There are two interesting threads going at once right now. The phenomenon of the countertenor (*endlessly* it would seem LOL) and that of motivation to sing which started life (sort of) as performance vs worship in Church. Bear with me if you can as my train of thought rarely runs along straight or indeed parallel tracks sometimes. I'll set up where I'm coming from first. As I've said before, just because I don't like something, or don't agree with you personally most times I will defend to the knell your right to hold that opinion and by default I guess I expect you not to get all bent out of shape with me no matter how contrary or opposing my views are. I mean no harm or offence. I am the sum of my experiences combined with a personality I had no choice in after all. So when I say I don't like countertenors, it is not a personal attack, or insulting to anyone here especially, it's just a bland statement of fact for me personally. Indeed I keep wondering "what's wrong" with me. I remember being utterly crushed when my singing teacher at the Conservatorium finally "decided" I was a Mezzo-soprano, for reasons she never clearly articulated, as the major part of a mezzos stage life, as presented to me at that stage of my life, consisted of pants roles, something which I don't mind watching all that much if I really must, by comparison, but just makes my stomach turn at the thought of me having to perform them. I'm not homophobic, I just can't stand the thought of dragging up as it were and pretending to be a man personally. Likewise, it leaves me cold watching men pretend to be women, be it Les Girls, or Baroque repertoire being performed by the voices it was actually written for, that is to say, men singing the womens roles. Not only do I find it boring, it discomforts me. My hang up. I won't go to see The Messiah performed by a counter tenor, it really doesn't float my boat. (But then again neither do Tenors who sound like they have their testicles in a vice either.) Another (major) reason for my dislike of counter tenors is my "feminist hostility" as it were, towards men taking away roles from women who can do it as well if not better, just for the novelty of phenomenon. I am a product of the women's movement of the 1970's after all. And I live in a country where women have had to/still occassionally have to fight tooth and nail to get recognition, let alone equal <fill in the blank> but that's another topic all together. So ..... getting to the heart of the topic the title sets up ... what I am curious about is what is the motivation to sing/to express yourself through song, when the repertoire being sung is largely contrary to your sexuality and/or life experiences? Why express yourself in this way especially if your inclination from birth is not to androgeny or misassigned gender? (For a counter tenor, isn't the repertoire even more overwhelmingly contrary than a mezzos?) Is it that for the vast majority of the repertoire a counter tenor is just acting, i.e. expressing feelings that are second hand rather than expressing something/anything fundamental to themselves, their souls, their life experiences? Or am I so far off track it's not funny? I am of course making the presumption that the majority of a countertenor's repertoire is indeed Baroque music and music written for Castrati and contralto voices and liturgical music. I don't know how a countertenor sings romantic repertoire unless you just transpose it up and what's the point in that? Goodness knows we females cop enough stick over transposing classical, especially the romantic repertoire to suit our voices, but that is a debate for another thread also. So where does motivation, self expression and selflessness merge? Or is it perhaps just that I sadly miss what everyone else hears, ie the sheer beauty of the voice type and the fact that that beauty can transcend all other considerations? I feel somehow disadvantaged that I can't appreciate countertenors, especially as it's more than obvious from those on the list how hard they work to attain their art, and how much they contribute to it and how much everyone also enjoys them. I just thought it an interesting part of the motivation discussion given their repertoire choices and limitations. Maybe it's just my ignorance. I know as a soprano/mezzo-soprano when I perform I have a very broad range of repertoire choices to motivate me. I can be acting a role, expressing poetry from a first hand experience point of view, or second hand, being a conduit for God, etc etc etc. and therefore I get to choose the whys and wherefores of performing with much consideration and great thought and care. I don't recognise this as being as complex for a countertenor. Where are/what are the roles and the poetry etc that, an especially heterosexual, countertenor gets to express himself first hand in? How much does this impact on the motivation to sustain a career in singing that actually reaches out and impacts the audience at a fundamental emotional level or is the point of the countertenor voice only primarily to express the beauty inherent in the sound? And if all you are using, as a singer, is your instrument to express yourself, are you shortchanging the expectation an audience has a right to expect from a singer? In other words, why sing when any other instrument could give just as satisfying performance? If you're not going to go the extra mile and use what is unique to singers, the manipulation of text to elicit response, why sing at all, why not just play it on the cello or clarinet etc? Surely singing by it's very nature (and we as singers) has to offer more than just pure beauty of sound to its intended audience? What do you all think? Michelle
Reality is just a figment of your imagination.
--------------------------------- - Exchange IMs with Messenger friends on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile phone.
|