Christmas is Stale
We've been listening to the all Christmas Carol station at work, which is the most efficient way I know to induce holiday fatigue. This is what inspired the figgy pudding post the other day, and I'd like to thank Erin Hughes for pushing that into a more productive direction. Listening to every professional musician who has ever lived singing the same selection of 30 or so songs has me wondering why Christmas seems so impervious to our otherwise jaded, postmodern, internet-brewed ironic cynicism. Newer artists barely even scratch the playlist, despite the dwindling number of people who even know who Bing Crosby is. Most of the newer artists (and by "newer," I mean "started their careers later than 1960") that get airtime are those who mimic the styles of Sinatra and Crosby, like Michael Buble' and Harry Connick, Jr. I'm not complaining about that specific style, mind you -- I rather like it, in moderation -- but the lack of diversity or advancement with regards to Christmas music (maybe one new song enters the annual playlist every 3 or 4 years) must inevitably lead to stagnation, as it becomes increasingly clear nobody has had the slightest impact on the cultural meaning of the holiday other than Wal-mart. New Christmas songs aren't good enough for us to remember, new Christmas movies are largely forgettable and FOX News has declared you the enemy if you even think about celebrating the holiday in a way that makes non-Christians feel welcome -- you're the offensively-accented waitstaff from "A Christmas Story" or you're nothing, as Bill O'Reilly would have it. War has been declared on anyone who would change the way we celebrate Christmas, even if it's a change that engenders goodwill towards men, if not peace on earth.
I have no problem with Christmas -- if I'd my druthers, it would not be a federal holiday, but that is such a low priority on the separation of church and state checklist that I am largely unconcerned, and while that's going on, if it looks very least a convenience time to meet with family if I am so inclined -- but I don't understand the strict resistance to change. Time marches on, but Christmas must remain a Rockwellian/Capra-esque time capsule from the 1950s?
I ask this question about the radio stations in particular, and I'm always met with responses suggesting that younger demographics today want to listen to this ancient Christmas music from long before they were born because their grandparents listen to it at Christmas. I guess I can understand that somewhat. American culture seems largely defined by its inability to imagine that anything will ever change, even as it in braces change at such a rapid pace is that today only the smallest world town look anything like they did in the mid-20th century. A person from the 1960s who time-traveled to today would think Star Trek came early (at least until someone told him that NASA has been under-funded for 40 years).
There have been developments to American culture in general and to Christmas specifically that I think are changes for the better. Christmas decorations are safer*. It's easier to get ones family together by far, or to contact those who can't be there. Why do we not celebrate the fact that living in the future makes Christmas better? Sure, some minor traditions have been lost, but that's not always such a bad thing. I think an excellent example would be if we lost the rampant materialism and greed that Jesus and Charlie Brown spoke against -- maybe the tradition someday could just be paying heed to the people that we admire this time of year, not just enjoying the parts we like and eating their assorted bread products (side note: Dolly Madison could make a mint selling Host wafers).
I'm sorry, I got a little preachy there. I was trying to make the point that my generation and my parents' generation and and my grandparents' generation have all contributed to the meaning of Christmas, in a modern, secular, cultural kind of way. I don't celebrate Christmas because Jesus's birthday means anything to me; I celebrated because I like the idea. A time of year were people are encouraged (shamefully, far more than they are the rest of the year) to be excellent to each other. The advent of Black Friday not withstanding, I think most of those contributions were good. Change is good. Everything that exists need to embrace change let it be destroyed, and that includes Christmas. I used the word "stagnation" earlier and I meant it.
Let's start with the radio, since that's what inspired this tirade. Every band and musician ever have a Christmas album in publication. Why don't we bring some of those forth and make some new standards? OK, so the world isn't ready for 'Weird Al's "Christmas at Ground Zero," MST3k's "Patrick Swayze Christmas," or my cousin Stephen's "Good King Wenceslas vs. Thor." Baby steps; I get it. How about or new performers performing the old standards? Hanson! KISS! Bowling for Soup! Jessica Simpson! Helix! Stephen Colbert! Cee Lo Green! And many more! Call your Christmas radio stations and request this stuff! Get it out there so that people can listen to it and Christmas can truly belong to everyone! Nobody WANTS to listen to Burl Ives sing "Holly Jolly Christmas" every damn day for a month, or Paul McCartney's "Wonderful Christmastime" even once; they do it because they think they have to and the only way they will change is if we show them that they can.
If you think it's weird that an atheist is calling for this, remember I'm talking about this season we all share, not the religious holiday -- like it or not, Christmas is the season of cheer, and that transcends sectarian bickering. Read it any way you like; Festivus, Decemberwe'en, Mithrasmas, Winter Solstice, Yule. Whatever. Until you go into someone's house, it's pretty much all the same.
* I watched a short film from the forties in which a family had lit sparklers on their Christmas tree. Who thought that was a good idea?
I have no problem with Christmas -- if I'd my druthers, it would not be a federal holiday, but that is such a low priority on the separation of church and state checklist that I am largely unconcerned, and while that's going on, if it looks very least a convenience time to meet with family if I am so inclined -- but I don't understand the strict resistance to change. Time marches on, but Christmas must remain a Rockwellian/Capra-esque time capsule from the 1950s?
I ask this question about the radio stations in particular, and I'm always met with responses suggesting that younger demographics today want to listen to this ancient Christmas music from long before they were born because their grandparents listen to it at Christmas. I guess I can understand that somewhat. American culture seems largely defined by its inability to imagine that anything will ever change, even as it in braces change at such a rapid pace is that today only the smallest world town look anything like they did in the mid-20th century. A person from the 1960s who time-traveled to today would think Star Trek came early (at least until someone told him that NASA has been under-funded for 40 years).
There have been developments to American culture in general and to Christmas specifically that I think are changes for the better. Christmas decorations are safer*. It's easier to get ones family together by far, or to contact those who can't be there. Why do we not celebrate the fact that living in the future makes Christmas better? Sure, some minor traditions have been lost, but that's not always such a bad thing. I think an excellent example would be if we lost the rampant materialism and greed that Jesus and Charlie Brown spoke against -- maybe the tradition someday could just be paying heed to the people that we admire this time of year, not just enjoying the parts we like and eating their assorted bread products (side note: Dolly Madison could make a mint selling Host wafers).
I'm sorry, I got a little preachy there. I was trying to make the point that my generation and my parents' generation and and my grandparents' generation have all contributed to the meaning of Christmas, in a modern, secular, cultural kind of way. I don't celebrate Christmas because Jesus's birthday means anything to me; I celebrated because I like the idea. A time of year were people are encouraged (shamefully, far more than they are the rest of the year) to be excellent to each other. The advent of Black Friday not withstanding, I think most of those contributions were good. Change is good. Everything that exists need to embrace change let it be destroyed, and that includes Christmas. I used the word "stagnation" earlier and I meant it.
Let's start with the radio, since that's what inspired this tirade. Every band and musician ever have a Christmas album in publication. Why don't we bring some of those forth and make some new standards? OK, so the world isn't ready for 'Weird Al's "Christmas at Ground Zero," MST3k's "Patrick Swayze Christmas," or my cousin Stephen's "Good King Wenceslas vs. Thor." Baby steps; I get it. How about or new performers performing the old standards? Hanson! KISS! Bowling for Soup! Jessica Simpson! Helix! Stephen Colbert! Cee Lo Green! And many more! Call your Christmas radio stations and request this stuff! Get it out there so that people can listen to it and Christmas can truly belong to everyone! Nobody WANTS to listen to Burl Ives sing "Holly Jolly Christmas" every damn day for a month, or Paul McCartney's "Wonderful Christmastime" even once; they do it because they think they have to and the only way they will change is if we show them that they can.
If you think it's weird that an atheist is calling for this, remember I'm talking about this season we all share, not the religious holiday -- like it or not, Christmas is the season of cheer, and that transcends sectarian bickering. Read it any way you like; Festivus, Decemberwe'en, Mithrasmas, Winter Solstice, Yule. Whatever. Until you go into someone's house, it's pretty much all the same.
* I watched a short film from the forties in which a family had lit sparklers on their Christmas tree. Who thought that was a good idea?