Oct 9, 2009
Humdrum drudges are more likely to be culturally relevant than “innovative pioneers.”
**Inspired by Shaun Groves’ thoughts on sexy leadership conferences.**
Being culturally relevant means relating to the masses.
The masses are average.
So if you’re not middle-of-the-road, you’re probably not culturally relevant.
LOL. I guess I shouldn’t have bought that French Press…
Matt-
I completely disagree with you. There is never a bad reason for a french press. Deal with the sin, but keep the coffee. :)
genius.
Yes. Consider music.
Has anyone ever noticed that when Hillsong or David Crowder Band, for example, sing their awesome worship tunes, they sound great, in-sync, well-orchestrated, powerful, well-mixed, almost heavenly?
But when the untrained guitarist, a younger brother-bassist, the nursery director’s teenage son on drums, and one or two average–okay, not even average (but sincere!)–people singing and/or playing keys, the same songs sound absolutely terrible?
This shows at least that the music that many produce (with notable exceptions, such as the Gettys) are simply impossible to reproduce AVERAGELY. They sound TERRIBLE when done with less than excellent skill and technique, both from musicians and singers, but also from technicians.
So you’re right–relevance gets commodified and sold back to the people who NEVER needed it. The distance grows between these new-fangled pastor-fops and their congregants, and the latter smolders if they recognize it (and justifiably so).
Average people love excellence.
It’s not a matter of excellence, culture is a matter of imitation. Whoever can get the masses to imitate them is “relevant”.
…but hopefully not just for excellence’s sake
yeah Paul was pretty average.
:)
Can a *person* be culturally relevant?
Relevance is judged by content and output, not individual personhood.
The man who lives alone in the wilderness is not relevant to the world until he writes a book that effects the world. And, it seems, to effect the world he had to produce something unaverage.
If everyone is innovative, no one is innovative.
(stolen/tweaked from The Incredibles)
This makes me think of a quote from CS Lewis:
“…no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.”
You have no idea how much the drudges appreciate having some fer real documentation PROVING that we have value and relevance. Thank you very, very much.
That was TeamPyro-esque. DJP-ian even.
Innovative pioneers – successful ones – BECOME relevant. In the end, they’ll have reached far more of “the masses,” than the average, middle-of-the-road, popular-today-forgotten-tomorrow-ers.
Relevant means “meaningful.”
Anyone can be meaningful. Without a good haircut and mad skillz.
I’m afraid we often redefine relevant as “cool”, “current,” “famous” or “young.” All of which can be relevant, of course, meaningful, but they’re not the only ones.
Loving neighbor as yourself (with action, not mere words) is always relevant, for instance.
Is the Gospel relevant to masses of average, ordinary, middle of the road sinners?
What could possibly be more relevant than the gospel…to anyone?