This paper analyzes Tom Smucker's 2004 article on Canadian musician Bruce Cockburn, focusing on Smucker's argument that Cockburn has achieved an unusually rare crossover success between Christian/gospel music and mainstream popular music. The paper examines three explanations Smucker offers for this achievement — Cockburn's artistic persona, his lyricism, and his use of contemporary rather than biblical imagery — and evaluates their relative persuasiveness. The analysis also draws comparisons to other artists such as Elvis Presley and Aretha Franklin, who similarly navigated both gospel and secular audiences, ultimately questioning whether Cockburn's success reflects something objectively unique or simply the subjective nature of artistic appreciation.
This paper examines an article about Bruce Cockburn, a musical performer who, according to the author, has been more successful than even many of the biggest names in modern music who shared his roots in gospel music. Whereas even the most successful Rhythm and Blues and Rock and Roll performers of the early and middle of the twentieth century all started out singing Christian or gospel-inspired music, by the time they achieved mainstream success they invariably found themselves unable to return to their musical roots successfully.
Inevitably, these artists faced the dilemma of being perceived as performing outside their established genre, losing either sincerity or artistic credibility — whether when they attempted to return to Christian music, or when, after doing so, they tried to return to their most successful popular genre. Meanwhile, Cockburn manages to straddle both worlds in much the same way that only Elvis Presley and Aretha Franklin managed to do.
The author presents three specific theories to explain Cockburn's success at being so versatile. First, he suggests that it is a function of the artist's "persona," though even the author acknowledges this as a somewhat hackneyed metaphor. Second, he suggests that Cockburn's lyrics lend themselves better to a dual appreciation across both audiences. Third, he argues that Cockburn's choice of contemporary rather than classical — that is, biblical — themes and imagery is responsible for his broad appeal.
The second and third explanations seem considerably more persuasive than the first. The notion that Cockburn's lyrical style and his use of contemporary rather than strictly religious imagery allow listeners from different backgrounds to engage authentically with his work is a more concrete and defensible claim than the vague appeal to "persona." Moreover, much of the article's argument rests on the author's subjective judgment about how successfully other performers have appealed to audiences across different genres. Ultimately, the article may do more to confirm that both beauty and artistic appreciation are equally in the eye of the beholder than it does to establish a fundamental difference between Cockburn and some of his predecessors.
Ultimately, the article may do more to confirm that both beauty and artistic appreciation are equally in the eye of the beholder than it does to establish a fundamental difference between Cockburn and some of his predecessors.
You’re 96% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.