|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why is "Christian music" so unremitingly crap?
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I should start by saying that I have a wide range of musical taste, and I listen to all sorts. In fact, as long as it is not Cowell-clone crap, I will probably give it a go. I am not a particular fan of classical music, but I do appreciate some of those genres too.
In fact, there is only one thing I ask from music, which is that it engages me in some form - mentally emotionally spiritually. The more intense that engagement, the better.
I was just cooking in the kitchen and listening to Underworld "Two Months Off". And I was dancing around the kitchen (something you really don't need to see) because it is a feel-good song. And it came to me that no Christian song makes me dance. Nothing in terms of Christian worship music - which should be engaging me, surely - doesn't move me.
It seems that so much of the "Christian worship" music is MoR, 1970s soft rock. Which I might have liked in the 1970s, but I - and the music business - has moved on a whole lot since that point.
This is not a "crappy choruses" thread - there is more to it than that. I think this total compromise, this lack of passion, this fear of emotional engagement that runs through church worship as a whole. Passion is reserved for (usually) condemnation of the "sinful", not for dancing to Underworld. For me, that is a real problem. I worship more - far more - dancing to Two Months Off than I ever have to "We really just wanna worship you Lord".
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
This may be completely off-base but I think maybe there is a bit of attitude of, "If it's for Jaysoos, who are we to judge it and say it's o good? And shouldn't we have different standards from the world? How well it glorifies God, and not how well they play their instruments or write memorable lyrics or inspiring melodies?"
When something else becomes more important than quality, then quality will suffer.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Do I assume that we are specifically talking about "modern" or "worship" music rather than music - however contemporary - in the "classical" or "choral" tradition (eg JohnTaverner, James MacMillan)?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
I expect so, since some of the most emotionally satisfying music ever written is spiritual in nature.
As for the thread title: Why is "Christian music" so unremitingly crap? Could it be because those who write it have no talent, and those who listen to it have no taste?
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
Most good art has an element of challenge in it. It doesn't just give you what you want - that's kitsch - it offers something original, and quite often in a way that is hard to like at first. I don't think the people in the churches that use and produce worship songs enjoy anything that unsettles them.
Bach is, for me, the writer of the most feel good music of all. Shame there's so little to be found in a Baptist church.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I've no idea. I don't listen to 'Christian music'. Much better to listen to music and enjoy what it is, not having the remotest idea whether the composer is Christian or not. Surely, music can speak to you regardless of who the composer is, or what (s)he believes?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Do I assume that we are specifically talking about "modern" or "worship" music rather than music - however contemporary - in the "classical" or "choral" tradition (eg JohnTaverner, James MacMillan)?
How about some Charles Wesley?
Some of you folk ought to have become Methodists! No impossible evangelical stuff to believe before breakfast, and no crap worship music (in most cases, anyway)!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Do I assume that we are specifically talking about "modern" or "worship" music rather than music - however contemporary - in the "classical" or "choral" tradition (eg JohnTaverner, James MacMillan)?
The thing is, I could do another rant about traditional music, but that is a different discussion.
However, classical style music also should engage me - the same core issues apply. A whole lot of organ hymn music is drab, tedious and soul-destroying.
I also think that some of the writers are talented, and many of the musicians are talented, but the music that the church system requires is trite and crap. There is a lack of people who can make a real difference, who can change things.
I used to play in church. I am not untalented, but I really wasn't allowed to rock it out, because people "people" wouldn't like it. I suspect nobody asked the "people".
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
As for the thread title: Why is "Christian music" so unremitingly crap? Could it be because those who write it have no talent, and those who listen to it have no taste?
No talent is a big part of it. Words whose natural rhythms don't fit the rhythm of the music, for example. Melodies that sound alike song to song and don't express the mood of the words. And that's before we get into the words themselves.
In churches, there is also the "Hillsong wannabe" syndrome. Band after church band wants/hopes/expects to become the next world famous Hillsong. That makes the group more focused on their sound brand than on serving the worship of the moment.
As to radio songs - the christian music stations are owned by secular corporations, songs are chosen for commercial momentary appeal. Songs are written to appeal to the secular bosses.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Two-Owls
Shipmate
# 9680
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
How about some Charles Wesley?
For me Wesley is in the first bloom of the rot. I love a bit of Tallis or Palestrina and I have a certain fondness for Gregorian chant, but I cannot bear Wesley or anything like. Too many years of being forced to attend chapel after church!
I feel the same way about Christian rock as I do about secular hymns; music with its heart ripped out.
Posts: 1262 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Why is it so crap? How long have you got? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
I think Miss Amanda has a point in terms of what's written. I've been in churches since I was a teenager, and have always loathed modern worship music. I assumed that this was because, certainly at the time of conversion and for some years afterwards, I was an NME-reading music snob, and stylistically the music was not to my taste. It was what the NME would have termed "stool rock", I think. (ie, can be sung by people, usually men, sitting on stools, and often was when performed on Top of the Pops.)
These days I'm pretty much a recovered music snob, and I still loathe it. I think what you write, SC, about dancing round the kitchen, is an important point. I went to my weekly aerobics class this morning - the latest CD we work out to is a collection of pop/rock type stuff and it is cheesy as you like, my younger snob self would have hated it - Maroon5/Black Betty/Bon Jovi/Phil Collins via Gary Barlow (oh yes) and yet it was a really enjoyable, and almost immersive experience. Livin' on a Prayer is, in my book, an absolutely cracking tune, and bopping sweatily around the parish hall to it whilst belting out the chorus was great.
Belting stuff out is really important to me. What I lack in finesse when it comes to singing, I make up for in enthusiasm. This does sometimes happen in church, but (to repeat an oft made sentiment hereabouts) it's the hymns that do it. Singing "death of death, and hell's destruction" with two of my mates was one of the few moments in church lately where I've thought "actually, there might be something in this. Perhaps I'll stick it out for a bit".
The modern songs we sing don't really lend themselves to belting or bopping. And yet, while I find them entirely unmoving, a lot of people seem to like them & find singing them helpful. So perhaps it's me. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
We're stuck in a funny place in churches like ours, I think. Church services are not, and should not be, a gig, so hurling your (beer assisted) self into the music with gay abandon doesn't seem right. So it's musically modern, but not immersive (I'm not sure if that's the word I want, but it'll do) - and besides, we only sing 3 or so songs at a time so there isn't the emotional involvement you have at a gig. And yet, the style of a lot of the modern songs doesn't lend itself to congregational singing.
Sorry, long and waffly. I could do a Mastermind specialist subject on reasons I don't like so much of what we sing in church.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I think this total compromise, this lack of passion, this fear of emotional engagement that runs through church worship as a whole.
I suspect that the more "emotionally engaged" your music gets, the more personal it gets, and what might engage you and fire you up might leave me cringing, which leaves us with inoffensive pablum that won't scare the horses.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
Good liturgical musicians are worth their weight in gold (quite a claim in certain cases...) They understand how to integrate the music they select into the whole experience. Otherwise it just feels dolloped in, and cannot be immersive, however long the "set", because it isn't part of the worshipper's immersion into the whole experience. My experience (and love) is of the classical repertoire, but good and bad examples exist across the threshold. To my mind, the worst offenders are musical nappies: guaranteed to give one warm, moist feelings in areas one doesn't necessarily
want them.
To that extent, I would almost suggest a musical as a point of comparison, rather than a gig.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Bach is, for me, the writer of the most feel good music of all. Shame there's so little to be found in a Baptist church.
We've got a Bach anthem tomorrow ... ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Two-Owls:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
How about some Charles Wesley?
For me Wesley is in the first bloom of the rot. I love a bit of Tallis or Palestrina and I have a certain fondness for Gregorian chant, but I cannot bear Wesley or anything like. Too many years of being forced to attend chapel after church!
I feel the same way about Christian rock as I do about secular hymns; music with its heart ripped out.
What I think you're saying is that Christian music ought to be affecting on an aesthetic level, quite apart from whether or not one accepts the Christian message.
Well, some non-religious people do enjoy the occasional rousing hymn, or even a touch of gospel music. Christmas carols are popular among atheists of a Dawkinsian type, as we all know. But perhaps the only Christian musical 'genre' that gets widespread cultural approval is the kind of high church music that you've mentioned - i.e. the kind of music that represents high culture.
I think this is partly a question of cultural heritage and social capital; people are always told that this is 'good' music, so they feel free to enjoy it even if they're not religious, or if their beliefs aren't orthodox. Worship songs are on far less secure cultural territory, and traditional hymns are part of a Nonconformist heritage that fewer and fewer British people now feel any connection with.
Fortunately, you can enjoy classical church music outside church contexts these days. Unfortunately, the average church simply isn't able to satisfy those who disapprove of both worship songs and traditional hymns. Where are the top quality musicians going to come from? Who's going to pay them to turn up on Sunday mornings and assist a meagre bunch of Christians to engage in 'worship'? You'll find something appropriate at a cathedral service, perhaps, or at a parish church with a good choir. But every other place will just have to make do with what it can get.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kitten
Shipmate
# 1179
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Two-Owls:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
How about some Charles Wesley?
For me Wesley is in the first bloom of the rot. I love a bit of Tallis or Palestrina and I have a certain fondness for Gregorian chant, but I cannot bear Wesley or anything like. Too many years of being forced to attend chapel after church!
I feel the same way about Christian rock as I do about secular hymns; music with its heart ripped out.
Thank God, I was beginning to think it was just me that detested Wesley hymns
--------------------
Maius intra qua extra
Never accept a ride from a stranger, unless they are in a big blue box
Posts: 2330 | From: Carmarthenshire | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
"Crap" is in the ear of the beholder.
Truth is that "crap" Christian music and "Cowell-clone crap" both exist and succeed for the same reason - there are enough people who like it to make it a going concern.
So when you say "Why is so much Christian music crap" you're really just saying "Why don't more Christians have my taste."
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paul.:
"Crap" is in the ear of the beholder.
Truth is that "crap" Christian music and "Cowell-clone crap" both exist and succeed for the same reason - there are enough people who like it to make it a going concern.
So when you say "Why is so much Christian music crap" you're really just saying "Why don't more Christians have my taste."
That does not account for the fact that good music in the wrong context is utterly alienating. Music has to be part of the whole for it to work in church, as well as being of an intrinsically high quality.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
I haven't got time to go into a detailed response, but if we're talking about what's sung in church, there's a difference between congregational music and performance music on a musical level(although lines get blurred). There's also a difference in how it's played - something with space for people to join in vs. something loud and overpowering to lose yourself in (sticking to contemporary and rock-related).
Trouble is, when you widen it out to music-by-Christians a lot of it still applies. I suspect the big Christian market in the USA holds some responsibility as everything blands out, lyricallyy if not musically. There's a marked difference between bands who happen to be Christians, and "Christian bands".
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Is this unique to music with a Christian message? Why would that be of concern to someone who is faithfree? If Christian music of the genre you're thinking of were more appealing to you, would you still be in the church?
What is the musical landscape like for other faiths? What is the musical landscape like for those of us who are faithfree?
Is the OP restricted to a certain genre of Christian music? We're singing the Bach St. John's Passion in chorus this spring; dancing isn't what I want to do in response to it, but I find it a great and profound piece of music that inspires me in many ways.
I'm also fond of the Healey Willan service music that I grew up with, and fond of a great many hymns (especially those Lenten hymns in minor keys that most everyone else thinks are dreary and depressing).
I also love some of the used-to-be-modern Christian songs that people love to lambaste as both cliche and 50 years out of date.
Some of the music I love in all genres (whether Christian or not) makes me physically want to dance, some doesn't. Some of the music I love is unremittingly insane sounding to many ears (Stockhausen's Klaverstucke IX is my current favorite example of this).
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
It is not that I expect everyone to share my taste in music - I don't expect Underworld in church. It is about music that engages me. It is about music that engages everyone. I am unconvinced that most worship music does that, although some would say it does, because it is expected.
And I doubt whether many 1D fans enjoy them because they actually find their music engaging. It is more because they want to fuck the members of the band.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
... And yet, the style of a lot of the modern songs doesn't lend itself to congregational singing.
...
This is my biggest problem with most modern worship songs.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
On the engagement for congregational music, I think there are a number of factors that complicate things:
- expectation: One would (I hope) generally go to church expecting to engage in the music in a different way to when one goes to a concert, club or other non-church event.
- context (order of service): this will depend on the kind of church you go to, but I find it hard to really get into a piece of music or to "let go" (assuming letting go is a good thing) if I know it's going to be one song immediately stopped and replaced by something else. So if you go to a hymn-sandwich place, you've got an immediate problem for engagement.
- context (cultural): at my place people just don't expect to bop in church. Even people who would bop at other events. Even when they're told "If you want to boogie on down, feel free". There's a sort of consensus that "That sort of thing doesn't happen here"; not that it's wrong, or bad, just that it would be ... weird. Yet one can break through that at special occasion services, only to see it slammed back in place the next Sunday.
- delivery (style): I know that at our shack any extended musical interlude is viewed with uncomfortable suspicion. Folk aren't used to praying, dancing, contemplating, 'resting', whatever - they just stand around like lemons until they can sing again. Not because the music is shit (although sometimes it is) but because of the cultural context. As a result ... we very rarely leave non-singing bits for people to strut their stuff in
- delivery (quality): generally most churches I'm familiar with rely on volunteer amateurs. Some of whom could actually be pros (or are, in other contexts); some of whom most certainly are not. This can have a big impact on how well the music can engage, just because of technical ability, rehearsal time, thought about arrangements etc.
- delivery (purpose): as mentioned above, there is a huge difference in how you can deliver music for congregational participation vs a performance where the audience might do a bit of a sing-along. And there's a difference in the kind of engagement that's going on, I think, although it's hard to put your finger on it
- delivery (instrumentation): not all songs are suited to whatever instruments/players may be available. Not all leaders are sensitive to this. We have some very gifted pianists/organists, but put them in a band context for a modern up-tempo song and they're a disaster, quite frankly. Put them in a small ensemble with a couple of orchestral instruments for more reflective 'classics' and they're great. Ditto some of the guitarists, in reverse. And we have some people who are best lost in the mix regardless (as well as some who can cover all the bases). Getting the perfect team with the perfect leader and the perfect songs is not going to be a weekly thing, and that's before you start thinking about the differing expectations, needs, and preferred styles across the congregation
- response (congregational): sometimes congregations are just shit. I've been in groups that have worked their socks off in rehearsal, delivered some objectively very high quality and well put together music, and the congregation just haven't been there for whatever reason. That creates a positive feedback loop that escalates the crapness - the band disengage, the congregation mope even more etc. etc.
- combinations of all the above, which can lead to a crap song being rendered incredibly moving, or your favourite and most cherished piece of worship music causing you physical pain depending on how the cards are dealt.
Fundamentally though, I don't think people should necessaily expect to engage with worship music in the same way that they do with 'normal' music.
The former is something that you are supposed to be an active participant in. Without your contribution it is not whole, it is not complete. The musician(s) should be leaving space for each other person present to bring their bit. It should be good enough that you can do that, so there's a base level of engagement, but ultimately the musicians are serving you in giving you something to add to and be part of in glorifying God (and hopefully encouraging one another).
The latter is something that you consume. It is complete without you. It is wrapped up, packaged and presented for you to listen to and accept or reject. If, out of all the myriad commercial music out there, you happen upon a song or a band that punch your buttons, then you can thoroughly enjoy bopping, or belting it out along to the CD or at a gig, but other than economically you as an individual don't matter to the piece at all.
None of the above is meant to be critical of your position; just chucking some ideas and views out there around the issue(s).
I share a huge frustration with the quality of some stuff that people rave about. Made worse by the way the CCM scene appears to lag about 5-10 years behind popular culture, then hit on a formula and churn it out ad nauseum with endless Coldplay-lite and U2-lite clones (and now Munford & Sons-lite etc.). And in a lot of ways, I'd rather be in a rock band than in worship bands - much more satisfying musically and to the ego, to see people engaging with what you're doing for your/their sakes, than to be seeking to create something where you effectively vanish and are just a conduit to something numinous. But for all those reasons and more, I think it's a category error to directly compare worship music with commercial performance music (despite the CCM industry doing its best to blur the boundaries).
Not sure if any of that makes sense; it's a bit stream of consciousness, and should probably be treated in a more academic way with a draft, some re-reads and re-writes to make a coherent argument. But this is a forum, not a course
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
It is not that I expect everyone to share my taste in music - I don't expect Underworld in church. It is about music that engages me. It is about music that engages everyone.
One way of getting people engaged by music in church might be for them to create it themselves, as part of the process of communal worship. This is what Frank Viola, a proponent of 'organic church' suggests. It's not a process I've ever witnessed, but Brother Yun in 'The Heavenly Man' talks about how songs just bubbled up out of him during his time in the Chinese house churches of the 80s and 90s. And I think the Caribbean Pentecostal churches went through a creative phase of producing their own choruses during worship.
This process wouldn't be acceptable in formal mainstream congregations, of course, but since most British evangelical churches have emerged from or been influenced by the fairly recent charismatic movement it surely wouldn't be impossible for them to let the Spirit work among them in this way.
The problem, I suppose, is that since such songs emerge from how people actually feel in a given moment of praise they would be very unpredictable, and occasionally rather raw and embarrassing. And today's charismatics aren't as keen on unpredictability in worship as they used to be, so I understand. And maybe this sort of thing only works in environments of spiritual intensity. Once the environment becomes more settled and routinised people get self-conscious, worried about what others will think, or concerned about sticking to a timetable.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
It is not that I expect everyone to share my taste in music - I don't expect Underworld in church. It is about music that engages me. It is about music that engages everyone.
But what "engages" is different for different people and down to taste again. You just swapped one subjective category for another.
quote:
I am unconvinced that most worship music does that, although some would say it does, because it is expected.
Possibly true in some cases but I'm unconvinced they're all lying.
quote:
And I doubt whether many 1D fans enjoy them because they actually find their music engaging. It is more because they want to fuck the members of the band.
That's incredibly condescending. Even 1D fans are people and therefore able to decide for themselves whether and why they like something.
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Let me address the point about people liking what they expect, because that is at the core of the issue. No, I don't think most people are lying about what they enjoy - lying implies a deliberate deception. It is far more subtle than that, and it is something that I see in a lot of areas of church - especially evangelical churches, but something similar is seen in other styles too.
In so many areas, there is a clear message from the church that x is what GLE people do. So you do that, follow that style, particularly when you are young or new to church. Over time, this idea is re-emphasised, reinforced, deviations seen as wrong. This is not necessarily in words, but in actions - what is the worship style at the big conferences? That must be the "right" thing. If you don't like it, then you are missing out, because all these other people like it.
And then within your church, everyone seems to be OK with the music (or the worship style, the preaching, the colour), so it is easiest not to complain. Until you come to associate that form and style with "worship", with spiritual music.
So it is not lying, it is conditioning. The problem is, when you reject the confirming to the church style, sometimes that is something that seems so wrong.
And yes, I get passionate and angry about it, (and make some OTT comments) because for me, it was one of the long-term breaking points. I could no longer worship in church, because what I worship to is not found in church. And I know that there are many others who feel the same.
And yes, I was being mean to 1D fans. It is not only them, not all of them, but some fandom is the people, not the music - it always has been, and always will be.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
But what exactly do you want? What does being 'engaged' by the music in church really mean to you?
If you don't want worship songs, traditional hymns, gospel music, Charles Wesley, Moody and Sanky, Bach and Tallis, or Jacquie and Dave with their own untutored warblings, etc. then what other genre are you looking for?
Or perhaps your problem isn't really to do with the style/quality of music at all but with the poor emotional and spiritual environment in churches? As someone with church issues myself (though not from an evangelical background) I'd really like to understand what you're getting at.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
The band I just resigned from plays Christian elevator music. Everything the same vague mild sound, because that's what the band leader equates with "worship music." One sound - different tunes but how they are done is all the same. Band leader says variety is performance, it's not worship.
I understanding at last why so many Christian musical friends over the years left the churches, switched to writing secular music and do their music in bars and open mics. Churches (not all, I've visited some musically amazing ones) seem to mostly seek and embrace bland.
But that's the structure isn't it? Sit and do/say nothing except what you are told, listen to a speech without any reaction, be bland. Anything else - laughing, crying, inventing a harmony "disturbs the worship of others."
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
In so many areas, there is a clear message from the church that x is what GLE people do. So you do that, follow that style, particularly when you are young or new to church. Over time, this idea is re-emphasised, reinforced, deviations seen as wrong. This is not necessarily in words, but in actions - what is the worship style at the big conferences? That must be the "right" thing. If you don't like it, then you are missing out, because all these other people like it.
And then within your church, everyone seems to be OK with the music (or the worship style, the preaching, the colour), so it is easiest not to complain. Until you come to associate that form and style with "worship", with spiritual music.
So it is not lying, it is conditioning. The problem is, when you reject the confirming to the church style, sometimes that is something that seems so wrong.
See none of that I have any problem with. If your OP had said "Why are so many churches mono-cultures when it comes to musical styles?" I would probably have agreed and not felt the need to comment. It's the labelling of the style you don't enjoy/doesn't engage you as "crap" that pushes my buttons.
quote:
And yes, I get passionate and angry about it, (and make some OTT comments) because for me, it was one of the long-term breaking points. I could no longer worship in church, because what I worship to is not found in church. And I know that there are many others who feel the same.
Again I don't take issue with that per se. There are many people for whom the prevailing worship styles don't "work". But the answer is not to label everything crap because that's just going to create an equal and opposite mono-culture where you're afraid to admit you actually like Matt Redman or whatever.
See this is something I'm passionate about too actually. Because the type of worship that I'm comfortable with and relaxed in, and which is therefore capable of allowing me to engage with God most easily, is often the type that gets the most disdain on these boards. And I wouldn't make any grand claims that this is anything more than a preference informed by background and personality etc. (though in my younger days I might have).
But the fact is that for most people there is at least some choice. Church worship styles differ and for all but the most rural you usually have options.
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
What I want at core is an acknowledgement that the music I worship to may not be what it found in church usually.
It is a frustration that there seems to be an idea that the stuff we do in church is the "spiritual" stuff, rather than, as so often, a ridiculous compromise so as not to offend anyone we care about. It is the idea that songs by Graham Kendrick are "acceptable", whereas songs by Underworld (for example - just as we started there) are not.
The truth is, I worship to Underworld more than Kendrick. I worship to Radiohead more than Vicky Beeching*. Bon Jovi, GnR, Floyd are all engaging for me. I would rather listen to Opeth and The War on Drugs than Hillsong.
The thing is, it extends - I would rather learn my spirituality by discussion, not sermon. I would rather pray in some way that is not the traditional intercessions. I would rather Be a Christian in a way that is different to the Going to Church way. It is just that music is a passion of mine, and one area that focusses this dissatisfaction.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
What I want at core is an acknowledgement that the music I worship to may not be what it found in church usually.
It is a frustration that there seems to be an idea that the stuff we do in church is the "spiritual" stuff, rather than, as so often, a ridiculous compromise so as not to offend anyone we care about. It is the idea that songs by Graham Kendrick are "acceptable", whereas songs by Underworld (for example - just as we started there) are not.
The truth is, I worship to Underworld more than Kendrick. I worship to Radiohead more than Vicky Beeching*. Bon Jovi, GnR, Floyd are all engaging for me. I would rather listen to Opeth and The War on Drugs than Hillsong.
I'd say that how you worship at home or when out and about is your business alone - no one is stopping you from worshipping with the aid of secular music there. But perhaps evangelicals do cast judgement on what music church members are listening to?
In the Methodist tradition, it's probably easier to admit to enjoying a different kind of music at home than at church; IME Methodist clergy are quite open about meditating with classical music at home, or looking for spirituality in rock music. My ex-minister talked about how much he loved Bob Marley's theology, and I bought him a book about The Wailers as leaving present. No one seriously finds this a problem - but at church, traditional hymns are still the norm in the average Methodist Sunday service.
I agree with Paul that the lack of variety in church music can get tedious. It's either one thing or the other - all worship music or all traditional hymns, or hymns plus parish choir with their 'anthem'. This monotony gets on my nerves, but most churches do seem to fall into a rut.
FWIW, there are resources to help group leaders use popular music (and film, novels, etc.) to encourage theological reflection. I'd love to be part of a Christian group that was interested in this. The first challenge would be in creating such group (because I don't know of any that currently exist). I'm not sure that there's much of a demand for this sort of thing, unfortunately.
[ 18. January 2015, 17:55: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Snags - I agree with your analysis.
I do want to belt songs out in church (well, not all the time, perhaps) but I feel my voice is what I'm bringing to worship. Including adding harmony from the pews. The importance to me of bringing my voice is one reason I really don't like instrumental solos, I feel excluded when I want to join in.
I don't expect to bop in church. I agree that I should be engaging with church music in a different way to the way I'd engage with non-church music. I don't expect, or want to, "let go" in church.
But plenty of others (the majority?) do seem to be more emotionally engaged with the music than me. Which is what leads me to think it's me, not them. In my own case I don't think there is quite that expectation that SC mentions. Everyone knows I really don't like the music, including the worship leader I play piano with. I don't think people think I'm unspiritual for not liking it, but they do see me as a bit odd, perhaps. A bit grumpy. But then I think I'm broadly seen as odd anyway.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
I thought of something else relating to the "this is how it's done at the big worship conferences and therefore this must be right" thing. There's a lot going on there.
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music, and nor does a new chap who came to join us. They learn by watching youtube clips of the song in question, by contrast I would learn from a quick listen to the youtube and then using the sheet music. In the past we've changed songs from what's done "in concert" (and even on the sheet music, which is often transcribed from a live set, I presume), to make things more congregation friendly, eg Leaving out bridges and the odd random bar which creeps in, esp where it creeps in in some verses and not in others. Some changes have been more radical - eg changing a time signature or rhythm.
I don't see these changes as a Bad Thing as I think it makes the result easier to sing as a congregation member. But the new chap did - it was not good that what we were playing was not like it was on youtube.
I think this is part of a broader discussion about whether a particular song should only be done in this way, or within a limited degree of variation of this way. Blame X factor if you like - endless covers of songs, with limited invention of new things.
So there's the what should the actual song sound like - a homage to Hillsong (or whatever) or St Blog's own version. There's also the issue of how people learn, and people who don't read music will be learning from listening & trying to reproduce what they hear.
I like folk music so I'm used to 87 different interpretations of the same song, but others will see things differently.
There might then be a tangent about what "doing it right" is - if we're closer to the Big Worship Conference rendition, are we somehow more spiritual? [I don't think so, obviously, but I'm a cynical git.]
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
SC, I can relate to all of that, and I don't see it as problematic. It's just a statement that your personal engagement with God is not going to be well-served by normative expressions of church. And frankly, if I'm in the congregation not the band I'm right there with you most of the time.
Jemima the 9th, amen, hallelujah, preach it sister.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
jrw
Shipmate
# 18045
|
Posted
I wonder whether some of the problem at least is due to believers who think that 'God gives them songs'. I'm sure that that happens sometimes but most of the time songs have to be written.
--------------------
plug plug
Posts: 522 | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music, and nor does a new chap who came to join us. They learn by watching youtube clips of the song in question... In the past we've changed songs from what's done "in concert" ... to make things more congregation friendly, eg Leaving out bridges and the odd random bar which creeps in, esp where it creeps in in some verses and not in others.
Yes this is a problem. People who learn by rote from hearing are thrown off balance when expected to sing NOT as they heard it. Meanwhile, the people who didn't learn it by listening to the radio are thrown off by the interlude (am I supposed to sing or not, maybe it's a performance and I wasn't supposed to sing at all?) and by the occasional extra beats.
Perhaps the solution is to not sing radio songs unless as played on the radio they are good congregational songs.
The band leaders I've known are unaware there's such a thing as a difference between performance songs and a congregational songs. So a better rule might be if it's on the radio we don't sing it in church. (One could explain "it's to give people variety from what they hear all week").
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amorya
Ship's tame galoot
# 2652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jrw:
I wonder whether some of the problem at least is due to believers who think that 'God gives them songs'. I'm sure that that happens sometimes but most of the time songs have to be written.
I like the Martyn Joseph quote: "I got sick and tired of people standing up on platforms saying 'God gave me this song', and then when you hear it you're like God wanted to get rid of it!"
Posts: 2383 | From: Coventry | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music
I'd be inclined to tell him to go away and come back when he's learnt the fundamental tools of his trade. Yes, I know, Paul McCartney etc., but Def Leppard's drummer only has one arm, and you don't find drummers saying "having only one arm's no problem; the second one isn't important."
Reading music is not hard to learn to do. My sons are 10 and 8. Learning to read music was the easiest thing both of them found about learning instruments. It's meant to be simple and intuitive, and to a large extent it is. I'm fed up with excuses on this one.
/rant
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amorya:
quote:
Originally posted by jrw:
I wonder whether some of the problem at least is due to believers who think that 'God gives them songs'. I'm sure that that happens sometimes but most of the time songs have to be written.
I like the Martyn Joseph quote: "I got sick and tired of people standing up on platforms saying 'God gave me this song', and then when you hear it you're like God wanted to get rid of it!"
Funny you should mention S. Martyn Abertawe. I was thinking here that, contra Paul., the issue is not genre. It's that in many cases the Christian musicians in the CCM scene aren't particularly good exemplars of the genre. One or two exceptions - Stryper were a good example of hair extension glam rock, and it's significant that they also had secular success. Similarly the aforementioned S. Martyn, Liberal Backslider, who's a damned good protest acoustic folk/rock singer in the tradition of Bob Dylan or Billy Bragg, although he himself tends to cite Bruce Springsteen, which connection I personally have never quite got. And again, I know strong atheists who are Martyn Joseph fans.
So perhaps the take-home message here is to look for secular success. If you can only sell to Christians, it probably means you're a bit shite.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
Up to a point, I think CCM suffers from the phenomenon that “95% of everything is crap”. In churches that sing traditional hymns, they’ve had longer to filter out the 95% of crap so they’ve mostly retained the ones that are worth singing.
The other issue that I see is the increasingly commercialisation. I think this dovetails with the Purgatory thread about “Christian” books, where “Christian” is a marketing label. I very rarely listen to CCM these days because so much of it is produced by a massive industry, making a highly homogenised product. Same sound, same pretty white 20-somethings singing it. I think a lot of the artists probably have perfectly sincere intentions when they set out on a musical career, but they quickly end up getting swallowed up by an industry whose main aim is to make money.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Funny you should mention S. Martyn Abertawe. I was thinking here that, contra Paul., the issue is not genre. It's that in many cases the Christian musicians in the CCM scene aren't particularly good exemplars of the genre.
When did I say the problem was genre? I said the problem was taste. And there are plenty of things which could be said to be a poor example of their genre which are nonetheless popular and well-liked. In fact it's almost a cliche when a hard-core fan will tell you that the band or artist that popularized a genre is not the "real thing" and point you instead to some obscure artist you've never heard of.
So again the decision that "band X is a poor example of genre Y" is a subjective opinion.
And if that's true for music listened to purely for entertainment then it's even more true for worship music which has other agendas to fulfill such as whether it's easy to sing, whether the lyrics make theological sense etc.
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paul.:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Funny you should mention S. Martyn Abertawe. I was thinking here that, contra Paul., the issue is not genre. It's that in many cases the Christian musicians in the CCM scene aren't particularly good exemplars of the genre.
When did I say the problem was genre? I said the problem was taste. And there are plenty of things which could be said to be a poor example of their genre which are nonetheless popular and well-liked. In fact it's almost a cliche when a hard-core fan will tell you that the band or artist that popularized a genre is not the "real thing" and point you instead to some obscure artist you've never heard of.
Indeed there are. And there will also be loads of crappy examples who are neither popular with the cognoscenti nor with the wider general public. Unless they're Christian and can therefore use that as their selling point, they will generally be completely unheard of.
quote:
So again the decision that "band X is a poor example of genre Y" is a subjective opinion.
I'd disagree. I've heard lots of bands at places like Greenbelt who are really bad examples of their genre. Metal bands that would neither get a half page in Kerrang! nor a single in the top 40 in a million years. That's what I mean by poor examples. Bands and artists who have little going for them except that they're Christians and someone somewhere in a crummy little Christian bookshop somewhere will buy it for little other reason.
quote:
And if that's true for music listened to purely for entertainment then it's even more true for worship music which has other agendas to fulfill such as whether it's easy to sing, whether the lyrics make theological sense etc.
Which two particular agendas are notoriously failed by much CCM; we even have an uber-thread dedicated to that.
Unrelated - some of it's production values. I bought, many years ago, a Garth Hewitt (remember him, Ship Old People?) album on the basis of a good live gig. The album was absolutely feckin' awful - over produced, twee sounding, yeurgh...
[ 19. January 2015, 12:07: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
Jemima the 9th, amen, hallelujah, preach it sister.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) No one's ever said that to me before, you've quite made my day!
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The band leaders I've known are unaware there's such a thing as a difference between performance songs and a congregational songs. So a better rule might be if it's on the radio we don't sing it in church. (One could explain "it's to give people variety from what they hear all week").
I've never braved Christian radio, but I agree about the difference between performance and congregational songs. I would never go to a performance type worship type event. Never. Not if you paid me a million quid and I got to have a pint with Benedict Cumberbatch afterwards. Well, possibly in the last scenario. Otherwise not.
Karl LB - yes I see what you mean about learning music. My older kids (11 & 9) have picked it up pretty easily whilst learning guitar and flute. As you say, not the hardest part of learning an instrument. Perhaps there's a view that if you're a singer rather than playing an instrument you don't need to learn? I don't think it's laziness on our worship leader's part - she's a wonderful woman, devoted to what she does. I think if she thought it was important to learn to read music, she would. It comes back to the point about "how to make good worship music" - are we trying to reproduce what we've heard, or doing something different? And the latter of those will be made much easier with a little bit of musical background.
The "go away and come back when you've learned how to do it" wouldn't happen, because I think a) It's seen as snobbery and b) We really need people to lead worship. Gift horses etc.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul.
Shipmate
# 37
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
So again the decision that "band X is a poor example of genre Y" is a subjective opinion.
I'd disagree. I've heard lots of bands at places like Greenbelt who are really bad examples of their genre. Metal bands that would neither get a half page in Kerrang! nor a single in the top 40 in a million years. That's what I mean by poor examples.
Which is still a matter of taste. Kerrang! and the people who buy top 40 singles are not more objective arbiters of taste than the music leaders, choir directors or whoever else is in charge of the churches' music that Schroedinger's cat so deplores.
And he has every right to deplore it, because he has every right to his taste. But so do the people who happy sing along to "Jesus is lord (x12)".
Posts: 3689 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music
I'd be inclined to tell him to go away and come back when he's learnt the fundamental tools of his trade.
Our band's leader scorns reading, says it's a crutch and holds people back, true musicians don't read, they learn by listening.
I'm fine with some people read and some learn by ear. I've never before run into open scorn for reading music.
Band leader is appointed by clergy person (who admits to knowing nothing about music and just grabbed the first guitar player she found). The group has no say about who is leader. Clergy won't fire the current amateur leader or discuss music group dynamics because they have enough to do without getting into music issues,if the band leader is happy enough to keep coming back, that's all that matters.
Sad that churches have become dependent of the weekly presence of someone with rare (?) skills.
Not rare, just rare to find people with real music skills willing to show up every Sunday morning plus extra Christmas and Easter) to play/lead a limited range of music for free, unless they truly love being in church every week. No wonder people who respond to decent music don't find themselves responding to the music in church!
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
New to me thought crossed my mind.
Clergy are "essential" every week but we don't (usually) grab just anyone willing to show up and do it, we (the system) put them through some sort of discernment which (I hope) has as much to do with personality fitness as spiritual health.
Just because a church cannot function without clergy is not seen as reason to grab the first willing person and stick them in that position.
If music leaders have important effect on the gathering, shouldn't music leaders be chosen via some discernment process? Some discernment about personality and leadership and whether their music goals fit with those of the church?
I may be seeing a band leader whose goal is to slowly reduce church member participation in the band so his hired (not of this church or denomination) combo have a permanent paid gig. OTOH the clergy might be fine with that so long as they get weekly music and don't have to think about it.
I'm struck by the importance to the show of two leaders - clergy and music; one we try to make sure is professional in training and attitude, the other we think any amateur immature person will do! Why the difference if music matters?
If we had serious discernment about music leaders, would church music be less crap?
I have visited a church where the band was as good or better than any pro group I've heard. They would be able to make your most hated crappy Christian song sound good. (They were paid by the church a reasonable fee to make being that good and giving church events priority worth the effort. I saw no personality grandstanding, although I can't know what goes on behind scenes.)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
In my own little group, our leader doesn't read music
I'd be inclined to tell him to go away and come back when he's learnt the fundamental tools of his trade.
Our band's leader scorns reading, says it's a crutch and holds people back, true musicians don't read, they learn by listening.
What an utter crock. Written music is the way musicians communicate musical ideas to one another. It's the way they record musical ideas. If I don't know a tune, the dots will teach me it. Play him the Amen chorus from Handel's Messiah then ask him to sing the Tenor part from listening alone.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
