Musings on music and theology
Multiperspectivalism (not relativism)
A simple C major triad is composed of the notes C, E, and G which are the root, 3rd, and 5th of the C major scale. This chord produces a very consonant, “happy” sound. Similarly, the notes D, F#, A form a D major triad (also the root, 3rd, and 5th of the D major scale) which produces the same quality of sound as the C major triad. The “rules” of music theory and composition would suggest that a D major chord would not harmonize well with a C major chord. In fact, if the two chords are played together in the same octave, the sound produced is not pleasant at all. However, if a D major triad is played on top (i.e., voiced an octave higher) of a C major triad the sound is quite different as the D, F# and A now create an extended harmony becoming now the 9, #11 and 13 in relation to the C triad and, as a result, produce a very rich sounding harmony. I wonder whether perhaps “some” (not all—please don’t read relativism or “sappy” ecumenicalism into this) of our theological disagreements are analogous to this example. In other words, in light of who God is (infinite), a great deal of our seemingly incompatible finite perspectives actually do harmonize, but different groups/traditions are drawn to focus more on the C, E, G triad, whereas others give their attention to the D, F#,A triad.
The Flatlands of Timeless Truths
One could find the notes G, Bb, D in the second mvt of a piece and the same exact G, Bb, D (G minor chord) in the 4th mvt. and “pull these” out in order to analyze them and “logically” conclude that both are simply G minor triads. However, this completely ignores the context in which they are found (e.g., what chords precede and what chords follow? Is this a chord of the tonal center being emphasized or it is a transition or borrowed chord leading to a new tonal center? At what point in the piece does this chord occur and how does it relate to the tonal center of the previous movements? Or perhaps it should not really to be analyzed as a G minor chord at all, but rather as part of a totally different chord [e.g., C, E, G, Bb, D = C7 chord, the G, Bb, D are the 5th, b7th and 9th of a completely different chord, and more than that a chord with a completely different purpose, sound and quality. Abstracting in such a way, is to like pulling these notes off the page of the score and throwing them on a blank page and asking the orchestra to play the notes. Undoubtedly, the notes will sound like a G minor chord, but what has happened to the symphonic piece? –The piece is ruined, it is unintelligible, it has been flattened – no dynamic marking can be inserted as there is no climax, no forward movement and no sense of beginning or end whatsoever. In the same way, it seems that systematics detached from a biblical theological (redemptive historical Christian metanarrative) has similar tendencies. I am not saying, “down with systematics,” but I do think systematics divorced from BT is problematic.
7 Responses so far
3:20 pm
I love your musical analogy. NT Wright has a similar analogy with a different twist. He says that the E in a C major chord makes all the difference for the “character” of the chord, but if we only play the E alone we have lost something significant. He uses this to warn about getting so wrapped up in one small, but important, part of our theology that we miss the beauty of the bigger picture.
5:02 pm
Thanks, Mark. Do you happen to know in which book NT Wright gives that example? (I’d love to check it out). I think that Wright’s example is excellent. No doubt the the 3rd of the triad (for those who are wondering what we are talking about–C=root, E=3rd, G=5th = C major triad)is the “color” tone. If one flattens the 3rd (Eflat), the major (“happy” sounding) chord becomes minor (“sad” sounding–somewhat of an oversimplification). However, if you replace the 3rd with the 4th scale tone, you get what’s called a “suspended” chord–neither major nor minor. Sometimes I think we ought to be OK with more sus-chords and live with the mystery of whether or not it will resolve into a major or minor. I don’t mean to “pull out the mystery card” every time things get difficult to answer, however, I think that the Reformed world would do well to be more embracing of mystery–I love the way in which Bavinck’s Doctrine of God starts off with a statement something like–mystery is essential to dogmatics.
5:43 pm
Cynthia, this is good stuff!
The analogy from Wright can be found in his lecture on the scriptures. It is located on the Veritas website. It is entitled “What is the Bible, and what are we supposed to do with it?” and can be found at
http://www.veritas.org/mediafiles/A96YALE04.mp3
Categories: General Biblical Studies (or unclassified so far)
If my mind is playing tricks on me and this is not the (W)right reference, let me know and I’ll check some other stuff.
Additonally, you may want to check out Jeremy Begbie’s books/essays. he basically makes a living writing about the interface between Music and theology, how music models theology. Your excellent musical metaphor is right along the lines of what he traffics in.
Mark
[email protected]
6:12 pm
Mark,
Thanks for your encouraging words, the veritas link and for the info on Jeremy Begbie’s work–I’d not heard of him before and his work sounds fascinating.
12:53 pm
C –
I know nothing about music and so cannot appreciate all of what you have said here, but find the basic thrust of it all suggestive.
Also, there is an interview on Mars Hill Audio Journal with Jeremy Begbie from this past summer…PCPC probably has the issue. The interview is quite long, and some of his reflections are incredibly thought provoking, especially for those like myself who don’t move in musical circles.
If you don’t get the Mars Hill Journal, you guys would love it!
1:10 pm
Mike,
I’ll have to check that out at PCPC–thanks for the tip. I did after reading Mark R.’s email, add two of Begbie’s books to my Amazon.com wish list. I still have a way to go to catch up to your 5 page wish list!
(Sorry for the deleted post above–I was actually trying to edit it. I’m still getting used to blogworld : )
8:05 am
My friend Mark beat me here with the Wright reference for you. It’s an analogy I’ve heard him use in several different lectures, actually.
And I very much second the referral to Begby. He is THE MAN on the intersection of music and theology as far as I’m concerned. I first heard him at the Music and the Spheres conference in Charlottesville three years ago. He walked us through Bach’s B-minor Mass, showing how Bach incorporated his theology into the very structure of the music. It was one of the few lectures I’d ever heard where the audience, at the end, stood up and cheered as if they’d just heard a virtuoso performance of the Mass itself.
Leave a comment