“Solfeggio”? But what is it? (from the same article)
The majority of people of the USA do not know what the term “Solfeggio” means in its first, classical meaning. Even modern English-American dictionaries spell this word differently: some of them with a single “g”, others – with double “g”. Music teachers are still discussing if one should say “Solfeggio” or “solfege”. Solfeggio is not a compulsory subject at American music studios and schools; Solfeggio training is not used in the classes of most private music teachers. One can attend a Solfeggio class officially only at music colleges and universities.
However, the level of such classes is barely adequate. For example, students from the former USSR who have come to the USA by exchange complain regularly that the level of teaching Solfeggio at the universities is extremely low. Professors usually select repertoire for individual lessons in accordance to student’s proficiency. At the same time during group studies at music colleges and conservatories students are forced to write dictations of complexity level corresponding to what 10-year-old third-graders of average Russian music school have to deal with. Even understanding of “Solfeggio” itself is different in Russia and USA.
In Russia, Solfeggio is an important part of work with a student not only in the area of ear development and perfection of intonation but also in the acquisition of skills of music writing and sight-reading. In the USA and other countries with “literal” system “Solfeggio” is mostly based on the system developed by Zoltan Kodaly. That system amounts to nothing more than to training students skills of singing in a chorus and using seven Italian syllables and seven hand signs.
Thus, sometimes during the first years of music study at grade schools in the USA children are taught to sing simple melodies using the names of notes of Solfeggio. The first sound of any key can be called “Do”. Kodaly used slightly modified syllables for his relative system (Jo, Le, Mi, Na, So, Ra, Ti) to separate it from the traditional notation but this is regarded as inessential in the countries with the “literal” system.
Using so-called “movable Do” has become alpha and omega of Solfeggio training at American public schools. It is considered that relative usage of “Do” of the major stop to all the other major keys would lead to the development of stop-harmonic hearing. But at the same time one’s ear for music is connected in no way with the inexhaustible source of music information – music written language. Students are limited to the repertoire learnt from teacher’s voice or hand signs. Without the ability to read aloud or to oneself new music material, learners’ music thinking is not developed properly, it is closed in the frame of a limited repertoire.
Unification of Kodaly’s system with Solfeggio into a single whole did not improve either one but it definitely had a detrimental effect on Solfeggio as a training system.
Since music singing and intonating are part and parcel of training, teachers at music studios of the “literal” system try to sing music using alphabet letters. It is inconvenient but they do not see another way to go about it. Professionals got used to believing that Solfeggio with “absolute Do” is excessively difficult for students to understand because there are no mnemonic associations connected with verbal language logic. They think that it is more difficult to keep in mind names “Fa, La, Do, Mi” than the abbreviation “FACE”, because it is generally accepted that we can build words of letters but Solfeggio syllables are no more than an abracadabra for human memory. I will discuss the validity of such speculations further in this article.
During our presentations of the latest achievements in music education, music teachers often ask me questions concerning “fixed Do”. Many music teachers consider that the aim of using traditional, classical Solfeggio with different keys does not go beyond development of perfect ear. The majority of teachers in the USA know little about the vocal nature of music language and about the intonation basis of music perception. Very few of them are able to cope with music dictations or singing music fragments at sight.
Literal naming of notes, popular in the USA, has divided music training into “singing” and “playing an instrument”. As a rule, those who play an instrument read music texts using the above-mentioned mnemonic techniques of visual-logical learning. For example, to memorize the notes of the treble clef they use the phrase “Every Good Boy Does Fine”; to learn the notes between the staves they employ the abbreviation “FACE”. The notes on the staves in the bass clef are learnt with the phrase “Goofy Babies Do Funny Acts” and the notes in between – with “All Cows Eat Grass”.
Many “innovative teachers” in the USA create more and more fairy-tales and manuals, as though they are competing with each other in inventing stories, which could draw a parallel between the world of notes and the world of letters. They believe that such linguistic discoveries can help beginners to learn note reading and writing. All these attempts look like works by medieval alchemists who were trying to find formula for transformation stone into gold.
Music pedagogy restrains development of note reading while trying to interpret music language by means of logic of verbal language. Although these devices seem to be attractive, simple and suitable for memorizing of separate notes on the staff, this approach is one of the main reasons for the ineffectiveness of music reading training. It also delays children’s music development overall. This situation is caused by the following facts:
1. First of all, literal note naming makes it impossible to teach children of younger preschool age music reading and writing. Children’s ability to recognize letters and to read is considered to be a necessary condition for music study. It follows that it is not music that prepares a child’s brain for successful studies of other sciences, but quite the contrary.
2. Secondly, sounds [ei, bi:, si:, di:, i:, ef, dзi:] are very unsuitable for singing and hardly help to develop the ear and voice while training to play an instrument. Singing a music fragment using letters is inconvenient for the voice and does not contribute to the connection between “singing – hearing – remembering”.
3. All the other syllables in the literal system lean on the vowel [i:]. Though it is one of the basic speech tones, it is also one of the tensest. While pronouncing the vowel [i:], singer opens his jaws only for 15 %. A voice, trying to sing alphabet letters, cannot “rest” on any one of the syllables, five of which are [i:] and two – [e]. It is no wonder that teachers stay away from singing music texts and prefer regular music performance
From the standpoint of comfort for vocal organs, the sounds of Solfeggio are more suitable for the larynx. They include different basic vowels –
- (50 % of jaw opening), [e] (50 % of jaw opening), [a] (100 %). The vowels alternate with each other provide a strong phonetic basis for vocal cords. They require using different muscles of the larynx when singing. Uniqueness of pronunciation of each sound “name” helps to remember the sound pitch both on the hearing, timbre level and on the muscular one.
* Linguists consider the vowels [a, o, e, i:] to be fundamental and basic for human speech organs and the main vowels in all the languages. The sound [є] is regarded like a secondary one. Usage of the vowel [e] in the syllables [ei] and [ef] is unsuitable for singing not only because of the tension that pronunciation of the sound [e] creates in the vocal cords and only partial opening of the jaws but also because the syllable itself is cut short by the consonant endings [j] or [f].
Studying of music language in literal system neglects tonal nature of music and excludes human larynx from the process of development. Such disregard can be considered among the greatest and the most destructive mistakes of the modern music education in the countries adhering to literal music system.
Literal system does not stimulate development of music thinking and music memory. Sounds do not correspond to signs due to “translation difficulties”, because signs are perceived with eyes and sounds – with ears and larynx.
People’s speech memory is much more advanced than the logical one. Every child begins to assimilate and memorize his/her mother’s speech from his/her birth. Free command of Solfeggio language on speech level – solmisation – allows beginners to read note texts easily. Attachment of notes to some artificially invented words and phrases minimizes development of music thinking.
To render justice it should be said that Solfeggio in its full variant, which is adopted at music schools, colleges and conservatories in the republics of the former USSR, is not a rule but an exception in the world of music pedagogy. Up until today music is taught at public schools of the whole world as a superficially informative subject. For the most part, it is lessons ABOUT music, during which they do not usually train the command of music language.
However, even is lessons of Solfeggio or piano would be introduced as general classes in public schools it is unlikely to improve something today. Nowadays, popular methods of teaching music are not able to effectively teach beginners with varying levels of music aptitude
Topic: Aural curriculum