"Too Preachy"

[MysterionMuffles]

I have been enjoying learning from Stefan to deconstruct certain terms that are designed to invoke innate negativity or self attack. So what I feel like a good word to tackle is "preachy."

 

In my opinion, being accused of being too preachy just means that someone had their beliefs challenged and can't argue back with anything substantial--so they just throw an adjective around. 

 

I've written lyrics about anti-spanking that you can find here on the boards: Monkeys in the Mirror

 

and my acoustic duo partner accused me of being too preachy.

 

I'm also in the process of writing a young adult novel that deals with child abuse, and although my character expresses moral outrage in her narrative over things that aren't about child abuse, I still get criticized as being too preachy. 

 

Perhaps I'm just taking the term too personally, but I'm starting to feel like being called preachy really is just a cop-out term for people who can't construct a valid criticism to contest my views, or cannot provide more creative ways to reword my arguments to make them less preachy sounding.

 

What are your thoughts on the word preachy? I know Stefan's been accused of being too preachy, but again, that's just easier than making argument right?

[Wuzzums]

I like wordings like "too preachy", there's so much to it. "Preachy" is considered bad on its own but "too preachy" implies there's a right amount of "preachy" to be had. It's a contradiction. It's a weird language trick to soften the critique but backfires if you look at the logic. Kind of like saying that something is "too rapey". If you remove the right amount of rape you're gonna get the perfect amount of rape.

[RyanT]

Certainly how I see it.

 

'Preachy' is basically just one of those buzzword/magic spells that allows people to avoid examining morality,

 

A bit like,

 

'Judgemental'

'Intolerant'

'Unforgiving'

'Extreamist'

'black and white thinking',

 

At the end of the day you have to go back to that point,

 

'Why are they actually criticizing me?

Do they understand and agree with my goals?

Or do they just want to sabotage me?'

[tiepolo]

I like wordings like "too preachy", there's so much to it. "Preachy" is considered bad on its own but "too preachy" implies there's a right amount of "preachy" to be had. 

That comment is too pedantic.

[dsayers]

I've written lyrics about anti-spanking that you can find here on the boards: Monkeys in the Mirror

 

and my acoustic duo partner accused me of being too preachy.

 

Once upon a time, I had heard a song by Rage Against the Machine. I bought one of their tapes. I didn't much care for them after that because it seemed like all their songs were about politics and I just wanted some good music. I guess you could say I felt that they were being preachy. There's times when I see a celebrity championing a cause and I feel they're being preachy. In these instances, my complaint is more along the lines of getting something other than what I came for.

 

I don't know the specifics of your arrangement, but maybe your partner was saying he wanted more mass appeal or to not be what he views as controversial. I'm not excusing the verbal attack, just trying to interpret it. It's not really constructive to tell somebody that they're being too preachy. I think it would be more edifying to try and find out why a message is so important to somebody that they'd want to write a song about it.

 

Generally speaking, saying somebody is too preachy (like there's just preachy enough?) is an appeal to insecurity. Many people are propagandized into being uncomfortable talking about anything of substance. Rather than addressing this truth about themselves, they use a passive-aggressive verbal attack in an attempt to coerce you out of discussing something of substance with them or in their presence. Does that seem like a realistic description?

[RyanT]

Generally speaking, saying somebody is too preachy (like there's just preachy enough?) is an appeal to insecurity. Many people are propagandized into being uncomfortable talking about anything of substance. Rather than addressing this truth about themselves, they use a passive-aggressive verbal attack in an attempt to coerce you out of discussing something of substance with them or in their presence. Does that seem like a realistic description?

I hear you....My favorite's got to be, 'you think too much'.What a creepy little statement?

[MysterionMuffles]

Yeah exactly, it's an appeal to insecurity. It's meant to have a negative connotation like preaching any word of wisdom is a bad thing. Then to have the word TOO in front of it is more manipulative langauge, at least that's the way I see it.

 

"You think too much," is also just as bad as "you ask too many questions." To me that relates, "I don't think enough to give you any solid answers."

[Carl Green]

Was he saying you're too preachy in general, or the lyrics are too preachy for the audience?

[Pepin]

Often times with art, it is seen as bad to use it as a means of conveying philosophy and personal views. Though it tends not to be stated, it is because it cuts down on your potential audience. If you are to compose a song which is against religion, it is likely that those who are religious will not wish to listen to it, cutting down on your potential audience significantly. It is suggested by many to stick to safe subjects and points of view which everyone can relate to.

 

Personally, I cannot adhere to such ideas. Art ought to be a psychological manifestation of your beliefs, and an argument in support of them. To make something shallow, which can be enjoyed by all, is to create something which contains none of you.

 

To be "preachy", is to be daring. To be "preachy", is to hold your convictions as true, and to express them to the world. To be "preachy", is to take art seriously. To not do so, is to fall into cowardice.

[MysterionMuffles]

Was he saying you're too preachy in general, or the lyrics are too preachy for the audience?

 

He was saying the lyrics were too preachy in general, and when I asked him which lines were considered to be too preachy, he never responded.

 

 

Often times with art, it is seen as bad to use it as a means of conveying philosophy and personal views. Though it tends not to be stated, it is because it cuts down on your potential audience. If you are to compose a song which is against religion, it is likely that those who are religious will not wish to listen to it, cutting down on your potential audience significantly. It is suggested by many to stick to safe subjects and points of view which everyone can relate to.

 

Personally, I cannot adhere to such ideas. Art ought to be a psychological manifestation of your beliefs, and an argument in support of them. To make something shallow, which can be enjoyed by all, is to create something which contains none of you.

 

To be "preachy", is to be daring. To by "preachy", is to hold your convictions as true, and to express them to the world. To be "preachy", is to take art seriously. To not do so, is to fall into cowardice.

 

Yeah art is MEANT to be an argument for beliefs and viewpoints of the world. Even in writing fiction they suggest not to get too preachy, wherein if you do have a deep challenging message to convey, it needs to be dressed up in a way where it doesn't talk down on the audience. It needs be shown more than told that there are principles brought forth. That is the one and only time I understand that "too preachy" sort of works, but even then. I think the people who put that as writing advice, that they themselves, want to invoke self attack if you have something worthwhile to say.

[Pepin]

As a general principle, I would suggest that this sort of behavior has nothing to do with you. Someone telling you that you are being "too preachy" does not particularly care about your work, they simply wish to maintain their psychological relation thiers. They realize that if they are to put their beliefs in the open, they will be subject to criticism and rejection. They wish to be honest, they wish to put their thoughts into the public discourse, but are internally damned to remain closed due to fear.

 

When someone tells you to not be "too preachy", they are not talking to you, yet rather projecting themselves onto you as a means to commit themselves to further inaction. You are playing the part of their drive to want to do something more, and they are playing the part of the dominant roles within their psyche which quell such thoughts.

 

My suggestion is to be a bit of dick. Say, "I realize you have your own reasons for not wanting to commit to these actions and that is completely acceptable, I cannot stop you from hiding yourself from the world, but this isn't about you. This is a desire that I have, this is my will, and it is wrong to attempt to crush my courage to preserve your cowardice".

 

Perhaps that's a bit harsh, but seriously, fuck these people that prevent virtue to preserve their inaction.

[MysterionMuffles]

Fuck YES, Pepin! Didn't think of it that way, wow!

 

I'm open for criticism all the time now. I've dealt with all my life that it rolls off my back. A personal commandment for myself is to be immune to praise and criticism, but always accept feedback. Being open to it is the only way one can truly discover the truth about themselves because we all have blind spots.

 

I think your hypothetical speech isn't all that harsh, but can easily be taken as such.

 

Hmm...I think I should have a discussion with my acoustic partner about this. In our songs, we've written about a friend of ours that died of cancer, unrequitted love, and taking chances in life. He doesn't neccessarily have to write anything to add to my anti spanking song, lyrically, vocally, or guitar addition otherwise--but I want it to be known. This shit is important to me and his criticism means nothing unless he can offer constructive feedback to make it less "preachy." But as we've been discovering in this thread is that preachy is an unphilosophical term.

 

Perhaps he needs to understand that this new theme of the better treatment of children--that's showing up in all my work (music AND fiction now)--is not only important to me, but also the world. It's not make or break for me, we both have songs of our own better performed and recorded solo, but I dunno. This thread has encouraged me to bring it up to him and let him know he can't just throw adjectives at me like that, and that I am actually willing to understand his viewpoint before deciding whether or not it's worth taking our musical messages a step further.