Criticism
Much of Garcia's 'method' remains extremely important as a plan for the correct development and production of the voice. But in this respect his 'scientific' approach misfired, and resulted in many students and singers attempting to reproduce the effect described by conscious muscular movement in the throat. This often had injurious results. An essential basis of expressive singing is that the breath and tone should be united without any conscious adjustment of the vocal mechanism, through teaching-methods which direct the singer's attention away from the muscular apparatus by which the sound is produced.
The technique (of 'some masters') referred to by Garcia of vocal exercising rapidly repeating plosive syllables such as 'Pa', transfers the momentary restraint of breath from the larynx or glottis to the lips, so that the natural diaphragmatic attack, without glottal manipulation, is learned. The use of soft vocalised syllables such as 'Ma' or 'Na', in rapid succession on single notes or in vocalises, assist in directing the tone to its 'forward' focus of resonance as the tone remains continuously engaged while the lips of the mouth are intermittently closed and opened and the nasal passages remain unobstructed.
The criticism of the method is expressed, for instance, by Mme Tetrazzini:
In the result the "attack" is certainly very sharp and clean, but personally I cannot recommend this particular method of achieving that result, since the effect is anything but agreeable to the ear, and there is good reason for thinking that the practice, besides being unnecessary, is also injurious to a vocal organ... There should never be any strain or forcing of any kind, and on the same principle is the rule as to the amount of breath emitted, which should always be the smallest quantity possible which suffices to produce the tone required. (How to Sing, 1923, Chap. 14, Vocal Cords.)
Read more about this topic: Coup De Glotte
Famous quotes containing the word criticism:
“It is ... pathetic to observe the complete lack of imagination on the part of certain employers and men and women of the upper-income levels, equally devoid of experience, equally glib with their criticism ... directed against workers, labor leaders, and other villains and personal devils who are the objects of their dart-throwing. Who doesn’t know the wealthy woman who fulminates against the “idle” workers who just won’t get out and hunt jobs?”
—Mary Barnett Gilson (1877–?)
“However intense my experience, I am conscious of the presence and criticism of a part of me, which, as it were, is not a part of me, but a spectator, sharing no experience, but taking note of it, and that is no more I than it is you. When the play, it may be the tragedy, of life is over, the spectator goes his way. It was a kind of fiction, a work of the imagination only, so far as he was concerned.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“The critic lives at second hand. He writes about. The poem, the novel, or the play must be given to him; criticism exists by the grace of other men’s genius. By virtue of style, criticism can itself become literature. But usually this occurs only when the writer is acting as critic of his own work or as outrider to his own poetics, when the criticism of Coleridge is work in progress or that of T.S. Eliot propaganda.”
—George Steiner (b. 1929)