Hipster Christianity

I finished Hipster Christianity by Brett McCracken last night and I have had so many people already ask me how I liked it. I have to say that overall, I didn't. It's not that I didn't like what he had to say, he had a lot of good points to make, but two aspects of the book really distracted me from what he was saying.

First of all, his writing was stylistically strange. McCracken is typically a magazine writer, writing a great deal for Relevant, which translated a bit too much (or too little, depending on which way he could have taken the style) into the writing of the book. Before I get into that, though, I want to make the disclaimer that I don't think of myself as a writing expert. This is all coming from my experience reading the book and others might think that McCracken's writing is perfectly fine.The writing was generally conversational but there were moments where McCracken was attempting to be academic, especially in his chapter on the history of cool/hip. It's the magazine writer writing a book and feeling like he has to write more like a book writer. It's a line that doesn't really need to be crossed, but I'm sure anyone would feel that kind of pressure.

Adding to his magazine style, McCracken uses lists much too frequently throughout the book. Lists like: Churches I visited, Christian Hipster Leaders, beliefs of the emerging church, and the different types of hipster. These lists make up a majority of his content, which, in my opinion, distracts from what he's trying to say. It's sometimes a breather when, in a non-fiction type book, the author uses a list style, but when all the reader gets are breathers, coming up for air gets tiring. It just shows how uncomfortable McCracken is with writing book-type prose.

The second aspect of the book that was a distraction was the scattered nature of McCracken's intended subject. Hipster Christianity really is not an appropriate title for the book. McCracken probably should have just stuck to the tag line he used, "When Church and Cool Collide." What he really wants to discuss is the disparity between what Christianity says about being cool and what the church thinks it needs to do to attract members. This issue is a huge problem for the church today, and one of the scariest parts about the emerging church. But I'll get down off my soapbox. McCracken talks about this subject in length and I really feel that that's what he was trying to get at. It's just a whole lot harder to differentiate the subtleties between churches like that and hipster churches.

This difference is played out most in the churches he describes as "hipster churches." When I read that he described Mars Hill (Seattle) as a hipster church, I am sure I had a confused look on my face. I don't know any hipster (and I know a lot) who would be caught dead at Mars Hill! No self-respecting hipster would go to a mega-church with neon lights up at the front behind a pastor who still wears suit vests with t-shirts and Ed Hardy sweatshirts. A typical hipster church is much more subdued and doesn't try to attract people. For all you Wheaton people, Church of the Res is a perfect example of a hipster church. Liturgy, tradition, but with great arts and more liberal outreach. Res isn't having meetings to dress the pastor or try and figure out how they can be relevant.  This is a point that McCracken gets right on, but Christianity is relevant without having to try. Hipsters hate people who try too hard, even though they do themselves, lets be honest.

Anyway, McCracken does talk about the problems that hipster Christians encounter, problems like the prevalence of drinking, smoking, and drugs that occurs in Christian hipster circles, but that's not really the subject of his writing. McCracken wants to talk about cool and Christianity but the cool he chooses to use as a label (hipster) doesn't really apply to the subject he wants to discuss. His talk about hipsters is a bit edifying. For someone who can probably be called a hipster, it is good to hear someone write about how we aren't just a bunch of no-goodniks, but we are young people who appreciate fine things, even though others might not agree (especially with fashion). Hipsters do take stock in finer foods, art, and music. We like things because they are good, but they also happen to be hip. I will just go out on a limb and say that I'm glad I like listening to bands like the Dirty Projectors and eating at gourmet restaurants (avec and the publican two high recommendations) rather than listening to Katy Perry and eating at McDonalds all the time.

Hipster Christianity was definitely an interesting read but I'd find a summary rather than slugging through the whole thing. I'm now into Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer. I really like it so far, but a review will be coming as soon as I finish it!