Choir of the Year
Monday night. 7.00p.m.
I know, I know it clashes with Real Madrid vs Barcelona!
So no-one listened?
Well, not sure you missed much.
Wellensian Consort had been the obvious winner of Choir of the Year from a long way back, first heats etc heard on radio anyway. Excellent balance, could do up-tempo stuff and the more thoughtful too. Good tone.
What distressed me were the interviews with some of the children in the younger classes all of whom talked about problems of remembering the music 'and the choreography'. Erm.......sorry? The what?
This is the iniquitous legacy of what one might call the X-Factor or Poo factor.
What the heck has 'choreography' got to do with [a] singing and [b] being Choir of the Year?
Do the judges actually rate the choirs on 'their lovely movement' during the singing? Would any judge specifically say 'hated the movement' and if would not say it, why not?
Oh, how I agree with you. I saw some choir competition on television, and they almost all did actions, like infants. It's ludicrous. Something to do with low concentration levels, I think. We can't be expected just to listen, can we? That would be far too boring.
Originally Posted by DracoM
I agree, although I should add that we spent some considerable time getting the 'choreography' right for the Advent Procession - but swaying and hand-flapping - NEVER!
I agree too. It's utterly stupid.
Somebody will no doubt tell us it's all about "entertainment" or "communication". Apparently we are now so brainless that we can't be entertained by merely listening to music, nor can music alone communicate anything to us. Thus choirs have to do infantile actions, announcers have to tell us how much we - I mean they - enjoyed the music, and we have to hear what other listeners had just done on some occasion when they heard the piece. It's all part of the same mentality.
I get so p*ssed off with being patronized.
I get annoyed when school choirs are subjected to this naffness, on the premise that the audience likes it. Maybe that's why school choirs are so rare. (When I was a classroom music teacher, I considered that I'd failed if the total school choir membership slipped below 150).
In the Primary School environment, I fear that "this naffness" is done in part to make up for the lack of musical quality/ability and so to provide an audience with something with which to engage.
I didn't hear the broadcast that heads the thread - nor did I watch any soccer! - but a week or so earlier I heard the finals of the Children's section of Choir of the Year. I guess it's all part of the same competition. (As a newbie, I apologise if this has already been discussed elsewhere on the board.)
There were two boys' choirs (Westminster and Warwick County), which is encouraging in itself - and they were by no means unworthy. It was won by a mixed choir (New Forest) - which, as usual, meant a mix of about twenty girls and four boys. They sang nicely, but there was something of the "Ahhhh" factor about them, which may have influenced the judges - or not.
At no stage do I recall any mention of the dreaded 'choreography' (which I reckon demeans the kids as much as the audience). When choristers are engaged in their outreach work in primary schools, it seems unlikely that they include a dance-and-prance routine. But it is a strange irony of history that the word chorus, and thence the words choir and chorister, derive from the Greek for dance.
But the YouTube Warwickshire Boys ensemble clearly shows all kinds of swaying and movement etc.
As do a number of others. Check it out from the BBC's own Choir of the Year page.