Depressive/Suicidal Metal - Shining and all that, and not only Metal

  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

    Previous
  • drip 26 Apr 2013 23:00:19 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I wondered, is anyone into this shit? Or rather, how many of you are into this shit?

    Stuff like Shining, Lifelover, newer Celtic Frost, Mayhem, Silencer, Diagnose: Lebensgefahr, Bethlehem, Skitliv, and whatnot.

    I'd love to learn about more depressive music, so please share.

    For a start, here's a perhaps unexpected one: Black Sabbath - Virtual Death

  • drip 26 Apr 2013 23:29:51 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I wondered before, are you named by the Polish black metal band?
  • drip 26 Apr 2013 23:51:36 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I have that Epilogue CD, I really liked it, although I don't necessarily agree with their political views.

    Speaking of Burzum, do you know this one? I think it was never released.

  • drip 27 Apr 2013 21:24:00 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago


    In case someone doesn't know Skitliv... it's Maniac (Mayhem) on vocals, an Kvarforth (Shining) on guitars.
  • GuiltySpark 27 Apr 2013 21:39:41 6,401 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    That Burzum track is awful : (

    I'm not sure how anyone can enjoy those vocals. But then again, it does sound like a VHS tape so I'll forgive it slightly!

    Get bent.

  • Beetroot_Bertie 27 Apr 2013 23:36:50 294 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Oh that mournful violin...



    To be honest I don't find black metal that depressive, nor doom stuff either really. I find the post-rock/metal/shoe gaze stuff much more emotive in that respect - a bit more bitter sweet with a sense of beauty/loss to it (if that makes sense).

    I've been listening to 'We Lost The Sea' recently which is more in that direction and made more poignantly so by the vocalist's recent suicide :(



    Oh, and this classic melancholic reflection on getting old by Priest (one of my fave tracks that builds to an amazing crescendo).



    Edited by Beetroot_Bertie at 23:44:31 27-04-2013
  • Dr.Haggard 28 Apr 2013 01:05:21 4,217 posts
    Seen 13 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    As in Death In June?

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm starting to see a pattern emerging...
  • thelzdking 28 Apr 2013 01:19:24 4,367 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 5 years ago
  • drip 28 Apr 2013 06:49:41 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Beetroot_Bertie wrote:

    To be honest I don't find black metal that depressive, nor doom stuff either really.
    I don't think anyone would claim black or doom was generally depressive. But due to their nature, they may be more likely to spawn depressive stuff.
  • drip 28 Apr 2013 06:59:12 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
  • Dr.Haggard 28 Apr 2013 14:33:38 4,217 posts
    Seen 13 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    @Graveland No just that I was wondering - half jokingly - if there were any bands you were into who weren't openly, or had at some time been accused of being, associated with neo-nazism :)
  • thelzdking 28 Apr 2013 22:52:13 4,367 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Those who are morally compromised can produce great art.
  • RedSparrows 29 Apr 2013 11:50:57 22,882 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Graveland wrote:


    One must always separate art from its creator.
    +
    thelzdking wrote:
    Those who are morally compromised can produce great art.

    Sorry to hijack, but I like these kinds of things.

    Graveland: of course, but at the same time no analysis of an artist and their work is complete without a good understanding of intention, context and history of that artist and their outlook re: their art.

    As Lzdking suggests, it can be argued that great art can be produced by those we find morally questionable, but it depends: is something great art if you can divorce it entirely from its creator? Surely their intention and their outlook is vital to a work's constitution and worth? I can take something beautiful or thrilling from a piece of art, and I can know the creator was someone I might despise, and it works. But is it right to do such a thing, when their beauty, their thrill, their 'good', might be so alien to mine? Surely a work where the artist is more sympathetic to you is a 'better' piece of work? Is aestheticism the opposite to morality?

    The Nazis are a really difficult case: German romanticism in the widest possible sense, had a lot to offer us. Sadly, the Nazis used a lot of it.

    I would say, however, that it's possible for an artist to admire Romanticism, folklore, mythology, willpower and the rest, without using Nazi iconography et al - if they so wished.
  • thelzdking 29 Apr 2013 13:50:12 4,367 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    RedSparrows wrote:
    Graveland: of course, but at the same time no analysis of an artist and their work is complete without a good understanding of intention, context and history of that artist and their outlook re: their art.

    As Lzdking suggests, it can be argued that great art can be produced by those we find morally questionable, but it depends: is something great art if you can divorce it entirely from its creator? Surely their intention and their outlook is vital to a work's constitution and worth? I can take something beautiful or thrilling from a piece of art, and I can know the creator was someone I might despise, and it works. But is it right to do such a thing, when their beauty, their thrill, their 'good', might be so alien to mine? Surely a work where the artist is more sympathetic to you is a 'better' piece of work? Is aestheticism the opposite to morality?

    The Nazis are a really difficult case: German romanticism in the widest possible sense, had a lot to offer us. Sadly, the Nazis used a lot of it.

    I would say, however, that it's possible for an artist to admire Romanticism, folklore, mythology, willpower and the rest, without using Nazi iconography et al - if they so wished.
    For the reasons you give I don't believe that art necessarily has to be separated from the artist. If I find something worthwhile in a work of art despite it being produced by an artist whose worldview is alien to my own then it tells me that the artist in question has an especial ability to communicate; a level of excellence in their personal artistic approach that stands above moral judgement and has to be respected no matter what. And if the price of an excellent artistic experience is temporary emotional complicity then so be it.

    I've found that I seem to be able to brush aside these issues with greater ease than most. I suppose that I don't suffer through cognitive dissonance as much as some do. If I were only able to draw value from art produced by artists whose beliefs overlapped with my own then I expect I would feel existentially kitsch, so to speak.

    Edited by thelzdking at 13:51:49 29-04-2013

    Edited by thelzdking at 13:52:34 29-04-2013
  • RedSparrows 29 Apr 2013 14:05:34 22,882 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    thelzdking wrote:
    RedSparrows wrote:
    Graveland: of course, but at the same time no analysis of an artist and their work is complete without a good understanding of intention, context and history of that artist and their outlook re: their art.

    As Lzdking suggests, it can be argued that great art can be produced by those we find morally questionable, but it depends: is something great art if you can divorce it entirely from its creator? Surely their intention and their outlook is vital to a work's constitution and worth? I can take something beautiful or thrilling from a piece of art, and I can know the creator was someone I might despise, and it works. But is it right to do such a thing, when their beauty, their thrill, their 'good', might be so alien to mine? Surely a work where the artist is more sympathetic to you is a 'better' piece of work? Is aestheticism the opposite to morality?

    The Nazis are a really difficult case: German romanticism in the widest possible sense, had a lot to offer us. Sadly, the Nazis used a lot of it.

    I would say, however, that it's possible for an artist to admire Romanticism, folklore, mythology, willpower and the rest, without using Nazi iconography et al - if they so wished.
    For the reasons you give I don't believe that art necessarily has to be separated from the artist. If I find something worthwhile in a work of art despite it being produced by an artist whose worldview is alien to my own then it tells me that the artist in question has an especial ability to communicate; a level of excellence in their personal artistic approach that stands above moral judgement and has to be respected no matter what. And if the price of an excellent artistic experience is temporary emotional complicity then so be it.

    I've found that I seem to be able to brush aside these issues with greater ease than most. I suppose that I don't suffer through cognitive dissonance as much as some do. If I were only able to draw value from art produced by artists whose beliefs overlapped with my own then I expect I would feel existentially kitsch, so to speak.

    I see what you mean. I think we are talking about slightly different approaches.

    You are suggesting a broader conception of difference between artist and 'consumer' (urgh). A great artist is one that makes you feel and 'see' things that you have no experience of, or little knowledge about, or, perhaps, cannot articulate at all. I quite agree with you. I like reading Arthur Koestler even though he was an absolute bastard to women. You use the word 'alien' - and that is morally neutral, to me, so I can accept it.

    If, however, Koestler had been a Nazi, I wouldn't feel so happy about it - and I have qualms anyway. I think my conception focuses more on the political (in this discussion at hand: more broadly I might be closer to your opinion, perhaps). If I know someone is venerating Nazi ideals, for example, I'm not going to hop on board - I can't. I don't think the art would entice me against my will - I have never felt that happen. There has to be an emotional and/or intellectual acceptance of the art, and that is very open, very willing to give itself, but it will stop dead at anything I consider deeply immoral, and I mean immoral in the strictest terms (not Mary Whitehouse et al). If I know that Wagner, on the other hand, is not entirely sympathetic to me but has been sometimes co-opted by scum, it doesn't ruin the opening of Das Rheingold, for instance.

    It's also a question of the historical meaning of art (see Socialist Realism, Nazi art. I don't think Koestler would have been as a good a [political] writer if he had been a Nazi, bla bla bla), but that's a different area.

    Lzd - could you give some examples of artists you can get on with, even when you dislike much about them? I'd be interested to see, as it'd help ascertain whether we are talking from two ends of the same book, or two different books entirely!

    Edited by RedSparrows at 14:06:34 29-04-2013
  • riz23 30 Apr 2013 00:09:17 1,310 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I followed this thread for the music. I'm staying for the discussion. Well done all.
  • drip 30 Apr 2013 00:20:39 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Yes, this is not quite the direction I intended this thread to be, but go on. It's actually more interesting than linking to Youtube videos.
  • drip 30 Apr 2013 01:24:48 4,108 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    For me it's a mixed bag with the separation from artist and his creations. If it's really good, I can enjoy something emotionally even if its creator is despiceable, but I can't really keep it free of the sour smack of deluded bullshit (like Varg) or stupid cuntery (like Hellhammer) when reading/watching what they say and probably even think.

    Thankfully, all black metallers I learned to know were either apolitical or had leftist tendencies, and I think the scene as a whole doesn't remotely have a far-right majority. But for my taste, the apoliticalness often goes too far, when people say they don't care at all what sort of thoughts--or in most cases, non-thoughts--some artists try to spread.

    Because when it's about destroying Juda, about black people belonging in zoos, or "honouring" the murder of a homosexual, stuff like that, I find it hard to not care anymore. I still separate their music, I can still enjoy Burzum and Mayhem, but as I said, there is always a somewhat sour smack to it.

    What I really dislike about the scene is a widespread indifference about NSBM. Even though they're no majority, there's a considerable neo-nazi subculture in black metal who don't only say that stuff in interviews, but make also music and lyrics with decidedly neo-nazi content. A great lot doesn't seem to care about that at all (music is cool, don't care about the rest), or about standing in a crowd that has some people making nazi salutes while the band is playing.

    Call me old-fashioned or PC, but I think a certain amount of intolerance against that would be appropriate.
  • thelzdking 30 Apr 2013 12:12:52 4,367 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I think me and RS are coming from broadly the same place. I'm trying to work out whether I've got a weaker moral centre than others, or whether I'm just unwilling to let someone's being a bit of a bastard get in the way of a good artistic experience. Perhaps you could say that the latter is only made possible by the former. Or, if I want to be generous to myself, that I'm trying to find the best in a bad person. Although that's somewhat insincere point because, as RS says, any consumer of art is sort of complicit in whatever the artist has to say. Whatever way I'm quite happy to lack cognitive dissonance.

    Burzum and Graveland are examples pertinent to this thread. Both have espoused neo-Nazi views in the past. I'm not a Nazi, but I don't find that the music has a 'sour smack' to me. I'm a big fan of socialist realism as well.
  • RedSparrows 30 Apr 2013 19:57:06 22,882 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Socialist Realism I cannot admire: it's so explicitly political, and that politicised content covers such a multitude of horrors, that I cannot buy it.

    Plus, stylistically, it's boring compared to everything contemporaneous from freer countries ^^

    Anyway, sorry - black metal! I like Bongripper - don't think they count, at all. :(
  • BillMurray 30 Apr 2013 19:59:50 7,760 posts
    Seen 9 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Bongripper are the tits.
  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply