Skip to main content

Why Madrigals, While Dirty, Handled Love Better Than Today's Pop Music-Rachael Gregson

 


If you'll familiar with both pop music and madrigals, you'll notice that the line separating them isn't all that thick. Love/sex is all everyone wants to hear about in today's time, and love/sex was all everyone wanted to hear about back in the 16th century. Nothing has really changed when it comes to the world of music. The only difference is their delivery and perspective, and that may very well be the most important. The people during that time were subtle and didn't stray beyond an innuendo. You have to remember they were just coming out of that quiet phase, where music was sacred. In their songs, they treated love/sex like a playful secret, where only the knowledge acquired the meaning and understood. Nowadays, innuendos rarely exist. We just come right out and say it explicitly, which in my view, loses the magic that is love. Some things are better left vague, sometimes a lack of privacy and discretion ruins what is meant to be done in private. We live in a culture where things don't count as reality unless they're "out on display".  While madrigals revolved around sex/lust too, they did not value it above love itself. They still valued their beloveds rather than valued just what their beloveds could give them, whereas any song that comes on the radio says otherwise and completely paints sexual intimacy to be nothing more than a fleeting moment of pleasure, not a lifelong commitment. 

I commented on posts by Brooke and Lily.

Comments

  1. My goodness, this is so true! Our modern-day pop songs are riddled with some of the worst sexual descriptions and obscene meanings. Today's artists do not hold back, either.

    As we read through Medieval poetry and look at old madrigal ballads, we are only able to see the bad beneath the frills once it has been fully explained.

    In addition, the balance of religious versus secular music has also been tipped. Nowadays, it is much more common to listen to worldly music than hymns that honor the Lord.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I see your point about being discret about their feelings of sex in Madrigals is better than today's pop music, but I disagree. I think both are evenly sinful. I believe a sin is still a sin (even when it is not seen or hidden).

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think you made some very valid points. I feel as if the madrigals were more respectful, however, than the artists are today. I also feel as if they were more passionate about their music and the stories that their music told than most pop artists you would hear on the radio are.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Overanalyzing Everyone's Intentions Here-Rachael Gregson

 First off, I'd like to say this is going to be a two part blog post, because a lot of things happened in this reading assignment that demands to be discussed.  As with any war I've realized, it's tricky not to fall into the initial perspective I am given. I began this book skeptical of Hector because I was bias toward the movie Troy, which was told mostly through the eyes of Achilles, but neither were what I was expecting. It's actually funny that they both hold values completely opposite from one another. Hector represented everything related to city-state pride, honor, and humility whereas Achilles was everything wild, reckless, and unpredictable solitary. This isn't to say that Hector is all good and Achilles all bad. Both had instances where I rooted for the other more or less. I just thought it was interesting how their two personalities represented something that basically causes all wars: the clash between civilization and savagery.  Secondly, I'm not de...