Black Metal.

[Alter]

Why the fuck would they even be associated with Satanism? As far as I know they never wrote anything of that nature. They write about nature and the north, their origins, and imaginary lands as a form of escapism from modernity. This is in line with the ideological basis of Black Metal. Satanism is only a small component of the ideology, and is not even remotely essential. It's merely a tool used most often to display a direct contrast and opposition to Christianity.

Thanking for proving my point that you are a hypocrite.

Btw can you explain a little about darkspace for me.

 

[skeptik]

You're an idiot if you see 'hypocrisy' in anything I've said, but go ahead and try to explain what I've said that is hypocritical.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Coincidence really isn't the best term to be using here, but regardless, this segment of the conversation is entirely insignificant. I really don't know why we're even discussing it. The reality is that this is the music coinciding with the ideology that produced it, not some other music or ideology.

I concur. Coincidence wasn't really the best term to use but I'm pretty sure you got what I was trying to say anyway.

Black Metal is a musical genre at the lowest common denominator. I've already addressed this. Black Metal is not merely a style of playing. The music that came to be understood as Black Metal is a direct product of the ideology. If the ideology was not in place, the likelihood is that the music would have been vastly different. So no, "the musical standpoint" does NOT "vastly outweigh the importance of the conceptual standpoint," because the music is an effect of the ideology. The ideology DOES dictate the music, it is not a subtext to the music. What the listeners experience has nothing to do with what the artists intended. And I don't see the point in making a distinction between music and literature, as they both have a similar circumstance, namely deciphering the artist's message and intent through critical examination of his or her work.

This is true for the originators of black metal and the majority of black metal musicians today. However, there are some bands that adhere to different lyrical themes yet play the same style of music. This means that they took influence from the first and second wave bands from a musical standpoint rather than a lyrical one (unlike the black metal bands that apply to the accepted notions of the ideology within the genre). So, in the end, yes the music does lead back to an ideology as the basis for getting the sound that defines black metal. However, now that the musical characteristics of black metal have been established, bands can use these musical characteristics while adhering to a different ideology and still be considered black metal.

You don't think that there is symbolism in music? The medium through which a message is conveyed is irrelevant. Black Metal, being an ideological concept, expresses its ideological merits mainly through lyrics and coinciding music.

Music most certainly does have symbolism which, as you said, is conveyed through lyrics and music. I just don't think there is a strict symbolism that is essential for playing black metal or any other kind of music for that matter.

Not necessarily, no.

Thereotically, music should be the most important aspect when a music genre is the subject at hand.

I think you're doing a disservice to music as a whole by holding it do a different standard than art and literature. And don't forget that music very often does have a visual component as well. And, of course, the lyrics are literature. Music often combines all of these mediums in order to convey a cohesive message or theme.

I wasn't holding music to a lesser standard than art or literature. The symbolism displayed by music is much different than art or literature because you hear it rather than see it. The visual component is irrelevant because, technically, it's not part of the music but rather a prop that compliments it.

From the very beginning, one of the key components of Black Metal has been anti-Christianity. The assumption that such a thing as Christian Black Metal could exist is nothing less than a paradox because it is in direct opposition to the virtues of the genre.

It is completely out of place. I agree. However, if the band still manages to convey a dark atmosphere by applying the characteristics of black metal, than it's still black metal.

 

[skeptik]

This is true for the originators of black metal and the majority of black metal musicians today. However, there are some bands that adhere to different lyrical themes yet play the same style of music. This means that they took influence from the first and second wave bands from a musical standpoint rather than a lyrical one (unlike the black metal bands that apply to the accepted notions of the ideology within the genre). So, in the end, yes the music does lead back to an ideology as the basis for getting the sound that defines black metal. However, now that the musical characteristics of black metal have been established, bands can use these musical characteristics while adhering to a different ideology and still be considered black metal.

You can't take away bits and pieces of something and markedly alter it and then still claim that it is in line with that from which you originally sampled. Black Metal-sounding music is not necessarily Black Metal if it is conceptually incompatible because, as I've already said, Black Metal is not simply a genre of music. If it was merely a way of playing then this entire argument would be irrelevant. You cannot create "Black Metal" music without paying credence to the ideological boundaries of the genre (which, granted, are a grey area, but things such as Christianity are clear-cut enough to obviously be excluded). Picking and choosing and then claiming to be the same thing just doesn't work.

Music most certainly does have symbolism which, as you said, is conveyed through lyrics and music. I just don't think there is a strict symbolism that is essential for playing black metal or any other kind of music for that matter.

The symbolism itself is not necessarily particularly strict, as long as it does not present any inherent contradictions without the work as a whole.

Thereotically, music should be the most important aspect when a music genre is the subject at hand.

Obviously, but I reiterate, Black Metal is not just a music genre, and should not be considered as such in any but the most basic and primitive discussions of the musical components. As thisisaformicatable has said, applying the same standards of classification for all genres does not adhere to reality, and the reality of Black Metal is that the conceptual framework is inseparable from the craft.

I wasn't holding music to a lesser standard than art or literature. The symbolism displayed by music is much different than art or literature because you hear it rather than see it. The visual component is irrelevant because, technically, it's not part of the music but rather a prop that compliments it.

Once again, you're viewing the subject as only the musical component when the artwork very often is an integral conceptual piece with the work as a whole. The artwork is not merely a "prop," but an essential piece of the puzzle. Of course this is not universally true, but largely it is.

It is completely out of place. I agree. However, if the band still manages to convey a dark atmosphere by applying the characteristics of black metal, than it's still black metal.

Aesthetically, on the basest of levels, but this is not the classification being discussed. Musical similarities do not dictate co-relations.

 

[Mort Divine]

Basically, this arguement is done to hell - everyone has their own stance on the issue, there is no need to discuss it further so just stop this lame discussion.

The Ruins of Beverast fuckin' rule.

 

[George]

The Ruins of Beverast fuckin' rule.

Right on.

 

[KevenZ]

Limbonic Art is underrated.

 

[Alter]

Sigh and Malleus Maleficarum are underrated.

 

[Alter]

god the work which transforms god is genius. i cant wait to buy fathers of the icy age.

 

[Matt]

I just bought Kosherat by Grand Belial's Key. I gotta say, it's pretty enjoyable so far.

 

[unknown]

^^ that's a great album

 

[Requiem.]

I've been listening to a lot of Sad Legend lately.

 

[Vossyrus]

The Ruins of Beverast fuckin' rule.

Definitely

 

[Manic Ferocity]

You can't take away bits and pieces of something and markedly alter it and then still claim that it is in line with that from which you originally sampled. Black Metal-sounding music is not necessarily Black Metal if it is conceptually incompatible because, as I've already said, Black Metal is not simply a genre of music. If it was merely a way of playing then this entire argument would be irrelevant. You cannot create "Black Metal" music without paying credence to the ideological boundaries of the genre (which, granted, are a grey area, but things such as Christianity are clear-cut enough to obviously be excluded). Picking and choosing and then claiming to be the same thing just doesn't work.

The only reason you say this is because of the extreme practices of the ideologies in the early scene. Like I said, people make this whole "inner circle" bullshit to be much more epic than it actually was when in reality, it was just a bunch of teens looking for something to rebel against. Most of the lyrical themes found in black metal were used long before black metal was even invented anyway. But now that the musicians ACTUALLY burned churches and ACTUALLY defiled graves the genre suddenly becomes more than just a music genre but an "epic movement".

Obviously, but I reiterate, Black Metal is not just a music genre, and should not be considered as such in any but the most basic and primitive discussions of the musical components. As thisisaformicatable has said, applying the same standards of classification for all genres does not adhere to reality, and the reality of Black Metal is that the conceptual framework is inseparable from the craft.

And, once again, I ask you, would you still consider it more than a music genre if it weren't for the extreme ideologies being applied by the early bands?

Once again, you're viewing the subject as only the musical component when the artwork very often is an integral conceptual piece with the work as a whole. The artwork is not merely a "prop," but an essential piece of the puzzle. Of course this is not universally true, but largely it is.

Because the musical component is what's most important. I'm not saying that the ideological influences should be ignored but it shouldn't prevent the genre from evolution.

Aesthetically, on the basest of levels, but this is not the classification being discussed. Musical similarities do not dictate co-relations.

They do if you focus on the musical aspect. I, once again, hold the feeling evoked from the music in higher regard than the message being conveyed through lyrics.

 

[Zephyrus]

Btw can you explain a little about darkspace for me.

It's black metal that conveys an outer-space feeling with an overwhelming focus on atmosphere. And by that I mean the guitars provide a huge wall of sound with a blasting drum machine, but produced so that the sound is melded into one interstellar blast of sound that will blow you away. Vocals are sparse, unintelligible screams that make you feel lost in space with no hope of rescue.

I highly recommend this band. Get either of their albums.

Limbonic Art is underrated.

True that. They hadn't gotten the recognition they deserved while on the Nocturnal Art label, but luckily Candlelight has re-released their albums and will provide the upocoming album to the US market.

 

[Mort Divine]

Limbonic Art is underrated.

Overrated imo, they get so much praise when they've only released one note-worthy album.

 

[VonCreep]

Black metal is exclusivist, elitist, and anti-christian. Adding any christian element would cause it to be no longer black metal in the traditional sense of the word. And since most black metal is also traditionalist towards its own aesthete, the traditional sense of the word 'black metal' is the only sense that matters. Christians should be shot... or better yet, burnt at the stake.

 

[Mort Divine]

 

[Zephyrus]

Overrated imo, they get so much praise when they've only released one note-worthy album.

First of all, where is this praise coming from (as this board exclusively surely cannot speak for much wider an audience) and what is lacking that makes you favor only one album?

 

[Mort Divine]

The praise is everywhere I go that has BM fans, UM, M-A, M-O, Gaia (lulz I know), Gfaqs, - everywhere they are known they are praised, far beyond what they should be.

The other albums that arn't IAD are just poorly executed, the synth work either doesn't hold up as well as it did on IAD or too much focus was taken away from it.