This is a new series, the follow-up to my series about the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit."
In the previous series I listed the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit and their scriptural references and commentary.
In this series I will do the same regarding the twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit.
First, let me put this in a context for you to understand two things: why God organizes spirituality and sanctity to follow any sort of list of personal qualities, and what the differences are between gifts and fruits, and how are they related.
There is not a list of these gifts or fruits in the Bible, dictated by God, as God provides in the obvious example The Ten Commandments or Jesus provides in The Beatitudes (the blessings). But that does not mean that they are not "from the Bible," because they are. From the earliest times both Jewish and Christian students of scripture and thus their teachers have distilled from the Bible the lessons and insights that can be gleaned.
For example, the first and most fundamental gift of the Holy Spirit, "Fear of the Lord," does not appear in a list of gifts, but there is repeated reference throughout scripture that Fear of the Lord is a gift from God, that it is basic and essential to faith and truthful knowledge of both God but also the world, and the benefits of Fear of the Lord.
Scholars have combed through the scriptures and very early on gleaned what gifts God, through his Holy Spirit, provides to humanity as a whole, that can and must be cultivated by each recipient. Therefore I provided in the series the Gifts of the Holy Spirit the most obvious places in scripture from which scholars studied and cited to recognize each of those seven gifts. So that is why God organized what humans have put into a list format. It is not a "performance check list" by any means.
Rather, let's think of it in computer terms, where the list of gifts is like a "shortcut" to access an application that runs on your computer. Rather than entering a bunch of commands to get to the application, you have an icon that gives you a direct route to the application. The icon itself is not the application, but a picture of it that takes you to the application. Likewise the gift "Fear of the Lord" is a lengthy application, which one must humbly receive and cultivate from the Lord. Putting it on the list of "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" is simply the pointer that scripture discusses that this gift exists and it is essential to both faith and truth. So God, in order to make himself more understandable and to uplift humans to their genuine potential under his holy guidance, provides a great deal of sacred verbiage in the scriptures, organized in a way that people can be open to applying, such as "Fear of the Lord," "Piety," or "Fortitude." A gift from the Holy Spirit is not like having an object or a talent given to you, poof, just like that. So let us now move into explaining how to best think of the gifts and the fruits.
Let's start with analogies. A gift of the Holy Spirit is like learning how to play a musical instrument. While some people are born as prodigies and fast learners, even they must recognize that a musical instrument exists, and they must become proficient in its use. Some people learn by imitating other musicians in their family, others learn by steady and frequent practice, while others learn by responding to their ear where what they play sounds good to them and others.
A fruit of the Holy Spirit is the benefit that is achieved for both one's self and the world as a whole by using appropriately what was given to them as a gift. Using again this analogy a young person who learns to play a musical instrument might receive fruits as a result of that gift in a number of ways, individual and personal to them. They might not ever do anything with that instrument other than enjoy a few years in band or other activities in high school. They might continue to play but only for their own enjoyment or their family's or friends'. They might use that instrument in church services or other faith or secular events. They might become a teacher of that instrument. They might become a talented amateur or they might become a talented professional. They might use their knowledge of the instrument to better manage the careers of other musical professionals. See? The gift is not "standard" to any one person any more than the resulting "fruit" is standard to any one person.
Likewise you cannot jump to conclusions about who "uses" their gifts "best" or is most "worthy" of those gifts. That is a severe error that is one of human beings' most disastrous flaws. It can be best explained by an example.
Two people each receive the gift of music, sticking to our analogy. They reach equal levels of proficiency. One goes on to volunteer her musical instrument talent to the church choir, and thus dedicates much time to donating her gift. Her fruit is that she is an essential part of the church services that many benefit from.
The other person does nothing with her musical instrument and it sits in the closet. Ah ha, you are thinking, she "wasted" her gift. No..... that's the great error I am going to point out to you. One day years after her musical lessons were received and the instrument has been untouched, her grandmother is dying of an illness. That woman brings her untouched musical instrument out of the closet and plays for her grandmother to ease her pain, and to help her pass the time remembering the good things in life. The fruit of this woman's gift was just as precious as the one who weekly donates in choir practice.
I hope that you have found this helpful and I look forward to working on this series with you.
FRUITS of the Holy Spirit
Charity
Joy
Peace
Patience
Longanimity
Goodness
Benignity
Mildness
Fidelity
Modesty
Continence
Chastity
Showing posts with label music talk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music talk. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Music talk: yes I DO like bluegrass :-)
I know I've been characterized as not liking bluegrass music based on my saying so.... I don't deny it LOL! But what I mean when I have said that I don't like it, I mean the caterwauling type of singing that goes with a small portion of it. Bluegrass music, the instruments, and the songs and the vocals I like fine, so long as it's not in the edge of teeth setting off caterwauling twangy wail that's just designed to be extreme yeeeeeeowling at the moon sort of stuff!!!!!!!!!!
Listened to some very fine live music by the church's bluegrass band this evening :-)
Will the Circle be Unbroken is a long time favorite of mine, a song that in fact I bought the sheet music for, back when sheet music was hard to find, especially as I lived way far out from a city, when I was a teen.
Listened to some very fine live music by the church's bluegrass band this evening :-)
Will the Circle be Unbroken is a long time favorite of mine, a song that in fact I bought the sheet music for, back when sheet music was hard to find, especially as I lived way far out from a city, when I was a teen.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Another song I think about
"Continental Drift" by the Rolling Stones.
It caught my attention when it was first released, not just cuz I like it, but as an appreciator of art, I did wonder where some of the images in the song really came from.... Cool nonetheless....
It caught my attention when it was first released, not just cuz I like it, but as an appreciator of art, I did wonder where some of the images in the song really came from.... Cool nonetheless....
Music talk
Do a search for the lyrics, or listen to the song online, of "Dear Diary" by the Moody Blues.
The "events" casually mentioned in the fade out at the end are quite droll. It's a classic song and it runs through my mind fairly often through the decades...
The "events" casually mentioned in the fade out at the end are quite droll. It's a classic song and it runs through my mind fairly often through the decades...
Monday, September 28, 2009
Watching rocking Psalm reading
While preparing to blog some more I saw on the TV the rocking version of Psalms 102(103) during the Papal mass in Czechoslovakia. LOVED IT!
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Music talk: wrote a song this morning
Proof that my own advice works, LOL. I had just woken up and was with bleary eyes changing radio stations to listen to a favorite preacher when the idea for the song, both lyrics and the tune, just suddenly occurred to me. I had to grab a sketch pad to write it all down. This is the first song I've written in a very long time and the kicker is that it's reggae. LOL! Imagine that. It's so simple yet I think the best popular song I've written to date. Hmmm.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Truth plus music provides reality safety net
I actually hurried back to my room from lunch in order to post this blog follow up because I think these further thoughts will help all of you even further to understand what I am explaining, to better inspire rather than stunt your artistry, and to promote more reality based peace of mind, even in edgy and interesting art.
It's not just the lyrics, the words, that I am cautioning must be honest, and not dishonest, and truthful, in addition to "valid," but also the compositions, the music itself. Here is the perfect example, which will help you to not only better understand the history of popular music, but also the human psyche.
Looking again at the blues, ask yourself, what are "the blues?" They are songs that follow a certain lyrical and compositional format. The lyrics tend to be about the hardships of life. The music follows, for the most part, a very specific structure called the 12 bar shuffle. Now, why would an entre genre of music follow a pretty limited structure of composition? Because it is the ideal format. It is ideal not only for the particular song type, but also for the human psyche and well being.
The blues shuffle is irresistible. When one listens to the blues, whether you are a fan or not, you cannot usually resist bobbing your head to that sound, tapping your foot, and/or swaying forward (as the performers often do) in time to the beat. Like a perfect match, the blues shuffle stimulates an ideal response in the human heart, body and spirit. There is a positive interaction between the music itself (forget about the lyrics for a moment) and the human body. In other words, the blue shuffle is not a downer trip, a bum out session, or berserker or suicide stimulation! But it's also not cloying syrup and artificial happy faces. It is a fundamental truthful positive reality foundation, musically, upon which a variety of "hardship of life" and "sad" or "troubled" lyrical themes can be built.
So the blues shuffle is musically and psychically a truth based solid reality that is a safety net upon which people who have suffered a great deal can write their tunes of the hardships of life, without opening up a "valid" but dishonest black hole, in both themselves and their listening audience.
This is why virtually all of the early great rock bands produced music that was directly built upon the blues. Both the Rolling Stones and the Beatles, for example, have talked from the very beginning about the fundamental influence of the blues upon them. Without even realizing it they adopted and adapted the truth based "safety net" of the musicality of the blues, transforming and importing it into the new genre of rock and roll. That is one of the reasons why rock and roll as a genre is certainly not evil.
The trouble arises when genres such a heavy metal and later rap totally misunderstand the difference between composing and writing for a "valid effect" and being genuinely truth based and honest. Without a safety net of musicality that does not at all intend to make the writers, performers or listeners sink into a black hole of unreality and dishonest despair, much of the music of the 1980's marketed dishonesty, disguised as "validity," "authenticity," and "that's how the disenfranchised youth 'really' 'feels.'" But that is not at ALL honest or true. How do we know that? Let's look at some comparisons of songs and behavior.
Think of any heavy metal gloom and doom song. Regardless how "authentic" that song is supposed to be, do you think they felt that way as they actually recorded the song? As they perform the song to their audience? Far from it, since just as those musicians are performing for their fans, they are on the natural (or artificial, but I'm only nodding at that factor, not discussing it now) high of having fans participate in enjoying their music. People are singing about how awful and crap life is just as they are actually having the time of their lives with an admiring audience. How bogus is that?
Compare that to a sad song that pops into my head on occasion. The lyrics I am thinking of go, "In my room, way at the end of the hall, I sit and I stare at the wall, each day is just like the last, for I live in the past." Now that is both valid and truthful, good "sad" music. It, like the blues, describes a situation, one that can be both thought about and felt, with a truthful safety net, rather than spewing garbage about the artificial blackness of life. So please understand I use this example deliberately so that you know I am not trying to be thought police, but actually I am trying to show how many of you have enslaved your own thoughts to artificiality, just as you most think you are "keeping it real." Spewing is never real because no one actually lives in evil spew all of the time.
So, looking back to the blues, the blues can sing about addiction, death, despair, poverty, a destroyed love life, etc, and still keep it in context, in reality, using a musical safety net that does not promote total despair and the desire to blow one's brains out! This is why early rock and roll had fantastic protest songs and songs of social awareness, again without giving people the impression that we might as well all hang ourselves now since we only belong to evil alien matrix black universe of nothing but despair. That is, I guess, "valid" if someone actually thinks that, but it is the height of dishonesty.
There is the slippery slope of symbolism. We all love to wonder "who is that song about." The classic example is, of course, "Layla." All rock fans knew the story of Eric Clapton and George Harrison's wife. More to the point, though, it was and remains an incredibly valid and authentic great song not because we know who it was specifically in the background, but because the song is clear enough that we know it is about someone. What I am decrying in my previous blog post, about why I totally stopped listening in total to all popular music for twenty years or so, is that music lyrics became hidden agenda driven. They sound like they are about a person, but they are about hidden cult beliefs, or they sound like a song of despair about life, but they are actually about the sadness of a specific person. It is dishonest to craft songs like that; there is just no way to sugar coat that assessment. Hidden and symbol messages are mind altering arrogant affectations by those who have the power to do so but lack the wisdom and ethics to understand why that is both wrong for their public but also wrong for themselves, robbing them of their own artistic integrity and authenticity. If you are unhappy about a girl, write that you are unhappy about that girl... don't write a song bashing her religion, for example as a "stand in" for your actual topic. If you totally disguise your artistic intention in impenetrable symbolism you are being dishonest to yourself and to your public.
Read lyrics of blues writers from the classic era of that genre and you can rest assured that if they are complaining about addiction, they are actually talking about addiction, and not using the entire song as a lie, covering up that they are really unhappy with their salary. Or if they write about being lonely, or having a lost love, they are actually singing about being lonely, or having a lost love, and not using it as a "step in" substitute for writing that they no longer believe in God.
You know what it's like? Imagine you are a painter. You paint the picture you really want to produce on the back of a canvas, and cover it up with paper. Then on the front of the canvas you paint it all green with a few cubist symbols on it. You sell it to someone based on what they have seen on the front, or worse, you sell it to a museum who proudly display your work in their facility, with a sign next to it describing what the green and cubist symbol means, having no clue the real painting is on the back under paper. You made money and you got your rocks off, but was that authentic art? Was that artistic integrity? Was that honest? Of course not. Saying that "no one was hurt by it" is also wrong. You've made people who trusted in you look like fools. That is always wrong.
So that's another analogy that I hope helps to explain how music estranged from, separated from, and ultimately divorced me, not I it. Disguised sniggering is not honest artistry of music, no matter how creative the lyrics and the composition. Also, music that is intended to convey a dishonest world view so that people can feel brainwashed, for either worse (the usual case because there is no utopia other than the truth) or not is also not authentic art. If you are called to be an artist, then be an artist, but be a honest and truth based human being first and foremost of all.
I hope you have found this helpful. If you are a creative person, or just an interested young person (Hi!), listen to some of the traditional blues, or at least read the lyrics, as a great detox experience. It will really cleanse your palate for the truth.
It's not just the lyrics, the words, that I am cautioning must be honest, and not dishonest, and truthful, in addition to "valid," but also the compositions, the music itself. Here is the perfect example, which will help you to not only better understand the history of popular music, but also the human psyche.
Looking again at the blues, ask yourself, what are "the blues?" They are songs that follow a certain lyrical and compositional format. The lyrics tend to be about the hardships of life. The music follows, for the most part, a very specific structure called the 12 bar shuffle. Now, why would an entre genre of music follow a pretty limited structure of composition? Because it is the ideal format. It is ideal not only for the particular song type, but also for the human psyche and well being.
The blues shuffle is irresistible. When one listens to the blues, whether you are a fan or not, you cannot usually resist bobbing your head to that sound, tapping your foot, and/or swaying forward (as the performers often do) in time to the beat. Like a perfect match, the blues shuffle stimulates an ideal response in the human heart, body and spirit. There is a positive interaction between the music itself (forget about the lyrics for a moment) and the human body. In other words, the blue shuffle is not a downer trip, a bum out session, or berserker or suicide stimulation! But it's also not cloying syrup and artificial happy faces. It is a fundamental truthful positive reality foundation, musically, upon which a variety of "hardship of life" and "sad" or "troubled" lyrical themes can be built.
So the blues shuffle is musically and psychically a truth based solid reality that is a safety net upon which people who have suffered a great deal can write their tunes of the hardships of life, without opening up a "valid" but dishonest black hole, in both themselves and their listening audience.
This is why virtually all of the early great rock bands produced music that was directly built upon the blues. Both the Rolling Stones and the Beatles, for example, have talked from the very beginning about the fundamental influence of the blues upon them. Without even realizing it they adopted and adapted the truth based "safety net" of the musicality of the blues, transforming and importing it into the new genre of rock and roll. That is one of the reasons why rock and roll as a genre is certainly not evil.
The trouble arises when genres such a heavy metal and later rap totally misunderstand the difference between composing and writing for a "valid effect" and being genuinely truth based and honest. Without a safety net of musicality that does not at all intend to make the writers, performers or listeners sink into a black hole of unreality and dishonest despair, much of the music of the 1980's marketed dishonesty, disguised as "validity," "authenticity," and "that's how the disenfranchised youth 'really' 'feels.'" But that is not at ALL honest or true. How do we know that? Let's look at some comparisons of songs and behavior.
Think of any heavy metal gloom and doom song. Regardless how "authentic" that song is supposed to be, do you think they felt that way as they actually recorded the song? As they perform the song to their audience? Far from it, since just as those musicians are performing for their fans, they are on the natural (or artificial, but I'm only nodding at that factor, not discussing it now) high of having fans participate in enjoying their music. People are singing about how awful and crap life is just as they are actually having the time of their lives with an admiring audience. How bogus is that?
Compare that to a sad song that pops into my head on occasion. The lyrics I am thinking of go, "In my room, way at the end of the hall, I sit and I stare at the wall, each day is just like the last, for I live in the past." Now that is both valid and truthful, good "sad" music. It, like the blues, describes a situation, one that can be both thought about and felt, with a truthful safety net, rather than spewing garbage about the artificial blackness of life. So please understand I use this example deliberately so that you know I am not trying to be thought police, but actually I am trying to show how many of you have enslaved your own thoughts to artificiality, just as you most think you are "keeping it real." Spewing is never real because no one actually lives in evil spew all of the time.
So, looking back to the blues, the blues can sing about addiction, death, despair, poverty, a destroyed love life, etc, and still keep it in context, in reality, using a musical safety net that does not promote total despair and the desire to blow one's brains out! This is why early rock and roll had fantastic protest songs and songs of social awareness, again without giving people the impression that we might as well all hang ourselves now since we only belong to evil alien matrix black universe of nothing but despair. That is, I guess, "valid" if someone actually thinks that, but it is the height of dishonesty.
There is the slippery slope of symbolism. We all love to wonder "who is that song about." The classic example is, of course, "Layla." All rock fans knew the story of Eric Clapton and George Harrison's wife. More to the point, though, it was and remains an incredibly valid and authentic great song not because we know who it was specifically in the background, but because the song is clear enough that we know it is about someone. What I am decrying in my previous blog post, about why I totally stopped listening in total to all popular music for twenty years or so, is that music lyrics became hidden agenda driven. They sound like they are about a person, but they are about hidden cult beliefs, or they sound like a song of despair about life, but they are actually about the sadness of a specific person. It is dishonest to craft songs like that; there is just no way to sugar coat that assessment. Hidden and symbol messages are mind altering arrogant affectations by those who have the power to do so but lack the wisdom and ethics to understand why that is both wrong for their public but also wrong for themselves, robbing them of their own artistic integrity and authenticity. If you are unhappy about a girl, write that you are unhappy about that girl... don't write a song bashing her religion, for example as a "stand in" for your actual topic. If you totally disguise your artistic intention in impenetrable symbolism you are being dishonest to yourself and to your public.
Read lyrics of blues writers from the classic era of that genre and you can rest assured that if they are complaining about addiction, they are actually talking about addiction, and not using the entire song as a lie, covering up that they are really unhappy with their salary. Or if they write about being lonely, or having a lost love, they are actually singing about being lonely, or having a lost love, and not using it as a "step in" substitute for writing that they no longer believe in God.
You know what it's like? Imagine you are a painter. You paint the picture you really want to produce on the back of a canvas, and cover it up with paper. Then on the front of the canvas you paint it all green with a few cubist symbols on it. You sell it to someone based on what they have seen on the front, or worse, you sell it to a museum who proudly display your work in their facility, with a sign next to it describing what the green and cubist symbol means, having no clue the real painting is on the back under paper. You made money and you got your rocks off, but was that authentic art? Was that artistic integrity? Was that honest? Of course not. Saying that "no one was hurt by it" is also wrong. You've made people who trusted in you look like fools. That is always wrong.
So that's another analogy that I hope helps to explain how music estranged from, separated from, and ultimately divorced me, not I it. Disguised sniggering is not honest artistry of music, no matter how creative the lyrics and the composition. Also, music that is intended to convey a dishonest world view so that people can feel brainwashed, for either worse (the usual case because there is no utopia other than the truth) or not is also not authentic art. If you are called to be an artist, then be an artist, but be a honest and truth based human being first and foremost of all.
I hope you have found this helpful. If you are a creative person, or just an interested young person (Hi!), listen to some of the traditional blues, or at least read the lyrics, as a great detox experience. It will really cleanse your palate for the truth.
Music talk follow-up
For a simple yet profound place to do some individual thought and study about what I said in the previous post, do a search for lyrics of bluesman Robert Johnson's songs and read them.
Hint, start with one of my favorites, "Crossroad blues."
The lyrics seem simple at a glance, but that is one of the clues, for in a few lines he's conveyed profound validity and truthful images, yet in strikingly artful ways. I don't mean just because he mentions the Lord. Look at the image of the rising sun going down. He conveys sadness by implying that the sun which has just risen is already setting. So you can believe in a truthful and realistic world and still convey incredible power in music.
And most of all, keep in mind these artists were writing real words with what they really meant, not filled with anagrams and coded messages. You can listen to the song and believe what you hear as being both valid and truthful.
Hint, start with one of my favorites, "Crossroad blues."
The lyrics seem simple at a glance, but that is one of the clues, for in a few lines he's conveyed profound validity and truthful images, yet in strikingly artful ways. I don't mean just because he mentions the Lord. Look at the image of the rising sun going down. He conveys sadness by implying that the sun which has just risen is already setting. So you can believe in a truthful and realistic world and still convey incredible power in music.
And most of all, keep in mind these artists were writing real words with what they really meant, not filled with anagrams and coded messages. You can listen to the song and believe what you hear as being both valid and truthful.
Friday, September 25, 2009
The need for truth in music, the arts.....
This is just a personal and philosophical/theological and factual observation, that is follow up to what I've been blogging where I explain that faith is authentically obtained by seeking the truth, the genuine, absolute truth, rather than "the best" "faith for me." Recalling what I've written that if one really cherishes and seeks the truth, one will inevitably find it-and the one true God-because God and his creation are the truth, let me explain my feelings about music.
I totally love music and as I reckon I've blogged before, I was listening to blues and pop music and rock and roll from the cradle (much helped by my much older brother playing the radio.) I wanted to play an instrument-and sing-but was kept from having any music lessons at all until I was able to pay for them on my own when in college. So I have a very clear love of music.
However, my friends, especially those in the music industry, wonder how I have lived for decades without listening to either current music or replaying those I've enjoyed in the past.
It became painfully obvious to me in the 1980's that almost without exception, all popular music, even the most brilliant of pieces, were written and composed by people who did not believe in the true God. Now, I am not saying I wanted Christian music because, actually, I find the same problem in much of Christian music from around that same time period. Since the 1980's the groundwork for the brainwashing and destruction of faith (genuine, factual, orthodox faith) that had been put in place during the 1960's-1970's started yielding their global bitter fruit. Even though most popular songs have absolutely nothing to do with God or faith as a topic, it was still painfully (and repulsively) obvious to me that the songs were all written in a distorted, God less and nihilistic mindset. Even the "happy" songs were clanging and warped, sometimes subtle, but usually very obvious to me. But it was obvious that ALL genres of music had become pieces of production made in in pained, God less and angry/manic depressive music "factories."
Now, young people especially, here is the crucial point I need to make to you, regarding both this topic of music (and art) and of faith and life in general. You must learn to distinguish between and properly manage, and put respectful boundaries around the two completely different mindsets of "truth" and "validity." Your parents (and many of their parents) combined the two, erroneously, in their minds, and have therefore caused their own mental, spiritual and emotional downfalls. It started with "let it all hang out." That is the philosophy that if you feel a certain way, then it is valid, "authentic" and honorable, and must be shared, even if everyone who listens to it then goes off the deep end and wants to shoot themselves. There is a huge difference between being "valid" (which means that right or wrong that is how you think/feel) and the truth, which is reality, a reality which includes the one true God and his role in this world.
For example, someone can write a miserable song because they feel like shit and they think they are evil reincarnated alien spawn. That's "valid," because that's what they think and feel (usually because they were brought up that way, or fell into the hands of sick "gurus"). But it is not the truth, because they would not feel that way if they were taught and came to believe in the truth of the world, a world that very much includes the one true God.
So sure, I am not against someone who has to do a "core dump" in the form of music of their sadness, anger, alienation, addiction, misery, aimlessness, vengefulness, spite, and so forth, since that is "valid...." that is, indeed, how he or she feels.
The problem is that like building houses on sand foundations, instead of bedrock, I noticed starting in the 1980's that virtually the entire music business prompted songs written, composed and produced by people who had totally lost their footing in the truth. They no longer even believed there is a truth, in the world, in their public lives, or in their private lives. They came to think that the current (or past) "validity" of what they think or feel IS the truth, which it most certainly is not.
So even the most inane and harmless of happy songs (those few there were, especially as rap, metal, angry punk and other genres took over increasing market share) were written by people who thought that the truth was to force out something commercially happy as a product, even though they did not believe in the truth. In other words, unhappy people living with perspectives that lacked recognition of truth were writing both happy and unhappy songs. This means that instead of most houses being built on solid foundations, most houses were now built on sand.
I can hardly listen to anything of the past few decades without seeing directly in the souls of those who produced and wrote these pieces and seeing their alienation, their loss of truth and worst of all, their determination that their "validity" IS the truth, and must be imposed as depressive and warped realities onto each new generation of listener. These adults raised children in the business who completely lost truth about life in the world and yet, brilliant as they are, produced brilliant music that is like a poisoned apple, great to eat but it kills you with each bite. We are on the THIRD decade of this disaster. That is why I cannot listen to music, most music, without pain.
I can even tell you the last song I gave a serious listen to as it came out, the version of "What's the Story (Morning Glory)" by Oasis. That is absolutely the last popular song I listened to and heeded and admired as it was released. Why is that? Of course technically it is wonderful, but more to point, it put into words exactly what I have described above: the disaster of being in a world where all your dreams are made when you're chained to the mirror on your razor blade. I pretty much turned off the radio after a few good listens of that, and that's no lie (as my stalkers can attest!) This is why I cannot listen to even the big hits, the really brilliant songs, even those of great compelling validity, of the late 1980's, the 1990's and the 2000's thus far. ALL of them are only "valid," very, very, VERY few of them are written by people with their heads screwed on properly and who believe in any truth, say nothing of the truth, of life, and of God's role in life.
I wish I could give you a real life example, so instead, imagine along with me the difference in a song about the exact same life experience written by a person who is valid, but does not know about or accept truth, and a person who is valid and is writing from a position of acknowledging the truth. So imagine that each songwriter wants to write about the misery of an addiction and ruined life, for example. One songwriter believes freaky things, nihilistic things, and writes about his or her addiction in that context. Even if they never mention their depressive and nihilistic mindset, that mindset, of course, is the well spring and informs their talent, which shapes their song. The other songwriter writes about the same intense valid misery in their, his or her, own life, but the well spring they have is one that still has at least a foundation in the truthfulness of a world that was created good, where there is a God, but where things go terribly astray. They might even come up with very similar words, and/or the instrumentation and music may be similar. But there would be a profound difference. Like I said, I wish I could give you actual examples but the scale is totally tilted with the bulk of compositions being of the "valid" but not grounded in overall life truth perspective. I'm not as able to access, not being part of the music industry crowd, of course, information where I can make such a real life comparison. The best I can do is point out how the blues, the old, traditional blues, were written by often very sad and afflicted people, and they are powerful and valid, but also honest because they were written by people who were still in touch with truthfulness in the world, including at least a nod toward the reality of God and his goodness, even if that did not comprise any of the song. This is why the old traditional blues are truly treasures of validity and honesty, in addition to their musical craftsmanship.
However, when I have a song recommended to me, which happened quite a bit in the early 2000's when people would email me "OMG I can't believe you never listened to this songwriter or this song or this group or this band" and then attach a link, I do listen and there it is again, but no one else understands what it is, since it's so pervasive. Only someone who grew up in the 1950's and listened to music that was still created on the foundation of truth (even if personal valid experience was miserable) can explain to you that there is a very stark "before" and "after." So after I listen to the song I resist the urge to shoot myself, and then research the artist and his or her other tracks. OMG, it is always the same. You can tell in their discography that they are totally into "validity" while living in a miserable, manic depressive, warped lack of truth. I then have to resist shooting myself after just reading the song titles. Good grief, it is a nightmare.
This really is a topic that lends itself more to face to face discussion (imagine that!) and having the help of a DJ who can pull examples of what I mean. But I thought that many of you, since you are questing, alert, and aware that these are disturbed times, will get the gist of what I mean, and have insight not only into how/why I perceive and do things as I do, but think about the facts as I have presented them and examine your own experiences for further insight.
A person can write the most brilliant piece of music ever, and it still be a wrong thing to do. That is a controversial statement, I know. By wrong I don't mean criminal or necessarily sinful or immoral. But just as products should not be subliminally marketed (the old popcorn hidden in the movie film scam), depressive "validity" that is denial of truth should not be deluging people, as it has for decades now, because that is dishonest. Artists, you must understand that it is possible, very possible, to be "valid" and "authentic," but totally dishonest. That is the boundary you must start to recognize, for the well being of not only your audience, but of your individual self.
I hope you understood as best as I could present these words tonight. I still love music, but for decades, music has not loved me back.
I totally love music and as I reckon I've blogged before, I was listening to blues and pop music and rock and roll from the cradle (much helped by my much older brother playing the radio.) I wanted to play an instrument-and sing-but was kept from having any music lessons at all until I was able to pay for them on my own when in college. So I have a very clear love of music.
However, my friends, especially those in the music industry, wonder how I have lived for decades without listening to either current music or replaying those I've enjoyed in the past.
It became painfully obvious to me in the 1980's that almost without exception, all popular music, even the most brilliant of pieces, were written and composed by people who did not believe in the true God. Now, I am not saying I wanted Christian music because, actually, I find the same problem in much of Christian music from around that same time period. Since the 1980's the groundwork for the brainwashing and destruction of faith (genuine, factual, orthodox faith) that had been put in place during the 1960's-1970's started yielding their global bitter fruit. Even though most popular songs have absolutely nothing to do with God or faith as a topic, it was still painfully (and repulsively) obvious to me that the songs were all written in a distorted, God less and nihilistic mindset. Even the "happy" songs were clanging and warped, sometimes subtle, but usually very obvious to me. But it was obvious that ALL genres of music had become pieces of production made in in pained, God less and angry/manic depressive music "factories."
Now, young people especially, here is the crucial point I need to make to you, regarding both this topic of music (and art) and of faith and life in general. You must learn to distinguish between and properly manage, and put respectful boundaries around the two completely different mindsets of "truth" and "validity." Your parents (and many of their parents) combined the two, erroneously, in their minds, and have therefore caused their own mental, spiritual and emotional downfalls. It started with "let it all hang out." That is the philosophy that if you feel a certain way, then it is valid, "authentic" and honorable, and must be shared, even if everyone who listens to it then goes off the deep end and wants to shoot themselves. There is a huge difference between being "valid" (which means that right or wrong that is how you think/feel) and the truth, which is reality, a reality which includes the one true God and his role in this world.
For example, someone can write a miserable song because they feel like shit and they think they are evil reincarnated alien spawn. That's "valid," because that's what they think and feel (usually because they were brought up that way, or fell into the hands of sick "gurus"). But it is not the truth, because they would not feel that way if they were taught and came to believe in the truth of the world, a world that very much includes the one true God.
So sure, I am not against someone who has to do a "core dump" in the form of music of their sadness, anger, alienation, addiction, misery, aimlessness, vengefulness, spite, and so forth, since that is "valid...." that is, indeed, how he or she feels.
The problem is that like building houses on sand foundations, instead of bedrock, I noticed starting in the 1980's that virtually the entire music business prompted songs written, composed and produced by people who had totally lost their footing in the truth. They no longer even believed there is a truth, in the world, in their public lives, or in their private lives. They came to think that the current (or past) "validity" of what they think or feel IS the truth, which it most certainly is not.
So even the most inane and harmless of happy songs (those few there were, especially as rap, metal, angry punk and other genres took over increasing market share) were written by people who thought that the truth was to force out something commercially happy as a product, even though they did not believe in the truth. In other words, unhappy people living with perspectives that lacked recognition of truth were writing both happy and unhappy songs. This means that instead of most houses being built on solid foundations, most houses were now built on sand.
I can hardly listen to anything of the past few decades without seeing directly in the souls of those who produced and wrote these pieces and seeing their alienation, their loss of truth and worst of all, their determination that their "validity" IS the truth, and must be imposed as depressive and warped realities onto each new generation of listener. These adults raised children in the business who completely lost truth about life in the world and yet, brilliant as they are, produced brilliant music that is like a poisoned apple, great to eat but it kills you with each bite. We are on the THIRD decade of this disaster. That is why I cannot listen to music, most music, without pain.
I can even tell you the last song I gave a serious listen to as it came out, the version of "What's the Story (Morning Glory)" by Oasis. That is absolutely the last popular song I listened to and heeded and admired as it was released. Why is that? Of course technically it is wonderful, but more to point, it put into words exactly what I have described above: the disaster of being in a world where all your dreams are made when you're chained to the mirror on your razor blade. I pretty much turned off the radio after a few good listens of that, and that's no lie (as my stalkers can attest!) This is why I cannot listen to even the big hits, the really brilliant songs, even those of great compelling validity, of the late 1980's, the 1990's and the 2000's thus far. ALL of them are only "valid," very, very, VERY few of them are written by people with their heads screwed on properly and who believe in any truth, say nothing of the truth, of life, and of God's role in life.
I wish I could give you a real life example, so instead, imagine along with me the difference in a song about the exact same life experience written by a person who is valid, but does not know about or accept truth, and a person who is valid and is writing from a position of acknowledging the truth. So imagine that each songwriter wants to write about the misery of an addiction and ruined life, for example. One songwriter believes freaky things, nihilistic things, and writes about his or her addiction in that context. Even if they never mention their depressive and nihilistic mindset, that mindset, of course, is the well spring and informs their talent, which shapes their song. The other songwriter writes about the same intense valid misery in their, his or her, own life, but the well spring they have is one that still has at least a foundation in the truthfulness of a world that was created good, where there is a God, but where things go terribly astray. They might even come up with very similar words, and/or the instrumentation and music may be similar. But there would be a profound difference. Like I said, I wish I could give you actual examples but the scale is totally tilted with the bulk of compositions being of the "valid" but not grounded in overall life truth perspective. I'm not as able to access, not being part of the music industry crowd, of course, information where I can make such a real life comparison. The best I can do is point out how the blues, the old, traditional blues, were written by often very sad and afflicted people, and they are powerful and valid, but also honest because they were written by people who were still in touch with truthfulness in the world, including at least a nod toward the reality of God and his goodness, even if that did not comprise any of the song. This is why the old traditional blues are truly treasures of validity and honesty, in addition to their musical craftsmanship.
However, when I have a song recommended to me, which happened quite a bit in the early 2000's when people would email me "OMG I can't believe you never listened to this songwriter or this song or this group or this band" and then attach a link, I do listen and there it is again, but no one else understands what it is, since it's so pervasive. Only someone who grew up in the 1950's and listened to music that was still created on the foundation of truth (even if personal valid experience was miserable) can explain to you that there is a very stark "before" and "after." So after I listen to the song I resist the urge to shoot myself, and then research the artist and his or her other tracks. OMG, it is always the same. You can tell in their discography that they are totally into "validity" while living in a miserable, manic depressive, warped lack of truth. I then have to resist shooting myself after just reading the song titles. Good grief, it is a nightmare.
This really is a topic that lends itself more to face to face discussion (imagine that!) and having the help of a DJ who can pull examples of what I mean. But I thought that many of you, since you are questing, alert, and aware that these are disturbed times, will get the gist of what I mean, and have insight not only into how/why I perceive and do things as I do, but think about the facts as I have presented them and examine your own experiences for further insight.
A person can write the most brilliant piece of music ever, and it still be a wrong thing to do. That is a controversial statement, I know. By wrong I don't mean criminal or necessarily sinful or immoral. But just as products should not be subliminally marketed (the old popcorn hidden in the movie film scam), depressive "validity" that is denial of truth should not be deluging people, as it has for decades now, because that is dishonest. Artists, you must understand that it is possible, very possible, to be "valid" and "authentic," but totally dishonest. That is the boundary you must start to recognize, for the well being of not only your audience, but of your individual self.
I hope you understood as best as I could present these words tonight. I still love music, but for decades, music has not loved me back.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Singing
They selected a nice hymn (though a bit modern) at church prayer service tonight, but.... not to be paranoid but I think they know which are the most difficult keys for me to reach ha ha ha.
Don't pick on the visiting Catholic, I'm just trying to help LOL. Hard for me to hit those high notes like somz I could mention.
The preaching was mighty fine, however, honestly.
Otherwise today another day in the glue factory.
Don't pick on the visiting Catholic, I'm just trying to help LOL. Hard for me to hit those high notes like somz I could mention.
The preaching was mighty fine, however, honestly.
Otherwise today another day in the glue factory.
End of Times or "These Times": analogy
I've thought of an analogy, using popular culture, to explain with accuracy these current times. Many people incorrectly believe that they are in and, heaven forbid, actual "enlightened" participants in the End of Times. If you read the Bible you would realize that this is such a huge "duh" that there is no way that even a fraction of the tribulations that will fall on humanity are even beginning to come to pass. It's quite plain that people will know when the End of Times is coming because you'd have to be dead not to notice the scale, magnitude and severity of the testing of the faithful and the chastisement of living sinners.
However, I totally understand the rest of the people's honest concern that there are very disconcerting events taking place that call to mind the End of Times. That is the difference and that is God's intention. You are hearing "warning shots," urging people to repent and lead good lives, not to buckle down and be even more "bad" so you can "bring on" the End of Times. The End comes when God wills it, not according to your misplaced or genuinely fearful thoughts and imaginings.
So here is the analogy. Think of these times as "sampling" of the End of Times. Sampling is a musical term, most often used in rap music, when snippets of previously recorded songs or music is used to insert into new material. So these times are just like normal times have been historically except that people have fallen dreadfully away from the purity of faith in the one God as they have been contaminated by many false prophets and idols, both religious and secular. This is why Jesus mentions most particularly that there will be continual rumors and false prophets, but to believe neither.
However, unlike what deists and others "believe," God is an activist God. He allows humans to exercise their free will, including whether to believe in him or not, and thus be saved, or not. God will and does, as both the Bible and Qur'an explain, administer earthly chastisement on occasion. He does so when he feels that humans are bringing on their own heads not only the consequences of their own disobedience, but dragging the children and others down with them. God then, according to his own Wisdom and All Knowing, will administer chastisement, or simply allow self induced negative consequences (God dries up grace, will not respond to prayers, etc if he must harden his heart). In other words, where he might have intervened to help a situation, he lets the human choice self induced "chips fall where they may."
So you are right to be uneasy that this is a sort of prelude time, but it is wrong to assume that anything humanity has experienced is anything that will be like the genuine tribulations. Just read the Bible and stop whining that every tragedy sounds anything at all like the real thing. However, be aware that because of the many false prophets and many rumors, humanity is going through a hardening of the heart phase that is resulting in many chastisements, kind of a "mini" or "sampling" of the tribulations. That ought to make you want to repent and convert your hearts back to the one true God, purely, rather than continually defying him or, worse, asking for him to "bring it on" because "you'll be saved and raptured." Not so much.
Remember that Jesus himself stated that he does not know when the End of Times will come, and that only God knows. Who are you then to interpret any of the minor sufferings of humanity (compared to the actual tribulations) as being "that time," when Jesus himself did not know? Really now, get a grip and some humility.
However, you are alert to recognize that those who filled your ears with such stuff are fulfilling the two warning signs that Jesus did advise would occur beforehand, rumors and false prophets. Remember, humanity could very well go through centuries of rumors and false prophets. God does not work in humanity's idea of "soon."
I do not understand how people can just sit there and be eager for more misery and suffering. How is that exercising Christian charity of "love of neighbor," as Jesus ordered? When God smites and chastises, or allows a "sampling" of the tribulations, or allows humans to suffer the consequences of their own falls and bad decisions, why do you think he would want you to do even more of the same, rather than stop, ponder, repent and convert? I mean, "DUH." It's like some people think that if the "End of Times" is soon, then charity goes out the window and everyone "gets what they deserve." Amen, brother, but what they deserve will be severe judgment upon one's individual death, when one's life is over and oops, the End of Times did not occur, but you allowed festering rumor and false prophecy and evil and sins and missed opportunities to just roll along and pile up on the backs of others.
So yes, heed the times, as Jesus said, and pay attention to the signs, the signs of rumors and false prophets, but do not follow them, knuckleheads. When God chastises or allows sorrow or evil to befall, especially when it is human self inflicted, its because he wants you to CHANGE, repent and mend your ways and return to him, not keep beating a dead horse, mocking God, and disobeying him in any or all things.
However, I totally understand the rest of the people's honest concern that there are very disconcerting events taking place that call to mind the End of Times. That is the difference and that is God's intention. You are hearing "warning shots," urging people to repent and lead good lives, not to buckle down and be even more "bad" so you can "bring on" the End of Times. The End comes when God wills it, not according to your misplaced or genuinely fearful thoughts and imaginings.
So here is the analogy. Think of these times as "sampling" of the End of Times. Sampling is a musical term, most often used in rap music, when snippets of previously recorded songs or music is used to insert into new material. So these times are just like normal times have been historically except that people have fallen dreadfully away from the purity of faith in the one God as they have been contaminated by many false prophets and idols, both religious and secular. This is why Jesus mentions most particularly that there will be continual rumors and false prophets, but to believe neither.
However, unlike what deists and others "believe," God is an activist God. He allows humans to exercise their free will, including whether to believe in him or not, and thus be saved, or not. God will and does, as both the Bible and Qur'an explain, administer earthly chastisement on occasion. He does so when he feels that humans are bringing on their own heads not only the consequences of their own disobedience, but dragging the children and others down with them. God then, according to his own Wisdom and All Knowing, will administer chastisement, or simply allow self induced negative consequences (God dries up grace, will not respond to prayers, etc if he must harden his heart). In other words, where he might have intervened to help a situation, he lets the human choice self induced "chips fall where they may."
So you are right to be uneasy that this is a sort of prelude time, but it is wrong to assume that anything humanity has experienced is anything that will be like the genuine tribulations. Just read the Bible and stop whining that every tragedy sounds anything at all like the real thing. However, be aware that because of the many false prophets and many rumors, humanity is going through a hardening of the heart phase that is resulting in many chastisements, kind of a "mini" or "sampling" of the tribulations. That ought to make you want to repent and convert your hearts back to the one true God, purely, rather than continually defying him or, worse, asking for him to "bring it on" because "you'll be saved and raptured." Not so much.
Remember that Jesus himself stated that he does not know when the End of Times will come, and that only God knows. Who are you then to interpret any of the minor sufferings of humanity (compared to the actual tribulations) as being "that time," when Jesus himself did not know? Really now, get a grip and some humility.
However, you are alert to recognize that those who filled your ears with such stuff are fulfilling the two warning signs that Jesus did advise would occur beforehand, rumors and false prophets. Remember, humanity could very well go through centuries of rumors and false prophets. God does not work in humanity's idea of "soon."
I do not understand how people can just sit there and be eager for more misery and suffering. How is that exercising Christian charity of "love of neighbor," as Jesus ordered? When God smites and chastises, or allows a "sampling" of the tribulations, or allows humans to suffer the consequences of their own falls and bad decisions, why do you think he would want you to do even more of the same, rather than stop, ponder, repent and convert? I mean, "DUH." It's like some people think that if the "End of Times" is soon, then charity goes out the window and everyone "gets what they deserve." Amen, brother, but what they deserve will be severe judgment upon one's individual death, when one's life is over and oops, the End of Times did not occur, but you allowed festering rumor and false prophecy and evil and sins and missed opportunities to just roll along and pile up on the backs of others.
So yes, heed the times, as Jesus said, and pay attention to the signs, the signs of rumors and false prophets, but do not follow them, knuckleheads. When God chastises or allows sorrow or evil to befall, especially when it is human self inflicted, its because he wants you to CHANGE, repent and mend your ways and return to him, not keep beating a dead horse, mocking God, and disobeying him in any or all things.
Friday, September 18, 2009
A very classic old fave song
Having trouble with cut and paste so look up the lyrics on www.sing365.com to Boston's "Don't Look Back."
It just rocks through the ages and too bad many who sing it and love it don't actually just DO IT as it advises.
It just rocks through the ages and too bad many who sing it and love it don't actually just DO IT as it advises.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Food talk
Just found this interesting sounding recipes on my hometown paper, by searching for "diced carrots." How cool is that? What are the odds... anyway, haz not tried it out yet but check it out.
http://www.syracusenewtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3554&Itemid=148
(They B 2 funny with the "crust never sleeps" NY ref LOL).
http://www.syracusenewtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3554&Itemid=148
(They B 2 funny with the "crust never sleeps" NY ref LOL).
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Latin for musicians :-)
Came across the Latin for these passages about music from one of the Psalms.
Praise Him with sound of trumpets: praise Him with psaltery and harp.
Laudate eum clangore tubae, laudate eum psalterio et cithara.
Praise Him with timbrel and choir: praise Him with strings and organs.
Laudate eum tympano et choro, laudate eum chordis et organo.
Praise Him on high sounding cymbals: praise Him on cymbals of joy.
Laudate eum cymbalis sonoris, laudate eum cymbalis crepitantibus.
Those of you who know English, French, Spanish or Italian can all easily recognize in these phrases as examples of their origins (or in the case of English, heavy extraction from) the "mother language," so to speak, of Latin.
For example, to laud, or laudatory meaning to praise is an English word, so "laudate" is easily recognizable. Many of the musical terms are very close to the English, since English drew upon Latin (and Greek) for the creation of new words as vocabulary and things needing to be named or concepts to be expressed increased in number. The grammar of Latin is difficult to learn, but building vocabulary in Latin is remarkably easy, for that reason.
Praise Him with sound of trumpets: praise Him with psaltery and harp.
Laudate eum clangore tubae, laudate eum psalterio et cithara.
Praise Him with timbrel and choir: praise Him with strings and organs.
Laudate eum tympano et choro, laudate eum chordis et organo.
Praise Him on high sounding cymbals: praise Him on cymbals of joy.
Laudate eum cymbalis sonoris, laudate eum cymbalis crepitantibus.
Those of you who know English, French, Spanish or Italian can all easily recognize in these phrases as examples of their origins (or in the case of English, heavy extraction from) the "mother language," so to speak, of Latin.
For example, to laud, or laudatory meaning to praise is an English word, so "laudate" is easily recognizable. Many of the musical terms are very close to the English, since English drew upon Latin (and Greek) for the creation of new words as vocabulary and things needing to be named or concepts to be expressed increased in number. The grammar of Latin is difficult to learn, but building vocabulary in Latin is remarkably easy, for that reason.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Music talk: Leadbelly
I'm a big fan of the blues. A lot of young people don't know about the traditional greats. Check out Leadbelly, one of my favorites. I've linked to a tune that often runs through my mind, as it was popular when I was a child "way back when."
http://www.rhapsody.com/leadbelly/where-did-you-sleep-last-night-lead-belly-legacy-vol-1/cotton-fields/lyrics.html
http://www.rhapsody.com/leadbelly/where-did-you-sleep-last-night-lead-belly-legacy-vol-1/cotton-fields/lyrics.html
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Repeat of lyrics of a favorite song
This is my favorite "Elton John" and "Bernie Taupin" song. I think I have blogged about this before.
"Where To Now St. Peter?"
I took myself a blue canoe
And I floated like a leaf
Dazzling, dancing
Half enchanted
In my Merlin sleep
Crazy was the feeling
Restless were my eyes
Insane they took the paddles
My arms they paralyzed
So where to now St. Peter
If it's true I'm in your hands
I may not be a Christian
But I've done all one man can
I understand I'm on the road
Where all that was is gone
So where to now St. Peter
Show me which road I'm on
Which road I'm on
It took a sweet young foreign gun
This lazy life is short
Something for nothing always ending
With a bad report
Dirty was the daybreak
Sudden was the change
In such a silent place as this
Beyond the rifle range
I took myself a blue canoe
[ www.azlyrics.com ]
"Where To Now St. Peter?"
I took myself a blue canoe
And I floated like a leaf
Dazzling, dancing
Half enchanted
In my Merlin sleep
Crazy was the feeling
Restless were my eyes
Insane they took the paddles
My arms they paralyzed
So where to now St. Peter
If it's true I'm in your hands
I may not be a Christian
But I've done all one man can
I understand I'm on the road
Where all that was is gone
So where to now St. Peter
Show me which road I'm on
Which road I'm on
It took a sweet young foreign gun
This lazy life is short
Something for nothing always ending
With a bad report
Dirty was the daybreak
Sudden was the change
In such a silent place as this
Beyond the rifle range
I took myself a blue canoe
[ www.azlyrics.com ]
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Gregorian Chant
To me, there is no higher form of music than Gregorian Chant.
Whenever I listen to Gregorian Chant I feel as though if a measuring cup were labeled "music," that Gregorian Chant fills that cup completely.
Whenever I listen to Gregorian Chant I feel as though if a measuring cup were labeled "music," that Gregorian Chant fills that cup completely.
What I am listening to this evening
Vienna Boys' Choir "Ave Maria" with works from Mozart, Schubert, Haydn, Bruckner, Humperdinck, Von Herbeck and Handel.
It's wonderful; I'm enjoying it very much. After that CD next up will be my first listen of:
Gregorian Chant, Christmas Chants with the Choirs of The Benedictine abbey of Montserrat, The Dominican Schola of France, The Royal Benedictine Abbey of Hautecombe, The Paris Gregorian Choir, The Nuns of the Benedictine Abbey of Maumont, The Monks of the Abbey of Einsiedeln and The Benedictine Abbey of Saint-Wandrille.
I'm working on the daily LA Times crossword puzzle, also working on several arts and crafts projects at the same time (as usual) and drinking Earl Grey tea (cold).
One of my crafts projects is using colorful bottle caps that I have collected and saved until I had enough to do something with them. I'm framing them in Plexiglas as kind of a random mosaic effect.
It's wonderful; I'm enjoying it very much. After that CD next up will be my first listen of:
Gregorian Chant, Christmas Chants with the Choirs of The Benedictine abbey of Montserrat, The Dominican Schola of France, The Royal Benedictine Abbey of Hautecombe, The Paris Gregorian Choir, The Nuns of the Benedictine Abbey of Maumont, The Monks of the Abbey of Einsiedeln and The Benedictine Abbey of Saint-Wandrille.
I'm working on the daily LA Times crossword puzzle, also working on several arts and crafts projects at the same time (as usual) and drinking Earl Grey tea (cold).
One of my crafts projects is using colorful bottle caps that I have collected and saved until I had enough to do something with them. I'm framing them in Plexiglas as kind of a random mosaic effect.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
marymajor's Diary: December 30
I've been thinking about talented musicians that I know, in particular, classical music composers and interpreters of such. The ones that I know feign modesty, but they do think they are pretty hot and keep their "brilliance" "under wraps." Some think they are kind of new modern day Beethoven's or Mozart's or something. Like I said, not actually too modest.
But if so, why is there not public acclaim for the works they produce, except among themselves? Friends writing reviews for friends and so forth. A very small percentage of Americans even listen to classical music. Why is that? I know, they figure Americans are the great unwashed country listening heathen. However, should not genuine prodigy command attention if it is so good? My friends do not have a clue, as talented as they may be.
I'm not a classical fan or expert (even when I took a few piano lessons it was Debussy or nothing for me; I'm just not into classical), but I know people and I know talent like nobody else. Here's what they don't understand.
All of the great composers lived in a time that was saturated with sincere belief in God. All of them were believers at some level, even if not personally devout. One cannot write a Requiem, for example, without having an underlying belief in both the Deity and the institution that one is writing about, and that the listeners of your music also believe in. This extends to all classical music. When those several generations of giants of classical music composition lived, they were lifted in their talent by their faith. Their aim at genius was true, because they aimed high. It is impossible to ever recreate the environment of the genius of these composers and the faith of the times that they composed in, and thus the mindsets they all had toward God, their music, their gift, their patrons and their audiences.
That is why there will never be another Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Hayden and so forth. That is why no one, no matter how talented or having inspiration or musical genius, can reproduce the level of genius and ever lasting relevance of their music.
Modern composers of the last century up and including now and those of the future are too self consciously concerned about the level of their output, rather than aiming for the sublime while actually believing in the sublime, and knowing that their audience does too. They have been infected by what they consider to be rational enlightenment, and the details of production and marketing in a God-omitting secular world. Of course they cannot ever achieve the brilliance of the masters! Duh!
Further, for "what if" fans, suppose you had brilliant atheist composers during the golden years of classical composition. Think about it; they would still be composing for audiences that are not atheists, in venues that are not atheist, and for purposes that are not atheist. The environment of faith that everyone lived within would have uplifted their work for legacy too. But it was people of faith who subscribed to and patronized the prodigies, who listened to their music, who appreciated the reach for the sublime rather than listening to those who are self consciously trying to be all on their own brilliant, innovative and cunning.
That is why when I must listen to classical, or actually am in the mood, it is so painfully obvious to me how the golden age of the composers can never be achieved again, either on an individual level or on the whole.
I think if my friends and acquaintances truly want to reach for the sublime and unlock the "inner genius" that they so modestly (not) think they have, they must understand this holistic view of composing. The composer is within the belief system of the time, and it shapes his or her music, just as it shapes their mind and the focus of their attention. If one is attending to the very highest, to God, even if one is writing a "secular" piece, it will be aligned for genius. None of the composers of the golden eras, even with the big egos, ever thought of themselves outside of a deeply believing environment and thus were lifted up beyond themselves as they composed.
When one is relentlessly focused on one's own "talents" and "interpretation" and "skill" and pseudo-spirituality, the results are painfully low since the bar is set so low. That is why we will never again see what was produced in music, and art, during the time of the great western believing, of faith in God being the obvious environment within which they created.
But if so, why is there not public acclaim for the works they produce, except among themselves? Friends writing reviews for friends and so forth. A very small percentage of Americans even listen to classical music. Why is that? I know, they figure Americans are the great unwashed country listening heathen. However, should not genuine prodigy command attention if it is so good? My friends do not have a clue, as talented as they may be.
I'm not a classical fan or expert (even when I took a few piano lessons it was Debussy or nothing for me; I'm just not into classical), but I know people and I know talent like nobody else. Here's what they don't understand.
All of the great composers lived in a time that was saturated with sincere belief in God. All of them were believers at some level, even if not personally devout. One cannot write a Requiem, for example, without having an underlying belief in both the Deity and the institution that one is writing about, and that the listeners of your music also believe in. This extends to all classical music. When those several generations of giants of classical music composition lived, they were lifted in their talent by their faith. Their aim at genius was true, because they aimed high. It is impossible to ever recreate the environment of the genius of these composers and the faith of the times that they composed in, and thus the mindsets they all had toward God, their music, their gift, their patrons and their audiences.
That is why there will never be another Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Hayden and so forth. That is why no one, no matter how talented or having inspiration or musical genius, can reproduce the level of genius and ever lasting relevance of their music.
Modern composers of the last century up and including now and those of the future are too self consciously concerned about the level of their output, rather than aiming for the sublime while actually believing in the sublime, and knowing that their audience does too. They have been infected by what they consider to be rational enlightenment, and the details of production and marketing in a God-omitting secular world. Of course they cannot ever achieve the brilliance of the masters! Duh!
Further, for "what if" fans, suppose you had brilliant atheist composers during the golden years of classical composition. Think about it; they would still be composing for audiences that are not atheists, in venues that are not atheist, and for purposes that are not atheist. The environment of faith that everyone lived within would have uplifted their work for legacy too. But it was people of faith who subscribed to and patronized the prodigies, who listened to their music, who appreciated the reach for the sublime rather than listening to those who are self consciously trying to be all on their own brilliant, innovative and cunning.
That is why when I must listen to classical, or actually am in the mood, it is so painfully obvious to me how the golden age of the composers can never be achieved again, either on an individual level or on the whole.
I think if my friends and acquaintances truly want to reach for the sublime and unlock the "inner genius" that they so modestly (not) think they have, they must understand this holistic view of composing. The composer is within the belief system of the time, and it shapes his or her music, just as it shapes their mind and the focus of their attention. If one is attending to the very highest, to God, even if one is writing a "secular" piece, it will be aligned for genius. None of the composers of the golden eras, even with the big egos, ever thought of themselves outside of a deeply believing environment and thus were lifted up beyond themselves as they composed.
When one is relentlessly focused on one's own "talents" and "interpretation" and "skill" and pseudo-spirituality, the results are painfully low since the bar is set so low. That is why we will never again see what was produced in music, and art, during the time of the great western believing, of faith in God being the obvious environment within which they created.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
