Correcting Categories, Part 7 – The Nature of Pop

My goal in this series is to help believers apply the Bible to their musical choices in life and worship. My contention is, however, that believers today approach the issue of musical choices with certain errant foundational presuppositions that need to be corrected before they can rightly apply the Bible in this area. So my task in this paper is to address a few categories of thought that inform our approach when applying the Bible to music and suggest a few ways that we may need to correct our thinking.
The nature of Pop
People are drawn to Dionysian art because it creates enjoyable physical feelings that are immediate. No work or effort is required to enjoy the feeling. No mental or spiritual engagement is necessary. It is immediate because it is shallow; it has no depth. However, because of the inherent shallowness of the medium, greater doses are needed to create the same effects as a person becomes more desensitized. Therefore, Dionysian art is intrinsically addictive.
With the creation of mass media as a result of the Industrial Revolution, savvy businessmen soon saw the potential of taking advantage of the power of Dionysian music in order to make money. Certain music, for instance, because it created immediate results and was intrinsically addictive, provided the perfect medium for making a considerable amount of money. They found that it was not difficult to hook the masses on Dionysian forms of music. Then, when the masses inevitably desensitized themselves to the immediate affects of such music, the entrepreneurs were always ready with more novelty and more stimulating forms. Such was the birth of pop music.
Kenneth Myers, in his very influential book, All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes, provides a very helpful description of the nature of pop music, including a table that compares pop culture to traditional folk or high culture. In essence, this chart compares Dionysian and Appollonian forms of art:
Table 1:
Myers’ Comparison of Popular Culture with Traditional/High Culture1
| Popular Culture | Traditional and High Culture |
| Focuses on the new | Focuses on the timeless |
| Discourages reflection | Encoruages reflection |
| Prusued casually to “kill time” | Pursued with deliberation |
| Gives us what we want, tells us what we already know |
Offers us what we could not have imagined |
| Relies on instant accessibility; encourages impatience |
Requires training; encourages patience |
| Emphasizes information and trivia | Emphasizes knowledge and wisdom |
| Encourages quantitative concerns | Encourages qualitative concerns |
| Celebrates fame | Celebrates ability |
| Appeals to sentimentality | Appeals to appropriate, proportioned emotions |
| Context and form governed by requirements of the market |
Content and form governed by requirements of created order |
| Formulas are the substancw | Formulas are the tools |
| Relies on spectacle, tending to violence and prurience |
Relies on formal dynamics and the power of symbols (including language) |
| Aesthetic power in reminding of something else |
Aesthetic power in instrisic attributes |
| Individualistic | Communal |
| Leaves us where it found us | Transforms sensibilities |
| Incapable of deep or sustained attention |
Capable of repeated, careful attention |
| Lacks ambiguity | Allusive, suggests the transcendent |
| No discontinuity between life and art |
Relies on “secondary World” conventions |
| Reflects the desires of the slef | Encourages understanding of others |
| Tends toward relativism | Tends toward submission to standards |
| Used | Received |
Conservatives have done themselves a disservice by defining pop music as sex. Certainly some pop music does express sexual passion, but pop music is a broader category encompassing all Dionysian music. Conservatives often describe pop music by certain musical elements such as back beat, vocal sliding, and breathy singing technique. Certainly music characterized by such elements is most likely Dionysian, but there is a whole lot more music that is Dionysian that does not have those elements. This reductionistic description of pop music by many conservatives, I believe, has led to a rejection of some forms of newer pop music that possess such elements while at the same time grasping onto other forms of pop music that don’t express sexual passion, but nevertheless are emotionally manipulative in other ways.
© 2009, Scott Aniol. All rights reserved.

Scott Aniol
Scott Aniol holds a bachelor's degree in church music from Bob Jones University (Greenville, SC), a master's degree in musicology from Northern Illinois University (DeKalb, IL), and has studied theology at Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN) and Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary. He was ordained to to the gospel ministry by First Baptist Church (Rockford, IL) in April of 2004. As the executive director of Religious Affections Ministries, Scott speaks on the subjects of music and worship at various churches and conferences. His most recent speaking engagements include the Preserving the Truth Conference, Central Seminary’s Foundations Conference, International Baptist College, and Bob Jones Seminary. Click here to read and/or listen to important talks from Scott Aniol. Curriculum vitae
Endnotes:
- Kenneth Myers, All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1989), 120. [↩]
Related posts:
One Response to Correcting Categories, Part 7 – The Nature of Pop
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Monthly eJournal
Twitter
- Presenting "God Said Something About Worship" today at http://t.co/NuvOMZGL. 1 hour ago
- Flying to Chicago this AM. Looking forward to worshiping at http://t.co/11gb5w5o and speaking tomorrow at http://t.co/eQOVTMKL. 1 day ago
- "Sanctification is not a matter of competition with other believers." http://t.co/AcG0VM98 2 days ago
Recent Blog Comments
- David Jacks on The Difference Between Birds and Bruised Offerings
- David on The Analogy of Rituals – 1
- Tim Emslie on The Analogy of Rituals – 1
- Dana Miles on Help Needed: Toward A Discography of Conservative Christian Music
- David Jacks on The Separatist Approach to Culture
Tags
affection art Articles on Culture Articles on Music Articles on Worship Audio beauty children choral Christ Christmas church music conservatism conservative contextualization Dan Forrest Driscoll emotion entertainment evangelism folk culture form Gospel hymns imagination Kevin Bauder meaning missional missions passion physical pop culture preaching Regulative Principle Resources reverence service shared Sola Scriptura Sound Worship support theology tradition tweets web pulse














Scott,
You understand why men reduce the Dionysian to those elements. They want to provide objective reasons why the music itself is wrong. I recognize that those will get disregarded by someone who doesn’t believe in any inherent evil in music. I agree that there should be more to the description too, but if someone rejects those easily grasped basics—sliding, breathiness, emphatic back beat, etc—where do we go from there. It seems that we really are back to square one, and that is attempting to prove that music itself can even be wrong.
I think it is obvious when something is emotionally manipulative. I can’t imagine that it isn’t difficult to others, but you may have something when you say that they are way past the affects that some of it has. I hear it in the fundamentalist-acceptable music, especially those songs that become really popular to and resonate with young people, who look for something that influences their feelings first, despite it being less overt perhaps.
I’ve read several of the Christian Worldview Series, including Kenneth Myers’ book. Quoting him brings in the expert that might seem credible to those who disagree, give them pause. We can both agree with him on what you have quoted, but again, many if not most will say that there is no objective criteria for making those distinctions. So in other words, it’s just Myers’ word (and yours) against theirs. And now you have this “worship movement” among Charismatics and evangelicals, as represented in Bob Kauflin, from which they earn their credentials for concern over shallow worship. And yet the music itself is ungodly.
I appreciate what you are trying to do.
Kent Brandenburg’s last blog post: The Erroneous Epistemology of Multiple Version Onlyism part five