OK, somebody help me out. I've gotten some negative feedback from several unrelated sources in the past few weeks about the term "Gospel Jazz". One older musician scoffed that it was unnecessary and "commercial". A prominent gospel artist remarked that the term was limiting from a marketing standpoint, because, "...it puts [an artist] in this weird, funky place where no one knows what to do with you." Tell me about it. He went on to say that I shouldn't feel so "conflicted". Anyone who knows me would've told him that I'm not conflicted at all. I still listen to and appreciate all types of music. I'm just going where I'm being led in this season.I may be suffering from delusions of grandeur, but I believe one of the mandates of my little ministry is to help tear down the barriers to "Gospel Jazz" that exist in the church and the marketplace. Nevertheless, I am not wedded to the term "Gospel Jazz" at the expense of the TRUE calling, which is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I believe that "Gospel Jazz" can reach some folks who are in a headspace where more traditional forms of Christian music cannot go. Quietly, I'm really not that concerned with how people label my music, but I had to call it something. And "Gospel Jazz" seemed to fit because it describes in a nutshell where I'm coming from, stylistically speaking.
What do you think? I'd really like to hear your opinion about the term "Gospel Jazz". Should we call it something else? Should we continue to fight for greater exposure and more recognition, or should we simply follow the path of least resistance? I'm praying on it. Meanwhile, I just do what I do.
