When did "art" music become a distinct and separate entity from "folk"
music? Please be specific about countries and time periods. My
specific research interest is choral music.

---

Request for Question Clarification by leli-ga on 05 Sep 2002 01:37 PDT

Thanks for your question.  Just one query - do you want us to focus
exclusively on 'folk' origins or do your interests include the
'church' origins of much Western choral music?

---

Clarification of Question by diesik-ga on 13 Sep 2002 10:01 PDT

That you for your reply. Basically, I want to know about both. I am
also unsure about whether I've even formulated the question correctly.
For example, in Western music, choirs started to improvise simply
polyphony arand 1100, thus enriching the melody above a simple
eclessiasticial chant. So parallel  organum is still folk music.
Greensleeves, sung by the troubaddors in France I would say was folk
music. I would still classify the Ordo Virtutum if 1151 as folk music
because it is used for religious puposes and it is monophonic, like
chant. Adam de la Halle (ca. 1237 - ca.1287) wrote "Je muir, je muir
d'amourete" in 2 (or three?) parts but I think it was intended for
solo singers as opposed to a choir. My choice for the separation
between choral folk music and choral art music would therefore be
Guillaume de Machaut because in 1324, Pope John 22, residing in
Avignon, officially allows this practice of enrichment

---

Clarification of Question by diesik-ga on 13 Sep 2002 11:57 PDT

Also, I would say that Machaut was a pivotal composer because he wrote
both sacred and secular music. Josquin is already art music in my
opinion. What I'm looking for here is some confirmation or denial of
my checkpoints. Perhaps you could provide me with some alternate
approaches, if you have any. In Russian music, I would say that
"Kalinka" is a folk tune which has been arranged for chorus and that
the official beginning of Russian art music doesn't start until the
early 1800's with Glinka, but I can't point to a choral piece thich
defines that genre specifically. In Africa, the Yoruba living by the
Nile river had "E Oro O" which is available in a modern arrangement by
Rosephayne Powell. I think that that would be an example of folk music
because it's only BASED on native African chant. But the Congolese
style of Missa Luba I'd call art music because it was written in the
post-colonial era and has the form of a Latin Mass. Which pieces or
time periods represent the dividing line? In China, I know that the
provincial operas developed sometime during the 16th century (Han,
Sichuan, Xian, etc.) but I don't know whether they used choral music.
Making a huge historical leap,I have a score by Bright Sheng, "Two
Folk Songs From Qinghai" (1990)for chorus (SATB), Percussion and Two
Pianos. So where where the dividing line beween folk music and art
music in Chinese choral music? What about Native Americans? I don't
even know if there is something that could be considered to be choral
art music. The only pieces I know of are harmonized arrangements of
native folk tunes although it would be good to know where ethnographic
transcripts end and where modern arrangements begin. That would also
apply to Korean music. I think American black gospel music would folk
music, but Scott Joplin's "Treemonisha" (1911) has some real 4-part
choral numbers and that would be considered art music. Where's the
dividing line? I have some Arabic monophonic folksongs but I also read
that there are Arabic operettas, but I don't know if they use chorus
and I don't have any scores or recordings. My project is to create a
high school choral music curriculum which relates world historical
events with choral music. For example, I would like to teach Martin
Luther's "A Mighty Fortress is Our God" at the same time when the
social studies teacher is teaching that in 1517, Martin Luther nailed
his 95 theses on the church door in Wittenburg. When the social
studies teacher is teaching a lesson on the Italian Risorgimento, I'd
like to teach "Va, Pensiero." I certainly wouldn't use an
interdisciplinary approach exclusively, but it would be nice to have a
list of conceptual connections. Hope that clarifies my request.

I'm not sure there is a specific answer to this question. My own
feeling is that folk music is defined by its being based firmly on an
aural tradition, with performers improvising over a very basic outline
learnt by ear. Once music is "petrified" into notation on a
manuscript, with its exact form (and later also its pitch, harmonies
and dynamics) defined according to the wishes of the
composer/arranger, it becomes art music, even if it has been taken
directly from a folk tradition.

I would place liturgical music nearer to art music than to folk music,
because it has always been fairly strictly controlled. From what I
remember of singing plainchant at school, it was fixed both with
respect to pitch and to ornamentation, and I think some of the pieces
were attributed back to the 10th century at least. IThe hymns found on
Greek papyri dating from as far back as 100 BC would be another
example.  I would not define liturgical misic as folk music, nor would
I use monophony as a criterion of folk music.

I read somewhere that in Ancient China music was very firmly defined
and was used ritually as a magical tool to uphold the stability of the
nation.  Apparently, huge orchestras and choruses were used for this
purpose, and the form of the music performed was fixed by the season
and/or astrological criteria.

I apologize for my delayed response. My spam killer program
misidentified your communication, but I was finally able to rerieve
your reply.
Your answer was helpful in organizing my thoughts as to the
"petrification" issue. It does seem strange to regard the music of,
say, Pete Seeger or Peter, Paul, and Mary as art music simply because
they have been notated. Any reply would be appreciated.
Adam Rosenbloom