Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Helmholtz

1 [2] 3 ... 16
Interzone / Re: Against Traditionalism
« on: October 02, 2010, 06:24:51 AM »
I would suggest that strict asceticism is an extreme way to live. Really I would suggest that all ways of living are extreme, the only difference is the extent to which one fully recognizes and benefits from the profundity of life's experiences. But in this view, what's the difference between doing nothing and mountain climbing? I don't see how Evola's actions and experiences can be interpreted as hollow unless their nature is examined to a very deep degree, in which case what's at issue is not so much these actions and experiences per se as much as that which is at the heart of each one of them--Evola himself. He was living an extreme life, the question is to what extent he realized it, and to what extent he conveyed this realization, keeping in mind that such type of realization often gets confused with the simplicity of the mundane.

I don't know anything about this author or traditionalism, but I'm guessing Evola's fault is that he assumes the path he's realized is applicable to all people, which is rubbish.

Just to clarify, then:

Traditionalism is the idea that there is a supra-historical level of reality, of Being so to speak, which has been conveyed by generations of civilization in various forms, i.e., Tradition.  Or so is the definition as Julius Evola and Rene Guenon would put it.  The source of this can be identified, for example, in say works like The Bhagavad Gita, The Upanishads, the original Buddhist Pali Canon, works by Plato and the Neoplatonists, Zoroaster, Mithraic and Hermetic texts, Grail Romances, and so forth.  The forms of Tradition are generally best exemplified in esoteric traditions of religion, which generally tend to take the form of either asceticism of action (Kshatriya/Samurai/Knight errant, etc. i.e. warrior tradition, but also including ceremonial magick), and asceticism of contemplation (yoga/meditation, etc.).  Essentially, these practices are meant to bring those who have the potential into a level of supra-humanity, where they then become a Divine principle manifested on the physical plane (world of manifested forms vs. the unconditioned).  Rome was also an example of such a Traditional civilization, the hallmarks of which are an orientation towards that which is "above".  Essentially, it is a very tangible concept of seeing Reality as it is, and coming to the point where one is "Lord of the Chariot of 5 Horses", and to whom Being is an essential component of one's nature from then on, as opposed to a frantic and feverish Becoming.  This is not however, to be equated with stagnation.

Now, via this definition, wahn's point was not that Evola's experiences were at all hollow, but rather he never reached true knowledge of this state of reality through his practices, therefore, in his argument, somewhat invalidating the entire concept of traditionalism (at least via Evola).

It is important to simply note that there are levels of this philosophy as well.  On one hand, practices like Hermeticism were dubbed "The Royal Art" by Evola because of the caste that would naturally have the potential to practice this.  Evola was not arguing that all people have the potential to become supra-human, but he did believe that the hierarchy of a traditionally oriented society gave the rest of the civilization the ability to participate in this level of reality to a greater extent than otherwise might be, and thus elucidate meaning in the lives of those who are not the rulers through whatever medium their natures were best suited to.  That was the idea of his political writings such as Revolt Against the Modern World and Men Among the Ruins.  Conveyed into the much decayed modern realm, it is the idea politically that the best shall rule, but it does put some additional qualifiers on what that elitism means, essentially asking for qualities in an aristocracy that are transcendental; in particular, the quality of seeing reality beyond the merely physical.

Interzone / Re: Against Traditionalism
« on: October 01, 2010, 08:45:26 PM »
I actually think one should look to his experiences initially in the UR Group, involving ceremonial magick.  His claim was at the dissolution of that journal, that he had found the sum of his esoteric experiences, and was then planning to act on them in an exoteric manner, so there is a suggestion to the initiatory nature of his knowledge.  I wouldn`t so much think that his various following writings and study were an attempt to find that experience, but more so to elucidate the nature of it to the modern world.

Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: October 01, 2010, 07:36:26 AM »
Well, to be dead honest, it just sounds wrong.  It sounds like he doesn't want to make arrangements of notes that are pleasing to the ear.  That's about the gist of my argument.

Now, I'll apologize if my condemnation was over-harsh initially, because really, I just wanted to elucidate what I felt the differences were between the melodic sense of metal and that of atonal classical music, where once again I claim that metal is not truly atonal and tends to follow phrasing and melodies that make, in my estimation, far more sense than say the works of Schoenberg.  Not that I deny that alot of work and thought went into atonal composition; it just doesn't sound correct to my ears, and I believe that's because there are certain ways of approaching melody and phrasing that make sense almost intuitively.  There's a reason atonality wasn't part of Western musical tradition, nor even traditions which had different scalar systems and were clearly capable of writing such music before Western music had gotten around to even-tempered intonation.

Interzone / Re: Against Traditionalism
« on: October 01, 2010, 04:32:02 AM »
I own the Doctrine of Awakening and I appreciate Evolas project, however, I think people too easily take his stuff at face value. My critique rests mostly on Evola's most autobiographical book Meditations on the Peaks (which I love BTW).

I`d be curious to see what exactly is the root of your criticism in his writing.  I understand the gist of your argument, I simply ask what is so striking about his work that it precludes that he has indeed had the experiences you claim he has not?  Do you refer primarily to the academic nature of his tone (which to be honest, I found less of in that work)?  Also, I think it's important to realize that work was a collection of essays dating from the 30s to the 50s.  Seeing as he lived to 1974, you might better judge the truth of your opinion on later works.

There is perhaps, I believe, an unfair impression based on his constant study and research into various methods of attainment, that this constant study was based on a lack of fulfillment in any one of them.  I think it might be incorrect to infer that simply because he studied and wrote about many forms of Tradition, that he did not find the experiences he wrote about in any one of them.

Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: September 29, 2010, 07:17:11 PM »
Despite the War of the Romantics, no one rioted at Wagner's performances.  I think this speaks volumes when compared to some of the debacles of atonality/serialism/twelve-tone, etc, and says alot about the "natural progression" of styles.  You'll be hard pressed to find such violent rejections of a style paralleled, and this is understandable given how it completely dispensed with so central a rule of music.

Now, maybe I just don't have an ear for it, but to be fair, I don't feel I'm missing out on much.

Schoenberg's premieres were generally well received, Webern's not so much.  I'm not sure but I believe the riot you are referring to is the one at the premiere of Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring", firstly this is not atonal/serialist music, secondly the riot had more to do with the choreography than the music.

Who would question the judgement of the masses anyway right?

Not to split hairs, but it was in part over the music, which was violently different from anything preceding it.  The idea was that many artists of good quality had never before induced a riot, irrespective of their audience.  We can claim they weren't ready for it, those poor plebeians, but really, give me one instance in history where people have been that angered over a piece of music due to the music itself.  Did the introduction of polyphony, chromaticism, harmony, counterpoint, cause fists to fly?  No, but a piece in which gratuitous amounts of rootless dissonance were the selling point did.

The inevitable result of this focus on dissonance/atonality, etc. in modern classical is to portray EVERYTHING in a grotesque, skewed, and "Oh, woe is life" way.  It seems fundamentally sick music in a way that metal isn't.  Metal doesn't compose pieces referencing one's sexual impotence and homosexual tendencies.  Yes, I'm arguing twelve-tone/atonality/serialism, etc, is inevitably linked to a materialistic Freudian/Marxist sickness, or at least really seems to be picked up upon by those types (Adorno).

Metal / Re: What would a metal society look like?
« on: September 29, 2010, 05:02:02 PM »
Helmholtz, It would most likely be dominantly indo-european, because as I've said, most jews are drek, and jewish culture, as interesting as it might be, is a real mish-mash of things with no definite focus.
Still, as you've said it, it's the trancendental  that we seek, a group of like minded people who have proven their genetic worth, not a bunch of kids who wouldn't get out of their comfort zone. Nationalism just does not seem enough for creating a new nation, you need an ideal first.
With that in mind, how would you describe the ideal Hessian?

First of all, someone who is dissatisfied with modernity, not because he fails to live up to its standards, but rather because it fails to live up to his, because it fails to provide him a fulfilling experience of reality.  First, we point out that being attentive, able to experience life fully and intensely, and having a complete distaste for the mind-numbing drone of modernity's egos, emotions, and frantic activity to nullify their boredom are attributes of such an individual.  We want those who are capable, willing, and passionate about devoting themselves to a discipline, those who are serious about what they do and less so about themselves, and those who are bluntly and brutally honest with others and themselves.  Such a person will by nature be more intelligent than most, and capable of seeing things on a level that most do not.  Such a person will not be easily bored, and will pursue experiences which are worthwhile in of themselves.  Such a person will likely also have taken time to physically improve themselves for health and greater ability in their endeavours.  Such a being is, despite their brutal honesty and pursuit of greater experience (whether "good" or "evil"), not arrogant, nor spiteful.  Having the ability to experience things at a greater level than the less attentive, less bothers him, though the things which he is passionate about he will pursue ruthlessly.  The self is affirmed only so far as it leads him to greater experience, and this man with no qualms bows before someone who is greater than he, and can lead him to greater meaning, thus affirming hierarchy where it is useful.  There is a balance between self-affirmation, and self-mastery.  We want, essentially an "Ekistensens Jeger".  Such a person will have traits that are obviously manifested through achievement in any number of fields, be they athletic, academic, martial, or spiritual.

Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: September 29, 2010, 02:59:26 AM »
Despite the War of the Romantics, no one rioted at Wagner's performances.  I think this speaks volumes when compared to some of the debacles of atonality/serialism/twelve-tone, etc, and says alot about the "natural progression" of styles.  You'll be hard pressed to find such violent rejections of a style paralleled, and this is understandable given how it completely dispensed with so central a rule of music.

Now, maybe I just don't have an ear for it, but to be fair, I don't feel I'm missing out on much.

Metal / Re: What would a metal society look like?
« on: September 29, 2010, 02:49:05 AM »
Would this society strive to creat a new race, genetically superior specimens through selective breeding and/or a eugenicist approach, or would basically be a european dominated society.
While I would agree most jews are drek, I don't see a need in excluding anyone. If a society is to be truly meritocratic, one could be judged by the worth of his genes, as expressed in his psychology, physical characteristics, and the actions derived from them. They could also be assesed according to the accomplishments of their forefathers.
Your thoughts?


I would say yes, though it'd likely be primarily Indo-European, just based on the nature of those who'd likely be attracted to such ideals.

Your society sounds like the U.S. Replace meritocracy with capitalism and there you have it. Support Nationalism.

I don't oppose nationalism, but personally I find more transcendental principles can be expressed in this medium, than in the long since far flung and corrupted roots of my people.  For those who feel the appropriate connection to their culture, and feel it can express higher truths, then by all means, it's a laudable path.

Your comparison is a bit faulty, by the way. There's nothing here that includes humanism, multiculturalism, consumerism, or any of those obfuscations.  This would be a nation significantly more virile and united in principle.

Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: September 21, 2010, 06:02:08 PM »
I'm sorry, but I'll have to disagree again.  Twelve-tone is purely theoretical and an abstraction.  Wagner and Bruckner, being at the end of the Romantic era and clearly presaging the eventual progression into atonality, were different because there were commonly recognizable scales or at least associations of intervals with which the more chromatic and dissonant parts could be associated to.  There was, in a word, contrast.  Dissonance existed in contrast to consonance.  When you create music that is entirely dissonant, but attempts to play itself off as being as expressive of every emotion as tonal music was, I call it contrived.  Atonality, serialism and twelve-tone attempt to take the alphabet and omit certain portions, or use completely different combinations of letters to spell what they claim is the same word as before.   The idea that the tonal system could ever possibly be "exhausted" is ludicrous, and assumes technique as being the keystone of music.

Let me state again, prior to the twentieth century, atonality did not commonly exist in music and was not commonly considered as beautiful (I'd argue that most people still don't consider it so).  2000+ years of divine music, and the atonal technique never seemed to occur to anyone.  Chromatics did, dissonance did.  Carlo Gesualdo has an infinitely greater sense of resolution within his work than anything by Berg: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_F1OuMeVSw&feature=related

Interzone / Re: Why not genocide
« on: September 19, 2010, 09:26:05 PM »
All non-parents are saying this, correct?

If you're referencing me, yes.

Interzone / Re: Why not genocide
« on: September 19, 2010, 08:29:59 PM »
I agree with deadite though that if I had a tard, I'd want it dead.


Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: September 19, 2010, 08:24:55 PM »
I've heard a corpus of works by Berg, and Schoenberg.  While I can respect your opinion, the explanation for twelve-tone, while understandable (and yes, Marx's criticism of the bourgeiouse, for example is understandable and necessary in the context of history at that time, though I still don't agree with his ultimate conclusions), is almost entirely theoretical.  Wagner, Bruckner, or Schubert are good because they are tied to some kind of standard, and work within the context of a tradition of musical form that seems to adhere to natural pleasing intervals, and if not, works development by working on a twist of natural intervals, invoking the sublime as opposed to the beautiful.  It is in short, unmistakable.  Yes, they might have their evil, romping churning metal horn blasts to the heavens (Which when played by a metal band seem to be identified as "atonal"), but these are identifiable as such because they speak a language that I can understand, with an intention to say something.  Twelve-tone seems to just scream "LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME" over and over again through theoretical, "radical", technique.  When you listen to it, because it attempts to speak an entirely different language for the sake of doing something new, everything in it sounds the same.

Metal / Re: Bands that you want to see reviewed by DLA
« on: September 19, 2010, 06:50:00 PM »
Seconding the first two Mercyful Fate albums here.  It seems to fit in perfectly with a lot of the Speed Metal/Proto-Black Metal already reviewed.  It influenced a lot of Scandinavian Metal after it came onto the scene, both musically, lyrically, and stylistically. In addition, songs like "The Oath" have a neoclassical phrasing that is often praised in the reviews of Morbid Angel and alike.

Fucking seconded.  Their influence to metal is unmistakable, as neither Slayer nor Morbid Angel would have come out the same way without them.  The sense of phrasing and melody this band possessed in its prime was elegant but powerful, twisted yet forceful, much in the manner of a giant of the genre such as Morbid Angel.

Metal / Re: Audiences hate modern classical music
« on: September 19, 2010, 06:08:57 PM »
  I think what most people mean when they apply the term "atonality" to metal is "chromaticism" or "dissonance".  Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner and Bruckner all had these elements in their music as well, though generally to far lesser degrees.

Essentially, there are certain melodic phrases that invoke certain feelings.  Some melodies naturally flow into a obviously pleasing progression, others strike us with sublime nature in making a portrait of beauty out of "ugliness" or "negativity".  The difference between metal's melodic sense and true atonality, is that metal tends to follow clearer natural progressions than atonality does.  Where I can listen to At the Gates or Incantation assemble an obscure and creeping but unmistakable sense of darkness, atonal/serial/twelve-tone music is completely exhibitionist in intent.  It exists only as a negation of the previous phase of music, historically.  It sounds lest honest and more contrived, and this shows through (perhaps through the academically limited sense of intentional metal music theory and technique) in a more clear cut "Classical" (in the Hellenic sense) ascesis of sound.  It holds none of the frills of the effete twelve-tone tradition.

Melody in metal might be chaotic, but it more often than not is based on a particular mode or permutation of a mode, whereas the atonal/twelve-tone/serial sense considers all notes equal, regardless of context.  Strange as it is to say, regardless of metal being less practiced theoretically (probably because of this) than modern classical, one sounds more pleasing melodically and structurally than the other.  One is more beautiful than the other.

Metal / Re: Functions of Gore
« on: September 14, 2010, 08:29:11 PM »
Hedonistic poetry mocks social taboos, and in essence mocks the idea of a universal standard. The fact that someone is horrified because you mock an idea, and does not merely have a physical reaction to the situation, that is what is being mocked. When we mock such things, we praise life as it is, and betray a desire to form the ideal around life itself, not around what is purely relevant to human beings. I know you may think that there are better mediums for the idea, but the point of art is not to convince someone that what is being mocked is wrong, or that the mockery itself is right. The art is merely attempting to communicate the mockery, and its subtle implications, itself. The listener is left with the decision of what is wrong or right, that's a consequence of art being clear in its message, but maintaining moral ambiguity.

``The pride of the peacock is the glory of God.
The lust of the goat is the bounty of God.
The wrath of the lion is the wisdom of God.
The nakedness of woman is the work of God.``

1 [2] 3 ... 16