Search Results

Americans used music to disseminate competing concepts of republicanism during Washington’s second term as president. As the unfolding French Revolution accelerated Americans’ engagement with the debate over aristocracy versus equality, Americans increasingly choose the medium of music to voice their political opposition. While Federalists perceived democracy as something to be curtailed, their emerging Republican opponents advocated active public participation in politics and “universal principles” of liberty and equality. Republicans challenged the Federalists’ fundamental premise that the people must defer to the wisdom of elected officials drawn from the elite. In song, Americans voiced their political opposition through a cosmopolitan language of natural rights inspired by Thomas Paine and resisted growing British influence. Federalists launched a counterattack by connecting Republican opposition to unlawful, violent rebellion.

American songwriters sonically represented the Republican takeover of the presidency with Jefferson’s election in 1800. Songwriters articulated a new narrative of Republican ascendance and political legitimacy. Counteracting years of Federalist assaults and their caricature of the “dangerous Democrat,” Republicans foregrounded a new image of Jefferson, cast the Federalists as evildoers, and stressed the Republican party’s laudable priorities and values. They creatively reworked songs that had come to symbolize Federalist power and legitimacy in previous years, along with songs in transatlantic circulation, and they adapted specific rhetorical and narrative techniques from Federalist precedents. Federalists, despairing of their marginalized status, contested this narrative with cutting satire, personal attacks, and a sectional counternarrative.

Americans commonly leveraged music to circulate narratives of partisan dominance in the early republic, and this chapter examines how Federalists in particular used music to articulate a powerful narrative of legitimacy based on the incessant presentation of Federalist heroes and Republican villains during the intensely partisan atmosphere of John Adams’s presidency. Following French attempts to bribe US diplomats, songwriters expressed a surge of federalism, nationalism, and militarism in support of Federalist projects through both ephemeral songs and “patriotic” hits like “Hail Columbia” and “Adams and Liberty.” Despite Federalists’ efforts to destroy domestic political “faction,” Republicans refused to be silenced. They used many of the same symbols, strategies, and tunes to promote different causes and inspire oppositional political action through music.

This chapter examines how Americans used music to craft powerful myths about the War of 1812. The war began amid strong sectional and partisan divisions, but Americans obscured these divisions by circulating a large volume of selective accounts of the war that ignored reversals of Republican policy and highlighted the Republican administration’s success in bringing peace with a navy of Federalist design. Understood in the context of the previous chapters, Francis Scott Key’s “The Star-Spangled Banner” illustrates the sonic transcendence of ideological and partisan debate. The American nationalism that the song came to symbolize developed not only in a transatlantic context but also alongside strong regional and other allegiances. Following years of economic stress and partisan strife, Americans used music to portray the nation as self-sufficient, militarily competent, and united in feeling.

Focusing on the period 1783–1792, this chapter examines how music was used as a tool of propaganda in the early American republic. Americans used music to craft a central myth of the nation, the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. Music was an important tool of propaganda as debates over how to address crucial financial problems impacting individuals, the states, and the federal government culminated in efforts to restructure the government through the Constitution. As advocates of a more powerful federal government repeatedly turned to musical propaganda, songwriters wrote music to contain popular protest, urge ratification, define the relationship between the people and the new federal government, and promote allegiance to the newly structured government during Washington’s first term as president.

Focusing on the period 1806–1811, this chapter examines how Americans used music to address critical political questions prompted by the Napoleonic Wars. The nation faced naval depredations, failed diplomacy, and economic devastation spurred by a broad embargo. As Americans struggled under severe trade restrictions, songwriters used music to address questions about the makeup and purpose of the navy, the prospect of alliance with a European power, and the possibility of avoiding embroilment in a major European war. Music provided an engaging medium not only to address these questions within the first party system but also to prioritize the nation’s goals, including peace, prosperity, and isolationism.

This conclusion traces how early American political music was used throughout the nineteenth century. While political music in the early nation was often ephemeral, some of it proved surprisingly durable. Not only were songs from the early national period still performed, printed, and compiled in the following decades, but their melodies were used to carry new lyrics responding to later political developments. At times, early American political music was adapted and repurposed for sectional and election purposes. Focusing on the example of Joseph Hopkinson’s “Hail Columbia,” this conclusion highlights how political music created in the early American republic was circulated in song collections, performed on varied occasions, and used to create new music through the end of the nineteenth century.

A multilayered system of self-censorship by the record industry association (Dorsey 2013), individual record companies, and producers discourage the use of lyrics that argue a political point or criticize individuals or organizations. With nuclear power as a taboo issue, major-label artists have relied on allegories, metaphors, and metonyms to express their antinuclear sentiments. The chapter categorizes these techniques by size and method: allegories as the basis of a concept album (Acid Black Cherry); metaphors spanning a song (Saitō Kazuyoshi); chains of metaphors and metonyms in quick succession (Quruli); and musical metaphors that align with Johnson’s image schemas of containment, paths, and cycles (Asian Kung-Fu Generation, Johnson 1987, Saslaw 1996, Larson 2011). Musicians also quote songs with similar messages or as reminiscences of the past and purposefully mispronounce words to suggest near-homonyms. Such techniques have more in common with those observed in countries with one-party systems, such as Castro’s Cuba (Manabe 2006b), than in the United States.

On the streets of Dublin a drunken navvy bawls out fragments of an Irish revolutionary ballad, and a crippled sailor growls out fragments of an English ballad about a crippled sailor, ‘The Death of Nelson’. These popular songs function, in James Joyce’s Ulysses, as mocking reminders of British rule. Nelson, in particular, the ‘onehandled adulterer’, fits the novel’s plot of sexual conquest and betrayal. Yet the wandering sailor’s associations reach to the deepest sources of the book: to Ulysses, to Sinbad, to Homer. (He also has a surprising ‘real-life’ origin in a one-legged Irish sailor who caused a disturbance in the royal box at Ascot in 1832.) His figure, and the song he sings, correspond to other ‘types’ in the novel, intricately doubled and bonded. In the final section of the novel devoted to Bloom, and in Molly’s concluding monologue, these threads of association are woven together.