All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes Review

Kenneth Myers of Mars Hill Audio is on campus this week. I recently read his book All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes Here's my take.

Kenneth Myers asserts that those who do not have much contact with popular culture will not enjoy nor do they have need to read his book, All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes, in which he closely examines popular culture and its nature, effects, and value and attempts to demonstrate the aesthetic superiority of high culture over popular culture (xii). Myers begins by defining culture and demonstrating the importance of studying culture. He claims that we are commanded to love God with all our being, and this includes our participation in culture. Thus, “we cannot be indifferent about culture.” (26). Culture is, he writes,

a dynamic pattern, an ever-changing matrix of objects, artifacts, sounds, institutions, philosophies, fashions, enthusiasm, myths, prejudices, relationships, attitudes, tastes, rituals, habits, colors, and loves, all embodied in individual people, in groups and collectives and associations of people…in books, in buildings, in the use of time and space, in wars, in jokes, and in food (34).

Clearly culture is not something that is easily or briefly defined.

Next, Myers explains the extent to which Christians should participate in culture and allow it to influence their lives. He writes that “we cannot expect our culture to be a holy enterprise, [and that] we can at least try to avoid participating in its profanities.” (53). Modernism found its roots in popular culture, and teaches that “what is popular determines what is good,” which has led to individualism and to subsequent isolation (71). Furthermore, modernism has contributed to popular culture a restlessness that desires the newest and most efficient devices (66).

Finally, Myers compares the aesthetic qualities of high and popular cultures, asserting that the debate is not rooted in taste, but rather in aesthetic value. He explains that since there is no quantitative measure by which we might easily compare high and popular culture, other bases for evaluation must be established (78). Myers claims, “The problem with standardized popular culture is that what is standardized wasn’t very good in the first place,” explaining that good art is supposed to reveal truths from human nature and it should not be suppressed by the demands of the populace (79-80).

Furthermore, popular culture “emphasizes the self and the present… it [encourages] a self-centeredness that Christians ought to avoid.” (101). Thus, when making decisions about culture, Christians should seek that which is most likely to “transcend our earthly preoccupations” (101). Popular culture has a tendency to highlight the artistic medium itself more than the actual message it is trying to convey, and for this reason Myers argues for the aesthetic superiority of high culture and the danger of the influence of popular culture (114).

Myers defends high culture throughout the book, while gently attempting to dismantle any value Christians might find in popular culture. He inadequately demonstrates the superiority of high culture, and makes large generalizations that apply only to pockets of popular culture. First, he compares popular culture to fast food which is served quickly, but lacks sufficient nutrients (89). Those who survive only on fast food, according to Myers, might be severely under prepared for “the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.” (89). His analogy successfully conveys his ideas: that prepackaged food is similar to prepackaged art, for example. However, Myers’ analogy unsatisfactorily describes popular culture because it falsely and prematurely degrades it. Fast food is practically a loaded word due to its negative connotations.

Myers cites Scripture to further make his point that high culture is superior to popular culture. He uses Philippians 4:8, claiming that Paul calls believers to think on that which is objectively true, noble, right, pure, lovely, and admirable. According to Myers, popular culture is more individualistic and subjective, and one cannot make objective decisions about whether it meets these Scriptural criteria (98). This trend of subjectivity, Myers fears, has crept into Christian worship services. He illustrates his point by imagining a service where a soloist sings a popular song that is

exceedingly trite, clichéd, maudlin, and pretentious. While the text it presented was generally true… the music was not true, noble, lovely, or admirable. If the soloist had some classical music training, you might stand a chance of persuading her that this was the case (99).

I too would be discouraged with such a performance. However, in this example Myers falsely characterizes popular music as “exceedingly trite, clichéd, maudlin, and pretentious.” (99). Surely Myers does not think that all popular music is this shallow. He makes large generalizations about popular music, and neglects much of popular music that could be characterized as true, noble, and lovely. Furthermore, not all people are “classically trained musicians,” and trite melodies may not be obvious to them. Also, not all people are well-educated theologians, and what he would call trite descriptions of God may not be so trite to them. Moreover, many of the terms in Philippians 4:8 are subjective, depending upon the culture in which one lives. For example, what is noble in the Middle East may not be so noble in America.

Myers seemingly neglects differences in classes and types of people by appealing to high culture as the superior form. Myers addresses this, however, arguing that judging culture means not only being concerned with taste and social class, but also with “the nature and the effects of cultural phenomena…” (76). He explains it this way:

If what happens when we listen to classical music, read literature, or attend the theater is fundamentally a different kind of experience than listening to rock ‘n’ roll, reading romance novels, or watching ‘The Cosby Show,’ then it is clear that having a ‘taste’ for high culture is a very different matter from having a ‘taste’ for popular culture (77).

Popular culture, according to Myers, focuses on ethos, while the quality of high culture is preserved by objective standards (77). However, mankind is not all on the same plane with regard to art, and not everyone appreciates classical music in the way that Myers does. In fact, one might find more aesthetic beauty, nobility, and loveliness in a popular song than a classical song, and there may be more truth in a popular song than the other.

Moreover, Myers generalizes, “The problem with standardized popular culture is that what is standardized wasn’t very good in the first place.” (79). He still makes objective a quality that is subjective by nature. People who are not classically trained musicians may actually prefer the popular as opposed to the classical, and they may not wish to “acquire the taste” of high culture (83).

Myers argues that great culture “imprints itself in our lives and becomes a reference point for our most subtle and profound experiences.” (82). According to Myers, if held by this standard, anything that meets these criteria should be considered good art, whether it is a part of high culture or otherwise. There is a fundamental fallacy in trying to dogmatically quantify something that is truly subjective. Because of this, Myers inadequately transcends his high culture biases, and in doing so, makes highly generalized strokes that are too broad to be completely valid.