Talk:Sacred Harp/Archives/2004

Moving things around a little

The discussion of "newbies" was placed right between the discussion of "singings" and "conventions". Since singings and conventions are closely related topics, I've moved "newbies" so it is now the last part of the History section.

Also, a couple small additions to "newbies": singing masters are still active today; link to Camp Fasola. I hope these are ok. Best wishes to all, Opus33 15:48, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

More moving things around

Looking over the article, I felt that it wasn't properly giving the basics--when you go to a Sacred Harp singing, what exactly happens and why? This should be up front, I feel. The previous presentation also divided the history into two sections, which struck me as not really right.

So the order I have it in now is:

• basic description of what happens in Sacred Harp
• history of Sacred Harp
• where the songs come from
• other books named The Sacred Harp

The last topic struck me as a bit peripheral (after all, three of the four weren't really "Sacred Harp" books at all), so I put it last.

While rearranging I tried to correct some mistakes I had made in earlier editing. But I think the content of the article is pretty much the same as before, other than added material on the "basics".

I hope all this seems reasonable. Opus33 04:25, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think the new layout looks good. I have made a few minor changes. I deleted the reference to the East Texas Musical Convention being started in Smith County. My research for the 150th anniversary of the convention so far just proves we don't really know in what location it was organized. If I discover where, I'll add it to the article. I took "soprano" out of this line - "treble (soprano), alto, tenor, and bass". I think that is probably confusing. The "tenor" of Sacred Harp, which carries the melody, is what is most likely thought of as the "soprano" line. Would be interested in comments on this.

This line of thinking - "B. F. White had died in 1879 before completing a fourth revision, and copies of his book gradually became hard to obtain. Without a book to sing from, the Sacred Harp tradition clearly would have died out" - also needs to be reconsidered. I didn't know until about a month or two ago (but some people have known for quite awhile), that White's grandson, C. P. Byrd, reprinted The Sacred Harp in 1897. From a book I inspected, it appears there may have been another printing by Byrd and J. L. White. Also, last week, I found in a 1909 Athens (Henderson Co., Texas) Review newspaper, an advertisement by a man offering the "old original" White and King Sacred Harp. I'm not sure what to make of that yet, but the idea that much of the impetus for revision was a lack of availability of The Sacred Harp is now lacking in support. Of course, I don't think there's any information available at this time as to how many copies of the book were issued by Byrd.

I also changed this part - "The 1869 revision was more extensive, removing some of the less popular songs and adding new ones in their places. From the original 262 pages, the book was expanded by 1869 to 429." 429 was the last page of songs in the 1859 edition. The 1879 edition ended its last song on page 477. - Rlvaughn 03:08, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, RLV, these changes are great. I'm especially grateful for the one you didn't mention, correcting my howler about "William" Cooper. (Funny, the Cooper book doesn't give his full name anywhere...)

I wouldn't worry too much about it. There are at least two printed sources that give his name as "William M." - Joe Dan Boyd's article "Judge Jackson: Black Giant of White Spirituals" and Buell Cobb in quoting from Boyd, and also listing him in his index as "Cooper, William M." In Boyd's new book on Judge Jackson, he simplifies it back to the standard "W. M." (which Cooper himself seems to have favored). I don't know if the mistake originated with Boyd, or if it predates him. Letting my imagination run, I can see someone transposing "W. M." to "Wm." and then "Wm." to "William". S. Smith of Ozark (AL) and K. Willard of Washington state discovered the name through researching county histories and censuses (I am relying on them to be correct!). - Rlvaughn 23:55, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Balm to my injured scholarly vanity! I thought I had made up "William" out of my head, but surely I got it from Cobb. Nice new article on Cooper, btw. Opus33 16:04, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I also agree completely that "soprano" shouldn't be there--it make no sense given that men often sing treble; they certainly aren't sopranos.

The business about an 1897 reprinting is very interesting. I'll rewrite this section in light of it (if no one else does so first), but should do some reading before I give it a try. Opus33 03:55, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The "Origin of the modern editions" section

I did a rewrite, whose main purpose was to explain the Cooper/Denson split without the dubious assumption (see above) that there was a book shortage at the time.

The theme I adopted, which I think comes closer to the truth, is that this was the time that Sacred Harp became traditionalist--the songs came to be treated as heirloom material to be treasured, and participants ceased to care that their singings no longer followed current fashion. The text gives as the reason for the split that people couldn't agree on which particular style of Sacred Harp singing ought to become the basis for the fixed tradition.

Corrections, adjustments, whatever... all welcome. Opus33 17:04, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Along these lines ("traditionalist" vs. "modernist" controversy), I've recently read an article by Gavin James Campbell which investigates the internal debate among shape note singers. If you haven't read it, I know you would enjoy it; see Old Can Be Used Instead of New, Shape-Note Singing and the Crisis of Modernity in the New South 1880-1910 in the Journal of American Folklore, Volume 110, Number 436 (Spring 1997), pages 169-188. - Rlvaughn 21:07, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, RLV, I'll check this out. Opus33 21:31, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)