Calling Creative Risks ‘Good’

I read, today, an excerpt from a book called Nur­tur­ing Artists in your Local Church by a guy named Joshua Ban­ner.

This line stuck out to me:

We sim­ply need to be curi­ous and demon­strate that we believe what artists are doing is important—to call their cre­ative risks “good” just as the Cre­ator blessed his own hand­i­work in the first seven days—and to bless that work by giv­ing it our atten­tion and shar­ing in it. (empha­sis mine)

This idea that the church needs to call more of our artists’ cre­ative risk ‘good’ is really inter­est­ing (and I think, true).

Most Good Poems Start Out As Really Bad Poems

To be hon­est, I think this is why we don’t see much art right now in the typ­i­cal church–because to make really great art, you’ve got to be will­ing to take some cre­ative risks. That’s not to say that every piece of great art is par­tic­u­larly risky, but rather that if you don’t feel like you have the free­dom to take any risk, you will feel boxed in cre­atively. And whether or not those risks are suc­cess­ful isn’t par­tic­u­larly important–the impor­tant thing is that you’ve got to try a lot of dif­fer­ent things to find the RIGHT thing.

Or to put it another way: you’ve got to write some really bad songs before you can write some good ones.

Or maybe even another way: most good poems start out as really bad poems.

Nor­mal­iz­ing Cre­ative Risk

Unfor­tu­nately, we don’t see much of that approval of risk from the church, and in par­tic­u­lar, the pas­tors of churches. In some cases, this is because the pas­tors just aren’t artists. Most aren’t. They may be preach­ers (preach­ing may be valu­able, but it isn’t art any­more than med­i­cine is) or teach­ers, singers, admin­is­tra­tors or even, well, pas­tors, but very few are the kind of peo­ple who are tak­ing these cre­ative risks them­selves. And because of that, they don’t under­stand those risks, they don’t get what’s going on there. That’s not an excuse for them not to be reach­ing out to artists, but unfor­tu­nately that’s how it often works.

More­over, I think too many pas­tors are afraid of those risks, are afraid of tak­ing those risks because they can be mis­in­ter­preted. Above, I described these risks as a way to get the bad notes out so that when it really mat­ters you’re only left with the good ones, but that’s not entirely true–sometimes these risks involve things like writ­ing a book title The Weak­ness of God or a song with pro­fan­ity in it, writ­ing a poem ques­tion­ing God’s very exis­tence. Some­times the best art’s con­nec­tion to the Gospel is not imme­di­ately apparent.

For a pas­tor to put his bless­ing on some­thing like that, to call it “good” can be trou­bling, trou­bling for the pas­tor (I speak from expe­ri­ence here) and trou­bling for their con­gre­ga­tion (and thus for the pastor’s career). Such a “good” risk may not be just risky for artist–the pas­tor puts his rep­u­ta­tion on the line for the sake of the artist by endors­ing their work.

That’s a sac­ri­fice, I think, more of our pas­tors need to make, to endan­ger their own well-being for the sake of the peo­ple strug­gling to reveal the face of God. For that’s what I think all art strug­gles to do, to lift the veil of the imme­di­ately appar­ent and reveal the really true (True?) thing under­neath. Pas­tors have a call to draw all peo­ple into their communities–normalizing those cre­ative risks as part of our con­gre­ga­tions is an vital part of what the peo­ple who get paid to be pas­tors, and those of that don’t, have a respon­si­bil­ity to do.

This entry was posted in art, christianity and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>