Bernstein Mass

I've been on a Bernstein Mass kick. I rented the DVD of it that was recorded at the Vatican in 2000. The staging was interesting to see, but felt like some of the bite of the original album had been toned down. (I saw some comments on either Netflix or Amazon about censorship. At the Vatican? Image that.) The orchestra for that DVD was truly mediocre. However, I did notice some text changes, but more on that later.

So I went back to listen to the original 1971 production. Overall it is so superior. Some days I think "If only the modern text was not so dated" with the "groovy" feel of the 60s. Other days I think that it is the time that it was written.  Still, to hear Alan Titus sing Simple Song is worth it.

It turns out that I have another recording: the Marin Alsop recording of 2009 with Jubilant Sykes as the Celebrant. This seems to have the all the text changes and the orchestra sounds much better. Although, the technical quality of the recording doesn't sound right. The original 1971 recording has a real lush sound to it. It seems missing here. (I'm sure that some would say that is the difference between the analog and digital recording technique, but to be honest I've never bought that theory.)

What I love about the piece itself is that it presents a conflict with the celebrant. "The celebrant, in a furious rage, hurls the sacred bread, housed in an ornate cross-like monstrance, and the chalice of wine, smashing them on the floor. At this sacrilege the other cast members collapse to the ground as if dead while the Celebrant sings a solo..." (Wikipedia) (BTW--this act of sacrilege is what is missing from the Vatican version.) It also asks the question about what makes the celebrant (the priest) different from anyone else (the laity.) Given the behavior of the Catholic leadership in that not too distant past (regarding the sex abuse scandal), I find this to be a timely and valid question.