Voce in Libertà – Freed Voice

an Applied Anthropology of the Voice

Ulrike Sowodniok

The normal instinctive voice is both light and dark – chiaroscuro. This multicolored voice
appears when mental and physical conditions are right. It cannot be mechanically produced
nor objectively controlled. ... It brings to the voice the feeling of one register – a single
mechanism from top to bottom. It can be opened or closed at will. ... Finally the height and
depth of perpendicular vibration is the same for all tones. The voice changes only its
resonance, thereby causing the so-called „registers“.1

Coming from the practical side, with vocal studies, we are not only concerned
with the voice but intensively through the voice. On this subject I dedicated
my first monography “Stimmklang und Freiheit – zur auditiven Wissenschaft
des Körpers” 2 i.e. “Sound of Voice and Freedom – about Auditive Science of
the Body” in 2013.
For over twenty years I have been working as a singer and vocalist in the field
of classical and experimental music. Combining the singing and the speaking
voice as a voice trainer, I have been working with people from a wide range of
genres like opera, jazz, pop music, singing in the style of Bollywood, acting or
dancing. Some of my students use their voices as professional therapists in
psychoanalysis, psychology, speech therapy, art and music therapy.
Currently, dancers take a great interest in using their voice for their
movement in a sensory way, likewise orchestra musicians, such as solo
oboists, showing interest in learning from a neighboring discipline. Teaching
vocal practice in the field of all these disciplines means to be involved in a
wide range of methods with their very own definitions of what the voice is.
Thus, for me, it has become a very valuable advantage of gaining a great
variety of practical experience in my scientific approach to the anthropology of
the voice. Above all, we must admit that sensory awareness is centered on
our somatic practices today, as they have been developed after World War
Two. Due to restriction and prosecution during the Nazi regime in Germany
we can find a rather late development of this “Zeitgeist”. However, after the
1980ies we notice, in consequence, rising practices in Germany which may

1
G.B. Lamperti “Vocal Wisdom – enlarged Edition – Maxims of Giovanni Battista Lamperti“, Ed. William Earl
Brown/ Lillian Strongin, New York 1931/ 1957; Original1893; p.139, p.103.
2
Ulrike Sowodniok “ Stimmkla n g u n d Fr eih e it – z u r a u d itiv en W is s e ns c h aft de s Kö r p er s ” ,
Biele feld 20 1 3 .
also go along with a Californian way of mind. Most of the founders of our
modern somatic practices concerning the voice, like Ilse Middendorf, Kristin
Linklater and Gisela Rohmert etc., were giving great emphasis on the
practical side of their work, this is why it is still very hard to find written
material about how to practise, especially any systematic theory explaining
consequently the structure of practice. Thus, writing about this subject is
always connected with a feeling of being a pioneer.
When we now include the voice into the field of sound studies and sensory
studies in general, we come to the conclusion that the human voice performs
a versatile function with an orientation towards any level of existence our
species might have. To value this general view on the voice we have to
examine thoroughly the relation between “somatics” and “semantics” in the
context of the embodied senses and the sounding voice.

I. “Mimetic hearing” 3 and the voice

Research on the voice in the methodology of an anthropology of sound 4, as
coined and developed by Holger Schulze after 2006, needs to refer to our
double historical situation as questioned in the historical anthropology by
Christoph Wulf et al.. When we discriminate historically, between the present
qualities of the sounding world and the qualities at the beginning of the digital
revolution in the 1980ies or the Industrial Revolution more than one hundred
years ago, we are able to detect the underlying mimetic processes being the
driving force for the development of culture. In terms of the World
Soundscape Project by Raymond Murray Schafer all human cultures originally
have their significant sounding environment. However, these soundscapes
have become more and more the same around the globe by the dominance of
the sounds of motor vehicles, in adapting architecture and city planning in the
leading industrial nations and in many other competing countries. Keeping
this kind of mimetic process in mind the term “mimetic hearing”, coined by
Christoph Wulf, is a very challenging subject to discuss. Still unborn, we are
already listeners of the surrounding world. The membranes and liquids of the

3
Christoph Wulf “Das mimetische Ohr” in “Das Ohr”, Paragrana 2, Christoph Wulf (ed.), Berlin 1993.
4
Sc hu lz e, H o lg e r & W u lf, C h ris top h ( 2 00 7 , e d s.) : Klan g a nth r op o log ie : Pe rfo r ma tivitä t –
Imag in atio n – N a rr a tio n . Pa ra g r an a 1 6 ( 2 00 7 ) , H . 2 , Be rlin : Ak ad e mie Ve rla g .
body are moved by the oscillation of sound. Do all the unborn humans,
worldwide, vibrate in the drones of our modern soundscapes? Can we define
the resonant body as a human body filled with the vibration of the sonic
occurrences around it? When we imagine the drones of modern traffic
systems etc. there will not much discrimination be left within our mimetic
cultural process. Going on thinking like this we are on the alert for hints aural
architecture can give us concerning the sonic consequences of our present
way of life. However, the unborn human is not directly tuned by the
soundscape. Mimetic hearing saves our resonant body from being naïve. The
unborn child is sheltered by a complex filter system that separates it from the
sound of the outer world. We listen to something and someone else. Summing
up shortly, we could reach the conclusion that this might be even one of the
main reasons why we have built a world around us, unaware of its acoustic
consequences. Keeping this in mind we will refer to it later. Mimetic hearing,
from the very beginning of our life, however, is determined by the body of the
pregnant mother. This includes not only the filtering qualities of her womb but
her behavior in response to the sonic world and, last but not least, the sound
of her voice. It was the French Audio-Psycho-Phonologist Alfred A. Tomatis 5
(1920-2001) who investigated his mayor research on the hearing of the
unborn. He describes how in the early fetal development, the vestibular sense
as the first sense, meets the challenge to stay balanced in the liquid of the
uterus in relation to the inner and outer movement of the pregnant woman.
Then the cochlear part of the ear develops and we start listening to the high
frequencies of the inside of the maternal body caused by the streaming of the
liquids and cellular processes pulsed by breath, heart beat and intestinal
peristaltic. Within this inner soundscape we are modulated by the reactions of
the mother to the outside world and its sounds. Her motions and emotions
towards perforating outer sound will determine the acoustic qualities which
will be led on to our inner world and the way we will react towards them. The
most modifying quality within this symbiosis of mother and unborn child is the
sound of the maternal voice. Tomatis describes how the mother’s voice is
transmitted by bone oscillation of the spine directly to the ear of the unborn.
The matrix of the maternal voice becomes the leading quality for the sensory
5
Alfred A. Tomatis “La Nuit utérine“, Paris 1981.
development of the child. Sound in this respect means all the delicate
changes the voice has in its unaware shiver and buzzing substance. Roland
Barthes, in 1972, coined the term “le grain de la voix”, 6 i.e. “the corn of the
voice”, for this inherent quality of the voice`s sound. In this publication I deal
with the voice from the perspective of research into the voice, in the sense of
“le grain de la voix” or sound of the voice as a substance. On the second level
this involves melody and rhythm of voice and on the third language and its
abstract meaning. Thus mimetic hearing starts from “Soma” and develops into
“Sema”. Unborn we are prepared for the sound of our mother tongue which
will be easiest for us to learn when we are born. The somatic qualities of the
voice will establish the emotional bonding of mother and newborn child and
then, step by step, introduce the semantic level which we will discuss in the
following. In this way, Tomatis specifies Wulf’s term of the mimetic hearing as
a leading cultural process by implementing the sound of the human voice as a
prime concern.

II. “Freed” senses and the voice

Recurring on Arnold Gehlen (1904-1976) we can read the term “Weltoffenheit”
i.e. “openness for the world” in the context of the conditio humana in Wulf’s
historical anthropology. Unlike the animals our senses are not bound to our
instincts but freed in a way that allows mimetic learning as a creative cultural
process and not only as copying from our ancestors. In comparison to our pet
dog we will definitely fail in hearing and smelling, etc. However, this makes us
open to the world at will. Considering the resonant human body in this respect
again, we can conclude that we are resonant at will. The resonance of the
somatic basis of our voice is caused by mimetic hearing and further
developments of learning processes that we undergo. During the first year of
our life – the anthropological extra-uterine early year – we develop bipedalism
and the larynx starts to sink lower by changing from breast feeding to more
and more solid nutrition. Thus our arms are freed and the vocal chords lying
under the vestibular folds in the larynx are given more freedom to oscillate.
By the lower position of the larynx the tractus vocalis is built in the pharynx
from the level of tongue and palate down to the entrance of the larynx
6
Roland Barthes “Le Grain de la Voix“ in “Musique en jeu”, n.9, Paris 1972.
allowing the discrimination of vocal sound in different vowels leading to the
semantic level of language. The 1-2 inches-length of the tractus vocalis cause
a crossing of the inner pathways for breath and nutrition bringing up the
danger of swallowing particles into the lungs. We can see how important the
development for a distinct vocal ability must be for the conditio humana if
risks like this have been taken by evolution.
At present time our senses have collapsed into meaning and are bound to it.
Michel Serres mentions in his philosophical sensory anthropology “Les cinq
Sens” 7 i.e., “The Five Senses”, the dominance of speech and meaning over
perception. He says that speaking we forget that we speak. And to make this
anthropological issue complete we can add that speaking we also forget how
we have learned to speak. Thus our current mimetic process of language is
disconnected from the senses. The mimetic hearing is at the edge of
becoming void in our grown-up living. Mario Perniola, in this respect writes
about the consequences of the Berlusconi media society, in his book “Del
sentire” 8 i.e. “About Feeling”. Through the present totalitarianism of mass
media in our western society there is always a given perception preceeding
his own perception, thus we are living in a world of “ready-felts”. Instead of
discovering the world with our own senses we are caught in consuming instant
perceptions. Contrary to this, we have to acknowledge sound as a substance
in our first year of life. This also adds to the vocal gains of the extra-uterine
early year. Like all other living things in the world we touch with our fingers;
the sound of the tongue also carries substantial information, like rough or
smooth, humid or dry, cold or warm, light or dark, solid or dissolved, static or
movable, etc. These qualities, in my opinion, have to be excluded from
metaphoric speaking about sound as they contain the most basic information
which we have about our sensory world. We should keep them as direct
criteria for sound qualities. In the same way we perceive the sound of the
voice or in Barthes’ words: “le grain de la voix”. And it is this inherent quality
of the voice which can lead to a critique of the unbound human senses
evoking an auditive science of the body.

7
Michel Serres “Les cinq Sens. Philosophie des corps mêlés“, Paris 1985.
8
Mario Perniola “ Del sentire“, Turin 1991.
 III. Auditive science of the body
In the critical historical anthropology of Wulf 9 it has become clear that after
the end of all normative anthropologies today, the body itself is the key
subject we need to define. However, this task has been proven to be a
difficult one. Wulf describes how the body, due to its transgression at birth
and death, is hard to be fully understood and defined. Michel de Certeau, in
his book “La fable mystique,” mentioned the loss of the body at the beginning
of Christian society by the transubstantiation of the body of Christ. Thus, in
his opinion, our modern concept of science, founded in the Christian cloisters
of the 13 t h century, was based there on the belief of the loss of the body as
dogma for Christian religion and culture.
In theatre and performance studies voice could be proved to be the leading
element in contemporary theatre. Doris Kolesch 10, in her detailed research
describes how transgression and subversion of the voice became stronger
than the written word. By transgressing and subverting any given opus or
deliberate meaning it performs the bodily structures of its own resonance in
an always changing occurrence. Thus a new epistemic paradigm could be
defined and coined as “performativity” by Erika Fischer-Lichte 11.
Mimetic hearing and the "performativity" of the voice lead to an auditive
science of the body. Coming from the body of the ready-felt perceptions we
are striving for a critique of the senses beyond the visual primary concern of
our scientific tradition. The resonant body is not naïve but it is a highly
developing cultural process. By observing and practicing the relationship
between voice and body through the senses we can define at least five stages
of interrelation between “somatics” and “semantics”. I call them “Five Bodies”
defining the physical body of modern Natural Science as the starting point.
Like in French phenomenology I prefer to stay with “corps” as one single term
for “body” to emphasize a modern point of view starting directly with the
“Soma” as all the founders of the somatic practices, like Moshe Feldenkrais,
Ilse Middendorf, F.M. Alexander, Elsa Gindler, Gisela Rohmert etc. did. It

9
Christoph Wulf “Anthropologie – Geschichte, Kultur, Philosophie“, Köln 2009.
10
Doris Kolesch & Sybille Krämer (eds.) “Stimme“, Frankfurt a.M. 2006.
11
Er ik a Fis c he r - Lic h te “ Pe r for ma tiv itä t. Ein e Einfü h ru n g ”, Bie le fe ld 2 0 1 2.
seems there are too many elements to be discussed about the German term
of “Leib”; elements rather adapted to the history of German phenomenology
than being helpful in gaining a modern critical view of the anthropology of
sound with regard to the sounding human body.
The outer body as the first step in physiology is defined as natural science
which dominates our perspective of the body in everyday life concerning
media, etc.. To understand more about the physical connection of voice, body
and senses we take a closer look at the physiology of the senses. Following
the early development of the vestibular and the aural sense – balance and
hearing – in the first weeks, until being completed in the second month of the
fetus, we must admit that it is the cooperation of both of them which we find in
the larynx as a perceptive organ itself. Kinesthetic sense of bodily hearing is
seated in the fascia, connective tissues and muscles. We listen with our
whole body underneath the skin. Training the resonant body by voice practice
means to touch the organs for vibration in the connective tissue and the
fascia like the Vater-Pacini-Corpuscles, for example, in the same way as the
muscular spindles inside the muscles themselves as organs for passive
stretching. Both types are highly represented in the larynx as the central
organ of our kinesthetic sense. Today there is a strong emphasis on research
on the fascia containing many different organs for kinesthetic perception and
being the informative system of the muscles.
The larynx as a multipurpose organ combines the functions of breathing,
shelter, stabilization and balance of the limbs in the moving body, holding the
body upright and, last but not least, phonology. The ability of phonology
underlies the rules of the functions of the inner organs caused by the
vegetative innervation of the larynx by the vagus nerve. Due to the evolutional
function of echolocation the larynx cooperates in a cybernetic circle with the
ear. Thus the larynx is the center of kinesthetic hearing in the body. Due to its
embedding into the vegetative functions, coordinated in the brain stem, the
larynx is closely connected to the basic pool of all senses there. The quality
of our sensual activity conditions our attentiveness and, in the same way, the
inner balance of our larynx. On the next level in the limbic system we decide
about the value of this information and if we may become aware of our
sensual activity.
The next step I call “inner body”. This is where the perspectives of objectivity
and subjectivity melt into one perception coined as “chair”, i.e. “meat” by
Maurice Merleau-Ponty 12. “Chair” is the moment of being part of the world and
observing it at the same time. Wulf mentions that perception always is
responsive. Bernhard Waldenfels 13 mentions that the perception of the voice
is based on “self-responsive hearing”. In listening to my own voice, he points
out, there is always an unresolved part of strangeness included. There we can
use the terms of Doris Kolesch who mentions that the voice always prolongs
the body into the environment in “Transgression” and always with the
deliberate intention of making the substantial condition of the body be heard
in an act of “Subversion”. Interestingly, we can find analogue somatic
qualities to the semantic terms of Transgression and Subversion of the voice.
The sense of the voice which is always outgoing, spreading over the bodily
shapes connecting us in a continuous response with the surrounding world,
was coined as “Transsensus” by the German physician Volkmar Glaser 14. The
analogue term for the sense of the undergoing quality of our voice touching
the fascia and connective tissue under the skin was coined by myself as
“Intersensus” 15. The inclusion of this kind of physiological knowledge into
phenomenological research and practical training of the voice is based on the
Lichtenberger® applied physiology of the voice by the singer Gisela Rohmert 16
(born 1932). The voice as a primary aural function closely connected to the
kinesthetic sense provides an auditive approach to the realm of the senses
and the sensory body for us. The sound of the voice itself shows an acoustic
image of the resonant body in speaking, singing, etc..

12
Ma ur ic e Me rle a u- Po nty “Le Visible et l’invisible. C h ia s mus ” , Pa r is 1 96 4 .
13
Be rn h a rd W ald e nfe ls “ Stimme a m L e itfa d en d es L eib e s” in “ Med ie n/Stimme n” C or n e lia
Ep pin g -J ä g er /Erik a L in z ( e ds .) , Kö ln 2 00 3 .
14
Volkmar Glaser “Das Lösungsprinzip in der natürlichen Bewegung“ in “2.Kolloquium Praktische
Musikphysiologie“, Walter Rohmert (ed.), Köln 1991.
15
Ulrike Sowodniok “Funktionnaler Stimmklang – ein Prozess mit Nachhallligkeit“ in “Funktionale Klänge“,
Sound Studies Vol.2, Georg Spehr (ed.), Bielefeld 2009.
16
In 1 9 8 2 G ise la R o hme r t a n d h e r h u sb a n d – th e er g o no mic r e se a r ch e r W a lte r R o hme r t
( 1 92 9 - 20 0 9 ) – fo u n de d th e Lic h te n b er g e r® Ins titu te in th e O d en w a ld – a for e s t r e gio n in
So uth e rn G er ma ny . Th e vo c a l tr ain ing o f th e L ich te nb e r ge r ® me tho d is b as e d o n an
e r go n o mic stu d y a t th e Te c hn ic al U niv e rs ity D a rms tad t du r ing the 1 98 0 ies .
The “empathic body” is the following step based on attributes for an auditive
science of the body from the characteristics of the voice. In cultural science
we can define the voice as cause of kinesthetic empathy between individuals
which can be discussed by them on the basis of intersubjectivity. In the
anthropology of sound by Holger Schulze the combination of these
characteristics is coined as "intercorporality". On a basis of accurate
sensation we share experienced knowledge in voice therapy or artistic
research on somatic practices of the voice. Through the senses and the
resonant response of the voice we gain knowledge of our bodies and their
sensual interrelation and that of the surrounding world. This in between is
called “chair du monde” by Merleau-Ponty. On the basis of an empathetic
reaction towards body and world we become knowledgeable about the
function of our senses, the sensual body and its motions and emotions.
However, to enter the semantics of the body we have to take a next step
entering the “strange body”. We already mentioned the self-responsive
hearing coined by Bernhard Waldenfels. As a part of his “phenomenology of
the strange,” 17 he describes the strangeness lying in the perception of our
own voice. In this respect we can define voice as a strong Alter Ego. Sound of
the voice is the in between of “Soma” and “Sema”. The strangeness of the
voice as an Alter Ego opens the anthropological window to meaning. A free
voice on this level means a voice transmitting the characteristics of presence,
freedom, peace and love as the great human ideals. If the sound of a voice
has risen to this level it cannot be attached to any physical technical
mechanism. Sound of voice carries meaning on the subtlest level and at the
same time in the most fulfilled way. On this stage, body and senses become
transparent in carrying what is beyond their physical reaches.
Furthermore, we enter the quality of “no-body”. This is the mystical implication
being part of any somatic practice. We are reaching beyond the senses.
Transgression and Subversion of the voice have been fulfilled. The physical
body in its transparence to the voice shows that it is hosting its own
transcendence. At this moment we can come back to our definition at the

17
Bernhard Waldenfels “Vielstimmigkeit der Rede. Studien zur Phänomenologie des Fremden“ Vol.4,
Frankfurt a.M. 1999.
beginning of this publication: the voice being versatile and orientated towards
function .

Finally, we come to the conclusion that “sound of the voice” has to be coined
as a scientific term for the understanding of the relationship between body,
senses and semantics in a modern critical, historical sense of anthropology.
The terms of "performativity" and "auditive science" show changes in
epistemic paradigms seen through the change of perspective of the voice. In
my approach of an applied anthropology of the voice I consider it very
important to stress that the resonant body, as described in the five stages of
bodies, does not have a naïve, vibrating physique but a learned form of
mimetic hearing. In the same way, to start with the “Soma” and exclude the
tradition of the term “Leib” in order to show a clear line of modern
interrelationship has always to be in response to our current situation. This
means that our contemporary resonant body always includes the functional
use of technical apparatus and media. To give an example for this: the voice
of pop singer Björk always has a special sound quality which is shaped by
media. Everyone taking a close ear on the “Björk Sound” can hear a certain
blurred quality in it as a deliberate electronic effect. Due to this, we will gain a
perception of her body as a more virtual, medial one. In the understanding of
Wulf, media are performative. Thus our bodies are shifting by the mimetic
cultural processes they go through.
However, the position of the “freed voice” brings along a very strong position
of the body. This can be very helpful in the current discussion of the body in
media studies. Do we understand the body and its relations on a deeper level
by using media or do we reduce the bodily "performativity" by putting veils of
digital filters over its innate qualities?
An applied anthropology of the voice questions the cultivation of voice, body
and senses in a human evolution of everyday life. Referring to the historic
quotation of Lamperti at the beginning, we can read between the lines about
the ideal of the voice in the late Belcanto Aera. However, he does not stay in
the ready-felt sense of his epoch as he follows the characteristics of the voice
far beyond this. Thus we may conclude that an applied anthropology of the
voice provides us with a helpful position for a critique of the senses and the
media.