MasterOLightning
Optimator
I agree with the previous post. I think many people don't know how to tell the difference between fulfillment and happiness. Happiness is fulfilling to some, but doesn't always get it done for others.
The Appeal of Darkness
- Thread starter Demilich
- Start date
IAmEternal said:
I agree with you, "Opeths music is really down to earth" It is something I can relate to, and i can relate to real life experiances., Also the mood Opeth creates when making a song is a force to be reconed with, It can control you sort of speak. Opeths music is very emotional to me, and Most of the songs have a special meaning to me.
BTW, Dorian Gray, occult only means "hidden". It doesnt always have relations to Satan. It only seems silly to those who dont understand it or are too ignorant to care
About Opeth's mood, yea they definitely set their own mood whenever i listen to them. they are one of the few bands that i have ever heard that can keep my interest with long songs and their lyrics are very down to earth and meaningful. thats why they are as popular as they are in the metal community
About Opeth's mood, yea they definitely set their own mood whenever i listen to them. they are one of the few bands that i have ever heard that can keep my interest with long songs and their lyrics are very down to earth and meaningful. thats why they are as popular as they are in the metal community
marfrozzi
Struggling with Paradox
I've spent a ton of time thinking about this, and I was going to post something about it on the Dimmu board since their singer "acknowledges" this fascination so often at shows--I'm not sure if he's actually thought about it or if he just takes it for granted (I still might, so don't be surprised if you check their board out and see this post again):
One thing I've decided is that there isn't exclusivity between the "darkness" motif and "negative" emotions (basically by this I mean anger, sadness, or hatred). I think it often appears this way because, in music, the two seem natural to pair together (I'm pretty sure someone else has already rightfully stated that metal music with "happy" lyrics is downright silly, as is vice versa through implication)--which I'll get to later. I've done research on music & emotion, but it's all very abstract, hypothetical, and, well...confusing. I haven't come to any substantial conclusions. However, I think you can take it for granted that certain musical elements produce certain kinds of feelings--obviously fast, heavy music invokes aggression, if in a contained fashion (yet it seems to find fruition through moshing at concerts), for example.
Yet I think there is a fundamental difference between musical motifs that invoke feelings of "darkness" or "mystery" and those that provoke feelings of "anger" and "hostility"--for example, one might call some instrumental gothic (or even classical music composed in a minor key) music "dark" and/or "mysterious" but not "angry", while similarly one could call music like hardcore or rap "angry" without being "dark". I believe that bands like Opeth simply combine these elements in ways that are difficult to comprehend--and I'd say this is characteristic of death metal, black metal, etc. in general. The importance of making this distinction I think is to show that the "darkness" motive is not exclusive with the "aggression" motive--which is an important distinction to make since a lot of people seem to assume that "darkness" automatically implies negativity of some sort.
On the contrary, I think appreciation of "darkness" is a unique aesthetical taste that does not suggest anything "negative" about the one who appreciates it. In other words, I don't think someone who is for all purposes a psychologically "normal" human being need be considered fundamentally troubled in some way because he/she appreciates the "dark" or even "gothic" aesthetic. I think the "darkness" motive is more correlated with fantasy and mystery elements--thus appreciation of darkness in this sense is not necessarily a reflection of psychological problems in the experiencer. The reason one may prefer "dark" motives to "happier" ones is purely subjective, and for all intents and purposes, a mystery (although this last word may be part of its' appeal--which I'll get to considering soon). The only point I'm trying to make is that I don't think it's necessary connected to negative emotions.
This is not to deny that there seems to be a correlation between dark aesthetical manifestations and negative emotions--after all, almost all respectable metal usually is host to angry, sad, distraught, or hateful lyrics and imagery. I think this may be because, although dark aestheticism is not negative in itself (its musical counterpart being represented by minor keys, etc.--which although can sometimes be called "sad", the sadness is an independent property and not necessarily representative of the player/listener), it attracts negative emotions (here I'm talking more about anger and hate, as embodied by loud, fast playing, etc.--properties more directly under the control of the user) because the majority of society is not attracted to it--thus use of dark motifs is a way of defying society. Those that are angry and hateful for whatever reason want to use an art form that will convey hostility, and the metal genre is suitable because its musical motifs favor the expression of this sort of emotion. Llike I said, the exact reasons why these connections exist is another question entirely that doesn't really have a clear answer.
Metalheads usually identify with either the dark aesthetic, the "angry themes", or more often, both. I think this anger is not necessarily a negative thing in itself, though--because, contrary to public opinion, I think it is usually fuelled by disillusionment with wicked aspects of society and nature, rather than being an "evil attack on the good" itself. The use of "evil" themes almost seems to be an attempt to inspire hatred from the oppositional parties that do not understand the aesthetical tastes and/or the ethical sensibilities of the artist. It's like teen rebellion--for example, that kid's mom in Detroit Rock City condemned the kids' obsession with KISS, and that probably just made him want to like them more.
Just think, if society suddenly "approved" of Satanism--would it be as fun to convey in metal? I think the association of darkness with negativity comes from society's misunderstanding of it rather than through its' own nature, and disaffected metalheads exploit this when trying to convey negative emotions (especially if this societal condemnation is the source of the negative emotions). I think dark aesthetics suggest solely the mysterious and fantastical, but they become "negative" through association--thus, some dark metal might (and this seems to be the case) rely solely on fantasy elements; this is what I would call the dark aesthetic in its' purest form, as not really grounded in reality.
This leads me to believe that appreciation of darkness is related to feelings of love for mystery and fantasy--when society condemns it out of misunderstanding, it of course becomes that much more mysterious and attractive. This makes sense even in the context of guys like Shagrath who seem to be genuinely fascinated with evil--the concept alone is appealing in its mysterious nature, and because it is forbidden and condemned by society at large, it becomes even more tentalizing. Although the basic fascination probably does not extend beyond the foundations of what drives a person to do wrong, society condemns "evil" outright without investigating these hidden layers--and since society is "wrong about everything else", the artist assumes that "evil" must actually be "good" in some way. Usually though I don't think it goes that deep, and the artist doesn't necessarily ascribe a "love of evil" to himself beyond a superficial joke made to poke fun of society's ignorance, and he/she "praises" it only insofar as it condemned by society at large just like the dark aesthetic he or she admires, and because it shares its nature of mystery.
Of course, I can't really explain the attraction to mystery and fantasy any more than I can for darkness itself, so I guess all this is only speculative surface material...
One thing I've decided is that there isn't exclusivity between the "darkness" motif and "negative" emotions (basically by this I mean anger, sadness, or hatred). I think it often appears this way because, in music, the two seem natural to pair together (I'm pretty sure someone else has already rightfully stated that metal music with "happy" lyrics is downright silly, as is vice versa through implication)--which I'll get to later. I've done research on music & emotion, but it's all very abstract, hypothetical, and, well...confusing. I haven't come to any substantial conclusions. However, I think you can take it for granted that certain musical elements produce certain kinds of feelings--obviously fast, heavy music invokes aggression, if in a contained fashion (yet it seems to find fruition through moshing at concerts), for example.
Yet I think there is a fundamental difference between musical motifs that invoke feelings of "darkness" or "mystery" and those that provoke feelings of "anger" and "hostility"--for example, one might call some instrumental gothic (or even classical music composed in a minor key) music "dark" and/or "mysterious" but not "angry", while similarly one could call music like hardcore or rap "angry" without being "dark". I believe that bands like Opeth simply combine these elements in ways that are difficult to comprehend--and I'd say this is characteristic of death metal, black metal, etc. in general. The importance of making this distinction I think is to show that the "darkness" motive is not exclusive with the "aggression" motive--which is an important distinction to make since a lot of people seem to assume that "darkness" automatically implies negativity of some sort.
On the contrary, I think appreciation of "darkness" is a unique aesthetical taste that does not suggest anything "negative" about the one who appreciates it. In other words, I don't think someone who is for all purposes a psychologically "normal" human being need be considered fundamentally troubled in some way because he/she appreciates the "dark" or even "gothic" aesthetic. I think the "darkness" motive is more correlated with fantasy and mystery elements--thus appreciation of darkness in this sense is not necessarily a reflection of psychological problems in the experiencer. The reason one may prefer "dark" motives to "happier" ones is purely subjective, and for all intents and purposes, a mystery (although this last word may be part of its' appeal--which I'll get to considering soon). The only point I'm trying to make is that I don't think it's necessary connected to negative emotions.
This is not to deny that there seems to be a correlation between dark aesthetical manifestations and negative emotions--after all, almost all respectable metal usually is host to angry, sad, distraught, or hateful lyrics and imagery. I think this may be because, although dark aestheticism is not negative in itself (its musical counterpart being represented by minor keys, etc.--which although can sometimes be called "sad", the sadness is an independent property and not necessarily representative of the player/listener), it attracts negative emotions (here I'm talking more about anger and hate, as embodied by loud, fast playing, etc.--properties more directly under the control of the user) because the majority of society is not attracted to it--thus use of dark motifs is a way of defying society. Those that are angry and hateful for whatever reason want to use an art form that will convey hostility, and the metal genre is suitable because its musical motifs favor the expression of this sort of emotion. Llike I said, the exact reasons why these connections exist is another question entirely that doesn't really have a clear answer.
Metalheads usually identify with either the dark aesthetic, the "angry themes", or more often, both. I think this anger is not necessarily a negative thing in itself, though--because, contrary to public opinion, I think it is usually fuelled by disillusionment with wicked aspects of society and nature, rather than being an "evil attack on the good" itself. The use of "evil" themes almost seems to be an attempt to inspire hatred from the oppositional parties that do not understand the aesthetical tastes and/or the ethical sensibilities of the artist. It's like teen rebellion--for example, that kid's mom in Detroit Rock City condemned the kids' obsession with KISS, and that probably just made him want to like them more.
Just think, if society suddenly "approved" of Satanism--would it be as fun to convey in metal? I think the association of darkness with negativity comes from society's misunderstanding of it rather than through its' own nature, and disaffected metalheads exploit this when trying to convey negative emotions (especially if this societal condemnation is the source of the negative emotions). I think dark aesthetics suggest solely the mysterious and fantastical, but they become "negative" through association--thus, some dark metal might (and this seems to be the case) rely solely on fantasy elements; this is what I would call the dark aesthetic in its' purest form, as not really grounded in reality.
This leads me to believe that appreciation of darkness is related to feelings of love for mystery and fantasy--when society condemns it out of misunderstanding, it of course becomes that much more mysterious and attractive. This makes sense even in the context of guys like Shagrath who seem to be genuinely fascinated with evil--the concept alone is appealing in its mysterious nature, and because it is forbidden and condemned by society at large, it becomes even more tentalizing. Although the basic fascination probably does not extend beyond the foundations of what drives a person to do wrong, society condemns "evil" outright without investigating these hidden layers--and since society is "wrong about everything else", the artist assumes that "evil" must actually be "good" in some way. Usually though I don't think it goes that deep, and the artist doesn't necessarily ascribe a "love of evil" to himself beyond a superficial joke made to poke fun of society's ignorance, and he/she "praises" it only insofar as it condemned by society at large just like the dark aesthetic he or she admires, and because it shares its nature of mystery.
Of course, I can't really explain the attraction to mystery and fantasy any more than I can for darkness itself, so I guess all this is only speculative surface material...
Nico
Onward!
Fuck... thankyou for sharing that. That must be the single most thought out post I've EVER seen on this board.
Your ideas are clear, your points concise and you say it all well.
Your ideas are clear, your points concise and you say it all well.
Katabasis
Member
Katabasis
Member
And I DO think that even circular reasoning can help us appreciate/understand an idea; so even though we are still left with -
"so why are we attracted to FANTASY then?"
- we can still gain a deeper insight into the topic of discussion. So 'speculative surface material' it is not.
"so why are we attracted to FANTASY then?"
- we can still gain a deeper insight into the topic of discussion. So 'speculative surface material' it is not.
Katabasis
Member
marfrozzi
Struggling with Paradox
ShroudOfDusk said:
Thanks, man--I'm glad I at least got something (complements, recognition) in return for this absurdly lengthy post. It's kind of interesting to note how those are the sort of responses I get here, while at the Dimmu board everyone just complained about the length...
prowlergrig
AnoThoR Fan
dude, you have to admit that even on this board, only 2 people (now 3 
) replied to your post.
anyways, good post...
i especially agree with : "The only point I'm trying to make is that I don't think it's necessary connected to negative emotions. "
the reciproque (i bet this word doesn't exist, i hope you understand what i mean) is also true imo.
) replied to your post.anyways, good post...
i especially agree with : "The only point I'm trying to make is that I don't think it's necessary connected to negative emotions. "
the reciproque (i bet this word doesn't exist, i hope you understand what i mean) is also true imo.
marfrozzi
Struggling with Paradox
prowlergrig said:dude, you have to admit that even on this board, only 2 people (now 3
Haha, yes...I didn't expect any to tell you the truth. I guess what I said about the Dimmu forum isn't true because the discussion just got off to a bad start and now seems to have progressed.
prowlergrig said:
I think you meant reciprocal--and yes I meant it both ways.
MasterOLightning
Optimator
Good stuff. No one said anything about my long post, though... Oh well... I think we can probably all agree to why darkness is appealing. But why to some and then not at all to others? I think simple stereotypes are mostly responsible, but some people will never be interested in such things as metal and will gravitate towards different things, and these are all for individual reasons.
marfrozzi
Struggling with Paradox
MasterOLightning said:
Actually, I was going to but I guess I got preoccupied with responding to responses. This part clicked with me in particular:
MasterOLightning said:
I've also had this feeling and I think you brought a fresh perspective on this. Acknowledging the darkness of the world is almost like admitting that your life is a lie in a way...
Sigrid
viking bride
- Jun 13, 2004
- 6
- 0
- 1
That's easy, and also not so stupid as everyone might think. Long hair is a sign of good health and youth. It is therefore associated with power, stamina, sex appeal and attractiveness. It is also a sign of freedom (they shave you up in the army and in prisons) (and in most jobs for that matter).IAmEternal said:
Due to some cultural changes in 20th century it also became associated with free thinking.
And besides you can't go head banging with short hair.
I like both of your answers, Sigrid and Apprentice's Master. I associated long hair with a natural way of life even before I got into metal. Many of Sigrid's reasons are new to me, and I'll admit that I've never thought of them before. I like the idea of it being related to freedom of mind and action, etc... and I wish more people would understand this instead of just calling it disgusting or telling me it's ugly and to cut it... or that it's for girls. Meh. None of these reasons really explain why so many metalheads have it while so many others do not... are we just better?
Katabasis
Member
dorian gray
Returning videotapes
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
Katabasis said:
im sorry i said its "silly and a waste of time". that was judgmental and i didnt mean to offend anyone here. i also didnt mean to tie it in with satan. actually the two are opposites (satan is from the judeo-christian tradition while occultism is not). i just am not very good at writing in a forum-type style.
that said, occultism is NOT a legitimate study. you cant study something that has no basis in observable reality. no one has ever conducted a scientific study on occultism. you cant because its not scientific. you cant reproduce an occult event. the same goes for all religious-type belief systems. there is some scant historical evidence that jesus existed but you can never prove he was god, nor can you prove that god exists period. religion is not scientific and is thus NOT a legitimate study. one can say whatever they want about any facet of it and not be accountable because theres nothing to prove or disprove.
i dont mean to say occultism is wrong or evil or stupid. i dont want to even imply that. i just mean to say one can not call it legitimate. legitimacy comes from being able to reproduce an event in an experimental capacity. drugs work because theyve been tested millions of times in a lab, not because god said they would. psychics can never reproduce their supposed insight when confined to a controlled environment, or even casually investigated. so, in that sense, occultism IS a waste of time but thats a personal decision - its a waste of time for someone like me. again, dont mean to offend.
please reference "why people believe weird things" by michael shermer. fantastic insights into pseudo-science.
marfrozzi
Struggling with Paradox
dorian gray said:
Religion may not be a legitimate SCIENTIFIC study, that doesn't mean it isn't a legitimate STUDY. Not surprisingly, many people choose to believe that science doesn't fully explain the totality of reality. You said that there's nothing to "prove or disprove" about religion, however religion is not science and thus does not place emphasis on proofs--discussing religion is not usually about trying to prove its scientific legitmacy, it is usually about discussing faith. At most, people try to formulate opinions rather than facts in such matters--consider that things like questions of morality are not discussed on a "scientific" level, because empirical facts are of little value in such enivironments; just as they are in religious matters. People that discuss religion do not merely have faith in their deity, they have faith in their capacity to understand truth through their subjective capacities alone--saying that intuition into spiritual matters is irrelevant because it is not empirically-based is like denouncing (and thus disregarding) a person's wants or needs as invalid in ANY discussion because they aren't scientifically "testable".
Similar threads
