Sympathy for the Devil

  • Thread starter Thread starter cenpress
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
John Kearns:
Deb,

The comment about the Stones life was further evidence regarding the song’s intent. But, let’s throw that away and look at the song on it’s own. Yes, I take the lyrics and show them as portraying Lucifer in a positive light. In fact, I’ve made four or five points showing the song praising the power, influence and yes, coolness of Lucifer. Not because that is what I believe, but because that is what is in the song. Show me one lyric, one word, that displays the downside of being Lucifer, from within the song
Click to expand...
I have repeatedly done so. The fact that he is shown as ’ a man of wealth and taste’ certainly depicts him as the opposite of Christ, which is what he is.

The lyrics state that he was there when St. Petersburg burned and Anastasia screamed. That sounds very negative to me. Or what about the bombing of Bombey? That sounds bad to me.

I’d go further into the song but I have to cook dinner.
 
John,

I applaud both your faithfulness to the Church as well as your willingness to be a strong supporter thereof. I’m glad you’re here and I’m glad you’re on our side. The world needs more people like you, willing to defend the Catholic Church with verve. So with that, I welcome you, sir. (But that don’t mean we see eye to eye on the meaning of this song.) 😉

In regard to your unhealthy/unhelpful attitude, I was referring solely to the post you submitted. Of course I wasn’t personally judging or labeling you. But you’ve addressed it and I thank you for doing so. Let’s just get back to the original topic:

And I believe that was The Rolling Stones’ song, “Sympathy for the Devil.”

I don’t see how one can listen to this song and believe (even for a moment) that it is Pro-Satan. On the surface, maybe … allowing yourself to be persuaded it’s pro-evil on the merit of the song’s title alone. But with a closer look and a little savvy, one ought to decipher the lyrics and finally conclude it is precisely the opposite … a warning for all of humankind to be on its toes, always, lest we fall into sin (and how easy it is to do just that … Because the devil is everywhere).

I could give you my own personal breakdown of these lyrics, but I’ll take the easy way out and give you instead the breakdown provided by the writers at www.reasontorock.com. The points made there mirror my own, so I’ll spare myself the carpal tunnel and just post what they’ve already written.

(see next post …)
 
From www.reasontorock.com:

"… Let’s consider the lyrics next. What are they all about? If you take them at face value, you might consider that Mick Jagger (as lead vocalist and lyricist) is sincerely suggesting that the devil really isn’t such a bad fellow. After all, he says, “every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints,” and it was “you and me” who “killed the Kennedys.” So what’s the difference? We’re all the same, aren’t we? He’s just one of the lads.

Look more deeply, though, and you will find that this confusion of good and evil, of appearance and reality, is really just a ploy of the evil one. The devil may appear to be a gentleman, “a man of wealth and taste.” He may appear to be polite and a member of good society, approaching you with the words, “Let me please introduce myself,” and “pleased to meet you.” But alongside of this we have a long catalog of some of the worst atrocities of human history, starting with the torture of Christ on the cross, and ending with the modern assassination of the Kennedys (so contemporary, in fact, that the lyrics were changed from “John Kennedy” to “the Kennedys” while the Stones were in the studio recording the song). Along the way we have the Crusades and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia thrown in for good measure. So let there be no mistake: there really is evil in the world.

This, then, is the real significance of the taunting refrain, “Hope you guess my name, But what’s puzzling you is the nature of my game.” This is not Mick Jagger, saying “hope you can guess that I’m playing the devil in this song.” That’s obvious from the beginning. No, this is the devil saying, “Hope you recognize me when you see me, because I come in many guises. And my game is not to do evil myself, but to trick you into doing it.”

This confusion between appearance and reality, between good and evil, runs throughout the song. Christ is mentioned, not only for the pain that he experienced, but for his “moment of doubt.” And in addition to all the acts of violence described, the devil says that he has “stolen many a man’s soul and faith.” His interest in the son of God was not limited to the torture of Christ himself — he also “made damn sure that Pilate washed his hands and sealed his fate.” And his final threat to the listener is to “… lay your soul to waste.”

Just in case we might be in danger of taking Jagger’s appropriation of the devil as a serious case of religious conviction, he throws in the lines, “I watched with glee, while your kings and queens fought for ten decades for the gods they made.” So Jagger is not seriously arguing Christian doctrine here.

Instead Jagger seems to be using the devil as a symbol, a personification of evil, and of how it works in the world. What the words seem to be saying is that there is evil in the world, and we need to be on our guard, because evil will not always appear as such, and may often be disguised by those who would wish to deceive us."

Precisely! 🙂
 
Poll time.

I assume there are others reading this thread. Could we get a show of hands, or the on-line equivalent, as to how many think this song is in praise of Lucifer, versus how many think it is a criticism of Lucifer.

Thanks.
 
John Kearns:
Poll time.

I assume there are others reading this thread. Could we get a show of hands, or the on-line equivalent, as to how many think this song is in praise of Lucifer, versus how many think it is a criticism of Lucifer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Sorry John, but I have to vote for option 3: an apology for Lucifer.

I think it is neither in praise of, nor a criticism of, but rather a defense of Lucifer.
 
I think Deb and I are in agreement (but I don’t want to speak on her behalf): The song is not a criticism per say, but a warning.

Sung from the point of view of Satan, it is saying “Look at me, I am responsible for all these awful things … but I didn’t make them happen, I convinced YOU to do them … and I’m laughin’ all the way to hell w/ your soul in my possession.”

That’s the warning. “If you don’t pay attention, you’ll align yourself w/ me. Even if you don’t mean to.”

After all, that’s what the devil wants, isn’t it? To “win” your soul?

“But what’s puzzling you is the nature of my game.” …

i.e., choose what makes you feel good here on earth and you’ll suffer for all eternity with me in hell.
 
40.png
cenpress:
I think Deb and I are in agreement (but I don’t want to speak on her behalf): The song is not a criticism per say, but a warning.

Sung from the point of view of Satan, it is saying “Look at me, I am responsible for all these awful things … but I didn’t make them happen, I convinced YOU to do them … and I’m laughin’ all the way to hell w/ your soul in my possession.”

That’s the warning. “If you don’t pay attention, you’ll align yourself w/ me. Even if you don’t mean to.”

After all, that’s what the devil wants, isn’t it? To “win” your soul?

“But what’s puzzling you is the nature of my game.” …

i.e., choose what makes you feel good here on earth and you’ll suffer for all eternity with me in hell.
Click to expand...
This will be my last post on this subject (not my last post mind you, just the last one on this subject). I want to thank you for the post from reasontorock.com. What little doubt I had that my interpretation of this song was right was totally erased by this post. The author needs a “reasotorock”. Further, one of the great objections to rock has always been that it’s “the devil’s music”. But, if we take the song most likely to be used as Exhibit A of that accusation, and we say that actually, it means the exact opposite of what it says…well there you go.

And who better to perform a nuanced criticism of Lucifer than a band whose members were performing every imaginable sex act, with every variety of person, while using every possible illegal drug, while employing a gang of murderous (in the literal, not figurative sense of murderous) thugs as bodyguards.

I guess they didn’t choose to listen to their own, “i.e., choose what makes you feel good here on earth and you’ll suffer for all eternity with me in hell.”, advice, eh?

One last question: Is it true that they intended to follow up with an album of Gregorian chants, but the accountants talked them out of it?
 
40.png
cenpress:
I think Deb and I are in agreement (but I don’t want to speak on her behalf): The song is not a criticism per say, but a warning.

Sung from the point of view of Satan, it is saying “Look at me, I am responsible for all these awful things … but I didn’t make them happen, I convinced YOU to do them … and I’m laughin’ all the way to hell w/ your soul in my possession.”

That’s the warning. “If you don’t pay attention, you’ll align yourself w/ me. Even if you don’t mean to.”

After all, that’s what the devil wants, isn’t it? To “win” your soul?

“But what’s puzzling you is the nature of my game.” …

i.e., choose what makes you feel good here on earth and you’ll suffer for all eternity with me in hell.
Click to expand...
That’s the way I understand it!..And have understood it, for lo these decades past!

If it’s necessary to the subject: I am 59, & therefore rememeber when the song was fresh & new, & I understood it then as meaning just the same as I do now.
God bless.
 
regardless of the intent of the Stones in writing and recording this song, the subject of the verses has certainly triumphed in this discussion, using honest emotional reaction and intellectual consideration of the content in order to bypass debate and go directly to dissension and discord of a peculiarly nasty and personal kind. Will you all please go back and review what you have been slinging at each other, make a good act of contrition and say 5 Our Fathers and 5 Hail Marys.
 
I started this thread to find out what other Catholics might think of this particular song … and what I’ve found is that there are several differing opinions. (I kinda figured that would be the case.)

In any event, it should be mentioned that despite any sinful lifestyle or immoral acts The Rolling Stones have indulged in throughout their lengthy career, the meaning of the song in and of itself ought not be weighed down by such baggage. Blame it on a single moment of clarity, if you wish.

That said, I guess the matter is pretty much settled. Some think it is evil, others think it is good. I’m willing to leave it at that, after making one more point.

And that is this:

For those who think the song is evil and wish to reject it as such and refuse to further subject oneself to its message, I commend you and wish you well in your efforts to do so.

For those who find an inherent moral worth in the song and believe it contains a deeper redeaming message within … one that is in line with Christian thought, I commend you, too, and wish you well.

Music, film, literature, all art is subjective and heavily reliant upon the interpretation of an audience. Where one finds value, another finds trash. This will never change. But what I find most encouraging is the strength of conviction ALL posters in this thread have portrayed in defending their beliefs. And so long as we keep our eyes focused on the Light of Christ … always and everywhere … (which I beleive is obvious we all intend to do), then we shall continue to stand side by side, proclaiming our love for Him together in one powerful and beautiful voice … no matter how often we might disagree.

May God bless you all … thank you for being part of this discussion.
 
I’ve always taken this song as a vain attempt by the devil to brag about what he has done, then try to say it really isn’t his fault because that’s just his nature. To me, this song is a reminder of society in some ways: doesn’t matter what i do, I shouldn’t have to take the blame or face the consiquences because it’s just my nature or I can’t help it.
 
Since my initial post on this thread, the words of a song by another 60s artist, Buffy Ste-Marie, have been going through my head…I cannot remember the name of the song, but she sang:

“Down in the heart of town,
the devil dresses up…
He keeps his nails clean–
Did you think he’s be a boogey-man?”

Kinda the same thought…
 
I have always been fond of rock-n-roll. In my youth probably too much. I now have a very balanced perspective on all forms of art and entertainment (thankfully through my conversion, and being past 40 with 2 tattoos 😉 )

I don’t see this song as being praise of Lucifer. It is no more a praise to Lucifer then is C.S. Lewis’s ‘Wormwood’ character - who also boasts about his triumphs over the human soul. It is fiction.

I think the Stone’s actually did a good job of showing the nature of the devil and what an arrogant liar and master of destruction the devil actually is.

It is art. We have statues, literature, and paintings of demons and the devil that also portray him as the bad guy. It think its crazy to think they are praise for him.
 
40.png
ridesawhitehors:
I have always been fond of rock-n-roll. In my youth probably too much. I now have a very balanced perspective on all forms of art and entertainment (thankfully through my conversion, and being past 40 with 2 tattoos 😉 )

I don’t see this song as being praise of Lucifer. It is no more a praise to Lucifer then is C.S. Lewis’s ‘Wormwood’ character - who also boasts about his triumphs over the human soul. It is fiction.

I think the Stone’s actually did a good job of showing the nature of the devil and what an arrogant liar and master of destruction the devil actually is.

It is art. We have statues, literature, and paintings of demons and the devil that also portray him as the bad guy. It think its crazy to think they are praise for him.
Click to expand...
Ok, I said I’d finished posting on this subject, but I simply can’t let this one pass without comment… You’re comparing C.S. Lewis to the Rolling Stones?

Let’s examine this one very briefly:

C.S. Lewis - One of the greatest Christian apologist, ever. His works have been, at least indirectly, responsible for the saving of thousands of souls.

Rolling Stones - Directly responsible for the death of 1 at Altamont. 3 others died there. Through emulation of their lifestyle, indirectly responsible for the destruction of thousands of lives.

Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
 
What does it matter who wrote it?!!

The poet John Donne lived half his life as a playboy, defiling women and living in absolute immorality. Then he had an awakening and became Christian. From that point on, he devoted all his poetry (all his life) to Christ.

C.S. Lewis spent a good portion of his early life an enthusiastic atheist before making his conversion.

Even if this song is the ONLY “Christian” themed song the Rolling Stones ever created, it doesn’t lessen the impact of the song in and of itself.

Besides, my original question was: Did Bono of U2 cover this song … if he did, would that change anything? The man who’s been nominated for two Nobel Peace Prizes? The man who is doing his part to help the world in any way he can? Do you suppose he covered this song because he’s under the spell of Satan?

What if Jars of Clay, an outwardly Christian rock group, covered the song? Or any other Christian rock group or singer/songwriter? Would you dismiss it then? Who cares who wrote it? It doesn’t matter … especially if the song moves me (or anybody) spiritually in such a way that it helps me keep my guard up against Satan and all his demons. That is, after all, what this song does for me.

C.S. Lewis is responsible for saving thousands of souls … yes. What if someone is responsible for saving only one? Is he any less worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven than Mr. Lewis?

If you (the universal “you” … anyone) think this song is evil, then don’t listen to it. Erase its lyrics from your mind and reject it with the strength of your soul. But I, for one, do not think it is evil. My interpretation of the song is clear: It reads as a warning … one that I will surely heed. It doesn’t make me right. It doesn’t make me wrong. That’s called the subjectivity of art. But if this song helps me keep my guard up against Satan, objectively, how can you call it evil?

And one more thing … I am no C.S. Lewis (to be sure). But I have written several devotions to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I’ve written several love poems to God. The fact that I’m not the greatest apologist of the 20th Century ought not lessen the impact of those devotions. Ought it?

Absolutely not.

And though we disagree, John, I have enjoyed discussing this matter with you. If my words sound impassioned, that’s because they are. But “impassioned” in the most positive way. I want you to know that I respect you fully and consider you a brother in Christ. Let us never lose sight of that.
 
John Kearns:
Ok, I said I’d finished posting on this subject, but I simply can’t let this one pass without comment… You’re comparing C.S. Lewis to the Rolling Stones?
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point. He is not comparing the Stones to C.S. Lewis. He is comparing the charaters of Lucifer and Wormwood and saying neither of them give praise to the Devil in that the reader wouldn’t be encouraged to.

Secondly, the quality of ones lifestyle does not determine the quality of ones writings. For instance, read Oscar Wilde then read about him.
 
John Kearns:
It’s hard being in this world and not being of the world. The song has a great melody and the Stones are soooo cool. This can’t really be a prayer in praise of Lucifer, can it? But it is just that, and no amount of wanting it not to be is going to change that.
Click to expand...
How does it praise Lucifer? I don’t see it at all. And I have no particular reason to like it–I’m not much of a fan of rock music in general and certainly not of the Rolling Stones in particular.

Is it possible that you really don’t understand irony even when it’s obvious?

Edwin

P.S. I’ve now read the rest of the thread, and there’s probably no way to argue the point with you. If you really think that the litany of horrors associated with the Devil is somehow supposed to make us “sympathetic” to the Devil, then there’s really nothing to say. But just as you think that those who defend the song are motivated by a love of rock music (which is honestly not the case for me–I like some stuff, mostly because I find the words interesting, but I’m not a big fan of the genre as a whole), so it seems obvious to me that you are twisting the natural meaning of the words because of your righteous indignation against rock music and against the debauched lifestyle of the Rolling Stones.

Of course they are saying that the Devil is associated with power and wealth and taste. That’s the point–they’re suggesting that the structures of the world, the “establishment,” are permeated with evil. Of course they don’t think Jesus is divine or a Savior–but they are using Jesus’ condemnation by Pilate, along with the Holocaust/WWII, as ultimate examples of evil. If you really think that stinking bodies and the condemnation of the innocent are images likely to evoke sympathy for the perpetrators–well, like I said, there’s really no arguing with you!
 
Perhaps a good literary work to compare this song with would be Jonathon Swift’s Modest Proposal.
 
This might be the Stones’ best song. If not this, then Gimme Shelter or Tumbling Dice, or Street Fighting Man are.

And Bono is a man of faith and conviction… he certainly is nor calling upon the Evil One.
 
Jagger always sounded like he was singing with rocks in his mouth. I’m 46 years old and never knew all the lyrics to this song until reading this post! So much for the bad influence of the Stones on me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top