Now that classes are done with for a while, I'm trying to catch up on some reading and to organize my books and other reading materials. I've been spending some time perusing the Christian Classics Ethereal Library, and I came across Hymns of the Greek Church, an early-twentieth century English publication by John Brownlie. Essentially what Mr. Brownlie appears to have done is gotten a hold of some Greek Orthodox service books and translated several hymns for the benefit of English worshipers (not Orthodox). The intent of the work appears to have been not only to bolster the stock of English hymnody, but also to hopefully inspire English hymnographers.
This sounds all well and good -- and I'm sure not a few English were edified -- but the problem, as usual, with non-Orthodox attempting to use deep-rooted Orthodox traditions in a heterodox environment is that these things are used and/or understood completely out of context. When this happens, perhaps a few good things will come of their use, but ultimately, without being attached to the trunk of the Tradition, the (broken-off) branches will simply wither. Of note, I found, were the following remarks from the preface of the work in question. I've just a few comments, some of which are critical of the author's observation, others supportive:
(3) The hymns of the Greek Church are all in rhythmical prose—strangely Oriental in appearance—with the exception of those by John of Damascus, which are in iambics; and difficulties confront one on every page. What lines will reward the work of rendering? Prayer, Gospel, psalm, hymn, and exhortation follow each other, and are sometimes strangely interlaced. Where does one begin and another end? Then, there is meaningless repetition which must be passed over, and expressions demanding modification. The symbolism is extravagant, and sometimes a single hymn is crowded with figures the most grotesque. The Mariolatry is excessive, and the hagiolatry offensive. Sifting and pruning are needed before a cento can be formed which would commend itself to modern taste.
Why would the author be surprised by the Oriental flavor of the Greek rhythmical prose? In particular, I love how he is confounded at the seamless rendering of "Prayer, Gospel, psalm, hymn and exhortation." This is the Church worshiping! Using every tool it has available to offer full praise to God! This is what happens when you understand the utility of Scripture and aren't afraid to use it creatively! That he simply passes over 'meaningless repetition' is the clearest sign of the lack of understanding of how these hymns are actually to be implemented (thus betraying the lack of context). "Figures the most grotesque," "excessive" "Mariolatry," and "offensive"(!) hagiography further underscore the Western church's complete alienation from the deeper traditions of the Church. Finally, his remark about commending the hymns to modern taste can be, at first, offensive, but, really, this is what our own translators do, sometimes with more or less effectiveness. We must understand that hymns (any poetic works, really) pull from the database of symbols and sayings that are familiar and meaningful to the culture and time wherein they are produced.
But when all that is said, there remains much that is both beautiful and attractive. Some of the hymns and fragments are most chaste,—beautiful and tender in their simple expression of Gospel truths, which are so attractive to all true hearts, no matter by what creed dominated.
His ignorant complaints aside, it is commendable that the author came to this conclusion.
(4) The remarkable simplicity characterising those hymns constitutes, strangely it may seem, no small difficulty for the translator. The mere rendering of them into English prose is a comparatively easy task, and can be of no value to any one but the specialist, but to take the unmeasured lines and cut them to form stanzas, and in the process sacrifice nothing of their spirit to the exigencies of rhyme and rhythm, is a task by no means easy. But such drawbacks and difficulties are not insurmountable; and with the growing interest in hymnology which characterises our time, it will be strange if, in the years to come, the Greek service-books are not made to yield their tribute to the praise of the Christian Church in the West.
This is an interesting observation on two counts. The first is in regard to the difficulty of rendering appropriate translations metrically - something, again, that our own translators would agree with. One wonders, though, to what extent the author had any idea of how the hymns were executed. In other words, did he ever experience these hymns in the context of Orthodox worship? The second observation is more of a hypothetical, in regard to how influential these hymns may be to the "Christian Church (no idea which...) in the West." Not being of that (or those) tradition(s), I can't say. If anyone who happens to read this knows anything about the development of hymnody in the western churches over the last century, please, feel free to chime in. Based on what little I've experienced of hymnody in western churches, I have noticed no real similarity with that of Orthodoxy.
V. One prime characteristic of Greek hymnody should be referred to. Unlike the English hymn, which is intensely subjective—in some cases unhealthily so—the Greek hymn is in most cases objective. God in the glory of His majesty, and clothed with His attributes, is held up to the worship and adoration of His people. Christ, in His Person and Work, is set before the mind in a most realistic manner. His birth and its accompaniments; His life; the words He spoke, and the work He did; His Passion, in all the agony of its detail; the denial of Peter; the remorse of Judas; the Crucifixion; the darkness, the terror, the opened graves; the penitent thief; the loud cry, the death—all are depicted in plain, unmistakable language. So we have in the hymns of the Greek service-books a pictorial representation of the history of Redemption, which by engaging the mind appeals ultimately to the heart and its emotions. Our self-regarding praise is perhaps inevitable, as being the product of the meditative spirit which has its birth, and lives in the land of the twilight; but the advantages of the objectiveness of Greek hymnody are so patent, that its cultivation might be fostered by our hymn-writers, with advantage to the devotional feeling of our people and to the worship of the Church.
This paragraph, in particular, I found rather interesting. I really like it. I think spending time with these texts certainly affected the author, and it is plain that he hopes others will get from the hymns what he did. Particularly striking is the affirmation from an outside source of the orthodoxy of our hymnography, in that it does not cater to sentimentality but to reality. This is a subtle but enormous difference in the Orthodox, Eastern phronema and that of the West, and is a symptom of our entire spiritual outlook, not simply a stylistic, ethnographic variation in musical tradition. My final observation is how the author picks up on the iconographic nature of our hymnody; it is fitting that we understand our hymns are literary, vocal, and aural analogues to our icons.
0 comments:
Post a Comment