My thoughts on "The Accolade"...

[Slaydon]

First of all, i agree that it's not blasphemy to create something based on being inspired by someone's art. It's not like he's calling it his own dude, he's saying he took something and changed it. It's not blasphemy, it's not plagiarism, it's fine. You don't have to like his interpretation as much, but it's legit. Example: Space Oddity is one of the best songs ever, and no one will argue that unless you're full of shit. Peter Schilling did an interpretation of that amazing song and those lyrics in his song Major Tom (Coming Home), which is obviously not as good as the original, but is still inspired by and therefore a relevant piece of art in its own sense.

Second, it's pretty obvious that the Accolade is about a Templar knight and not just a "regular" knight. It's pretty blatantly obvious from the chorus that this is the case.

Yeah, it is obvious. You can hear it when he sings "Across the sea to lands unkind, knight of the templar". To take the history further, I believe the templars held the secret about Jesus' descendants, as mentioned in Da Vinci's Code. That is probably the main reason why the Pope and the catholic church wanted them exterminated. I believe they also were the keepers of the grail.

 

[razoredge]

Well its my artistic belief that taking personal liberty to change someones art and in this case saying these are the lyrics to this song is blasphomy... disrespect... irreverence to anything sacred. Is not ones personal property sacred ? Is not the work of an artist their own sacred personal property ? In the case of writting much time is spent choosing the proper phrasing and words, many edits, many alternatives may be tried, occasionally an entire piece or parts of the piece may just come out as they are wanted. Key words - "are wanted" and this responsibility only exists for the origional artist. Here we also have alterations clearly changing the meaning and flow of the piece, which as I origionally said flowed excellently in spoken word, and far superior.

Its no big deal, the burdon lays on one that takes personal liberty with someone elses work. I made no big deal of it in my origional post, I briefly stated that its blasphomy... deny all one wants

Nothing wrong with turning people on to Symphony X but I question turning someone on to ones own version of Symphony X lyrics and the necessity for alteration. Bold as I am I would never alter anyone elses work, written words are sacred and the easiest thing to correctly duplicate. I believe a finished work to be carved in stone.

 

[proulxski]

Agreed, and no I don't know the band personally no, some people on the forums do but like Zach said they make themselves rather accesible at shows!

 

[Slaydon]

Well its my artistic belief that taking personal liberty to change someones art and in this case saying these are the lyrics to this song is blasphomy... disrespect... irreverence to anything sacred. Is not ones personal property sacred ? Is not the work of an artist their own sacred personal property ? In the case of writting much time is spent choosing the proper phrasing and words, many edits, many alternatives may be tried, occasionally an entire piece or parts of the piece may just come out as they are wanted. Key words - "are wanted" and this responsibility only exists for the origional artist. Here we also have alterations clearly changing the meaning and flow of the piece, which as I origionally said flowed excellently in spoken word, and far superior.

Its no big deal, the burdon lays on one that takes personal liberty with someone elses work. I made no big deal of it in my origional post, I briefly stated that its blasphomy... deny all one wants

Nothing wrong with turning people on to Symphony X but I question turning someone on to ones own version of Symphony X lyrics and the necessity for alteration. Bold as I am I would never alter anyone elses work, written words are sacred and the easiest thing to correctly duplicate. I believe a finished work to be carved in stone.

It's blasphemy, not blasphomy. And I don't really understand what you are trying to say. Can you be ahem, a little more blunt?

 

[proulxski]

James Blunt?

 

[Slaydon]

James Blunt?

No, Emily Blunt.

 

[ArroyoMusic]

This is the first Metal Forum Debate I have ever experienced where someone wasn't cussed out! You guys are true gentlemen. And I am gonna ask someone from the group if I could write a short story expanding on the Accolade and post it on MySpace, of course giving Symphony X credit for the original work. If they say no, then I won't. Oh yeah, I am gonna be the knight, cuz that's how I roll. j/k


ummmm...anyone know how I can send them a message?

 

[proulxski]

im pretty sure you're free to write about what ever you like, I'm sure the band would be happy to see someone expanding on it. As long as you arnt selling or claiming its your work, than there is no worries. But just incase you can always ask Jax, but I'm pretty sure a myspace story expansion of the Accolade is not violating any copyright laws lol. Oh and we're just on our best behaviour, this forums are plagued with people being cussed out. But I mean most of us have gotten better, especially as of late.

@slaydon: LOL

 

[Slaydon]

What does @ mean?

 

[proulxski]

lol man you're killing me!

 

[Slaydon]

Thats my job.

 

[DoomsdayZach]

Razoredge, you're basically saying any cover version of any song is irrelevant and blasphemous. Furthermore, you're saying LIVE versions of songs are also not valid because bands WILL change lyrics, extend parts, and generally change songs from their original version. You are welcome to your opinion, but i think it's a pretty fuckin' shitty attitude to have.

A guy on the internet changing lyrics is not an issue. It's the old "don't like it, don't read it" thing. There are other people who will dig it and it's cool that this dude is using some creativity to expand on someone's art.

 

[Detective Clarence Beauregard]

The guys are super accessible. If you go to a show and want to meet them, you WILL meet them and they'll bullshit for at least a short time. One of the most appreciative bands of their fanbase.

Very true. I actually remember a conversation my friends and I had with Russ after a show about the lyrics to The Accolade. He obviously got in the mindset of jousting to pen the lyrics (he even said he had a few scars on his head from injuries). He didn't go into great detail, though - we were too busy asking him far more important questions, such as whether he preferred Scorpion or Sub-Zero.

 

[razoredge]

No need to be dense about what I was saying so back to my first post

"Welcome to Symphony X the Accolade is one powerful song and they have many

Actually the lyrics are quite poetic as they were written and make for excellent spoken word. To me its a form of blasphomy to rewrite someone words. The way you did it changes some meaning as well"

Then I further explained my reasons behind it, when questioned, which is what I thought I was supposed to do ??? Im getting far more flack than I gave by bringing it up and the question was asked. I dont feel anyone has the rightful liberty of changing someone elses words, get over it.

As for the lyrics I found mention of Arthurs court and Knights Templar interesting because they are not entirely related but it still makes historical sense. Arthur being legend/folklore during the time of the Knights Templar. Russell did a craftly job wording that.

To see the light he spent his life
to understand
The sword he once held tight,
falls forever from his hands

This crusader sees the light upon death, a gates of heaven kind of thing, to finally understand this "God" who he has seen death by promoting all during a lifetime of bible study trying to understand it all. I think its great lyrical work.

 

[OfSinsAndShred]

Very true. I actually remember a conversation my friends and I had with Russ after a show about the lyrics to The Accolade. He obviously got in the mindset of jousting to pen the lyrics (he even said he had a few scars on his head from injuries). He didn't go into great detail, though - we were too busy asking him far more important questions, such as whether he preferred Scorpion or Sub-Zero.

.... ... So which did he pick? Scorp or Sub?

 

[DoomsdayZach]

I bet he's a sub zero man. I mean, if he's writing about knights of the templar, he probably sides with Good and thus, sub zero would be the obvious choice.

 

[proulxski]

Reptile!

 

[Detective Clarence Beauregard]

Nope, he's a Scorpion guy through and through; said so himself while yelling "Get over here!" And although I didn't ask, I could see Rullo being more of a Sub-Zero guy, and Lepond a Reptile guy. Apparently MJR and P don't play video games, which doesn't really surprise me. Not sure if Rullo or Lepond do, either, to be honest. That covers all the cool MK "ninjas" though; the rest were kinda lame (perhaps excluding Smoke).

 

[DoomsdayZach]

I dunno... Noob Saibot was always fucking amazingly cheap. I loved kicking the shit outta people with him back in the days of ultimate mk3 for genesis.

 

[proulxski]

NOOB Saibot says it all. Anyone try the new Street Fighter Game? wondering if its a buy or bust!