Worship Is No Excuse For Bad Grammar
I just got home from church, where I saw one of the most hideous displays of poor grammar I've ever seen. We were singing a new song (something I have a big problem with, but that's another post for another day). The first part of the chorus went like this:
Put a new song
In my mouth
Of praise...
...and it goes on from there.
Now, it may appear, to the untrained or uneducated reader, that there's nothing wrong with that phrasing. That's incorrect. What you're looking at is a textbook example of a misplaced modifier. "Why is that so important?" you may ask, and I'll tell you. I have never in my life heard the oral cavity referred to as a "mouth of praise." Never. However, this is exactly what the song is saying. I'm sure the author wanted to say "Put a new song of praise in my mouth," which would not only be correct, but a much better-sounding phrase for the song. It just flows better. Unfortunately, he did not say that. Now, this isn't as funny or as glaring an example of a misplaced modifier as Stieber's infamous sentence, "The creepy old man sat on the park bench eyeing the young girls with bad intentions," but it's important, nonetheless.
Where am I going with this? *snicker* I'm so glad you asked. The problem I have with this annoying grammatical error represents a growing problem I see within the Christian community. We settle for less because it was done in the name of "Christian art" (sadly, an oxymoron if ever I've heard one). Why do people buy crap music with "inspirational" lyrics? Because they think that the fact that the artist is a Christian somehow excuses the shoddy execution. For a hilarious and quite dead-on satire of this practice, try to find the episode of South Park entitled "Christian Rock Hard." It's funny because it's true. Mel Gibson proved, with "The Passion of the Christ," that one can indeed get the message across efficiently without compromising the artistic value of the piece. We need to stop settling for second-rate quality simply because it was produced by an artist who happens to be a Christian.
(I realize this post is quite long-winded and not very funny, but trust me, I've got some awesome material lined up for the new year. Just you wait and see.)
Put a new song
In my mouth
Of praise...
...and it goes on from there.
Now, it may appear, to the untrained or uneducated reader, that there's nothing wrong with that phrasing. That's incorrect. What you're looking at is a textbook example of a misplaced modifier. "Why is that so important?" you may ask, and I'll tell you. I have never in my life heard the oral cavity referred to as a "mouth of praise." Never. However, this is exactly what the song is saying. I'm sure the author wanted to say "Put a new song of praise in my mouth," which would not only be correct, but a much better-sounding phrase for the song. It just flows better. Unfortunately, he did not say that. Now, this isn't as funny or as glaring an example of a misplaced modifier as Stieber's infamous sentence, "The creepy old man sat on the park bench eyeing the young girls with bad intentions," but it's important, nonetheless.
Where am I going with this? *snicker* I'm so glad you asked. The problem I have with this annoying grammatical error represents a growing problem I see within the Christian community. We settle for less because it was done in the name of "Christian art" (sadly, an oxymoron if ever I've heard one). Why do people buy crap music with "inspirational" lyrics? Because they think that the fact that the artist is a Christian somehow excuses the shoddy execution. For a hilarious and quite dead-on satire of this practice, try to find the episode of South Park entitled "Christian Rock Hard." It's funny because it's true. Mel Gibson proved, with "The Passion of the Christ," that one can indeed get the message across efficiently without compromising the artistic value of the piece. We need to stop settling for second-rate quality simply because it was produced by an artist who happens to be a Christian.
(I realize this post is quite long-winded and not very funny, but trust me, I've got some awesome material lined up for the new year. Just you wait and see.)
posted by Vaughan at
11:28 AM
8 Comments:
Andrew,
Another incisive observation: I can't say that I've personally every connected the spheres of grammatical excellence and praise lyrics. Your mention of the fallacy of "Christian art" brought to mind some recent reading... I'm curious to know how you feel: should there be "Christian" art? (or music, books, movies, gifts?) In other words, if there was no demarcation between what's "Christian" and "everything else," and it all competed in the same market, perhaps the quandary of second-rate "Christian" work would be solved? I've attached an excerpt for further illustration.
Heaven Is A Place On Earth, Michael E. Wittmer
Chapter Three "Where Are We?" Pg. 67
Printing "cross-training" or "cross-eyed" on a T-shirt trivializes both the cross (do we really want to compare Jesus' suffering to a type of exercise or astigmatism?) and ordinary T-shirts (which are perhaps not as good as those with religious slogans). The same holds true for spill-proof cups emblazoned with John 4:14--"whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst"; key chains that parody milk advertisements with the probing question "Got Jesus?"; dinner plates that claim to be "Home Grown and Heaven Bound"; and stuffed ducks wearing rain gear on account of recurring "Showers of Blessing" (honestly, I could not make this stuff up). Rather than improve creation, such silliness only distracts from the goodness that is already there while mocking the gospel it seeks to advertise.
Well, John, I'm gonna say that I think the only thing the Christian market needs is a heightened sensitivity to metaphor. What Christian artists don't seem to get is people are much smarter than they may seem. John Q. Public has a much higher tolerance for ambiguity and metaphor than most Christian artists, performers, and even evangelists realize. If we focus more on the art form and less on the clarity of the message, we'll end up with, I believe, two positive results. First, I think more Christians will be able to appreciate the art for what it is that way. Second, we'll see more conversions, because we'll be appealing to something other than a tired assumption that people are either afraid of hell or in need of guidance (it's sort of a reaganomics theory applied to evangelism).
Great perspective. Are you hinting at things along the lines of the good/evil subtext in the Lord of the Rings?
Would such heightened metaphor erase the aforementioned "ordained and otherwise" distinction?
Here's the nail... right here. You hit it right on the head. Yes and yes.
Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of rational discourse, I will fear no confusion, for the wise Andrew talks with me.
Andrew, I completely agree with your assessment of Christian "art" , and it would seem the problem won't be getting any better any time soon. It extends into every aspect of Christian sub-culture. As you indicated, one of the worst areas is Christian music (popularly called CCM). Most of us by the time we reached high school realized CCM sucked. That's why we all hated Q102. It played "music" with lyrics nearly identical to what you listed and musical creativity to match. Part of the problem is that our parents or at least mine did not approve of any other forms of music because they didn't have overtly "Christian" lyrics. The problem does not stop there though. Have you ever seen a Thomas Kinkade painting? It is passed off as "Christian art" and therefore the fact that it has no artisitic value does not seem to matter. We as Christians must also act as critics of both popular culture and our own Christian culture. I like that you mentioned metaphor. Good metaphor is dying. The idea of metaphor in visual art as well as music has been lost to Christians. Lyricists who can write fronting bands with talent could save CCM, but those are the bands that get signed to the major labels and called sellouts or remain underground because no CCM label has the guts to sign them. You know the one thing I hated more than anything else about Q102? Their slogan: "Safe for the whole family." Art should not be safe. Art should never be "safe." Art should express the harsh reality in all its gory detail. Music should deal with real issues and be done well. Paintings should show real issues and express real ideas. Nothing Christians do should be "safe."
Hehoff
p.s. sorry that was so long, but you gave me something worth ranting about.
On the topic of t-shirts, how about those "Jesus is my homeboy" shirts. How trite can you get? And if I ever see another "Abreadcrumb and Fish" shirt I am going to kill someone.
Wow, you guys seem fired up about this. I'm glad to have finally voiced my opinion on the matter. I know I've been slow in posting a new bit; I have, believe it or not, actually been quite busy, though I'm not sure with what...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home