Copland came up with a paradigm for how we listen that involves what he called the three “planes” of listening. He identified 1) the sensuous plane, 2) the expressive plane, and 3) the sheerly musical plane. Copland was clear that these were components of a system of listening that were intertwined, but he thought it was helpful to break apart the components like this to understand how we listen. There is a misconception that I hear repeated in conversation and in the culture in general that the only purpose of music is to elicit an emotional response. Certainly an emotional response is ONE of the things that happens when we listen to music, but if that is all that happens, we are missing a richer experience of music. I think Copland’s three planes can give us some insight into this richness. I also think it can be helpful for us who are called to be music makers by participating in the song of the liturgy.

The first plane, the “sensuous” plane, is the simplest way to listen to music, that is, listening for just the pleasure of the musical sound itself. This is when we hear music without thinking or considering it in any way. Sometimes we use music with this type of listening to escape some other sonic reality, and the music becomes the backdrop for the other things we are doing. We aren’t really engaging it in any way, it’s there to set a certain mood or tempo for what we’re doing.

The second plane is the “expressive.” This is when we engage the music and the artist and try to derive some meaning or message from the piece. Copland is careful here. Music, like all art, is interpreted in the context of the beholder. Once the artist releases it, he or she essentially loses control of how it will be interpreted, and it speaks for itself. So it is impossible to say a piece of music or performance definitely means a certain thing. Nevertheless, the artist did have a motivation, ideas, feelings, thoughts he or she was trying to convey, and in the expressive plane, we as the listener engage that meaning. What is the composer or songwriter or musician trying to communicate with this piece of music or in this performance?

Finally we come to the third plane, the “sheerly musical.” This is where we analyze the elements of the music itself such as the melody, accompaniment, instrumentation, voicing, tempo or style. The more knowledgeable we are about music, the more we are able to engage the sheerly musical plane. But sometimes knowing too much can be a hinderance. Professional musicians often fall into the trap of being too clinical when listening to performances, analyzing the theory or listening for mistakes in a performance to a degree in which we miss the larger experience. Nevertheless, thinking about the musical elements, especially things like the melody (why does it go higher here and lower there) or instrumentation or tempo (fast or slow) can enrich the listening experience, and one doesn’t have to be a musician to appreciate these basics.

When we listen to music, we are always combining these three elements in some way. In the context of liturgy, in which we are called to participate in the music, I think these elements are also helpful. We tend to be more passive listeners, but also passive participants, maybe singing along, but more or less just letting things pass over us, not really considering what we are singing. What we might strive for both as listeners of music, and as makers of music in the liturgy as the assembly, is to engage the expressive and sheerly musical planes more intentionally. Perhaps our appreciation for music, and our participation in the music of our worship, could be greatly enriched.

Submit your liturgical questions or comments to Jeff at liturgyandmusic@saintraphael.org
– Jeff Rice, Pastoral Associate of Liturgy & Music