Use it or lose it

One of the scholars who is frequently cited in articles that promote how everyone should sing is the late Professor Stephen Demorest of Northwestern University. He has conducted some of the most prominent research studies demonstrating how singing is a learnable skill and is not as dependent on "talent" as we are often led to believe. Importantly, his research also highlights how singing skills take practice to maintain (just like speaking a second language, doing a backflip, etc.) or we risk succumbing to the "use it or lose it" phenomenon. 

The pertinent research was published in the journal Music Perception, and is summarized in an article in the Northwestern News. In the study, investigators compared the singing accuracy of kindergarteners, sixth graders, and college students. They found there was significant improvement in students' skills from kindergarten to sixth grade, which—go figure—is when most students are getting some sort of consistent music instruction in school. From sixth grade to college, however, students regressed in their abilities and were only singing as accurately as the kindergarteners in the study. 

As the article describes, the years between sixth grade and the end of high school (when their singing abilities started to decline) are when most children experience voice changes due to puberty (it doesn't receive as much attention, but it's worth noting that children who experience an estrogen-dominant puberty, as opposed to a testosterone-dominant puberty, also experience significant voice changes during those years). I suspect the vocal instabilities of adolescence and the heightened self-consciousness that coincides with that time of life cause many students to stop singing around that time—or at least to stop singing in front of others. 

Of course, a lot of students that age simply choose to focus their energies in other areas, since those are also the years when they start filling their schedules with sports, AP classes, and other activities that place demands on their time. The arts, music, and singing often get left behind. As Demorest points out in the article, by eighth grade, only 34% of children in the United States participate in elective music instruction, and that number declines even more by the time students reach high school graduation.

I think we all understand that if someone trains as a figure skater from kindergarten through sixth grade, and then stops, that person will not be as good a skater by the time they get to college. Logically, this applies to singing, as well. 

Of course, the other noteworthy results that come out of Demorest's research is how it highlights the psychological baggage we bring to singing that we don't bring into other activities. As mentioned in the article, children who have been told that they can’t sing are less likely to engage with music throughout life. Many of them carry painful memories—like being called "tone deaf"—well into adulthood. 

As Demorest states, “Everyone should be able to have music as a part of their life. It’s OK to select out of it, but it should be by choice, rather than because you think you don’t have ‘talent.' And if at any point in life you decide to become more engaged, you can be...When people are unsuccessful [at singing] they take it very personally, but we think if you sing more, you’ll get better.”

One way Demorest suggests people can continue to use their voices regularly is to have low-stakes opportunities in music that don’t require the commitment of time that playing in a band or an orchestra does. “People need a place to sing and have fun without worrying about how good they are,” he said. 

I would argue that even those of us who have professional aspirations as vocalists need these sorts of low-stakes opportunities to sing. Focused practice is obviously crucial for building specific skills, but recreational singing, or just jamming out with friends, is also allowed to be part of your vocal exercise (actually, it's encouraged). 

How has your practice been this week? Do you need more low-stakes opportunities to sing with others? How can you add that to your life? 

Now go practice. 

Magic To Do

"We've got magic to do, just for you. We've got miracle plays to play. We've got parts to perform, hearts to warm, kings and things to take by storm, as we go along our way." 

—Leading Player, "Magic To Do," Pippin

Who doesn't love the magic of theatre? The world of the imagination, the suspension of disbelief, the communication of triumph and tragedy through words, music, lights, costumes, and sets. Anyone who has had a transformative experience through theatre will likely have a difficult time expressing the power of that experience through words. There are some words, however, that may be particularly inadequate or—in the opinion of at least one music professional—inaccurate. 

Nova Thomas is a singer and Professor of Voice at Rice University's Shephard School of Music, as well as Teaching-Artist at opera companies across the country (including the Utah Opera). In the foreword to the book we discussed last week (The Vocal Coach Approach: When Practice Makes Perfect by Susan Shiplett Ashbaker), Thomas talks about the potential problems with using the term "magic" to refer to musical performances. 

"Extraordinary performances are often described as 'magical.' Indeed, that is probably the most accurate description for those transporting experiences that defy the confines of language; but the nomenclature, however flattering, presents a dilemma for those who endeavor to become the delivery systems for making that kind of art. If 'magical' is the result, then one might assume that the process is mystical, mysterious, or (even less helpful) just the result of a huge talent, or some ever elusive 'it' factor. In truth, the 'magic' we all seek is the result of work that has been enormously methodical...The kind of 'magic' we all seek requires an egoless, humble, specific, and ordered process." (p.x)

I find a similar issue when performers are told that their performances seemed effortless. Just like the word "magic," such phrases seem to dismiss the years of work that performers spend honing their craft, often at great sacrifice (and expense!). As we know from the stages of motor learning, it often takes years of slogging through the early stages of learning, applying effort, enduring failed attempts, and taking the necessary slow steps toward progress before we reach the automatic stage of performance. Comments like those above almost imply that anyone is capable of successful, professional-level performances if they are naturally gifted enough or if they are somehow chosen by some mystical muse who will then use them as the empty vessel through whom they will express profound musical ideas. 

I would think these type of comments can be especially irksome for those who do not feel particularly naturally gifted or who did not have the advantage of early musical training. When someone who has built their abilities, seemingly from square one, is told that their performances are the result of anything other than a lifetime of dedication, it can feel as if all of that effort is devalued. 

Of course, we sometimes do give performances that feel uniquely inspired. A handful of times, I came away from a performance feeling as though everything aligned perfectly, as it never had before. Nevertheless, even in those moments I had to acknowledge that it was only through consistent work and dedication that I was even in a place where that mysterious inspiration could come in and add that last bit of spark. There is no "magic" that will suddenly come in and make a half-prepared performance come to life. 

Now, I'm not saying that we should berate audience members who care enough to offer compliments and praise after our performances. Everyone takes something different away from the arts, and I don't believe it's our job to tell people what they should be getting from a performance. (Naturally, education, talkbacks, and other efforts can potentially help people understand performances at a deeper level, but that doesn't mean audience members are wrong in the opinions they form about our performances.) These interactions do, however, provide opportunities for us to help audiences understand the time and effort that does go into the process of creating impactful art. 

Patron 1: "Oh, that performance was just magical!"

Performer 1: "Thank you! It took us a lot of hours of rehearsal to get to that point." 

Patron 2: "It just looks so effortless when you perform!"

Performer 2: "I'm so glad! That's certainly one of my goals when I'm in the practice room every day." 

Instead of following the Leading Player's mantra of, "We've got magic to do," we might borrow from Nova Thomas to come up with a lyric that reflects the truer reality for musical theatre singers: "We've got work to do—enormously methodical, egoless, humble, specific, and ordered work to do." That's probably not as catchy, and it definitely has too many syllables to fit into Stephen Schwartz's melody. But it may also help us get into the practice room and take our success into our own hands instead of waiting around for magic to improve our performances. 

How has your practice been going this week? How successful have you been in establishing a routine and sticking to it? 

Now go practice.