A while back I started to build a site concerning the whistle. Aimed at encouraging beginners to use it in Christian music.
I dropped the project, after deciding that similar sites probably already exist.
The site (though largely incomplete, and mostly dead links) is at:
http://free.gentle.org/users/gospelhymns/Whistle/
I was wondering if I could get some feedback, as to whether I should go ahead and build this site.
Walden, that is really cool. I’d encourage yo to build it. The way you have whistle fingering for the songs is a good idea. My kids could go to your site and easily play along with the songs.
To my knowledge, you can put any music up there as long as it is for “free, educational and reasearch purposes only.”
Since guitar is my primary instrument, that is what I teach and my students are Christian kids from my home church. My pastor once encouraged me to teach my talents to others that the church may be built up. By doing this, you are investing in the future. 
Gary
Proverbs 22:6 Train a child in the way he should go,and when he is old he will not turn from it.
Go for it, man. I like where you seem to be taking this. I’ll sure link to ya from the Annex.
The penny whistle is an instrument immenently suited to Christian music, with its pure ethereal sound, ease of
play, and inexpensive cost. The Bible says, “Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord. Praise ye the
Lord.”The penny whistle, or tin whistle, is a six-hole musical pipe belonging to the fipple flute family. Other fipple
flutes include: the recorder, the flageolet, the tabor pipe, and the Native American flute.The original penny whistle was made of tin, with a wooden fipple. Today there are whistles made of various
materials, and in most all keys. The most popular key today is the key of ‘D.’
Can’t help you with your decision to put up the site or not. But I do have two bits of feedback.
The first is something you might not want to do something about. I don’t like the lable “Christian music” and I cringe at Christian Whistle Music or the like. Music is music and the most wonderful, beautiful, and hopeful thing about it is that it speaks to all, young or old, rich or poor, regardless of background, education, class, and religious beliefs. If you want to draw a distinction between religious or church music and secular music, fine. To put “Christian” is sectarian and exclusive to my ears. Just my two silverlings.
The second bit of feedback is something you might want to do something about. There is such word as “immenently”. I think you mean eminently, which literally means “sticking out” but is used in the sense of “very/to a high degree”. Cost (of the whistle) cannot be “expensive” or “inexpensive” but only “high” or “low”. Finally, I don’t know about the whistle being a “musical pipe” (except for Overton Low Ds, which are musical cosmic drainpipes).
I am not usually nitpicky like this, but I thought you might like know if you’re going to actually publish this on the Web.
CAUTIONDANGER*****
Read this post with discretion as it contains spiritual and religious content that is specific to the Christian faith. If you don’t want to read it, stop reading this post.
On 2002-07-02 10:19, Bloomfield wrote:
. . . The first is something you might not want to do something about. I don’t like the label “Christian music” and I cringe at Christian Whistle Music or the like. Music is music and the most wonderful, beautiful, and hopeful thing about it is that it speaks to all, young or old, rich or poor, regardless of background, education, class, and religious beliefs.
You have your opinion, you are welcome to it, and you have stated it. I will state my opinion, as well. Music also speaks to Christians. It becomes an important of our personal lives as part of worship. We have a right to music that speaks to us just as much as anybody else has a right to have music that speaks to them. I personally cringe at soprano singing, but that doesn’t make me wish to tell them not to sing that high because I am uncomfortable with that kind of music, nor do I wish to tell them that they should make music that speaks to a more general audience.
. . .If you want to draw a distinction between religious or church music and secular music, fine. To put “Christian” is sectarian and exclusive to my ears. Just my two silverlings.
If the music has words that affirm Christian faith and not other faiths, then it seems natural to label it Christian. There are Jewish music sites that I have visited, and I don’t see where that is exclusive. Christian music is no more sectarian than a site devoted to just whistle music, or English Country Dancing. I can go to learn about English Country Dancing, but I choose not too. That is not the fault of people that enjoy English Country dancing, but mine for not having the desire at this time to learn about it.
Bloomfield, please allow me to read in between the lines of your post, but I seem to get the feel that you are saying “You can be a Christian, but don’t practice your faith in public because some people don’t feel comfortable about that.” If that is your intent, I’d like to inform you that Christians practice faith not for the comfort of others. We practice because we believe. We believe that there is only one way to salvation, which is not by righteous acts, but faith in that God loves us. And as far as being exclusive, we welcome those who do not believe to read and consider what God has done. If you choose to believe, you can have that salvation too. There is nothing exclusive about it. It is YOUR choice.
I would say that music, all music, is the property of all mankind.
While I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having “Christian music,” you really can’t remove it from the rest of music and make it the exclusive property of one set of folks who believe a particular way.
I do think it would be a shame if you were to limit yourself to just that one kind of music. But I doubt that you would be able to anyway–it is a rather narrow perspective from which to see all of music.
Just my $.02 worth, and hoping I didn’t offend anybody of any faith,
–James
http://www.flutesite.com
I have done web searches for sites like you’re talking about – and found very little. If you have the time and energy to do this site, many people would appreciate it!
Steve
On 2002-07-02 11:29, Mark_J wrote:
CAUTIONDANGER*****
Read this post with discretion as it contains spiritual and religious content that is specific to the Christian faith. If you don’t want to read it, stop reading this post.
Oh, dear! I didn’t mean to offend anyone, if I may read between the lines of your post that I have offended you. It’s a misunderstanding. Let me explain.
You have your opinion, you are welcome to it, and you have stated it. I will state my opinion, as well. Music also speaks to Christians. It becomes an important of our personal lives as part of worship. We have a right to music that speaks to us just as much as anybody else has a right to have music that speaks to them. I personally cringe at soprano singing, but that doesn’t make me wish to tell them not to sing that high because I am uncomfortable with that kind of music, nor do I wish to tell them that they should make music that speaks to a more general audience.
I think music is for everyone and I said so! It is beautiful and universal. Nothing would be further from my mind to deny Christians a right to music. Hey, you don’t need a right to music, no one does. I also don’t have a problem with whatever words you or anyone wishes to set to music. I read my post again, and I didn’t think I was telling anyone to make music of a more general appeal. If I did, than I am a stupid lout and welcome public censure as well-deserve penitence. Let everyone make the music they like and the more of it the better!
If the music has words that affirm Christian faith and not other faiths, then it seems natural to label it Christian. There are Jewish music sites that I have visited, and I don’t see where that is exclusive. Christian music is no more sectarian than a site devoted to just whistle music, or English Country Dancing. I can go to learn about English Country Dancing, but I choose not too. That is not the fault of people that enjoy English Country dancing, but mine for not having the desire at this time to learn about it.
Fair enough.
Bloomfield, please allow me to read in between the lines of your post, but I seem to get the feel that you are saying “You can be a Christian, but don’t practice your faith in public because some people don’t feel comfortable about that.” If that is your intent, I’d like to inform you that Christians practice faith not for the comfort of others. We practice because we believe. We believe that there is only one way to salvation, which is not by righteous acts, but faith in that God loves us. And as far as being exclusive, we welcome those who do not believe to read and consider what God has done. If you choose to believe, you can have that salvation too. There is nothing exclusive about it. It is YOUR choice.
Well, I can’t stop you from reading between my lines. 
I will take this as a helpful reminder to post very carefully so as to step on as few toes as possible. I am NOT telling you how or where, how much or how little, why or why not to practice your faith. On the matter of your faith I have nothing to say to you. I’d be seriously worried if you did anything differently than you otherwise would because of something that I said (or implied). It is YOUR choice, and we agree on that. We might agree on much more, but I choose not to discuss my religious views on this board. My choice, and no harm in it either, I think.
Hope this clears things up. Let me just mention that it was only my intention to let Walden know how I feel about his proposed web site. He asked for my feedback. I am not telling him what to do or not to.
I know I am all-too fond of my own wit on this board, but it’s all meant to be good fun. I don’t mean to put anyone on the defensive.
Best!
EDIT:
I just realized that you may have understood my saying that “I cringe at Christian Whistle Music or the like.” That refers on the label—not the music. I guess what it is is that if I believed in the universal truth of something (and I might ) that I wanted to worship with music, I would want the music to be universal, too. I would want it to be called something that suggested its sameness, and not its distinction from “other” music. So you see, my comment was all about the name.
/bloomfield
[ This Message was edited by: Bloomfield on 2002-07-02 12:06 ]
Bloomfield, please let me start by saying I am not offended at all. I was intending to be strongly melodramatic, but I can now see that it looks as I was being defensive. Maybe a few emoticons would have helped; then again, maybe I should just learn to write better. I thought it would be good to support Walden’s request by starting a discussion, and you took the bait (as I have in the past).
I am, however, overtly curious about the perception that Christian music, alone builds barriers that prevent other people from enjoying that music. James posted a more overt example about what makes me curious.
On 2002-07-02 11:44, Peeplj wrote
I would say that music, all music, is the property of all mankind.
While I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having “Christian music,” you really can’t remove it from the rest of music and make it the exclusive property of one set of folks who believe a particular way.
I do think it would be a shame if you were to limit yourself to just that one kind of music. But I doubt that you would be able to anyway–it is a rather narrow perspective from which to see all of music.
How does any label divide music? How does a label make the music exclusive property of on group of people, however they are different from others. How does that prevent Walden from enjoying other music if he chooses to express only one on the internet at this time?
It is just cataloging. Why does that imply a narrow perspective?
Please allow me the liberty to paraphrase your text as follows:
“While I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having “St. Louis Blues music,” you really can’t remove it from the rest of music and make it the exclusive property of one set of folks who live in other parts of the world.”
That seems very silly when you insert St. Louis Blues or Dixieland Jazz into your text. I did that to illustrate that only Christian music gets the stigma of isolating musical culture from the rest of the world and that is just curious to me. Many classical composers wrote tons of religous music that the classical music community at large enjoys reguardless of profession of faith. And to use an example that has popped up in our discussion board, the Welsh folk tune, “the Ash Grove.” The Ash Grove will always be a Welsh folk tune, yet more than a dozen hymns have been written to use that melody. That doesn’t take it away from Welsh people or any other people for that matter.
Looking at the tunes that Walden selected, I saw that they are mostly hymns. As a whistler involved with Church Music, this is the first effort of It’s kind and I felt as if it was worth having in existance. I would imaging that an athiest could go to waldens site and learn whistling from the fingering of the tunes for songs that Walden put up on the web.
On 2002-07-02 11:58, Bloomfield wrote:
I think music is for everyone and I said so! It is beautiful and universal. Nothing would be further from my mind to deny Christians a right to music. Hey, you don’t need a > right > to music, no one does. I also don’t have a problem with whatever words you or anyone wishes to set to music.
We are agreed
I read my post again, and I didn’t think I was telling anyone to make music of a more general appeal. If I did, than I am a stupid lout and welcome public censure as well-deserve penitence. Let everyone make the music they like and the more of it the better!
Your assesment of your own post was correct, but the allusion is very easliy read into your words. Also, you do not deserve sensure. I just felt it good to take the opportunity to have this discussion, and you’re a good sport in the posting, so much the better.
Hope this clears things up. Let me just mention that it was only my intention to let Walden know how I feel about his proposed web site. He asked for my feedback. I am not telling him what to do or not to.
You shared your opinion and so did I. Fair play to you.
Best!
to you, as well
EDIT:
I just realized that you may have understood my saying that “I cringe at Christian Whistle Music or the like.” That refers on the label—not the music. I guess what it is is that if I believed in the universal truth of something (and I might >
I think I understood that, but I think my part of the discussion was defending the right to have the label, just as other musics have their own labels.
Cheers to all. . . Oh, and God bless ;p
Mark J
[ This Message was edited by: Mark_J on 2002-07-02 12:49 ]
Kim, I think your site is exquisite! Don’t worry about whether there are other similar sites on the net - even if there are, each one is different and yours has a LOT to offer. I know how difficult it is to build and maintain a site, but yours is a very worthwhile endeavor, and I doubt there are very many that are whistle-specific.
Please keep up the good work; I’ve bookmarked your site.
Walden… Please check private messages.
On 2002-07-02 14:14, Kendra wrote:
Kim, I think your site is exquisite!
It is a nice site, huh? It’s not mine though, it’s Walden’s! LOL He’s a guy!
Kim
What a great website! I book marked it. I would encourage you to continue with it. Or even better, pray about it & follow God’s guidance.
Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I’ll go ahead with it, then.
Bloomfield, I’ll check my spelling.
I didn’t mean to get another argumentative thread started.
Persons of all faiths are welcome to make use of the site.
Perhaps I shall add some Jewish music, as well.
I had started the site, and uploaded the pages quite a while back, but nearly forgot about it.
Okay. I’ve got it up and running. I wrote a brief instructional page, and added a couple more songs. I plan to add more as time goes by. No dead links (I think).
Whistle](http://free.gentle.org/users/gospelhymns/Whistle/%22%3EWhistle) Praise
Though this thread seems to have exhausted itself, the brief discussion about “Christian music” piqued my interest.
As a follower of Christ, and as a musician of 30+ years (vocally and instrumentally), I cringe at labels as well when applied to music. Music has existed for much longer than humans’ propensity to label things. Genesis 4 records the invention of the flute by Jubel. BTW: I’m sure it was of the keyless, six-holed variety.
Joannie Madden’s “The Level Plain” is a beautiful air in it’s own right. I transcribed it for my wife, a flutist, who played it in church a while ago during the offering. It was beautifully transformed into a worshipful piece of music. But that didn’t change the nature of the music itself.
Last year, I played several Irish jigs as part of the Overture to our Christmas program, and got more compliments about playing “real” music (though that may be more of a commentary on the style of music typically offered versus what people want to hear), than if I had played a Bach fugue (which would have difficult to do by myself ).
Also consider: Many of our so-called “great hymns of the faith” were written using the folk music of the day–including bar songs. One example is “A Mighty Fortress is Our God.”
As a Worship Director, I look for music that will not distract people from their primary objective: to worship. But the music doesn’t have to be found in a hymnal to be appropriate. We’ve even rewritten hymns to modernize the language, and set them in contemporary music styles. [I’ve actually found the lyrics of some of our traditional hymns aren’t biblically sound (which is of more concern to me as a Worship Director than the style).]
The Apostle Paul said he became all things to all men to further the Gospel (1 Corinthians 9:21-23). We who follow Christ need to stop nursing our preferences and to remember we’re not left on this earth to be comfortable and wallow in our faith, but to reach out to others.
It’s been said the church is the only place where people are expected to sit on 16th century seating (pews), sing 17th century songs (hymns), played on 18th century instruments (organ). And then we wonder why people say we’re “disconnected”!
Well, I’ll end this ramble by restating my point: Music speaks to the heart, and does not respect–as one has already mentioned–religious persuasion, beliefs, race, sex, gender, age, or whatever. It is the language of the human spirit, which was given to us by our Creator.
Great discussion!
-Tom
Tom Gallagher
a whistling tenor, just fiddling around
fiddlingtenor@usa.com
“This is petrified truth.” (Mark Twain)
[ This Message was edited by: fiddling_tenor on 2002-07-03 08:59 ]
On 2002-07-02 12:49, Mark_J wrote:
I am, however, overtly curious about the perception that Christian music, alone builds barriers that prevent other people from enjoying that music. …
How does any label divide music?
…
It is just cataloging. Why does that imply a narrow perspective?
Please allow me the liberty to paraphrase your text as follows:
“While I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having > “St. Louis Blues music,” > you really can’t remove it from the rest of music and make it the exclusive property of one set of folks who > live in other parts of the world> .”
That seems very silly when you insert St. Louis Blues or Dixieland Jazz into your text. I did that to illustrate that only Christian music gets the stigma of isolating musical culture from the rest of the world and that is just curious to me. Many classical composers wrote tons of religous music that the classical music community at large enjoys reguardless of profession of faith. And to use an example that has popped up in our discussion board, the Welsh folk tune, “the Ash Grove.” The Ash Grove will always be a Welsh folk tune, yet more than a dozen hymns have been written to use that melody. That doesn’t take it away from Welsh people or any other people for that matter.
…
Mark, you reminded me of this thread recently. I went back and read it again, and I realized that I did not respond to your comments. Since I also realized that Walden changed the title of his webpage to “Sacred Music” I thought I’d try to explain why such labels as “Christian music” rub me the wrong way.
DISCLAIMER: Everyone is welcome to keep using that label. I am not telling you what to do or not to do. I don’t disapprove of you, your views, beliefs, practices, or favorite music. I think it’s interesting to listen to people whose views are perhaps different from mine. Since you are reading this I assume that the same is true of you. END OF DISCLAIMER
I don’t think the St.-Louis-Blues analogy works. First off, it’s a descriptive label that says nothing more than “blues music from St. Louis” and that makes it different from the label “Christian Music” in my view.
Before I explain why “Christian” isn’t just a descriptive label in my experience, let me say that I don’t think the problem here is that music is being taken away, appropriated if you will, by calling it by a specific label. It’s not impossible for such a thing to happen, though, and one should be on the look-out. For instance, under the Nazi’s “final solution” meant the destruction of the Jews of Europe, and to my ears that term can never shake that connotation. It has been appropriated by the Nazis and I cringe involuntarily if I hear the words “final solution” used in perfectly inoccuous and mundane circumstances. That is a crass example to bring home the point that cultural associations can grow so strong that it becomes impossible to ignore them. Consider Ravel’s Bolero: A beautiful piece of music that cannot be seriously played in this country anymore, thanks to Bo Derek and that hilarious sex scene. On the other hand, it is still possible to play the Ashgrove in a session without bringing a church service to everybody’s mind.
So, while I think that cultural appropriation exists and that it is not “just about cataloging”, such appropriation wasn’t my original concern. I think that the label “Christian” is different from a lable like “St. Louis Blues”, “Hard Rock”, or “Madrigal” for two reasons.
The first difference lies in the meaning of “Christian.” If you use the term to define music that has words about Christ or is played in worship, you are drawing a line. (“define” means to establish a border.) There wouldn’t be a problem with this if Christian belief in its substance weren’t antithetical to such lines or borders. It is not our business to draw lines between Christians and non-Christians, I think (judge not, and so forth). After all, everyone is considered a child of God, and all our attempts at distinction would be meaningless in the eyes of God, right? (You know more here than I do.) Similarly, to draw distinctions between Christian and non-Christian things strikes me as inherently suspicious, as potentially losing sight of what “it’s meant to be about.” The music we play, songs we sing, words we say, and places we go, our clothes, our food, our secret handshakes: all these things don’t just have meaning in themselves but also serve to establish cultural separations. They are markers for group associations, and tell everyone what club we belong to. It’s comfortable and comforting to belong to a club where I know what to expect and what reaction I will get for what I say, but again, this comfort is not what it’s about, I think.
The second reason why the St.-Louis-Blues analogy doesn’t quite work, in my opinion, is that the label “Christian” comes with more historical and cultural baggage then other terms. It calls to mind overzealous and intrusive attempts to save someone elses souls, Christian sectarianism, and cultural aloofness, and even images of slightly-deranged-seeming and slightly scary people waiving bibles on streetcorners and screaming “Jesus Loves You” in my face (my views, my perceptions, of course). Now, I realize that this is a bit hard on someone who honestly believes and does not want to intrude or be disrespectful, but to whom faith is an important part of life that permeates everything else. It’s like being blamed by association. There is no way out of it, however, I think. You can either hang out at your “club” and talk to people whose association with labels like “Christian” is colored by different things. Or you can avoid the label where possible and remember that it is actions and not words that count.
(If you’ve gotten this far, please remember that this is just my view and that I am not asking you to agree with me, or to change, or to do anything that should cause you to get upset now.)
Walden,
Nice start to the site, and as the son of a pastor, and an ex-worship leader myself I can see how it could be valuable to the people in the community, so go for it! Do be careful of copyright, remember that even giving out the words to songs for use in church can be a violation (you may not get ‘done’ but that’s not the point, is it?). I would recommend adding a page to your site saying something like “I believe that all material used is either not copyright or is covered by fair use. If you believe this not to be the case for any item then please contact me immediately and I will remove it”. That wouldn’t stand up in court, but at least shows willing (and you’re more likely to get a polite e-mail than a ‘cease and desist’). If you’re really worried then ask a lawyer (most churches have several…)
I would say stick with what your heart tells you, if you want to make this a Christian site then do so. I am not a Christian (I follow a Buddhist practice), but I believe that tollerance means letting all have their say, not forcing all to accept everything.
Now, perhaps I should start a Buddhist Whistle site…Hmmm, I know of Nepalese flutes, and conch-horns, and of course those end-blown schaceewooble flute things in Zen..
Nice site! Keep up the good work!
Great site Walden.
Golly Bloomfield, I don’t see what you are saying. You don’t seem to find offense with the ITrad Forum. What is the difference with that and a Christian whistle site? If the music would be for Sailor Tunes than I would hope they would call it the Sailor Tune site so I wouldn’t be mistaken with what they were were putting on there. Do you want Walden to put up a misnomer so as to trick unsuspecting Nonchristians into hearing about Christ. I think he should be able to call it what ever he wants.
Thats my Reasonable Person Principal thoughts.
Kathy
Edited to change a not so reasonable word.
~Live Well, Love Much, Laugh Often~
[ This Message was edited by: chattiekathy on 2002-08-16 20:24 ]