What is wrong with you, genius?
A comparison occurs when something is "compared", to "compare" is to note similarities, or even a singular similarity, like you just said yourself...
You can't have a comparison when one object is not compared to another. The mere fact that Metallica is mentioned in the same thread as Emperor does not constitute a comparison between the two. The context is obvious: Metallica is merely used as a means of illustrating the falsity of certain arguments being advanced about the nature of selling out. The partisans of Gimperor have chosen to (incorrectly) read that as a comparison of Emperor and Metallica precisely because they cannot adequately address the actual points the reference to Metallica raises. So, instead, you attack the strawman of a comparison that was never actually made. It's easier than actually addressing the real point (which they can't do, since they refuse to admit the obvious truth: later Emperor is fag music).
You were saying Emperor sold out, and you used Metallica to make a point about selling out, tell me how that is not noting a similarity?
'Sold out' is your phrase. 'Sold out' is your concern. I merely pointed out the incontrovertible
fact that
Anthems to the Welkin at Dusk is significantly more commercial in its approach than
In the Nightside Eclipse. The response of my opponents was two-fold (and didn't involve the obvious, pointing to elements that could be construed as less commercial than the previous album - of course, there are none, but that's beside the point):
1. Emperor couldn't have become more commercial because all of their albums are different. I suppose that the logic was that if a band always changes, then changes cannot possibly be construed as having a commercial logic, but the whole notion is obviously absurd, and I merely referenced Metallica to highlight the absurdity (and the invalidity) of the whole line of argument.
2. Emperor couldn't have made more commercial music because it's unlikely that anyone in the band consciously decided to make more commercial music. Again, it's an absurd argument, and one based on willfully ignoring how many bands end up making the music they make. Again, Metallica served as a means of illustrating the falsity of a particular argument, not as a model of Emperor's career.
Bottom line: the validity of the points I raised doesn't rest on any similarities between Metallica and Emperor. It rests on the fact that the career of Metallica proves just how wrong certain assumptions being advanced by the Gimperor fans really are.
So either drop the strawman argument or butt the fuck out.
