Let the Fun Begin!
As the only non-musician on this blog, my posts must, necessarily, be different. My personality being what it is, my posts must, necessarily, be a little edgy -insert evil laugh here-. So, what I would like to bring to the table in this blog is to take the discussion outside the box of "Christian" music (don't worry, it's only one day a week).
Secular & Sacred
I suppose a good place to start would be with definitions. Growing up, listening to "worldly" music was generally looked down upon. This label included any music that wasn't Christian or, of course, country. Basically anything that was popular at school was worldly. Here I would like to offer slightly different definitions.
What is Christian music? This is widely agreed to encompass the genres of Contemporary Christian, Gospel, Praise & Worship, Hymnology (thanks to Ms. Ahrens for reminding us of that!), and Southern Gospel. I may be leaving out some subgenres, but you get the idea. Secular, also called worldly, music is pretty much anything that is not produced by a Christian artist, or could not be played on Christian radio. I would love to do some strong nuancing to these definitions, but I think that most readers will agree that these are fair definitions for the discussion.
Christian Rock
This is a sticky subgenre indeed! Many evangelical pastors share a general distaste for rock music. This often (but not always) carries over into Christian rock. Likewise, most rock musicians share a general dislike for pastors and churches. This creates an interesting tension for those Christians who want to be rock musicians. Some are blessed to be connected to a pastor who encourages their talent and funnels it into the arena of Christian rock. Others, while staying Christians, distance themselves from the church and reject the label of a Christian band. This has been the case for many popular bands such as Creed, POD, etc.
Finally Getting to the Point
This tension serves to illustrate the inadequacies of the above definitions, especially in dictating which genres of music are acceptable and which are not. So to make a point of encouraging discussion, I will end this post with a question that I hope we will answer as we move forward:
How do we determine what is "good" music and what is not?
posted by Josh at
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
9 Comments:
Wow,
You weren't out to start a perpetual discussion, were you? Just kidding.
I have a feeling your question is, in a way a pre-emptive distillation of what this blog will have been about, when the final tally is taken.
Here's my problem. Your post causes me all these exploratory responses, but now I'm stuck as to whether I should write them here, or post them into my own hapless screeds on Friday. You know that whole "If I articulate my main point here, I'll sound redundant and non-introspective later" dilemma that all writers face.
Nice toss, Josh.
-R
When confronted with this question, I usually ask myself what the purpose of the music is. Even within so-called "Christian" music, the purposes differ. I usually divide it into two camps: music with praise/worship purposes and music with entertainment purposes.
As an an avid Christian rock listener, it annoys me when people ask, "Could you praise and worship God to that noise in church?" Maybe not, but that's because its purpose is Christian entertainment--entertaining music with uplifiting/positive/Christian themes and lyrics. And many non-Christian artists do the same, so I don't have a problem with some so-called "worldly" music. Even in the Bible, music did not have a strictly praise/worship purpose. For example, David played his harp to calm Saul.
Another issue to consider is that Christian rock is simply a contemporary genre of music set to Christian themed lyrics. Now, think of many of the old standards in the hymnal. Think of the music that was popular at the time a lot of those hymns were written. One of the most popular genres was honky-tonk country. lol. I mean, "I'll Fly Away," hello? So, as far as I'm concerned, the Christian rock phenomenon is just an updated version of the honky-tonk to hymns phenomenon of the past.
And one more thing. Many that criticize Christian rock are perfectly fine with classical music. Why? Classical music's purpose is not in most instances to praise God. In its time, it was highly secular. But now, since it doesn't have a driving drum beat it's okay. lol.
I think to make the comparative leap from "rock" to "classical" robs this question of the nuance Josh may be looking for.
"Rock" in an of itself is really as much of a lifestyle term as well as some vague, definitional word.
Part of Christian Rock's problem was "Hey, let's just crank up our amplifiers and scream 'Jesus Loves You,'" never understanding the nuance that even euphonious rock music would require. It's very introduction to the scene was engendered by those wholly unqualified to define it--semi-aging baby-boomers whose B-side antiwar ballads never made the cut at Woodstock.
By the time anyone not making polar pilgrimages between cocaine and redmeption came on the scene, it was already tarred.
That being said, I do believe in limits, and I do believe "lines" do exist with God, but I believe those limits exist more in the histrionic nature of the particular sub-genre, and the allegiances those sub-genres require, more than the pure style itself.
I think I know my direction, now, when I actually write my bit . . .
-R
Josh,
I agree with you on the inadequacy bit with regard to labels and definitions. You might be able to make broad, sweeping, generalizations, but music is voluminous in its scope and size, and trying to get at a pure form is fleeting. Ron makes a good point when he notes music has an attached lifestyle. And Chantell, good point about worship music vs. casual listening. I don't think many in AP circles do a good a job of delineating between the two. Josh...look forward to seeing how YOU define "good" music AND how you match up AP music with your rubric. Nice teaser.
KB
A note on purpose: I think the purpose of music, as with any art, is to express and communicate on an emotional level. Any listener will likely experience their own unique set of emotions. At church there is a proper set of emotions that should be expressed: joy, celebration, praise to God, etc. But outside of church should we also focus solely on these same emotions, or are there others worth singing about?
As a pastor, I want the people who feel like they are on the edge of the church because their tastes don't mesh with others in their church to know this ... God created you with your own likes and dislikes. Don't fret if you are willing to act on your differences. Do fret (and repent) if you are acting on sinful instincts.
Here's a twist most church leaders won't tell you ... the "world" and "worldliness" is not "whatever the church or specifically the pastor defines as being bad or sinful or shameful". In scripture the world is defined as a system of selfishness, not governed by God. Check out 1 John 2:15-17.
How then does this make a difference in our choices of music in light of what we've generally been taught?
For a bit of my thoughts, check out my blog on the WORD blog of 90&9.
Howdy Josh, by looking at your picture I can tell you are on the edge of this discussion … possibly on the “other” side. What does the Bible say about facial hair?
That’s right … absolutely nothing.
Josh is a good friend of mine from Urshan Graduate School, and I agree with him that we have inherited a very faulty and shoddy formula for determining “bad” music from “good” music.
My favorite episode of SouthPark ... which I saw on the internet ... is when Cartman and his friends started a Christian boy band because they could make millions much more easily than being good musicians. (No, really. I really saw it on the internet.) They found a formula for making hits. Take love songs and insert Jesus’ name somewhere in the lyrics … and whammo! An instant hit!
And from the “inspirational” music I hear on Christian radio these days, I can tell this formula is not just a joke on a vulgar cartoon (which I saw on the internet) … it is making questionable Christians millions. And sadly, it’s working its way into our churches because we’re too lazy (or better said, too tired because we’re overworked) to have our own experiences with God and write about them.
Oh yeah, the Kings of Leon, whom we love to hate … are naming their newest album “Because of the Times” after the UPC ministers’ conference in Alexandria, LA (my hometown). Evidently they are returning more to their Pentecostal roots, and this has intrigued more than a few people. Recently I heard them interviewed on NPR and they said they wanted to honor the experiences their parents and the previous generations have had in Jesus. Say what you want about them, but they are on NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO talking about our Jesus.
And where are our musicians playing? Of course … only in our churches, where they can keep their “holy” badges. And where are the people we are reaching for? HINT: Not in our churches.
Toby:
You did not see South Park on the internet! Okay, you saw it on my computer because I downloaded it from the internet, but you did not (technically) see it on the internet! ha ha
Josh:
The purpose of music, or any art is to "express and communicate on an emotional level"? Really? Is this really what you mean? Is this a complete statement of purpose?
General:
Does music's relation to math (all music is a ratio expressed audibly...) have anything to do with its artistic merit and thus "goodness"? Can atonal and the likes of Phillip Glass be classified as "good" music or have they broken some sort of mathematical coherence or have they thus transcended and become the best/most artistic expression? Also, can chords be arranged in such a way so as to be manipulative and not artistic (just as it seems to me words can)? In other words, does the question "What is good music?" have any moral ramifications/overtones (that's some musical jargon, smile) as the word "good" seems to suggest to me?
Toby and Josh:
You are funny! Can I join the UGST nerd fan club? I promise to be a good nerd.
Courtney:
I have an additional question for you on Ann Aherns day.
Josh,
Just a comment on Chantell's comment and Ron's comment on Chantell's comment.....! I agree that much of the issue with rock music is the lifestyle behind it. That being said, I wouldn't necessarily lump classical music in with that camp. I've done my fair share of sweating blood while slogging through a Beethoven sonata or two, so I think I can speak with an itty bitty bit of authority here. Much of classical music WAS secular and I tell my students regularly that there are some composers and some music that I would avoid completely because of the spirit, theme and lifestyle of the composer who wrote it. On the other hand, for instance, Bach's music was ALL sacred. Read his journals and study his manuscripts and you find that he was tired of people praising him for his music and thus declared that he would write NO secular music and thus inscribed his manuscripts- ALL of them - with IJN "In Jesus' NAme" or "To the Glory of God Alone", and many other inscriptions. I'm not harping on classical music - I know this is an AP music blog- but hang with me here for minute. At a piano lesson where I was studying a piece by Bach, my teacher, who was OPENLY gay, made a comment to me after I had finished playing that nearly knocked me off my bench. He said in a reverent tone, which he was not normally prone to, "There's something very cleansing about that music, isn't there?" Point made? I've stood in a college choir surrounded by gays, transvestites, and who know's what else, singing Bach's "St. John's Passion" and had tears streaming down my face because I felt God's presence.
Okay, so I'm really on a roll here. I guess I should wrap it up. I just think we have to be careful not to lump all of a genre into one label, good or bad.
Ann
Post a Comment
<< Home