Christian prog vs secular prog

EnglishAssassin wrote: More so than any other genre of popular music, prog rock, whether the lyrics are about God, Richard Dawkins or By-Tor - Knight of Darkness, proclaims itself to be art for art's sake, an inherently secular and humanistic dictum.

Very good point.

There seems to be a clear divide in the responses and people seem to fall into one of two categories: either the content/message of the lyrics is not an ‘aesthetic’ by which they judge the art at all (the ‘it's the music that counts’ brigade), or it is and the music is correspondingly deemed to be either to one's taste or not accordingly.

I suppose this could be taken further, the subset of people for whom lyrical content is important in judging the art to be to/not to one's taste have further subsets – those for whom religious lyrical content is never a problem and those for whom it could be a factor in whether or not they like it.

allan Duul II wrote: I feel some are bing somewhat bigoted also.

I daresay this could be aimed at me . But the response is, so what?

The people for whom lyrics are never a factor in whether they like music will always come across as looking ‘reasonable’ or unbigoted – “Oh yeah, I listen to song X by artist Y inspired by religion Z because I really like the music..." whereas someone with strong opinions one way or the other who does judge on lyrics will come across as bigoted.

The word is thrown around like it's an insult or a bad thing. In a world of moral equivalence, where all views carry equal weight and equal importance, it probably would be wrong to be bigoted. But where absolutes are concerned – and face it, the world's religions can't all be right, before we even go throwing atheism and agnosticism into the mix – where ideas are deemed to be right or wrong, there will be what appears to be bigotry; this could be levelled at either side, pro-religion or atheist.

Personally, I would feel I was being hypocritical if I had any tolerance for religious views in music: maybe that looks bigoted to others, but it's self-consistent from where I stand. I'm not saying the ‘lyrics not important’ people are hypocrites, by definition they can't be.

allan Duul II wrote: I think this thread is a bit religo-centric, there are other beliefs than Christianity and atheism.

Well, that's probably down to the OP, a self-declared Christian who set the thread title. The question posed did mention musicians and faith generically, but I think the dice were loaded from the start .

Oh, and atheism isn't a belief or belief-system – it's a total lack of either.

Jorvík, on one side of the fence being a bigot, not ‘doing’ pluralism

Often times, music with a Christian theme is relegated to the Gospel/Religious bin in music shops. In other words, the lyrical content, rather than the musical style dictates the placement. I'd agree that music should be categorized by musical style or genre and not lyrical content. 

I think this thread is a bit religo-centric, there are other beliefs than Christianity and atheism.

I feel some are bing somewhat bigoted also.

To my knowledge none of the music I listen to is Christian, there are some biblical references in some of it with A silver Mt Zion, some odd Buddhist spiritualism in Gong, Atheism among Robert Wyatt's stuff, some Rastafarianism within my Reggae etc

I suppose what I am saying is that I don't actually care whether my music is religious or not, as long as it sounds good.

Mabey a bit more Commie radical Lefty stuff would make me happier though ;) me being a Socialist and all lol.

terramystic wrote: Even if it's not a Christian song it wakes existential questions and searching for meaning and truth. I don't find it anti-Christian. It actually reminds me of some lines in the Bible: "All is vanity." (Ec) "For you are a vapor, that appears for a little time, and then vanishes away." (Ja 4,14)

1. No God
2. Earth will never reach the Judgement day because it lassts forever.
3. There's no soul
4. Not existing soul, there's no salvation.

Please, it's philosophic but there's noi trelation with Christianity.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - January 18 2008 at 21:22

BaldFriede wrote: Ahem, the religious content in the albums of Popol Vuh has to be taken with a grain of salt. It is not so much the religion that is important, it is the spirituality. "Einsj�ger und Siebenj�ger", for example, refers to an old Mayan myth. The name "Popol Vuh" itself refers to the holy book of the Mayans. Popol Vuh are definitely not a Christian band.

Yes, but PV have definitely a strong Christian influence.
At least 2 albums are biblical:
Seligpreisung (Beatitudes)
Das Hohelied Salomos (Canticle of Canticles)

Norbert wrote: Maybe these so called Christian Prog  lyricists should learn something from J. R R. Tolkien(not by creating the album No. 2547785785689876 dealing with LOTR or Silmarillion). Tolkien was a devoted Catholic, his works are in accordance with his faith, but none of them get preachy, not even a little bit.

Very well said! Tolkien clearly stated that, although his work (especially LotR) was informed by his Catholic faith, he consciously chose not to use any explicit references to it, and criticised his friend C.S. Lewis for doing so, especially in his Narnia books.

verslibre wrote: Doesn't "Supper's Ready" have to do with the Book Of Revelation?

I believe so. But I don't think that makes it in any way Christian prog.

As Swinton MCR pointed out on page 1, the themes of the bible have been used numerous times, but so have other mythologies and fantasies. I would draw a distinction between merely using and exploring a mythological or fantasy theme (probably in most cases revolving around good vs evil) and using religious texts to preach that religion. I would say that Supper's Ready just uses the bible as a trope and is thus in the exploration category, not the preachy one.

I can see that using an existing mythology would be advantageous to a lyric writer – especially with something fairly widely known like the bible or Lord of the Rings, i.e. a trope – as it means that less effort needs to be expended on providing back-story, explaining characters and their motivations.

As I said earlier, lyrics are a fairly big deal to me and I have no tolerance for religious content, but using religious texts as a literary trope is fine by me – I might still think the lyrics are rubbish and the music appalling, but that's a different matter entirely

This is an interesting thread.  I can care less what the lyrics are about.  If the music moves me I will own the record.  I own some Mylon Le Fever albums.  He was one of the first Christian rock artists and a great guitar player as well.  Glass Harp and King's X are also in my collection.  Life is what you make it.

Jorvik wrote:   I suppose I don't sit on the fence: if lyrics are openly and strongly of an opposing view to my own views I won't listen to the music; the music itself might be okay, but the lyrics are surely as important and wouldn't be saying anything I had any respect for or wanted to hear. People use the label opinionated like it's a bad thing .

Excellent post - considered and well constructed. I agree with your sentiments about lyrics - they are important to me. They add another dimension to the composition. It is interesting to listen to a song that has been translated to another language, The change in the pattern of syllables and the length of phrases provides subtle changes to the sound of the voice and the feel of the song.

And then there is the dimension you allude to - the meaning. So the lyrics work on at least three levels, the voice as an instrument, the rhythm of the words and their meaning. I enjoy watching anthems played at the start of International sports matches. For example the South African anthem uses 3 languages with different feels  but great pasion.

I appreciate your even-handedness with ideologies.

From reading several posts it seems "spiritual" as a word is ok but "religion" isn't. I think of religion a bit like water - you can drink it or you can drown your mother in law in it.

And there is no ideological vacuum. A lot of popular music is about consumerism and excessive materialsim, (50 cent Destiny's Child) which is possibly more dangerous than  fundamentalism. We are fortunate to  be able to have these conversations in this forum.

We can enjoy music for itsown inherent value and it can also inspire us. Live Aid for example contributed towards constructing a sense of global citizenship which can only be good.

Thinking of a world and the light of the sun
And all the many lives that were ever begun,
Ever begun.

Our little world turning in the blue
As each day goes there's another one new,
Another one new.

How many people will we feed today,
How many lips will we kiss today,
If we wake up?

How many worlds will we ever see,
And how people can we ever be,
If we wake up?

Thinking of a world in the light of the sun
And all the many lives that were ever begun,
Ever begun. (Eno)

My view is this: if a track has words they are surely as important as the music, otherwise the artist wouldn't have bothered and it would just be an instrumental. (Erm, maybe it's best to just to forget about Yes and any bands with made-up languages – none of which I listen to – for the time being .)

Consequently, if I can understand the lyrics (I've looked up translations of Änglagård and Sinkadus, must do so for the other non-English stuff I listen to) I can't just ignore them and concentrate solely on the music, they are an integral part of the track.

I can sometimes overlook naff or bland lyrics that don't really say anything much at all, but if the words are actually about something there is the possibility that they could really grate on my nerves to the extent that the track – and possibly also the album and even the artist – would be a write-off for me.

I can cope with philosophical lyrics or vaguely ‘spiritual’ stuff, but not overt pro-religion lyrics. For example, I have no problem with Wind Up by Tull, which strikes me as more about religion as an organisation than the content of religion. I would include overtly atheist lyrics, even ‘militant’ atheism, such as the aforementioned The Only Way by ELP, in the philosophical camp (it has nothing to do with religion), plus they're unlikely ever to offend my own (quite militant) atheist views.

I've never been able to stomach Spock's Beard anyway – and I've no idea how similar the music is – but would certainly never go anywhere near any of Neal Morse's music because he is a Christian and vocal about it.

I believe that Dave Cousins is a Catholic, but (and it's been a while since I've listened to the Strawbs) the songs with religious leanings are more generically spiritual or about sectarianism (thinking of The Hangman and the Papist).

I take a lot of political messages the same way: if it starts getting really ideological it turns me off.  (And most political messages in music seem to be left-leaning, what is it about artists? ) I'm finding it hard to think of specific examples. One springs to mind, but it's non-prog: I used to like New Model Army and whilst I have a particular affection for them as a band, their politics tend to be a turn-off for me (although the music is nowhere near to my taste as it was 15 years ago, thanks to prog). Sometimes I find Roger Waters's lyrics a little hard to stomach for their political ideology.

I suppose I don't sit on the fence: if lyrics are openly and strongly of an opposing view to my own views I won't listen to the music; the music itself might be okay, but the lyrics are surely as important and wouldn't be saying anything I had any respect for or wanted to hear.

People use the label opinionated like it's a bad thing

Cheers

Jorvík

P.S. Just thinking about the thread title "Christian prog vs secular prog" – I can't bring to mind any Sikh, Hindu, Buddhist or Jewish prog, but I tend to lump all religion in together. I'd think more in terms of "Religious prog vs secular prog".