Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

America should have avoided making black metal

(Black Witchery, Krieg, both these bands are parodies of BM)


Explain how Black Witchery are a parody. They embrace the Satanic philosophy of immorality and destruction and, unlike the Norse bands who have by and large shown their true colours by creating 3rd rate music later on in their careers, remain unrelentingly barbaric in their musical output. Bands like Darkthrone and Emperor are more a parody by contrast, creating some relevant music in their infancy and then releasing worthless dross later on.

Black Metal, aside from that influenced by Blasphemy, seems to me to be a crock of shit nowadays. I find it very difficult to take it seriously as the years go by. It seems to be a genre weakened by trend and moronic Metal idiots.

Explain how Black Witchery are a parody. They embrace the Satanic philosophy of immorality and destruction
I can't speak for Umbrage, but that would be exactly the reason  I would consider them parody.

Quote
unlike the Norse bands who have by and large shown their true colours by creating 3rd rate music later on in their careers, remain unrelentingly barbaric in their musical output. Bands like Darkthrone and Emperor are more a parody by contrast, creating some relevant music in their infancy and then releasing worthless dross later on.
The decline of quality over time has been widespread in Metal.  I believe there have been multiple topics on the subject.  Regardless, making a few first rate albums then a ton of shit is better than making nothing but mediocre releases over and over again.

Quote
Black Metal, aside from that influenced by Blasphemy, seems to me to be a crock of shit nowadays. I find it very difficult to take it seriously as the years go by. It seems to be a genre weakened by trend and moronic Metal idiots.
You haven't noticed an abundance of "fuckin' bestial black metal" and black thrash retardation?

Explain how Black Witchery are a parody. They embrace the Satanic philosophy of immorality and destruction
I can't speak for Umbrage, but that would be exactly the reason  I would consider them parody.

Quote
unlike the Norse bands who have by and large shown their true colours by creating 3rd rate music later on in their careers, remain unrelentingly barbaric in their musical output. Bands like Darkthrone and Emperor are more a parody by contrast, creating some relevant music in their infancy and then releasing worthless dross later on.
The decline of quality over time has been widespread in Metal.  I believe there have been multiple topics on the subject.  Regardless, making a few first rate albums then a ton of shit is better than making nothing but mediocre releases over and over again.

Quote
Black Metal, aside from that influenced by Blasphemy, seems to me to be a crock of shit nowadays. I find it very difficult to take it seriously as the years go by. It seems to be a genre weakened by trend and moronic Metal idiots.
You haven't noticed an abundance of "fuckin' bestial black metal" and black thrash retardation?

They're considered a parody because their ideals? Most peculiar and somewhat grounded in a blinkered view of what Black Metal is/ was.

Decline over time is widespread in all musical genres, not exclusive to Metal. That these acts declined as massively as they did, I consider farcical. I have more respect for individuals sticking to their guns than losing their shit.

If I have noticed an abundance of "fuckin' bestial black metal" and "black thrash retardation" then I haven't paid attention to it. I listen to acts I deem worthy to my ears and ignore the rest of the collective waste of human effort that has become the Heavy Metal genre over the last 2 decades. Some bands are worth listening to, others are not. It's subjecitve. What's your point?

It's subjecitve.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.

They're considered a parody because their ideals? Most peculiar and somewhat grounded in a blinkered view of what Black Metal is/ was.
They are a parody because their ideals represent an absurd caricature of Black Metal.

Quote
Decline over time is widespread in all musical genres, not exclusive to Metal. That these acts declined as massively as they did, I consider farcical. I have more respect for individuals sticking to their guns than losing their shit.
I completely disagree.  If you look at any other discipline it becomes clear that this is just silly.  Isaac Newton made tremendous contributions to math and science, then ended up losing his shit and reverting into a total Christian Revelation Theologian.  Compare that to UFO-ologists who are always sticking to their guns.

Quote
If I have noticed an abundance of "fuckin' bestial black metal" and "black thrash retardation" then I haven't paid attention to it. I listen to acts I deem worthy to my ears and ignore the rest of the collective waste of human effort that has become the Heavy Metal genre over the last 2 decades. Some bands are worth listening to, others are not. It's subjecitve. What's your point?
My point would be that maybe you should have noticed it, for it is staring you right in the face.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.
Like, that's just your opinion, man!

Some bands are worth listening to, others are not. It's subjecitve.

Whaaaa?

It's subjecitve.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.

I'm not interested.


They're considered a parody because their ideals? Most peculiar and somewhat grounded in a blinkered view of what Black Metal is/ was.
They are a parody because their ideals represent an absurd caricature of Black Metal.

Quote
Decline over time is widespread in all musical genres, not exclusive to Metal. That these acts declined as massively as they did, I consider farcical. I have more respect for individuals sticking to their guns than losing their shit.
I completely disagree.  If you look at any other discipline it becomes clear that this is just silly.  Isaac Newton made tremendous contributions to math and science, then ended up losing his shit and reverting into a total Christian Revelation Theologian.  Compare that to UFO-ologists who are always sticking to their guns.

Quote
If I have noticed an abundance of "fuckin' bestial black metal" and "black thrash retardation" then I haven't paid attention to it. I listen to acts I deem worthy to my ears and ignore the rest of the collective waste of human effort that has become the Heavy Metal genre over the last 2 decades. Some bands are worth listening to, others are not. It's subjecitve. What's your point?
My point would be that maybe you should have noticed it, for it is staring you right in the face.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.
Like, that's just your opinion, man!

I take it that, in the Metal Hall, Black Metal must be intellectually defined by nature worship and triumphant themes to be taken seriously? This is somewhat laughable and blinkered; seemingly conforming to a gang mentality considered "correct" on this message board. How tedious.

The Isaac Newton vs UFO-ologist metaphor is a little ridiculous in the context  of the statement I made about musicians regressing vs musicians sticking to their guns. I get your point, it just seems flamboyant and pretentious.

As regards the the comment I should pay attention to the modern day Metal scene to be made aware of mediocrity? Why?  I don't pay attention to crap that "stares me in the face" as I don't follow Metal in the media or any pathetic Metal/ Hessian scene that you seem so enlightened of. Why would I want to deal with a subculture that holds such mind numbingly conformist views? Metallers are generally pathetic idiots screaming "Sataaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!" while drunk or chin stroking, dull as fuck gonks.. Both caricatures offer me nothing, pretty much like your stereotypical ANUS mindsets.


I take it that, in the Metal Hall, Black Metal must be intellectually defined by nature worship and triumphant themes to be taken seriously?
I wouldn't say so.  I think if one looks historically at the Metal scene, the progenitor bands used Satan in a purely symbolic and often theatrical way.  The purpose was to display a rejection of Christianity.  However, the inherent flaws of such an approach were eventually realized and the intelligent bands began to shift their focus to a more positive approach.  Any ideology that promotes, as you say, "immorality and destruction" is innately oppositional and therefore it remains stuck within the confines of the Christian paradigm.

Quote
This is somewhat laughable and blinkered; seemingly conforming to a gang mentality considered "correct" on this message board. How tedious.
There is more of a consensus here than a gang mentality.  People here are just generally direct, much like yourself.

Quote
The Isaac Newton vs UFO-ologist metaphor is a little ridiculous in the context  of the statement I made about musicians regressing vs musicians sticking to their guns. I get your point, it just seems flamboyant and pretentious.
As long as the point was conveyed, that's fine.

Quote
As regards the the comment I should pay attention to the modern day Metal scene to be made aware of mediocrity? Why?  I don't pay attention to crap that "stares me in the face" as I don't follow Metal in the media or any pathetic Metal/ Hessian scene that you seem so enlightened of. Why would I want to deal with a subculture that holds such mind numbingly conformist views? Metallers are generally pathetic idiots screaming "Sataaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!" while drunk or chin stroking, dull as fuck gonks.. Both caricatures offer me nothing, pretty much like your stereotypical ANUS mindsets.
I think you misunderstood me.  I was implying that the bands you support (which you have yet to explicate, so this is mainly speculation) are the mediocre and ridiculous bands that are right in front of you.

I would add that your repeated emphasis on conformity is misplaced.  The whole notion of conformity or non-conformity carrying some inherent value with it sounds rather juvenile.

It's subjecitve.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.

I'm not interested.

Translation: "I might have my fundamental views shattered, so I won't engage with it".


Quote
The Isaac Newton vs UFO-ologist metaphor is a little ridiculous in the context  of the statement I made about musicians regressing vs musicians sticking to their guns. I get your point, it just seems flamboyant and pretentious.

It's still right.  For God's sake, people should stop being so concerned about what may or may not be "pretentious".  If I pretend to be a King and then enact a number of laws which seriously benefit the nation over which I have adopted sovereignty, then the outcome is still good, despite my "pretentions" to Kingship.

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.
You work pretty well as a comedy act, broski. ;)

What really transpired was this.

You pick a key set of principles (arbitrary - although, with the qualification that the "wise man" will pick the best) and you can objectively measure the quality of music against them.

But measuring music against no standards whatsoever, then it all becomes subjective and loses context.

So basically, without agreement on the first principles there is no objective discussion.

First tier
There isn't anything important to music among those nine. Nothing to offer music history here.

Honestly, what does this even mean? Important to music, really?

I second this question. The link further confuses things.
Scourgey scourgey boy, which part of the forum are you on ignoring us!

But measuring music against no standards whatsoever, then it all becomes subjective and loses context.

So basically, without agreement on the first principles there is no objective discussion.
So if you have no standards whatsoever, then the quality of music becomes completely subjective?  That sounds about right.  I wonder what type of person would have absolutely no set of standards?  Hmm...

Search around for the "subjectivity vs. objectivity in music" debate on this forum.  Pro tip: objectivity won.
You work pretty well as a comedy act, broski. ;)

What really transpired was this.

You pick a key set of principles (arbitrary - although, with the qualification that the "wise man" will pick the best) and you can objectively measure the quality of music against them.

But measuring music against no standards whatsoever, then it all becomes subjective and loses context.

So basically, without agreement on the first principles there is no objective discussion.


To clarify: I'm coming from the perspective of "what's useful?", which is the perspective which everybody should adopt if they want themselves to be similarly useful.  I could go on about instinctive human drives towards creation/maintenance, but that would take too long to explain in full - I hope you catch my gist, anyway.

But measuring music against no standards whatsoever, then it all becomes subjective and loses context.

So basically, without agreement on the first principles there is no objective discussion.
So if you have no standards whatsoever, then the quality of music becomes completely subjective?  That sounds about right.  I wonder what type of person would have absolutely no set of standards?  Hmm...
Same as comparing two completely different sets of standards. It's a non-discussion.


To clarify: I'm coming from the perspective of "what's useful?", which is the perspective which everybody should adopt if they want themselves to be similarly useful.  I could go on about instinctive human drives towards creation/maintenance, but that would take too long to explain in full - I hope you catch my gist, anyway.
What do you mean by useful? See... far too vague. Useful to who?

I see what you mean, but I don't agree.