| Chevelle – Clones Lyrics | 11 years ago |
|
Congratulations, Rudez88. Your post is the straw to break the camel's back. In this case, the straw is the highly unoriginal sentiment you've regurgitated, while the camel's back is my patience with that sentiment. Intention does not equal meaning. An artist can say what they intended (partially or fully) with their art, but that does not exhaust what the art means. If I write the word "ORANGE" on a billboard, and intended the color, while some other dude comes along and reads it as meaning the fruit, the word "ORANGE" on the billboard has at least two meanings, both the color and the fruit. In other words, the subjective experience of the other dude is not *merely* subjective. It touches on an objective facet of the symbol. Yes, I didn't intend for the word to be read as meaning the fruit, but I should have been aware that the English word "orange" *just does* have these common meanings. That's what it means to share language. (This is all Semiotics 101, by the way.) I hate this about popular music criticism and interpretation: any attempt to forward an objective interpretation of music and/or lyrics--especially when the interpretation posits religious aspects--is shot down as "intolerant," "close-minded," etc. 'We all got our opinions, man, and no one has any right to forward his opinion over anyone else's.' Anyone see the irony of this last sentence? This sentence, parroted in how many different ways in press and on the Internet, forwards *AS OBJECTIVE FACT* the *OPINION* that it is wrong to forward one's opinion as fact. You might rejoin that it is *not* an opinion that it is wrong to forward one opinion as fact, but rather a *fact*, to which I pose the following question: How do you know? Answer: You don't. There are no practical means of determining which domains of discussion are open to fact and which open merely to opinion. (Also, in classical thought, "opinion" didn't mean something that was true for its believer and not necessarily true for anyone else; it meant something of which its believer wasn't 100% sure.) If anyone actually cares about value theory and types of knowledge, realize that this whole "Fact vs. Opinion" garbage is based on the long-refuted philosophical system of logical positivism. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_positivism ) With respects to "Clones," come on: read "I'd simply ascend / To see what the soul looks like in the end," consider Pete's admitted Catholicism, and try to read it in a non-religious way. (The "they're not a Christian band" bullshit is a cop-out. And again, what Pete consciously intends is only one part of the picture.) Whether "Clones" syncs up specifically with "Envy" is a matter of debate, but jackwhiteWannaBe is right that this album's symbolism is laced with religious significance. |
|
| Chevelle – Arise Lyrics | 11 years ago |
|
Wealth issues abound throughout 'Hats Off to the Bull.' Here in 'Arise,' we see Pete's Catholic (!) approach to it. The key is in the following lyrics: "And reach to other worlds Right through the needle's eye Come take your first look inside" Taken alone, "reach to other worlds" might just mean creativity or new political structures or whatever. The following verse is critical: "Right through the needle's eye." A subtle (eh, its subtlety is debatable) Biblical reference: "Yes, I tell you again, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 19:24, Jerusalem Bible) So, 'Arise' says something like the following: You can behold Heaven, the possibilities of creativity, love, and action, and the escape from death and finality ("Our fate is all we know [Rising up into another world] / A fate we would all change [Rising up anew]"), if you would just relinquish your excess wealth and worldly satisfaction. All you have to do is turn away, then you may get your "first look inside." It's up to you whether you "fail or rise." Of course, you might choose to fail, and if so, only one short sentence will be delivered on you: "This one's done." |
|
| Chevelle – Brainiac Lyrics | 11 years ago |
|
Pentagram + biological/scientific imagery = modern science as witchcraft. (Perhaps specifically genetic engineering or transhumanism?) Modern science was birthed by alchemists (e.g., Newton, Leibniz), and its occultic character is still manifest in medical imagery like the Hermetic caduceus. Also, in occult circles, humanity is often mapped onto a pentagram. See Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man for the most famous example. So, "each of these men holds a pentagram" could be tantamount to scientists holding humanity--perhaps fetal children or psychiatric patients--in their hands and viewing said humanity as a magical-mathematical equation they are free to mess with. *OR*, it could be tantamount to patients of some kind holding pills in their hands: psychotropic witchcraft ("pentagram") meant to (al-)chemically alter its consumer. |
|
* This information can be up to 15 minutes delayed.