General Music Chat

You better not be comparing me to a neo nazi!,and don't be offended by facts,its not healthy,arts not my thing.

Dali was an anarchist, not a nazi.

the link said "'the real neo" before it popped up,lol,the tv kind of anarchy or the drive for natural freedom without levels of order kind?

... at that point you decide what moods are invoked by a style of music, but everybody gets different emotions from different styles of music. This reminds me of a time in high school when I walked by a door that read "music theory" in my my uneducated position I thought. Well that means theories on the different moods that might be invoked when a person listens to different chord progressions, musical styles etc. Now that would be a theory. Instead of course it was about scales and modes that go with different keys and chord progressions. To me those are not theories they are facts. To me deciding what mood goes with what music is largely personal. Much like tastes in food are personal and vary widely. As far as Martin Luther saying being a rebel was being an enemy of God. He was a rebel when he nailed his message of the 99 or 100 things wrong with the catholic church on the door of the catholic church. And have you seen the bumper sticker that reads"Jesus was a liberal"? Isn't that a being a rebel?

Neanderpaul that is only true to a point. You are really discussing shades of flavor here, not overall truths. For instance, if you throw a punk song at any audience, you will find it will agitate. It has to! Sonically, it cannot do anything else. You may get variations of whether people like the agitation or not, but the basic energy is irrefutable. No one will see it as a sleep aid.

This really has little to do with music theory. It has to do with aural-sonic fact. The way you manipulate sound causes different effects in people. And when you couple that sonic energy with a message that is mismatched (which I still believe, regarding the linkage of Christianity and metal/thrash/punk) you will get dissonance. Dissonance decreases or obliterates the chance that the message will be both heard and absorbed.

Martin Luther, as you accurately note, was a paradox because he preached against rebellion while being a rebel himself. But when he nailed the 99 Theses on the door of cathedral at Wurtemburg, I propose that he did not see himself as a rebel, but as a conservative trying to pull Christianity back to the basics and away from the glitzy, power-at-the-top organization he saw the Christian church becoming. You also have to remember this - Luther was not trying to use a pop music form to advance his ideas. He was simply using the pulpit, which was the common mouthpiece of communication between the clergy and the layity.

Trying to draw a parallel between this and using high energy, agitating music to advance the cause of basic Christian ethos is analogically flawed, Paul.

the link said "'the real neo" before it popped up,lol,the tv kind of anarchy or the drive for natural freedom without levels of order kind?

Well, according to Dali himself he was both an anarchist and a monarchist, which at first glance would appear to be a contradiction in terms, since anarchists believe in the destruction of government, and a monarchy is a country ruled by a king. Perhaps he believed a monarchy was not really a form of government, or perhaps he relished the contradiction as humorous, and enjoyed keeping the public off kilter.

To say he was eccentric, would be a huge understatement.

On one Tonight Show appearance, he brought a rhinoceros made of leather with him, and sat on it for the entire interview, refusing to sit on anything else.

Joe Strummer put it best back with The Clash "I don't wanna to shout,..but while we were talken I saw! you knodding out",if you get it

lol,now theres a guy i wanna smoke one with,leather rhino and all.But anarchy isn't about desruction or chaos,its about Natural Freedom,Not the pretend kind,you know?

Martin Luther was a disturbed individual. His actions which set forth the protestant reformation, also gave him internal conflicts, that he would die a heretic's death. He was an anti-semite, and in effect directed the murders of thousands of peasants who had revolted against their horrendous living conditions in Germany in the 1500's.

He stated...

"They should be knocked to pieces, strangled and stabbed, secretly and openly, by everybody who can do it, just as one must kill a mad dog!"

He was a living contradiction, to be sure.

i wasnt being hateful paul far from it amigo

Oh my man! Anthony! I totally didn't think you were being hateful. I'm sorry if you got that from anything I said. It is horrible killing "in the name of God" and not found in the new testament as well. I'm pretty sure were on the same page with those 2 topics. I think that as long as everybody stays cool and can submit their opinions (that's all I'm doing) with class then we are good to go. I happen to enjoy a thoughtful kind discussion. I know it's hard to maintain that level of tact while discussing politics and religion. I just really like nice. To me good is good. Respect and listening go a long way towards mutual personal growth.

lol,now theres a guy i wanna smoke one with,leather rhino and all.But anarchy isn't about desruction or chaos,its about Natural Freedom,Not the pretend kind,you know?

As a political ideology, Anarchy proposes the elimination of government. Anarchists believe governments are both harmful and unnecessary.

You may get variations of whether people like the agitation or not, but the basic energy is irrefutable. No one will see it as a sleep aid.

The reason I find that humorous is because I used to fall asleep listening to metallica. Conversely I also get fidgety when classical or techno is played. That's just not black and white to me. Irminsul, you are great at presenting your point of view. I always enjoy your posts.

They are harmefull to society,when you have the chance to put a power trippin junkie in the core of the establishment,it will do no good.Like it or not the goverment is just another buisness out to make a buck,it never changes.They got the bigger houses,the nicer suits,the fake respect,if it was for the people they'd live like the people.

This really has little to do with music theory. It has to do with aural-sonic fact. The way you manipulate sound causes different effects in people. And when you couple that sonic energy with a message that is mismatched (which I still believe, regarding the linkage of Christianity and metal/thrash/punk) you will get dissonance. Dissonance decreases or obliterates the chance that the message will be both heard and absorbed.

My objection would be to screamer christian music, but not necessarily other forms. As you noted, the message, one would think, should be able to be understood.

However, Christianity is broader than "turn the other cheek" passivism. Jesus himself, was a figure that elicited violence as well as peace. He overthrew the money changer's tables in anger, and on many occassions hurled remarks that were so vitriolic, that the recipients would immediately seek to stone him.

My objection would be to screamer christian music, but not necessarily other forms. As you noted, the message, one would think, should be able to be understood.

However, Christianity is broader than "turn the other cheek" passivism. Jesus himself, was a figure that elicited violence as well as peace. He overthrew the money changer's tables in anger, and on many occassions hurled remarks that were so vitriolic, that the recipients would immediately seek to stone him.

The moneychangers incident was highly unusual for the man - it was not his usual method of communication but an act of desperation and anger. That is different than one choosing a form of agitation as the regular medium for their message. Lots of New Testament is completely lost from the metaphor, for instance "I bring not peace but a sword".."I set brother against brother.." etc. That was a metaphor to illustrating that he was upseting the old social order, not that he wanted to jam a sword into anyone who crossed his path.

"I bring not peace but a sword".."I set brother against brother.." etc. That was a metaphor to illustrating that he was upseting the old social order, not that he wanted to jam a sword into anyone who crossed his path.

I agree. However, he most certainly WAS an agitator, and one has to conclude that he did it purposefully. You cannot tell a religious leader that his father is the devil, and not expect an angry and violent response. This, he did with regularity.

His reasoning may have been a willing lack of restraint due to his anger at their misrepresenting God and misleading the people, or it may have been a method of exposing their murderous intentions, bringing them out in the open, or any other number of reasons. But he was an agitator, and a rebellious figure, in the minds of the people. In that sense, I don't necessarily reject that rebellious music is not in accord with Christianity.

In fact, considering the state of the church today, having strayed so far from what I believe was Jesus' original intent for the church, I would propose that some rebellious Christian music could be apropos right now!

I thinks it's important at this point to bring up the point that Christ was sinless. The money changers incident was shocking, but it was not a sin. I agree with Craig that he was an agitator. Sometimes the truth agitates.