should music be politics free?

Ok, I'm letting this one fly.

I just want to let you know ahead of time, any purely political rants or flames will be deleted immediately.  Fair warning, okay?

The question is "should music be politics free?"

Nick

i think people can sing about whatever they want to sing about. i don't really like it either in excess, but then again, no ones forcing me to buy the cd

To me it doesn't really matter.

I will listen to a band that I like what ever there political affiliation is as long as I like the band and the music.

Some times lyrics are really good when they're not political, like fantasy based, or lyrics on mythology. I like to hear when a band sings about Hobbits and Dragons and I also like Norse mythology and Sumerian mythologies. Or lyrics about nature.

These types of lyrics can be more powerful and appropriate to the song than political lyrics.

But I do like some political lyrics when done right. The band Nevermore has really good lyrics comparing our society to the society of Gorge Orwell in 1984. In a lot of black metal there are lyrics around the ideas of Nihilism.

I think its good when the band can do it properly.

How ever I cant stand a guy with an acoustic guitar strumming a few chords and singing about the government. He is using the music as a tool for his politics. Instead of using the politics to add to the music.      

Chris--
Art involves self expression.  As such, it never has been free of politics.  Even Beethoven's symphonies were considered political in their day and considered supportive of revolutionary tendencies in the Europe of that time.  The Fifth recalls the hammer blows of the revolution (standard interpretive lore of the fifth), the Eroica celebrated revolutionary heroes in France, especially Napoleon if I recall correctly, and the Ninth's Ode to Joy used a Schiller poem in the chorus that was considered an anti-aristocratic call for unity and solidarity among the middle classes.  
Folk songs often had a kind of protest dimension, too; as did the Blues as a kind of protest against living in misery.  

Now, that certainly doesn't mean that music has to be political, but merely that some music always will be because it is artistic self expression and some artists are more concerned about political and social issues.  Bob Dylan is often highly political, as was John Lennon, for example.  Carlos Santana speaks broadly of a political dimension to his recent work.  Did you know that Paul McCartney wrote "Blackbird", a very lyrical piece, in support of the Civil Rights movement in the US?  

These are just examples.  Your question is normative -- should it be political?  Art always eludes normative statements.  Rock and roll itself once transgressed everything people felt music should be, for example.  It was unmelodic, primitive, too wild, etc.  Nevertheless, it is still here.  Should music be political or not?  Hard to say what it should be, but I know it will have political dimensions.

One of the marvels of the market is that people are free to purchase or not to purchase music and thus to validate or reject political artistry.  And people have preferences.  Some like political art (I, for one, do), but would never argue that all music should be political.

In the end, I think music will have political dimensions and that the best way to express dissatisfaction with a trend is not to buy the music.  But otherwise I'd fear to make normative statements about what music should or should not do or be. That, I fear, would kill the creative spirit.  (Aha--that's the point of my long-winded response!)
Peace!
Tim

The question is "should music be politics free?"

In my opinion, no, it should not. However, there are differences in how you bring politics in your song. If people use very broad subjects (eg: government as a whole sucks bigtime!) or preaches to me, I don't like it.

On the other hand, touching political subjects is ok. A lot of REM songs are, if you take a close look at the lyrics, about politics. Many people don't even know it, they just hear the music, sing along and they have fun. Cool with me.

Sometimes, when a specific thing is really very, very wrong in my eyes, I will speak about it. I will write about it. And if I can sing, why should I not sing about it. It's a great of giving my opinion, and if you ain't like it, don't listen.

To get back to the question, I don't think music should be or do anything at all. That would limit the artist's freedom by definition. You have songs about politics, you have songs who are not about politics. It's just up to the individual to what he wants to listen.

i think a band should present both sides of a political argument, yeah the government sux's and this is why and this is the solution to fix the problem. alot of bands will only present one  side like what is so wrong...but what they are trying to do is to get you to focus on the problem, but when they neglect to offer a solution then it leaves you with out hope for the future...then on the other hand some bands want to focus on issue they feel is being ignored or not seen at all....

So should the include politics in there music? sure as long as they are telling truths and not lies about the issues...

But isn't it all a sham, if they sing about political issues that they don't back up off-stage?

But isn't it all a sham, if they sing about political issues that they don't back up off-stage?

That depends. For example (NOTE: just an example, don;t dwell on it  ;) ) I am against death penalty. However, in Holland pretty much everyone is against it, just because that is currently the way people are supposed to think. So if I am in a debate, or write a song about it, I will be PRO death-penalty. By showing the good points of it I want people to re-think their opinions. Now, if they, after re-thinking, they are still against it, cool. If they are pro, cool as well. As long as they think about it.

As an artist (yeah, you could argue whether or not I am, but lets just assume I am  ;D) I think I have the right to give an opinion, not nescesarily my opinion. The problem starts when people are using an opinion differing from their own just because it will make them cool. When you change opinion to match those around you you are a sham. That is fake, and not cool. If you change your opinion to open a debate, that is something entirely else.

Well, I think it'd be pretty boring if we all sung about the same things, don't you?

Tell me how the Government screwed you or sing me a love song, I'll be there for the taking either way. Nick, didn't you write one about an old dried up potato (the kind you find at the back of the sink). See anything goes, sometimes I feel like a good political rant so I write about that. Sometimes you just want to tell someone how much you love or hate them.

If it's put across well, then a political/protest song is great. Recently, however, I haven't heard any good ones but that's not to say they aren't out there.

Pete. :)

promedics, believe it or not, you have a right to give both: 'my' opinion and 'an' opinion. an artist can say whatever he wants. Yes, they can . take a band like rage against the machine or something like that, most of what they do is rant about teh government. fine by me, what are we gonna do, ban all groups that rant about the government? lol..that would be interesting.

Promedics, try again.

Taso, just say no to political comments.

Nick

imho,

Music should be politically free.  One writes a song.  Others intrepret the meaning.  An intrepretation is an opinion.  Ergo, if you say that i wrote a political song, it is your right to say so.  It is my right to say that the song is just about "stuff".  

Y'all have a safe one.

Steve

THANK YOU STEVE!

jeez, sorry i didnt realize, didnt even notice what you edited when i read it over again anyways.

Thats true steve. ofcourse its your right to say its jsut about stuff. doesnt mean everyone is going to believe you. but hey, if i knew how to write, or play i would certainly put my political ideas in there. although its not likely todays generation would want to hear about it. I remember going to this debate thing phill donahue hosted, it just so happened that danny glover was in the audience (wich was cool) and he spoke for a good 10 mins, and his ideas were stupid. just cause someones a celebrity doesnt mean they are smart.  once again, my point is lost. im not going to post ever again