Jump to content

Time for Alex & Geddy to "assume control"


GeminiRising79

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (BeOhBe Bob @ Jan 29 2011, 06:12 PM)
QUOTE (GeddysMullet @ Jan 29 2011, 06:51 PM)
QUOTE (Working Man @ Jan 29 2011, 02:43 PM)
I just don't understand how people get "everyone who believes in God is a fool" from "[love is] faith enough for me"?

applaudit.gif applaudit.gif applaudit.gif new_thumbsupsmileyanim.gif new_thumbsupsmileyanim.gif trink39.gif goodpost.gif

 

So I'm not the only one who has noticed that there is absolutely no reference whatsoever in the lyrics of Faithless either to God or to any specific belief system? No? Good!

THANK YOU I thought I was the only idiot who DIDN'T see "God bashing" or religionhatespeak in Neil's lyrics and by God (pun intended) if ANYONE in this sphere of influence (that being TRF RUSH! and/or anyone exposed to this thread in particular) wanted to HATE God, sure seems like a likely candidate would be our drummerdude!

It is, in fact about God, but that's only half the point of the song.

 

Right at the start:

QUOTE
I've got my own moral compass to steer by
A guiding star beats a spirit in the sky

Spirit in the sky=God

 

 

The song keeps going....

QUOTE
And all the preaching voices -
Empty vessels of dreams so loud
As they move among the crowd
Fools and thieves are well disguised
In the temple and market place

Neil eventually comes back to the well disguised fools and thieves that are in the temple and in the market place. He implies that people who believe in god (fools, who are in the temple) and capitalists (thieves, who are in the market place) are an intermixed group of people preaching out to get others to follow them.

 

 

Right after the chorus,

QUOTE
I've got my own spirit level for balance
To tell if my choice is leading up or down
And all the shouting voices
Try to throw me off my course
Some by sermon, some by force
Fools and thieves are dangerous
In the temple and market place

The previously mentioned capitalists and faithful/god followers try to change his own moral compass, some by sermon (church service), other by force (you may have noticed some companies have very agressive marketting strategies).

 

CONCLUSION: Neil doesn't "bash" god, but he does call the believers fools and/or theives.

 

The God topic is getting tiring to me, but I still enjoy songs with the theme (I thought BU2B was pretty awesome, especially live). So as long as they keep up what they're doing with CA, I'm cool with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 362
  • Created
  • Last Reply

QUOTE (usb_connector @ Jan 29 2011, 06:04 PM)
QUOTE (BeOhBe Bob @ Jan 29 2011, 06:12 PM)
QUOTE (GeddysMullet @ Jan 29 2011, 06:51 PM)
QUOTE (Working Man @ Jan 29 2011, 02:43 PM)
I just don't understand how people get "everyone who believes in God is a fool" from "[love is] faith enough for me"?

applaudit.gif applaudit.gif applaudit.gif new_thumbsupsmileyanim.gif new_thumbsupsmileyanim.gif trink39.gif goodpost.gif

 

So I'm not the only one who has noticed that there is absolutely no reference whatsoever in the lyrics of Faithless either to God or to any specific belief system? No? Good!

THANK YOU I thought I was the only idiot who DIDN'T see "God bashing" or religionhatespeak in Neil's lyrics and by God (pun intended) if ANYONE in this sphere of influence (that being TRF RUSH! and/or anyone exposed to this thread in particular) wanted to HATE God, sure seems like a likely candidate would be our drummerdude!

It is, in fact about God, but that's only half the point of the song.

 

Right at the start:

QUOTE
I've got my own moral compass to steer by
A guiding star beats a spirit in the sky

Spirit in the sky=God

 

 

The song keeps going....

QUOTE
And all the preaching voices -
Empty vessels of dreams so loud
As they move among the crowd
Fools and thieves are well disguised
In the temple and market place

Neil eventually comes back to the well disguised fools and thieves that are in the temple and in the market place. He implies that people who believe in god (fools, who are in the temple) and capitalists (thieves, who are in the market place) are an intermixed group of people preaching out to get others to follow them.

 

 

Right after the chorus,

QUOTE
I've got my own spirit level for balance
To tell if my choice is leading up or down
And all the shouting voices
Try to throw me off my course
Some by sermon, some by force
Fools and thieves are dangerous
In the temple and market place

The previously mentioned capitalists and faithful/god followers try to change his own moral compass, some by sermon (church service), other by force (you may have noticed some companies have very agressive marketting strategies).

 

CONCLUSION: Neil doesn't "bash" god, but he does call the believers fools and/or theives.

goodpost.gif applaudit.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's right... Neil thinks you're a "fool and/or thief" if you believe in God. I wonder if he realizes how many of these fools and thieves are buying his merchandise and concert tickets.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jan 26 2011, 07:22 PM)
QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Jan 26 2011, 01:28 PM)
QUOTE (GeddysMullet @ Jan 26 2011, 03:26 PM)
QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Jan 26 2011, 04:18 PM)
let me put it this way... Neil preaching about his lack of faith is just as bad if not worse than the fanatical Christians who scream at people telling them they're going to hell. He's on the other end of the spectrum, but he's doing the exact same thing. Both sides are annoying.

This is a ridiculous statement. Fanatical Christians who scream about everyone going to Hell are judging others. Neil is expressing his personal feelings, without trying to control or dictate anyone else's values or behaviour.

 

There is a HUGE difference between telling someone "You are going to hell unless you believe what I believe!" and telling someone "Here is what I believe, take it or leave it."

he's telling people "if you believe in God, you're a deluded moron". Pretty much the same thing.

I pretty much get this feeling as well.

 

For those who think we're just deluded, look at this way: a LOT of people are bothered by Faithless and BU2B. if the lyrics were truly benign, why is it bothering so many people? maybe there is something to it.

 

All I know is prior to S&A, I really can't think of any Rush songs that really bugged people other than some songs people just didn't like. He's being very direct now with his philosophies in a way that turns off a lot of people. That should be pretty obvious based on the reactions. It's unfortunate, and I truly wish he'd either stick to less polarizing material or do it in such a way that's less inflammatory and more open to interpretation. Maybe I'm just interpreting in a way that some of you aren't, but I'm not the only one, obviously.

QUOTE
For those who think we're just deluded, look at this way:  a LOT of people are bothered by Faithless and BU2B.  if the lyrics were truly benign, why is it bothering so many people?  maybe there is something to it.

 

Maybe there is? Maybe that was Neil's goal. Maybe he's trying to get people to look outside the box a little. Neil's an intelligent guy and I'm sure he knew there would be some offended by doing athiest lyrics but he did them anyway. It was his, and Alex and Geddy's choice to do them. They not only recorded them but they did a whole string of them in order during the last tour. Hell, he's been implying athiesm for 30 years it's just that the recent swing has been more direct.

 

Maybe after all these years of hiding the athiesm throughout the lyrics that America has finally seen a shift due to many popular authors, books, newspaper, internet coverage, the amount of youth turning from religon and a host of other bands doing athiest themes in their lyrics that he finally felt confidant enough that the backlash wouldn't be detrimental to the bottom line. It isn't judging by their recent popularity.

 

Maybe Neil just feels like he is doing his part and leaving his little mark in the world that he percieves as good and helpful or maybe even, "sticking it to the man".

 

Neil doesn't owe anything to anybody in regards to his lyrics as he said many years ago, "Yet it was for me, not you, that I came to write this song".

 

So, though the lyrical content might upset many, they simply have a choice to make to try to understand where he is coming from or not. You respect his intelligence enough to give some credence to his lyrics or don't. You can try to respect his opinion or not.

 

You certainly don't have to listen to it. You certainly don't have to like it. And you certainly have the right to continue starting or joining into numerous threads whining about it like you have been and baiting people that do like it into arguments but I don't see the purpose. I think everyone gets your opinion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is a mission behind his lyrics, it's most likely to get you to THINK. THINK about where you are, what you do, how you spend your time etc....is it blindly listening and doing what the thieves/capitalists/preachers tell you is right and good to do OR, having free will and hopefully your own moral compass you'll do "the right thing" without being preached at spoken at or forced by preying on your guilt, or any other emotions.

 

 

I say KUDOS to the OP for starting this thought provoking "pot stirring" thread. Seems as if we're all agreeing to disagree and validate Neil's point regardless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jan 29 2011, 08:24 PM)
however you want to put it's a nice stretch of pee break. tongue.gif

whew! yeah, so glad to be able to catch the drum solo for a change! smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the whiners are still complaining that Neil is addressing the chains of "belief", that keep humanity firmly enslaved to the church, and tyrannical governments.

 

behold! These are the "institutions" you worship:

 

 

It is time to evolve past the sky beings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my problem isn't even just the subject matter of the words, it's that he's been writing lyrics in such a way that it's almost impossible to compose a coherant memorable song around them. The last two Rush albums, especially Snakes....the lyrics read more like rambling lengthy rants with no structure or order to them than traditional "song lyrics" like he used to write.

 

Say what you want about albums like HYF and Presto and RTB...at least the lyrics made sense to the average listener and you can put a solid melody and form around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jnoble @ Jan 29 2011, 10:32 PM)
my problem isn't even just the subject matter of the words, it's that he's been writing lyrics in such a way that it's almost impossible to compose a coherant memorable song around them. The last two Rush albums, especially Snakes....the lyrics read more like rambling lengthy rants with no structure or order to them than traditional "song lyrics" like he used to write.

Say what you want about albums like HYF and Presto and RTB...at least the lyrics made sense to the average listener and you can put a solid melody and form around them.

that's why i think it's got to be a bitch to write music around his lyrics lately. they're not very singer friendly and leave little space for jamming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...