Talk:Sacred Harp hymnwriters and composers

Untitled

Hello, Amity150 and other editors. I've put Amity's list as a separate article, and added some additional material for orientation, emphasizing (what I hope are) the highlights.

The origin of Sacred Harp music is a huge topic that we should have more on. Getting a list going is a good start. For future work, I hope we can some day cover all the songs in all editions, and also tie it all together, to the extent this can be done, into a narrative. Opus33 17:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

composers of the 20th century

I was wondering if you also want to add Composers of the 20th century (several still alive) too? I.e. Neely Bruce is one of them such is Hugh McGraw...--VeronikaMM (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

terminology, New England school

Opus33, I concede that White was not a Georgia native, but he, King, and the others who contributed to or revised the early editions were almost all Georgia residents. But your wording is accurate; I just didn't like "in 1844" and "in Georgia" appearing at different points in the same sentence. Other edits you reverted were more intentional. Certainly the Sacred Harp is a tunebook, emphasizing music, with enough text to sing at a school or singing, rather than a hymnal, which emphasizes complete texts, or at least complete enough for worship services. Early literature on the "first New England school" of composers ranged to 1820 (Warrington, Metcalfe). Britton and Buechner stopped at 1800, mainly due to the bibliographic coverage by Evans, Shipton-Mooney, and the Readex microprint, but the standard Britton-Lowens-Crawford bibliography extends to 1810 and to Wyeth's original Repository. Finally, nearly all the tunes in the Sacred Harp that first appeared 1801-1810 were in fact composed by New Englanders who wer clearly members of that "school": Holyoke, Ellis, Doolittle, Jenks, Sherman, Shumway, Wetmore, Castle and Moors. What's more, there are no "southern" tunes in the Sacred Harp that were first published during that same decade. I commend your work on this and other related articles, but I believe my current edits to be accurate. Finn Froding (talk) 20:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Finn.

Fair enough.

I add: it looks like you've done some real reading. Might you introduce some of the names you mention into the bibliography of the article?

Thanks, Opus33 (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

New sidebar + Please discuss organization

For reasons I've explained more fully at Talk:Sacred Harp#Internal Inconsistencies and Ongoing Issues: Origin of music, scope and organization of coverage, I've added a sidebar to this page.

There are some big issues about the overall organization of Wikipedia's coverage of this subject matter and how to organize it into various articles. I think it's really important for editors involved in this group of articles to discuss the subject and come to a consensus, because the current state of affairs can be very confusing in some respects. Various people have occasionally brought these problems up on various talk pages, but I'm hoping everyone might congregate at the talk section above and figure out some solutions to disentangling these interrelated topics and organizing them into a sensible group of articles.

I see a particularly obvious example of these problems in this article: while the introduction is quite clear that "This article is a historical overview and listing of the composers and poets who wrote the songs and texts of The Sacred Harp.", the title might lead one to believe that this article would be a list of composers and poets of "Sacred Harp"-style music, not only those whose work is included in the book The Sacred Harp.

LiberalArtist (talk) 02:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)