OleEinar

So that would be recommended for me. I have to say you've piqued my curiosity, even though productions of this kind always seem a bit "suspect." However, you could have avoided doing the review in a shopping list style...

Of course you wanted to give 5 stars, right? I love your enthusiasm; it's wonderful to think that a 15-year-old can still get excited about these things today.

Ah, by the way, the Maiden covers are shit leopards.

Damn, and I, in my ignorance, believed those who say this is their best! Anyway, it's the only Maiden album I know, I like it but I rarely listen to this kind of metal at any other time than on my morning commute from home to university... Usually, during that time, I alternate this, the first Metallica, and the second Judas Priest album :-) Double 5 because I care about you :D

This one seems interesting to me. But 2 samples? :-)

Anyway, this Maiden review you'll have to find a way to make us read it ;-)

Sub Pop? Interesting...

Sorry, manliù, I hadn't noticed. I was wondering where you had been. Welcome back!

..."So -you are the ones speaking- new economic relations will emerge, already prepared and calibrated with mathematical precision, so that in an instant all possible questions will vanish for the simple reason that all possible answers will be found. [...] Of course, there can be no guarantee whatsoever (I say this myself) that we won't die of boredom, because everything will be extremely sensible. Certainly, for boredom, you can invent anything. Even gold pins can be stuck out of boredom [as Cleopatra did into the bosoms of her slaves], but that would be nothing. The problem is that one would do it as if the pins were a lovely thing, enough to take delight in. Because man is foolish; a phenomenon of stupidity. Indeed, he is not stupid at all, but ignoble like no other being, even if you searched with a lantern. There you go, I, for instance, would not be at all surprised if suddenly, without saying a word, amidst future universal reasonableness, a gentleman with a despicable, or rather regressive and mocking, physiognomy appeared, put his hands on his hips, and said to us all: <<Well, gentlemen, isn't it time to kick this reasonableness to bits, solely for the purpose of sending logarithms to hell and returning to live according to our foolish will?>>. That would still be nothing; the trouble is that he would certainly find followers: such is man. And all for the most trivial reason, which wouldn’t even be worth mentioning: for the reason that man, always and everywhere, whoever he may be, loves to act as he pleases and not as reason and interest advise; because one can even desire what is against one's own advantage but at times it is POSITIVELY INDISPENSABLE. One's personal, free, independent will, one's whim, even if it is the coarsest, one's imagination sometimes driven to the limits of madness, that is what that more advantageous advantage is, neglected, that does not fit into any classification, and for which all systems and theories constantly go to hell. From where have these wise men deduced that man must desire normality and virtue? From what does their assumption arise that man must necessarily want what is sensibly advantageous? Man only needs to be INDEPENDENT in his will to choose, no matter what price his independence has and wherever it leads him. In short, the devil knows what he wants..." (Fedor M. Dostoevsky)

..."When has civilization ever made us more human? Civilization generates only a contradictory multiplicity of sensations in man and... nothing else. And with the development of this contradiction, man may well reach the point of finding intoxication in blood. After all, he has already arrived at that. [...] Civilization has made man, if not more bloodthirsty, at least worse, more ignobly bloodthirsty than before. Previously, he saw justice in the shedding of blood, and exterminated those who deserved it with a clear conscience. Now, although we consider the shedding of blood to be a shameful act, we nonetheless engage in this shame far more than before. [...] Even now, although man has learned to see more clearly than in barbaric times, he does not behave as reason and science would have him. And yet you are absolutely convinced that man will undoubtedly learn this as soon as certain old, bad habits disappear completely and good thought and science prevail, thus educating and correcting human nature. You believe that then man will VOLUNTARILY cease to make mistakes, and, so to speak, will automatically no longer feel the need to separate his will from his normal interests. Moreover, you say, science itself will then teach man that in fact he has neither will nor whim, and that he himself is nothing more than a piano key or the stop of an organ and that, above all, the laws of nature still exist in the world; so that whatever he does does not depend on his will, but happens on its own, according to the laws of nature. Consequently, it will only be necessary to discover these laws, and man will no longer need to answer for his actions, he will be able to live with utmost lightness. All human actions will then be automatically evaluated according to these laws, mathematically, like logarithmic tables, up to 108000 and entered into the calendar; or better yet, there will appear some commendable editions similar to today's lexical encyclopedias, where everything will be so perfectly calculated and defined that there will be no more events or adventures in the world."...