Chaps -
I recently saw a chat show here in Norway called Skavlan, where the guests were as follows and in order of appearance;
1.BjÖrn Ulvaeus - from Abba (self confessed Atheist).
2. Ulrika Johnson - C list celeb originally from Sweden now residing in London (self confessed Atheist).
3. Brandon Flowers - lead singer from The Killers (Mormon).
4. Richard Dawkins - evolutionary biologist and author etc. (self confessed Atheist).
Obviously, The Killers were to perform their new song at the end of the show. Before then, Brandon Flowers sat down for a short interview. So the interviewer went to great pains to ask Brandon Flowers about the usual family stuff and the comfort he gets from his belief. And then proceeded to be a little tricky by suggesting that... its a little odd for a Mormon to be living in the ultimate sin city (Sodom and Gomorrah) Las Vegas, incidentally Las Vegas is also Brandon´s home town. That was it, no discussion on The Killers new single.
Then comes the irrefutable giant of ‘anti-religion’, Richard Dawkins, brilliant author of many books as you all are probably aware. After some minutes of initial introduction to why Richard Dawkins does not agree with religion, the interviewer asks Richard to comment on the Mormon faith..........
Now this clearly made Brandon feel very uncomfortable and slightly embarrassed and slightly annoyed as Richard Dawkins began to say how the book of Mormon was a fraud. Then, before any real discussion could begin, the interviewer said that time had elapsed and it was time for The Killers to perform their new song, at this point Richard Dawkins was clearly surprised that Brandon had to leave and seemed to think that they were both there for a debate, but nobody had told them, clearly a stitch up.
Then The Killers performed their very boring new song, but Brandon, to his credit sung it with much gusto and passion, clearly angry at being put in a very awkward situation and without time to defend his corner.
Now, I personally find The Killers music rather dull and compromised...a sort of millennium indy (as in not the indy from the 80´s of 90´s) and pop. But as I realised that there was a certain christian message to the killers lyrics all wrapped up in this sort of indy/pop, I found it more interesting, albeit still boring and not my cup of tea.
But my main query is not The Killers music, but the possible compromise(s) one makes to fulfill a music obligation, whether that obligation is to a record company or to oneself. I wondered if the Forum new of any bands/musicians/singers/songwriters that compromised their political/religious or any other beliefs in the pursuit of a musical career?
I know that late wonderful Donna Summer, who was bought up a strict ‘southern catholic’, was said to be very embarrassed and uncomfortable performing ‘Love to Love You Baby’ live because of its overt sexual connotations.
Footnote: My personal view is that The Killers music ‘sounds’ compromised due to the indy/pop sound they have, not Brandon’s religious views. Although that may also be the case.
Posted on: 09 September 2012 by AndyPat
I feel sure that the OP was something about whether musicians are hostage to their craft or their ideals, both or neither. I didn't detect a particularly strong support for Dawkinianism. The first few paragraphs were more of a background to how the question came to be considered.
I'm not sure that a person's musical aspirations and the rest of their life can be neatly compartmentalised. John Denver comes to mind as someone whose music stayed true to a spiritual view of the world, sometimes successfully, sometimes less so.
Artists of many forms are often said to suffer for their art so could religious or other beliefs be instrumental in defining a musician's musical expression? J.S. Bach, did his music reflect his beliefs or did his beliefs become influenced by his music? It's chicken and egg stuff for me I'm afraid.
Andy
Posted on: 09 September 2012 by George Fredrik
Earlier I posted something about the enigma that is the meaning of most music. Among popular music perhaps there is less than average meaning to the songs from the Killers. How are we meant to read such oddities as Are we human, or are we dancer [singular], let alone a song like Read my mind, or another like Mr Brightside! The song about the boyfriend looking like a girl friend [or the other way round], is total enigma to me. ...
The sound is euphonius and the words are like the nonsense rhymes of Edward Lear. Potentially open to a massive range of readings.Innocence in this may be a blessing ...
If that was the point of the thread then why even mention Dawkins. Seems that Faith has nothing to do with the Killers' music to my mind, unless I have "skipped a beat," which seems an over used cliche in modern pop!
Anyway, I am still hoping for a reason for this thread, so I don't have to guess what it is that the OP wants discussed ....
ATB from George
Posted on: 09 September 2012 by rodwsmith
Originally Posted by Jasonf:
I recently saw a chat show here in Norway called Skavlan, where the guests were as follows and in order of appearance;
1.Björn Ulvaeus - from Abba (self confessed Atheist).
2. Ulrika Johnson - C list celeb originally from Sweden now residing in London (self confessed Atheist).
3. Brandon Flowers - lead singer from The Killers (Mormon).
4. Richard Dawkins - evolutionary biologist and author etc. (self confessed Atheist).
Were the guests introduced according to their religious (non)beliefs? Or do you just happen to know that Björn and Ulrika are atheists? I'm not sure that Ulrika's religious views have ever been a subject about which she has been interviewed/questioned in the UK.
Of course Dawkins' views on religion are widely known, although I'm sure he'd rather be known as an evolutionary biologist than a professional atheist. And Brandon Flowers is also known for his religious views, partly because everyone seems to want to believe that they are somehow at variance with his being a rock musician (or indeed from Las Vegas). He doesn't seem particularly comfortable with talking about it.
I'm not sure - to answer your question though - that he has made any compromises, or had to. He writes his own lyrics (unlike Donna Summer), and has not had (to our knowledge) any lapses or variations in his faith that have caused him to write something he subsequently does not want to perform, or even to disown (Cliff Richard {wasn't that song "Devil Woman" by the way?}, and famously Cat Stevens/Yusuf).
He is the only Mormon in the band, and the others are on record as saying they are not all that happy about it being a constant subject:
"We're all very different personalities," argues bassist Mark Stoermer."Brandon's the only Mormon among us, but he keeps it personal. It's an influence on his life so it comes through in his lyrics sometimes, but not in an overt or preachy way."
I'm not sure about the Killers music. It seems curiously anodyne somehow. Like Queen without a sense of humour and a gloss of sort-of American please-everyone have-a-nice-day-ness about it. But then, they are American, there are some strong melodies, and the performances seem polished and accomplished. I've never found the lyrics to be preachy, or even particularly meaningful (to me).
I did find Bono's Christian phase to be more irritating. That really did seem affected, and were I a Christian (which I'm not), even mildly offensive (his lifestyle did not reflect the words he sang). As was/is Madonna's use of Christian (Catholic) imagery and lyrics I imagine, although I don't listen to or have any of her music, so maybe that's just an unfair and superficial impression.
Personally, if I were Flowers, I would be more concerned about having something in common with Mitt Romney than anything else.
("Mitt Romney", by the way, is an anagram of "My, I'm rotten")
Rod
