super bowl

Rethinking Christina Aguilera and the Star Spangled Banner

Manuel Luz — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 21:09:02 -0800

Wow. It seems like everyone these days has an opinion on Christina Aguilera and her now infamous rendition of the National Anthem. Radio talk jocks and internet bloggers, patriots and politicos, grandpas and pre-teens, professional athletes and armchair quarterbacks—there is no lack of spin coming from all directions.

Now, if you're looking for a blog slamming Aguilera for her performance, this ain't it. It is true that I am neither a fan of pop divas (except maybe for Aretha Franklin), nor of the lifestyles they seemingly represent. I do know that Aguilera is an extremely talented vocalist (her performance on Herbie Hancock's album, Possibilities, still knocks my socks off). But if you know me or read my blog, you know that I will occasionally rant against culture but purposefully not rant against people.

Instead, I'd like to offer a Christian response to all of the stuff coming out lately. It is, as they say: IMHO.

One of the main criticisms of Aguilera's performance is her flubbing the words to the Star Spangled Banner. What she did, forgetting a line and garbling another, seems inexcusable. But have you ever tried it? I mean, in front of people? Before a big game? How about before one hundred million people? It is a lot harder than it looks. Personally, I have only performed the National Anthem once, and I made sure I had the words in front of me—just in case. In truth, all of us have felt the nerves of being in public, and erred during speeches or performances some time in our lives. If her only real sin was "getting so lost in the moment" and forgetting a few words, then we really ought to cut her some slack, shouldn't we? That is what grace is all about.

Others criticize her for stylizing the song beyond recognition. She reached for the lows, stretched for the highs, added a few gospel growls, and even threw in a falsetto jump on "freeeeee!" I think I counted eight notes just on the word, "night." Yes, her rendition is overstylized. But here's the thing: She's Christina Aguilera! That's her schtick! If they didn't want that, they shouldn't have booked her. My point here is that—although I too felt that she should have reined it back—she was simply being her flamboyant herself.

So I don't fault her the actual performance. But if anyone should take exception at all, it should be because of this..

The National Anthem means something much greater than the person who sings it. By it's very nature, it has gravitas. Penned during a battle, sung during every Independence Day, Olympic victory, and war, there is almost a sacredness to it. This is why we stand at attention and put our hands over our hearts when it is played. It represents two centuries of freedom, and honors the people who paid a price for it.

It is like leading worship. A worship leader must never draw undue attention to him or herself, for that person is merely the conduit upon which some greater and mysterious Truth is revealed and reverentially recognized. God then becomes the rightful object of our worship. And as the worship leader is simply a representative of our commonality of faith, his or her job is to simply point people to the Throne.

I think this is really the shame of it all. Any person who sings the Star Spangled Banner is simply a representative of our commonality of country. Their rendition of the National Anthem, while reflecting their uniqueness, must never try to supercede that which the song represents.

As a society, we seem to have forgotten this. Through our cultural culpability, we have allowed an entire generation of people to see the National Anthem as simply a showcase for singers. That is, until Christine Aguilera glaringly pointed this out on Super Bowl Sunday. And on this point, we are all to some degree guilty.

As a means of closing out my point, I'd like to leave you with the absolute best rendition of Star Spangled Banner I've ever heard. Watch it all the way to the end. Enjoy.

An athlete's praising lips

Jeff Hopper — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:55:14 -0800

I'm intrigued by the wondering out there this week as to whether it’s kosher for athletes to praise God when they’re interviewed after a victory. Kosher may not be the right word, for literally that would mean it is acceptable to religious people—or at least a specific portion of them. And the question at hand seems to be whether it is acceptable to the non-religious people who have to hear all this “glory-to-Godding.”

So let’s think about this for a few minutes.

One of the key criticisms of athletes who thank or praise God for a victory goes like this: “Well, of course they’re praising God. They won.” It’s not a criticism that’s too verifiable because, well, normally postgame reporters only interview the winners.

Except there was one very interesting moment during the Super Bowl that might actually have revealed a look at the other side. In the fourth quarter, Matt Stover of the Indianapolis Colts missed a 51-yard field goal attempt. It was outside his range, really, so an unlikely effort. But when it fell short and left, Stover raised two fingers to the sky as though he had made it. CBS’ all-world sports anchor Jim Nantz didn’t miss the moment. He noted that this was something Stover does whether he makes or misses a field goal, because he is “a spiritual man.”

In case you don’t know, Stover’s spirituality is most definitely of the Christ-focused sort—and, if his response to his missed field goal is any indication, perhaps a Calvinist as well. More than all that, what Stover may represent is the one thing the critics have counted on not existing: an athlete who praises God even when things aren’t going well.

But let’s think further.

What of the athlete who is purportedly a believer of the evangelical persuasion who doesn’t, you know, evangelize when the mic is thrust his way after a win? Would you ever imagine his silence to be a key component of his evangelism?

Several years ago, I spent a good many minutes during an interview with a PGA Tour player talking about just this thing. With a couple of recent wins under his belt, I had been asked why he hadn’t said anything in his post-victory interviews—no strong it’s-all-about-Jesus words. So I put the question to him. His explanation was outstanding, and one we might do well to hear more often.

You see, while PGA Tour players (and a lot of athletes in a lot of other sports) have regular interaction with fans, their closest day-to-day engagement is with their colleagues in the game. This particular player had been building at least one good friendship with a non-believing player, someone whose life he was having increasing opportunity to speak into. And this player to whom I was speaking suggested that should he come out with widely reported “Yea for Jesus!” words, his growing friendship with this other player might have been jeopardized.

I know, there is much good reason to run with Paul’s words, “I’m not ashamed of the gospel” (Romans 1:16). There is reason as well to speculate that in God’s sovereignty had this player gone ahead with some Thank you, Jesuses, his friend might not have thought him to be a freak but authentic. Who knows? I would leave it to the Christ-centered athlete to judge in his or her own heart just where to go with words of testimony and praise when the lights are on and the cameras rolling.

So here’s one thing we could conclude: an athlete who gives verbal praise is not doing as big a thing as we might suggest, be we in favor of those kinds of words or against them.

Then again, I may be wrong. After all, I hear no battles raging over Olympic figure skater Johnny Weir’s announcement that he is adorning his room in the Olympic Village with a photo of Lady Gaga, saying, “She needs to be there watching over us, protecting us.” Maybe people only get opinionated when the words are about God, and especially when Jesus is named.

The Only Day We All Talk About Ads

Brett McCracken — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:41:50 -0800

The Super Bowl just happened. This is really the only time of the year when we all collectively talk, however briefly, about commercials. So let’s get to that task. Here are my quick thoughts after watching the game and all of its advertising extravagance.

Best Overall Ad: Google — “Parisian Love.” Google is an outsider to TV advertising, but they showed everyone else how it’s done with this beautiful ad. It was simple, told a great story, and reinforced why Google is probably the most important brand of my generation. We literally live our lives by it.

Worst Overall Ad: Anything by GoDaddy.com. I almost regret that I have registered domain names with them.

Most Needlessly Controversial Ad: Tebow/Focus on the Family. There was no mention of abortion, pro-life, or anything remotely controversial (unless you think “Celebrate Family. Celebrate Life.” is an offensive sentiment).

Worst Attempt to Capitalize on Zeitgeist: Bud Light autotune / T-Pain spot. But a close second goes to the Bridgestone “Now that was a bachelor party” ad with the whale, which clearly originated from some suggestion to “Do something Hangover-esque. That movie was HUGE!”

Best Movie Trailer: Shutter Island or Robin Hood.

Worst Movie Trailer: Alice in Wonderland or that horrible M. Night Shyamalan kids movie.

Best Ad for a Product I’ve Never Heard of: Flo TV – “My Generation.” I loved this ad. Utilized a song by The Who, tons of great archival footage, and made a good point: Live TV can be unforgettable and no one wants to miss out on the “Where were you then?” type moments. So get a mobile TV!

Worst Ad for CBS Show: That NCIS head slapping one.

Best (i.e. the Only Good) Ad for CBS Show: The Dave Letterman / Oprah / Leno spot.

Best Car Ad: Audi – “Green Police.” Mainly for how well it knows the Super Bowl audience (largely skeptical of the overzealous “green” proponents), while staying true to the Audi brand (yuppie, clean, eco-friendly).

Most Unexpected Ad: The Best in Show actors doing an ad for the Census Bureau.

Best Attempt to Capture the Sentiment of the Iconic Late 90s Monster.com ad “When I Grow Up”: Cars.com – “Timothy Richman.”

Worst Micro-Trend: Pantless men. As seen in the back-to-back Careerbuilder and Dockers ads.

Best Micro-Trend: Indie bands lending music to ads. It’s ok to sell out! I hope Arcade Fire and Grizzly Bear pocketed plenty of money for their respective ads (NFL and VW).

Best Use of Zoom: Dodge Charger – “Man’s Last Stand.” (0:30-0:47). They also get points for the “Vampire TV Shows” line. Brilliant.

Not an ounce of controversy

Jeff Hopper — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:13:26 -0800

But avoid foolish controversies...because these are unprofitable and useless. (Titus 3:9, NIV)

Phew! Glad we all survived that Tim and Mom Tebow commercial.

In what promised to be—if you let yourself get carried away with all the pregame hype of the political kind—the most controversial moment of the game, a lot of folks who spent a lot of bluster over the whole deal must have melted in their chairs under the sheer weight of the nothingness that the ad contained.

Of course, if you have any sense of what Focus on the Family is all about, you know that that all is a whole lot more than abortion. Not that those who were so foresightedly upset about this deal wanted to admit this. They took their stance: what good could anyone who actually includes the choice of life in the pro-choice world have to say about marriage or parenting or overcoming depression or household management or—no way!—sex?

So focused on one aspect of Focus, the detractors lost focus of the bigger picture.

Not so with the New Orleans Saints.

In a game where everything could have hinged on the work of one Peyton Manning, the Saints didn’t let the fact that Manning looked his very best in the opening quarter send them into a tizzy. They stuck to their own game plan—including some layering in of fresh defensive schemes as the game progressed and building their collection of scores on the foundation of their own offensive strengths. And on the backs of that plan and those scores, they steered a course to Super Bowl victory and celebration.

It was a grand game, really. Only one call was questioned, and though it was probably rightly overturned, it didn’t matter in the end. Little we could call a dirty play, just a couple of fairly normal late hits that were properly flagged. No taunting or self-glorifying celebrations. Just two professional teams doing what they are supposed to do: play professionally. Indianapolis was defeated on the scoreboard; they were not outclassed. In that we can all celebrate.

And in the future, maybe as soon as the Winter Olympics or the Daytona 500 coming up this week, we can all remember that the sports we play and the sports we watch are to be enjoyed, not fumed over. Sure, it might put sports talk out of business. But you know, it is just talk.

Dobson and Pigskin Politics

bo.white — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:21:17 -0800

So I’m scrolling through my newsfeed on Facebook the other day and see a link to a story on ABC about Focus on the Family running an anti-abortion ad during Super Bowl XLIV starring Tim Tebow. I may have been the last person on the 'Interwebs' (that’s what my 65 year old dad calls it) to see this, but it sparked a few thoughts.

In the article, Gary Schneeberger, a Focus on the Family spokesman, is quoted as saying, “There is nothing political or controversial about the spot.” Are you kidding me? Nothing political or controversial… right. Focus on the Family has become synonymous with both politics and controversy due to its strong alignment with crazy right-wing ideologies.

Personal note to James Dobson: Stop sending me letters about gay people taking over America! Thank you.

Regardless of where one stands on abortion, the only thing most us will take away from this commercial is that Focus on the Family ran a commercial during the Super Bowl, and the message, however good it might be, will be lost. Look, I do think abortion should be avoided in most circumstances and there are many folks on both sides of the political aisle who agree on this. But how to actually reduce the occurrence of abortions is the point of contention and Focus on the Family has unfortunately become associated with the Christian Coalition/Pat Robertson political machine on this. (FYI, Robertson says things like, “The feminist agenda encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”)

If anyone who sees this commercial actually gets past the politics of Focus on the Family, then I’m guessing he (probably not a she) already adores James Dobson – of course in a purely platonic sense, not in a gay way. However if Focus on the Family is really interested in shaping a productive dialogue on the issue of abortion rather than having a shouting match, then I would suggest they spend their $2.8 million for a 30 second Super Bowl commercial elsewhere.

-jonathan