Vocalist.org archive


From:  Reg Boyle <bandb@n...>
Reg Boyle <bandb@n...>
Date:  Fri Mar 9, 2001  5:56 am
Subject:  Artifice


At 07:41 PM 08-03-01 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 3/8/01 6:23:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>bandb@n... writes:
>
><< ARTIFICE........grrrrrr...now there's a word that really gets me going, >>
>Why, Reg? It's got oh so many semantic layers to it!

It's the non-specific nature of its definition that I find objectionable
and its meaning supports the idea that all things are mere tricks or
whims of no real value, heaping scorn on the principle of devotion
and dedication.
In singing, there is very little that can be nailed down so that
we can say, "this is correct and this is not". Therefore it may all be
legitimately labeled artifice. Nasty labels have a way of undermining
worthy undertakings and this is one of them, in my opinion.

I've found that the closer we approach excellent vocal technique the
more difficult it becomes to explain. A man I sing beside in a choir
can't understand why I keep changing my technique, he fails to
appreciate that perfection is elusive and that if you stop seeking it
you fall back just as effectively as when you label yourself as having
arrived.

Regards Reg,

Artifice.......
1. Trick or Clever Device
2. Cunning.
3. Skill, Ingenuity.


"One must have loved a woman of genius
to comprehend the happiness of loving a fool."


emusic.com