Skip to main content

Christian rock as a threat?

I'm not sure what Peter Suderman's point is here at Alarm-Alarm, but the line he cites from a Pitchfork short track review is pretty straight forward:

Why is Christian Rock the new punk rock? Because those bands care about what they're selling-- care a lot-- and they make a culture out of it: a weird, fucked, mortal-enemy-to-what-we-hold-dear culture, but there it is.

To which Peter comments:

If pop culture art with Christian ideas succeeds, it may well be because of what Baron is describing.

Well, yes, because of that passion. Too many performers today seem more caught up in themselves than in their craft. And I said "craft" because it's not "art". (What is art? In the eye of the beholder. In other words, I know it when I see/hear/smell/taste/touch it.)

Lately I've taken to listening to a variety of what I suppose is called "Christian rock". Certainly Lincoln Brewster is right there, singing songs of straight-forward praise and redemption.

But where do you put BarlowGirl? Oh, certainly they're driven by their faith; they make no bones about what they believe. Yet their songs are often wrought with the same angst that drove much of the punk rock I've listened to. Listen to a song like Porcelain Heart which is almost entirely about the pain of a broken heart.

Someone said, "A broken heart
would sting at first then make you stronger."
You wonder why this pain remains.
Were hearts made whole just to break?

That's damn-near bitter bitch money cynical. The positive spin they put on it is a cry to the Creator, the only one who can make a broken heart whole again.

Anyway, I stray, because Peter's point is well taken. Passion and belief in the message you're delivering goes a long way in any industry, in any endeavor. Much of modern rock has lost both, while those performers casually dismissed as "Christian rock" have both. And in spades.

I'm just wondering what "threat" Pitchfork's Zach Baron perceives.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Have I mentioned I saw Monsters vs. Aliens?

It’s possible that Pixar is becoming a blight on the world of animation. Yes, they do some really great work ( The Incredibles , Ratatouille ), but they’ve also done some clunkers ( Cars , Wall-E ). Their greatest sin, though, is that they apparently radiate a variation of the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, so that any other animated film – especially if done with CG – is automatically judged inferior. There is some justification to this, but you don’t see every live action film being compared to, say, the films of Ingmar Bergman (well, except by brooding people wearing dark glasses sitting in dim coffee shops smoking clove cigarettes discussing cinema, damn you ). In the traditional film world, it’s accepted that different artists turn out different products. In the animated world, everyone is supposed to match or surpass Pixar, or so it seems. Needless to say, that’s just a crock. Monsters vs Aliens is to your typical Pixar production as Spielberg is to Scorsese. And I h...
2 comments
Read more

Rogan

The entire Joe Rogan controversy is an example of the kids being left in charge and the adults refusing to teach them any better. I’m not a regular consumer of podcasts. There are a couple I listen to from time to time, but nothing on a regular basis. While I’ve caught a few minutes of the Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube, I’ve never listened to his podcast. One of the primary reasons for that is that you have to subscribe to Spotify to do so, and I prefer Qobuz, Tidal, or even Amazon Music. Rogan is behind Spotify’s paywall and that’s that. But the nature of the fight is about more than who does or does not listen to Rogan. This fight goes to the very nature of the First Amendment and the fundamental concept of the United States. And yes, I understand that cuts both ways. What’s his name and Joni Mitchell are free to yank their creations from Spotify, no ifs, ands, or buts. I’m not denying their right, I’m questioning their reasons. Rogan talks to people. He does so largely unfiltered....
Post a Comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more