BM, DM, and religion

[Profanity]

True but to broadcast an image of it for people to enjoy is truely psychotic.

 

[Don Corleone]

One of the reasons I feel that there is little relevance between the views of the artist and the actual music itself is the fact that many extreme metal artists (with the exception of black metal extremists) don't take their lyrics seriously.

Tom Araya in an interview on slayersaves.com:
What's the biggest misconception people have about Slayer?

The obvious one: the Satan stuff. I'm not here to fault anybody. And I hate to say this, but Christ came and taught us about love. About doing unto others. That was his preach: Accept each other for who we are. Live peacefully, and love one another. Period.

Do you believe in God?

I believe in a supreme being, yeah. But He's an all-loving God.

Can you see how people might miss that message in your music?

Yeah. And I don't fault them for that. Songs are open for interpretation, you know? It's like we can both be looking at a flower, but the information that we absorb is different about that flower.

Larry Lalonde in the book Sound of the Beast: The Headbanging History of Heavy Metal: "If you believe in all this Satan stuff, you have to be stupid!"

Quorthon in the same book: "I went back and checked my lyrics, and there wasn't anything there about slitting someone up because of his sexual preferences. I was talking about raping angels and masturbating on the golden throne up there, but I find it very hard to imagine someone raping an angel. I mean, these are abstract fantasy lyrics. For anybody not being able to take that as a horror story--an expansion of Tales from the Crypt or Black Sabbath--they're screwed up."

excellent post

 

[Profanity]

A bit long for my liking.

 

[Justin S.]

True but to broadcast an image of it for people to enjoy is truely psychotic.

agreed. Although psychotic behavior is hardly rare...

 

[NeverIsForever]

Lmao...I thought this thread died a long time ago...

On topic, sort of: I agree with the people who don't think psychotic lyrics necessarily make the individual who wrote them psychotic. I would extend this idea to say that it doesn't make those who listen to such music psychotic, either. Now if only the general population could figure that out. I hate it when people assume I'm depressed or suicidal simply based on what music I like...

 

[deliverance]

bwahahaha! "i always wanted to become an FBI agent.........I also thought about making a dress out of people."

 

[Du sollst dich töten]

no, that is incorrect. you have quoted me wrong.

i implied nothing, i STATED that lyrics (whether read OR heard) are the message of the music. any other message through the instruments themselves is purely speculation and up to interpretation.

Jesus. For starters, I didn't quote you at all - I made a comment about your comment. "Stated" and "implied" isn't the issue. The issue is that you're under the impression that music can't communicate a message or a feeling without lyrics, which is blatantly false. This can be picked apart any number of ways. Do you believe that all lyrics are to be taken literally? Are you saying that lyrics are beyond speculation, and whatever they say must be what the artist thinks? What if the vocals are in a foreign language? What if they're abstract, and don't explicitly name the subject matter? What if the lyrics are sarcastic? What if a band can't find a vocalist, so they forgo the whole issue of having lyrics to begin with - does this mean their music means nothing? What about classical music - music that has been evoking specific emotions in people for hundreds of years? But wait, there's no lyrics there, so that must make it incapable of meaning anything, right? I'd really like you to explain how all of this is possible.

I ask you once again: is, say, Darkthrone's music, ON ITS OWN - no vocals, no lyrics, no anything but the music - hateful, discordant, aggressive, and "evil"; or you unable to realise any of this until the vocals start?

 

[Du sollst dich töten]

Seriously. I'm sure prior the the Norwegian explosion there could have been some kid fooling around on his guitar and realized that you can make a really evil sound with distortion, tremolo picking, and discordant riffs, yet had no intention of making an anti-Christian statement. I'm not saying this happened mind you, but I'm making a point that a style of music can be discovered or invented without the intentions it's currently associated with. Look at classical music. There are a vast array of different messages depending on the composer you're listening to. You can't pidgeonhole a style of music--a fucking SOUND for God's sake--into a set philosophy. Sure there can be a demographic of people performing that style that share a common belief, but the sound itself is NOT inextricably linked to the philosophy.

Norwegian explosion? Bathory, Hellhammer, Celtic Frost, etc., had more to do with the beginnings of black metal than any Norwegian bands. Classical is an odd example, because no-one actually says that classical music has a "pidgeonholed" philosophy, whereas black metal does, to a degree. This would be anti-Christianity, or at the very least, a dislike of society trying to impose a religion on them. This is why bands like Mercyful Fate and Venom are mentioned alongside Burzum and Nargaroth as being black metal.

 

[Justin S.]

Jesus, you people are stupid

hit. them. on. head. with. 2X4.

Thank you Damien, I was getting nervous that it was opposite day again.

 

[AnTz0r]

but what about white metal (opposite of black metal), like: death metal with christian lyrics.

i don't think the music is inherently evil or satanic, it is just the assocation people make with it.

 

[Kenneth R.]

For starters, I didn't quote you at all - I made a comment about your comment. "Stated" and "implied" isn't the issue. The issue is that you're under the impression that music can't communicate a message or a feeling without lyrics. Do you believe that all lyrics are to be taken literally? Are you saying that lyrics are beyond speculation, and whatever they say must be what the artist thinks? What if the vocals are in a foreign language? What if they're abstract, and don't explicitly name the subject matter? What if the lyrics are sarcastic? What if a band can't find a vocalist, so they forgo the whole issue of having lyrics to begin with - does this mean their music means nothing? What about classical music - music that has been evoking specific emotions in people for hundreds of years? But wait, there's no lyrics there, so that must make it incapable of meaning anything, right? I'd really like you to explain how all of this is possible.

I ask you once again: is, say, Darkthrone's music, ON ITS OWN - no vocals, no lyrics, no anything but the music - hateful, discordant, aggressive, and "evil"; or you unable to realise any of this until the vocals start?

you fool.

do not spread your lies here. musical message comes from the lyrics. if there are no lyrics it comes from the title (which is words). are you so ignorant that you did not even understand what i wrote? all of your questions above pertain to the w-o-r-d-s. sarcasm and other literary devices are used. people know this.

how can classical music evoke emotion without words? first off, some of it DOES have words, in latin, german, italian.. etc. those that do not, evoke their message through the title, which lays the backdrop for listener speculation as to what it all means.

you fool.

music can have meaning without words, but that meaning is no longer explicit. it is inferred meaning that varies by listener and what they want it to mean. it no longer has a specific message.

discordant is something music can present. agression perhaps. hateful is not something a chordal progression can do without lyrics. tell me right now which chords are "evil". there are none. they are all indifferent to sides.

by your own foolish logic, think about it. a black metal band could be employing sarcasm by sounding "evil" in a satire of such beliefs.

 

[Jon Snow]

I bet Jesus would like jam bands.

 

[RookParliament]

I bet Jesus would listen to Johnny Cash

 

[Jon Snow]

^Nice sig dude. Dawkins is the man.

 

[Vlad the Impaler]

Norwegian explosion? Bathory, Hellhammer, Celtic Frost, etc., had more to do with the beginnings of black metal than any Norwegian bands. Classical is an odd example, because no-one actually says that classical music has a "pidgeonholed" philosophy, whereas black metal does, to a degree. This would be anti-Christianity, or at the very least, a dislike of society trying to impose a religion on them. This is why bands like Mercyful Fate and Venom are mentioned alongside Burzum and Nargaroth as being black metal.

I understand that perfectly, but honestly, do any of those bands besides Bathory sound as similar to Darkthrone or Emperor to be warranted the same genre? I know black metal elitists love to classify those bands as black metal as well, but to me that's the same as calling Slayer death metal. They may have had huge influence, but as the genre now stands, they bear small resemblance.

Anyway, I still disagree with saying that black metal as just the sound itself, disregarding lyrics, is inherantly evil. When Venom released Black Metal they never had any intentions of starging an anti-Christian rebellion, it was all farce. I even quoted Quorthon in this thread as stating that his lyrics were to be taken as no more than horror stories. I compared classical music because that genre also had origins in a specific religion but as it progressed it was used to convey things beyond that.

 

[Kenneth R.]

indeed, in certain time periods the only accepted form of public music was that of the church. we have since realized that music itself is not devoted to any cause, but can be used to further many, regardless of its tonality.

 

[Justin S.]

I briefly touched upon the idea of scientific discovery, specifically biology, revealing pre-determined human responses in the Philosopher section.
I would not be surprised if our increasing understanding of the brain and all its workings largely closed this debate.

It is undeniable that the human psyche responds in certain ways to its environment. One of these aspects is sound. Certain sounds inherently arouse sepcific emotions and responses that can be measured in terms of brain activity and chemical composition.

Regardless of what lyrical or overt message is superficially plastered on top of the sound, the physical and psychological responses will occur and alter mood, perception, level of excitement, etc.

A cacophony of instruments or machinery will create tension, unrest, fear, etc., the very mechanisims that metal, and especially death and black metal utilize to transmit their message. The lyrical and vocal aspect is simply the dressing. The vehicle is the sound itself. At some point the symbols arranged on top are trivial in terms of a psychological response. A great example is the inaudibility of many extreme metal acts. You dont need to understand or even comprehend human vocalization to literally feel the discontent.

What is so ridiculous about many of the opinions here is that they actually try to claim that contradicting sound and metaphysical concepts can be synthasized. Hopefully you can see why I see this as insane.

A barrage of discordance, anger, fear, and anxiety cannot, no matter the rationalizations and language manipulation, be used to support ideals of order, harmony, love, etc. They are fundamentally juxtaposed. To make a claim of consolation is to throw all ideas of reason and critical evaluation out the window.

 

[Justin S.]

Also, for those of you that are very critical of Freud, I highly recommend Civilization and its Discontents for a great overview of his general ideas.

I would be surprised if after reading it you would still be as skeptical. He is very methodical and honest in his investigation of the human situation.

 

[NGC 3370]

you fool.

do not spread your lies here. musical message comes from the lyrics. if there are no lyrics it comes from the title (which is words). are you so ignorant that you did not even understand what i wrote? all of your questions above pertain to the w-o-r-d-s. sarcasm and other literary devices are used. people know this.

how can classical music evoke emotion without words? first off, some of it DOES have words, in latin, german, italian.. etc. those that do not, evoke their message through the title, which lays the backdrop for listener speculation as to what it all means.

you fool.

music can have meaning without words, but that meaning is no longer explicit. it is inferred meaning that varies by listener and what they want it to mean. it no longer has a specific message.

discordant is something music can present. agression perhaps. hateful is not something a chordal progression can do without lyrics. tell me right now which chords are "evil". there are none. they are all indifferent to sides.

by your own foolish logic, think about it. a black metal band could be employing sarcasm by sounding "evil" in a satire of such beliefs.

^^^^^ totally agree with that one Silent Song. I have read all the posts after this one and this one still has the most thought out of them all. Sorry Justin S and Damien but your points are just not as well thought out as this one no matter how many words you look up in a dictionary to put your point across.
Please enlighten us on what chords are evil and if you play them you go straight to hell. Could it be a minor seeing minor chords are seen as sad.
I can see the devil laugh every time I play a minor chord, scale or tremelo pick fast.
Give me a break.

 

[Botfly]

ROFL, that reminds me...

If Mike is going to use words like "perdition", he should at least learn how to use words like "there", "their" and "they're" properly.

wudda psuedo-intellect.