Talk:Stryper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Slight update on "Reborn" album
updated "reunion" section to update the release date for the album "reborn" to August 16, 2005.
[edit] Discussion
"They are considered the pioneers in the popularization of Christian Rock music".
Mmmmmm.... I think that title belongs to Larry Norman, who pioneered Christian Rock in the late 1960's.... more than 15 years before. See wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Norman
Perhaps the wording should be changed to "the pioneers of Christian metal," or if that is too POV, simply "pioneers" without "the." - KB 22:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] legacy
Why was the information about the Stryper biography replaced with stuff about people thinking heavy metal was "close" to "satanic music?"
- First, the section you refer to was practically an advertisement for the book Loud N Clear: the story of Stryper. THis violates Wikipedia policy. Second, the legacy section is intended to show the fact that Stryper was recongnized by many as a great musical band but that their openly christian image prevented them from obtaining bigger succes, in the like of Guns N ROses, Motley Crue and Quiet Riot, who were band with similiar sound.<<Coburn_Pharr>> 20:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Touche. But the fact that there was a biography published about them -- is in and of itself a testimony to their legacy, no?
[edit] Credibility
Perhaps something should be said about the credibility of the band? It's no secret that Stryper had MANY critics for trying to combine religious ideas that are predominantly about conformity and living by a strict set of rules, with a musical style that has always been active in pushing the boundaries, promoting free-will, and rebellion against power in the wrong hands.
The band didn't just have critics from one side of the argument either. As already suggested in the article, some religious groups saw them as being too close to the bands they were trying to counter, and my perception was that the majority of rock fans saw them as having little artistic credibilty in a rebelious musical genre such as Heavy Metal, due to their religious stance.
Of course the paragraph would have to be written in a balanced way, otherwise it could be construed as personal opinion (and therefore not valid for an encyclopedia) ... however there must be countless archive articles, tv shows, interviews etc that can be cited to give an overall view of the band's standing inside the context of the 80's rock/metal world, and the religious world.
--Compost 17:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Wow, because what you just said isn't full of a hell of a lot more POV than the article itself, right? If you even bothered to read the article there is stuff about the controversy anyways. Seriously you need to actually read things first and see what is in the article, and if you already did then maybe you just need to grow up. About them not having "artistic merit", they were pretty popular and have just as much "artistic merit" as pretty much any other glam metal group of their time. --E tac 20:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding the band's "credibility". Are you saying that Stryper wasn't credibly a Christian band, or not credibly a metal band? Or both? Maybe you can assert that the "metal scene" rejected Stryper, although I have no idea whether that's true or not, and either way it had better be verifiably sourced. But Stryper obviously found mainstream acceptance -- they had a platinum album and multiple music videos regularly played on MTV -- and thus were the first Christian hard rock band to gain widespread credibility at all. Jpers36 21:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I am unsure about what he meant by credibility as well, It seems he is just pushing his own POV because controversies are already part of the article. --E tac 05:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)