From: 00hfstahlke@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical,rec.music.christian
Subject: critical reviews of hymnals
Date: 4 Jan 93 13:30:19 GMT
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's

For the last couple of years, I have been playing through hymnals for some of
my sight-reading practice, and I've become curious about the critical reaction
to different hymnals.  Because of denominational convenience, I started with
the three Lutheran hymnals I had on hand:  _The Lutheran Hymnal_ (St. Louis: 
Concordia Publishing House, 1941), _Service Book and Hymnal_ (Minneapolis: 
Augsburg Publishing House, 1958), and _Lutheran Book of Worship_ (Minneapolis: 
Augsburg Publishing House, 1978).  After playing through those, I picked up a
battered copy of _Praise and Worship:  The Nazarene Hymnal_ at a rummage sale
at a, naturally, Lutheran church nearby.  From some of the copyrights on
individual hymns, I think the hymnal dates to the early 1930's, but I don't
know the exact date or the publisher.  Currently, I am about sixty percent
through the Episcopal _Hymnal 1982_ (New York:  The Church Hymnal Corporation,
1985).
                              
The following are my informal critical reactions to these five hymnals:

LH, as I knew from growing up with it, had a very strong basis in the 16th and
17th Lutheran chorale tradition, hymns I knew as a child, sang in Bach's
arrangements in a variety of choirs, and still love for their melodic and
rhythmic richness.  LH includes some of the more popular hymns from various
other traditions, but the clear emphasis is on the chorale.  This is a somewhat
narrow focus culturally but very rich esthetically.  Harmonically, LH is not
very adventurous and becomes even a bit predictable.

SBH contains fewer chorales but includes both some very charming hymns and
carols originally composed for SBH as well as a fair sampling of 19th century
English hymnody, much of which I find less satisfying, probably also for
cultural rather than esthetic reasons.  SBH does include quite a few of the
Bach arrangements of chorales.

LBW has rather less of the 19th century English content and much more American
hymnody, including Sacred Harp, Southern, and Black  traditions.  LBW is by far
the most adventurous of the three harmonically, including some deliciously
dissonant arrangements that a lot of organists, unfortunately, avoid for
congregational    use.  I like LBW the best of the three Lutheran hymnals I'm
familiar with.

P&W is predominantly 19th century English and 19th and early 20th century
American with many hymns written for P&W, I suspect.  The harmonizations are
even more predictable than in LH and are mid to late Romantic in style.  I was
surprised the richness and power of the "call and response" style prevalent in
this more Wesleyan tradition, and while Wesleyan hymnody is not generally to my
taste, playing through P&W gave me a new respect for the hymnic potential of
call and response writing.

H'82 is by far the most interesting and enjoyable of the hymnals I've read
through.  The hymns are well selected, with few hackneyed tunes and most of
those enhanced by interesting arrangements, and the scholarship on sources and
harmonizations is the best of any hymnal I've seen.  The hymns and their
harmonizations range from medieval to modern and from three and four-part
writing to lieder- like accompanyment.  Episcopal friends of mine tell me that
many of the more modern arrangements are, for all their dissonance, quite
singable.

I would be interested in aesthetic and musical reactions to other hymnals.  A
lot of hymn writing tends towards the hackneyed, and hymns seem generally to
get ignored in serious music discussions, until a Bach or Copland or Ives does
something interesting with them.  But there is some very fine music in the
genre.  Are there journals where denominational hymnals are reviewed?  What
about African-American and other culture-specific hymnals, other denominational
hymnals, and Jewish hymnody?  Can a hymnal, practically speaking, avoid being
very culture-specific?  LH certainly is as ethnic as any collection I've seen. 
I'd like to read reactions that go beyond personal taste and narrowly sectarian
judgments, although I certainly indulged in the former above.  I hope I avoided
the latter.

Herb Stahlke
Ball State University