Well, I made it! My first year with my own blog. I can’t tell you all how grateful I am for your readership, your interest, and your comments. Over the past year, I’ve invited various people to check out what I write, but every now and again I ask myself “Why?” Well truthfully, I want to encourage people, and I particularly want to encourage artists whose music I enjoy. But there’s a punchier (and not necessarily untrue) answer as well, which is that I’ve got a lot to say about a lot of stuff, and I want the rest of the world to know it! But then you wonder, “Am I just talking to myself? Is there anyone out there who actually gives a hoot what I think about anything?”
That’s where you come in. Every bit of positive feedback I get means something to me. It tells me I’m doing something right. It tells me someone’s reading and enjoying what he reads. And it tells me someone would be genuinely disappointed if I shut everything down. (On the other hand, constructive criticism is welcome too, with an emphasis on the constructive part. Later some time this week or next week I’ll open up a thread where you can offer comments on what you like/dislike about the blog and where you might like to see it go.)
I’d like to take this opportunity to thank some special people who have graciously given of their time and support to me over this past year. They deserve to be acknowledged by name. So, in no particular order, I would like to thank…
Terry Franklin: For being, quite simply, one of the best men I know. I can’t thank you enough for your readership, your encouragement of me in my singing and writing, your time, and your friendship. I am deeply humbled and deeply grateful.
Dianne Wilkinson: For being my sweet, honorary Southern grandma. Thank you for reading, for telling me I can write songs, and for sharing your wisdom with me.
Michael Booth: For telling me that I have a purpose and that I’m fulfilling it well. And for singing a duet with me.
Kevin Williams: For being as sweet as you are hilarious. I can’t believe you actually remembered who I was and handed me free music at the Christmas Homecoming. Thanks for being my fan. I assure you the feeling is mutual.
Buddy Greene: For giving me free music, for reading, and for being the means of Steve Green leaving a comment on my blog.
To know that you’re reading makes me slightly nervous but very honored as well!
Ernie Haase: For your readership and continued support. And for singing a duet with me.
The Other Signature Sound Guys: For being sweet and supportive and letting me interview you. Y’all rock.
Wendy Wills and Lyn Rowell: For being willing to go behind one of the best songs of 2011 with me. Thanks to Wendy in particular for your continued correspondence and friendship.
Jim Stover: For your enthusiastic support and encouragement. We are kindred spirits.
I also want to thank the other southern gospel bloggers who’ve allowed me to fit right in—DBM, Swain, Burke, all you guys. You make me feel cool.
Special shout-out to me Irish matey across the sea, Phil. It was fun to get know you this year.
Also, a shout-out to all the artists who have sent me their music for review. Because after all, without southern gospel music, there are no southern gospel bloggers.


Masculinity, the Church, Post-Modernism, and Southern Gospel
John Piper has apparently upset some feminists. Recently, he made some rather direct comments on the masculine nature of Christianity. To quote directly:
Well. You can just imagine the howls of indignation from Rachel Held Evans and her ilk. Of course Piper is spot-on, but naturally many will disagree.
Meanwhile, a certain blogger who shall not be named has offered his own take on the controversy as it relates to southern gospel. As an English professor and a post-modernist, his reaction is really rather typical. But it’s tricky. It’s slimy in a subtle way. So today I’d like to unpack it a bit for the benefit of my readers.
You see, when a liberal encounters something that clashes with his preferred political tastes—whether it’s in literature, in the culture, in the Church, or what have you–he can react in one of two ways. First, he can have an immediate negative knee-jerk response, i.e. “Such-and-such is terrible because it’s [fill-in-the-blank--sexist, racist, etc.] We must write books and articles shouting from the rooftops how terrible such-and-such/so-and-so is.”
Or, he can say, “Well… such-and-such seems bad on its face. But under the surface, there are all kinds of fascinating tensions and sub-texts that make it far more complicated and nuanced than the average layman might think. Really, we can’t be too simplistic, and having made a study of these underlying tensions, I’ve concluded that such-and-such should be received positively, whether it was meant to be or not.”
For example, consider this in the area of literary criticism. A passage of Shakespeare annoys the first group of liberals because they think it’s sexist. Up goes the cry, “Shakespeare is sexist!” But along come the post-modernists to say, “Wait a minute, wait a minute. I think you’re unaware of the sub-texts. Really, when you get under the surface of this passage, you discover that Shakespeare isn’t a sexist after all.” Because the Muse is liberal, you see, and because Shakespeare is great, Shakespeare must be a liberal at the end of it all. Otherwise he couldn’t create such great art. His artistic impulses are carrying him leftward whether he wills them to or not. So they do a post-modern “reading” of Shakespeare in order to “find” what they think has to be there.
This is what passes for respected intellectualism in the disaster that is our modern educational system—a disaster that would be laughable if it weren’t so profoundly and harmfully influential. And it’s what our blogger who shan’t be named is doing with southern gospel. In fact, it’s exactly what he’s doing with southern gospel. He begins by taking Piper’s quote as a sort of evangelical template for accepted gender roles. But then he says that even though fundamentalists would like to believe things are that simple, because such a foundation of “absolutes” gives them “security,” things are not as they seem. He then discusses ways in which he sees southern gospel “upending” the standards of this traditional template, e.g., the popularity of groups with a female lead singer, the fan love for tenor singers (“the man who sings like a woman”), and emotional songwriting (like Marshall Hall’s “When I Cry”).
Now of course that’s a lot of… I’m going to restrain myself here… baloney sausage. But you have to get inside the post-modernist’s head to see how this works. Yes, it’s twisted. Yes, it’s ridiculous. But you see, they’ve got to find the… here comes the word… “subversive” forces at work in whatever they’re analyzing. (That word by the way is explicitly used in the blurb for said blogger’s upcoming book, which should be a textbook example of this kind of analysis in its full glory.) The southern gospel culture isn’t so sexist and hypocritical after all. It’s so much more interesting than that. It has to be.
Let me close with a candid word from my own experience: One of the reasons why I was initially attracted to southern gospel was because it seemed like a much “manlier” genre than, say, CCM or praise and worship. Or, to be more specific, what CCM and P & W have become in the last decade or so. I was so sick of the effeminate singing, the effeminate songs, the cheap emotionalism. I was sick of dudes with bad hair and torn-up jeans singing love songs to Jesus. But when I watched this video clip, I felt like I was standing in front of an open door. There was a whole world of music out there that I had never explored. And it looked promising. Much more promising. From there, the rest is history. (And please, for those of you who just can’t wait to spill your insinuations about how southern gospel is really infested with homos… save it. I’m not denying that there may indeed be some, nor am I denying that this is a problem if true. But pointless gossip is worse than pointless. I for one am content to enjoy the many perfectly normal men who are singing good, manly music.)
So, that’s about the closest you’re going to get to a review of our blogger’s upcoming book from me. I have no intention of wasting pennies or seconds on it, because I can already recognize it for the insignificant bit of post-modern clap-trap that it is. If you were planning to spend your own time and money in that way, it’s none of my concern. (And I know that Daniel Mount is bravely volunteering to do so for the purposes of reviewing it.) However, I do encourage you to spend that time and money elsewhere. I believe it will be better spent that way.
12 Comments
Filed under Commentary, Faith and Culture