Hal

Thank you for your response mementori, I have some doubts regarding what you call writing codes, or rather their use; perhaps "destra revisionista" is a linguistic code that I would not only understand better, but that is probably more accurate for these fanatics. Nonetheless, what you meant to say is clear to me, although not everything, as I still have some doubts about the correctness of the "way to immerse the reader in the moods of the listening," as well as the method; on this, I believe we will remain distant.

There are things you say that I agree with and others that I don't, mementori. Evaluating a work, yes, it's a fundamental issue, it's true, but it's not the only one. A complete vision is necessary, alongside an assessment and interpretation. On these points, it's possible and permissible to divide opinions. In this case, when you face an audience - as you say - speaking of a "romantic and decadent right..." (with what follows), you are not just providing a fact, but you are interpreting it.
I do not share your interpretation at all. You are highlighting the message with elements of charm. You are free to discuss it as you wish, and I am free to strongly disagree with this reading without questioning the musical and innovative abilities of these guys. However, what leaves me stunned - even in your reply - is that you thought to review this work trying not to hurt the sensibility of those who listen to this music (Metodo), without considering the opposite problem. That is, these works are aimed at offending the sensibility of others; they are born and live for this purpose. You cannot think that this only pertains to the personal sphere. It's a crazy method. Do you want to provide a complete view? Then you must also say these things. Forget about the romantic right... forget about doing justice to this music... here we are dealing with idiots, and stating that is neither unprofessional nor unpleasant, but it involves taking a position that one should not be worried about. Bye.

Dear Lethe, you don’t need to speak for me; you risk saying untrue things, that is, nonsense. What I think is abundantly clear here and in the other review of this group, if you have the patience to read. For your convenience, I’ll summarize: when talking about this album, the connection to an intrinsic message is evident. The nonsense is pretending to see it detached from the music. Best regards.

Not I, but a Jew like Barenboim has said that no work of Wagner has an anti-Semitic tone. Frankly, I do not believe that the WORKS of this group are free from Nazi and anti-Semitic sentiments. And in the end, the phrase about the independence of art came: all nonsense.

I don't think the example is appropriate. It is absolutely true that Wagner was anti-Semitic, so much so that it was not possible to perform his works for a long time in Israel. It was not without controversy that Daniel Barenboim broke the curse. The conductor justified this choice by separating the man from the artist and stating that no Wagner opera has an anti-Semitic undertone. Controversial? Maybe; certainly, if certain exaltations are present, they have a non-explicit tone. These should be discussed in the analysis of Wagner. On the other hand, in the case of Blutharsch, it does not seem to me that such a division can be made painlessly, as their art is explicitly infused with their own "mission" (the cover speaks for itself, and I invite you once again to check their website). I would also add that I would not underestimate these "artistic" projects, nor the allure that Nazism can exert on many.

lost listening, to be regained

Thank you for the genuine response. It will be difficult for me to see him perform live, so choosing the album to get to know Bogino is mandatory. Bye.

Memento, you say you don't want to do something and then you do it inexorably. ("I don't want to equate a peaceful citizen of the West with a bloodthirsty SS" ---> "Yes, their duty, in different forms of responsibility, just like all of us"). Relationships and equivalences aimed at curbing confusion, you seek justification, believing it to be an explanation. Before the content, the error lies in the method. So, this post of yours with der blutharsch is relevant, at least concerning the perspective you've given us. In fact, posts like these serve as reminders that are confusing and contradictory; what you want to communicate remains blurred, perhaps because you don't really know in your heart what to think. Your confusion is demonstrated in your subsequent explanations where you link the “desolation, death, and decay” of the war witnesses to their music. While I can understand that desolation and death can be common themes, they represent antithetical visions of the same desolation and death. The review shows the same interpretative suffering. It is not therefore "what" you reviewed, but "how" you reviewed it that was and is questionable. Odradek's words on the matter are exemplary and perfectly grasp the point. The only thing that comforts me is that, at least this time, I haven't read the widely spread and colossal nonsense that states "it's just music." Goodbye.

Alright then, I'll update you tomorrow about the two young lads, odra Haloa.

ENOUGH CRAP!! (money well spent)