I went to a concert yesterday. I liked it a lot: a choir singing ‘committed’ songs for a ‘good cause’, as a sign of social commitment. They have been together for long, they are celebrating their twentieth anniversary or jubilee.
But although I love their music, I wonder if they are not in some way ‘revolutionistas’ in the same way as ‘fashionistas’: obsessed with some kind of ideal, but the means have become an end in itself, or at least: their (somehow) revolutionary style has become some kind of out-dated fashion but they stick to it, like to some kind of faith. But I wonder whether it makes sense.
Some considerations:
- I should not be too critical: this is a 60-member group of friends, who have good contact, lots of loyalty towards one another, who are singing and creative together. And they have good intentions. – And maybe I am too critical.
- I am quite certain the group refers to these small Christian communities in the church, involved in discussing social issues, starting from some religious perspective, but not excluding anyone and focusing mostly on social analyis and social change. They were linked with liberation theology and were inspired by Latin American bishop likeDom Helder Camara and Mgr. Romero. They wanted to use religion as a source of social change – and often did not refer to (or forgot about) religion as such, as it seemed like only a kind of dressing on an already complete dish. That was the 70s-80s style around here in Belgium. There was some vague belief underlying it, but it is mainly some vague Christian faith – if I am not too critical again.
- A friend wondered whether it was not a new religious group, though not called like that. The fact is: a lot of people have a Christian inspiration, are practising Christians, and/ or have distilled the ethical inspiration from their Christian faith. They have also joined hands, they know one another well, they certainly have a good bond. And so there might be some hope arising from it. I would not call it a Christian group though, as the Christian inspiration is too implicit. Too critical again ?
- But my main problem (though a question asking for reaction, maybe rebuke) is their starting point or their former starting point. I did not join them twenty years ago. I thought their identity was too narrow in some sense, in that faith was at the background too much. There was a practical problem as well: there was none in my neighbourhood and I had no friends in one of them.
But the main problem might be that their identity seemed to be called ‘opposition’ or ‘otherness’. Some form of counterdependence to me. They wanted to be different from the traditional church and thus lost track of the religious tradition almost altogether. I do sympathize with the urge to go beyond charity (in its negative meaning), to translate faith into action, contemplation into ‘fight’ ( as in Taizé, lutte/ contemplation, Or Thomas Merton’s contemplation/ action) , but… it is not the very essence of my being a Christian. I share the ideals but their focus seems too narrow: exclusively social (They might say the same about me, I thought, although no, I do not think so: I try to keep in touch with tradition, liberation theology and also be committed in North/South, peace, etc. issues…)
Yesterday some words struck me, like the cry for ‘freedom’ and for ‘revolution’ and for being different (‘other’) apart from the fight against ‘injustice’, etc. As a matter of fact, my brother pointed that out to me: it had struck him as well, although he is not involved in such issues. Quite some songs, I think, were in Spanish and French, although the Leitmotiv was one of Theodorakis’ Mauthausen songs (I admit I did not grasp the link with the rest really). And that made me wonder: is this not sticking to some romantic ‘revolutionary’ ideal in a society/ world that has changed.
I mean… I have the feeling that the problem of exclusion (as in racism) is still a problem, but it is one of them, probably not the key problem. Revolution to me implies one kind of enemy, someone (or a group, …) holding power and the possibility that the power structure can be overthrown, as in Latin America in the 70s-80s. But then: in Africa now there is a diffuse power structure mainly, which does not allow you to focus solely on the Sudan or Congolese regime if you want change. All over the world there is some kind of Muslem fundamentalism spreading (to some limited extent; I am not suggesting Islam is fundamentalist as such) but it is a dragon with single head nor a single body. It might be one kind of phantom spirit but ‘haunting’ in several ghostly shapes. The food situation is mainly based on some vague international politcal and commercial structures and of course local mismanagement as well, often sustained by international power.
The title ‘Out of the shadow’ shows some presupposition, I would think: they want to put people in the light (there was a curtain on the poster). But inf fact, the main problem is mainly putting situations in the light (Congo, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran) and un-covering the mechanisms causing it.
But that does not allow for songs, I am afraid, for lyrical freedom songs, for songs eliciting courage (singing courage and conviction into their hearts). The main addressee now could be the ordinary consumer. He and she are quite powerful and they can be addressed. And the powers will be affected by that kind of action, even if we do not know who or what they are…
So it is hard to devise some specific ‘lyrical’ music to that theme, I think. Whereas it is more pleasant to be able to name a problem, name the enemy, calim action, etc. …
There is more that can be said about that but… I wonder if anyone feels the urge to react to this (attempted) analysis…
)