CHAPTER IV

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.