OK, this is old news from earlier in the week for those of you who watched the Utah news or read LDS-Phil. It's one of those odd things that I wasn't sure quite how to bring it up. But it lets me talk about a few odds and ends that I'm not able to talk about here normally. So here it goes. BYU Philosophy professor Mark Wrathall is writing one of the latest volumes in the pop culture and philosophy series. You know the ones, The Matrix and Philosophy or The Simpsons and Philosophy. A few of those, like the Matrix book, make sense. A lot don't seem to make much sense to me at all. When I glance through them down at Barnes and Nobel they seem kind of trite. However a U2 book actually makes a lot of sense. For one, their lyrics are actually deeper than it often appears. Secondly I like U2 and the volume really intrigues me.
I should add, as a bit of a tangent, that I thought How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb easily one of my favorite albums of the last few years. I know it got a lot of initial praise and then there was a lot of criticism of it. Certainly it isn't a radio-friendly album. (Beyond Vertigo) But it really grows on you. Further it has some of my now all time favorite U2 songs. I think I've listened to this more than anything else the past four months.
OK, now that I have my biases told, let me say that I fully understand why many didn't like the album. Vertigo musically wasn't as original as it could be. There was little in the rest that was catchy single music that you sing along to. But I think a lot of the backlash was simply anti-U2 memes because they are big and have been around so long. (Sort of like the anti-Led Zepplin backlash of the late 70's and early 80's especially in the punk movement)
But back to philosophy. Wrathall apparently is going to analyze U2 in terms of Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Plato. (What, no Heidegger?) It'll be interesting to read I think. Of course the trick will be drawing out significant philosophical terms. Will this be a philosophical analysis and critique of U2 or drawing out their philosophical claims? I admit I'm not sure. Given the large shift between Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby I think I can understand the Nietzsche approach. A lot of people rightly or wrongly saw that as a repudiation of a lot of their Christian roots, only returned to in their last album. I'm not sure that's fair. Pop, while definitely their nadir, seemed to have a lot of still deeply moving Christian symbolism. Still there simultaneously was a lot of distrust of conventional religion. It'll be interesting to see what Wrathall draws out there, given some of the Mormon use of Nietzsche towards the abuses and excesses of Christianity through the past 2000 years. I admit I've always had sympathy towards Neitzsche's critique of Christian charity as a way of keep power over the people. Johnny Cash singing "The Wanderer" on U2's Zooropa has obvious allusions to Nietzsche's madman. Song I can already pick out some things.
The interesting discussion that came up on LDS-Phil wasn't Nietzsche, Bono and Christian charity. Although given Bono's activism for Africa, that would be an interesting discussion for sure. (Word is that he and Wolfowitz, the future leader of the World Bank, have been talking a lot and some say have similar views.) Rather the discussion was U2's theology of deferred redemption.
According to Bryan Warnick on LDS-Phil, U2 constantly presents the challenge of the tension "between the beauty of divine promises and the ugly realities human beings confront and inflict upon one another." It seems to me, following Bryan's comments, that this is a theme throughout U2's career on up to the current album. We are promised heaven, but here we sit in hell. And typically it is a hell of our own making. Both religiously as well as an analysis of U2's lyrics. The idea is that part of faith is questioning, especially a questioning of these apparent paradoxes we see between the promise and the reality.
Mark Wrathall replied by suggesting that in the last two albums there is a sense that U2 has moved beyond this deferred redemption and rediscovered existential Christianity. Bryan points out though that the last song in the current album, "Yahweh," still talks of a grace to come.
I ought to ask Bryan and Mark if I can post their comments here. I thought them very insightful. Especially the relationship between faith and questioning.
As far as the other "Philosophy and" books:
Well, the Simpsons one is actually very good, but not as a Philosophy text. As a literary theory text, or a rhetoric text, it works well. For example, the essay on allusions in the Simpsons is the absolute best explantion (for a general audience) of allusions (and allusions vs. references vs. false allusions) anywhere.
The Buffy one (suprisingly or not) is much more political than the other ones (at least, of the ones I've read). The best essay is one that argues that Buffy and her crew are best seens as fascists in training (rather than the happy liberals other commentators see them as).
The Lord of the Rings and Philosophy one was, IMHO, a let down. A few really good essays, a few really bad essays - with most of them just passable. Mainly it was a let down because of the richness of the source material. But it's still worth a read because the good essays are really good.
And I have never really liked the Matrix phenomenon, so I haven't read the Matrix one. Perhaps I should anyway?
Most of the Matrix one is available online. The sad thing about the Matrix is that it is generally written from an analytic position rather than a continental one. So it tends to lose a lot of what is in the films. Having said that though I honestly don't see the Matrix as philosophical as some do. It has philosophical allusions, of course. To things like the "brains in a vat" issue and of course Plato's cave. But by and large I don't find it nearly as philosophical as some do.
The second film, for all its many flaws, was the most interesting philosophically, I think. But a far better film that touches on similar themes is Dark City.
That's one reason I never really cared for the Matrix -
I saw it and it wasn't as good as Dark City, though it covered a lot of the same ground - a movie I enjoyed immensely (and, which I got to late the first time I saw it. So I came in 15 minutes late. I experienced the mystery along with the main character. It wasn't until later that I discovered there was a opening narration that explained the whole thing from the outset).
The Matrix seemed to me to exude lots and lots of "coolness" - the cool factor was extremely high, but it seemed to me a triumph of style over substance. Though it had a lot more substance than most FX extravaganzas.
Well we're definitely getting beyond U2 and philosophy. But I'd say that the first Matrix is a near perfect movie. Yes it has a lot of style, but it also has a fairly coherent plot, and I actually do love the heavy symbolism in the movie. I just don't think symbolism, whether religious or philosophic, entails a movie being philosophic. But I think the first movie is fantastic, especially for an action film. The next two are highly flawed, unfortunately. Their plots are a mess, the philosophical subtext doesn't work (and is dropped in the third film), and even the symbolism and "mythic nature" are flubbed. (IMO)
But I think the first one is at least as good as the first Star Wars. It makes use of a lot of basic symbolism, is excellently filmed, broke a lot of stylistic ground, and was a rollicking good time, if you like action-adventure films.
I also hear that Douglas Blount is one of the contributors to the forthcoming U2 and Philosophy book. Blount is an Evangelical Christian who teaches at Southwest Baptist Theological Seminary. I disagree with Blount on the metaphysics of time and God (he's a B-theorist--consequently he thinks God exists timelessly). Nonetheless, I think Blount and I would find common ground talking about U2. Just thought I'd give a little plug... I imagine a good number of evangelicals read this blog.
An argument can be made that their song "Until the End of the World" (from Achtung Baby) is about Judas betraying Christ. People have written/spoken about it before:
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2004/April/08/style/stories/04style.htm
I also read though that the song was written for a movie. See the 5th comment here:
http://hem.bredband.net/steverud/U2MoL/AB/endofworld.html
It's funny, because on the surface Bono's lyrics are not that sophisticated and sometimes even wince-inducing. Yet I totally end up thinking they're brilliant.
U2 quiz: 30 questions for those who have ears to hear
by Sol O. Mann
http://www.canadianchristianity.com/cgi-bin/bc.cgi?bc/bccn/0405/u2
I'm excited about the book. I remember particularly enjoying the "philosophy lecture series" presentation that Wrathall did at BYU when he addressed the subject. I was amazed at the way he read some of the lyrics. Words I had heard hundreds of times suddenly made sense in a new way - and his reading isn't a stretch at all; it's quite convincing.
Maybe I misunderstood him, but I'm sure he said something to the effect that Bono had no idea what he is really saying in these lyrics. I think that's an interesting idea - that an author could continually write something rich and meaningful while not fully recognizing the depth of what he's saying. Anyways, I hope this idea gets further discussion in the book. At any rate, it's certainly going to be an interesting read.
BTW, I agree with Clark about the Matrix. The first one, in particular, can't be beat.
Hi Clark,
Feel free to post my LDS-PHIL comments. I would be interested in hearing what others have to say about the topic.
Bryan
Whoops. I'd forgotten about saying I ought to talk to you guys. Here's some excerpts I'd kept.
Throughout their history, U2 has challenged the listener with a tension between the beauty of divine promises and the ugly realities human beings confront and inflict upon one another. In their early song, "October," we are presented with the image of an autumn tree, stripped bare of life, bracing against the oncoming winter. The tree, however, is immediately contrasted with the glorious idea of an eternal, unchanging being who transcends death and winters ("Kingdoms rise / and kingdoms fall / but you go on, and on"). Much later, in his song "Peace of Earth," Bono contrasts the Christmas promise of peace with ugly realities of human history: "Jesus this song you wrote / The words are sticking in my throat / Peace on Earth / Hear it every Christmas time / But hope and history won't rhyme / So what's it worth? / This Peace of Earth."
Within such a framework of glorious, but seemingly forever deferred promises of redemption, U2 seems to suggest that questioning can be an act of faith. Thus, their song "Wake up dead man" becomes a simultaneous act of both affirmation and questioning: "Jesus / I'm waiting here boss / I know you're looking out for us / but maybe your hands aren't free." Taken to an extreme, this attitude culminates in the rather sympathetic portrayal of Judas Iscariot in U2's masterpiece song, "Until the End of the World." Judas seems to say to his betrayed Lord: "In my dream I was drowning sorrows / But my sorrows they learned to swim / In waves of regret, wave of joy / I reached out for the one I tried to destroy / You, you said you'd wait until the end of the world." Judas, acknowledging a degree of guilt, reaches out to someone who, thankfully, has deferred final judgment into the distant future. The eternally deferred redemption allows for an eternally possible repentance - if only we can bring ourselves to do it.
The spiritual elevation of questions, confusion, and doubt, however, is matched by an equally strong celebration of divine promises. U2 follows up their questioning refrain of "Peace on Earth" with a gentle ballad called "Grace." In this song, Grace, personified as a divine female force, quietly works to clean up the messes of human life: "What once was hurt / What once was friction / What left the mark / No longer stings / Because Grace makes beauty / Out of ugly things."
So, how does one navigate a theology that simultaneous celebrates divine promises with one that recognizes (as we must recognize) that the fulfillment of such promises is often delayed or absent? Bono's answer is simply to wait, to seek, and to persist. "If you walk away, I will follow," Bono proclaims, betraying an attitude persistent, even stubbornness, in awaiting the forever-not-yet-arrival of a redeeming Messiah. Even if you still haven't found what you're looking for, there is spirituality in the quest itself.
The latest album sums up the spirituality of questioning, the acknowledgment of forever deferred redemption, and the value of persistent waiting. In the last song, "Yahweh," Bono calls out for help in transforming himself into something better ("Take these hands / Teach them what to carry"), and then slurs the divine name to sound very much like a repeated chant of "Yeah I'll wait." The last chorus is manipulated to simultaneously affirm faith, but it is a faith infused with questions:
Yahweh, Yahweh
Always pain before the Child is born
Yahweh, tell me now
Why the dark before the dawn?
There is just something about how U2 asks honest questions that seems to presuppose an intimate relationship with the being who is asked the questions. The questions are made with a full awareness of human suffering and with a full awareness (and love) of divine promises. The questions are (usually) not just screaming into a void. They are questions that assume one is listening who cares, but who often seems absent in human history. Indeed, questioning seems to be the posture that affirms both the suffering and the reality of promises.
. . .
Remember, that the affirmations of "Grace" follow the doubting of "Peace on Earth." I'm not sure whether "Grace" should be taken as an answer to "Peace on Earth," or whether "Peace on Earth" should be taken as questions aimed at "Grace." And in the last song on their last album ("Yahweh"), U2 is still looking for grace to come in a future. Bono's lyrics seek for a grace that hasn't yet been fully found individually or collectively (take this city / a city should be shining on a hill / take this city / if it be your will). If U2 is acknowledging the presence of grace and redemption, it is a partial redemption and one preceded by suffering. This itself becomes the topic of more questions (why the dark before the dawn?)
I've heard that Bono was heavily influenced by post-WW2 Jewish poetry at one time. I think it still shows.
I'm not sure why "of course" Blount should think God is outside time just because he's a B-theorist. The B-theory is compatible with God's being in or outside time. It's the A-theory that has a hard time doing anything but taking one side on the divine temporality issue. I don't know of any B-theorists who say God is in time, but there's no reason why one couldn't.
I don't think Blount is a B-theorist, though he does affirm divine atemporality. As a matter of fact, he's got no position on the A-theory/B-theory debate and believes (contra William Lane Craig) that the doctrine of divine timelessness does not entail either theory. Still, if it did entail a B-theory, then in that case I would happily endorse that theory.
On another matter, I'm not (so far as I know) contributing to the U2 and philosophy volume (though I did contribute to the LOTR and philosophy volume). I do however have an article entitled "Rattle & Film: U2, Nietzsche and the Kingdom of God" in a forthcoming book on Christianity, Philosophy and Film edited by Doug Geivett and Jim Spiegel. I'm also working on a monograph on U2, but I don't know whether I'll be able to find a publisher for it. I'm particularly interested in Bono's long-standing distinction between blues and gospel--which, I think, drives almost everything U2 does.
Best wishes,
Doug Blount
Dr. Wrathall's book is in the news and discussed at Enowning.
I've closed comments in order to avoid spam since I don't check this older blog as much anymore.
and Theology
Number of unique visitors:
Blogged by Clark Goble