"The Trees" is a silly song. Maybe even a bad one. Well, no. Okay, listen: I really like Rush. I made a point to listen to Rush while writing this. I mean, c'mon - "YYZ"? "Closer to the Heart"? "Xanadu"?! Even, yes, "The Trees". It is incredible that those three guys ended up in a band playing together. Astounding musicianship from each, without question. I have honestly teared up when the beat drops in "YYZ". Geddy, Alex, and Neil all clearly worked very hard to achieve what they have. But that's kinda the thing. "The Trees", if you're unfamiliar, is a song about how human rights activists are misguided and antisocial, using the allegory of a forest. No, truly. The Maples (activists) are upset that the Oaks ('successful' people, presumably) get all the sunshine. "Too lofty," they say. We're told the Oaks are just born to be bigger, and that lesser trees should be content to bask in their shade. In the end, the Maples unionise and demand some fairness. The solution is a "noble law": "the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw". So, a few things... Despite the passing report of some anonymous creatures fleeing the conflict, there is no mention of any other kind of life in this forest. Nobody has anything to say except two pretty similar species of large hardwood deciduous tree. Not a quip from the conifers. The shrubbery is shushed. Groundcover gagged. Never mind the fungi, bacteria, bugs, and birds. Well, the other organisms are remaining neutral, I guess. But, then, who is wielding all these implements of destruction? Are we expected to believe that the Maples are cutting themselves down, as well as the Oaks? Seems implausible. So, actors unknown are hacking down these trees in response to the passing of legislation in some arboreal parliament. Alright, fine. We got some mysterious treefellas in the equation. Sure. But why even pass this law? Maple species do have a broad range of heights, but very many are just as tall as oaks. Oaks, if anything, would block out light through the breadth of their canopies. But maples grow faster than oaks, anyway. All of which is beside the point, because this is just not how forests work. Forests are incredibly complex networks of co-operation and interdependence, of which trees are only the final, and most fragile, expression. It takes centuries of work by fungi, pioneer species, and intermediate shrubs and the like before the big guys show up. And it's only after hardier conifers come in that shade-tolerant trees(!) like oaks and maples can take root and fluorish. All of which is aided by animals like earthworms, bees, birds, deer, and even humans. They work the soil, pollinate plants, transport seeds, deal with pests: the myriad tasks that go into laying the ground for the lofty trees of which we are so enamored. In fairness, the trees do end up crowding out the light. Not just for each other, but for everybody. But, the solution is kinda what ends up happening in the song: the trees die. Either they get too old and rot, or there's a forest fire, or, yeah, some logging operation goes through. Then the air is cleared for the cycle to start over, to grow a new forest. So, what is going on with this song? Rush do talk a lot about the importance of individuality and freedom in their work. They have a song on the subject literally called "Freewill" fer cryin' out loud. But the darker side of this perhaps is identifying collectivism as being counter to those values. See their 1976 opus, "2112", for twenty magical minutes of confirmation. Maybe it was growing up in the era of Red Scare that instilled this idea. Or Neil Peart, the lyricist, being born to parents who fled Yugoslavia. Whatever the reason, Rush certainly aren't the only artists to flirt with notions of how selfish competition is the only way for a society that values the individual to operate, and that some individuals are just inherently better than others. Still, we see those ideas espoused, perhaps all the stronger for the seeming ubiquity of neoliberalism. So, I won't label Canada's greatest prog rock trio as being anti-equal-rights or (*gasp*) fascist for employing these talking points. But, it's not as if Rush were born fully-formed rockstars who were granted their skill and stardom because of the way they were made. The abilities honed, the challenges overcome, the successes achieved were not predetermined, but the product of not just the hard work of individuals, but of the support of family, friends, and a community of fans. It is the collective that makes the individual possible, rather than destroys it, because without that support we're all just so many hungry monkeys. So, it pays to take a hard look at these ideas being presented so patly (and with killer guitar solos). Go spend some time in a forest, if you can. Look down as much as up, and stop to appreciate just how much life is thriving in every nook and niche. You might find organisms cutting each other down to get ahead in the game of life, but you'll definitely see a lot of mutual support, especially where it comes to those grander species like maples and oaks. No living thing is independent of this intricate web of symbiosis. So, please, do enjoy some Rush tunes, but be careful not to miss the forest for "The Trees".