|Home | Library > Music|
Secularism, Media, Music and Culture
Summary: To discuss in detail the elements that gave rise to the predominantly Christianised, Western World becoming a largely secular society, could, in and of itself, involve a whole book. Great revolutionaries, like Voltaire and his ???Charter of Human Rights,??? and a range of other thought leaders of that era and beyond, who???s relativistic, humanistic philosophy began to seep into our educational systems, all played a role in setting the stage for a godless takeover of the Western, Christian mind-set.
To discuss in detail the elements that gave rise to the predominantly Christianised, Western World becoming a largely secular society, could, in and of itself, involve a whole book. Great revolutionaries, like Voltaire and his "Charter of Human Rights," and a range of other thought leaders of that era and beyond, who's relativistic, humanistic philosophy began to seep into our educational systems, all played a role in setting the stage for a godless takeover of the Western, Christian mind-set. The rise of spiritualism in the 19th Century and its acceptance by many Christians helped to blur the distinction between the godly and the demonic. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky and her Theosophical blending of Eastern and Western occultism, laid the foundation for the New Age movement and its key prophets such as, Annie Bessant and Alice Bailey: major activists in promoting the idea that man, essentially is God and, thus, is the real solution to all his problems, temporal and spiritual. Added to these developments were Darwin's theory of evolution and the rise of communism.
Moving along with these trends was the rapidly transforming world of the arts. As the age ofbrushed its strokes of color onto the canvas of a new breed of painters, so to the Western-World of music began evolving from a traditionally classical foundation, branching out into blues, then moving into jazz, swing, be-bop, rhythm and blues and then finally, by the mid 50s, rock and roll. Slowly but surely, at first, and then moving ever faster, with the help of the technologically revolutionized world of media and communication, the old-style Christian culture transformed into a secularized society.
Secularism is an organism that is, essentially, without spiritual belief—from a Christian perspective, without Christ—godless. Man is the solution to all his needs. Secularism or secular humanism, as it is sometimes called, is apparently non-religious. Yet, in its very denial of faith, in the trust it places on human solutions, it becomes an idolatrous system and a neo-pagan religion, that is, knowingly or unknowingly, as specifically heathen as any of the pagan cultures that worshiped Baal, Ashteroth, Isis and Osiris or any of the other ancient deities.
We, as Seventh-day Adventists, live in this world of secularism and are often in a dilemma as to how we should relate to such a social structure. How do we reach the secular mind with the eternal gospel? How much of its philosophy, culture and lifestyle should we absorb into our daily experience? How are we to be in the world and not of the world, maintaining the high principles and characteristics of our faith while staying relevant to those whom we are trying to reach with precious truth? Is it possible, in this world of media overload, where MTV culture seems to rule the lives of our youth and where the "plastic reality" of Hollywood has found inroads into the very sanctity and privacy of our own homes, to stay true to what we believe? These are profound questions that need to be answered. Each child of God deserves to, indeed, has a duty to, grapple with these questions and to find answers to them.In 2 Timothy 3:1-5, Paul describes a people that would exist in the "last days":
If one were to read only till the end of verse 4 you might imagine this to be a description of a people without faith in God—without religion—perhaps an accurate description a neo-pagan secular society. Yet, verse 5 clearly states that these are a people that have religion, a form of godliness, but without the power. It can be no mistake that Paul's description of these deceived believers begins with him describing them as loving themselves—the root of sin—the very attribute that contributed to Lucifer's fall from grace. This is a description of a situation where man, while believing that he is worshiping God, is in fact making a god of himself. All the other attributes of covetousness, boasting, pride, blasphemy and disobedience to parents, grow out of this foundational evil—love of self.
In a world where the media sets the trends for moral values and lifestyle it is hardly surprising that the natural, mature affection that stems from a relationship with God has grown cold and almost non-existent. People seem to be ruled/guided by the overpowering master of passion. Our whole decision-making process is based on how we feel rather than the higher, eternal guide of principle that originates from the Word of God. The slogan of our neo-pagan society is, If it feels good, do it. The media, through movies, sitcoms, commercials, TV games, printed material, and the MTV music-video culture has led society, even Christians, to feel comfortable with making decisions based on how they feel rather than on a "thus saith the Lord."
Today, neurologists speak about the "new brain" that has resulted from over-exposure exposure to the media. They tell us of a rewiring of the brain that is having a profound effect on our generation.i A culture has developed that is counter the culture of Christ, that has brought Christians, even Seventh-day Adventists, to the point where they may be practicing a form of Godliness without the power. Nowhere is this more manifest than in the radical changes that have taken place in our, once biblically and spirit of prophecy-based, music and worship practices. It would be almost inconceivable, even naïve, to imagine that while our Christian walk has been tainted by so much else that the media has loaded on us, which we seem to so eagerly absorb, that our music and worship should escape untainted. Indeed, that which underlines and has become the emotional vehicle for so much of the media's communication is the language of music. Without the apparent use of physical force, a revolution has taken place that has replaced a value system that once based its government and laws on the principles of God's Word, with a value system that has elevated relativistic-humanistic theories to ruling status.
It would have been worth our while to have considered the words of 18th century British Statesman, Edmund Burke, when he outlined the most successful method used by revolutionaries to overthrow an established cultural and political system:
If a once-godly nation, whose laws were based on Biblical principles could be persuaded to reject her moral base and religious position, imagining that in so doing she might experience a superior level of liberty and freedom, could she not, ultimately, allow the laws of "humanistic passion" to become her system of value? Edmund Burke contributes some sobering comment to this possibility:
The New Age inspired Counter-Culture Revolution, that found its birth in the mid fifties and grew to adulthood in the sixties and seventies, espoused a philosophy that was directly opposed to the values of European/American Christian based laws and ideals. Free love, free sex and rebellion against the established value system became the order of the day. Although it is true that the existing status-Quo had some serious flaws it, non-the-less, had a base (crumbling though it was) that was established upon morals and values that were rooted in biblical principles.
The chosen vehicle of expression for the counter-culture was music that, apparently, expressed that generation's frustration and angst and their overwhelming desire for new freedoms/liberties and values/morals in a way that had not been done in quite the same way before.The question is, at least at this point, did the counter-culture enjoy success in utilizing their vehicle of choice and, if so, how extensive an influence did their philosophy have on the previously Christianized, Western World and its Bible-based system of values? This is a question that will be answered more fully as we progress. Indeed, another question, upon which the answer to the previous question hinges, is: was it possible to use such a seemingly neutral medium such as music to contribute to radical moral and political change? Let's begin by reviewing some selected comments by great thinkers and philosophers of bygone years, with relation to music. It will be seen, that heir opinions, in harmony with the understanding of these issues as communicated by the counter-culture revolutionaries themselves, clearly contradict present relativistic notions about music. After doing that we will see if the evidence of recent history and scientific research supports their statements. Over 300 years B.C. Aristotle made these observations regarding music and its ability to communicate the emotional states of humans:
This belief that music has the ability to indoctrinate, ensnare or "channel" to such a degree may be considered by some to be the collective delusion of ancient philosophers and an outdated prophet without the aid of modern science. But, when one considers the evidences of current research, as we shall do later on, then it will become apparent that not much has changed. The musicians of our present age—those who sculpted the musical vehicle of the counter-culture—certainly seemed to believe that there was a power in the medium of music that was beyond the ordinary.
Both Hendrix and Pitman understood the ability of certain musical influences/atmospheres to get the people below the point of total conscious control of their reasoning faculties.
Some may argue that they are assigning too much influence to the medium. It may also be argued that, "it is not what the music does to us it is what we choose to do with the music by virtue of the condition of our heart." They would add to this: "If you don't want to experience something through the music, you don't have to." Another argument is that, "if we claim that hearing certain music makes us evil, then we are like the pagans, we cannot make decisions about what should or should not affect us."
It must first be noted, in response to such uninformed and partially accurate reasoning, that many music and worship instructors who espouse these views will, on the other hand, tell us that we should choose pieces of music for worship that will have the ability to touch the physical, emotional, the intellectual and spiritual sensibilities of the worshipers. They often talk about shaping the worship experience through the music to suit the culture, environment, education, belief and value systems of the people. Even if we were to agree that different cultural considerations will determine the response you have to the musical atmosphere (this view is only moderately accurate, as we will adequately prove later in this chapter), you will still have to admit that, in their sphere of musical appreciation, the applied form will still have a powerful effect on the worshiper to "channel" them into a particular mood or state of mind.
The fact that some, in certain musical environments, can consciously choose to not be affected by the music in the same way that others may be, is no proof that that music is not having a positive or negative effect on them. Indeed, although the person choosing not to be affected may succeed in consciously allaying the emotion suggested via the music, his subconscious still processes the sound and atmosphere of the piece—if he still sticks around while the music is being performed—and can, in the recesses of his gray matter, contribute to positive or negative states. These can have short-term or even long-term effects. It is a basic common-sense fact, which can and will be amply proven by the extensive neurological research in the field of sound, that music creates atmospheres. Although a certain piece of music may communicate mayhem and chaos to one group and a sense of pleasure and an adrenaline high to another, does not suggest that the piece of music is being interpreted differently by the basic functions of the human organism. This type of superficial analysis only hides the real fact that one person may still be sensitive enough to a negative atmosphere. He may feel the adrenaline surge rising in him, but his susceptible sensibilities cause him to channel that adrenaline into an action of repulsion. Alternatively, the other person has, through a process of constant exposure directed it into a perverted sense of gratification. This is why the "natural man," as Paul puts it, enjoys that [sin] which the converted heart is repulsed by. Simply put, this is called desensitization. It may be quite possible that, that which is apparently enjoyed as worship music for a whole new generation of Christians, is the proverbial glass of whisky that in more circumspect times would have been spat out as vile tasting poison. The whisky may appeal to the senses of fallen nature and may seem to tantalize the pleasure senses. As Ellen White put it, "Satan knows what organs to excite, to animate, engross, and charm." But what the taste for whisky really needs is a readapting to the taste of pure cleansing water. Whisky kills, but water gives life. The spiritual analogy here is all too obvious.Another key musician of the counter-culture philosophy, David Crosby, quite frankly revealed his intention to separate the children from the value system of their parent's world through the influence of his music:
More than a generation of people has been affected by the philosophy and musical atmosphere of the counter-culture. An all-pervasive emotional status was created through the atmosphere of rock music and its many sub-genres. These emotional states gave rise to the rule of passion that affected the whole way in which a generation of people began to govern themselves and how they related to the value system of their parents' world.The political revolutionaries of the counter-culture knew precisely what definitive contributions music made to the success of their agenda. Prominent counter-culture leader, Jerry Rubin could not have put it more clearly than he did in his manifesto, which was appropriately titled Do It:
The 60s became noted as a generation in which the counter culture expressed itself in violent acts. On the one hand they protested the war in Vietnam, criticized the white-collar hypocrisy of the established system and spoke of the dawning of a new Aquarian age that would bring about peace in the world. Yet, while they were vocally, and, often, violently, in angry rioting, demonstrating against the old-world value system, they were imbibing illicit drugs, sexual immorality and dabbling in the occult. Their symbol was the, so-called, peace sign, yet they created no peace.
Everyone was talking about being cool and mellow; yet, the time was characterized by anything but that. Sexually related diseases were on the increase, divorce rates escalated to unimaginable levels and crimes of just about every description became regular consumer fare in leading newspapers and journals around the world. One would be hard pressed to find one rally or riot that did not take place without the crowd chanting to some or other hit song of the day.
As the 60s ended in chaos and ruin, the 70s pop-rock culture morphed into a sinister age of darkness. Open occult expressions became regular themes with the emerging "mega-rock" bands of the era. Musicians, by the score, were jumping on the bandwagon of devil worship, dragging millions of admiring fans along with them into outer darkness. David Bowie gave an accurate analyses in a 1976 Rolling Stone interview when he said: "I believe rock'n'roll is dangerous, it could very well bring about a very evil feeling in the West... it's got to go the other way now and that is where I see it heading, bringing about the dark era. I think that we are only heralding something even darker than ourselves."xvi
Nothing improved with the inauguration of the next decade. All the chaotic, contradictory elements that characterized the 60s and 70s splashed into the churning melting pot of the new 80s pop-culture. The pseudo-behavior that realized its painful birth in the emerging Punk-Rock culture spiraled out of control, obliterating the last vestiges of decency and morality. In the first half of the decade, drug-related emergencies increased by an alarming 1100%.
By the 90s, society had become so desensitized that the rise of artists such as Eminem, Marilyn Manson, and a variety of other morally degenerate performers barely elicited an effectual croak of protest from any quarter. Today, in the enlightened 21st Century, as they say, anything goes.What other results could one expect when the overriding thought of the counter-music-culture was a desire to break free from anything considered to have a connection with the "old" conservative, conformist way of thinking. This attitude was, and still is, expressed in the philosophical positions of the majority of musicians and thought-leaders of the rock music industry. A prime case-in-point is this comment by Brian Adams:
All of these attitudes by the counter-culture leaders and propagators—whether they be the political activists or musical revolutionaries—clearly and adequately demonstrates their implicit belief in the power of the medium of music to play a major role in inspiring revolution and change. It must also be stressed that, although the lyrical communication of the counter-music either blatantly or subtly promoted rebellion against the established order, the tone of the music itself, very often created an atmosphere that complimented these verbal expressions. In fact, any form of verbal communication, whether it is via music or the spoken language, makes its real impact felt through the tone of its delivery. This is simply a common-sense fact, which will shortly be confirmed.The 18th century Scottish writer and orator, Andrew Fletcher, was so right when he asserted:
If music did not really have the ability to create immediate emotional states/atmospheres, then isn't it almost illogical that, in so many various daily situations, people are constantly using music to create moods. The following question and comments might serve the purpose of demonstrating the point.
If someone wanted to create an atmosphere of romance through the use of music, what type of musical atmosphere would they choose? One could suggest a particular band or artist, style of music, or basic tone from classics, folk, to contemporary. If it is true that music is neutral or that our total response to music is determined by our culture, upbringing, previous musical disposition or just the words, then there should be no basic commonality shared by people in the realms of romantic or any other kind of musical choice. While we consider this question, it would be good to bear the basic bounds of normality in mind. There are certainly extreme considerations and exceptions to every rule.
I have used this example of choosing music for an evening of romance in different cultures and countries around the world and the responses have been consistent, even in remote parts of Africa. What is more, the responses are consistent with the evidences of neurological research done by leading scientists around the world.
People consistently suggest music that is of a more subdued nature. Classical listeners may suggest Mozart's Kleine-Nacht-Musik. Contemporary listeners might suggest anything from soul to rock or country ballads. Although their musical tastes may differ, they consistently choose music that reflects the softer, tender and more sensitive expressions of their chosen genre. Also, it has that special, almost indescribable quality, we call romantic.
Would it, for example, be acceptable to choose military-march-band-music for a romantic atmosphere? When this question is asked, people always laugh at the very suggestion of such an idea. Why not though? Perhaps if one had military style music with romantic lyrics it would be fine? The response to that suggestion would be equally incredulous. It does not matter what kind of lyrics you put with military-march-band-music, the atmosphere is simply wrong.
If you wanted to create an atmosphere of anarchy or chaos through musical atmosphere, would you use Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata? Such a suggestion would be just as ridiculous as the previous one. It has been consistently proven, through extensive research, that music of a subtle, melodic, gentle nature, has a calming and even healing effect on those exposed to it.25
If there are acceptable expressions of musical atmosphere for Romance, marching, chaos and anarchy, and, of course, a whole range of other situations then, surely, would there not also be acceptable atmospheres of music appropriate for communicating praise, adoration and worship to a holy God, music that would not create the same ambience as a club or restaurant?
The same brain-centers that are involved in processing the language of music are the ones used for processing our spoken/verbal communication. As in music, although in a less sophisticated way, we express, not only words/lyrics when we speak but also tone/atmosphere. Thus the brain centers concerned with emotional response and discernment are activated.xxvi
If you were going to tell someone, in that moment of romance, that you loved him or her, would you shout, I LOVE YOU!? Evidently not. The words are right but, the most important ingredient, the tone of voice, is sending out a conflicting message. It would not either matter what culture or country you came from. The basic tonal qualities communicated in expressing love and in the expression of a whole variety of communications (situation and context considered) are the same in every country or culture. The language/words may differ, but an understanding of emotional communication and the response that it will elicit, is the same around the world.
Europeans and North Americans often try to justify their use of loud, highly rhythmical rock music in worship services, by referring to ethnic cultures that have a tradition of drums and dancing in their music. They say that you can't expect these cultures to appreciate European style hymnody in worship because their response to musical atmospheres is tuned so differently to ours. When this argument is used, the thought often crosses my mind that those Europeans and North Americans are not from those cultures, so the argument could not apply to them anyway. If one bought the assumption that in these cultures (African culture is often used as a prime example) they only have that style of musical approach, then the argument might be relevant, but this is not so. It is true that in certain settings—more often than not in the ritual pagan worship setting—Africans do use heavy repetitive drumming. One could also agree that the musical culture seems to generally contain more accentuated rhythm than one finds in classical music culture, but this does not mean that these cultures and their music are devoid of other musical expressions. I have done my own research into this area—particularly in Africa—and have consistently discovered that in tribal cultures you have music that is composed by individuals for a variety of different events. A shepherd might compose a simple, melody about his sheep and nature. A lover might sing a gentle, melodic tune about the one she loves while, in other situations, a group of people might get together and combine melody and harmony to express a whole variety of sentiments.
If a mother in Africa wanted to use some music to lull her child to sleep, she would not bring out drums and start banging on them. She would sing a gentle lullaby, in the same way that a mother anywhere else in the world would do—regardless of culture or even personal musical predisposition.
True, the music would have an African flavor, in the use of melody and complimentary harmony, but the innate understanding of loud and soft, the use of melody, harmony and rhythm, in communicating, and, the understanding of what type of response will be elicited in the listener, is the same around the world. This is a general common-sense rule that any thinking person will have to agree with.
When a movie producer releases a new film for international circulation, he does not have a different music sound-track scored for every country and culture where that film will be released based on the assumption that, for example, in Indian or Chinese culture, they would simply not respond to the musical atmospheres in the same way the audience in the West would. Indeed, even though the moviegoer in India or China may be prone to listening to the rhythmical and tonal qualities of his music culture, he still responds to the musical atmospheres of that movie in the same way as the person in Europe.
There seems to be built in emotional-response-mechanisms that we all share. Even though we may not have identical musical taste or identical methods of communicating melody, harmony or rhythm, we all respond in the same way to the basic emotional/tonal qualities that communicate themselves via music. This is hardly surprising when you take into account that the neurological and physiological responses to the three main elements in music (melody, harmony and rhythm) are essentially the same for all human beings.
When this aspect is accentuated in music it stimulates the brain in the area of the aesthetic, emotional and spiritual.
Our response to this aspect is more on the intellectual level. This facet of music is more complex in nature because of the interplay between melody and harmony.
Quite obviously, when this part of music is emphasized, we are stimulated on the physical level. In fact, research tells us that the predominant factor in emotional response to music also stems from emphasis in this area.
Music from all cultures is made up of these three musical elements. Sometimes they will, depending on the atmosphere they want to create, accentuate or suppress either one or more of the three essentials: melody, harmony, or rhythm. In every culture, for example, where rhythm/beat becomes the predominant factor in the music, it stimulates people to dance (predominant physical response). The extent of the rhythmical accentuation and monotonous repetition of the beat in dance music will differ from culture to culture but this pattern of physical response to rhythmical inflection remains consistent throughout. It may be of interest to note that in the more primitive cultures, that still practice the ancient pagan forms of ritual drumming, dancing and sacrificial rites, repetitive, monotonous and emphasized drumming remains a staple feature. This is hardly surprising as the worship philosophy of these cults is based on the belief that one has to reach the crossroads between the physical and spiritual worlds by obtaining a trance state through repetitive, monotonous drumming and highly physical expressions of dance. I will say more on this in the next chapter but a brief comment at this point might already stimulate some reflection.
Jesus tells us that His children will worship God in "spirit and in truth" (John 4:23-24). Ellen White highlights this thought when, in connection with worship and singing, she advises that we worship God in "the spirit and in the understanding also."xxvii The comments contained in the New Testament and in the Testimonies, regarding Christian worship, consistently suggest that the biblical worship experience emphasizes a spiritual and intellectual exercise rather than a predominantly physical and highly emotional state of being. This does not suggest that our worship experience should be devoid of any emotion and appropriate expression but, rather, these elements flow form the afore-mentioned areas of emphasis. From a musicological perspective, this may very well imply that melody and harmony (spiritual, intellectual and, secondarily, emotional) should be the predominant factors in Christian worship music, unlike the pagan practice where rhythm, due to its highly physical and primary emotional, becomes the driving factor in the ritual music.
We live in an age where the focus of the media and the music it uses to communicate with are of a highly stimulating nature definitely aimed at the emotional and physical levels, rather than the spiritual and intellectual. It could also be worthwhile discovering from where the present, predominant musical expressions find their origins and philosophy. This will also be a feature of the next chapter.It almost goes without saying that the principles that should guide a Christian, in all the choices they make, should conform to the criteria spelled out by Paul in Philippians 4:8:
The wisdom of the world suggests that if it feels good, do it. Even if the volumes of an average live band exceed 100 decibels—this can even happen in a church worship service, and, very commonly, at a Christian rock concert—it seems to merit no major response. Yet, it is an established fact that when we are exposed to sounds above 85 decibels the delicate inner-ear-hairs are permanently destroyed. Today, the average freshman at university, has hearing loss similar to the elderly.xxviii Those who insist on loud music in worship are already, just in this singular instance, ignoring a definitive Biblical principle: your body is the temple of God.
It is unfortunate that, in less than fifty years, that which would have, in a Christian-value-based society, been considered morally and socially inappropriate and destructive, has become the acceptable norm.
Less than fifty years ago, public pornography would have elicited an immediate outcry. Today we are surrounded by it, and, even mature Christians hardly blush or bat an eyelid when confronted by it in its various degrees.
Likewise, it would have been repugnant, even to the rebels of 1954, if instead of Elvis Presley or Little Richard; they had been bombarded with the sounds of Metallica or Marilyn Manson. At that time, many politicians and spiritual leaders denounced even Elvis' music as "the devil's music." Today, Elvis and the rest of the 50s style rock has literally become kindergarten music. Indeed, many churches are even incorporating heavy metal and other styles of extreme contemporary music into their worship repertoires.The great philosopher and historian, Plato (with reference to the once great Greek nation), said that it was through ignorance that they affirmed that "music has no truth [it is neutral], and, whether good or bad, can only be judged rightly by the pleasure of the hearer."xxix He spoke about the contribution music made to the moral decline of the nation and the ignorance of "men of genius." Following is a considerable extract. Notice the similarity to the philosophy and practice of our day and age:
Surely, as God's end-time people, we are not insolent and foolish enough to disregard the lessons of the past. If we do we are doomed to repeat that which has been recorded as a testimony for our education and edification.
Any thinking Christian who will not admit that we have been profoundly desensitized through harmful music and media is either blind or in a willful state of denial. What a price we are paying for allowing our youth and ourselves to enjoy sin without guilt. Let us plead with God for spiritual eye-salve so that we will see our lost, wretched condition before it is forever too late.We cannot afford to simply attach the same value to all kinds of music. We are continuously evaluating everything else we have to deal with in life while shopping for groceries or a car, in conversation, works of art, people's behavior, and so on. So why, when it comes to music, are people not exercising the same discernment? Consider, in closing this chapter, these remarks by a highly qualified and experienced musician:
References 1. USA TODAY, Monday, April 5th 2004, By Marilyn Elias. 2. As quoted in The New American, April 8th 2002, p. 16. 3. Ibid. 4. Letter 47, 1889, Battle Creek, Mich. March 1, Ellen White - Italics supplied. 5. The Politics, Aristotle 340 B.C. 6. Ibid, Book 8, section 5, p. 466. 7. Adventist Home p. 407, 408, Ellen White - Italics supplied. 8. 2 Selected Messages, p. 36, 38, Ellen White - Italics supplied. 9. As quoted in The New American, April 8th 2002, p. 11. 10. MTV advertisement, as shown on Hells Bells video series, pt. 2. 11. MTV's Rock Around the Clock, Philadelphia Enquirer, Nov 3 1982. 12. Bob Pitman, founder and one-time president of MTV - as quoted by Eric Holmberg on Hells Bells Pt. 2 video series. 13. Life, October 3 1969 - Jimi Hendrix. 14. Peter Herbst, The Rolling Stones Interviews, Rolling Stone Press, 1981. 15. Jerry Rubin Manifesto, Do It, The New American, April 8th 2002, p. 11, 12. 16. Rolling Stone Magazine, February 12th 1976, p. 83. 17. Cape Times, Monday, May 10th 1999. 18. The Secret Power of Music, David Tame, Destiny Books, Rochester, VT, 1984, p. 153. 19. Time, April 14th 2003, Musical Guerrillas. 20. Uncut, in the April 2002, p. 76. 21. 18th century Scottish writer, parliamentarian, and orator, Andrew Fletcher, Stevenson's Book on Quotations, New York Dodd-Mead, p. 123. 22. Prince, as quoted by Eric Holmberg on Hells Bells Pt. 2 video series. 23. Richard G. Pellegrino - Medical Doctor and Consultant to the entertainment industry - Billboard, 23rd January, 1999. 24. Shabbat Shalom, Autumn 2002, 5763, p. 11. 25. Popular Mechanics, March 2002, p. 52, 53. 26. Ibid. 27. Review and Herald, July 24, 1883; PaM 178 - Ellen White. 28. Readers Digest, March 1989, p. 121-123. 29. Plato, The Secret Power of Music, Chapter 5 - David Tame. Also, Laws III, 700, 701, Plato. From Great Books, Vol. 7, p. 675, 676. 30. Laws III, 700, 701, Plato. From Great Books, Vol. 7, p. 675, 676. 31. Shabbat Shalom, Autumn 2002, 5763, p. 14.