Micromovement and the case against "Choralography"

My love for the choral music (and making music in general) all began in Young Naperville Singers.  Centered in the town where I was raised, (a large suburb west of Chicago) YNS was a staple of the musical community for years, and rightfully so. It was perhaps the most musically meaningful experience of my life.  While that may seem an exaggerated statement, it’s absolutely true!

I auditioned in 5^th grade, at the encouragement of my elementary school music teacher, and continued until 9^th grade. I remember one particular experience in YNS was singing “O, lovely peace” from the oratorio Judas Maccabeus by Handel. 

Take a listen here: http://youtu.be/cPwWJbIEr-I?t=57s

This choir was quite demanding, and therefore we learned a lot of music in my time with the choir.  This particular piece sticks in my memory more prominently than any other, and I know why:  

Our director incorporated movement and dance into our learning of the piece.

I never have forgotten this dance, in which she had us pretend was picking up a pile of feathers, and throwing it over our shoulder.  I was entranced by this music because of how the dance made me feel: light, buoyant, and simply happy!  This was the first time that I danced to classical music as a child, but it definitely wasn’t the last.  Dancing and movement is the way I approach music today (when I’m at my musical best.) I credit dancing to Handel as the beginning of my deep love of classical music today.

Some might assume that classical music, especially baroque literature, would be boring to children.  I am living proof that is not always the case.  Because my director incorporated our entire bodies in moving to the music, it wasn’t at all boring, but exciting!  Movement is integral to music, that’s why music is called “moving” when it is truly emotionally powerful.  Baroque music is no exception.

I feel a lot of pressure from the choral education professional world to incorporate popular genres into the choral classroom, and rightfully so.  Popular genres are important to the backgrounds of my students.  However, I will not incorporate rock, pop, and jazz at the expense of classical music because “it’s boring.” If you teach movement with classical music, classical music feels just as good and is as exciting as radio music!  Singing is nothing without movement, no matter the genre. 

Now, when I refer to movement, I do not mean “choralography.” Choralography is a recent movement in the choral world where choreographed arm motions (and sometimes more) are added to a choir performance. 

Look here for some idea of what I’m talking about: http://youtu.be/hw8Ofda0T6I

There is something about choralography that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and always has.  However, that seems at odds with my belief in movement’s place in music.  If choralography is movement, doesn’t that mean it should theoretically create better singing?  Theoretically, the answer is yes.  In practice, I believe the answer is no.  I believe that movement should be used as a tool, not an end product.  Therefore, movement should be incorporated in the rehearsal process!  But when movement is incorporated into the performance, I have found it usually results in a distracting and awkward experience for all (as I found in the video above.) 

The ultimate goal of movement in choral education is to eventually have movement within the body and mind.  That is something not visible to the outside eye, but can enhance the musical sound greatly!  This idea, which has earned the title micromovement in some circles, really works!  I know this, because I’ve experienced it in my own personal practice. 

I’m excited to incorporate movement and dance into the rehearsal process for my own choir someday!