THE DECADENCE OF THE ART OF SINGING AND ITS CAUSES; ITS RESTORATION
The rapid disappearance of good singers has become so alarming
in the last few years, that the complaint so widely expressed by
those who are concerned about the future of the art of singing
seems more than justified.
The deterioration of the vocal art has affected even the Italian
school of _bel canto_, which, judging from its contemporary
representatives—with the exception of a few celebrities—shows
real evidence of degeneration from the glorious old traditions.
The causes responsible for this decadence are growing so rapidly
that a solution of the problems essential to the very life of
the art of singing has become imperative.
There is no doubt that this critical status of affairs can be
faced and successfully overcome, so that the art of song may be
restored to its original splendor; but in reality it is a
difficult task to carry out such a program, under present
conditions.
The downfall of _bel canto_ is the result of various and complex
causes; the aim to restore it, in view of the present conditions
of the teaching field in general, will be severely handicapped,
for reasons connected with the commercial element which
predominates it at present.
If, however, recovery from the present unhealthy conditions is
really desired, it can be attained by radical intervention at
the very roots of the pernicious growth—the teaching—a difficult
task for any one person to undertake, unless strongly supported
by the coöperation of all those interested in the future of the
culture of voice.
In a search for the remote causes which brought about the
decadence of _bel canto_, most of them can be traced to two
primary sources: one musical and the other professional in
origin. The first is related to the evolution of singing music,
on the whole, and especially of opera; the second to the
degeneration of the artistic aims of the modern singers, whose
careers have become essentially commercial, and who have
forsaken all ideals, to pursue solely a financial and ephemeral
success, regardless of how it is obtained. Unfortunately this
class of singers furnish the vast majority of the teachers of
to-day.
In reference to the evolution of singing music, it must be
admitted that the opera has undergone a radical change from its
former traditions and style.
Within the last half century a new sense of life, more intense
and deep, has opened up new horizons for the display of human
emotions in all arts, affecting music most decidedly. The
different sentiments which have started to pulsate in the human
heart have fundamentally changed the psychology of the world,
giving rise to new ideas and feelings, much stronger, more
dramatic, more complex—above all—more realistic. In fact, we now
live in an age in which there is no longer room for romantic
sentimentalism, and the ingenuous productions which the
preceding generations enjoyed in opera or drama have no longer
the power of interesting the majority of modern audiences.
Therefore, this sudden and radical evolution which has
influenced our psychology—for reasons and through circumstances
which cannot be discussed here—has been transfused and absorbed,
in a natural process of assimilation, by all the different forms
and expressions of human sentiment, through literature, music,
painting, sculpture, perhaps principally through the theatrical
and operatic works of recent times.
By natural laws every expression of life must be subject to the
evolution and changes of human thoughts and emotions;
consequently, it is not surprising that these new influences
have changed, in a radical form, the operatic world, its aims,
productions, style, meanings, and the taste of the public also.
Audiences of the last thirty years were getting weary of
listening to the arias and duets of the romantic period of
Rossini, Mozart, Bellini, Donizetti, and their predecessors.
Meanwhile the field of the operatic composers has become
influenced by new waves of emotion, more intense and much
deeper, which are gradually taking a prominent place,
substituting realistic and dramatic musical expressions for the
old, conventional melodies and rhythms.
Wagner, the pioneer genius, pressing hard with his gigantic
evolution, the young Italian composers, heralded by the magic
seer of the human heart—Verdi, the French, by Berlioz and
Bizet—the sparkling painters of colors and sentiment—started the
radical reform of the opera, which began to substitute realistic
musical mediums for the conventional melodies of the romantic
period.
This change has given birth to the so-called modern _truism_ and
has had a favorable response from the majority of audiences,
exercising a very marked influence in the evolution of the art
of singing also. This influence, however, from the standpoint of
the _bel canto_ style, has proved decidedly negative, though no
blame whatever can be laid on the composers of the new operatic
music.
The modern Italian realistic school, whose radical operatic
evolution was prepared by Verdi’s “Aïda” and “Otello,” conquered
the field so decidedly and in such a triumphant manner with
Mascagni’s “Cavalleria Rusticana”—followed later by
Leoncavallo’s and Puccini’s operas—that the conquest of public
favor seemed almost a spontaneous and natural outcome. It did
not take long for these musicians to put themselves at the head
of the operatic reaction in Italy against the old formulas and
conventionalities; and while the preceding composers of the past
epoch—Rossini, Donizetti, Bellini, and even Verdi in his first
operas—were accustomed to write their works either for certain
prima donnas, tenors, or baritones, setting the music to their
vocal ability, the modern composers, by discarding these
practices, gave a higher standing to their works. They began to
create operas solely for the sake of the music, regardless of
the vocal technicalities of the singers. This new pursuit, more
noble, more artistic and dignified, started a new era in the
field of Italian opera.
The same transition took place in France, principally through
Bizet’s “Carmen,” followed later by the operas of Massenet,
Charpentier, and others, until Debussy and Dukas introduced
operas almost musically spoken, such as “Pelleas and Melisande,”
and “Ariadne and Barbe Bleue.”
This new style of music, which abolishes the artificial
virtuosity of the romantic period of opera, has naturally been
responsible for the sudden change, and perhaps, to a certain
extent, for the decadence of the so-called _bel canto_, with no
blame, however, reflected on the composers but rather on the
singers.
Originally the Italian school of _bel canto_ was merely
empirical and vague; imparted from teacher to pupil by direct
imitation, without definite rules, except for some suggestions
resulting from personal experience. By this method the art of
singing was transmitted from one good singer to another, and
thus from generation to generation.
On the other hand, the operas suited to the taste of the masses
were limited in number, almost alike in style, and of popular
interest. It was not difficult, therefore, to pass the
traditions of their _bel canto_ from one singer to the next, by
means of the well-known songs and duets of these operas,
especially if the pupils were gifted with intelligence and
artistic sense as well as with naturally beautiful voices.
When the operatic evolution, however, initiated by the young
composers, commenced to gain a foothold in the musical field,
the amateur tenors and prima donnas of all singing studios found
themselves suddenly confronted with new exigencies, and, instead
of applying to the teachers for assistance, in order to make
themselves fit to face these novel conditions, they preferred
rather to rely on their own judgment, or to follow the
suggestions only of those teachers who were more condescending,
though less competent. Refusing to go through further training
as it was required, the only thing they thought necessary was to
learn from a coach or a pianist to shout the rôles of
“Pagliacci,” “Cavalleria Rusticana,” “Bohême,” or “Tosca.”
Therefore, since this epoch, the traditional and patient
studying of six or seven years became merely a myth in Italy.
This period marks the _first intrusion_ into the _teaching
field_ of unsuccessful pianists, orchestra conductors, and
coaches, who encouraged the impatient singers in the corruption
of the art of singing, and later helped, with their incompetent
teaching, to hasten its complete decadence.
The realistic style of the modern operas, setting up a very
suggestive and temperamental ground, stimulated the young
singers to a new manner of singing, more intense and dramatic,
above all, more sensational. Attracted by the emphatic and
colorful emotions embodied in the rôles of Radames, Don José,
Turiddu, Rodolfo, and Cavaradossi, or Carmen, Santuzza, Tosca,
and Manon, they found that there was so much to be displayed
through the impersonation of these intense characters that, to
sing them properly, or to exhibit sensational interpretations by
screaming them, mattered very little in the pursuit of their
personal success.
The audiences, in fact, who are usually enthused by anything
sensational, gave the stamp of an enthusiastic approval to these
first steps toward artistic degeneration. Therefore, a logical
reason was no longer seen, nor an actual need felt, for
dedicating seven or eight years to the study of correct voice
production and artistic singing, as singers of previous
generations had been accustomed to do when, in order to sing
“Don Juan” or the “Barber of Seville,” or “Norma,” or “Lucia,”
etc., a thorough technic and a complete ease of voice production
and artistic style had been required.
At the ages of twenty or twenty-one these self-made singers
proclaimed themselves the legitimate interpreters of the operas
of Mascagni, Puccini, Massenet, Leoncavallo, etc., on the sole
support of their natural assets—a beautiful voice and an
explosive temperament. The result was soon evident. They entered
the operatic field with rare and fresh vocal equipment, and the
youthful enthusiasm which such rôles can inspire, but with
inadequate preparation. Like young horses whose instinctive
enthusiasm for running is uncontrollable, they started their
race. A few years of a more or less conspicuous career spent in
lavish wastefulness of their natural gift by screaming
sensationally the rôles of Santuzza, Canio, Rodolfo, Mimi,
Tosca, or Butterfly, established the new standard of the
artistic career for these premature singers. Their creed was
summed up in the narrow belief that in being able to sing the
few popular modern operas, their success was assured, and their
ambition was centered only on the applause of the audience for
their high notes, as a means of making money quickly at any
sacrifice. Art, its noble mission, its elevating influence, the
supreme satisfaction it gives to its apostles, was completely
ignored or disregarded by this class of singers. Some exceptions
existed, but they were the _raræ aves_ who unfortunately have
almost disappeared at present.
After four or five years these great tenors or prima donnas,
realizing the finish of their hectic and brief careers, were
compelled to seek in the teaching field the only means for
earning a livelihood. Thus they became the celebrated teachers
of Milan, Paris, New York, London, bringing into the teaching
field, along with their ignorance and incompetence, the robust
egotism which usually characterizes unsuccessful singers.
From these international centers of art, the poisonous theories
which rule the schools of singing of to-day were spread all over
the world, exercising their disastrous influence on the young
generation of singers. The Canios and Santuzzas who had lost
their beautiful voices by screaming like street venders, posed
in the musical world as celebrated teachers. Thanks to an
elaborate campaign of publicity they appointed themselves
purveyors of the secrets of Italian _bel canto_, and the
delicate mission of educating the inexperienced pupils endowed
with beautiful voices was blindly intrusted to them.
These pupils formed the second generation of bad singers, and
later on, in their turn, became the second and larger set of bad
teachers. Certainly what militates in their defense is the fact
that they found the field of singing already corrupted at the
commencement of their studies, and they had to accept the
erroneous doctrines of self-made teachers, who were the ones
really guilty of starting the decadence of the art of singing.
The responsibility, therefore, for the downfall of the
traditional and glorious school must be ascribed to those
incompetent teachers who, under the false pretense of being the
legitimate representatives of the Italian _bel canto_, spread
all sorts of improvised and arbitrary methods of singing
throughout the world.
On the other hand, the influence over voice culture exerted by
German theories within the last forty years, since the advent of
Wagnerian operas, marks another obstacle to the original methods
of correct singing.
I do not believe that originally a real German school of singing
existed; but if one did exist it was molded on the cast of the
Italian school _bel canto_. As a matter of fact, around the
early part of the eighteenth century, Giovanni Battista Mancini
(born at Ascoli, Italy, 1716) was professor of singing at the
Imperial Court of Vienna, where he died in 1800.
It is otherwise known that until some time ago German operas
were written on librettos in the Italian language, which
suggests the idea that most of the singing teachers were
Italians, or had studied the _bel canto_ method in Italy.
Before the advent of Wagner, German composers like Händel,
Glück, Mozart, Beethoven, etc., were writing their operatic
music after the style of the primitive Italian operas. Even the
first operas of Wagner were influenced by the Italian school;
but later, beginning with Tannhäuser and Lohengrin, the outcome
of his newly developed art commenced to gain a foothold in the
operatic field, finally establishing the new era of German
operatic music with “Tristan,” “Meistersinger,” and the “Ring.”
The transition from Glück, Mozart, and the others to Wagner
brought out too decided and blunt a change, so that the soft and
delicate modulations of the voice, which most of the German
singers had been very particular to develop for singing Glück,
Mozart, Bellini, or Donizetti, were no longer sufficient and fit
material for the intense, dramatic music of Wagner’s rôles.
Consequently the deficiency of their vocal means became evident,
and created disquietude among singers and teachers. Every one
tried to face the new exigencies by using, unfortunately, the
instinctive means of compensation for any deficiency, namely,
force. They thought that if their voices were not efficient and
strong enough for Wagner, there remained but one remedy—to use
them to their utmost physical power.
Their conception was indeed erroneous. They did not discriminate
between the necessity of training their voices into easier, more
obedient and effective mechanisms for surmounting the greater
difficulties, but utilized the simpler expedient of forcing
their production in order to obtain the required effects.
Consequently a few of their number, whose vocal organs were
physically very strong and could withstand the strain,
accomplished some results by using more power, or, in other
words, more breath; the others failed lamentably.
From this class of singers, endowed with exceptional physical
resistance, came the German method of singing based on an
exaggerated physical efficiency, which was adopted as the only
remedy for facing the emergency brought about by Wagnerian
music, a method strongly condemned by Wagner himself.[1]
This method, founded on the full power of the breath, supported
by the full tension of the diaphragm and other respiratory
muscles, was later called by some teachers _physiological_—a
false denomination based on a misconception of the real laws of
physiology—and which created a false ground for the teaching of
voice production in the German schools of singing.
Thus it came about that these erroneous principles, based on
mechanical force, established the foundations of a method which
advanced many erroneous theories about the breathing apparatus
and the exaggerated importance of the diaphragm in voice
culture. These theories were not confined to the German field of
singing alone, but spread all over the world, through the
interpreters and teachers of Wagner’s operatic music.
The false interpretation of the physiological laws of voice
production, started by the Germans, later gave origin to the
more elaborate singing methods which are in vogue at present,
and to which we owe chiefly the abolition of natural voices, by
their incorrect placing and artificial production, based almost
wholly on the rules of the chest and diaphragm power.
From these methods of voice culture originated the
characteristic type of singer—so popular nowadays—ridiculously
conceited, who takes particular delight in asking his admirers
to note the expansion of his chest, and test the tension and
power of his diaphragm while he is breathing or singing. A
wonderful display of brute force, of course, performed by
ignorant screamers who feel proud of their athletic
achievements, and who never seem to have observed the little
nightingale who can sing so beautifully, for hours at a stretch,
his voice carrying to great distances, but whose diaphragm is
only proportionate to his diminutive size. Evidently the
conception of the high-chested singers is that the delicate
function of singing is to be compared with the work of a
stevedore or a wrestler; and some of the public believe it too,
and admire them!
Thus the art of singing, during the period of the operatic
evolution, was represented on one side by the temperamental
outbursts of the Italian and French singers, and by the athletic
and diaphragmatic efficiency of the Germans on the other. Both
sides, directed toward a false line of development, not only
failed to face the radical evolution of the opera, but hastened
the degeneration of the art of singing to the depths that at
present are a source of constant distress and anxiety.
Now what is to be done to face this critical situation, and
restore the art of singing to a solid and stable basis? Must we
go _back_ to the old school of _bel canto_ and rebuild its
method, or must we resort to a _new source_, and establish the
foundation of new rules so as to attain a radical reform of the
school of singing?
In principle, _progress_ is the result of the _incessant
evolution_ of mankind in its striving for _advancement_ and
_perfection_; therefore, there is no progress in any branch of
science or art in going back a century.
Furthermore, there are several reasons why we cannot revive what
has already been worn out in the art of singing of the Italian
school of _bel canto_. First, few, even vague rules, if any,
have been left by that school which we could set as a standard
for the reform we are advocating. Second, its traditional
method, transferred from teacher to singer, has gradually been
deformed by its adaptation to the vocal equipment of each
person, who tried to add to it something of his own
individuality and experience; and often, instead of improving
the art of singing, brought about the opposite result of
contributing to that decadence which in recent years has become
so conspicuous throughout.
Third, the exigencies of the school of singing of to-day are
very different from those of the past, and therefore must be
faced with new equipment, better fitted to the evolution and
progress of the present-day music.
Thirty years ago, when a surgeon was called to diagnose a
fracture, or a tumor, or to locate a bullet in the human
tissues, the only assistance for his diagnosis was the proper
valuation of the given symptoms by means of his natural
intuition and experience. His professional prominence was then
related to his personal skill, and was the only warranty for the
importance given to his verdict, though it was not always
infallible. Later, the X-ray discovery made it possible for any
surgeon to see into the human body and diagnose all surgical
cases. Thus the skill itself of the surgeon of thirty years ago
no longer has the same valuation, due to the aid of the
scientific discovery of the X-ray, and no one to-day would limit
a diagnosis to the personal verdict of a surgeon without the
confirmation of the X-rays. The surgery of to-day has a real
scientific basis.
The great singers of the past, by their natural disposition for
singing, by their personal intuition, and by imitation of good
examples, were able to achieve perfection in the art of singing.
In their older days they were consequently competent singing
teachers—celebrities identified with the famous school of _bel
canto_. But, like the surgeons of their time, they had no
equipment other than their own skill and the painstaking care to
follow the intuitive and sole method of teaching of those days,
from which they got their own consummate experience.
Would the reviving of that routine in the present condition of
the singing field be a possible or self-sufficient solution? By
no means. First, because true exponents of the _bel canto_ of
former times are but memories of the past, and second because
the modern repertoire requires much more power and skill, as
well as ease of voice production, in order to face the evolution
of operatic music. Then, too, another reason—the most important
one: the competency of the old masters was in reality not the
result of a profoundly conscious knowledge of the art of
singing, which could be transmitted in the form of definite and
sound principles, but a purely empirical method. These singers
of the past, accustomed to sing with the guidance of their ear
and the power of imitating their predecessors, were products of
both patient mastery and long experience. Their singing was the
result of a methodical and gradual training of the vocal organs,
with no hasty influence, like the convulsive excitement of
to-day. Their method of phrasing aimed more at a perfect
production of beautiful tones than at the attainment of
psychological expression according to the significance of the
words. Sometimes, in fact, the words of a musical phrase
intended to emphasize hatred or contempt were expressed by a
most elaborate suavity of tone, merely for the purpose of
displaying a beautiful style of singing. The music itself often
did not urge much discrimination between different sentiments. A
beautiful, inspiring melody sometimes served to overshadow the
psychological situation of the opera, creating a conflict of
sentiments for the sake of beautiful singing. Certain very
celebrated arias, like the famous “Sextette” from “Lucia,” for
example, show little coherence between the melody and the
significance of the words. In some other popular quartets,
trios, or duets, the same musical phrases were sung by different
singers, all of whom were expressing, in their words, sentiments
along different lines, and ofttimes of totally different
character, as in the above-mentioned “Sextette” from “Lucia.” It
was a psychological anachronism of the operatic music which,
however, did not vitally affect the indiscriminate and simpler
tastes of the audiences of the past.
Yet, from a purely musical standpoint, we do not know if the
audiences were in error. It was the period of melody’s reign;
therefore it was permissible, on the strength of the beauty of
the music, to sing with the same purity and sweetness “Spirito
gentil” from “Favorita,” or “Chi mi frena in tal momento” from
“Lucia,” regardless of the meaning of the words. But times have
changed, and the present epoch witnesses the most radical
evolution in the operatic music as well as in the world’s
psychology and taste. The meaning of the phrase plays the
leading rôle in modern music. Human feelings are portrayed in
their realistic form, and human voices are intended to express,
by the use of singing words, the truth of a dramatic, romantic,
or tragic situation, no longer confining themselves to a banal
competition with flute or oboe obligato for the mere sake of
displaying the flexibility or the purity of vocal tones.
Singers are placed on a more elevated and dignified plane by
modern composers, and intrusted with a higher mission by making
modern operas less conventional and closer to real human
sentiment.
In “Otello,” Verdi, though still a devoted apostle of the pure
Italian melody because of an elevated sense of art, often
refrains from using melodious phrases in situations which call
for rapid and realistic developments. The invocation of
Desdemona, in fact, “Otello non uccidermi,” is expressed by only
a few notes of striking effect and conciseness.
Even the commonplace end of “Pagliacci”: “La Commedia è finita,”
or “Hanno ammazzato a compare Turiddu” of “Cavalleria
Rusticana,” have a more effective meaning at that psychological
moment than any pompous musical phrases the old-style operas
ever possessed.
The new conception of the art of singing as the medium for
realistic emotions and situations on the operatic stage makes us
look on the school of _bel canto_ as an insufficient, time-worn
method of singing, just as we look on the conventional
construction and orchestration of the old operas, with the
accompaniment of the cymbals as old-fashioned works—precious
relics of the past, unsuited to our day.
Consequently, the art of singing and the art of vocal culture
must be uplifted from its empiric stage, and put on the same
progressive and scientific level as all the other arts and
sciences. This, and this only, will relieve the present critical
situation of the art of singing.
In order then to bring about the radical reform we advocate, we
must begin by building up a new method of voice culture on _new
foundations_, more modern and concrete, _scientifically
correct_, basing it on well-defined _physiological laws_. This
will make the method solid, logical, clear, and true enough to
be accepted by the vast majority of those who are seriously
concerned about the evolution of the school of singing and
interested in the future of the vocal art.
We contend that the practical application and evidence of this
method has been established by no less an authority than Enrico
Caruso, who has so wonderfully demonstrated and reinforced the
natural laws of voice production.
His singing, almost faultless, inspired us to investigate the
problems of the human voice in its natural production, and gave
birth to our conception of voice culture, which claims for
Nature alone the right to govern the mechanism of voice
production.
The arbitrary methods confined to personal secrets—the creation
of singers—and the upbuilding of voices by magic power, should
be wiped out as remnants of other ages. One method must be
adopted, which should cover all the modern exigencies of voice
production and styles of singing, and safeguard very closely the
full resources of Nature, priceless in value, as suggested by
science, which is infallible. _One method only_ for the
physiological production of the human voice, as well as for its
artistic development and mission.