Thanks everyone, comments are really helpful!
I agree with everything, but let me say first something about the last paragraph. I was trying to associate readers to the fact that Baudelaire's collection ended on court and the 6 songs were restricted. An Autumn for Crippled Children also did something unexpected and reversed "the rules" in black metal circles. Relationship between the artists and the public stayed pretty much the same throughout the centuries - It is risky to brake horizons of expectation (phenomenon called horizon of change http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizons_of_Expectation
). Maybe I should be more opened and understandable in the review about this.
MutantClannfear, I like your proposal. I didn't know fragmentation is so obvious, It's little hard for me to take a bigger view on everything that has been written. I must admit, after I'd written this review I read It and ended up with a conclusion that It's not telling me so much about the music, so I decided to add one more paragraph about it (because my very first, rejected review was like short lyrical essay and has nothing to do with the music) and I was driven by my thoughts to a layer of meaning trying to interpret the album. That's how another "controversial, plant paragraph" was made. I'm not a musician so I cannot talk so much about the music without being boring. I would like to be able to review something from a composer's perspective, but you live just once, so It is impossible to be academically educated in every aspect. Of course, I don't think all reviewers are professional musicians, but the more involved in music you are, the easier is for you to write about It. At the end, I don't loose, I can be a good music recipient because the way of thinking about art is the same, weather you're encounter a picture or get attacked by a novel.
Smoking_Gnu, I've just read the review, It is marvelous! So effectively written that forces me to listen that album (although I thought only the last album of Rotting Christ is worth being in my collection)! Relies on phenomenological theory, especially this magnificent part:
"I explored the forest, colored entirely white by the morning’s snow, for the entire length of the album. I broke open the ice covering the rivers, revealing the immensity of life beneath the deadened snowfall, the small minnows swimming against the current, the invincible plants that thrived on the banks. I looked to the aging oak trees and saw that they were very much alive, in spite of their slackened appearance; there were animals creating their dens within them, feeding off of the plants buried deep within the earth. It was then, among what seemed to be a frigid and still wilderness, that I understood the nature of this album."
MonumentalBlackArt, I agree, but personally would like to read more reviews similar to the one mentioned above. Is there any difference between meaning of those words: review and recension? I thought the original meaning of review is like something written on the back of the novel or a text that tells us how some piece of art looks like, how we see (view) it, but doesn't evaluate it.
Diamhea, this is just what popped up into my mind when I read somewhere that review won't be read if it's not formatted properly. It's funny, now I need to consider deeply everything I've done - everyone thinks there's something wrong. I'm not saying It was perfect, but there was a sparkle of hope that it fits the criteria.