(Formerly) CE from York

[french frank]

Misogyny or not, I think it worth reflecting on the fact that the tradition of boy choristers became established at a time when schools were for boys, and girls weren't educated. During the past millennium, it's been barely 150 years since education for girls has been promoted, starting with the movement for separate schools for girls in the 1870s. The best education has been in the single-sex schools.

If I speak as someone outside the tradition of cathedral choral music, how could it be otherwise when girls weren't given the opportunity to attend choir schools and be trained as choristers? The choir school here has only accepted girls in the past couple of decades, and there is now a girls' choir.

People talk about boys learning differently, behaving differently when girls are around: and how could that be any different when for centuries the girls weren't around?

The millennium of the tradition of boy choristers was founded on the exclusion of girls. Not separate choirs, or separate schools, but the total exclusion. Now that boys and girls are educated together and it's coming to be accepted that the particular sound of a choir depends more on the training than the sex of the chorister, perhaps it's time to end the segregation entirely?

[jean]

I did wonder if RT was trying to tell us something this week by printing informator choristarum but decided that, as it was Magdalen College, probably not.

I'd never thought about it before. One does find the form informator choristorum as well of course, but as it's not a classical Latin word (nor even a classical Greek one as far as I can tell) I don't know what the nominative is or what the significance of the a and the o in the genitive might be.

Does anyone know?

[french frank]

I'd never thought about it before. One does find the form informator choristorum as well of course, but as it's not a classical Latin word (nor even a clalssical Greek one as far as I can tell) I don't know what the nominative is or what the significance of the a and the o in the genitive might be.

Does anyone know?

The question has been posed. The add to this post contains what we know.

[jean]

Thank you - I hadn't seen that!

Interesting that the taint of a feminine-sounding form was so great they had to masculinise it. I wonder when it was done?

[french frank]

Thank you - I hadn't seen that!

Interesting that the taint of a feminine-sounding form was so great they had to masculinise it. I wonder when it was done?

Well, the clergy weren't always that well educated . I don't know that there was any idea behind it other than 'It must be wrong'. A classicist, of course, would know that the correct grammar would be "Chorista bonus" - there's no sense in which the word was ever feminine.

I note also 'canonista' to add to the other list, also ecclesiastical with a Greek origin.

[Mr Stoat]

My one and only visit to Lincoln for Evensong was on a "Girls" day. They sang fabulously and it was a real act of worship. Do I feel short-changed? No.

[Magnificat]

Misogyny or not, I think it worth reflecting on the fact that the tradition of boy choristers became established at a time when schools were for boys, and girls weren't educated. During the past millennium, it's been barely 150 years since education for girls has been promoted, starting with the movement for separate schools for girls in the 1870s. The best education has been in the single-sex schools.

If I speak as someone outside the tradition of cathedral choral music, how could it be otherwise when girls weren't given the opportunity to attend choir schools and be trained as choristers? The choir school here has only accepted girls in the past couple of decades, and there is now a girls' choir.

People talk about boys learning differently, behaving differently when girls are around: and how could that be any different when for centuries the girls weren't around?

The millennium of the tradition of boy choristers was founded on the exclusion of girls. Not separate choirs, or separate schools, but the total exclusion. Now that boys and girls are educated together and it's coming to be accepted that the particular sound of a choir depends more on the training than the sex of the chorister, perhaps it's time to end the segregation entirely?

ff

There is a practical point to be made about boys' choirs which are still the main choir in many leading establishments.

It is that boys are not easy to train and motivate and to do it well means years of experience and this is not always available to aspiring choirmasters these days. Parish churches were the starting point for many of our most famous choirmasters.

Whether you or Flosshilde or anyone else think this is important any more depends entirely on how much you value the tradition of using boys and keeping them singing at all costs for the benefits that most on this board will happily acknowledge.

For the umpteenth time it has nothing to do with whether girls can sound the same as boys ( they can but they are usually much older when they do - 13/14 as opposed to 10/13) or whether to let them sing in cathedrals which they should but to mix them will inevitably lead to the boys departing as they have done the parish churches. It's the nature of the beast I'm afraid nothing to do with the tradition of centuries.

VCC

[Flosshilde]

The implication being that ALL men are casual misogynists? Hmm. Is that how we are meant to read that final parenthesis?
I suppose if you were looking to stir up enough ire to fuel a different thread, that would do it? Yes, on reflection, I can see it's quite a clever tactic.

No, what I said didn't imply that I thought all men are mysogynist; just that the level of mysogyny I saw in Magnificat's posts suggested to me that magnificat was male. Women can be, & are, sexist in that they can be prejudiced against women; Margaret Thatcher was one. Mysogyny, however, is (I think) rather more than simple prejudice, but a deep dislike, even fear, of women. I think it would be a very rare woman who felt like that.

& no, I don't want, nor am trying, to 'stir up ire'; just puzzled why it should be so important to know if it's girls or boys singing when the person wanting to know has indicated that they can't tell the difference, & wonder if the apparent anxiety is on a par with the feeling of some CofE members & clergy about women clergy.

[jean]

...wonder if the apparent anxiety is on a par with the feeling of some CofE members & clergy about women clergy.

Actually this thread has strangely reminded me of another thread in another place where it is being suggested that allowing gay people to marry may well result in some (straight) people deciding not to marry at all...

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Well, the clergy weren't always that well educated . I don't know that there was any idea behind it other than 'It must be wrong'. A classicist, of course, would know that the correct grammar would be "Chorista bonus" - there's no sense in which the word was ever feminine.

Quite. A few 1st declension nouns are masculine.

[MrGongGong]

Actually this thread has strangely reminded me of another thread in another place where it is being suggested that allowing gay people to marry may well result in some (straight) people deciding not to marry at all...

12 Across ?

Huffenpuff ?


(I was assuming that this was a clue to a cryptic crossword)

[jean]

Quite. A few 1st declension nouns are masculine.

Of course - but the interesting thing is why anyone pretends they aren't.

That's why I'd like to know when the change from chorista to a putative choristus ws made.

[jean]

(I was assuming that this was a clue to a cryptic crossword)

Oh, why?

[Simon]

The Minster used to say which set of trebles did each service, but attendance at the girls' services was less than the boys because people assumed they'd be getting a different and inferior sound.

Not necessarily. Though the sound is, generally, different, I imagine that most people just wanted to see and hear the traditional male choir. After all, that's what has been preserved for centuries and is one of the few things in which this country still leads the world. All your comment proves is what we all know - that most people, still, want to hear a boys/men choir in a cathedral. So you try to make that difficult for them. Very helpful, that!

As you have all observed this is not the case and so, to remove any inherent bias, the Minster doesn't release which set of choristers will be on, including for broadcasts and recordings, in order to give the girls at least a fighting chance of being considered on the same plane.

Leaving aside the inaccuracy - we have NOT "all observed that this is not the case" one has to say "Oh coo! How sweet! How wonderfully equality-minded you dear people are in York! How sublimely politically correct. Yes, let the girls have "fighting chance". After all, their voices break and they don't have long as sopranos, do they?

So, when the girl set-ups have, eventually (and despite the hard-work of those at a few remaining foubndations who try to keep the boy/men tradition alive and paramount) overtaken the boys, except perhaps for a couple of college choirs near the Cam - after all, it's much easier to get and retain girls for choirs - we know who to blame. The dissemblers at York, among others. What a short-sighted and ignorant policy.

[MrGongGong]

Take a deep breath
the voice of reason returns

BP 180:120