Messages in music

[Kenneth R.]

began, but that does not mean it must remain so. in fact, bands are already changing that.

 

[Intoxicator]

The only Christian band I like even somewhat are Immortal Souls. They have Christian lyrics that aren't preachy and they can be related to other things.

 

[no country for old wainds]

began, but that does not mean it must remain so. in fact, bands are already changing that.

I said began and evolved, not to mention was named after. It ceases to be death metal if it strays away from the origins.

 

[Kenneth R.]

given that perpesctive, you cannot claim that genres ever make progress then.

 

[no country for old wainds]

The more primitive forms of death metal still had a way to go before stripping away all the populist tendencies and purely expressing the ultimate aim, this doesn't change the aim itself.

 

[Kenneth R.]

and what aim is that? no matter how you word it, your argument makes genre progress impossible. it's foolish.

 

[no country for old wainds]

I say aim, I essentially mean worldview. I already stated what.

no matter how you word it, your argument makes genre progress impossible. it's foolish.

What I meant by my comment is that something which began with a purpose and was labelled with that purpose as its fundamental definition, can not go against that fundamental definition and retain the same label.

What you're suggesting is akin to "Christianity can't progress unless people start denying the existence of God".

 

[Kenneth R.]

I'm suggesting that Death Metal can include lyrical themes from a wide array of sources and topics and still be Death Metal. actually i'm not even suggesting. it IS.

 

[no country for old wainds]

Music that sounds like death metal is founded in DM's core values, whether the creator intended it - or the lyrics oppose it - or not. Anti-DM lyrics with DM music comes off as confused and ultimately worthless, though.

 

[Kenneth R.]

i disagree. that it is "worthless" amd "confused" is up to interpretation, therefore subjective, and representative of your view only. your "worldview" as you call it.

in my opinion, what makes a band DM is the focus of passionate extreme intensity on whatever subject is at hand, along with the musical style commonly associated with the genre (which i assume we aren't debating)

 

[warsofwinter]

How many movies do we see about plane crashes, death, drugs, sex ... all which interests people enough to make a killing from yet when a small group of people write some music about their beliefs or just more sensitive subject matter people go fucking ape shit. It's kind of like when people who were all against passion of the christ were trying to get it banned from cinimas .. its a fucking movie about something that may have or may not have happened. I guess when people are so devoted to a band really they just care too much about the people creating the shit rather than the creation which in the end is always the only thing which has any importance.

Dimebag darrell fucked up pantera so i'll go shoot em up so they'll have any chance of geting back together completely washed down the drain, some people just take it for what it is and some just build it up inside their little heads and make illogical decisions.


Im rick james bitch

 

[cthulufhtagn]

GoD's argument is based on the idea that the genre itself is a separate entity from the bands that constitute it, who are subject to its ideological principles. I tend to operate on the opposite assumption; i.e., the genre is shaped by its constituent artists. Genre is a difficult concept, and while it can be useful in cataloguing and recommending bands it too often gets in the way of accurate description and (all-too-often in the metal community) leads to conflicts over who is the most grim tr00 necro kvlt, and who is a "poser" (black metal, i'm looking in your direction).

There are some who believe Christianity is incongruent with their vision of death metal (or whatever genre), and others who justify a connection. However, as I see it those genre boundaries are man-made to begin with. There were bands, and specific "scenes" (e.g. the notorious inner circle), formed with specific goals, but who is to say whether those specific individuals represent the "true essence" of the genre? I mean, look at Varg, his beliefs have changed over time but would anyone accuse him of being a "poser"? Can he currently hold different beliefs than those of the original circle and yet at the same time remain true to the goals supposedly set in stone for the genre of black metal? I see a paradox.

p.s. WoW must you end all your posts with that tired catchphrase?

 

[Furious B]

Im rick james bitch

Hey, what ever happened with Wars of Winter? I remember dling your stuff a while ago off Audiogalaxy (haha, if anyone can actually remember that place). I thought there was potential, but the production was really bad. I still enjoyed it though. Particularily, "A New Vision (?)" had some good momenets.

 

[Kenneth R.]

GoD's argument is based on the idea that the genre itself is a separate entity from the bands that constitute it, who are subject to its ideological principles. I tend to operate on the opposite assumption; i.e., the genre is shaped by its constituent artists. Genre is a difficult concept, and while it can be useful in cataloguing and recommending bands it too often gets in the way of accurate description and (all-too-often in the metal community) leads to conflicts over who is the most grim tr00 necro kvlt, and who is a "poser" (black metal, i'm looking in your direction).

There are some who believe Christianity is incongruent with their vision of death metal (or whatever genre), and others who justify a connection. However, as I see it those genre boundaries are man-made to begin with. There were bands, and specific "scenes" (e.g. the notorious inner circle), formed with specific goals, but who is to say whether those specific individuals represent the "true essence" of the genre? I mean, look at Varg, his beliefs have changed over time but would anyone accuse him of being a "poser"? Can he currently hold different beliefs than those of the original circle and yet at the same time remain true to the goals supposedly set in stone for the genre of black metal? I see a paradox.

p.s. WoW must you end all your posts with that tired catchphrase?

this is more the point i was trying to make. agreed...

 

[no country for old wainds]

GoD's argument is based on the idea that the genre itself is a separate entity from the bands that constitute it, who are subject to its ideological principles.

Or rather, that all music is the product (the aural expression) of the creator's mindset/ideology, and that the inherent, defining element of death metal art from the outset was always that it strips away all external symbols and focuses on chaos and death.

I tend to operate on the opposite assumption; i.e., the genre is shaped by its constituent artists.

This seems paradoxical to me - it's a viewpoint which begs your own viewpoint. I believe the genre is shaped by its constituent artists, and that artists who express things incongruent with death metal are not death metal, in sound or in anything else. If they express things congruent with death metal in sound, yet throw Christian lyrics on top, they're simply not really sure what they're doing (or they're joking).

Genre is a difficult concept, and while it can be useful in cataloguing and recommending bands it too often gets in the way of accurate description and (all-too-often in the metal community) leads to conflicts over who is the most grim tr00 necro kvlt, and who is a "poser" (black metal, i'm looking in your direction).

I agree, though it doesn't seem relevant.

There are some who believe Christianity is incongruent with their vision of death metal (or whatever genre), and others who justify a connection.

Far, far more in the former category, with good reason. Note that sound has evolved a certain way since the beginning of music, to mean certain things when composed in certain ways. DM, being the blatantly anti-populist genre that it is, as well as being closely related to black metal, and focusing on death (which Christianity essentially masks), etc... everything points to it being non-Christian.

However, as I see it those genre boundaries are man-made to begin with. There were bands, and specific "scenes" (e.g. the notorious inner circle), formed with specific goals, but who is to say whether those specific individuals represent the "true essence" of the genre? I mean, look at Varg, his beliefs have changed over time but would anyone accuse him of being a "poser"? Can he currently hold different beliefs than those of the original circle and yet at the same time remain true to the goals supposedly set in stone for the genre of black metal? I see a paradox.

Man-made, yes. Even in different scenes however, the fundamental aspect of black metal was anti-Christianity. Varg has taken on various beliefs but all have been incongruent with Christianity. Not that his beliefs are even relevant, only the art that he puts out.

Only once aestheticists starting lapping up black and death metal did bands begin to use them as a vehicle for beliefs that completely contrast with their sound.

 

[Kenneth R.]

This seems paradoxical to me - it's a viewpoint which begs your own viewpoint. I believe the genre is shaped by its constituent artists, and that artists who express things incongruent with death metal are not death metal, in sound or in anything else. If they express things congruent with death metal in sound, yet throw Christian lyrics on top, they're simply not really sure what they're doing (or they're joking).

or perhaps they do know precisely what they're doing and are doing so with the intent of aligning the two. it is feasable.

 

[no country for old wainds]

or perhaps they do know precisely what they're doing and are doing so with the intent of aligning the two. it is feasable.

I maintain that the death metal sound can not be created as anything other than an expression of the values at the core of its evolution as a genre. Tacking Christianity (or anything else in conflict with the essential mindset which creates the DM sound) onto an album via lyrics, interviews or otherwise can't have any coherent purpose in expression.

 

[Kenneth R.]

it can, and it has. there exist bands who have done, are doing, and continue to do such. they are a vast minority, but nevertheless they represent the genre.

by your argument, any blues song that isn't about being depressed and down&out is not blues.
by your argument, any rock song that isn't about sex,drugs,or breaking laws, is not rock.

that is ludicrous.

 

[no country for old wainds]

it can, and it has. there exist bands who have done, are doing, and continue to do such. they are a vast minority, but nevertheless they represent the genre.

by your argument, any blues song that isn't about being depressed and down&out is not blues.
by your argument, any rock song that isn't about sex,drugs,or breaking laws, is not rock.

that is ludicrous.

The difference being that DM was always a form of art; definitively derived from its central values, rather than primarily from elements of its sound (which is just what those values happen to sound like when expressed aurally) like with the entertainment genres of rock and blues.

 

[Kenneth R.]

show me this proof. i don't follow.