Classical singers learn through their studies of vocal styles that flamboyant modifications and improvisations are acceptable forms of expression in certain kinds of music. For example, during the Baroque Period (1685-1750), it was expected that taking great liberties with the vocal lines especially at cadences was a sign of expertise. But just because you can add flourishes, should you? When is too much JUST TOO MUCH for the situation?
After the Baroque Period, came the Classical Period in music (1750-1820) and composers decided that if the piece needed flourishes, they would write them in themselves. Mozart, in particular, really hated singers taking liberties with his music.
The Romantic Period (1820-1900) was not about love-making, but all about feeling and expression. But still, composers liked being in control of their music.
The Modern and Contemporary musical style periods followed and the flood gates opened. With everything from avant guard, tone row, neoclassic, popular styles combined with traditional styles, and everything in between happening all at once.
The Church (of any faith) tried to keep to more traditional styles, for many years. Leadership in those faith traditions added guidelines through the years to stick to simplicity with no outlandish performances. And yet, some branched out to include praise bands and gospel styles, but many still stick to the older hymnody traditions.
What I was taught in my solo singing studies was that music for the Church should be about praise of God and Christ and singing your testimony. If you use style components that bring more attention to yourself and your personal "artistry" than inviting the Spirit into the meeting, you have gone too far.
Unfortunately, that is not always the case with soloists. Last week I attended a community choir's performance of Handel's "Messiah." The singers clearly had something to prove. In the program, their biographies listed their lengthy schooling and qualifications. However, they were adding flourishes that detracted from their performances because they were too frequent, often did not fit the chord progressions, and seemed to be thrown in just to show off. Granted, in Baroque music, adding flourishes is considered standard, but these singers let their flawed flourishes get them into trouble.
Yesterday in one of the Christmas programs I attended, Contemporary Pop Styling really shocked me. A young man let his desire to imitate modern Rock Band Lead Singers get out of hand. He emoted with his face, and hands and whole body so much that even his high tenor wailing was overshadowed. Had he toned down his "interpretive dancing" that only drew attention to himself, we might have been able to hear his message and feel the Spirit.
After the Baroque Period, came the Classical Period in music (1750-1820) and composers decided that if the piece needed flourishes, they would write them in themselves. Mozart, in particular, really hated singers taking liberties with his music.
The Romantic Period (1820-1900) was not about love-making, but all about feeling and expression. But still, composers liked being in control of their music.
The Modern and Contemporary musical style periods followed and the flood gates opened. With everything from avant guard, tone row, neoclassic, popular styles combined with traditional styles, and everything in between happening all at once.
The Church (of any faith) tried to keep to more traditional styles, for many years. Leadership in those faith traditions added guidelines through the years to stick to simplicity with no outlandish performances. And yet, some branched out to include praise bands and gospel styles, but many still stick to the older hymnody traditions.
What I was taught in my solo singing studies was that music for the Church should be about praise of God and Christ and singing your testimony. If you use style components that bring more attention to yourself and your personal "artistry" than inviting the Spirit into the meeting, you have gone too far.
Unfortunately, that is not always the case with soloists. Last week I attended a community choir's performance of Handel's "Messiah." The singers clearly had something to prove. In the program, their biographies listed their lengthy schooling and qualifications. However, they were adding flourishes that detracted from their performances because they were too frequent, often did not fit the chord progressions, and seemed to be thrown in just to show off. Granted, in Baroque music, adding flourishes is considered standard, but these singers let their flawed flourishes get them into trouble.
Yesterday in one of the Christmas programs I attended, Contemporary Pop Styling really shocked me. A young man let his desire to imitate modern Rock Band Lead Singers get out of hand. He emoted with his face, and hands and whole body so much that even his high tenor wailing was overshadowed. Had he toned down his "interpretive dancing" that only drew attention to himself, we might have been able to hear his message and feel the Spirit.
Then again, in a different meeting I attended, I was moved by the professional Opera singer who sang a pure rendition of "Gesu Bambino." Clearly she had the training and the chops to add all kinds of flourishes to her performance, but she chose to follow the composer's score and let her own beautiful voice and personal testimony shine. She sang "let us adore Him" in a way that allowed us all to worship with her.
She invited the Spirit into our meeting so we could really feel fed.
Merry Christmas!
She invited the Spirit into our meeting so we could really feel fed.
Merry Christmas!
RSS Feed