AUDIO
 |
Phillip Jensen speaks on Anger as part of a series on emotions in the Christian life, delivered at the Australia Day Convention 2010
|
Back in the mid 1990s, I remember trialling some cutting-edge software at my church. We’d taken possession of a huge data projector the size of a washing machine, and I’d scrounged an old PC running Windows 3.0.
For the first time, we used PowerPoint to display song words in church.
One of our parishioners commented to me that he thought that this made us feel very ‘corporate’ (in the negative sense) and that the overhead projector was more friendly.
A lot has happened in the past 15 years.
Now, PowerPoint has become mainstream, even passé. Most churches use data projectors to display songs and random clip art, and the overhead projector has become a museum piece.
So, what’s next? What is the next big thing we should use to display our song words and other liturgical elements in our gatherings?
I am attracted by the possibility of using Flash technology to provide animated words. I’d love to be able to replicate the kind of effect used by U2 on their recent Australian tour, where the words and the background match the beat and feel of the music.
However, no matter how scripted we try to be, there will always be the renegade song leader who decides to repeat the final verse, or skip the bridge.
What’s more, unless we utilise sequencers and metronomes, we will be likely to get out of time with the words.
At this year’s TWIST Conference, we’re looking afresh at the way we do gatherings. TWIST is more than just singing...it’s about singing together, in a gathering. We want to serve churches by trialling new technology and techniques so as to help us keep contemporary without being unhelpfully captive to our culture.
So, what should we use next? Other than animated backgrounds and centre-aligned text, is there something out there we could choose to use that will serve as an enhancement but not a distraction?
Jodie McNeill is the Executive Director of Youthworks Outdoors, and helps organise the TWIST Music Ministry Conferences.
or http://www.renewedvision.com/propresenter.php (Mac only)
But really there are two different questions: (1) what do we want to see on the screen and (2) what tool shall we use to get it there.
The tools above provide for
* on-the-fly song structures rather than a pre-set verse-chorus-bridge sequence
* video behind lyrics
* on the fly bible verse display
Whether these things are desirable/useful/distracting is another question. I haven't been tempted away from powerpoint for our church yet.
I admit technophilia in that I download an enormous number of BOOKs to read on my computer screen.
I know that times are a'changing but I don't see what is actually gained in worship by projection. I fear it is another cultural thingo with no substantive spiritual purpose behind it other than being trendy. Clergy, I note, tend to stick to reading from a printed script. I guess it is a case of balancing the cost of PRAYER BOOKS against paper, electronic gear and power bills and, above all, staff time. Any cost analyses out there?
The staff sometimes print the readings on the pew sheet in the "authorised" version of the moment—I guess when preparing endless screen images doesn't take up all the typing time. I note that when hymns are "upgraded" gender bias often passes untouched even when a change would have no theological significance of worth or weight.
I did spend time, usefully, in days gone by reading the PRAYER BOOK and remembering by heart the 39 Articles rather than fall asleep. I am fortunate that the preaching in my part of Australia is the best in thirty years. And I just have to listen and absorb, not read a screen version, in which case, it occurs to me, why would anyone preach at all?
Taking a look at print/online media, they've been using the same tools for longer, and still pump out creative compelling pieces, so I think it's more about the content and design than the software.
Jodie, you raise a great point about the dangers of complexity in technology; particularly for churches, the more complex something is, the more will go wrong. I say stick with simple, it's amazing what simple design can achieve.
And as a nod to Mr Welch above, keeping text at a readable size is not only practical and accessible, but generally makes for better design.
Here's something new(ish) that could be interesting - and potentially VERY distracting: Prezi (http://prezi.com). It treats all slides as one big slide and smoothly moves in and out of different areas. Could be cool and playful, but waHEY it could put people off their lunch!
The risk, however, is that people won't know what to do with their hands... which we know is always risky! ;)
Animated words on the screen might work to supplement the singing and liturgy, not to distract, although it's likely that the initial 'wow' of an impressive display might draw a bit too much attention.
I guess that's the risk with any change or with the introduction of new technology. I know that the new-fangled PowerPoint was distracting for the first few weeks as people said "wow, it's so pretty". But, in the end, it became normal, and helpful.
However, I'm really keen to find something that allows animation of text, as I said, like the U2 concert. I've just had a look at prezi.com and it seems quite extraordinary. I'll have a play.
Any other ideas/ programs out there? Something that does flash-like animated text, but with the option to change things on the fly?
Can I ask - by way of helping us all to think this through well - what outcome you're hoping the animated text will achieve? Eg to make people feel X, to make them realise Y, to emphasise Z...
(I realise this could sound like a conservative reactionary put-down - and I am getting older every day - but I really mean it as an open question!)
Tom
Still less can I see the link between U2 type images with worship. It seems to me that individual entertainment, a la the Hillsong kind of activity, is dominating our vision of worship and confusing adoration of the Creator and Sustainer, as well as gratitude to the Redeemer.
It also seems that two aspects of life are being conflated, so that those who like electronic gadgetry and games are linking their entertainment value with worship. I'd like to see some discussion of what the links are supposed to be.
I experienced at Christmas the sheer bad manners of a songleader, at a service predominantly for non-attenders, throwing in an utterly unknown verse into a traditional carol. It was appalling misjudgement but characteristic of imposing 'Me' upon 'Them' without first considering the impact and the outcomes.
We need to think rather more about what we mean by worship in the life of the church. It is abundantly clear that the muddling around that has characterised church services in the last thirty odd years has been ineffectual in evangelism and confused worship. Why go to church to see what can be seen on a screen at home with all the Avatar type gimmicks done really well.
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100305/hologram-preachers-slated-to-appear-in-churches/index.html
"entertaining pew fodder is critical to advancing 'the gospel'....." ?????
Now that is definitely NOT the sort of language that will win friends - but it will surely influence people !
I am aghast that anyone would refer to a congregational meeting as merely "entertaining pew fodder". And have some already replaced Biblical preaching and meeting together to worship God with someone with the gift of preachertainment ? Has April 1 come early ?
To further bang the U2-concert-like drum, I'm wanting the words to look good and match the music, so that it will help create an atmosphere that will capture people's attention and assist them in reading and then singing/speaking God's word in a way that helps them know him and themselves better, to result in acts that glorify God.
However, if we turn the lights off in the room, then perhaps that might lead towards the unfortunate outcome of individualism instead of a corporate awareness of service of each other.
Can we now contemplate going to a local church for a U2 version of the old bouncing ball, with Avatar colours and 3D images all conducted by a holograph human supplemented by a holographic super-preacher exhorting an entirely holographic congregation.
The 'community of faith' takes on a new meaning, entirely and completely.
'Church' has a different contextual setting. I can stay home and tune in to the holograph preacher of my choice with technological support that is better than anyone could manage in an individual auditorium in the legendary 'burbs.' That, I am forced to conclude, would be preferable to many, if not most, television preachers.
No Australian content or cultural relevance at all.No friendships, no help for the sick or needy, no sharing one another's burdens in the local community.
Just one holograph personality will service the whole world with instantaneous translation into as many language as needed.
The parish concept is dead. 'Mission districts' must be next to go. I suspect that theological colleges and mass ordinations are increasingly irrelevant because the holograph human will do it all.
I await further guidance.
However, to try and focus us again, the question I'm wanting us to discuss is whether or not animated words on an attractive moving background is a step forward or backwards? Can it enhance what we do together, rather than detract?
Please continue to enliven our imagination.
Being a curmudgeon cannot be allowed to obscure worship and understanding as inseparable.
I confess to an intense dislike of dramatics in worship. I once watched a now very prominent bishop elevate the 'host' for more minutes than I could count, while alone, I stood, as earlier during the creed, while everyone else knelt, presumably in adoration of the bread. To my confusion and embarrassment in the context my mind remained fixed that I worship only Christ and him crucified, not a work of human hands. In the same emotional way, I detest gimmicks in everyday worship, and I suspect that rotating rhythms and prancing words onscreen fit into that category. I recall that the organ replaced the cacophony of the village band.
I guess I am a puritan at heart. I still value "Jesus, stand among us...' etc. I also love "worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness..." and similar hymns now rarely heard, but I cannot love modern music, keyed to the chord structure of the guitar, monotonous and lacking real musical values for my ear. I also deplore the theological inaccuracies of many hymns, old and new and above all, assuming that either God or we are dead we indulge, as the Articles put it so well, in mindless repetition—a notorious device in itself.
To sum, there is a time and a season. The question remains why, other than personal interest, are so many folk fixated on screens in churches?
Isn't it a blessing from God that we're all made in His likeness, yet have different tastes and gifts, and that some worship formats are going to resonate with some more than others according to their tastes? I hope readers won't be offended by thinking that your judging their heartfelt connection to God in worship is somehow inferior, compared to your tastes.
@Jodie: I was recently at Mars Hill Church in Seattle, and they had their song words (beg pardon, hymn verses) in white Arial on subtle but moody and evocative low-contrast desaturated stills of landscapes, and I thought that was just fantastic. It was completely in step with the verses themselves and the sentiment towards God in worship.
I don't think animated text would add any value; gently animated background *maybe* (maybe gently rippling water.... clouds gliding very slowly across a mountain top...hmmmmm.... I think I just talked myself out of it).
But animated text and creative typography for Bible verses, now THAT would be evocative and exciting, to bring the Word to life in a creative way!
I agree that we need to lift our game, but I don't necessarily think that means we need to find a new toy to play with. Rather, I think it means we need to think about design and creativity for our presentation graphics (and other forms of communication) as a valuable skill rather than a clerical task or something that is farmed out to the computer geek. So I think that animated words and backgrounds could be useful and appropriate and tasteful if in the hands of the right person. Otherwise, I think it may end up looking tacky.
I guess what I'm trying to do is to work out the cutting-edge next step.
Part of what we're trying to do with our big TWIST Conference day in October is put the energy in to try to be cutting-edge in music and our gatherings, so we can keep the conversation going about how we do an excellent job of church.
I largely agree re: the need to keep using existing software better, but is there anything out there that enables animated text and graphics, plus the ability to change things on the fly when tempos or verse order changes during a song? Flash seems to be too hard-wired for our use, even though it has the technological grunt to deliver.
a186081@bigpond.net.au ought to work. Maybe the last . was the problem. Send me your email and I'll pass it on. It is all the more interesting, in passing, because I think Carlin was not friendly to Christianity. It is the technique that is my interest, although there is nothing disturbing in the text.
Here's another good example of animation that John Piper pointed to - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9x5KhfWAis
On a slightly unrelated topic, videos on the Cool Hunting podcast might provide inspiration on editing video for presentations. They can also be seen here - http://www.coolhunting.com/video/
@Ben - Thanks for pointing out prezi! Looks sensational.