Fidia

I'm taking advantage of a moment of free time to write to you. For Pretazzo: I expressed myself poorly, I meant that in my thoughts I am essentially a progressive. The bands you mentioned, except for the Velvet, I know only marginally, so I couldn't respond to you, as I am much more knowledgeable in other genres (metal, gothic, dark, something of new wave). As for musical tastes, I believe I am diverse, otherwise I wouldn't listen to Killing Joke, Sisters of Mercy, Siouxsie, Katatonia, Black Sabbath, The Sound (I encourage you to read my review that will be published soon because I care a lot about it and you'll understand why), Clan of Xymox (currently the ones I listen to the most, and they mix techno music, Depeche Mode, and the same Sisters of Mercy, so absolutely unmissable). But that doesn't mean I disdain (and indeed still listen to, albeit less frequently than in the past) the bands that introduced me to music like Def Leppard, the old Iron and Metallica, and the same scorned Guns, groups for which, for the reason mentioned above, I have great respect. I think this also means being progressive. As for Reznor and other bands like Ministry, as well as people like, for example, the Neurbaten, etc., de gustibus, sorry, I really can't listen to them, with all good intentions. But I absolutely respect (and it goes without saying) those who do listen to them.

A polite request to the editors, just for accuracy. If you could change the release year of the album, since it came out only a few weeks ago. Thanks.

I want to clarify, just to avoid misunderstandings, that my conservatism only pertains to a certain type of music (namely some industrial sounds) ;-D

Hello guys.
Joan, once again I partially agree with what you wrote, as if Michelangelo had really faced opposition, he wouldn't even have had the opportunity to fresco the Sistine Chapel.
Let’s be clear, all great artists have had issues with the church and their patrons, from Leonardo to Michelangelo.
But they were nonetheless regarded for what they truly were, that is, formidable artists, even back then, not just after their deaths (as happened, to cite the most famous example, with Van Gogh). Their fame and skill were indisputable and brought glory and prestige to their patrons.
To my friend Undying: I'm really sorry, but I only know David Lynch by reputation and haven't had the chance to see any of his films.
I partially disagree with what you wrote about Coleman.
Like everyone, I love music that gives me intense sensations and emotions.
There are bands that provoke a certain type of emotion only temporarily (like, for example, some hard rock bands that Tabba would define as "tamarri"), but then they completely tire me out, bands that don’t evoke any kind of emotions at all (please don’t take it personally, but this is exactly the case with NIN), and bands whose songs consistently provoke the same type of emotions in me.
This is precisely the case, among others, with Killing Joke from the New Wave period (mid-80s), whose wonderful albums "Nighttime," "Brighter than a Thousand Suns," and "Outside the Gates" give me intense sensations every time I listen to them.
That's why I define Coleman as an artist, because he is capable of conveying emotions that Reznor doesn’t provide me with. That's all. Greetings to everyone.

Hi Mista, the points you raise are absolutely right and shareable. It's true, one of my biggest flaws is that sometimes I can't fully "disconnect." I will try to make the most of what you wrote and I thank you for the advice and compliments.

I await your thoughts on this matter; for now, I wish you good night (sveglia bastarda!) ;-D

Enrì, have you read Salem's Lot by Stephen King? (I know it has nothing to do with it, but I wanted to chime in ;-D)

For Undying: personally, I am against establishing general rules to define artistic taste. The work of a painter, a sculptor, a writer, etc., primarily lives through the intimate and interpersonal circumstances of the one who created it.

Currently, however, the conception of beauty and personal taste has fallen into disuse, and art is only pursued for mere speculative purposes, hoping that a purchased piece will become a golden goose in the more or less near future.
Let me give you a concrete example. I have personally seen my, so to speak, employer who literally went crazy with joy at the death of Franz Borghese because just before, he had purchased one of his oils.
Moreover, the very fact that big banks and large companies invest in art says it all about the world we live in today.

The argument you make, Joan, is only partly true. The artists you mentioned enjoyed political and religious support simply because they were the best. And the fact that they were the best was, in a way, objective, since, unlike today, art at that time was based on beauty. There were no other criteria known, such as social denunciation, etc.