To begin, I would like to direct your attention to the following: A Song That Sam Will Love...
In conclusion, I would like to address those issues which have thus far been unanswered, and choose to do so now. Primarily, this blogisode will serve as a response to the recent allegations regarding "inanity and the empty-headed fratboy reactionary bullshit that is destroying American culture." I would like to retort to this accusation in two parts:
"inanity":
Inanity is defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as "something empty of meaning or sense." I would like to ask the question, "What songs, if any, are not truly empty of meaning or sense?" and then proceed to answer this question. What songs, if any, are not truly empty of meaning or sense? Of course, our National Anthem possesses a great deal of meaning, and makes a great deal of sense. Patriotism aside, I would now like to delve into philosophical territory.
I would like to make this argument using the same assumption with which my co-contributer 'Sam' uses to consider the 'Anti-Life' in my own considerations of Life itself. In a word, I would like to present the assumption that Life is subjective, and that there is no objective value in life. Of course, some will refuse to accept this assumption, but it is not to these individuals that I direct my prose. Rather, it is to those of you who recognize that the only meaning that one is able to find in life is the meaning which one attributes to particular things. The point of this digression is that although Sam may find some things to be inane, this does not mean that they actually are. In fact, if one gets down to the bottom of it all, everything is inane in an objective sense.
In a subjective sense, Ashur Roth's timeless song is not nearly as meaningless or senseless as many bits of art which have been hailed as masterpieces. Of course, that is only for me, because I have not personally given any meaning or value to certain pieces of art which I find absurd and utterly worthless. To others, however, there is a great deal of value to be found in art, and many people would pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to be able to own a piece of art that I would rather burn than allow to see the light of day. The same applies to books, music, critically acclaimed television series, movies, and adult entertainment material, with the exception of the price which would be paid by an enthusiast (although I'm sure someone would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on rare 1800's pornography). In a word, everyone finds a lot of things inane, and anyone living outside a fascist state would be hard pressed to find one piece of art that would be loved by everyone.
"empty-headed fratboy reactionary bullshit":
First, I would like to point out that it sounds like someone didn't get a bid... Secondly, I don't believe this 'fratboy' culture about which is spoken could actually be described as 'reactionary.' Fraternities are a deeply beloved tradition in our great nation, and have been around far longer than the long-haired, peace loving, unprotected sex having, flag burning hippie culture which has found its way to college campuses nationwide. This, my friends, is a true reactionary culture. At least Ashur Roth advocates safe sex, as opposed to the Mamas and the Papas, who choose to advocate the spreading of venereal diseases casually among multiple, unacquainted partners. Fraternities were here first, the hippies and dissenters came second. Thus, this would not be 'reactionary bullshit,' just normal bullshit.
Thirdly, if one is to attack this 'empty-headed culture,' one must not stop at Ashur Roth; one must continue one's crusade until one has denounced the time-honored classics of Old School and Animal House, among others. What Ashur Roth is doing is not redefining, this I will admit. However, not everything needs to be. Certain things (fratty things) are fun time and time again. Maybe we should all shun entertainment of the fratty kind, and instead turn to films such as Revenge of the Nerds, which stereotype all Fraternity brothers into convenient packages, not only encouraging us, but making it easier to, hate men who choose to become a part of a brotherhood.
Maybe we should say 'goodbye' to masculinity, and instead hail in a world in which everyone is free to be as they choose, unless they choose to be masculine. Just because someone may take shots and funnel beer (which I've seen many people do, including my co-contributers (both GDIs)), this does not make them 'empty-headed.' This is not to imply that all Fraternity men act in this way, as, again, this is stereotypical. Rather, I would like to point out that individuals in fraternities have become easy targets for snobbish, pseudo-intellectual elitists, who would prefer to judge an individual as a stereotype and scapegoat rather than judge him on his individual merits and faults.
Although I do, in fact, live the life described in Ashur Roth's timeless classic, I am not personally offended by those who would rather it be banned from the airwaves. I would simply like to point out that when one enjoys something, this does not mean that one finds it to be "profound and truthful, something that could justify their aimlessness and intellectual laziness as a legitimate and acceptable way of life." It just means that they enjoy it. Beyond this, some people do (falsely?) attribute a great deal of meaning, truth, and life-affirmation to songs (see, particularly, the musics of Bob Dylan, Pink Floyd, and The Wu-Tang Clan).
To summarize this entire post into a single sentence: The criticisms directed at Ashur Roth can just as easily and legitimately be leveled at any other entertainer or artist that has ever existed, and America is the greatest nation on Earth.
