BM, DM, and religion

Lyrics can be important, but I am happy to listen to things in languages that I do not understand.

Sotajumala are a fantastic band, but I haven't got a clue what the lyrics are. Not even a clue what the titles mean...
 
I'm not a christian, but I have deep respect for the religion itself. I don't agree with the organized religion propaganda, but I respect the christians who are living their life for God, not in organized/political ways. That means they could be a part of a church, but aren't part a political force to force people to become christians or start wars, or whatever, but rather they are spiritually in connection with God and with the followers of God.

Now I listen to some DM, but I don't like BM. I don't listen to bands that preach against christianity. If the BM band shares it's pagan views, but doesn't have a propaganda to hate on christianity or God, then I'm fine with it. Same goes for DM. I can care less what the bands believe in, but rather I care what they talk about and what their intentions are in their lyrics/music. Just because the instruments sound good, doesn't mean I'll listen to it, the lyrics are very important to me as well.

I took a while to really get into Opeth. At first I thought they were a band that preached against christianity and religions, but I read their lyrics and stuff and got something else out of them. I do appreciate Opeth and their lyrics and I tend to interpret their lyrics in my own terms. I don't care what Opeth believes in, as long as their music conforms to what I accept, I'm ok.

I don't find anything wrong with Christians listening to or being in a DM band. It's mine and your opinion on what DM represents. I don't think it matters if there's a christian listening to a death metal band. It's up to you to think what is right or not. I don't believe in any facts here when it comes to metal. Metal can be anything you want. If metal were meant to be against christianity, then we might as well create a new term for heavy music that isn't against christianity.
 
Damien. said:
LOL @ the people who think lyrics are important to a band's "message". If Morbid Angel were instrumental, would they be any less anti-Christian?

A Christian (for example) listening to black metal is the equivalent of an atheist going to Sunday mass. Maybe they can sever the MEANING from the MUSIC, and enjoy it on a strictly audial level while ignoring the true intent of the musician, but then that's the very definition of the word "superficial". Metal in general doesn't have to be strictly anti-Christian, but I question the depth of religious people (IE: people who believe in God) who enjoy the more extreme genres of metal, such as black and death.
I'll have to heartily disagree with you on that. The equivalent of a Christian listening to black metal (which I do all the time) would be an atheist or satanist listening to Christian music. For me it's about the sound and atmosphere, not the message. I understand what you say about a band's message always shining through, and in truth, I feel many bands would not be the same if it weren't for their lyrical content as well. What it comes down to for me, however, is that I'm listening to it for the artistic appreciation, not for the message it is telling me. It may be different for you.
 
bball_1523 said:
who defined metal, death metal, black metal, in the first place?
No one person did. Definitions of genres change as they evolve. Metallica and Venom used to call themselves power metal. Bands originally defined as death and black metal sounded far more like thrash than what death and black metal sound like today. While they may have been a huge influence, can one honestly listen to Venom or Mercyful Fate as compared to Darkthrone or Emperor and think that they are all from the same genre?
 
This thread is scary. The complete dismissal of deeper psychology and anything more than a shallow, literal take on aesthetics. The use of semantics to co-opt and render meaningless words and phrases in order to synthesize contradiction.

Its hard for me to deal with how fucking insane you all are. Run, NOW, read Freud, and major works on media and music aesthetics. Come back and then tell me how you find it acceptable to synthesize Christian tenets with music that is fueled by anger, is militaristic and destructive in nature, and throws material pleasure in the face of Christian utilitarianism.

This thread is a perfect example of the mistake of specialization. Opinions spit out within such narrow parameters, without regard to history or greater context.

Pass the fucking barf bucket.
 
Justin S. said:
This thread is scary. The complete dismissal of deeper psychology and anything more than a shallow, literal take on aesthetics. The use of semantics to co-opt and render meaningless words and phrases in order to synthesize contradiction.

Its hard for me to deal with how fucking insane you all are. Run, NOW, read Freud, and major works on media and music aesthetics. Come back and then tell me how you find it acceptable to synthesize Christian tenets with music that is fueled by anger, is militaristic and destructive in nature, and throws material pleasure in the face of Christian utilitarianism.

This thread is a perfect example of the mistake of specialization. Opinions spit out within such narrow parameters, without regard to history or greater context.

Pass the fucking barf bucket.
And why can't someone enjoy things that go against his beliefs on a purely artistic level? Do art and belief have to go hand in hand? The major works on media and music aesthetics you speak of are just another man's opinion.
 
I feel the ideology behind music is very important. Beliefs influence the style of music played and by supporting the music, you are supporting what the music ios trying to represent.
 
Vlad the Impaler said:
And why can't someone enjoy things that go against his beliefs on a purely artistic level?

First you are assuming that there can be a seperation between spheres of life. Everything is integrated, and nothing is "free". Why is something "OK" if its "art" (a rather loose term), but not otherwise? Whats the difference? Secondly, enjoying something in conflict with perceived "strongly held convictions" would imply that those beliefs are imaginary.

Vlad the Impaler said:
The major works on media and music aesthetics you speak of are just another man's opinion.

Im not suggesting you go and regurgitate a particlular perspective, rather the methodology of psychoanalysis and critical aesthetics. The power of these as investigative tools is not debatable.
 
Justin S. said:
Its hard for me to deal with how fucking insane you all are. Run, NOW, read Freud, and major works on media and music aesthetics.
bwaahahahaha! Freud has been discredited by psychologists and psychiatrists 'round the world. His entire paradigm is now a case study on how to avoid believing in something so meaningless.....Or is that your point in the first place?
 
dorian gray said:
bwaahahahaha! Freud has been discredited by psychologists and psychiatrists 'round the world. His entire paradigm is now a case study on how to avoid believing in something so meaningless.....Or is that your point in the first place?

What in the world are you talking about? Freud is widely read in any respectable University in the world. Here at the University of Chicago, there are courses that study him for an entire 12 weeks. His works will be encountered in any social science, pyschology, and anthroplogy courses.

That doesnt mean that he is perfect. Of course there are valid criticisms of his conclusions, but his core ideas are psychology. Ever heard of the sub-conscious?

I have never heard anyone discredit him. Youve lost me on that.
 
freud was mistaken by the way. :edit bah i see it's already been pointed out.

its 2am and i'm too tired to debate at this hour, but needless to say, i disagree with many of you.

the extremely short version:

music of the instrumental kind cannot be "for" or "against" anything. its emotional content can be inferred through tonality and progression/rhythm etc etc but that's as far as it goes, unless you're absurd enough to do blastbeats in morse code spelling out S A T A N. :Smug:

the message of music comes from the lyrics. the music behind them is just the landscape in which they are laid out. whatever the band's personal convictions are, they do not transfer to the music unless lyrically.
 
Silent Song said:
music of the instrumental kind cannot be "for" or "against" anything. its emotional content can be inferred through tonality and progression/rhythm etc etc but that's as far as it goes, unless you're absurd enough to do blastbeats in morse code spelling out S A T A N. :Smug:

the message of music comes from the lyrics. the music behind them is just the landscape in which they are laid out. whatever the band's personal convictions are, they do not transfer to the music unless lyrically.
Utter nonsense. Do you honestly think black metal is raw, dissonant, chaotic, etc. for no reason? If I were to form a band playing disharmonic Darkthrone-esque riffs, with fast drumming, and just make screaming noises for vocals, are you telling me that it wouldn't be black metal, simply because it doesn't have lyrics?
 
Heavenscent said:
Freud was fucking sexually frustrated when he was a little emo kid...

Freud's Psychodynamic Approach was the foundation of psychology. His theories have been proven. The imbalance bewtween the ID, EGO and SUPER EGO can be seen when someone is drunk and the super ego is werakened which is why some people get violent and follow their animal instincts(ID) and why some people go completely quiet (super ego). The problems experienced at the Oral, Anal and Phallic stages being the result of problems later in life has been proven by Wonderlich(1996) who found links between childhood sexual abuse and bulimia.

Freud has never been proven wrong and has received a large body of evidence, it's just that other approaches to psychology have taken over because they are more practical such as the biological approach. Freud's ideas are still used in psychological research/treatment today.
 
Damien. said:
Utter nonsense. Do you honestly think black metal is raw, dissonant, chaotic, etc. for no reason? If I were to form a band playing disharmonic Darkthrone-esque riffs, with fast drumming, and just make screaming noises for vocals, are you telling me that it wouldn't be black metal, simply because it doesn't have lyrics?
incorrect. i am saying black metal does not necessarily have an idealogy.

and once again for those who cling to fantasy: FREUD WAS WRONG. they teach it in psych class.