If You’re Ignorant and You Don’t Know it Clap Your Hands…
Earlier this year, a friend of mine was asking about guidelines when writing for a blog. One of the first things I told him was that you should not praise or pan works (art, music, books, movies etc.) without actually having viewed, skimmed, listened or observed the work, itself (with the obvious exception of pornography, which, by definition, I don’t need to see to classify). The reason for this is threefold:
1) To avoid praising something that shouldn’t be praised
2) To avoid dissing something that shouldn’t be dissed
3) To avoid putting my ignorance on public for the world to see.
My next bit of advice, in line with #3, was that I don’t blog on golf, clogging, NASCAR and other topics about which I have no clue.
So, in catching up with some reading today, I found some perfect examples of ODM violation of both of these rules, one of which will allow me to answer a question posed to me (but missed until today) by amy.
Exhibit A: Wait a minute! Bruce Willis was dead during the whole movie?!?
In a number of articles in the past few weeks (one might suspect, cynically, were written to garner web hits), some of the ODM’s have taken issue with High School Musical, posting the words and/or video of one particular song as an example of why is should be reviled and spurned by Christians. It was also pointed out earlier that this artistic work was being performed by drama departments at *gasp* Christian schools. Amy queried us on an earlier thread whether we would support the performance of this particular musical which includes a song and dance number with the following lyrics:
Sharpay:
Kickin’ and a scratchin’
Grindin’ out my bestRyan:
Anything it takes
To climb the ladder of successBoth:
Work our tails off every day
Gotta bump the competition
Blow them all away[...]Both:
Move it to the groove
‘Til the music stops
Do the bop bop, bop to the top
Don’t ever stop
Bop to the topGimmie, gimmie
Shimmy shimmy
Shake some booty and turn around
Flash a smile in their direction[...]Both:
Bop, bop, bop
Straight to the top
Going for the glory
We’ll keep stepping up
And we just won’t stop
‘Til we reach the top
Bop to the top
On the surface, I would agree that it seems rather antithetical to something Christians should be supporting. However, since the ODM sites in question have a record of “discernment” about an inch wide and not nearly as thick, I decided not to make a snap judgment. I held off commenting until I had actually done a little bit of research (since that word is in the title of our site) into the work in question.
Sure enough, as it turns out, it was best that I didn’t make a snap judgment. The song in question which keeps getting quoted and played by the ODM’s is the introduction of the story’s antagonist, and the message contained therein is antithetical to the message of the story (which is normally the case with the worldview of a story’s antagonist). Basically, this musical number was used to introduce us to the villain of the story, and to describe their motivation.
So, one must question whether the ODM’s in question were just ignorant, neglecting to do any actual research into the work of art, itself, in pursuit of scoring nasty put-downs, increased web hits or both. Or, were the ODM’s being purposely deceitful and malevolent in intent? Out of charity, I will assume the former.
In that vein, let’s ask ourselves - reasonably - if the introduction of the antagonist should be used to portray the intent of a story.
If so, then it would be best to tear Genesis 3 out of the Bible. After all, one of the characters in this story says “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Do we really want people believing this?
We also might want to tear out Genesis 11, since the people there say “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” What an awful philosophy to be teaching!
Then, let’s toss the story of Joshua and Jericho, since one of the protagonists of the story is a prostitute. Oh, the impropriety! And, let’s toss Jesus being tempted in the wilderness, since one of the characters in the story suggests that Jesus should bow down to him. Blasphemy!
I suspect you get the point, but that’s what happens when you review a work without actually doing any research into it in the first place…
Exhibit 2: I’m not a musician, but I slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night…
This article gives a perfect example of why you should not speak on a subject on which you apparently ignorant.
It seems that a Christian music company was advertising a fake book of 400 Praise and Worship songs for C instruments (which would include keyboards, harps and some other stringed instruments, though not guitars). The terminology “fake book”, for those of you who don’t play modern music, is an industry term which describes a piece of music which includes the lyrics of a song, chords for that song and (sometimes, but not always) the melody line of the song. It is primarily used in public performance of music - particularly music written originally for guitar - as an aide to musicians.
The wikipedia describes it thusly:
Fake books are not intended for novices: the reader must follow and interpret the scant notation, and is expected to have thorough familiarity with chords and sheet music. However, fake books can be an avenue to playing songs quickly; a few chords and a one-note melody line can allow even an amateur to play a passable version of any song with relative ease. [emphasis mine]
In Praise and Worship music in church, fake book arrangements are often used, as a large number of talented guitarists (in particular) do not learn to read classically staffed music when learning the guitar. So, in order to allow bands to quickly learn songs and play quality versions of songs, more and more P&W bands have started to use ‘fake book’ arrangements.
Back to the article at hand.
In an apparent attempt to support a thesis of modern Praise and Worship music being ‘man-centric’, the author of this piece writes:
Ever wonder why the P&W teams show words on the jumbo-tron but no music? Well, they wouldn’t be able to “improvise” (aka “fake”) their way through and we certainly wouldn’t want to impinge on their artistic expression or human potentiality.
In actuality, if the author actually understood music ministry, he would know that “fake book” has little or nothing to do with “artistic expression” or “human potentiality”, but has everything to do with reducing the practice time required without sacrificing the quality of the accompaniment music - which, otherwise, would detract from a worship music setting. With a little bit of knowledge, he would understand that the primary purpose of “faking” a song is not for improvisation, but for ease of use. However, he chose to violate the second rule above…
Could it be that the writer just wanted to pan any songs in church which might have ‘fake book’ arrangements for them. If so, it would have been just as fruitful to quote II Opinions 2:3-5 “Thou shalt not worship with music that is not written in sheet format, with a 4/4 or 3/4 beat, with the downbeats on 1 and 3″.
So, when you see me blogging next about NASCAR or an Italian opera (I hate opera), someone please point me back to this article so that I can avoid making the same mistakes as the authors of these pieces…
August 18th, 2007 at 6:27 am
If you feel called to confront serious doctrinal trends that seem to be compromising historically accepted positions, you will have your hands full. Most Christians will agree that in the swirling eddies of new approaches and new interpretations a solid dialogue is necessary.
But if you are going to write about every form of Christian entertainment, every modern sermon presentation, every off hand remark from any preacher, every inconsistency from a famous Christian, and every anything from anybody that appears inconsistent with Biblical standards and/or your own standards you will be consumed with a judgmental negativity that will not only cloud your entire “ministry”, it will teach others to see things as you do.
OK, you see the emergent/purpose/seeker movements in a certain light and you even attack them and their users in a personal and viscious way. OK. But when you read these posts about the most diminutive corners of the Christian church you realize just what an addictive cancer it has become. I remember asking Ingrid for what purpose did she attack the painter Kincaid because it was reported he and an employee had a falling out. I asked what did that have to do with doctrinal issues and she told me not to tell her what to write on her blog.
So here we have an expose on a high school musical. The post is designed to elicit applause from the ever present gallery and everyone feels reinforced in their entrenched position. I have come to see most of the ODM blogs as nothing more than fleshly entertainment. They never call for prayer for their attackees, they never call for a fast for them, they never admit shortcomings themselves, and their caustic, satirical, hyperbole laden “missives” would be nothing but “Phelps-like” curiosities if it were not that people actually believe and enjoy them.
And men like Camp and Corley and others either don’t see what is happening, or look the other way so as not to thin their ranks. The love thing? Good bye yellow brick road…
August 18th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Can’t believe I’m doing this - but in “defense” on the High School Musical piece at Slice: she had received a press release on a book written to pull spiritual insights from the first movie, and that’s what had bunched them up. They typically pull the worst part of something, and since that particular song is easy to pick on, that’s the choice - without knowing the story, the villians, etc. I wouldn’t be able to say that it was about the webhits, and I don’t think they know the story enough (unless they’re now actually watching and/or reading the whole thing, something they don’t typically do in these situations) to have picked that song deceitfully. They don’t get it, and that’s a problem - but I think I’m erring on the side of misguided ignorance over full-out deceit.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Chris,
The irony of your writing this piece about that question is that I brought up the High School musical question after reading Nathan’s article which took the substance of Ingrid’s criticism towards the musical and didn’t link it to the musical, but to cultural things such as coffee (was it having coffee in church?).
Granted Ingrid has made some unnecessary criticisms (in my opinion) towards things like offering coffee in church, but that wasn’t what her criticized article was about. It was about High School Musical.
So quite a number of things you say here should actually apply to the original article posted by Nathan. For example, here’s a suggestion as it applies to Nathan’s article: “Hold off writing about an article until you take the time to make sure you know what it’s about.”
This applies to other articles written here as well. If someone provides a correction, have the grace to admit you’re human and made a mistake and go back and correct the article to accurately reflect what was being presented, instead of seemingly ignoring the correction or asking questions such as “Does it matter?”
As for the piece itself, I have serious problems with the video clip in question being presented as something that Christians should watch. It’s intentionally sexually suggestive. Why should Christians, especially teenagers, be encouraged to watch this? Second, (and this is really important) aren’t lots of Christian kids and adults already taking this type of dancing in stride as acceptable?
What I’m saying is that I seriously doubt that some churches using this video will treat the type of dancing on the video as something to be avoided - because some Christians are already used to seeing this kind of dancing, and/or dancing in this way.
Is the dancing by the “protagonist” significantly different?
As for the “Fake Book” article, the author showed his ignorance by writing as he did.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Amy - the answer is: Don’t let your kids watch it and don’t go to a church that promotes it. Do you for a minute believe that people like Ingrid are making a difference with talk? All the things Ingrid is against are making great strides and spreading while the strain of Christianity she espouses continues to lose ground. If indeed her view is God’s view where is God’s power to transform the evangelical community?
When will we all admit all we have is talk, surely not God’s power? Fastings, prayer meetings? Yea, right. You cannot get God’s power and anointing without serious and elongated times of prayer and fastings, not spending all your time in research of others. My problem with people like Ingrid isn’t in reality their overall views concerning some of the modern movements, it’s the total refusal to confront their own pride and powerlessness. Talk, talk, talk. That’s all we have, we are not reaching the world, we are not turning the doctrinal slide, we are not preaching the gospel, we are not seeing young people becoming missionaries, we are not shedding tears for anybody, we are not fasting, but we are becoming very creative in posting, writing, name calling, and generally criticzing everything except ourselves.
We live in a Christian room that seems void of mirrors. How about a rule of thumb - for every hour spent perusing the internet, or commenting, or even posting let us spend that same amount alone, on our face, in intercessionary prayer for our friends, our enemies, our families, and for ourselves that God would strip us of ourselves and allow Christ to manifest Himself through our lives.
But if criticism will still be our core, there is a mountain of things yet to be uncovered so we all can consume the faults of others while ignoring the pitiful powerlessness of our own existance which majors in vibrating molecules and punching keyboards. If those brought God’s power we would have reached the world by now and would be headed for Mars!
August 18th, 2007 at 7:53 am
You’d think at some point they’d get embarrassed.
August 18th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Rick (not Henry),
I agree that it was most likely ignorance, as well, and not deceit. And that’s the problem inherent with being a critic but not having the modicum of diligence required to view an entire work, rather than a small piece of the work - out of context - to characterize the entire body of work.
August 18th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Rick,
Just speaking generally to this comment. “Amy- the answer is: Don’t let your kids watch it and don’t go to a church that promotes it.”
First of all, which is better, to be warned ahead of time about something, or to try to undo the damage afterwards?
Secondly, my sense of responsibility towards kids doesn’t stop with my own. To think otherwise is, to me, very selfish. If I were in a Mom’s and tots group at a playground, and I saw a rabid-looking dog running up to the playground, what kind of Christian would I be if I took my child and quietly left without warning the other moms and their children?
I can’t close my eyes to what I see happening with kids I have been close to. I have friends whose kids are being influenced by all kinds of things, because of the “spiritual” things they are learning at church and through the internet and through popular books.
The stories I could share are not for the most part “kids who are getting into drugs, premarital sex” etc. They are stories of kids who have seemed to have a heart’s desire towards things of God who still think that they are following hard after God. But they’re changing one kind of “spirituality” for another.
They’re questioning:
the innerrancy of scripture
“Are abortion and homosexuality really unacceptable?”
“I am spiritually mature, an adult, therefore I can take in whatever entertainment rubbish I want to - it can’t touch me. I need to be part of the world.”
“It’s more important to share “my story” than the gospel. Outright sharing of the gospel is “beating someone over the head.”
What “good and spiritual” things can I learn from this pagan religious practice?
Let me sum it up this way: “Spirituality” is being renamed. Personalities are being followed more than God’s Word. The focus is on one’s inner journey/spirituality, not on God’s Word and knowing God Himself as He is presented in that Word. And there’s a sense of unity provided through the internet where people can discuss their journeys into what they think is a deeper relationship with God and a superior understanding of “spirituality.”
Many parents are quite ignorant about the “Christian” issues their children are facing when they visit a friend’s church, when they go to a Christian college, or even within their own youth group. They’re unaware of how their kids are being influenced by popular books such as “Generous Orthodoxy.”
It’s amazing how little time it takes from hearing about issues on CRN and Slice to seeing kids who are being personally drawn to follow whatever is being brought up.
As long as pastors are spreading their teaching through the media, Christians need to be made aware of it, if they care about the young people around them.
I have some issues with how Ingrid goes about things sometimes - how often, I don’t know, because I don’t keep up with everything on her site. I believe that there is a place for warning people about what is going on in the church. Whoever finds themselves in that position will be criticized, no matter how loving they are and no matter how careful they are in their criticism.
I don’t know if Ingrid cries over what is happening to young people. But if she does, what good would it do for her to announce it to the world? If she said, “I spent hours crying before I wrote this post,” she would be mocked.
As far as fasting, fasting isn’t something you’re supposed to tell other people that you’re doing.
I do believe that she is sincerely grieved over what is happening in churches and specifically grieved over how this affects young people.
I know that I grieve over what is happening to specific kids I know, and I wonder what my responsibility is to them. I hate deception, and it’s deception that is leading many kids into a false spirituality.
August 18th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Amy,
I prefer including kids (as they are able) in my evaluation (gradually, over time, including their evaluation, as well) of modern media.
As a counterpoint, I’ve found Slice and C?N to be a wealth of information on media that is appropriate for families to address by seeing which things:
a) A number of Christians support and find useful in teaching; and
b) Are singled out for criticism by Slice/C?N
Just with the example at hand (High School Musical), I found something I was completely comfortable with allowing my kids to watch and that a) decent lessons could be garnered; and b) I could better relate to and understand the current high school culture (in which my kids live).
August 18th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Amy - if that is all you received from my comment so be it. And if you do not see what I see at SOL then also so be it. You are my sister but we see things very differently.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Amy,
The problem is that there’s puppies everywhere and all Ingrid sees is rabid pitbulls.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Tim,
“The problem is that there’s puppies everywhere and all Ingrid sees is rabid pitbulls.”
I would agree that some things that Ingrid identifies as “rabid pitbulls” are not. I also think that you and I probably have a different perspective on which things are puppies and which things are rabid pitbulls.
The only dog that ever tried to bite me was small and innocent looking. At least I think he was innocent-looking; he had so much hair covering his face it was difficult to tell just what kind of expression was there.
I’m reading a book right now (which I won’t identify because I don’t want this thread to get off-track) which I would describe as “a snake pretending to be a cuddly, purring kitten.”
I do not want to be seen as an “Ingrid-defender.” Even if I agreed with her in every way, I don’t think that being a people-follower is wise. Unfortunately it is practically impossible to discuss issues here and take the same or similar viewpoint as Ingrid or Ken without folks assuming that you’re defending everything about them.
Being able to discuss issues instead of people is one of the biggest challenges this site faces.
August 18th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
But, you can, at least discuss those issues here.
I’ve notice a person can’t criticize Ingrid elsehwere without her saying she’s being attacked. But you can’t criticize her views on her own site because she’ll make sure those comments never see the light of day, saying it’s her blog and she decides what will and will not be posted. Even if that means she has to pull her own posts and pretend she never wrote something that could come back to bite her.
That’s just not being honest.
August 20th, 2007 at 8:21 am
Did anyone see this piece by Mr. Walker that was posted over the weekend? He just won’t let this “fake book” thing go. His point would be taken a lot more seriously if he actually admitted he was wrong in his implication of what the purpose of a “fake book” was.
Also, how one can pass judgement on all worship teams like he does is simply astounding. Sure there are some prima donnas in churches, there probably were in Bach’s day as well. That doesn’t make that the norm.
August 20th, 2007 at 8:28 am
Let’s see, Pastor Walker judges worship teams that use such books as more ineterested in their art than in worship. So refreshing to hear from someone who can see the heart like God. Of course the musicians that practice classical music for hours a day are not interested in their art, only worship.
And then, as the coup de grace, he shares a personal story about how God had chosen him to minister at a funeral and be the example of how to please God as opposed to the “touchy-feely” crowd who God vehemently disapproves of. Boy how we all wish we could somehow be in the Spiritually popular crowd, but alas, we are outcasts.
August 20th, 2007 at 8:52 am
phil,
What an odd article. He also seems to think that I suggested that he was stupid, which I went out of the way not to say. Stupid is a completely different ballpark that ignorant. The continued … well … ignorance on what a “fake book” actually is, though, is rather sad.
As for the example he gives with the minister whose church voted him out for suggesting songs to the worship team, I would say there is probably a whole lot more to that story (there always is) that has nothing to do with a riff with (apparently) the worship minister.
As for what this has to do with a “fake book”, it boggles the mind…
August 20th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
I’m worship director/drummer at Journey Church Lakeland, yes THAT Journey. Why would the attenders care to see the music anyway? Personally we take the music and simplify it to a place where the words and worship stand at front and us musicians take a back seat where we should be. A friend Charlie West said once that he wanted the band to be invisible. If that’s faking our way through the music then so be it.