Content area
Full Text
American vocal pedagogy has become a body with two heads, one speaking with the voice of the subjective teacher, the other with the voice of the science-oriented teacher.1
SO WROTE RICHARD MILLER IN HIS seminal 1996 work when describing the longstanding and ongoing philosophic divide between those teachers who rely on vocal science and those who rely on imagery.2 This article will report on the results of a recent survey of over 500 voice teachers in the United States and Canada concerning the use of science and imagery in the voice studio. The survey has yielded interesting results. It has documented the broad-based use of a blended approach to the use of science and imagery. It has also revealed both the need and desire for better communication within our profession.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
The philosophic division between science-based and imagery-based approaches to voice pedagogy is long standing, dating to the invention of the laryngoscope by Manuel Garcia in 1854.3 This "science vs. imagery" debate continued into the twentieth century. One commentator, for example, declared "science is a blind man's guess,"4 while another pointedly lamented singers' lack of understanding of voice science.5
Within the past ten years, numerous articles acknowledging the division between the science-based and imagery-based methods have appeared in the Journal of Singing. Pedagogues Donald Freed,6 Margaret Kennedy-Dygas,7 Paul Kiesgen,8 Kenneth Bozeman,9 Lynn Heiding,10 Ingo Titze,11 and Deirdre Michael12 all have added their observations and opinions to the debate. Bozeman observed in 2007,
[t]here are nonetheless those who claim that voice science has not helped voice instruction, that it has been a distraction, or still worse, a substitute for effective teaching. While this no doubt has been true in some instances, the same criticism could be leveled at exclusive reliance on historic pedagogy.13
Similarly, Helding acknowledged that same year the existence of a pedagogic rift between science and imagery when she stated,
While few voice experts agree on the quality and extent of [the] influence [of Voice Science], most would concur that it is significant, that this influence has been both positive and negative, and finally, that disagreement and miscommunication between voice scientists and voice pedagogues unfortunately persist.14
PURPOSE AND METHOD OF SURVEY
There clearly has been no shortage of debate over the use...