logos redux

If you don’t have an Emusic account yet you need one. It’s by far the cheapest way to get great music. So here’s my recent additions:

In the Reigns from Iron and Wine and Calexico: pairing a great songwriter whose sparseness is often overdone with a some latin influenced indie rockers.

Secret, Profane and Sugarcane from Elvis Costello.

Franz Ferdinand’s self titled debut.

and The Loon from Tapes n’ Tapes

Then today I realized that some bonus tracks emusic had given me for customer loyalty were about to expire. After hearing “Bumblebee” Bob Kamoske play some amazing electric blues the other night at the Venice Cafe I was in the mood to explore… so I picked up these three albums.

Muddy Waters’ Delta Diamonds which I believe is a compilation of some of his classic tracks.

You Better Run from Junior Kimbrough.

And Martin Scorsese Presents the Blues: Stevie Ray Vaughan

This should keep me in good supply for quite some time. If you are interested in signing up with emusic email me. I’ll get free music and so will you.

“O Mother,
Where can I go
with my pain and my sorrow?

And Sister,
Where can I turn
with my achin’ down so low?

And Brother,
Who will deliver me
from the worries of tomorrow?

Bring your weary soul to the altar,
close your eyes and bend your knees,
lay your worries and your burdens down.

Oh Sons and Daughters,
Who will dry,
dry your cryin’ eyes?

Believers,
Tell me who will believe
when it’s time to say goodbye?

Bring your weary soul to the altar,
close your eyes and bend your knees,
lay your worries and your burdens down.

May your words be few.
Let the Spirit carry you,
and the angels will make that joyful sound.

Bring your weary soul to the water,
let the holy water set you free,
lay your trials and your tribulations at His feet.

May your words be few.
Let the Spirit carry you,
and the face of Jesus you will see.

–”Bring Your Weary Soul to the Altar,” Sanders Bohlke

Listen here.

Found this little bluegrass gem on Pandora today:

“Refrain: Sinner, you better get ready O, you better get ready, halleluia Sinner, you better get ready The time’s a-comin’ when the sinner must die

Well, God gave Noah the rainbow sign The time’s a-comin’ when the sinner must die It won’t be by water, be by fire this time The time’s a-comin’ when the sinner must die

Refrain

Well, I thought I heard the angels say, ‘The time’s a-comin’ when the sinner must die so you better get down on your knees and pray The time’s a-comin’ when the sinner must die’

Refrain“

The version I heard was by the Lilly Bros, and I think they had a third verse, but I couldn’t catch the words.

I’ve taken a hiatus from my daily NPR and talk radio routine. I realized recently that I have all this music that I’ve collected through emusic over the last few months much of which I haven’t had the time to really listen to. So I’ve decided to listen to my ipod straight through in terms of recently purchased music as well as a few standby’s (The Beatles, Dylan, Johnny Cash, etc.) So, a few thoughts I’ve had:

1. Cloud Cult is still unquestionably the best indie-pop-rock band out there right now. I listened to most of their corpus through again and wow, amazing stuff. Craig Minowa makes the current hipsters like Andrew Bird, Vampire Weekend, etc. look like amateur hour. They combine creativity, an easy familiarity with any genre you could want, lyrical poignancy and depth of emotion with a deftness that I find really unparalleled at the moment. If you have an emusic subscription go by their albums now (hint: I think Who Killed Puck? is the best place to start, but only if you’re going to buy more than one album. It’s one of their strongest but it’s early and it’s a concept album so it doesn’t give you a good feel for the whole of their corpus). If not, at least set up a Pandora station with Cloud Cult as the defining criterion.

2. The Beatles remain astounding to me as musical and aesthetic geniuses. Maxwell’s Silver Hammer is at the same time disturbing and extremely catchy. Actually a lot of their songs are that way (Come Together?).

3. What I’ve been listening to lately:
   Cloud Cult: Who Killed Puck?, The Live on the Sun, The Meaning of 8, Aurora Borealis, Feel Good Ghosts
   Andrew Bird: Armchair Apocrypha - Good solid album but in my view somewhat overrated. I have a hard time with the whispery vocals.
   The Apples in Stereo: New Magnetic Wonder - Nice fun pop album. Don’t let the first couple songs put you off. They actually have some range of ability that will surprise toward the end.
   Arcade Fire: Neon Bible - Again, I find myself not on the same page with most folks. Don’t get me wrong, it’s an enjoyable album, but it doesn’t strike me as super engaging or original. I’ll try it again, but I find it to be a little too undifferentiated.
   Architecture in Helsenki: In Case we Die - Another good pop album. This one is a lot of fun, but not something I would listen to all the time.
   The Avett Brothers: Emotionalism - This is actually a really great album. Listening to it straight through I was impressed. They do a lot of cool stuff with bluegrass and southern folk instrumentation but combine that with indie-pop lyrical sensibilities and vocal clarity that approaches that found in groups like the Decemberists. The Ballad of Love and Hate is worth a listen, although it’s sparse on instrumentation.
   Bark, Hide and Horn: National Road - Not sure what to say about this album. It’s good, but again the songs aren’t terribly distinct or interesting. At times they approach n grungy, Nirvanaesque sound which is kind of cool.

I think a lot of the so-called “worship wars” could be solved if we could grasp a simple but oft overlooked concept: appropriateness.

In elder days, the word might have been “propriety.” But these days that sounds stuffy and repressed. However, the concept is important and can be expressed as “appropriateness.” We all have a sense that when a set of clothing or the choice of decorating or the background music of a film conforms to the reality of a situation, it is what we call “appropriate.” It fits; it is fitting. It’s right. It belongs. When something is inappropriate, it doesn’t fit; it’s out of place; it might belong somewhere else, but not here or now.

For example, a funeral march is not appropriate at a wedding reception. “But what if we made all the lyrics say happy, celebratory things? Wishing the couple well? Praising God for His gifts?” That would not fix anything, but would be even more inappropriate. Saying jubilant things to a somber tune is inappropriate. Period. The lyrics don’t change the objective message of the music. The tones, the tempo, the instrumentation, all express sorrow and heaviness. And they do so apart from the lyrics. The lyrics, then, can only agree or disagree with this mood, or fill in the content of it (why are we sad?). In any case, sorrow and heaviness are inappropriate to a wedding reception. The impropriety is even worse if the lyrics are not sorrowful or heavy; far from remedying the situation, they simply enhance the inappropriateness of it.

This principle holds for all cultures. Though different instruments produce different sonic signatures from culture to culture, all communities recognize certain emotions or moods and express them in their music. Whether sorrow and heaviness, playfulness and levity, reverence and joy, passion and eroticism, casual-ness and care-free attitudes, music can be found within every culture that embodies these and many more moods and feelings. A funeral dirge, for example, may sound a bit different in a church in England than it does in a village in Africa, but both will reflect the same mood of sadness, darkness, and mourning. And neither would be appropriate in a different setting (e.g., a party or celebration).

It is this principle of appropriateness that ought to govern our thinking about worship music. Having rejected relativism in the areas of truth and knowledge, we must not be aesthetic relativists. We cannot think that circus music is sad, even if someone bizarrely declares that it sounds “sad” to him. Though personal response has a place in aesthetics, it is not absolute. Likewise, then, not all music is “worshipful” just because somebody, somewhere thinks that it is. Music does have objective, expressive qualities that are not simply in the ear of the listener.

So for the same reason we would rightly reject the idea of a funeral march at a wedding, we must reject some forms of music for corporate worship. God has given us the tremendously diverse and wondrous gift of music, and He doubtless expects us to be wise enough to know that the great variety of musical expressions means that some music will be appropriate to certain situations and inappropriate to other situations. This means we must discern what sort of occasion corporate worship is, and discern what sort of mood or feeling the music in our culture (or any culture) expresses.

In corporate worship, we approach the throne of the Living God. It is a throne of grace, to be sure, but it is a throne, not an easy chair. That is to say, the occasion of approaching God in formal, corporate worship is an occasion for reverence, a degree of somber-ness (though not downcast-ness). It is also an occasion of great joy, but a certain kind of joy: an awe-filled, thankful, humble joy, the joy of creatures in the presence of the numinous. It is a celebration, too, but one infused with all of these elements. It is not: casual, trivial, sexually-driven, morbid, or silly. These things are not sins in themselves; they each have their place in human life. But they ought not to characterize our approach of God’s throne. That is a good way to get oneself on the receiving end of God’s wrath.

This being so, we must exercise discernment regarding the musical forms found in any culture. We must ask what the music itself, apart from the lyrics, is expressing. Circus organ music, for example, expresses levity, humor, and silliness. This is fine; this is entirely appropriate for lighthearted, goofy occasions. It is not appropriate for corporate worship. Sensual saxophone jazz expresses sexual passion; again, entirely appropriate for a romantic evening, but entirely inappropriate for corporate worship. Rock music generally embodies self-assertion, defiance, and strident individualism, often with a healthy dose of violence or at least dissonance. Again, not necessarily wrong at all times or places, but not appropriate for corporate worship. We are here not to assert ourselves or envision violence, but to humble ourselves before God and thank Him for giving us life and redemption.

Reggae music, for another example, with its pulsating off-beat guitar and percussive interplay, embodies both sexual energy and care-free, casual mood. This is wonderful and fine for an afternoon in the backyard for a barbecue, or for a leisurely evening with one’s spouse, but it is inappropriate for corporate worship. The simple fact is, the music speaks, and it speaks apart from the lyrics.

But what if the singers are sincere in their desire to praise God through this music? Then those wiser than them ought to feel loving concern for the singers. Recognizing their desire to praise God to be earnest, those with discernment ought to gently correct those singers, showing them how their choice of musical style undermines their desire for reverence and adoration of the Living God. The earnestness of the singers does not change the objective fact that they may have chosen an inappropriate style of music for the feelings they wish to express.

Sincerity is not the sole criteria for acceptability. While it has always been true that God does not accept insincere worship, that those who worship Him with their lips but whose hearts are far from Him incur His displeasure, there is another error possible: It is possible to have the power of godliness, but to deny the form thereof. Form and content are not utterly divisible. Hence, not only our lyrics, but our music itself (notes, tonality, tempo, instrumentation, rhythm, etc.) must reflect the content we wish to convey. Form and content are always related. So if we are truly sincere in our desire to worship God, we will pay attention not only to our words, but to our music; we will want to be discerning about what the music itself is saying to and about God; we will want all of our expressions to be thoughtful and carefully crafted; we will let our content rule and direct our form. Sincerity can coexist with ignorance, but not forever. Sincerity, over time, produces diligence and seeks better discernment. So the sincerity of particular singers or musicians in their desire to praise God does not excuse or mitigate the use of inappropriate musical forms in corporate worship. Sincerity is good, but it is no substitute for discernment.

“We must learn to respect worship styles of our brothers and sisters in Christ from across the globe.” (Matthew Hundley, reply to reader’s letter, Critique, Issue 1 2008)

Reverence and awe mixed with joy may take somewhat different forms across cultures, but they are always recognizable. But musical style, in the sense of genre or type, does matter. From the foregoing explanation, it should be obvious that this is not a matter of Western music versus non-Western music. The conversation should never be construed as such. We are talking about the reality of a variety of styles within any culture; and no, not every style is appropriate for worship of Yahweh.

“No one style has been, or ever can be, sufficient to serve effectively as the sole and permanent church style.” (Lawrence Roff, Let us Sing)

Maybe not. But reverent joy is the style which is both sufficient and the sole permanent style for the church’s worship. And we must discern which musical forms reflect that attitude and which do not.

I think the worst verse must be:

“Once I tried to run.
I tried to run and hide.
But Jesus came and found me
and he touched me down inside.
He is like a Mounty
He always gets his man (!)
And he’ll zap(? sack? sap?) you
Anyway he can.

I’m thinking about adding a new category just for this post. Disturbing.