Originally Posted by Glice

Does that not engender the lyrics with a certain power that I'd rather not be giving it?

That's quite the question that you're asking, there. If the music in any way disturbs you to the extent that you feel like it affects your mind the wrong way, it's obvious that there is something wrong there to begin with and you are being attracted to it for other reasons that would be there anyway. If, instead, you dive into it and still come out with your brain intact because you happen to have a strong personality and can make up your mind or already have before you put the record on, then there's joy to be had through sheer aural pain.

[MellySingsDoom]

Originally Posted by Glice

[especially if it's in the noise idiom - Whitehouse are an exceptionally funny band]

Spot on, mister.

I feel it is possible to enjoy listening to music whilst feeling less than thrilled with the politics/beliefs of the musos involved (hello Varg Vikernes and Chuck D). I personally can't stand the homophobic lyrics of some hip-hop, dancehall etc, but draw the line at asking for this stuff to be censored.

[demonrail666]

I increasingly find extremities quite dull, if that's all they are. That whole association of extremes with some kind of 'truth' when in fact the 'truth' is usually a lot greyer, more subtle, and as such FAR more interesting.

I find Burzum interesting in this respect because while the music is this quite bombastic Wagnerian stomp, Varg's vocals have this weak, wounded, defeated, almost pathetic sense to them. The genius is found somewhere in the grey area of that conflict/contradiction.

[Cardinal Rob]

Does anyone want my Westboro Baptist Church mp3s?

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by Tokolosh

Ps: Didn't your mother ever teach you that being a gay nazi is contradictive? Carry on.

well your mother is totally wrong, gays and nazis go hand in hand, just like Republicans and nazis. Of course it is unhealthy repressed sexuality which is easily expressed as physical violence. all those big strong men bonding with each other in the precise uniforms and fetishizing 'strength and will' certainly have a repressed agenda. And sublimate the love of a man for the love of one's Party.

but these days the aryan brotherhood, with its ethic of jailhouse male-on-male sex and willingness to do anything to make money like indulge in pedophilia and work with russian mobsters in human slavery and other trafficking is unnatural and pathological.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

I increasingly find extremities quite dull, if that's all they are. That whole association of extremes with some kind of 'truth' when in fact the 'truth' is usually a lot greyer, more subtle, and as such FAR more interesting.

I find Burzum interesting in this respect because while the music is this quite bombastic Wagnerian stomp, Varg's vocals have this weak, wounded, defeated, almost pathetic sense to them. The genius is found somewhere in the grey area of that conflict/contradiction.

I agree with this a lot. It was always the thing that fascinated me about metal - while the rhetoric surrounding it always talks about extremities and anti-isms, the actual music is incredibly formulaic and often very rigid. Even worse with anarcho-punk, which often follows exactly the same musical format. This isn't a criticism - there are good and bad in both (I expect, can't stand punk myself) - but the rhetoric never lives up to the music.

Burzum are just a good band, I doubt there are many who would be genuinely disturbed by it. There are a few records that, usually musically, are really difficult to listen to, and incredibly harrowing. I adore Schnitkke, but there's records of his that are so bleak I can't listen to them too often. But that's different to finding something genuinely challenging to step away from lyrically - I don't/ can't hear Burzum's lyrics, and I expect he's pretty bad at them, but I'll stick with my first example and say Randall, I find, is exceptionally difficult to step away from, to intellectually distance myself from. It's entirely incidental, non-important music that is in many ways shite, but the content is so wrong, or worse, so effective in its aims of being wrong, I can't even laugh at it any more. Which is what I find more worrying.

Extreme political imagery or ideas in music have to be some of the most stupid, obvious things that I can think of. Is it possible to not be offended by the use of a swastika by a 'bright' artist who decided to throw it into their creative cauldron because part of you can't help but feel utter contempt for them and their own methods of self-expression? Personally that's my attitude towards these things now. Extremism in music works only when there is a seriously talented person at work, and said extreme music/imagery isn't of the kind that is ultimately only employed to offend and aggravate. Whitehouse can be funny, but a lot of the time leave me cold and rather bored of their antics.

[Glice]

Precisely. It seems from the recent Wire interview that Whitehouse are quite bright chaps, but that doesn't make their aesthetic any less defunct. Now, someone like Non is interesting because I think he challenges a lot of things without coming across like a puerile twat. Which is, potentially, a lot more dangerous, but certainly a great deal more valuable.

What I don't always understand, on the other hand, is why sometimes a musician can be an engaging and stimulating interviewee but that doesn't reflect on their music at all. I swear I read a Bono interview where I've even found myself liking him and agreeing with what he said.

[Glice]

Terris, remember them? Brilliant, utterly brilliant interviewees. Rubbish music. J&MC since about 1995. Manic Street Preachers. Mike Patton. All great interviewees, all rubbish music.

Articulating myself a bit more (so, obviating the cathartic element to this thread) the problem I find is that music is nearly always better when it leaves you feeling a bit dirty, or ecstatic, or like you've been raped, or like you've had the best blow-job ever (etc) but it can be incredibly confusing when these effects actually happen to you.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

I like Wagner.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Glice

Terris, remember them? Brilliant, utterly brilliant interviewees. Rubbish music. J&MC since about 1995. Manic Street Preachers. Mike Patton. All great interviewees, all rubbish music.

ditto henry rollins, jarvis cocker & latley, thurston moore

[demonrail666]

The problem with so much of alt. rock's use of fascism as some kind of shock tactic is actually how safe it is. We live in a liberal society where such gestures are ultimately tolerated (albeit reluctantly and at times with some opposition) There are now far greater social taboos than National Socialism, which has become little more than a distant symbol of evil or 'wrongness' in most parts of the world - at least those parts of the world where this type of music tends to be created (America, Britain and Central Europe, Japan, etc.). You only have to look at the current moral outrage in Britain surrounding the whole 'Madelaine' saga to see that the swastika is, by comparison, a fairly minor source of anxiety in most people's lives.

Originally Posted by Glice

Terris, remember them? Brilliant, utterly brilliant interviewees. Rubbish music. J&MC since about 1995. Manic Street Preachers. Mike Patton. All great interviewees, all rubbish music.

Articulating myself a bit more (so, obviating the cathartic element to this thread) the problem I find is that music is nearly always better when it leaves you feeling a bit dirty, or ecstatic, or like you've been raped, or like you've had the best blow-job ever (etc) but it can be incredibly confusing when these effects actually happen to you.

Wow, yes, Terris were another one of those bands that could be entertaining interviewees but whose music to be perfectly honest with you I can't remember at all. I think I had one or possibly two of their singles but I must have given them away to someone or sold them. This kind of brings us to another side of this topic, which is that of regular mouthy people making music but lacking the talent for it, and therefore using anything under the sun to get noticed.

[Tokolosh]

Originally Posted by tesla69

well your mother is totally wrong, gays and nazis go hand in hand, just like Republicans and nazis. Of course it is unhealthy repressed sexuality which is easily expressed as physical violence. all those big strong men bonding with each other in the precise uniforms and fetishizing 'strength and will' certainly have a repressed agenda. And sublimate the love of a man for the love of one's Party.

but these days the aryan brotherhood, with its ethic of jailhouse male-on-male sex and willingness to do anything to make money like indulge in pedophilia and work with russian mobsters in human slavery and other trafficking is unnatural and pathological.

I never looked at it that way. Go figure.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Glice

Terris, remember them? Brilliant, utterly brilliant interviewees. Rubbish music. J&MC since about 1995. Manic Street Preachers. Mike Patton. All great interviewees, all rubbish music.

I often think that some bands should be given interview, rather than recording, contracts. You can imagine it. Morrissey being signed by Rolling Stone magazine to do three interviews a year. He could even do a 'metal machine music' style contract breaker and do his final interview with them in latin.

[Everyneurotic]

the truth is most people who dabble in that shit are idiots and/or looking for shock value; sometimes, they grow up and realize what they did was stupid (example: throbbing gristle) or wear their shit out until it's no longer shocking and have to move somewhere else (bowie and his illegitimate son, marilyn manson).

there's bands who dabble in that shit but are so clueless you have to laugh (like slayer). it was a bit scary watching them in new jersey and have a few skinhead neo nazis sieg heiling, although i doubt they knew they were giving the aryan approval to two latinos.

i feel more sorry for daniel johnston than anything, he's just a mentally unstable person, would you really take him seriously?

then there's the people who are immerse in that shit for life, where they are like spokespersons for such "movements" and do believe that stuff, and just as i wouldn't join a party or an ideology, i don't buy their records. still, not listening to what they have to say makes you ignorant to what you are opposing.

as i see it, there's so many stupid persons doing ace music that not supporting them just because they are morons would be dumb, if the music is good. it's just a different way in which their stupidity shows. i mean, if you don't like drugs, would you stop listening to people who do music, even though their music is right up your alley, because they do drugs?

also, many of these people are pathetic figures who hate themselves, have awful addictions, are miserable and have tried to kill themselves; would you really hold what they say as some threat?

there's this need for rock n' roll since the hippies started, to give music a "message" and a "meaning" but, really, it doesn't, at least not directly; but when people force these meanings and messages, they usually end up with some retarded.

still, good music is good music regardless, and you can enjoy music without supporting assholes.

[floatingslowly]

Originally Posted by MellySingsDoom

I personally can't stand the homophobic lyrics of some hip-hop, dancehall etc, but draw the line at asking for this stuff to be censored.

that's what I was going to post.

I love both hip-hop and dancehall, however it's hard for me to buy into the one-love concept when there's an exclusion list.

in my mind, I like to attribute it to cultural ignorance, although that's no real excuse.

[jico.]

i'm not tolerant with xenophobia, racism etc. etc.
no one should.

[atsonicpark]

Well, what I don't really see is the point in labeling yourself as a racist band; making it part of your imagery or whatever.. I'm sure 80% of musicians have strong beliefs in things we wholeheartedly disagree with, but they don't have to make it the focal point in their music.

Even if it's something considered "okay" by popular opinion -- a "christian" band for example. There are a shitload of bands who are Christian, but bands that separate themselves from the pact and conform to the idea and advertise themselves as a "Christian band" are ridiculous.

It all comes down to how far they drive their message into their music; Axl Rose went on a homophobic, racist rant in one of his songs, but the rest of Guns N Roses's imagery/songs had nothing to do with homophobia or racism... I don't think any lyrics or art or anything should be censored, but I agree that it seems most bands just put out this kind of stuff to "shock" people anyway.

But as I said earlier, it's hard for me to even give a band a chance if I hate the people involved... though it takes a lot for me to HATE someone.. I can always admit if a band is GOOD, but I don't enjoy listening to people I hate, so yeah.

You can be racist without being in a "racist band" and letting your racism shine through in everything you do... we all have sides of us that no one sees and beliefs that we may not completely advertise, so yeah.. just don't make it the focal point of the band. It should be about the music, anyway.. that's what should be important.. I can't really think of any bands I listen to for the lyrics.. but when I DO hear a band go , "FUCKIN KILL ALL THE NIGGERS!!!!!! FUCKING DIE NIGGERSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS" I honestly think the band is morons and their retarded 'message' makes the music a lot less enjoyable to me.