Talk:Sacred Harp/Archives/2008

Assigning material to Sacred Harp and Shape note
We've got two rival articles covering the Sacred Harp/shape note tradition, neither (until now) linked to the other.

One option to consider is to merge and have just one article. Another, toward which I have made a tentative first step, is to have an overall article Shape note covering the tradition as a whole, and refocus the Sacred Harp article into an article on the book originated by White and King and elaborated by others since then in various editions.


 * Opus33 23:11, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * I would recommend that the articles not be merged. The Shape note article needs work, because it seems to be operating on the mistaken premise that all shape note music is Sacred Harp. There are two strong traditions of shape note music currently operating in the United States - the four shape system combined with the old Elizabethan scale fa,sol,la,fa,sol,la,mi,fa and the seven shape system combined with the Italian scale do,re,mi,fa,so,la,ti,do. The Sacred Harp is the major "four-note" system, though the Southern Harmony has remained in continous use at one singing in Benton, Kentucky, and is now experiencing a small amount of growth. Also a "shape-note" revival has brought about the institution of new singings from defunct books, such as the Missouri Harmony, as well as new books by modern composers, such as the Northern Harmony. The "seven-note" has acappela singings of a similar type to the Sacred Harp, such as the Christian Harmony and the New Harp of Columbia, but is also used in numerous "gospel" or "southern gospel" singings where musical instruments are used (most often a piano). This would be old gospel songs like "Sweet By & By" and "Shall We Gather at the River", and like the Stamps-Baxter quartet type music; maybe some are familiar with those. Though "seven-shape" books are not as popular as in the past, there are still a great number of churches in the south that use hymnals that are printed in the "seven-note" system, both in church services and at singings. However the issue is resolved, at some point the Shape note article needs to recognize that Sacred Harp is shape note music, but Shape Note music is not necessarily Sacred Harp. Rlvaughn 22:08, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Rl. I think you have a good point, and a sensible way to go in light of it would be to put all the Sacred Harp material under Sacred Harp, with Shape note done as the more general article on all forms of shape note music.


 * Opus33 23:11, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Opus, I think that would be a good solution. An article on Shape Note music should make reference to Sacred Harp, but not focus on it as the present article does. Rlvaughn 23:19, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I consulted this article to get more information concerning the following paragraph taken from "The Sacred Heart in Northeast Mississippi" by John Quincy Wolf, Jr. (Mississippi Folklore Register Volume IV #2, Summer 1970):

"His [George Pullen Jackson's] errors are difficult to understand but not to explain. As has been suggested elsewhere, he relied largely upon singing school teachers and other leaders in the fa-so-la tradition to inform him of Sacred Harp singings in the South; but these leaders were of no help to him for information concerning Mississippi, because there the do-re-mi tradition prevailed. This difference, seemingly trivial, was important to the singers because they were divided into two distinct groups, one using the do-re-mi-fa-so-la-ti scale, the other using the fa-so-la-fa-so-la-mi scale. To each group the rival scale was rather like a different musical language, and the singing styles and preferences of the two differed somewhat. The singing school teachers east of Mississippi, using fa-so-la, were not sought in Mississippi, where do-re-me held sway and where local teachers of d-re-mi were readily available for the singing schools. As a result, the followers of each system wanted their own ways and did not visit the singing conventions of the other. For the same reason Jackson and his fa-so-la friends in Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia heard little or nothing of the singers in Mississippi, who were then and are still very active. "

Sadly, I could not find any mention of these two opposing traditions in the main article, although I did find a brief mention on the discussion page (above). Now, since I am a know-nothing intruding upon a conversation between experts who obviously know much more than I, I would merely like to ask you to consider whether or not this other tradition should be given more prominence. Perhaps there is more difference here than just the shapes of the notes? Perhaps, as Wolf suggests, an entire tradition is being lost because it is being ignored.

--- Warren Gaebel, B.A., B.C.S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.167.244.207 (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

"recycling" lyrics
The statement that "The twentieth-century composers often have recycled their lyrics" misrepresents the way that text and melody have interacted over 3000 of sacred music tradition beginning with the Psalms -- namely, that text and melody are independent of each other, and new melodies are always being composed for established texts. One ought to say, "Unlike the greedy singer-songwriters who want to hog all the royalties for themselves, Sacred Harp continues the tradition of music being composed for established texts such as metrical psalm translations of Isaac Watts first published in 1719." The singer-songwriter-who-also-writes-children's books only became the norm beginning about 1965.


 * One reason the lyrics were recylced is, that many lyrics were directly used psalms, wheras others were rephrased psalms that would work with the meter of songs...--VeronikaMM (talk) 14:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

When did the Rudiments first give advice on how to run a singing?
I have a copy of an older edition than the 1991 edition, and the rudiments were already in the old versions too. Those were always an important part of the book as it was meant to enforce music literacy on people with no music reading experience. --VeronikaMM (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, the text doesn't say (or even imply) that the Rudiments first appeared in 1991. It says that the 1991 Rudiments tells you how to run a singing.  Does your older edition include this material?  Thanks, Opus33 (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * my older edition holds exactly the same kind of information. as far as I know the rudiments were and are still used primarily for singing school. At the Sacred Harp museum in Carollton, GA I held one of the very first editions in my hands, and even they had that section.--VeronikaMM (talk) 16:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. For encyclopedia writing we need exact details--can you please tell me the edition and year?  Opus33 (talk) 17:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * At the museum I had the chance to look at copies of basically every edition, but I can't tell you the years ect. anymore, because that was a couple of years ago. If there is someone editing this article living near Atlanta,GA maybe that person could have get in touch with the Sacred Harp Publishing Company and get a look into the Museum and its library...
 * sorry I can't help more than this for now but I think the copy I have is the edition of 1971, not absolutely sure, but I will take a look and let you know--VeronikaMM (talk) 18:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I have looked at my copy: "Original Sacred Harp" (Denson Revision) 1971 Edition, Standard Melodies ..... it has the same Rudiments of Music as the 1991 edition.--VeronikaMM (talk) 17:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Veronika, sorry if this is not 100% polite, but: I don't think you're being careful enough here.  Both John Bealle, on p. 226 of his 1997 book, and Kiri Miller, on p. 49 of her 2007 book, make it completely clear that the Rudiments were revised in 1991, by John Garst, and that one of the things that Dr. Garst added was the section on how to run a singing.  Bealle and Miller are quality scholars and they would not be making this up!  I suspect you just haven't flipped through enough pages to find the differences.  Try grabbing a 1971 and 1991 edition and read them very slowly in parallel, one page at a time.


 * If you're curious to see the passages from Bealle and Miller, then you can go to Google, select "Books" and search on "John Garst rudiments". Bealle and Miller are the first items to appear.  Yours truly, Opus33 (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The spread of Sacred Harp singing--which particular locations?
Hello, I propose that we not give any examples of what areas outside the South are most prominent in the modern spread of Sacred Harp singing. This information seems only marginally useful to the reader. It's better, I think, just to say that Sacred Harp singing has spread throughout America and overseas, and cite the standard web sources that will tell you where all those new conventions are. Opus33 (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, Opus33. I think you have done a great job on this article, but I disagree with your edit to remove all of the examples of strong conventions and singing communities outside the South and the specific reference to the UK, etc. At least mentioning a few would be useful to both old and new singers and to the public at large. I would even suggest beefing up the paragraph altogether rather than paring it down. Given the recent article on SH which appeared in Time magazine (specifically discussing the fact that SH is now being sung other places, like Manhattan), and the fact that "Awake My Soul" has now been aired throughout the US on PBS (generating a lot of interest outside the circles of Sacred Harp singing), I personally think that all that background was actually very useful and informative. That is one of the reasons I had added some of it. In my opinion, your deletion of all of that information, and the :reference merely to the user to consult fasola.org, reduce the utility and the content of the paragraph to practically zero. How is your typical scholar or interested outsider going to make sense of that enormous list of singings just from looking at it? The fasola singings list is not all that user friendly even for those of us who are "insiders". It doesn't tell me that Western Mass attracted 390 singers in March of this year, for example. That is important information.
 * In sum, I think you have done a great job editing and consolidating all sorts of information in this article, but this is an example where I am persuaded that you have pruned a branch too far. That information needs to go back in and ideally to cite to the Time Magazine article as well as to further newspaper articles along the same lines that have appeared over the course of the last 12 months (e.g. the Boston Globe). By the way: There was a special on BBC4 here in the UK on Good Friday ("White Gospel") that featured Sacred Harp singing, as well as gospel singing from the South, and showed footage from the United Convention in September 2007. The fact that SH singing is generating such intense interest right now far outside its original territory is useful information and worthy of inclusion in its Wikipedia entry.
 * I am not adding the information back in because it would frustrate me just to have it all chopped again, so I am asking you, respectfully, to consider adding it back in yourself. If you do so, please specifically mention the UK community, because we want people in the UK to know that we are here. Our web site is www.ukshapenote.org.uk Many thanks and best regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mischaw (talk • contribs) 10:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Mischaw, I see your point of mentioning places at the same time it would not fit to well into an encyclopedic article I am afraid, since, althought the meetings in the places are facts, they are also due to change. As far as I know the singings in the UK are also listed on [www.fasola.org], which should help people who are interested to find out about them. --VeronikaMM (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Mischaw and Veronika, I think Mischaw makes a good case for including some indication of what areas outside the South are current leading centers for the new singings. But we have to do it in a way that satisfies the rules at Wikipedia, which require the use of reference sources and forbid original research (see WP:VER, WP:NOR).  It should be possible to do this.  One way would be to cite published sources (such as John Bealle, Stephen Marini, and Kiri Miller) who have discussed the modern spread of Sacred Harp singing.  I'm reading through these sources right now and will see what I can do.  Another possibility would be to find some web site where someone has posted comparative attendance at singings, and quote its findings; if you know of such a site please let me know where it is.


 * I hope this helps. Yours truly, Opus33 (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Opus, that is a great idea and I am really grateful to you for undertaking to do that. Also: I know Steve Marini and can ask him for some info on sources - watch this space. Veronika: Sorry, but I simply don't agree with you that this information should and can be easily derived from fasola.org. I really do think that to make this information user-friendly, it needs to be spelled out on Wikipedia, and not left to the divination of readers who may or may not be able to wade through what is on fasola.org. If you really feel that strongly that the UK should not be mentioned (for whatever reason) then ok, I can live with that... Hmmm... I would just counsel you that the fact that the BBC is now picking up on Sacred Harp music is noteworthy in and of itself. I am not suggesting that you say that the "East Midlands Convention in Kegworth" is a strong singing outside the United States, merely that there is a growing and vibrant Sacred Harp community in the UK. I think the Southern traditional singers were and are very pleased and excited about the fact that they have managed to "transplant" this music overseas - several of them have run singing schools in the UK in the past, and last summer (June 2007) a large contingent of them (approx. 30 or so), including Hugh McGraw and various members of the Ivey family, did a tour through the UK. A special singing was organised here in their honor. Leaving all of the UK aspect aside, though, the fact that you are getting such huge singings in non-traditional parts of the US, such as Western Massachusetts, is absolutely worthy of mention on Wikipedia. It is clearly a "factum" in the general cultural milieu of the United States in the 2000s, and is simply not clear from anything on fasola.org. There was a lengthy article last year in the New York Times on Sacred Harp singing in the North, in fact. That was the idea behind my suggestion and it was meant with the best of encyclopedic intentions! Best mischaw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.127.99 (talk) 23:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Mishaw, I am sorry that my posting was not better phrased, I am afraid, I was writing it between several tasks that I had to accomplish last night, and so I did it quickly without reading it afterwards if it really said what I wanted it to say. I have done quite some reading on the history of the Sacred Harp, and from the my research I think it would be important to mention also the sources of many of the songs in Folk songs from the UK, composers and hymn writers from New England. Unfortunately I am currently very busy with finding a job, getting several things in my apartment fixed... anyway, I think this article as such IS focused too much on the south as such, as it did not only survive over those past 150 years in the south. It did have a stronger basis there, but there have been Sacred Harp singers in New England all those years...

--VeronikaMM (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)::I hope you can forgive me this previous post of mine...

Opus and Veronika: I have started to add some of this information back in with citations to sources (including one article by Prof. Kiri Miller). Apparently, Prof. Miller's new book "Traveling Home" deals in some detail with the spread of Sacred Harp music in modern times. I haven't yet got a copy, but once I have it in hand I will propose further edits to improve what is there. What I have put in Wikipedia today is my proposal for a start on the edits to this paragraph, so please don't hesitate to let me know what you think. I personally think that one area of focus for the Wikipedia article on Sacred Harp singing should be its resurgent popularity in the present day, which is borne out by Kiri Miller's book and the recent article in Time. Best regards Mischaw (talk) 06:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Mischaw, this seems fine to me. Best wishes, Opus33 (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)