Critical Review #9

Critical Review #9

In his article, Campbell focuses on the reactions toward “new” forms of Sacred Harp Singing versus the “old” form. Progress is the key term that acts as a “happy medium” between the two. The idea that Sacred Harp music must modernize in order to progress is one that devotees of the traditional style loathe. On the other hand, those who are in favor of the more contemporary gospel style feel that the only way to progress is to get rid of older styles and introduce newer ones. Herein lies the problem: Why must singers of Sacred Harp music give into the “out with the old, in with the new” motto? Traditionalists fear that the “intrusion of new elements…would pollute the sanctity of their tradition.” Those in favor of contemporary infusion worry that without revitalizing the traditional style, Sacred Harp singing could face “extinction.” As an outsider, I can only wonder whether or not there is a way to keep Sacred Harp music “pure” and closely embedded within its tradition, but not “pollute” it?  Why must modernization be seen as a form of “pollution?” Will the keeping of traditional styles really extinguish Sacred Harp music from the general musical scope?

Interestingly enough, Campbell states that it is the opposition between these two sides that “disguises some fundamental similarities between them.”  According to Campbell, both the modern and the traditional repertoires are easily learnable, and their music books merely seek to fuse both styles with one another, not disjoint them. Their point of contention lies within their followers, who refuse to see that this meld can, in fact, really exist. In reading Campbell’s article, I realize that contemporary revitalizations of older traditional music are not a form of exclusion, but rather, a joining of the past and present.