I found that John Henry: Steel Drivin Man was the most engaging of our assigned readings thus far. I enjoyed the chance to read about Nelson’s actual investigative history, since this is most likely what we would do if we continued into the historical field. I enjoyed his ability to uncover, through extensive examination, the details of “the real John Henry’s” life, including the innovative (at least in the field of the books we’ve read) use of songs as a source.
When I first saw that Nelson would make such frequent use of the songs, I doubted their usefulness as a source. The name ‘John Henry’ seems common enough that it could be a generic, folk-legend name, with little to no actual backing. The songs were also questionable because most composers would trade historical accuracy for other factors such as rhythm, rhyme, and tone. When recorded in writing, much of the songs’ meaning (as contained in the melodies and inflections) can be lost or misinterpreted. For example, Nelson asserts that modern historians wrongly view Henry as a hero due to contemporary versions of the song‘s “fast and chirpy country” tune, which distorted its substance. (30) In part, these concerns were valid: the songs’ content did become “mangled and transformed” (95) based on the situation. Hunting for historical fact is proved risky by these many distortions. Early miners’ chants were meant to keep rhythm, and involved an awareness of death and tragic fate to fit the mold of the miner’s ballad. Later, when convicts sang of John Henry, they sang of distant lovers to reflect their own situations. (106) He then became a working class hero in the chants of railroad workers. (111) This transformation of Henry’s portrayal from a man who cried when he saw the size of the mountain to a macho, triumphant figure echoes the fallibility of the songs as a source of fact.
While these points are true, I initially failed by mistaking the value of a source for the possible accuracy of a source despite our frequent discussion of the principle in class. Like the factually dubious work of Weems and Bradford, distortions and exaggerations reveal precious fragments about those who “recycled old songs for new purposes.” (95) As Nelson stated, language has the ability to “go underground…from code to jargon back to code again.” (95) We can learn about the lifestyles, fears, and dreams of the miners, railroad workers, and convicts from the versions of John Henry songs that they sang. Even apart from this, the songs are not necessarily less factually accurate than other primary sources, as I had assumed. All sources are flawed, and even well preserved documents may contain errors due to data miscalculations, personal filters, and mis-remembrances. Additionally, archives can be easily suppressed by those in power, while widespread civic texts like the songs are harder to silence.