Harry Potter and the Illusion of Media Neutrality
For those of you who were doing the internet equivalent of waiting in line at a book store for "Year 3" of my blog series, the doors have opened! As has been my trend, this post will have even less to do with Harry Potter. However, I defy you to find a more enjoyable hobby than making up blog titles of the "Harry Potter and the..." flavor. As such, I have no choice.
As the title does suggest, I did want to throw out some food for thought regarding the perceived neutrality of media. As an upfront clarification, please note that by "media" I do not refer to the nightly news or such ilk, but rather the media through which human experience is expressed (e.g., music, poetry, movies, television, etc.) As is my custom, my main focus is Christian worship music. I've begun four sentences so far with "as." Good writing? As for my opinion, I say yes. As.
In "The Purpose Driven Church," pastor Rick Warren makes the statement that no musical style is intrinsically "good" or "bad." There is no such thing as 'Christian music,' only 'Christian lyrics' (p.281). I detect traces of such a philosophy undergirding the use of different musical styles in worship. Rock music isn't intrinsically "bad," so we can just take that cultural form, add Christian lyrics, and produce perfectly acceptable worship music, yes?
I don't know if the equation is quite so simple. The reason, as suggested by my title, is that there is no such thing (IMHO) as a "neutral carrier" when it comes to media. Consider music: Would it be appropriate to sing "Jesus Loves Me" to Ride of the Valkyries or Beethoven's Fifth? How about superimposing Alanis Morrisette's "You Oughta Know" lyrics on top of the music to Disney's "Hakuna Matata"? The ideas are are laughable. It follows that music indeed has intrinsic meaning. It is not neutral in its message, waiting for meaning to be assigned to it by the listener (post-modernity, anyone?).
We could even dive deeper and consider the background of such music. What if Anton LaVey pioneered a new style of music that came to great popularity. Would it be acceptable to co-opt said form and add our own Christian touches to it? Rock n' Roll has its roots in youthful rebellion, and other sensual matters that aren't always in line with Christendom. Should this affect how we use it?
What of television? Here is a device whose raison d'etre is entertainment. Does this not affect, even subconsciously, how the viewer interprets and responds to the messages it conveys? In a blink, we switch from some horrific human tragedy in a news clip to a sitcom. Does this not somehow cheapen the human tragedy? Moreoever, if somebody sits in front of a TV, whether to watch "The Simpsons" (ahem) or the Jesus film, aren't they subconsciously expecting to be entertained? Should we care about this?
Of course, Christianity has a long history of borrowing from local culture. Much in classical Christian art employs pagan symbology (e.g., the halo), and the Christian calendar is filled with holy days that were once pagan holidays (e.g., Christmas). Even more, you could drive yourself crazy with this stuff: Levi's jeans were originally developed as clothing for gold prospectors, and in the 50's and 60's blue jeans were often associated with rebellious riff-raff. Shouldn't this inform our choice of dress? Hmmm. This shifts the question a bit. Of course, nobody cares (or knows) the history of blue jeans now, and they've become acceptable attire for Christians. When and how can we draw this line? Is there a statute of limitations?
Back to the matter at hand, what about praise music? Should we sing a praise song in a minor key? To rock music? I can't propose a blanket answer, but I will propose that we do well to at least consider such matters. I feel American Christians tend to err on the side of being too cavalier about adopting cultural forms in Christian expression: "Contemporary music at church? Sure! It'll better connect with the congregation and evoke stronger emotions from them! Entertaining sermons with stunning visuals and drama? Sure! It'll keep everybody's attention!"
My suggestion, then, is a thoughtful pause before the "sure!" The forms we choose carry baggage with them, and we may need to address it in our teaching. At a minimum, we should think about it. The emotions felt during the worship may be in response to the music, not God. The engagement during the sermon may be because of the presentation, not the content. If so, we miss the mark, hence we ought to proceed, as my Spanish teacher would say, "con cuidado." If I were to peanut-butter any statement across this whole subject, I'd say that everything we do should be purposed towards keeping God at the center of it all. We don't want people standing on the Golden Gate Bridge to fall so in love with the architecture that they fail to cross, and reach the more important destination.
More to follow, I guess, but for now, Harry has boarded the Hogwart's Express, and is headed home for the summer. Who knows what adventures await next post. Ah, half-baked ivory tower musings...Whatever would I do without you?
As.
As the title does suggest, I did want to throw out some food for thought regarding the perceived neutrality of media. As an upfront clarification, please note that by "media" I do not refer to the nightly news or such ilk, but rather the media through which human experience is expressed (e.g., music, poetry, movies, television, etc.) As is my custom, my main focus is Christian worship music. I've begun four sentences so far with "as." Good writing? As for my opinion, I say yes. As.
In "The Purpose Driven Church," pastor Rick Warren makes the statement that no musical style is intrinsically "good" or "bad." There is no such thing as 'Christian music,' only 'Christian lyrics' (p.281). I detect traces of such a philosophy undergirding the use of different musical styles in worship. Rock music isn't intrinsically "bad," so we can just take that cultural form, add Christian lyrics, and produce perfectly acceptable worship music, yes?
I don't know if the equation is quite so simple. The reason, as suggested by my title, is that there is no such thing (IMHO) as a "neutral carrier" when it comes to media. Consider music: Would it be appropriate to sing "Jesus Loves Me" to Ride of the Valkyries or Beethoven's Fifth? How about superimposing Alanis Morrisette's "You Oughta Know" lyrics on top of the music to Disney's "Hakuna Matata"? The ideas are are laughable. It follows that music indeed has intrinsic meaning. It is not neutral in its message, waiting for meaning to be assigned to it by the listener (post-modernity, anyone?).
We could even dive deeper and consider the background of such music. What if Anton LaVey pioneered a new style of music that came to great popularity. Would it be acceptable to co-opt said form and add our own Christian touches to it? Rock n' Roll has its roots in youthful rebellion, and other sensual matters that aren't always in line with Christendom. Should this affect how we use it?
What of television? Here is a device whose raison d'etre is entertainment. Does this not affect, even subconsciously, how the viewer interprets and responds to the messages it conveys? In a blink, we switch from some horrific human tragedy in a news clip to a sitcom. Does this not somehow cheapen the human tragedy? Moreoever, if somebody sits in front of a TV, whether to watch "The Simpsons" (ahem) or the Jesus film, aren't they subconsciously expecting to be entertained? Should we care about this?
Of course, Christianity has a long history of borrowing from local culture. Much in classical Christian art employs pagan symbology (e.g., the halo), and the Christian calendar is filled with holy days that were once pagan holidays (e.g., Christmas). Even more, you could drive yourself crazy with this stuff: Levi's jeans were originally developed as clothing for gold prospectors, and in the 50's and 60's blue jeans were often associated with rebellious riff-raff. Shouldn't this inform our choice of dress? Hmmm. This shifts the question a bit. Of course, nobody cares (or knows) the history of blue jeans now, and they've become acceptable attire for Christians. When and how can we draw this line? Is there a statute of limitations?
Back to the matter at hand, what about praise music? Should we sing a praise song in a minor key? To rock music? I can't propose a blanket answer, but I will propose that we do well to at least consider such matters. I feel American Christians tend to err on the side of being too cavalier about adopting cultural forms in Christian expression: "Contemporary music at church? Sure! It'll better connect with the congregation and evoke stronger emotions from them! Entertaining sermons with stunning visuals and drama? Sure! It'll keep everybody's attention!"
My suggestion, then, is a thoughtful pause before the "sure!" The forms we choose carry baggage with them, and we may need to address it in our teaching. At a minimum, we should think about it. The emotions felt during the worship may be in response to the music, not God. The engagement during the sermon may be because of the presentation, not the content. If so, we miss the mark, hence we ought to proceed, as my Spanish teacher would say, "con cuidado." If I were to peanut-butter any statement across this whole subject, I'd say that everything we do should be purposed towards keeping God at the center of it all. We don't want people standing on the Golden Gate Bridge to fall so in love with the architecture that they fail to cross, and reach the more important destination.
More to follow, I guess, but for now, Harry has boarded the Hogwart's Express, and is headed home for the summer. Who knows what adventures await next post. Ah, half-baked ivory tower musings...Whatever would I do without you?
As.
posted by bmarchio at 9:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home