dream

what does music mean?

So, I'm reading Harold Best's "Music through the eyes of faith" in my music major capstone class. This week we're talking about chapter two, 'what does music mean'. Best offers some strong assertions about the nature of music and its use in worship. Take for example this quote, "art and especially music are morally relative and inherently incapable of articulating, for want of a better term, truth speech. They are essentially neutral in their ability to express belief, creed, moral and ethical exactitudes, or even worldview. [...]" He goes on to say no matter what the artist's intent was, the art remains purposefully "dumb" and their works are simply to be understood as handiwork. Finally, he says, Christians are bibically justified in fully celebrating artistic creativity of the most diverse sort, including that which may have been created in downright unbelief.

The bulk of this blog may be me asking more questions than offering answers...

First, I don't think I agree with Best that music can't articulate truth. Best is careful to distinguish truth and beauty, saying they don't equal each other, so I can't go that route. However, there is something profound about music whereas without it, we would not understand the world, or the Creator, in such fullness. In this sense, music must have the ability to speak truth.

I will agree that music doesn't have an absolute meaning all the time. Ten people will give ten different interpretations on a given piece of music. However, I won't go so far as to say that all music is neutral in its messages. Notes and chord progressions and rhythms all say something, and they are meant to say something.

On to a new concept for me which Best brought up - common grace. This idea that God blessed ALL of humanity with different gifts and talents. It enbles anyone to perform noble deeds, or to make beautiful art. And so, could it be that there is no such thing as Christian or non-Christian music. Best asks, "what would it be?" and through his long list we see it is absurd to think that one type of music could be "Christian." This doctrine helps us understand why all music - over time and through all cultures - can be good, and is worthy to be offered in worship.

This brings up an interesting dilema. If all music can be worship music, what happens when I'm comfortable with using a U2 song as worship and yet my neighbor thinks it's wrong, or is at least not comfortable with it. Best would say, make personal choices about what is appropriate for you. He pretty much leaves it there, at the personal level. I just wonder how this translates to corporate worship. If everyone is worshipping with music that's right for them, what about music that's right for us, as a community. Maybe it's just a matter of teaching the congregation a deeper understanding of worship.

Another related topic: What about using music to make people feel a certain way, to "set the mood", specifically in a worship setting? Best would say, music doesn't make anyone do anything. "People wil behave exactly the way they want to, deep down in their hearts. [...] People who truly want to worship, as an ongoing condition of the heart, should not credit music with the power to bring worship about. They will worship irrespective of music. It is just as wrong to say music causes worship as it is to say that music causes sexual behavior." So, how do we structure our worship music as not to manipulate people's emotions... or is that even a concern? I once talked to a sound guy who on several occassions performed his own little experiement: as the band began to play more passionately and intensely, he would turn up the overall volume; and just as he did so, people's hands shot up in the air in gestures of worship. Hmm. volume controlling when we raise our hands, when we feel caught up in worship... that's a little scary. But then again, isn't that what the point of music is, to convey our emotions?

I told you I had more questions than answers.

Posted by brant at April 28, 2004 11:46 PM