one year passes...
one year passes...
Newsgroups: alt.rock-n-roll.metal.death, alt.fan.metal, alt.music.slayer, alt.evil
From: Dwaallicht <d.st...@nrc✧✧✧.n✧>
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:10:50 +0200
Local: Fri, Aug 10 2001 6:10 pm
Subject: Re: I DON'T EVEN WANT TO HEAR SLIPKNOT ONE TIME Re: ????
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
> > "Unoriginal" gives a little more hints but you need to elaborate on
> > it, naturally. and "garbage" says nothing as well about a band's
> > sound. Granted, some people have a harder time putting into words why
> > they don't like something and I don't think everybody should be
> > questioned on their tastes but if your'e going to go over the top and
> > slam a band you should damn well have real reasons for it. Details,
> > details, details.
> M-hm. Why am I willing to bet that if the poster had slammed the fuck out
> of the band and then copped out with the WEAK subjectivist "The music does
> nothing for me, IMHO", it would have been accepted without the need for
> details?
> Is it because subjectivism is not as threatening? Are opinions dangerous
> unless qualified with self-deprecation?
It's the same old defensive shit again. People out there are so damn
hung up on ego, it is the only way they are able to perceive the world.
It doesn't occur to them that there are those who try to listen to music
_because of what it tells_, they think that _everybody_ listens to music
the way they (apparently; crucial here!) do, namely to pass the time and
to be entertained, and to provide a wallpaper-like pattern on their
landscape of existence. So, they look for an 'IMHO' or a 'just my 2
cents' somewhere, and when that doesn't appear, they smugly announce
that at least _they_ are able to recognize their own smallness in the
plethora of voices that is Usenet, and they pass off heavily judgmental
diatribes about those others who have no need for opinions. Bad air, bad
air!
Am I bothered by that? Sure as hell, I am bothered by stupidity, so I am
bothered by this. I don't understand how most people don't get this,
because it's pretty easy. Man, the judeo-christian victory is pretty
much completed. Ha, except for me and some others. METAL RULES.
All together now: DEATH TO FALSE METAL!
Maarten
--
Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you jesus christ
― those balls look like a butt (San Te), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 03:03 (fourteen years ago)
"S!gnificant P!ckle" wrote in message
[snip banter]
> Well let's think logically here. If a metalhead is into music for the
> music, he ignores music he doesn't like. He isn't threatened by it.
I am very threatened by boy bands. They represent the epitome of a
pseudo-culture that, like a disease (or a really bad "sci-fi" alien race),
assimilates and destroys all semblance of character our little connected
societies may have had and replaces their value systems with its own. A set
of inherently self-destructive and anti-life value systems, one may add.
I realize this is not what you meant, but can you see >why< it is reasonable
without complete insecurity to be threatened by commercialized music?
> But here's a trend I see: it's almost becoming 'trendy' to hate
> nu-metal. [...]
> HOWEVER...some people out there almost get off on insulting it.
> People get so caught up in who's a poser and who isn't and what band
> is "true" and what isn't that they ignore the quality of the music in
> question.
Not entirely untrue. But why not simply ignore those people, and not be
threatened by them?
</irony>
> Some metalheads are more into the "image" of metal and partially like
> it because of it's image and and the way it makes others perceive
> them. Obviously these people would not want to be associated with
> "nu-metal" because of this. I really am not too fond of these types
> of people because it's almost as if they put the music SECOND behind
> the image/archetype.
Like the idiot mainstream. Fuck 'em. They're not metalheads. They're
POSERS.
> And last, there are some that, whom, because of what other metalheads
> around them say and do, because of their low self-esteem, will bash
> these bands because they don't want to be viewed as a poser.
> And then there's the people that just plain out don't like it.
> However, a truly objective person gives every nu-metal band a chance
> before dismissing them. I don't see a lot of that in the metal
> community of late. I believe in giving everything a fair shake.
You meant to say "value neutral", not "objective".
The whole "open-mindedness" ideal is neat, but impractical. Stereotypes and
generalizations exist for a reason...and are often useful. Why, in the
limited amount of time you have on this earth, would you give something a
fair shake that is part of a group you have had many bad experiences with,
when you could be "open-minded" towards something that fits into a group you
have had little to no exposure to, or - heaven forbid (tm) - from a group
that you have had POSITIVE experience with?
Death is certain...life is not. Fuck the weak, embrace the strong. Etc,
etc.
> > "talentless unoriginal numetal garbage" is pretty descriptive. At least
as
> > much as any subjective interpretation of the music any cretin on this
board
> > can come up with.
> No it isn't, because it says absolutely nothing. "Talentless" is a
> word way overused, many times erroneously. I've heard of countless
> talented bands called "talentless" because they don't wank.
Is that not descriptive??
> "Unoriginal" gives a little more hints but you need to elaborate on
> it, naturally. and "garbage" says nothing as well about a band's
> sound. Granted, some people have a harder time putting into words why
> they don't like something and I don't think everybody should be
> questioned on their tastes but if your'e going to go over the top and
> slam a band you should damn well have real reasons for it. Details,
> details, details.
M-hm. Why am I willing to bet that if the poster had slammed the fuck out
of the band and then copped out with the WEAK subjectivist "The music does
nothing for me, IMHO", it would have been accepted without the need for
details?
Is it because subjectivism is not as threatening? Are opinions dangerous
unless qualified with self-deprecation?
[...]
> Just FYI, I like the Tones but I don't think they're amazing or
> anything, so it's not like I'm biased or anything, I could take them
> or leave them.
I'll just leave 'em, thanks.
DEATH TO FALSE METAL.
― those balls look like a butt (San Te), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 03:17 (fourteen years ago)