Song of the Moment: Mind Your Manners

[Jorge]

Not only that, but I believe Ed has gone on record specifically saying it's an anti-religion song.

[Jorge]

Which is fine, by the way, I have no real problem with anti-religious lyrics. I just don't think these are very good ones. They're clunky and crass. I don't hate the song, and I do think it's better than "Infallible", but I understand the criticisms.

[Jorge]

The thing that redeems "MYM" in my estimation is Ed's vocal delivery. It fits the song very well, even though the music beneath it feels surprisingly languid for a punk rock rave-up.

[LoathedVermin72]

Yeah, it should come as no surprise to anyone that I have no problem with anti-religious sentiments, but I agree, it's a clunky, easy, and simple anti-religion song. But, as someone said earlier, that is in keeping with its punk sound. But...that punk sound is diluted, limp, and overly polished (all of which undermine the very idea of the punk aesthetic).

[stip]

I'm with Strat and DcT in that I do think KD missed the mark here on that song, almost completely. The initial impression is that it's an anti-religious rant (which I've got little patience for), given the opening lyric. It's a song about needing to take responsibility for the world and our place in it, and goes after people too complacent to care, too afraid of rocking the boat to recognize that obligation. In fact, the references to god are not attacks on religion as much as they are about learned helplessness. I can't do anything to fix things myself so I'm going to wait for someone else to come along and do it. And the self realized/metaphysically redeemed part is also sarcastic--that people who retreat into themselves in times that require solidarity and a call to arms are not to be respected.

And "this world's a long love letter that makes me want to cry" is a fantastic lyric.

I get what you're saying, but the song never expands its "learned helplnessness" idea beyond the specificity of religion, so in effect, it is just an anti-religion song. There's never any lyric in the song that supports "I can't do anything to fix things myself so I'm going to wait for someone else to come along and do it." - everything is specified to God and the afterlife. You're projecting a broader message than what is actually in the song.

I think the video makes this a lot clearer. So does Infallible. These are two songs that are (appropriately enough) in conversation with each other, a different angle on the working out of the same idea.

[stip]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

[LoathedVermin72]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

But that still only extends to religion and nothing larger. And that's actually a pretty standard component of anti-religious arguments.

Again, I don't really have a problem with any of this. I just don't think the song is doing what you're saying: attacking apathy, inaction, or "learned helplessness" in any sense larger than religion.

[stip]

My take is heavily influenced by the video, which was the first time I ever grappled with the song's meaning. But the fact that another song from the same album is making basically the exact same point in a non religious way gives us a pretty big clue as to the larger sentiment/intentions behind the song and where Eddie was going with it. There are some cues in the MYM lyrics as well.

[Jorge]

My take is heavily influenced by the video

See, this is exactly why Pearl Jam stopped making videos in the early 90s

[stip]

Thank god for the pncmg, then!

[Kevin Davis]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

I know I am in the minority -- or, perhaps, singlehandedly am the minority -- of religious people on RM, so perhaps being on the bad end of Eddie's ranting has left me feeling a little sensitive, but as such I'm also pretty confident in saying that most religions (assuming he is talking about Christian religions, which -- judging from the picture of the rosary on the single artwork -- seems reasonable) simply don't do this. I can't think of any religion that teaches, "God has this under control, so feel free to sit back and do nothing while horror unfolds around you." To the contrary, this would be considered in many churches a "sin of omission," and really has nothing to do with the idea of "theodicy," a concept which "seeks to show that it is reasonable to believe in God despite evidence of evil in the world and offers a framework which can account for why evil exists." Believing that a reason for the presence of grave, unspeakable evil in the world may exist on a level that transcends our human understanding is not diametrically opposed to the idea of still being obligated to acting within our scope of human understanding to stop it, and I don't think many religions teach otherwise. So if this is Eddie's purpose with this song, then my original point that he conveniently disregards the finer points of the ideas he rails against simply because to acknowledge them would stand in the way of his precious outrage is right on. He takes "we could will it to the skies/or we could something else" and makes a false dichotomy out of it, when realistically most religions encourage if not demand that we do both.

Of course, I don't think what he's doing with this song is anywhere near that thoughtful. Mainly I think it's just a poorly executed rant against something that pisses him off -- specifically, institutional authority which dares propose external guidelines by which one might live one's life which don't happen to jibe with his own. Perhaps this is just the punk aesthetic. But I have no fondness for the punk aesthetic, and as a fifty-year old guy who has previously expressed similar sentiments with a great deal more tact, I think he comes off sounding -- as I said -- petulant and moronic.

[PHATJ]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

I know I am in the minority -- or, perhaps, singlehandedly am the minority -- of religious people on RM, so perhaps being on the bad end of Eddie's ranting has left me feeling a little sensitive, but as such I'm also pretty confident in saying that most religions (assuming he is talking about Christian religions, which -- judging from the picture of the rosary on the single artwork -- seems reasonable) simply don't do this. I can't think of any religion that teaches, "God has this under control, so feel free to sit back and do nothing while horror unfolds around you." To the contrary, this would be considered in many churches a "sin of omission," and really has nothing to do with the idea of "theodicy," a concept which "seeks to show that it is reasonable to believe in God despite evidence of evil in the world and offers a framework which can account for why evil exists." Believing that a reason for the presence of grave, unspeakable evil in the world may exist on a level that transcends our human understanding is not diametrically opposed to the idea of still being obligated to acting within our scope of human understanding to stop it, and I don't think many religions teach otherwise. So if this is Eddie's purpose with this song, then my original point that he conveniently disregards the finer points of the ideas he rails against simply because to acknowledge them would stand in the way of his precious outrage is right on. He takes "we could will it to the skies/or we could something else" and makes a false dichotomy out of it, when realistically most religions encourage if not demand that we do both.

Of course, I don't think what he's doing with this song is anywhere near that thoughtful. Mainly I think it's just a poorly executed rant against something that pisses him off -- specifically, institutional authority which dares propose external guidelines by which one might live one's life which don't happen to jibe with his own. Perhaps this is just the punk aesthetic. But I have no fondness for the punk aesthetic, and as a fifty-year old guy who has previously expressed similar sentiments with a great deal more tact, I think he comes off sounding -- as I said -- petulant and moronic.

Kevin, I don't always agree with your takes on songs, or whathaveyou, but I agree 100% with this post (well, all except the fact that I enjoy listening to MYM from time to time). I specifically agree with your takes on the Christian church's expectation for its followers to not only raise up prayers but to also take action. This truth is close to always ignored by the general public and even more so by those with a particular distaste for Christianity.

FYI, you are not he only religious person on RM. I may not be very active in my person faith at his point in my life, but I grew up in a strongly conservative Christian household. I was taught strong traditional moral values. I've spent 20+ years as an active church attender. I've even been the host of a home church. I've raised my kids to put faith in God and Jesus. I've struggled with my personal faith from a young age, but as a group, I've found the Christians that I know to be genuinely good people, that have shown more care and compassion to me than any other group of people. While the far left preach tolerance they seem to habitually omit Christians when applying their creed.

[William Bloke]

I like that Christianity and big fat J's aren't mutually exclusive, as some would have us believe. I am not particularly religious, as such, however I certainly have Faith (and I'm not just talking about the fact that I own the album by The Cure).

Part of my personal belief/faith system requires that I act when need warrants. Too many people sit on their hands in this world.

[epilogue]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

I know I am in the minority -- or, perhaps, singlehandedly am the minority -- of religious people on RM, so perhaps being on the bad end of Eddie's ranting has left me feeling a little sensitive, but as such I'm also pretty confident in saying that most religions (assuming he is talking about Christian religions, which -- judging from the picture of the rosary on the single artwork -- seems reasonable) simply don't do this. I can't think of any religion that teaches, "God has this under control, so feel free to sit back and do nothing while horror unfolds around you." To the contrary, this would be considered in many churches a "sin of omission," and really has nothing to do with the idea of "theodicy," a concept which "seeks to show that it is reasonable to believe in God despite evidence of evil in the world and offers a framework which can account for why evil exists." Believing that a reason for the presence of grave, unspeakable evil in the world may exist on a level that transcends our human understanding is not diametrically opposed to the idea of still being obligated to acting within our scope of human understanding to stop it, and I don't think many religions teach otherwise. So if this is Eddie's purpose with this song, then my original point that he conveniently disregards the finer points of the ideas he rails against simply because to acknowledge them would stand in the way of his precious outrage is right on. He takes "we could will it to the skies/or we could something else" and makes a false dichotomy out of it, when realistically most religions encourage if not demand that we do both.

Of course, I don't think what he's doing with this song is anywhere near that thoughtful. Mainly I think it's just a poorly executed rant against something that pisses him off -- specifically, institutional authority which dares propose external guidelines by which one might live one's life which don't happen to jibe with his own. Perhaps this is just the punk aesthetic. But I have no fondness for the punk aesthetic, and as a fifty-year old guy who has previously expressed similar sentiments with a great deal more tact, I think he comes off sounding -- as I said -- petulant and moronic.

Kevin, I don't always agree with your takes on songs, or whathaveyou, but I agree 100% with this post (well, all except the fact that I enjoy listening to MYM from time to time). I specifically agree with your takes on the Christian church's expectation for its followers to not only raise up prayers but to also take action. This truth is close to always ignored by the general public and even more so by those with a particular distaste for Christianity.

FYI, you are not he only religious person on RM. I may not be very active in my person faith at his point in my life, but I grew up in a strongly conservative Christian household. I was taught strong traditional moral values. I've spent 20+ years as an active church attender. I've even been the host of a home church. I've raised my kids to put faith in God and Jesus. I've struggled with my personal faith from a young age, but as a group, I've found the Christians that I know to be genuinely good people, that have shown more care and compassion to me than any other group of people. While the far left preach tolerance they seem to habitually omit Christians when applying their creed.

I'm thrilled to hear that this has been your experience. It has certainly not been mine.

[epilogue]

Part of my personal belief/faith system requires that I act when need warrants. Too many people sit on their hands in this world.

I agree with this. But fail to see what it has to do with religion.

[epilogue]

I don't know.

I feel like "If it's out there somewhere we sure could use it now" acquits the song of petulance.

But I also don't think there's anything upsetting or pretentious or whatever about the lyrics to Off He Goes.

So fuck me, I guess.

[PHATJ]

I think the really clear emphasis here is also on engagement, even if he's mostly starting with religious stuff. The issue is not that religion is bad or stupid (Getaway, I agree is an overly simplistic anti-religious screed, and not that interesting as a result). It's a song about using the certainty that can come with religion, or the ways in which religion can offer you a theodicy that absolves you of responsibility to take action, that is the issue. And that is not an overly simplistic sentiment nor part of a standard anti-religious screed.

I know I am in the minority -- or, perhaps, singlehandedly am the minority -- of religious people on RM, so perhaps being on the bad end of Eddie's ranting has left me feeling a little sensitive, but as such I'm also pretty confident in saying that most religions (assuming he is talking about Christian religions, which -- judging from the picture of the rosary on the single artwork -- seems reasonable) simply don't do this. I can't think of any religion that teaches, "God has this under control, so feel free to sit back and do nothing while horror unfolds around you." To the contrary, this would be considered in many churches a "sin of omission," and really has nothing to do with the idea of "theodicy," a concept which "seeks to show that it is reasonable to believe in God despite evidence of evil in the world and offers a framework which can account for why evil exists." Believing that a reason for the presence of grave, unspeakable evil in the world may exist on a level that transcends our human understanding is not diametrically opposed to the idea of still being obligated to acting within our scope of human understanding to stop it, and I don't think many religions teach otherwise. So if this is Eddie's purpose with this song, then my original point that he conveniently disregards the finer points of the ideas he rails against simply because to acknowledge them would stand in the way of his precious outrage is right on. He takes "we could will it to the skies/or we could something else" and makes a false dichotomy out of it, when realistically most religions encourage if not demand that we do both.

Of course, I don't think what he's doing with this song is anywhere near that thoughtful. Mainly I think it's just a poorly executed rant against something that pisses him off -- specifically, institutional authority which dares propose external guidelines by which one might live one's life which don't happen to jibe with his own. Perhaps this is just the punk aesthetic. But I have no fondness for the punk aesthetic, and as a fifty-year old guy who has previously expressed similar sentiments with a great deal more tact, I think he comes off sounding -- as I said -- petulant and moronic.

Kevin, I don't always agree with your takes on songs, or whathaveyou, but I agree 100% with this post (well, all except the fact that I enjoy listening to MYM from time to time). I specifically agree with your takes on the Christian church's expectation for its followers to not only raise up prayers but to also take action. This truth is close to always ignored by the general public and even more so by those with a particular distaste for Christianity.

FYI, you are not he only religious person on RM. I may not be very active in my person faith at his point in my life, but I grew up in a strongly conservative Christian household. I was taught strong traditional moral values. I've spent 20+ years as an active church attender. I've even been the host of a home church. I've raised my kids to put faith in God and Jesus. I've struggled with my personal faith from a young age, but as a group, I've found the Christians that I know to be genuinely good people, that have shown more care and compassion to me than any other group of people. While the far left preach tolerance they seem to habitually omit Christians when applying their creed.

I'm thrilled to hear that this has been your experience. It has certainly not been mine.

That has been true for me. I know it clearly isn't that way for everyone. Obviously there are bad seeds, that is true for any large group of people. I don't blame the religion though, when bad people claim to be Christians or say they are just following God, and proceed to knowingly and willingly do things that hurt others for their personal gain, whatever that may be. To me, that person is just an asshole, and the religion has been raped by a person that never cared for it to begin with.

[Birds in Hell]

But I also don't think there's anything upsetting or pretentious or whatever about the lyrics to Off He Goes.

Neither do I.

However, and admitting I'd never given the lyrics a great deal of thought before now, I'm sympathetic to Kevin's view on Mind Your Manners.

[epilogue]

But I also don't think there's anything upsetting or pretentious or whatever about the lyrics to Off He Goes.

Neither do I.

However, and admitting I'd never given the lyrics a great deal of thought before now, I'm sympathetic to Kevin's view on Mind Your Manners.

Sure. I'm sympathetic insofar as Kevin Davis is a super intelligent and well spoken dude. So I take what he says very seriously and I try to empathize with his POV. Absolutely.

But listening to the song again and again over the last half hour, I just... simply... respectfully... disagree.

Doesn't mean what KD or PHAT or anyone else says isn't valid.

[PHATJ]

But I also don't think there's anything upsetting or pretentious or whatever about the lyrics to Off He Goes.

Neither do I.

However, and admitting I'd never given the lyrics a great deal of thought before now, I'm sympathetic to Kevin's view on Mind Your Manners.

Sure. I'm sympathetic insofar as Kevin Davis is a super intelligent and well spoken dude. So I take what he says very seriously and I try to empathize with his POV. Absolutely.

But listening to the song again and again over the last half hour, I just... simply... respectfully... disagree.

Doesn't mean what KD or PHAT or anyone else says isn't valid.