mementomori

...but it's not quite clear...usually, people tend to consider die propheten as the true first full-length, while satanische is seen as the EP that collects material from the band's early period, and the fact that several tracks included in it were then reworked on die propheten makes one think that it's more of a demo than anything else...anyway, I could be wrong...

it's not the best of the nineties, but it brought a nice breath of fresh air... I remember it managed to bring everyone together, young and old, extreme and less extreme... until Load by Metallica, the metal universe was something healthy, with fewer labels and more respect... then, with Load, the cracks began, the distinctions, the competitions of virility, defender vs poser, the rise of power metal and the revival of the Manowar mentality, conservatism, etc. What a shame, the metal of the first half of the nineties looked promising, with black metal, English doom, progressive, Swedish melodic death, Entombed's death'n'roll, the hardcore tendencies of Sepultura, the industrial metal wave with Godflesh and Ministry, Tool's post-metal (back then they called it that), stoner, Fear Factory, Nevermore, Type O Negative, Therion... there were plenty of great albums, it was a creative time... then the system imploded and divided between the ultra-conservatives and those who stepped outside of metal (Ulver, Tiamat, Moonspell...), luckily Neurosis stepped in to fix things... by the way, best album of the nineties: Through Silver in Blood!

In fact, this forum has been a continuous intertwining of different plans, and this, also due to my shortcomings, has prevented the creation of a clear ground for discussion that would allow for effective and adequate communication. I also apologize if some of my responses were not precisely targeted (the example of Battisti is indeed off-point), partly because I often have to read various contributions a bit hurriedly, depending on the circumstances. The viewpoints of the people are perfectly clear; it’s pointless to beat around the bush endlessly, this is certainly not the ideal setting. I have tried to pursue a difficult and personal approach to things, which had to tread lightly on a treacherous path filled with pitfalls, amidst prejudices, clichés, and particularly delicate themes. A cold and scientific approach that needed to go beyond the obvious condemnation and the celebration of bias. It’s clearly my fault; I have evidently failed in my intent, perhaps also because from the very beginning I should have better delineated the problem, better argued certain points (something that, after all, does not lend itself to the synthesis required by the context), and thrown less meat on the fire.
At this point, I would like to add one last thing regarding the crucial theme of the relationship between art and message, particularly concerning the analysis of a work of art where the message/content/intents are particularly negative/detrimental.
I will give a concrete example, to avoid unnecessary explanations. I don’t know if you have ever seen "Cannibal Holocaust," a (terrible) trash film that has become a cult because in it animals are killed to increase the impact of certain splatter scenes. As Hal rightly points out, there is the emotional level (exaltation and indignation, depending on whether one is mentally ill or a good person) and the analytical level: it is obvious that an analysis of this work cannot overlook this aspect (the violence against animals); not discussing it (or worse, justifying it) would truly result in a truncated analysis. But is it really so unthinkable to separate the technical-artistic aspect from the ethical-moral one? According to the reasoning of many, it seems to me that once the operation is condemned, there could be no technical proficiency, script, directorial mastery, actor skill, etc., that could justify such a grave act (the killing of animals). Well, that’s a shareable opinion, but it’s not the only possible approach. For example, Paolo Mereghetti, in his film dictionary, gives this movie 2 stars (with a maximum of 4), and this does not at all equate to a complete dismissal, but rather to a passing grade (Giusti, in his dictionary on trash cinema, even praises it, naturally with a good dose of irony). While for many it would have been a “no vote,” Mereghetti chose to go beyond the obvious condemnation of the operation and evaluate other factors. And I quote: "What is true, however, are the violent acts against animals, which many fans of the genre find unbearable. At the time, it was seized and condemned, raising a unanimous chorus of execration; then it returned with some cuts. It remains an indirect document of the malaise of the time and a mandatory step for anyone wishing to reflect on the representation of violence." I would like to emphasize the focus on the last sentence, which underscores the necessity of a metatextual analysis (after all, I too, beyond the technical aspect, have described the work of Der Blutharsch in the same terms: as a representation of a malaise, of an aggressive impulse always ready to manifest, and a useful essay to understand what goes on in the mind of a warmongering idiot). And with these words, I do not think of Mereghetti as a sadist, a hypocrite, or a malicious person, but simply as a disseminator of information, someone who provides information, a person who has conducted a thorough analysis. Perhaps clumsily and with a few too many phrases, I have

Damn, I feel like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, uncontrollable forces have been unleashed... I took a leap into the site too, but I must say that more than indignation, it inspired me with idiocy. All the arguments being made are correct, but they dig too rationally into a purely subjective and emotional dimension. They essentially clash with a simple fact: you listen to music, and you like it. You find out that the one who makes it is an idiot. So what happens, do you stop getting goosebumps? Do you rationally stop having emotions? No: you continue to have emotions (I’m not talking about Der Blutharsch but in general), emotional reactions are not a switch to be turned off or on at will. As I said before, the only thing you can do is question yourself... why do I like this music? Maybe because (I’m making a general hypothesis) my life is cold and rational, I work 40 hours a week, perhaps I commute, I see the same people, and then the need to escape somehow arises, maybe by reading a novel or watching a movie, without actually considering the message, just for entertainment. One simply disconnects. And maybe, as happens with horror cinema, we seek extreme experiences that everyday life doesn’t provide. For this reason, it’s possible to disregard the message; music is then the most ethereal art, connecting to feelings that so often we cannot control... And what about Battisti? Who financed the MSI? Isn't it serious that the money of some unaware fan went to such a cause? Should we stop listening to Battisti? (I want to emphasize that I have never listened to Battisti). Is his voice less beautiful? Are the lyrics less beautiful? But back to us, why does one listen to depressing music... because they are depressed? Because they are necrophiliac? No, simply because within each person's psychological nature, consciously or not, there exists an aggressive drive, which Freud defined as the death drive, that can be directed towards others or oneself. Perhaps it doesn't exist in those terms, but such a tendency exists, and many recognize it: why deny it? The reaction in this forum from certain people professing peace seemed to me a clear manifestation of what I'm saying. It is rather useful to understand it to better tame it, or sublimating it with listening to this kind of music rather than manifesting it in actual violence. Unfortunately, war persists not only because some instrumentally use it as a means of resolving conflicts. Unfortunately, war is also made by those who believe in it and consider it a cool thing. So listening to this music also enhances one's perception of the world, it makes one understand the feelings underlying those who think this way. Just like a horror movie, even a mediocre one, helps us understand how a serial killer thinks. These are four losers, they have a following of a few people, at least they are genuine and play out of passion, and what boredom can they really bring in practice? Why so much indignation, when in everyday reality filling up a tank has very different consequences? I don’t want to mix goats and cabbages again (I acknowledge that my discourse on the world has been a bit out of place), but it seems to me that there’s an assumption of a fictional and absolutized world of good and evil, of black and white, where one must take a stance, with or against something. It’s not populism, I just find myself in the strange situation where my brain says one thing and my skin says another. It’s a fact, it often happens in love but also in the stupid things in life, hasn’t it ever happened to you?

Wow guys, a day goes by and I still find you debating? Well, aside from the fact that I appreciate all the contributions (I really do), I would like to downsize the boundaries of the discussion for a second, otherwise we won’t get anywhere. The intention was to talk about a band. Period. I tried to stay as close as possible to the content, and I believe, as a reviewer, I provided all the necessary elements (both positive and negative aspects) to understand whether the album might interest the reader (someone, for example, who can’t separate form from concept has been warned and will rightly keep their distance). I wanted to outline the message behind this music, which lends itself to being described with emphasis, something I did not do (instead, I opted for an ironic approach), and, for the sake of honesty, and purely from my personal perspective (perhaps in a bit of a simplistic way that may have offended someone’s sensitivity), I wanted to clarify my position on it, distancing myself from the typical clichés that buzz around these characters (great vs fucking fascist). As for the rest, two clarifications: it’s logical that there are countless distinctions, my piece was not a treatise on sociology, I just wanted to embody a tendency. There are certainly those who fight silently and anonymously against the system, and there are those who limit themselves to fighting it by not going to McDonald's... but on a large scale, it seems to me that the masses respond, consciously or unconsciously, some more than others, with all the variations of the world, to very specific and induced cultural models. And even those who are aware of this have to engage in self-criticism and ask themselves if they can do more. Besides, I was talking about a starting point. Personally speaking, I don’t feel at peace with my conscience if I limit myself to driving less or writing on a forum to raise awareness on certain issues. And if that is my only weapon, then the sense of helplessness grows. I know it’s a drop in the ocean. I’m not saying it’s useless, but I also don’t think that alone can change things. For every three “good” actions, I will carry out a hundred “bad” ones of which I won’t even be aware. For this reason, knowing one’s limits is a good first step toward moving closer to the better, though that doesn’t stop people from continuing to die in everyday life, in the short term. And the system has become so complex and uncontrollable that it’s impossible to understand the consequences our simple daily actions can have (for example, buying a bottle of water, behind which lies an infinite chain of activities that are out of our control... we don’t live in a mountain community of five people!). This is the heartbreaking contradiction I feel. As for the music, if, for instance, a guitarist is skilled and can convey emotions, why not acknowledge that? And in my opinion, Julius knows his way around electronics (technically speaking), why not appreciate it? I’m an analytical type, not a synthetic one; I manage (and enjoy) dissecting things with the scalpel of the mind. And then, it’s a banality, but the reception of art is purely subjective. If I find myself getting excited about a type of music whose message is against my way of thinking, at the very least I ask myself questions, and reflections in reception are nothing more than answers and not justifications...

Guys, I didn't want to stir up a hornet's nest; I just wanted to talk about a certain type of music without coming across as a warmonger. As for the rest, what can I say, the fact that we’re here like fools bickering over trivial matters on the internet somewhat demonstrates our privileged condition... The fact that I ask questions and engage in self-critique is just a manifestation of my dialectical approach to reality and my materialistic, and above all relativistic, view of things, a vision that does not contemplate any absolute truth, none at all, not even the ideologies that become faiths and cloud our minds... yes, my values are fragile, but they couldn't be otherwise because everything is in constant motion and knowledge is a continuous negotiation... if all this sounds nihilistic or negative, I don’t know what to tell you; it’s just my way of seeing things. A scholar's report said the other day that the greenhouse effect has reached almost uncontrollable levels: how many of you have minimally changed your daily habits? How many have researched the issue? I don't think many, yet if the phone dies, we all rush to charge it, right? As for Der Blutharsch, they can suck like shit; I don't feel like carrying out a crusade for them (they don’t even drive me crazy), but I think the message from U2 is more harmful to the world, making us believe that everything is fine, with adorable children from the Third World making silly faces at the camera, etc., etc.... thanks to people like them and the banda bardò, we start to think we can be against the system while at the same time indulging in the comforts of life... life is easy, no? A nice sofa communism, but above all a good panacea for consciences... and as soon as someone points out (wrongly or rightly) a small contradiction, suddenly everyone starts barking. For this reason, and I'm saying this as someone on the left, if the left wants to have any meaning in the West, it will have to shake off a lot of prejudices, rid itself of some dogma, and conduct a proper self-examination, and maybe start reading Nietzsche... forget Moretti, go read (and watch) Pasolini instead! As for Lou Reed, I apologize; it was meant to be just a light-hearted provocation...

I agree, perhaps as a first approach, Venice is better; it flows better, is more ambient and less noisy... in my opinion, it's a bit less brilliant, but equally splendid and elegant, highly recommended!

CA-PO-LA-VO-RO...perhaps the review is a bit ethereal, but in fact, it's not music that can be easily described in words. Suffice it to say that the title track opens with the famous riff from Paranoid by Black Sabbath, and it continues for eight minutes of pseudo hallucinatory rock, with a more Satanic Tibet than usual and a more paranoid Balance than ever...a truly unclassifiable piece....as for the monumental seven seals, well, the bow is mandatory: twelve minutes of apocalyptic psychedelia, a crescendo of visions and words that undoubtedly constitutes one of the best moments ever from Current! Hard to find, it has been recently reissued, along with other essential EPs, in six six six: sick sick sick. A must-have, no ifs ands or buts.

golden words, break it down: the glorification of war is not only something unjustifiable culturally and rationally, but it's downright stupid. It's something obvious, but I'll never tire of repeating it: war is truly a load of crap, and all those who exalt it are total idiots who don't know what they're talking about and deserve to explode in the trenches amidst the worst suffering. The height of idiocy is hearing about war from an American jerk like Boyd Rice, who hasn't even seen war on a postcard. And if all this crap about war aims for a broader conceptual breath and represents a misanthropic view of the world and a metaphorical depiction of a ridiculous humanity, well, I may be simplistic, but I still believe it's better to be idiots in peace than dead (and idiots) in war. To the warmongers of this site, I recommend a healthy read: "Voyage au bout de la nuit" by Cèline.

My dear, keep in mind that "absence" represents about 30% of the album... if you don't like the industrial component, then you might want to focus on the canonical ambient of Eno ("On Lands" is also unsettling and gets close to certain things presented here), or, if you really want to take a risk, try "Requiem for abandoned souls," which is a bit more melodic... unfortunately, when dealing with raison d'être, one must factor in, between one melodic break and another, at least 5-10 minutes of minimal noise (not industrial in the strict sense)... take it or leave it...