For the longest time Derek Webb had confused me. I started really listening to music long after Caedmon’s Call had come onto the music scene, and even after Webb had released his first couple solo albums, but somehow I got exposed to Webb in more-or-less chronological order. First I heard those classic Caedmon’s songs–Thankful, Thy Mercy, Table for Two, Forty Acres, Lead of Love, Shifting Sand, etc–that in my estimation earned the band the title of Most Calvinist Band Ever. And then I heard that classic, unmatched Webb album She Must and Shall Go Free, which to this day I declare the best album on the Church in the history of the Christian music industry. After that I stumbled into some later Webb–The Ringing Bell, parts of Mockingbird–the albums which saw Webb shift the attentions of his songwriting genius to more didactic, more politically minded music. Then at this point, I think I went out of order and discovered The House Show, which still makes me rather mad that I never got to see the old Webb in concert. I’ve never heard a musician preach the Gospel like that at a concert. Anyways, at this point I was sold on Webb, and a full-out part of the niche market (of YRR’s) that he had carved out for himself, and so I awaited the release of the “controversial” Stockholm Syndrome with eager anticipation, a little annoyed at how ridiculous he was being but nonetheless expecting great things from it, due to all the hype. And then when I finally got the album, and listened to it five, maybe ten, times through, and started to try to interpret/understand it, and then talked to other people who had listened to it about what they made of the album, I started to get confused. And the reason why is that I really didn’t see the Gospel anywhere. I mean, if I looked really hard and read way in between the lines and drew meaning out of obscure places, I could see it. But in general, as a whole, the main gist of the album was not a bold declaration of the Gospel, even though “the truth is never sexy”–no, instead all I could really see what bitterness, and outrage, and angst (and ironically, he was bitter/angry at fundies/conservatives for being hateful/hypocritical). And I had to ask myself: “How could Webb have forgotten the Gospel? He appeared to have understood it so well, and articulated it better than anyone else in the Christian music industry, but where is it now in his music? I can’t even find it–and what I do find instead looks an awfully lot like the worst kind of liberal Christianity: evangelical-hating social gospel.”
But recently, a thought hit me, and I think it works if you trace it through the history of Webb’s career. Is it possible that Webb was never really as obsessed with reformed theology, and the local church, and Gospel-centered living as he made it out to be, but that in reality he just likes being edgy? That deep down, what drives him is simply a desire to be critical, to be on the outskirts, to be contrary to what’s popular? For the record, I hope not. But let me try to walk through his career, in just a sentence, to try to show how I think it works. Webb was a calvinist before it was cool; Webb preached the importance of community when mega-churches were booming; Webb sang against trusting in government right as (Christian) conservatives were celebrating victory; Webb lashed out at right wing fundies about their treatment of homosexuals while evangelical leaders stressed the importance of preserving the sanctity of marriage and not defiling the pulpit. And now Webb has released an album challenging the “conventional” concept of what “worship music” is. Sounds kinda like being edgy for edginess sake to me.
What do you think?