Musical Fundamentalism II
Posted July 3rd, 2008 by MikeA post last week I posted on an article about music. It garnered one comment that was a perfect example of Fundamentalist criticism (more on that later).
‘Send Me’ – Live at MHC | Ballard from Mars Hill Church on Vimeo.
This isn’t really my thing, but I respect it as valid Christian (teaching) music. Because while I can think of many personal/cultural reasons not to like it, there are no valid Biblical arguments to say it’s not right. Every criticism will first visit a cultural angle, then ‘hook’ that cultural angle up to scripture and hijack the authority.
Meanwhile, Tom Schlueter’s article “music is never neutral” was also picked up by a Christian music blog. I like this blog, but definitely sourced in western church music–which is a style all its own. Look at this from a review of Holy Holy Holy:
The descent of the ‘c’ phrase contains a marvelously constructed sequence of detail. The descending fourth in m. 13 is followed immediately by another descending fourth in m. 14. After these initial two leaps, we can watch as the descending intervals narrow sequentially: mm. 14 and 15 conclude the hymn with descending third, a descending second, and finally, a repeated prime. Mirroring the narrowing descent is the rate at which the descent occurs: in mm. 13 and 14 the descending fourths require two beats to occur; in m. 15, the descent of the third takes only one beat of time; the descent of the second and unison increased to the eighth note level, dawg.*
* Randyism mine
Holy Holy Holy is a great traditional Hymn. And this analysis is spot on…for the western hymn genre. In fact, you could even do a similar analysis of “Sweet Child o’ Mine” by GnR, or even the Beatles.
But while music is universal, genre and tradition is not. There is a world of music out there and this analysis wouldn’t make sense in other types/styles. More importantly, this analysis (while good) is traditional in nature and not Biblical.
Thus, the cultural judgments continue. And that’s fine, as long as we see that for what it is.
4 Responses to “Musical Fundamentalism II”
July 3rd, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Dear Mike,
I appreciate the nice comments you made about the analysis I did on the NICAEA hymn tune. I have some questions about the other comments you made, though.
You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?
Why do you state that an analysis such as this would not work for other styles? Why not? Did you see the other analysis I did for a praise chorus by Scott Roley of Indelible Grace? If not, you might want to take a look at it here:
http://religiousaffectionsministries.org/musical-analysis-roley-and-can-it-be-shafer
In what way do you believe cultural judgments were made in the analysis? Can you point to examples?
Finally, though I don’t know the GnR tune you mention, I’d be glad to take a look at it to see how it compares biblically against a fine tune like NICAEA.
Thanks, Mike.
Tim
July 4th, 2008 at 12:17 am
I wonder if these are the same guys that I heard doing a rap about exegesis, eisegesis, and hermeneutics.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Hi Tim, I do enjoy your analysis.
You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?
It’s not that it is unBiblical…meaning opposed. And I hesitate to say that extra-Biblical because that has its own set of connotations.
It is an analysis rooted in certain lines of western thought in regard to music and poetry. A very good and thorough analysis. But it is not universal in application.
Certainly if you’re putting together a worship service for people who are of that musical culture, then it’s 100% applicable.
I did read your analysis of the Indelible grace tune, and I think this is more of what I’m talking about w/r/t “Musical Fundamentalism”. You bridge the gap between the tactics of music and scripture, but it is by the culture and tradition of your musical standard. This is fine if you’re operating within that culture and tradition, but it’s of limited effect otherwise.
I’m fairly certain you’d be even harder on my own Hymn re-works. But I know many people who find the more historical renditions to be far less effective than what contemporary artists have done. Does that make them more scriptural? No. More effective? In some cases.
The analysis of other music styles as “depraved” and “slothful” is not directly Biblically based. It absolutely requires a filter of a source culture.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Mike,
Thank you for your response to my questions. In my analysis, I said that I would depend on Old Testament theologian John Makujina’s exegesis of several scriptural passages in order to assert music’s universal ability to communicate objectively. Have you read his book, “Measuring the Music”?
His case regarding universal musical principles is compelling, both biblically and musically. There is separate scientific proof that bears it out, if you’re interested. I would strongly encourage you to read it if you haven’t. If you only have time for a short read, skip right to Appendix C.
If I understand correctly, your argument seems to be based on the notion (roughly paraphrased) that musical style is culture-specific, and that being culture-specific, it cannot be judged except from the perspective of that culture. (Forgive me if I put words into your mouth or don’t say it in the way you would defend it.) This is tantamount to saying that no universal exists, with the accompanying implication that musical styles themselves may not be judged good or bad. Makujina elsewhere points out that this line of thinking denies the effect of the Fall, if not on the discipline of music itself, then on the broader category of musical style, resulting in a Pelagian error in regard to man’s musical creations: Man Can Do No Wrong in Music.
In fact, universals always exist with God. There is no such thing as a gray area. While we may not always be able to see them perfectly or clearly, it is our job to seek to discern.
Though not a musical rule book, God’s Word is replete with principles for discerning good music.
Sorry to disagree, Mike. Music contains the same acoustical elements across cultures: duration, frequency, amplitude, and waveform. These elements are combined in various ways to create what we call style ( which is really a system of probabilities and expectations) – and all of them are tainted to varying degrees with sin, like all of man’s creations. We are commanded by God to discern from among them what is excellent, lovely, pure, and noble. We don’t get to exclude music or musical style from our discerning.
I’d appreciate it if we could continue this conversation on Religious Affections Ministries blogsite, where the analysis was posted.
Thanks!
Tim
Leave a Reply