Leo Sowerby (1895–1968) was an American composer who spent the last 41 years of his life as an Episcopal church organist and composition teacher. Following numerous theses on aspects of Sowerby’s work, this is billed as the first book about his entire life and career and seeks to restore Sowerby’s onetime standing among secular composers. Sargent supplements his numerous quotes of experts attesting to Sowerby’s actual (or potential) greatness with his own systematic analysis of eight Sowerby works from 1919 to 1965.
Sowerby spanned a key transitional period in classical music, with both the rise of American composers and the shift from the romantic to contemporary styles. Sowerby is one of the Episcopal Church’s first major composers, preceded only by Charles Winfred Douglas (1867–1944) and the Anglo-American T. Tertius Noble (1867–1953). But unlike the sacred focus of Douglas and Noble, Sargent makes clear that Sowerby faced both opportunities and challenges as he divided his composition efforts between secular and sacred genres.
Based in Chicago, Sowerby received early recognition in the 1910s and 1920s. But by the time he won the (fourth ever) Pulitzer Prize for music in 1946, Sargent lists three reasons why Sowerby had largely faded as a secular composer. First was Sowerby’s disinterest in networking and self-promotion. Second was the skepticism of New York critics towards ‘regional’ musicians out West – such as Sowerby, who worked most closely with the Chicago Symphony under Frederick Stock and later Fritz Reiner. Third, Sowerby rejected ‘atonal and avant-garde’ musical trends while disclaiming a coherent style of his own.
With his 1927 appointment as an Episcopal Church music director, Sowerby shifted his attention to sacred music, also teaching in and eventually leading the composition department at the American Conservatory of Music. In 1962, he became the founding director of a national church music programme at the Washington National Cathedral, hoping to mould a future generation of church music composers; instead, the programme closed in 1969, the year after his death.
Of greatest interest to Anglican readers is the last 28 years of Sowerby’s career, captured by the penultimate chapter entitled ‘Secular Decline, Sacred Rise’. Half the chapter is about Sowerby’s sacred cantatas and other concert music, while the remainder provides the bulk of the discussion of his contributions to and impact on church music – including a single paragraph discussing seven communion settings and 14 morning canticles identified in a 1972 dissertation.Footnote 1
Of the eight works analyzed, only one is for prayer book worship: Sowerby’s 1930 Magnificat in D, from the first of his two evensong settings. Other works analyzed include two anthems and two solo organ works, areas where Sowerby has more enduring impact, as measured by recordings, music catalogues and church use.
The book also mentions Sowerby’s brief impact on Anglican hymnody. Beyond hymn arrangements, it mentions the five hymn tunes published in 20th-century Episcopal hymnals – but not Sowerby’s Fifth Communion Service in the 2nd and 3rd editions of the 1940 hymnal. None of these are found in English, Canadian or ACNA hymnals published since 1982. Meanwhile, Sargent says Sowerby’s ‘tireless advocacy of quality music and rigorous standards’ was repudiated by supporters of the Hymnal 1982.
Despite all the testimonials to Sowerby’s musical talent – emphasizing his knowledge of form, structure and harmony – there’s little discussion of his melodies. The ability of Copland, Vaughan Williams and other composers to pen memorable melodies has given them popular staying power. Future discussions of Sowerby’s impact might contrast his melodic contributions to those of more popular contemporaries.
The book could provide a clearer roadmap for future research. While it lists numerous American theses on Sowerby, it surprisingly omits the Sowerby Foundation’s inventory of his works, held by the Library of Congress and the Northwestern University archives.Footnote 2 We never learn why Sargent and others catalogue Sowerby’s works with an H. instead of an opus number.
In the Epilogue, Sargent calls for rediscovery of Sowerby’s secular music while asserting that ‘Sowerby’s reputation in sacred music has stood the test of time’. But even the latter assertion seems limited to a subset of American church organists.
The book thus provides a starting point for a debate over Sowerby’s broader contribution to American music. It remains to be seen whether others will be motivated to engage in this debate.
