Harsh as it may sound to your delicately chiselled ears, you seemingly dread the fact that all auditionnees for a popular musical first happen to be treated on an equal footing, just as any contestants in any other selection context. You might as well end sounding simply not as good as some unexpectedly unlearned still talented vocalist, despite whatsoever chartered technique you may have become aquainted with in the long range. Clearly, allowing participants to get their act together beforehand would unfairly favour the learned ones, trained to smooth out their vocal rough edges along lines rehearsed in and out, as opposed to the laymen, proner to strike the rocks unawares. Now there are "naturals" (well-coordinated/good-sounding) around, likely to amaze you, and, once such one has been chosen, it's only a matter of appropriate coaching to have her fit her part like a glove, with a possibly fresher outcome than the ever-optimized singer's package. In that respect, having you perform an unknown bit from scratch is indeed having you expose your voice at its worse, not your brain at its best. You know it darn well, hence all the fuss about the auditionners' lack of professionalism. As to the accompanist's point, it don't catch either, miss. If you're a singer in the flesh, all you need is a tuning fork, and on it goes, a capella, mind you. Your favourite pianist is not invited to the party anyway, for all his lace. I ask, who's calling the tune, here ? Funny how you're hastier to judge others than to acknowledge their prerogative to judge you in the first place, as long as you enter their fray, which they certainly did not summon you to do. Discovering your fabulous "lyrical and dramatic potential" is really the last wish on their list, as this early stage. Step by step. Easy.
BJJocelyn
|