Hacker News Reader

Comment by evanjrowley | Hacker News Reader

You're not alone. The lyrics tell a tale of hedonism, but because of the pretty melody and religious imagery, people somehow think it's uplifting? It's blasphemous and cursed according to the ideal that many mistakenly attribute the song to.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy media that uses religious influences in ways contrary to their original purpose. My point is that a line gets crossed when the intent is to create something that's not respectful and people somehow misinterpret it as an endorsement.

View on HN

Maybe I'm overoptimistic about people's intelligence, but my impression is that no one in the history of ever has thought the song is uplifting. There's a reason why it's been used so often in television and film to accompany heartbreak and tragedy and the like.

(I don't really see "a tale of hedonism" in it, either. I mean, it has sex in it, for sure, but that's not the same thing. It's a song of damaged and broken relationships, not of consequence-free one-night stands.)

[EDITED to add:] That last sentence is an oversimplification. There are lots of versions of the song, even if you consider only Cohen's own ones, with different balances between the religious and the sexual/romantic elements; the original 1984 version isn't "a song of damaged and broken relationships", or at least not only that. You could even, kinda-sorta, call it "uplifting". Later versions, Cohen's and others, not so much.

But none of them, so far as I know, is a "tale of hedonism" in any useful sense.

It is certainly not fun and happy song, but I would go as far as claim it is ultimately uplifting. After all it says "I'll stand before the lord of song with nothing on my tongue but hallelujah" - past all the suffering and brokenness the author is ultimately thankful for his lot. And in many philosophical traditions, including the Judaic one, the happy man is one who is satisfied with his lot.

Whether a song is uplifting or not is completely subjective. Intelligence has nothing to do with it… Sometimes even a perfect expression of despair in a song can be uplifting to the listener, for many reasons.

Whenever I’ve been at my lowest, for ex, the various versions of Dylan’s "Not Dark Yet" have always been a source of comfort.

I don't see how it tells "a tale of hedonism", especially if you know which parts of the Bible it refers to. There's a lot of sex, lust, love, heroism and betrayal there, but "hedonism" would not be among words I'd ever use for it, neither it seems to be any in describing Cohen's view of love as "cold and broken Hallelujah". You are free to read the text as you wish, of course, but I'd suggest you might be missing some things there.

> My point is that a line gets crossed when the intent is to create something that's not respectful and people somehow misinterpret it as an endorsement.

Not sure what you mean. That Cohen was disrespectful to the biblical sources? The man doesn't use so much of that kind of symbolism in his songs if he doesn't feel a deep connection to it, and Cohen uses a lot of it, consistently. And, I think, he already answers this question in the song itself - what's "the line"? Where does it come from?

What in the song is blasphemous?

(I suppose the name of the song itself is literally blasphemous, but I don't think this is what you meant?)

Note Jewish myself, but I've seen rabbis complain about people coopting the song as a Christian religious song of praise given its origin, but never complaining about the song itself, either because it "blasphemous" or anything else.

What is your basis for calling it blasphemous?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com