CHAPTER II
VOCAL CULTIVATION AND THE OLD ITALIAN METHOD
Historical aspect of vocal cultivation—The modern conception of voice culture; the mechanical and psychological methods—Ancient systems—Mediæval Europe—The revival of solo singing; the rise of coloratura—The old Italian method—The bel canto teachers: Caccini; Tosi and Mancini; the Conservatoire method; the Italian course of instruction; theoretical basis of the Italian method.
Musical historians generally agree that the training of voices for the purposes of artistic singing had its beginnings about the year 1600. Voice culture as a distinct department of musical education is held to date no further back than the time when solo singing first began to attract the attention of educated musicians. This view, however, is altogether misleading. From its very beginnings the art of music in Europe was built upon the foundation of singing; no other type of music was, indeed, recognized as a legitimate branch of the art until music had progressed through several centuries of development. Music was brought up to the beginning of its present stage of evolution through the working out of theories which were exemplified in practice only by the use of voices. Counterpoint, the basis of musical composition until well along in the seventeenth century, had its origin in vocal music; throughout its entire history, up to its highest expression in the music of Palestrina and his school, contrapuntal writing was applied only to works composed for voices. Even if no records were to be found of any means used for training the voice, the conclusion would be inevitable that, throughout all these centuries (roughly speaking, from the sixth to the seventeenth), some attention must have been paid to vocal development and technique. It is true that anyone endowed with a good voice can sing, with some degree of facility, any simple music which he has the ability to memorize. No technical training of the voice is needed to enable one to sing simple songs. Folk-music was the possession of the great mass of the people to whom any ideas of vocal management were utterly unknown. This was also true of the various classes of minstrels, troubadours, etc. Although theirs was purely a vocal art, the only training their voices ever received was that incidental to the actual singing of their music. But for the performance of the music incorporated in the Roman ritual throughout all its history this untutored style of singing would not have sufficed. A much better command of the voice was needed than can be acquired merely through the unguided singing of simple folk-songs and lays. Precision, power, and facility of voice were demanded in the music of the church and these could not have been hit upon by accident. The chances are all against a voice falling into the correct manner of production if called upon to sing music of any difficulty without some definite instruction. This will be made clearer by a consideration of the peculiar problem involved in any extended use of the voice.
I
Modern thought on the subject of vocal cultivation has crystallized along well-defined lines. For one thing, it has emphasized in a striking way the problem of the management of the vocal organs. The fact is now clearly recognized that the voice has one correct mode of operating, as well as an almost limitless possibility of wrong or incorrect forms of activity. When the voice is correctly produced it can be used daily in large halls and churches without strain or undue fatigue. By judicious exercise, when rightly produced, the voice is greatly increased in volume and power; it acquires facility in the singing of difficult and elaborate music; its compass is increased, giving it command of a wider range of notes than is possessed by the untrained voice.
Yet vocal cultivation demands the adoption of the correct management of the vocal organs. When the voice is correctly produced nothing more than judicious exercise is needed to bring it to the condition of technical mastery. But if the proper manner of producing tone is not acquired, then the exercise of the voice is fraught with peril to the vocal organs. Instead of the voice being benefited by practice the contrary result is almost inevitable. The use of a wrongly produced voice on an extended scale, involving, as it must, the daily attempt to produce tones powerful enough to fill a large space, strains and injures the vocal organs. This results in a weakening of the voice, in loss of control, in discomfort and pain to the singer, in a strained, harsh quality of tone, and finally, if persisted in long enough, in complete loss of voice.
The difference between the correct use of the voice and any incorrect manner of producing tone is inherent in the organ itself. No one who wishes to sing can elude the problem which Nature thus propounds. On the contrary, the problem of vocal management must be solved some time in the course of a singer’s vocal studies or the technical command of the voice can never be attained. Vocal cultivation is that form of exercise of the voice which leads, through the correct management of the organ, to a command of all the voice’s resources of beauty, range, power, and flexibility.
Even on the earliest singers of the church a solution of the vocal problem was imposed. These singers had to perform daily in large cathedrals and churches; they had to sing their music in time and in tune. Some measure of vocal cultivation was of necessity involved in their training. We are, fortunately, not left in ignorance of the methods applied in vocal training in the centuries which preceded the rise of solo singing. Many references to this subject found in the writings of early musical historians have been gathered together by H. F. Mannstein in his Geschichte, Geist, und Ausübung des Gesanges von Gregor dem Grossen bis auf unsere Zeit (Leipzig, 1845). Fétis also contains many passages which throw valuable light on the subject It is true that the subject has been considered rather obscure, owing to the fact that students have looked for something not to be found, that is, for rules bearing on the mechanical management of the vocal organs. In order to understand this subject fully the modern conception of voice culture must first be briefly considered.
Modern methods of voice culture are based upon the doctrine that the vocal organs must be consciously guided by the singer in the correct performance of their functions. The idea is that the voice must be led to adopt the correct manner of action by direct attention to its mechanical processes. According to the present conception, the singer must see to it that his vocal cords act in a certain way; that his breath is controlled at the proper point; that the tones have the correct origin and receive the influence of resonance in the correct manner. Even back of this conception lies a belief in the helplessness of the vocal organs to hit upon the proper mode of acting without the conscious direction of the singer. The singer must impose a certain manner of operating on the voice and carefully supervise all the processes of tone production. This is the scientific view of voice culture; until quite recently it was almost universally held.
It is almost incredible that this view is thoroughly modern and that its origin cannot be traced further back than the invention of the laryngoscope in 1855. Not until 1883 did the scientific view of vocal cultivation find definite expression in the writings of any authority on the voice; in that year Browne and Behnke, in their book entitled ‘Voice, Song, and Speech,’ stated the scientific doctrine in plain terms, and asserted that the voice cannot be controlled in any other way than by attention to the mechanical processes of the vocal organs. For many years thereafter this doctrine went unchallenged, and methods of voice culture treated as the most important materials of instruction the means they embodied for enabling students of singing to acquire direct conscious control over their vocal organs.