This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

The Black Metal Phenomenon: A Reasonable Approach

Discussion in 'The Philosopher' started by wagontrain, Jul 15, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Scourge of God loses:


    what is your point?

    Venom's own wikipage, likely created by fans of the band, catagorizes the band as: Speed metal; Blackened thrash metal;
    Black metal. The Venom wikipage goes on to state:

    But, Scourge disagrees and therefore Prozak is right even though Scourge doesn't completely agree with Prozak's conclusions. Whatever.

    The Celtic Frost wikipage, likely created by fans of the band, catagorizes Celtic Frost as: Thrash metal, Death metal, Doom metal, Black metal, Avant-garde metal. But Scourge disagrees therefore Prozak is correct even though Scourge doesn't completely agree with Prozak's conclusions. Whatever.

    Bathory's wikipage, likely created by fans of the band, catagorizes Bathory as: Black metal, Viking metal, Thrash metal but Scourge disagrees therefore Prozak is correct even though Scourge doesn't completely agreee with Prozak's conclusions. Whatever.

    All of this even though Scourge doesn't completely agree with Prozak's essay. This is getting ridiculous.

    Let me quote Wikipedia's black metal essay agin:

    And scourge agrees that these bands were the formative bands of Black Metal, but he doesn't think either of those bands should be called Thrash metal therefore Prozak is correct even though Scourge doesn't completely agree with Prozak's conclusions. Whatever.

    Conclusion: Prozak and Scourge are anus buddies and neither are correct.

    I tell you what speed, you're well read enough, I'm simply offering you an alternative to another misplaced, inaccurate anus article.
     
  2. infoterror

    infoterror Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
  3. infoterror

    infoterror Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You've been an ANUS-hater forever, though. You'd hate anything they/he do, and you'll always use that as your guide instead of honest judgment about what they do. Why don't you just admit you're motivated by hatred because Prozak owned you on the forums a few years ago, and get the fuck over it?!?
     
  4. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Why are you anus protectors so incredibly predictable in your defense of what you consider to be your "special" place?

    If you could cite an instance when I was "owned" then I might consider what you're saying. But since all you have is internet troll speak (oh my, was I really owned, oh dear) to argue against me with then its likely you have no real point to make except "he owned you." Which, essentially, is the anus message.

    Yes, I do think a.n.u.s. was a big joke and the opinions stated there by regulars such as yourself were mostly opinions of ignorance. I have no problem admitting that. You perform the same scoial service on these boards.

    My honest opinion is simple. If you do not agree with an article's conclusions then it's silly to post it for the sake of posting it. I asked Scourge why he'd bother to post it and I posted a link to another article.

    What do you care anyway what my opinion of anus is?
     
  5. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest

    You lose.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_metal


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_music
     
  6. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So let me get this straight: your basic argument is that wikipedia is right and prozak and I are wrong because...

    ...wait for it...

    ...the suspense must be killing you...

    ...not yet...

    wikipedia says so!

    Look, if this is your definition of 'evidence,' maybe a philosophy forum isn't quite your speed. You might try these forums for music discussion targeted toward your intellectual demographic.
     
  7. Blowtus

    Blowtus Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Straya
    as compared to your basic argument that Prozak says so?
     
  8. infoterror

    infoterror Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I think his argument was that he agreed with Prozak, and then Ojeblikket had a panty-drop and got butthurt that anyone might do that, and then tried to debunk him by saying "butt wikipedia says so!!1!"

    That's the point here.
     
  9. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Your comprehension is questionable. I asked Scourge why he'd bother posting an article in attempts to call it informative if he disagreed with some of the article's information.
     
  10. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest

    you lose.

    I discredited your suggestion that some aforementioned bands were not of the thrash genre by showing you a page where fans of the bands in question referred to the bands as being of the thrash genre.

    You attempted to dismiss wikipedia's accuracy by discredting its evaluation of the genre of some bands. Well, if there are fans of the bands in question that publicly and accurately discredit you then its likely that your estimation of the bands' genre is innaccurate and that you're simply trying to push a point.
     
  11. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As opposed to my basic argument, which is that there are clear distinctions of basic musical approach between the first generation of black metal and the music of their speed metal contemporaries. This isn't about what anyone says: it's about the basic facts. The classic hallmarks of speed metal - high speed staccato riffing emphasizing the resolution of rhythm (that little headbanging punch at the end of each phrase that is the enduring legacy of the genre) over any other concern, the 70s prog-inflected structures building elaborate strings of riffs around a core of verse/chorus architecture, and the use of extensive (and often exteded) lead breaks in the guitar hero tradition are notably absent in the first generation of black metal. Instead, these bands went either for a stripped down punklike urgency carried more by unwavering intensity in the vein of Motorhead or The Misfits than by pure velocity or strategically placed syncopation (Venom and Sodom), or for demi-operatic narrative music utilizing a range of tempos and textures not found in speed metal (Hellhammer/Celtic Frost and Bathory). You can try to make this about personalities, but that's only, I suppose, because you can't afford to make it about the facts.
     
  12. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I see. Now why don't you take a look back at the thread and look at who posted the article. You might find it to be an educational experience.
     
  13. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And wikipedia also says GWAR, Trivium and Panterar are thrash bands, your point?
     
  14. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    The quote from wikipedia I've been displaying has stated that: "The First Wave of black metal refers to the bands that first influenced the black metal sound, often starting as thrash metal bands."

    Wikipedia says this of thrash metal: "Thrash metal is a subgenre of heavy metal music, one of the extreme metal subgenres that is characterised by its signature high speed and aggression [...]This genre is much more aggressive compared to its relative, speed metal.

    So, speed metal has only entered the debate by Scourge, not myself. Perhaps Scourge is under the impression that Thrash metal is Speed metal and hence he believes his argument against speed metal stands true of thrash metal as well.
     
  15. Øjeblikket

    Øjeblikket Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    old scratch, scourge of god, what do I care? you're both anus fags.
     
  16. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Like a lot of people here, I use the term 'speed metal' to describe what you would call 'thrash metal' (and reserve 'thrash' for the speed metal/hardcore 'crossover' hybrid of bands like S.O.D., D.R.I. and Cryptic Slaughter). However, if you'd take the time to compare my comments on speed metal to pedopedia's on 'thrash metal', you'll note that we're obviously talking about the same thing.

    In other words, stop stalling.
     
  17. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'd noticed your disdain for facts already, but thanks for the heads up there, pal!

    :loco:
     
  18. Justin S.

    Justin S. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,007
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    A little bitch-fight may be amusing, but this is getting ridiculous. Please make your way back towards the (shit) topic.
     
  19. Scourge of God

    Scourge of God New Metal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've been on topic, my man, but 'yon chump insists on dragging it away from facts and toward personalities. Alas, there's nothing I can do to bring him toward a more disciplined approach: but occasionally we must go where the conversation leads, no (can someone please come up with a handy little Gallic Shrug emoticon for just such an occasion)?
     
  20. Cythraul

    Cythraul Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    6,754
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Dear Scourge of God,

    Why do you refer to wikipedia as 'pedopedia'???

    Sincerely,
    Cyth
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page