What are you currently reading?

NAto · Post by **NAto** » Feb 19th, 2008, 08:04

Daedolon wrote:
Daedalus wrote:Ugly cover, huh?
Yes. What's the content about, apart from what it states on the cover?

I was wondering the same thing.

Sure Mayhem probably started a lot of stuff regarding Black Metal, I just think the music is bad IMO

mouth · Post by **mouth** » Feb 19th, 2008, 12:10

I'll take Lurker Of Chalice over Mayhem any day

Post by **Daedolon** » Feb 19th, 2008, 15:12

NAto wrote:Sure Mayhem probably started a lot of stuff regarding Black Metal, I just think the music is bad IMO

You could say that about pretty much everything, even if you don't like them, you can't argue with them having started the whole black metal scene.

NAto · Post by **NAto** » Feb 20th, 2008, 07:53

Daedolon wrote:
NAto wrote:Sure Mayhem probably started a lot of stuff regarding Black Metal, I just think the music is bad IMO
You could say that about pretty much everything, even if you don't like them, you can't argue with them having started the whole black metal scene.

BM goes further back than just Mayhem. Mayhem started second wave BM probably.

Post by **Daedolon** » Feb 20th, 2008, 10:45

IF you can call glam/heavy metal with posed satanist lyrics black metal, that is.

I can't.

Post by **Dimebog** » Feb 20th, 2008, 11:40

Yeah.

Anyway, it's arguable. Because satanic elements were out there since the fifties and the blues. Then you have Black Sabbath who were dubbed as a satanic band in the sixties. The myth of selling the soul to the devil didn't run past the Zeppelin in the seventies. Then cometh the eighties \m/ and the rest is history. I will only remind that jazz and soul were considered to be ungodly and sinister way back in the first half of the last century when gospel was imposed by the church as the only "good" music.

So, each era had it's share of what is considered satanic. However, when you say black metal, it's just a musical genre, and it should be enough to use your ear to identify what is and what is not.

NAto · Post by **NAto** » Feb 20th, 2008, 14:52

Seriously guys, bands that were seen as apparently thrash back in the day are now called First Wave Black Metal.

The one Venom album was even called "Black Metal", that's who coined the term in the first place.

Post by **Daedolon** » Feb 20th, 2008, 14:56

Yes but they played heavy metal / glam rock, and they were just using the satanic theme to provoke and gain media attention. Mayhem was the first band that made black metal in the true sense of the word.

Read the book. It has all about Venom, Bathory and even bands like Led Zeppelin and alike.

NAto · Post by **NAto** » Feb 20th, 2008, 15:13

Well, what is Black Metal in the true sense of the word? I hardly think it's defined by satanism, you get secular Black Metal bands. Even many of the more modern BM bands fake satanism.

Ok let me construct my argument this way...

Black Metal according to theory = First wave and second wave Black Metal. Both refer - collectively - to Black Metal.

When you refer to Black Metal you are talking about second wave Black Metal, therefor when you say Mayhem started it, you'd be correct... But, in theory, this is not the case.

The band who started the collective and theoretical Black Metal, was Venom. I'm not talking about the 90's onwards, I'm talking about before that.

Sure it might say in the book that Venom isn't Black Metal, but just because it's been published doesn't mean it's the "gospel". Before I believe what it says, I'd wait for it to be peer reviewed. In the mean time, general consensus is that First Wave Black Metal is part of Black Metal and therefor are the founders.

Post by **Daedolon** » Feb 20th, 2008, 15:43

I'm not saying the book knows the term, but as far as I can believe my own ears, I can say for 100% certainty that Venom is nothing like black metal, even if they came up with the term.

Shadowman · Post by **Shadowman** » Mar 31st, 2008, 02:02

By The Light of the Moon by Dean Koontz.

Shaggy · Post by **Shaggy** » May 19th, 2008, 22:45

thomas mann - the magic mountain.
oh man, this book was mainly so fucking boring! obviously i haven't grown up for this book yet. some tinkerings were quite interesting, but discussions between settembrini and naphta were mostly totally abstract for me. well, it reminded me of some other boring must-read-or-you-will-get-worst-note books from school. if you already forget this feeling, i assure you - it simply and utterly sucks!

but just to show that i'm not a pessimist, over and out - this book have, amongst many cons, one pro - it's thick, a classic brick to kill people and to build churches, ergo looks good standing in your little library shelf. (maybe not my copy though, because cover is violet...).

and now onto the interesting books, at last.

Post by **Daedalus** » May 19th, 2008, 22:49

So what is the magic mountain?

Shaggy · Post by **Shaggy** » May 19th, 2008, 22:58

Daedalus wrote:So what is the magic mountain?

is that a test to prove that i read it? :>

this is not magic in any way - just a mountain like many others in switzerland, but on that one lies a sanatorium called "berghof" and where main hero spends 7 years instead of planned 3 weeks. here he meets other people, blah blah blah, observes their lifes, falls in love, becomes one of them, blah blah blah, the first world war begins, the end. to say the least without spoilers - i don't want to ruin your potential reading. :]

Post by **Daedalus** » May 20th, 2008, 00:08

That does sound a little dreary, but at least you've got something to read. I'm stuck with nothing and all the books I want need to be ordered.