In my mind, there is no question that John Mayer is a good musician. With his latest endeavor, Continuum, he has exercised more creative freedom than in his previous releases by moving to a less-pop-more-blues style of music (good for him!). Steve Jordan and Pino Palladino round out Mayer's trio of talented musicians. And, as he should, Mayer willingly and humbly admits that he is much less talented than the great SRV. But, hey, he's got some good songs.
I have an axiom, however, by which I live: "Do not let any musician influence your worldview." Yet again, Mr. Mayer validates this rule with his song Belief. Here is a sampling of the lyrics:
We're never gonna win the world
We're never gonna stop the war
We're never gonna beat this
If belief is what we're fighting for
What puts a hundred thousand children in the sand
Belief can
What puts the folded flag inside his mother's hand
Belief can
Mayer is not a fan of belief, so it seems. Throughout the song, he states the various negative consequences of people acting upon their beliefs. Soldiers die; 100,000 children are buried (I am not sure whom he is referencing with this statistic); war will continue ad infinitum. But do these bad effects really render all belief as unproductive, or even evil, as Mayer suggests?
First, Mayer does not distinguish between unfounded belief and justified belief. What if what I believe is true and justifiable? According to the song, I should not even then act upon my convictions (at least not in the public sphere). Yes, a person with unfounded, incorrect beliefs likely will cause harm by acting upon them (think 9/11). Mother Teresa, though, spent years helping the people of India by acting upon her (in my opinion) justifiable beliefs. Martin Luther King is another example of a person who changed this world for the better specifically by acting upon his beliefs. I would submit, in fact, that all great men and women are great because they act on their convictions in the public sphere. True, the same holds for the most evil of men and women, but as C.S. Lewis argued, the greatest sinners would make for the greatest saints. In other words, the acting out of one's beliefs is not necessarily good or bad; that depends on the beliefs and the people who hold them.
Second, Mayer condemns acting on convictions, yet he wants the listener to act upon his belief of not acting upon beliefs, which is self-contradictory. This is a very good example of where postmodernism breaks down. There are no moral absolutes or metanarratives within postmodernism, yet it comes chock full of "ought" statements. There can be no ultimate basis within postmodernism to tell someone he or she ought to do anything. (For more in depth treatment of this topic, consult Lewis in The Abolition of Man.) To what standard does Mayer appeal, and how can he justify his request, which denies the very idea it seeks to affirm?
Perhaps Mayer should have covered Pride and Joy instead.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Commentary about the philosophical, theological, musical and cultural landscapes of our day. And, of course, the occasional book review.
5 comments:
Jon
Belief did kill the people on 9/11 as you mentioned, but it seems that the only one that should be held accountable for any killing these days is Bush. (He doesn't actually say this in the quoted lyrics, but don't you think that Bush is ultimately the object of his hatred?) Interestingly also, is the fact that the ones that did the killing on 9/11 did so motivated solely by belief, unlike the US military who are there for a whole host of reasons, belief probably being one of them .
Ultimately however Mr. Mayor is suffering from a neutral complex. In his world he is totally neutral, while those that would disagree with him are extremist.
In the end what really scares me are all the people that are just going to buy this paradoxical hogwash without ever really thinking it through. So much I guess for the unpopularity of the "sheep" mentality.
Welcome to the blogosphere. I loved the Abolition of Man.
Danny,
I think you may be right that Bush is the ultimate object of Mayer's hatred. There is no shortage of people to hold accountable for killing in this world, though, and I doubt there ever will be.
Thanks for the intelligent interaction! It is much appreciated!
I'm glad you posted on this song, because even though I love the song I have always been perplexed as to what the blazes Mayer is talking about! He, himself, obviously has beliefs: He wants to stop the war. Yet "we're never gonna stop the war if belief is what we're fightin' for..."
But maybe he is actually coming from the same place as you. Maybe he is criticising people who merely have empty, unjustified beliefs.
In the po-mo culture everybody has beliefs, but does anybody have real conviction? We can hold signs, but this isn't really meaningful any more because everybody has beliefs. So, maybe Mayer is criticising a culture that has belief but not real conviction. Maybe Mother T. would be the example of self-sacrifice that gives currency to beliefs......
Jonathan,
I appreciate your comments. I, too, like the song as a song, but I find the lyrics lacking (like many songs today). I'm not sure if John Mayer is smart enough to make such a differentiation about beliefs. I'm not trying to be mean here (I promise!); I've just heard him give interviews. He's kind of vapid and self-centered.
That reminds me of an interview of Sheryl Crow I saw just before the war started. Her foreign policy at the time was, "Why can't we just be friends?" Classic.
Jon;
Interesting comments on the lyrics, I actually had noticed the same thing, we may be fortunate that most people don’t even notice what is actually being said, I have unfortunately seen this in Church, and I find it is the same in most of the culture. How do we change that?!
I buy into your axiom full throttle.
Fill me in on your thoughts about Mother Teresa.
The Abolition of Man is a good book.
Another good post
Post a Comment