Newsgroups: rec.music.christian
Subject: Re: Is music amoral??
From: steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (jason "Think!" steiner)
Date: 21 Aug 92 21:41:25 EST

rhm@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Miller) writes:
> 
> I guess I would contend that the truth about morality in music is
> somewhere between the "music is amoral" and "music always makes a
> moral statement"  extremes.
> 
> First, I do not agree that the only moral statement in a
> well-written song is contained in the lyric. If I'm doing my job as
> a writer, the music is written to specifically reinforce the lyric.

would you say that the music has a message without the lyrics?

> The more succesful I am at that, the more the music is infused with
> the same moral statement as the lyric. Now to say a  genre is
> corrupt is probably stretching it, particularly if numerous examples
> of the use of the genre can be found which make "good" statements.
> And one can find such back to the earliest days of rock (calls for
> justice, for example). On the other hand, remember the classic rock
> "feel like makin' love" by (??)? The music under and around the hook
> line is basically a libidinous picture of  physical sex. I can't
> think of anything *else* listening to that line. Put "I'm livin in
> Gods love" on top of that music and I'm still gonna be thinking
> about sex...and wondering about the competence of the writer.

what makes you think about sex? that particular sequence of notes?
your association with the original song? would the song inspire you
to think about sex if the original lyrics had been "livin in Gods
love?"

> Second, to those who hold that "only God can create, therefore
> everything is  good", I think one should realise that *man* has been
> given a limited ability  to create as well. And we can create both
> holy things and evil things. A *man* created the rhythm we call
> reggae, for example. Did it exist earlier? If a tree falls in the
> forest and no one hears, does it make a sound? So I would contend
> that it *is* possible for a musical work, and possibly because of
> the intent of it's founders, a *genre*, to be evil. [I don't think
> rock in the broad sense fits that accusation, however...hold your
> fire, please]

sorry, i can't. you're making a -big- jump. you are assuming that
the ability to create implies the ability to impart good or evil
into the object created. i'm not sure, but i think it would be
very difficult to name a single thing (not action) that is evil in
and of itself.

> My prescription? When a writer's heart is in touch with God and he
> knows his craft well enough to marry the right lyric with the right
> music so they become a seamless whole, that's what matters. Perhaps
> because of differing cultural conditioning, another hearer might not
> understand the connection, but I would contend that while the writer
> must be sensitive to his audience, if the work is holy in the
> concert-hall of his Spirit-filled heart, let no man dare to call it
> profane.

and there you have the words: "cultural conditioning". please don't
mistake the effects of cultural conditioning for "the way things
are."

> Bob Miller rhm@hpfirhm.fc.hp.com 

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,
`, "Get off the cross. We need the wood." steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu `,
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,
Newsgroups: rec.music.christian