mementomori

Wow, all in one breath... but who are you? One of the Wolf Eyes? Good for them, but I haven't heard this one...

Hello, this is the first time I'm commenting on one of your reviews, but I've been a silent admirer of yours for a long time: it was time to express my appreciation for you, as I define you a brave "fighter in the dark," like other courageous souls on Debaser. With passion, you bring an invaluable contribution to the web, showcasing authors and works of high value that are little known, which is why your reviews are often not widely read or commented on. In any case, it is precisely this kind of effort that makes Debaser a unique site and perhaps the largest historical archive in Italy, given that here we read things often overlooked elsewhere. Congratulations, keep it up...

Hi I BAN, I'm sorry if sometimes I haven't replied to you; it's not something particularly intentional or planned. I don't spend much time on the internet, so I don't have many opportunities to respond. When I'm asked "technical" questions, I usually reply, and if you check the comments, there should be over 300 interventions. Sometimes I miss something, or I get questions that I've already answered in the past, or whose answers are contained in other reviews of mine... but there's nothing elitist about it... and I often make an effort to respond to private messages... of course, my comments, even on reviews that aren't mine, are always focused on music and its content, while often on debaser it devolves into other topics, which is why I'm not a regular visitor to forums... in any case, I will try to be more present in the future. Bye.

I attach myself to the debate a bit late because I've only just had the chance to listen to it, and I really want to comment: truly spectacular album, and I who doubted it after reading various conflicting opinions here and there. Sure, they've become quite sentimental, and even Radiohead are no longer the benchmark, as the adopted paradigm is that of the more sentimental rock sponsored by the always-criticized Coldplay. Yet Anathema continue to excite, more melodic, more emotional, more landscape-oriented, almost serene and sunny they've become. They’ve maintained the monumentality of Pink Floyd, they’ve become perfect, thanks to the always excellent Wilson and the decisive contributions of the orchestra, great sounds, breathtaking crescendos, dreamy atmospheres like only they know how to create... definitely better than the penultimate "desaster", which remains the only album that leaves me puzzled in their discography... it's just a pity about Vincent's voice, here too clean and fussy, lacking its peculiar rasp that made it so characteristic. Excellent, in any case.

ugly panda, let me clarify: when I say that the listener must be respected, I'm obviously not referring to the artist (who, as I explained above, must express themselves without limits and without considering the consumer of their art); I'm rather referring to us in forums: you see, you and I probably share a similar view, but that doesn’t mean it’s absolutely right and that those who think differently from us should necessarily be labeled as rigid, schematic thinkers, driven by preconceptions and prejudices. In short, maybe I see it differently, but if someone is outraged because a certain artist glorifies Nazism and war or expresses revisionist or anti-democratic views (or seems to do all these things; one doesn't have to delve deeply if they're repulsed from the surface), they should ultimately be respected. We are still talking about taboos that are strong in our society, about genuine historical dramas, atrocities, millions of deaths—many horrible things that I can understand might offend the sensibilities of many. Probably, we no longer care about Nazism; perhaps an artist who rode an image of pedophilia would shock us more and leave others indifferent... In short, if art is free expression, then its evaluation remains free as well...

ugly panda, let me clarify: when I say that the listener must be respected, I'm obviously not referring to the artist (who, as I explained above, must express themselves without limits and without considering the consumer of their art); I'm rather referring to us in forums: you see, you and I probably share a similar view, but that doesn’t mean it’s absolutely right and that those who think differently from us should necessarily be labeled as rigid, schematic thinkers, driven by preconceptions and prejudices. In short, maybe I see it differently, but if someone is outraged because a certain artist glorifies Nazism and war or expresses revisionist or anti-democratic views (or seems to do all these things; one doesn't have to delve deeply if they're repulsed from the surface), they should ultimately be respected. We are still talking about taboos that are strong in our society, about genuine historical dramas, atrocities, millions of deaths—many horrible things that I can understand might offend the sensibilities of many. Probably, we no longer care about Nazism; perhaps an artist who rode an image of pedophilia would shock us more and leave others indifferent... In short, if art is free expression, then its evaluation remains free as well...

Hey hold on, calm down, let’s not slip into the usual controversies (and in this, I’m a veteran, considering I usually write about apocalyptic folk). Generally, I agree with Panda, as for me, art has no color: being a communicative urgency, and therefore irrational, it can take any form; this is a freedom that must be recognized for every artist. That said, we must also understand that even a simple reference to certain historical phases can upset different sensitivities, and just as the artist deserves respect, so does the listener. To all those wondering why there beats "a black heart" in neofolk/industrial, I remind you that industrial culture (British first wave, led by Throbbing Gristle) sees the current phase of history as the terminal phase of an incurable disease for humanity; industrial music thus arises as a representation of this decay, and it aims (provocatively) to encompass all the worst possible (racism, satanism, nazism, pornography, wars, industrial alienation, exploitation, media manipulation, etc.): it is music of unease (strongly avant-garde) that seeks to shock the listener, at least in its original connotation. Over time, this structure loses its value of conceptual disruption, and becomes a cliché (as happens every time a genre is created), also draping itself in fundamentally right-wing ideologies (often in opposition to the status quo, in line with the decadent spleen that dark trends would bring in the eighties)... provocation, cult for death, representation of unease in all its forms; some believe it, others profit from it, no one admits it. Specifically, I was talking about Blood Axis (and the fact that I consider them fascists doesn’t mean they are necessarily bad artists), but it’s obvious that you can't generalize (ha ha ha), so there are a thousand distinctions to be made, from the impenetrable Death in June by Douglas Pearce, to the contradictory Current 93 by Tibet, from the "traditionalist" visions of Sol Invictus and Fire + Ice, to the real fascists, who are Blutharsch (who are good, by the way)...

Hello everyone, seeing so many comments on my review moves me; and if we’re talking about Blood Axis, it’s truly the best way to celebrate my two hundred fiftieth review on Debaser. I wanted to make a couple of clarifications: I certainly don’t consider myself an authority on the matter; my writings stem from the simple enjoyment of the products, and the rest is just personal impressions, not backed by documented and reliable sources. In a sea of assertions, I gradually rediscover a few too many clichés, so the overall sentiment of my reviews, rather than being the bible of apocalyptic folk, should be taken as the gospel according to Memento. Second issue: Blood Axis fascists/non-fascists? This has been discussed a thousand times in a thousand forums, and I thank those who come to my aid with various posts. I’ve never read statements, books, essays, or treatises by or about Moynihan... I rely on common sense and personal sensitivity: someone who during a concert performs the Roman salute or includes a Mussolini speech in a song (in 1998, not in 1978), industrial culture and provocations aside, is a fascist in my view. Just read the lyrics of "The Comrade Song," which explicitly expresses the typical vision of an organic society (illuminated/sheep, barons/peasants) that totalitarian regimes (from the right) loved so much... every captain has his comrade, and even if Moynihan likes to play the captain, that doesn’t exclude him from a worldview that I would define (simplistically) as fascist. Moynihan’s thought is certainly more complex, and I welcome all those who offer an alternative view to the status quo, but in general, I believe that one should be wary of artists’ statements (where they love to wallow in ambiguity and never, I mean never, claim to be fascists). Just my personal opinion. Bye.

WHATTTT???? The last Blood Axis has been released? What news you’re giving me, I didn’t expect it anymore… just a moment while I recover from the shock…

p.s. "Cats, Incense, Candles & Wine": I find it irresistible. But beyond the Beatles-esque opening and closing, I would have difficulty defining it as Brit-pop, if by that term we mean bands like Oasis and Blur. It seems more like a bizarre experiment that fits well within the context of this "mega-melting pot of rock" that is this double album: for instance, the central explosion is overwhelming and I even find elements of swing, Zappa echoes, transitions between the baroque and the playful that are somewhat distant from canonical Brit-pop...Dorrian’s voice, after all, would kill any (even unconscious) pop temptation...in any case, I wouldn’t worry about the band’s evolution, which seems solid (indeed, imprisoned!) within the strong canons of rock, unable, even before being unwilling, to do anything other than respond to the verb of rock...bye, see you next time...