Marbren, I just read the full article, “Rock and Roll: Sound of Music or Noise of War”. My initial response is that his thesis - namely that the very sound of a “back beat” (a regular syncopated rhythm) is Satanic in origin and therefore spiritually and physically destructive - is a little bit of truth taken way, way, way to the extreme.
First of all, the writer is not just saying music that we readily define as “rock and roll” is the only “rock and roll”. He defines the “rock sound” with any type and style of music that has a regular back beat (syncopated rhythm). This would include African American spirituals (”Go Tell It On the Mountain” for example), many, many American folk songs, Stephen Foster songs like, “O, Susanah”, “Camp Town Races”, all bluegrass music including “I Saw the Light”, “I’ll Fly Away”, etc. Songs by George Gershwin (”I’ve Got Rhythm”, “Rhadsody in Blue”, etc.), Irving Berlin songs (”Alexander’s Ragtime Band”), songs like “Singing in the Rain”, country western music (including “God Bless the U.S.A.”) and on and on. “Surfin’ U.S.A”, “The Little Old Lady from Pasadena”, “I Want to Hold Your Hand”, - these are Satanic songs?
Plus the writer made some statements about the Bible and music that are definitely a stretch of logic. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that certain sounds or rhythms are satanic. If it were all that important, wouldn’t you think that God would have told us??
The writer also mentions “whale songs”, “stellar sounds”, “bird sounds”. He says none of these things have a rock beat to them. The truth is they don’t have ANY disernable regularly recurring rhythm pattern to them - no strong beat rhythms nor syncopated rhythms. At best they are “poly-rhythmic”, that is, changing and fluid rhythm patterns that are not regular and recurring.
As to whether or not a “backbeat” rhythm ever occurs naturally in nature - I honestly don’t know if that’s true or not, but even if it is true, what does that prove? There are lots of things that do not occur naturally in nature but are not necessarily considered bad things - such as engines, automobiles, telephones, radios, pianos, roads, gardens, farms, etc.
He mentions the effects of “rock rhythms” on plants and a various types of people. There is no question that music affects us, as we discussed before, but in these studies he quotes it says nothing about VOLUME. I don’t care what kind of music it is - if it is played at a certain decible level - it is going to do damage to you and your body.
So, my overall impression is that the writer is genuinely concerned about the effects of “rock sound” on people. I do not question his motives, but I do question his logic and therefore his conclusions. He is wrong about the backbeat not existing prior to “rock and roll”. It may be argued that there were no classical songs or traditional hymns that were predominately syncopated like modern rock music, but there certainly are sections and passages in all styles of music - baroque, classical, hymns, Gospel songs, etc.
I would also dispute his thesis that rock is only the “back beat” or syncopated beat. Rock is also very strong on 4/4 or common time. It usually establishes that strong four beat tempo - then throws in syncopation for interest.
I think the writer, though sincere, is making some illogical conclusions. Remember, he is not just saying Rock Music alone is the problem - it is the very sound of a regular backbeat. And, as I previously mentioned - that would exclude almost all folk music and popular music of all styles and eras.
As to musical sounds and styles being neutral, I guess I would qualify that with volume.
He also quotes Little Richard and other rock musicians who claim they got their music from Satan. That may very well be - but Little Richard is a theological and musical expert?? He may know about his experience with rock music and his motivation for making music, but I don’t see how he can claim that even Christian rock is Satanic. It seems a cop-out to me to blame the sound of rock music (as opposed to the lyrics) for the rotten lifestyles that many rock stars have. How about Hollywood stars? What’s their excuse? How about politicians? Isn’t the common denomiator fame? Wealth? Power?? Greed?? It’s the music that’s making them act this way? It’s not my sinful nature and personal choices that caused me to experience these bad things - it’s the music! I don’t buy it.
Whew, I’m off my soap box now. Anyway, that’s my 2 cents.
Excellent points.
Particularly about other syncopated rhythms that are not at all ‘satanic sounding.’
Hard to know precisely where to draw lines.
I do think the attitude of the heart, as usual, is key.
However, when the volume is destroying children’s (as well as adult’s) hearing . . . SOMETHING IS HORRIBLY WRONG whether the people who’s hearing is being destroyed LIKE it, are addicted to the dopamine high from it, or not.