 Greetings from Wisconsin. You're on. Hey, go get ready, huh? Say it again. That's snow already. Not much. It's actually pretty warm here right now for the season. I do want to take an opportunity to, you know, encourage listeners and everybody to, in addition to supporting yourself to support the Iron Rand Institute and one simple and fun way that I found to do that is through Amazon Smiles every time you make a purchase, Amazon will kick a few percentage points over towards the Institute. I do that. I just got my report from Amazon on how many dollars, you know, the Iron Rand Institute has received from the Amazon Smiles program and it's a non-trivial amount. So yeah, moving on. I want to talk about, you know, I guess music versus lyrics, right? So you get a lot of questions about musicians and songs. I know you said you're a fan of Pink Floyd. And I guess when you're having those discussions, are you separating the music from the lyrics? Are you considering both? Does the music take away from the message? Does it add to the message? How are you analyzing that? So the ideal, right, the ideal song, the ideal any kind of vocal musical piece, the lyrics and the music would be completely integrate. They would reinforce one another if the words evoking an emotion, the music should evoke a similar emotion, right? And that's great music. When you can do both of that, when you can have the words and the music integrated, no matter what the theme, but integrated, then that is, I think, an ideal situation. And that happens. I think Pink Floyd does. I mean, the music is pretty, usually pretty depressing and dark, and the lyrics are pretty depressing and dark, right? And it's integrated. And in that sense, it's good, right? It's good aesthetically because it's integrated, right? It might not have the right sense of life. It might be presenting values that you don't like, but you have to evaluate it aesthetically not based on our values, but based on the characteristics of the aesthetic characteristics of the music and the lyrics and the integration between the two. I find I respond much more to music than to lyrics, right? So I, for example, I listened to a lot of opera. I like knowing what the lyrics are, but I can listen to opera without knowing what the hell she's talking about, right? And I can get, because the music is so emotion evoking, I hope that the lyrics are consistent with that when she's singing because the emotions are so strong. I listen to, I really like Bossa Nova, which is a Brazilian form of jazz. And so the singing is in Portuguese. I have no idea what they're saying, right? But I find that the music and the emotion that you can express with a voice, when that, that's another level of integration, right? It's how you use your voice, the lyrics, the music, all of that. I'm very attracted. But on the other hand, when I listen to songs for my teen years, particularly in Hebrew, the fact that I understand the woods is a value. So, you know, I think it's, I think it's, I think you can enjoy different things in different songs. And again, the ideal is when everything is integrated. I, you know, I just, I just heard, I just heard the singer, Urna Sacks, Urna Sacks, right? She's a singer 20s, 30s, 40s, right? Long time ago, 100 years, almost 100 years ago. And she had the most stunning voice I've ever heard. She could do stuff at the top range that I've never heard any singer opera, non opera do, right? And it was just enjoyable just listening to her voice. The music was fun. Didn't understand the words she said. She's saying in German. But the stuff she was doing with her voice was stunning, just stunning. So I can enjoy different things in different compositions. You know, I don't particularly like Bob Dylan's voice. But I think his voice matches his lyrics and his music quite well. I wouldn't want Bob Dylan singing Bossa Nova. If you know Bossa Nova, it's a smooth jazz, right? But for his gritty poetry and the kind of music that comes with it, I think his voices perfectly integrate. And it's a blend. So I don't know if I'm answering your question. I'm rambling on about my views on this stuff. Yeah, I think you're answering the question pretty well. I thought, for me, I wanted to clear it up a little bit that did seem to me like you kind of focus more on the music than the lyrics. And I figure a lot of the questions you get, you know, the questioner isn't concerned about the music. They're impressed with the lyrics of Rush more so than the music, perhaps. Maybe. I don't know. And again, I've never really responded to Rush. So I won't comment. But I also look, you know, take Pink Floyd, for those of you who know Pink Floyd. Take Wish You Were Here, right? I mean, the, or Shine on Crazy Diamond, either one of those, that album, the words can be interpreted in a way that I understand, right? I wish you were here. The music is very wishy, right? It's like what's the term I'm looking for, but it expresses that, I miss you, right? It really does express that longing, that's the word, longing, right? That Wish You Were Here is reflecting. And it's got the sad, longing, wistful kind of thing to it. And so I think the music and the lyrics are well integrated. And this is the thing, the lyrics, I don't respond to literature generally, to written word generally, because it's right. I don't respond to literature because it's right, right? I respond to it because it's beautiful, because it's well communicated, because it's projecting some intense value. It doesn't even have to be my value. So take, for example, Hugo, Victor Hugo. You read Victor Hugo, and like Demis Robles has a whole thing about socialism and about the plight of the poor, and 93, which is my favorite, they're struggling over things that I don't really care that much about. I mean, both the heroes are my villains, right? They're both wrong. But abstract away from that, and it is the heroism, it is the valuing, not the particular values that I respond to. So I worry about objectivist art, so-called objectivist art, there is no such thing as objectivist art. Art that is so focused on getting the lyrics to be consistent with objectivism that everything else is forgotten. But A, the lyrics have to be good. That doesn't mean objectivist just means good. Then if you're an objectivist and you want them to be consistent with your values, then they need to project those values. And then you have to write great music on top of that. All of that is super, super difficult, right? And I respond, different people respond to different things. I respond to the music because the music is more direct. There's no literature. There's a thought process involved. You're thinking about things. Music is just responsive. And I find that very easy and in a sense appealing because I don't have to, okay, does this make sense? Is this true? I just think, is this beautiful, isn't it? That's it, right? There's no cognition involved, which is nice for artists supposed to appeal to your emotion and music goes directly to your emotion. And the lyrics in a sense get in the way because now I'm thinking, well, does Bob Dylan really mean that? What does he mean by that? And then I've lost the song because I'm trying to analyze his lyrics. Now, when you kind of understand again, Bob Dylan, his lyrics are not objectivist, right? But his lyrics make sense in the context of the music. And they again reflect certain emotions that I think are universal. That's what makes him successful. The fact that the emotions are universal emotions, even if the specifics of the lyrics are not something I like. How does it feel to be on your own? I mean, when I was a teenager and an objectivist teenager to be like a rolling stone, I mean, that hit that got me, right? Even though you would say from an objectivist perspective, oh, you know, that's so depressing. It's so down. Yeah, but I was down and depressed. I was alone as a teenager, you know, hard getting girls and nobody agreed with me. And I felt like I was the only human being on the planet. And Bob Dylan with that song got to me, right? In a way that other forms of art don't, because it's so visceral. Music is so visceral. Anyone? Okay, thank you. I appreciate the attention here. Sure. My pleasure, Matthew. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist roads. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now. 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I think at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it, but at least the people who like it, you know, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this. And you know, the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, and if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there. Help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at your own bookshow.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show your support for all for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this. And of course, don't forget, if you're not a subscriber, even if you just come here to troll or even if you're here like Matthew to defend Marx, then you should subscribe because that way you'll know when to show up. You'll know what shows are on, when they're on. You're good notified. Right. So, yes, like, share, subscribe, support, like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one or all of those, please.