A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF MODERN METHODS
[CHAPTER I]
MECHANICAL VOCAL MANAGEMENT AS THE BASIS OF VOICE CULTURE
Notwithstanding the wide diversity of opinion on most topics connected with vocal training, there is one point on which all authorities agree. This is, that the voice must be consciously controlled. In all the conflict of methods, this basic mechanical idea has never been attacked. On the contrary, it is everywhere accepted without question as the foundation of all instruction in singing.
The idea of mechanical vocal control is also the starting-point of all analysis of the vocal action. Every investigator of the voice approaches the subject in the belief that an exact determination of the muscular operations of correct singing would lead to an absolutely infallible method of training voices. The problem of tone-production is identical, in the common belief, with the problem of the vocal action. Three sciences, anatomy, mechanics, and acoustics, are believed to hold somewhere among them the secret of the voice. All investigation has therefore been carried on along the lines of these three sciences. It is on this account that modern methods are called scientific, and not because they are in conformity with general scientific principles. Before taking up the question whether the idea of mechanical vocal control is well grounded in fact and reason, let us consider further the influence of this idea on modern methods of instruction.
All instruction in singing is intended to teach the student to "do something," in order that the vocal organs may be directly caused to act properly. No matter how vague and indefinite the directions given, their aim is always to inform the student what to do, how to guide the vocal action. Even when used in a purely empirical way the directions for open throat, etc., are always given in this spirit. That these directions are utterly meaningless in the mechanical sense does not alter the fact; nobody has ever found any other connection in which they would take on a definite meaning.
In this regard the empirical directions are no more unsatisfactory than the mechanical doctrines of the accepted Vocal Science. It was pointed out that no means has ever been discovered for applying several of these doctrines in practical instruction. The rules contained in the theoretical works on Voice Culture for managing the registers and vocal-cord action, for forward emission of tone, and for control of the resonance cavities, are of no value whatever to the student of singing. It will be asked, how does the conscientious teacher get over this difficulty? How are the deficiencies of the scientific doctrines supplied in instruction? In many cases the deficiency is absolutely ignored. The student is simply told to "make the vocal cords act properly," to "direct the tone against the roof of the mouth," to "bring in the nasal resonance," etc., and no further help is given. That this works severe hardship on the earnest student need hardly be mentioned.
Other teachers, as has been explained, rely on a description of the singer's sensations, and on the use of several vowel and consonant combinations, for imparting control of resonance and forward emission. These means are purely empirical makeshifts, and as a rule they are not sanctioned by the consistent advocates of scientific instruction. But for acquiring control of the correct vocal-cord action, absolutely no means has ever been found, scientific or empirical. On this, the surpassingly important feature of the vocal action, Vocal Science has thrown no light whatever.
It was also remarked that the strictly scientific idea of Voice Culture is very seldom carried out, to its logical conclusion, in actual instruction. One important reason for this is that a student seldom remains long enough with a teacher to cover the entire ground of mechanical instruction. Students move about from teacher to teacher. In the class of any one master the proportion of pupils who have never had any previous instruction does not average one in ten. To carry the idea of averages further, the length of time a student takes lessons of one instructor may be set down as seldom more than two years.
How long it would take to apply the complete system of mechanical vocal training has never been precisely stated. Cases are on record of pupils being kept on mechanical drills and elementary exercises for four years, without being allowed to attempt a simple song. But these instances are extremely rare. It seldom happens that a teacher can hold a pupil long enough to carry out the complete course of mechanical study.
There are however many teachers who try conscientiously to have their pupils pay attention to all the mechanical features of the vocal action. What it would mean to sing in this way can only be imagined. Before starting a tone, the singer would prepare by taking a breath in some prescribed way, and retaining this breath an instant by holding the chest walls out. Meanwhile the lips, tongue, soft palate, and larynx would each be placed in the correct position. The jaw would be held relaxed, and the throat loose and open. The expected tone would be felt, in imagination, high up in the head, to assure the proper influence of nasal resonance. The vocal cords would be held in readiness to respond instantly to the mental command, so as to assure the exact state of tension necessary. Preparation would be made to direct the "column of vocalized breath," through the pharynx and mouth, to the proper point on the hard palate. Then, at the same precise instant, the breath would be started, and the vocal cords would be brought together, but without touching.
So the tone would be begun. And all this would have to be done, with due attention to each operation, in the fraction of a second preceding the starting of the tone! The downright absurdity of this idea of singing must be apparent to any one who has ever listened to a great singer.
Under the influence of the idea of mechanical vocal management there is little room for choice between voice culture along empirical lines, and the accepted type of scientific instruction. Modern empirical voice training has little practical value. Describing to the student the sensations which ought to be felt, does not help in the least. Even if the sensations felt by the singer, in producing tone correctly, are entirely different from those accompanying any incorrect use of the voice, nothing can be learned thereby. The sensations of correct singing cannot be felt until the voice is correctly used. An effect cannot produce its cause. Correct tone-production must be there to cause the sensations, or the sensations are not awakened at all. Nothing else can bring about the sensations of correct singing, but correct singing itself.
Further, these sensations cannot be known until they are actually experienced. No description is adequate to enable the student to feel them in imagination. And, finally, even if the sensations could be described with all vividness, imagining them would not influence the vocal organs in any way. This is true, whether the description is given empirically, or whether it is cited to explain a mechanical feature of the vocal action. Instruction based on the singer's sensations is absolutely valueless.
It would seem that modern methods contain very little of real worth. The investigation of the mechanical operations of the voice can hardly be said to have brought forth anything of definite value to the vocal teacher. But this is not the worst that can be said about the mechanical doctrines of tone-production. When critically examined, and submitted to a rigid scientific analysis, several of these doctrines are found to be erroneous in conception. These are the theories of breath-control, chest resonance, nasal resonance, and emission of tone. It will be observed that these doctrines comprise more than half of the materials of the accepted Vocal Science. Yet notwithstanding the fact that they are accepted without question by the great majority of vocal theorists as important elements of instruction in singing, each of these doctrines involves a distinct misconception of scientific principles. An examination of these doctrines is therefore the next subject to be undertaken.
[CHAPTER II]
THE FALLACY OF THE DOCTRINE OF BREATH-CONTROL
When Dr. Mandl advanced the statement that the laryngeal muscles are too weak to withstand the pressure of a powerful expiratory blast, the theory of the vocal action therein embodied met with immediate acceptance. This idea is so plausible that it appeals to the thoughtful investigator as self-evident, and seems to call for no proof. The doctrine of breath-control was at once adopted, by the most influential vocal scientists, as the basic principle of tone-production.
Curiously, neither Dr. Mandl, nor any other advocate of breath-control, seems to have read an article by Sir Charles Bell dealing with this same action, the closing of the glottis against a powerful exhalation. This paper, "On the Organs of the Human Voice," was read before a meeting of the London Philosophical Society on February 2, 1832.
Dr. Bell dispels all the mystery concerning the closure of the glottis, and the holding of the breath against a powerful contraction of the expiratory muscles. He points out that this action occurs in accordance with the law of the distribution of pressure in a fluid body, commonly known as Pascal's law of fluid pressures.
Pascal's law is stated as follows:—"Pressure exerted anywhere upon a mass of fluid is transmitted undiminished in all directions, and acts with equal force on all equal surfaces, and in a direction at right angles to those surfaces." (Atkinson's Ganot's Physics, 4th ed., New York, 1869.)
The hydraulic press furnishes the familiar illustration of this law. Two vertical cylinders, one many times larger than the other, are connected by a pipe. The cylinders are fitted with pistons. Both the cylinders, and the pipe connecting them, are filled with water, oil, air, or any other fluid; the fluid can pass freely from one cylinder to the other, through the connecting pipe. Suppose a horizontal section of the smaller cylinder to measure one square inch, that of the larger to be one hundred square inches. A weight of one pound on the smaller piston will balance a weight of one hundred pounds on the larger. If a downward pressure of one pound be exerted on the smaller piston, the larger piston will exert an upward pressure of one hundred pounds. Conversely, a downward pressure of one hundred pounds, exerted on the larger piston, will effect an upward pressure of only one pound on the smaller piston.
A type of the hydraulic press is presented by the chest cavity and the larynx, considered as one apparatus. This fact is illustrated in the following quotation: "If a bladder full of water be connected with a narrow upright glass tube, heavy weights placed on the bladder will be able to uphold only a very small quantity of liquid in the tube, this arrangement being in fact a hydraulic press worked backwards. If the tube be shortened down so as to form simply the neck of the bladder, the total expulsive pressure exerted by the bladder upon the contents of the neck may seem to be very small when compared with the total pressure exerted over the walls of the bladder upon the whole contents." (A Text Book of the Principles of Physics, Alfred Daniell, London, 1884.)
That the glottis-closing muscles are too weak to withstand a powerful expiratory pressure is therefore an entirely erroneous statement. Owing to the small area of the under surfaces of the vocal cords, the air pressure against them is very small, in comparison with the total pressure exerted on the contents of the thorax by the expiratory contraction. The glottis-closing muscles are fully capable of withstanding this comparatively slight pressure. The doctrine of breath-control is therefore scientifically untenable. This doctrine has no place in Vocal Science.
As the basic doctrine of breath-control is unsound, the singer does not need any direct means for controlling the breath. The attempt to check the flow of the breath in any mechanical way is entirely uncalled for. This being the case, it is hardly to be expected that the systems devised to meet this fancied need would stand the test of scientific examination. Each of these systems of breath-control, opposed muscular action and ventricular, is in fact found on analysis to embody a misconception of scientific principles.
Opposed-Action Breath-Control
A curious misapprehension of mechanical processes is contained in the doctrine of breath-control by opposed muscular action. This can best be pointed out by a consideration of the forces brought to bear on a single rib in the acts of inspiration and expiration. One set of muscles contract to raise this rib in inspiration, an opposed set, by their contraction, lower the rib for the act of expiration. In the opposed-action system of breath-control, the action of the rib-raising muscles is continued throughout the expiration, as a check upon the pull in the opposite direction of the rib-lowering muscles. Theoretically, the downward pull is "controlled" by the upward pull. To express this idea in figures, let the expiratory or downward pull on the rib be said to involve the expenditure of five units of strength. According to the theory of opposed-action breath-control, this downward pull would have to be opposed by a slightly less upward pull, say four units of strength.
Thus graphically presented, the fallacy of the "opposed-muscular" theory is clearly exposed. The rib is lowered with a degree of strength equal to the excess of the downward over the upward pull. If the downward pull equals five units of strength, and the upward pull four units, the rib is lowered with a pull equivalent to one unit of strength. Exactly the same effect would be obtained if the downward and upward pulls were equal respectively to twenty and nineteen units, or to two and one units. Further, the result would be the same if the downward pull involved the exertion of one unit of strength, and there was no upward pull whatever. In every case, the actual result is equivalent to the excess of the downward over the upward pull.
In the case of the expiratory pressure of five units of strength being "controlled" by an inspiratory contraction of four units, nine units of strength are exerted, and the same result could be obtained by the exertion of one unit. There is a clear waste of eight units of strength. The power of the expiratory blast is just what it would be if one unit of strength were exerted in an "uncontrolled" expiration. The singer exerts just nine times as much strength as is necessary to effect the same result. This is why the practice of breath-control exercises is so extremely fatiguing.
So far as the effect of the expiratory blast on the vocal cords is concerned, "controlling" the breath has no influence whatever. The vocal cords respond to the effective air pressure; they are not affected in any way by the opposed contractions of the breath muscles. "Opposed-muscular" breath-control is a sheer waste of time and effort.
Probably no particular harm has ever resulted to any singer's throat from the practice of breath-control exercises. But the attempt to hold back the breath has a very bad effect on the singer's delivery. The "breath-control" type of singer is never found in the ranks of the great artists. There is something utterly unnatural about this holding back of the breath, repugnant to every singer endowed with the right idea of forceful and dramatic delivery. The vast majority of the successful pupils of "breath-control" teachers abandon, very early in their careers, the tiresome attempt to hold back the breath. These singers yield, probably unconsciously, to the instinctive impulse to sing freely and without constraint.
But in the ranks of the minor concert and church singers are many who try conscientiously to obey the instructions of the "breath-control" teachers. Singers of this type can always be recognized by a curious impression of hesitancy, or even timidity, conveyed by their tones. They seem afraid to deliver their phrases with vigor and energy; they do not "let their voices out." Frequently their voices are of excellent quality, and their singing is polished and refined. But these singers never give to the listener that sense of satisfaction which is felt on hearing a fine voice freely and generously delivered.
As for the particular fallacy contained in the theory of ventricular breath-control, that must be reserved for a later chapter. Suffice it to say here that this theory disregards the two basic mechanical principles of tone-production,—Pascal's law, and the law of the conservation of energy. The application of this latter physical law to the operations of the vocal organs is considered in Chapter VI of Part III.
[CHAPTER III]
THE FALLACIES OF FORWARD EMISSION, CHEST RESONANCE, AND NASAL RESONANCE
Sir Morell Mackenzie's analysis of the acoustic principle supposedly involved in "forward emission" has already been quoted. That this analysis involves a complete misunderstanding of the laws of acoustics need hardly be said. When stated in precise terms, the fallacy of the "forward emission" theory is evident:
"On issuing from the vocal cords the tone is directed in a curved path, around the back of the tongue. There the tone is straightened out, and made to impinge on the roof of the mouth at a precisely defined point. From this point the tone is reflected, not directly back, as it should be, since the angles of incidence and reflection must be equal. Instead of this, the tone is reflected forward, out of the mouth, necessarily again taking a curved path, to avoid striking the front teeth." Naturally, no muscular action has ever been defined for causing the tone to perform this remarkable feat.
The "forward emission" theory assumes the existence of a current of air, issuing from the vocal cords as a tone. In other words, the tone is supposed to consist of a stream of air, which can be voluntarily directed in the mouth, and aimed at some precise point on the roof of the mouth. This is an utter mistake.
There is no "column of vibrating air," or "stream of vocalized breath," in the mouth during tone-production. In the acoustic sense, the air in the mouth-pharynx is still air, not air in a current. The only motion which takes place in the air in this cavity is the oscillatory swing of the air particles. To imagine the directing of air vibrations in the mouth, as we direct a stream of water out of a hose, is absurd.
What then is the "forward tone"? There must be some reason for this well-known effect of a perfectly produced voice,—the impression made on the hearer that the tones are formed in the front of the mouth. There ought also to be some way for the singer to learn to produce tones of this character. A consideration of this feature of the vocal action is reserved for Chapter IV of part III.
Chest Resonance
Who was originally responsible for the doctrine of chest resonance, it would be impossible now to determine. Were it not for the fact of this doctrine having received the support of eminent scientists (Holmes, Mackenzie, Curtis, and many others), it might be looked upon as a mere figure of speech. That the tones of the voice are reinforced by the resonance of the air in the chest cavity, is an utter absurdity. In the acoustic sense, the thorax is not a cavity at all. The thorax is filled with the spongy tissue of the lungs, not to mention the heart. It is no better adapted for air resonance than an ordinary spherical resonator would be, if filled with wet sponges.
Nasal Resonance
Enough was said of the theories of nasal resonance in Chapter IV of Part I to show the unscientific character of all these theories. It remains only to point out the misconception of acoustic principles, contained in all the discussions of the subject. This is very much the same as in the theory of "forward emission," viz., that the tones of the voice consist physically of a "stream of vocalized breath." The mistaken idea is, that nasal resonance results from part or all of the expired breath passing through the nose.
What is nasal resonance? How is it caused? What is its effect on the tones of the voice? These questions have never been answered. It can however be proved that a satisfactory science of Voice Culture is not in any way dependent on obtaining an answer to these questions. This much is definitely known:
1. If the resonance of the air in the nasal cavities exerts any influence on the tones of the voice, this influence cannot be increased, diminished, or prevented by any direct action on the part of the singer. Shutting off the entrance of the breath, by raising the soft palate, is possible as a muscular exercise. But it is impossible to perform this action, and to sing artistically, at the same time. To produce any kind of tone, while holding the soft palate raised, is extremely difficult. In a later chapter it will be seen that this action has no place whatever in the correct use of the voice.
2. As the nasal cavities are fixed in size and shape, the singer cannot control or vary any influence which they may exert as a resonator.
3. Independent of any thought or knowledge of how the nasal quality of tone is caused, the singer has perfect voluntary control over this quality by the simple, direct influence of the will. A singer may produce nasal tones, or tones free from this faulty sound, at will, with no thought of the mechanical processes involved. All that is required is that the singer have an ear keen enough to recognize the nasal quality in his own voice, as well as in the voice of any other singer.
[CHAPTER IV]
THE FUTILITY OF THE MATERIALS OF MODERN METHODS
Of the strictly scientific or mechanical materials of modern methods, four have been seen to be utterly erroneous. The remaining topics of instruction, mechanical and empirical, may with equal justice be submitted to a similar examination.
Several of these topics have already been critically examined. The rules for registers and laryngeal management were seen to be of no value to the student of singing. So also was it observed that all instruction which attempts to utilize the singer's sensations is futile. All that is left of the materials of modern methods, in which any valuable idea might be contained, are the rules for breathing.
Without undertaking to decide whether one system of breathing can be right, to the exclusion of all other systems, one general remark can be applied to the whole subject. It has never been scientifically proved that the correct use of the voice depends in any way on the mastery of an acquired system of breathing. True, this is the basic assumption of all the discussions of the singer's breathing. As Frangçon-Davies justly remarks,—"All combatants are agreed on one point, viz., that the singer's breath is an acquired one of some kind." (The Singing of the Future, David Frangçon-Davies, M.A., London, 1906.) This is purely an assumption on the part of the vocal theorists. No one has ever so much as attempted to offer scientific proof of the statement.
Further, it is frequently stated that the old Italian masters paid much attention to the subject of breathing; the assumption is also made that these masters approached the subject in the modern spirit. Neither this statement, nor the assumption based on it, is susceptible of proof. Tosi and Mancini do not even mention the subject of breathing.
Breathing has been made the subject of exhaustive mechanical and muscular analysis, for one reason, and for only one reason. This is, because the action of breathing is the only mechanical feature of singing which can be exhaustively studied. The laryngeal action is hidden; the influence of the resonance cavities cannot well be determined. But the whole muscular operation of breathing can be readily seen and studied; any investigator can personally experiment with every conceivable system.
Furthermore, the adoption of any system of breathing has no influence whatever on the operations of the voice. A student of singing may learn to take breath in any way favored by the instructor; the manner of tone-production is not in the least affected. Even if the correct use of the voice has to be acquired, the mode of breathing does not contribute in any way to this result.
All that need be said in criticism of the various doctrines of breathing is, that the importance of this subject has been greatly overestimated. Breath and life are practically synonymous. Nothing but the prevalence of the mechanical idea has caused so much attention to be paid to the singer's breathing. A tuba player will march for several hours in a street parade, carrying his heavy instrument, and playing it fully half the time; yet the vocal theorist does not consider him an object of sympathy.
No doubt the acquirement of healthy habits of breathing is of great benefit to the general health. But this does not prove that correct singing demands some kind of breathing inherently different from ordinary life. To inspire quickly and exhale the breath slowly is not an acquired ability; it is the action of ordinary speech. Singing demands that the lungs be filled more quickly than in ordinary speech, and perhaps a fuller inspiration is also required. This is readily mastered with very little practice. It does not call for the acquirement of any new muscular movements, nor the formation of any new habits.
What is left of all the materials of modern vocal instruction? To sum them up in the order in which they were considered in Part I:
Breathing does not need to be mastered in any such way as is stated in the theoretical works on the voice. Breath-control is a complete fallacy. The doctrines of registers and laryngeal action are utterly valueless. Chest resonance, nasal resonance, and forward emission, are scientifically erroneous. The traditional precepts are of no value, because nobody knows how to follow or apply them. Empirical teaching based on the singer's sensations is of no avail.
In other words, modern methods contain not one single topic of any value whatever in the training of the voice. It will be objected that this statement is utterly absurd, because many of the world's greatest singers have been trained according to these methods. No doubt this is in one sense true; modern methods can point to many brilliant successes. But this does not prove anything in favor of the materials of modern methods.
Singers are trained to-day exactly as they were trained two hundred years ago, through a reliance on the imitative faculty. The only difference is this: In the old days, the student was directly and expressly told to listen and to imitate, while to-day the reliance on the imitative faculty is purely instinctive. A fuller consideration of the important function of imitation as an unrecognized element of modern Voice Culture is contained in Chapter V of Part IV.
[CHAPTER V]
THE ERROR OF THE THEORY OF MECHANICAL VOCAL MANAGEMENT
A fundamental difference was pointed out, at the close of the preceding chapter, between the old Italian method and modern systems of vocal instruction. This is worthy of repetition. The old Italian method was founded on the faculty of imitation. Modern methods have as their basis the idea of conscious, direct, mechanical control of the vocal organs. All the materials of instruction based on this idea of mechanical control were seen to be absolutely valueless. It is now in order to examine still further the structure of modern Voice Culture, and to test this basic idea of mechanical control.
As a muscular operation, the actions of singing must be subject to the same physiological and psychological laws which govern all other voluntary muscular actions. What are these laws? How do we guide and control our muscular movements? At first sight, this seems a simple question. We know what we want to do, and we do it. But the important point is, how are we able to do the things we want to do? You wish to raise your hand, for example, therefore you raise it. How does your hand know that you wish to raise it? Does the hand raise itself? Not at all; it is raised by the contraction of certain muscles in the arm, shoulder, and back. That is, when you wish to raise your hand, certain muscles contract themselves. But these muscles are not part of the hand. What leads these muscles in the shoulder and back to contract, when you will to raise your hand? Normally you are not even aware of their contraction. Yet in some way these muscles know that they are called on to contract, in response to the wish to raise the hand. This takes place, even though you know nothing whatever of the muscles in question. The process is by no means so simple, when looked at in this light.
A complicated psychological process is involved in the simplest voluntary movements. This is seen in the following analysis:
"To move any part of the body voluntarily requires the following particulars: (1) The possession of an educated reflex-motor mechanism, under the control of the higher cerebral centers which are most immediately connected with the phenomena of consciousness; (2) certain motifs in the form of conscious feelings that have a tone of pleasure or pain, and so impel the mind to secure such bodily conditions as will continue or increase the one, and discontinue or diminish the other; (3) ideas of motions and positions of the bodily members, which previous experience has taught us answer more or less perfectly to the motifs of conscious feeling; (4) a conscious fiat of will, settling the question, as it were, which of these ideas shall be realized in the motions achieved and positions attained by these members; (5) a central nervous mechanism, which serves as the organ of relation between this act of will and the discharge of the requisite motor impulses along their nerve-tracts to the groups of muscles peripherally situated." (Elements of Physiological Psychology, Geo. T. Ladd, New York, 1889.)
Let us again consider the action of raising the hand, and see how the psychological analysis applies in this movement. We note in the first place that we are concerned only with the third, fourth, and fifth particulars of Prof. Ladd's analysis. These are:
The idea of the movement.
The fiat of will which directs that this movement be performed.
The discharge of the requisite motor impulses, along the nerve-tracts, to the muscles whose contraction constitutes the movement.
It will be simpler, and will answer the purpose equally well, to combine the third and fourth elements, and to consider as one element the idea of the movement and the fiat of will to execute the movement.
The Idea of a Movement
The mental picture of a purposed movement is simple and direct. No reference is involved to the muscles concerned in the performance of the movement. When you will to raise your hand, the action is pictured to your mind as the raising of the hand, and nothing more. Certain muscles are to be contracted. But the mental picture of the movement does not indicate what these muscles are, in what order they are to be brought into play, nor the relative degrees of strength to be exerted by each muscular fiber. You do not consciously direct the muscles in their contractions.
The Discharge to the Muscles of the Nerve Impulse
How then are the muscles informed that their contraction is called for? They have no independent volition; each muscular fiber obeys the impulse transmitted to it by the nerve, from the nerve center governing its action. These nerve centers are in their turn controlled by the central nervous mechanism. And in complex voluntary movements the central nervous mechanism is under the control of the higher cerebral centers. The wish to raise the hand appears to the mind as an idea of the hand being raised. This idea is translated by the central nervous mechanism into a set of motor nerve impulses. Does consciousness or volition come into play here? Not at all. On this point Prof. Ladd remarks: "As to the definite nature of the physical basis which underlies the connection of ideas of motion and the starting outward of the right motor impulses, our ignorance is almost complete."
Is it necessary for the performance of a complex muscular action that the individual know what muscles are involved and how and when to contract them? No; this knowledge is not only unnecessary, it is even impossible. Prof. Ladd says of this: "It would be a great mistake to regard the mind as having before it the cerebral machinery, all nicely laid out, together with the acquired art of selecting and touching the right nervous elements in order to produce the desired motion, as a skilful player of the piano handles his keyboard."
How then are the muscles informed of the service required of them? Or more precisely, how does the central nervous mechanism know what distribution of nerve impulses to make among the different nerve centers governing the muscles? As Prof. Ladd says, our ignorance on this point is almost complete. There resides in the central nervous mechanism governing the muscles something which for lack of a better name may be called an instinct. When a purposeful movement of any part of the body is willed, the mental picture of the movement is translated by the central nervous mechanism into a succession of nerve impulses; these impulses are transmitted through the lower centers to the muscles. The instinct informing the central nervous mechanism how to apportion the discharges of nerve impulse among the various muscular centers is to a high degree mysterious. The present purpose will not be served by carrying the analysis of this instinct further.[7]
There is therefore no direct conscious guidance of the muscles, in any movement, simple or complex. So far as the command of voluntary muscular actions is concerned, the first simple statement of the process sums up all that for practical purposes need be determined;—we know what we want to do, and we do it. The mind forms the idea of an action and the muscles instinctively respond.
But the fact remains that the muscles need to be guided in some way. We do not perform instinctively many complex actions,—writing, dancing, rowing, swimming, etc. All these actions, and indeed most of the activities of daily life, must be consciously learned by practice and repeated effort. How are these efforts guided? To arrive at an answer to this question let us consider how a schoolboy practises his writing lesson.
The boy begins by having before him a copy of the letters he is to write. Under the guidance of the eye the hand traces these letters. At each instant the eye points out to the hand the direction in which to move. As the hand occasionally wanders from the prescribed direction the eye immediately notes the deviation and bids the hand to correct it. The hand responds to the demands of the eye, immediately, without thought on the boy's part of nerve impulse or of muscular contraction. By repeated efforts the boy improves upon his first clumsy attempts; with each repetition he approaches nearer to the model.
In the course of this progress the muscular sense gradually comes to the assistance of the eye as a sort of supplementary guidance. But at no time is the eye relieved of the responsibility of guiding the hand in writing. To sum this up, the movements of the hand in writing are guided, so far as the consciousness is aware, directly by the sense of sight.
We have here the law of voluntary muscular guidance. In all voluntary movements the muscles are guided in their contractions, through some instinctive process, by the sense or senses which observe the movements themselves, and more especially, the results of the movements. In most actions the two senses concerned are sight and muscular sense. The more an action becomes habitual the more it tends to be performed under the guidance of muscular sense, and to be free from the necessity of the guidance of the eye. But muscular sense does not usually rise so high into consciousness as sight, in the guidance of muscular activities. Many oft-repeated movements, especially those of walking, become thoroughly habitual and even automatic; that is, the muscular contractions are performed as purely reflex actions, without conscious guidance of any kind. But even in walking, the necessity may at any instant arise for conscious guidance. In such a case the sense of sight immediately comes into service; from reflex the movements become voluntary, and consciously guided. In the case of most complex actions the sense of sight furnishes the most important guidance.
If the muscular operations of singing are subject to the general laws of psychological control, the guidance of the vocal organs must be furnished by the sense which observes the results of the movements involved. This is the sense of hearing. Just as in writing the hand is guided by the eye, so in singing the voice is guided by the ear. There can be no other means of guiding the voice. Muscular sense may under certain conditions supplement the sense of hearing, but under no circumstances can muscular sense assume full command. The net result of the application of psychological principles to the problem of tone-production is simply this, that the voice is guided directly by the ear.
It is thus seen that the idea of mechanical vocal management is utterly erroneous. On pushing the analysis still further the fallacy of this idea is found to be even more glaring.
Is a knowledge of anatomy of any assistance in the acquirement of skill in performing complex muscular actions? Not in the least. An understanding of muscular processes does not contribute in any way to skilful execution. The anatomist does not play billiards or row a boat one whit the better for all his knowledge of the muscular structure of the body.
Even if the precise workings of the vocal mechanism could be determined, the science of Voice Culture would not benefit thereby. Knowing how the muscles should act does not help us to make them act properly. It is utterly idle to tell the vocal student that as the pitch of the voice rises the arytenoid cartilages rotate, bringing their forward surfaces together, and so shortening the effective length of the vocal cords. Whatever the vocal cords are required to do is performed through an instinctive obedience to the demands of the mental ear.
And finally, a precise analysis of muscular contractions is impossible, even in the case of comparatively simple actions. When, for example, the hand describes a circle in the air, a number of muscles are involved. True, it is known what these muscles are, and what effect the combined contractions of any group would have on the position of the hand. The direction of the hand's motion at any instant is determined by the resultant of all the forces exerted on this member. But as this direction constantly changes, so must the relative degrees of strength exerted by the muscles also constantly change. At no two successive instants are the muscular adjustments the same. This simple action, performed without thought or knowledge of the muscular processes, presents features too complex to be analyzed on the basis of mechanical law and anatomic structure.
A complete analysis of the muscular operations of tone-production is absolutely impossible. The adjustments of the laryngeal muscles involve probably the most minute variations in degree of contraction performed in the whole voluntary muscular system. What we do know of the mechanical operations of the voice is exceedingly interesting, and a further knowledge of the subject is greatly to be desired. But we can never hope to clear up all the mystery of the vocal action.
This statement must not be construed to mean that the study of the vocal mechanism has been devoid of valuable results. On the contrary, the present understanding of the mechanical operations of the voice will be found of very great value in erecting a true science of Voice Culture. The only weakness of the present results of vocal investigation is due to the fact that this investigation has always been carried on under the influence of the idea of mechanical vocal management. This influence has led all theoretical students of the subject to attempt to apply their knowledge in formulating rules for direct mechanical guidance of the voice. That these rules are valueless is due solely to the fundamental error involved in the mechanical idea.
Voice Culture must be turned from the idea of mechanical vocal management. The old Italian masters were right in that they relied, even though empirically, on the imitative faculty. Modern teachers may do better, for in the light of present knowledge reliance on the faculty of vocal imitation can be shown to be in strict accord with sound scientific principles.