Pierre-Paul
05-18-2006, 06:52 AM
I've been toying with this for a while now. There only seems to be a small musical connection bewteen the two (the ending notes of Intension seem to sound a bit like the notes in the beginning of Right in two) but I feel the lyrics are strongly connceted.
I think both Intension and Right in two are related to Jean-Jacques Rousseau's work. Rousseau is a french philosopher (well, he was from Switzerland, but wrote in France). From Wikipédia: "Rousseau saw a fundamental divide between society and human nature. Rousseau contended that man was good by nature, a "noble savage" when in the state of nature (the state of all the "other animals", and the condition humankind was in before the creation of civilization and society), but is corrupted by society. He viewed society as artificial and held that the development of society, especially the growth of social interdependence, has been inimical to the well-being of human beings.
Society's negative influence on otherwise virtuous men centers, in Rousseau's philosophy, on its transformation of amour de soi, a positive self-love, into amour-propre, or pride. Amour de soi represents the instinctive human desire for self preservation, combined with the human power of reason. In contrast, amour-propre is not natural but artificial and forces man to compare himself to others, thus creating unwarranted fear and allowing men to take pleasure in the pain or weakness of others. Rousseau was not the first to make this distinction; it had been invoked by, among others, Vauvenargues."
One of his famous works, Discourse on Inequality, tracks down the "natural man". The "natural man", for Rousseau, is more or less like any other animal, where "self-preservation being his chief and almost sole concern" and "the only goods he recognizes in the universe are food, a female, and sleep...". Moreover, what distinguishes men from animals are two qualities which every man has: (1) "free agency", which is the ability to choose. You can also say "free will" and (2) "perfectibility", which is the quality to create yourself an identity in relation to what other humans think of you.
So let's see how Rousseau's opinions relate to Intension and Right in two, and how this connects both together.
From Intension:
"Pure as we begin
Pure as we come in
Pure as we begin
Pure by will alone"
This obivously refers to the natural man. His soul is still clean and has not been corrupted by society.
"Pure as we begin
Here we have a stone
Throw to slay the stranger
Swore to crush his bones"
First tools of primitive men were stones. Tis is the natural man's first contact with society: he has to kill the stranger (probably over food issues).
"Spark becomes a flame
Flame becomes a fire
Forge a blade to slay the stranger
Take whatever we desire"
The discovery of fire. I think this stroph relates to the birth of the metallurgical science. The discovery of metal, for Rousseau, is the first big "revolution" in the history of mankind. This revolution obivously lead to wars but also to progress in agriculture, which made men sedentary, which created villages and the first state of social man.
Finally, the line "move by will alone" refers to the capacity of men to use their free-will, which is the main subject of Right In Two.
Let's take a look at Right in Two.
"Why did Father give these humans free will?
Now they're all confused."
It pretty much explains itself.
"Father blessed them all with reason,
And this is what they choose?
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground.
Silly monkeys give them thumbs they forge a blade
And where there's one they're bound to divide it
Right in two
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground.
Silly monkeys give them thumbs they make a club,
And beat their brother down."
Natural men were corrupted by society, and their perfectibility lead them to become slayers of their own kind. The line "monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground" is particularly intersting, since the second part of Rousseau's Discourse on inequality starts this way: "The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying "This is mine", and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody"."
In conclusion, I believe that Intension and Right in two form one song because they both elaborate on Rousseau's philosophy, mainly his Discourse on inquality. Intension seems to describe the evolution of natural man into a civil man. Right in two seems to me more like the noticing of how free will, private property and society all ruined men's evolution.
I know this is a long post, and that my english in not perfect (I'm a french-canadian), so thanks to all who had the courage and interest to read this from top to bottom.
Now it's time to discuss.
I think both Intension and Right in two are related to Jean-Jacques Rousseau's work. Rousseau is a french philosopher (well, he was from Switzerland, but wrote in France). From Wikipédia: "Rousseau saw a fundamental divide between society and human nature. Rousseau contended that man was good by nature, a "noble savage" when in the state of nature (the state of all the "other animals", and the condition humankind was in before the creation of civilization and society), but is corrupted by society. He viewed society as artificial and held that the development of society, especially the growth of social interdependence, has been inimical to the well-being of human beings.
Society's negative influence on otherwise virtuous men centers, in Rousseau's philosophy, on its transformation of amour de soi, a positive self-love, into amour-propre, or pride. Amour de soi represents the instinctive human desire for self preservation, combined with the human power of reason. In contrast, amour-propre is not natural but artificial and forces man to compare himself to others, thus creating unwarranted fear and allowing men to take pleasure in the pain or weakness of others. Rousseau was not the first to make this distinction; it had been invoked by, among others, Vauvenargues."
One of his famous works, Discourse on Inequality, tracks down the "natural man". The "natural man", for Rousseau, is more or less like any other animal, where "self-preservation being his chief and almost sole concern" and "the only goods he recognizes in the universe are food, a female, and sleep...". Moreover, what distinguishes men from animals are two qualities which every man has: (1) "free agency", which is the ability to choose. You can also say "free will" and (2) "perfectibility", which is the quality to create yourself an identity in relation to what other humans think of you.
So let's see how Rousseau's opinions relate to Intension and Right in two, and how this connects both together.
From Intension:
"Pure as we begin
Pure as we come in
Pure as we begin
Pure by will alone"
This obivously refers to the natural man. His soul is still clean and has not been corrupted by society.
"Pure as we begin
Here we have a stone
Throw to slay the stranger
Swore to crush his bones"
First tools of primitive men were stones. Tis is the natural man's first contact with society: he has to kill the stranger (probably over food issues).
"Spark becomes a flame
Flame becomes a fire
Forge a blade to slay the stranger
Take whatever we desire"
The discovery of fire. I think this stroph relates to the birth of the metallurgical science. The discovery of metal, for Rousseau, is the first big "revolution" in the history of mankind. This revolution obivously lead to wars but also to progress in agriculture, which made men sedentary, which created villages and the first state of social man.
Finally, the line "move by will alone" refers to the capacity of men to use their free-will, which is the main subject of Right In Two.
Let's take a look at Right in Two.
"Why did Father give these humans free will?
Now they're all confused."
It pretty much explains itself.
"Father blessed them all with reason,
And this is what they choose?
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground.
Silly monkeys give them thumbs they forge a blade
And where there's one they're bound to divide it
Right in two
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground.
Silly monkeys give them thumbs they make a club,
And beat their brother down."
Natural men were corrupted by society, and their perfectibility lead them to become slayers of their own kind. The line "monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground" is particularly intersting, since the second part of Rousseau's Discourse on inequality starts this way: "The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying "This is mine", and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody"."
In conclusion, I believe that Intension and Right in two form one song because they both elaborate on Rousseau's philosophy, mainly his Discourse on inquality. Intension seems to describe the evolution of natural man into a civil man. Right in two seems to me more like the noticing of how free will, private property and society all ruined men's evolution.
I know this is a long post, and that my english in not perfect (I'm a french-canadian), so thanks to all who had the courage and interest to read this from top to bottom.
Now it's time to discuss.