Leader_OCola wrote:
Five_Nails wrote:
orthodoxy.
let's see how much you know.
define the meaning of this term with respect to black metal, and then explain its origin.
Well, you see black metal started when Dimmu Borgir and Cradle of Filth decided to jizz on their own faces and scream into microphones after watching Kiss play "Detroit Rock City" on VCR
/s
So I guess the ball's in my court (as it should be) to define a word I used as jargon to describe elitism in black metal because you decided to go elitist about it. But it wasn't enough to feel elitist, it had to be a knowledge contest as though there are stakes to this exchange when all I did was joke that you wouldn't like my opinion on a band you enjoyed.
Alright, which definition do you prefer? Do you like the one having to do with the original black metal bands and the new breed that upholds the style initially created, one that is totally irreverent, plays their black like thrash, and still so many bands play their music with huge variations in order to keep up the 'trve' idea created a decade after those beginning bands? Are Venom, Sodom, and Bathory enough to call things orthodox when the '90s showed that thrashy sensibilities into their blend were only a stepping stone to something far more intense and branched into so many greater areas?
Do you like the overwhelmingly anti-religious idea that becomes a religion on its own? The one perpetrated by Satanists and Luciferians who play their black metal as hymns to an inverted god so that they may show their defiance toward the Semitic roots of modern European civilization and prefer to play their songs as tributes to the new almighty they view as a way to worship yet also, sometimes without irony, deride the idea of worship itself and "false" deities. Do you like how Gaahl complains about the Semitic roots in "Metal: A Headbanger's Journey" despite the fact that he fell from grace in the community? His words worked for such an idea despite the direction so derided by many that he took with Gorgoroth. Did you like that guy on the review discussion board who complained that a review of his band didn't understand the worship in the music as that reviewer described how they didn't like the music simply for being dislike-able music? Does Deathspell Omega ping on this radar in the sense that it provides grandeur and incredible bouts of insane worship to a malformed god created only by the Semitic roots that Europe has dealt with for so long?
Do you like the idea of pagan revival, the glory brought by Odin to so many Scandinavian ancestors, and called to a new triumph by Bathory, the orthodoxy given to an attempt to reaffirm the ancestors' words and sounds, the way to understand them with modern, more Western, instruments as well as to show the grandeur of 'Blood, Fire, Death'? Does Deathspell Omega ping on the radar in this sense, the worship given by bands like even Beherit, belief in deities as inversion in order to survive an ancient cultural shift rather than see it as true, a new atheism that may at least through art define a new culture?
Or, and I know this isn't the play you're going for, the orthodoxy of lo-fi sound and terrible production in spite of the genius occurring below the blending. Everyone knows this as the staple idea but is it really so worthy to recreate in a crisp computer program now when you can make glory flow beautifully without digitally ruining your sound? Wouldn't you rather hear 'In the Nightside Eclipse' embrace its harmonies than tearing your ears no matter how many woods walks you've taken to enjoy "Cosmic Keys to My Creation and Times"? Couldn't it be a time and place situation and now that technology is past that it's impossible to recreate it without coming across as contrived?
Still, feel free to embrace the reality that the word orthodoxy doesn't work in a black metal sense, feel free to tell me your version of something so subjective and so well-versed in corrupting prevailing dogma in order to play music that is digitized nowadays or puts ideas to vinyl is riding on wings in order to further free itself from chains that it has already embraced. Feel free to assume that a book like 'Lords of Chaos' is the definitive answer to a word as subjective as "orthodoxy" in black metal when really I was just using the word as another placeholder for, essentially, a one and the same dogmatic principle heard too many times that flies in the face of a style supposed to be individualistic.
Orthodoxy was a term I used, yes it wasn't "kvlt". I failed as a writer to get my meaning across in that sense, but I still knew what I meant by it because the new black metal bands, plenty of them, do attempt to replay the same jargon, the same notes, the same tropes, and the same style of bands that were supposed to be railing against a defined movement and the repetitious idiocy they saw in modern music. This was a style that was set up to invert cultural sensibilities, to not be defined, to do well by ancestors in some respects, but to deride ancestors for their weakness in other aspects while upholding the strength of the modern individual and make good on their failings when greater powers overcame them. Black metal is difficult to paint with a single brush the more you listen and learn. That is how black metal is in so many ways, so many bands play it that way, and because they push into so many other aspects of music it keeps the sound fresh. "Orthodoxy" is limiting and that is what I saw in Runespell, another of many attempts to be the same as so many.
The "trvth" of the black metal "kvlt" is angst and the reality is a bunch of kids playing guitars and drums. Some of them committed crimes, some were smart enough to find different ways to incorporate interesting elements in their music. Orthodoxy is something that came up in the past few years and it assumes genius in teenage angst where stupidity got Euronomous killed, stupidity burned those churches, stupidity got kids like Absurd heiling Hitler, and stupidity gets kids now playing the same shit that has already been done a few thousand times over and calling it new. Talent is not always genius and a good listen to Burzum is hearing, especially in "Jesus Tod", a hook that catches an ear like a pop song with simply a bunch of noise due to bad production. Why is this genius or genuine when the dude wrote some catchy songs and tried to push back on aesthetic? It's not genius, it's a pale attempt at seeming different when his real difference was his own idiocy and the fact is that he showed how much you can separate an artist from his crimes. I like 'Fallen' better, there's the opinion, but that's all it is. It's just a preference.
A great black metal opera can still fit the standard dynamics of an opera, but that is not where greatness lies in an irreverent and counterculture movement that is now so well defined as honoring its ancestral roots and denying the anti- that was on the tops of those musicians' minds. Satyricon, Emperor, and Enslaved saw symphony and opera their own ways and they utilized that courtly and gentlemanly vocation as an outlet for hatred, rage, and anger. They could well be orthodox in their own rights for inverting what was once the sound of kings and courts but Satan forbid that is the orthodoxy that some elitist black metalheads get into. However, those elitists, do they realize that they're doing nothing but dividing like Protestants in the 1400s, though on the Soundcloud and bandcamp rather than pitchforks in towns, when realizing a schizm in their own "sacrosanct" ideology?
Deathspell, Darkthrone, Demonaz, you can call each of them orthodox in their own ways for the fact that they play (or have played) "legitimate black metal" but how do you define "orthodoxy" in black metal? There isn't a central text to this term and there is one reason for that. If there truly were, would it be the irreverence that is black metal?
Does orthodoxy mean "you don't understand it like I do"? Black metal is supposed to fly in the face of orthodoxy because orthodoxy is a system meant to unify people under one banner and a singular version of customs. If it were so, then obviously I don't know "legitimate black metal" for its "orthodoxy" because I like a band that can do something new with a prevailing sound and see how individuality can come through. Doesn't the individualism of black metal defeat the purpose of orthodoxy in black metal to begin with in that sense?
"Orthodoxy" is really another word for "kvlt" or "trve" and it's "bvllshit".
Please, don't try to play me for a fool. At the end of the day every time you're talking to me you're on a computer like every other metalhead on this forum and it doesn't matter how big your arms are or how well you can squash a douchebag's face. If you're so deep into the "kvlt" and know the ins and outs of being so incredibly evil and so well-versed in the sound, then how is this the place to complain about someone who didn't like an album that you did like when you could give a far better-versed summation of the same music? I gave my opinion and made a joke, that was it. I said what I said, it was a bit douchey, but at least I put my thoughts down and had the balls to put them out there to your "elite" derision.
Just to stay on track, I've been listening to Burzum's 'Aske' and 'Belus' through this ridiculous rant.