Rush Blog - Rush is a Band Blog: Rush and Philosophy book details

Blogoshperes

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Rush and Philosophy book details

Posted at 10:31AM | comments (58)

Back in June I let you know that Open Court Publishing had put out a call for papers for a Rush and Philosophy book that they were planning to release as part of their popular Culture and Philosophy book series. The table of contents for the book - listing the authors and titles of all the essays it will contain along with section titles - has been posted to co-editor Durrell Bowman's website at this link. The book will be divided into 4 sections containing 16 essays with a complete title of Rush and Philosophy: Always Hopeful, Yet Discontent:

Rush and Philosophy: Always Hopeful, Yet Discontent

Chicago: Open Court, 2010 - edited by Jim Berti and Durrell Bowman

Introduction - Jim Berti and Durrell Bowman

Part I: "The Blacksmith and the Artist"

1. Rush's Libertarianism Never "Fit the Plan" - Steven Horwitz, Ph.D.; St. Lawrence U.
2. Hardly Rand-y Peart - Deena Weinstein, Ph.D.; DePaul U. and Michael A. Weinstein, Ph.D.; Purdue U.
3. "What Can This Strange Device Be?": Man and Machine in Rush - Timothy Smolko, M.L.S.; U. of Georgia
4. Barenaked Death Metal Trip-Hopping on Industrial Strings - Durrell Bowman, Ph.D.; Kitchener, Ontario

Part II: "I Want to Look Around Me Now"

1. Myth, Mystery, and Mist?: Secular Humanism and Mystical Language in Rush - Chris McDonald, Ph.D.; Cape Breton U.
2. The Inner and Outer Worlds of Minds and Selves - Todd Suomelo, MLIS; Minnetonka, Minnesota
3. Contre Nous: Musical Otherness in Rush - Nicole Biamonte, Ph.D.; U. of Iowa
4. How is Rush Canadian? - Durrell Bowman, Ph.D.; Kitchener, Ontario

Part III: "To the Margin of Error"

1. "Cruising in Prime Time": The Drumming of Neil Peart as Distraction - Nicholas P. Greco, Ph.D.; Providence College and Seminary
2. The Groove of Rush's Complex Rhythms - John J. Sheinbaum, Ph.D.; U. of Denver
3. 'Nailed It!': Virtuosity, YouTube Performance, and Rush's Aesthetics of Replicability - John T. Reuland, Princeton U.
4. From Plato's Cave to Benjamin's Language Forest: On Imitating Rush - Andrew Cole, Ph.D.; U. of Georgia

Part IV: "The Ebb and Flow of Tidal Fortune"

1. Training Listeners to Think, Feel, and Act - Mitch Earleywine, Ph.D.; U. at Albany
2. Ghost Riding on the Razor's Edge: Neil Peart's Search for Meaning through Tragedy - Jim Berti, North Colonie Schools, U. at Albany
3. Honey on the Rim of "The Larger Bowl" - Melissa L. Beck, Woodstock Academy
4. "Bearing a Gift Beyond Price": Valuing the Music of Rush - Kayla Kreuger, M.A.; West Virginia U.

The book is expected to release sometime this year but no definitive date has been given.

The Culture and Philosophy book series are collections of essays by academic philosophers exploring the meanings, concepts, and puzzles within television shows, movies, music and other icons of popular culture. Since its inception in 2000 with Seinfeld and Philosophy: A Book about Everything and Nothing the series has published over 40 titles including Lord of the Rings and Philosophy, Star Wars and Philosophy, Bob Dylan and Philosophy and Pink Floyd and Philosophy. Other books on Rush and philosophy include 1998's Mystic Rhythms: The Philosophical Vision of Rush, 2002's A Simple Kind Mirror: The Lyrical Vision of Rush, and the recently released Rush, Rock Music and the Middle Class: Dreaming in Middletown. Thanks to Steven Horwitz (one of the contributing authors to the Rush and Philosophy book) for the heads up.

COMMENTS

#1 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:39AM by bakes7 [contact]

Philosophy about Rush ? I just settle for some new music and a tour...

#2 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:43AM by cschnebe [contact]

Excited to see what Deena and Michael Weinstein have written about "Hardly Rand-y Peart". Michael is a photography critic and political science professor, and Deena wrote a very academic volume about Heavy Metal some years back that is highly regarded. I've known Michael for ten years or so and he's reviewed some of my exhibitions. Great guy. Deena teaches a course on the history of rock and metal at DePaul University that my sister-in-law took and loved.

#3 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:52AM by TheHonestMan [contact]

Oooo...a definite must buy for me. Some of these essays sound really interesting. It's nice to mix RUSH in with other areas I find interesting.

Any word on when the paperback release of "Chemistry" is going to occur? Last I checked only used (and a few new) versions of the hard cover were available for quite a lot of dough. I've got to save that money for the 2010 tour!

#4 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:55AM by Kelly D [contact]

As Bubbles would say, "Oh my F*#$!" This book sounds incredibly interesting to me.

#5 - Posted 2/3/10 @12:52PM by crusher87 [contact]

Very cool - if only Prof. Horwitz had been at SLU when I was an undergrad there I might have done better in my economics coursework!

#6 - Posted 2/3/10 @12:56PM by scootertrashaz [contact]

Yes. I must have this. It sounds very interesting..

#7 - Posted 2/3/10 @1:27PM by John E. [contact]

Am I the only one that thinks this is ridiculous ? Seriously, its music. Enjoy it. This to me is just obsessive nonsense.

If you want to know the meaning, philosiphy and interpretation of Neil's lyrics..just have someone ask him !

OR

Decide what the music means to you and you will also have your answer. Sorry about the negative post but I felt I had to share my opinion.

#8 - Posted 2/3/10 @1:38PM by Tom [contact]

I am sort of in agreement with No.7 unless the book is just using lyrics, themes from rush's extensive work - to illustrate ideas, as a way of introducing the lay-reader to philosophy. But otherwise, its music and lyrics throught provoking each one of us with our own ideas what a song is about. Best thing is to do re: meanings of lyrics if of course, ask Neil what it means to him, but i am quite happy just knowing my own interpretation (even if that differs from his intention!)

#9 - Posted 2/3/10 @1:53PM by scootertrashaz [contact]

wow.. take it easy, sluggers.. its just a book. I am very much aware of the way I feel and interpret the lyrics. Its just fun to hear a different point of view.. Jeeze..
You don't have to buy it. its okay! :)

#10 - Posted 2/3/10 @2:00PM by The Professor [contact]

To #7 and #8:

The idea is to use the TV show/band/movie or whatever to introduce and illustrate important ideas in philosophy (or related disciplines). None of us contributing are saying we have "final word" on what the music or lyrics mean. In writing my piece, the goal was to introduce readers to what libertarianism is by way of passages in Rush's lyrics that illustrate the core ideas of that political philosophy. After all, neither Geddy nor Alex are libertarians and Neil has sometimes called himself a "left-libertarian," so I'm certainly not saying that my reading "proves" that he/they are libertarians.

The point is not to say "this is what Neil really meant." Only Neil knows that and it's not the interesting thing anyway. The more interesting thing is how what he meant interacts with what we hear/read and how *that* makes meaning. The point of the collection and my piece specifically is to connect what Neil has written with these larger issues. For those contributions that are about the music, they are doing similar things.

Steve Horwitz - aka "The Professor"

#11 - Posted 2/3/10 @2:46PM by Icademus [contact]

Nicely put Steve (# 10), I look forward to reading the book. I tend to agree philosophically with some of the lyrics.

I do not consider myself to be a libertarian, I like the way Rush's music makes me think and most importantly feel. Music in general is a spritual thing for me, Rush tops my list.

If someone else thinks the same about a certain song or lyric or feels the same as I do, that is great. If not, we can agree to disagree can't we?

Did I get "elevensies"?

#12 - Posted 2/3/10 @2:51PM by Runkerry [contact]

Absolutely no. 7, John E. Obsessive nonsense. Whatever they are trying to convey musically and lyrically, its all very personal to the individual listener.

Jeez, this is a band, not some freak show to be analysed by academics. Life is complex ya know, and music is a way to escape, even if the lyrics do from time to time deal with heavy/weighty issues.

Just listen and enjoy; dont analyse. Sorry, big thumbs down for this. : (

#13 - Posted 2/3/10 @3:07PM by katskahnne [contact]

Not sure how I feel about this. When I was a sophomore in high school, our Creative Writing teacher gave us an assignment to make a little notebook, with artwork, of poetry that meant a lot to us. Mine was all rock lyrics. ALL. Bernie Taupin, Hoyt Axton, George Harrison...a variety, but all lyrics. And that was 1970-71.

Boy, writing essays has gotten hella cooler since I was in college! If a "Snakes & Arrows" or "Presto" or "Roll The Bones" had been around when I had to write an essay about something I could connect to the music I loved...but, then, as far as the lyrics, as has been noted, all I can do is write about what they mean to me, which might be millimeters or light years from Neil's original intent. As far as what music means to me overall, I write about that quite often on my own (blogging). This book might just in the long run be "dancing about architecture", but it might be interesting to read others' thoughts on Rush all the same. That's part of the reason I come to RIAB! :-)

#14 - Posted 2/3/10 @3:12PM by The Professor [contact]

#12:

Does it make a difference that pretty much all of the academics contributing to this are, in fact, fans and that none of us think Rush is a freak show? Does it matter that maybe thinking about stuff like this is how WE escape from the stuff we *have* to think about all the time and that this is a lot of fun for us? Does it matter that we, too, listen and enjoy, but also think that the unexamined life and music are not worth living and listening to?

I will leave you with this: arguing that it's all personal to the listener IS a engaging in an analysis. (If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice, eh?) Welcome to the club Runkerry. :) Hope you change your mind and buy the book, it will be great.

#15 - Posted 2/3/10 @3:20PM by John E. [contact]

# 10, I see your intent now and understand the purpose of introducing different subjects to readers by using Rush's lyrics.

I guess it makes it a little easier to digest if you can apply something you enjoy to understand some complicated topics.

My initial reaction was "at the end of the day, its music to enjoy and jam out to, not necessarily to dissect and study".

I see your purpose.

Good Luck.

#16 - Posted 2/3/10 @3:53PM by drmike [contact]

As a research Psychologist studying music perception/cognition, I have to weigh in on this discussion. Music is communication--from lullabyes that calm an infant and play songs intended to keep kids happy, all music is intended to communicate meaning in the form of emotions. The listener is *supposed* to get the meaning.

Lyrics are also supposed to convey meaning--they are words afterall. Neil's lyrics are complex and I expect he is trying to communicate something to us. Personally, I think debating about the meaning of something Neil wrote makes me love Rush even more than I already do. Years on alt.music.rush newsgroup makes me think a lot of people enjoy those debates.... so relax and enjoy, or at least allow those of us that want to read (and write) such stuff have our fun.

#17 - Posted 2/3/10 @4:25PM by TheHonestMan [contact]

One of my teachers put it best a few years ago: The meaning of a work is what it conveys to the audience, regardless of the intended purpose of the author. In other words, Neil's purpose in writing the lyrics is not necessarily the meaning for everyone. I agree that how you interpret the work is important, but it is very interesting to understand and gain insight into how others interpret the very same piece. It may even open new possibilities and ideas that you agree with, but have never considered. I don't think anyone would argue that viewing things from other perspectives is a bad thing.

The Professor - Your paper looks the most interesting to me, and I cannot wait to read it. Thank you for your contribution to the book.

#7 - There's no need for that kind of post. If you don't want to buy the book, fine. Leave it at that. Don't call it ridiculous and obsessive nonsense. Not everyone is going to have the same interests as you.

#18 - Posted 2/3/10 @5:09PM by drmike [contact]

I remember a discussion about the meaning of The Trees. One fan believed it was about the evils of the big guys keeping the little guys down. The Professor and I both argued that it was about the fact that the only way to keep everyone equal is through brutal force ("by hatchet axe and saw") and is therefore wrong. It's hard to think that Neil would like the thought that some people got his message exactly opposite to what he was trying to say (regardless which of us got the message right).

#19 - Posted 2/3/10 @6:15PM by The Professor [contact]

Hey Dr. Mike.... My interpretation of "The Trees" will make an appearance in that chapter. ;)

#20 - Posted 2/3/10 @6:42PM by TheHonestMan [contact]

#18 - I believe Neil has said that his inspiration for that song was just a cartoon of trees talking, and he didn't really intend it to be a metaphor. He just thought it would be funny if trees acted like people.

However, having said that, I would agree with your interpretation. I doubt that at that point in his life, Neil would have believed in limiting an individual. Also, after first hearing the song I wondered if the humans who cut the trees at the end represent another group of oppressors. Therefore, does the equality of the trees matter if there still exists a group that is able control them?

I could go on about this stuff for hours...

#21 - Posted 2/3/10 @7:04PM by Jaybird [contact]

In the Sep 1988 RBC newsletter, Neil answered the question about the meaning of The Trees by saying:

"It's an allegorical metaphor on human behavior. (You asked!)"

#22 - Posted 2/3/10 @7:16PM by Kelly D [contact]

I'm actually shocked by the backlash on the board about this. Since when is thinking intellectually a problem? Why not expand one's horizons, especially if the subject is one's favorite band? What's the harm? No one is putting words in Neil's mouth. There is such a thing as a differing opinion (and Gawd knows there are enough of them on this board) and hell, if you can put Rush's lyrics into an academic realm, why not?

Color me confused, folks. But still excited to read the essays.

#23 - Posted 2/3/10 @8:25PM by 1-2-bucklemyshoe [contact]

When Isaac Asimov was just starting to write, he went to hear a lecture given by another well-respected science fiction writer. During the lecture, this other author gave an analysis of one of Asimov's short stories, which the latter felt was completely off target. So at the conclusion of the lecture, he went up to the speaker and told him that he had completely missed the point of his story. To which the lecturer responded: "What makes you think that you understand the meaning of the story simply because you wrote it?" That's when Asimov realized that writing stories is something greater than the work of one individual but rather involves a community and a whole other dimension.

I think Neil would approve wholeheartedly of his lyrics being analyzed and studied because he knows (and has stated this many times) that his words may have a completely different effect on the listener than his original intention. I also think that all of the boys get a kick out of their music being studied, imitated and even criticized. It means their creativity is having an impact on the universe.

Besides, you know that, whether they wrote for the fun of it, or because they want others to hear their views, or because they need another publication to get tenure, all the contributors to this book are secret air drummers who go up and down on the wood blocks in the middle section of "The Trees." regardless of its meaning.

#24 - Posted 2/3/10 @8:37PM by The Professor [contact]

I wish I had a dollar for every time a student walked into my office and caught me air drumming.

#25 - Posted 2/3/10 @8:52PM by spiralarray [contact]

#23-
I agree. An example of Neil understanding this (and Geddy too) was in the Making of Snakes and arrows video . They both talk about that very subject in a few clips.
I remember listening to Tom Sawyer once and for some reason all of a sudden ,I noticed when Geddy sings "the river", I wondered if that was a reference to a song by Genesis (the song eludes me right now,though). It may or may not have been, but that's another example of lyrics having different meanings to different listeners or maybe different inspirations, also.

#26 - Posted 2/3/10 @8:59PM by TheHonestMan [contact]

#21, Jaybird - Hmmm...that's really interesting. I've never seen that quote before. You learn something new everyday :). Here's the quote I was talking about:

"No. It was just a flash. I was working on an entirely different thing when I saw a cartoon picture of these trees carrying on like fools. I thought, "What if trees acted like people?" So I saw it as a cartoon really, and wrote it that way. I think that's the image that it conjures up to a listener or a reader. A very simple statement." -- Neil Peart, in the April/May 1980 Modern Drummer magazine

It does seem likely, however, that Neil did incorporate some deeper message into the song, even if that message was not the inspiration for writing it.

#27 - Posted 2/3/10 @9:00PM by spiralarray [contact]

#25 (me)

The Genesis song was "Firth of fifth" and the lines from the lyrics were "The sands of time were eroded by
The river of constant change." When I heard that, it reminded me of a few of the lines from Tom Sawyer.
That could be pure coincidence or maybe Neil was subtly referencing that song.

#28 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:17PM by dtoelectric [contact]

Fools and thieves are dangerous!It's a (paralladox)you dig.
This book and Neils church bulletin scrap book. Thinking is the problem and until one attains that knowledge they are hiding from the truth that they refuse to accept. Yes this book is all about fun and nothing else so enjoy it for the entertainment( learned behaviors nothing genuine ) that it is because, thats entertainment!

#29 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:25PM by limelighter [contact]

i know that a lot of neil's lyrics are used in universities in the classroom across canada. the u.s. i do not know. how neat of a class would that be. it sounds like a bird course but i bet you it probably isn't. that being said i would absolutely take it anyway. rush will always be the most successful act coming from canada. the worst band from canada? that's easy. congratulations nickelback

#30 - Posted 2/3/10 @10:53PM by Lamb Saag [contact]

If Tom Wolfe can write a book about Bauhaus furniture, then why can't philosophers write a book about Rush lyrics? Authors are entertainers, too.

re: #20
QUOTE "Therefore, does the equality of the trees matter if there still exists a group that is able control them? "

Only if they fall in the forest and nobody's there to hear their sound.

#31 - Posted 2/4/10 @5:38AM by Jaybird [contact]

TheHonestMan,

Thanks for that.

What Neil said can be found at the PowerWindows site.

link

#32 - Posted 2/4/10 @8:16AM by dadof4 [contact]

I'm excited, perhaps it will be better than that other book I never finished... Mystic something....ugh

Aren't we all looking for lyrical enlightenment?

#33 - Posted 2/4/10 @8:37AM by PetieLee [contact]

Happy Birthday, Ed!!!!!!! Wishing you the very best today (and everyday)! Just remember you're not one year older, just one year more awesome! When you blow out your candles today, wish for Rush tour dates! *tee hee hee*

Cheers!

link

Love da Geddy! Miss da Geddy!

#34 - Posted 2/4/10 @8:51AM by craig [contact]

i find it utterly AMAZING that some folks leave comments about everyone able to have their very own personal ideas and interpretations, and the ability to express them, but then chastise those whose ideas are contrary to their own. this forum unto itself is quite a read. i would like to hear more about why #7 is not entitled to his own personal feelings and why his opinion should be squelched...

would #17 care to retort, or his he willing to excuse himself due to his contradictory statements...? to quote thehonestman:

"One of my teachers put it best a few years ago: The meaning of a work is what it conveys to the audience, regardless of the intended purpose of the author. In other words, Neil's purpose in writing the lyrics is not necessarily the meaning for everyone. I agree that how you interpret the work is important, but it is very interesting to understand and gain insight into how others interpret the very same piece. It may even open new possibilities and ideas that you agree with, but have never considered. I don't think anyone would argue that viewing things from other perspectives is a bad thing."

so, in other words: leave an open mind to how others think.

and he continues...

"#7 - There's no need for that kind of post. If you don't want to buy the book, fine. Leave it at that. Don't call it ridiculous and obsessive nonsense. Not everyone is going to have the same interests as you."

wow

#35 - Posted 2/4/10 @9:11AM by theanalogkid [contact]

What's all this fuss about Russian philosophy? Sounds very abstract and complicated.

#36 - Posted 2/4/10 @9:12AM by mommy_of_zuzu [contact]

I'm so proud of Rush and particularly Neil.

Imagine being a high school dropout, self-educated, and forty years later have adcademic publishing at the PhD level study your work?

To me, it validates it. My own college essays are somehow more worthwhile because of this book and others.

I agree with Kelly D #23 in regard to some of these posts.

Elevate from the norm!

#37 - Posted 2/4/10 @9:53AM by I love Rush [contact]

Petie: love the cake! yum yum

And happy birthday Ed

#38 - Posted 2/4/10 @10:29AM by idrum2 [contact]

Seriously? People are downing this project? What's with all the anti-academics? Y'all sound like a bunch of fundies.

I enjoy Rush because of the fact they are more intellectual. They aren't just a sex, drugs, and rock and roll acts. I am really looking forward to this book.

Another thing though, from the titles it doesn't seem like anyone is addressing topics like "Roll the Bones," "the Larger Bowl," and "Fatihless." To me, these are the most overt philosophical topics Rush has addressed in their music, wrestling with theism and the problem of evil in the world.

I am also interested in the essays dealing with mysticism and humanism. To me, this has always struck me as a paradox of Rush's lyrics (also in Neil's Ghost Rider book, reconciling Tarot and rationalism).

#39 - Posted 2/4/10 @12:09PM by Lamb Saag [contact]

MEANWHILE IN AN ALTERNATE UNIVERSE...

A book with philosophical musings of Rush music has got to be better than this offering:
"To Be Sixteen Again: KISS, AC/DC, and The Philosophy Of Cock-Rock" (which, after all, is only 20 pages and all pictures)

#40 - Posted 2/4/10 @12:30PM by TheHonestMan [contact]

#34, Craig - Did you even take time to read what you copied from my post? Had you done so, you would have realized that I have no problem with him saying he wasn't interested in the book. My issue arose from the rude and disrespectful nature of him stating his opinion. Calling something "ridiculous" and "obsessive nonsense" is attacking other people. That was clearly stated in my first post.

Once again, I have no issue with the fact he doesn't care for this topic. The manner in which he belittled and insulted those who do enjoy it is the problem. Everyone should just be polite and respectful, and these little arguments would never occur. Please don't call me a hypocrite for refusing to stand by while others criticize me.

There's your retort...

#41 - Posted 2/4/10 @1:20PM by Cortisol [contact]

I always ( perhaps stupidly ) thought that The Trees was about the Quebec - Canada secession thing.
alright then. :P

#42 - Posted 2/4/10 @3:48PM by dadof4 [contact]

Cortisol, I thought "The Trees" is about countries placed in submission by weapons. Go figure, I guess we all have our own interpretation.

Anyone else have their own idea?

#43 - Posted 2/4/10 @3:51PM by Runkerry [contact]

No, Im with Cortisol on this one; thats the story I always heard.

No offence intended on earlier posts on the whole philosophy thing (just read some of the other comments). Just my opinion.

: )

#44 - Posted 2/4/10 @4:47PM by The Professor [contact]

Whether or not Neil had it in mind, the main themes of *The Trees* are very similar to those of Kurt Vonnegut's *Harrison Bergeron* from 1961: link You can decide for yourself if that's a good reading of the song.

#45 - Posted 2/4/10 @4:53PM by GedHed [contact]

#44: That's my take as well.
Great Vonnegut story. Love it.

#46 - Posted 2/4/10 @5:51PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

Wow , now this is an interesting blog ! Disecting Pratt's facial skin, baggy eye's, body weight plasticbotoxairbrushedimplantslimmerpudgylogerhair...
Not so much.

#47 - Posted 2/4/10 @5:51PM by spiralarray [contact]

"They say there is strangeness to danger us
in our theatres and bookstore shelves
that those who know what's best for us
must rise and save us from ourselves

Quick to judge
quick to anger
slow to understand
ignorance and prejudice
and fear walk hand in hand"

#48 - Posted 2/4/10 @5:54PM by spiralarray [contact]

*strangeness too dangerous.

oops.

#49 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:03PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

danger us ?
are you from Canadia ?

#50 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:17PM by spiralarray [contact]

Yeah, #49, Im from Canada. Not sure where Canadia is. Not sure what your point is. Trying to divide more people in the Rush blogs maybe? Stir some more trouble? Maybe start siding Canadians against other countries? Oh, by the way..where is Rush from? You annoyed me in the other blog and now this one. I will try to skip over your future posts.
It was a cut /paste mistake. I wanted to put the lyrics up ,because they fit with the topic of the blog. I got them from a lyric site that obviously had the one line wrong. I noticed after putting it up.

#51 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:27PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

"got them from a lyric site"
nough' said

#52 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:36PM by spiralarray [contact]

Ok, Im done. Ive enjoyed these blogs for the most part, but there's just some very STRANGE Rush fans who are members of this site and well ,#51...prime example.
I come on here to check the Rush news, not to be annoyed, bothered, or in the case of you #51 post...basically "heckled". I saw some other posts of yours on the last blog and commented on one of them, defending another person because you thought you would call that person a "fair weather fan" of Rush. Apparently, you come on here to cause trouble, be an idiot, etc.
To the members who actually have intelligent or funny things to say, I enjoyed reading and having some exchanges with some of you on here. Going close my account now.

#53 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:43PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

Yeah, what he said ! me too !

#54 - Posted 2/4/10 @6:58PM by double-agent

I am very excited to read this! It's a cool scholarly work that examines my favorite band. What's not to love? Plus, one of my very best friends is one of the authors!! Just freaking awesome!!

double-agent ♥

#55 - Posted 2/4/10 @7:41PM by drmike [contact]

Great link to the Vonnegut story, Professor (#44)! Maybe the original lyric was

and the trees are all kept equal
by hatchet
axe,
and ear transmitter!

Of course, Neil would have had to shave some syllables so had to change the last to "saw".

Looking forward to your chapter, Professor!

#56 - Posted 2/5/10 @9:38PM by The_king_will_Neil [contact]

#20, I always thought the end of The Trees was meant to put us in our place - we were put on this earth simply to enact the Oaks' solution.

(Then again, I'm always reading in more than could have been intended - "why the Maples / Can't be happy in their shade" - who's shade: the Oaks' because they're taller or the Maples' because they're in the shade?)

I once heard a DJ describe The Trees as "a song about some trees, that talk; what were they smoking when they wrote that?". The same DJ probably thought Anna Godda Davida was a phrase in Latin from a famous work (or maybe it an Italian actress' name).

#57 - Posted 2/6/10 @2:20PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

I've read a few articles desribing a thickley smoke filled studio w/ many enpty wine bottles before they tried to sing (prnounce) 1-2-3 (roll tape) In the Garden of Eden, Baby...

#58 - Posted 2/6/10 @2:23PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

Kinda like my spelling...

RUSH IS A BAND

Blogoshperes

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Rush and Philosophy book details

COMMENTS

Random Sample...

Looking for an answer

Time Stand Still...

Finding Your Way

Important Items

Contribute

Recent Posts

Site Navigation

Signals Transmitted

Temple of Rush-links

Archives

RUSH IS A BAND

Blogoshperes

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Rush and Philosophy book details

COMMENTS

... of Salesmen

Random Sample...

Looking for an answer

Time Stand Still...

Finding Your Way

Important Items

Contribute

Recent Posts

Site Navigation

Signals Transmitted

Temple of Rush-links

Archives