From Melkor & M Dick's comments in the last post. This is a problem for the Right Side of the Robinson Clan. Rockers All, how do we justify being fans of bands that we probably strongly disagree with politically? How do we headbang when we "disagree sir with what you are saying". In the comments, list songs that you love that have lyrics you hate. Tell us why they rock and why you hate the lyrics and how you deal with the dychotomy.
I'll do today's 'This Is Rock' contribution to kick it off: Black Sabbath playing War Pigs in Paris in 1970: The Power of Black Sabbath! Bill Ward's aggressive, thundering drums. Gosh, I could watch him play for hours, but not in a gay way. Ozzy's uhm, soaring, uhm vocals. Guitarist Tony Iommi doesn't solo well, but came up with the fantastic riffs that all metal evolved from. Geezer Butler writes the cool lyrics and the scary thundering music and is a fun bassist to watch. But Geezer, what's this hippy shit about Generals gathered in their masses? Well, those of us that served our country know that there are good and bad generals just like everybody, but generally, they wish good not ill for our country and the world. I get past it by thinking Ozzy's vocals are great, the words are fun comic strip movie stuff even if I disagree with them, and the music f'n RAWKS! Admittedly, this disagreement is mild stuff. Easy to get past these lyrics. I'll try to think of a tougher one to discuss in the Comments.
Notice how Ozzy changes most of the lyrics, but it still works. Watch closely for the cool Ozzy dance throughout the song.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
War pigs is a song promoting an antiwar, Vietnam war(?), message and how that the politicians are sending out little pawns, the poor, to fight the politicians' war. I like the sound and feeling that the song gives me and I don't need to know what the lyrics are talking about in order to like the song under certain circumstances.
ReplyDeleteIf you like the sound of the music combined with the lyrics, but you don't agree with the lyrics then you are more concerned with the sound and the feeling that the music gives you-- like a drug. So you either ignore what the song is saying and you just listen and allow the lyrics to come into your mind subversively or you just listen to the version of the song without the lyrics. The human mind is like a computer. It needs to be programmed. What you put into your mind is what you get out. So junk in equals junk out. When I listen to a song that I disagree with or a song that is talking about a state of being I am not in or don't like, I am analyzing the lyrics and arguing with what the lyrics are saying; so I can't really enjoy the song unless I am wanting to achieve a certain drugged out feeling and suspend thinking.
The whole rock culture and music grew out of the hippie/liberal movement or the hippie/liberal movement took over the rock music and culture. The vast majority of rock music talks about drugs, sex, and violence. This goes hand in hand with the liberal agenda. You promote the worst in people. This weakens them and enables them to be taken over. This is why liberals promote the gay lifestyle, drugs, teen sex or any other immoral lifestyle that weakens the individual . It is no wonder that when America was a far more free and conservative country that the people were more moral and had a stricter sense of morality. Rock music on the whole is just a symptom of the state of the American culture. As noted before.
Overall, I think music and culture is devolving-- reverting back to animal like groans and the beating of drums and sticks, in the case of hip hop reverting back to primitive African tribes-- and is another medium through which to disseminating a liberal message, or any other message it just so happens that the liberal message is what is mostly being disseminated, and control a people. A deep topic that I hoped I scratched the surface of.
I agree with what you are saying Sir Deanalot, but I think you are missing the point of the topic. You were supposed to comment a song that you like but disagree with the lyrics. Maybe you should have put down a Garth Brooks song, or something, since he played at Obama's inauguration.
ReplyDelete"Efficiency and progress is ours once more
Now that we have the neutron bomb
Its nice and quick and clean and gets things done
Away with excess enemy
But no less value to property
No sense in war but perfect sense at home"
"The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax to pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light
Jobless millions whisked away
At last we have more room to play
All systems go to kill the poor tonight"
"Gonna
Kill kill kill kill kill the poortonight"-Dead Kennedy's
Now there are some bad ass lyrics from a bad ass liberal band. I couldn't agree with Jello more.
BTW's Vietnam is an okay war to protest over (you know, being started by Kennedy and massively enlarged by Johnson giving Nixon an easy ticket to campaign against), War Pigs should be deemed acceptable by the the Robinson Talking Points. I know it has a wider message about war, but if we justify it in our minds through the reference of Vietnam, we can sleep better after listening to it.
ReplyDeleteBack to the topic at hand.
This is a conversation that Jake and I sometimes have. There is a song by Perfect Circle called "Judith" that is the most anti-deity of any of Maynard's songs (in my opinion) in which the lyrics are intolerable but the instrumentals and Maynard's voice work to make an awesome song. Nonetheless, whenever I hear the song I turn it (along with NIN "Terrible Lie"). There are multiple other songs in my music library that have an anti-God slant, but its not "too bad" in my mind. Generally they revolve around idiotic practitioners of religion, which in my opinion (grouping the more extreme ends of the Christian right in there) is okay. I guess for me, each song has a threshold that I arbitrarily choose that is solely based on the message of the song. But that's the great thing about ipods, itunes, ilife, I'm not bound to the album for what I listen too, but I can make and select my own playlist that weeds out "undesireable," thus I generally solve the problem a priori.
I guess even my musical taste solves this problem. I don't like Punk musically. I don't like Rap because its sound and not music. And I frequently don't listen to Rock Groups that are too stridently political. Like Rage or others.
My only angst music would be Nirvana and Alice and Chains, etc. Whom were generally not so much political but about being lost and dealing with stuff as an individual. When they did have comments about anything about society it was more gripes about it vs a call to arms against the government. Thusm as I too have a few critisims about consumer society I never found a conflict with my music.
I guess my comment agrees with Jeff, it's hard to listen to music and ignore the words. I simply can't (part of the reason "Imagine" is not in my music library) .
ReplyDeleteI also agree that Rock, if one would classify it as an institution, is anti-conservative. But, sigh, I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. I take conservative and liberal to mean here, retrenchment of Status Quo, and change.
I gotta catch my bus. I'll flush this more out later.
Judith is rough. I cringe when I hear the lyrics and its almost too much. Sometimes I do turn it. But if I don't, I feel like God is frowning upon me.
ReplyDeleteI was kidding when I said I agreed with Jello's lyrics by the way.
ReplyDeleteI was addressing how I deal with and view the dichotomy within songs in general. I don't view rock as a bad thing. The culture of a people, including rock, is a barometer that can show the state of a society.
ReplyDeleteThe Vietnam war in my opinion should have been fought with the intent of winning. It in part helped to stave off the advance of communism. I am not knowledgeable on the war. Another topic.
Melkor, I guess it depends on what you define as status quo and therefore change. These are specific. I was being general on the point of how most rock music promotes a liberal agenda by promoting liberal causes or the worst in us. I guess if one views status quo as conservative and liberal as change then that is what I am talking about. I don't know if conservative is or was the status quo. The status quo could be the "system" or government as in rage against the machine(?). It depends on what the system is. Being against something just because it is the norm or the accepted thing is allowing others to define your beliefs.
I like some of Alice in Chains songs. Most of their songs deal coping with drug addiction. Down in a Hole, for an example. I guess a song can mean different things to different people. You don't have to analyze a song to enjoy it.
I use to like U2 but since they were supporters of Obama I can't listen to their music. Makes me feel annoyed when I think about their version of a 'Beautiful Day'--Obama being president and bringing socialism to America.
The Garth Brooks song above I disagree with. I would never be able to listen to such an obvious promotion of a liberal world view.
I am not knowledgeable in the music department. So I can't really state a specific song unless I look on up.
Great comments, as usual. I really like the analysis of Tool and Maynard's other stuff. The words are the reason I don't listen to Rage. I think Rage lays down a great rockin' groove, but then listening to what's his face's lyrics put me off.
ReplyDeleteImagine isn't on my playlist either. It used to piss me off when people, even devout Christians I knew said what a wonderful song it was, clearly not listening to what Lennon was saying.
The good thing is that most songs are not political. I like U2, and actually like their lyrics. Bono's an ass in real life, but the music and lyrics are great, and U2 is one of the few out-front Christian bands out there, though, I'm sure they're not Missouri Synod Lutherans!
So, I still need to come up with a song I like that I can't stand the lyrics on.
I'm going to have to find the link to someone Ace linked to a while ago. A hilarious 'documentary' of Conservative rock bands, such as Rage Against The Machine. The guy took the lyrics and interpreted the meaning to bring out conservative values. Sort of like how Triominauts discover Triomino songs.
ReplyDeleteToejamm's remarked about the Dead Kennedys, who really are hardcore lefties. As I've said before, in spite of that, they have two songs that are the most awesome slams of liberals ever written: California Uber Alles and Holiday In Cambodia.
ReplyDeleteCalifornia Uber Alles was always a joke song that no one thought could ever come true, but it looks like we're living it now!
Jeff that was damn close to what I was going to say. In my opinion, Rock generally serves as a medium to highlight problems or critique something you disagree with, which in itself is against the SQ, whether that be "critiquing" entrenched leftists in the example by Bud-D and the Dead Kennedy's, or society at large. Rock is an outlet for the band to build momentum "against something", rarely "for" something. Thus, in the classic sense, I think rock is liberal.
ReplyDelete(side note, in a book I read called "Kremlin Rising" it talked about this guy that started one of the biggest Russian Rock Stations called "Наши Радио" or "Our Radio," he countered Euro/Hip Hop trash with a lot of the underground liberal punk bands in the Soviet Union that fought against oppression and censorship. Today, however, he has found that many of these "liberal punk" bands have easily turned into pulpits of Putin or the numerous Neo-Nazi groups that are sprouting throughout Russia. The punk call to resist has been twisted to "resist outsiders" which is extremely supportive of the United Russia Party.....I wonder how easy our own generation of punks could be twisted into idiotic footsoldiers of a tyrannical regime....)
I think that the "barometer of society" is important (I'm not trying to imply you're arguing it isn't) as it might be something that we would not otherwise notice until problems are much more pronounced. For example, Alice and Chains and Nirvana's self loathing about the dangers of drugs are important. This is one of the few outlets that can get people to see a problem that would otherwise be papered over by a society that ignores failures. I don't know what the "aggregate" amount of knowledge alternative rock has given middle class culture about the horrors of falling into the downward spiral of drugs, none the less, we do know far more than we would otherwise. And for many youth, music might be a far better medium to feel the mental fatigue and destruction of drugs than a ridiculous DARE program in schools. The costs of not having an "early indicator" can be very prohibitive. The Soviet Union tried to hide the fact that suicide was one of the leading killers of it's male population and one of the greatest contributers to it was alcoholism (all of which has its true root in a patronage system that inhibits the individual's free action, thus stifling one's self worth) leading to a society that was believed to have over 23% of its male population to be alcoholics (http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/agm167v1 I'm not sure if you guys can read the full article as my library gives me access, this is just the abstract so maybe you can see it)
Rock can be this social cry to alert us to the problems we need to fix much earlier than when the situation gets so bad we need an NGO or Non-Profit to champion the cause. Rock shows that we still have a drug problem that won't go away no matter how many Mexican drug smugglers we catch as the demand simply does not go away. Stronger familial ties might be the lynch pin to defeat this. But it isn't Rock that leads us to drugs, nor is rock wrong for singing about it. It should be allowed to flourish and provide us with the free discourse that is needed to perennially improve our society.
this improvement is awesome, but it still doesn't mean I have to listen to such songs as Judith or a Terrible Lie...
ReplyDeleteI like what you said about the Russian punk bands being supportive of the United Russian Party(If I understood you correctly). I always found it funny how punks in America generally hate being "controlled" and they say "F the man" and what not. Yet they are creating a controlling environment by supporting socialism and they don't even know it. They thought Bush was spying on them and doing all sorts of stuff to destroy their liberties. We'll see what happens when Obama's massive civilian volunteer force starts ratting on people who viloate our increasing laws and regulations. Big Brother is always watching.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI guess it would depend if the song is highlighting a problem and bringing attention to it or promoting a certain world view glorifying a certain lifestyle. I was assuming that most rock was promoting, I was only addressing rock that does promote and glorify the drug, sex, and violence culture or a liberal worldview. But I did not look at from the perspective of bring attention to an social issue. I know some hip hop makes being a criminal and making the raping bitches and hoes lifestyle a popular thing. So I am trying to state how rock does the same thing to promote the hippie and drug culture. I am no music expert so I don't know how many rock songs actually do this. I agree with you on the point that it is a good thing to bring problems in society out in the open and addressing it through music rather than manifesting itself some other way, and talking about it is not wrong or a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteThe point I was trying to make about rock and the popular culture being the barometer of society is that it can show the state of a society by showing what it promotes and/or the theme that permeates throughout most of it.
The point about the Russian Punk bands being turned into pulpits to support something they were originally against is an interesting point, and I was trying to say something similar about the pop culture of America, although I don't think pop culture has ever been against the liberal cause. Imagine by Lenon is a good example. It is a medium through which to disseminate a message and an agenda, any message or agenda. I was trying to illustrate how Popular culture, including rock, is being used by the liberal agenda to do this.
I don't know a lot about rock so I was assuming that it is mostly about sex drugs and violence. I do know this is true about some rock. I do know that most of popular culture, movies, music, and the arts etc, do promote a liberal agenda, for the most part, and my main point-- Might be off topic. I was only trying to tie into the rock topic-- was that the liberal agenda tries to promote the worst in us, drugs, violence, and sex, and a liberal worldview, and how this weakens a people and enables them to be less independent and self sustain; therefore, making them more dependent on someone or something else. The government is more than happy to set itself up as that entity. The quote by E. Burke was the basis for my point about morality being important to a free people, and how rock by promoting immorality can undermine freedom: "Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites..". Or Tocqueville: "Liberty can not be established without morality". As used here, the definition of morality is far greater than simply the sense of drugs, sex, and violence, but the three can undermine the broader sphere of morality.
I looked up the lyrics to Imagine, and I certainly disagree with it. No religion[ might not be bad]...no countries... sharing all the world... the world live as one. This is obviously some hippie one world socialist dream of utopia on Earth. Trying to realize this dream has lead to the deaths of millions of people and the enslavement and misery of countless millions. It is interesting how some people don't see this. They just listen to it while being indoctrinated subconsciously
I think that the song Imagine does sound nice. Too bad man has sin and someone will take charge and exploit everyone. It is impossible. I guess all you can do is imagine.
ReplyDeleteMusic is a release. Whether it's a rebellious release through rock or rap, or a soothing release through new age or easy listening, or an intellectual release through jazz, classical, or prog rock, it's a release. I don't know where country fits in. I've never really been a fan, so don't know what it does for people who enjoy it. Maybe a righteous release.
ReplyDeleteRock & rap were both originally rebellious music for teenagers, so of course lashing out at the values of their parents would be highlighted. Rock morphed into music of political protest in the '60's, which was a pretty easy evolution, but it also morphed into much more than that. Mostly love songs, lots of philosophical exploration, or just plain musical experimentation.
In a free society, a certain amount of rebelliousness and questioning of authority is healthy. It'll question the values and morals of society, which is good, so long as it is not taken overboard, and makes people think that rejecting all values of parents/authority is the right thing to do. Questioning: yes. Occasionally rejecting: yes. Being satisfied when you learn the reasons: this is how it should normally work.
And of course, like I already said, most rock is not political. Love songs, quirk songs, thrill-ride songs, whatever. John Lennon wrote many songs that are fantastic. He also wrote Imagine. I'm not going to condemn him for it. If all his songs were like Imagine, I would.
I shouldn't say rock morphed into love songs. It almost exclusively was that in the beginning. But, the music form itself was rebellious, and similar to rap in that way, in that parents hated it. Just as I hate rap now.
ReplyDeleteImagine does sound good. But Lennon, like Lenin, leaves out God in his one world utopia. Would be nice to imagine an utopia, but can't ignore reality.
ReplyDeleteI like music and enjoy it and I agree with Bud-d.
The point about what parents thought of their kids' music kind of illustrates what I am trying to get at is that some parents of the baby boom generation condemned the rock music of the 60s era as being evil and of the "devil". I remember reading how Elvis could not be videotaped below the waste due to his dancing, something like that. And talking about love and some of the themes of the music of that era was considered immoral or what not by traditional parents. The music of that era is clean and mild in comparison to some of the music of today. Britney Spears dancing around almost naked having simulated sex and dealing with the themes that she does. The themes of today's music is definitely changing to reflect the state of society. It has been progressing towards a more open and what some consider more immoral state. Maybe changing to reflect the changing issues we deal with today. So I wonder what the music of the next generation will be. Maybe music videos of the future will just be straight up porno videos with less focus on stimulating the mind, only stimulating or animal passions. Our standards of what is acceptable are being changed and devolving and what some would say lowered to more unacceptable standards, depends on what your standards are. The culture devolving back to animal passions and our animal impulses. The parents of one generation consider their childrens' music to be so horrible and then their kids think the same thing about their kids music all the while music as a whole is degrading from the stand point of morality. Our standards are being changed in part by pop culture, or the other way around. America has not doubt grown more liberal during the same time music has been devolving.
I like what you say a lot Jefferey Allen. Luckily for us here on Robinson Talking Points, we can build off eachother and evolve our morals and standars to be better than our other 8 billion counterparts who don't read this blog. We can soon take over. And just like in the corps, you can be my apprentice.
ReplyDelete