Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Join our Email Newsletter

Mark209


About This Article
A Thorn By Any Other Name
Written: 06/02/2009
Author: Nick Bruno
Category: Monthly Articles
Comments: 56
Favorited: 1
Favorited by:
• Nick Bruno

Email this article
RSS feeds
(What's an RSS feed?)






Monthly Articles

02
Jun
2009
A Thorn By Any Other Name


Add this entry to Your Favorites [56] Comments

image

We’re all familiar with the famous quote, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” It originated in the play “Romeo and Juliet,” written by William Shakespeare.

The meaning is clear and simple. You can call a rose a banana, a cucumber, a daisy, or any other name you can think of, but the rose will still be what it is.

At first glance the rose bush is beautiful, but hidden among the pretty flowers are thorns…nasty thorns that will hurt you. It is generally believed that the purpose of the thorns is to repel animals that would make a meal of the roses.

The same analogy applies to the thorn…you can call it anything you want to but it is, and will always be, a thorn.

THE ROSE

To me, Southern Gospel Music is the “rose,” exquisite in its beauty and fragrance. There is no other music on earth as enjoyable to me as good SGM. I will admit I’m partial to male quartets. That’s what SGM was when I started in 1963, mostly male quartets. There were a few mixed groups, The Speer Family, The LeFevres, The Chuck Wagon Gang, The Weatherford Quartet, to name a few, but SGM was predominantly an industry of male quartets. Our industry today has many mixed groups and I enjoy listening to them all, trios, family groups, duets, whatever. As long as they are singing SGM, and singing it well, they’re singing my song.

THE THORNS

Just as in the rose bush, SGM has its thorns. Some are right out there where you can see them and some are hidden way back, behind the scenes, so to speak. They WILL hurt you and they are, in fact, hurting SGM.

THE MUSIC ROW CROWD

In Washington they are called “The Inside The Beltway Crowd.” These are the people who are so caught up with each other that they are oblivious to the rest of the country. The only thing that matters to them is appearing to be important to the rest of the “in” crowd, or as so aptly described in the song by The Eagles, they are “too busy being fabulous.”

We have a similar group in SGM. I call them the “Music Row Crowd.” They don’t all live and work in Nashville, but they all belong to the club. They are Southern Gospel label executives, radio promoters, talent agents, marketing and design people, promoters, trade executives, and some artists.

These folks rub shoulders with their secular music and contemporary Christian music counterparts on a daily basis. They desperately want to be accepted and to be treated as equals, but many of them are ashamed of our heritage and embarrassed by our music, and so they willingly compromise our art form to be accepted by the “in” crowd. It is beneath them to accept Southern Gospel Music as it is, or as it should be, so they are always trying to change it into something else… always with the same phony-baloney story about reaching more young people by changing the music. To which I say… A THORN BY ANY OTHER NAME IS STILL A THORN!

THORNS BEGET THORNS

Of course any time a group shows up on the doorstep of SGM that is anything but SGM the “Music Row Crowd” begins salivating. The longhaired, un-shaven, un-pressed, hole-in-blue jeans, gravely voiced rocker is music to their ears. They go running to their secular counterparts with CD and press kit in hand, “See, see, this is what we are. This is what Southern Gospel Music is now. Can we join your club now, can we, can we? Oh please, please?”

The “Music Row Crowd” also likes to play the “Name Game.” If an artist doesn’t fit into the mold of traditional Southern Gospel they just call it “Something Southern Gospel” you know like, Bluegrass Southern Gospel, or Christian Country Southern Gospel or my favorite…Progressive Southern Gospel.

They also think that by changing the name of SGM to “American Gospel Music,” or “Chinese Gospel Music,” that more people will want to hear it. They believe that the name Southern Gospel Music turns people off.

It’s not the name that turns people off…it’s the poor performance of many SGM artists that turns people off.

This fact, combined with the presence of artists that don’t perform true SGM, is why SGM is viewed as inferior. We have lost our identity. We have abandoned our true heritage.


SGM, when performed by a top notch SGM artist, is loved by everyone. If you don’t believe me ask The Perrys, Ernie Haase and Signature Sound, The McKameys, The Booth Brothers, The Inspirations, Legacy Five and the other truly fine, professional groups (I don’t have room to name them all) who are doing quite well.

THERE IS ENOUGH AUDIENCE, YOUNG AND OLD, TO SUPPORT OUR MUSIC IF THEY WILL STOP TRYING TO MAKE IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE.

My good friend and partner, Bob Jones, told me about a night in 1986 during the Dove Awards week when Southern Gospel Music really shined. At the time Bob was the President of Zondervan Music Group, which also included the Benson Company. Their labels were Impact, Powerdisc, Riversong, Heartwartming and also Enigma. The artist repertoire of those labels included Sandi Patti, Larnelle Harris, Degarmo and Key, Stryper and The Cathedral Quartet, among others.

The Benson Company was given one night to feature their artists and it was decided that the theme would be to showcase the variety within the company. You can imagine the broad range of music that appeared on that stage that night, from Sandi Patti to Stryper, but Bob said the biggest hit of the night was the Cathedrals. The crowd loved them and showed their appreciation with a standing ovation. In fact, they got the biggest response of any artist the entire weekend. Of all the artists and bands that appeared on that stage that week, four gentlemen with a piano player and a bass guitar stole the show.

In all the years I enjoyed the Cathedral Quartet I can’t ever remember them singing anything but pure Southern Gospel Music. As a matter of fact, in trying to define Southern Gospel Music, I would have to say, “Listen to the Cathedral Quartet. Do that and you’ll be doing what I believe is the finest example of Southern Gospel Music.”

SGM is an art form that originated in the South and, it has been argued, stands alongside jazz, blues, and country music as the fourth great genre of grass roots music and the fourth major type of southern music. It has a distinctive sound. Other genres of music also have a sound that is unique to that genre. To alter or distort a genre’s sound and try to make it sound like something else is, in my opinion, a cardinal sin.

For example, have you ever heard of a barbershop duet? I doubt it, because barbershop music is designed to function as a quartet. There are lots of people who love that art form and probably many more who don’t, but you never hear of the barbershop quartet industry changing their music to reach more people. They remain true to their heritage. You either like it or you don’t…that’s it.

How about George Jones with a big band… Or Frank Sinatra with a steel guitar? I think you get my point.

A ROSE IS STILL A ROSE

My friends, Southern Gospel Music can stand on its own merits. It is designed by its very chemistry to be performed by four voices, much like barbershop quartet music. Please understand me here. I’m not suggesting that we dismiss every group that is not a quartet. I am merely trying to point out that our art form, Southern Gospel Music, is by its nature, Quartet Music. The name of our biggest event is The National QUARTET Convention. That is our heritage. Just like the rose, you can call it anything you want to but it will never change what it is.

WHAT IT IS NOT IS COUNTRY, BLUEGRASS, MOR, PRAISE AND WORSHIP ROCK AND ROLL OR PROGRESSIVE.

I disagree with those who proclaim that there is a place for everyone in SGM. There is only a place for those who are committed to the art form, and the art form is clearly defined by listening to groups like the Cathedral Quartet. If you want to sing music like that, whether you are a quartet, or a trio, or a mixed group, then you are welcome.

If you and the “Music Row Crowd” insist on making this beautiful rose bush into a bush of thorns then you are most certainly not welcome.

I, for one, have had my fill of the blue jeans, long hair and country music “wannabees,” singing music that is not SGM pretending to be a rose, and I don’t believe I’m alone on this.

I say, “Bring back the red suits, short haircuts, shined shoes, and tried and true Southern Gospel Music.”

As Always, I Welcome Your Comments.

God Bless You,

Nick Bruno
http://www.nickbruno.com

Reader Comments

I'll try to jump in here with the auto analogy.
Autos = Music
Ford = Music business
pickup truck = SG
Sports car = contemporary


The pickup truck (SG) doesn't have as large a market share as some others. There are still plenty who like them. However, in pickups (SG) (some prefer certain options and not others. Some want full size, some not. Some want shells, some not. Some want four wheel drive, some not. Some want auto, some not. They are all still pickups, but appeal to different people. The person who wants to only haul things may have different needs than those who have a family, or who goes mudding, or who wants a shiny one to show off, or to go camping, or to take a long trip. Some like the old SG that was around back in the fifties. These people might want the old basic truck without all the new gadgets like an mp3 player etc. Others might want one with all the current options, fully loaded. They might not like the old boxy look of the tried and true.

The fact remains is that SG HAS changed some since the twenties. We have tons more instruments strings, drums and the like) higher production values, much more equipment and technology etc. Compare a 78 from the thirties or whenever to a CD and tell me they are the same. Even if you compared traditional groups, there will be SOME difference. Admittedly, the traditionalists have changed less, but I am not sure there is anyone out there who sounds the same. Maybe someone like the ChuckWagon Gang has kept a lot of what they did, but I am not sure.

Nonetheless, I am not saying we should call a Porsche a pickup truck and totally get away from everything that makes SG SG, but that doesn't mean we can't have pickups with air conditioning, power steering etc. to those who want them.


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/06/2009
By the way, I realize the point about a rose is still a rose no matter what you call it, but by the same token there are different colors of roses. Red is the primary one, but some prefer others. Progressive SG is a different color of rose. It is still a rose, but is different enough to warrant an explanation so people know what they are getting instead of ordering roses to be delivered and being disappointed. smile


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/06/2009
I don't think, Susan, that Nick is inferring that people should scour the Goodwill stores in their neighborhoods trying to find some old Statesmen records and never listen to anything produced after 1961.

His comments are painting with a broader brush because he is saying (dear Lord)...."If we IDENTIFY other forms of music as Southern Gospel when if fact it is NOT.. we will eventually LOSE that unique style called SGM."

Evidently, he feels there is a danger that this will happen. To paint him in a caricature light as someone who is stuck in the past is missing the point of someone who is making a very valid point.


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/06/2009
Susan Unthank's avatar MD,

With all due respect, perhaps you should check your reading glasses. (And I am old enough to refer to your age)

Nick did say, "There is only a place for those who are committed to the art form, and the art form is clearly defined by listening to groups like the Cathedral Quartet. If you want to sing music like that, whether you are a quartet, or a trio, or a mixed group, then you are welcome."

I don't have any problem interpreting that statement.

I would like to know where on a piece of sheet music is it written what style the song should be sung in? Does it say quartets only, no country, no bluegrass, no mountain! Does it say, 4 men, matching suits and piano only?

Susan Unthank
http://susan.sogospelnews.com/
http://mostlyorganized.com/
http://twitter.com/sunthank
http://twitter.com/sogospelnews
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)



Commented by Susan Unthank On 06/06/2009
Chris D. Unthank's avatar Let me be perfectly clear (even though I went out of my way to make sure Mr. Jones knew that I was not trying to be disrespectful) - the reason I said "you're showing your age" is because Mr. Jones himself made the statement earlier in this course of this discussion:

"I guess I have to show my age and give a history lesson".

Again - it was not meant to be disrespectful. Mr. Jones and I have talked before in person and this is not the first issue that we have disagreed on. smile However, I have a great amount of respect for him as he is one of the great businessmen in this genre.


Commented by Chris D. Unthank On 06/06/2009
Chris D. Unthank's avatar I was discussing this very analogy (rose/thorns) today with another person, and she brought up a very strong point.

Why is the thorn being discussed as a bad thing for the rose? The thorn is not meant to be a hindrance to the rose - rather it is a form of protection - a way to keep the rose a beautiful part of the whole bush.

That - to me - is what other fringe parts of SG are. They are a way that we can keep (i.e. protect) the heritage of SG so that it can survive, thrive, and remain a beautiful part of this industry and remain the "core" part of what makes this music so great.

There are going to be some people who don't like the thorns - but lovers of roses will know that the thorns are necessary in order for the rose to survive.


Commented by Chris D. Unthank On 06/06/2009
Well first of all, truth be told Susan, I don't own a pair of reading glasses, nor do I recall mentioning my age.

I do not disagree with anything being said by any postings, including yours, your son's and others who disagree with Nick. That's what a forum is about - discussion. Sometimes discussion includes disagreeing with someone's opinion.

If you will read my postings, with or without YOUR reading glasses, you will see that the thing that is frustrating me isn't that people are disagreeing with Nick, but missing his point.

MISSING HIS POINT. Sing whatever music you enjoy... he is saying.. but if you want to keep this style of music we are calling southern gospel... don't dilute it. Is it so difficult to see what he is saying??? Or is there some other reason?

Nick did say, "There is only a place for those who are committed to the art form, and the art form is clearly defined by listening to groups like the Cathedral Quartet. If you want to sing music like that, whether you are a quartet, or a trio, or a mixed group, then you are welcome."

What part of that am I missing? That's exactly what he said, and exactly what I have been saying that he said.

If you, or anyone you know, is performing music that is on the "fringe" or may not be exactly described as SGM....of course his words would sting.

I don't believe he is saying people should ONLY PERFORM SOUTHERN GOSPEL MUSIC THAT SOUNDS LIKE THE CATHEDRALS... is HE???? No.

I believe (sigh..) he is simply saying...that this is the style of music that gave this industry it's beginning... and he believes that because OTHER STYLES OF MUSIC are being LABELED Southern Gospel.. eventually it will bring an end to music like The Cathedrals... the music that started this industry.

I, personally, don't care who sings what or where they sing it. But I feel bad when people misinterpret what someone is actually saying. It's ok to disagree, but disagree with what HE ACTUALLY SAID.. not what you think he said.


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/06/2009
Contrast this article to Matt's 1949 Ford article. Seems like he and Nick are saying just the opposite. Was that the intent? Two views on the same subject?

Anyway, I agree more with Matt and not so much with Nick. SGM needs to be a big tent. It has traditionally been just that.

I remind Nick of a few Cathedral songs & ablums. Like:

- The Cathedral Quartet WITH STRINGS album

- The Cathedral Quartet WITH BRASS album

- Their marvelous hit song "YESTERDAY" which featured Roy Tremble and George Younce which is beautiful music but sounds like something the Beattles wrote more than it does something George Younce wrote.

- Their very successful "MEXICO" song with latin beat.

Like the Statesmen and the Oak Ridge Quartet, the Cathedrals blurred the lines whenever they wanted to but they also knew how to nail a traditional southern gospel song and to set the standard that others would follow. Ernie Haas and Scott Fowler have walked the same line for they learned from the masters and they have developed strong quartets that honor the tradition while blurring the lines when it suited them. God love them. I do.

Cheers,
Tony

Tony Partigianoni

http://www.ksgm.com/images/gospel.gif

Pure SGM & Quartet-Style Singing
http://www.ksgm.com



Commented by Tony On 06/07/2009
MD, I think you are missing part of the point too. Nick also complained about calling music such as Progressive Southern Gospel because he said

"If an artist doesn’t fit into the mold of traditional Southern Gospel they just call it “Something Southern Gospel” you know like, Bluegrass Southern Gospel, or Christian Country Southern Gospel or my favorite…Progressive Southern Gospel.


See, he is acting like that shouldn't be done and yet he doesn't want it called Southern Gospel either if it doesn't fit the mold. That is done in lots of genres. You have traditional country, urban country, rock, classic rock, grunge rock etc. To me giving it that extra description makes it easier to know which type of SG one likes. It is like different flavors of Ice Cream. They are all Ice Cream, but when you get into more detail, you get the flavors. What if someone said Vanilla Ice Cream was the only one that could be called Ice Cream? Once again McKameys and Inspirations are called SG. Nick even did so. Yet compare them to the Cathedrals, Gold City, the Stamps, Gaither Vocal Band etc. and you see a big difference. Don't get me wrong, the last four groups are some of my favorites. I also like the Greenes, Hoppers, Talleys, Perrys, Legacy Five, Signature Sound and others. I don't always like every song or style by these groups, but they have things I like. I also like some songs by the Crabbs (Please Forgive Me, Through The Fire, The Cross etc.) which may or may not fit the definition above for Southern Gospel. My problem isn't with a lot of groups he calls Southern Gospel and I tend to prefer many of them. I just disagree with a lot of the article.


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/07/2009
hey quartet man,
You disagree with most of Nick's article. That's ok.

I don't believe he is saying that everyone should eat ONLY vanilla ice cream. I think he is saying "Don't call frozen yogurt ice cream. Don't call sherbert ice cream. Just because they're all cold doesn't mean they're the same thing".

And once again, I think his point is ONLY ONE THING.."If SGM isn't careful, it will lose the kind of music that got it started" To Nick, this seems to be a major point.

If you interpret what he is saying as "No one should ever sing one song that is not exactly like the Cathedrals sang in 1964" then I believe you are missing his point. He sees that style of music being REPLACED by the other forms.

He doesn't want that music REPLACED by what others are "calling" SGM. That's his opinion.

Everyone is talking about INCLUDING other music, but his main point seems to be that he sees a trend that willcause that original type of music to be REPLACED.

And concerning Matt Felts article, I don't think it gets Nick's point at all...even though it was posted days after Nick's article appeared and Matt could have possibly (?) read Nick's article before writing his own.


Commented by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) On 06/07/2009

Page 5 of 6 Comment Pages « First  <  3 4 5 6 >

Add Comments

If you are seeing this form you are not a Member or have not logged in. Why not consider becoming a Member?

Membership allows you to have a prepared signature of your choice applied to every comment you make, as well as the ability to choose an avatar to display next to your name to help identify your posts. Members are also given opportunity to vote weekly in our Weekly Chart as well as special Members Only contests, polls and giveaways during the year. If you are already a member, login here, otherwise please register here.

**Note: Forums membership is a seperate membership.

By posting you agree to our Comments Policy

Name:
Email:
Location:
URL:
Comment:
Remember my personal information
Notify me of follow-up comments?
Please enter the word you see in the image below: