Rich Cohen, posted what I thought was a nice article in the New York Times, Where does Rabbi Voice Come From?
He identifies a common speech pattern and tone among Rabbis he’s known and calls it “Rabbi Voice.” He sets out to research its origin. He describes the “voice” as he hears it and links to some comic treatments by Wood Allen and Jerry Seinfeld (suggesting that Rabbi Voice is widespread and has been around for a long time.) But, he notes, not much serious consideration or writing has been devoted to the development and persistence of Rabbi Voice.
The article received blowback from at least one NYT reader, complaining that this was a stereotype and offensive. But Mr. Cohen never claimed that ALL Rabbis use Rabbi Voice. Some do and his description of what he was and is hearing when he attends synagogue on Fridays was recognized, familiar and acknowledged by many he consulted in the field.
There’s also a sweet sentimentality in his consideration of the phenomenon. He’s not judgmental or even calling for the disappearance of Rabbi Voice. He ultimately finds it comforting and reassuring.
Poet Voice
There may not be much literature out there on Rabbi Voice, but the incidence of a recognizable speech pattern among professionals and clergy in particular is not unique to Rabbis. It’s not dissimilar to Poet Voice, the distinctive voice many poets adopt when reading their work aloud, which has received a lot of attention.
Mr. Cohen’s article caught my attention because the conclusion he comes to is that the voice is as important as what’s being said. The tone of voice provides resonance and depth – and generational continuity — that goes beyond face-value meaning of the words. Like a mother’s lullaby, the recognizable sound of the human voice fulfilling a recognized role triggers an emotional response in the listener.
My father and the fathers of many of friends growing up were members of the clergy. I’ve listened to a wide variety of ministers, pastors, and priests and a few Rabbis in countless religious services over the years. I certainly recognize a recurring speech pattern in much of the sermons, baptisms, weddings, counseling sessions and readings from scripture on which I was at the receiving end.
“Little Johnny tried to be a good boy….” began a typical homily in our local community churches in that familiar Norman Rockwell-ish pastoral cadence that sounds warm and friendly unless you are “Little Johnny” and know you’re not really all that good or even really trying all that hard to be good.
There are many reasons speech patterns take hold in any profession. Here are links to sites and articles including a recent academic study about Poet Voice.
Beyond Poet Voice: Sampling the (Non-) Performance Styles of 100 American Poets, Marit J. MacArthur, Georgia Zellou, and Lee M. Miller
Poet Voice and Flock Mentality: Why Poets Need to Think for Themselves, Lisa Marie Basile
I think many of the reasons for the development of the Poet Voice style also apply to the clergy and lay readers in the mainline protestant churches.
Pastor Voice
In the case of mainline protestants, who have always placed a high value on education and intellectual rigor, there’s what I like to call Authentic Academic style; a kind of all-knowing, literary quote-dropping, bemused detachment seasoned with a soupcon of humanist sentimentality.
What’s often missing here – especially in the reading of scripture aloud – are the imperatives of a compelling performance before a live audience. The presenter wants to be safe, and so wraps themselves securely in tradition. That tradition most often favors the neutral. Emotion is dismissed as belonging to an order that is lower than intellectual rigor (context and commentary in the case of readings from scripture.) The principles of live performance are generally ignored and covered over by the “Voice”. “Actorly” and “theatrical” are pejoratives and are to be avoid as much as mortal sin.
Reading Scripture Aloud
But the goal is not and never has been to be actorly, theatrical or overly dramatic when reading from scripture. When referred to in this context, theatrical and actorly usually mean BAD acting. There are bad actors and bad theatrical performances just as there are bad sermons and disappointing scripture readings. We don’t want bad. We want to promote the good. Sermonizing can also be a pejorative, but we don’t attempt to banish sermons. So, don’t condemn performance to perdition. Be wary of performing, but do not discount the important principles of live performance.
A first principle of live performance is: don’t be boring. The problem with promoting a recognizable “neutral” speech pattern in readings from scriptures is that it can easily become predictable and boring. When overdone, it’s at best hypnotic: comforting…. soothing… calming… but it doesn’t challenge the congregation in the slightest. The familiar neutral voice insulates us from the words. Scripture becomes a soporific.
As the study on Poet Voice referenced above points out, the Oxford English Dictionary defines “neutral” as “Exciting no emotional response; provoking no strong reaction; innocuous, inoffensive.” It continues, “Displaying . . . no overt emotion; dispassionate, detached.”
Surely that’s not what we want from readings of scripture. We need voices that faintly echo one crying in the wilderness.
Read Previous Post
