(Formerly) CE from York

**terratogen** · 15-06-12, 00:25

Originally posted by Magnificat View Post

If that is the case the critic was obviously lazy but his comments were exactly as I have said.

If we're thinking of the same (very brief) review, VCC—in which the reviewer, who never specifically refers to boys or girls, mentions the difficulty in maintaining a high-quality treble section when the choristers are constantly coming and going with the passing of time and the changing of voices—it may simply have been that the he was speaking of choristers generally. (Apparently, people do that now and again.) Boys' voices will tend to be the only ones at risk of breaking dramatically, of course, but it isn't as though the girls' line is static. At Wells, at least for the last few years, the girls have moved on at the end of Year 8 just as the boys have done, new probationers have come up to take their places, and both lines are in constant flux.

**Magnificat** · 15-06-12, 00:47

Originally posted by Gabriel Jackson View Post

So here we have a "critic" who cannot tell whether he/she is listening to boys or girls, and cannot read. .

Gabriel,

Yes very confusing I agree; but the man commented as though he believed that the Wells choir's top line was boys only. It was because I knew that Wells were recording with combined forces that I immediately noticed the apparent inconsistency. It looks to me , as I have said in reply to Miles Coverdale, that he was one of those people who automatically assumed that cathedral choirs are still only boys and men. I can't remember the paper he wrote for but it was an online edition with the review of the record.

VCC.

**Magnificat** · 15-06-12, 01:06

Originally posted by terratogen View Post

If we're thinking of the same (very brief) review, VCC—in which the reviewer, who never specifically refers to boys or girls, mentions the difficulty in maintaining a high-quality treble section when the choristers are constantly coming and going with the passing of time and the changing of voices—it may simply have been that the he was speaking of choristers generally. (Apparently, people do that now and again.) Boys' voices will tend to be the only ones at risk of breaking dramatically, of course, but it isn't as though the girls' line is static. At Wells, at least for the last few years, the girls have moved on at the end of Year 8 just as the boys have done, new probationers have come up to take their places, and both lines are in constant flux.

Yes, this seems like the review I saw. You could well be right. The reference to the changing of voices could have given me the impression that he thought he was listening to boys only.

VCC

**DracoM** · 15-06-12, 08:51

The fact that the BBC come to a foundation to broadcast CE means that there is a high PR premium on that foundation putting out its best. No argument with that - it's a no-brainer.

Yet concurrently, it has not gone unnoticed that in the last five or so years, a number of foundations who on paper / websites declare proudly that they run both girls and boy treble chorister units, and more power to them for so doing, fairly regularly put their girls on the broadcast services rather than the boys.

Conclusions as to why this seems to be happening more regularly? Well, it's obvious that by and large they believe the girls will show the foundation's music in a better light than their boys. What message that sends to the boys, to the parents of potential boy choristers in terms of recruitment, I leave to other to decide. If you then underline the message by not making it clear in public websites etc that you trust the boys to uphold the foundation's highest expectations, it could become a self-fulfilling prophesy that sooner rather than later, the number of boys auditioning drops. Boys like to star too, and if they are seen to be regularly unlikely to represent the foundation in high-prestige broadcasts etc, they will just drift off and play football or whatever.

By NOT making it proudly clear on websites etc that you entrust such services to boys and girls indiscriminately, I feel you are gradually painting yourself into a corner and incrementally affecting recruitment. Now it may be that, force majeure, it is a corner that is acceptable to a foundation. Maybe the number of boys who want to sing is dropping anyway. If the only way you can get your foundation on record, on the BBC etc, is by putting your girls on the top lines, then so be it, I can see the reasoning. But I do NOT see why that preference is 'hidden' on service sheets / calendars / websites. If you believe in your girls, then say so,. If you believe in your boys, then say so. That way, each gets kudos, each becomes potential recruitment material, each feels validated.

The time to stop specifying which top line is leading is when you only have left the one gender to sing the top line, because that is all you are running.

**Wolsey** · 15-06-12, 12:15

Why are people repeating here the same tired arguments which were essayed in the thread (q.v.) following Guildford Cathedral's broadcast on 14th March? That choir, incidentally, rotates its girls and boys for broadcasts. It is over twenty years (yes, twenty) since Salisbury Cathedral became the first English cathedral to form a separate and independent foundation for girl choristers, and yet there are some who appear to have not caught up with the everyday reality of cathedral choral foundations in the twenty-first century. Is it still such a 'big deal' to know - or be informed beforehand - who is singing the top line after the appearance of a set of girls in cathedral choirstalls almost a generation ago?

**DracoM** · 15-06-12, 13:22

< Is it still such a 'big deal' to know - or be informed beforehand - >

Succinctly put. Good question. Must be that for some in cathedral congregations / radio audiences it is important.

**Magnificat** · 15-06-12, 18:05

Originally posted by Wolsey View Post

Why are people repeating here the same tired arguments which were essayed in the thread (q.v.) following Guildford Cathedral's broadcast on 14th March? That choir, incidentally, rotates its girls and boys for broadcasts. It is over twenty years (yes, twenty) since Salisbury Cathedral became the first English cathedral to form a separate and independent foundation for girl choristers, and yet there are some who appear to have not caught up with the everyday reality of cathedral choral foundations in the twenty-first century. Is it still such a 'big deal' to know - or be informed beforehand - who is singing the top line after the appearance of a set of girls in cathedral choirstalls almost a generation ago?

Wolsey,

Those of us who inhabit this board know all about girls choirs in cathedrals but why, apparently, in your view is it so wrong for us to want to know whether or not we are listening to a boys' top line or a girls' top line and why do some cathedrals think it is not important to the kids to acknowledge their singing in a broadcast service?

The fact that York seems not to want people to know that their girls' choir is first rate is quite disgraceful frankly. I am surprised that Robert Sharpe is, apparently, prepared to go along with this. It is idiotic in the extreme.

VCC

**Contre Bombarde** · 15-06-12, 19:33

Originally posted by Magnificat View Post

Wolsey,

Those of us who inhabit this board know all about girls choirs in cathedrals but why, apparently, in your view is it so wrong for us to want to know whether or not we are listening to a boys' top line or a girls' top line and why do some cathedrals think it is not important to the kids to acknowledge their singing in a broadcast service?

The fact that York seems not to want people to know that their girls' choir is first rate is quite disgraceful frankly. I am surprised that Robert Sharpe is, apparently, prepared to go along with this. It is idiotic in the extreme.

VCC

Because the gender of the singers is inconsequential. What is important is the survival and continued performance of the music. The fact that that boys' voices are "traditional" is down to nothing more than a mysoginistic accident from past times. The real worry is that this frankly unpleasant undertone about the gender of 21st singers is still extant.

Those of us who today are actively involved in producing music for you to enjoy, or not, care not one hoot about your gender-related tastes. We are those keeping alive the traditions of cathedral music. You are not.

I saw a recent posting on another forum about this very subject and which made some cojent points with which few would argue. I am sure that Wolsey knows to what I refer.

This will be my final post.

**Gabriel Jackson** · 15-06-12, 20:02

Originally posted by Contre Bombarde View Post

The fact that that boys' voices are "traditional" is down to nothing more than a mysoginistic accident from past times. The real worry is that this frankly unpleasant undertone about the gender of 21st singers is still extant.

And it's still all about misogyny. Basically, if you are, or sound like, a boy, that's great. If you sound female that's bad. The York girls receive plaudits here because they were thought to be boys. The sopranos of the BBC Singers are vilified because they sound like women.

**ardcarp** · 15-06-12, 20:03

I've kept out of this girl/boy thing so far. I'm a huge advocate of girl choristers, not least for the very selfish reason that I've spawned a few. I realise that nobody is advocating the abolition of boys' choirs, but there are two reasons (one following on from the other) why they need to be retained at all costs. 1. Boys tend to learn differently from girls...not just in singing...being less methodical, maybe less patient, but more sponaneous even to ignition point at times. For this reason many consider that they are best fostered separately, even if at times they join to produce a super-choir. Sometimes this is put crudely as 'girls drive out boys'. I don't wholly subscribe to that, because some mixed choirs have worked successfully, but if that were to be true, then 2. WE NEED TO PRODUCE THE TENORS, BASSES (oh, and even altos) of the future. So whether it's traditional or not, we need them.

**BBMmk2** · 15-06-12, 20:35

I think witrh this girl/boy arguement, that if the two genders are as good as one another then, does it reeally matter as to who is singing?

**ardcarp** · 15-06-12, 21:06

sopranos of the BBC Singers are vilified because they sound like women.

No, Gabriel, it's because they wobble and have no quiet control on high notes. If you are trying to say women = wobble I profoundly disagree. From the 1960s onwards there has been a proud tradition of straight women singers which members of my family have been part of. It's nothing to do with trying to sound like boys. That's an insult, actually. It arose because many felt that clear lines and clean textures benefit certain sorts of music...indeed most sorts of choral music. For instance, try the Figure Humaine CD of Poulenc's choral music by Tenebrae. It is so clear and wonderfully blended....something IMO the BBC Singers (fine musiciams though they are) could not achieve.

**DracoM** · 15-06-12, 21:50

I absolutely support ardcarp on this, and his point 2 was implicit in my statement above that if you do not in foundations nurture boys, as well as girls, and if you do not make them feel special as outlined and separately showcased, you are eventually going to cut down the number so boys interested in and prepared to chance their arm. Voices break, boys know that, DoMs know that, self-sacrificing and fee-paying parents know that they are a separate case and a special commodity, and unless there has been a singing tradition in that boy BEFORE the voice breaks, the chances of him then taking up serious vocal stuff in his mid-late adolescence is pretty nearly nil, and the loss to the musical community both professional and amateur will be incalculable.

Maybe those of you deeply taken up with the high level professional singing world need to step back a bit and have a look at the real world and what is happening in education to realise that the numbers of boys engaged in classical SINGING is dropping like a stone. If the cathedrals merely resign themselves to girls only choirs, and/or do not showcase their boy choirs, then, sorry, but ardcarp is right, you guys writing music for them might find the professional ranks thinning, and if the men that these non-singing boys become do not themselves appreciate music and singing, then neither might their sons AND daughters, and thus the market for your wares diminish.

Easy to scoff, but a little more careful thought about the underlying issues might help. Terms like 'misogynistic accident of history' do not help. Concentrate on what is at stake NOW and over the next 20-30 odd years if the stream of professionally trained boy choristers dries up. .

**Gabriel Jackson** · 15-06-12, 22:14