Home     RSSRSS

Archives: CCM

Body Piercing

June 6, 2006 by james | No Comments | Filed in Books, CCM

I met Andrew Beaujon briefly at the Festival of Faith and Music last year and have been looking forward to his book ever since, so I was very pleased when Kate emailed to say that “Body Piercing Saved My Life: Inside The Phenomenon of Christian Rock” was now available, and even more pleased when the first shop I tried had several copies in stock.

The book is the result of a year-long exploration of ‘Christian rock’ that Beaujon (senior contributing writer at Spin, contributor to the Washington Post, the Washington City Paper, the Guardian and Salon.com) undertook last year. He openly acknowledges that amongst his colleagues in the industry there is a rather snide or dismissive attitude towards artists who are identified as Christians, and that for himself “I consider atheism too much of a commitment.” That context makes the sympathetic and insightful tone of the book quite remarkable.

Beaujon runs the gamut of Christian rock and CCM, going back to the phenomenon’s roots in the Jesus People movement of the late 60s/early 70s, through the rise of CCM as an industry, and onto the current day where he visited both GMA Week and Calvin’s Festival, interviewed a wide range of bands, and spent quite a bit of time with David Bazan. Along the way he does much to analyze the psychologies that go along with involvement in the Christian music subculture, and does a good job of assessing its results.

There are a few errors of detail. I was particularly sensitive to some quotes taken from the Festival of Faith and Music, and it is disappointing that he didn’t feel he had the cultural language to engage with David Dark‘s keynotes at that event. It would be interesting to hear whether that cultural language has been developed after further exposure to the background many in Dave’s audience were coming from.

I was particularly taken with Beaujon’s response to a ‘worship event’ he attended at GMA week where he noted the individualistic character of the lyrics used, and their failure to evoke the sense of community present in much older church music. Similarly the comments on the racial divide within CCM were right on the mark. But beyond that, the book conveyed powerfully the struggles for those artists who don’t want to entirely reject their Christian roots but want to engage seriously outside of that ghetto, and also the tension within the CCM community about the idea of ‘crossing over’.

The immediate excitement that usually greets anything resembling ‘crossover success’ (which often equates to minimal recognition in the mainstream) has always clashed with a rapid turnaround to accusations of ‘selling out,’ but it was striking to read of publicists barring Beaujon from their press events at GMA week, and consistently failing to even respond to his requests for interviews.

Eighteen months ago, I wrote a piece entitled Why I might let myself care about CCM and I was reminded of that while reading through the reviews and interviews that have so far greeted the release of this book. (Beaujon is doing a great job of chronicling that on the book blog). With Christian bloc-voters holding so much power in modern America, it is vital that those outside of that world (and those of us on its periphery) attempt to step beyond articles in coastal magazines that treat middle America as a foreign country, towards understanding this bizarre cultural phenomenon on its own terms. This book is an important contribution to that attempt.

Laying Britlinks To Rest

May 22, 2006 by james | No Comments | Filed in CCM, Life, Music, Projects

For seven or eight years, I ran a website called Britlinks. Over that time, it grew from a simple list of links gleaned from altavista, usenet, and greenbelt programmes into a pretty hefty database of information about bands based in the UK and Ireland with some form of affiliation with the Christian faith.

I tried to use the site to tread and promote the thin path of asserting some value in community between Christian musicians, but avoiding most of the trappings that plague ‘Contemporary Christian Music.’ That attempt met with mixed success, and its results are still difficult to judge, but it certainly drew quite a number of visitors and built up sizable mailing lists.

A few years ago, I began trying to pass the site on, hoping that someone of like mind but more free time might pick it up and run with it. That’s not happened, and yesterday, after a little polishing of the code, I officially put the site into an ‘archive’ mode. It’s now complete with warnings on each page not to expect up to date information, and a brief history.

Running britlinks was quite a ride, and if it weren’t for that site my life would look quite different. But it feels good to have put it to rest in a more official manner.

Burn it to the ground

July 20, 2005 by james | No Comments | Filed in CCM

Posted as a comment on this entry at Jeffrey Overstreet’s blog in response to another commenter. Jeffrey’s post was a link to this article by Kate Bowman Johnston.

Gabe – if CCM really did simply exist to perpetuate a sort of music that wouldn’t be accepted in the mainstream because of the way it “edifies the body, lifts God up in worship, and presents Bible truth in good lyrics” then I’d say you had a point. But CCM left those boundaries a long time ago. Even if we could put aside the theological triteness of much of its output (which in itself undermines all three criteria), a few minutes at GMA week will show that it has long since moved on to seeking to present an ‘alternative’ to mainstream culture.

The crossover artists that Kate refers to in her article are helping to muddy boundaries that never should have become so clear, but there remains an attitude within CCM that involvement in that scene is a symbol of the “soundness” of an artist. Lately we are seeing more of a shift, as some of the CCM world tries to push itself into the wake of “coolness” left behind by artists like Switchfoot (not, mind you, Sarah, Bill, or Sufjan whose more independent spirit discounts them) but there is still a very strong in/out attitude forced out very hard through the many organs of CCM.

And it’s precisely these boundaries that have undermined any chance CCM may have had of touching many of us with “bible truth.” That mindset has reduced much of the output of the CCM machine to artistic disaster, but has also twisted much of the content to a simple “God loves me if I love middle class american suburban life” refrain, which is about as far from edifying as it gets. There are spots of light, but they are usually beaten out or end up leaving the industry. Similarly it is all too easy for many of us to appear artistically elitist when we talk about CCM, when most of its key proponents don’t rate artistry as a central part of what they’re about.

(we could also talk about how there is no real difference in approach, or indeed ownership, between “CCM” and “secular” labels beyond the demographic they’re marketing too. but that’s another conversation)

If CCM were to redefine itself to reclaim the mandate you suggest, perhaps more of us who are otherwise “elitist” and “snobs” (because we aren’t comfortable with its insularity and the artistic degradation that has been born of that) would have time for what little was left of it. For a long time I hoped that would happen, but time has made me doubtful, and I increasingly suspect that the best hope is to burn it to the ground and see what emerges from the ashes.

The ongoing CCM thing

February 13, 2005 by james | 3 Comments | Filed in CCM

Those who scan the comments of this blog from time to time may have noticed that an online publication called CCM Buzz picked up on the whole Christian Music Makeover debacle. It’s good to see more attention coming to critiques of that particular initiative, but I’m hoping that it will not focus attention too much on one very particular concern rather than casting a spotlight on broader issues with that industry.

Kate‘s latest column at Catapult “Unsound Rock” is a good read for those wanting to think more about the peculiar cultural phenomenon called CCM. She was also good enough to write some kind words and publish the full text of an email interview with me over at Evangelical Expat.

Rite of Passage

January 30, 2005 by james | 21 Comments | Filed in CCM

It can sometimes be tempting to believe that receiving a ‘cease and desist’ is a rite of passage for bloggers. If it is, then mine came today as Brian Mayes made a claim that I have been making false statements (apparently Christian Music Makeover is not controversial in the slightest) and threatened to contact his lawyer should I “continue to make false statements, slanderous comments or personal
attacks.” Make of that what you will.

Why I might let myself care about CCM

January 29, 2005 by james | 1 Comment | Filed in CCM

For quite some time I’ve pulled away from the bizarre world of “Contemporary Christian Music.” Having spent a lot of time writing increasingly critical reviews of much of the dross released through that industry I got burned out and pulled away almost completely. But of late I’ve been reading a few more news sources from that world and as anyone who reads this blog will know, ranting at length about some of its more distasteful initiatives.

Since writing my entries about Christian Music Makeover I’ve emailed the editors of a number of CCM news websites to ask if they’d consider adding a note about the entries when they run stories on CMM and this week one of them said she thought such conversations should remain private and copied their reply to Brian Mayes, who accused me of using his campaign for my own publicity. I replied and told him that I was sending these emails because I consider the CCM industry to be theologically bankrupt. Too much that is dreadful is allowed to pass in that ghetto because its not politically correct to criticise, and because those of us who would offer critique find much more worthwhile uses of our time looking elsewhere.

As I’ve reflected on these emails and the existence of CCM I’ve come to realise that it may just be worth caring about. In many ways the cultural arbiters of CCM share a lot of ground with the gatekeepers of evangelicalism. Those who would argue that Christians should use their money to buy propaganda posing as sub-standard music often overlap with those who would argue that to be a Christian means to vote however James Dobson tells you. And the same lack of critique, retreat from debate, and genuflecting to a set of assumptions that allows people to buy this dross, gently supports an uncritical acceptance that God takes partisan sides.

So I’m wondering whether there’s cause for a sustained critique of CCM? One that engages with what’s happening in that space and constantly asks questions. One that hopes that by opening up questions of any sort people can be spurred into asking questions of all sorts. Is there any space for such a critique? Is there any chance that it might have an impact?

Tags:

Tags:

Christian Music Makeover Pt. 4

December 30, 2004 by james | 5 Comments | Filed in CCM

The reply to my last email to Brian Mayes, the man behind Christian Music Makeover, was rather shorter than I expected:

Hi James,

Thanks for all of your interest. Check out the site when it launches in
January – I believe all of your questions will be answered.

Merry Christmas.

I was disappointed with this response, to say the least. The interest these blog entries have generated suggests I’m not the only one with deep concerns about this initiative. It may be that as Brian says, the yet-to-be-launched website will answer my questions, but it’s a shame that conversation couldn’t continue.

So I guess with the conversation apparently at an end, this is the appropriate forum to respond to some of the comments in Brian’s last email (quoted in full here).

He may be right that I overstated my argument against reality TV music shows. But at the same time, while Kelly Clarkson has demonstrated a knack for performing an above average pop song, none of the winners mentioned has yet demonstrated that they have anything particularly novel to bring to the music world, anything that seeks (to quote my last email to Brian) “to create for the sake of fostering conversation or producing something beautiful.” All of this, however, missed my original point that the press release that triggered all this refers only to “the physical” and “the spiritual”, not “the artistic”.

My core concern remains that the concept of a ‘spiritual makeover’ smacks of a dangerously thin theology. It may be that the show and its website will better unpack this theology than a short press release can, but that does not free those writing press releases of all responsibility. Spirituality is an intensely personal thing that reaches to the core of a person’s being, something that we explore and express in community. It is not a commodity to be flaunted, or to be “made over” in public. The press release indicated that the producers of this show think otherwise, and I’m beginning to find it hard to find words for how sad that is.

As to watching the show, that’s one thing I know I won’t be doing. I took some time yesterday to listen to Daniel’s Window (they offer some tracks through their site) and had to stop the player midway through each song. The tracks feature on that website are a sure demonstration of the CCM industry’s ability to take a few ideas that worked well when initially tried, mash them together, and coat them in sugar while surgically removing personality. Not recommended.

The previous sections of this conversation are here, here and here.

Christian Music Makeover Pt. 3

December 29, 2004 by james | 3 Comments | Filed in CCM

The Christmas break delayed the continuation of the ‘Christian Music Makeover’ discussion started here and continued here. But Brian responded last night with this email:

Hello James,

Your contention that music-based reality television shows focus only on surface aspects of the industry has no factual basis. “American Idol” winner Kelly Clarkson is not your average stick-thin bombshell, and Ruben Studdard and Clay Aiken hardly fit the superstar mold. “Nashville Star” selected a middle-aged songwriter. Shows like “Star Search”, “FAME” and “America’s Most Talented Kid” have solely focused on talent and musical ability, going so far as to draw fire from the industry for not selecting more marketable talent. And let’s not forget that Christian music finally got it’s own show with “Gifted”, which aired in November on TBN.

The Makeover campaign which launches in January is highly evangelical and seeks to promote health and self-esteem, especially in young women, while tying everything into a spiritual lesson. The group will be under pastoral counsel throughout the campaign, and fans will have the opportunity to be involved with a daily interactive devotional right along with the band.

I would ask you not to rush to judgements and false claims before the details of the campaign have even been released. I understand the basis for your assumptions, and appreciate your concerns. But watch the campaign as it gets underway, and I believe you will be pleasantly surprised.

You also claim that “the press release seemed to suggest that spirituality is something that can be ‘judged’ or that audience participation is a good way of ‘improving’ a band’s spirituality.” You go on to state that the “implication was very clear” yet you cite no example. The press release says no such thing. The campaign is not a competition – and there are no judges – or judging for that matter. Again, your assumptions are incorrect.

With all due respect, you are attempting to write a review of a car before having the opportunity to take it for a test drive. And for that, you own your readers an apology.

Thank you for the opportunity to address your concerns.

There is much to respond to here, but I decided that perhaps a next good step would be to get a little clarification on a couple of issues, so responded with the email:

Hi Brian,

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I’d like to discuss this a little further if I may. I have a number of observations to make on your detailed response, but to help clarify a few things before we proceed, perhaps it would be useful if you could answer a few questions for me?

Firstly you state that the campaign is “highly evangelical” and I was wondering what exactly that means. Do you mean it is very strongly based on an evangelical worldview, or that it is highly “evangelistic” in the sense of reaching outside of the “Christian” community?

Secondly, the press release that triggered all of this contained the section (which I quoted in my original blog entry):

“The transformation is not only designed to emphasize the physical, but the spiritual as well — a complete makeover, from the inside-out.”

Could you perhaps explain to me what this means? What is involved in such a ‘spiritual makeover’ and how is it managed?

I am not sure if I will be able to watch the show as I have a very busy few months coming up and rarely get time to watch television as it is. But this subject is of immense interest (and no little concern) to me, so I really appreciate your time in responding to me.

thanks. James.

There has been a further reply, but rather than make this post ridiculously long, I will continue in yet another!

The previous sections of this conversation are here and here. It continues, here.

Christian Music Makeover Pt. 2

December 19, 2004 by james | 3 Comments | Filed in CCM

As those who read the comments will have spotted, Brian Mayes, the promoter behind ‘Christian Music Makeover‘ commented on my post on the subject and offered to discuss it with me. To that end, I have emailed him the following message. I will endeavour to keep this blog up to date as the conversation unfolds. And do comment if you have any thoughts on the subject.


Hi Brian,

Thanks for commenting on my blog entry and for offering to discuss this campaign with me.

As you’ll probably have gathered from my blog entry I find the description of the campaign contained in the press release offensive. While it’s true that ‘reality tv’ has been immensely successful, its productions have often been in poor taste, and those of its offspring that seek to promote music have usually been unduly focussed on the surface aspects of the industry (physical appearance, pandering to particular markets) rather than the promotion of anything that strives to be good on any artistic basis.

I am a firm believer in the importance of Christian engagement with popular culture, but I believe that within that engagement we should be seeking to promote that which is excellent (beautiful, true, etc) rather than simply picking up on the marketing techniques utilized by a mainstream media that has managed to largely drain the popular sphere of music that seeks to create for the sake of fostering conversation or producing something beautiful.

My initial concern with the press release was that it made no mention of the band’s music. If someone is seeking a career in the music industry then surely music should be the prime criterion. Popular music is far too controlled by the ability of certain parties to market a particular look or other aesthetic rather than encouraging people to engage with the quality of writing and performance, and it is my hope that as Christians we can work towards rectifying that. I would be interested to hear how you would respond to this and how this promotion will engage with this issue.

Probably more fundamentally I objected to the fact that the press release seemed to suggest that spirituality is something that can be ‘judged’ or that audience participation is a good way of ‘improving’ a band’s spirituality. This implication was very clear, but if it is the result of poor choice of words, please correct me. If not, I must say that I think that this is a very dangerous way to discuss spirituality and a bad message to be communicating to often impressionable fans. Spirituality is an issue that must be worked out in community, but a community of deep relationships rather than one of mass media. How do you intend to ensure the band’s relationship with God is worked out with fear and trembling before God and primarily amongst those who really know them, while they are engaged in this promotion?

Thank you again for agreeing to discuss this with me. Since the discussion began so publicly, I intend to post this letter on my blog and you are welcome to reply by email or on that blog. If you do reply by email and would rather that I not reprint your words verbatim on the blog please let me know that explicitly.

James.

The previous sections of this conversation was here . It continues, here and here.

Christian Music Makeover?

December 17, 2004 by james | 5 Comments | Filed in CCM

Apparently the Chicago band Daniel’s Window are going to be involved in a new marketing campaign to help step up their career. It’s probably about the right time (five or so years in) for the CCM community to pick up on the ‘reality tv’ phenomenon, and so they’re going to be allowing fans to interact with some sort of makeover in order to take them to “the masses”.

According to the press release (reprinted at Tollbooth News):

Part Extreme Makover and part Making the Band, The Christian Music Makeover will take a talented pop/rock group and transform them from “average” to “wow” over a 6-month period. The transformation is not only designed to emphasize the physical, but the spiritual as well — a complete makeover, from the inside-out.

There are so many things to be scared of here, though none of them is really a surprise. There is, of course, the fact that there’s no mention of the music in the description of this event. But what I find rather more concerning is that the band’s spirituality is being so clearly described—by their PR people—as ‘average’. In an industry which is all about making you think you should buy a CD because the ‘artists’ are allegedly extra-spiritually-special, isn’t that a bit like a normal record company announcing the release of their top artist’s “mediocre new album”?

This topic sparked some further posts that can be found: here, here and here.