The impulse to create music is as old as humanity itself. Human beings have always needed to express themselves through rhythm, melody and harmony, using both voices and instruments. Different cultures have widely varying tonal scales, melodic patterns, harmonic combinations and instrumentation, but there has been much sharing of these musical characteristics as humans have travelled, explored and conquered throughout history. I believe that various musical forms arise spontaneously and organically out of a need that exists in a certain time and place, among a certain group of people.
Sacred music has a long and important history in virtually all cultures, because the belief in a higher power and the need to worship through music are also deeply human impulses. Medieval Gregorian chant, the very formal musical structure of the Roman Catholic Latin mass, Mozart's Requiem, the wonderful hymnal traditions of the various Protestant religions, slave spirituals, and southern gospel, are but some examples of western sacred music, and all are necessary, important, and organic in their genesis. They came about to fill specific needs, and some of these musical forms continue to serve those purposes.
Then there is secular music. In the United States, there are various folk music traditions that have arrived with each wave of immigrants who have come here to make a life. There are also the uniquely American musical forms like jazz, swing, bluegrass, r&b, country & western, the blues, and many others. And we also have rock 'n roll, arguably the most influential and financially lucrative form of secular music in the last 60 years.
I believe that all of these secular musical forms, even though some of them have borrowed to some extent from sacred music, arise from a completely different impulse than sacred music. (And, of course, some rock 'n rollers, most notably Elvis Presley, never really left their gospel roots behind.) Rock 'n roll in particular began as an expression of youthful energy and rebellion in the post-war era, a time when youth culture was created and even necessitated by the baby boom and the economic conditions that allowed adolescence to last longer than ever before. It was never about religion. And I believe that there is nothing wrong with that. Even in a very religious country, which the United States certainly is, not everything has to be overtly religious. We don't live in a theocracy.
Heavy metal, as an offshoot of rock 'n roll, seems to appeal more specifically to young guys (although there are quite a few female headbangers out there). Admittedly, there is some heavy metal that focuses on "Satanic" imagery, but the main appeal is its speed, its volume and its thumping rhythm. You don't have to know the lyrics to Black Sabbath's "Paranoid" to appreciate the visceral impact.
So what's the problem if there are Christian versions of this music?
What I object to is the lack of originality in Christian rock and heavy metal. I believe it is nothing more than the repackaging of secular rock and heavy metal music and image with different lyrics. The bands look and sound practically the same, but there aren't any of those "troublesome" concepts to have to deal with, like, say, sex. In other words, the Christian music industry has co-opted these two musical forms that were never intended to be sacred, and is marketing them to young people because that's who buys the majority of recorded music. I have my doubts about the motives here. With this amount of money at stake, I am not sure I believe that Christian rock and heavy metal are about saving souls (and even if that was the motive, I believe it is completely untrue to the intent and spirit of rock 'n roll). In this instance, isn't evangelism just another way of increasing market share?
Ka-ching! Jesus is now a commodity, and one with a pretty short shelf life, if it is based on the fickleness of the average teenager.
Which brings me to the word "cynical". One of the definitions of "cynical", and the way I am using it here, is as follows:
- "Cynical implies a contemptuous disbelief in human goodness and sincerity."
It is obvious that my opinions about Christian rock and heavy metal are, in themselves, more than a bit cynical. I will own that. But, I also think that the belief that Christian rock and heavy metal will keep kids "safe", that secular rock and heavy metal (and, again, secular is what they were intended to be) are somehow morally impure regardless of their subject matter, and that the mere act of listening to secular rock and heavy metal is going to lead to a rejection of faith and a life of sin - these ideas are also quite cynical. And yet, many mainstream Christians believe just that.
If a parent really believes that his or her teen is going to be enticed into a life of debauchery because of rock music lyrics, how secure is that faith to begin with? Instead of demanding that Christian kids shun secular artists, shouldn't their churches and their parents talk to them about everything they're listening to, and have a discussion about what the lyrics mean? But, I would imagine it's a lot easier to just pick from a list of pre-approved artists.
Green Day a little too subversive? Here, try Relient K! (Because questioning authority is wrong, isn't it?)
Metallica too threatening? Here, download this Temple of Blood CD! (Please. The urge to headbang doesn't come from Satan - it comes from being 15! And isn't it weird that a secular band is called "Metallica", while a Christian band is called "Temple of Blood"?)
Christian heavy metal lyrics are especially interesting. There is every bit as much of an obsession with blood, demons, skulls, gore and death, but it gets a pass because it's all about Jesus' torture and execution, and the slaying of demons. I guess that makes it all OK!
Yes, this is a Christian metal band.
It seems like just about every secular rock act has a Christian doppelganger. Again, I think this is nothing more than the industry keeping an eye on what sells and repackaging it in "Christian" form. If rock 'n roll and heavy metal didn't already exist, would there be Christian rock and heavy metal acts? Somehow, I don't think so. If the music of choice for young people was bossa nova, there would probably be a Christian bossa nova industry.
Does Christianity really need this to survive? And, if so, what does that say about Christianity?
I see this as a continued attempt by some Christians at separating themselves out of a secular world. But, I think that Jesus was very much a man of the world, and I see the reliance on Christian rock (along with other things like Christian radio, Christian home-schooling, the Christian Yellow Pages, etc.) as a retreat from the world. It's like there is a parallel Christian universe, but there is a price for entering that universe, which is shunning anything that doesn't have the Christian seal of approval - the ichthys symbol or "Jesus Fish".
Please don't read this as me bashing religion, saying that Christian rock and metal should be banned, or that no one should listen to this music. I am simply stating why I think it is both redundant and cynical to repackage these two secular forms of music for a Christian audience. (NOTE: I think I probably have the same concerns as above about Christian rap - I just don't know enough about rap music to comment.)
I just wonder what the point is, ultimately, other than for some people to make lots of money, while providing a false sense of righteousness and security. Not that there's anything new about that.
In the end, I think I might have to go along with Hank Hill, who said of Christian rock in an episode of King of the Hill, "You people are not making Christianity any better. You're just making rock 'n roll worse."
And besides, the existence of The Beatles is more than enough proof for me that God/god loves us all.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Ted Frier
Diana Senechal
Working Class Heroes
Bob Simpson
Kanuk
nanatehay
Salon.com
Comments
Thank you.
"I just wonder what the point is, ultimately, other than for some people to make lots of money, while providing a false sense of righteousness and security. Not that there's anything new about that."
I was around when contemporary Christian music actually started to become contemporary, so I can tell you how it started, and it had nothing to do with money.
In the early '70s the protestant church started to loosen up a little, including the "Jesus People." Some really talented musicians "got saved," but didn't want to leave behind the music they loved. Instead, they wanted to use their talents to create a new type of worship. My Dad, and eventually his entire band, were among them.
They rarely played in churches - mostly coffee-houses and parks - they rarely recorded. Hell - we ran a coffee-house, strictly volunteer and donations. We were poor as hell, but I got to be a "roadie." I can't explain it if you haven't experienced it.
I've been to the Christian "Woodstock" type events - they can be incredible, if you're in the right mindset. Now it would make me ill - not because of the music, but because of the dogma that often goes with it.
However, as always, if there's money to be made, someone will find a way to make it. No different than Top 40 - there are musicians, and there are package bands.
Sorry to make this so lengthy - I guess it just touched a chord. :~)
Rob, that's the best compliment I could get. Thanks.
Owl, no problem posting a long comment. I appreciate your first-hand perspective on this. When you said, "Some really talented musicians "got saved," but didn't want to leave behind the music they loved. Instead, they wanted to use their talents to create a new type of worship.", that gave me pause. Now, I haven't been saved, so I guess I don't understand what it's all about. But I wonder why a person would feel that they would have to leave behind the music they loved. Because it's not "bad" music, it's just not worship music. In other words, I have a difficult time seeing why, when one gets saved, one has to leave behind something like that.
But maybe that's because I'm a heathen. :-) (Not really! I was raised as a Catholic, and I still love the songs we used to sing in church.)
Luckily I unsaved myself and am a happy hedonist.
Here's a joke we used to tell: Why are Baptists (or the strict denomination of your choice) against pre-marital sex? It could lead to dancing!
Also, there is/was an undercurrent of self-denial being good for the soul, as well as a hint that anything too beautiful/consuming/beloved could come between you and God, effectively becoming a sin.
The experience I had with Christianity/Church/God is really hard to explain - even my wife is a bit mystified when I try to describe it - there were moments of true ecstasy and memories which still haunt my nightmares, largely thanks to the Book of Revelation and my imagination.
It's really interesting that you wrote this, though - I haven't thought about Christian Rock in years!
But I agree with Owl, because I had the same experience. I was a BAC starting in the early 70's and the Christian rock (and folk, which much of it was) scene was just really getting going, and I have to say it was the least cynical thing in the world.
And it was highly controversial in the Christian churches. Many people thought rock was per se "of the devil" and couldn't be made Christian -- so it's kinda fascinating to hear you argue basically the same thing! It was in fact an expression that God could permeate anything, including any form of art, and that none were profane, per se. I personally agreed with that, although I also felt I could find good in work by non-Christians as well, which many of my peers agreed with but others did not.
Now, I don't doubt that Christian music has gotten a ton more commercial and calculated since those days. Especiallly since non-Christian music has, too! The old days of singer-songwriters who aren't that sexy or good looking but who actually have musical and writing talent getting record deals and making music on their own terms that people bought and listened to because it sounded good -- and not because it looked good or was advertised or played on the radio or stealth marketed to them on the internet -- well, those days are as long gone as my once naturally brown hair.
in short, I don't see Christian rock as any more cynical than non-C rock these days - -if anything, the reverse.
that was supposed to read, "I could find God..." instead of "good" but it's an interesting typo!
Secular rock, though, for the most part, doesn't make any claim to some kind of higher calling. That's not to say a lot of it isn't pretentious crap, of course.
And yes, the entire music industry has become calculating and cynical.
I have no problem with someone wanting to reflect their love of God in their music. I just think it should be their music to begin with.
"I have no problem with someone wanting to reflect their love of God in their music. I just think it should be their music to begin with."
Nerdyjen, yeah, that's basically where I'm coming from. Sharing isn't so bad, but I don't like exclusion, and that's what it feels like is happening with the Christian rock industry.
Sirenita, I know you've had a trying day, so it's nice that you stopped by. I know so very little about Latin music, so your comment is interesting to me, and points up how much I have still to learn.
my problem is the thread of a notion (almost the theme of your whole blog, really) that it is wrong of these christians to usurp a musical genre they did not originate. since when is it wrong?
i remember as a youth being educated by a little paperback called 'white boy singing the blues', which detailed the near-unbroken history within american pop music of white producers, impresarios (and musicians too, not least) co-opting black/negro musical idioms as their own and massively commercializing them for monetary gain. my eyes were opened to what seemed like an egregious transgression.
in our own day, i've rankled some at all the adulation justin timberlake has received, since it has been so patent to me that he has largely just taken the dance moves and musical props of his predecessor, the artist genuwine, and repackaged those as his own... daylight robbery!
however. i've come to recognize that there is NOTHING wrong, per se, with that kind of artistic 'borrowing', or (let's call a spade a spade) flat-out larceny, robbery, theft. it's OKAY.
this is how the human race progresses, in all its endeavors. t.s. eliot said it well: ‘immature poets imitate; mature poets steal.’ and he might well have been speaking of popular musicians, computer programmers, animist shamans, high-church theologians, whatever. we snatch from each other, fertilize what we usurp with our own juices, and new creations ensue... impure, yet imbued with hybrid vigor.
so there is my problem with your blog, the sense in it that these christian rockers are repackaging a musical form they did not create, and for monetary purposes, oh shame! but it's what we all do... some poorly, some well [and timberlake is outstanding, even in self-parody - you should check out his 'dick in a box' act from SNL]...
"oh, what's that cool thing you got going there? i'm gonna go make me one – but mine will REALLY rock!" ...that's how we roll.
I fully recognize that the subject of "race music" was the "elephant in the room" on this particular blog. We all know that white rock 'n roll artists borrowed heavily (or stole outright) from the black artists who came before. However, I do believe that there was more collaboration between whites and blacks when it came to early rock 'n roll music, especially in the south, than many people realize or care to admit. Despite the horrendous (and often deadly) racial oppression, poor rural southern whites and blacks did share quite a bit of musical heritage. One of the ultimate cultural "WTF?" moments, of course, is watching Pat Boone singing "Tutti Frutti", but at the same time you've got Elvis who, I believe, understood, felt and, yes, lived, rock 'n roll. I also believe that people like Ahmet Ertegun, Jerry Wexler and Tom Dowd (of Atlantic Records) did what they did because they loved the music and wanted to expose black artists to a larger audience. Many of those early artists did get ripped off. I hope that the music industry will begin to address that.
And there were also lots of white kids, my parents included, who sought out this so-called "race music", not because they wanted to steal it, but because they knew it was good! As a kid, I listened to their collection of 78 records, which included Chuck Berry, Hank Ballard and the Midnighters, Frankie Lymon, The Clovers, Fats Domino, and Little Richard, among others.
I will also say that I think this kind of borrowing/stealing did eventually result in new musical forms, once rock 'n roll moved in the 60's. The British Invasion, while owing everything to the r&b and black rock 'n roll that came before, did truly create new musical forms within rock 'n roll. And this continued throughout the 60's and 70's.
So, my contention here is not that it's flat-out wrong to "borrow" or "steal" someone else's brilliant musical idea. But with Christian rock and heavy metal, I'm still wondering why? Why this urge to separate, especially when so much secular rock and metal is perfectly harmless? And I do believe that Christian rock and metal haven't really made it past the outright stealing stage. I don't think any of these artists are doing anything new. But, that might just be a sign of a bigger problem with rock 'n roll. Is there anything new left to do? It seems like the last true evolution in pop/rock came with hip-hop and rap. (And we all know that this got ripped off too. But, I think at least most of us had the good sense to be embarrassed by Vanilla Ice and Marky Mark! I think you are right about Timberlake, though. He seems like a young man with real talent and the ability to mock himself, something I think is absolutely essential.)
Again, I really want to thank you for your comment. It gave me a lot to think about.
I feel the same way about this that I did the WWJD bracelets...a triumph of marketing over sincerity.
nice article. well-written. A lot of my friends are reading "the end of faith" and getting angry at Christianity all over again. Me, I'm kind of over it - as long as they stay out of my face with it.
I read a GQ article a while back about a Christian rock camp of some sort. The author distinguished between Christian bands (he mentioned Evanescence, which I found a bit surprising) and Christian rock bands which he didn't think too much of. If Christians are making their music for "God," why in God's name would they make it INFERIOR to the music that's written with a secular purpose? Do Christians really have less talent than secular artists? I don't think so. Traditional Christian music isn't inferior; it's just stylistically different. But I think when Christians pull out of culture and create their own playing field, it allows them to lower their expectations on what they produce.
I think lyrically you are being a little unfair with some of the "Christian" heavy metals bands. If you have listened to bands like The Chariot, Norma Jean, Maylene and the Sons of Disaster, among others, you should notice that they neither talk about joyous Christian subjects (as does worship music) nor do they obsess in the imagery of blood, torture, sacrifice. But instead they deal with a very orthodox Christian belief that man is prone to do what is bad (and, in some cases, down right evil). Even secular bands who do not believe in a higher power or anything (though that is just as much a religion as any religion is) understand that concept. There are certain ideas and concepts that are noticed in both secular and sacred realms. Both saw the genocide of Rwanda or the Third Reich as evil. The difference is our understanding of the origin and the defeat of that evil. So I think it is possible for heavy metal musicians who are Christian to concentrate on subjects that are both orthodox Christian beliefs and secularly-held beliefs. The thing that separates the lyrics is that the Christian has hope in divine justice and the secularist has hope in man, or society, or government, or whatever it may be. Now do I think most "Christian" heavy metal bands are doing a good job of this? Sadly no, because I think Christians, in a general sense, have lost our ability to bring aesthetic quality back to our faith. That is our fault, and you are right to call out the rather false aesthetic that "Christian" music has. However, there are some bands out there that I think are changing that, like Thrice, and who are wanting to bring attention back to aesthetics in the faith. Sorry again for the long response, but an excellent article like that needs to be contemplated on! Thanks for the read and for the ability to discuss with you!
That said, ironically, I find your article to be full of cynicism, and while it is thought-provoking, I don't agree with your main point.
Your ideas seem to stem from the cynical assumption that Rock, Metal, and Heavy Metal produced by Christian artists is just the same thing without the bad messages. And though this rarely happens, I'd say that the overall goal of any good "Christian" artist is to improve on the work that is already in the genre. Every artist has his influences, and for bands like Demon Hunter, who you kindly mentioned, one of them just happens to be Christ. Demon Hunter, specifically, takes a style that I appreciate and proceeds to improve and set standards. If you do some research, you'll notice that they're often included in top five and top ten lists of all Metal bands because of their evolved style. And unlike most Metal bands, Demon Hunter actually uses the style to intentionally convey positive messages. The genre is dominated by negative thought, but a group of Christians enters the genre, turns heads, and produces music that actually encourages people to fight AGAINST evil, not to embrace it.
Also, you say that Christian bands use all of the same themes to lure in the same target audience. This may be true in some cases, but I know that this is not always the case. Actually, the opposite may be true. Many "dark" themes in secular music are tied to Biblical prophecy and other mystical elements of spirituality. The "dark" themes used in Christian Rock and Metal music can be found in the Bible and even your Catholic liturgy. Blood, death, life, redemption, demons, spiritual struggle... they're full of these kinds of symbols.