Thoughts on Oliver Anthony’s “Rich Men North of Richmond”

Full disclosure, I live well north of Richmond. I’m probably not richer than David Oliver.

I started writing a somewhat lengthy analysis of conservative reactions to the song a few weeks ago, but couldn’t quite finish it. Maybe it will still see the light of day.

Just a couple thoughts here.

I don’t know if Oliver meant the song to be an expression of his own thoughts. Song writers often imagine a narrator and write from that point of view. He certainly expressed some widespread grievances and frustrations. Maybe they are his own also.

I appreciate Oliver’s honesty. In his lyrics and music, we hear the anger that is percolating on the political Right — which is a direct response to the extreme and immoral policies advocated by the political Left.

It’s not all the Left’s fault. The discontent Oliver expressed is at least half a “direct response” to the outrage-and-hostility-mongers on the Right who have told them they should feel that way. Think Tucker Carlson and his ilk constantly pumping out the rhetoric of suspicion, alienation, and resentment toward the conveniently never defined “elites.”

Nobody likes snobs who think they’re better than everyone else. So that’s an easy market to cater to! But the perpetually aggrieved who blame everything hard in life on the snobs aren’t to be admired either.

Just for clarification, the song is not about people who live north of a line that runs east and west from Richmond. It is about where you end up if you travel on the main road that leads out of Richmond, VA. That road leads directly to Washington, DC. Although I agree with much of what the author wrote, Anthony has made clear statements about his song. He does not hold only one of the political parties accountable for what he is complaining about. I agree with the author that we have far too much complaining in our country. No doubt we have far too many people that are willing to cater to complaints depending on who is complaining. I hope all of us (including myself) take a little self reflection on that.

The word 'woke' originally meant to be socially aware- to be understanding about the plight of those who were not in power and of the injustices they experienced. I have long said that Christians should be compassionate toward those who do not have power and should defend the innocent who are defenseless. In that sense, when I first heard the Anthony song, I considered it a woke ballad. I want to have compassion for his concerns without promoting a victim mentality.

The problem that I see on the left is that too many get upset when the innocent defenseless are defended and would rather have the guilty with little power defended. That is often one of the things that sets the politically left apart from the politically right.

I wonder if some of the lament psalms would pass the criteria Cauthorne posts above?

There needs to be space for lament in our Christian vocabulary and experience. It's dangerous and naive to insist Christians respond like Pollyanna playing the glad game when they are experiencing grief, injustice, or suffering.

Room for lament, yes. But a lament is directed toward God vs. directed toward getting others to join you in your displeasure. … at least, usually.

But people do often read “only” in Philippians 4:8 between “think” and “on these things.” It is not there, and in the context, Paul is talking about a strategy for finding peace—usually after already “thinking on” the ugly, painful, and wrong things that have happened (which the apostle also does in other parts of the letter).

So whether Php 4:8 applies to a song (or lots of other things) depends on your personal context.

But I think the spirit of what C.D. is saying holds up. The song is full of unthankfulness and grousing, in a society where even the worst off are, as a group, more prosperous than half the rest of the world—and where people routinely rise above all the disadvantages of their upbringing and their “class.” The story the song tells is essentially a dark fantasy.

Moan!

(how's that, Tom?)

Seriously, point well taken, and there is a certain point where it almost seems as if we fundagelicals are afraid of people not feeling well, afraid of hurting. Hence we are doing a fairly poor job reaching out to....the poor and lower middle class.

None of the lament Psalms use God's name in vain. The Bible allows us to use God's name in prayer, praise, and witness. "Rich Men North of Richmond" does none of that. Oliver clearly uses God's name in vain. That is unacceptable -- a violation of the Third Commandment.

Granted. What about the other criteria you suggest? Do the lament psalms qualify under your other standards?

Room for lament, yes. But a lament is directed toward God vs. directed toward getting others to join you in your displeasure. … at least, usually.

When you read the lament psalms, some are personal while others are corporate. So, yes, some lament psalms do involve others in the author's cries of grief, requests for vengeance, etc.

I would also argue that Rich Men North of Richmond may be using the Lord's name in the song in a vocative sense, which means it is directed toward God as well.

quick edit: I'm not endorsing this song. I've only heard it once. I wasn't really impressed and wasn't sure why it had become so popular.

Philippians is a good example of the kind of balance and tension—almost paradox—of Christian attitudes. In Philippians, Paul calls for (and expresses) joy and rejoicing.

In the same letter, we find grief and tears (Php 3:18) and he’s back to joy a couple sentences later (Php 4:1). We have sorrow in Php 2:27 and then rejoicing again in Php 2:28, but also with a reference to being “less anxious” (about Epaphroditus’ illness, etc.).

The apostle did not think that being faithful meant pretending to never be unhappy about anything. He apparently didn’t even think that being anxious and/or tearful couldn’t go with rejoicing at pretty much the same time.

We have Jesus in Gethsemane apparently what we usually call “scared to death” (Luke 22:44) about what He knows is coming, but ambiguity on what He’s feeling there aside, He is described plainly in Matt 26:37 as “sorrowful and troubled,” and in 26:38 He says so out loud.

But note the joy in Hebrews 12:2.

When we study Psalms we find similar patterns. To be human is to struggle with pain, grief, loss, and sorrow—and this is not integral to our sinfulness. It’s integral to our humanity. So the Psalms are full of thanks and joy, but also have painfully honest moments of sorrow and angry imprecation.

The message there is take the whole human experience to God and lay it submissively at His feet.

So by all means, feel it and be honest about it. But laying the whole human experience submissively at God’s feet does not appear to be what Oliver is doing in that song. Admittedly, there’s a lot of interpretation involved there. But I can’t personally see much alignment with a lament Psalm. It just sounds like resentful bitterness to me—of the “blame everyone but yourself for your problems” variety, we humans find so endlessly attractive (see Genesis 3 right after the Fall! .. Gen 3:12-13).

When we study Psalms we find similar patterns. To be human is to struggle with pain, grief, loss, and sorrow—and this is not integral to our sinfulness. It’s integral to our humanity.

Aaron, can you flesh this statement out a little? When we get to Heaven, we will no longer have "pain, grief, loss, and sorrow," yet I don't think we will be missing some integral part of our humanity. Do you? Will we not be fully human up in Heaven?

Kevin, perhaps if Aaron had said "an integral part of our FALLEN humanity, he would have been more technically accurate. No doubt we as humans will have a wonderful experience of no tears in the future, but we are all fallen today, so all of humanity has the experience of the fall and the sadness that goes with it. No doubt, Jesus was fully human and was as well sinless, yet he was living within a world affected by the fall and thus he too had sorrow. Thus in our current state, what Aaron said is quite accurate.

Your point about heaven is quite important though. Thank you, for reminding us of a much brighter future ahead. I think that is where we should take political conversations with our unsaved friends. It is not unusual to hear complaints about our political leaders. I like to use those complaints to remind people that we as Christians look forward to the perfect leader- Jesus Christ.

Kevin, perhaps if Aaron had said "an integral part of our FALLEN humanity, he would have been more technically accurate.

But that addition would have been somewhat confusing after he had just written the line that struggling with those things is not integral to our sinfulness. Perhaps it would be even more technically accurate if he had said that those things are an integral part of our reactions to living in a fallen world.

Aaron, can you flesh this statement out a little? When we get to Heaven, we will no longer have “pain, grief, loss, and sorrow,” yet I don’t think we will be missing some integral part of our humanity. Do you? Will we not be fully human up in Heaven?

Good questions! That’s probably not clear without more context.

Suffering is not integral to our fallen humanity—which is why Jesus experienced it as well. It’s integral to being human on a cursed planet.

¹⁸ For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. ¹⁹ For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. ²⁰ For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope ²¹ that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. ²² For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. ²³ And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. (Ro 8:18–23)

So until He wipes away all tears (Isaiah 25:8, Rev 21:4), pain, grief, loss, and sorrow are integral to being human—or maybe it’s better to say integral to the human experience. But this sounds too removed. We are the kind of beings that can feel grief, and God Himself does the same (Gen 6:6, Eph 4:30), or something very like it (impassability debate… but, still).

But I digress. The point I was trying to make is that all the human emotions are, in themselves, innocent. For us, they are tainted by sin, but so is everything else about us at present. But I’m interested in avoiding the “aversion to openly feeling anything negative” dynamic that sometimes develops in churches, ministries, even families. It’s not a sin to feel and to pour that that out before God.

Edit to add: Going back to Oliver and the song, I read some bits of interviews etc. somewhere, and Oliver seems to have some Christian beliefs. As an artist, there is an especially great/powerful opportunity for him in learning the biblical sort of lament. I think it might result in some really beautiful work, so I hope he keeps growing. He seems to be on a journey, so I hope his road takes him to good places.