Rap Music

[Pope Saint Pius V]

Perhaps I will join the argument. But do I have the time? (and will I get censored??)

[BeenaBobba]

Hi PSPV,

That's your call. If you don't follow the phorum guidelines, your posts will be edited. The guidelines are pretty straightforward and reasonable, so I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to follow them. If you follow them, there'll be no reason for your posts to be edited. So, keep that in mind.

I look forward to chatting with you if you decide to join this discussion.

God bless,

Jennifer

[dUSt]

[quote name='Pope Saint Pius V' date='Jul 2 2004, 11:10 PM'] Perhaps I will join the argument. But do I have the time? (and will I get censored??) [/quote]
Perhaps you will. I don't know. (maybe.)

[qfnol31]

I like Catholic rap.

[heyyoimjohnny]

My two cents...


Immorality in music is determined by it's lyrics. Whether it's bad or not excluding the lyrics is purely opinion. Would listening to rap music without lyrics bring you away from God?

[dUSt]

[quote name='heyyoimjohnny' date='Jul 3 2004, 10:01 AM'] My two cents...


Immorality in music is determined by it's lyrics. Whether it's bad or not excluding the lyrics is purely opinion. Would listening to rap music without lyrics bring you away from God? [/quote]
I think that's the big argument.

Those against Catholic rap are arguing that the music (just the instrumentals without the lyrics) is dis-edifying.

[Guest JeffCR07]

I would really, really, really like someone to respond to my previous posts, so I have consolidated them here:

[quote]Amarkich, I would like to respond if I may:

Your basic premise is that there are two relevant aspects to consider when judging the worth of a particular musical piece. The first is "lyrics" while the second is "musicality." "Lyrics" refers to the verbal message accompanying the music. "Musicality" refers to skill with which the notes of a piece are arranged in order to invoke particular emotions.

You argue that the two can be analyzed seperately and have their individual value appraised aside from the influence that the other has.

I agree.

It is clear that lyrics can either be good or bad, and the determination of this is relatively easy, so you proceed to the more difficult task: addressing the issue of musicality.

Like you, I agree that, because the arrangement of notes in certain ways can evoke certain emotions, sheer musicality, entirely apart from lyrics, can have a positive or negative affect on one's spirituality.

For anyone who disagrees with me, I will use an example from Music Theory: The Laconic Mode. The Laconic Mode is a series of notes in which each successive note is an equal degree of dissonance apart from the note that preceeded it. It was banned from Church music for a long time. Why? - It just sounds evil. Anyone who doubts me, feel free to listen to it, or to any song that is played within it.

However, here is where Amarkich and I part ways, for it is my opinion that even something like the laconic mode can be used tastefully.

If you are listening to a piece of music that has multiple movements (one without lyrics, I might add) the music itself is used to tell a story. If one is trying to tell the story of, say, Christ's temptation in the Desert and his subsequent fidelity to God and rebuke of Satan, it would not only be "ok" to use the laconic mode, but even advisable.

When it starts out, I can imagine the music to be slow & somber - Christ is fasting. Suddenly it speeds up and gets more excited - the devil has appeared.
The music changes for each temptation, getting louded and louder as Lucifer ups the ante.
Then he asks Christ to worship him - cacaphony, chaos, evil: the laconic mode.
Abruptly it stops. Christ has repulsed the Devil and submitted to God
The music becomes light and airy - the angels minister to Christ

Even music that is, in and of itself, "evil" can be used to magnify the positive affect that music can have.

"But Jeff, what about things like Rock and Rap: THEY don't work in movements like classical music!"

Thats right, they don't. But now we get into a question of how to define things like Rock, Rap, Hip-Hop, etc. Rock first, then Rap and Hip-Hop:

Rock: Most of what has been said with regards to Rock so far is incorrect. Not all rock is "electrifying." Not all rock is "loud." etc. There are many types of rock, so let us first define it.

Really what we are talking about is an instrumental arrangement. For rock music, it consists of guitar(s), bass, drum, vocals, and sometimes piano and other instruments, but those first four are the key.

Each of those instruments is capable of playing "good" music (that is, good for spirituality) and "bad" music (that is, bad for spirituality). Being that no instrument is "evil" in and of itself.

So Jeff, can Rock music ever be good? Yes, it can, listen to Eric Clapton's "Tears in Heaven." It is tremendously sad, uses all of the correct instruments, is undeniably "Rock" (if you contest this, then your definition of Rock is not the same as mine, and is probably too narrow, thus denying some forms of rock music).

The song teaches the importance of living up to one's responsibilities, and of the unconditional love for a son that a father has. It is productive and formative for spiritual development. So, for Rock, it is all about how the instruments are used.

Rap/Hip-Hop:

The basic argument for this is much simpler than that of Rock, due to the nature of the music.

Rap and Hip-Hop have their origins in the old Call-and-Response tradition of the American Slaves. It has slowly developed over time, and, true to what people have said, the musicality (heavy bass beat, mellow guitar parts, and even DJ sampling) is entirely focused on the individual rapper/singer.

But for catholics, this deep focus on one thing (the rapper/singer in this case) should not be a new concept. We focus deeply on Relics, Icons, Crucifixes, Statues etc. In the same way, if the individual that hip-hop or rap music causes you to focus on helps to bring your attention to God, then the music itself is good.


Conclusion:

All this having been said, I would just like to summarize though please (especially amarkich) dont just read the summary.

Any given musical intrument can play a series of notes that either bring one closer to, or further from, God, whether directly or indirectly.

In the case of Rock music, it tends to be direct, with the focus on the music itself (typically the guitar(s)), so it all depends on how the instruments are being played and how the music is being arranged. When done well, Rock can produce positive, wonderful songs, like Tears in Heaven by Eric Clapton.

In the case of Rap and some Hip-Hop, it is indirect, with the music trying to focus the listeners attention on the singer/rapper and what he/she is saying. If the message is good, then the music, which draws attention and focus, is also "good" just like an icon helps draw you to God through focus on a holy image.


Just one last note, then I'm done. I would very much like for any responses to try to avoid the "It sounds like noise," "It isn't music - just listen to that crashing and banging," "I can't focus on the lyrics because the music is too loud" type arguments. More than likely, it is an issue of being accustomed to certain things. Music evolves in a very concreate and real way and if it was truly "so loud" that it nullified lyrics, then lyrics would have eventually dropped from that type of music, even over the course of just 5 or 10 years. This is true because music is a type of communicative expression, like poetry, and demands not only to be concise, but to be acurate to what the artist is trying to portray.[/quote]

[quote]As it has been stated already in this post, Rap, as a music style, tends to rely heavily on bass as the driving power behind the music. This is why:

Typically, if guitars are used in a rap song, it is in an arpeggio (finger-picking) style or impliments the use of an "alaska" pick, worn on the thumb (a more specific style of finger-picking). This guitar style tends to be significantly more subtle, and does not draw attention away from the rapper (that is why it is also the dominant force in folk music).

Sampling (DJing) can have a wide range of uses in terms of what it adds or detracts from the music, and typically (in a manner reminiscent of the call-and-response style) if the artist is in the process of rapping, the sampling is light, only to pick up when the vocals drop off. This helps draw attention to the rapper as well.

The Bass: I would like to spend a few moments addressing the role of the bass in rap songs, because it is a.) what you asked about, and b.) very important. If I can speak with authority on any of this, it is with regards to the bass, seeing as that is the instrument I love most and play best. A bass, unless in the hands of a very capable player, does little more than provide the backbone of the music - a very important job, I might add  . It does not tend to be flashy, but rather, helps to accentuate those things that it accompanies, in order to increase their role in the music. In a guitar-bass duo, the bass allows the guitarist to play intricate solos and get a point across without having the listener lose the true feel and flavor of the song. In the case of a rapper, it provides the platform upon which his vocals stand and, as Dust pointed out, when the bass beat cuts out, it adds complete focus on the rapper. The role of the bass is to allow the vocalist (in the case of rapping) a little more lee-way than he would normally have, and to make it easier for him to make transitions. However, very rarely is the listeners attention focused on the bass itself - typically that occurs when someone plays a "slap-bass" style, which is rarely used in rap.

The end result is that the bass beat holds up the other aspects of the music so that the listener can pay more attention to them. In rock this is in the form of the guitar, in rap, the vocalist.[/quote]


please, a response to this will (i hope) return the debate to the track that it was on at the beginning.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff

[Pope Saint Pius V]

Is there any musicical form intrinsically higher than another?

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='Pope Saint Pius V' date='Jul 6 2004, 01:10 AM'] Is there any musicical form intrinsically higher than another? [/quote]
I think church music is intrinsically "better" than all other music.

God bless,

Jen

[dUSt]

[quote name='Pope Saint Pius V' date='Jul 5 2004, 11:10 PM'] Is there any musicical form intrinsically higher than another? [/quote]
Yes. Gregorian Chant is intrinsically higher than rap.

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Jul 6 2004, 01:18 AM'] Yes. Gregorian Chant is intrinsically higher than rap. [/quote]
Right you are, O Venerable Webmaster!

God bless,

Jen

[Pope Saint Pius V]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Jul 5 2004, 11:18 PM'] Yes. Gregorian Chant is intrinsically higher than rap. [/quote]
If this is true (which I agree that it is) then there is an intrinsic "value" to various types of music (just to put it another way). If this is the case then we cannot say that no form of music is better than another nor can we say, as beebabobba has stated, that it's all subjective. If Gregorian Chant is higher intrinsically then it doesn't matter what I like or dislike. The fact of the matter remains that I can either conform my tastes to that which is objectively higher (no, I'm not suggesting that we should listen to chant all day) or I can chose the lower, more base, forms of music. The higher you go in that hierarchy the more edifying, almost by definition. The higher forms imitate more closely the highest forms which is in this case "The Beautiful" which is God.

[Guest JeffCR07]

Um, if anyone is still in disagreement with Dust and I (that is, if anyone believe that Rap [i]music[/i] is intrinsically evil) could someone [i]please[/i] respond to my post?

I feel like the points I'm making are important to the argument, but, rather than being addressed, my points are just being skipped over and the conversation simply moves in a different direction...

[Pope Saint Pius V]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 6 2004, 07:24 AM'] Um, if anyone is still in disagreement with Dust and I (that is, if anyone believe that Rap [i]music[/i] is intrinsically evil) could someone [i]please[/i] respond to my post?

I feel like the points I'm making are important to the argument, but, rather than being addressed, my points are just being skipped over and the conversation simply moves in a different direction... [/quote]
Patience. PSPX is suspended for another week and a half. By the way, I'm not sure that he is arguing (nor am I) that Rap music is intrinsically evil. The problem with that statement is that it begs the question as to what exactly is considered Rap Music. There are a couple points from your commenst that I want to look at again and will get to later.

[dUSt]

[quote]If this is true (which I agree that it is) then there is an intrinsic "value" to various types of music (just to put it another way). If this is the case then we cannot say that no form of music is better than another nor can we say, as beebabobba has stated, that it's all subjective. [/quote]
The reason Gregorian Chant is higher is because of many reasons, but two are 1) it is a powerful form of prayer and 2) the Church specifically speaks of Gregorian Chant having a special place in the Church. It is [b]not[/b] higher because of the arrangements of it's notes or chords.

[quote]If Gregorian Chant is higher intrinsically then it doesn't matter what I like or dislike.  The fact of the matter remains that I can either conform my tastes to that which is objectively higher (no, I'm not suggesting that we should listen to chant all day) or I can chose the lower, more base, forms of music.  The higher you go in that hierarchy the more edifying, almost by definition.[/quote]
I agree. Nobody is arguing that hip-hop is more edifying than any other form of music, and certainly nobody is arguing that hip-hop is the [b]most[/b] edifying. I'm simply stating that it [b]can[/b] be edifying, and, when used in the correct manner, is not intrinsically evil.

Praying in front of the exposed Eucharist is "higher" or more edifying than praying in front of your bed, no? Does this mean that we should not pray in front of our beds? Are you saying that unless we can glorify God in the [b]most[/b] edifying way we should not glorify Him at all?

[quote]The higher forms imitate more closely the highest forms which is in this case "The Beautiful" which is God.[/quote]
I agree. I don't see this making a case not to use hip-hop to glorify the Church though.