Rage Against The Machine Re-Form

[rick James]

Not really when you think about it. Even if your favourite part of a song is the lyrics, whether or not you like the song is dependent on the music. Sure, lyrics might make the song better, or might just push the song over the line, but essentially it's first and foremost about the sound.

I get what you're saying, and once again you're over-simplifying a topic.

Fact is, there's a variety of reasons to either like or dislike a song. You're trying to say that whether you like a song or not is based entirely on whether you like the music, and I'm saying it's not.

There have been songs I would have liked if the lyrics weren't ludicrous, there's also been songs I've loved because the lyrics were awesome.

In both those examples the main determiner of whether I liked the songs or not was the lyrics. in these cases the lyrics haven't pushed a song over the line, or held it back, they've been the primary reason I've liked or disliked the song.

I'd say in 90% of songs I like or dislike it's based on music, 8% originality and 2% lyrics.

But as usual, you think that your blanket assertions are fact because you're a simpleton with an over-inflated sense of self.

 

[bunsen burner]

not trying to be deliberately obtuse, but nick cave would be a good example for me.

don't like 90% of his music at all, but think a good proportion of his lyrics are amazing.

Bob Dylan has a lot of good lyrics but given his voice annoys the shi t out of me I don't listen to him. Same thing assuming you don't listen to that 90% of Nick Cave.

 

[bunsen burner]

I'd say in 90% of songs I like or dislike it's based on music, 8% originality and 2% lyrics.

So you pretty much agree but here you are arguing over 2%. Good on you Rick.

But as usual, you think that your blanket assertions are fact

The problem here is you, not me. There's exceptions in almost everything so it's assumed knowledge. For some reason anytime some one does make disclaimers for exceptions you get on your high horse.

because you're a simpleton with an over-inflated sense of self.

Do we need to discuss that little wager again?

 

[rick James]

So you pretty much agree but here you are arguing over 2%. Good on you Rick.

Yeah I was, because you claimed that 100% was one way, I'm pointing out that's incorrect.

The problem here is you, not me. There's exceptions in almost everything so it's assumed knowledge. For some reason anytime some one does make disclaimers for exceptions you get on your high horse.

It isn't assumed knowledge in all cases, especially with you. You make blanket statements, overly simplified statements and downright ignorant statements with a view to making yourself appear as knowledgeable. I don't like it because I can see you don't know sh*t, so I poke holes in your crappy arguments (and you proceed to dodge them or dismiss them as semantics).

Do we need to discuss that little wager again?

The wager you have apparently backed out on? I said I'm up for it buddy boy, you go right ahead.

I'd also like to discuss the challenge I put to you though, the one about showing me five RATM songs that deal with conspiracy theories. I'm waiting.

 

[mr_cellotape]

Even if your favourite part of a song is the lyrics, whether or not you like the song is dependent on the music. Sure, lyrics might make the song better, or might just push the song over the line, but essentially it's first and foremost about the sound.

I totally agree. I can like a band that has horrendous lyrics as long as I like the music and the vocalists' actual voice. On the flip side, I can't think of any bands that I listen to because I love the lyrics but don't like the music.

That said, some people may not agree, and while I think that's stupid (it is called music after all, not poetry), I guess that's their choice. That's the only explanation I can find for why hip-hop is popular .

 

[rick James]

I totally agree. I can like a band that has horrendous lyrics as long as I like the music and the vocalists' actual voice. On the flip side, I can't think of any bands that I listen to because I love the lyrics but don't like the music.

That said, some people may not agree, and while I think that's stupid (it is called music after all, not poetry), I guess that's their choice. That's the only explanation I can find for why hip-hop is popular .

Hiphop is a perfect example of an entire genre where the lyrics/flow are first and foremost the most important aspect of the music.

There are hundreds of commercially successful artists whose lyrics are purely concerned with bitches, drugs, bling, guns and cash - I can't stand them for the sole reason that their lyrics are sh*thouse.

 

[evo]

I swear you're not hearing what I'm saying!

Do yu actually think I don't listen to any lyrics or hold any importance to lyrics? I like lyrics as much as you do. But both of us DO NOT listen to music because of the lyrics. Even if you think you do, and even if the favourite part of a song is the lyric, it is not really why you listen to it.

Get your favourite lyrics and insert them into Wham!'s Wake Me Up Before You Go Go. They don't mean the same now do they? And you would have never discovered these lyrics had the been in a Wham! song rather than a band you like.

If the Spice Girls sang about all your political views would you listen to them? Would you think, "Gee, those Spice Girls have some edgy music"?

Music is about feel. Lyrics are nothing without music that rocks your palette. They complement each other to different degrees, but essentially it's about the sounds. Words are secondary.

Firstly,I don't see the discussion about the appreciation of music an argument to be one or lost.More a sharing of ideas.

1st bolded statement-Bunny,I know exactly what you are saying.you've re- stated it a number of times.How could I not.Yes I take your point about wah wah nee ,spice girls etc-'.I get your point !


2nd bolded statement-Now this is where I see that we are fundamentally different.

You listen to a song for the first time-say something by RATM.Think it sounds good musically and listen to it again,after a few times you start listen to what the singer is saying,maybe read the lyrics on the cover.In this your are the same as me and anyone else who listens to music.

Howeveronce you realise that perhaps the lyricist doesn't share the same world view as you-you shut down to the meaning of the lyrics from there on in-just enjoying the music 'feel'.This is amply shown(to me at least and it seems to RJ too) by the fact you posted this.....

They are conspiracy theorists. Everything they sing about is anti establishment. I find this sort of thinking and behaviour ridiculous.

I also find people like you who either think they make a big difference or lap up their views wearing a Che Gueverra t-shirt comical.

I like their music a lot. I'm happy that they're angry about these issues because it comes out in the music. But I don't agree with this ridiculous chip on the shoulder stance that some people take. Yes, the world is a big bad dodgy place, but get over it.

In short you've decided your view before ever listening to RATM and no matter how good they sound or how persuavive their lyrics may be, you already made up your mind.(about, in this case ,anti-establismentism)


In contrast to you- I listen to lyrics to get other people opinions on the world.Then i go and a have a bit of think about what they've had to say.This could apply to any artist I've just listened to-RATM,Dylan,Sabbath or whoever.I might not have agreed with it,but it has got me thinking.

The reason I posted 'After Forever' is to illustrate a point.It is possible to come into a song even with pre-conceived ideas(my atheism) listen to what Ozzy is singing (about God)admire the beauty in the thought behind the lyrics(even if i don't agree with them) and then go and think what he was saying.Question and probe the validity of my atheism possibly re-affirm it.

I just think I,rick,contra etc. are getting more form music than you seem to be.Of course I could be wrong.That's just my impression.

 

[bunsen burner]

Firstly,I don't see the discussion about the appreciation of music an argument to be one or lost.More a sharing of ideas.

1st bolded statement-Bunny,I know exactly what you are saying.you've re- stated it a number of times.How could I not.Yes I take your point about wah wah nee ,spice girls etc-'.I get your point !


2nd bolded statement-Now this is where I see that we are fundamentally different.

You listen to a song for the first time-say something by RATM.Think it sounds good musically and listen to it again,after a few times you start listen to what the singer is saying,maybe read the lyrics on the cover.In this your are the same as me and anyone else who listens to music.

Howeveronce you realise that perhaps the lyricist doesn't share the same world view as you-you shut down to the meaning of the lyrics from there on in-just enjoying the music 'feel'.This is amply shown(to me at least and it seems to RJ too) by the fact you posted this.....
In short you've decided your view before ever listening to RATM and no matter how good they sound or how persuavive their lyrics may be, you already made up your mind.(about, in this case ,anti-establismentism)


In contrast to you- I listen to lyrics to get other people opinions on the world.Then i go and a have a bit of think about what they've had to say.This could apply to any artist I've just listened to-RATM,Dylan,Sabbath or whoever.I might not have agreed with it,but it has got me thinking.

The reason I posted 'After Forever' is to illustrate a point.It is possible to come into a song even with pre-conceived ideas(my atheism) listen to what Ozzy is singing (about God)admire the beauty in the thought behind the lyrics(even if i don't agree with them) and then go and think what he was saying.Question and probe the validity of my atheism possibly re-affirm it.

This is all great (and I mostly agree) but has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

I was about 26 when I first heard RATM and i'd long before analysed the whole anti-establishment deal. So it's not as if not sitting down and specifically analysing what they're saying is ignorant - i'd already been there through other mediums.

I just think I,rick,contra etc. are getting more form music than you seem to be.Of course I could be wrong.That's just my impression.

If that means letting self indulgent rock stars shape your opinion, then yes. But realistically that's not what they are doing - it just happens they agree with the anti estab sentiment.

 

[evo]

But by that criteria.Can't any artist you don't agree with be considered 'self indulgent'?

Are Pink Flloyd self indulgent,are Led Zepplin?

 

[bunsen burner]

Yeah I was, because you claimed that 100% was one way, I'm pointing out that's incorrect.

Like your point about "persona" and "conspiracy theory", you're arguing over semantics. Splitting hairs. Being petty. Acting like ****wit because you're my bitch and you want to get back at me because big bad bunsen made fun of people who those twat hats - which incidently you wear.

Get over it before you turn into Diego.

It isn't assumed knowledge in all cases, especially with you. You make blanket statements, overly simplified statements and downright ignorant statements with a view to making yourself appear as knowledgeable. I don't like it because I can see you don't know sh*t, so I poke holes in your crappy arguments (and you proceed to dodge them or dismiss them as semantics).

You have never ever owned me. It's tragic that you think you have. You sure have tried though.

The wager you have apparently backed out on? I said I'm up for it buddy boy, you go right ahead.

It seems you have no choice as you get owned either way. You better not reneg. I'll be pm'ing Groves tomorrow.

I'd also like to discuss the challenge I put to you though, the one about showing me five RATM songs that deal with conspiracy theories. I'm waiting.

1.
Instead I warm my hands upon the flames of the flag
As I recall our downfall
And the business that burned us all
See through the news and the views that twist reality

2.

So called facts are fraud

3.

Nothin' proper about ya propaganda

4.

I give a shout out to the living dead
Who stood and watched as the feds cold centralized

5.

Something must be done
About vengeance, a badge and a gun

-----------------------------------------------

There you go. That's just some references on the first half of the first album. The music is littered with left wing, freedom fighting, anti-establishment, conspiracy theory propaganda.

And don't bother arguing that maybe a better term than conspiracy-theory could have been used. It could have. So what? No one else has a problem with it. Just you. Everyone else knows what I'm getting at and that's it's not really pertinent to the debate. Just you being a tool and trying to own someone over semantics.

 

[bunsen burner]

But by that criteria.Can't any artist you don't agree with be considered 'self indulgent'?

Are Pink Flloyd self indulgent,are Led Zepplin?

They're all self indulgent but it takes another twist when fabulously wealthy people who because of their wealth are in la la land whilst being all righteous about the world's problems.

Just play the music d***heads and stop trying to be political messiahs.

 

[The_Eagles]

 

[moistie]

Audioslave have broken up as well. Could be good for RATM to reform.

And I don't see any conspiracy in any of the five points you put forward there, BB.

 

[bunsen burner]

Audioslave have broken up as well. Could be good for RATM to reform.

And I don't see any conspiracy in any of the five points you put forward there, BB.

My actual point was more anti establishment that conspiracy theorists but if Rick wants to focus on something that is immaterial to what we're talking about and "Pwn" me then good luck to him.

I could have used a better word than Persona or conspiracy theory. Big deal.

 

[rick James]

My actual point was more anti establishment that conspiracy theorists but if Rick wants to focus on something that is immaterial to what we're talking about and "Pwn" me then good luck to him.

I could have used a better word than Persona or conspiracy theory. Big deal.

Mate you made the comments, you then tried to defend them - when you realised they were indefensible, you claimed it was semantics.

If it was just semantics, you wouldn't have bothered to try and defend them, you'd have just said "my bad, I really meant..." and just clarified your point - which is what most people do when they're apparently misunderstood (or in your case, used completely incorrect terms).

But you didn't do that. You tried to prove your terms as being relevant, and they aren't. So now instead of just admitting you were wrong or misinformed or posing, you try to deflect your own comments back on to me - as if it's my fault you don't know what you're talking about.

If it's immaterial to this discussion, why the ******** mention it in the first place?

(Though I find it hard to believe that comments on the lyrical content and image of RATM are immaterial to a discussion on RATM)

 

[rick James]

And I don't see any conspiracy in any of the five points you put forward there, BB.

That's because they aren't conspiracy theories. Thanks for pointing it out to bb, he's a tad slow.

Why, he even claims I take him too seriously, yet simultaneously has offered to email me pics of his kids, girlfriend, possessions and uni transcripts in an attempt to get me to leave him alone.

Yes, I'm clearly taking this too seriously when compared to his completely calm and collected temperament.

 

[Carlos]

That's because they aren't conspiracy theories. Thanks for pointing it out to bb, he's a tad slow.

Why, he even claims I take him too seriously, yet simultaneously has offered to email me pics of his kids, girlfriend, possessions and uni transcripts in an attempt to get me to leave him alone.

Yes, I'm clearly taking this too seriously when compared to his completely calm and collected temperament.

At least when you engage him on a point he actually attempts to respond to you dude.

I'm not sure why, but he just craps on with irrelevant, random babble to me and almost never ever actually responds to a single point we're trying to discuss.

I used to enjoy the odd stoush with him, but now i'm actually worried about the big guy. Its kind of embarrassing watching how he's conducting himself on here these days.

 

[rick James]

At least when you engage him on a point he actually attempts to respond to you dude.

I'm not sure why, but he just craps on with irrelevant, random babble to me and almost never ever actually responds to a single point we're trying to discuss.

I used to enjoy the odd stoush with him, but now i'm actually worried about the big guy. Its kind of embarrassing watching how he's conducting himself on here these days.

Agreed, he's starting to lose it. I may just have to place him on ignore, for his sake.