People who know me in the real world might not think that I’m uncomfortable with “stirring the pot.” Lemme tell you… any pot stirring I’ve done face-to-face has been rare, difficult, and mild compared to what rumbles around in my pot-stirrin’ brain. My brain is always stirring the pot… always simmering…
Something I’ve been simmering on for the past week or so is the supposition that voice (anatomy &) physiology is NOT part of voice science. #smh I still don’t understand that statement. If physiology isn’t voice science, then neither is acoustics. Fluid dynamics… and aerodynamics. Nah. Not voice science.
I’ve read a lot of definitions and descriptions of physiology these past few weeks. My favorite thus far is:
Physiology is the study of normal function within living creatures. It is a sub-section of biology, covering a range of topics that include organs, anatomy, cells, biological compounds, and how they all interact to make life possible.
The interaction is critical!!!! Without interaction, physiology is static. Without interaction, what is the value of acoustics in singing? Without interaction, fluid dynamics go unnoticed in the vocal system. (Unless we’re talking about snot and spit… we notice those fluids a LOT when we’re singing.)
Last time I checked, biology was considered a field within science. Assuming that’s still true today and taking into consideration the definition provided above, I’d say that physiology is indeed a sub-sub-category of science. Perhaps there is a perception out there that physiology is the “softer” side of biology and therefore less rigorous and less scientific? Again, if we’re going to compare it to other sub-categories, such as acoustics being a sub-category of physics (which can also be seen as a sub-category of math), then I disagree with this assessment. Working in the field of physiology doesn’t intrinsically make one’s work scientific or non-scientific. It’s what you’re doing in any sub-field that may “earn” you the additional qualification of “scientific.”
It is true that some voice teachers and voice pedagogy course instructors are lacking in their understanding of capital S Science. I’m not here to say that it matters or not; not in this post. My point here is to merely defend the incorporation of anatomy and physiology in teaching. This information can be extremely useful in promoting healthy biomechanics which allow for appropriate and efficient work across all systems at play in the complex interaction of singing. And that’s enough science for most.
Evidence Informed singing 