Rush lyrics and their meaning

[revolead]

I am a little afraid to post this simply because I do not mean to bring up politics or philosophy on a guitar forum, but I wondered if you guys heard anything about the Rush song "The Trees."

 

Moderator's note: if this gets out of hand, feel free to lock the thread

 

It is one of my favorites, and catchy riffs aside, it's a cute story about maple trees and oak trees. Now, without discussing the morality or politics of the meaning, we should be able to discuss the intent of Peart's song.

 

Everywhere I have read indicates that Peart wrote the song after watching a trippy television show, but to me, that seems like a cover up. Especially since Peart is a fan of Ayn Rand and objectivism, and several of the other members are admitted libertarians of some sort. For instance, the song "Free Will" is obviously about free will versus fate and destiny. And 2112 is actually a guitar-based parallel of Ayn Rand's novel The Anthem.

 

Obviously, Peart is well known for random and science-fiction and fantasy-inspired lyrics, but many of his songs allegedly contain or make references to the individual versus the state or collectivism and communism. Many Rush fans debate the meanings of several of his songs for this very reason, and I wondered if anyone here heard or knew anything about this.

[miroslav]

It could be about Canadian politics, American politics, global politics...or the result of good drugs.

[Dr. Ellwood]

Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

 

There is unrest in the forest

There is trouble with the trees

For the maples want more sunligh

And the oaks ignore their pleas

 

The trouble with the maples

(and theyre quite convinced theyre right)

They say the oaks are just too lofty

And they grab up all the light

But the oaks cant help their feelings

If they like the way theyre made

And they wonder why the maples

Cant be happy in their shade?

 

There is trouble in the forest

And the creatures all have fled

As the maples scream `oppression!`

And the oaks, just shake their heads

 

So the maples formed a union

And demanded equal rights

the oaks are just too greedy

We will make them give us light

Now theres no more oak oppression

For they passed a noble law

And the trees are all kept equal

By hatchet,

Axe,

And saw .

 

[Xplorer]

The song is clearly about trees. Whats the issue?

 

[stamplicker]

It's all about being a short tree in a big tree forest

[Dr. Ellwood]

It's a pretty obvious comment on class warfare. It refers to oppressive government and legislation leveling the playing field and giving unearned assets earned by the rich to the poor.

[Xplorer]

"The Trees" is a song by progressive rock band Rush off of their 1978 album Hemispheres. It is a common misconception that the theme of the lyrics deals specifically with racism or inequality in the labor force. Neil Peart has remarked that the inspiration for penning the song came from chancing upon a humorous comic strip which depicted trees arguing like people. The song is featured on many of Rush's compilation albums and has been a perennial fan favorite of Rush's live shows. On the live album Exit...Stage Left, the short instrumental Broon's Bane is performed as a short introduction to this song.

[Xplorer]

..not my words, so don't take it as fact.

(like it would be anyway, LOL)

[BrianWren]

I do not see it as class warfare, nor as being about war, etc. I see it as a parabolic story calling to consideration the fact that it is commonand problematicthat people do not take the time to consider problems from the other person's perspective.

 

This is a common theme, touched on by phrases like "walk a mile in my shoes," and so on.

 

Secondarily, this failure can lead to war, and to class warfare.

 

Of course, some peoplelike Hitler, Napoleon, Alexander, Attillahave no concern at all for the position of the other guy. So considering the position of the other would not end all war.

 

The same can be said of class warfare. Some class-oriented strife is merely envy. There are some who envy those above them who would cease being irritated if all were brought down to their level. This shows that the level is not intolerable, only the fact that some are not at that level is. Additionally, class warfare is first and foremost a tool in the hands of elites who want shape society according to their vision, but who realize that no one will go for their ideas strictly on their merits.

[revolead]

Of course, some peoplelike Hitler, Napoleon, Alexander, Attillahave no concern at all for the position of the other guy. So considering the position of the other would not end all war.

 

First of all, this has nothing to do with the meaning of the songs. So, despite that you and most people may not like any of those people, it is irrelevant and brings up political and philosophical issues which are not at all addressed in the song.

 

If there is any philosophical/political lesson intended from the song it is that of the dangers of oppressive and totalitarian regimes, as pointed out by Dr. Ellwood. Otherwise, it is as stated in the Wikipedia article that Xplorer posted. I, however, never listen to anything Wikipedia presents, especially uncited references on pop culture.

 

The same can be said of class warfare. Some class-oriented strife is merely envy. There are some who envy those above them who would cease being irritated if all were brought down to their level. This shows that the level is not intolerable, only the fact that some are not at that level is. Additionally, class warfare is first and foremost a tool in the hands of elites who want shape society according to their vision, but who realize that no one will go for their ideas strictly on their merits.

 

Blah, blah. This is not a political forum. Please do not bring up these issues.

 

I do not see it as class warfare, nor as being about war, etc. I see it as a parabolic story calling to consideration the fact that it is commonand problematicthat people do not take the time to consider problems from the other person's perspective.

 

Though I seem defensive of your other points (for the forum's sake) this is a valid point. However, I disagree entirely, since objectivism, the philosophy that Peart somewhat subscribes too, teaches that selfishness is a virtue and that men should not even pretend to look toward others and their problems. If you do not understand this concept, I will not debate it on this forum, but it should be noted that Peart would never write a song with such a meaning since it is contrary to everything he stands for.

 

As a side note, the best bumpersticker I've seen in a long time read: "Before you criticize a man, walk a thousand miles in his shoes. That way, you'll be a thousand miles ahead of him and he'll be without shoes."

[Guitar Geezer]

Very eloquent post BrianWren

 

 

However the story I heard was Peart was watching an old cartoon with some goofy trees having a silly battle.....

 

I mean, come on, Neil Peart IS a DRUMMER after all.......

Ducks and runs for door

Just Kidding

[revolead]

However, no one can come up with an alternative source other than Wikipedia for the cartoon story.

[Xplorer]

So what's your take, Revolead?

[rickygclef]

Wow. Never knew there was some much going on in a Rush song

Just goes to show ya- you learn something every day.

I never was a big fan, but maybe I'll give them a closer listen

next time.

[stamplicker]

Rush has always had a away of taking the simplistics and bending them into a whirl-wind of diverse mind travelling brain excercises that would/could border many different stances, but I'm sticking with the small tree in big tree forest theory.

[revolead]

So what's your take, Revolead?

 

My instincts tell me that the song has an underlying political/philosophical overtone. After all, Rush made a career out of these sorts of lyrics. Granted their musicianship helped elevate their status, but in the height of the collectivist mentality (the 1960s and 1970s), anyone who was saying capitalism and individualism are okay (especially musicians) would have been torn apart by rock enthusiasts. So likely, Rush (specifically Peart) kept their messages and their dedication to their philosophy but made it more subtle simply so they could sell records. After all, would anyone in 1978 have bought an album that was condoning the very things rock sought to eliminate only a decade earlier? Peart has likely denied the rumors about the song for the same reason though: why ruin a good thing?

 

Personally, I find it genius to be subtle but passionate nonetheless about your beliefs, especially in a cutthroat musical world. Whether you agree with the message or not is not the issue. The fact that there are some who want to alter the meaning (BrianWren and Guitar Geezer seem to buy into this) is testament to the band's ability to sell records for reasons beyond edgy or sexy lyrics.

 

And I mean no offense to Brian or GGeezer, since people of opposing beliefs to Rush do the same thing. I know diehard Green Day fans who refuse to let the overt political message ruin their favorite bands, even when they disagree with everything Green Day stands for. Music seems to be what people interpret it as.

[Kikaz]

That song appears to me as a song that can be applied to many things. Such as racism, activism, human rights, animal rights, fascism...

 

...maybe it was meant to apply to all of them?

[revolead]

No, it cannot.

 

So the maples formed a union

And demanded equal rights

the oaks are just too greedy

We will make them give us light

Now theres no more oak oppression

For they passed a noble law

And the trees are all kept equal

By hatchet, Axe, and saw.

 

If you take the first part of the song, then perhaps. But this section clearly illustrates a labor struggle where the maples demand equal access to the sun (which can be read as money or any other product that they want equal access to without working for [growing up in the case of the trees]). They then form a union to force the oaks to give them sunlight, but the only way to do that is to cutdown the oaks to make all the trees the same height.

 

The sunlight can only be a material product (an extrinsic value) that one needs to survive, which eliminates racism, activism, human rights, animal rights, fascism, etc. from any possibility, since all of those are of intrinsic value. I will agree that collectivism, which is what is being talked about here, breeds fascism and disregards human rights, but that's not for forum discussion.

 

Sorry but there's only two choices: a story about trees or a critique of collectivism. Pick one.

[Kikaz]

well...someone's a bit sure of themselves on this one...

 

I guess anti-collectivist is closest to what i'm thinking

[Rampdog]

Good song anyway.......

 

[revolead]

I'm not trying to be vindictive, merely assertive. I won't ever pretend to say I know exactly what Neil Peart was thinking when he wrote this, but I do know that anyone who dedicates an entire album to a book that rips apart collectivism is not going to worry about issues which stem from a collectivist mentality, i.e. racism, animal rights, fascism, communism.

[Kikaz]

well... the stuff i mentioned does appear to be at least related to collectivism so i guess i wasn't too far off

[stamplicker]

*cough it's about the trees *snicker hehee

[A String]

bump

[Xplorer]

It's funny that this thread came up.

 

I was on my way home last night and got pulled over by the OPP (Ontario Police). The cop got out and says "Sir, is there a reason you're weaving all over the road?"

 

I said, ya, I almost had an accident. I looked up and there was a tree right in front of me. I swerved to the left and there was another tree in front of me. I swerved to the right and there was another tree in front of me!"

 

Then he pointed out that it was just my air freshener.

 

 

[Fumblyfingers]

I had that happen once...a tree jumped from the side of the road, and bit my car!

[stamplicker]

Xplorer? did you turn blond? heehee Kidding..

 

rotten trees, never mind their own beeswax!

[miroslav]

I had that happen once...a tree jumped from the side of the road, and bit my car!

 

Was it a ficus?

 

Or did your policy cover all/any trees?

 

:grin:

[musicalhair]

I think "The Trees" doesn't have a meaning actually. It has a subject, but it isn't like a fable where you can discern a "moral of the story". I think they purposefully avoid that in the song.

 

I think though it is about two populations focusing on their differences instead finding common ground or solving a problem they both had in common. In the end all the trees were cut down, but they did not cut each other down, so all the bickering over "we need more light" "suffer in darkness" was for naught.

 

If anything the song is a ringing endorsement for the Theory of Evolution because for the trees to communicate in that manner, they will have to evolve quite a bit.

[Caevan O’Shite]

...I always thought that the most interesting part of the lyrics in Rush's/Peart's "The Trees" were the lines:

 

"...and the trees are all kept equal

 

by Hatchet, Axe, and Saw... "

 

Making one wonder, was the fire better than the frying-pan in the end?