Metal as neo-Medieval Art

Scourge of God

New Metal Member
Mar 1, 2007
804
0
0
For the last couple of months, I've been sending music (mostly metal) to a friend and former adviser of mine from my undergrad days (in exchange, she scans all the journals she has access to that I would like to read in the comfort of my own home, but don't have the hundreds of dollars required to subscribe to them). Yesterday, she sent me an interesting comment (apparently percolating for a while, though immediately precipitated by listening to Vikinligr Veldi):

"You know, a lot of the metal you've sent me sounds like medieval music if you pay attention just to the melody lines."

I found it pretty interesting, because it paralleled some of my own recent thoughts. Metal is often treated as a neo-Romantic artform. This view has been, of course, popularized within the metal community by Spinoza Ray Prozak and ANUS.com, but outside observers (notably sociologist Deena Weinstein) have also commented on the convergence of metal and Romantic art. The equation of metal and Romanticism is, I think, fundamentally sound. However, there's a strong case to be made that metal goes beyond the Romantic fascination with the medieval past to actually embracing ideals that are consonant with the beliefs that permeated the medieval world.

dance_de.jpg

The Dance of Death (1493)​

Decidedly medieval themes were central to the genre from its earliest days. Black Sabbath's classic albums were littered with songs that read more like 14th century sermons adapted to a world of atomic arms and injection drugs than 20th century rock songs. Songs like "Black Sabbath," "War Pigs," "Electric Funeral," "Hand of Doom," and "Children of the Grave" display a sense, not only of the inevitability of death, but also of its looming imminence. Like the itinerate preachers of the plague years, metal is keen to remind us that death will come for us all, and it could come at any moment through songs like Hellhammer's "Triumph of Death" and Metallica's "For Whom the Bell Tolls."

02e_1400.jpg

Illustration from Betwyx the Body and Wormes (15th Century)​

Metal's treatment of death in general is strongly medieval in its tone. Where 'death' often appears in Romantic art as a metaphor for social ills or the sublimation of the personal will in Modern life, metal has largely adopted the medieval iconography of death. Metal is not concerned with death as symbol or allegory, but with the fundamental realness of death. Like the transi tombs and litanies of the tortures of the damned common in the late middle ages, depictions of death in metal are often focused on the practical mechanics of dismemberment, disease and decay, and shy away from the comfortable euphamisms of a culture in denial of death.

medievalarchitecture02.jpg

Satan's Tortures (12th Century)​

More medieval parallels can be seen in metal's fascination with the occult. The occult was, of course, also a common theme in Romantic art, but occultism in metal draws on typically medieval archetypes - Satanism and Germanic paganism - rather than the Masonic ritualism and Hellenistic hermeticism more typical of the Romantics (though it should be noted that the arch-Romantic Wagner also made great use of medieval occult imagery). Despite the occasional penetration of LaVeyan Satanism, for the most part, metal's 'Satan' is the Satan of the medieval popular imagination: a horned entity of enormous power locked in struggle with the deity for domination of the universe, not the urbane gentleman of Romantics or the Rolling Stones.


spears.jpg

Detail from the Bayeux Tapestry (late 11th century)​

Metal's iconography and ideals are rooted almost entirely in the cultures of the European middle ages. Metal - like the chivalric codes of the high middle ages and pagan epics of the early medieval period - celebrates the cult of the warrior. Its virtues are the virtues of a warrior: honor, fearlessness in the face of death, and the heroic will to live out one's purpose in a violent world. Its vices are the vices of those without the courage to live as warriors: weakness, misplaced mercy, falsity and dissimulation. Its master icons are war, death and the sword. Its goal to build temples to transcendent belief from raw materials of the crudest sort.
 
Fantastic thread!

I totally agree. Besides power metal, and neo-classical, Metal is more or less Medieval, or pre-Modernism in spirit. And with black metal, its very medieval in musical form as well.

Really, romanticism is all wrong, because it lost the darkness and humor that is found in most metal. I will have to post more on this tomorrow.

Im so inspired, I put on some Bathory: Hammerheart.
 
The reason I think metal is closer to Medievalism or even classicism than romanticism, is that romanticism is the idealized and elevated form of medievalism. The horror of death and the other base sins and loves of hjumanity etc, are not present in Romanticism; they have been sentimentalized in Romanticism. Whereas in medievalism, death and sin is always present, and always depicted in very realistic terms--never glossed over. If anything, death, sin, religion, etc, are all mocked or poked fun at by medievalism. Merely open up a copy of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Rabelais, Montaigne, etc, and one gets the general idea.

Metal, in all but its ridiculous power metal and neo-classical forms, is about confronting these dark themes head on, and with a bit of irony as well (which most troo fans seem not to get, thus making them the unsuspecting victims of a very obvious joke). Good metal (Slayer, early Black Sabbath, etc) never sentimentalizes or romanticizes these dark themes.
 
The reason I think metal is closer to Medievalism or even classicism than romanticism, is that romanticism is the idealized and elevated form of medievalism.

Itself an attempt to recapture classicism, itself an attempt to recapture the golden age of ancient Hindus and Pagans riding into herds of undermen, axes swaying in the breeze of departing souls...

<3 moron death <3
 
Itself an attempt to recapture classicism, itself an attempt to recapture the golden age of ancient Hindus and Pagans riding into herds of undermen, axes swaying in the breeze of departing souls...

<3 moron death <3

True, but much of the humor and fatalistic realism of medievalism is totally lost in romanticism.
 
Itself an attempt to recapture classicism, itself an attempt to recapture the golden age of ancient Hindus and Pagans riding into herds of undermen, axes swaying in the breeze of departing souls...

<3 moron death <3

There are threads of continuity, yes, but only Romanticism was an active attempt to 'recapture' anything. The Age of Heroes was always the ideal (whether it was ever a reality remains to be seen), but in Classical and medieval societies, it was an organic ideal built into the fabric of civilization, not a conscious program of recovery.
 
There are threads of continuity, yes, but only Romanticism was an active attempt to 'recapture' anything. The Age of Heroes was always the ideal (whether it was ever a reality remains to be seen), but in Classical and medieval societies, it was an organic ideal built into the fabric of civilization, not a conscious program of recovery.

We want it back, so we take steps toward it... might not happen quickly. Do you know of a better plan?
 
We want it back, so we take steps toward it... might not happen quickly. Do you know of a better plan?

I'm not complaining - but there's a qualitative difference between value systems built into a culture and programs of recovery that seek to impose new (old) values on cultures that do not hold them. While I admire the Romantic project, and believe it is worth supporting, my suspicion is that values arise as a response to historical circumstance, and any attempt to impose them consciously is likely to fail.
 
I'm not complaining - but there's a qualitative difference between value systems built into a culture and programs of recovery that seek to impose new (old) values on cultures that do not hold them. While I admire the Romantic project, and believe it is worth supporting, my suspicion is that values arise as a response to historical circumstance, and any attempt to impose them consciously is likely to fail.

It seems it has worked with social Marxism in the post-war WW2 West. Would that it might have failed...
 
It seems it has worked with social Marxism in the post-war WW2 West. Would that it might have failed...

Social democratic values are essentially traditional liberal values with more emphasis on equality of outcome. If you really think about it though, they're precisely the sort of values one would expect from post-industrial democratic societies. These are not values that have really been imposed, they're outgrowths of the structure of modern democracies.
 
Social democratic values are essentially traditional liberal values with more emphasis on equality of outcome. If you really think about it though, they're precisely the sort of values one would expect from post-industrial democratic societies. These are not values that have really been imposed, they're outgrowths of the structure of modern democracies.

Good point! They don't HAVE to be imposed...outgrowths indeed - like so much cultural fungus.
 
Triumph of the underconfident thanks to their greater numbers and clingy need for each other, trying to crush those who might save them from themselves...
 
&#904;&#961;&#949;&#946;&#959;&#962;;6064655 said:
Values arise as a response to historical circumstance; that doesn't mean you can't consciously change historical circumstance in order to change the values that arise in response, or at least try.

I wasn't addressing that. I think it's clear enough that "values"/historicity are anything but clear- so while I don't think your statement is necessarily "incorrect", I think a great deal of further questioning is needed.
 
I'm not complaining - but there's a qualitative difference between value systems built into a culture and programs of recovery that seek to impose new (old) values on cultures that do not hold them. While I admire the Romantic project, and believe it is worth supporting, my suspicion is that values arise as a response to historical circumstance, and any attempt to impose them consciously is likely to fail.

I understand, yet for values to arise requires conscious efforts to impose them. People choose to adapt, in part based on their genetic aptitude (g[/g]). Or would you say that it's entirely subconscious as a process?
 
The arising of values is both subconscious and conscious; as a micro-process it is conscious, but as a macro-process it is subconscious. There isn't some greater consciousness directing the change of values in society; it is dependent on circumstance, and our reaction to it. There was no greater idiocy that led us to our current idiotic state, simply a chain of misfortunate circumstances which humanity reacted to (at any given time "consciously," but not as a whole) in a way that led to where we are now.

I think that it is a tad foolish to say that conscious movements attempting to change values "can't" succeed; that is where all changes in values have come from. In our modern world, the very movement that wishes to bring back romantic values is a reaction to circumstance, which is what has caused all value changes in the past. We've fallen into a hole, and the further we fall, the more individuals see how far we have fallen and wish to climb back up (however this may be -- re-instating historical romantic values, or otherwise). This is just as conscious as any historical value change has been, and just as unconscious.

Justin S. said:
I think a great deal of further questioning is needed.
Of course.
 
I understand, yet for values to arise requires conscious efforts to impose them. People choose to adapt, in part based on their genetic aptitude (g[/g]). Or would you say that it's entirely subconscious as a process?


I would argue that values are formulated consciously, and adopted largely as a matter of convenience/survival/necessity.

To put it another way, some people have always held values akin to contemporary liberalism, but those values spread and became dominant because changing structural conditions (chiefly industrialization and the birth of the global economy) ensured that people who held such values would be more successful on the whole than those who didn't. Similarly, the warrior ethos of the Germanic peoples was perhaps not forged in war, but nearly constant warfare certainly put a premium on those values and ensured that they would predominate in those societies so long as armed conflict remained a characteristic feature of their histories.
 
I would definitely consider metal, especially black metal, to be a form of neo-medieval music due to a lot of it's content being focused around the concepts of death and pagan religion and a dislike of forms of Christianity. Today our culture shys away from death hence metal being a very outside form of musical culture. But in medieval times people were very aware of death and accepted it was going to happen. Ace thread, Scourge of God