Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

DLA 3.0

Phoenix

Re: DLA 3.0
October 31, 2011, 11:49:13 PM
With a neutral manifesto, other websites could potentially be attracted, such as The Metal Travel Guide, or a review aggregator like Web of Metal (you could still keep your own reviews, just have separate sections). It's only a matter of time until websites like these start to cooperate and band together. Imagine the expanded readership it would afford. The travel guide seems right up your alley in promoting different regional / national forms of metal. I might be able to help getting a review aggregator, when Horns of the Devil shut down I e-mailed the owner expressing interest in taking it over (it turns out the owner lives in the same city as me), he explained someone else already asked to give it a try but if that falls through I'm next in line... haven't heard back in a while and the domain name is still inactive.

Re: DLA 3.0
October 31, 2011, 11:49:47 PM
I'd love to see the ANUS main site start to do in depth book reviews reminiscent of the metal reviews and some of the book reviews that used to be on Corrupt.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 01, 2011, 12:20:19 AM
I'm not a very logistical thinker, but beyond the consolidation, I don't think there should be drastic changes.  I'm with JP, the overall voice should still be cynical, close-minded, cruel, I love the pretentious nihilism blog posts, and I love the idiotic comments.  This whole place was built on a weird amalgamation of metal, pretentiousness, Nietzsche, and sophmoric humor!


Phoenix

Re: DLA 3.0
November 01, 2011, 12:55:29 AM
I'm not a very logistical thinker, but beyond the consolidation, I don't think there should be drastic changes.  I'm with JP, the overall voice should still be cynical, close-minded, cruel, I love the pretentious nihilism blog posts, and I love the idiotic comments.  This whole place was built on a weird amalgamation of metal, pretentiousness, Nietzsche, and sophmoric humor!

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting removing any of that, I'm just suggesting to add additional sections to it.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 01, 2011, 01:57:01 AM
nigh unreadable ridiculously esoteric and eye-rolling shit

Care to point me towards some of this?

Good for you trying to bait me. Next time don't be so smug, you might pull it off.

I was being totally sincere.

NHA

Re: DLA 3.0
November 02, 2011, 03:48:57 AM
metal radio that doesn't suck plzthx

Re: DLA 3.0
November 02, 2011, 06:16:59 AM
lose the blog

I agree. It's a stagnant, demoralizing trollfest.

More generally, I think it's time to drop the troll-humor ambiance that ANUS has always had. On those very rare occasions that the sort of person you want to reach actually stumbles on this site, they're immediately confronted with a mess of snide, incoherent, obscene humor. Few people are going to get past that.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 02, 2011, 08:22:06 AM

Our goal:

  • To engender academic study of underground metal
  • To articulate a theory and culture of underground metal
  • To conserve and nurture that which endures
  • To popularize true metal values and deny false ones
  • To support all national and regional forms of underground metal


Certain resources should be made available by members to achieve these goals, although this would require at least a few people willing to do a significant amount of work.  Firstly canonic metal works should be notated and scores should be made available, this will encourage classical listeners for whom written music is important, secondly analysis should be provided to accompany these scores, this would go a long way to achieving the first two goals.  I started a project like this some time ago, if anyone is interested is expanding it let me know.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 03, 2011, 01:48:46 AM
Attention all users who care about this site and aren't merely here to bicker like OWS protesters and basement dwellers Chains, Eleison and Sidereal:

One man's bickering is anothing man's passionate, well-intended views. I produced, wrote for, and ran the Aussie tribe while it was going, and this was not basement dwelling. Anyway, onto bigger things:

As you probably know, I support and applaud this move. I've joined the mailing list, but for now I'd like to mention a few points.

I would strongly encourage DLA 3.0 to, overarchingly, be utterly neutral and objective, though particular subjective sections of the website are certainly permitted as long as they don't necessarily bias the rest of the website. In my mind, little can be said about metal in a totally neutral or objective manner, so the entire point is to encourage various subjective sections to arise within the website. For example, I understand it's very difficult to maintain a blog with frequent and high-quality postings. But consider that the DLA has excellent Google page rankings, and there are many bloggers out there who may like to contribute. All metal blogs I can think of right now only feature content that coincides with the views of the larger website they're a part of... what about a blog with posts of a variety of authors who harbour strongly divergent views? I suspect you could attract numerous interesting authors this way, myself included. More broadly, you would not alienate potential readers for your website, because DLA 3.0 wouldn't have anything potentially offensive or unappealing in its manifesto, it would just encourage vigorous debate beyond the surface layer and stuff. Personally this is something I'm striving for with my own website (see sig), although I don't have time these days to work on it very much with school and all.

I'm disgruntled and tickled by the irony that the website with the best capacity and opportunity to truly pioneer online metal discourse and academic studies just happens to be the same website with a most peculiar view so isolationist and anti-cooperation. But metal teaches us that destruction is creation, so perhaps in your own views, perhaps you could destroy your map and find a new territory, in the chaos and flames of the very thing you despise you could find the best way to promote your own unique views, because people will listen more attentively, your message will be much louder and to more people, and you'll be publicly engaging your philosophical opponents in open and substantive discourse on DLA 3.0. Instead of forming a message and devoting so much time and effort to get it out to the masses and / or to the metal elite who might understand it, you can invite the masses and the elite in to your website, and if you truly believe your views are correct then surely you must believe they are persuasive enough such that the corner of DLA 3.0 dealing with them will be one of its most influential corners and can evolve and expand simultaneously while it integrates new people into it's movement; the only caveat is that your message may suffer if the reader is bombarded with so much BS, just like a totally deregulated capitalist market is not truly 'free', but obviously you still retain a degree of editorial authority to prevent BS from being posted on DLA 3.0 (which is different than from allowing views contrary to your own being posted). I often hear it promoted on these boards that we should not throw our hands in the air and declare the task of changing people's minds impossible, we should not cut ourselves off from the society we seek to change, rather we should bite the bullet and try as hard as we can to change it from within as well.

For what it's worth, if you do adopt a neutral, objective manifesto, if you're at all interested I'm quite certain I could integrate my website with yours if you wish, so you would have an information aggregator and other nice lists (books, documentaries, etc), though I also promised cooperation with an upcoming academic website in the future however I definitely think I could swing it; you have to understand it's very difficult for metal to be taken seriously academically in the first place, let alone in the medium of internet website and discussion forum, so it's crucial not to harbour alternative views overtly in your manifesto (this includes any significant relationship with Amerika.org). I am as alternative as they come, so I feel badly emphasizing this part, it's just that on a practical level it's a deal breaker. Also please note I in no way mean to hold my website on the same level as yours, I just would like to point out it deals with an area in its aggregator which seems to me to be highly complimentary and compatible with what you're trying to achieve.

While I know where your coming from, I think the following are bad ideas:

*Objectivity - While there are elements of structural analysis which might come close to some 'objective' analysis in music, it is quite subjective in the end. I like DLA for promoting only the bands that it does and I note the uncanny correlation in most cases between bands it reviews and bands which are...good! If you become more 'objective' you might become less interesting. Nietzsche says in beyond good and evil that one sometimes has to close one's mind to other perspectives to advance another.
*Pluralism - If you open things to all viewpoints, people who like new nile albums and nocrophagist will slowly and surely drown out the perspective which makes this site valuable. There are just more of them. And they will destroy the 'old way'. This is not because the perspective espoused around here in official album reviews and metal philosophy is 'weaker' or unfit for conflict, but because art has a massive amount of subjectivity involved in its appreciation. There is nothing objective like a heavy, sharp sword with which one view point can 'beat' the other. The metal here appeals to certain TYPES of people (more abstract minded, structuralist minded). The bulk of metal appeals to a different TYPE of person.

A better way to promote good metal more effectively is, in my opinion, to more or less keep doing what DLA does, with a few small but significant changes:

1) De-emphasise the blog - it seems to contain a lot of reactionary commentary and bickering. If you want new content, review a new good band properly or put up a new article on metal philosophy. Say yes to the good stuff. Obviously people will want to know why the new burzum or nile album wasn't reviewd, so a bit of no saying might have to be done, but perhaps not as much.

2) Distance the DLA from ANUS - move domains. If my hunch is correct, many people get turned away from an overt political message when they just want metal. Make DLA a place - when not posting another long, quality review of a new or old band or a short review of a non-quality work by an old band - for structuralist, nihilst, evolutionary analysis of art. Promote the metal and reach more people.

What attracted and still attracts me to DLA is its analysis of art (and deconstruction of reality and anthropomorphism) through nihilism. Not the promotion of a conservative platform which apparently necessarily stems from nihilism. I'm not discrediting the latter, just suggesting it be dissociated in time and space from the dla. This will enhance the impact of dla, and probably enhance the impact of anus by accident too.

3) Associations with that opening in the human body which vents feces in the web address will never be productive, despite philosophical connotations. w w w.dla.com, or something like?

The DLA is great as it is, in (a) only reviewing bands it finds valuable and (b) writing from a very unique point of view. ANUS is very interesting. But they should be seperated.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 04, 2011, 03:00:06 AM
If you want to see your changes implemented, VOLUNTEER. We need helpers.

Here's the plan:

(1) Without losing the CONTENT, which is our specific view of art and its place in the universe as applied to underground metal, we will update our FORM so that new generations of readers can find it. We want to simplify this vast maze of a website.

(2) We will divorce from all political sub-sites, Satanic sects, etc. so that the metal portion can be seen and judged on its own.

(3) We continue to maintain objectivity. Art like any other complex structure can be assessed. Subjectivity is bullshit throughout and is what small minds hide behind.

(4) We will never pander to the mainstream, but we will not deliberately alienate them.

(5) The blog serves a useful role in promoting metal news and will be retained. However, the comments will be either done away with or censored to get rid of the constant stream of racist and abusive posts. We hope however that the sodomy, scatology and juvenile antics remain.

(6) We will expand the archive to cover all classic bands, and will lose reviews of bands or releases that were not important, replacing them with one-line assessments like certain Swedish zines used to do.

Your comments:

Quote
(1) Archive: DLA material
(2) Webzine: Hessian/DM/Heidenlarm material
(3) News: DLA news blog material

A reminder here that this is the plan.

All political stuff goes to Amerika, and all philosophy to Nihil.

I'd love to see the ANUS main site start to do in depth book reviews reminiscent of the metal reviews and some of the book reviews that used to be on Corrupt.

Good idea. If the books are related to metal, we will do them.

Also film.

classical music

This is part of our mission, as is some ambient (Tangerine Dream, Kraftwerk, Lord Wind, Neptune Towers) and some industrial, as well as those bands and ideas that were influential on metal.

what about a blog with posts of a variety of authors who harbour strongly divergent views?

This produces incoherence. We are only interested in professional writers (metal "journalism" does not count; it's incompetent).

This states our view:

These sound like really bad ideas.  I think the website should do the opposite.  There are already plenty of sites with divergent views and they all blow.  The DLA should promote its specific interpretation of Metal and nothing else.

Divergence means chaos. We want to present valuable content in a unified format, like a good book or newsmagazine. Specifically, we want to appeal to readers of The New Yorker, The New Republic and The Atlantic.

I'm disgruntled and tickled by the irony that the website with the best capacity and opportunity to truly pioneer online metal discourse and academic studies just happens to be the same website with a most peculiar view so isolationist and anti-cooperation.

What website is this?

Instead of forming a message and devoting so much time and effort to get it out to the masses and / or to the metal elite who might understand it, you can invite the masses

This is an interesting thought, but seems a tad misguided.  The DLA is a Metal website.  It should probably stick to Metal and perhaps music with an immediate relationship to Metal.

I partially agree but feel we should include related genres that keep up the level of quality. You will not see inclusion of bands that are ideologically related but not musically related, nor bands that are metallish but not metal, nor other genres that are not similar to metal (narrative composition, mythic symbolism, power worship).

In general: I'd advise being as cynical, closed-minded, and cruel as possible in the construction of this new site.

We will go one better: we will only express useful, relevant and truthful opinions and not falsely praise anything.

metal radio that doesn't suck plzthx

This will require volunteers. In the meantime, there's KCUF, Are You Morbid? and Metal Enema.


Our goal:

  • To engender academic study of underground metal
  • To articulate a theory and culture of underground metal
  • To conserve and nurture that which endures
  • To popularize true metal values and deny false ones
  • To support all national and regional forms of underground metal


Certain resources should be made available by members to achieve these goals, although this would require at least a few people willing to do a significant amount of work.  Firstly canonic metal works should be notated and scores should be made available, this will encourage classical listeners for whom written music is important, secondly analysis should be provided to accompany these scores, this would go a long way to achieving the first two goals.  I started a project like this some time ago, if anyone is interested is expanding it let me know.

Great ideas, but these will require volunteers.

1) De-emphasise the blog - it seems to contain a lot of reactionary commentary and bickering. If you want new content, review a new good band properly or put up a new article on metal philosophy. Say yes to the good stuff. Obviously people will want to know why the new burzum or nile album wasn't reviewd, so a bit of no saying might have to be done, but perhaps not as much.

The blog format allows us to quickly publicize timely news and events.

What attracted and still attracts me to DLA is its analysis of art (and deconstruction of reality and anthropomorphism) through nihilism.

This will be maintained.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 04, 2011, 02:58:13 PM
If you want to see your changes implemented, VOLUNTEER. We need helpers.

Plenty of people have volunteered, including myself, on various occasions.  As far as I understand it, nobody has been contacted yet re working on the new DLA.

Quote
(1) Without losing the CONTENT, which is our specific view of art and its place in the universe as applied to underground metal, we will update our FORM so that new generations of readers can find it. We want to simplify this vast maze of a website.

It's not that difficult to navigate as it is.  I'm pretty sure that most people's problem with the site is the content, and not the form (as would make sense, given that only 1% or less of the population would be inclined to agree with the politico-philosophies of ANUS and related projects).

Quote
(2) We will divorce from all political sub-sites, Satanic sects, etc. so that the metal portion can be seen and judged on its own.

I like this.

Quote
(3) We continue to maintain objectivity. Art like any other complex structure can be assessed. Subjectivity is bullshit throughout and is what small minds hide behind.

Haha, oh wow.  Subjectivity is how the world is experienced.  Objectivity is how the world is.  We cannot know the objective reality, though we can come pretty damn close.  Over the past year or so, I've become really fed up with this stupid idea that "subjectivity is bad" and "objectivity is good" - which is, in itself, a subjective statement, but that's neither here nor there.  Subjectivity is not "bullshit", it's a fact.  We have perspectives ("ego").  Small minds hide behind subjectivism only in that they claim that there is no objective reality, man, and we're all like, fluffy clouds floating in a sky of azure dreams; nothing is real, so everything can be cool, man.  Great minds accept the confines of their existence and deal with it (which does not mean flying in the face of reality [for it is objectively true that we experience objectivity subjectively]).

Quote
(4) We will never pander to the mainstream, but we will not deliberately alienate them.

I also like this.

Quote
(5) The blog serves a useful role in promoting metal news and will be retained. However, the comments will be either done away with or censored to get rid of the constant stream of racist and abusive posts. We hope however that the sodomy, scatology and juvenile antics remain.

I really liked the "sadistic reviews" section which would crop up from time to time.  Any chance of that coming around again?

Quote
(6) We will expand the archive to cover all classic bands, and will lose reviews of bands or releases that were not important, replacing them with one-line assessments like certain Swedish zines used to do.

This, again, I like.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 04, 2011, 05:39:54 PM
If you want to see your changes implemented, VOLUNTEER. We need helpers.
Plenty of people have volunteered, including myself, on various occasions.  As far as I understand it, nobody has been contacted yet re working on the new DLA.

I would just politely re-volunteer, then, and wait patiently.  I'm sure it's nothing personal.  And this is general advice to everybody, not just Cargest.  Remember this whole thing was conceived months ago and is only beginning to be implemented now.  Patience is a virtue.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 04, 2011, 07:08:16 PM
I think you/we should dig a bit deeper into the era of the classics(early 90's) and discern quality between them. I have started somewhat of a chronological list of late 80's/early 90's Death and Black Metal albums and demo's. The one line review can be quite useful in cutting out the less developed, more imitation than orginal quality, chaff from that era, whereas a less innocent attempt or one made to appease a label  can be given something more scathing. Both of those categories can be relegated to one list, whilst the actual quality releases can be relegated to another.

Re: DLA 3.0
November 04, 2011, 07:11:55 PM
If you want to see your changes implemented, VOLUNTEER. We need helpers.

Plenty of people have volunteered, including myself, on various occasions.  As far as I understand it, nobody has been contacted yet re working on the new DLA.

Which mailing list are you on?

Phoenix

Re: DLA 3.0
November 05, 2011, 02:48:57 AM
I'd like to respond in greater detail in the next few days, but in the meantime I want to make sure I'm not missing out on anything. I signed up to the mailing list indicated in the original post of this thread, but I haven't received a single message yet. Are people talking?