reggae and overt religiosity

[Mr. Tea]

The only thing that's going to be different in 2012 is there going to be a lot more disillusioned Terence McKenna fans standing around.

Hmmm...I'm not so sure. The Olympics looks like it could cause the end of Britain or at the very least London, if not the world at large. Pretty much the same thing either way, as far as most of Dissensus is concerned.

But yeah, the '2012' meme is arguably the lamest bit of mystical/conspiracy bollocks in an Internet packed to the rafters with mystical/conspiracy bollocks.

 

[Mr. Tea]

I've just read the words 'mayan calendar'...I think this is a good indication that I should log off and get to bed.

 

[john eden]

that you dont really know what will happen any more than me

I don't know that the sun will rise tomorrow, but it seems pretty likely.

 

[DannyL]

that you dont really know what will happen any more than me

No, but as Jon points out, I'm basing what I'm saying on what is *likely* to happen - not as you are, that which is extraordinarily *unlikely*.

and FWIW, i have no idea what terence mckenna said about 2012

Really? But the whole 2012/Mayan calender schtick comes directly from McKenna - if you saying there's going to be some sort of global change at this point in time, McKenna is ultimately your source. I find it a bit surprising that you can be basically quoting his ideas back at me without having read him but that's the internet for you - ideas percolate all the time with little intervening thought.

2012 is not so much about the end of time, so focusing on the apocaplytic stuff is a distraction. what it marks, is the beginning of a new year/age according to the mayan calander.. as with our new year celebrations, we dont celebrate the old one passing. just so happens this new year only repeats every 5000 or so years

But why is the Mayan calendar worthy of our consideration? There are thousands of calendars throughout human history which all put as at different points - the Mayan culture has been dead for a centuries now and has no relevance to us, it isn't close to us culturally at all. Why should we pick it up and start applying its dates to our lives? This seems to me to be a very "new age" thing to do - cherry-picking other cultures for bits we find exciting and titallating.

i think at around that time mankind will achieve a critical mass in believing that all it believed in wasnt worth the time and money it previously invested. surely thats a re-evolutionary thought ?[/QUOTE]

I'm not totally sure what this means, but I don't see much signs of a global shift in consciousness on the horizon and I don't think there's much revolutionary about fantasy.

 

[droid]

I heard about the Mayan calendar and 2012 long before I heard of McKenna or had an internet connection. It doesn't come 'directly' from him at all.

Regardless of all the hype, the reason it gets attention is because the Mayan calender is based on astronomical data and is ridiculously accurate..

 

[DannyL]

I've no problem with thoughtful, accurate work giving an account of the Calendar. I'd find it as interesting as I do reading about any other cultural artefact. Maybe more so. But I still don't see what that has to do with us and our culture - ?

And, the idea 2012 = massive change in human history starts with McKenna - or at least he was the most visible publiciser of that idea.

 

[droid]

I don't even know what McKenna says. The theories Ive heard are about the reversal of the Earth's magnetic field and a millennial high in sunspot activities combined with odd planetary alignments - all verifiable and could conceivably have a physical impact on every culture.

 

[matt b]

rasta had it's own millenialist stuff what with 1977 and the 2 sevens clashing, interestingly, it didn't happen.

Not forgetting that HIM died

 

[baboon2004]

I don't know that the sun will rise tomorrow, but it seems pretty likely.

ah, the old induction arguments....

(i've lost the thread of this thread completely...)

 

[Client Eastwood]

Very quickly from me. Its always been about religion and resistance as many rasta
were living as outsiders in JA. And that outsideness fed into
the alienisation uk black (and other) youth were feeling in the 70's dole age and people found strengh in music, blues and rastafari to contunue a daily
struggle. Some reggae artists even critcised rasta for the lack of
militancy and direct action. Have a read/listen to this . . .

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Lyrics to Reality Poem :


dis is di age af reality
but some a wi a deal wid mitalagy
dis is di age af science an’ teknalagy
but some a wi check fi antiquity

w’en wi can’t face reality
wi leggo wi clarity
some latch aan to vanity
some hol’ insanity
some get vision
start preach relijan
but dem can’t mek decishan
w’en it come to we fite
dem can’t mek decishan
w’en it comes to wi rites

man,
dis is di age af reality
but some a wi deal wid mitalagy
dis is di age af science an’ teknalagy
but some a wi check fi antiquity

dem one deh gaan outta line
dem naw live in fi wi time
far dem she dem get sign
an’ dem bline dem eye
to di lite a di worl’
an’ gaan search widin
di dark a dem doom
an’ a shout ‘bout sin
instead a fite fi win

man,
dis is di age af reality
but some a wi deal wid mitalagy
dis is di age af science an’ teknalagy
but some a wi check fi antiquity

dis is di age af decishan
soh mek wi leggo relijan
dis is di age af decishan
soh mek we leggo divishan
dis is di age af reality
soh mek we leggo mitalagy
dis is di age of science an’ teknalagy
soh mek wi hol’ di clarity
mek wi hol’ di clarity
mek wi hol’ di clarity

 

[Tentative Andy]

I'm of a similar view to the person who originally started the thread, though I couldn't explain it very well. I can understand the 'resistance narrative' aspect of Rasta and also appreciate how that connected with people so strongly with people outside the faith in 70s-90s Britian. But ultimately there's just too many aspects of Rasta belief that I disagree with, even when interpreted in a non-literal or secular way. And so because of this, although I love a lot of roots and dub as music, I don't really 'idenitfy' with it in the way that some people seem to - it would just involve contradicting myself too much.

 

[viktorvaughn]

Having thought about it.

I agree that if you write some of the beliefs down on paper and asses them as theological claims they look a bit hard to believe

and

people who love reggae would dismiss a lot of similar stuff it was espoused by nerdy white ideologues or conspiracy theorists

but

the reason people still like music with it in is pretty simple isn't it? it sounds good As andy says you don't have to identify with it ideologically to enjoy the music aesthetically do you, Plus it can still move you as a thing of religious beauty in it's dedicated, the submission to Jah just as the prose of the bible or Islamic art can also be amazing.

 

[matt b]

although I love a lot of roots and dub as music, I don't really 'idenitfy' with it in the way that some people seem to - it would just involve contradicting myself too much.

I don't think you have to identify with rasta in any sense- I'm well aware I'm outside reggae culture (and as a middle class white man, will be seen as being part of babylon shitstem by some).

That it is a POPULAR music with a deep felt set of messages, which can/does both critique modern society (which if you remove the religiosity, is a broadly socialist one) and offer solutions is something of a rarity. I like that.

Of course, there are songs/messages that are distasteful, but given the sheer number of songs recorded/released in the genre, this is no surprise.

That rasta is non-denominational is also important- there is no 'right' way- as many have said, it is a livity. I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to increase peace, love, truth and rights etc and can quite easily disregard those views with which I disagree without having some kind of 'blindspot'.

 

[Tentative Andy]

I don't think you have to identify with rasta in any sense- I'm well aware I'm outside reggae culture (and as a middle class white man, will be seen as being part of babylon shitstem by some).

That it is a POPULAR music with a deep felt set of messages, which can/does both critique modern society (which if you remove the religiosity, is a broadly socialist one) and offer solutions is something of a rarity. I like that.

Of course, there are songs/messages that are distasteful, but given the sheer number of songs recorded/released in the genre, this is no surprise.

That rasta is non-denominational is also important- there is no 'right' way- as many have said, it is a livity. I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to increase peace, love, truth and rights etc and can quite easily disregard those views with which I disagree without having some kind of 'blindspot'.

Well I'm glad that you can respond to it in a coherent way that you are happy with, and I'm certainly not challenging your right to do so. However, unfortunately it just so happens that I don't feel capable of doing anything similiar myself. I'm wholly confident that many aspects of my life would be regarded as supremely Babylonian by a comitted Rasta, and not just of who I am, the background I'm from, but because of things I do, things I've actually made a choice about. And the thing is, with at least some (if not all) of those things, I feel that I'm justified in doing them, they're things that I've thought about and come to the reasoned conclusion that they're the right thing to, so there we have a genuine clash of beliefs.
The whole concept of Babylon is in fact one of things I disagree with most strongly in Rastafari, it's such an unhelpful, Big Other type of idea, no better than old hippies wittering on about the System or the Man - the idea that there's one single, coherent thing that is at the root of all of your problems in life, and that belief in that thing allows you to comfortably divide the world up into 'them' and 'us', just doesn't ring true with any of my experience of the world. I'm also strongly opposed to any belief system which promotes the idea of a 'chosen people', or a chosen land/nation. Since I've been slagging him off a bit as per usual, I should say that this is something that k-punk is very good on, the idea that 'there is no good ethnicity' and that the false belief in such cannot form the basis for a politics.
Finally, whilst I don't doubt the scriptural accuracy of your claim that there is no single 'right' way to follow Rastafari, I would have to say that this doesn't match up with my experience of Rastas expounding their beliefs, or indeed with the commentary of experienced observers like yourself.


Edit: but, y'know, I'm honestly not having a go at all. I'm just trying to explain why I personally don't feel comfortable with closely associating myself with the Rastafari faith, even on a cultural/political level.

 

[matt b]

Well I'm glad that you can respond to it in a coherent way that you are happy with, and I'm certainly not challenging your right to do so. However, unfortunately it just so happens that I don't feel capable of doing anything similiar myself. I'm wholly confident that many aspects of my life would be regarded as supremely Babylonian by a comitted Rasta, and not just of who I am, the background I'm from, but because of things I do, things I've actually made a choice about. And the thing is, with at least some (if not all) of those things, I feel that I'm justified in doing them, they're things that I've thought about and come to the reasoned conclusion that they're the right thing to, so there we have a genuine clash of beliefs.
The whole concept of Babylon is in fact one of things I disagree with most strongly in Rastafari, it's such an unhelpful, Big Other type of idea, no better than old hippies wittering on about the System or the Man - the idea that there's one single, coherent thing that is at the root of all of your problems in life, and that belief in that thing allows you to comfortably divide the world up into 'them' and 'us', just doesn't ring true with any of my experience of the world. I'm also strongly opposed to any belief system which promotes the idea of a 'chosen people', or a chosen land/nation. Since I've been slagging him off a bit as per usual, I should say that this is something that k-punk is very good on, the idea that 'there is no good ethnicity' and that the false belief in such cannot form the basis for a politics.
Finally, whilst I don't doubt the scriptural accuracy of your claim that there is no single 'right' way to follow Rastafari, I would have to say that this doesn't match up with my experience of Rastas expounding their beliefs, or indeed with the commentary of experienced observers like yourself.


Edit: but, y'know, I'm honestly not having a go at all. I'm just trying to explain why I personally don't feel comfortable with closely associating myself with the Rastafari faith, even on a cultural/political level.

Don't worry, I don't think you are having a go

I'm no rasta, and I certainly don't have any spiritual set of beliefs that chime with it or religion in general. I never have, or ever will, praise Jah.

The importance of the non-denominational aspect is that there is no agreement over what Babylon, chosen people, even Jah is. You can essentially believe what you like.

Therefore there is no doctrinal weight behind someone singing 'Down Here in Babylon'- each individual can take what they want from it.

I do like the fact that lots of reggae records are deeply moving, address the world around us and sound so wicked loud you cannot help but dance to them. (now go and listen to Brent Dowe's version of the above song).

 

[viktorvaughn]

I love it like i love that 90s hiphop that i can sing along to with NOI or 5% lyrics when i am basically a bit of a white devil

or like a listen to a Kool G Rap or Raekwon crime narrative and thing it's a great tune whilst thinking the morality in it is pretty awful...

anyway enough from me, i'm not adding to anything.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Someone upthread said something about liberal white 'soft atheists' - what does that mean, exactly? I would hazard a guess that it's a distinction that would cast me as a 'hard atheist'. That doesn't mean I have to be a total dick about works of art or other kinds of cultural expression that are religiously inspired, and hopefully most other atheists feel the same - I mean, I expect most of the people who contributed to Idle's thread about beautiful temples were atheists or at least agnostics. Same goes for music, and although I know pretty much shit all about reggae, I'm sure the homophobic crap is outweighed by all the stuff about salvation, emancipation and positive resistance, isn't it?

 

[baboon2004]

but it's the homophobic songs about positive resistance that are the headfuck.

Anyways, historical perspective as to why jamaica might be one of the world's most homophobic countries is of course useful. I don't have that myself, but I can take a guess at the Christian Church. What's also interesting is the tipping point at which a widely-held belief becomes a norm - I suppose it happens over time, but most observers can pinpopint a certain timeframe in which social attitudes become ossified, I'm sure.

 

[mms]

but it's the homophobic songs about positive resistance that are the headfuck.

Anyways, historical perspective as to why jamaica might be one of the world's most homophobic countries is of course useful. I don't have that myself, but I can take a guess at the Christian Church. What's also interesting is the tipping point at which a widely-held belief becomes a norm - I suppose it happens over time, but most observers can pinpopint a certain timeframe in which social attitudes become ossified, I'm sure.

you get 8 years in jamaica for gayness.

 

[zhao]

but it's the homophobic songs about positive resistance that are the headfuck.

Anyways, historical perspective as to why jamaica might be one of the world's most homophobic countries is of course useful. I don't have that myself, but I can take a guess at the Christian Church. What's also interesting is the tipping point at which a widely-held belief becomes a norm - I suppose it happens over time, but most observers can pinpopint a certain timeframe in which social attitudes become ossified, I'm sure.

was just listening to BBC doc about gay legislation in South Africa being the most progressive in the world. the laws in that country are ahead of society: there is of course still lots of bigotry -- this professor was saying largely due to the influence of the church, as homophobia didn't exist much in africa before arrival of missionaries.