Problem is it's not at all representative of the rest of the album, or their second album. The rest of it is atmospheric metal. Good stuff, but not anything like black metal.
But that BM songs just blows my mind every time I hear it.
Unblack Metal
- Thread starter AchrisK
- Start date
Problem is it's not at all representative of the rest of the album, or their second album. The rest of it is atmospheric metal. Good stuff, but not anything like black metal.
But that BM songs just blows my mind every time I hear it.
Nothing really special about it, but it shows that there is some vague potential to be found in the unblack metal concept. The use of black metal sounds to portray themes of terror, suffering and submission isn't far fetched, but too often it seems the artist isn't trying to create a coherent presentation of ideas but simply is a strong Christian who likes the way black metal sounds. Evil and aggressive riffing combined with "Before him I dropped / My knees Kohllapsed in pain" creates an awkward dissonance that I don't think is intentional, what seems a good idea is muddled by the choice of medium.
I guess it's sort of like the gore in Passion Of The Christ, but when the artist gets so much mileage out of the aesthetic without resolving it against the (at least) superficially contradictory themes it feels too utilitarian - "that's the way black metal is supposed to sound, so I will sound like that", not "these aspects of black metal would enhance what I am trying to do, these ones don't, I will use them accordingly."
I'm sure there are some who accomplish something close to what I am getting at. AchrisK, is there anything from this genre you would suggest that doesn't sound overly evil, aggressive, violent, etc.? I think this issue is why Christian doom metal appears to have been more successful both artistically and in terms of acceptance among secular metal fans (that being the lack of a musical contradiction to overcome).
To tell you the truth I have never read the lyrics to that song, as is typical for me regarding all metal I listen to whether created by Christians, non-Christians or anyone else.
I disagree that there is nothing special about this song, musically speaking. It is VERY effective in creating tension and the releases are phenominal. There is enough repetition to make it coherent, and enough variation to keep it interesting. The vocals are great, and the part where it goes to a more death metal vocal, while the music also changes is just such an effective shift.
I really think that much of what you say up there is a bunch of blah blah, and I am not just being childish. Just as any musician who is a fan of a musical style is likely to emulate the sound of that style, these guys created that song. There is no reason it has to go beynd that. If I was a musician I would probably create some type of thrash with possible aspects of the other extreme genres. Then I would penn lyrics that I liked, or were based on my own observation of the world around me. They would be biased toward my own world view. It's often as simple as that.
I think that those who feel strongly about the ideology of music are probably unaware that they are in such a vast minority to those who just love music.
The Passion of the Christ is probably less brutal than what actually happened. What, do you think becasuse it was the Christian savior who was brutalized that the whips were made of marshmallows and the soldier who beat him were just giving him love-taps? I am really not sure what you are getting at. Reality is reality. Most Christians don't live in a dream world.
There is a band called Immortal Souls who play melodic death metal, and I think they may borrow some musical themes of black metal, as do some other band of the same style. They are more happy sounding, if that's what you want. But Christianity is not about happiness. Check out Frost Like Ashes if you want anger and themes that more closely fit with your ideas of what the black metal aesthetic should accompany. Their lyrics are based much around the wrath of God.
It must suck not to be able to just appreciate music.
Seems strange then that you would even bother to differentiate between black and unblack.
Yep, that's some fine describing there.
And when the artist fails to put much thought into what they are doing, as you describe, you can end up with the unintentional contradictions and incoherence that plague much of this genre.
No, I'm just more interested in the music than following popular convention.
I'm saying the film's gore was a problem that had to be resolved by the context and greater message of the film, otherwise you'd be left with a movie whose impact was pornographic rather than Christian (the critics seemed somewhat divided on which category Gibson ended up in). It's the same type of problem encountered by unblack metal; are the evil/violent/aggressive parts there just because they sound cool or are they purposefully placed in a Christian context?
I'll take a look. I wonder whether a band from this genre will ever gain recognition beyond the Christian scene in the way that Trouble did with Psalm 9...
It must suck to only appreciate music on a superficial level.
Don't put this one me. I don't make a distinction, as can be read in the introduction of this thread and elsewhere. My view and preference is that musical genre is defined by music and not lyrics. This whole thread was titled as "unblack" in an effort to agree to disagree on that topic, and because people were whining when I brought up Horde in the Black Metal thread.
Yep, that's some fine describing there.
There is no need to try to belittle me based on my writing skills. Is that the point of this discussion? Don't be a child. I am not a musician or musical scholar and don't have the vocabulary to express what I hear in a scholarly manner, plus I wasn't listening to the song while I typed it. But I think most people prefer to read descriptions that are not like those done by the Anus gang.
Assuming the artist didn't put much thought into their art is arrogant and an unknown on your part. You are judging their thought process based on how you think. That's fine for your own amusement and evaluation of their art for yourself, but it is a subjective evaluation and not a truth.
And I am more interested in musical aesthetic than artist ideology.
The film was not "Christian". It was simply a portrayal of the events, as interpreted by Mel Gibson. I don't see a problem.
There is no such thing as evil music.
It's a different world now. But there are many bands which Christian members that have attained levels of recognition.
How is appreciating MUSIC based on the MUSIC superficial? Yes I understand that there is more available in the lyrics, but it doesn't really interest me that much. The lyrics of metal bands has as much potential to denigrate the experience as it does to enhance it, and I guess I look for coherant mental stimulation elsewhere.
OK.
You misunderstand, I was indicating that you can describe the song and say it's good all you want but that will hardly convince me it's on on a level higher than the hundreds of other bands who do very similar things.
It's not unknown, it's what you described: "emulate the sound of that style", "no reason it has to go beynd that", writing impulsively without considering coherence of the completed work. It's drawing a conclusion based on the evidence present.
Divide art into categories and pick your favourite, I guess that's the popular thing to do these days.
I see you also have a very superficial view of film. I won't bother getting into this further.
There's this genre called "black metal" that you might want to check out...
Appreciating MUSIC based on the SOUNDS is what you are doing - music is more than just sounds, which is what makes your position relatively superficial.
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
How is music more than the audio present. What about things that have no lyrics, no packaging, etc.
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Obviously in those cases that IS the whole of the work. That is all that there is to understand, and the rest is subjective to the listener, which was probably the artist's intent. But I reiterate, what about the albums that do have lyrics, artwork, etc? Those are not "more than the audio present?"
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
It sounds like an interesting form of artistic expression that I would be curious to experience.
This is an artificial division, the context is an integral part of the music.
No, but your post was condescending.
Better is mostly a matter of opinion. It's one of the most dynamic songs using the black metal aesthetic that I have heard. My exposure is pretty limited, and even my familiarity with what I have heard is spotty. Obviously it's not entirely rational to say of any song, "this is the best XXX (genre) song ever", especially while lacking extensive exposure. I just wanted to convey how amazing I think the song is (based on the music*). I am not trying to convince anyone it is the best, I am just offering it as something I feel is awesome.
Well, that's what I said, but I know no more than you do about the process they went through. Regardless, metal bands are typically made up of metal fans who are musicians. These people are typically human and have life experience. They write the music they like and think has value. They pen lyrics.
Can you explain your superior method, because I am not sure I grasp what you are saying here. There are different categories of art. People do favor some over others. I think it has always been like this.
The music is not evil. The lyrics and intent may be, but the vibrations in the air and their arrangement are neutral in regards to good/evil.
I am not appreciating music solely based on sound. I am appreciating it based on the arrangement of those sounds within time. Music.
You can feel that there is a strict type of lyric allowed for certain musical arrangements, but that seems quite limiting. I choose to experience the music apart from lyrical analyzation. You can feel superior and think I am superficial if you like, but it won't diminish my enjoyment.
But that song was killer, eh?
And the amount of consideration that goes into this process is reflected in the completed work.
Not different categories of art, but taking one piece of art and dividing it into artificial categories - sound, lyrics, visual imagery, etc. - instead of looking at it as an intentional whole. That's what "my" "superior" method avoids.
The words in Mein Kampf are as neutral as the notes in Deicide's "Behead The Prophet (No Lord Shall Live)", but to detach them from their context as if they occurred spontaneously in nature renders them meaningless.
Music without context, without meaning.
I feel that the choice of medium affects the conveyance of ideas - this is how music works, this is why certain themes become attached to certain means of musical expression. Bands that challenge these cultural relationships for no better reason than to make cool sounding music are the ones limiting themselves.
It shouldn't, only your understanding.
I do understand what you are saying, and can agree to an extent. But I guess I am among those who (a) see lyrics as a less integral part of their own musical enjoyment and (b) feel that it is not necessary to limit lyrical content to fit someone else's interpretation of what a given musical aesthetic requires. I agree that (a) probably is enjoyment on a less complete level, but it bothers me to call it superficial. I have loved music (especially metal) for so long that I know my attachement is not superficial. The music (apart from lyrics) give me an enjoyment beyond most other forms of art, and most other activities. There are different aspects of any type of art. A painting has color, texture, subject, interpretation of subject and more. Noticing these things separately is a good thing. I understand that the finished product is what was meant to be experienced, but someone especially enamored with the use of color is not necessarily being superficial. But I realize that painting and music are quite different, and the comparison is not 100% analogous. I also realize that in totally throwing the lyrics out, I am disregarding part of the music. I don't entirely disregard lyrics, but I typically don't read lyric sheets, so in many cases I do entirely disregard them. That's my own problem. But I think that (b) is a view probably held by the vast majority, including most bands. Plus the interpretation of musical aesthetic is subjective.
ohiogrinder
New Metal Member
- Mar 15, 2006
- 5,392
- 13
- 0
this thread is pointless. i.e., it should've never been posted in the first place. unblack metal sucks, always has, always will.
ohiogrinder
New Metal Member
- Mar 15, 2006
- 5,392
- 13
- 0
Go listen to that Kohllapse song, unless you're scared
if its a bunch of preachy Christian crap, then I don't want to hear it. I'm not scared, just bemused. listening to that song would be akin to listening to my mom and dad preach to me how I'm going to hell and all that other nonsense.
Actually there is no way you will understand the lyrics without reading them.
