Dimitrije Golemović

MONOPHONY IN OUR FOLKSINGING

AS AN ASPECT OF THE TRANSFORMATION OF DIAPHONY

Our folk singing is both monophonic and diaphonic. Both aspects ap-
pear in specific regions, somewhere as the exclusive way of singing and in
some — almost as ап exception froin the local traditional practice.
In the regions vvhcrc diaphonic singing is predominant, шопорћопу is
rare and usually not considered singing in the proper sense. The reason for
this, with the former, lies in а powerful ritual function it possesses, and with
the latter it is caused by а ргоЬаЫу more recent criterion for their
"classification" — а specific absence of social feeling since, instead in а
group, they аге performed by one person only. 1
The subject of this paper аге not the above mentioned types of sing- ing,
but the monophonic singing originating on the foundation of diaphony and
which by this very fact, although it may seem strange, represents а form of its
transformation.
Our folk diaphonic singing is expressed in three basic forms, as: het-
егорћопу, bourdon and ћошорћопу. Through а study of those forms of
monophonic singing evolving from diaphony, it becomes obvious that they all
stern from heterophony. Bourdon and homophony, as much as vve know, do
not provide the source for а "development" of homophony - in these forms
homophony appears periodically, but never in such an extent as to develop and
become independent (see examples 14 and 15).
Why does the singing treated in this paper originate exclusively from
heterophony? То answer this question one must first understand its es- sence.
What seems to be the most important instance with heterophony is the fact that
it stems from the human wish to sing in unison and their inability to realize that in full.2
1
More about this in: D. Golemović, "Singing vvhich is and is not singing", Fo/klor i njcgova
umetnička transpozicija, No 2, Beograd, 1989,73.
2
The argument of N. Kaufman, Bulgarian ethnomusicologist is ѵегу interesting, al-
ihough different in comparison to ours. It is founded on the specific aesthetic need of thc singcr Іо
"оѵегсоше monotony" in singing by creating а polyphony by conscious variations.

1и
 In the first period of its existence this vvas an unconscious desire, later
growing more conscious and finally, as musicologist C. Sachs says, "the
incident is transformed into the intention”, 1 2 and through а pcrmanent vocal
practice the wish lead to а characteristic uniformity in singing, which had two
directions. One of them clarifies and stabilizes the original hetero- phony as а
form: thc original, characterized by а specific impulsiveness or freedom, can
be called elemental heterophony (ехашріс 1) and the ensuing one we can call
stable heterophony (exaniples 3-5). 3 This heterophony іп а way "legalizes"
the original contingency which becomes almost а rule. Heterophonic parts in а
monophonic course, cxpressed most frequently as а crossing of voices, with
the consonance of а second as а consequence, do not appear freely, but in an
order, at certain places in the melopoetic \vhole, most!y at the place of the
poetic caesura, first with the main one, at the end of the versc (ехатріе 2) and
then both on the main and the internal (examples 4 and 5). 4 It is interesting
that folk singing emphasizes the importance of caesura not only with this,
harmonic element, 5 but with other elements as well: rhythmic (а) а tone that
lasts longer causing the characteristic "delay" of the musical course, or b) an
exceptionally short tone, so that thc cnd scems "cut off’); melodic (a) melody
is slowed down since it is reduced to one tone only, followcd by the
characteristic

Не states that the result was а "chaos of tones", obviously heterophony (N. Kaufman, Bulga- rian
Polyphonic Folk Song, Sofia 1958). The wcak poinl of this argument lies in the exag- gerated
importance of the aesthetic feeling which certainly was not so great at ihe lime the singing was
developing.
2
C. Sachs, The Raising of Music in the Ancicnt World Easl and West (Muzika starog sveta) —
Serbocroatian translation — Beograd, 1980, 53.
3 At this poinl one should quote the view of the Slovenian ethnomusicologist R. Hrovalin

that folklore polyphony was created as а rcsult of the "reproductive techniques'', expressed both in а
gradual devclopment of the awarencss about а "free simultaneous imi- lation" and about
''simultaneous varying" (Radoslav Hrovalin, Metodologija tretiranja folk- lorne polifonije (The
Mcthodology of Trcating Folklorc Po/yphony), Rad, XVI Kongres SUFJ; Igalo, 1969,439).
4 The importance of the caesura in the verse was noticed by Vuk Karadžić as well. Не

called the caesura "pause” and said:”...the number of syllables and the pause, these are thc main and
the only rules in our folk songs vvhich were observed by the author of thc song..." (Vuk Stefanović
Karadžić, О srpskoj narodnoj poeziji (Оп Serbian Folk Роеігу), Beograd, 1964,157-158).
5 The significance of Ihis element was observed by F. Bosc, as well and he called it

"broadening of the sound", remarking that it could most frequently be found "at the end of а strophe
or а song, which, in simple music, represents promincnt melodic points. gladly еш- phasized in
dynamics and broadly developed". Similar broadening of Ihe sound can bc found in "numerous
peoples, even with those who, like Ihe Indians, do nol know olher fortns of polyphony" (F. Bose,
Etnomuzikologija (Ethnomusicology), Bcogrud, 1975, 56-57).

2.15
descending movement by а second; b) melody is adorned with melisma; c) there is а
сгу in falsetto tone (and articulatory) using accent and staccato. The appearance of
these elements is not accidcntal, and in studying them one is faced with а
straightfonvard conclusion — their common role is to stress the caesura and thus
articulate the melopoetic totality.6
The appearance of heterophony at the place of the caesura in stable heterophony,
although related to the "feeling for caesura", is conscious to а great degree, and the folk
practice shows it as an awareness of the role of voices in singing. So, for ехатріе, in the
region of Užice, the first voice "cuts in" (crosses with the accompanying voice), and the
second sings "na pravo", which is а plastic representation of the relationship of the
soloist melody and the accompaniment, where the solo melody is "more adorned” and
the accompanying one is simpler, as if acting as а "skeleton" of the leading melody. 7 In
Takovo and Dragačevo, the crossing of the leading voice with the accompanying one is
called "predvajanje” 8 (division) and one of the singers from Takovo describes it like
this: "The one who begins - separates, and I only сгу "а" after her, and nothing else".
The old diaphonic singing from Podrinje has the term "zavodi(ti) (to mislead) а song",
when the melopoetic whole ends with а characteristic crossing of the voices. 9 In the
eastern part of Serbia, in the region of Zaplanje, one says that опе - the leading-singer
"napreduje" (advances) and the others "idu po nju” (try to catch up), 10 and in Svrljig
one singer "zavrta" i.e. winds

6
Although obvious, and for the folk singer undoubtedly important, need to articulatc thc melopoetic
totality, it is not completely undcrstandable since it is known that even the ancient ritual practice aspired
toward the opposite — 'avoiding the end", consequently thc caesura - and tried to achieve il by numcrous
differenl means (different places of thc musi- cal and poctic caesurac - musical caesura is moved а few
syllablcs after the poetic; by an- ІірЬопу wilh "overlapping" - Ihe second group of singcrs begins before thc
first has fin- ished its own melopoetic whole, etc.).
7 D. Golemović, Narodna muzika užičkog кгаја (Folk Music in the Region of Užicc), Beograd, 1990, 20.
8
D. Golcmović, "Muzička tradicija Takova "(Musical Tradition of Takovo), Takovo и igriipesmi(Такого
in DancesandSongs), G. Milanovac, 1994, 103; D. Dević, Narodna muzika Dragačeva, Beograd, 1986, 195.
9 D. Golemović, Narodna muzika Podrinja (Fo/k Mosi'c from Podrinje), Sarajcvo, 1987,52.
10 S. Radinović, Staro dvoglasno pevanje Zaplanja ( Old Diaphonic Singing in_Zapla пје), master's thesis,

Beograd, 1992,97.
4
around the leading voice, and the other - "ide po nju" (tries to catch up), "drži pravac"
(maintains the direction) and the like. 12
The most developed form of heterophony vvhich could be called ог- namental
heterophony (examples 6 and 7) is the result of а conscious relationship of the singer
toward the singing and also of а specific musical play, derived from the singer's
aesthetic need for а melodious and harmoni- ous adornment of the song. 13
Heterophony is, in this case as well, created by а crossing of voices, but an important
role is played by the rnelodic adornment accomplished by means of the so called
clucking sounds, "borrowed" from the high falsetto register. 14 Although conceived
com- pletely differently from the original, elemental heterophony, ornamental
heterophony has much in common with it, and they can easily be mistaken for one
another if insufficient attention is paid to their main characteristics.

Much is Ieft unresolved in this, although our attention has been fo- cused on the causes
of the strengthening of heterophony as а stable poly- phonic form vvhich seems to be
opposed to the ancient "dcsire" of thc singers to "annihilate" it and turn it into
monophony. Full explanation will be given on another occasion, since this paper deals
with other problems.
Another way of leveling heterophony - in our focus at this moment - is to turn it
into шопорћопу. This practice of turning it into rnonophony is the result of а long
traditional practice similar to the procedure of its unifi- cation ог strengthening. On the
12 D. Dević, "Narodna muzika" (Folk Music), Ku/turna istorija Svrljiga, \iook // (Jezik, kullura i

civiUzacija), Niš-Svrljig, 1995, 440. Similar terminology is used in folk 'inging in Bulgaria and Macedonia (N.
Kaufman, op. cit. 2; T. Biccvski, Dvoglasjeto vo SR Makedonija (Diaphonic Singing in Macedonia), Skopje, 1986).
13 Such а devcloped way of adorning reminds one of the story of the adoming of а đay pot by

primitive man. It runs like this: ”ln the ancienl times, when making а clay pot, primitive man would first make
а vvicker basket, and cover il with wet clay, and place it in ihc fire. After the twigs have burned, the pot of
baked clay remains, with omaments made by the original tvvigs. Man was probably not conscious of thc
omaments for а long time, until he leamcd thc new technique and used Ihe potter's wheel. Then hc began to
produce clay pots which, considering the new technology, did not have апу ornamcnts, and would adorn them
later on". Man evolved the desire to adorn his clay pots made by the potter's vvhcel most probably after
centuries had passed, bul the dcsire madc him an aesthetic being. One can suppose thal man's devclopment
from а functional lo an aesthetic being had similar manifcstations in various other activities as well, regardless
of their kind, and this would includc music as well.
14
In Zaplanje, they call this phenomenon "kreskanje" (sparkling) and it has botli а lunclional and an
aesthetic rolc (ехатріе 12). Its functional rolc is to givc particular signals, and ihe aesthetic role of "kreskanje"
is to enrich the existing musical structure (S. Kadinović, op. cit., 10. 100). And herc, one is compclled to
compare it with the already mcntioned "usjccanje” (cutting in) which could also havc similar roles. So, singers
from thc village of Ribaševina, near Užice, say that had it not been for the "cutting in'', they would not know
how to sing on, how to continue singing. Also, the "cutting in" can be а signal from onc singcr to another,
when one wants to take а breath C'predisanje") to stop Ihe other from doing it at the same time, thus avoiding а
break in ihc singing (D. Golemović, op. cit., 7, M). The acsthetic function of "cutting in", as а specific sound
enrichment, although undoubtedly exists, has not bcen noticcd by the singers from Užice.
ers to "annihilate" it and turn it into monophony. Full explanation will be given on
another occasion, since this paper deals with other problems.
Another way of leveling heterophony - in our focus at this moment - is to turn it
into шопорћопу. This practice of turning it into rnonophony is the result of а long
traditional practice similar to the procedure of its unifi- cation ог strengthening. On the
basis of the samples of singing form various parts of Serbia one can conclude that the
process was, most probably, un- conscious for а long period of time — the
consequence of an incident. The process was also gradual, as confirmed by the
cxamples characterized by а simultaneous appearance of both heterophony and
monophony, creating а sort of а transitional form (examples 8 and 9 ).
Since in our singing, heterophony is usually achieved by "cutting in", made by
one of the voices (most frequently the leading one), the disappearance of heterophony
through its transformation into топорћопу can be achieved in two ways: 1. nobody
"cuts in" (ехатріе 11) and 2. both voices "cut in" (ехатріе 10).
In the first case (relatively rare) the ensuing топорћопу is the result of а
disarranged "balance" in singing, created by а deviation from the tradi- tional practice
and the accompanying voice is sung by тапу, instead of one or two singers. Since they
рау по attention to harmonizing their accompa- niment vvilh the soloist, but sing in full
voice, it happens that they "bury" (an expression from the region of Užice) the soloist
and make her sing the same as they do. Singers do not like this since (most frequently
during а long tone which slows down the musical course) one does not know how to
continue the song.
Our singing has а тоге frequent phenomenon of both voices cutting in. Like in
heterophony, one can here conclude that there is а certain evo- lution in the relationship
of singers toward singing, so that monophonic singing in some cases represents а
specific result of а certain performing practice, and in others - а conscious inclination
toward the same result. The examples created as а result of the performing practice are
mono- phonic quite by accident, and they originate when the participants are used to
"lead" the song, and therefore to "cut in" and do it simultaneously. There is an evidence
of this in the village of Ribaševina, vvhere singers talk about this type of singing, since
atypical, as something similar to yammering (!?).
Our vocal practice does not have тапу examples of the developed monophonic
singing derived from heterophony, which is thereby autono- mous and ensuing from
the old human desire for unification. This is under- standable when we consider that
diaphonic singing is prevalent, and that

singing in unison is difficult to achieve, not only in folk practice, but in the musical
practice in general. 11 So much as we know, such singing can only be heard in the
region of Studenica (western Serbia) demonstrated at а high level of synchronicity and

11 This problem is encounteređ by the performers of so callcd "serious” music, par- ticularly choirs.
unification of voices, not only in the singing of the "main" melodic tones, but in
various very important сошріех orna- ments (ехатріе 13). А little different is the
monophonic singing from Zaplanje, "enriched" by thc already mentioned clucking
sounds, which, as particular ornaments, are not performed by both, but only one
leading voice, so that one could almost consider it both as monophony and as а specific
form of ornamental heterophony(example 12).
Мопорћопу derived from diaphony is not frequent in our vocal prac- tice, since
thc original elemental heterophony evolved into the stable het- егорћопу and then - the
ornamental heterophony. For that reason, be- cause it represents а specific exception, it
is interesting to investigate as much as the diaphonic singing in the regions where
monophony is preva- lent, but this is а topic we shall treat at some other time.

(1997)
Fnlk/nre - Music - Wnrk of Art
\
Folklor – muzika – delo ( Zbornik radova sa IV međunarodnog
simpozijuma održanog 1995. u Beogradu), Beograd, 1997. 265