iav1917@cs.rochester.edu (alan i. vymetalik) (12/25/89)
In article <12554@cbnews.ATT.COM> ajw@cbnews.ATT.COM (andrew.j.whitman) writes: >Well, I'm going to go off on a tangent on the tangent . . . Please tangent! Part of the purpose of my original posting was to get people talking. I want to thank Andy for responding... >I've heard most of the groups/performers listed above, and, with the >exceptions of Kerry Livgren and (occasionally) Rez, I don't find much >to hold my interest. Lyrics aside, Christian music strikes me as >extremely derivative. You want Punk? Metal? Thrash? Pop? Progressive? >Christian music can give it to you, all done up to sound just like your >favorite "secular" group. And that's the problem. Sure, you can find >a Judas Priest clone singing about Jesus. But I find very little >innovation in that, even if, by some standards, the subject matter is >much more worthwhile. My original list of groups/artists was fairly selective. I tried to leave out the punk/metal/thrash derivatives that have done a good job to make the "Christian Music" genre become basically a muddled thing to listen to. I tend to find the general problems that Andy pointed out in his reply-posting in just about every area of music, past and present. I have extremely varied listening tastes when it comes to music. My collection swings from Duke Ellington to Jean-Luc Ponty to The Dregs; from Gentle Giant to Fairport Convention to Saga to Jethro Tull; from Yes to Genesis to Kansas; from Amy Grant to AD to Petra; from Dvorak to Mozart to Chopin; from Ravi Shankar to George Winston to William Ackerman; from Tangerine Dream to Mannheim Steamroller to Synergy; from Peter Gabriel to Suzanne Vega to Paul Simon; from Scottish Highland Bagpipes to African Percussion; from... well, you get the picture, hmm? I think what I was trying to drive at originally was to get people just a little bit interested in checking out the "good Christian Music" that does exist! Yes, there is trash everywhere. I don't deny it. I deplore it. Music has to be discovered and experienced by each individual in his or her own personal way. Yes, you're going to have to wade through some trash to find the gems. But, I sincerely believe that it's worth it. Check out AD's music or Kerry Livgren's solo albums. (Andy, you singled out this particular artist. Any particular reason? Don't base your answer on the fact that that Livgren and AD are some of my favorite musical artists regardless of the genre.) Here's a combination of progressive rock and orchestral-oriented sound with lyrics that actually have meaning and a purpose to them: to make you think about what's being sung. Livgren, as some of you may know from experience or my earlier postings on the subject, is the former lead keyboardist/guitarist/composer for Kansas who penned such classics as "Carry On Wayward Son," "Hold On," "Reason to Be," "Dust in the Wind," "Song for America," "Icarus-Borne on Wings of Steel," just to name a few. If you liked Kansas, you'll probably enjoy AD's music as well as the solo albums from Livgren. His latest, "One of Several Possible Musiks," is an all instrumental offering showing Livgren's talents on every single aspect of the album from composting to the playing of all of the instruments. He literally did everything except master the CD! That's talent... (with a little ego to boot, I suppose) >Much of my favorite music is "Christian" music - Bach's Christmas >Oratorio, albums from Ralph and Carter Stanley, the Louvin Brothers, >Bruce Cockburn, T-Bone Burnett. This is music that reaches me, time >after time. And one of the reasons that it reaches me is that it >sounds fresh, new - it doesn't sound like anything anybody else is >doing. And that's what I miss the most about the "Christian Music" >scene. Ah that's the key thing: Variety. Difference. Standing out from the crowd. Most of my previous posting dealt with Petra's music on their latest release. I didn't spend a lot of time dealing with the general (and very important) issues Andy is discussing here. I wish I had been more awake when I wrote the last posting... My reason to listen to the artists that I do is this aspect of "sounding fresh." I agree that it's very difficult to find "new" stuff in the Christian genre bins at your record store, but that shouldn't deter anyone from looking. >Personally, I'd like to see the term "Christian Music" done away with >entirely. I don't want to listen to "Christian Music." I usually >enjoy music made by Christians, but "Christian Music" leaves me cold. >"Christian Music" seems to alternate between the themes of "Come to >Jesus or you're gonna fry" and "I used to be a druggie but now I know >Jesus and I have a natural high." That, of course, is a generalization, >but it seems to fit the genre for the most part. Who would listen >to this stuff? Other Christians? Not me. It doesn't fit the reality >I know. Non-Christians? You've got to be joking. By the very nature >of the expression, this music consigns itself to a self-imposed ghetto. I will only disagree mildly here... Christian music, in general, IS listened to by Christians. The generalizations made by Andy are, for the most part, quite true. However, they are also mostly at the extremes of the genre. There is a lot of music "in the middle" that doesn't incessantly dwell on these topics. Grant, AD, Rez, DeCarmo and Key, Petra, Farrell and Farrell were some of the examples I used before. The music these artists produce are, at least for me, quite stimulating! I could listen to Grant's music for hours and put down the headphones and "actually feel good inside." I don't quite feel this way after listening to, say, Howard Jones, U2, or Jethro Tull. I feel invigorated in a way that, of course, centers on the religious aspect in my life. Other music affects me in different ways, depending on the music. However, it is the "faith reaffirmation" (I think that's what I am getting at) that is important to me. I "feel more alive religiously" after listening to some Petra or AD, for example, than spending a half-an-hour in a church. (Now, all you church-going folk... don't start flaming me about the importance of "church.") I agree with Andy when he says that the Christian music he described must consign "itself to a self-imposed ghetto." But, I want to re-iterate that there is still good music to be found. Just because there are several bad apples in a barrell, it doesn't mean that all of the apples are bad and that the whole barrell should be thrown out. >We could argue forever about whether the music expresses the "truth," >but the reality is that it is a "truth" that precious few people >would be willing to take the time to hear. I agree. I don't wish to argue about truth. I know of people who have found "truth" in a bottle of gin. I know of people who have found "truth" in drugs. I know of "truth" in hundreds of different forms. I cannot argue with these people, nor do I want to. Similarly, when it comes to music, each person must decide what is the "truth" for them. I am not exactly sure of the slant on "truth" Andy is alluding to, however, I will assume that he means that there is indeed truth to be found in Christian music. But, it's a truth so mired down in the crap mixed in that very few people would want to take the time. If so, I just want to say that I am not "out to save the whole world." If I interest just ONE person to dig through the sludge to find the "truthful" music, then I consider my job successful. >In contrast, I believe that there is some outstanding musical work >being done by musicians who happen to be Christians. Performers and >bands such as Bruce Cockburn, T-Bone Burnett, Peter Case, Talk Talk, >U2, Van Morrison, the Waterboys, Los Lobos, and Arlo Guthrie have >made and continue to make music that is infused with a Christian world >view, but which is willing to address the range of experiences that >seems to characterize life as most people know it - joy, sorrow, doubt, >despair, peace, contentment, work, family, relationships found and >lost, issues of the heart and issues that have global significance. >More power to them. It's more difficult music because it doesn't >offer a black and white solution to every problem. But, to me, it's >much more authentic music because it recognizes the struggles that >I face in trying to live out a life of faith. It just seems more real >to me. Reality is important. These artists and many more are important also. And, just for the reasons Andy has described. Yet, sometimes, many people needed to hear a "black and white solution" because sometimes that is the only way. Oftentimes, other solutions to problems can be the best route to take. I, too, have a tough time to trying to live a life of faith. I feel that life is sometimes too crazy to have my solution shown to me in "three simple steps." But, again, maybe that is the best approach to take. I don't know. I know that I'm imperfect and that no amount of analysis and explanation of my problems can override the solution I sometimes reach: simply hang it all on the Lord and let him help me. Is that a cop-out? No. "Jesus is not a crutch; he's a stretcher! You can't even limp into Heaven without Him." (Paraphrase of a Greg Volz concert comment, "Petra - Captured in Time and Space." But, I'm getting a bit far off the topic at hand... music. Listen to Amy Grant's "I Have Decided," as quick example of what I mean. >It might help to know that I don't really buy into this "Christian" vs. >"secular" framework. I don't believe that Christian music is >automatically good, and that secular music is automatically bad. (I >know you're not saying this, Alan, but I've encountered enough >Christians who believe it that I think it needs to be addressed.) I hope everyone has received the feeling that neither Andy nor I believe in this division of music. My original posting didn't take the time to explore this issue (hence, it's current cross-posting to Soc.Religion.Christian... I hope people don't mind too much), since my original posting was mainly a comment on Petra's "Petra Praise CD." >To the extent that Christian music promotes a selfish, materialistic >lifestyle (the "Jesus wants to bless you with Cadillacs and furs" style >of Jim and Tammy Bakker), then that music is bad. To the extent that >non-Christian music promotes respect for others and provides an impetus >to look beyond oneself, then that music is good. Most music is neither >good nor bad - it just is. "Most music is neither good nor bad - it just is." I couldn't have said it much better. So, I simply quoted you. >I'm interested in hearing music that challenges me to consider new >viewpoints, new ideas, and which forces me to evaluate those viewpoints >to see if there might be areas where I need to grow. I believe music >made by Christians can do that. I think music made by non-Christians >can also do that. The albums that have had the biggest impact on me >have done those very things. I'm always open for new suggestions. "Always keep an open mind, but not so open that you're brains fall out." I don't recall who said this, but I've always tried to follow it. For myself, I require "mental input" from a variety of sources. Many things have a significant impact on my thoughts and on what and who I am. Christian music and non-Christian music affects me in different and, sometimes, similar ways. For the most part, I am affected in positive and useful ways. Everyone must grow. Pulling in stimulus from all that life offers is a desirable thing. Sometimes, I get the answers that I need from talking to friends, praying, or from listening Christian and Non- Christian music. Sometimes, I just throw my hands up and say that I can't deal with it anymore. When that happens, I always try to start over by talking to friends, etc. >> "Go in His love..." >> >> Enjoy, >> alan >> > >Andy Whitman >AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio >att!cblpn!ajw Thanks, Andy, for the chance to respond to your thoughts in your posting and for continuing to open this discussion. I can easily understand your feelings and opinins on the subjects we've just briefly chatted about. In some ways, I am glad I didn't go into too much detail in my first posting. That way I got you to respond and bring up ideas you may not have bothered to post at all. The net-waves are hear for people to express their views and feelings. Let's do it! Come on, everyone. Enjoy, alan -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Alan I. Vymetalik, 2244 East Avenue #5, Rochester, New York, 14610-2518 USA, Phone: (716)-271-8528 ...!rochester!ritcv!iav1917 -or- ...!rochester!rit!ritcv!iav1917 ritcv!iav1917@rochester.UUCP -or- iav1917%ritcv@cs.rit.edu /If I can't be reached via any of the above e-paths, please write./ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
iba@ics.uci.edu (Wayne Iba) (01/01/90)
Several points in response to recent discussion on christian music:
First, all lists of various artists left out a particular musician --
Phil Keaggy. This was inexcusable. Phil is realistically the best
musician playing "christian" music and is generally agreed to be
"one of the best guitarists in the world at large". He's an example
to me of "doing whatever you do as unto the Lord".
Music is a highly opinionated issue. (However, my previous paragraph
is un-opinionated and represents objective truth :). However,
I think one issue that came up before and that is probably appropriate
for discussion here is what role music made by christians should have.
Someone suggested that somehow christian musicians had a responsibility
to "win souls" through their music. I find this rediculous. This
is a manifestation of the tendancy to "redeemify" everything. Your car
has to have a fish or dove on the back, your skate-board has to have
appropriate christian stickers on it, etc. Basically, everything
needs to be "sanctified" by putting scripture quotes and fishes on it.
It is people that need redemption -- not things (IMHO).
Aside from any potential responsibility of the christian musician,
what role as listening christians should music have in our lives?
This is part of a larger question -- what role should entertainment
and recreation play in our lives? I would be interested in people's
thoughts on this.
No answers, just questions.
--wayne
"and we crucify each other,
leaving a battered, wounded bride
but Jesus loves the church
so we walk the isle of history
towards the marriage feast
for Jesus loves the church"
Shela Walsh (wrds) P Keaggy (music)iav1917@cs.rochester.edu (alan i. vymetalik) (01/04/90)
In article <Jan.1.10.59.06.1990.11741@athos.rutgers.edu> iba@ics.uci.edu (Wayne Iba) writes: > >Several points in response to recent discussion on christian music: > >First, all lists of various artists left out a particular musician -- >Phil Keaggy. This was inexcusable. Phil is realistically the best >musician playing "christian" music and is generally agreed to be >"one of the best guitarists in the world at large". He's an example >to me of "doing whatever you do as unto the Lord". Yes, I forgot Phil Keaggy, Sheila Walsh, Bruce Caroll, BeBe & CeCe Winans, Twila Paris, 2nd Chapter of Acts, SCB (Sweet Comfort Band), Stryper (oops, should have forgotten them again), Carman, First Call, Scott Wesley Brown, and a bunch more. Sorry, I didn't mean to leave out anyone's favorite. Yes, not including Keaggy was a big oversight. "Martha, that boy should be horse-whipped. Now, find me that horse!" Now, personally, I prefer Kerry Livgren's work. In my opinion, humble and otherwise, he deserves a lot more exposure and support than he has received. He's probably one of the most highly-underrated Christian musicians around. He's also one of the best composers and songwriters of the last decade. That's not just my opinion, by the way... >Music is a highly opinionated issue. (However, my previous paragraph Of course it is. See my previous paragraph. >is un-opinionated and represents objective truth :). However, >I think one issue that came up before and that is probably appropriate >for discussion here is what role music made by christians should have. Ah, I see someone picked up the underlying thought I wanted people to pick up on. Not the commerciality. Not the spandex. Not just the music itself. I've talked about this aspect to a couple of people who e-mailed me directly. The point of my postings was just to get people talking about this subject in general. >Someone suggested that somehow christian musicians had a responsibility >to "win souls" through their music. I find this rediculous. This >is a manifestation of the tendancy to "redeemify" everything. Your car >has to have a fish or dove on the back, your skate-board has to have >appropriate christian stickers on it, etc. Basically, everything >needs to be "sanctified" by putting scripture quotes and fishes on it. Iconization (the process of using symbology to represent your religious affiliation) is a tough thing to avoid. It is a method of advertising and it's used to connect your prospective "customer" with your "product." If you appeal to people this way and "hook" them, it makes your job easier. Livgren's music stayed away from this icon usage to a great extent and his music grabbed a hold of me more powerfully than most other Christian (or secular) music ever did. Fish signs and scripture quotes are powerful advertising tools. Think, next time, about your personal feelings at the time you see a McDonald's logo, the Chevy symbol, the AT&T "death star", the American flag... etc. But, I don't think the goal is to "sanctify" everything in this manner. I may be wrong (I have been before...) Also, I don't, personally, feel that most musicians consciously try to "sanctify" their music. I feel that they try to cue the listener into the source of the inspiration of their music. Petra is an example of this. Some go a bit too far: Stryper, for example. The spandex and vinyl-covered Bibles for their audience are a bit much, if you ask me. Even Styper's name has the underlying reference to a verse by Isiah. When you're just using the symbology to get the listener's attention and then you don't do anything meaningful (in a spiritual manner) with your material, then you're just trying to pull your listener's purse strings. I'm not even sure that the winning of souls through music is THE goal of any Christian musician. However, if the music catches someone's attention and cues them into the Scriptures and meeting/prayer groups and a greater awareness of the Lord, then, hey, all power to the musicians and their music! This is what I see the role of music (Christian and otherwise) to be. Music has become such a powerful influence in our lives that we can't ignore it, let alone avoid it (see below). The role of the Christian musician could easily said to be the "first line of offense" to grab ahold of those haven't found their way to the Lord on their own or through the help of a friend. Is it that important "how" you got there, but rather that you "did" get there? Interesting question. Another topic for discussion... >It is people that need redemption -- not things (IMHO). It shouldn't be "IMHO." It should be a certainty! No "thing" needs redemption. A "thing" doesn't have a soul and, I am absolutely certain, that it doesn't care one way or another about its redemption. ;-) However, people, on the other hand, should care. They should care a lot. I know of many people who have felt a lot stronger about their own personal redemption due to the "call" of music. I've even felt the tugging of my "heart strings," if you will, when I listen to music. To continue on a little more about music... Music is such a powerful influence on people's lives. And, it has become more influential over the last twenty or so years. It's in the commercials, the movies, the TV shows, the radio, the sports outings, the family picnics, bars... the list goes on and on. I can't think of many places you can go these days and NOT hear music... Elevators, rest rooms, air planes, low-Earth orbit aboard the shuttle, etc. etc. (don't get esoteric on me now!)... Music holds a powerful "control" over many of us (myself included... I do music reviews, concert reviews, and generally feel more comfortable with life if I'm listening to music... Tangerine Dream is now playing through my headphones as I write this posting). Music can also be a tool that molds and shapes the way we think and act. Witness the "high success" of secular heavy metal and rock music has over the world's youth. Millions upon millions of dollars are spent on records, tapes, CDs, T-shirts, concerts, clothes, haircuts, make-up, and other fashion items simply because a particular teen enjoys a particular group (hey, I am guilty of this myself...so, I can't throw any stones, can I?). This not only adds up economically, but it has an effect on the people who eventually grow up and enter the commercial, political, and social circles that control the world. But, what's really important to grasp here is that most of the music out there is of a truly secular origin. Now, of course, there is a lot of fantastic, moving, and personally-enriching music that exists that is neither totally secular nor totally religious in nature. Several people did a job of pointing out that various artists (Bob Dylan, Dan Fogelberg, Bruce Cockburn, etc.) create music that talks about the "human condition, life, frailties, and all" that sometimes far exceeds the messages found in "Christian-style" music. This kind of music tends to grip us tightly because it is contemporary and deals with contemporary things. It shows us solutions, sometimes, to our problems. It sometimes tells us that the solutions are complex, and not easily arrived at. But, it's the ton after ton of music that does nothing more than sell records and make company executives rich and fat that bothers me. I am not sure I want to jump head first into these treacherous waters. I am sure I'm going to get flamed as it is! It's this area that concerns musicians. I suppose that commerciality of Christian music has done as much to help the genre as hurt it. But, I suppose that I would prefer to spend my money and time listening to those musicians (Christian and otherwise) that took the time to enrich mankind's spiritual situation rather than other musicians. Now, of course, the original reason for my postings on this whole subject was to remind people that, despite the "garbage" that is creeping into the arena of Christian music, there is still a lot of "gold" to be found. You just have to look harder. There's garbage everywhere you look these days, to be sure, but at least when you dig through the garbage in Christian music, you eventually come up music that can be soul-uplifting and a potent addition to your spiritual life. After you've dug through piles of Aerosmith and Black Sabbath, et al., well, you've just got more of the same. I, personally, do not look for "religion" in that kind of music. I am upset that so many of our youth actually do. I am upset that the follow the words and music to such a dangerous level that their lives (both physical and spiritual) can sometimes be ruined horrendously. Now, no one said I can be a judge in these discussions. I am only stating my feelings, not my condemnation or approval. >Aside from any potential responsibility of the christian musician, >what role as listening christians should music have in our lives? >This is part of a larger question -- what role should entertainment >and recreation play in our lives? Now, I know I could go on and on about this topic, but I'll spare you all the agony. ;-) The point I'm striving to arrive at centers on the fact that Christian musicians truly have an important role in the shaping of our lives. For, if my thoughts and practices should be assisted with music, I would prefer it to be the music of Grant, Livgren, Petra, Keaggy, and many other Christian artists rather than Metallica, Black Sabbath, ad naseum. Of course, there are many other artists in the secular world I wouldn't want to ignore just because they don't record on a "religious record label." (There go those icons again...) I am simply concerned that we allow ourselves to be swallowed up in the "here and now" that we sometimes forget what is swallowing us! The role of the Christian musician (as well as entertainment and recreation) needs to be an assisting of our focusing on the truths and goals set forth for us by the Lord. If these activities go towards meeting those goals, then that is a beneficial thing. Even if the "nudging" is but a slight tickle in the back of our minds, it is still preferable than something that nudges us the other way. Anyway, there are so many other aspects that should be covered. But, space and time are finite things, and it's getting late. I am sure I left out some areas of discussion. I am also sure that several people will help point out my areas of deficiency. Let's keep the conversation going. The underlying concepts presented here can (and do) apply to many aspects our of lives beyond music and entertainment. > I would be interested in people's >thoughts on this. Those are my thoughts. Any more comments? I welcome any and all discussions on this topic or any other... "Only God can create a truly random number." -Anon "And, only God will know for sure if it IS a true random number." -me Enjoy, alan -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Alan I. Vymetalik, 2244 East Avenue #5, Rochester, New York, 14610-2518 USA, Phone: (716)-271-8528 ...!rochester!ritcv!iav1917 -or- ...!rochester!rit!ritcv!iav1917 ritcv!iav1917@rochester.UUCP -or- iav1917%ritcv@cs.rit.edu /If I can't be reached via any of the above e-paths, please write./ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
nick@lfcs.edinburgh.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) (01/07/90)
[In article <Jan.1.10.59.06.1990.11741@athos.rutgers.edu> iba@ics.uci.edu (Wayne Iba) asked about "what role music made by Christians should have" In article <Jan.4.02.30.00.1990.13797@athos.rutgers.edu>, rit!cs!ritcv!iav1917@cs (alan i. vymetalik) responded > Ah, I see someone picked up the underlying thought I wanted people > to pick up on. Not the commerciality. Not the spandex. Not just the > music itself. I've talked about this aspect to a couple of people > who e-mailed me directly. The point of my postings was just to > get people talking about this subject in general. --clh] Nice article, Alan... Would somebody care to define "Christian Music" for me...? Perhaps I missed some of this discussion. I could suggest that any Christian has a view of the world and its affairs, and a view of human feelings and emotions, which isn't shared by non-Christians, and so any music made by a Christian is Christian music, regardless of form, style or lyrics. Whether or not Christian "insight" into things makes Christian music inherently better or worse than other music is, of course, open to debate. Off the top of my head, the most beautiful music I can think off is pieces by Peter Gabriel, Kate Bush, some bits of Tangerine Dream, some bits of Vangelis, and a few chunks of Shostakovitch. I doubt that all of these are/were Christian, but that doesn't make their musical communication any less intense, meaningful or beautiful. Presumably, I could (in principle, were I good enough...) fire up my collection of synthesisers and software and make Christian music (albeit without lyrics) as valid as somebody singing in church, since it would (hopefully) stem from common beliefs and be trying to communicate related ideas? This is a bit of a meandering line of thought, but if anybody has any feedback... > alan Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ "...all these moments... will be lost in time... like tears in rain."
crf@ginger.princeton.edu (Charles Ferenbaugh) (01/16/90)
In article <Jan.6.21.55.29.1990.7002@athos.rutgers.edu> nick@lfcs.edinburgh.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes: >Would somebody care to define "Christian Music" for me...? Perhaps I >missed some of this discussion. I could suggest that any Christian has >a view of the world and its affairs, and a view of human feelings and >emotions, which isn't shared by non-Christians, and so any music made >by a Christian is Christian music, regardless of form, style or >lyrics. The trouble with talking about "Christian music" is that different people do indeed mean different things by it. I can think of at least five ways I've heard it used: - any music that uses Christian imagery - any music dealing with Christian issues, the human condition, etc. - any music done by a Christian - any music done by a Christian, in which their Christian world-view plays an important role - music done by a Christian for the purpose of glorifying God and/or building up others in their relationship with God Note that these are in a sort of hierarchy (most general first, most restrictive last) and the boundaries may be fuzzy. IMHO, the proper definition is the last one. As pointed out in an earlier article (which I've now misplaced; sorry) any music done for selfish reasons, whether by a Christian or not, is missing the point. There is a definite purpose for music: the glorification of God and the edification of others (see Colossians 3:16). So now that I've established a definition (still open to debate), we can deal with the question, is Christian music any better than other music? Of course I mean good Christian music vs. good other music; comparing garbage to anything is hardly fair game. As Nick observed, there is plenty of good music out there by non-Christians, whether it's good just by virtue of musical quality and beauty, or good due to dealing with life in a positive way, or both. Although care must be taken, such music is worth listening to (remember Philippians 4:8: "... whatever is pure, whatever is lovely... if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.") However, Christian music has the advantage that those who are performing it know God, the source of beauty and truth, in a more direct way than others do, and thus can incorporate beauty and truth into their music more consistently than others do. Those are my thoughts. I'd be glad to hear anyone else's reactions... Grace and peace, Charles Ferenbaugh
iba@ics.uci.edu (Wayne Iba) (01/16/90)
(Nick Rothwell) writes: > >Would somebody care to define "Christian Music" for me...? Perhaps I >missed some of this discussion. I could suggest that any Christian has >a view of the world and its affairs, and a view of human feelings and >emotions, which isn't shared by non-Christians, and so any music made >by a Christian is Christian music, regardless of form, style or >lyrics. .... This is what I was intending to argue against. Does a christian programmer writing a program produce a "christian program"? How 'bout a chritian carpenter building a chair -- a christian chair? I believe you intended to avoid any qualitative judgement with respect to "christian music" being better (or worse) than "secular music" but I do not believe it makes sense to even create such labels. A christian is someone (a human) who Loves Jesus AND Obeys His Commands. Therefore, I submit there is no such thing (or shouldn't be) as "christian music", christian furniture, christian computers, christian tires, .... A christian is a noun, and should not be used as an adjective (unless perhaps with "church", as in christian church but even here using "the church of Christ" might be better(?)). I sense there is something important here that points to a weakness in christianity today, but I can't tell what it is. I think it may have to do with "having a form of Godliness" (2tim.3.5) but am fuzzy on this. (by "christianity today" i mean, of course, the body of Christ at large made up of human beings). --wayne "it could have been me, put the thorns in Your crown; rooted as i am, in a violent ground; how many times, have i turned Your promise down? still You pour out Your love, You pour out Your love..." Bruce Cockburn
nick@lfcs.edinburgh.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) (02/05/90)
In article <Jan.31.22.06.02.1990.28571@athos.rutgers.edu>, userUAC3@mts writes: >Christian music tends to be quite different. If a person is not >a Christian, and hears talk of praising God, and Jesus, etc. in >the lyrics, then they might feel uncomfortable. Not that that's >bad, but if you make people uncomfortable, then you're not going >to sell many records. (I'm thinking of Praise & Worship stuff.) Ah, I think this is heading into deeper water...! I sometimes feel uncomfortable singing this kind of "Christian" music, or listening to it, since I feel it puts across this rather shallow feeling of naive optimism which I can't identify with - Praise the Lord, clap your hands, life is beautiful, and so on. In fact, the world isn't like this, instead it's an incredibly rich mixture of human belief, striving, human failing, a myriad of wonderful things and all kinds of horror and evil [ :-( ]. I think the best music reflects this contrast. I'd like my music to reflect and communicate this element of "striving" as well. So, does this mean I'm not interested in Christian music, or does it mean my Christian music is going to be a little unconventional? In being more abstract (all this stuff about human strife and so on) does it somehow cease to be Christian? >In Christ, -= Scott Advani =- ditto, Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ...als das Kind, Kind war...
oneill@csli.stanford.edu (Patrick O'Neill) (02/05/90)
I think that I missed some interesting discussion on music during December, so if the following questions have already been asked, just ignore me! 1. What do you (everyone/anyone) think about the nature of music itself? Many assume that the music of each era is "spiritually" or morally neutral; others believe just the opposite--- that music does communicate or influence in some spiritual sense (without taking lyrics into account). What evidence do you have for your position? 2. Does anyone have any references to any studies relating different types of music to different physiological or social responses? I keep hearing rumors about such studies, and I'd really like to see the results. Pat O'Neill
procsy@cbnewsd.att.com (Jeff Sargent) (02/09/90)
In article <Feb.5.04.35.26.1990.26577@athos.rutgers.edu> oneill@csli.stanford.edu (Patrick O'Neill) writes: > 1. What do you (everyone/anyone) think about the nature of music > itself? Many assume that the music of each era is "spiritually" > or morally neutral; others believe just the opposite--- that > music does communicate or influence in some spiritual sense (without > taking lyrics into account). What evidence do you have for your > position? I'd say that different music of each era communicates different meanings. Recently the "classic rock" station in Chicago was playing a series of classic albums. Alas that I did not tune in earlier so I could catch all of Kansas's album "Point of Know Return" [sic]. Of course, many of Kansas's lyrics are packed with religious overtones; but much of side 2 of that album is purely instrumental music, and it is heavenly, in a very full and touching sense of that word. The next album was a Rolling Stones album. What an anticlimax! Even the first few bars were so obviously empty and lifeless that I had to switch to another station immediately. Not that some of the Stones' work lacks ingenuity; but it also lacks edification. Frankly, a lot of "Christian" music today strikes me as so self-conscious and self-righteous that it is equally unedifying. And, looking behind the scenes, I know a man who could, if he chose, go professional (he's a superb guitarist and a most interesting composer and lyricist, the only person I know of who's gotten a rock song out of the Transfiguration); but when he looked into the possibility, he found that the Christian music business is just as competitive as the secular music business, or indeed any business -- hardly Christian in its practices at all. So he decided not to go pro, and it's a loss for all of us. -- -- Jeff Sargent att!ihlpb!jeffjs (UUCP), jeffjs@ihlpb.att.com (Internet) AT&T Bell Laboratories, IH 5A-433, Naperville, IL (708) 979-5284 PRAY NAKED
userPUB1@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Scott Advani) (02/09/90)
In article <Feb.5.03.52.59.1990.24698@athos.rutgers.edu>, nick@lfcs.edinburgh.ac > > So, does this mean I'm not interested in Christian >music, or does it mean my Christian music is going to be a little >unconventional? In being more abstract (all this stuff about human >strife and so on) does it somehow cease to be Christian? > Well, let me answer your question in part with another question. When you pray, is it always in the same way? Do you always get on your knees to pray, or do you always lift your hands to God? Probably not. Depending on your mood, situation, and need, your posture of prayer is likely to take different forms. Similarly, when you listen to music that offers praise and/or prayer to God, or music that purposely relates Christian ethics, needs, or behavior, the style you choose to listen to depends on your musical preference, needs, mood, and other factors. As long as the goal of the song is to somehow edify the body of Christ, then I would definately classify it as Christian music. If the goal is not along that vein, but it is of simply a religious nature, talking about religious ideals, then it would definately fall under the classification of religious, but whether it was CHRISTIAN would depend. In Christ, -= Scott Advani =- ----------------- "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." - John 1:1
iav1917@cs.rochester.edu (alan i. vymetalik) (02/12/90)
11 Feb 1990 Hi Folks, I'm back. I've been away from this newsgroup for a little while and was surprised to see this news-thread still dangling. Hmm. It's my fault. I started it... In article <Feb.9.02.18.30.1990.17100@athos.rutgers.edu> procsy@cbnewsd.att.com (Jeff Sargent) writes: > >I'd say that different music of each era communicates different meanings. I have to agree. Most of the music that we term as "classical" (Tchaikovski, Mozart, etc.) was written by the composers for the wealthy, upper-class people of their respective countries. Music such as this was for the "rich." The music was definitely not meant for the poor, besides that they definitely couldn't afford it. This is not to say that the less-fortunate didn't have or enjoy music. I was just different. Also, should a lower class citizen get a chance to listen to "music of the rich," they probably had some disdainful opinions of the rich to go along with their commentary on the music. Now, of course, today, music is one of the most universal aspects of life. It cuts across all races, creeds, ages, and income levels. In addition, music cuts across all religious and non-religious levels as well. So, now, there are so many interpretations and critics and so many reasons for creating and producing music (Christian music as well) that you might feel like a pinball in a pinball machine bouncing off thoughts, reviews, criticisms, morality, opinions, commentary, self-righteous attitudes, and a number of other obstacles and pitfalls as you roll over the musical landscape. My comment is to take all of that input and add some salt to it, shake it thoroughly, and see what comes out. Then, most importantly, check the music out for yourself. If you find yourself enjoying it (there's nothing wrong with finding joy in this world) and you feel that it's giving you a positive rather than negative feeling about living and all the myriad aspects of life, then listen to it and adopt it as part of your life, your being. Music is a strong force and it can definitely influence the way you feel and think. Be careful in your selections and revel in your discoveries. Just remember this, and I may just get flamed for it, nearly all music and the inspiration for that music comes from God no matter if it's blues, reggae, rock, jazz, etc. God gave us a unique, creative spirit that no other creature possesses. I personally don't believe that Satan has any real creative abilities when it comes to music. Oh, he can use, twist, and distort, but the core comes from God. Amen. >Recently the "classic rock" station in Chicago was playing a series of >classic albums. Alas that I did not tune in earlier so I could catch >all of Kansas's album "Point of Know Return" [sic]. Of course, many >of Kansas's lyrics are packed with religious overtones; but much of >side 2 of that album is purely instrumental music, and it is heavenly, >in a very full and touching sense of that word. Yes, nearly all (if not all) of Kansas' albums are packed with religious overtones. You may be surprised to know that until Monolith (and Kerry Livgren's breakaway with his solo album and later with AD) most of the religious views were not Christian. For example, you mentioned "Point of Know Return" [no sic. needed, this is a perfect title]. Well, I have to comment that while there are alot of instrumental sections of the songs on side 2, all are filled with lyrics; strong and important lyrics. Yes, quite the contrast to "The Rolling Stones." But, the only true instrumental piece is Walsh's "The Spider" on side 1. You might also be curious to know that the song "Portrait (He Knew)", for example, has nothing to do with religion at all. For years Kansas' fans thought the song was a story about Christ. Well, according to Livgren in his autobiography "Seeds of Change" (an interesting read for people who are into learning about the trials and tribulations of someone turning to Christianity), he states the song is a tribute to Albert Einstein! Now, out of personal or public pressure, he rewrote the song and titled it "Portrait II" which is definitely a song about Christ. (This track can be heard on "Prime Mover," Sparrow Records, recorded by Kerry Livgren/AD.) By the way, I like the new version of the song. Now, while this music may not have been Christian in nature until about 1979, God definitely had a hand in laying the groundwork for Livgren and the rest of Kansas even if they didn't know it or thought it was because of other influences at the time. It's really a shame that Kansas couldn't have hung out for another year or so with Livgren and John Elefante at the helm. Kansas ditched it just before the big move towards Contemporary Christian music hit its stride. But, then, maybe the Lord didn't want to have a "big commercial success" of the past pushing along the music. I don't know. Just commenting. > The next album was a >Rolling Stones album. What an anticlimax! Even the first few bars were >so obviously empty and lifeless that I had to switch to another station >immediately. Not that some of the Stones' work lacks ingenuity; but >it also lacks edification. You switched! Good for you. Empty, three-chord music does nothing for my soul. My body may like it, but I try to look beyond that kind of gratification for pleasure's sake. I believe there is music out there that can do both for me at the same time. >Frankly, a lot of "Christian" music today strikes me as so self-conscious >and self-righteous that it is equally unedifying. And, looking behind >the scenes, I know a man who could, if he chose, go professional (he's >a superb guitarist and a most interesting composer and lyricist, the only >person I know of who's gotten a rock song out of the Transfiguration); >but when he looked into the possibility, he found that the Christian >music business is just as competitive as the secular music business, or >indeed any business -- hardly Christian in its practices at all. So he >decided not to go pro, and it's a loss for all of us. That's a really bad part of the Christian music scene and probably the biggest reason most people sort of look down at Christian music despite what the music is saying. They say, "Look at Amy Grant. She's on A&M records, won all of those awards, doing those commercials. She's sold out. She's not doing it for God anymore." Blaaah! Of course she's doing it for God, as are most if not all of the others. They firmly believe it in their hearts and minds. Who am I to argue otherwise? Their inspiration, they feel, comes from God. Hallelujah. The problem, however, is that in order to deal with, gain acceptance in, and do business with the secular world, you have to become somewhat like the secular world. If not, then Christian music would still be played in churchs and prayer halls. Concerts would only be announced by word of mouth and xeroxed flyers. The audiences would remain small and a group's message would only be heard by a few people. Now, maybe that's the way to do it. I don't really know. All I know is that in order to reach a wide audience and bring the Gospel to large number of people, modern methods and secular acceptance are extremely necessary. Should the artists and record companies give up their identities and beliefs? Of course not. But, a "holier-than-thou-hold-at-arms-length" attitude by these same folk would alienate them from the secular world very fast. I personally believe that both the religious and the secular world need each other. We're all the same, brothers and sisters, under the Lord. It's just that some people haven't recognized it yet. Give them time, my friends, give them time. If all of the efforts of the artists and companies has brought another, I don't know, say a million people to know the Lord, than the efforts has been worth it. If only ONE person has found the light, then it'll be a very expensive undertaking on everyone's part, but that one person would be extremely grateful! >-- Jeff Sargent att!ihlpb!jeffjs (UUCP), jeffjs@ihlpb.att.com (Internet) >AT&T Bell Laboratories, IH 5A-433, Naperville, IL (708) 979-5284 >PRAY NAKED ^^^^^ We're all naked in the eyes of the Lord, whether we're dressed or not. He sees through the veils of life that we wrap around ourselves. He sees into the core of our being and knows us better than we know our- selves. We will stand before Him naked when it comes our turn to atone. When that time comes, do not waver. -me Enjoy, alan -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Alan I. Vymetalik, 2244 East Avenue #5, Rochester, New York, 14610-2518 USA, Phone: (716)-271-8528 ...!rochester!ritcv!iav1917 -or- ...!rochester!rit!ritcv!iav1917 ritcv!iav1917@rochester.UUCP -or- iav1917%ritcv@cs.rit.edu /If I can't be reached via any of the above e-paths, please write./ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
mangoe@cs.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) (02/22/90)
I am becoming increasingly disturbed by some of the comments made about
religious music.
When I was an undergraduate living in the dorms here at UMCP, a friend of
mine who was an organ student told me one day at lunch that rock music was
physically harmful because the beat worked contrary to that of the heart.
Now, nobody is saying anything *quite* that rediculous, but I see similar
efforts to prove the superiority of this or that kind of music.
I don't want to suggest that music is "spiritually neutral". I hear very
little heavy metal, for instance, but I hardly have to; the whole atmosphere
of it is stridently antithetical to a whole laundry list of christian values.
And I love gregorian chant very much indeed. But these sweeping
generalizations are far too sweeping.
Let me suggest an extremely difficult religious piece: Leonard Bernstein's
_Mass_. For the full effect you should seek out a videotape of the 10th
anniversary performance, or failing that, the lyric book. _Mass_ is a
performance piece, and the music doesn't deliver the full effect by itself.
Bernstein is noted for his unconventional religious views, and I might
suggest that Joe Buehler and other sensitive RC souls might want to take a
strong tranquilizer first. Some of this piece makes me very uncomfortable.
And yet, I hear a very strong prophetic voice coming out of it. There is a
complaint against the christian church which, I think, is largely justified.
At the same time, the voice of the psalmist and the voice of Job arise out
of the noise, and often.
Someone spoke about classical music. The separation between "classical" and
"popular" music is a blurry line indeed. Some of the best religious music
was written by a group of modern english composers who were also scholars of
english folk music. It is often very hard in Vaughan-Williams, for
instance, to distinguish between the various fantasies to see which comes
from religious sources and which from secular; and then consider that V.-W.
contributed a very large portion of modern hymnody.
My main problem with pop religious music is that, by and large, it has
little connection with the traditional liturgy. John Michael Talbot is a
notable exception, but then he is a former monk. Too much of it seems
trivial and too "nice". It's too safe. Some of the best hymns in the
present and former episcopal hymnals are found in the passion hymns, but it
seems unlikely that I shall ever hear Amy Grant singing about how she
crucified Jesus, or about how all but one of the disciples were martyred.
Well, that's my prejudices....
--
C. Wingate + "The peace of God, it is no peace,
+ but strife closed in the sod.
mangoe@cs.umd.edu + Yet let us pray for but one thing--
mimsy!mangoe + the marv'lous peace of God."daemon@garage.att.com (Joseph H. Buehler) (02/22/90)
The rose-coloured glasses of time have led us to forget our history. DeRosa indicates that in the early 1600's the songs sung at mass in St. Peters were so lascivious that the Curia discussed whether singing ought to be banned altogether from mass! The stuff you're talking about has nothing to do with Gregorian! In short, any style of music can appeal to what ever level you let it appeal to you. And any style of music can be used by God or the devil. Modern rock music would never work in a monastery. You can't live the contemplative life and listen to that stuff. That's why monasteries have always kept the Gregorian. It's a treasure from the past. There is also this: we are not living in a particularly Christian era. 50% divorce rate, how many million babies murdered each year, etc., etc. It is highly doubtful that much in the way of specifically Christian cultural beauty should come from such a time. Not when compared to past ages, when genius for this sort of thing flourished. We live in a technological era, not an artistic one. Beethoven is probably my own favorite secular composer. But as far as music characterized as "Christian", I think #1 should be Gregorian. As for the hard rock stuff, I side with the Protestant fundamentalists: anathema sit! Joe Buehler jhpb@granjon.att.com
daemon@garage.att.com (Joseph H. Buehler) (02/22/90)
Whoa, this is a dangerous generalisation to make (as are all generalisations, of course). For a start, you are trying to pigeonhole music under a set of labels, which may or may not be successful (let me see you place Kate Bush, Philip Glass, Tangerine Dream, Peter Gabriel under those categories then). Secondly, you are categorising I spoke, as you say, in general. I didn't mean to pigeonhole every possible composer, dead, living, or yet to be born, into 3 categories. I was merely expressing the idea that, speaking of music specifically "Christian", we are on a downhill slide, as can be seen by comparing musical styles of the last 500 years or so. the ways in which music "appeals" to higher faculties, sense, passions, and so on; any music lover knows that music appeals on several levels at once, and I can think of counter-examples to the above categorisations. Thirdly, you seem to imply that the bad *style* of some music derives from the bad lifestyles and immorality of the performers. This in itself is passing judgement which we are not qualified to do. I don't know what you mean by *style*. What I meant was that the disorder in the composer's souls comes out in the music. When a person is turned away from God, an incredible disorder is present, and it manifests itself in the person's behaviour. People who love sin speak of sin. People who love God speak and think of God. I am, of course, not competent to judge the state of people's souls. But when I hear of the kinds of things rock stars do for amusement, I am not surprised at the kind of music they write. >As for evidence, well, listen for yourself. Get some Gregorian chant >and compare the music with some of the more popular rock groups. What about the latest Kate Bush album (popular rock) where she uses Bulgarian chant? What about Orff's Carmina Burana which uses chant together with heavier percussive orchestration? (isn't the Carmina Burana a piece about love and, er, pleasure, by the way?) What about Vangelis' Heaven&Hell, with chant and electronic arrangements? What about my own little ditties with synthesisers, atmospherics, "classical" orchestration and sequenced rhythms and percussion? I've never listened to the pieces you speak of, so can't comment. Different kinds of music are appropriate for different things. (Hard rock is appropriate for Hell :-) I am merely pointing out that monastery music is the most specifically "Christian" music, be it Eastern or Western style. If anyone is in the market for plainchant, some of the more well-known pieces are the Mass (well, kyriale) of the Blessed Virgin, the solemn tone Salve Regina, or the ordinary Preface to the Canon. (A priest I know once told me that a famous classical composer (whose name I forgot long ago) stated that he would have given all his works to have composed the Preface. It is made up of only four different notes.) Joe Buehler jhpb@granjon.att.com
dls@cs.rochester.edu (Darren Swartzendruber) (02/25/90)
When I started reading this thread, I thought it was concentrating solely on contemporary Christian music. The thread has seemed to have expanded to cover all Christian forms of music. Music is one thing that is created from a person's spirit. When one listens to music, I believe it effects his/her spirit. That is why it is important to consider writer's spiritual condition. All this talk about one form of music being "more spiritual" than another form is fruitless (especially since it is subjective). So I propose this, there is not one form of music that is "more spiritual" than another, but that the writer's spirit makes the music spiritual. I attend Calvary Chapel of the Finger Lakes. For worship, we sing praise and worship songs, Psalms, and other contemporary songs (there is even a rap song in a blue moon). If I went to the church my parents attend, I would hear hymns. To me, hymns are not as uplifting as the praise songs I am accustom to singing, but I still say hymns are spiritual because THEY GLORIFY GOD. The same goes for contemporary Christian music (CCM). After praise/worship music, CCM is what I listen to most. Artists like Carman, Mylon and Broken Heart, Amy Grant, Crumbacher, Idle Cure, Alter Boys, etc. Now, I am fairly young. I am 24. So I am sure this explains my interest in CCM. But I don't foofoo 16th church music, either. Someone here at work mentioned to me one time that CCM does not have a place in the Christian Church; proper church music is hymns and classical selections because it has stood the test of time and is not provocative (that's subjective). To that kind of statement I wonder what church members were saying when this "good Christian music" was contemporary. I mean, 16th century hymns were contemporary in the 16th century. I guess what I am really saying is, music that glorifies God and Jesus Christ is Christian music. It just comes in many varieties. God Bless,
judith@athena.mit.edu (Judith Provost) (03/16/90)
Darren, I hope you don't mind a nosy sister saying "Amen" to your
posting.
Very few people know, including Lutherans, unless they're musicians,
that the music to: "A Mighty Fortress is our God" is a German drinking
song, the words are quite bawdy in German. People were astonished when
Luther wrote his hymn to that music. His answer to them: "Why should
the devil have all the best music, let's give it to whom it belongs, God".
I like that statement and I agree with him 100%.
I've heard good Gospel, Rock, Mellow, Long-hair, Ancient, Medieval
hymns and chants. They're all beautiful, when sung and played to
God.
Just imagine Heaven: African chants, Indian, Greek, Native American,
Oriental.....all those voices lifted up praising God, talk about "The
Lost Chord"!! There will be guitars, lutes, tamborines, banjoes,
violins, organs and pianos, flutes, trumpets, drums - and o yes,
harps. :-)
Any music that "Makes a joyful noise unto The Lord" is worthy.
Read Psalms, read The Old Testament, every instrument used and
played can be played for His honor and glory.
Pax et Bonum,
Sr. Judith Teresa(Provost), OSF mike@turing.cs.unm.edu (Michael I. Bushnell) (03/19/90)
In article <Mar.16.03.43.04.1990.26509@athos.rutgers.edu> judith@athena.mit.edu (Judith Provost) writes:
Very few people know, including Lutherans, unless they're musicians,
that the music to: "A Mighty Fortress is our God" is a German drinking
song, the words are quite bawdy in German. People were astonished when
Luther wrote his hymn to that music. His answer to them: "Why should
the devil have all the best music, let's give it to whom it belongs, God".
I like that statement and I agree with him 100%.
A nice story, even if it isn't true. According to all the hymnals in
my house (four), the text is based on Psalm 46, written by Martin
Lutherin 1529, and translated by Frederick H. Hedge in 1853. The
music, known as the hymn tune "Ein Feste Burg" (8.7.8.7.6.6.6.6.7.)
was written by Martin Luther in 1529, and has always been associated
with the hymn.
(Ein Feste Burg, is of course, German for "A mighty fortress").
--
Michael I. Bushnell \ This above all; to thine own self be true
LIBERTE, EGALITE, FRATERNITE \ And it must follow, as the night the day,
mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu /\ Thou canst not be false to any man.
CARPE DIEM / \ Farewell: my blessing season this in thee!