvvu' 1

VIM. Imitation: All three parts engage in imitation from measures
one through four, on the tonic, dominant and supertonic tones.

Soft

WK'

PO tti vfi+ rf

mtiiJ

TbmC

ifrdrni

poMirfMr

P/foggEE

p^g^

IX. Range of the Parts:

wAV^-'^e. %**■£ wsso

l< fc o \

Canzonette #4 (A mor Fa Q uanto Vuoi)
and Bass

— Soprano I, Soprano Z Z ,

I. Length of work: 12 measures

II. Structure: A two part form. The first section is 5 measures
long and the second 8 measures.

III. Meter: In common or 4/4 time

IV.

Tonality (and Chromaticism) : Given a key signature of one
flat, the first section is in the tonality of D while the second
section is in G. In wavering between the major and minor
modes, Rossi makes use of F# six times, C# once and B
once; the first section ends with all three parts on D while
the second section ends with the three parts on G. In measures
9 through 1 1 of the Soprano I part, Rossi surprises us with
a descending scale passage which begins on f fc* and ends on
F#.

PEfB^g

V. Three Part Harmony: The vertical three-part harmony of this
canzonette is pronounced giving the appearance of a Bach
Chorale; Bach was born in 1685 or 115 years after Rossi. The
opening measures give an example of the harmonic treatment.

so?&

IUliL.1

#d tf> ^

0fiSSO

QJ rH't S i

fe=

In this setting, duetting and imitation are nonexistent.

Canzonette #5(Toma Dolce II Mio Amore) — Soprano I, Soprano
II, and Basso

I. Length of work: 20 measures

II. Structure: In 3 sections. The first section (7 measures) and
the third section (10 measures) have first and second endings
while the middle section, of only 3 measures, is not repeated.

III. Meter: In common or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: The first section opens in g minor but closes with
all three parts on g. In the short middle section the tonality
moves from g minor to d, neither the major nor minor with
the three parts ending on d. The third section opens in g
minor and closes with all parts on g. Even though the work
is essentially in g minor, a Bb major scale intrudes into the
setting from measures 14 through 18 of the bass part (in
Rossi's day our major scale would be called the Ionian mode).

r,Ufif rir'ylf 'lid

V. Chromaticism: Several times Rossi uses chromaticism to tease
our ears. In the measure preceding the first ending in the
first section he inserts an F#into the V chord. On the follow-
ing measure all three parts sing a g causing us to do our own
perceptual filling. He does the same thing at the close of
the work. Observe measures 6 and 7 of the first section where
the Soprano II part contains an F#.

<frffc

SofS

VI. Three Part Harmony: Solid block-like harmony is short-lived
in this setting of interwoven parts. Measures 10 and 11 show
all 3 parts on the same harmonic rhythm.

/iiuwi

■<■ ; it * • f

fefe

m \ \tt it^f

VII. Range of the Parts:

SoflaX- 90MP

gASSO

fo -j fl r^ 11 & Ho \\y frO 1

Canzonette #6 (Se Gli Amorosi Sguardi)
and Basso

— Soprano I, Soprano II,

I. Length of work: 24 measures

II. Structure: In 3 sections. The three sections are each 8
measures long with first and second endings' in the first and
third sections. Section two is not repeated.

III. Meter: In common or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: With a signature of no sharps and no flats, the
opening section is in G major. The middle section modulates
to C major and the final section closes in G major.

V. Chromaticism: F#is used a total four times (once in the
first section and three times in the third section) as the lead-
ing tone in the key of G major. It is the only accidental in
this work.

VI. Three Part Harmony: All three parts sing quarter notes in
measure 22 (it is the only measure of the work containing
block-like chords).

^img

VII. Duetting: In measure 2, the Soprano I and Soprano II engage
in a duet while the Basso rests.

s*r-

pip

scmt

The Soprano I and Basso parts sing a duet in the third
measure while the Soprano II is sustained.

&r rr r I !

50^3C

#1=

/ 1 U ij 5

20
VIM.

Imitation: Several examples of imitation appears in this
canzonette. The work opens with the Soprano II singing
alone. In the second measure the Soprano I enters on the
same figure. The Basso enters in the third measure, on the
same rhythm, but not the same pitch. Together the parts
establish the tonic chord of G major.

w,\- i\-u\ J i

T^-^ — V s ^~

\ - i » r r

«ri®g

|y,^ ,» J*

W \ \

\ \ \ \

IX. Range of the Parts:

Canzonette #7 (Rose Gigli E Viole) — Soprano I, Soprano II, and
Basso

I. Length of work: 19 measures

II. Structure: Two part form. The two sections are six bars and
13 bars long respectively and both sections have first and
second endings.

III. Meter: In common or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: With a key signature of no sharps and no flats the
work opens in C major and moves to the dominant (G major)
by the end of the first section. The second section opens and
closes in G major.

V. Chromaticism: Rossi uses just one accidental, F # in moving
from C major to its dominant chord, G, at the end of the first
section. In the second section F# appears twice and C#
once. At the final cadence F#is used to establish the leading
tone of G major which closes the work. In the second case
F#and C # are used in the same measure to give a temporary
change of color. Note measures 12 and 13 where we have a
hint of b minor or D major but neither is established because
of an incomplete chord in measure 13.

IFF

fmm^

Wo l C /'i P F

VI. Three Part Harmony: A homophonic texture is clearly estab-
lished in the first two measures where all three parts contain
the same harmonic rhythm.

##!#f

O • ' 9

J o

^^^

VII. Duetting: Only one duetting episode appears in this work.
Note measures 3 and 4 where the Basso and Soprano 1 1 parts
are in thirds.

■ • • ♦

VIM. Imitation: A descending five note figure in quarter notes is
followed in all three parts of measures 8 and 9.

^ ■ i \ \ \

IX. Range of the parts:

3ffti- SoftfOT Basso

24
Canzonette

#8 (Voi Che Seguit' Amore) —
and Basso

Soprano I, Soprano II,

I. Length of work: 19 measures

II. Structure: In 3 sections

A. Section 1 is 5 bars long with a repeat.

B. Section 2 is 6 bars long without a repeat.

. C. Section 3 is 8 bars long with first and second endings.

III. Meter: While the work is in 3/4 time, the meter changes to
4/4 time in the second measure of the final section and stays
that way to the end.

IV. Tonality: The entire work is in the tonality of G. While the
tonic chord is always in the major (G, B, D), the dominant
chord wavers between major and minor through the use of
F#and Ffa. respectively.

V. Chromaticism: The only accidental in the work is F sharp
which appears 3 times as the third of the dominant chord.

VI . Three Part Harmony: There are two trio episodes in the work
and both are two measures in length. Note the crossed voices
in measures 10 and 11 where the Soprano II part is higher
than the Soprano I.

SOP*

.«» .* .¥"t

&&D

J \ - — ■

VII. Duetting: Several duetting episodes are found in the work.
One example is found in the Soprano II and Basso parts of
measures 8 and 9.

yjfMn 1

VIM. Imitation: Both rhythmic and melodic imitation are found m
the work. In measures 12 through 15 the Soprano I and II
parts engage in rhythmic imitation. Melodic imitation is
found in

iffl'TCilf ^

r> in- iS"

measures 6 through 8 of the Soprano I and II parts.

1X . Range of the pa r*: ^

9***-'

Canzonette#9 (Cercai Fuggir Amore) — Soprano I, Soprano II,
and Basso

I. Length of work: 11 measures

II. Structure: The- work is in two parts of 6 and 5 measures
respectively, without repeats. Both sections have first and
second endings.

III. Meter: Common or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: The work opens in C major and modulates to G
major at the end of the first section. It remains in G major
to the end.

V. Chromaticism: F# is the only accidental in the work. It is
used 3 times as the leading tone of G.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Save the last measure of each of the
two sections, only two measures exhibit three part harmony.
Note measures 1 and 7.

M£fK. I

h^s-7

!?■<■■ -i r ik i r f

VII. Duetting: Five of the eleven measures in this work contain
duetting episodes. One example is found in measure 8 where
the Soprano I and Soprano II parts are in thirds.

SbfK.1-

a<fc3£

m$5

VIM. Imitation: This canzonette is marked by an absence of imita-
tion which shows, once again, Rossi's experimentation with
different musical textures.

IX. Range of the parts:

Basse;

:a:

-e-

29
Soprano I,

Canzonettc #10 (Seguif Amor Donna Gentil E. Bella)
Soprano II, and Tenor

I. Length of work: 15 measures

II. Structure: This canzonette is two parts of eight measures
each. The first part contains first and second endings while
the second part has a repeat on the measure before the last.
On the repeat the work closes on the final measure.

III. Meter: While the work is in 414, the first ending measure of
the first section is in 2/4 This should be thought of as a
quick return to the beginning rather than a change of meter.

IV. Tonality: Given a key signature of no sharps and no flats,
the entire work is in the tonality of G.

V. Chromaticism: As in the previous canzonette, F#is the only
accidental which accounts for the key of G.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Trio episodes are found in measures 3
and 5. Note the harmonic rhythm in all three parts.

Me*. ~b

r± m H^> £"

n'fVlWn

'■fh l

jb — y

(^fpivK

itm

(y jij i m m

VII. Duetting: Measures 6 and 9 contain duetting episodes in the
two lower parts (Soprano II and Tenor).

SoPtf'

K rtS-6

HCAS' <\

-u-

UJlrf f

\£H0fv

■ U (0a^

VIM. Imitation: Two rhythmic figures form the basis of imitation
in this canzonetta. The first is J S'fS' J ancl the seconcl
J^T J * Note t ' ie °P enm 9 two measures where the Soprano
II and Tenor imitate the Soprano I applying the first rythmic
figure.

Stfffi

■— . 7 TA

-^*r —

31
The second rhythmic figure is applied in measures 10 and

11.

$offc-

SOPR-

^Mf-nift

y rT ir m

r±

fcPVt\

■' W i f f j

IX. Range of the parts:

ctfto sw-ir TfMo^

_o_

ITg

-e-

Canzonet te #11 (Donna II Vostro Bel Viso) — Soprano I, Soprano
//, and Alto

I. Length of work: 17 measures

II. Structure: The work is in 2 parts. Part 1 is 10 measures long
with a first and second ending. The second section is seven
measures long with first and second endings.

III. Meter: C or 4/4 time

* IV. Tonality: In the context of a key signature with no sharps
and no flats, Rossi uses three accidentals (F#, C#and G#).
The F#appears 3 times and the C#and G#one time each.
This canzonette is in the tonality of G major.

V. Chromaticism: F # is used in the very first measure and again
at the close of each of the two sections as the leading tone of
G major. In measure 12, Rossi uses a G#as the third of an
E major chord but instead of moving to an A tonality, sug-
gested by the G #, the composer uses a G natural on the
following measure, note measures 12 and 13:

w e \ \

oft p MUUlJl

In measure 2, a C#is used to lead into the Dominant
which becomes a minor chord when Rossi uses an Ftj in
measure 3.

**==s

^^=i
pp

u \\ m

itiuOi M'l

VI. Three Part Harmony: An example of three-part block chords
is found in measure 11 when the Soprano I and 1 1 parts move
in contrary motion to the Alto part.

♦ . 9 m J

3^P

VII. Duetting: The Soprano II and Alto engage in a duetting
episode in measures 3 and 4.

=22

, i r i j j i

■&— i

ff=H

4 ^

VIII.

SofR.

I mitation: From measures 3 through 7 the rhythmic figure is
found in all three parts at different times. The figure appears
first in the duetting episode, above, beginning on the third
beat of the measure. From measures 5 through 7 it begins
on the first beat of the measure — and it is imitated in the
Soprano I and Soprano II parts.

\ i i r rn7 T i \- ^

IX. Range of the parts:

Scft-X _ $<&£ -, RLT0

_Ci

-^TcT

iO_

•tfolfc

:2s:

Addenda to IV (Tonality) : From measures 13 through 16 the Soprano I and
II parts are in imitation on a descending Mixolydian scale pattern. Note g
to g on natural notes.

Soft

11'.

\f f f I:

♦ ^

Canzonette #12 (Non Voglio Piu Seruire) — Soprano, Alto, and
Tenor

I. Length of work: 21 measures

II. Structure: In 3 sections of 6 measures, 3 measures and 12
measures respectively. The first and third sections have a
first and second ending while the short middle section acts as
a bridge between the first and third sections.

III. Meter: Measures 1 through 12 are in C or 4/4 time while a
change to 3/4 time takes place from measures 13 to 20. The
closing first and second ending measures revert back to 4/4
time. The duple and triple meters give this canzonette the
appearance of a pavan and galliard, respectively, two popular
court dance forms of the period.

*IV. Tonality: Once again, tonality is established by chromaticism
rather than by key signature. There is a wavering between
a C and G tonality through the use of F#.

V. Chromaticism: The only accidental in the work is F# which
appears five times and curiously enough, all in the Alto part.
Whenever used, it is the leading tone of G.

VI. Three Part Harmony: The first section, which is pavan-like
in appearance, displays vertical chords on the same rhythm
from measures 1 through 4.

^niuj]i ))J J i rVr

^ rM\) iiii.il j jj i J j'Jli

-j--r -^

SfPPf

.« » .»

v — *-

In the third section, which looks like a galliard, we find
block chords in a 3 pulse meter from measures 13 through 18.

*» MHtl+l' J luM3UIJllj,i;

-±— »-

HLfo E2E3

% gi»MirM^n\^ !iU'^

VII. Duetting: In measures 6 and 7 of the short middle section
we find the only duetting episode of the work in the Alto and
Tenor parts.

J~ ^ 1 AJ 1

pi g ^

VIM. Imitation: One example of imitation is found in this can-
zonette (both melodic and rhythmic). It occurs in measures
10 and 11 of the Soprano and Tenor parts.

9rr

t)" : io?1t

7TM,

IX. Range of the parts:

BLTO

^= ZS1

-a- o

*£l.

*Addenda to IV Tonality: The Soprano part from measures 15 through 18
contains a descending scale pattern in the Dorian mode (from D to D on
all natural notes). One step of the scale is missing i.e., B

d-#

*=3

Canzonette #13 (Io Mi Sento Morire) — Soprano, Alto, and Tenor

I. Length of work: 23 measures

II. Structure: In 2 sections. Section 1 is 8 measures long with
a repeat while section 2 is 15 measures long with a first and
second ending.

III. Meter: The entire work is in C or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: The first section is in C major (Ionian mode). In
the first six measures of the second section, Rossi modulates
to the key of F through the use of a Bb. From there, the
composer returns to the tonality of C major which closes the
work.

V. Chromaticism: Only one accidental is found in the work i.e.,
theBb mentioned under tonality above. It is found in measure
10 of the Tenor part.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Just a few measures of three part
vertical harmony are found in this work. Measure 1 opens
like a stately pavan but this is short-lived when the Alto part
moves independently in the second measure.

ScPR.

4c J. J If*

ACT*

UN- J i J ,J )i

■fe^

^=ri

In measure 5 we see more movement in the three parts
on eighth notes.

fctWl

g'jyrni i

VII. Duetting: A duetting episode occurs on the first 3 measures
of the second section (measures 9 through 11) — the only one
in the work. Observe the Alto and Tenor parts.

a ■ •

Ml J I i I \

*=7

1" f W i \

VIM. Imitation: The dominant textural trait of this canzonette can
be found in the imitative figures it displays. I n measure 6 we
have an example of melodic imitation; the Tenor voice enters
first, followed closely by the Soprano.

\ i,A

wA i'

Then, in measures 14 and 15, we have another figure
which is found in all three voices i.e., first in the Alto, then
in the Soprano and third in the Tenor.

*** %>\ u^i n n

Ht-fo

TMtf

3s:

I n measure 17, the Tenor part enters on the same figure
which begins four measures of close imitation, both melodic
and rhythmic. Observe measures 17 through 20.

SOW

ROD

)c f i.l lyjl l f^^

i Irii irn LU' N 1 lu

.- • • • / -^

^ pggjig g

m-iMii

=tS3=

IX. Range of the parts:

-j-gNCtft:

231

■^

-C2-

-a-

Canzonette #14 (U Alma Vostra Beltade) — Soprano, Alto, and
Tenor

I. Length of work: 19 measures

II. Structure: In two parts. The first part is 8 measures long
with a repeat while the second part is 11 measures long with
a first and second ending.

III. Meter: The entire canzonette is in C or 4/4 time.

IV. Tonality: Both sections open and close in C major. In the
second section there is some movement toward the tonality of
d minor; one does find a major dominant chord (A, C#, E)
and a minor tonic chord (d, f, a) but neither a major or minor
subdominant chord (G, B, D or g, b\ d). Rossi teases the
ear but doesn't establish a d tonality. Observe measures 12
through 15.

H. I

mi) m a

W£

i -f-ej- ^

\\ W | j p

V. Chromaticism: Two accidentals appear in this work i.e., F#
and C #. The F# is found just once as a passing tone in
measure 2 (Alto part).

■T

]« U J

C# is used 3 times as indicated above under Tonality.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Measures 8 through 10 contain block
harmony in all three parts.

mo ^

VII. Duetting: Only one duetting episode is found in the work.
Note the Soprano and Alto parts in measures 3 and 4.

===?=

f g i \ r o"

1 HI M \

U ^iljl J j

*w'

VIII. Imitation: An example of melodic imitation is found in mea-
sures 4 through 6 where the Tenor imitates the Alto.

Wire

\£nc£

-+—J

IX. Range of the parts:

Soft flLTo T^cC

-e-

X2I

-&-

Canzonette #15 (Correte Amanti) — Soprano I, Soprano ZI, and
Bass

I. Length of work: 16 measures

II. Structure: The work is in 2 parts of eight bars each; the first
section is repeated while the second section has first and sec-
ond endings.

III. Meter: In C or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: Given a key signature of one flat, the first section
is in d minor while the second section modules into and closes
in g minor.

V. Chromaticism: The first section contains one accidental, a
C#in the seventh measure, which creates a major V chord
in the context of d minor. In the second section F# is used
four times as the third of the major V chord. The constant
use of Bb reminds us of the g minor tonality. Only once is a
Btf. natural used as the third of the tonic chord; it provides
a striking change of color but the work moves back to and
closes in g minor.

VI. Three Part Harmony: In measures 8 through 10, Rossi has
the three parts singing an F major chord; the same tone is
sung four times on different note values.

Sofk

: Sr Ir'rlr-LTf i

r pepipgp^

r i \\U\\\\\

•5~r

VII. Duetting is absent from this work.

VIM. Imitation: Rhythmic imitation is found in measures 1 to 3
of the Soprano I and II parts.

IIP

±c

1 * J •

The work contains no melodic imitation.

IX. Range of the parts:

- o n r

£te

is:

it=i

Canzonette #16 (Ahi Chi Mi Tiene II Core)
II, and Bass

I. Length of work: 24 measures

— Soprano I, Soprano

II. Structure: Two part form. The first part is eleven measures
in length with a repeat while the second part is thirteen mea-
sures with a first and second ending.

III. Meter: In C or 4/4 time

IV. Tonality: With a key signature of one flat, the first part opens
in g minor and closes in d minor. The second part opens and
closes in g minor.

V. Chromaticism: In the first section, F#is used four times to
reinforce the tonality of g minor. C# is used once at the
close of the first section as the third of an A major chord
which leads to a d tonality at the close of the first part. In
the second section Eb appears twice in keeping with the
tonality of g minor and F# once as the leading tone of g.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Rossi reminds us, in this canzonette,
that we are in the period of the madrigal and individual -voiced
counterpoint, Harmony in this setting evolves from the inter-
action of 3 independent voices rather than vertical block
chords. Note measure 2 as an example.

k^_

\J •'

*-— * — •-*-

% [ IT U

VII. Duetting: In measures 6 and 7 the Soprano II and Bass
parts are in thirds while the Soprano I part moves inde-
pendently.

S>F*

v «-

aJ hJU

\ i av f i n i

VIM. Imitation: From measures 16 through 21 the Soprano I and
II parts display rhythmic imitation.

j.,<JDiiUi«U\iJi o ^p

\h- \A\

f- i-<"wrii

ra u

There are no examples of melodic imitation in this can-
zonette.

IX. Range of the parts:

° " ^— o IK-)'.

ICZ

-e-

Canzonette #17 (Scherzan Intorno I Pargolette Amori) — Soprano
l y Soprano ZZ, and Alto

I. Length of work: 18 measures

II. Structure: The work is in two parts of 7 measures and 11
measures respectively.

III. Meter: This two part work has two meters. The first section
is in 3/4 while the second is in C or 4/4 time.

IV. Tonality: The entire work is in the key of F major (Bb is in
the key signature).

V. Chromaticism: Eb is used twice in the first section; these are
used to provide changes of tonal color, rather than modulation
to another tonality. Only one accidental, a B^, is found in
the second section as a passing tone between two chords.

VI. Three Part Harmony: Since this work is constructed along
imitative and contrapuntal lines, only one place can be found
where 3 part vertical harmony exists. Note measures 6 and 7
which end the first part.

6 \ ^

^1 \

Kin \ \

I ■

W * I

1 *

V5 # V

[

) /r±-

— U ■

The preponderance of individual-voiced counterpoint is
seen in measures 15 through 17. Three part harmony in this
setting results from the interaction of three voices.

I f f ; \\ ' J I

.» 4

I J I If

1 .J. 1X17U j i^

VII. Duetting: Measures 5 and 6 contain a little episode in the
Soprano I and II parts.

i k i) ,i i

VIM. Imitation: Two kinds of imitation are found in measures 1
through 4. First, the Soprano II and Alto parts are in fifths
from measures 1 through 3.

'Ji-

frLTD

Then from measures 2 through 4, the Alto and Soprano I
parts engage in melodic imitation.

9f>

/ftTO

IX. Range of the parts:

-gr

ILTO

jCZ

321

Canzonette #18 {Mir ate Che Mi Fa Crudel Amore)
Soprano II, and Bass

53
Soprano I,

I. Length of work: 30 measures

1 1 . Structure: I n three parts of 12,
tively.

5 and 13 measures respec-

III. Meter: The entire work is in C or 4/4 time except for the
first ending measure of the first section which amounts to a
quick return to the beginning.

IV: Tonality: With a signature of one flat, the entire work is in
g minor save a temporary modulation to d minor in measures
7 through 9. There is a wavering between the major and
minor dominant chords (D, F#, A and d, f, a).

V. Chromaticism: F # is used 6 times as the third of the major
dominant chord (D, F# , A). C# is used once as the third
of an A major chord (the V of V) in modulating to d minor.
Eb is used four times as part of the g minor tonality (only a
Bb appears in the key signature),

VI . Three Part Harmony: I n measures 12 through 14 we have an
example of the same harmonic rhythm in all three parts.

So!*-

jj-

-<3-

<2*©0

VII. Duetting: The Soprano I and Bass engage in a duetting
episode from measures 19 through 21.

% 1 f g 'l.

\" p.mvip

Cf^o

%rJr uuur

VIM. Imitation: The work opens with a 2 measure figure in the
Soprano I part. Two measures later the same figure is imitated
in the Soprano II part.

i — 1

"7"

^f H'\r J

«=*

I n the final section of the work we encounter close rhyth-
mic imitation which reminds us of a Beethoven development
section. Observe measures 24 through 27.

r ■* ill ^jRJP

lP u^NK^

mn fflft i J

->«»-» » . * zfe

uzrr

* j f j if i ^^ ^

IX. Range of the parts:

-o-

~w-

Canzonette #19 (Se'l Leoncorno)
Bass

— Soprano I, Soprano II, and

I. Length of work: 22 measures

II. Structure: In 3 parts of 7 measures, 5 measures and 10 mea-
sures respectively. The first and third parts have first and
second endings while the middle section is not repeated.

III. Meter: In C or 4/4 time. The first ending measures of both
the first and third sections are in 2/4 time which is nothing
more than a quick return to the beginning of the respective
sections.

IV. Tonality: With a key signature of one flat (Bb) this can-
zonette is in the tonality of G. Through chromaticism there
is a wavering between G major and g minor. The chords which
end each of the three sections form an interesting feature of
this work (the first section ends with all three parts on G,
the second on an incomplete chord i.e., Bb, D, Bb from bottom
to top and an incomplete chord at the close G, Bfc? , G).

V. Chromaticism: F#is used 6 times as the third of the major
dominant chord of G. Eb appears 3 times to reinforce the g
minor tonality. C#is used just once to give the temporary
feeling of a D tonality in measures 14 through 16. Finally,
B is used just once, in the final chord of the work, to give
a G major feeling.

VI. Three Part Harmony: The close of the second section has
the three parts in vertical harmony. Note measures 11 and 12.

_Q_

-&-

5
^

/y)l p 1 J | ^

VII. Duetting: In measures 7 and 8 the Soprano II and Bass parts
are in thirds.

lite

ppp

^■ nn nji f

In another instance, the same two parts engage in another
episode but this time the Bass outlines chords in contrast to
the stepwise movement of the Soprano II part. Observe mea-
sures 14 through 16.

lAi-rntifl

VIM. Imitation: An interesting example of imitation is found in
measures 2 through 4 where the Bass, Soprano II and
Soprano I sing the same figure in succession.

IV l Uirr,

&S^

5^
3J

..'l^tttj; 1 M

IX. Range of the parts:

£D

-e-

^o_

HAZZANUT FOR A ROYAL OCCASION

Charles Heller

A Royal occasion in Toronto last September provided a unique
challenge to J ewish music. The event was an interfaith Service of
Thanksgiving, attended by Her 'Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, with
contributions from diverse Christian groups as well as Moslems and
J ews. To represent the latter, Cantor Louis Danto of Beth Emeth
Synagogue, Toronto, had been invited to chant a 'prayer'; the or-
ganizers did not provide any more specific details. I was in turn
approached to provide something suitable.

The first question was: what form should this 'prayer' take?
It seemed most appropriate to me that the text should be the formal
Prayer for the Welfare of the Royal Family as printed in the British
(Orthodox) Siddur ('Authorized Prayer Book'). This prayer (Hano-
ten teshuah) is recited on every Sabbath and Festival in Britain as
well as in South Africa and probably elsewhere in the Commonwealth,
although curiously enough it has fallen into oblivion in Canada. This
prayer is normally recited (in English) by the Rabbi, although there
is a simple musical setting by the 19th-century composer Mombach.
The text is particularly sonorous in its Victorian version, and is worth
quoting here, opening with Psalm 144: "May He who dispenseth
salvation unto kings, and dominion unto princes; whose kingdom is
an everlasting kingdom; who delivered His servant David from the
destructive sword; who maketh a way in the sea, and a path through
the mighty waters; may He bless, preserve, guard, assist, exalt, and
highly aggrandize, Our Sovereign Lady Queen VICTORIA ...
(etc.)' The more Imperialistic sentiments have however been sup-
pressed in the current version.

So much for the text. In composing the music I had the follow-
ing in mind:

1. The accompaniment would be provided by the Central

Staff Band of the Salvation Army, a highly professional
group of some 35 musicians.

2. The piece was to take three minutes,

Charles Heller is Choir Director at Bath Emeth Yehuda Synagogue,
Toronto. His original research on diverse aspects of Jewish Music has been
published in the Canadian Folk Music Journal and the Journal Of the Arnold
Schoenberg Institute. He also taught a course in Jewish Music at the Uni-
versity of Toronto School of Continuing Studies. His most recent set of musical
arrangements is Encore! (duets published by the Toronto Council of Hazzanim,
1983).

3. It would be performed before an essentially non-J ewish
audience, although sung in Hebrew.

4. I preferred to avoid "freygish-sounding' music precisely
because this is what non-J ews expect of J ewish music.
(I recall an occasion on a CBC Radio quiz when listen-
ers had to identify an unnamed piece, which was in fact
Achron's Hebrew Melody. The producers were struck
by the large number of listeners who said it sounded
'J ewish' or 'Hebrew'.)

5. The piece should be based on authentic and appropriate
nusah as far as possible.

6. The exploitation of the highly polished vocal and can-
torial skills of the performer (Cantor Danto).

7. The music should fit a Royal occasion.

Many of these criteria were met at one stroke by the adoption
of a particular traditional melody for the opening, that used for Psalm
144 before Motsaei Shabbat Maariv:

4^ n\rvr^&

(cf. Kol Rinah [London] Number 127; Zamru Lo V r ol . 2, p. 167)

The opening of this melody, using a sequence of fourths, is a
very strong motive which is adaptable to many situations. The in-
terval of a fourth also hints at the IV-I cadence which is so crucial
to traditional nusah. This provided a useful way of linking different
sections of the piece. The overall structure of the composition
emerged as a sequence of short sections, not exactly variations on
the traditional Psalm tune, but each taking off from it, reflecting,
of course, the changing mood and meaning of the text from section
to section. The Psalm tune hovers between major and relative minor
(no freygish here!) and sounds suitably majestic. It lends itself to
brass band scoring and treatment in what might be called the
'English Regal' style. (An example of this would be Vaughan Wil-
liams' setting of Psalm 100, originally composed for the 1953 Corona-
tion and which, I was delighted to find, after writing the music, was
also on the programme at the Toronto Service,)

The prayer for the Royal Family is traditionally recited after
Yekum Purkan and could have been set in the so-called 'Mi Shebemch
mode'. I preferred to stick to the major-minor materials, however,

utilizing the major nusah as sung between aliyot on Shabbat, which
also hints at a brass band fanfare.

The performance was broadcast live by CBC TV and radio and
reported widely in thej ewish and non-J ewish Press. Particular men-
tion was made of the fact that, Her Majesty personally congratulated
Cantor Danto on his performance. This may well have been an
unique occasion in J ewish history, in which a cantor performed
before the reigning monarch of the country.

There was also novelty in the situation of the cantor working
closely and successfully with a non-Jewish ensemble. The event
attracted the attention of many Church musicians, for whom it was
a revelation to hear the reserves of technique and expression to be
found in hazzanut. This Interfaith Service could have turned into
a mere circus; but instead it promoted genuine feelings of friendship
between faiths and triggered a desire to benefit from each others
talents in the future.

A ROYAL OCCASION:

A SERVICE OF THANKSGIVING

0^ *.,

o^ ij/izt^fa **& <C5r&&> Tb^^e/wadc &#£& *2/jwm ^A^z^tA^

Order of Service

Processional

* * *

Arrival of
Her Majesty The Queen
and His Koyai Highness
The Dufce of Edinburgh

# * *
O Canada

* * *

Introductory Statement of Purpose

by The Right Reverend Arthur D. Brown,
Anglican Suffragan Bishop of Toronto

Caii to Prayer

Azan
by Imam Bi(al Mohamed

Coil To Worship

by The Right Reverend W. Clarke MacDonald,
Moderator, United Church of Canada

* * *

Hymn — "Joyful, Joyful We Adore Thee'' (Hymn to Joy)

Joyful, joyful we adore thee, AH thy works with joy surround the

God of glory, Lord of love; earth and heaven reflect thy rays;

Hearts unfold like flowers before thee, stars and angels sing around thet }

opening to the sun above. centre of unbroken praise

Meft the douds of sin and sadness, Tieid and forest, vale and mountain

drive the dark of doubt away; flowery meadow, flashing sea,

giver of immortal gladness,, chanting bird and flowing fountain,

fill us with the light of day. call us to rejoice in thee.

* * *

Reading from Jewish Tradition

From the Etfuaif Writings of Rabbi Eleazar of Wurms (13tft Century)

by Rabbi Jordan Pearfcon,
President, Toronto Board of Ra56is

* * *

"Prayer For The Weffare of the Government' 1

by Cantor Louis Danto,
Beth Lmeth Synagogue

Reading from Islamic Tradition (Quran)

At Fatilia 1:1-7; Roman 30:17-27; Women 4:1

by Iman Said Zafar,
Marfcaz Al-Dawa Ad-Islami

* * *

Reading from Christian Tradition

Mattnew 5:38-48

by His Royal Highness The Duke of Eamfiurgn

* * *

Hymn — "God Who Gives to Lift Its Goodness" (Hyfrydbt)

God who gives to life its goodness God who fills the earth with beaut)

God creator of ad joy, God who binds each friend to fnem

God who gives to us our freedom, God who names us co-creator,

God who blesses tool and toy: God who wills that chaos end *

teach as how to laugh and praise you, grant us now creative spirits,

deep within your praises sing, minds responsive to your mind,

till the whole creation dances hearts and wills your rule extending

Homily

The Most Reverend Lewis S. Garnsworthy,
Anglican Archbishop of Toronto

Prayers of the People

Introduction

by His Grace Sotirios,

Bishop of Toronto Greek Orthodox Diocese

Almighty and merciful God, we come together at this time, in this place, to give thanks to
you and to celebrate important milestones in the life of our province and city.

We do so with gratejut hearts. We live in a heautvfut and bountiful land and are mindful
that we enjoy advantages and privileges that others are denied.

Our people are divided by race, language, cufturaf and religious tradition, 6ut are united in
our acceptance of your sovereignty over all creation,

Strengthen among us the spirit of being members of one jdmify, unite as in the cause of
justice, the love of freedom and the quest for peace and order.

Amen.

1. For tfte Queen

Leader: Sylvia Meade, First Baptist Church

Almighty God, we your peopfe offer thanks for the work and leadership of Elizabeth our
Queen; for her example as wife and mother; for her devotion and tireless service to all
nations of the Commonwealth; and for the standard which she has set in public life.

People:

Hear our prayer, O God, for Her Majesty the Queen and all members of the Rcyaf /amify
and for all her ministers in government. May they continue to promote understanding aruf
honour our cultures and religious Jaiths.

2. For the Family

Leader Fatima Ravat, Markaz Af-Dawa Al-Islami

We are thankful, O God, for our parents: in them we ftave received gifts we can never lose,
nourished in patience and wisdom; for their exam-pies for Cove and constancy upon which
family life is built; we are grateful when love is made visible in the world,

Peopk:

We pray, O God, that you will protect our children, that you wdi give the gift of love to
husbands and wives that famiiy life wilt grow strong in our society,

* * *

3. For Peace

Leader: Skaidrite Leja, St Andrew's Latvian Lutfieran Cnurcft

We praise you, O God, that you have blessed this city and this province with tranquility.
We call to mind off those who find here a refuge from war and turmoil to wort out tfteir
lives in the security of a land at peace.

Peopk:

We beg of you, O God, keep our streets and our fields free of strife and preserve our cultures
in harmony. May the people of this eartnfy kingdom build up your kingdom of peace,

* * *

4. For Justice

Leader: Anna Maria Afcate, St Thomas Aquinas Roman Catholic Cfturcft

We are tnanfcjuf, fteavenfy Creator, for the Bounty of this land and the industry of its
people- We recaff with gratitude tnose wfxo work untiringly for the mentally and physically
iff, for the care of those less fortunate, for the security afforded the aged and for the
education e*rtenae<f to our young people. We cherish the efforts of those who labour to build
in this land a free and just society.

People:

We pray for compassion for those in need, for those exploited or forbidden to speak. We,
your people aatfreraf 6efore you, pray that all may thirst for justice aruf look to you as their

eternaf reward.

67
5. For Worship

Leader: Chris Bouris, Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church

We are thankful, O God, for freedom to wars flip you in our traditions of faith. We are
gratefuf tftat here we may stand as your family and give praise to you wit/tout fear. We
rejoice in handing on our faith in you and (earning together the ricftness of your love and
the depth of your wisa'om.

People:

O God, may our children enjoy their right to life as faithful people. May religious
persecution be taken from our world and may tolerance prevaif. Grant wisdom always to
those called to leadership in faith

Hymn - " Now Thank We Aff Our God" (Nun Banket)

Now thank we all our God, O may this 6ounteous God

with heart, and fianas, and" voices, tftrougft all our life be near us,

who wondrous things hath done, with ever joyful hearts

in whom this world rejoices; and blessed peace to cheer us,

who from our motfter's arras araf keep us in his grace,

hath blessed us on our way and guide us when perplexed,'

with countless gifts of love, and free us from all ills

and still is ours today. in this world and the next

Blessing

His Eminence G. Emmett Cardinaf Carter,
Roman Catholic Arcftoisfiop of Toronto

God Save The Queen

* * *

Recessional

Presentations

■^ Tr^W^ort*.^ Aie(<ri^ /^*i£*i '4 + .

*J" ,

^kwt oUmCm

Bu. Y*vc ■

retU .

r-q ""

"' \ TV

\ I

Lji

r Li r

u£-

^— r-

<fa

1 9 y ""**< *

zmt

Et liaMA^ f-

U*tf* H*ste*»t, V -let flrfkbtirtf , ,

v'etkthart; Aic^r-

»f G

rtAJ (,404 ~

^g-

#•

3SCT

=^=

ct«

Ale /e^ w*(def Wowli

«(**m & f«tUn

A«/ y^^Wf^A V^iSAmM

Ho**

TiH

Trts

f-jr

iiS

T=r,

3£

* m A d

j-^-

rt -Uo. UMiMl T<* rlfl. vywjoft Y«/v-

/e Acv

/e*^ B-^' 4«

fofc)

^ 1 1 1-1 .4

-^ — #

7 T~TT f

^ftc n*j — ,

fair f r i

r - c rr

f * J /3 1 J rJ>

(e^olV-^-U ^-*<U ( UrU* ^

~ nm > , l'^* C ^A

. S j„ief« ht+J*!**^ y,\ sM

§Pf

\m*rr*£ \

Uill <

ffi

ippi

=£

-* *

» » A

* f —

' a

T — r

F=f

r=f

3 v~H rnt. — z^rz

a «■

^ *'/*<

°S*4 £t,€j£vV

- J

/^ef -*-

321

ckeje^v'- 1-

<*^*t" —

rrrrT

i )■

^^m

f 5 *

TT=f¥

Twojft

WI[

'** U- tfosk-ve

C'JT^ I I

P§

f m

- J I |

^ . -

1- 1

tfi

■^?-

j=t

\L*$ $Ju4*a|Ul j ■ f, v£ l }*lLd SU~Uk\ *Lk*ftefi.**s 'Tf-**(

{' r g dii

J ! i>c ,fi Jif i

V *<? **a-r

/* -

^^E

S ^ ^

^^P ^

^ftt'-ni r

^M SMfe ^j

q j j i

P<- E

Jf J J

C 7 V ^

ff. 'r 1_J

fNe

pafep

fejg

»j | ■ d *

lur'i i J 1 " ' " ' J' I

75
CONVENTION PROCEEDINGS

Beginning with the current issue of the "Journal of Synagogue
Music," and continuing in each subsequent June issue, we shall
publish the major papers and addresses delivered at the annual
conventions of the Cantors Assembly. Technical and economic prob-
lems make it difficult to continue to publish the full proceedings of
each convention as in the past. Until these can be overcome, the
Editors will use the Journal as the means of providing our readers
with texts of the most relevant and useful convention papers.

The following items are included in this issue:

The proceedings of the Honors Convocation of the Jewish Theo-
logical Seminary of America, held on Sunday evening, May 5th at
the 38th annual convention. These proceedings include the formal
program, the conferring of the degree of Doctor of Music, honoris
causa to Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum, the Convocation address by
the Chancellor of the Seminary, Dr. Gerson D. Cohen, and the
awarding of the designation of Honorary Fellows of the Cantors
Institute to Hazzanim Frank Birnbaum, Merrill Fisher, Kalman
Fliegelman, Joseph Guttman, William Hauben, Yehuda Keller,
Joseph I. Kurland, Fred S. Mannes, Abraham Seif, Shlomo Shuster,
and Larry Vieder.

Also included are the Report of the Executive Vice President,
delivered at the 38th annual meeting of the Cantors Assembly on
Tuesday, May 7th, and the precedent breaking address of Rabbi
Alexander Shapiro, President of the Rabbinical Assembly, also de-
livered on Tuesday, May 7th.

Finally, an informative and highly practical discussion of
Hebrew diction as presented by Hazzan Pinchas Spiro at the 37th
annual convention, on Wednesday, May 23, 1984.

In this fashion we hope to publish, in future issues, other im-
portant papers from the 1985 convention, and from the 1983 and
subsequent conventions. (The 1982 Proceedings are the last to be
published in toto.)

The Editors

HONORS CONVOCATION

THE JEWISH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

OF AMERICA

CANTORS ASSEMBLY

Sunday, May 5, 1985 at 9:00 P.M.

The Playhouse — Grossinger's Hotel

(Seated on the Platform Are: Rabbi David C. Kogen, Rabbi
Morton Leifman, Rabbi Shamai Kanter, Hazzan Samuel
Rosenbaum, Hazzan Ivan E. Perlman, Hazzan Ben Belfer,
Hazzan Sol Mendelson, Hazzan Henry Rosenblum, Mrs.
Judith Tischler, Hazzan Max Wohlberg, Hazzan Eliot Vogel)

Rabbi David C. Kogen, Presiding

WELCOME

Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum:

It is a particular pleasure to open the 38th Annual Convention
of the Cantors Assembly by welcoming the members of the adminis-
tration and the faculty of the Jewish Theological Seminary of
America who are participating in this Academic Honors Convocation
tonight.

I am happy to introduce to you Rabbi David C. Kogen, Vice-
Chancellor of the Seminary, the Presiding Officer; Rabbi Morton M.
Leifman, Vice President of the Seminary and Dean of the Cantors
Institute who will present the candidates for designation as Honorary
Fellows, and also Hazzan Ben Belfer, Hazzan Sol Mendelson, Hazzan
Henry Rosenblum, Mrs. Judith Tischler, Hazzan Eliot Vogel, and
Hazzan Max Wohlberg, members of the faculty of the Seminary's
Cantors Institute Seminary College of Jewish Music.

As some of you may know, the Seminary is about to celebrate
the 100th Anniversary of its founding. This centennial celebration
is a source of great pride and admiration for all of us. We will soon
be participating in centennial events in our home communities but
I wish to avail myself of this opportunity to offer congratulations to
the parent institution of the Cantors Assembly, The Jewish Theo-
logical Seminary of America on its 100th Anniversary. And now, I
turn the podium over to Rabbi Kogen.

Rabbi David Kogen:

The opening prayer will be offered by Rabbi Shamai Kanter,
a graduate of the J ewish Theological Seminary of America and spiri-
tual leader of Temple Beth El, Rochester, New York.

Rabbi Shamai KANTER:

Ribono shel olam. Master of the vastness of Your universe,
we come together at a time when during the last several days we
have been struck with the depth of emotions that we thought were
long forgotten and long buried. Memories that were far from us
here suddenly seemed to come so near. As our beloved teacher,
Abraham J oshua Heschel once taught us, we find ourselves much
more J ewish in our feelings than we ever suspected.

And so we come together remembering the important truth of
what we share as a people and as those who try to serve You.
D'varkha emet v'kayam la-ad. Lord, Your word exists forever. Your
word ever inspires our lives. Help us to search for the melodies as
well that illuminate the meaning of Your sacred word. For melodies
inspire, melodies help us to remember. Melodies help us to study.
Melodies help us to understand.

We ask Your help, strengthening us so that we may learn more
deeply, so that we can teach more truly, helping us to live more
intensely so that we can communicate by our lives more directly.
Help us to love more completely so that we can shine forth Your
love to all of Your people, to all of Your children.

We pray, as well, that You grant that we ever honor those who
serve for us as example through teaching, through service to Your
people. Help us to honor those who show us that our greatest dignity
is in finding new ways to serve You and to help others to sing Your
song.

So may it be.

Amen!

Rabbi David Kogen:

Hazzan Rosenbaum, Hazzan Perl man, Rabbi Leifman, Hazzan
Mendleson, Hazzan Rosenbaum, Mrs. Tischler, Hazzan Wohlberg,
Colleagues, Honorary Fellows of the Cantors Institute, Alumni of
the Cantors Institute, and dear friends and guests:

We are gathered here today in formal Academic Convocation of
the J ewish Theological Seminary of America to confer the Degree
of Doctor of Music, Honoris Causa on your distinguished Executive
Vice-President, Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum, who is not only a con-
summate artist, creator, explicator and exponent of J ewish liturgical

music, but also a man whose leadership of the Cantors Assembly
has served to enhance the perception of the role of the cantorate
in American society. We meet, too, to demonstrate by word and
by deed the admiration and affection, the respect and esteem, in
which we hold those distinguished members of the Cantors Assembly
who have been recommended by the faculty of the Cantors Institute
and the Seminary College of Jewish Music for designation as Honor-
ary Fellows of the Cantors Institute. This distinction is the highest
award that the Cantors Institute can bestow, and it is therefore only
proper that the awards be conferred within the context of this special
convocation.

Before proceeding, I want to say a special word of welcome to
the Honorary Fellows of the Cantors Institute who received the
award in past years and are participating in this convocation today.
They continue, of course, to be held in the highest regard.

Honorary Fellows of the Cantors Institute, I invite you to please
stand and be recognized.

I transmit to the Alumni of the Cantors Institute — Seminary
College of Jewish Music who are present here today the greetings
of your teachers and members of the administration who could not
be here this evening.

Unhappily, I must inform you that Chancellor Gerson D. Cohen,
who was keenly anticipating this celebration is unable to be with
us as planned. The Chancellor, fell and broke his ankle while visit-
ing Israel at Passover and his leg is in a cast which makes him
unable to travel. Until almost the last, moment he had hoped to be
here. However, though he is making good progress, his doctors will
not permit him to travel yet.

This is an historic occasion because we are celebrating a great
milestone in the life of the Conservative Movement: The one hun-
dredth anniversary of the founding of the Seminary. Were Dr.
Cohen here, I know he would comment that, just one week ago we
inaugurated the centennial celebration, calling together the Board
of Overseers (on which the Cantors Assembly is represented) and
other Seminary leaders to look back over the accomplishments of
the past 100 years and to contemplate the future of the Seminary
and our Conservative Movement. We held these ceremonies in the
beautiful new building which is one of the accomplishments that
distinguishes Dr. Gerson D. Cohen's tenure as Chancellor. That
building contains superb facilities for cantorial students — sound-
proof practice rooms, a music library and listening rooms, a small
auditorium where cantorial recitals are held, and a 400 seat audi-
torium (where an opera has already been produced, and a student

musical staged). Our cantorial students are flourishing in this new
environment. With Rabbi Leifman's help there has developed a
very rich student life. Cantorial students and rabbinical students
are housed in the same buildings, nurturing the partnership we hope
to see continued in their professional lives as cantors and rabbis
of congregations. I urge you all to come and visit us and see for
yourselves.

Our Chancellor has been a major proponent of these policies.
Those of you who know him are acquainted, not only with his erudi-
tion as a scholar of J ewish history but also with his passion for
music — instrumental and vocal, secular and sacred. Dr. Cohen has
incorporated both of these facets in his Convocation Address, 'The
Hazzan In History." He has asked me to read it for him:

The Hazzan In History

It is a source of deep regret to me that I am unable to deliver
these remarks in person. However, I want to assure you that I
have reflected long and hard on your role in the community, and
on the particular significance of that role in this age. I have long
felt that a community is in large measure identified by the character
of its liturgy. This is true of secular communities, all of which have
a secular or civil corpus of hymns, songs, and anthems with which
they affirm their loyalties to the allegiances of their founders. It is
particularly true of our own heritage.

Our liturgy is not only an anthology of passages from Scripture,
but also a series of affirmations, normally called blessings. These
are basically statements of our commitments to our God, our Torah,
and to Israel. It is significant that the Talmud begins with the
laws for the recitation of the Shema. This, I think, really means that
essentially a J ew is identified to himself or herself by the kind of
liturgy that he or she recites. And our liturgical corpus is rich. It
has grown uninterruptedly over the centuries through the composi-
tion and insertion of piyyutim into the prayer book. Typically, these
piyyutim are statements of the significance of the day on which
they are recited, and while occasionally they contain some petition,
they are essentially hymns and affirmations — even, frequently,
sermons in verse. In the middle ages, these poems were not taken
as lightly as they appear to be today, although the vocabulary was,
on occasion, as strange to our forebearers as it is to us. But they
understood the underlying message of these piyyutim — that words
have power, and words coupled with the proper intention are the
most direct means we have of approaching God. To facilitate this,

some medieval scholars wrote commentaries on the piyyutim which
were directed as much to the hazzanim as to the community at large.
Such preoccupation with meaning is uncommon today. In this con-
nection, let me be very candid. Sometime ago, I happened to hear
a hymn by the man who is known as the most prolific contemporary
Anglican composer — Herbert Howells. It was a moving piece, al-
though I confess I am not equipped to evaluate it musically, or for
that matter, hymnalogically. I was moved, on hearing it, to find
that there are contemporary Anglican composers who do not feel
as lonely as the modern hazzan necessarily feels in his synagogue.
I asked myself why this should be so, and why we do not have con-
temporary poets and composers such as those we had in the middle
ages.

We know now the history of the Mahzor — not only its contents,
but its actual form. Thanks to the researches of the late Dr. Ernst
Goldschmidt, as reported in the essays collected by his son-in-law,
Dr. J onah Frankel, we now know that medieval hazzanim in Ashkenaz
used to record their own liturgical compositions in the margins of
the community 'Mahzor — a large, oversize, parchment book that
they kept for generations, so that, to a considerable degree, our
Mahzor grew by agglutination. Each hazzan perceived it as his duty
to compose afresh. They had, apparently, the advantage that Her-
bert Howells has, and that the at least equally talented hazzanim
of our time lack — an audience which understood the vocabulary
in which they were speaking. You often sing today to an audience
that rarely understands the poem that is printed, let alone any poem
that you might make up in Hebrew. Our English readings are
recited, responsively or collectively, and the hazzan is compelled to
be a musical virtuoso, rather than the explicator or the stater in
verse of the significance of a particular Sabbath festival as haz-

zanim did in Ashkenaz, in Italy, and in other countries.

A medieval document, composed in Capua in the year 1054 by
Ahimaaz ben Paltiel, author of the so-called Scroll of Ahimaaz, con-
tains a series of stories about the credulousness of our ancestors and
their hagiographic descriptions of their rabbinic leadership. The
stories have often made our ancestors the objects of mockery, but
I am not at all embarrassed by them. The real purpose of this
scroll is to describe one central miracle which cannot be affirmed or
denied except by faith. The miracle that the Ahimaaz celebrates
is that the liturgical compositions of those rabbis were so effective
that they would permeate the clouds of heaven and reach the throne
of glory. We still recite some of these piyyutim, especially during
the Neil ah service on Yom Kippur.

The loneliness you feel is a result of the fact that whatever
vocabulary you recite, you are doing so in solitude — virtually talk-
to yourselves. Most of our congregants do not know how to chant
the Torah — or even the Haftarah — liturgically. Much less are
they able to understand the complicated Hebrew poems that we find
in our Ashkenazic Mahzor. Therefore, I want to indicate that I
frequently share your sense of isolation. More than once I have
tried to put myself in your shoes, although I cannot read a bar of
music, much less sing a phrase in tune. But I can ask myself the
following: You are all in your minds sheliahey tsibbur — emissaries
of the congregation — although the congregation often appears
neither to know nor to care. It wants to be entertained by the
music, but the music doesn't speak to it even as Italian opera speaks
to audiences that know no Italian. Mozart and Rossini have made
international and eternal a vocabulary that speaks to us even though
we don't understand the language.

Alas, we have forgotten not only Hebrew, but also the significance
of the liturgy. I want to emphasize that in a profound sense you
are the emissaries of the congregation, and I hope that you will con-
tinue to regard yourselves as such — as the saving remnant, preserv-
ing a sacred corpus of liturgy. I would urge you to be not only
singers, but, indeed, true teachers, working with youngsters and
teaching them both the liturgy and the music — the recitative as
well as the significance of each prayer. If you become teachers —
or, more accurately, expand your teaching roles, I feel sure you will
get greater satisfaction from your work. I want to thank you, as
a Conservative J ew and a rabbi, for what you have accomplished,
against tremendous odds. I want to congratulate you on this occasion,
and above all congratulate the honorees, who are recognized today
for so much hard and intensive work. Remember that each soul
whom you have taught to sing will reach another soul, until ulti-
mately our congregations will recapture the vocabulary which should
be their heritage, and which you are doing so much to bring back to
them.

This is an enterprise in which we shall be working together.
One of the things which I hope the Seminary will achieve during
the celebration of its centennial is a greatly expanded program of
reaching out to our laity, through a variety of agents and media.
I expect and hope that our hazzanim, and the Cantors Assembly,
will play a large role in helping us to achieve that goal, and that
we shall thus approach the day when the earth will be filled with
the knowledge of God as the waters cover the seas. In our efforts,

we shall be guided by the words of the psalmist, who invites us to
sing a new song unto the Lord — a song of renewal.

I welcome you as my partners in this effort, since, as we all
know, any genuine renewal must include liturgy and song. May
Cod be with you in your work, and may our next such meeting be
face to face.

Conferral of Honorary Degree on
Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum

Rabbi David Kogen:

Turning now to the important business of the evening, the
Faculty Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended, and the
Board of Directors has voted unanimously to confer the Degree of
Doctor of Music, Honoris Causa, upon Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum.
Will he please come forward. Hazzan Rosenbaum is sponsored by
Rabbi Shamai Kanter, who was ordained by the Seminary and is
the spiritual leader of Temple Beth El, Rochester, New York; and
by Hazzan Max Wohlberg, Professor of Hazzanut and Senior Member
of the Faculty of the Cantors Institute. Will they come forward.

Rabbi Morton M. Leifman, Dean of the Cantors Institute will
read the Honorary Degree Citation.

Rabbi Morton Leifman:

Samuel Rosenbaum: Distinguished and beloved Hazzan of
Temple Beth El, Rochester, New York since 1946, you served as
President of the Cantors Assembly from 1955-58 and, since 1959
have utilized your singular administrative talent as Executive Vice-
President of that organization. A creative and versatile musician
and dedicated practitioner of our faith who has combined a love of
J udaism with a love of music, your life and career have inspired the
love and respect of your peers in the cantorate, the rabbis who are
your partners, and the lay persons, young and old, whose worship
you enhance.

A native of New York City, you received your secular education
in its schools and at New York University, your J ewish education
at the Hebrew High School of New York's J ewish Education Asso-
ciation and the Herzliah Teacher's Academy, and your professional
training in hazzanut, voice, and piano with such illustrious teachers
as Dr. Jacob Beimel and Cantor Adolph Katchko.

Your contributions to the larger community are legion, ranging
from wartime service in the United States Army from 1942-46, to
appointment as Scholar-in-Residence at the workshops in liturgical
music in Boys Town, in Omaha, Nebraska.

Your translations of Yiddish poetry are renowned. Others of
your many-faceted published works teach and enrich our understand-
ing of the Jewish life cycle, the synagogue and its service. Your
moving oratorios, cantatas and other compositions for radio and
television, which celebrate the history, culture and religion of our
people, are performed frequently and have won you international
recognition.

Among the many honors you have received are a nomination
for an Emmy Award, prizes for films and television productions, a
Solomon Schechter Award in Synagoguge Programming, a Kavod
Award from the Cantors Assembly for originality and variety in
J ewish music programming, and the distinction of being named by
the Seminary an Honorary Fellow of the Cantors Institute.

You have used your rich and varied talents in the service of
your congregation, your colleagues, and the world wide Jewish
community.

Rabbi David Kogen:

Hazzan Rosenbaum: In recognition of your creative musical
artistry, and in order to publicly express our respect and admiration
for your many contributions to the enhancement of the role of the
Hazzan, not only in your synagogue, but also in synagogue life gen-
erally, through your leadership of the Cantors Assembly, the Faculty
Committee on Honorary Degrees and the Board of Directors of the
Jewish Theological Seminary of America have voted unanimously
to confer upon you the Degree of Doctor of Music, Honoris Causa,
and I am privileged to present it to you in their behalf, in token
whereof I hand you this diploma.

And now, it is with special pride that I announce that the
Faculty of the Cantors Institute have this year recommended for
appointment as Honorary Fellows of the Cantors Institute eleven
hazzanim, talented and devoted members of the Cantors Assembly,
who have served the cantorate for a minimum of 25 years and have
distinguished their service with serious devotion to their calling.

Rabbi Morton Leifman, Vice-President of the Seminary and
Dean of the Cantors Institute and Seminary College of J ewish Music,
will present the candidates for designation as Honorary Fellows.

Rabbi Morton Leifman:

Thank you, Rabbi Kogen. Before proceeding with the pleasant
business before us, I want to note that it is now 33 years since the
founding of the Cantors Institute, the youngest of the Seminary's
schools. In those 33 years we have graduated 107 Cantors and

granted 75 Bachelor of Sacred Music Degrees, 11 Master of Sacred
Music Degrees and 10 Doctor of Sacred Music Degrees.

The scholarly and artistic level of recent graduates and of the
present student body is high indeed. We are very proud to see so
many of our graduates in this audience tonight and proud, too, that
this evening a student in the Cantors Institute was invited to officiate
at the Maariv service at this convention for the first time.

As Dean of the Cantors Institute and Seminary College of J ew-
ish Music, I encourage you to bring to our attention other such
worthy candidates for the Cantor ial profession.

Mr. Vice-Chancel I or, it is now my privilege to present to you
the distinguished candidates for designation as Honorary Fellows
of the Cantors Institute. They have dedicated their lives, I'avodat
habore, to the worship of our Creator, and to the enhancement of
the J ewish people. I am going to call each man individually and
ask him to come forward as his name is announced and to remain
here on the platform.

Hehazzan Ephraim Fishl ben Eliyahu, Hazzan Frank Birnbaum,
since 1973 beloved shliach tsibbur of Temple Israel in Charlotte,
North Carolina, you have served communities in New Orleans, Phila-
delphia, and Silver Spring, Md. with distinction, and have brought
honor to yourself, to your profession and to the Seminary's Cantors
Institute which trained you. In your lifetime you have witnessed
overwhelming cataclysmic changes in J ewish life, and you were more
than an observer. You were an active participant in the events of
the world around you. You served as president of the Zionist Re-
visionist Organization of Washington, D.C. and were president of
the Cantors Association of that same area. Earlier, during World
War II you fought with the Hungarian underground and helped
organize the Irgun Zvai Leumi's section in Slovakia. Your Alma
Mater is pleased indeed to welcome you into the ranks of Fellows
of the Cantors Institute. Mazal Tov!

Hehazzan Menahem Hayim ben Zvi, Hazzan Merrill Fisher,
since 1979, devoted cantor of the prestigious Main Line Reform
Temple — Beth Elohim in Philadelphia. You have been a leader in
the area of creative programming for J ewish music and participated
in the premiers of works by Gershon Ephros, Garth Dragin, Mark
Silver and Ben Steinberg. Your broad educational background in-
cludes studies at Yeshivah University, New York College of Music,
the J ulliard School and, of course, the Hebrew Union College School

of Sacred Music which awarded you its BSM degree. Your rich
baritone voice continuously inspires the thousands of your con-
gregants who pray with you. It is with great joy that the Cantors
Institute of the Jewish Theological Seminary welcomes you as a
Fellow of the Cantors Institute.

Hehazzan Kalman Yaakov ben Yehezkel haKohen, Hazzan Kal-
man Fliegelman, highly respected and beloved Hazzan of Temple
Beth Torah of Westbury, New York. Your biography reads like a
chapter of modern European J ewish historical drama, complete with
childhood imprisonment by the Nazis, dramatic escapes, miraculous
family reunions, and eventual travel to America and the long arduous
path which led you to your prominent place in the cantorial pro-
fession.

The Cantors Institute of the J ewish Theological Seminary, joins
your beloved congregation and the thousands of your friends who
pray for your continued well-being, as we today confer upon you
membership in the prestigius company of Fellows of the Cantors
Institute.

Hehazzan Yosef ben Yaakov, Hazzan J oseph Guttman, "Yayin
ben Yayin". Talented son of a talented father. Your boyhood in
Seilish, Czechoslovakia was filled with piety, learning and tradi-
tional J ewish music. Especially important in that life was the ex-
ample of your sainted father, a constant student of Torah and the
possessor of a splendid baal t'fillah voice and a dignified bearing.

The music of the hasidim as you heard it in your home added
to your already deep roots. The miseries and terrors of World War
M's oppression and persecution seared your soul as you witnessed
the destruction of so much that was holy and pure.

This is a special day for you and for the Cantors Institute of
the J ewish Theological Seminary. Today marks exactly forty years
of your liberation from slavery and the beginning of your road of
service to God and your people on the American continent. We
rejoice with you and with the congregation of the Millinery Center
Synagogue in Manhattan which has given you the proper platform
for you to express your dedication and love since 1956. The Cantors
Institute is pleased indeed to welcome you to its newest class of
Fellows of the Institute. May God's grace continue to guide you
and yours for many productive years to come.

Hehazzan Z'ev ben Shlomo, Hazzan William Hauben — You
bring to your pulpit, Rodeph Sholom of Tampa, Florida, a combina-

tion of the J udaic culture of Eastern Europe and the outstanding
voice training acquired in Western Europe and in the United States.
You guided Rodeph Sholom to its well deserved place in the ranks
of United Synagogue congregations and witnessed its being awarded
the National Solomon Schechter Prize for Musical Programming.
You were instrumental in the development of the unique annual
Rodeph Sholom J ewish Music Festival. Your colleagues and friends
are pleased to welcome you as a Fellow of the Cantors I nstitute and
to greet you with affection and respect.

Hehazzan Yehuda ben haRav Hayim Avraham, Hazzan Yehudah
Keller — Beloved shliach tsibbur of Temple Beth Zion-Sinai of
Long Beach, California — Your noble lineage is reflected in the
dignity of your chanting and in the way that you relate to your
fellowman. The influence of your remarkable parents and of the
Hungarian shtetlakh from which they emmi grated is still evident in
your life. Your beloved congregants and wonderful family share with
you in this honor which the Cantors Institute of the J ewish Theo-
logical Seminary is pleased to bestow on you. May you continue to
go from strength to strength.

Hehazzan Yosef ben Yitzhak Menahem Eliezer, Hazzan J oseph
I. Kurland — Your education in gymnasium and yeshivot in Poland,
your vocal training with distinguished professors in Austria and in
America — all complemented your childhood hazzanut experiences
in East Europe. You traversed a long road from Sosnowiec to
Chicago, from the choir of the Lublin Synagogue to Ezras Israel in
Chicago and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Your becoming a
Fellow of the Cantors I nstitute is an honor bestowed by the Seminary
with affection and joy. May you go from strength to strength.

Hehazzan Shmuel ben Yehuda haKohen, Hazzan Fred Mannes
— Beloved shliach tsibbur of the prestigious West End Synagogue
of Nashville, Tennessee, you bring to your pulpit the sincerity, talent
and devotion that have become the expected norm for hazzanim in
our Movement. You shared these qualities with congregations in
Chicago, in Iowa, in Oklahoma and in Western Canada before com-
ing to Nashville to become leader, teacher and inspiration for young
and old. The Cantors Institute of the J ewish Theological Seminary
is pleased to confer its Fellow of the Cantors Institute on you with
hopes and prayers for a productive and happy future.

Hehazzan Avraham Yehoshua ben haRav Tzvi Eliezer, Hazzan
Abraham Seif — Your life, I supose, could be characterized as a bit

of wood salvaged from the flames — you were one bereft of siblings
and a devoted father lost to savagery and torture — Your response
could have been either deep silence or unsettled screaming. You chose
neither path — you chose instead to sing God's song and your peo-
ple's anthems. You chose affirmation rather than denial. You chose
holiness rather than impurity. Your beloved ministry at Kneseth
Israel in Miami Beach has given you a most proper platform to
glorify your Creator. Your service to your people and to your Maker
have made you a most fitting recipient of the Fellow of the Cantors
Institute Award.

Hehazzan Shlomo ben Barukh, Hazzan Shlomo Shuster — Your
excellent education, both secular and religious coupled with your
natural talent have combined to prepare you to become a leader in
your profession. As the beloved shliach tsibbur of Niles Township
Jewish Congregation, you have invested the energies of your multi-
talented personality to service of God and man. Aside from the
responsibilities involved in leading Jews in prayer, you developed
special music programs for your community, directed the synagogue
quartet, are actively involved in music education. You have brought
new music to the Chicago area both by commission and collaboration.
Your influence on teenagers is immense, reflected only partly in the
large number of young people that you prepare every year for B'nai
M itzvah.

Hehazzan Meir Ben-Zion ben Yitzhak Shmud, Hazzan Larry
Vieder — Your influence on thousands of young people in Detroit's
Adat Sholom Synagogue and in the general community is incalcuble.
To teach nusah and trop has been the tool that you used for its
own sake and in order to bring Jews closer to their heritage. You
have served as a role model — musician, cantor, teacher, dedicated
tom'lckhdt hakodesh. Your Hungarian and Czechoslovak! an teach-
ers succeeded in planting in you the seeds of ahavat Tor ah and
following in their footsteps you have enriched and ennobled thousands
of American adults and teenagers. The Cantors Institute is pleased
to recognize your talent and devotion and welcomes you to the
Fellowship of the Cantors Institute.

Rabbi David KOGEN:

Gentlemen: The kadosh barukh hu has blessed you with great
musical gifts which you have used as instruments for God's service.
As a result of your dedication, worship in the synagogue has been
beautified and sanctified, and appreciation and knowledge of Jewish

music among our people has been enhanced. Because of you, a great
many men, women and children have been enabled to respond to the
beauty of the traditions of our ancestors. Your devotion to our faith
has enabled you truly to fulfill the hazzan's noble function as the
"Sh'liah Tzibur".

In recognition of these contributions, it is therefore entirely ap-
propriate that the Faculty of the Cantors I nstitute should have recom-
mended, and the Board of Directors of the J ewish Theological Semi-
nary of America, should have unanimously approved, that you be
admitted to the ranks of Honorary Fellows of the Cantors Institute.
May I congratulate you now. God bless you all.

Hazzan Ivan E. Perlman, President of the Cantors Assembly,
will now offer the closing prayer.

Hazzan Ivan Perlman:

Avinu shebashamayim, look down upon us and continue to
shower us with your magnificent blessings. Grant Thy healing power
to our cherished Chancellor, Dr. Gerson D. Cohen, so that he, along
with his administration and faculty, may continue to bring us un-
derstanding of Thy holy Torah.

May our Jewish Theological Seminary of America always be
recognized as its fountain of learning. Vouchsafe Thy blessings upon
our beloved Hazzan Samuel Rosenbaum that he may continue to
serve our sacred calling and klal Yisrael for many more fruitful years.

May the Seminary leadership find more of us worthy of such
high honor as the years go by.

Bless all our newly elected Honorary Fellows, together with all
our colleagues who serve in the vineyard of the land. And may we
share ever further nahas for our people with our spiritual colleagues
in our pulpits everywhere. Bless us all with good health and unity
of purpose so that our Movement may continue to provide the in-
spirational leadership it needs and deserves. And may we all live
in our hearts, in our homes, in our places of worship in a world of
everlasting peace.

Amen!

REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
MAY 7, 1985

HAZZAN Samuel Rosenbaum

Colleagues and friends :

The protocol of academia does not allow for sentimentality, and
so it would have been inappropriate for me to respond to the honor
accorded me at the Seminary Convocation on Sunday evening.

As you can understand, my heart was filled with a thousand
images : Sainted parents and grandparents: Ina, Michael, J udy and
Tom and Abigail, David and Gail and Daniel Jeremy. From all of
them I borrowed precious time and love to earn this honor. Teachers
and revered colleagues of past decades, known and unknown. Friends
and co-workers in the Assembly who are no longer with us, but who
— I dare to hope — may have been watching from their places in
that Academy-on-High especially reserved for hazzanim.

And then there was the memory of a dear and precious friend, with
whose death I still have not been reconciled, Norman Warembud.
He, more than any other person outside of the family, pushed and
schemed and nagged at me to begin doing many of the very things
for which I was honored. And finally, each and every one of you.

All of these kept pressing in on me asking to be remembered.
All have a palpable share in my simha.

I n the days ahead I hope to have the opportunity to acknowledge
these debts in a direct and personal way. For the moment, I ask
you to accept my deepest thanks and my promise to try to be worthy
of the honor and of those who helped make it possible.

There is, however, a huvurah which deserves more than that,
the Cantors Assembly, itself. In pointing up the special relationship
between the Assembly and the occasion of the first conferring of an
honorary degree on a practicing hazzan, I hope I can illumine, as
well, the great overriding significance of the event for all hazzanim
and for hazzanut. Particularly for the hazzanim who are setting out
on their careers, looking ahead in anticipation and with some appre-
hension to the pursuit of the professional goals they have set for
themselves.

In spite of more than a fair share of frustrations and disappoint-
ments, the Cantors Assembly has dreamed and achieved, dared and
succeeded, faltered and survived and meets here once again, strong
and united, to celebrate its 38th anniversary.

Sometimes, when we are occupied with the day-to-day challenges
which conerned hazzanim confront, working in an unconcerned

world, we may become blinded to what we have accomplished in the
relatively few years of our existence.

We may not realize that the Cantors Assembly speaks not only
to the immediate needs of J ewish life, but that it speaks as well —
over the heads of the American J ewish community of the present —
to uncounted J ewish communities yet unborn, just as the institutions
and the sages of the past spoke to us over the heads of their
communities,

We should take heart that our message to the future will post
proof of the steadily broadening parameters of service and influence
of this calling of ours that has comforted and guided Jews from
our earliest years as a people. We project ourselves and our impact
into the future, even as we write the history of the days of our years,
leaving a mark for those who will follow to recognize and to remember.
A mark against which they can begin to measure their own achieve-
ments and a point from which they can proceed to project their his-
tory into the future.

I n the process they endow us with a measure of eternity as they
achieve for themselves an understanding of who they are, which
comes only from knowing the source from whence they have come.

Leaving something lasting and meaningful for the future to in-
herit and to remember is one half of the coin of hazzanut; the daily
pursuit of our special and demanding calling is the other half.

Let not the joy we feel at what we have accomplished blind us
to the realities of contemporary J ewish life; but let not the problems
which cry out for solution lessen our determination to serve, to sur-
vive and to overcome.

The difficulties which beset J ewish life today need no elabora-
tion documentation. The list is a long and sad one: assimilation,
intermarriage, empty synagogues, the abandonment of even the
simplest mitzvot and of Torah study, J ewish illiteracy, the almost
complete eclipse of halakha as a determining factor in the way J ews
live, and the growing dominance over the community by Federa-
tions led by J ews whose commitment to J ewish life, in many cases,
is almost entirely financial.

So, we find ourselves celebrating our survival in an increasingly
apathetic, if not downright hostile environment, an environment in-
different to the disciplines of a movement and to principles to which
we are committed, individually and collectively.

Yet we will not turn our backs on what hundreds of generations
have struggled so hard to keep alive. As J ews who know J ewish
history, we have seen the pendulum swings in J ewish loyalty, alter-

nating between alienation and reconciliation; how we turn away in
one generation only to return in another to test God's capacity to
forgive. We must believe that this generation, like so many in the
past, is capable of return. Our's is the responsibility to help bring
about that reconciliation, or at least to stem the tide of alienation.
It is not our's alone, but yet it is our responsibility, too.

It is already noticeable that a return to tradition is taking place,
particularly among young people — teenagers as well as young mar-
rieds. Sociologists and demographers are already telling us that
Orthodoxy is the fastest growing movement in America and the most
active. A new batch of young charismatic leaders, men and women,
have captured the imagination and loyalty of the 20 to 40 generation,
and they are responding happily and vocally. Whether their regimen
of mitzvot is anything like that of earlier generation is really im-
material.

What is important is that there is a genuine ground-swell of
return abroad in the land and signs of it are visible everywhere:

The small knitted kipah has proliferated to where it is taken as
normal by J ew and gentile alike, by wearer and observer alike. The
Anglo-Jewish press has been bulging with articles and reports of
activities of Orthodox organizations and institutions. Some of the
fastest growing industries in large cities like New York, Boston,
Chicago and Los Angeles are those which manufacture and distribute
kosher products; kosher fast foods, kosher take-out services and in-
creasingly elegant and expensive kosher caterers and bakers, to name
some of the more visible.

The enthusiasm of this group is infectious. They have come out
of the closet and they are ready to open their hearts to anyone who
wants to listen to tell them that Orthodox is beautiful!

I envy them their regeneration, and I would want very much
to see a similar return in Conservative ranks. The return to funda-
mentalism in religion need not be limited to Orthodoxy. There are
more than enough young J ews from Conservative homes and back-
grounds who are drifting, intermarrying and assimilating to provide
us with new life and new energy.

The next few years may well be a watershed of J ewish life; a
point of decision. In short order we will know whether the impetus
to return is genuine or merely a fad. But we cannot afford to gamble
or to try to guess what will happen. We must accept the return of
young people as genuine, and we must now, today, this moment,
begin to win back the thousands of young people who look back at
their meager J ewish education as a meaningless waste and at their
Bar or Bat Mitzvah as a release from bondage.

Eugene Borowitz, in an interview in last week's "Jerusalem Post"
agrees :

Tor some of the returning young people, Orthodoxy is a choice,
a reasonable, viable choice for Americans who want to live in the
modern world and want a vibrant, living, exciting Orthodoxy.

"But beyond this group", he continues, "is a larger group of
non-Orthodox young people who say they want to be more J ewish
than heretofore." These, especially, are the young people who could
find a comfortable place in the Conservative movement.

And let us not forget the growing number of retirees who, after
throwing off J ewish observance upon retirement, are now finding their
way back to the synagogue for the comfort and activity they need
to fill their empty hours.

Young and old are ready to come back; many already have.
Are we ready to receive them?

It seems to me, that there are certain conditions, however, that
need to come to pass if we are to refurbish our movement, our
synagogues, our profession to a point where we can deal positively
with the opportunity which seems to be presenting itself to us. The
matter is crucial. Do we continue to flounder, wallowing in our dis-
appointment? Or do we learn to navigate to a better world? Will
we continue to react or will we act?

I think we have no choice. But you must understand that when
I say "we," I do not mean only we, hazzanim. I mean our colleagues,
the rabbis and the educators, and those enlightened laymen to whom
J ewishness is precious. But most of all I mean we hazzanim and we
rabbis. More about that in a moment.

No, I do not have a ready made, sure-fire plan that will solve
our problems, but I have an agenda and I know where I want us
to go.

And I have it on the authority of that beloved philosopher-poet,
Yogi Berra, who taught: "If you know where you want to go, you
have a better chance of getting there."

Here, then, is my agenda. A list of things to do until the
mashiah comes, or for the next ten years. Whichever comes first.

Like any agenda it is only a bare outline of what needs to be
filled in by those who undertake it. That filling in will take time,
thought, reason and wisdom; some turning back, some moving for-
ward and, above all, perseverance and commitment. There is enough
work and glory to keep all of us busy for the unforseeable future.
My father used to say, "the foreseeable future is no future at all."

III
Item one:

The majority of synagogues of the Conservative movement seem
to function today on the principle that the synagogue is a social
agency in which decisions on all questions including matters of faith,
liturgy, ritual practices, etc. can be made by popular vote or by a
ruling clique playing at power politics. Somehow they will need to
be educated to reconsider that policy and come to learn and to accept
the concept that Judasim is an evolving tradition in which change
can happen in an orderly manner within the framework of law and
tradition. Not by a vote of untutored men and women sitting around
a table in a smoke-filled room.

Input from all Jews has, over the ages, always brought about
change as the need arose; but it came in a process guided by the
scholars, teachers and rabbis of their time. The Conservative move-
ment, itself, is a living example of that process. Yet most synagogues
today give final authority on ritual, liturgical and halakhic questions
to barely literate Jews, in many cases without any serious prior
discussion with the rabbi or hazzan. As this process is duplicated
in hundreds of synagogues it is easy to see why we are deluged
by a growing number of disparate, and often contrary practices which
make of our movement a patchwork quilt of varying traditions from
which it is difficult to determine where we stand on any single issue
and which often force us to function in situations which compromise
our religious principles.

We are confused and torn by the lack of a reasonably uniform
set of principles which are arrived at in the light of halakha and
whose process for change is that set down and mandated by the
movement's founders and which have been adhered to by subsequent
law committees through the years.

My argument, is not necessarily with the changes which have
evolved these past two or three years, but with the dangers which
are inherent in changing practice by methods which are not based
in law.

With all that is at stake, perhaps even the very existence of
American Jewry as some sociologists predict, should we — hazzanim
and rabbis, individually, collectively and cooperatively — not be
speaking to this issue?

Whosoever cares and speaks out, we care and we must begin to
make ourselves heard in a variety of ways.

That proposal is not an easy one for me to make. Those who
know me, know that I am opposed to rabble-rousing and to inf I ama-
tory oratory as a means of solving a problem. I am by nature a

compromiser and whenever the Assembly is faced with an issue which
might seriously divide us, I almost certainly am among those who
advise backing off from combustible issues until a time when we
are secure enough and strong enough to deal with them.

As I re-read this last section when I was preparing my report
I thought to myself that a good many of you might wonder why
in the world I would insist at this point in the life of the Assembly in
bringing up a problem which many of us had long ago been com-
pelled to categorize as a makat medinah, a problem from which all
kleykodesh suffer and which many of us had discounted a long time
ago as being insoluble; a problem with which one has to learn to live,
like air pollution.

I think that it is a sign of our strength, and of the confidence
I have in the maturity of our membership that I can now, at last,
address ourselves to an issue which has hung over our professional
lives like the biblical cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night for
the last twenty years.

And so I decided to go with it. To share my intuition with you
and let you decide in the weeks ahead whether my proposal is realistic
or not.

The front page of last Sunday's "New York Times" bolstered
my opinion with a resounding 'Yes!". The paper reported on an
address which Albert Shanker, the nationally famous educator, de-
livered to the convention of the New York State United Teachers
Association at Niagara Falls.

Shanker, who is president of the American Federation of Teach-
ers, a union within the A.F.L.-C.I.O., urged teachers to support a
wide-ranging roster of measures that he said would enable them to
achieve greater status, prestige, decision-making power and job
satisfaction.

The language is education and labor, but the substance is
professionalism.

In place of "collective bargaining" read "annual contract nego-
tiations". In place of "teachers" read kley kodesh. In place of "school
boards" read "synagogue boards". In place of "superintendents and
principals", you might read "United Synagogue Committee on Con-
gregational Standards".

He argues that collective bargaining may produce grudging
salary increases but will not add one iota of professional status.

A restructuring of education to encourage bright young people
to enter teaching even if only with the intention of remaining five
or six years.

Shanker insisted that unless teaching takes on the qualities of
a profession such as medicine or law, it will be impossible to raise
standards or attract first rate candidates. "We wont get the best
and the brightest teachers if we continue to be treated like workers
in a factory."

A key to acquiring the attributes of a profession is for those in
teaching to be able to have a main role in setting educational policy,
School boards, superintendents and principals now reserve for them-
selves the authority that should be shared or handed over entirely
to teachers.

"A professional is not a person who just follows orders," Mr.
Shanker said. "A professional is permitted to operate independently,
make decisions, is not tightly supervised, is trusted and is generally
well compensated."

He said that when teachers began negotiating labor contracts
two decides ago, they expected officials to resist salary demands and
to be open to giving teachers authority instead of money. But the
opposite happened, according to Mr. Shanker, who said that it had
turned out that "professional issues were not subject to negotiation."

So, he has decided that there are limits to what can be achieved
through collective bargaining. It was a conclusion that few would
have expected from M r . Shanker, who i n past years was tel I i ng teach-
ers that the negotiating table was the best place to make gains.

Shanker's succinct statement on what it means to be a profes-
sional and his suggestions as to how teachers might go about securing
that status, are worth studying. I believe that my recommendation
is of that same order.

I am not sure I know yet how we can best go about getting in-
volved in this issue.

But, I can tell already that at least one Assembly member has
thought about it. Quite coinci dentally I received a letter from one
of our younger colleagues, Sheldon Levin of Philadelphia, filled with
constructive suggestions on how we could go about dealing with this
problem. I know that his suggestions, along with any others you
may have, will form the basis of the discussions on this subject which
will take place at the coming Executive Council and regional meetings.

I am certain, however, that a convention is not the forum for
a thorough discussion of ways and means. I would rather we treat
this and the other items on my agenda, in the same sensible, open
and frank manner in which we considered the issues of the rabbinic
ordination of women and the pending sanction by our movement of
women cantors. I am proud of how that was done, of the spirit in
which differing opinions were discussed and evaluated, happy over

the maturity we displayed in reaching our positions on those ques-
tions. Although they were not completely to the liking of everyone,
they were accepted by everyone for the sake of unity and continuity.

Item two:

Having been emboldened by raising the first issue, I will move
on to another which ranks on a par with the first as to pervasiveness
and combustibility.

Let us talk now about that odd couple, the rabbi and hazzan,
and the relationship between them.

I daresay that there is no subject which so dominates conversa-
tions, discussions, meetings and seminars of hazzanim as this. No
matter where our talk begins, the moment we touch on the things
that make us unhappy with our careers, we inevitably fall to finding
fault with our rabbis and before long, with all rabbis.

No matter that we know that there are hazzanim who live and
work amicably, peacefully with their rabbis. No matter that we know
that there are hazzanim who tell us that their rabbi is their closest
friend in the congregation and that the amity and unity flow over
to their families, as well. Somehow, most of us — even those who
have no real complaints, react like Pavlov's dog, and at the first
mention of a problem with a rabbi, no matter what the merits of
the complaint, we begin to salivate, and chime in with horror stories
which we have heard from others.

But this once, and hopefully from now on, if we agree, let us
exorcise that demon from one psyches and let us talk honestly and
rationally. Not for the purpose of proving that we are right and
they are wrong, but in order to begin to work our way out of the
morass of our antagonisms and find our way to a detente, a detente
that will gradually warm to an armistice and, finally, to peace.

What I think we need is a forum in which we can mutually
ventilate with the same freedom, the same vulnerability which we
sense in a therapy session. And I would hope that the discussions
which might lead to a new era of understanding would not concern
themselves with a particular quarrel between a particular pair of
kley kodesh, but which would be concerned with the things that
every hazzan, every rabbi needs. The space he requires in which
he can function; the freedom, within a mutually agreed upon code
of discipline, to grow and expand in any direction consonant with
his needs and those of the congregation.

I would hope that such a discussion would help us to discover
the goals we each have for ourselves and how each proposes to achieve
them.

How I need to be able to say to a rabbi: Colleague, brother,
friend, be my rabbi. Let me be able to believe in you! Comfort me,
guide me, teach me, let me share my fears with you as you share
yours with mine. Be true to your great calling. Be a rabbi!

How I would like to have a rabbi talk to me in the same fashion.

Perhaps it is the welcome breakthrough we have made under
Ivan Perlman's leadership in establishing a fresh and more cordial
relationship with the Rabbinical Assembly, that gives me hope that
this might be the time for such a wish to come true. For the first
time the president of each group is addressing a convention of its
counterpart. For the first time each organization has input into the
convention plans of the other. For the first time a Mason committee
has been established between the two organizations which will be-
come involved in settling disputes between a rabbi and a hazzan. In
this way, such differences will be aired before peers who know and
understand synagogue life, and not before a lay body that has not
the background, and often not the compassion for kley kodesh and
who may respond with "a plague on both your houses!"

That this is good and desirable is obvious. There is, however, a
deeper level of relationship which must be explored that cannot be
accomplished by public addresses. Speeches have, by their very
nature, a token quality about them. We cannot deal with the day
to day problems which provoke us to disagree in public utterances.

If the kind of discussions I have in mind can be held and some
agreement arrived at, we could go on to plan and work together
welded to each other by understanding, confidence, competence and
love in service of the greater good of the J ewish people.

What could we not accomplish with such a relationship?

How?

Again, the details are yet to be filled in, but it is not an im-
possible dream. The details will all fall into place once we are
sincerely and fully committed to making it happen. But as with
most great causes, we must first convince ourselves. Only then will
we be able to convince others.

I tern three:

J ust as "mitzvah goreret mitzvah", one good deed encourages
the performance of another, it might be appropriate to say "ometz
goreret ometz" courage generates courage.

There is a third heretofore untouchable subject with which I
conclude my agenda for things to do until the Messiah comes.

Ever si nee the Cantors Institute was established we have always
asked the question, "Why is there not a hazzan at the head of a

school for hazzanim?" Mostly, we asked that question among our-
selves, although it was implicit in many conversations with Seminary
administrators over the years.

Perhaps it was appropriate, when the Institute was established,
that a rabbi be placed in charge. There were few, if any, hazzanim
with the educational and administrative competence to run an ac-
credited college-level school. But today, thanks in a large extent to
our efforts, that school has graduated and presented us with over
120 graduates. All of them have at least a bachelor's degree; some
have additional degrees. We all have become more knowledgeable
and more sophisticated in management and administration. Can
there be a good reason why a number of qualified candidates for the
position of Director could not be found when it becomes vacant?

We posed this question in a wide-ranging discussion we had with
two members of the Seminary administration, frankly and openly
and in the presence of the current Dean, a dear friend and a
cherished colleague. Ivan pointed out that the question was in no
way a reflection upon his performance or on the relationship we
have had with him since he first took over that post.

But in view of the openness of the talk in that small group we
felt that something like this, which troubled us for many years,
needed desperately to be articulated and put on the table as one
of our most urgent priorities. At the moment, Ivan went on, the
question was purely theoretical. It would become real and urgent,
when and if that post became vacant.

That priority was again pointed out by Ivan in an historic meet-
ing between him and Dr. Gerson D. Cohen, Chancellor of the Semi-
nary, some two months ago. Dr. Cohen agreed that the idea was
reasonable and acceptable to him. He promised to give it full con-
sideration at the time it became necessary to replace the incumbent.

I mention this here not only to inform those who may not have
been present at several of the regional meetings held this winter
where it was previously reported. But also because it is of a piece
with my other proposals and a further token of the growing maturity,
strength and acceptance of the Cantors Assembly which hopefully
is a harbinger of better things to come.

There are a number of other items which I would share with
you but for the fact that I have already gone over my time and
probably exhausted your patience. I will, therefore, content myself
with just listing them, with the promise that we will be talking about
them as early as the next meeting of the Executive Council on
Thursday.

Among these will be the proposal to ask for a broad scale review
of the curriculum of the Cantors Institute. We have talked a great
deal in the last several years about the growing need for hazzanim
to become competent in a number of new fields such as sensitivity
training, music therapy, counselling, Yiddish, Yiddish literature and
folk art.

It is our aim to study the curriculum with an eye to time
priorities, goals, etc. in order to make room for courses in as many
of these subjects as possible.

I have a plan, apart and separate from the NEH project, to
invite every hazzan over 60, retired or active, especially those who
have a European or Sephardic backgrounds, to record every service
of the year as they are accustomed to chanting it, to serve as an
archive, and as a valuable teaching-aid for young hazzanim who
otherwise might remain cut off from these different strands of
hazzanut.

These are but a few of the dreams I have for us for the years
ahead. But between the dream and the reality, there is the thinking,
the planning, the doing, and the work; the work, the work!

As we begin another year we pray:

Vihi noam Adonai aleynu,
umaasey yadeynu kon'na aleynu
umaasey yadeynu koneneyhu.

Be gracious unto us, Lord, and be with us.
Establish Thou the work of our hands for us.
Yea, the work of our hands establish Thou it!

AMEN!

100

ADDRESS: PRESIDENT RABBINICAL ASSEMBLY
MAY 7, 1985

Rabbi Alexander M. Shapiro

It is a source of great pleasure for me to be present here today

at your convention. I must confess that the atmosphere here is quite
different than at the last convention that I had the honor to address
recently, in a different location in the Catskills. To the Rabbinical
Council of America I came as one from the outside, where indeed I
did receive a rather cordial welcome despite the fear of perhaps having
to dodge a brickbat or two. On the other hand, at the Cantors
Assembly I come with a complete feeling of collegiality and the sense
that I belong in every way. I trust that that will not move you
immediately to ask me to sing to prove my credentials! If you do,
Cantor Henry Rosenblum will be the first to attest to my total and
complete tone deafness. Nonetheless, in spirit if not in voice we are
very much one.

It has not always been so. I do not have the delineate to this
convention the history of rabbi/cantor relationships in the past.
Clearly, you know as well as I do the degree to which those relation-
ships were often embittered by all kinds of disagreements over mat-
ters of esthetics and halacha. Gaonic authorities were particularly
incensed against those whom they conceived to be musicians who
trivialized the liturgy and dared to introduce compositions of their
own, thereby both elongating the service and weighing it down with
extraneous elements that have no place in J ewish life. The paytan
of the middle ages, whom we revere, had his difficulties in getting
his works heard and certainly in getting them incorporated into the
liturgy. While I am probably more aware of rabbinic comments about
cantors than the other way around it is clear to me that not only
in the modern world but in the medieval one as well, there were
cantors whose lives were embittered by denigrations of their pro-
fessional abilities. Nonetheless, in a volume that I am sure you
know far better than I , that of Leo Landman's work on the cantorate,
not only does he refer to an occasional hazzan who was known as
a cantor and preacher of Torah. There were many over the course
of the ages who not only sought to combine singing ability with
scholarship; there were others whose knowledgability extended far
beyond the realm of liturgy.

The reality of our time has been in some ways similar. All too
often instead of a relationship of common concern and mutual help
relationships between rabbis and cantors have been fraught in too
many communities with petty jealousies and ludicrous competitive-

ness in a world that desparately needed their joint inspiration for
the greater good of the J ewish community as a whole. Not too long
after I was inaugurated into office as president of the Assembly, I
had a meeting with your esteemed president. We sat and talked at
length. We agreed that the time had at long last come for us to
begin some of the healing of the past divisiveness that is overdue.
I found my conversation with Cantor Perlman to be exceedingly il-
luminating and helpful. Many years ago when the situation in my
own community was very different than it is now, I remember sug-
gesting the possibility of our annual Rabbinical Assembly. Purim
party including cantors and I remember well the answer of one rabbi,
who obviously ought to remain nameless. "Alex", he said, "you don't
understand. The whole point of the Purim is to get away from my
hazzan"! I have to say with gratefulness that the situation has begun
to change very radically. In the very short time that has elapsed since
Ivan's meeting with me a great many changes have occurred. A can-
tor-in-residenceand a rabbi -in-residence have taken their appropriate
places in each of our conventions. Your own distinguished Hazzan
Hoshe Taub became the official cantor for our convention. He repre-
sented the Cantors Assembly in a very beautiful way and distin-
guished himself not only in the manner in which he advised us in
matters of liturgy but in the musical programs that were presented
to our membership. I am sure that Rabbi Kievel has had a similar

While those appointments are significant, they are essentially
still symbols since there is so much more to do, I am still amazed to
this day that the publication of the Birkat Hamazon by the entire
Conservative Movement contains the emblems of every one of our
groups, including the Womens League, but nowhere does the name
of the Cantors Assembly appear and it is the cantor who most often
is called upon both to train others and to lead in the Birkat Hamazon,
Similarly, I would have to attest to the fact that the publication of
our new siddur has not had nearly the kind of input by cantors I
would like to see ultimately in all of our liturgical publications. I am
absolutely convinced that we are only at the beginning of a road that
has to take us much, much further.

Nonetheless, the efforts made thus far have to be viewed in
their total context. That context is a very challenging and a very
troubling one in many ways. If you would permit me to say so, it
is obvious that one of the difficulties we have is that the level of
scholarship and training of Hazzanim in the field is not all that it
should be. That young rabbi who wanted to run away from his
Hazzan was talking about a human being who is not a cantor in the
Cantors Assembly tradition but some part-timer picked upon some-

102

where who bears the title Hazzan though in many ways not deserving
of it. Often such a cantor does not understand what he is saying or
why he is saying it and often his belief in what he says is limited,
to say the least. It is evident that we find ourselves in a catch-22
kind of situation, just as it is true in many areas, such as J ewish
education. On the one hand we desparately need to attract to the
cantorate as many of the finest young minds as well as voices that
we can. At the same time, the problem of status and, yes, the problem
of kemah as well, is such that it becomes increasingly difficult to
attract people of the highest caliber. With the small number of
young people being graduated every year, we are further and further
away even from filling the gaps that exist as men retire, or, God
forbid, pass from this world.

Clearly, both the Rabbinical Assembly as well as the Cantors
Assembly have a common task of raising the degree to which cantors
fill respected and honored positions in their communities. Moreover,
we must find the way as imaginatively as possible to attract the most
talented young people that are available as well as to educate our
congregations as to the nature of the work of the cantorate and its
place within our communities. It is interesting to know that we
have already set up a joint committee of rabbi and cantor to adjudi-
cate problems that may arise between rabbis and cantors in the
course of their work together. We have got to do much more than
that however. The time has come, I believe, to incorporate the notion
that cantors are called to the world of scholarship also, that they
can teach in our schools and in our adult education programs in
areas that do not directly impact the world of music. They are clearly
significant and important resource people within the life of the con-
gregation. In that entire area it seems to me that you have a role
to play also, an exceedingly important one, in demanding more of
your membership and not less, in demanding a deepening of their
scholarship and in insisting that they fulfill a whole range of roles
within the life of the congregation, particularly in those areas where
Jewish leadership is difficult to come by.

I am aware, too, that we must change a great deal of symbol
and a great deal of substance. It is time for the dean of the Can-
tors Institute to be a hazzan and not someone from the outside,
as much as I treasure those who have functioned in that way in the
past and I certainly do not speak judgmental ly of its present dean
who I treasure and respect. It is time, also, to find the way of
incorporating the leadership of the Cantors Assembly into much
more that is being done and said both within the Movement as well
as on behalf of the Movement. J ust as United Synagogue calls upon

rabbis to fulfill certain high responsibilities from time to time, so
must we impress on our United Synagogue counterparts that they
have a very significant corp of leadership within the community of
cantors available for service if only they were asked.

Let us be honest with one another. There are significant and
important problems within the Movement as a whole. There is a
good deal of divisiveness, a tendency of the Movement to go in many
different directions that I have sought to address in a variety of
ways. There is a need that different parts of the Movement have
to hear one another and not to sit in judgment on each other. The
scars of the issue of women's ordination badly need to be healed
and all of us have to find the way to incorporate such women rabbis
into the Movement in a way that does not challenge the integrity
of either the right or the left. Certainly, the issue of women cantors
will have to be addressed much sooner than later and incorporated
into the life of the Conservative Movement as we see it and under-
stand it and live it.

My daughter, who is spending this year at the Hebrew Uni-
versity, tells me that young people of the Movement living in Israel,
hearing some of the rhetoric in the Movement, talk a lot about
whether we are going to split apart. You and I have a sacred re-
sponsibility. It is the responsibility that is conferred upon us by our
calling, though often, we are not quite equal to it. Theoretically we
are spoken about by the tradition as being hahamim and zekenim.
Though we have a beard or not, we are thought of as somehow or
other incorporating within ourselves the wisdom of our people. Those
who are called to serve know all too well how deficient they are in
wisdom and how the traditional prayer of Hineni speaks so movingly
as to what we feel about ourselves.

Nonetheless, whatever our own self doubts may disclose, how-
ever we feel to be inadequately prepared for our calling, the responsi-
bility that rests on our shoulders is overwhelming. Together we have
the responsibility of teaching by our own example a life of faith, a
life of commitment to God and to Torah and the continuity of the
Jewish people. We have a responsibility not to be preoccupied with
pettiness and with squabbling and quarreling amongst ourselves. We
have a responsibility not, God forbid, to speak ill of our fellows and
to demand of the other an acceptance only of our most cherished
ideological positions. We have a responsibility to hear the other, to
work with the other, to involve ourselves with the most sympathetic
readiness to function without judgment of any kind. These are days
not to speak of a coming collapse of the Conservative Movement as
is spoken of so often by some irresponsible ideologists. (The report

104

of our imminent demise both within and without the 'Movement are
rather grossly exaggerated.) It must be our task, little by little, one
step at a time, to find a way to resolve those issues that divide the
right and the left among us, those who speak one language of theology
with those who speak another language of theology.

At the Convention of the Rabbinical Council of America the
other day, I spoke of the fact that I left the world of Orthodoxy
not because I rejected God but because I rejected the world of
bedikat tzitzit.

It is Salanter who tried to teach us to change our mode of
thinking. 'The problem", Salanter said, "is that we worry about
somebody else's soul and our own bodies. Rather", said Salanter,
"be more preoccupied with your own soul and sustaining some-
body else's body". What distinguishes us in the Conservative
Movement, it seems to be, is the courtesy and the honor we have
always given to those who have disagreed with us. The ability to
learn from the polarities of the Movement, from Heschel as well
as Kaplan, from those who speak the language of halacha as well
as those who speak the language of agadah. As we rabbis and
cantors together find the way to come to a new discovery of each
other and what each of us means to each other, we must find
a way as well to work together for one united movement affirm-
ing our faith in God and in Knesset Israel, accepting our respon-
sibility as halachists and of those ruled by Torah and at the same
time possessing the openness of spirit and the readiness to hear
in new ways new understandings of why God put us in the world.
The fact of the matter is, that in the long run we need one another
desperately. I so need to hear not only the prose of Torah but its
melody, so need to have my spirit lifted by the lilting voice of a
cantor who stands next to me, so need to find within the life of the
synagogue stimulation of my own spirit and of my own heart; a voice
that sings, a human being who struggles with me, helps me to bear
sponsibility not to be preoccupied with pettiness and with squabbling
the utter loneliness of the pulpit. All of us need the discipline of
the intensive day by day study of Torah and the rewards of the
spirit to be found in fulfillment of God's mitzvot. Let us find the
way then to persevere together with love for one another and with
the greatest of respect that comes from human beings who know
and understand something not only about the meaning of Torah but
the meaning of life itself.

May God strengthen our hands and hearts in the challenging
and critical days that await us.

105
SOME THOUGHTS ON HEBREW DICTION

PINCHAS Spiro

I would like to talk to you about a subject very close to me;
one with which I have been concerned for all of my career. The
subject is Hebrew diction. I have a few thoughts on the matter
which I think are well worth discussing.

I read a quote somewhere attributed to conductor Richard
Westenburg of the famed Musica Sacra, a quote with which I can
identify. This is what he said: "I am a word man. Very few people
can get as excited about a well-phonated vowel or a well-timed con-
sonant as I can." I recall my student days at the J uilliard School
of Music, and I am sure that my former classmates, Ben Belfer and
Larry Avery, who are here this morning will agree that among the
most important things we have learned in that school was a high
regard for proper singing diction in any language. Which brings me
to a question I want to ask you: As hazzanim, how important do
you think should correct and precise Hebrew diction be in the exer-
cise of our profession. My own answer is that it should be one of
the most important concerns of every self-respecting hazzan.

Before I proceed, I feel the need to make my position clear. I
don't regard myself as an authority on the subject of Hebrew diction,
and I don't intend my remarks today to be considered as the last
words on the subject. Therefore, don't ask me: mi samcha /' rosh?
All I hope to accomplish is to bring the subject and its problems
to your attention and to stimulate further study and discussion.
I want to say one more thing by way of an apology. I find it
somewhat awkward to present a paper on Hebrew diction to a
learned group such as this because I will have to refer to matters
which seem obvious and elementary. I ask in advance for your
patience and indulgence.

During several opportunities in the past, I discussed the follow-
ing areas of Hebrew pronunciation: mil'el and milra accents; kamatz
katan and kamatz gadol; sh'va nach and sh'va va. We can, there-
fore, dispense with these today.

Please note that my remarks today concern mainly the sephar-
dic pronunciation. Actually, what we call today "Sephardic pro-
nunciation" is a synthesis of Ashkenazic (mainly of the Polish
variety) and authentic Sephardic. In general, it can be said that the

Pinchas Spiro is the Hazzan of Tifereth Israel Synagogue of Des Moines.
He is a well known authority on the Hebrew language, biblical canti Nation
and nusah hatefillah and has written extensively on all of these. He is the
author of the "Complete Weekday Service" and the "Preliminary Service for
Sabbaths and Festivals" published by the Cantors Assembly.

106

Ashkenazim have taken over from the Sephardim only the pronuncia-
tion of the VOWELS, but not the pronunciation of the CONSO-
NANTS. (The exception, of course, is the tav which is always
pronounced as a "T" whether it has a dot in it or not.)

The Hebrew alphabet consists of 26 letters, each of which, in its
original version, had its own distinct manner of pronunciation. In
its original form, Hebrew writing was completely phonetic, and spell-
ing posed no difficulties. In our day, only some Yemenites still pro-
nounce each letter in its original version. (It is interesting to note
that they pronounce the vav like the English WA, and the tsade
more like an S than a TS.) In modern Israeli pronunciation there
are only 19 distinct sounds for the 26 letters of the alphabet. The
following pairs of letters are pronounced identically: kof and kuf;
chet and chof; sin and samech; tet and tov; as well as vav and vet.
The only pair of letters where some purists still insist on making
some distinction are the alef and the ayin. The guttural nature of
Xheayin makes it somewhat difficult for European-trained J ews to
adopt naturally.

(Demonstration: As a prime example of beautifully articulated
Hebrew diction, Hazzan Spiro played excerpts from a tape of the
early day broadcast of Kol Yisrael which he recorded in Des Moines
off the air on his small short-wave radio. The announcer starts each
morning with a beautiful recitation of Sh' ma, V'ahavta, Shirshel Yom
and Mishnuh Yomit. Hazzan Spiro called the attention of his listen-
ers to several matters, among them the announcer's accurate pro-
nunciation of Xhesh'va na and his making a clear distinction between
the alef and the ayin.

Hebrew is a relatively easy language to read. Most of the time
you pronounce each letter along with its corresponding vowel just
the way you see them. There are, however, some exceptions, as well
as several areas that are prone to errors. I have provided you with
a page of examples. Anyone among you who is involved in teaching
B'ney Mitzvah will probably find these examples to be agonizingly
familiar. Let me go over this list with you briefly:*

Examples =ft and #2 concern the letter vav. Normally it will
serve either as the consonant V or as the vowels or 00. In the
words of Example #thevav serves a dual purpose: as both the
consonant V and the vowel (e.g. VO). The first two words, mitz-
vot and ma-tzot, seem to indicate the rule: Whenever the vav with
a dot on top is preceded by a letter that has a sh'va, that vav is
pronounced vo. If, however, the preceding letter has no vowel at all
then the vav serves as its cholam vowel. I would not belabor this
* Examples will be found at conclusion of article.

107

rather elementary reading rule except for the difficulty that I have
with the last word in Example #1. The way it is printed it should
be pronounced v' ed-vo-tav, but all my instincts tell me that it is
o'e-do-tav. This word needs further inquiry. There is no question
that the last word on the first line should be pronounced u'ko-vey.
The reason some mistakenly pronounce it v'ko-yey has to do with
the fact that the vav is a narrow letter and because there isn't enough
room under it for the vowel, the vowel is pushed a little forward.
The problem of space under the letters is also the reason why the trop
is sometimes placed exactly between two vowels when the accent is
mll'el.

Example #2 deals with the vav that in addition to the vowel
also has a dagesh chazak. Some children tend to confuse it with
the vowel 00. We see that sometimes you do not read Hebrew the
way you see it.

The patach g'nuvah of Example #3 again proves that you don't
always read a word the way you see it. Many still mistakenly pro-
nounce it mag-bi-ha sh'falim and e-lo-ha s'lichot instead of, as it
should be, mug-bi-ah and e-lo-ah.

Example M calls attention to a common pronunciation error:
It should be pronounced la-do-shem andba-do-shem, and not la-a-do-
shem and ba-a-do-shem.

Example #5: A yod that follows a vowel changes it into a
diphthong. It amounts to adding the vowel EE to the previous
vowel. When a melisma is sung to that vowel, or when that vowel
is sung to a long note, the added EE must come at the last possible
instant. The yod does not change the sound of a chirik vowel, but
it changes the quality of that vowel from a t'nu'ah k'tanah (minor
vowel) to t'nu'ah g'dolah (major vowel) with its resultant gram-
matical implications. The words alai, alav show that sometimes the
yod will not change the vowel into diphthong. Most of those who
speak Hebrew in Sephardic pronunciation pronounce all the tzere
vowels assegol. Personally, especially when I sing, I prefer to pro-
nounce the tzere as ey (like in grey) when it is followed by a yod.
This is a good opportunity to comment that while I am a strong
believer that all hazzanim should use the Sephardic pronunciation
and associate their praying with a living language as it is spoken in
Israel, yet I must call attention to one shortcoming in this manner
of pronunciation. By eliminating several vowels and diphthongs
there is less variety and coloring in the sound of the language. I
still vividly remember the great singer and hazzan, Herman Yad-
lowker, who was my first vocal teacher, throwing a fit and mimicking:
ata-mata-pata. ... My unwillingness to give up the tzerey al-

108

together is perhaps influenced by the need that I feel to add, dis-
criminatingly, some variety.

The manner oft speaking a language, any language, with good
diction differs in many respects from the manner of singing it. Unlike
speaking, where every syllable has a constant duration and where
the rhythm of the words is dictated by the meaning of the text, in
singing the duration of each syllable is determined by the composer
and his music. The following may be obvious and yet we neglect to
take note of it: In singing, the duration of each syllable is taken
up almost in its entirety by the vowel. The consonant, whether
preceding the vowel or following it, takes but an instant to articulate.
Good and precise diction is determined mainly by well-defined and
well -articulated consonants.

The manner of speaking and singing modern Hebrew is similar
to that of most Mediterranean languages. One of its chief character-
istics is an especially energetic pronunciation of the consonants, and
particularly at the beginning and end of words. I have read that
the main problem of English-speaking people who try to master
Hebrew is in developing a more energetic lip movement. ((Modern
Hebrew" by Eliezer Rieger.)

When a phrase ends with a consonant, preceded by a vowel
chanted on a long note, the practice is to wait for the last possible
instant before articulating that final consonant. The last word of
v-sham-w \sva-yi-na-fash, and most composers are fond of interpret-
ing it with a very long and diminishing note on the syllable -FASH.
The last sound you should hear is a short SH. (Demonstration):
Ending a phrase on a consonant, and especially a double consonant,
is particularly problematic for a choir. However, diction for choir
singing is a more involved area into which I cannot go at this time.

The rule about articulating the last consonant of a phrase at
the last possible instant need not always be followed with the con-
sonants M and N. In Hassidic music, the accepted way is not to
sing Bl 1 1 1 1 m and BAAAAAm, but B I M M M M M and BAM M M M M M .
The same applies to other phrases. (Demonstration: ennnn kamochah
and v'al y'rushalayimmmm). I believe that it was Fred Waring who
made that kind of singing his hallmark.

I brought with mean interesting excerpt from an old recording
by Hazzan Yosele Shlisky. He sings the birkat kohanim in quite a
remarkable way. On the word "am" of am k'doshechu, he places
the M in the middle of the musical phrase, and then he proceeds
to spin a lovely melisma on the consonant M with closed lips. Note
another remarkable thing about the manner in which he takes a
pure falsetto tone and developes it into a full throated tone while

109

he holds the consonant M . (Playing of the taped excerpt from Yosele
Shlisky's recording).

Let us continue with Example #6: I doubt that many mis-
pronounce the word yerushalayim, even though the yod is always
missing and only the vowel is there to indicate the pronunciation.
I cant think of any other word that has a vowel without a letter.
It is also interesting that the customary Masoretic k' ri and k'tiv
markings are absent here.

Example #7 concerns the very common pronunciation problems
caused by the shin — sin letter when combined with a cholam chaser
belonging either to it or to the preceding letter. Our example
illustrates seven distinct possibilities! Several noted grammarians
have attempted to devise a solution to this vexing pronunciation
problem, but there seem to be no takers. It should be noted that
the Koren Bible has come up with a practical solution which it in-
corporated in its printed edition. You will find it discussed in the
masterful introduction to the Koren Bible.

Example #8: — The mapik hey is a uniquely Hebrew pro-
nunciation feature which is usually neglected. That the proper
pronunciation can make a big difference in the meaning of a word
is illustrated in Example #8 by the two pairs of words: dodahldodah
(impossible to transliterate properly!), "aunt"/"her uncle", and
ishah/ishah, "a woman"/"her man". These should not be, but usually
are, pronounced alike. The mapik hey should be pronounced lightly
with just a touch of the hey. (Demonstration of the verse in Hosea
1 1,13 which is included in Example #8). Exaggerating the pronuncia-
tion of the mapik hey, as I have heard some overly zealous Torah
Readers do, is in my opinion worse than not pronouncing it enough.
The exaggeration tends to throw the entire flow of the chanting out
of proportion.

Example #9 deals with a related problem — the pronunciation
of the hey with a sh'va. Those of us who teach B'ney Mitzvah
probably don't demand (and wisely so) that the young students pro-
nounce that hey. However, the serious artist will no doubt indicate
the presence of the hey by his manner of articulating the words,
the a/ef and the ay/n which I already mentioned earlier.

Example #11 concerns the pairs of letters that are pronounced
exactly alike in current practice. The Sephardic pronunciation of
the tav (whether with or without the dagesh) increases many fold
the frequency of the T sound and reduces the S sound in modern
spoken Hebrew. The chances for spelling mistakes are multiplied.
But since we are concerned with pronouncing words and not with

110

spelling them, we need not worry about distinguishing the sound
between these pairs of letters.

What I don't understand is why those who have tried to
standardize the manner oft transliterating Hebrew into Roman letters
have made a distinction between the chet (which they transliterate
as H with a dot underneath, even though regular typewriters don't
have such an animal) and the chaf (which they transliterate as kh!)
The way I look at it, to those who do not speak Hebrew it doesn't
make any difference whether it is a chet or a chaf, and to those
who do speak the language it is confusing enough to have to make
sense out of a transliteration without having to worry about a H
with a dot and a KH. Furthermore, I think that it increases the
tendency among those who really need transliteration to pronounce
the chet as a hey, and the chaf as a kaf I myself stick to the good
old ch for both the chet and chaf

One more comment on item #11: One of the grammar rules
for determining a sh'va na (which is pronounced as a quick EH, as
opposed to the sh'va nach which is absorbed in the previous syllable)
concerns otiyot hadomot. In strict grammatical terms this refers to
the sh'va that occurs under the first of two IDENTICAL letters, as
in \ha-l'-lu-yah and hi-n'-nl Note that I stressed the word identical,
because in strict grammatical terms pairs of letters such as tet and
tav are not considered otiyot hadomot. Therefore, in such words as:
v'sha-mat-ta or v'nish-pat-ti, the sh'va on the first of the two T's is
sh'va wac/i and, consequently, absorbed in the previous syllable.
This defeats the whole purpose behind the rule of otiyot hadomot,
which is to make sure that the two letters don't become one in
pronunciation. My own inclination, when singing, is to ignore that
rule and to pronounce them as a sh'va na, as follows: v'sha-ma-t'-ta
and v'nish-pa- 1'- ti.

Example #12 concerns the so-called BaGaD KaFaT letters that
under certain conditions will change their pronunciation. In practice,
only three will change: B to V, K to CH, and P to F. The TAF,
as we have already noted, will always be pronounced as T, but this
is a relatively recent development. The gimel and dated have
for a long time been pronounced the same way with or without a
dagesh kal. The dot in these letters at the beginning of the word
seems to be a meaningless grammatical practice left over from
the times when people still knew how to pronounce these two letters,
each in two distinctly different ways. It is said that some Yemenites
still know to make pronunciation distinctions there.

Example X-13 contains words with the combination daled-taf
/find that it is extremely difficult, even impossible, to pronounce

Ill

well a dated with a sh'va nach when it is followed by a taf, unless
the daled is pronounced as though it had a sh'va na. Let me make
it clear that I didn't find a special pronunciation rule for the D-T
combination in any grammar book. I made it up based on my own
practical experience. My way of pronouncing the words in Example
#L3 is as follows: li-ma-d'ta (and not li-mad-ta); he-e-va-d'-ta-ni;
v'-hi-ga-d'-ti; he-e-ma-d'-ta; b'ri-d'-ti; v'nif-ka-d'-ta and v'-ya-La-det.
(However: al tesht and v'na-hart).

Before proceeding to Example #14 I want to discuss briefly the
pronunciation of the R (reysh) which is an area of some confusion.
The R should be rolled slightly, but not in an exaggerated manner
as in Italian or Spanish. When singing Hebrew, theR is rolled slightly
more than when speaking the language. Some Israelis use the
uvular R, probably under the influence of Yiddish and French.
(Demonstration on the word "BARUCH"). It is not considered
desireable. Americans, on the other hand, make the mistake of
using a palatal R. If the R poses a problem for you, listen to
Israeli radio announcers and to recordings of Israeli singers. They
do roll the R slightly. In my practice, I roll the R considerably more
when I sing than when I speak it. (Demonstration).

Now to Example #14 which will probably cause some contro-
versy. But first a brief introduction. The gemination (or doubling)
of a consonant is encountered in Hebrew when speaking or singing
a letter with a dagesh chazak. For example, in the word Shabbat,
the single bet (with a dagesh chazak) must be pronounced with a
double emphasis, asthough the word was actually SHAB-BAT. To
be sure, we do not pronounce the bet twice, but we emphasize and
elongate the single bet so as to imply and strongly suggest the
doubling. This is particularly relevant for singing.

Now, if you glance at your Word List, at item #14, you will
find many pairs of words where the consonant that ends one word
is the very same consonant that starts the next word. Some years
back, I wrote an article in the old Cantors Assembly publication,
"The Cantor's Voice/' In this article I suggested that the accepted
rule concerning the singing of such pairs in English be applied
to Hebrew as well. Let me demonstrate it for you in English. Let's
suppose that we have a melody with the first line of Hatikvah.
(Demonstration on the syllable LA). Now I will put words to it.
(Demonstration: My name is PinchaSSpiro). Note that I didnt
sing: "My name is Pinchas-eh-Spiro!" In the last example on your
sheet you have the phrase: hapores sukat shalom. There are three
possible ways to sing that phrase. The first one is: (Demonstration
of #), but note that we changed the melodic line slightly.

112

We inserted a l/16th pause, even though the composer wants an
unbroken, straight, smooth line, as indicated in M. So, let's try
again with 4&\ (Demonstration: ha-po-res-eh-su-kat sha-lom). What
is objectionable to me is the added grunt "eh" that is inevitably
involved. Lastly, my suggested method is to combine the two S's
into one elongated S sound: (Demonstration of #3). When sung
properly, the second S is definitely suggested and implied, in a very
similar way to that of the gemination of the Dagesh Chazak which
I just explained.

Following the publication of my article there appeared a pro-
testing Letter-to-the-editor that disagreed with me rather sharply.
The writer pointed out that the shulchan aruch prescribes exactly
the manner of singing such pairs of identical consonants, namely,
to make a break between the words.

Let me state that it is not my intention to go into an argument
with the shulchan aruch concerning the aesthetics of singing.
Furthermore, I must admit that since writing that article I have
modified my views somewhat. To put it simply: my only objection
is to the grunt "EH" which I regard as unseemly. I am sure that
you must have heard the Kaddish sung in the following way: (Sung
demonstration) yitgadal v y yitkadash-eh-sh-mey rabal Do you like
that sound? My opinion is this: If you can pronounce both con-
sonants individually and smoothly, without a grunt — kol hakavod!
More power to you! But if you must grunt an EH by doing so, then
you are better off combining the two consonants into one
elongated sound.

By the way, if you look at the words in Example #L4, you will
note that not all the double consonants require a grunt to be properly
pronounced twice. The tsade need not pose much of a problem with
a little practice (Demonstration: b'erets tsiyah); the T sound, the
CH sound and the K are also not too problematical (Demonstration:
v'et torotai; vitedotayich cha-zeki; tsadik katamar), But the M and
the N are extremely difficult. (Demonstration: ken nishbati). I
dare anyone to sing it without breaking and without grunting. The
L is relatively easy (v'yagel Zibenu) ; the SH is problematic, but not
impossible (kadosh sh'mo), but the S usually means trouble.

My concluding remark concerns the exclusive attention that
some singers give to the quality of their voices, leaving no room (or
not enough room) for attention to the precise enunciation of the
vowels and especially the consonants. The result is often a beautiful
singing line with completely unintelligible words. You can under-
stand what is sung only if you happen to know the text by heart.

113

Hazzan Saul Meisels made to me the astute observation that
one of the greatest difficulties that the hazzan encounters in his
function as sh'Wach tzibur, in the noblest sense of the term, is to be
able to "daven" with full kavanah, without being distracted by the
need to pay due attention to techniques of vocal production, dy-
namics, proper diction and all the other elements that go into play
when performing a work with artistry.

I suppose that the answer to this vital problem is simply
practice and experience. There is a jocular saying in Yiddish: Tun
yohr'n vert men oich elter." In our case, it would mean to say that
years of diligent practice and experience also count in establishing
patterns that become second nature, allowing the hazzan the freedom
to concentrate on the inner meaning of the words and to carry out
with competence his sacred calling as a true sh'Wach tzibur.

114

HEBREW DICTION - AREAS OF ENUNCIATION DIFFICULTY

(!) t n i I y ,riT3iy. ,7iy ,vrn?na ,rmc ,nixo (i)

(3-D l x o»dVd) ITIiyi Tusv&n i»ni*D T»n>n i*o*tf>
3 ^ [7 ? o->»k •>*? -»3 , 3 3 3 2f 1 vrixca *3*£V -i?k * H 1 i* D (2)

■» ' a cvnx inn» , n i ,v a ,n i n O naiyi (4)
(i v^y _ -»^y) * n ^r^rmn'? ,nni3o : k + * = *>k // '^x : x + n = \n (5)

II ON : x + x = 'X // »* 'IX ,"IX : k + in = MX
(»-m naV) -ik + x = ('jam mn' kd353) IX // ik + k = (mjsck xoaoa) IK

innjn C "7 7 -1 1 "» 3 1 , 3 ^ :' 1 V 3 Tty in an : l * t> 3 a^Vy"^ (6)

(7-11? nxxin V? nana s'-n=^ nx-i) *» 1 Q V (t) ' X V ] ( *0

Her man - TO'N ; A woman -HW ; Her uncle - ^111 ; Aunt - Hill (8)

(13-D ,ywin) ITiyiD *??"[ ^tfStf'l IWin Hjn TO/TTD- 1 ?* ^2'j'm
, r-t J -r : f ;t t- t t ■-:■.

C * D 7 n q> 'nnsi ,T?n y-ix £px 1'iTTl *3 ,nm laia rmTI ,71x1'? VH* (9)
• : : - :<■--: j? '" <•• ■••;*-: t: ;

is ^3'y d * *? y x i ,ni;in "i ji y ■» i , 7 * y , 7 ' x (10)
to* 'jnynp ,-iw vix'Tft :3-? // s^n >y -^x ^inrn ,no?n :a-n (11)

V?X ,3'?X :a-i // 707 ,730 ,7 , ?7 ,7'»?0 : o-w
*nir.*? THJR // D'JIDS^' ,\RM>a?31 f CTM3n ,CyD ,QFI ,1100 ,ra? ,rOtf" :n-n-u

n^Y? r^T^oms 1 ? onjs ,rtoi rto ^a 1 ? T7i % W2*? rra. (!n"m) n^ vj,* (12)

T-iy 'innV FllOyn I'-Fmrn vbvowh ,nn:oi ' ?513y»l k"V ^DID 1 ? ianix in^ (13)

(Finn 31 ,HOT ^x) ,7? PI V 1 ,P12??1 » nn v- ^x 'Prill

'pya^3 7» ,i»P? ?*»"ix ,*??n ^nnnn ,»npn nxi \niir-HKi ,^ , x V"^k» (14)
»n»o.i niilS 'vP'xo ,id3/ tt?iT|? ,oi> n-i7-7y riit/nn ,^aa.7 7i'T xia' mnci
o^-iy^ *n>D *n a^^l 3w'» V^iaoV l n ,vi:yl lM'on 7"iw^a ,K2ii iioa/' Jfiprn Vim?

\; '. \ • ' — t*T "" "* _ tT "■; » r • -,' i ■ ▼ — " - - ; ;

n^nn o'naTin ^ni :diko Vsin q^S3 *733,^ 523*7-*?3a ^'n'^K nin? nx nanxi

:T33*7 % DVH 3^X0 '33N -iw'x
V. t ; - — ■ - " " t *■ -;

115

JEWISH YEMENITE SONGS FROM THE DIWAN

Recordings and Commentaries by Naomi and Avner Bahat from
"Anthology of Musical Traditions in Israel" produced by the
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jewish Music Research Center;
Director — Israel Adler

In October, 1980, I had the pleasure of interviewing the affable
Dr. Avner Bahat at his apartment outside Tel Aviv. While he is
probably the ranking authority on Yemenite Jewish music in the
world today, his approach to the subject struck me as being not only
one of scholarship, but also one of love and respect. I n answer to my
question, "Why should J ews in North America, most of whom are of
Ashkenazic origin, be interested in Yemenite J ewish music?', this
Israeli of Jewish-German parentage replied simply, "Because it's
beautiful." That sentiment permeates the music of this recording as
well as the words of the highly informative booket which is included
in the record jacket.

Yemenite music is indeed beautiful but it does not immediately
reach western ears that way because the poetry is unfamiliar and
the accents somewhat strange. Because of these things the music
must be approached as a new and exotic taste. This is the real
achievement of this recording, which not only presents and informs,
but does so with loving care. After all, to gain an accurate glimpse
into the culture of fellow J ews in such an isolated, far-off land is a
rare privilege. While the acquisition of this record will not transform
a listener into an expert, it will bring both understanding and appre-
ciation within his grasp through the excellent booklet contained in
the record jacket.

The study booklet, for this is what it really is, is written in both
Hebrew and English and is noteworthy for its technical information
which is generally presented in a clear, readable way. While there
is much here for the musician, there is also material which is acces-
sible to the ordinary listener. First, the authors have written an
essay describing the history, forms and character of the Yemenite
Diwan (book of religious poetry). Following this, there is a descrip-
tion of the pieces on the recording: the general meaning of each
piece is discussed; the author of its text given; the performers men-
tioned and the music described. It is these musical descriptions
dealing with the technicalities of melody, rhythm and form which

Ben Steinberg, a noted composer and lecturer, is the Music Director of
Temple Sinai, Toronto. He conducted the North American premiere of this
music on a broadcast of the C.B.C.

116

so add to the value of the booklet. They are extremely helpful, if at
times somewhat detailed for the layman, and even include musically-
notated fragments of various pieces on the record. Happily, the per-
formers are introduced at the end of the booklet and we learn briefly
from whence they came, their ages, their occupations and a bit of
their backgrounds.

A weakness is the lack of complete text transliteration for non-
Hebrew readers and of full literal text translations for those who
can read the Hebrew but cannot understand it. This record-study
booklet is valuable enough, it seems to this writer, to merit this kind
of care which would make it accessible to a non-J ewish ethnomusi-
cologist or even a non-Hebrew speaking J ew.

The Yemenites are a gentle people, possessing a wonderful ap-
preciation of language and poetry as well as a keen sense of humour.
I remember attending a concert at Kibbutz Ein Hashofet in 1968
when the best standup comic in the area came to entertain — he was
a Yemenite from the nearby village of El Yakim. He had his audience
alternatively roaring with laughter and applauding his efforts. This
kind of goodwill and good humour is captured in some of the songs,
in their descriptions and even in the illustrative photographs of the
booklet. One would like to see a wider use of this music in the west,
but to make the music interesting to western ears without losing its
essential character is a real challenge for the composer-arranger.
Some of these melodies are so tuneful and delightful — it is re-
grettable that they are not adapted and used more widely.

Tor the J ews of Yemen", write the authors, "song and dance
are a source of joy as well as fulfillment of a mitzvah." We might
well add that the same is true for any J ew who studies and hears
this music.

117

SEPHARDI SONGS FROM THE BALKANS

Recordings and commentaries by Susana Weich-Shahak from: "An-
thology of Musical Traditions in Israel" produced by the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, Jewish Music Research Centre. Direc-
tor: Dr. Israel Adler

Following the Spanish persecution of 1391, the expulsion from
Spain in 1492 and the Portuguese Inquisition of 1547, waves of J ews
emigrated to the Ottoman empire bringing with them their unique
Spanish-J ewish musical traditions. These traditions and customs are
the subject of an impressive presentation in record-booklet form by
the Hebrew University of J erusalem.

Like their other collections ("Synagogal Art Music of the 17th
and 18th centuries"; "J ewish-Yemenite songs from the Diwan") this
one consists of a record and an extremely well-written introduction
in the form of a study booklet. The songs on the recording fall into
four subject categories: wedding songs; secular songs; circumcision
songs, piyyutim and songs for religious festivals. They are nearly all
sung in the J udeo-Spanish language and are presented, not as a
concert by accomplished singers, but as authentic folk songs sung
by members of the J udeo-Spanish community of Israel. Thus, to
listen to this record is not to be entertained by great voices. Rather,
it is like being invited to a private party by fellow J ews from a
fascinating and exotic background. That kind of invitation is always
a rare, flattering privilege and this is no exception, for the singing
is natural and sincere, and the mood is one of welcome.

Included among the songs is the familiar Balkan rhythm of
alternating 3/4 and 3/8 bars, heard here in the context of an en-
gagement song, "Oy que buena que fuela hora" (I caught you in a
lucky hour) sung by Matilda ("Mazal-Tov") Lazar and a group of
other women. The gory tale of the jealous king and his adultress
wife is also performed by the same singer with a description of the
son's text-melody syllabic relationship being offered in the booklet.

The "childhood songs" section of the record ("Canticas de
parida") refers to the songs reserved for the day of circumcision as
well as to the eight days between the birth and circumcision. These
tend to be somewhat freer and more joyous, with participation from
all those present. In one selection "S'AQUEJA LA PARIDA" (the
mother complains) there is even the high-pitched sound of someone
blowing on paper to accompany the singers.

Perhaps the most interesting piyyut on the recording is the
Adon Olam sung by the excellent cantor J acob Sadicario originally
from Salonica. The song is an example of "contrafact", a folkloristic

118

device which uses an existing tune for a new text. In this case the
Adon Olam text is sung to the tune of the wedding song "VEN-
TANAS ALTAS" (high windows), with the original nonsense-
syllable refrain ("tiralaila hop . . .") reappearing as "Elohay hu,
Elohay hu". Cantor Sadicario gives a more intriguing example of his
hazzanic technique in the J udeo-Spanish Rosh Hashanah prayer,
"Hablad a mi madre" (Tell my mother).

The study booklet describes the main forms of musical expres-
sion of the Sephardi J ews — Romances, Complas, Canticas and Piy-
yutim — and explains each, with particular attention to rhythmic
elements and modality. Song-texts are given in J udeo-Spanish, in
English and in Hebrew. Each song also receives a brief description,
including such items as meaning, historical background and syllabifi-
cation. There is, in addition, an excellent bibliography provided for
those interested in further study.

Because our music provides a window to our past and because
this presentation's first-rate quality makes it so easy to use, its
acquisition is a must for the cantor. Without doubt, many con-
gregants of differing background would be intrigued with a brief
study-session on this material. What better way to make contact
with this other segment of our people whose traditions are so different
from ours, yet who share our prayers, our thoughts and our J ewish
hopes?

Ben Steinberg

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Cantors Assembly Journal of Synagogue Music"

See other formats