5

Presenting America’s Religious Heritage Abroad

As the historian Jonathan Herzog describes it, the Cold War inspired a “deliberate and managed use of societal resources to stimulate a religious revival in the late 1940s and 1950s.”1 Again and again American thinkers tied their country’s place in the world to its religious identity. Highly placed figures in the U.S. government frequently drew a sharp contrast between a Judeo-Christian America and the “godless Communism” of the Soviet Union. Within the United States, church attendance rose through the late 1940s and 1950s, and church membership was considered a defense against accusations of Communist affiliation. At the same time, some mainline Protestants felt a religious calling to aid the development of impoverished nations and to oppose war, setting them in opposition to their own government.² Religion was an important part of the public dialogue about international intervention throughout this period.

The religious distinction between Communism and capitalism was useful for U.S. propaganda abroad. When President Truman created the Psychological Strategy Board in 1951, religion was immediately identified as a key factor in helping others understand America. The director of the board, Gordon Gray, wrote that “the potentialities of religion as an instrument for combating Communism are universally tremendous. . . . Because of the immoral and un-Christian nature of Communism and its avowed opposition to and persecution of religions, most of the world’s principal religious organizations are already allied with the cause of the free nations. Our over-all objective in seeking the use of religion as a cold war instrumentality should be the furtherance of world spiritual health; for the Communist threat could not exist in a spiritually healthy world.”³ A few years later President Eisenhower noted that religion helped other peoples feel warmly toward the United States. Eisenhower understood that America could seem materialistic to other nations. He did not want the world to associate America with “the speed of our automobiles or the wonderful gadgets that we use in our homes.” Rather, Eisenhower aimed to communicate that “throughout its history, America’s greatness has been based upon a spiritual quality.”4

The Eisenhower administration made considerable use of religious ideas in its propaganda abroad. The CIA and the National Security Council recognized in 1954 that partnerships with religious organizations were a useful strategic tool for undermining Communism in the Soviet satellite states.⁵ A 1956 policy guide stated that “because religion is an important part of the life and culture of the people of the United States, concrete facts about this will help provide more complete understanding of this country among peoples abroad.”⁶ The constitutionally mandated separation of church and state meant that policy had to be developed carefully, and various agencies and even individual officials approached religious themes in different ways. A PAO in Pretoria, for example, wrote that the U.S. government was too timid. In his view the Bill of Rights limited not religion but only denominational favoritism, and he routinely made religion a part of his message to the people he served.⁷ In 1959 Ronald Bridges, the religious adviser of the USIA, explained that “religion and state are not separated”: “Religion is not to be overemphasized or treated as something separate and unique, but it is to be dealt with forthrightly in the context of American life.”⁸ As long as the U.S. government did not appear to be proselytizing for any one denominational group, religion could be presented as a characteristic element of American culture.

Religion was not a dominant theme in the State Department’s music programs, yet sacred music was a persistent presence in U.S. concert programming abroad. Professional and collegiate choral groups frequently offered sacred music as part of their programs, and the department reported that these groups “helped achieve the objective of portraying the United States as a country of cultural and spiritual depth.”⁹ Church music represented an important component of European classical music, so this music could simultaneously serve multiple ends, drawing on the prestige of Europe while at the same time demonstrating Christian spiritual values. Embassy staff found that music could effectively convey “ideas about the religious life of the American people.”¹⁰ An additional advantage of using choral music as propaganda was that this music was considered uncontroversial by the Christian majority in the United States, and its inclusion therefore helped to maintain congressional support for the Cultural Presentations program.¹¹ Most of the choral groups who traveled on behalf of the State Department offered at least some sacred music, often as part of mixed programs as described in chapter 1.

The effectiveness of religious music differed by region and audience. In Asia, not only was the music unfamiliar, but religious content risked the appearance of proselytizing. U.S. diplomatic officials in Bangkok requested that the State Department respect the feelings of local Buddhists by minimizing the amount of Christian music presented.12 In Eastern Europe, where much religious expression was suppressed, the rare presentation of sacred music by State Department–sponsored performers was thrilling. Because of the tremendous capacity of religious music to move audiences, U.S. officials negotiated vigorously to get choral groups into Eastern Europe. The audience response appears to have merited that effort.¹³ When Robert Shaw took his chorale to the Soviet Union in 1962, the religious works on the program were received “ecstatically”; these included Schubert’s Mass in G and several Negro spirituals (“My God Is a Rock,” “Soon It Will Be Done,” “Sometimes I Feel Like a-Movin’ On,” and a boogie-woogie version of “Dry Bones,” which was encored). The New York Herald Tribune reported that “the religious beliefs of the Russian people may be no concern of ours. But music is a means of conveying our own inward feeling and devotion as a people.”¹⁴ In Belgrade, Yugoslavia, the Shaw chorale performed a set of six Negro spirituals as encores; an eyewitness compared the audience’s wildly enthusiastic response to “the scene of an old-fashioned revival.”¹⁵ Likewise, when the Westminster Choir performed in Zagreb, its religious choral works and spirituals struck a chord, evoking “considerable nostalgia among the strongly Catholic audience.”¹⁶

Sacred music of some kind was present on the programs of nearly every singer and choir that toured under the Cultural Presentations program. In some cases the programs merely contained a few spirituals as encores, but occasionally religious music formed a major portion of the program. In the remainder of this chapter I consider two aspects of religious music as it was presented abroad. First, and at the forefront of the State Department’s strategy, was the use of Negro spirituals, which were in high demand by audiences abroad, consistently requested by diplomats, and urged on performers by the planners of the tours. The presence of the spirituals supported the idea of the United States as both racially tolerant and undeniably Christian, reaching broad audiences through their popular style while conveying a sense of religious identity. Second, I examine the case of the Westminster Choir, a Christian collegiate group. Their tour demonstrates that U.S. musical diplomacy specifically addressed the needs of Christian groups abroad.

THE NEGRO SPIRITUAL IN CULTURAL DIPLOMACY

Throughout the duration of the Cultural Presentations program, diplomatic posts frequently asked the State Department to send them performers who could offer Negro spirituals. To a great extent this programming choice was driven by the disparity between the department’s desire to send classically trained performers and the posts’ need to cater to broad audiences, many of whom had little prior exposure to Western styles of singing.17 The spiritual was a happy medium: it could be performed in a variety of styles, from unaccompanied and folksy to arranged and harmonized in the manner of Western classical choral music. Concert choirs such as the Robert Shaw Chorale and the University of Maryland Singers offered sophisticated arrangements of spirituals. African American singing groups such as the Phoenix Singers, the Golden Gate Quartet, and the Deep River Boys often performed spirituals in popular style, interspersed with secular popular songs. Although some officials complained that these songs were not elegant enough to represent the United States properly, programs of this kind were well-liked by audiences (figure 12).¹⁸ In some cases the popular style of the performance was as important as the nature of the spiritual. In Rangoon, for example, the embassy noted that it was showmanship and “clowning” that put the Golden Gate Quartet’s concerts across, not the spirituals themselves.¹⁹

Spirituals also offered a broad range of emotions legible to almost all audiences. In the United States these songs inspired romanticized thinking about the suffering and “natural genius” of African Americans; abroad, their reception was tinged with similar exotic stereotypes.²⁰ As a critic in Manila wrote, “The solemn ones touched [us] deeply as no other but their people can touch the hearer; the merry ones were as frolicksome [sic] as any four Americans full of the life and joy of their art can make them.”²¹ The words of spirituals were accessible and allowed for a kind of dramatic showmanship that might be considered inappropriate in the performance of European classics but rendered the spirituals especially attractive to audiences. Furthermore, the subject matter emphasized religious identity without putting forward an explicit denominational heritage. In its folksier incarnations the spiritual could be presented as historical folk music about the African American past. In more classicized renditions it spoke of the elevation of a people toward participation in a “cultivated” musical present, while still holding fast to tradition. In either style the spiritual offered foreign audiences a feeling of vicarious access to a particularly controversial aspect of American experience—the hopes and struggles of African Americans—as well as a compelling narrative about overcoming suffering.

Figure 12. The Golden Gate Quartet performs at the Chin Woo Stadium in Kuala Lumpur, Malaya, 1959. RG 59-G-96-206, National Archives.

The use of spirituals addressed the ever-present challenge of attracting audiences’ interest. Choral music in the European and American traditions is predominantly sacred, but the words are sometimes sung in languages unfamiliar to listeners, or the music may be too serious in style to captivate audiences for the duration of a concert. State Department officials had hoped that religious music would be especially useful in reaching Roman Catholic audiences in Latin America, but these listeners were hoping for entertainment, not church music. Audiences asked, “Why don’t they sing something else?”22 A department report noted in 1967 that the Hamline University Choir displayed excellent technique, fine discipline, and exceptional personal qualities, and some Latin American critics praised their “seriousness”—meaning their choice of European repertoire and their high standard of performance. Still, “the choir’s repertoire was considered by some commentators to be weighted too heavily in the direction of serious religious music, thus limiting the universality of their appeal.”²³ The use of spirituals with a vernacular popular tone offered an attractive alternative.

As we have seen in other instances, though, even a mixed program could not keep all audiences happy. A few audience groups expressed concern about the folk-music aspect of the spirituals. Some felt they were being condescended to with performances that emphasized showmanship instead of artistry: they were reluctant to accept programs too laden with popular music. In Nairobi, Kenya, the post reported “an almost insatiable interest in American negroes,” and eminent African American singers were warmly received.24 When the soprano Camilla Williams appeared in Nairobi, though, “the audience would have preferred her to have given a heavier program than she did—for instance, a bit of lieder substituted in that portion of the program which she devoted largely to Negro spirituals.” The Westminster Singers were also criticized there for their “folksy method of presentation.”²⁵ In Hong Kong the Golden Gate Quartet presented spirituals in a popular style alongside American popular songs. Unfortunately, an article appearing before their concert advertised incorrectly that the quartet was known for “its simple, sincere interpretation of the spirituals,” and those audience members who were expecting authentic African American folk music were shocked and disappointed by the doo-wop-inflected style of the quartet.²⁶ Music critics who sought to maintain their professional standing tended to praise the classical numbers while maintaining that mass publics appreciated the spirituals best—though more than a few critics were won over to appreciation of the spiritual.²⁷

Constant pressure from diplomatic posts caused the State Department to demand changes in programming among its touring concert artists. Although artists submitted programs for approval to the Music Advisory Panel and finalized them as contracts were negotiated, the posts frequently requested alterations in the preapproved programs. The most common request was the substitution of spirituals or lighter songs in place of art songs. These program changes are especially noteworthy in the case of classically trained singers, who had been chosen for the Cultural Presentations program to demonstrate a high level of musical expertise. For musicians whose programs were prepared with utmost care in advance, midtour requests for spirituals could be an affront. Marian Anderson, who typically included one set of spirituals on her programs, was unable to change her predominantly classical program on short notice. Yet official reports suggest that many musicians accommodated the posts’ wishes. When asked to do so, the great classical baritone William Warfield (figure 13) willingly emphasized spirituals, eliminated difficult numbers, and added more popular or humorous songs. (He routinely performed “Ol’ Man River,” which he had famously sung in the movie Showboat, and he offered Aaron Copland’s arrangement of “I Bought Me a Cat” as an encore that encouraged audience participation.)28 As a result of the posts’ requests, some musicians appeared abroad with substantially different repertory than they performed at home. The African American soprano Betty Allen, for example, was known in the United States for her performances of American contemporary music and Baroque oratorio. She was a specialist in the music of Virgil Thomson. Nevertheless, she performed spirituals on her tours at the department’s request with great success. Officials commended flexible artists who were good at “reading” an audience and changing programs to accommodate local tastes.

Figure 13. William Warfield sings at the Regal Cinema in Lahore, Pakistan, 1958. RG 59-G-96-206, National Archives.

One wonders whether U.S. officials recognized that changing an opera singer’s repertoire might cause offense. In particular, requesting that an African American singer perform spirituals was a form of racial essentialism, an assumption that someone’s skin color revealed his or her musical skills or preferences. The spiritual had long been a fraught topic. African American activist and singer Bayard Rustin wrote that to avoid racist behavior, one should “avoid asking Negroes to sing spirituals unless it is done interracially or unless the Negro considers them his specialty.”29 Racial bias shaped opinions about spirituals abroad, as well as at home: the State Department pressed spirituals on African American singers principally because foreign audiences expected to hear spirituals from them. A Latin American reviewer cited Allen’s “powerful and ancestral ability” to perform spirituals, even though she exclusively chose classicized concert spirituals, arranged by Hall Johnson and Roland Hayes.³⁰ In Iceland one reviewer criticized the spirituals Allen offered as “a dubious novelty,” but another praised “her outstanding rendition of the Negro Spirituals which express so well the genius of her race.” Another Icelander reported that Allen sang “spirituals with the artistic feeling which is hardly to be found with any singers except those who are Negroes themselves.”³¹ The essentialism of foreign audiences suffused their thinking about the American singers to such a degree that any music associated with African American culture, even show tunes, was elided into the spiritual: in Manila a critic noted that Warfield’s concert reached its peak with “the classic Negro lament ‘Ol’ Man River.’”³² Likewise, some critics expected African Americans to perform only the music associated with their race, dismissing their other offerings. When the Howard University Choir performed in Argentina, a critic reported that “sometimes their interpretation of international repertory is a little distant from our expectations, but when they sing the songs of their race, they are transformed into true artists and are intensely linked with their audience.”³³

The State Department also encouraged ensembles that were entirely or predominantly white to perform Negro spirituals. In San José, Costa Rica, audiences liked the Roger Wagner Chorale’s performance of Brazilian folk songs and the amusing pictorial madrigal known as the “Echo Song” (Orlande de Lassus, “O là o che bon eccho”), but according to the PAO the rest of their programs were too heavy: “A higher percentage of folksongs and negro spirituals might have been more advisable.”³⁴ The University of Maryland Singers, an ethnically diverse but predominantly white ensemble, had begun as a madrigal choir, but their performances of spirituals were the best received music on their programs in Amman and Cairo.³⁵ That singers of other ethnicities performed music that was easily recognized as African American was meant to persuade audiences that the music was respected in the United States.

Performances of spirituals by white or predominantly white concert choirs were usually but not always well received. The polished precision typical of American concert spiritual performance surprised audiences who associated the spiritual with folk practice. The Robert Shaw Chorale’s renditions of spirituals, for instance, appealed to audiences—but as highly stylized performances coming from predominantly white groups of singers, they could also be criticized as inauthentic. The Turkish music critic Ilhan Mimaroğlu wrote after hearing Shaw’s chorale that the spirituals were merely “an imitation of the Negro spirit and were sung like college songs.”36 This was a stylistic problem affecting a variety of genres, not only spirituals. When the Harvard Glee Club performed Filipino songs in Manila, the songs themselves were transformed by the crisp diction and the precise tuning of the choir. The critic for the Manila Chronicle wrote with a mix of admiration and discomfort: “Despite their unimpeachable virtuosity—or perhaps because of it—the Harvard Glee Club transformed these Filipino songs into American ditties.”³⁷ Spirituals had regularly been performed in this polished concert style since the Harlem Renaissance of the 1920s, but the transformation of what was perceived as folk music into a more formal manner of performance was not universally accepted as appropriate by audiences abroad.

Spirituals also offered a participatory opportunity, a chance for singers to interact personally with their audiences. Warfield taught spirituals to Malayan boys during his visit to Ampang; the Deep River Boys sang them with Malagasy singers.³⁸ When the Westminster Choir visited Belgrade, they sang spirituals at a party with the Branko Krsmanović Choir. An embassy official there noted that “there can be no more concrete evidence than this of the penetration of American culture. The youth of this country may be a little confused about the kind of politics they want, but there is no doubt in anyone’s mind of the kind of music they enjoy.”³⁹

Over time some audiences were exposed to multiple Cultural Presentations performances and developed a taste for the spiritual. In Belgrade the Robert Shaw Chorale was followed fourteen months later by the Westminster Choir. Both groups included spirituals on their programs. The embassy’s PAO cited increased interest as a result of these tours: citizens had begun to request records and scores of Negro spirituals from the embassy.⁴⁰ In South Africa, where white listeners typically expressed disdain for the music of black people, spirituals were a great success when performed by the all-white Westminster Singers. The musical staff of the South African Broadcasting company even requested American help in building a library collection of recorded spirituals. The U.S. embassy in Pretoria was at that time engaged in reaching out to Dutch Reformed churches, and the religious message of the spirituals apparently superseded the racial history of the music, successfully attracting white, Christian audiences to African American music.⁴¹

Spirituals and gospel music were presented to African audiences as a means of cultivating pan-African attitudes: these performances demonstrated U.S. government support for African American culture and provided access to music that was in high demand in the era of decolonization. Choral director Leonard De Paur was known in the United States for modernist music, having directed the Broadway revival of Four Saints in Three Acts.42 In 1966 De Paur toured Europe, the Middle East, and Africa with an ethnically mixed all-male chorus that performed “folk, spiritual, and African numbers.” Their tour included a stop at the World Festival of Negro Arts in Dakar, Senegal, and it was acclaimed as “one of the most successful tours of Africa ever undertaken by the Cultural Presentations Program.” The embassy in Cairo reported that “the audience was especially pleased with American folk music and the ‘Songs of New Nations’ sung by the Chorus.” The U.S. embassy in Cotonou, Dahomey (later Benin), was enthusiastic about the pan-African resonances of De Paur’s program choices: “The audience came alive after the Ashanti number and belonged to the Chorus for the rest of the show. This musical identification of America with Africa opened communication with the audience and made it receptive to the American musical messages imparted by the rest of the program.”⁴³

Gospel singers Mahalia Jackson and Marion Williams also served as delegates to the First World Festival of Negro Arts, performing both sacred and secular music in a wide variety of venues. “Marion Williams is a great entertainer,” one post reported. “When she flashes a broad smile, stretches out her hands and begins to intone Alleluia or When the Saints Go Marching In, her audience instinctively reacts by singing along, clapping and stomping.” Williams’s performances in Africa included a “rousing” concert in a Methodist church in Lomé on Christmas Day. The Christian content of Williams’s music appears to have presented no difficulty for non-Christian audiences; rather, the engaging popular style of the music and the emphasis on African American achievement pleased audiences and won attention from the press throughout her tour.⁴⁴

Thus, the spiritual (and its relative, gospel) presented both a Christian and an ecumenical vision of American culture. Performed by artists of various ethnicities, the spiritual appeared to be at once African American, American, and universal. The words of spirituals spoke to experiences of suffering and liberation that were experienced by many around the world, cultivating sympathy with the well-known story of African Americans’ quest for freedom. That the spiritual was so routinely included on the State Department’s music programs testifies to officials’ eagerness to present a Christian and interracial identity abroad in a musically accessible way—and to worldwide demand for the spiritual. In the minds of officials and listeners alike the spiritual’s inclusion was an act of representation: a critic in Fortaleza, Brazil, wrote of the Howard University Choir that “the Choir is eloquent proof of the efforts of the North American government to eliminate racial discrimination while recognizing the right and capacity of the Negro to represent to the whole world along with the white man.”45

THE WESTMINSTER CHOIR: SUPPORTING CHRISTIAN MUSIC ABROAD

The use of religious music extended into other musical repertories, as well. Since a substantial part of the choral music literature consisted of Christian church music, any effort to send choral groups abroad implied the inclusion of some religious music. But this project went considerably further than the mere inclusion of religion: some choirs were used specifically for religious purposes.

The Westminster Choir was one of the first collegiate groups to tour under the Cultural Presentations program (1956–57). Westminster Choir College’s Christian identity was relatively rare among the touring groups. The college, located in Princeton, New Jersey, had long trained choral singers and conductors with the specific purpose of improving the quality of church music in the United States. When the Music Advisory Panel approved the choir for its tour, the panel made no mention of its religious mission, calling it simply “a first-class group.”⁴⁶ The choir toured with three concert programs: one devoted exclusively to American music, with an emphasis on folk music and Negro spirituals, the other two combining European classics with American music.⁴⁷

Accounts of the choir’s performing skills differ. The conductor, John Finley Williamson, was sixty-nine years old when he began his State Department tour in 1956. He was well past his prime as a conductor, though his choir continued to be respected in the United States. (He would be forced to retire from the college in 1958, primarily because of the decline in his conducting ability.) Critics in the United States noted that all of the choir’s numbers—whether dating from the Renaissance or contemporary times, whether folk or classical—tended to be presented in a similar style.⁴⁸ A critic in Sacramento remarked that Williamson put “too little stress on diction”; indeed, Williamson considered the audibility of the words far less important than conveying an emotional effect.⁴⁹ As usual, Tokyo critics expressed some dissatisfaction. One found the choir’s technique “inferior to that of European groups.” Another found that the choir placed “too much emphasis on mechanical technique,” a typical flaw “in a country which has a short history and little tradition behind her.” The American Cultural Center in Fukuoka, Japan, reported that listeners enjoyed the performance but found the classical pieces “unpolished.” The American songs on the program elicited the best critical reaction.50 In spite of these critics, State Department officials noted that “the Choir is as great a success as anything this [Cultural Presentations] Program has assisted so far.”⁵¹ A Japanese audience in Yokohama demanded “four or five encores,” and a critic in Lucknow, India, reported that the audience was “enthralled” and “bewitched.”⁵² The choir also made an excellent personal impression. A diplomat in Singapore wrote that the students possessed a “wholesomeness not commonly associated with young Americans of today. There were repeated comments by Singaporeans on this fact and often the wonder that it was actually so.”⁵³

In some respects Williamson and his wife, Rhea Williamson, were a risky choice for the State Department tour. Both held honorary doctorates, but embassy staff found the Williamsons uninformed about world affairs and ill-equipped to understand the situations they were walking into.⁵⁴ The Williamsons appreciated the opportunity to learn about the world, but they also saw it through the perspective of their comfortable lives. (Rhea Williamson spent much time shopping for jewelry and furniture in Asia.)⁵⁵ During his African tour of 1959 Williamson wrote to a State Department official: “We have made the discovery that simple, childlike people who live close to nature appreciate beauty as much as do highly cultured people of good taste.”⁵⁶ Rhea Williamson appeared to have given some thought to the problem of racism as a result of her tours. In a 1961 interview she explained: “We get to thinking that the white race is superior; however, when one visits a country where only a percentage are white, one ceases to feel superior, only different.”⁵⁷ Such remarks would, of course, run a high risk of offending the Williamsons’ hosts.

The Williamsons’ attitude toward the people they encountered abroad was founded on a firm belief in the political and cultural superiority of the West. Rhea Williamson wrote in her diary in Laos: “There are many fine American people there, who are directing the natives to realize that life consists of more than a straw shack.” She wondered what would become of Malaya when it received its independence from the British that year: “Freedom is a glorious possession only when an individual or a nation knows what to do with it.”⁵⁸ The Williamsons also viewed their audiences through a colonial lens: they judged the character of the people in each country by how they responded to what the Williamsons had to offer. When listeners praised the choir in India, Rhea Williamson praised them in return, noting in her diary that this audience was “going places fast.”59 In Japan, likewise, she noted that “This crowd is welcoming every number with thunderous applause. This is going to be a very great nation I’m sure, as the young people have so much eagerness.”⁶⁰

One reason the Westminster Choir was selected to tour was that it was racially integrated.⁶¹ The 1956–57 touring choir included two African Americans, and its ethnic composition was an important selling point for the State Department, touted in the choir’s own publicity and frequently mentioned abroad.⁶² In this, as in many other cases, the department sought to emphasize American inclusiveness by presenting an interracial ensemble. The choir’s press book from 1957 emphasized that the college accepted students of “all races, creeds, and nationalities” and that the tour of the previous year “in no way altered the typical inter-racial, democratic and cosmopolitan nature of this group.”⁶³ Williamson understood that it was important to convey the impression of racial harmony: he wrote that on tour “we must act like friendly Americans who love people regardless of race or color.”⁶⁴

Although the message of racial equality was part of the choir’s purpose, this message was not entirely true to the normal operation of the choir. Williamson explained in a 1956 letter that “we accept Negroes [at the choir college], but they must be as good or better than whites.”⁶⁵ Williamson’s correspondence from 1958 reveals that he never hesitated to arrange tours for the Westminster Choir in the southern United States, even though that meant that Afrika Hayes and Emma Smith, the choir’s two African American members in that year, would be unable to participate. The two students were not permitted to sing when the white members of the choir performed in places such as Birmingham, Alabama. By 1958, with civil rights protests well under way, more and more white musicians in integrated groups were refusing to perform in venues that would exclude their colleagues. Yet Williamson seems to have valued the promotion of the choir’s Christian message and his own choral methods over the feelings of two of his students. “We understand these local situations,” wrote Williamson as he arranged for the two girls to travel and be housed separately from the choir; at times he left them behind for several performances in a row so as not to offend southern sensibilities.⁶⁶ That Williamson readily acceded to segregationist pressure was not just a mark of the times: it also belies the message Williamson conveyed abroad.⁶⁷ We have no sources to indicate that this inconsistency was noticed during the Westminster Choir’s tour for the State Department.

Westminster Choir College had for some time been accepting foreign students, whose tuition was paid by churches in their home countries. Once these students had graduated and returned home, they became an international network of church musicians. On the choir’s State Department tour the former students served as liaisons, welcoming the choir, providing social connections, and arranging local performances.68 Protestant organizations, especially the Presbyterian church, also provided a key site for the choir’s diplomacy. In Thailand the choir visited Presbyterian institutions and churches, as well as churches of other denominations and several Christian schools.⁶⁹ Missionaries from a variety of Protestant denominations hosted them for meals and took them on tourist outings.⁷⁰ On many Sundays they provided music for worship in Christian churches, sometimes breaking into four or five choirs so as to visit as many churches as possible.⁷¹ The particular churches they visited in Korea, Saemoonan Presbyterian Church and Young Nak Presbyterian Church, were those most strongly associated with Western music and anti-Communist politics.⁷² A typical tour stop for the choir would fulfill many obligations, both secular and sacred. In Tehran, for instance, the choir gave four formal concerts, two to paying audiences and two to invited audiences, including one at the University of Tehran. They also sang at three Iranian schools and provided worship music at the Sunday service of the Community (Christian) Church.⁷³

Although Williamson recognized that the choir’s official mission as conceived by the State Department was distinct from a religious mission, he still considered the tour a form of evangelism: “Religion does not enter into it, although we are expected to live our religion.”⁷⁴ While the choir was away, the pastor of the Williamsons’ Presbyterian church preached about their tour in similar terms:

On this last Sunday of the year, while we worship God in our Princeton churches, the Westminster Choir is far away, bearing witness to our universal Savior in man’s most truly universal language—the language of music. Distributed in small groups through various churches in Singapore, members of the Choir are carrying God’s message of peace and reconciliation through His Son to fellow-Christians of all races and nationalities in one of the world’s most cosmopolitan cities. In the evening they may move on to Kuala Lumpur in Malaya or they may be giving another concert in Singapore—undoubtedly another triumph for their school, their country, and their faith.⁷⁵

Williamson aimed to demonstrate conspicuously, beyond all doubt, exactly what he believed America and Christianity stood for. At a concert after the group’s return to the United States, he commented that foreign audiences all seemed to understand the choir’s message: “And what we were trying to say is that America is a Christian nation, made of people who love the home, who are not interested in jazz, who are not interested in nightclubs, they are interested in things of the home, the things of culture.”76

The Westminster Choir made a point of demonstrating Christian charity throughout its Asian tour; its relatively small donations of equipment and money appear to have cultivated goodwill. In Thailand, for example, the choir presented a new saxophone to the students at a school for the blind and sent $100 contributions to schools for orphans in Thailand and Korea. The U.S. ambassador in Bangkok praised the choir for showing, “far more effectively than words could tell, much of the true spirit of our American people.”⁷⁷ Williamson also spoke of his evangelical mission to people he met on tour. As the choir left Dumaguete, the Philippines, Williamson offered these parting words to the people who saw him off: “All through the world we are bound by the love of one God, and we of this Choir have been privileged to spread abroad this love. We shall continue to hold you in our thoughts and prayers.”⁷⁸ A radio commentator who heard Williamson’s message found it deeply moving. He responded to the choir’s message: “We remember their music, and thank God that He has made harmony which even the chaos in this world cannot drown.”⁷⁹

For Rhea Williamson, ever-present and recording the tour in her diary, the evangelical aspect of the mission was always central. She repeatedly expressed surprise and delight to find that Christian hymns were known and sung abroad (sometimes even in English) and that the Christian religion was being practiced in a recognizable way: “Tonight we attended a midnight communion service at the Methodist church. . . . The church and out-of-door area were packed with hundreds of people—Chinese—Malayans—Indians, British and Americans. It was really thrilling to see table after table of all these different peoples kneeling together at communion.”⁸⁰ The sense of mutual participation and commonly held values was a vital part of the choir’s activity, and its reliance on widely known sacred musical repertory connected its members with Christians abroad. After a tea given by the Oratorio Society of Hong Kong (directed by Theodore Huang, a Westminster alumnus), the two choirs sang Handel’s “Hallelujah Chorus” together.⁸¹ In Kobe, Japan, the choir talked and sang with the Glee Club of the Kwansei Gakuin University, a Christian university. The Glee Club serenaded the American students with “God Be with You ’til We Meet Again,” and the Westminster students responded in kind.⁸²

Setting a high standard for subsequent tours of college students, the Westminster Choir demonstrated a remarkable ability to connect with students at Asian universities, especially Christian ones. In Calcutta more than a thousand men and women of college age attended the choir’s concerts.83 The choir attracted a crowd of twenty thousand at an outdoor concert at the University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa.⁸⁴ In Karachi, Pakistan, the choir met with student groups from all the colleges and universities.⁸⁵ In Madras, India, the students broke into small groups, each visiting a different college. Singing for and listening to student musicians, discussing educational systems, and answering questions about U.S. foreign policy, the choir found a friendly reception.⁸⁶ Rhea Williamson recounted another moment of warm mutual interaction in Japan: “Just as we were finishing our dinner at Nikatsu Hotel at about 10:30 we heard singing. We stepped out on the mezzanine and below were members of the Choir of Tokyo, who had entertained us at our reception on the first day. They were teaching our choir members some of their songs. It was really worth all of our time here to see this joyous inter-mingling of these two choirs. . . . They remained for an hour or so. How wonderful!”⁸⁷

The American Cultural Center in Kobe reported that the Westminster Choir was extremely effective: “This Director has seldom seen Japanese and Americans in such large numbers mix so easily and with so much warmth and feeling. Others said the same thing later, including members of the hotel staff.”⁸⁸ After the choir’s tour a variety of organizations requested Williamson’s support in developing choral music in their own countries. A wealthy Indian banker planned a visit to the college in hopes of bringing a Westminster graduate back to India. In Karachi a radio broadcasting station requested further support from Westminster to develop Western choral singing in Pakistan.⁸⁹ Part of Williamson’s mission when his choir toured the United States was to propagate his method of choral directing; his State Department tour allowed him to reach an international constituency who wanted Western choral music, fulfilling both his aim and theirs.

Indeed, after their State Department tour the Williamsons were invited back to several Asian countries to give workshops for choral conductors and choirs. They made teaching tours of Japan (1957, 1958, and 1963); the Philippines and Hong Kong (1958 and 1960); Thailand (1958); Taiwan, Malaya, and Korea (1960); and Indonesia (1961). The choral workshops Williamson conducted in Asia were funded primarily by Christian organizations, in combination with government funds from some of the host countries.⁹⁰ Although these teaching tours were not funded by the State Department, they were well-aligned with the department’s goals. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles identified Asia as particularly susceptible to Soviet influence, and he had long believed that religion was a means to engage and inspire people across international boundaries.91 In Japan and Thailand Christians made up less than 1 percent of the population, yet Christian groups were staunchly anti-Communist. Supporting them seemed an important way to build solidarity against Communism.

In countries where Christians were a tiny minority, these churches greatly appreciated assistance from abroad. Japanese church musicians wrote numerous letters of gratitude to the Williamsons. These musicians were firmly allied with the Williamsons’ evangelical mission. For example, Dr. Nichio Kozaki, president of New Church Music Institute in Japan, said to the Williamsons at their farewell party in autumn 1957: “we feel very much that we need good music leaders in Japan who are not only talented in music but who have deep Christian spirit and who can make choir members good Christians instead of good singers.”⁹² Teruko Uraguchi wrote to Williamson after a choral workshop: “We must confess that many of us came to learn human choir techniques, but you have shown us the way of Christian living through music, aliveness, sensitiveness, unselfishness, and being obedient to God. . . . We will try to help our nation sing from its entire being praises unto God, for this will help blend all nations into one perfect and beautiful harmony of praise.”⁹³ Yayonie Hirayama, a participant in the Japanese workshops, told the Williamsons: “You have succeeded in making us feel that the human race is one in God.”⁹⁴ Williamson’s workshops on sacred music were not an imposition of American Christianity onto foreign peoples. Rather, they shored up an already existing minority, which was created by the missionaries of the past and strengthened in opposition to the Communist threats of the present.

Christian repertoire was central to Williamson’s workshops and concerts on his teaching tours. In Hong Kong in 1958 he led a handpicked choir of local singers in choruses from Handel’s Messiah and works of J.S. Bach. In Taiwan he organized a performance of Mendelssohn’s Elijah.⁹⁵ Wherever he went, Williamson’s church connections allowed him to reach large groups of people. During his stay in the Philippines in 1958, he made contact with some eleven thousand choral singers and conductors. Two years later, the Williamsons returned to the Philippines to teach. Rhea Williamson wrote to friends: “Rejoice with us that every week here in Manila more than a thousand people are growing in Christian service under Westminster influence!”⁹⁶ In her eyes, both the choral repertory and the personal contacts helped propagate the faith. As she reported in 1961, “In Bangkok 6,500 persons heard the Messiah. I call this evangelism through music as most of the University audiences were Buddhists.”⁹⁷ Even ostensibly secular concert performances had Christian resonances. Williamson’s 1960 performance of the Brahms Requiem with the Festival Choir of Manila began with a choral processional to the Protestant hymn “The Church’s One Foundation”—making the performance seem much more akin to a religious service than a concert.98

As did other American musicians, Williamson featured Negro spirituals in his workshops and concerts abroad. Here again, spirituals served as a valuable tool for engaging foreign singers with markedly American and Christian music. When Williamson served as teacher and guest conductor in Manila in 1960, he led the choir in renditions of “De Gospel Train,” “He’s Got the Whole World in His Hands,” “Ain’t Got Time to Die,” and “Ezekiel Saw the Wheel,” as well as sacred classical music and works arranged by the Filipino composer Antonio Molina.⁹⁹ In Japan that year Williamson included a set of spirituals and a set of Russian sacred music. He explained to his former student Arthur Kamitsuka that the spirituals were “very definitely classical music, but at the same time it is Christian music.”¹⁰⁰

Williamson’s agenda on these teaching tours was not only evangelical but also explicitly anti-Communist. The practical alliance between Christian churches and anti-Communist organizing closely reflected the strategy articulated by John Foster Dulles, and it was particularly evident in Korea and Japan.¹⁰¹ Many feared the Communist infiltration of labor unions in Japan: according to one report, more than four thousand choirs in Japan were directed by Communists and supported a socialist agenda.¹⁰² The Rōon movement, begun in Osaka in 1949, founded hundreds of choirs in factories and schools, intending to “protect Japanese music from American imperialist thought.” The Communist choral movement was aided by Akiko Seki’s Central Chorus, which won the 1955 Stalin Peace Prize for organizing workers’ choruses on a Soviet model.¹⁰³ As early as 1954, Williamson received a request from a missionary in Osaka that he come to spend some time with labor unions. The aim of this work would be to present workers with a Christian, anti-Communist alternative to participation in Rōon. The missionary cited the Committee for Study of Social Problems of the United Church of Christ in Japan: “it is hoped that the Christian church, through evangelism, education and study, can render great service to the development of a sound labor movement based upon the Christian spirit instead of class struggle.”¹⁰⁴ Williamson gladly subscribed to this program. After the initial Asian tour he remarked that Asia comprised “hundreds of choirs directed by Communists, all singing Communist music and working against things worth while [sic].”¹⁰⁵ When the Westminster Choir visited Nagoya on its 1956–57 tour, its concert was attended by nine thousand members of Onkyō, the management-backed musical organization created to compete with the Communist-sponsored Rōon.106 Williamson’s presence supported Onkyō and thereby the Christian resistance to Communism in Japan.¹⁰⁷

When Williamson returned to Japan to lead workshops in 1957, 1958, and 1960, his work with choirs was explicitly defined as “combating communism among choral groups.”¹⁰⁸ On these trips he typically gave seminars to train Christian choral conductors by day, and by evening he taught conducting and choral singing to groups of union workers.¹⁰⁹ If Williamson’s own account can be believed, he taught a total of ninety-five hundred Japanese choral conductors during one month in 1957.¹¹⁰ In Chiengmai, Thailand, in 1958, more than seven hundred people attended Williamson’s classes.¹¹¹ In summer 1958, to extend their reach, the Williamsons made a teaching film used in Japan to train choirs. Because the numbers of students in their courses were unwieldy, Williamson used Westminster graduates resident in Japan to teach as additional faculty: these included Tordis Petersen, Lily Hoshiga Kamitsuka, Naoka Okamura, Koichi Matsuda, and Tetsusaburo Nishimura.¹¹² The case of Tordis Petersen is remarkable: although she began her work in Japan as a choral conductor, she soon left voice teaching to pursue “industrial evangelism,” with the aim of helping workers “gain a Christian rather than a communistic viewpoint.”¹¹³ Williamson’s support and that of his students for anti-Communist choirs commingled religion and politics to fulfill U.S. propaganda aims.

Williamson’s efforts were not universally welcome. His technique was failing late in his career, and some Japanese critics noted that Japan did not need musical instruction from abroad. “Thinking it’s a good thing to have foreigners come and teach us is a very bad habit of the Japanese. Japan’s choral technique is known throughout the world. There’s no reason to call a 70 or 80 year old man to come teach us!”¹¹⁴ The critics’ disdain of the foreign musician may also have reflected concern about Christian influence from abroad. Yet because missionary groups and the U.S. government shared common interests in combating Communism and protecting Christianity, both would work to ensure a continued flow of ideas and music between the United States and Asia.

Religious music did not present a coherent message to audiences abroad: it offered different meanings to different listeners. For Christian and non-Christian audiences alike, the Negro spiritual offered a story of racial uplift, a sense of spiritual depth, and a folksy accessibility. For all these reasons audiences worldwide celebrated the spiritual as America’s own religious music. For the general public the concerts of John Finley Williamson and the Westminster Choir provided entertainment and exposure to U.S. choral singing in a manner typical of U.S. cultural presentations. For Christians in Asia, however, Williamson’s concerts, workshops, and church appearances afforded special opportunities to develop their own capacity for religious choral music. Since Christian music-making also attracted members for anti-Communist organizations, Williamson’s coaching supported these groups both politically and musically. The audience for U.S. musical diplomacy was by no means predominantly Christian, yet religious music made an effective connection with the segment of the population who demanded it. The religious content of these cultural presentations and the connections forged with members of religious groups abroad proved to be a significant resource for furthering U.S. propaganda objectives.