THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => BAND => Topic started by: Be My Head on 10 Mar 2009, 19:42
-
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=115816
Well, let's just hope nobody else concocts a plot to murder him, eh?
-
Hopefully there will be more Burzum albums now. He has said that he will probably pick up again where he left off (stylistically).
-
that's too bad, synth is boring.
-
By that I mean where he left off from before he went to prison - not in the same vein as the ambient synth albums he released whilst in prison.
-
That's cool I guess. I doubt he'll ever match Engvar, but it'll be interesting to see what he does. A post-prison album has the potential to be pretty damn brutal.
-
Are we actually hoping to hear more music from a nazi? Because I don't. Because he's a nazi.
-
:-)
(http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/1355/vargcapbyal.jpg)
-
I'd go to a Burzum Show. Would be pretty educational.
This gets me even more pumped to see Mayhem this May.
Regardless, I'm surprised he got parole after his 2003 stunt. Norway is a strange place.
-
For those church burnings alone I'd be more than happy if he stayed in prison for a few years longer. Those were some amazing buildings.
-
It had to happen sooner or later, you can't keep him in prison forever.
He has said that he has cut ties with the neo-Nazi groups. If that's true (I am not even going to attempt to guess if it is or not) then I personally have no trouble with him being released.
-
It's relevant more because when they helped him escape it was quite apparent they were planning on doing some serious shit right away (when Varg was rearrested he had a large store of weapons and explosives). The groups Varg was allied to was not the type that marched in silly little uniforms and made Xerox'd zines.
-
The way I heard it, he had one pistol with some ammunition, and one rifle, sans ammunition. Also a map and a GPS, I think. Seems like the stealing military property and a car would have gotten him a few more years, though.
-
Despite the character behind it (and he's quite a character), Daudi Baldrs was pretty sweet.
-
Am I the only one who thinks that it's morally reprehensible to buy CD's from and listen to music produced by a known nazi?
-
Nope. You're not.
-
Depends. If it's music espousing Nazi ideology, or produced when he was an active Nazi, then yes I think that's pretty disgusting. On the other hand I like to believe in the possibility of redemption and rehabilitation, so if he's cut all ties with Nazism and starts producing music that has absolutely nothing to do with Nazism, I think it's okay to listen to and/or buy that music.
(Bear in mind that I'm talking hypothetically, my knowledge of this particular situation basically comes down to the key words "Norwegian", "Nazi", "murder", "church burning", and "parole".)
-
That seems a fair point of view. However, I think that personally it would be hard for me to support someone who hated jews, for instance, being linked to that way of life via birth. Forgiving and forgetting are, in this one aspect, for me fairly hard to do. But that's a personal viewpoint, I suppose.
-
In my opinion, music can exist as a separate entity from the person who created it. I'm not particularly keen on funding Varg Vikernes, but I don't feel that listening to his music means I approve of his actions - just that I enjoy his music. Music is an entirely subjective experience; each listener will get something different out of it, different to what the artist got out of their song. What is, say, a nazi anthem to one could be a peace protest to another.
-
Do you listen to gangsta rap
-
Do you listen to michael jackson
-
In my opinion, music can exist as a separate entity from the person who created it. I'm not particularly keen on funding Varg Vikernes, but I don't feel that listening to his music means I approve of his actions - just that I enjoy his music. Music is an entirely subjective experience; each listener will get something different out of it, different to what the artist got out of their song. What is, say, a nazi anthem to one could be a peace protest to another.
I've got to agree with this. If I never listened to anybody who disagreed with me, my CD collection would be extremely brief. I'm staunchly anti-drugs, and most of my favourite artists were off their fucking heads. Hell, the greatest influence in my life from a popular culture figure was from Bill Hicks, and he used to say that drugs are here to facilitate our evolution. I don't agree with that whatsoever... I still enjoy his work, though.
Just like I can enjoy 'Fuck Tha Police' by NWA without necessarily considering every policeman to be a racist hatemonger.
Quite apart from which, my viewpoints on things change over time.
-
There are obvious solutions to the 'giving money to a nazi' problem. Mainly, don't buy any Burzum material off of Unholy Records or Cympophane Records (if they do them, not sure), as both are fronts for Resistance Records and go directly to funding insane backwoods skinhead lunatics. Second-hand copies of Misanthropy records versions are the ideologically cleanest, as I'm not sure all the money for those has even got to Varg. Even better, get the original Deathlike Silence vinyls, though good luck with that one.
Or, you know, just pirate it.
-
There are obvious solutions to the 'giving money to a nazi' problem. Mainly, don't buy any Burzum material off of Unholy Records or Cympophane Records (if they do them, not sure), as both are fronts for Resistance Records and go directly to funding insane backwoods skinhead lunatics. Second-hand copies of Misanthropy records versions are the ideologically cleanest, as I'm not sure all the money for those has even got to Varg. Even better, get the original Deathlike Silence vinyls, though good luck with that one.
Or, you know, just pirate it.
It may be a different band, but I remember some early Deathlike Silence vinyls selling for close to $1000.
Whether he's a nazi or whatever (pretty sure he isn't, by the way, he has a habit of changing round his opinions fairly regularly), he's served his time. you can't just keep people imprisoned because of their ideology. Here's hoping there's a few albums as good as Hvit Lyset or Filosofem, those two at least were rad.
(http://www.burzum.org/img/gallery06/big/photo19.jpg)
Dude has a weird but rad beard, too. It's like bumfluff x 1000
-
He is such a happy little nazi!
I want to give him a biscuit.
And yeah, DSP vinyl, especially Burzum and Mayhem, changes hands for ridiculous sums of money. The only black metal record more insanely collectible is probably the original pressing of Bathory's self-titled where the goat had red eyes. Apparently a lot of them ended up getting burned by fundies.
-
Varg isn't exactly a nazi, if you take your time to read his articles on his political beliefs.
If you had however taken the time to read them articles, you might also have taken the time to read his articles on what his music is expressing, or what he was trying to achieve through the medium- he wanted to make music that made people drift off into a trance state afterwards is the basic gist of it. I don't think his political beliefs ever influenced him musically.
-
He is at least anti-miscegenation, and spoke (or wrote) about keeping the white race pure.
-
I'm fairly certain he talked about keeping all races pure, not just the white race. :-)
Anyways, the music- Is gonna be pretty damn good, I think.
-
Damn... First post in about 120 days.. oh what the heck
Am I the only one who thinks that it's morally reprehensible to buy CD's from and listen to music produced by a known nazi?
No.. I don't care. You know why? Because there isn't a trace of nazism in the lyrics and music... NOTHING AT ALL.
I support his music but not the man itself. I don't understand people who don't put a wall between musicians and the music they make since there are lots of musicians who make wonderful music but they are the biggest assholes ever.
And also... Moral is subjective. At least for me... So buying a cd that contains no nazi references that it's done by a dude who happens to be a nazi doesn't really matter.
-
Um but there's a small difference between a guy who is an asshole because he refuses to sign autographs or because he shoots his mouth off at awards ceremonies and a guy who kills a dude with a knife to the head, escapes prison and is later apprehended with a big stash of weapons and explosives.
-
I wouldn't want to buy anything made by this guy, i'd just download it for free.
-
Um but there's a small difference between a guy who is an asshole because he refuses to sign autographs or because he shoots his mouth off at awards ceremonies and a guy who kills a dude with a knife to the head, escapes prison and is later apprehended with a big stash of weapons and explosives.
And I like and own a cd by Silencer. A swedish project by a dude who almost killed a small girl with an axe and then went totally nuts and he's in an institution but was recently set free as far as I'm concerned.
So yeah... I know what kind of assholes I'm talking about. :-)
-
Hhahahahhaha yeah... After I maked that post I knew there was something wrong about that part.
Then again, I just finished eating a baby, but I'm fine... really. :-D
-
(http://www.burzum.org/img/gallery06/big/photo19.jpg)
I've seen that image around before but I had no idea it was him. Crazy.
-
Um but there's a small difference between a guy who is an asshole because he refuses to sign autographs or because he shoots his mouth off at awards ceremonies and a guy who kills a dude with a knife to the head, escapes prison and is later apprehended with a big stash of weapons and explosives.
To be fair, he didn't have a big stash of weapons and explosives, he had an unloaded rifle, a pistol (don't know if it was loaded), a stolen car, maps, and a GPS. It wasn't like he had gone to some place that he had hidden weapons before he went to jail so he could go on a killing spree when he escaped, he just raided a surprisingly poorly guarded... what is the equivalent of national guard for Norway? place, maybe he had to run before he could grab ammo for the rifle, I don't know.
-
Ah, okay. So do they go with the military in times of war, or do they stay and guard the home front? I'm asking because that seems to have changed at some point in somewhat recent history for the US, and I'm not sure what people not in the US think of it as.
-
Honestly, the myth of the National Guard being expected to stay on the home front is basically a product of ignorance on the part of the general population along with a dash of misdirection; let's face it, a lot of recruiters aren't in a rush to dispel the notion that you won't die thousands of miles away from home as a Guardsman. The only thing "homebound" about the National Guard is that they are not always on active federal duty and (for rather obvious reasons) nobody is really interested in giving any one state the authority to just up and send their militia off to Iran to see if they can take out the Ayatollah. But once called into active duty they can be deployed more or less just like the rest of the army; most limitations on deployment are a matter of policy rather than any hard and fast laws.
-
Damn... First post in about 120 days.. oh what the heck
Am I the only one who thinks that it's morally reprehensible to buy CD's from and listen to music produced by a known nazi?
No.. I don't care. You know why? Because there isn't a trace of nazism in the lyrics and music... NOTHING AT ALL.
I support his music but not the man itself. I don't understand people who don't put a wall between musicians and the music they make since there are lots of musicians who make wonderful music but they are the biggest assholes ever.
And also... Moral is subjective. At least for me... So buying a cd that contains no nazi references that it's done by a dude who happens to be a nazi doesn't really matter.
If I buy a CD from him I'm helping to feed a nazi. Someone who would like to see my parents dead for being jewish.
I'd rather he'd starve.
-
Fair enough, I still disagree but I see what's your point and understand it.
-
If I buy a CD from him I'm helping to feed a nazi. Someone who would like to see my parents dead for being jewish.
I'd rather he'd starve.
QFT
-
If I buy a CD from him I'm helping to feed a nazi. Someone who would like to see my parents dead for being jewish.
I'd rather he'd starve.
QFT
-
... I don't download music. I buy CD's.
Illegal downloading is theft and some of the bands I like could really use the 99 cents they get from a sale (or something).
-
We've had this discussion before like a million times so I'm not really in the mood to repeat the salient points but suffice to say you're wrong.
-
Saying you don't want to discuss it and saying and then saying that I'm wrong is a bit lame.
It does seem to be outside the subject of the thread. Sorry about that.
-
If I buy a CD from him I'm helping to feed a nazi. Someone who would like to see my parents dead for being jewish.
this is almost exactly the same reason why I don't buy Immortal Technique albums except replace "nazi" with "homophobic douchebag"
god his raps are so tight though.
so tight
-
Saying you don't want to discuss it and saying and then saying that I'm wrong is a bit lame.
It does seem to be outside the subject of the thread. Sorry about that.
Well it was mostly to avoid veering wildly off-topic (especially into pretty well-worn) territory but also because if you looked even medium-hard you'd be able to find good explanations of why you are so, so wrong.
Actually you know what I am going to throw you a bone and just link you to The Lefsetz Letter (http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/). Bob Lefsetz is a music industry insider who's been doing it for about 30 years so he knows what he's talking about. He's a dinosaur and he's got very questionable taste in music and is overall ignorant of almost everything happening outside of the Billboard 200 but he's probably one of the most eloquent voices in articulating why the music business needs to change drastically.
-
even if he did download music I don't really understand what your point would be Tommy.
I mean everyone knows you use the best justification available to you in order to pirate music and this is pretty high up there as far as reasons to not have to pay for music go.
Well it was mostly to avoid veering wildly off-topic (especially into pretty well-worn) territory but also because if you looked even medium-hard you'd be able to find good explanations of why you are so, so wrong.
Actually you know what I am going to throw you a bone and just link you to The Lefsetz Letter (http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/). Bob Lefsetz is a music industry insider who's been doing it for about 30 years so he knows what he's talking about. He's a dinosaur and he's got very questionable taste in music and is overall ignorant of almost everything happening outside of the Billboard 200 but he's probably one of the most eloquent voices in articulating why the music business needs to change drastically.
I once got an assignment back where I'd done nothing but reference secondary sources and refer to other peoples arguments and the professor got a big red sharpie and wrote "NO CONTENT" over it like a big stamp and that is what I want to do to this post.
I mean I know you've argued about it before but at least give us a specific link to focus on here instead of a link to the front page of his website or something.
-
We've had this discussion before like a million times so I'm not really in the mood to repeat the salient points but suffice to say you're wrong.
He isn't wrong though. There are people for whom illegal downloading is an alternative to paying, rather than a separate entity. There are people who won't buy a t-shirt or go see a show.
Here, we support musicians that we care about, so it's easy for us to argue in favour of filesharing. We're part of a specialised market that allows for that kind of flexibility regarding 'illegal' downloading without presenting a moral quandary.
The top 200 billboard however is a completely different kind of monster. In this context, filesharing is as different as the circumstances surrounding the artists.
While a small band can and will benefit from filesharing, the billboard 200 crowds take a significant hit in sales. Perhaps it's partly because people realise how awful the music is now before they pay for it, but I sincerely doubt that. It's because they no longer have to buy the CD to enjoy the product. They will download the song, they will listen to it until they hate and then they won't buy the t-shirt.
That is a market significantly larger than the one that we are a part of and every day it's costing more money than you'll probably ever have in your life. While we can argue that people who affiliate themselves with the majors or are successful enough to chart don't deserve money, that is not what the debate is. The debate is whether or not illegal downloading can be theft. We can argue about the definition of theft all day, but basically...
If you have a product on your iPod that the artist probably intended for you to pay for and you didn't...
...they have lost money.
Not being able to afford music in the first place is not a factor in this argument because if you can't afford music, then you can't afford it, file sharing or no. These arguments apply to the people who could conceivably be paying for music but choose not to. I have a suspicion that a lot of people who use the "I can't afford music" argument have no problem spending money on shoes they don't need, so dismiss that argument every time you hear it. Not being able to afford something is not the same as spending your money on something else instead.
It's not about whether or not file sharing is appropriate. It's about when and where it is. It is up to the individual to decide whether or not it is stealing based on their own habits regarding the downloading of music.
BeoPuppy has decided that if he doesn't pay for music, then he is stealing it. Hats off to him for saying something that a lot of people here don't seem to want to say.
I steal music. Just like you.
-
a small band can and will benefit from filesharing,
not as convincing a justification for music piracy as "I refuse to financially support nazi's" but I guess it works alright
seriously though if you think music piracy can never hurt a small band you are wrong, sorry. I am just really sick of smug people who actually use this to justify pirating independent or struggling artists' work. I know that is not actually your point here Darryl but you've kind of used it as a buttress for the rest of your argument so I am getting uppity here since it seems everyone just wants another music piracy backpatting thread instead of maybe discussing this complex moral issue.
-
yeah, let's amend that to 'can and usually does'.
that's closer to what I wanted to say.
-
I don't think it's a complex moral issue. I think that copyright is a set of arcane laws designed almost solely to protect the rights of those who distribute, rather than the artists. Now that the distributors have become irrelevant those on the top are worried about the security of their rich arsehole mansions, private jets and cocaine. They're worried that they won't be able to make ridiculous amounts of money by bribing radio stations to play substandard content and then raking in the pocket money of a couple of million 13 year old kids. The idea that artists need to work through record labels is an utter lie. They need to work through record labels to become big rockstars and get to shag hollywood actors and go to the best parties, but greed, after all, is something we don't need. The fact of the matter is that record labels do not create value, they simply leach off the creativity of others. Others who they offer no job security and have no loyalty to. The gallery and agent system in the art world works very similiarly; the gallery cut is actually one of the biggest obstacles to people making a living out of traditional art.
I say this as a dude who derives over 50% of his income from selling original works of art and music. Truth is, there are other ways of managing things. It is cheaper than ever to make extremely good music; anyone with a home computer, a few instruments, a lot of patience and a gram of talent can produce interesting results. Musical endeavours can be financed in numerous other ways; a lot of the bands I like make their money through a combination of merchandising, touring and selling 'boutique' limited editions of their work at inflated sums. If I had a higher level of output, and more fans, I would start a subscription service; for three quid a month I will send you, digitally (or for six quid a month, physically) every bit of music I make, and offer you discounted merch. Supplemented with merch, limited edition EPs and the odd live show, that would be sufficient to live on, for me anyway, with about six hundred subscribers; 100 six quid subscribers and 500 three quid subscribers would come up to 21k a year, which is a decent wage.
I really need to get more popular.
-
I don't think it's a complex moral issue.
I am talking about giving money to nazi's, not copyright law.
Like the topic was about originally
sometimes I think I am going crazy and making up imagined conversations we weren't actually talking about at all so when I yell "LETS TALK ABOUT NAZIS FOR FUCKS SAKE" it turns out I am the crazy one. This happens in real life as well, minus the luxury of being able to scroll back a page.
-
The debate is whether or not illegal downloading can be theft. We can argue about the definition of theft all day, but basically...
If you have a product on your iPod that the artist probably intended for you to pay for and you didn't...
...they have lost money.
No no no no NO. It is NOT theft. Whether or not it's MORALLY right is another issue, but it is definitely not theft.
If you want to steal something, it has to be a real object, and you have to be depriving the previous owner of its use when you steal it. Neither of these things apply to downloaded music.
I've pointed this out before, but economics says that the price we should be paying for music now is zero. That's right, ZERO. Music (and digital information) is a post-scarcity environment. There's a whole wodge of interesting stuff in there about copyright, and I won't repeat Khar's masterful summary of the key issue.
On the whole giving money to fascists thing, I don't think there's anyone here who would argue that we should be giving money to fascists, so I dunno if there's much we can argue about there.
-
If you just download all music regardless, you can't claim to be making an example of him by downloading his music because you're doing it to everyone regardless of their political stance
who said anything about an example? Some people are just legitimately uncomfortable knowing they've given money to a Nazi. Do you really think anyone is going to pirate a Burzum album and go "ho ho ho that'll learn him"
(no)
-
I mean I know you've argued about it before but at least give us a specific link to focus on here instead of a link to the front page of his website or something.
Yes but I guess what I really wanted to achieve with posting that link (which I just could've easily stuck to my guns and not done anyway) is to basically get people to pay attention to the site in general because almost everything he has to say is pretty flippin' interesting. It was presented in the context of the argument at hand but it was more or less to rep the site to people who didn't know it existed.
-
I buy his music because he's Norwegian. Whitey gotta stick together
You just maded my day, thank you. :-)
I agree with supersheep in the definition of what's theft and what's not.
And also, in my case i couldn't care less since most of the bands I listen to are the ones that don't get enough selling for a living anyway and therefore they work normal jobs too. And they are also the bands that get most of their money from concerts than cds... Now that I think of it, most of the artist get way more money from concerts than cds... Last time I checked it was that way, I don't know how it is overall but I still have the opinion that dowloading is totally ok... and I still buy a lot of cds too!
-
No no no no NO. It is NOT theft. Whether or not it's MORALLY right is another issue, but it is definitely not theft.
If you want to steal something, it has to be a real object, and you have to be depriving the previous owner of its use when you steal it. Neither of these things apply to downloaded music.
The thing is, to some people, music isn't a right, but a privilege. That's a terrible way to look at music that I definitely do not approve of, but there are people in the industry who think like that. And if those people don't want us to listen to their music without paying for it, that's fine. It's their product and ultimately their decision to decide whether or not I have 'stolen' music. The law might not agree with them, but until you're being slapped with a lawsuit then law never comes into these debates, they're entirely about who thinks they have the moral higher ground.
If you took a naked picture of your girlfriend and charged money to see it, that'd be fine. If I stole a look anyway and you called me out on it, that'd be fine too. If you told me that I had no right to take a peek without handing you £5, I would agree with you. Whether the picture is worth £5 to look at or not doesn't come into it. It wasn't mine to look at. Even though there's nothing material that I am taking away from you.
That's all digital music is. It's a 'look'.
This is not a debate about law and it is not a debate about copyright, despite words like 'theft' and 'stealing' being thrown around.
There are two individuals involved in this.
The artist and the consumer. They alone choose whether or not they are stealing or being stolen from and it is nobody elses place to say.
Respect the artist. Respect the consumer. And don't bring in some bullshit about copyright to defend a moral stance.
-
Darryl that's a really dogshit analogy
-
You're just sore that I won't show you the picture.
Come on man, you can afford it.
-
who said anything about an example? Some people are just legitimately uncomfortable knowing they've given money to a Nazi. Do you really think anyone is going to pirate a Burzum album and go "ho ho ho that'll learn him"
On the first page people seemed to be implying that he would be an exception because they wouldn't buy his music. This would be bullshit if they didn't buy anyone's music.
In the case of Beopuppy, he genuinely does buy other people's music but not Varg's.
There is a difference between what people seem to imply and what people are actually saying. "Seemed to imply" is a rhetorical phrase that is not very helpful because it's just not clear what you are trying to say here.
It seems like you are saying "People say they want to make an example of him by not buying his albums but if they pirate them how can they make an example of him" which would be fair except nobody has actually said that they don't pay for music but still want to make an example of him. In fact nobody has even implied that or even SEEMED to imply that as far as I can tell
Darryl that's a really dogshit analogy
Not if Darryl is a big record label and his girlfriend is a struggling band.
-
Mostly I just took issue with this:
If you told me that I had no right to take a peek without handing you £5, I would agree with you.
what
-
Look I'm not going to say that "seemed to imply" has absolutely no legitimate use in conversation, but you can't just use it to project shit onto people like that. Saying "I don't feel comfortable giving money to a nazi" does not imply anything about music piracy in any way and it seems like you just wanted to pick the same pedantic fight/circle jerk about music piracy we have around here every second week when we could have a discussion about this instead. Dovey seems to think we have argued about the wall between artist and art enough around here not to bother but honestly it can't be nearly as many times as we've had the exact same discussion about music piracy.
-
I mean, Dovey seems to imply that Darryl is running some kind of prostitution ring and I can say that as much as I want to support my argument he is an amoral prick but luckily if either one of them calls me out it does not necessarily negate my argument because I've set it up as just one of the pillars of Darryls shitbaggery and I'm sure I can build plenty more.