David Stewart wrote:
>Been listening to it. Wondered if anyone could help me with an
>'interpretation' problem.
I can certainly try. The way I understand the Offertory is this. The
opening text, given to the boys' choir, asks that Christ free the souls
of "all the faithful dead" (note that this request is confined to only
the souls of those who were true believers in life) from hell, and the
adult chorus follows this negative request by a positive one, asking the
archangel Michael to bring these souls "into the holy light" (presumably
meaning the presence of God in heaven).
Then comes the phrase that this whole section of the Requiem turns on: "As
once you promised to Abraham and to his seed."
At ths point, the Owen poem about Abraham and his son breaks in. This
poem is not just a "rewriting" of the Old Testament passage, as you say;
it is precisely the opposite of that passage. When the angel offers a
ram, the ram of pride, as an alternative sacrifice, this "old man" Abraham
rejects it and goes ahead to actually kill his son -- "and half the seed
of Europe, one by one."
>1. Owen sees the world leaders at the time as Abraham and deliberately
>destroy one-by-one the seed of europe.
You are basically right, I think. Not exactly the "world leaders" as a
whole, but the "old men" who brought on the slaughter of WWI and were
responsible for continuing it to such lengths.
>Britten simply for irony's sake sets it against Owens old testament and
>the boys who are to die make their presence felt which gives more weight to
>the 'crime' of the world leaders as they are responsible for their deaths.
Britten, I think, fully agrees with Owen here, and throughout the Requiem,
and would not put quotes around the word "crime." To them, the "old men's"
actions definitely were a crime. I would not call it irony--to Britten and
Owen, it is just a statement of moral fact.
The boys' choir then immediately continues with "Sacrifices and prayers to
you, Lord, we offer with praise..." And the promise to Abraham and his seed
(i.e., to "the faithful") is repeated -- God will accept the sacrifices and
prayers offered and receive the souls of the faithful dead into heaven.
The problem, as Owen and Britten see it, is that the "sacrifices" referred
to here are the very soldiers whom the "old men" condemned to virtually
certain death, and are now praying to God to grant eternal rest to. First
we kill you; then we use your sacrifice as an offering to obtain your
entrance into heaven!
>2. Britten uses his resources to mock Christianity or perhaps religion
>since the OT is as important to Judaism as it is to Christianity (IIR my RE
>lessons C) and I am sure he would not have wanted to have a go at Jews, at
>that time.
Whether this is a mockery of Christianity or religion depends on how you
understand them, I guess. Certainly Owen and Britten were strongly opposed
to conventional piety as they saw it. However, as the Requiem proceeds,
there is a suggestion of what true religion might be. The Owen poem in the
next section, the Sanctus, suggests that there is another kind of religion
than that of the priests, whose flesh is marked by the Beast "by whom the
gentle Christ's denied."
"The scribes on all the people shove
And bawl allegiance to the state.
But they who love the greater love
Lay down their life; they do not hate."
And again, in the Libera Me:
"I am the enemy you killed, my friend...
I parried; but my hands were loathe and cold.
Let us sleep now ..."
At this point, as I hear Britten's music, a real reconciliation is
achieved, among the dead "enemies" who have become friends. This allows
Britten, I think, to end by quoting the text of the mass, "requiem aeternam
dona eis, Domine," without irony. At least there is a hope that the
sacrifice of the soldiers may lead to real peace. What's done is done; the
only way for the living to heal the situation now is never to allow war to
happen again.
Jon Johanning // [log in to unmask]
|
