Critical Review 7

In an email exchange on the Sacred Harp listserv, we witness the community wrestling with issues of authenticity and egalitarianism.  From the correspondence, it is clear that the shared values of the community have created a space where every member is expected to be accepting of different cultures and religions.  But they also hold dear the authenticity and social history of their shared text.  The email thread begins with someone expressing their discomfort with two verses in the Sacred Harp, one vilifying Jews, the other representing a Native American monologue in an arguably condescending manner.  Everyone has their two cents.  One man has Jewish friends, so he can’t do any harm by singing the verse, right?  Many responders refuse to sing the verses and advocate for altering or expunging them.  Others argue that singers should accept them even though they are politically incorrect in a modern context because they were written long ago.  Adherents of the latter camp often refer to the offensive language with euphemisms such as “strong stuff” or “hearty language” and suggest that singers instead consider the deeper meanings of the verses. In debating whether changes should be made, an underlying tension exists between maintaining the authenticity of a historical text and allowing that text to evolve in response to its changing social context.

Is perpetuation of a racial stereotype in the context of a traditional artistic practice an act of prejudice?