What do you think?
Rate this book
"My Song Is My Weapon": People's Songs, American Communism, and the Politics of Culture, 1930-50
A revealing exploration of the origins and development of People's Songs, Inc., "My Song Is My Weapon won the ASCAP-Deems Taylor Award. Robbie Lieberman brings to life the hootenannies, concerts, and rallies of the time, paying special attention to the politics of culture of the Old Left. Her analysis of the communist movement culture, coupled with interviews with former members of People's Songs, sheds new light on Cold War America, the American Communist movement, and the experience of left-wing cultural workers.
- GenresHistory
232 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 1988
2 people are currently reading
29 people want to read
About the author
Robbie Lieberman
15 books10 followersRobbie Lieberman received her Ph.D. from the University of Michigan in 1984. She has taught at Southern Illinois University since 1991, where she is Professor of History. A specialist in recent U.S. history, her particular areas of interest include war and peace, social movements, and music.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 27, 2012
During the midst of the Great Depression the American people looked toward the left to relieve the economic privations that resulted from the collapse of the existing capitalistic system, hence the turn toward FDR and the semi-socialistic programs of the New Deal. The Communist Party USA’s intelligentsia saw the Great Depression as an opportunity to expand its membership and influence and to expedite the goal of world-wide socialism.
One of the means that the American communists used to help spread their message was via the use of traditional folk tunes that were sung to pros that carried a suitable political message. These songs served as a means of carrying the Party’s line to labor rallies, political gatherings, and other large audiences. In that the folk songs were seen as a method of motivating change by their singers, they were thus considered a type of weapon.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON details the work of the various individuals and groups that used folk music to promote the Communist Party’s message between 1930 and 1950. Lieberman lays out an intricately detailed historical account about how folk songs came to be used by American communists, and he also analyzes the successes and failures this approach had in moving minds and changing the world.
The CPUSA officials of the early 30s were directed by the Comintern (Communists International), and the Comintern was controlled from Moscow. The early rhetorical efforts of the CPUSA were heavily influenced by the rather dreary and heavy-handed propagandistic narratives and films that were being pushed by the Party elite in Moscow, and these proved to be singularly unattractive to American audiences. The aficionados at the CPUSA soon had the happy idea of “Americanizing” the party and its message, and they allied themselves with traditional American values (e.g., equality) and widely recognized historical figures (e.g., Lincoln).
A small part of this movement to Americanize the CPUSA was the use of American folk music. In the 1930s a group associated with the CPUSA, the People’s Songsters, was formed, and it included singers Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Huddie Ledbetter and Burl Ives. The later People’s Artists of the late 1940s included some of the above singers and also the popular Weavers group. Most of these artists were firmly committed to the ideals of communism, but their efforts were given scant financial and logistical support by the Party.
Lieberman explains in depth how the Russian Communist Party’s machinations were a great hindrance to the People’s Songsters. For example, the Songsters were told to write songs excoriating FDR by Comintern officials in the late 1930s, but they were then told to laud him after World War II broke out. Similarly, the Songsters were told to back off making nasty songs about Hitler when the Russo-German Nonaggression Pact of 1939 was signed and then they were told to go after Hitler again when he attacked the USSR. This lurching back and forth to the demands of a distant puppeteer was accepted by the People’s Songsters, but it wasn’t appreciated or conducive to a consistent message.
The Worker’s Songbook and the journal Sing Out! published many of the tunes that members of the People’s Songsters and Artists wrote, like “The Hammer Song” and “We Shall Overcome.” These songs became very popular at labor and desegregation rallies and also at the hootenannies and concerts that the People’s Songsters and Artists put on. However, the CPUSA never caught on in America as a viable political movement, and its membership was never very large (est. of roughly 1.2 million members at its height).
The CPUSA’s membership declined very rapidly after its unsuccessful backing of Henry Wallace’s Progressive Party during the 1948 presidential election. Communists and their “mouth pieces” were attacked during the campaign by the press as well as both Republicans and Democrats, and the party was in full retreat by the time the McCarthy era began in earnest. This, of course, had a great impact of the People’s Artists of the late 1940s.
The huge hootenannies that once drew thousands to hear the Party’s message became the scenes for violent anti-communist riots and the use of folk music as a weapon by the CPUSA quickly dissolved. The People’s Artists were disbanded in 1950, but many of its former members were hounded in the witch hunts that ensued. The Weavers’ careers were destroyed, as were the careers of many other artists who did not recant their “wicked and unAmerican” beliefs. But despite the demise of the People’s Songsters and Artists, their songs were left to posterity, and Lieberman points out that many of these are still used today.
The author comes to the conclusion that folk music can be an effective means of causing changes in some cases and not in others, and that sometimes the changes wrought are not in the direction which was intended. For instance, Lieberman points out that Woody Guthrie’s “This Land is Your Land” was originally designed to be a parody of Irving Berlin’s “God Bless America.” The schoolchildren of today sing “This Land is Your Land” as a patriotic song and they do not pay any regard to its original intent.
One of the best aspects of Lieberman’s work is his inclusion of the texts of many of the folksongs the People’s Songsters and Artists wrote and the tunes that they were sung to. Not all of these texts were set to traditional folk music, but the majority of them were. The hymn “Sweet By and By” became the militant “The Preacher and the Slave,” while the Civil War tune “John Brown’s Body” became the popular “Solidarity Forever.” We heard “Solidarity Forever” sung by the Polish workers as they demonstrated against a communist regime. So much for original intentions.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON is Lieberman’s Doctoral thesis, and there are a numerous sources that he used in preparing the book. The Preface alone cites fourteen sources and interviews, Chapter Two cites 65, and Chapter Five has the highest with 79. Lieberman conducted over 100 interviews with singers and organizers of the People’s Songsters and the later People’s Artists. He also used numerous personal letters, especially from Woody Guthrie to his wife, to provide personal insights into how the performers and organizers felt about pertinent issues.
Lieberman’s scholarship is first rate, but one gets the sense that the author comments too much and does not allow the folk-artists to tell their own stories. I am not contending that Lieberman isn’t accurate in his narratives about the events that transpired or what the folk-artists felt, but he has an annoying habit of analyzing what is already clear from the dissected bits of interviews that he includes in the text.
In some ways MY SONG IS MY WEAPON reads like a long magazine article wherein the author uses the primary characters as sources to fill out the story he is telling. That is why we seldom see more than a few lines of dialogue from any folk-artist, and these lines are often buried under mounds of narrative. I believe Lieberman should have include more extensive sections of the numerous interviews he conducted because this would allow readers and folklorists to make their own analyses of the data he collected.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON has certainly made me aware of the vast amount of work and research that is involved in the study of folklore, and Lieberman earns high honors as a researcher. I am particularly interested in Lieberman’s use of personal letters to detail his thesis because I think letters and dairies can provide profound insights onto how folk-artists really feel about certain issues. Letters and diaries are free from the influence of an interviewer and audience, and they are thus of great importance when analyzing what motivates an artist. I enjoyed MY SONG IS MY WEAPON very much, and I would advocate its reading by anyone who is interested in how folksongs can be used a political tool.
One of the means that the American communists used to help spread their message was via the use of traditional folk tunes that were sung to pros that carried a suitable political message. These songs served as a means of carrying the Party’s line to labor rallies, political gatherings, and other large audiences. In that the folk songs were seen as a method of motivating change by their singers, they were thus considered a type of weapon.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON details the work of the various individuals and groups that used folk music to promote the Communist Party’s message between 1930 and 1950. Lieberman lays out an intricately detailed historical account about how folk songs came to be used by American communists, and he also analyzes the successes and failures this approach had in moving minds and changing the world.
The CPUSA officials of the early 30s were directed by the Comintern (Communists International), and the Comintern was controlled from Moscow. The early rhetorical efforts of the CPUSA were heavily influenced by the rather dreary and heavy-handed propagandistic narratives and films that were being pushed by the Party elite in Moscow, and these proved to be singularly unattractive to American audiences. The aficionados at the CPUSA soon had the happy idea of “Americanizing” the party and its message, and they allied themselves with traditional American values (e.g., equality) and widely recognized historical figures (e.g., Lincoln).
A small part of this movement to Americanize the CPUSA was the use of American folk music. In the 1930s a group associated with the CPUSA, the People’s Songsters, was formed, and it included singers Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Huddie Ledbetter and Burl Ives. The later People’s Artists of the late 1940s included some of the above singers and also the popular Weavers group. Most of these artists were firmly committed to the ideals of communism, but their efforts were given scant financial and logistical support by the Party.
Lieberman explains in depth how the Russian Communist Party’s machinations were a great hindrance to the People’s Songsters. For example, the Songsters were told to write songs excoriating FDR by Comintern officials in the late 1930s, but they were then told to laud him after World War II broke out. Similarly, the Songsters were told to back off making nasty songs about Hitler when the Russo-German Nonaggression Pact of 1939 was signed and then they were told to go after Hitler again when he attacked the USSR. This lurching back and forth to the demands of a distant puppeteer was accepted by the People’s Songsters, but it wasn’t appreciated or conducive to a consistent message.
The Worker’s Songbook and the journal Sing Out! published many of the tunes that members of the People’s Songsters and Artists wrote, like “The Hammer Song” and “We Shall Overcome.” These songs became very popular at labor and desegregation rallies and also at the hootenannies and concerts that the People’s Songsters and Artists put on. However, the CPUSA never caught on in America as a viable political movement, and its membership was never very large (est. of roughly 1.2 million members at its height).
The CPUSA’s membership declined very rapidly after its unsuccessful backing of Henry Wallace’s Progressive Party during the 1948 presidential election. Communists and their “mouth pieces” were attacked during the campaign by the press as well as both Republicans and Democrats, and the party was in full retreat by the time the McCarthy era began in earnest. This, of course, had a great impact of the People’s Artists of the late 1940s.
The huge hootenannies that once drew thousands to hear the Party’s message became the scenes for violent anti-communist riots and the use of folk music as a weapon by the CPUSA quickly dissolved. The People’s Artists were disbanded in 1950, but many of its former members were hounded in the witch hunts that ensued. The Weavers’ careers were destroyed, as were the careers of many other artists who did not recant their “wicked and unAmerican” beliefs. But despite the demise of the People’s Songsters and Artists, their songs were left to posterity, and Lieberman points out that many of these are still used today.
The author comes to the conclusion that folk music can be an effective means of causing changes in some cases and not in others, and that sometimes the changes wrought are not in the direction which was intended. For instance, Lieberman points out that Woody Guthrie’s “This Land is Your Land” was originally designed to be a parody of Irving Berlin’s “God Bless America.” The schoolchildren of today sing “This Land is Your Land” as a patriotic song and they do not pay any regard to its original intent.
One of the best aspects of Lieberman’s work is his inclusion of the texts of many of the folksongs the People’s Songsters and Artists wrote and the tunes that they were sung to. Not all of these texts were set to traditional folk music, but the majority of them were. The hymn “Sweet By and By” became the militant “The Preacher and the Slave,” while the Civil War tune “John Brown’s Body” became the popular “Solidarity Forever.” We heard “Solidarity Forever” sung by the Polish workers as they demonstrated against a communist regime. So much for original intentions.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON is Lieberman’s Doctoral thesis, and there are a numerous sources that he used in preparing the book. The Preface alone cites fourteen sources and interviews, Chapter Two cites 65, and Chapter Five has the highest with 79. Lieberman conducted over 100 interviews with singers and organizers of the People’s Songsters and the later People’s Artists. He also used numerous personal letters, especially from Woody Guthrie to his wife, to provide personal insights into how the performers and organizers felt about pertinent issues.
Lieberman’s scholarship is first rate, but one gets the sense that the author comments too much and does not allow the folk-artists to tell their own stories. I am not contending that Lieberman isn’t accurate in his narratives about the events that transpired or what the folk-artists felt, but he has an annoying habit of analyzing what is already clear from the dissected bits of interviews that he includes in the text.
In some ways MY SONG IS MY WEAPON reads like a long magazine article wherein the author uses the primary characters as sources to fill out the story he is telling. That is why we seldom see more than a few lines of dialogue from any folk-artist, and these lines are often buried under mounds of narrative. I believe Lieberman should have include more extensive sections of the numerous interviews he conducted because this would allow readers and folklorists to make their own analyses of the data he collected.
MY SONG IS MY WEAPON has certainly made me aware of the vast amount of work and research that is involved in the study of folklore, and Lieberman earns high honors as a researcher. I am particularly interested in Lieberman’s use of personal letters to detail his thesis because I think letters and dairies can provide profound insights onto how folk-artists really feel about certain issues. Letters and diaries are free from the influence of an interviewer and audience, and they are thus of great importance when analyzing what motivates an artist. I enjoyed MY SONG IS MY WEAPON very much, and I would advocate its reading by anyone who is interested in how folksongs can be used a political tool.
Displaying 1 of 1 review