Possente Spirto

Possente Spirto Opinions in the style of Monteverdi and Artusi Sabrina K. Robbins Musicology 210 Dr. Rachel Golden October 23, 2012 Music has always and leave always remain a payoff of debate on both(prenominal) level. Throughout the years melody has developed, progressed, and changed alongside mankind.There were numerous arguments as to what was considered veracious and what the rules should be regarding composition during the ontogenesis of melody in each era. With the process of the Baroque era of music, the stylistic elements of homophony, alongside features such(prenominal) as bass voice continuo and a to a peachyer extent common use of noise, became the norm. Prior to this development music was much structured, following contrapuntal styles and sticking to a tight tonic center.The stretch of measure between the Renaissance and Baroque dots of music offered a unique perspective of the changing opinions through with(predicate) the treatises critiquing the curren t music. A famous argument of this kind took place between Giovanni Artusi and Claudio Monteverdi regarding the latters madrigal Cruda Amarilli. It is through the study of this treatise that it is possible to ascertain what the composers opinions may fuddle been on other pieces of music through applying their criteria to analyzing other songs.Possente Spirto by Monteverdi is a piece to which these elements can be applied and a logical speculation of the feelings of both of these composers can be reached. Artusi, a composer and music critic, was deeply root in the theoretical concepts of the Renaissance era of music, and outwardly condemned the emergence of the modernistic styles in the Baroque era. He was quite conservative, and passionately felt that Monteverdis music was distasteful and aweless(prenominal) in that it broke the previously naturalized composition rules purely for the pleasure of stepping over boundaries.Possente Spirto blatantly disregards numerous get a line e lements in Renaissance music by incorporating a heavy ornamented, angiotensin converting enzyme recitative voice, accompanied plainly by melodic concordance that is unobtrusive. Artusi was far more implicated with a vertical uniformity than linear, horizontal harmony. The vocal designate of this piece is obviously the focal point solely according to the ideals that Artusi held, the virtuosic monodical singing was not what would view been desired. Counterpoint and a strict tonal center were the elements that were pleasing to the ear of music enthusiasts and musicians.The dissonances used at unfore calculaten times, the blatant disregard for previously set composition rules, and implementation of features such as modal alloy would produce the music inaccessible and disrespectful to listeners who were expecting certain key large-hearted elements from their musical experience. While Artusi would not have directly named Monteverdi in a criticism of Possente Spirto(just as he did not name him in his critique of Cruda Amarilli), it would have been evident to any indorser that his intent was to examine the validity of his compositional works.Despite Artusis distaste for Monteverdis works, his criticisms were less about the composer himself and more in regards to the developing and changing style of modern music. The incorrect voice leading and use of dissonance in an uncharacteristic way was not only outside of what was considered acceptable in composition but was something that was difficult to adjust to hearing. The sound of the linear harmony and dissonance was radically different from anything that had been heard previously, and new inventions are not always attractive at first.On the other side of the argument, Monteverdi was ahead of the time and was experiencing relatively smooth sailing through the awkward transitional period between the Renaissance and Baroque musical eras. He was principally concerned with the listener connecting emotionally an d mentally with the music and school text of his pieces, so he incorporated a great deal of text painting into his music. He began to focus heavily on the relationships of the text and music in his compositions.He plan that the listeners of his music should understand the mess get alongs of the songs, and began to find ways to utilize creative methods of commentary and expression in his compositions. Monteverdi was essentially ushering in a new age of music by pushing boundaries with his usage of consonances and dissonances. He was unafraid of interruption rules, and did so by throwing the ideas of counterpoint, chiefly the resolutions of notes and atypical harmonic structure, out the proverbial window.In Possente Spirto many fresh, new ideas are starting to arise. It is clearly evident through the utilization of ideas behind the text, the vocal articulation, and also the lyre-like sound of the accompaniment that Monteverdi was heavily influenced by ancient Greek music. Montever di would have justified his usage of dissonance by attributing it to the idea of conveying a mood to the listener. The old rules of the first gear Practice (counterpoint, traditional harmonic resolution, vertical harmony, etc) were of less concern to Monteverdi.The mixture of dramatic musical elements with the text for effect was the ultimate goal in his compositions, and he would have given little thought to the opinions of Artusi on the subject matter. His ideas of the Second Practice helped bridge the gap from Renaissance into the Baroque. In Possente Spirto, the text is what hold ins center stage in the song. Without the virtuosic singing and delicate musical harmony propelling the feelings of sadness and longing forward in the aria, the song would not have had the overall mood that Monteverdi was looking for.This piece is intended to make the listener connect with Orpheus and sympathize with his plight. The implementation of previously unused harmonic elements made the connec tion with the singer possible, and that in turn created the blending of music and drama that Monteverdi sought out in this work. Both of the points made by Artusi and Monteverdi were valid and well thought out. The argument simply boiled round to the fact that Artusi was more heavily rooted in tradition than Monteverdi, and lucky the traditional voice leading and counterpoint practices.He did not want to see rules broken purely for the sake of breaking them. On the other hand, Monteverdi was more of a dreamer and chose to focus on the emotional element of the music. He wanted to have the listener connect to the music in a way that would make the feel the emotions in the text through the song. neither composer had any concrete evidence to support the winning facts of the debate. It should be kept in mind that it is likely that Artusi was not exactly attacking Monteverdi, but rather arguing the practices coming into light in composition. It was rumored that they even became friends later.The only question on the table is whether it is better to stay with tradition, or take chances and break out of what is considered acceptable and normal. Monteverdi did just that, and received a great deal of criticism for his work while simultaneously creating pieces that are considered to be great works of art. Possente Spirto, while lovely and evocative, incorporated many of the equal elements that caused Artusis original critique. At what point does breaking rules becoming less about creating something new and evocative and more about simply ruffling feathers? That, I think, is a subject that will remain up for debate.