Article response -- Tom selects some fine vocal turns of recent times

...lets not forget these fine performances-

Lisa Gerrard-The Unfolding; La Bas; Sanvean Kate Bush-Sat in Your Lap Sinead O'Connor-In This Heart Morrissey-Lifegaurd Sleeping, Girl Drowning; Seasick, Yet Still Docked; Last Night I Dreamt That Somebody Loved Me Depeche Mode-Stripped Tori Amos-Blood Roses PJ Harvey-To Bring You My Love Tara Vanflower-Little Bleu Cherry Girl Die Form-Cantique Rise and Fall of a Decade-Pure Hands

Brilliant as usual. If Tom doesn't get a chance to do his book he should just round up a couple of essays like these and release it a la Blissed Out (the "Death of Pop" article and this one together could form the basis of the "problem" section of the book; the quesion is, what's the "solution"?).

Thanks Tim (and thanks Ned for putting it up!).

Hip-hop voices were excluded from the article (to anticipate the big question I can think of being asked) because they work in slightly different ways and also because they generally get 'right' what a lot of voice-centred music gets 'wrong'.

Do the same people who accuse Mariah Carey of singing seven octaves 'because she can' have the same level of animus for conceptual artists, or performance artists for that matter? The only reason many revered cult figures do what they do is 'because they can', so why the double standard?

Not at all, because the whole point of a conceptual artist is that what they do is in the service of the greater concept - which is what I'm arguing is the position singers should be in in relation to the song. A better comparison would be World's Strongest Man contests, or Athletics. Come to think of it I think singing, shredding guitar playing etc. would be excellent if adopted as freestyle sports.

Sure, but isn't exerting the most rigorous conceptual intelligence somewhat equivalent to exerting the most technical/physical skill?

Also, displays of technique can be specific demonstrations of new developments of the possibilities of the form, which can then be used by others of less technical ability and perhaps different 'content' to convey with said developments. Depends if you like the experimnents raw or cooked, as it were.

I'm not sure physical and conceptual rigour are comparable - with conceptual rigour the focus is on the 'object' acted upon, with physical or technical rigour the focus is on the action itself.

As for technique, certainly - but it can work both ways - technique in setting itself up as a measure of 'good' can work to patrol the boundaries of the form and prevent its progression. This is what I think happened with soul music, for instance. A non-dynamic form isn't neccessarily a bad thing, of course, and I'm not arguing that technique is de facto useless just that the privileging of abstraction and technique in vocal performance has limited usefulness.

'technique in setting itself up as a measure of 'good' can work to patrol the boundaries of the form and prevent its progression.'

What!? Technique just IS, progression is limited only by lack of imagination. Who respects boundaries?

Maybe the problem I'm getting at is that certain kinds of styles and techniques become codified as good once a genre or style of music loses its initial momentum, and this codification contributes to the loss of momentum. What is Wynton Marsalis doing, for instance, other than using technique as a boundary-marker for 'real' jazz?

The relationship of songwriting craft to technique is the real unexplored thing in the piece, it's struck me. Did the songcraft beloved of e.g the Pinefox wither because it became as ossified in its way as vocal abstraction has done?

The more rules, the more opportunity to break same.

Also, what's your precise def. of 'ossified'?

'Ossified' = the most prominent and successful musicians in a style are/seem more interested in obeying rules than breaking them. If you like the rule-set you'll still enjoy the music, of course - it's not a synonym for 'bad'.

The relationship of songwriting craft to technique is the real unexplored thing in the piece, it's struck me. Did the songcraft beloved of e.g the Pinefox wither because it became as ossified in its way as vocal abstraction has done?

I disagree with what I think you're suggesting here. Formal constraints shouldn't limit creativity. Appropriateness to theme, etc. should be important within songwriting, and I don't know that it has been disregarded by songwriters as it has been by vocalists.

Or have confessional singer songwriters overtaken the protest songwriters of the seventies? i.e. do we need more ditties?

This part of the article is great:

The high moans and the showy use of dynamics characteristic of bands as critically distant as Starsailor and Sigur Ros amount to little more than markers for an entirely unfocussed - and thus usefully undeniable - sensitivity. The keening of Sigur Ros, that band's fans might tell you, can mean everything because it means nothing. But you may as well say that it means nothing precisely through meaning anything.

I think you're absolutely right about the lack of focus. I also appreciate the background information in the article.