Talk:Gospel music

White Gospel

While the two schools of gospel--white and black--are still quite distinct, I hate to compound the century-old pattern of segregation by breaking this article into two. As anyone can see, however, I know next to nothing about the white variety. I also hope others will fill in the links to groups such as The Swan Silvertones and import some suitable images to ornament this page and others.

~ Italo Svevo ~ The article mentions that some of the gospel music crossed over between black and white churches. Can anyone list some of the songs that crossed over? And what groups may have sang them. I would like to compare and contrast the two different styles using the same songs, hopefully during the same era, ie: 40's and 50's. Thank you.

Does anyone know which gospel music crossed over between black and white churches?

Examples of Contemporary Christian (white Gospel) and Gospel (black Gospel) artists that have crossed into both types of congregations would include Israel Houghton and the New Breed, Martha Munizzi, Mary Alessi, Ron Kenoly, and Clint Brown. I don't really know of any Southern Gospel crossovers. I do agree that the breakout of black and white is inaccurate because of the appeal of both styles to people of each race. The blending of music styles, much like the blending in popular culture music, has made such distinctions obsolete. At some point the members of Wikipedia may want to address Christian music as a genre and then break it into subgroup based on style (traditional hymns, worship music, rap, jazz, Christian pop, etc.). All of these styles exist in today's Christian music, but appeal to people of different races. Both the Gospel music and the Contemporary Christian music articles may need some rework.
Absolon S. Kent 19:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Southern Gospel

My understanding is that "southern gospel" is a subset of "white gospel." I don't claim any expertise in this area; someone who actually knows the field should clear up this confusion and expand this part of the article.

Lining out

The claim that tracing gospel to Celtic traditions of "lining out" is racist is strange. African-American culture, gospel included, was created from African slaves' and their African-American descendents' confrontation with white-dominated society. The fact that their cultural forms took more from that society and did not preserve the sort of clearer African lineage in the U.S. that African slaves did in Cuba and elsewhere does not make them any less authentic here in the U.S. Nor does it insult African-Americans or their culture to point out the practices they borrowed, then adapted.

And gospel took as much from white culture—starting with the Methodist hymns of Dr. Watts and other eighteenth century composers, the theology of the Great Awakening, the ecclesiastical structures of Baptist and Methodist churches and all of the other aspects of religious culture which their masters allowed them to participate in—as any other aspect of black culture in the U.S., even when being sung by blacks for blacks in black churches. While it's fair to say that gospel music became "blacker" with the advent of the Holiness churches in the early twentieth century—an outgrowth of the Pentecostal movement, interracial at the outset but quickly segregated—even then black gospel music maintained some tenuous, mostly one-way connections with white gospel music; Dorsey wrote songs that became standards for white gospel singers, black gospel groups appeared in secular white venues.

The subject of precursors to modern gospel music and the mix of European and African traditions is an interesting one. I hope this is just the start of a fuller discussion. --Italo Svevo 18:59, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Still waiting

I removed the gratuitous and unhelpful statement "But that can be written off as nothing but politically correct fluff." We do, however, need someone to contribute to this section, since the article presently jumps from the eighteenth century to 1920, which is preposterous. --Italo Svevo 05:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Gospel choirs appearing in other genres

Seriously, it would be really cool to have a list of songs in other genres which feature a gospel choir.

I'll get us started:

• Downfall by matchbox twenty
• I'm Alright by Jars of Clay
• All These Things That I've Done by The Killers

--AlanH 23:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Added to the main page.

--AlanH 23:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why someone removed it

discuss it first, ok? Reverted that section. --AlanH 01:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

gospels

the gospels was sing bye the black people in the hard work,how they have to do!one people was sing and the oder sing second him or her!so gospelmusic have there origin from the plantation where the blackpeople have worked!

by Renate

???

What the.... Racist troll or ESL? Laggard

Methodist hymnal

Unsure of the following statement from the article:

"While the separation between the two styles was never absolute both drew from the Methodist hymnal and artists in one tradition sometimes sang songs belonging to the other"

Can someone provide references or documentation on the Methodist hymnal part. If not it will be removed.
Absolon S. Kent 18:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Alternate theory of origin

Looking at the references provided for this section, I'm not sure if they meet the Wikipedia test for reliable sources. Unless someone else can provide a more creditable source I will remove this section NLT December 1. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Absolon, the issue of black gospel is a touchy subject. However, the information given in this article is not correct. Gospel as we know it did not originate from slavery. The music that came from slavery was known as Metered Hymn. This was music that was put to a meter and sung as a group of beats. It was sung in those beats as a form of communications between the slaves. If the boss was coming the meter got faster and if it was safe it was slow and that also gave those slaves that were tired a chance to lay down in the fields and rest for a while. So, in conclusion, I do not agree with this section and feel it needs to be removed or at minimum corrected to show correct information. Junebug52 13:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

June, I have no problems with any changes you have or might suggest. I would definitely support an entire rewrite with accurate information. I have noticed for a long time that this article is really lacking in references. In the past, I think the various editors wrote from their own ideas about the development without citations. Since there is a disagreement on the issue of origin/development, it may be prudent to focus the article on the differences in the sub-genres unless someone can find solid sources to answer the history/development questions. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I originally put in the reference for the possible Gaelic origins of gospel singing. It is a theory proposed by Professor Willie Ruff, an Arican American and reouned musicologist. If you are looking for a credible source then look at the Yale University site.

http://www.yale.edu/music/linesinging/

I am currently living in Scotland myself (as an Irishman) and saw a T.V. show in Scottish Gaelic about the Gaelic origins of gospel. The show had prominent African American citizens discuss the theory and the reaction was quite positive. Perhapse you should contact Professor Willie Ruff directly as he is an expert in the subject anmd as an African american himself could better discuss and talk about the subject with sources. Regards, Slan Leat Celtic Harper (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned earlier I have no problem with the correct information being included. Feel free to add what you like. As June mentioned above the subject of urban contemporary gospel is a "touchy" one because the common belief is that it developed out of slavery, so some people will hold that no matter what evidence is presented. I would only caution you to provide multiple sources if possible (a "theory" by one professor will most likely be disputed) to help avoid potential edit wars. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree whole heartedly with Absolon on this issue. The issue of Gospel music originating out of slavery is a touchy issue. I think if you are going to chime in on this subject, it would be a good idea to educate yourself in the ways of Metered Hymn singing (which is original slave music or communications)and shape note origins (Used after slavery). These areas are not where Gospel Music originated from. Juilliard has vast amounts of information with regards to origins and placement, however, due to their classical influences, I would not deem them as experts either. I am on their board and I can assure you that even with their reputation, they lack in this area! There is a book entitled, "Close Harmony a History of Sounther Gospel" by James R. Goff Jr. This book is one of the most detailed reads that I have found on this subject. One might want to get a copy and read it for ones own reference. As I said before, Metered Hymn singing was the first and most primative form of gospel music. It was used as a form of communications between the slaves while in the fields. As time progressed and slavery was no more; the shape notes came into play and was used to write gospel music that we all know and love today. Of course as yet more time went, shape notes disappeared and along came traditional note writing and chording charts. So, in conclusion, in order to correctly write this article, one will need to not rely on the facts of one researcher, but get a braod view of the subject through the eyes of many. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. I will caution editors chiming in with edits though. I will monitor the article and when I get a chance I will add verbiage to it's content, but in the mean while, if I see information being added that is not sourced or is POV I will remove it immediately. We do have to preserve the integrity of this article. Thank you Junebug52 15:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply to my post, I am aware about the “touchy” subject material and resentment the African American community feels against America and the slave trade. I understand the common belief is that gospel singing developed out of slavery, so some people will hold that. Although popular culture itself has a POV and is no way helpful from a musicologist stance or that of an accademic one. The popular viewpoint itself is just a theory and providing multiple sources from Professor Ruff (a renouned musicologist and African American himself) proposed and discussed this in the latter part of 2007 at Yale University. Even one valid source, especially from an institution as prestegoius as Yale and an expert on the subject does have creedence in this article even if it speaks against the “slave origin” theory of gospel music. I suggest we wait till there is a published peer review of his work as deleting his research will only fule another type of POV. Remember he is the expert and we are just the writers. Furthermore if you have issue with his research as I suggested before deleting anything and taking you’re own stance, you should contact Professor Ruff to discuss the finer points of his research. Junebug, I can see you are very passionate on the subject and I understand how raw you must feel (if you are an African American) Slavery has impacted on all cultures throughout the world for centuries. But for good or bad, there was a celtic-african influence and even an Anglo-African one. Metered Hymn singing was the first and most primative form of gospel music, yes even Professor Ruff states this, but who taught the slaves to sing in this European form of music? Gaels were there for good and bad and influenced African American culture. This was a two way process, just because this research doesn’t fit with popular culture doesn’t mean to say it isn’t valid. If you have a passion for gospel singing then take this study as a cutting edge topic as it was discussed at Yale University in 2007. Regards Slan Leat Celtic Harper (talk) 19:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I would vote for inclusion of all theories of development until definative proof of one over the other is found (which may be impossible). That way we avoid edit wars. We definitely need a rewrite because the current read make it seem as if one (origin in slavery) is true, and the others are just theory. I welcome any thoughts anyone may have on the subject.

On a separate note: It’s always dangerous to ascribe a thought or idea based upon race (stereotyping). I don’t think only African Americans believe that Gospel music originated in slavery. I think Americans of all races and backgrounds believe this because that is what we have been taught. I’m sure if we research the various types of music that have developed over time in the U.S. we would find that many commonly held beliefs are in error. Not pointing fingers, I just don’t want any misunderstanding about motives if things get hot during the rewrites. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 20:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Celtic Harper, I am not an African American, but I do have a pssion about making sure that things are written with accuracy. As I stated, "I am a historian of these issues and I am called upon to lecture in regards to musical and theatrical origins." I feel the contacting Prof. Ruff would not give us the answers but may only lead us to original research which as you know is against wikipedia guidelines. We need citable material. I am not opposed to leaving things in as long as there is a considerable rewrite to the existing information which I believe Absolon would agree with. I also can appreciate you passion and I applaud you for that. I feel we need more editors with that passion. I also think you will agree that as editors, we have a responsibility to insure the readers that what they are reading is researched, cited and sourced without POVs. Let's get this puppy done! Junebug52 00:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you, of course we need more editors with that passion, and to insure the readers that what they are reading is researched cited and sourced without POVs. Its refreshing to see editors who want to improve wikipedia, as long as the articles balanced then no problem. Thank you once again for you're comment. Slan Leat Celtic Harper (talk) 16:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

There are definitely clear African influences to the style. But the style is also influenced by European sources. So it's not impossible that the Scottish influence is accurate. I think the appropriate thing to do would be to balance the information according to how well the general academic community views it. If the Scottish influence is a fringe theory then it should be discussed in a smaller proportion to other theories. Right now it looks like everything is tied to this one individual. If not for the Washington Post article I'd say can it altogether. But they lend credibility to it. CJ (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Part of the confusion may be a matter of perspectives (if that makes any sense). The influence of Shape note and Metered Hymn may be stronger in some sub-genres than others. As I suggested earlier on this page in another discussion perhaps the right way to go is to simply do a trace of development of the subgenres. I really think it will be too hard to simply say "X" is the source of all gospel music. Each subgenre will have a different path of development. Thoughts? Absolon S. Kent (talk) 12:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed revision of History section

Perhaps we should consider the following as a starting point for the discussion on revising the history section. Instead of talking about the various places the different styles developed they could all be discussed based upon the time period. Sections could include:

History

• Ancient times - discussion of early church as related to gospel
• European Renaissance (or proper time period) - discussion on Metered Hymn and Shape note?
• American establishment (or proper name for period) - discussion of Gospel or Christian music in early America
• African slave trade - discussion of music styles brought to America by African slaves
• American reconstruction (or proper name for period) - this is probably where the major split among genres began ????
• 20th Century - major period of Gospel music industry development.
• International expansion - discussion on the spread of Gospel music from America to other countries and the development of the distinctive styles.

Genres and subgenres

• Southern Gospel
  • Progressive Southern Gospel
  • Christian country music
• Urban contemporary gospel
  • Jubilee quartet
  • Christian hip hop
  • Mass choirs
• Contemporary Christian music
  • Christian pop
  • Christian rock
  • Christian metal
  • Christian punk

Business (or Industry)

• Gospel music marketing - production and development
  • Gospel /Christian record companies
• Gospel music media
  • notable Gospel media sources - TV networks, radio companies\

This is just a suggested starting point. Feel free to comment. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's just do it! LOL Junebug52 14:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I would also suggest mentioning Thomas A. Dorsey in the history section. Mr. Dorsey is often refered to as the Father of Gospel Music and is credited with coining the term "gospel" as a reference to this type of music. I was surprised that he wasn't mentioned in the article. Optimistmb (talk) 22:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I know Dorsey was a major figure in the subgenre that became urban contemporary Gospel. Perhaps we should look at his inclusion on that page more so on the Gospel music article. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Revisions on 8 January 2008

I rewrote the lead to bring it more in line with the Christian music article. I also hid the History section until we can find a better way to word it. I think the article reads alot better without as much detail. Please comment. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I was shocked at how little information this article currently contains, and was just about to tag it before I read this discussion. There needs to be a history section in there - not hidden - which refers to both the African origins of large elements of the music, plus the melodic (at least) contributions from the European folk and classical traditions. Sorry, but I don't believe it's that impossible to draft a section that meets all the concerns and, if there are disagreements, explains what they are. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle, I certainly agree with you in regards to there being little to no information on this page for history. I do believe that we are in the research stages of trying to find what verbiage would be the appropriate to use for inclusion. This has at times been a really heated debate on origins and history. I think with some help and a little time, we will get it together. Thank you for your input. Canyouhearmenow 15:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My only suggestion is that it is much easier, and more correct in WP terms, to write an article that says "this happened", "then that happened", "meanwhile this was going on..." etc., rather than seeking to hypothesise that one thing caused or led to another. At the very least, there should be a statement in the article of what is agreed factually to be the case in terms of the history (eg, perhaps, Dorsey's role) with a side section on areas which are not agreed (eg the Scots influence). Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The problem, as mentioned earlier, is that no editor could provide a well referenced statement of origin. The compromise, as discussed at the Christian music wikiproject, was to keep the major genre articles brief and generic, and expand the various subgenre articles with information. Articles like Christian music and Gospel music are purposely left general (basically without much detail on history, representative artists, etc) and articles like urban contemporary gospel, Southern Gospel and Christian metal are given much more detail. I think this has been good because it has helped keep a lot of the random edits and misinformation out of the articles. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I have rewritten the history section, providing extensive reference notes. The real problem is that the term "Gospel music" is used in the literature for two separate types of music without any indication as to which the author is talking about. Go to any library and look at the books on the subject. Books will be about black gospel or white gospel, and the authors, even scholarly authors, assume that the type they are writing about is the only "Gospel music." Unfortunately, this is a persistent problem, and reflects the racism that endures in our society. In my rewrite of the history section, I tried to be fair to both types of music. Richard E. Davies (talk) 22:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)Richard E. Davies

Genre Assignment

Since there are editors for various genres of Christian music, might I suggest that each editor take the genre that they have knowledge of and act as a lead editor for that genre. Then at some point we can change genres at the request of said editor and add and check each others work to make sure that we are not leaving factors out. This way we are not double working and running over each others edits which could lead us into an edit wars at some point. Does anyone have any input about this suggestion? Junebug52 05:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I will be happy to start with Christian country music since that is an article I started and have knowledge of the artists involved. Junebug52 05:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Moving discussion

I'm transferring your question and comment to the Christian music portal and copying to the new Christian music WikiProject. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 05:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Much of current content is in error

The history of Gospel music is well documented and what is shared here is not the accepted history. What is represented here is but one of gospel's offshoots. Thomas Dorsey is commonly called "The Father of Gospel Music." Perhaps we culd include one of the standard timelines from a neutral source to write a proper chronology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.234.96 (talk) 03:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

External link removal

I removed the link www.musicgospellyrics.com from the external link section because it violates WP:SONG#LYRICS and Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works. Please do not readd this link. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 16:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I did not add the link, but I did wikify the link after it had been added. I did not pay attention to its whereabouts. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me! Canyouhearmenow 21:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

All Genres?

If Gospel music is music that is written to express either personal or a communal belief regarding Christian life, as well as (in terms of the varying music styles) to give a Christian alternative to mainstream secular music, should it not include ALL genres that conform to this criteria (e.g. modern genres such as Christian Rock)? D van Eeden (talk) 13:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Short answer: Yes. All forms of Christian music general proclaim the Gospel of Christ. Longer answer: American record companies and media outlets have typically created categories for the various styles of music to differentiate their markets. While the basis for Gospel music is the same as Christian music, categories have been created (i.e. Christian rock, Christian metal, Southern Gospel, etc.) based solely upon style. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Let is also be said that mainstream marketing also dictates to what degree a song should delve into Christian content. Most of the songs that are hitting radio today are what they classify as "middle of the road" These songs could go secular or Christian, ie. "I Can Only Imagine", "Butterfly Kisses" and "Drop that Rock". There are also the typical cookie cutter songs. Meaning that they really have no depth but good beats and a little bit of praise content. This was a movement we saw with Amy Grant and David L Cook in the 80's. So, therefore as Absolon pointed out, we have created all of these sub genres to appeal to different markets. Canyouhearmenow 14:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

List of legends

I removed this listing because it adds nothing to the article and has the potential to become an out of control listing of personal favorites. If someone can come up with a verifiable listing of artists we can readd it. Otherwise it would simply be a listing of original research. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Fundamental problem with the article

There seems to me to be a fundamental problem with this article, which is that it reflects the religious views of a few editors, and is not neutral. I would guess that those who seek to manage the article are Christians, living in the USA. They have valid opinions, and no doubt in many cases have a great depth of valuable knowledge which should be passed on. However, most people do not share the same beliefs, and do not live in the USA. Nonetheless, gospel music may still be of interest to them, and they may wish to read an informed article about it. My personal interest in gospel music is as a genre of African-American music from the early to mid 20th century. I'm well aware of the belief systems behind that, and to some extent its precursors and later development, but I would like to find out more. The article doesn't let me do that, and to my mind that is unfortunate. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

PS - My apologies for reindenting this and previous comments incorrectly - previously all seemed to stem from comment 8, but I obviously haven't done it quite right - hope someone else can correct it! Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Please review the above discussions for the rationale behind the current status of this article. Gospel music is not just music of African-American traditions. Gospel music (like Christian music is a major classification covering many styles of music (all of which carry a common theme). As you have also stated, Gospel music is not just music of the USA. The compromise (made by a group of editors) was to make this article very general in scope and provide more detail in the various subgenres of Gospel music (see Urban contemporary gospel, Southern Gospel, etc. Hope this provides the information you seek. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 17:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I note and understand your points. Unfortunately, however, you and fellow editors seem to be approaching this from the perspective of what you would like (or can agree) to say, rather than considering the perspective of those who come to the site in order to gain more information. Subdividing the subject into sub-genres, without a full and discursive background which explains their history and (if necessary) different perspectives on them, is not particularly helpful, in my opinion. I know that I know much less about the subject than you and others - that is why I would like a fully explanatory (and neutral) article here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome to propose the type of information you would like to see contained in the article. I would encourage you to look at the article history and see what information was originally contained within and removed (with the supporting rationale). You may also wish to address your concerns with the Christian music WikiProject. Good luck. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 02:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree on two grounds. (1) It should not be the general reader's responsibility to "look at the article history" in order to recover information in which they might be interested. It would not necessarily be clear whether material has been removed because it is inaccurate, or simply because it offends the opinions of another editor. (2) In this case, the idea that the development of African-American gospel music in the early/mid 20th century can wholly be explained within the context of "Christian music" - itself a highly POV concept, in my view - is simply inadequate. Unfortunately, the underlying attitude here seems to be that knowledge should be tightly controlled by editors with a POV agenda (that is, motivated by a particular set of religious beliefs) rather than being open to all, including those with different perspectives. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess I'm confused on what your point is. What exactly do you feel is missing from this article? Gospel music is defined and the subgenres are listed. If the reader "wants more" they can view the subgenres which give history, development, style, etc. Could you define exactly what you think is missing? Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Essentially, it seems to me that, in this article, there needs to be more historical background, or story of the gradual development of the music and its different sub-genres. As it stands, it's not clear to me which of the sub-genres, if any, I (or any casual but interested reader) should look further into. The article is short (12K) compared with, for instance, Blues (a featured article, 60K), Jazz (41K), Rock and roll (27K), etc. (Apologies if you are unhappy with these comparators.) Brevity has some advantages, but to my mind the article as it stands gives insufficient basic and neutral information. But, unless others want to make similar points, I'll leave it there - I certainly don't intend to do any editing here myself. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, I encourage you to read the previous discussions regarding the history of Gospel music. Removing the history section was a compromise to maintain neutrality. Because it is so diverse no single definative origin could be agreed upon by multiple editors. Which origin should be included (shape note, negro spiritual, celtic, American Southern Gospel)? I personally have given up on content management/update of this article and have simply maintained it on my watchlist because of the constant vandalism, so if you don't intend to add information I guess it will remain as currently written. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The simple answer as to which references to origin to include, in my view, is all of them. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

History: Correction needed to 'first published use of "Gospel" to describe this kind of music....'

Gospel Songs (1874) by P. P. Bliss actually came before any of the Gospel Hymns series. The story of how Sankey and Bliss combined their Gospel Songs and Sacred Songs and Solos efforts into what was subsequently published as Gospel Hymns and Sacred Songs (Gospel Hymns no. 1) is pretty well documented. The cited Malone source is either wrong or misquoted - easy to confirm just by checking the publication dates on worldcat or elsewhere. However, a good explanation may also be found on page 486 of Benson's The English Hymn which is available on-line at: http://books.google.com/books?id=0FQuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA486

Didn't change it myself because I'm not sure that Gospel Songs (1874) is even the first use; I just know it came before Gospel Hymns(1875). Thanks! Rostdo (talk) 04:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

help request

This decoration would go well on a page near here, but where? The lyrics are 16th century, the music was recorded with this traditional tune in 1979 and performed by a dozen artists and now available on a similar commons license to wikipedia, is it gospel or christian or ancient or contempoary?

where does this go?

Edit needed under "2.1 20th Century"

The paragraph under "20th Century" on Thomas A. Dorsey has a few problems with both grammar and NPOV. I've never edited anything here, and I also know very little about the subject, so I'll just point out the section so someone can look it over.

"He had many trials in his life that he overcame concerning his health and his wife died. He dedicated all of his musical talent to the service of the LORD. Thomas gained knowledge of his religion from his father who was a Baptist minister and took up on piano from his mother who was his teacher. He started working with lack blues pianist when they moved to Atlanta."Z0X0X (talk) 19:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I have improved it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. --Musdan77 (talk) 16:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Choosing of a song

I don't think the choice of Yolanda Adams is the right one. It is clearly more contemporary jazz oriented than gospel. There must be better music exemplifications that are free of licensing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ASDLR (talk • contribs) 11:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gospel music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150225093800/http://www.countrygospelmusic.com/platinumheart.htm to http://www.countrygospelmusic.com/platinumheart.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Gospel Music Style

Gospel is a style of music. The “First Gospel songs” that are mentioned in this wiki were just Christian hymns that were adapted to thr Gospel style. Black Church music has a distinct style. When the songs that are mentioned were first song they did not sound likr gospel music. If you need a cultural example, think of the movie “Sister Act”. A Catholic hymn was repurposed into a gospel song.

White Christian music and African- American Christian music sound nothing alike. The slaves used their master’s songs and words in their style. Now like every other Black Genre the style has been appropriated, but not duplicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.26.101.23 (talk) 05:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Just visit a Negro Church and you will hear the difference..

Side note Elvis frequented Negro Churches. Also, Negroes do not adopt or embrace white culture. Any adoption is always very limited. For example, Country Music, Slang.... The cultural sharing is VERY uneven. Many minority groups are this way... This wiki makes many claims without citations. It implies that Blacks have a choice in sharing their culture and that their is mutual collaboration. Black Music, Dance, Slang and all Culture is very distinct. There is not collaboration. There is condemnation, the acceptance and then appropriation. This has been done over and over again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.26.101.23 (talk) 05:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• 20100209 Yolanda Adams - How Great Thou Art at the White House.ogv

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• 20100209 Yolanda Adams - How Great Thou Art at the White House.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Origins

In regards to the origins of gospel music with the definition presented "christian lyrics" what about the biblical psalms and song? Do they not fall under the category. Yes there is no understood beat pattern, but lyrically it can be studied to represent earlier accounts of "gospel music" what more authentic than the songs written within the time of the man Christ himself? Closure53 (talk) 07:20, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

"Christian" does not mean anything after Christ, it means any that is interpreted though the lens of Christianity. Psalms definitely fall into the category. Walter Görlitz (talk) 12:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Something is not right. Gospel music is supposed to be a form of Christian music, but some songs labeled under the genre (like Prince's Purple Rain) seem to have nothing to do with Christianity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:C201:C640:99F2:E5DC:E424:D432 (talk) 03:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Ethiopian

Gospel 196.188.245.240 (talk) 09:02, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Jesus

Hana 196.188.174.21 (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Black American Music

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mbasnight02 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Winter2342.

— Assignment last updated by Isha0323 (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)