I’m sure that there will always be two very views in this discussion, and that neither side will never agree with or completely understand each other. But I am actually talking about the same thing! That Tom was talking about ‘stage presence’ whereas I was simply talking about ‘being present’.
#Stage presence free#
) of the text and its musical expression – while at the same time being free of all impediments to that presence.”ĭeb suggested that maybe Tom and I were talking about two different things. That’s what makes them so watchable.” Tom fundamentally disagreed with this and said that “ presence is much more than just focusing ‘on the task at hand.’ Indeed, the SPECIFIC nature of the task makes all the difference A singer will have presence if they are connecting specifically with the meaning (passion, poignancy, power. I said that “ presence simply means that the performers are totally in the present and only engaged on the task at hand. However, considering these two approaches does allow us to look in more detail at several important concepts in singing and performance.
I think whichever point of view you adhere to is very personal, and neither is ‘better’ than the other. I think both our approaches are useful and possibly produce the same results. I think Tom and I represent two clear and different approaches to singing. But on the surface we seem to have very different approaches and understanding of certain concepts. I’m sure that at some fundamental level we agree since we are both very keen to find ways of getting the best out of a choir in performance. Since then Tom and I have had several lively exchanges on this topic. That’s when I first ‘met’ Tom Carter, author of Choral Charisma: singing with expression. I wrote a post some time ago that set out my personal attitude to lyrics in songs and how we might express the ‘meaning’ of a song which has foreign lyrics ( Sing it like you mean it).
0 kommentar(er)
