Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Robert Plants comment about sabbath.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I agree with your sentiments, but you are factually incorrect.

    You say gansta rap is an abomination and then go on to list artists you like that actually are gansta rap.

    Some might find gansta rap morally repugnant, but the same people have no problem watching the Godfather trilogy.

    Comment


    • #62
      I have no problem asserting that with every fiber of my being I detest rap, hip-hop and gangsta rap. This is not a racist thing at all. I'm happy to listen to black artists and musicians doing legitimate forms of music (unless it's really poppy modern R&B) that aren't anti-melodic, anti-harmonic, boorish, vacuous, racist, misogynistic and violent. Overall, my ears register it as utterly unlistenable and indefensible. I've had friends play me the A-Z, from old-school to the modern extreme, from positive rappers to gangsta. Can't stand it. And with few exceptions, what's being promoted is morally repugnant (and yes, the actions portrayed in The Godfather are just as morally repugnant in my eyes.)

      But don't go by me. I think death metal (and black metal) should've ended with Celtic Frost's Into the Pandemonium. I think the genre is just as ridiculous, repugnant and formulaic as gangsta rap, representing little more than the expressed tantrums of 20-somethings trying to make themselves look tough and scary. How they actually look is emotionally dysfunctional and psychologically damaged.

      But in fairness, and to cut rappers and death-metallers some slack, I think any extreme representation in entertainment is a reflection of a dysfunctional, broken global society, bad parents (or bad or absent parenting), and the result of the abject failure of government, commerce and religion to behave in ways that are anything but predatory.

      ---------- Post added at 03:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:50 PM ----------

      Originally posted by WheelsOfConfusion View Post
      Well, I personally think that you're being highly creative in stretching the defintions of pop, country, bluegrass etc in attempting to claim that "St Vitus Dance" and other Sabbath songs branched out into those genres. Just because a song has elements of a genre, doesn't mean it is that genre.

      A song could have an element of pop in it. Songs like "Looking for Today" (as you suggested ) or the much more radio friendly "Am I Going Insane" and "Never Say Die". But in the end, they are still not pop songs even though they have an element of pop in it.
      I agree. I was just playing with the idea of labels, which I think don't work, and serve no real purpose but to confine. That's why I say Sabbath aren't a metal band. They created the subgenre (along with Zep and Purple) and just as quickly transcended it.

      Originally posted by WheelsOfConfusion View Post
      In the end, "Am I Going Insane" and "Never Say Die" and "Looking for Today" are not full blown pop songs like "Show me the Way" from Peter Frampton. So you have to differentiate. Does a song have an element or influence only from a particular genre or is it a full blown version of that genre?
      True, but what really defines "pop"? The word is a signifier of nothing else but "popular". Certainly under that definition, Sabbath and Zeppelin could be qualified as pop. Obviously, however, the term has come to mean something that's commercially viable and relatively lightweight. But even under that definition, is Green Day's "Boulevard of Broken Dreams" really a pop song? It was played on pop radio all over. What about "Stairway to Heaven"? What about "Sounds of Silence"? There are so many songs that were never intended to be pop songs, and in fact aren't, but somehow they've crossed over into mass consciousness, and are played on pop radio, which basically means Top 40.

      "Paranoid" falls into that category as well.

      No, it's not a pop song, but it's been accepted into the pop arena. For that matter, more and more we're seeing formerly underground music come into that fold. I went for a haircut in the local unisex salon that I go to (you know the one where they cut everyone's hair from old ladies to little kids), and freakin' Ride the Lightning was playing!! And nobody batted an eye. I'd have NEVER thought when I first got that album in 1984 that it would be played in a hair salon! It just goes to show how things change, and how quickly what was once unacceptable socially becomes the social standard. I think it also shows that labels ultimately little more than a corporate contrivance that has everything to do with marketing and nothing to do with whether something is good or bad on its own merit.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
        I have no problem asserting that with every fiber of my being I detest rap, hip-hop and gangsta rap. This is not a racist thing at all. I'm happy to listen to black artists and musicians doing legitimate forms of music (unless it's really poppy modern R&B) that aren't anti-melodic, anti-harmonic,
        The only person that mentioned race was you.

        Rap IS a totally legimate form of music. To say otherwise is just totally wrong & academically indefensible. Just because it doesn't meet with your (apparently narrow) ideas about melody & harmonics doesn't make it anti anything. There are many forms of music from all around the world that don't meet the western criteria of what music should be but only the ill-informed would argue against them being "legitimate".

        I've heard passionate arguments between hugely knowledgeable musicial minds all around the world about the validity of John Cage's 4'33" where people have even argued that absence of sound doesn't equate to a piece being invalid, so something as obviously rhythmic & melodic as Hip Hop has every claim to be LEGITIMATE.
        Last edited by devilmaycare; 11-16-2009, 02:53 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by devilmaycare View Post
          The only person that mentioned race was you.

          Rap IS a totally legimate form of music. To say otherwise is just totally wrong & academically indefensible. Just because it doesn't meet with your (apparently narrow) ideas about melody & harmonics doesn't make it anti anything. There are many forms of music from all around the world that don't meet the western criteria of what music should be but only the ill-informed would argue against them being "legitimate".

          I've heard passionate arguments between hugely knowledgeable musicial minds all around the world about the validity of John Cage's 4'33" where people have even argued that absence of sound doesn't equate to a piece being invalid, so something as obviously rhythmic & melodic as Hip Hop has every claim to be LEGITIMATE.
          Agreed - There are many forms of music & you should listen to it all with an open mind & not say 'it's not legitimate music' simply because you don't like it - what it all boils down to is there really is only 2 type of music - what you like & what you don't like - that's why I personally hate all of the labels placed on music - rock, country, metal, death metal, black metal, rap, ska, dub, etc - the labels are just marketing ploys - look at the grunge bands - was Soundgarden really a grunge band or just another rock band that had a lot of zep & sabbath influences? I know when I worked at a record store we drove a lot of people crazy because all of the music was in the bins alphabetically & some of our customers didn't like having to go past a BB King record to get to a King Diamond record.
          At least my hair is all mine, My teeth are my own, but everything else is on a permanent loan I'm on a low budget - Ray Davies

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by devilmaycare View Post
            The only person that mentioned race was you.

            Rap IS a totally legimate form of music. To say otherwise is just totally wrong & academically indefensible. Just because it doesn't meet with your (apparently narrow) ideas about melody & harmonics doesn't make it anti anything. There are many forms of music from all around the world that don't meet the western criteria of what music should be but only the ill-informed would argue against them being "legitimate".

            I've heard passionate arguments between hugely knowledgeable musicial minds all around the world about the validity of John Cage's 4'33" where people have even argued that absence of sound doesn't equate to a piece being invalid, so something as obviously rhythmic & melodic as Hip Hop has every claim to be LEGITIMATE.
            But you do agree that according to western criteria, the absence of melody and harmony is outside the definition of what some consider "legitimate" music? If so, then academically it is defensible to argue that rap does not qualify as the branch of art called music. A strong assertion of something doesn't make it fact, nor does its popularity change the definition of what art and music are defined as. There are criteria that qualifies something as artistic. 50 years ago, if rap existed, the very notion that one would argue it was music would be laughable. I don't agree with elitism, but to say the point shouldn't be argued because of rap's popularity, I think is ridiculous, especially when so many can see that it's lacking in several of the qualifications that even the dictionary definition lists as to the requirements of what constitutes art.

            Tribal music and world music from various countries around the world actually meet the requirements that would qualify their admittedly odd sounding (to Western ears) music. For starters: Skill, the ability to use instruments to produce music. Then, craft, which defines the development of those skills to produce difficult passages within the music.

            I don't see how rhyming profanities over a computer-generated beat (that most of the time comes from another artist) fits even into the broader qualifications of world music. Even tribal beats, when examined, prove a lot more complex than at first believed.

            But if you can produce arguments to the contrary, and not from rare exceptions to the rule (like the two death metal bands in the world that break into salsa and country in the middle of their songs), I'm willing to hear your case.

            Comment


            • #66
              1) I don't find hip hop to have an absense of melody or harmony. Obviously SOME do... you, for instance.

              2) I never made any argument about Rap's popularity.

              3) ART?? Who mentioned ART?? Oh well. In my dictionary ART is defined like this : the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power... So yes Hip Hop, Rap, call it what you will ABSOLUTELY qualifies as ART.

              It's like comparing surrealist painters to the old masters. Now my old dad would say "That's shit, it doesn't look like anything", but he would never dispute the validity of a Miro as a piece of art... He'd just shrug and say he didn't like it.

              4) There is great skill in rhyming over beats... Otherwise you or I could do it right? But to say that THAT is the only thing that modern Hip Hop offers shows a huge lack of knowledge. As does saying that all hip hop doesn't feature REAL LIVE MUSICIANS. And to argue about something you have to know something about it.

              5) Arguments to the contrary of what? You made no point.
              Last edited by devilmaycare; 11-16-2009, 03:51 PM. Reason: typo. plain & simple.

              Comment


              • #67
                I don't know what to call the Fugees - but by any standard, it's simply good music, even the hip hop bits. Public Enemy, what style is it, again I don't know, again it's simply good music, and I know quite a few metal fans that love it (the early stuff at list).

                Words such as "metal" or "hip hop" are just shortcuts, tags, that you can take as an indication of quality (most hip hop IS shite, because it's music made to order in a production line where creativity is not an element), but often don't mean anything.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Some definitions:

                  Art:

                  The conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects.

                  Music:

                  An art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.

                  Rap's sole claim to "skill" is the rapper's ability to rhyme over a beat. This takes no account of quality of voice, inherent vocal ability, training or anything other than finding sentences which have corresponding sounds at the end of each line. As "gifted" as that may be, I know children who can do that. But when they do it, it's called doggerel.

                  Doggerel is defined as: "a low, or trivial, form of verse, loosely constructed and often irregular, but effective because of its simple mnemonic rhyme and loping metre."

                  So much for the supposed skill of the rapper.

                  Rap's sole claim to musicality is rhythm, which is found in the beat itself, but it's a beat that usually doesn't originate from the rapper. It comes from pregenerated samples or is "borrowed" from another artist.

                  There goes the supposed creative imagination.

                  Ah, but then there's the words, such gems of modern poetry! Right? No? Oh... it's about how women are whores, and the rappers are tough pimps with bling who got away with their crimes. That, and how everybody else is a piece of shit.

                  Ok. I know 5% of rappers actually rhyme about worthwhile subjects, and I applaud that. But c'mon! The genre as a whole is a wasteland of derivativeness and vulgarity. Even rappers complain about the genre they work in.

                  At best, rap is creative rhyming. At worst, it's shit doggerel with no qualifying, redeeming factors, no musicality, no originality, and popular because of its ubiquity, because of its supposedly amusing use of profanity against whatever target is hot that month, because of its status as the cultural norm in certain areas, and because most of its listeners have unfortunately been given zero education in genuine forms of music, ancient or modern, western or otherwise.

                  ---------- Post added at 06:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:33 PM ----------

                  Originally posted by devilmaycare View Post
                  The only person that mentioned race was you.
                  And I'm glad that's the case. But it's usually the first thing I'm charged with when I mention that I can't stand rap in any form. So I mentioned it to forestall the seeming inevitable.

                  ---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:36 PM ----------

                  Originally posted by devilmaycare View Post
                  As does saying that all hip hop doesn't feature REAL LIVE MUSICIANS.
                  What percentage of hip hop features real live musicians in the studio? Is it about the same percentage of death metal bands that don't spew messages of hate and violence?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Mate. This is getting dull. You don't like it. You've made your point. Factually you're way off in your definitions & descriptions of rapping & Hip Hop and of "most" of the subject matter, but you obviously won't or can't see that either.

                    We can argue back and forth on any artistic merits that I see & you don't. Neither of us will convince the other and frankly I have a life & I'm off to live it.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by devilmaycare View Post
                      Mate. This is getting dull. You don't like it. You've made your point. Factually you're way off in your definitions & descriptions of rapping & Hip Hop and of "most" of the subject matter, but you obviously won't or can't see that either.

                      We can argue back and forth on any artistic merits that I see & you don't. Neither of us will convince the other and frankly I have a life & I'm off to live it.
                      Fair enough. I was thinking along the same lines as well.

                      Bottom-line, if you've found some measure of joy in it, perhaps in more creative pockets within the genre that I'm unaware of, then more power to you. I'm not looking to take it off store shelves, or out of your home, or to deny anyone anything that benefits them. And despite my strong feelings, I don't judge anyone who listens to it (unless they're acting on the more extreme lyrical examples).

                      And as to the more egregious examples of the genre, which, like death metal, promote hate and violence, I think the sooner all of that's eliminated the better. But with society the way it's gone and going, I don't see expressions of rage and vitriol going anywhere until Sabbath's prophetic "Electric Funeral" comes to pass.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        There's artists and theirs entertainers, and in many cases they're a combination of both, an artist being true to him/herself and also to their fans. Too much of either, and you have a starving artist or a entertaining prostitue. One thing I've always thought was true surely in the idealogical 60's and to some extent the 70's music was each band tried to have their own message and "sound". You wanted showmanship, pirotechniques and sex appeal, it was Zeppelin, you wanted heavy dark mysterious atmosphere, it was Sabbath, mind altering psychadelic imagary, there was Pink Floyd, and on and on... Bands that found a succesfully "commercial" sound usually only lasted until they were "in" before they were "out". Look at Zeppelin, they came on the scene as a hard rock blues juggernaut, then make a 180 with an acousticlly dominated 3rd album. Not trying to do Whole Lotta Love II. Sabbath kept changing just enough to keep us and them interested. I don't see that so much in today's music, get a formula and milk it to death is more the norm.
                        I'm looking forward to thenext H&H album being a 180 turn in the road, that's what I want to hear, "to go where no man has gone before..!"
                        "Music is so sacred to me that I canít hear wishy-washy nonsense just played for the sake of selling records."
                        R. Blackmore

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                          Rap's sole claim to "skill" is the rapper's ability to rhyme over a beat. This takes no account of quality of voice, inherent vocal ability, training or anything other than finding sentences which have corresponding sounds at the end of each line. As "gifted" as that may be, I know children who can do that. But when they do it, it's called doggerel.

                          Doggerel is defined as: "a low, or trivial, form of verse, loosely constructed and often irregular, but effective because of its simple mnemonic rhyme and loping metre."

                          So much for the supposed skill of the rapper.
                          I think the original post about Rap was the differences between Gangsta Rap and Hip-Hop. As others have pointed out there are those who are creators and those that are followers. The early rappers had no basis for which to measure their skill against, they simply went out and tried to find an audience. This is the reason it was more varied and could be at least tolerated by an audience that was not sex-driven teenagers whose imagination failed to extend beyond which outfit to buy from the Rave or Hot Topic in their local mall.

                          Now that Rap has distinquished what sells in its field and what does not, the genre is watered down by artists with little to no skill, hoping to make a few bucks before their fifteen minutes of fame is extinquished.

                          The same is true in the other genre you mention, Death Metal. The original Death Metal had no idea what would sell because it was a brand new idea. The bands had to bust their ass and find what people would spend their hard earned money on and what they would not. Originally there was little to no growling vocals and there was a clarity in the sonic expression. DM's original identity was not so much the music itself but the freedom to discuss subjects deemed to "EXTREME" for the mainstream public, hence why it is sometimes dubbed EXTREME METAL.

                          Nonetheless, just like in ALL genre's of music. There are the Trend Setters(Or Leaders) such as: Black Sabbath(Metal), Pink Floyd(Psychedelia), Judas Priest(Heavy Metal), Bee-Gees(Disco), Elvis Presley(Rock And Roll), Misfits(Punk), Vernon Dalhart(Classic Country), Garth Brooks(Modern Country), Hip-Hop(Run D.M.C.), Gangsta Rap(Tupac Shakur), Swing Jazz(Miles Davis), just to name a few... Then you have the Trend Followers, which there are always more to name then the leaders...

                          Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                          Rap's sole claim to musicality is rhythm, which is found in the beat itself, but it's a beat that usually doesn't originate from the rapper. It comes from pregenerated samples or is "borrowed" from another artist.

                          There goes the supposed creative imagination.
                          While I agree that Gangsta Rap has very little coherent rhythm in it, old school Hip Hop was a fun and energized dance fused music, heavily influenced by Country's idea of the heavy bass line, that was easy and fun to dance to. I think you are generalizing two genre's that even the industry realizes needs to be seperated. The RAP from 1985 - 1995 is light years away from the rap of 1996 - Present.

                          Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                          Ah, but then there's the words, such gems of modern poetry! Right? No? Oh... it's about how women are whores, and the rappers are tough pimps with bling who got away with their crimes. That, and how everybody else is a piece of shit.

                          Ok. I know 5% of rappers actually rhyme about worthwhile subjects, and I applaud that. But c'mon! The genre as a whole is a wasteland of derivativeness and vulgarity. Even rappers complain about the genre they work in.
                          Once again, it comes down from differenciating between Hip-Hop or Rap and Gangsta Rap. Sure, these days it is rather sickening. Not because the subject is what it is but because of the lack of variety. Rap is one genre that has been stuck on auto-pilot for over a decade, with the lone exception possibly being the hysterical Ludacris.

                          Your obviously entitled to what you believe, but I fail to see complaining about the subject matter of a song. Just because a song is about depraved acts does not mean they depreciate in value. They may be disgusting and you may be above such standards, but no one is accusing you or forcing you to having lived in such a way.

                          I am not suggesting that you are saying this but others do and I fail to also see how violent music is the cause for violence in society. What is that little thing that all human beings have that you can never rid yourself of? Oh yeah, FREE-WILL.

                          It doesn't matter if you were listening to a song that said at some point, "Hey, go shoot yourself" or "Hey, go shoot someone else" or "Hey, go rape that person" or "Hey, go hijack that airplane and fly it into a building." It was entirely your decision to go do it and the blame should fall directly on your shoulders if you do, face the music and take it, or better yet, DON'T BE THE LOSER THAT COMMITS THE CRIME!

                          Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                          At best, rap is creative rhyming. At worst, it's shit doggerel with no qualifying, redeeming factors, no musicality, no originality, and popular because of its ubiquity, because of its supposedly amusing use of profanity against whatever target is hot that month, because of its status as the cultural norm in certain areas, and because most of its listeners have unfortunately been given zero education in genuine forms of music, ancient or modern, western or otherwise.
                          It goes back again to the pigeon-hole of Rap across the board, although I agree this is precisely the mindset of individuals who listen to Gangsta Rap.

                          Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                          What percentage of hip hop features real live musicians in the studio? Is it about the same percentage of death metal bands that don't spew messages of hate and violence?
                          Since you mention Hip-Hop and NOT Rap I will say you are QUITE mistaken. As mentioned above, Hip-Hop's origins date back to the late 70's but mostly early to mid 80's through the 90's. This means that during their fledging years, there was no such thing as sampling.

                          Whenever they did "borrow" from a band it was with the band present. What band, in their right mind, wouldn't enjoy the chance at broadening their horizons and introducing a whole new generation of fans with a new kind of music?

                          I am sure Aerosmith are NOT complaining about the popularity they continue to receive by allowing Run DMC to jam with them. Why they would even think of it goes back to my earlier statements. Because Hip-Hop was a music done by individuals that had to pay dues and actually work hard to get where they have gotten, they were humble and more intelligent. They were professionals and a person would be a fool to think that rock and rap artists, or collectively as bands, did not jam together in the studio. Or even invite each other over for dinner.

                          Bottom line is, they are ALL professionals that are in the music business for the same reason: To make a living, in order to support themselves and their families, by finding an audience that bothers to spend their time and hard earned money and entertain them.

                          Because of that known FACT, it makes all forms of music have not only worth but the right to call themselves music. If you do not like it, the answer is simple: DON'T LISTEN TO IT.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                            And as to the more egregious examples of the genre, which, like death metal, promote hate and violence, I think the sooner all of that's eliminated the better. But with society the way it's gone and going, I don't see expressions of rage and vitriol going anywhere until Sabbath's prophetic "Electric Funeral" comes to pass.
                            Hate is a valid emotion, I see no reason why it shouldn't be explored in an artistic manner, as with death (or black) metal. The fact that you don't like the message, doesn't mean that it should be eliminated. Perhaps we should censor every emotion we find uncomfortable.

                            And as for violence, calling out death metal musicians for it is just ignorant... do you see death metal musicians actually going through with what they sing about? Have you ever heard a story in the news of a death metal musician defiling a dead corpse or whatnot? I haven't.

                            And even if that was the case, it has no bearing on musical quality anyways.

                            As for rap... I like the early stuff. And I don't mind some artists like Eminem and The Lonely Island either.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by The Butt View Post
                              Hate is a valid emotion, I see no reason why it shouldn't be explored in an artistic manner, as with death (or black) metal. The fact that you don't like the message, doesn't mean that it should be eliminated. Perhaps we should censor every emotion we find uncomfortable.

                              And as for violence, calling out death metal musicians for it is just ignorant... do you see death metal musicians actually going through with what they sing about? Have you ever heard a story in the news of a death metal musician defiling a dead corpse or whatnot? I haven't.
                              Then you may have been living in a cave.

                              Heard of the Norwegian Black Metal bands?

                              Think Murder, cannibalism and arson for starters. They're not alone. They just made the headlines. There are numerous young people involved in "satanic" cults of their own making for which black/death metal is their soundtrack. The victims are often innocent animals, but I know of at least one local case where it was a young girl who was brutally raped and murdered.

                              Hate is not a valid emotion, it's a destructive cancer, both to the individual and to those around him. And it's not been "explored" in death/black metal, it's been exploited to channel rage in the musicians and their listeners, promoting the vilest acts towards fellow humans.

                              As Ashley noted, listeners obviously have free-will to make choices, but death/black metal is marketed to young, immature audiences, who can relate to those feelings and lyrics, giving them tacit permission to fantasize about indulging in acts of violence towards others.

                              Those lyrics do serious psychological damage, and tip those already on the edge towards evil acts.

                              ---------- Post added at 12:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 AM ----------

                              Originally posted by Ashley Dalby View Post
                              I think the original post about Rap was the differences between Gangsta Rap and Hip-Hop. As others have pointed out there are those who are creators and those that are followers. The early rappers had no basis for which to measure their skill against, they simply went out and tried to find an audience. This is the reason it was more varied and could be at least tolerated by an audience that was not sex-driven teenagers whose imagination failed to extend beyond which outfit to buy from the Rave or Hot Topic in their local mall.

                              Now that Rap has distinquished what sells in its field and what does not, the genre is watered down by artists with little to no skill, hoping to make a few bucks before their fifteen minutes of fame is extinquished...

                              Bottom line is, they are ALL professionals that are in the music business for the same reason: To make a living, in order to support themselves and their families, by finding an audience that bothers to spend their time and hard earned money and entertain them.

                              Because of that known FACT, it makes all forms of music have not only worth but the right to call themselves music. If you do not like it, the answer is simple: DON'T LISTEN TO IT.
                              You make some good points. I'm not convinced, however, that just because you're in the music industry, that means you're by definition a musician, or that if you're trying to make a living by catering to certain audiences that that makes you anything more than an entertaining salesperson. Anybody can call themselves anything. That doesn't make it so. Music has nothing to do with commerce in the first place. That aspect has been added on to the picture, which is fine because it allows musicians to do what they do best, make music full-time without having to worry about supporting themselves. But as you yourself have noted, the modern day reality has seen music swallowed up by corporate giants, who are solely concerned with commerce. "Music" that comes out of those avenues is little more than product, prepackaged from a mold to be marketed to target audiences who've been preconditioned by the marketing tools of radio and video, or so-called "underground" channels, to like it. Call me an elitist, but I hold music to far higher standards.

                              That said, I think you did a good job distinguishing the differences between older forms of rap and what's come to be in the last decade or so. None of it's for me. But I can respect the difference, and understand the complaints that old-school rappers have with what's come about.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                                Then you may have been living in a cave.

                                Heard of the Norwegian Black Metal bands?

                                Think Murder, cannibalism and arson for starters. They're not alone. They just made the headlines. There are numerous young people involved in "satanic" cults of their own making for which black/death metal is their soundtrack. The victims are often innocent animals, but I know of at least one local case where it was a young girl who was brutally raped and murdered.
                                I have indeed heard of the Norwegian Black metal bands... a lot of them are my favorite bands.

                                I was referring to death metal though which is what I thought you were talking about. Death and black metal are not the same thing.

                                In any case though, what I said before still stands. Whatever crimes/injustices the artists may have committed has no bearing whatsoever on their musical quality; that's their business, not mine. So I have no problem buying CDs by an artist who has say, sacrificed a goat or burned down a church. They've put work into making music/art to be listened to... it deserves to be explored.

                                Surely you would not say that Richard Wagner's music is illegitimate, despite him being a known anti-semite, and despite writing books dedicated to nazi propoganda?

                                Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                                Hate is not a valid emotion, it's a destructive cancer, both to the individual and to those around him. And it's not been "explored" in death/black metal, it's been exploited to channel rage in the musicians and their listeners, promoting the vilest acts towards fellow humans.
                                Hate is indeed a valid (albeit primal) emotion. It may not be an emotion that humanity is comfortable with, what with the hippie "peace and love", politically-correct BS that's shoved down people's throats, but it's valid nonetheless.

                                I can safely say that I hate some of my fellow humans. It is an emotion that I do not feel is negative, and feel no need to repress or cover up. It gives me some degree of strength. If it weren't an emotion we were meant to feel, we would not have been programmed to feel hate in the first place.

                                Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                                As Ashley noted, listeners obviously have free-will to make choices, but death/black metal is marketed to young, immature audiences, who can relate to those feelings and lyrics, giving them tacit permission to fantasize about indulging in acts of violence towards others.
                                Studies please. Death and black metal are not marketed to any specific audience at all. In death metal (typically situated with blood/gore lyrics), it's done in generally a tongue-in-cheek manner. No death metal artist has or would partake in any of the actions they sing about.

                                And in the case of black metal (which is typically permeated with hate/anti-religious/satanic lyrics)... everybody has their beliefs. To say that a different set of beliefs is "immature" merely because you disagree or they make you uncomfortable... I'd expect that from a Christian granny-type of character. Even if the black metal musicians do sometimes carry out heinous crimes, that doesn't affect the quality of the music, which along with the cold, misanthropic atmosphere, is perfectly legitimate, art-wise.

                                Originally posted by thesithempire View Post
                                Those lyrics do serious psychological damage, and tip those already on the edge towards evil acts.
                                Again, studies please. Until then, no.

                                You could easily make this claim about a song like fucking Highway to Hell or Suicide Solution. And we all know how butthurt the rock/metal fans got in the 80s when their favorite songs got persecuted against in a biased, ignorant manner. Same applies here.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X