Silas Lang Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Isn't BU2B the same concept though? After all, if you've been brought up to believe in something (whatever that may be) doesn't that take away your freedom to decide for yourself what to believe in (or not believe in)? It is pretty much the same message, right? So I fail to see how Peart is being insulting or what line was supposedly crossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted October 17, 2010 Author Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (Silas Lang @ Oct 17 2010, 08:37 AM) Isn't BU2B the same concept though? After all, if you've been brought up to believe in something (whatever that may be) doesn't that take away your freedom to decide for yourself what to believe in (or not believe in)? It is pretty much the same message, right? So I fail to see how Peart is being insulting or what line was supposedly crossed. It's a far more definitive statement - blind men in the marketplace doing what they're told implies that these people essentially have no freewill - they're just regurgitating the beliefs that they were told to believe without thought, and then it goes on to say that what they were following that they thought loved them will just kill them in the end and all their beliefs were for nothing. And people wonder why I used the words cynical and depressing. It's very far from saying "you can choose." It's more like saying, if you chose this way, you made the wrong choice. At least that's how I see it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rummut71 Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (The Main Monkey Business @ Oct 15 2010, 04:41 PM) Personally I think Neils lyrics are spot on and I love all of S&A. Clockwork Angels is shaping up to be one of the best Rush albums of all time IMO I LOL'd here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyJeff Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 17 2010, 07:48 AM) Also, in Freewill he's giving you a choice and isn't saying this is how it is definitively. Previously when he would tackle these subjects there was enough poetic license or ambiguity as to make it open to interpretation. When you leave things that open, it's hard for people to really take offense or disagree. And at the heart of that song is the concept of choosing freewill - honestly, who could have a problem with that concept? Choose whatever path you want to. I think a lot of people would object to the way he's cast the term "freewill". In fact, I do. Believing in and allowing a spiritual, external force to guide our actions is not the same thing as not having freewill, but that is what he is saying in the song. I object to (the song) "Freewill" as much as I do any of other more recent anti-religion songs and always have. But I've always at least appreciated that he picked an interesting topic that made me think about this stuff when I was a teenager asking these kinds of questions. Most other songs available to me at the time were about hating xyz, partying and doing drugs, or sleeping with chicks. I will give you, though, that Freewill does seem to leave more room for other opinions and he doesn't outright mock believers. "While our loving watchmaker loves us all to death" is clear sarcasm and therefore mocking of the viewpoint that does believe in a loving watchmaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun3701 Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 I wonder if Neil realizes that not all religious people were "brought up to believe". I'm sure the majority of them are, and many just regurgitate what they've been taught since childhood. But on the other hand there are those (myself included) that were never brought up in a religious home, but made a conscious decision as an adult to believe in "God". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddyRulz Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 14 2010, 12:45 PM) Ok, I know there will be some major ing here, but it's something that's been weighing on me, and I need to say it. While I'll certainly be in the minority here, I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this. Anyway, I would sure love it of BU2B got left OFF of CA. Many years ago, I always looked forward to their new album knowing I was going to love it based on their history. After awhile they stopped being consistent (IMHO), BUT I always would sincerely hope that their next album would be something special, and they have sometimes happily surprised me. And here I am waiting for their new album, already knowing that I really don't like one of the new songs. I just find BU2B depressing, preachy and cynical. It kind of sucks knowing they have an album coming out and I already know it's got at least one clunker on it (again, IMHO). Caravan I'm not super crazy about, but I don't dislike it, and parts of it I think are really great. I didn't love S&A all the way though, but it's at least half of a great album which I still appreciate and enjoy. I can still hold out hope for that, but it's unfortunate that for me it's already got a strike against it before it's even finished. So here's my request for the band that they'll never see, and even if they did they'd ignore, and for which many fans will think I'm crazy to make. Please leave BU2B OFF of the new album. Keep it as a single b-side, and let's maybe move on to if not happier topics, at least some more neutral/benign ones? Just one man's opinion... Did you really think you'd like EVERY song on the new album?? When was the last time that happened for you... Signals? You were bound to dislike at least one song on this forthcoming album anyway, if not hate ten songs. You'll just have to deal with that and hope there's still three to ten songs you DO like... just as you've had to do in preparation for each of the last 8 albums or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughedatbytime Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (SlyJeff @ Oct 17 2010, 12:58 PM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 17 2010, 07:48 AM) Also, in Freewill he's giving you a choice and isn't saying this is how it is definitively. Previously when he would tackle these subjects there was enough poetic license or ambiguity as to make it open to interpretation. When you leave things that open, it's hard for people to really take offense or disagree. And at the heart of that song is the concept of choosing freewill - honestly, who could have a problem with that concept? Choose whatever path you want to. I think a lot of people would object to the way he's cast the term "freewill". In fact, I do. Believing in and allowing a spiritual, external force to guide our actions is not the same thing as not having freewill, but that is what he is saying in the song. I object to (the song) "Freewill" as much as I do any of other more recent anti-religion songs and always have. But I've always at least appreciated that he picked an interesting topic that made me think about this stuff when I was a teenager asking these kinds of questions. Most other songs available to me at the time were about hating xyz, partying and doing drugs, or sleeping with chicks. I will give you, though, that Freewill does seem to leave more room for other opinions and he doesn't outright mock believers. "While our loving watchmaker loves us all to death" is clear sarcasm and therefore mocking of the viewpoint that does believe in a loving watchmaker. I don't know...the lyrics to Freewill aren't too kind to believers either. "There are those who think That life has nothing left to chance A host of holy horrors To direct our aimless dance A planet of playthings We dance on the strings of powers we cannot perceive The stars aren't aligned or the gods are malign Blame is better to give than receive" Sounds like there's mockery there to me... "You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill" (Not sure what the difference is between this and "While our loving watchmaker loves us all to death") "All preordained, a prisoner in chains A victim of venomous fate Kicked in the face, you can pray for a place In heaven's unearthly estate" However, as a Christian, while I may disagree with Peart, I respect his positions and beliefs...and I love both BU2B and Freewill, maybe more so from a musical perspective than a lyrical one, but I believe both songs are well written as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickfree Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 I've actually warmed up to B(ubbau)2B(ubba). Not that bad a song. And the overall heaviness and weirdness, lead me to believe this is the token heavy song for Clockwork Angels. (Spindrift - Snakes, Earthshine - Vapor Trails, Time & Motion -TFE, Double Agent - Counterparts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagegrace26 Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Oct 17 2010, 01:12 PM) I wonder if Neil realizes that not all religious people were "brought up to believe". I'm sure the majority of them are, and many just regurgitate what they've been taught since childhood. But on the other hand there are those (myself included) that were never brought up in a religious home, but made a conscious decision as an adult to believe in "God". I'm sure he's aware of that. Again, the song doesn't seem to be addressing everyone who 'believes' and it seems to be focusing on one point of view - or even one character's point of view. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tontonfranck Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 14 2010, 06:45 PM) I just find BU2B depressing, preachy and cynical. I don't have an opinion because I don't know the meaning of the lyrics. Can someone tell me what it is about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theredtamasrule Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (Astromancer @ Oct 16 2010, 04:12 PM)Freewill and love are what matters...IMHO, you're f*cked in the head... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Main Monkey Business Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (tontonfranck @ Oct 17 2010, 07:38 PM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 14 2010, 06:45 PM) I just find BU2B depressing, preachy and cynical. I don't have an opinion because I don't know the meaning of the lyrics. Can someone tell me what it is about? only from a frenchman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielmclark Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (tontonfranck @ Oct 17 2010, 01:38 PM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Oct 14 2010, 06:45 PM) I just find BU2B depressing, preachy and cynical. I don't have an opinion because I don't know the meaning of the lyrics. Can someone tell me what it is about? It's about a cat who befriends a dog and a squirrel, and they go on several wacky mis-adventures trying to find their way home to California from Ontario, Canada. The way Neil writes the squirrel is especially endearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tontonfranck Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (danielmclark @ Oct 17 2010, 08:47 PM) It's about a cat who befriends a dog and a squirrel, and they go on several wacky mis-adventures trying to find their way home to California from Ontario, Canada. The way Neil writes the squirrel is especially endearing. Hope you enjoy this guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted October 17, 2010 Author Share Posted October 17, 2010 QUOTE (SlyJeff @ Oct 17 2010, 10:58 AM) I will give you, though, that Freewill does seem to leave more room for other opinions and he doesn't outright mock believers. "While our loving watchmaker loves us all to death" is clear sarcasm and therefore mocking of the viewpoint that does believe in a loving watchmaker. This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 of the 7 Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 I took another look at the lyrics, and to me, it isn't saying you CAN'T believe in something, simply that what you've been told about HOW that something works can be very flawed and can have a negative impact if you haven't thought about it for yourself (and can give other people power over you that they shouldn't have). I find it freeing that it suggests (again, to me) that we earthly beings can have a far more active role in shaping our future than just simply sitting around and waiting for a higher power to act from on high (though sometimes we do need to let go). Maybe that's not the way it works. Maybe it works through its creation, not on it? I think there's still a lot of room for future spirituality in Rush...after all, Working Them Angels and heck, Clockwork Angels are pretty recent Rush creations. Granted, "angels" could be meant in a very sarcastic/different sense than how religion sees them, but I personally don't think it's that far off. And Neil has talked about his "(baby) soul" before...I'm pretty sure he still feels he/we have them. In what way? How do they work? Good questions we all need to think about. I concur with a lot of folks that we need to see how this is going to play out, and what the other songs are going to say, maybe in response. If BU2B got left off, we may end up missing it in the grand scheme of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyJeff Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 QUOTE (1 of the 7 @ Oct 17 2010, 06:45 PM) I took another look at the lyrics, and to me, it isn't saying you CAN'T believe in something, simply that what you've been told about HOW that something works can be very flawed and can have a negative impact if you haven't thought about it for yourself (and can give other people power over you that they shouldn't have). I find it freeing that it suggests (again, to me) that we earthly beings can have a far more active role in shaping our future than just simply sitting around and waiting for a higher power to act from on high (though sometimes we do need to let go). Maybe that's not the way it works. Maybe it works through its creation, not on it? I think there's still a lot of room for future spirituality in Rush...after all, Working Them Angels and heck, Clockwork Angels are pretty recent Rush creations. Granted, "angels" could be meant in a very sarcastic/different sense than how religion sees them, but I personally don't think it's that far off. And Neil has talked about his "(baby) soul" before...I'm pretty sure he still feels he/we have them. In what way? How do they work? Good questions we all need to think about. I concur with a lot of folks that we need to see how this is going to play out, and what the other songs are going to say, maybe in response. If BU2B got left off, we may end up missing it in the grand scheme of things. I think the only reference to spirituality in "Working Them Angels" is the word 'Angel', and in context it isn't a spiritual thing- he's just saying he's been pushing his luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbertk Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 QUOTE (SlyJeff @ Oct 17 2010, 07:00 PM) QUOTE (1 of the 7 @ Oct 17 2010, 06:45 PM) I took another look at the lyrics, and to me, it isn't saying you CAN'T believe in something, simply that what you've been told about HOW that something works can be very flawed and can have a negative impact if you haven't thought about it for yourself (and can give other people power over you that they shouldn't have). I find it freeing that it suggests (again, to me) that we earthly beings can have a far more active role in shaping our future than just simply sitting around and waiting for a higher power to act from on high (though sometimes we do need to let go). Maybe that's not the way it works. Maybe it works through its creation, not on it? I think there's still a lot of room for future spirituality in Rush...after all, Working Them Angels and heck, Clockwork Angels are pretty recent Rush creations. Granted, "angels" could be meant in a very sarcastic/different sense than how religion sees them, but I personally don't think it's that far off. And Neil has talked about his "(baby) soul" before...I'm pretty sure he still feels he/we have them. In what way? How do they work? Good questions we all need to think about. I concur with a lot of folks that we need to see how this is going to play out, and what the other songs are going to say, maybe in response. If BU2B got left off, we may end up missing it in the grand scheme of things. I think the only reference to spirituality in "Working Them Angels" is the word 'Angel', and in context it isn't a spiritual thing- he's just saying he's been pushing his luck. Yeah, and it's not really in a spiritual sense. It's more a guardian angel type reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun3701 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 I think what we're trying to avoid here (and hoping Neil is too) is the militant-fundamentalist type of atheism that expresses hatred and disdain for anyone with spiritual or religious beliefs. All you have to do is go browse any internet message board that deals with religion to see that there are people out there who literally want all traces of religion wiped off the face of the Earth, and they're scarily similar to the religious extremists who want to kill people in the name of their "god". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyJeff Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Oct 17 2010, 07:53 PM) I think what we're trying to avoid here (and hoping Neil is too) is the militant-fundamentalist type of atheism that expresses hatred and disdain for anyone with spiritual or religious beliefs. All you have to do is go browse any internet message board that deals with religion to see that there are people out there who literally want all traces of religion wiped off the face of the Earth, and they're scarily similar to the religious extremists who want to kill people in the name of their "god". While I doubt Neil wishes physical harm to people of faith, my impression (based on his lyrics) is that he attributes a great deal of the pain in the world to religion. Of course, he's right, unfortunately- but it pains me he cannot see that that is not the entire story. I've always imagined if I met him he would not care for me or respect me because I am a person of faith. In a way it makes me sad to feel that one of my "heroes" would not like me if we met, but then again it's a reminder that he is only human and not someone I should deify anyway (irony intended). At the end of the day, he's just an extremely talented guy who makes music I really enjoy. What he believes or would think of my beliefs isn't really the point. Perhaps he might at least appreciate that I would never think him a "long awaited friend" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 QUOTE (SlyJeff @ Oct 17 2010, 09:29 PM) QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Oct 17 2010, 07:53 PM) I think what we're trying to avoid here (and hoping Neil is too) is the militant-fundamentalist type of atheism that expresses hatred and disdain for anyone with spiritual or religious beliefs. All you have to do is go browse any internet message board that deals with religion to see that there are people out there who literally want all traces of religion wiped off the face of the Earth, and they're scarily similar to the religious extremists who want to kill people in the name of their "god". While I doubt Neil wishes physical harm to people of faith, my impression (based on his lyrics) is that he attributes a great deal of the pain in the world to religion. Of course, he's right, unfortunately- but it pains me he cannot see that that is not the entire story. I've always imagined if I met him he would not care for me or respect me because I am a person of faith. In a way it makes me sad to feel that one of my "heroes" would not like me if we met, but then again it's a reminder that he is only human and not someone I should deify anyway (irony intended). At the end of the day, he's just an extremely talented guy who makes music I really enjoy. What he believes or would think of my beliefs isn't really the point. Perhaps he might at least appreciate that I would never think him a "long awaited friend" quite the opposite of my way of thinking. i couldn't care less what he would think of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun3701 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Oct 17 2010, 11:00 PM) QUOTE (SlyJeff @ Oct 17 2010, 09:29 PM) QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Oct 17 2010, 07:53 PM) I think what we're trying to avoid here (and hoping Neil is too) is the militant-fundamentalist type of atheism that expresses hatred and disdain for anyone with spiritual or religious beliefs. All you have to do is go browse any internet message board that deals with religion to see that there are people out there who literally want all traces of religion wiped off the face of the Earth, and they're scarily similar to the religious extremists who want to kill people in the name of their "god". While I doubt Neil wishes physical harm to people of faith, my impression (based on his lyrics) is that he attributes a great deal of the pain in the world to religion. Of course, he's right, unfortunately- but it pains me he cannot see that that is not the entire story. I've always imagined if I met him he would not care for me or respect me because I am a person of faith. In a way it makes me sad to feel that one of my "heroes" would not like me if we met, but then again it's a reminder that he is only human and not someone I should deify anyway (irony intended). At the end of the day, he's just an extremely talented guy who makes music I really enjoy. What he believes or would think of my beliefs isn't really the point. Perhaps he might at least appreciate that I would never think him a "long awaited friend" quite the opposite of my way of thinking. i couldn't care less what he would think of me. well you're a fan, so he hates you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spock Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 I'm on the fence - on the one hand, I tend to think that the lyric ..."while our loving watchmaker loves us all to death" seems to have a whole 'nother meaning than the obvious one. I'm still thinking that through, trying to see if there's some tie-in to Caravan? On the other hand, this was one of three songs played back-to-back in the concert - Freewill, Faithless, BU2B and although the songs sounded GREAT, the combined effect of 3 "there's no such thing as God" songs left me wondering: "Does the issue really warrant one song per album now"? It was really strange to see so much concert time dedicated to one subject. At the time, Freewill was great, made me think about what I believed myself and all that, but now it's a theme on every record - Who's Neil trying to convince, us or himself? Like Lady Macbeth, perhaps he protesteth to much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Rebel Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 My guess is that since Neil has had non-belief themes scattered through the Rush lyrics for over thirty years that he isn't going to stop midstream with this album. He mentioned envisioning a future world when writing the Caravan lyrics so he might make it a themed album around that concept, similar to a Terry Goodkind science fiction novel with an anti-faith based concept. The opening line to Caravan came from this book, which is a history of religon in Europe through to the middle ages and isn't very flattering to believers. (It is an excellent informative book though). http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k168/yangster1020/litbyfire.jpg BU2B is a blatant stab at an ultimate creator and why religon has persisted over time. He has mentioned reading Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris who have brought athiesm back into the limelight. He mentioned trying to "find his voice" concerning the subject of speaking out at religous fundamentalism, presumably meaning that he wants to speak out but not ruffle too many feathers or come off as what many percieve as aggressive athiesm. I guess he's thinking that he doesn't have alot of albums left given his age and with full support from Geddy and Alex it seems they want to do their part to bring light to a growing "movement" for lack of a better word. I wondered if the first two songs were a "test the waters" kind of thing to see what, if any the response might be but given the download sales and concert attendence I doubt they will be dissuaded from continuing the theme. Neil has always had a knack for getting people to search out the inspirations and books behind his lyrics and I'm sure he's hoping for much the same with this album and hopefully inspire some fence sitters along the way to at least look or consider the idea. Some don't (and have never) cared about the lyrics. Many others just love the music or technical aspects. Some will find the lyrics offensive and be turned off. In any case I wouldn't get my hopes up for some kind of religous conversion or an album that isn't themed in non-belief since he appears to be wanting to do his part to (as he said) to "Fight the man!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.