Until art can take religion seriously again, it's a pointless discussion. Great artists are authentic and, sans religion, the authentic position is nihilism: everything else begs The Question.
The authors clearly understand this, at some level, by pointing out the singular value of black spiritual music in american history. But, like most of today's elite, they are unable to look the obvious answer in the face, because it's so horrifying.
I find attitudes like this bewildering. I can't imagine being so uncreative as to assert that the only authentic non-religious attitude is a nihlistic one. How hard is it to take the human condition and it's joys and sorrows seriously and at face-value, exalting what we are and might become without resorting to silly supernatural fairy tales. We don't need religion for great art, we need to cultivate our expressions of humanism.
Like it or not, religion (or more correctly, spirituality) is a big part of being human, especially when expressed as art. I think ever since the Age of Enlightenment we've made a big mistake in dismissing anything that can't be rationally explained by science as "silly supernatural fairy tales". We're relying too much on our senses and logical thinking, and neglecting feeling and intuition.
Even Mr. God Is Dead himself was not a nihilist. He talked about it a lot, but because it was something he saw in the world, not because he thought it was a good thing.
Art certainly can be about overcoming nihilism, but it certainly does not require religion to do it.
As always with these discussions, I think it comes down to what you mean by "nihilist". He certainly thought that the end of traditional Christian values was a good thing, which is why many people call him a nihilist. That's not to say he believed in "nothing", Big Lebowski style, though.
Actually, both the "Nobody knows but Jesus" and "Nobody knows my sorrow" versions are traditional, long-standing versions (and I can't find any clear indication of which is the "original" on the web.) Given the origin of the song, its quite likely lots of variations existed before it was written down.
I'm a fairly religious person myself, and still find the idea "sans religion, the authentic position is nihilism" to be the fairly ridiculous (unless you broaden the definition of religion so much as to make it unrecognizable). Just because lots of people find meaning in religion -- and even if one assumes that those people are in some deep respect right and everyone else is wrong -- doesn't mean that people who find meaning outside of religion lack authenticity. Beliefs can be authentic and different from yours -- even authentic and wrong.
Depends on what definition of nihilism you use. I would agree with the first couple of lines from Wikipedia:
> Nihilism (/ˈnaɪ.ɨlɪzəm/ or /ˈniː.ɨlɪzəm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is a philosophical doctrine that suggests the negation of one or more putatively meaningful aspects of life. Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.
But this does not mean I don't enjoy life, and find meaning for myself. I just don't believe that there's anything objective or intrinsic about it - that is, what gives my life meaning is what I make of it, and nothing else.
One could possibly argue that we derive meaning from our biology - the factors that evokes emotions, beauty, or drives our reward responses, and this represents "objective meaning" in some way, but I feel that's a big stretch, though it is certainly likely to shape your thoughts on what is meaningful.
The authors clearly understand this, at some level, by pointing out the singular value of black spiritual music in american history. But, like most of today's elite, they are unable to look the obvious answer in the face, because it's so horrifying.