In regard to writing hymns, John Newton, said:
Perspicuity, simplicity, and ease should be chiefly attended to, and the imagery and coloring of poetry, if admitted at all, should be indulged very sparingly and with great judgment. (John Newton: From Disgrace to Amazing Grace)
Newton wanted his hymns to be understood by all manner of people, and so he shied away from imagery and poetry. I tend to agree with his advice.
What about you?
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
The revelation of God seems to be filled with imagery and poetry all its own.
Perhaps Mr. Newton was onto something.
Hairstyle not withstanding.
I'm digging all this web presence of John Newton. A few weeks back I posted about how worship leaders should imitate him, based off a powerful quote from the preface to his Olney Hymns.
http://sounddoxology.blogspot.com/2010/02/worship...
Perspicuity is generally the main thing I am looking for when I write. Some of my friends are known to call me "Mister Perspecuity".
On a separate note, as a going bald guy (okay, gone bald guy) I am wondering when the wigs are coming back into style. I think I would totally rock in an old school Victorian white wig.
Newton is one of my favorite hymns writers. Although I agree with the goal of making songs accessible to many, I think this statement needs consideration as regards context and the author's predispositions and preference, and shouldn't simply seen as a best practice for Christian songwriter's overall. I think it’s more a question of balance.
Newton’s stated goal of simplicity and imagery used sparingly may mean more people understand what the author wants to communicate, but does that mean it communicates more effectively, and is therefore more helpful. Does it mean it’s a “better” approach than employing imagery or poetic techniques? Or, is God more glorified in simpler language than through the use of imagery?
In our hymns and songs, doesn’t the use of simple language and the use of imagery strive to the same goal – to help others accurately perceive something about God and worship him with greater understanding and appreciation?
The Psalms and much of scripture are rich in imagery. And that imagery is God glorifying and continues to reach a worldwide audience and span history. Also, many hymns (Newton’s included) draw on imagery already used in scripture.
The Psalms are accessible to vast numbers of people, not because of simple language and lack of imagery, but more so because of their generalizations rather than detailed specifics: another approach altogether.
Also, most writing conveys ideas of the writer's current culture and thinking – Newton's as well. Common images and current strains of thought are a large part of that.
So considered in context, who was Newton primarily writing for or talking about? His local congregation? The church nationally? Historically, or at large? Children and/or adults? Educated or uneducated? Multi-ethnic or multi-cultural groups within the church? I’m sure that affected his hymn writing approach to reaching folks?
I’m grateful for Newton’s gift of songwriting. Amazing Grace in all its simplicity has remained a cherished hymn to me since my early childhood when I was not a believer, and until now. Other Newton Hymns have affected me in significant ways, helped sustain me in trials, and deepen my affections and appreciation for my Savior… as have other worship songs that employ imagery and poetic techniques.
Restating the earlier thought: I agree with the goal of making songs accessible to many, but I think Newton’s statement on how best to do that is a question of balance and shouldn’t be considered a best practice for Christian songwriter’s across the board.
I do agree. It's the truth about God that causes us to know and love him more; that truth is mostly conveyed in Scripture through plain, objectively stated words and phrases and paragraphs. Surely our songs should reflect that (after all, we're to sing from hearts filled with the word of Christ). It doesn't mean, as the Sovereign Grace folks and so many others have proved, that those words and sentences and paragraphs can't be throat-catchingly, soaringly beautiful.
How could you shy away from imagery (what I take to be metaphor) and poetry when hymns by definition are poems. What better way than imagery to get a point across and give an example that illustrates your point and helps simplify a complex doctrinal thought or truth.
I admit, I haven’t read the book you quoted from but I feel as if Newton is disagreeing with his own hymns. Newton himself is the image or example in Amazing Grace, “I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see.”
Further, this contradicts Christ’s model. In John, Christ is often comparing himself with inanimate objects: a door, a vine, or a shepherd (that last one is animate
. His parables are didactic tools for His followers to continue to learn from. And there are layers of meaning in them. Imagery is powerful.
In short, I guess it depends on what is meant by imagery. What is the context of that quote? The imagery found in Newtons hymns are simple but I don’t believe that he would shy away from using imagery if he felt it would communicate better.