“Bubba Shot The Jukebox” By Mark Chesnutt Essay Example

Introduction

The given music analysis will primarily focus on a song called “Bubba Shot the Jukebox,” performed and recorded by Mark Chesnutt. It is important to note that the song was written by Dennis Linde, and it is a country song, which was released in 1992 under the label of the Music Corporation of America or MCA. The total duration of the performance is 3:05 minutes, where the main story revolves around a person, Bubba, who shot a jukebox due to his emotional disturbance, which resulted in the arrival of police (Lee Kelley).

Musical Elements

The first part of the musical analysis will be based on the assessment of musical elements. These include structure or form, silence, pitch, timbre, rhythm, harmony, and melody (Chapter 2: Music: Fundamentals and Educational Roots in the U.S.). The timbre can be categorized as light, vibrant, and strident, which is mainly the result of Mark Chesnutt’s signing pattern. Since country music is deeply rooted in folk music, the approach of performance in regards to the singing process has elements of a southern folk accent. The singer uses a vibrant timbre, which is created through his vocal dynamics, where, for example, he applies a vibrant timbre to a word “forty-five” (Lee Kelly 00:01:43). In the case of the pitch of the musical performance, the note vibrations are within a higher range of vibrations with periods of slower pacing, such as during the “bathrobe” moment (Lee Kelly 00:01:57). The amplitude of the song is mostly loud, with no clear indications of soft elements of music. Through the performance, one can notice that the duration of the sounds is primarily short, and the longer sounds are mostly used at the end of the song. Furthermore, the song is highly melodic, with evident indications of frequent musical notes successions in an array of pitches. The assessment of the performance’s harmony relevels that notes’ vertical combination forms chord are harmonic. In regards to the rhythm, the music is dynamic and has a fairly quick pace. It is important to point out that the texture of the performance is homophonic because it is structured as a melody with accompaniment, where there are a band and a lead singer (Chapter 2: Music: Fundamentals and Educational Roots in the U.S.). Therefore, in general, the song is highly rhythmic, homophonic, and dynamic.

Instrumental Elements

The second part will revolve around the analysis of instrumental elements of the performance. By observing and listening to the song, one can easily distinguish the primary instrument, which is string instruments. The latter is also accompanied by keyboard instruments and percussion instruments. Therefore, there are three major instrument families, such as string, percussion, and keyboard. More specifically, one can hear two types of string instruments, which are guitars of various types and fiddles. Both fiddle and drum set the rhythm and pace of the background music, and the former provides more depth to the overall performance. The band also includes drums, which are critical to set the core pace of the song, and it both begins and ends the performance because it comprises the foundational layer of all sounds. In addition, there are a number of different guitars, such as acoustic, electric, and steel guitars. They are required to set and give texture to the musical performance. Lastly, a keyboard instrument is also present in the song, but it is mostly imperceptible and becomes highly important when a lead singer transitions between chorus and verses. For example, a keyboard instrument can be prominently heard when Mark Chesnutt sings about “a charge” for a crime committed by Bubba (Lee Kelley 00:01:35). Therefore, the musical performance is a product of a lead singer, who is accompanied by musical sounds emerging from string instruments, percussion instruments, and keyboard instruments.

Lyrics and Context

The third part will mainly focus on the lyrics of the song and the meaning in regards to the overall context. The song describes a situation from a third-person perspective about a person, Bubba, who was spending time at the bar called Margie’s. During this moment, an unidentified individual turns on a jukebox, which starts to play a sad song. As a result, Bubba gets emotional, where he tears up, which is probably due to the fact that the song had some form of relevance and meaning to him. Subsequently, Bubba jumps up and leaves to bring his 45 caliber handgun from his truck, which he uses to shoot the jukebox playing sad music. The next scene reveals that Bubba is a mentally unstable individual, which is indicated by the unease of his friends. A shortly after, the police and sheriff himself arrive at the shooting location, where the latter stated that Bubba is charged for reckless firearm use, for which Bubba replies: “Reckless! Hell! I shot just where I was aiming” (Lee Kelley 00:02:14). In other words, the song reveals that Bubba is a highly mentally unstable person who responds to his emotional urges with violence through deadly gun usage.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the song “Bubba Shot the Jukebox” by Mark Chesnutt is about an incident at a bar where a man shoots a jukebox due to his mental and emotional instability. It is important to point out that the music is highly melodic, dynamic, and quick-paced with deep texture. In addition, the performing band uses three main instrument families, which are string instruments, such as acoustic and electric guitars, percussion instruments, such as drums, and keyboard instruments.

Works Cited

“Chapter 2: Music: Fundamentals and Educational Roots in the U.S.” MILNE Library.

“Mark Chesnutt – Bubba Shot the Jukebox – Country On the Gulf.” YouTube, uploaded by Lee Kelley, 2015.

Determinism, Libertarianism, And Compatibilism

Introduction

In ancient times, people believed that everything in the world, including their own behavior, depended on the will of the gods. Today, people have different beliefs regarding the matter, but many think that humans have free will and are completely responsible for their actions.

The philosophical views related to the matter are determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. These paradigms can be instrumental in making choices and explaining one’s own position on a particular event in one’s or other people’s life. For instance, the case of Ethan Couch, who killed four people in a drunken-driving car accident, makes a person reflect on the extent of people’s accountability for their deeds. This paper includes a discussion of the three philosophical perspectives mentioned above and the way they can be applied to the Ethan Couch case.

Basic Positions

It is possible to start the analysis with a focus on determinism, which may seem a comforting model. The major premise of this philosophical view is that people’s behaviors, actions, thoughts, and desires are determined by prior events or decisions (Lawhead 130). In simple terms, it is believed that people have no free will and can hardly act freely as all their choices are predetermined. In this situation, people are thought to be unable to be held accountable and make moral decisions.

Libertarians accept that if some actions are determined, a person cannot be responsible for the outcomes. However, they oppose determinists stating that people have metaphysical freedom in many cases, so they have to make responsible and moral choices (Lawhead 124). Libertarianism is based on the assumption that people’s choices are only partially determined and, moreover, people’s behaviors can often be hard to predict. Hence, an individual is free to make decisions in almost any situation. For instance, a person is not forced to commit a crime (unless there is a direct danger such as a loaded gun) even if some life circumstances make other options seem less attractive. This individual is free to choose another option to satisfy their needs, although it may seem harder compared to committing a crime.

The supporters of compatibilism balance the two paradigms and assert that people’s actions and characters are determined, so only circumstantial freedom is possible. According to compatibilism, a criminal is free to make a choice and commit a crime, but it is also argued that the very nature of this crime is determined by diverse factors (Lawhead 124). Hence, the accountability of this person can be limited to a different extent depending on various circumstances.

Specific Positions

The analysis of Ethan Couch’s case can be an illustration of the basic positions of the three paradigms in question. In terms of determinism, Ethan Couch can be acquitted since he can be seen as a victim of “affluenza,” which is the inability to control one’s behavior due to the specifics of their parent’s behavior. In simple words, some people (usually wealthy ones) tend to make immoral choices because their parents did not set any limits for them in their childhood. Based on the ideas of determinism, Ethan is a victim in this case as he could not make any other choice but drive intoxicated, which eventually led to the death of four people. He was a product of his parents’ childrearing methods that proved to be harmful to their son and society.

According to libertarians’ views, Ethan Couch should be sentenced to 20 years for his crime. For libertarians, such a notion as “affluenza” makes no sense as a person has free will to act the way they find appropriate in different situations. No past story of childhood behaviors, limitless opportunities, and desires that always come true can determine a person’s behavior. Although Ethan had everything he wanted, he understood that killing was wrong and unacceptable. He also knew the possible consequences of binge drinking and careless driving as he attended school and knew the basic rules. Thus, he was completely accountable for the crime he committed.

As far as compatibilism is concerned, the supporters of this framework would sentence Ethan to ten years in prison. Based on the concepts of this philosophy, the teenager is responsible for his behavior and has to be punished as every action is associated with particular consequences. At the same time, it was an accident caused by careless behavior that, in its turn, was determined by Ethan’s parents, who failed to set moral benchmarks for him. Compatibilists are likely to accept the “affluenza” defense strategy that would accept the fact that Ethan was guilty, but he was partially responsible for the death of four people. Ethan’s parents, along with their son, would be held accountable for the crime.

Personal Position

Personally, I agree with the libertarian position when considering Ethan Couch’s case. I believe people have metaphysical freedom making them morally responsible for their actions and choices. It is highly unlikely that Ethan’s parents continuously repeated that he had to drive intoxicated and try to kill as many people as possible. It is highly unlikely that a person living in the USA does not know that killing another person is unacceptable and can lead to particular consequences. The teenager was absolutely aware of the way alcohol affects the human organism and the potential outcomes of his irresponsible behavior.

Hence, the adolescent should be held accountable for his deeds. The 20-year sentence seems fair enough, although it is difficult to state that 20 years in prison would neutralize the harm he did to society. “Affluenza” is a lame attempt to help people act in irresponsible ways. My firm belief is that people are free to make choices and must be accountable for the associated consequences of their decisions. Irrespective of the way they were brought up or the events they had to go through, they choose to act in a certain way based on their judgments. People try to satisfy their desire, but they should also consider potential outcomes. Eating a delicious fruit can be tempting, but it can be poisonous and lead to a painful death. Everyone makes this kind of choice, so if they are ready to pay the price, society has to accept this payment.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is possible to note that determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism are three different philosophical frameworks trying to explain people’s behaviors. The degree to which a person is accountable is the primary focus of these perspectives. In the modern world, libertarianism and compatibilism are the most viable philosophies, as people know a lot about the universe and themselves. No action is determined completely, while some deeds can have a clear explanation, such as past events and experiences. A person is morally responsible for every action since people have metaphysical freedom.

Work Cited

Lawhead, William. Connect Access Card for The Philosophical Journey: An Interactive Approach. 7th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, 2018.

Review Of “Hope Works: Moving From Darkness Into Your Dreams”

Relationships with family members play one of the essential roles in the life of any person. Children take an example from their parents and try to be like them. In addition, parents ensure the safety of the child, which no one else can provide. When relationships change in the family and problems arise, the child’s psychological state is in danger. However, in some cases, people outside the family can help children, despite the importance of family relationships. The purpose of this paper is to discuss family relationships in the book Hope works: Moving from darkness into your dreams.

The central concept that the author reveals in this book is hope. Indeed, no matter how difficult the events in a person’s life, especially a child, there is always hope for changes for the better. Children are under the scrutiny of dozens of adults, such as school teachers, doctors, and coaches. Consequently, if a child feels bad in the family, adults can immediately notice this and take the necessary measures. Thanks to this, the child has hope for a happy and prosperous future. They get into reliable hands and start a new part of their lives with new ambitions and opportunities.

Unfortunately, children are not always able to make wise decisions on their own. For example, the decision to stay in an abusive family is unconscious but standard behavior. Even when mistreated, children try to make their parents happy with them. They hope to earn forgiveness and love, although the parent constantly misbehaves and harms the child. If others do not recognize such a situation in time and do not change what is happening, this can lead to various negative consequences. At best, the child will be traumatized and less productive in adult society. At worst, he will not find a way to interact with the parent and receive physical injuries. Another option is that the child will grow up to be as cruel as the parent, and their whole life will be filled with anger and despair.

In such situations, people outside the family give the child hope. In the life of the author of the book, teachers and coaches have become such people. They allowed a young man who was poorly versed in the world around him to believe in himself and achieve his goals. Undoubtedly, it was difficult for him since he was from a low-income family. His life path began hard, and he needed to make an effort to feel equal with other children. Fortunately, he received timely external support, thanks to which he achieved success in life (Schwaner, 2020). He decided to convey the importance of hope and support in the lives of children and has collected stories that reflect this idea.

Hope works: Moving from darkness into your dreams is a good example of literature that helps people find the strength to change their lives. The concept of hope runs throughout the book and stays with reader even when they close the book. It leaves a strong impression and helps find inner strength for living. Adults reading this book can take care of their children and those children with whom they come in contact. In addition, they can look back on their past and change attitudes in life. Letting go of hurting situations from the past, they are filled with hope and can live on, full of energy and faith in themselves.

Reference

Schwaner, S. L. (2020). Hope works: Moving from darkness into your dreams: A storytelling approach. Independently published.

error: Content is protected !!