Sufjan Stevens 4: Response to Christian.

CONCEPT

I'll take a break from the close reading to address some points raised by my colleague, Christian. To quote his post in its entirety:

I can remain silent on this issue no longer! So let's get some things straight: I've never listened to his music, and in truth I know almost nothing about him. But I do know this much--the man is a big league tool.

Reasons why Sufjan Stevens is a tool:
1. He's a hipster. There's nothing I hate more than hipsters. Thinking they're so hip. "Ooooh, look at me, I'm so coo-ool! I'm Sufjan Stevens!" You think you're better than us? Us? U.S.? U.S.A.? No way!

2. His brand of in-your-face Christianity sickens me.

3. What kind of a name is Sufjan, anyway? I bet it's not even his real name.

F. You're a gimp.

Here's a little advice, Sufjan: you had better damn well crawl back into whatever hole you came out of or I'll make it so you won't live to see New Hampshire.

Oh, Christian...

Actually, there's not a whole lot here I can dispute, inasmuch as much of it comes down to personal taste, and we really quickly arrive at lowest common denominators where that's concerned. And, for that matter, some his post is possibly ironic or possibly sarcastic (though I've never known Christian to be either). But I do want to address two of his points, in brief, because they did occur to me as I listened to his music:

#1. The Hipster point.

Most of my friends, and I myself, broadly speaking, cannot abide what we call "hipsters." Of course, what is a hipster is a tedious question, and there are many possible answers, but those most likely to induce eye-rolling involve trendy urban neighborhoods, berets, goatees, thick glasses, various classes of indie punk/emo/techno/hip hop/what have you, and mixed media artforms such as graphic novels or improvisation. I can't speak for my friends, but while all these different things come together to make a stereotype, what's really so onerous about the whole shabang is the quiet, aloof, and self-righteous air of critical detachment balanced against ironic indulgence. In fact, there is a correlation between these attitudes and they can take on a communal aspect. That said...

That said...

1. Methinks thou dost protest too much. Unlike many of the other cliques I've run into in high school, college, and beyond, those-who-would-be-called hipsters rarely called themselves hipsters.

2. Also, to my sideburned Castlevania-playing Family Guy-quoting friend (from a shade-wearer and Sufjan Stevens admirer), we should consider the mirror when making such declarations... to the outside world, our strife must seem overwhelmingly sectarian.

#2. The Christianity point.

Yes, Sujan's music is undeniably "Christian," something that's come up in numerous reviews and interviews. And this comes down to a matter of taste. It does, however, beg the question, I think, do we dislike "Christian music" because we don't like it is as music, or as Christian, or as both? Christian seems to be arguing for one of the latter two.

Myself, as a Christian, I have an easier time, but I enjoy music produced for other faiths, and truthfully, most of the music we all enjoy today has got some sort of religious history knocking around back there. Where, then, is the problem?

It may be that Christian scents something rhetorical, even evangelical in Sufjan's tone. I wouldn't disagree: he's trying to convince you of something.

The difference for me, and I'm speaking personally here, not qualitatively, is that Sufjan's conception of God is sufficiently broad and open, and his songs and anecdotes sufficiently rooted in the world that I think I would enjoy his music even if we didn't share the same religious convictions. For all his persuasiveness, his "in your face"ness, he isn't irrelevant or inaccessible, and I believe that in art, accessibility goes a long way.

END OF POST.