GIUSEPPE CAMPANARI
So much has been written upon the
futility of applying one method to all cases in vocal
instruction that it seems useless for me to say anything
that would add to the volume of testimony against the
custom of trying to teach all pupils in the same manner.
No one man ever has had, has, or ever will have, a
“method” superior to all others, for the
very simple reason that the means one vocalist might
employ to reach artistic success would be quite different
from that which another singer, with an entirely different
voice, different throat and different intellect, would
be obliged to employ. One of the great laws of
Nature is the law of variation; that is, no two children
of any parents are ever exactly alike. Even in
the case of twins there is often a great variation.
The great English philosopher, Darwin, made much of
this principle. It is one which all voice students
and teachers should consider, for although there are,
from the nature of things, many foundation principles
which must remain the same in all cases, the differences
in individual cases are sufficient to demand the greatest
keenness of observation, the widest experience and
an inexhaustible supply of patience upon the part
of the teacher.
Please understand, I am not decrying
the use of books of exercises such as those of Concone,
Marchesi, Regine, Panofka and others. Such books
are necessary. I have used these and others in
teaching, suiting the book to the individual case.
The pupil needs material of this kind, and it should
be chosen with the greatest care and consideration
not only of the pupil’s voice, but of his intellectual
capacity and musical experience. These books
should not be considered “methods.”
They are the common property of all teachers, and
most teachers make use of them. My understanding
of a “method” is a set of hard and fast
rules, usually emanating from the mind of some one
person who has the effrontery to pass them off upon
an all too gullible public as the one road to a vocal
Parnassus. Only the singer with years of experience
can realize how ridiculous this course is and how
large is the percentage of failure of the pupils of
teachers whose sole claim to fame is that they teach
the method. Proud as I am
of the glorious past of vocal art in the country of
my birth, I cannot help being amused and at the same
time somewhat irritated when I think of the many palpable
frauds that are classed under the head of the “Real
Old Italian Method” by inexperienced teachers.
We cannot depend upon the past in all cases to meet
present conditions. The singers of the olden
day in Italy were doubtless great, because they possessed
naturally fine voices and used them in an unaffected,
natural manner. In addition to this they were
born speaking a tongue favorable to beautiful singing,
led simple lives and had opportunities for hearing
the great operas and the great singers unexcelled
by those of any other European country. That they
became great through the practice of any set of rules
or methods is inconceivable. There were great
teachers in olden Italy, very great teachers, and
some of them made notes upon the means they employed,
but I cannot believe that if these teachers were living
to-day they would insist upon their ideas being applied
to each and every individual case in the same identical
manner.
THE VALUE OF OPERA
This leads us to the subject at hand.
The students in Italy in the past have had advantages
for self-study that were of greatest importance.
On all sides good singing and great singing might
be heard conveniently and economically. Opera
was and is one of the great national amusements of
Italy. Opera houses may be found in all of the
larger cities and in most of the smaller ones.
The prices of admission are, as a rule, very low.
The result is that the boys in the street are often
remarkably familiar with some of the best works.
Indeed, it would not be extravagant to say that they
were quite as familiar with these musical masterpieces
as some of the residents of America are with the melodramatic
doings of Jesse James or the “Queen of Chinatown.”
Thus it is that the average Italian boy with a fair
education and quick powers of observation reaches his
majority with a taste for singing trained by many opportunities
to hear great singers. They have had the best
vocal instruction in the world, providing, of course,
they have exercised their powers of judgment.
Thus it is that it happens that such a singer as Caruso,
certainly one of the greatest tenors of all time,
could be accidentally heard by a manager while singing
and receive an offer for an engagement upon the spot.
Caruso’s present art, of course, is the result
of much training that would fall under the head of
“coaching,” together with his splendid
experience upon the operatic stage itself.
I trust that I have not by this time
given the reader of this page the impression that
teachers are unnecessary. This is by no means
the case. A good teacher is extremely desirable.
If you have the good fortune to fall into the hands
of a careful, experienced, intelligent teacher, much
may be accomplished; but the teacher is by no means
all that is required. The teacher should be judged
by his pupils, and by nothing else. No matter
what he may claim, it is invariably the results of
his work (the pupil’s) which must determine
his value. Teachers come to me with wonderful
theories and all imaginable kinds of methods.
I always say to them: “Show me a good pupil
who has been trained by your methods and I will say
that you are a good teacher.”
Before our national elections I am
asked, “Which one of the candidates do you believe
will make the best President?” I always reply,
“Wait four years and I will pass my opinion
upon the ability of the candidate the people select.”
In other words, “the proof of the pudding is
in the eating.”
SINGERS NOT BORN, BUT MADE
We often hear the trite expression,
“Singers are born, not made.” This,
to my mind, is by no means the case. One may be
born with the talent and deep love for music, and
one may be born with the physical qualifications which
lead to the development of a beautiful voice, but
the singer is something far more than this. Given
a good voice and the love for his music, the singer’s
work is only begun. He is at the outstart of
a road which is beset with all imaginable kinds of
obstacles. In my own case I was extremely ambitious
to be a singer. Night after night I played ’cello
in the orchestra at La Scala, in Milan, always wishing
and praying that I might some day be one of the actors
in the wonderful world behind the footlights.
I listened to the famous singers in the great opera
house with the minutest attention, making mental notes
of their manner of placing their voices their
method of interpretation, their stage business, and
everything that I thought might be of any possible
use to me in the career of the singer, which was dearest
to my heart. I endeavored to employ all the common
sense and good judgment I possessed to determine what
was musically and vocally good or otherwise.
I was fortunate in having the training of the musician,
and also in having the invaluable advantage of becoming
acquainted with the orchestral scores of the famous
operas. Finally the long-awaited opportunity
came and I made my debut at the Teatro dal
Verme, in Milan. I had had no real vocal
instruction in the commonly accepted sense of the
term; but I had really had a kind of instruction that
was of inestimable value.
NOT GIVEN TO ALL TO STUDY SUCCESSFULLY WITHOUT A TEACHER
Success brought with it its disadvantages.
I foolishly strained my voice through overwork.
But this did not discourage me. I realized that
many of the greatest singers the world has ever known
were among those who had met with disastrous failure
at some time in their careers. I came to America
and played the violoncello in the Boston Symphony Orchestra.
All the time I was practicing with the greatest care
and with the sole object of restoring my voice.
Finally it came back better than ever and I sang for
Maurice Grau, the impresario of the Metropolitan Opera
House, in New York. He engaged me and I sang
continuously at the Metropolitan for several years.
Notwithstanding this varied experience, I will seek
to learn, and to learn by practical example, not theory.
The only opera school in the world is the opera house
itself. No school ever “made” a great
singer or a great artist. The most they have done
has been to lay the foundation. The making of
the artist comes later.
In order to do without instruction
one must be very peculiarly constituted. One
must be possessed of the pedagogical faculty to a
marked degree. One must have within oneself those
qualities for observing and detecting the right means
leading to an artistic end which every good teacher
possesses. In other words, one must be both teacher
and pupil. This is a rare combination, since the
power to teach, to impart instruction, is one that
is given to very few. It is far better to study
alone or not at all than with a poor teacher.
The teacher’s responsibility, particularly in
the case of vocal students, is very great. So
very much depends upon it. A poor teacher can
do incalculable damage. By poor teachers I refer
particularly to those who are carried away by idiotic
theories and quack methods. We learn to sing by
singing and not by carrying bricks upon our chest
or other idiotic antics. Consequently I say that
it is better to go all through life with a natural
or “green” voice than to undergo the vocal
torture that is sometimes palmed off upon the public
as voice teaching. At best, all the greatest
living teacher can do is to put the artist upon the
right track and this in itself is responsibility enough
for one man or one woman to assume.
SINGERS MAKE THEIR OWN METHODS
As I have already said, most every
singer makes a method unto himself. It is all
the same in the end. The Chinese may, for instance,
have one name for God, the Persians another, the Mohammedans
another, and the people of Christian lands another.
But the God principle and the worship principle are
the same with all. It is very similar in singing.
The means that apply to my own case may apparently
be different from those of another, but we are all
seeking to produce beautiful tones and interpret the
meaning of the composer properly.
One thing, however, the student should
seek to possess above all things, and this is a thorough
foundation training in music itself. This can
not begin too early. In my own home we have always
had music. My children have always heard singing
and playing and consequently they become critical
at a very early age.
I can not help repeating my advice
to students who hope to find a vocal education in
books or by the even more ridiculous correspondence
method. Books may set one’s mental machinery
in motion and incite one to observe singers more closely,
but teach they can not and never can. The sound-reproducing
machines are of assistance in helping the student to
understand the breathing, phrasing, etc., but
there is nothing really to take the place of the living
singer who can illustrate with his voice the niceties
of placing and timbre.
My advice to the voice students of
America is to hear great singers. Hear them as
many times as possible and consider the money invested
as well placed as any you might spend in vocal instruction.
The golden magnet, as well as the opportunities in
other ways offered artists in America, has attracted
the greatest singers of our time to this country.
It is no longer necessary to go abroad to listen to
great singers. In no country of the world is
opera given with more lavish expenditure of money
than in America. The great singers are now by
no means confining their efforts to the large Eastern
cities. Many of them make regular tours of the
country, and students in all parts of this land are
offered splendid opportunities for self-help through
the means of concerts and musical festivals.
After all, the most important thing for any singer
is the development of the critical sense. Blind
imitation is, of course, bad, but how is the student
to progress unless he has had an opportunity to hear
the best singers of the day? In my youth I heard
continually such artists as La Salle, Gayarre, Patti,
De Reszke and others. How could I help profiting
by such excellent experiences?
GREAT VOICES ARE RARE
One may be sure that in these days
few, if any, great voices go undiscovered. A
remarkable natural voice is so rare that some one is
sure to notice it and bring it to the attention of
musicians. The trouble is that so many people
are so painfully deluded regarding their voices.
I have had them come to me with voices that are obviously
execrable and still remain unconvinced when I have
told them what seemed to me the truth. This business
of hearing would-be singers is an unprofitable and
an uncomfortable one; and most artists try to avoid
the ordeal, although they are always very glad to
encourage real talent. Most young singers, however,
have little more than the bare ambition to sing, coupled
with what can only be described by the American term,
“a swelled head.” Someone has told
them that they are wonderfully gifted, and persons
of this kind are most always ready to swallow flattery
indiscriminately. Almost everyone, apparently,
wants to go into opera nowadays. To singers who
have not any chance whatever I have only to say that
the sooner this is discovered the better. Far
better put your money in bank and let compound interest
do what your voice can not.