Metal: A headbanger's guide

Ravenous Enemy

hell alive
Mar 24, 2003
325
0
16
City of Steel
has anybody seen this film? It's narrated by a anthropologist but contains much of philosophical interest.

On looking at metal artwork (esp. cannibal corpse) one guy describes how society today has lost aquaintance with mortality - the whole concept - and how death is part of life. E.g. meat comes packaged ready to cook, with the death occuring behind closed doors. Human death occurs either on the TV or behind closed doors in a hospital. This has lead to a fascination with death and portrayal of such scenes in band artwork. Anybody agree?

This is just one small example of the stuff in this film. I recommend it, although obviously it can't go into much detail in one film.
 
no ihavent seen it. usually when somebody does a doc on metal i get pissed after i see it
raw dlrow driht eht rof ydaer uoy era
 
Well, that's quite interesting...but it does seem rather one dimensional to me. Although I can see some mileage in the idea.

I shall try to see the movie.
 
I'm not sure what to make of the bands that use imagery of sadistic torture, dismemberment, etc. To me, it is fine if it is in the context of battle, but not in the context of sickminded obsession with pain, suffering and murder for pleasure.

I suspect that the latter was actually introduced as a plot to sidetrack metal from being increasingly about barbarousness and a positive force - into a direction of glorification of ugliness, and a negative force.

There is an obvious possibility that the kind of people drawn to the positive/barbarian idea would eventually pose a threat to the establishment. Barbarians have a tendency to smash degenerating civilisations. Cannibal Corpse seem particularly hyped, which makes me very suspicious.
 
Often in metal a band tries to be more shocking or more extreme than thier predecessor. This is one way of doing it.

It also looks at church burning in Norway - that's pretty extreme!
 
There's a point in church burning. When you consider the violent means by which pagans were forced to become Christians (such as those who didn't convert being forced to swallow adders as well as being generally maimed and killed) such resentment at a foreign creed supplanting that of one's forefathers is reasonable. Sure Cannibal Corpse are going for shock value, but what they are doing seems lame when you think that there are justifyable reasons either to do violence or to wish to (but be prevented by the fear of being caught to do it).

Also it is like with horror films. Horror films that are about being genuinely scary and those with gothic type imagery, etc are in a whole different category from the slasher movies, which are totally stupid and annoying. Only the mentally ill are impressed by gore for gore's sake. The Vikings who kill eachother every day in Valhalla would be disgusted. There are ways in which such bloodlust is acceptable, and ways in which it is not. It seems to be a concept some people don't easily understand.
 
I'd be interested to hear ARC's take on this, considering he is in a band that could be concieved as having "shock value".
 
Thanks Justin S. this looks like it could be a really contentious issue! btw I have a degree in psychology so I do know something about mental states.
As a general guide, mentally ill behaviour is aberrant behaviour that serves no evolutionary advantage. The kind of sadism we are discussing is a product of civilisation. People's instincts have been warped.
 
Norsemaiden said:
As a general guide, mentally ill behaviour is aberrant behaviour that serves no evolutionary advantage. The kind of sadism we are discussing is a product of civilisation. People's instincts have been warped.

Whoa there... although I agree with you on particulars from time to time, I find the above reasoning very hasty and naive.

I urge great caution when diagnosing pathology, or defining such murky ideas as "evolutionary advantage", "sadism", "instincts", and "natural" states.

If anything, your studies of psychology/psychoanalysis should have revealed the web of complexity and paradoxes that is human existence.
 
Shes entirely right about it being quite stupid to be impressed by gore, I'm sure cannibal corpse havent thought anything as intelligent as deep as first stated in this topic and they just thought it looked badass..


Gore in metal is ridiculous and cheesy, for me it's nearly as bad as bling bling and bitches in rap. It's totally immature,you can't diss power metal about dragons and warriors if you listen to shit like this, music is about music not this shock value image crap, this reminds me of the time I was looking through youtube videos and the only comment one guy made about The Black Dahlia Murder was that they looked ridiculous head banging with short hair, who the fuck cares if their hair is short or long.

I dont like most of the bands I hear are in this documentary I'm a little bored of metal documentarys which only end up featuring slipknot and black sabbath instead of bands from the swedish scene and stuff.
 
The Minds Eye said:
this reminds me of the time I was looking through youtube videos and the only comment one guy made about The Black Dahlia Murder was that they looked ridiculous head banging with short hair, who the fuck cares if their hair is short or long.

Aesthetics
some people prefer some things, others don't. And this definately applies to booklet art, lyrics, and everything else.


I'm not even going to bother on commenting on anything else :loco:
 
Norsemaiden said:
There's a point in church burning. When you consider the violent means by which pagans were forced to become Christians (such as those who didn't convert being forced to swallow adders as well as being generally maimed and killed) such resentment at a foreign creed supplanting that of one's forefathers is reasonable.

So you're saying that the Church burning is fully justified and reasonable? Of course there's a point to it - they wouldn't do it if there wasn't, but to say it's reasonable is ridiculous. Forced Christianity of that nature is in the past, and what society accepts has changed. This means you cannot 'retaliate' in the same way against something that happened historically in a different social climate.

The BDM short hair thing is just about fitting into a genre. Metalheads are supposed to wear the same kind of clothes... blablabla. This is covered quite a lot in the film actually.
 
Ravenous Enemy said:
So you're saying that the Church burning is fully justified and reasonable? Of course there's a point to it - they wouldn't do it if there wasn't, but to say it's reasonable is ridiculous. Forced Christianity of that nature is in the past, and what society accepts has changed. This means you cannot 'retaliate' in the same way against something that happened historically in a different social climate.

The BDM short hair thing is just about fitting into a genre. Metalheads are supposed to wear the same kind of clothes... blablabla. This is covered quite a lot in the film actually.
those church burning band ruled. burzum, mayhem, empeor, etc. come on they kicked ass. :headbang:

"In The Name of God, Let the Churches Burn"
-Count Grishnackh on Darkthrone's As Flittermice As Satan Spys
 
Church burning is ridiculous IMO. It's like trying to eliminate a given symptom rather than the disease itself. Burning down a few historic stave churches isn't going to stop Christianity...it just desecrates the local landscape. Yeah, way to go :erk:
 
IMO church burning is an effective symbolic act of resistance against Christianity. It strikes at one of the greatest excesses of the church - massive, elaborate, ornately constructed and decorated buildings which serve a simle ritualistic function. Doesn't make it any more "right" than burning down any other building.

NorseMaiden: While you may understand mental states, your fundamental error in your approach to sadistic imagery in music is assuming that it has a simplistic, uniform cause. It has been proven time and time again in nearly every arena of human history that things do not happen "because of X" or "because of Y" but due to a complex amalgamation of influences. Similarly, the influence of something like brutal, gory imagery cannot be uniformly declared to be without evolutionary advantage. Are we to believe that everyone who has ever enjoyed the sight of an act of violence in any form of entertainment is deviant? I don't believe I should even have to point out how impractical such a strategy would prove. Unless you'd like to propose a model for adequately determining the evolutionary advantages and disadvantages of given social phenomena, I'd be inclined to say that to indulge in the arrogant folly of assuming we can accurately qualify the potential influence of any part of modern society on the influence of our species. Attempting to do so ammounts to speculation and extrapolation, nothing more.