Thanks for your comment. I agree with your initial point. It would be a mistake to argue that Tool or any popular musicians “revolt” against society (which is why I didn’t make that claim). Labeling Tool as “pop” indicates that they are very much a part of “the common musical discourse of society.” However, you must admit that a song about a hooker with a penis is not exactly mainstream either. In any case, the point of the “I’m the Man” line seems to be that we are all “the Man,” hence the lyrics suggesting that if you want to point your finger at someone for being “the Man,” then your own posterior orifice is the best place to point that finger. We are all “the Man,” participants in the dominant paradigm, selling our souls to make a living. The question is not whether or not someone is revolting against the system, because that question is moot: the system feeds on revolt and turns the counterculture into a commodity. We are all “the Man,” yet there are different ways of handling that: one way is to be destructive, hateful, point fingers, blame others…; the other way is to be creative, compassionate, communicating and communing instead of dividing and fragmenting. My point is this article is that Tool’s music is not about revolt as much as it is about healing, growth, and integration facilitated through intensified states of consciousness.

Thanks for the comments, Nick. Those are all good additions regarding Maynard’s difference from other members of Tool, the diverse (anti)religious sentiments expressed in Maynard’s lyrics, and his work with other bands (A Perfect Circle; Puscifer). I would also add the eco-spiritual significance of his work as a vintner.

Within the limits of this short article, my main focus was the music Tool and not Maynard himself. In any case, I’m hoping to give a more detailed analysis in the future, including an interpretation of each member’s unique contributions as well as an interpretation of their musical expression as a unified thing, a band, a tool.

Well I’m not going to retype the rest – but suffice to say I thought leaving out a song like 10,000 when discussing Maynard and religiosity left out important information.

Well this is was interesting. Though, I think he makes a few errors/leaves a few things out tht I think would make this a better analysis.

First, he acknowledges the band is made up of four individual members, but tries to tie the ‘religiosity’ of Maynard’s lyrics with Carey’s drumming. Sorry, but those two guys seem to come from two very different places (in regards to beliefs) – and I think that muddles up that part of the conversation. He also ignores Adam’s major role in the aesthetics of Tool – and references their live performance visuals but says nothin about their many incredibly unique (and amazingly creative and full of all sorts of imagery themselves) music videos.

Second, Maynard’s stage positioning, while unique in what he’s calling pop music, isn’t unique to Tool – he does the same thing when he performs as Puscifer or A Perfect Cirlce. And sometimes he’s in costume or behind a curtain – the guy doesn’t like to be on stage and is always very uncomfortable looking. So that’s another part that is lacking.

Lastly, there is a lot more that could be discussed in terms of ‘religiosity’ in regards to Maynard’s lyrics – but he completely ignores the other bands he’s in and writes for. And so in addition to skewing Maynard’s position by mixing it up with Carey’s he also ignores a big source of material that I think would help clarify things. So often his use of religious language is spiteful (Judith) or mocking (

But still very interesting.