And now for something completely different

[maradydd]

The Head Minion recently stumbled across, and thus I am compelled to share with the Web at large, the video to the Pet Shop Boys' "It's A Sin". It is decidedly an '80s video, one of those moody and contemplative set-pieces in which not very much happens and everyone has costumes which must have looked awesome in 1987 but which now (rather like every Cyndi Lauper video ever shot) give off the unmistakable aura of rejects from the wardrobe department of The Road Warrior or possibly The Wicker Man. Still, if your music-video-watching interests include monks in cassocks, a set resembling the backstage at a post-apocalyptic theatre, chicken-wire cages and/or Neil Tennant in chains, it's definitely worth a look. Other things for which to keep an eye out include each of the Seven Deadlies, pseudo-religious iconography (is it a cross or an upside-down boat anchor?), and precisely what constitutes a sin in this context anyway.

I mean, really, Meat Loaf at least told us, at the very end anyway, what he wouldn't do for love. Chris, Neil, you've left us hanging seventeen years now. Will you ever cut us a break?

Edit: Right, I guess it'd help if I had the correct URL, wouldn't it.

Comments

[dorianegray.livejournal.com]

He did tell us.

"Everything I've ever done
Everything I'll ever do"

Very simple. If Neil Tennant has done or will do it, it's a sin (though possibly only if it's him doing it).

[maradydd.livejournal.com]

though possibly only if it's him doing it

That would make everything a lot easier for the rest of us, but in which case, sucks to be Neil Tennant.

[dorianegray.livejournal.com]

Indeed.

(Not to mention the lines I forgot at time of earlier posting: "For everything thing I long to do, no matter when or where or who - it's a sin" - so not only anything he has has done or will do, but also everything he wants to do!)

Let us all give thanks that we are not Neil Tennant.

And thanks to this post of yours, I've had the song stuck in my head all day!

[maradydd.livejournal.com]

Let us all give thanks that we are not Neil Tennant.

My brain has just gone back to the dusty archivy bits where most of the Anglican hymnal is stored, and is poring through the "Hymns of Thanksgiving" section, looking for one which can be suitably filked to involve giving thanks for not being Neil Tennant.

Curse you, Dorian, you and all your lineage from now until the end of time. (I'm not telling which end.)

[dorianegray.livejournal.com]

When you find it and filk it, send me a copy, please!

(I'm not sure why you're cursing a bunch of people who (apart from my parents) are all dead, but carry on if it makes you happy - I don't mind being cursed, and I doubt my parents will either.)

The plot thickens

[maradydd.livejournal.com]

Of course, this does lead to another question: if Neil Tennant wants to do it, but someone else does it, are they guilty of the sin, or is Neil? Or both? It's clear that the action is a sin, because Neil longed to do it, but which is the guilt-bearing thing, thinking of it or doing it?

I guess this hinges on whether "sins of contemplation" count.

(I am so going to hell for this.)

Re: The plot thickens

[dorianegray.livejournal.com]

Neil says that anything he longs to do is a sin; therefore, if he does anything he longs to do, he's sinning. Also, longing to do something is a sin, because he also says that everything he's ever done or will do (which includes longing) is a sin.

So, are we going absolute here? Is "anything that Neil Tennant has ever done, ever wanted to do, or ever will do" the absolute definition of sin? If so, most of us are probably dammed for things like eating and sleeping - and will all be damned for dying!

But if that definition applies only to Neil himself, logic dictates that the rest of us also get to define our own sins. Which leads to the uncomfortable conclusion that the psychopathic paedophile is not sinning, because he sees nothing wrong with his actions.

Perhaps sin is defined by consensus? Majority vote? Arbitrary decision of a (some, fewer or many) god(s)? Sticking a pin in a list?

Now you're making my head hurt.

Re: The plot thickens

[maradydd.livejournal.com]

Yes, and there's the question -- does the definition apply only to Neil, or is Neil the definer of sin for all humanity? This is difficult, because anything that Neil longs to do, he can only do himself; i.e., Neil can eat breakfast, but I cannot eat breakfast for him. Is engaging in the act of breakfast-eating a sin, or is it restricted to specifically the act of breakfast-eating that feeds Neil?

On the other hand, if Neil Tennant wants to feed me breakfast, and I have breakfast, have I sinned? Now I'm making my own head hurt.

(I feel like I'm skirting giddily close to proclaiming that Neil Tennant will die for our sins. And I'd like to stay far, far away from the idea of the second coming of Neil, thanks very much.)

Re: The plot thickens

[dorianegray.livejournal.com]

Eek.

Okay. Anything Neil has done is probably only a sin for him, because anyone else would do it not quite the same. Neil might have, say, eaten cornflakes at 6am, facing south, in a damp but warm environment, while wearing only a hat...etc. etc. So that's a sin. But I have eaten toast with cheese at 8.03am, facing southwest, in a dry and vaguely chilly environment, while fully dressed... So that's not a sin (or at least, not the same sin).

However. If Neil longs to eat breakfast under the circumstances that I eat breakfast - which, to be super-exact, would require him to long to eat breakfast in my house, as me - which basically requires him to long to be me...well, longing to be me is a sin (because it's Neil longing to do it). But me, eating breakfast, is not a sin, because I do not long to be me, I am me. I'm not Neil longing to be me, eating breakfast in my house under my specific circumstances.

So it can be argued that yes, Neil is the definer of sin for all humanity - but in order for our longings to exactly conform to his longings, he must become us, or we must become him, which is I suppose possible, but unlikely to vanishing point.

(And if he does die for our sins, that becomes a sin too!)

So we're probably reasonably safe.