Supertitles for Vocal Recitals
Dear Editor: I am writing regarding the Bulletin Board posting entitled “Recitals with Supertitles” in the April 2002 issue of Classical Singer. On January 18, 2002, The Marilyn Horne Foundation conducted an experiment using English supertitles for the first half of its annual gala concert, which featured German-language art songs. The audience was surveyed in writing regarding the use of supertitles, and the results of the survey are contrary to what you report as “the consensus” and “the final verdict.”
Specifically, the survey indicated that 70% of the audience thought supertitles added to their enjoyment of the recital and wanted to see more of the same. 20% responded to the contrary, while 10% were undecided. 76% responded that the use of supertitles increased their understanding of the German song text, compared to 15% who felt otherwise. The findings you printed in Classical Singer did not represent the majority opinion of our survey. Supertitles in opera in this country have increased awareness of and understanding of operas performed in a foreign language and increased attendance to live performances. The Marilyn Horne Foundations’ belief is that supertitles can make a difference for the vocal recital as well. And we are “putting our money where our mouth is” by using supertitles for all of our New York City recitals this spring and next season. —Marilyn Horne
I was delighted to find that our information was wrong as I’ve often wondered why, with the great success of supertitles in opera, no one has tried them for vocal recitals. Perhaps this will be the shot in the arm that the marketability of the recital needed. Congratulations on breaking new ground. —Editor
Dear Editor: The correct solution is to find librettists/lyricists who truly understand the singing voice and are poetically gifted to provide contemporary English singing translations for the singer. Few Americans are proficient in German/French/Italian as were/are the Continental art song audiences who may inflict their snobbery on American audiences. The great composers wanted their texts to be understood. They didn’t write in Chinese and didn’t look down upon translations for other national audiences. If you are singing words not available to your audience you might just as well be a flute or a cello! The lovely emotions of a fine lyric are lost to your audience even if they have a printed translation.
—Isadore Nicholson
There have always been two very distinct schools of thought on this issue. However, we now have three ways to perform recitals: original language, translations or supertitles. I’m not sure that it has to become an issue of snobbery but simply a matter of preference. Frankly, you can make an argument for all the choices and that’s why the debate has been going on for so long. Luckily, the choice comes back to you, the singer. It’s your recital: what do you want to do? —Editor
Pavarotti Story Error
Dear Editor: I would like to comment on the article written about Mr. Pavarotti [March, 2002, cover] The article was insightful for the most part, however, as it relates to the Kennedy Center Awards I was a little disappointed. Pavarotti was mentioned, Julie Andrews, Jack Nicholson and others. What others? There was only one more and that was Quincy Jones. How could one possibly overlook someone who has had such a huge impact on music for the past 50 years! I was disappointed with this oversight. It was as if he weren’t important. Also, there was mention of Pavarotti being so overcome with emotion, that he broke down and cried and was comforted by Jack Nicholson. Perhaps I was watching a different award show, but I saw Quincy Jones providing the comfort since Jack Nicholson was sitting on the other side of Julie Andrews and Mr. Jones was sitting next to Mr. Pavarotti. Perhaps these are such minor points in comparison to the entire article, but the impression is that this great role model to minority artists was so unimportant that he could not be mentioned. Thanks for reading my comments. —Name Withheld, Niles, Ohio
Various Teaching Techniques
Dear Editor: The article “The Search for Excellence in Voice Teaching” by David Jones [April, 2002, p. 20] made some good points, but the section “Healthy Concepts: Characteristic of Excellent Teaching” was seriously flawed. The specific technical points raised may work for one singer, but they are hardly the basis of good singing and they don’t address the larger picture of good teaching. A “laundry list” of technical exercises frequently leads students to question why there hasn’t been “instruction in using an oval mouth position” or other pearl of wisdom, possibly the opposite of what the specific student needs for his or her progress. As a teacher and performer, I was also disappointed not to see ANY mention of the importance of communication of text in the article. In my opinion, the technical (physiological) basis of singing breaks down into four main categories – breathing, phonation, resonance and articulation. Teachers can help guide students to find efficiency and balance in these four elements and to make aesthetic choices. Specific exercises need to be chosen for each individual student. Good teaching can’t be determined by formula! Thank you.
—Steven Stull, Ithaca, NY
Mr. Jones, as a teacher of Shirley Verrett, is not a teacher whose advice I would classify as seriously flawed. It is rather like what Dr. Jahn does in his medical advice when he answers singer questions. Dr. Jahn can’t see the singer and the problem, yet he gives general medical advice—always with a disclaimer. Similarly, the article by Mr. Jones was not an “office visit,” but I appreciated the fact that he could close his eyes and try to put into words what he would envision an ideal singer would be doing if that singer were standing in his studio. Even so, teaching studios vary greatly in their emphasis and as we wrote at the end of the article, CS does not endorse any teacher or method of singing. —Editor
