On Black Metal and Self-Mutilation (Dec. 2010)

Over the course of the last few years, it has been nearly impossible not to notice the very large number of people, within the Black Metal scene, that engage in self-mutilation. People are, in many cases, shredding their flesh and scarring themselves to varying degrees and then displaying this to the world, often making a strong connection between this and Black Metal. It's a rather peculiar development, and one which I think should not persist. This sort of thing is not a useful contribution to the scene, in any way.

To get right to the point, not all people that cut themselves are sub-human emo trash. The thing is that there is a wide variety of reasons for engaging in this practice. For some, it is a coping mechanism. Obviously, they have been psychologically damaged and this is one of the only methods by which they are able to relieve stress of grief. Others use it as a means to punish themselves for something. Again, this goes back to a mental defect. Some people are simply masochistic and they enjoy the pain or even the sight of their own blood. In certain cases, it can actually be a combination of several factors. Whatever the reason, I am of the opinion that it should be a private activity. If you are miserable and the idea of shredding your flesh with a razor or a shard of broken glass seems appealing and you feel that it will take the edge off or help your mood, go for it. Just keep it to yourself. The problem is, there are also a lot of those who do such a thing merely for the attention that they can gain by doing so.

It is a sign of the pathetic culture that we live in, today, that people would rather go out of their way to garner sympathy or concern rather than spend a few moments to come up with something interesting to say. Of course, in the age of the internet, there are many more channels by which to exploit oneself as an attention whore. Surely, there are a lot of reasons behind it. As previously mentioned, some may have no other way to feel that anyone cares for them, other than slicing their wrist and making sure someone can see it so they receive that all-important sympathy. Others may be trying to emulate some of their favourite musicians, by doing this, or attempting to seem “extreme” to those who view their wounds or scars. Naturally, these days, it is very simple to spread this around. It is common to see the typical goth-girl-turned-Black-Metaller who has an online profile that is filled with dozens of photos of her scarred or bleeding flesh. What is the purpose of this? Attention, of course. Perhaps, too many people admired the cover of the Abyssic Hate L.P. or the countless other sheep that got the idea that you are not “grim or cult” unless you have taken a knife to your arms and legs and made little street maps up and down them. It is my belief that the number of truly disturbed people is far less than the legion of imitators. For every person such as Per Yngve Ohlin who was genuinely melancholic, there are a dozen posers like Niklas Kvarforth who wish only to gain as much attention as possible. Based on the incessant need to display their mutilated flesh to any stranger that happens upon their internet profile, it is quite clear that most of these people are demented attention whores.

To reiterate an earlier point, if someone honestly feels that they must tear their flesh open and watch the blood come pouring forth, more power to you. But there is a difference between someone who does such a thing in private and the type of person that does so only so that others will take notice. Anyone who is slicing themselves to pieces and posting the photos online for the world to see is desperately and pathetically begging for any and all possible attention. Whether they desire the “credibility” gained by proving how little they care for their personal well-being or if they are after the sympathy that might come from those who would be concerned for them, it is all disingenuous behaviour that has no place within the Black Metal scene.

Such an attitude does not deserve to be associated with Black Metal. Exposing one's weakness for all to see – strangers, no less – seems to completely contradict what Black Metal was intended to stand for. While it may mean different things to different people, to take it so far from its core beliefs is to bastardize it beyond recognition. And this leads to what we have today, an ever-growing mass of gothic-emo weaklings that have hijacked Black Metal aesthetics and even some musical techniques, in order to cloak their whining, attention-seeking trash as something more extreme and rebellious than it really is. The entire concept of seeking attention for its own sake goes better with some other form of music.

On the Superiority of Primordial Creation (Dec. 2010)

In many creative fields, it is often true that the artist's earliest works are usually the best; the ones most worth remembering and those that really set the standard by which the artist would always be compared. In general, this is also accurate when it comes to music. Regardless of genre (or sub-genre), the early material is usually considered to be the best, or the most pure and meaningful. For bands that quickly disappear after a couple albums, such a matter is not cause for concern. However, those that endure for many years (or decades) must face the irrefutable fact that the quality of their music is quite likely to deteriorate; at least in the eyes of their fans. The changes that a band goes through can be caused by many factors: time constraints and label pressure, other outside influences, changing musical landscape, larger budget / perfectionism, stagnation or development of musicians, age, etc.

While not always true, most Metal bands aren't given recording contracts within a few weeks or months of forming. They go through a lengthy process of finding the right members and deciding upon a creative direction, and then gradually honing their craft. They rehearse as much as possible, with only the dream of making a single album motivating them to push forward. They record demo tapes and put a lot of effort into their first songs. Through rehearsals and playing live, they work on the songs, revising them and getting everything just right, as they go along. At this stage, they are struggling to get noticed by fans and labels, in the hopes of securing a deal and releasing a proper album. And that isn't really for the purpose of attaining fame or glory, but simply to make a record of their own and contribute something. In many cases, the bands haven't thought far beyond making that one album, so they pour all of their energy into it. In general, during this phase of a band's existence, the primary thing is creating. If the band happens to attain even a small level of success, things transform rapidly.

Once the band is signed to a label, inevitably, things become different. How much they change really depends on the size of the label. Within the underground, it is much more negligible. However, for those bands that signed to a larger label, a wide variety of new forces begin acting upon them. They may be told, directly, to alter their sound in one way or another, with the goal of appealing to a broader audience and reaching a higher level of success. This same decision could also come from within, as well. To use well-known examples, just think of Slayer and Metallica. After signing with Rick Rubin, Slayer was advised to get rid of the reverb and trim the songs down, thus over-simplifying them and sacrificing a great deal of atmosphere, in order to gain a larger following. The masses like music that is easily digested and doesn't require much attention or thought. A similar thing happened to Metallica, as Bob Rock was brought in to produce their self-titled album. Rather than following the dictates of their inner creativity and passion, they listened to a big-time producer who was looking for radio hits and did a great job in transforming the band into a stadium Rock act. Credibility was traded for mass acceptance.

One must also consider time. In the early part of their career, a band creates songs at their own pace, with months or even years to get them exactly as they want. After signing a recording contract, they begin pumping albums out each year, or every other year. The strange thing is that, early on, the band has more time to create but less time to record. Once signed to a label, they have a larger budget and more studio time, but not as much time to perfect the songs before they go into the studio. So, what the end up doing is writing a lot of the album as they're recording it, and then experimenting with the new technology that is available to them, since most people are nothing more than overgrown children anyway and prefer to play with things, whenever they get the chance. At any rate, another thing to take into consideration would have to be touring. Sometimes, a record must be rushed in order to take advantage of a touring opportunity. This results in a drop in quality, in a lot of cases.

Look at Testament, for example. The songs that made it to The Legacy had been worked on for several years, and they had ample time to perfect them. This yielded, arguably, the best album of their entire career. However, once they were releasing albums on a yearly basis, they became watered-down and more generic. After a couple of lackluster records, they began to get back on track with Souls of Black, but it still lacked the passion and intensity of the first album. And later on, of course, they tried to follow in Metallica's footsteps, with The Ritual. In the end, they succeeded only in alienating their fan base.

And that brings up another point. Once a band gets even the slightest taste of mainstream success, they throw creativity overboard in an attempt to cash in. This can be in response to similar bands getting big or it can be limited to their own success; i.e. they get radio play for a song and then attempt to repeat themselves. After Metallica's 1991 self-titled monstrosity, many Thrash bands tried to jump on the bandwagon, slowing down and making much more simplistic music. And if they managed to get the slightest bit of notice for those efforts, then it usually spelled doom for any sincerity that the band had left. Dave Mustaine admitted that he altered his songwriting in hopes of creating radio hits. The spirit of Metal had been consumed by his own greed. The problem with Metal bands trying to be pop stars is that it just doesn't work that way, nine times out of ten. Pop music is not art, but rather a corporate imitation of art. Professional songwriters are tapped into popular culture and they know how to exploit the tastes of the masses, writing simplistic, catchy garbage that will be easily digested. Record companies then find someone to perform those songs, often putting together their own groups for just that purpose. However, Metal was never meant to be for everyone. When Metal bands try to sell out, they usually fall flat on their faces, alienating their fans and going unnoticed by the mainstream.

Another factor to consider has to be that of outside influences of a different kind. This can mean a number of things, including bands trying to take elements of more popular / trendy music and incorporating it into their own style, or making changes in order to “keep up” with others within their particular sub-genre.

As an example of the former, one need look no farther than Anthrax and Slayer. In the mid-to-late 90s, each band transformed into something quite unlike what they had started out as. Anthrax added elements of alternative Rock on Sound of White Noise, and then tried their hardest to emulate Pantera in the years that followed. Slayer took influences from the pathetic and trendy Nu-Metal scene, with bouncy groove-laden riffs interspersed with riffs more typical of the band. In both cases, the end result was laughable and disgusting.

To shift focus to an example of the latter form of submitting to outside influences, one can see this with the deterioration of the Death Metal scene in the 1990s. Many bands were trying to outdo one another in terms of being more “sick” and “brutal” than the next guys, playing as fast as possible, with the vocals getting deeper and the musicians including more random time changes, with the end result being that the atmosphere of the originators was forever lost. Not long after, in the realm of Black Metal, a lot of bands jumped on the symphonic bandwagon (as well as industrial or experimental), to keep up with the times. Once something gets popular, it seems everyone has to join in. Losing sight of your own creativity, making decisions based on what others are doing, will usually have a detrimental effect on what you are doing. Occasionally, it can be a beneficial thing, as it can motivate a band to tighten up their sound and not be shown up by others that they end up playing with, resulting in them putting forth the most effort possible and improving themselves. This is most applicable in the band's early stages. But, more often than not, bands end up joining one herd or another.

As the years go by, inevitably, most musicians become better acquainted with their instruments, songwriting and the recording process. Early on, they may have been learning on the job and, in later years, they reach a point where they might look down on their previous accomplishments and view their old albums as flawed and imperfect. There are two different ways that an artist can approach this. On one hand, they may feel that the very style itself is limiting and boring. They would prefer to add new dimensions to their sound, in the name of artistic progression or musical evolution. Whether they wish to show off their new skills or just expand the boundaries of the band's established style, the end result is the same. On the other hand, the band might choose to stick to their roots, but to make an attempt to perfect their sound. Utilizing modern production techniques and more proficient abilities, they maintain the same style, yet they are always in a state of perfecting their sound and attempting to achieve the ultimate expression of their vision. Unfortunately, modern recording techniques will always fall short in terms of atmosphere and character, when compared to a more primitive and old school approach. So even when trying to remain true to who they are, such bands will come off as a pale shadow of their former selves, churning out stale and rehashed music that shows no overall advancement. So, in a sense, musicians are damned either way.

Of course, one can also look at the age of the musicians. Say, for the sake of argument, that they maintain their traditional style and don't go overboard with modern sounds, the fires of creativity fade away with time. The passion and energy gives way to an emptiness that cannot be avoided. Eventually, bands lose their ability to make worthwhile music. For some, it may take ten or twenty years; for others, it may take two or three. Nothing lasts forever, and there is no escaping the fact that a band (or any other type of artist) will, at some point, fail to live up to the accomplishments of the past.

Many would like to write this off as some sort of “elitist attitude”, as if no one really likes the old albums from a band; those that profess to like the demos and first couple of releases must be trying to impress others, as surely they cannot believe what they're saying. People who recognize this must just be trying to go against the grain, in the minds of these people. However, there may be a reason for this erroneous thinking. In a lot of cases, a band doesn't reach a certain level of popularity until their third of fourth album, at which point their audience grows and more casual fans become aware of them. So, naturally, these types will prefer the material that drew them in, as opposed to those fans who were there from the beginning. Still, one must not have to be there at the start of a band's career to realize that the old stuff is, typically, much better. It's not a matter of trying to seem “cool” by shunning the popular albums and embracing the lesser known ones; it's the simple process of recognizing the energy, creativity and passion that exists in the early stages of a band's existence, as evidenced through their demos and early albums, and realizing that this is no longer present as the years pass by.

In the end, there is no right or wrong. It all boils down to personal opinion, and this is mine.

On the Decline and Collapse of Thrash Metal (Nov. 2010)

Thrash Metal was born in the early 1980s, largely influenced by the NWOBHM bands, such as Angel Witch, Diamond Head, Raven, Saxon and Venom. One cannot discount the importance of Judas Priest and Motorhead, as well as some Punk Rock bands, to the development of this musical movement. The music was more raw and aggressive and also embodied some of the old rebellious spirit that had long been missing from Rock and Metal.

In the old days, defining a sub-genre of music was different than it is today. It wasn't long after the birth of Thrash Metal that Black and Death Metal were also growing from the same roots, in a sense. Sometimes, certain bands belonged to two or more categories, right from the beginning. For example, Slayer was as much a Black Metal band as Venom, yet they were also Thrash. The full transition would come a few years later, which will soon be touched upon.

Early on, the Thrash movement yielded a multitude of high-quality bands like Metallica, Slayer, Overkill, Anthrax, Megadeth, Exodus, Kreator, Sacrifice, Razor, etc. Strong scenes developed in New York, the Bay Area, Canada, Germany and even Brazil. They all managed to produce great albums that would stand the test of time as true genre-defining classics. The very best records to come from this movement, for the most part, emerged in the first few years. This work had a strong impact on those bands who followed, all throughout the Metal scene, regardless of whichever sub-genre they belonged to. Eventually, several bands were “converted” and made the transition. Slayer gave up the Satanic topics and dark atmosphere for a more pure Thrash sound with Reign in Blood. Sepultura, Sodom and Possessed are examples of bands that did the same, with Schizophrenia, Persecution Mania and Beyond the Gates, respectively. Even Kreator cleaned up their sound and lost the raw Black/Death feeling for the more streamlined sound heard on Terrible Certainty.

In time, more bands would follow, seeking to emulate or even out-do those that had inspired them. As record labels saw the success of bands like Metallica and Slayer, they began to sign tons of new groups. Often, these bands really had nothing to contribute. As with most musical movements, you have the pioneers that blaze the trail and then you have the legions of followers whose primary concern is to simply add their own perspective or to just follow in the footsteps of those that went before them. Several solid records were released as a result of this. Even if some of the newer bands weren't doing anything groundbreaking or unique, they were working within the newly defined boundaries of Thrash Metal and making quality music. Sadly, as time went on, many others jumped on the bandwagon with nothing to add but sub-par imitation and ended up contributing to the demise of the music that they valued.

Just as Thrash Metal was reaching the height of its popularity, many of the primary bands had started to lose their creative spark and to lower themselves to the level of their followers. It didn't take long for some of these bands to lose their edge and abandon the principles on which they were founded. After two impressive albums, Metallica released the dumbed-down disappointment known as Master of Puppets. And while the masses ate it up, it represented the end of an era for that band. They chose to stay within their safe zone and make boring music that was more easily accessible. Slayer did the same with Reign in Blood, dropping the more complex song structures and evil atmosphere for something simplistic and easier to digest. And while a band like Testament was a latecomer, not releasing their debut album until 1987, their follow-up was bereft of any real ambition.

The lyrical approach also took a nosedive. Many bands embraced the excesses of the age while others sought to use their music as a tool to preach their political beliefs. This ended up with a lot of bands either becoming too serious or not serious enough. The “party hard” feeling that was conveyed by some bands did a lot to perpetuate the stereotype of the “dumb metalhead” and alienated some listeners that didn't care to hear drunken Neanderthals praising alcohol and other empty substances. This often led to bands writing about goofy topics, and Anthrax can be blamed for a lot of this. The 1987 release of I'm the Man, singlehandedly, undermined nearly everything that they had accomplished and would set a precedent for the hideous and repulsive mixing of Metal with rap.

On the other end of the spectrum, there were bands that were using their lyrics to convey more serious messages but, often, messages that listeners didn't care to hear. Perhaps, it was one of the influences from Punk Rock, but the tendency to go on about corrupt politicians or televangelists was a real turn-off. Take a record like Peace Sells... But Who's Buying?, for example. Ten times out of ten, I prefer to listen to “The Conjuring” or “Devil's Island” over the title track. Some people don't care about politics, or would rather not have to think of such things while they are trying to listen to music. Others might care, but then the songs become quite dated as time goes on. For all the bands that took shots at Jimmy Bakker or the PMRC, how many of today's generation even know what that was all about? The comment on the Cold War by writing a song about nuclear holocaust is a bit more clever than being so obvious about it and making it completely irrelevant a short time later. I don't believe that politics need to be mixed in with Metal, whether it's Thrash or NSBM. However, I'm willing to concede that this may only be a personal preference.

The aesthetics of Thrash Metal also suffered. Cover art went from scenes of violence and horror to drunken band members drinking beer in front of the television. Or, often times, the artwork reflected the political nature of the lyrics. Also, in the early days, it seemed the the Metal look was more defined. In time, the basic Thrash Metal image became the standard jeans, high-top sneakers, band t-shirts and maybe leather or denim jackets. Then came State of Euphoria. Anthrax's whole image changed from guys wearing black jeans and leather jackets, with some rather serious sounding riffs, to being ridiculous clowns that wore shorts that a lot of girls would even be embarrassed to wear in public. I've always maintained that the aesthetics of an album should be a part of the overall presentation. While the bands don't all have to be trying to look evil, holding axes and chains, they should at least appear as serious as the music contained therein. In the case of Anthrax, the aforementioned album isn't really as goofy as the packaging would make it seem, but it makes it more difficult to enjoy the full experience when the band members look like they're on their way to a gay beach party.

In the late 80s and early 90s, Thrash Metal was dying. Most of the early bands were merely shadows of their former selves. Some had fallen into a rut of self-imitation and going through the motions, rehashing old ideas, while others were simplifying their sound and making radio-friendly “hits” to appeal to the mainstream. The process started before the 80s came to a close, but Metallica's Black Album certainly signaled the end, moreso than any other single release. As they completed what they'd begun a few years earlier, selling out and opting for the stadium Rock route, others tried their best to follow in their footsteps. Megadeth, Testament and Anthrax all made weak records that were more accessible and boring, trading the Thrash for mid-paced groove riffs and catchy choruses. A handful of bands opted for a more intense approach, fading back into the underground.

During the years that Thrash was beginning to become stale, just before the decline, Death Metal had filled the vacuum that existed in the underground. The cycle repeated itself, as the classic period of Death Metal coincided with the stagnation and eventual collapse of Thrash. And, of course, once Death Metal had run its course and followed the same pattern that Thrash had, albeit on a smaller level, the Second Wave of Black Metal rose up and carried on the true spirit of the underground.

These days, Thrash Metal is experiencing somewhat of a revival. Some of the old bands have reformed and are doing their best to return to their roots, but it all stinks of modernity. As well, the retro bands that sprang up in the past decade leave a lot to be desired and have done nothing to rekindle the old flame. They may be picking up where many of the original bands left off in the late 80s, but very few are even striving to match the achievements of Thrash Metal's classic era.

Thrash Metal was born of the underground and it was meant to remain there. Like any movement that pokes its head up into the mainstream world long enough to be noticed, it became just another victim of the music industry.

On the Downfall of Death Metal (Oct. 2010)

In the shadows of the early-to-mid 1980s, a malevolent darkness fell over the underground Metal scene. While Speed and Thrash Metal were more intense and aggressive than what came before it, the First Wave of Black Metal and the early Death Metal bands created an atmosphere that was shrouded in evil, death, and darkness. This truly was a special time in music history, when the stars were aligned in such a manner that allowed for so much creativity and the spawning of various new sub-genres.

Inspired by the early Thrash and Black Metal bands, Death Metal came forth in the mid-80s, and little did anyone suspect that it would grow as large as it did. Many look to Possessed and Mantas / Death as the first Death Metal bands, though the lyrical content, aesthetics and execution of Seven Churches links Possessed much more strongly to the likes of Venom, Slayer, Bathory and Hellhammer. With Possessed belonging to the First Wave of Black Metal, this leaves Mantas / Death as the true beginning of pure Death Metal. In a short time, many other bands formed and those earliest groups forged ahead and represented the true spirit of this new sub-genre of Metal. Morbid Angel, Necrophagia, Xecutioner / Obituary, Massacre, Autopsy and many more joined in establishing the core elements of Death Metal. In time, the plague began to spread and other bands, some of which were playing Thrash or Grindcore, were soon drawn into the ranks (including Nihilist, Pestilence, Carcass, Napalm Death, Carnage, etc.).

Death Metal grew in popularity, throughout the late 80s and into the early 90s. All of the best albums of the sub-genre were released between 1987 and 1991, roughly. However, just as thing seemed to be going well, the same problems that befell Thrash Metal began to afflict the scene. Record labels saw dollar signs and signed a slew of uninspired bands, many that were merely taking influence from their contemporaries rather than from those bands and the ideology that had served as the original source. Instead of having a handful of talented bands making great albums, legions of mediocre and unimaginative bands were churning out rehashed music that had little passion or creativity. One of the problems was that many bands were all aiming for the same sound as those that they looked up to, leading to a situation where everything seemed to sound alike.

The two most popular places to record were Morrisound Studios in Tampa, Florida and Studio Sunlight in Stockholm, Sweden. After the release of Entombed's Left Hand Path, most Scandinavian Death Metal bands wanted to record at Sunlight in an attempt to get the same sound. And, more times than not, Tomas Skogsberg succeeded in giving the band the general sound that they were looking for. As a result, most Swedish Death Metal from this period sounds very similar. Bands even traveled from Norway and Finland to get this type of production. In the states, the problem was even more detrimental. The cause for homogenization was lead by Scott Burns, whose awful production jobs sucked the life out of nearly every record that he ever had a hand in. Death, Obituary, Morbid Angel, Deicide, Malevolent Creation, Cannibal Corpse and dozens of others were all ruined by this man's vision of what Death Metal should sound like, as well as their own bad choice of seeking out this particular studio. Bands even traveled from abroad to get this awful sound, such as Napalm Death and Pestilence. So many good Death Metal albums were all reduced to non-threatening, soft piles of wasted potential. Some classics, such as Blessed Are the Sick, manage to shine despite this, but imagine how much better the record could have been if it only the band had gone to another studio or not suffered the ineptitude of Scott Burns. Thrash, Black and Death Metal are supposed to have a raw sound, and each loses a great bit of atmosphere as the production techniques slowly smooth away those rough edges.

Another problem was branching out and becoming too progressive. This went against the very essence of Death Metal. In the beginning, they were conjuring the essence of death, and you can hear this in the old albums. From Scream Bloody Gore and Leprosy to Consuming Impulse and Slowly We Rot, you could almost smell the decaying flesh and rotting graves. [In all honesty, releases such as Altars of Madness seemed to owe more to the old Black Metal bands, in atmosphere and content. Similarly, Deicide did very little to invoke a feeling of death. As many in the Norwegian Black Metal scene said, they were more like a commercial Black Metal band, as their message was Satanic and had nothing to do with death, more or less, yet they utilized the typical Death Metal sound.]

As time went on, even the more established bands began changing their style. Some were obviously tired of playing Death Metal, seeing that the sub-genre had certain limitations that did not allow them to grow as musicians. So, rather than give up their bands and move on to something else, they began to allow different influences into their albums. Their "Death Metal" riffs were boring and generic, and were then fused with technical nonsense, or more traditional Metal riffs and arrangements, often creating more upbeat and accessible music than they previously had. One need look no further than Death for one of the earliest examples of this. Of course, other bands came along with this idea from their beginnings, such as Atheist. It would be difficult to call such a band pure Death Metal, as there's really nothing deathlike about the atmosphere that they created. The same can be said for many others. With so many bands ripping each other off and using the same studios and producers, it's no wonder that some ventured outside the boundaries of the sub-genre in an attempt to make themselves stand out as something “unique”. However, injecting jazz influences in Death Metal... there is no excuse for this. It seemed that the progression away from pure Death Metal first took place in Europe, as many bands from Entombed and Tiamat to Amorphis and Sentenced all drifted to different territory.

Keeping with bands that were exploring beyond their established borders, we come to the so-called "melodic Death Metal" bands, such as early In Flames and Dark Tranquillity. It is my view that this label is quite erroneous. While it is melodic, there's little about this that should link it to Death Metal, other than the harsh vocals. And, in fact, a lot of these bands had vocals more similar to the Second Wave Black Metal bands. For example, Joakim Göthberg, was briefly the vocalist for In Flames, after a two-album stint as the vocalist for Marduk. Many of the vocalists for these bands utilized a raspier sound, having little in common with the predominant style of the period, or that which preceded it. Musically, these bands had much more in common with Iron Maiden and Helloween, than with Death or Obituary. [While At the Gates is often thrown into this group, I would say that they gradually evolved (or devolved) to that point, over time. There's nothing melodic about Gardens of Grief, and while The Red in the Sky is Ours does utilize more melody, it's more closely related to the first Burzum album (with the exception of the drumming).] And, of course, rarely did any of these "melodic Death Metal" bands reference topics of death or darkness and, of course, lyrical content is very important.

The lyrics of the early bands were mostly inspired by horror films or serial killers, or even simply ruminations on death itself, in a more serious tone. But, in time, the Thrash influence took over, and many bands were writing lyrics with a more political nature or, in the case of Death, actually espousing positive thinking or using lyrics to address mundane worldly matters such as media slander or trash-talking ex-members. This was completely ridiculous and boring and had no place in Death Metal, whatsoever.

Then there were bands that didn't necessarily add the wrong kind of influences or topics, but they approached it incorrectly. By 1992 or so, the dominant sound of Death Metal was fast becoming more percussion-oriented. Quite often, the songs were driven by the drumming rather than the guitar riffs. The guitars were thicker and had more of a bass-like quality, with much less treble. Even the vocals were getting deeper and deeper. With vocalists such as Chris Barnes of Cannibal Corpse, Joe Ptacek of Broken Hope and Frank Mullen of Suffocation, it got to the point where the vocals took on the 'cookie monster' qualities and really stopped adding anything to the atmosphere. Even vocalists that had better styles, like David Vincent and Glen Benton began going deeper and deeper, losing the very qualities that made them stand out.

This deepening of the vocals was somewhat tied to this retarded concept of 'brutality'. By the mid-90s, it seemed that most of the Death Metal bands were trying to out-do one another, by being faster or more technical with more drum fills, time changes and riff cycles, with deeper and deeper vocals, or the ever-gimmicky dual vocalists, with one deep and one high-pitched. If the bands weren't bringing in Grindcore influences and making senseless noise, they were going in the other direction and trying to cram in so many riffs that Darkness Descends begins to look primitive and simplistic. As well, the overwhelming mindlessness of 90s “groove” began to take over as well, with bands focusing on catchy rhythms and breakdowns, further killing off the sub-genre and also making it appeal to a wider audience of mouth-breathing parasites.

To use an example, think of the A Nightmare on Elm Street series. The first one had a great concept and a creepy atmosphere. It looked pretty good, but was gritty enough to add to the ambiance and the story was well-written. The second one was, obviously, inferior but still not too far off. With the third installment of the series, it was now purely for the mainstream. Rather than seeming ominous and threatening, Freddy Krueger had become a stand-up comedian. In the original, he spoke very little and when he did, it was something like, “I'll kill you slow”. By the third film, he's smashing a girl's head into a televisions screen and saying, “Welcome to prime time, bitch”. The character turned into a joke, and there was nothing creepy about any of the sequels. There may have been “cool” scenes and interested kills, but the atmosphere had been completely lost. The same is true for Death Metal.

Bands may write a decent riff or two, but the atmosphere and feeling has been forsaken. By 1997-98, bands like Suffocation, Nile, Cryptopsy and Opeth were all quite popular, and not a single one of them embodied the spirit of what Death Metal was to me, so I washed my hands of it. Anytime that I've heard any modern releases, in the decade-plus that has followed, it never failed to disappoint. Nothing new is being done, rather, nothing that adds anything positive. Old bands are still churning out worthless garbage and cheapening their legacies, while new bands are ripping them off and contributing nothing. The original principles that Death Metal was founded upon were long since forgotten. This was something that many others realized long ago. The musicians in the Norwegian Black Metal scene, for example, recognized that Death Metal had become something trendy and designed for the unintelligent masses as early as 1991-92, and began to rebel against this.

In the end, a sub-genre that was founded on the principle of creating and maintaining an atmosphere of death and darkness became sterile and, ironically, lifeless. That's the real death in Death Metal. It has no feeling whatsoever, just mechanical noise. Riffs and songs are interchangeable, as are the bands themselves. There hasn't been a relevant Death Metal release in well over a decade, and there's no reason to believe that this will ever change. Death Metal will continue on as a parody of itself, with very few of the musicians or fans even realizing it. It's a frustrating situation, but how can one even argue for the integrity of a sub-genre that was sold out by one of its own creators, almost two decades ago?

On Destroying the Musical Past

How many times has a band attempted to re-write history and only ended up tarnishing it instead? With the recent announcement that Gorgoroth intends to re-record Under the Sign of Hell, it brought up the never-ending debate on the issue of bands meddling with the past. This is something that I, generally, frown upon. Very rarely does it end with anything other than utter failure.

There are a few different manners by which a band will rape their own legacy. The most common is by simply remastering an album for re-release. Then there are times when they re-do parts of the recording, but not the entire thing. And, finally, there is the complete re-recording, whether of a song or two, or an entire album.

In the case of remasters, it's something that has been going on for quite some time. In many cases, it's hardly noticeable, and does nothing to severely alter the atmosphere of the original. Then there are bands like Megadeth, that want to “update” the albums so that they sound more contemporary. Some years ago, I found myself at the home of an acquaintance, looking for some tolerable music to listen to. I ran across the remastered version of Killing Is My Business.. and Business is Good! The different cover art was already enough of a turn-off, but suffering through the horridly altered music was another story. It was offensive, right from the beginning, yet some kind of morbid curiosity compelled me to continue. Not long ago, I learned that the other Megadeth albums also received this treatment, and sampled bits and pieces, for the sake of forming an opinion. The general feeling that I got was of having been aurally raped. One of my strongest reasons for disliking newer music is the sterile modern production that does nothing but suck the life right out of the music. Taking this mentality and robbing old albums of the aura that made them special is ridiculous. And this isn't merely limited to albums that I grew up on; i.e. this sentiment is not based on nostalgia, alone. The same goes for any Speed/Thrash album that I happen to dig up, all these years later. If any of those had such an empty and lifeless production job, I'd hate them as well. If the person in charge of remastering the album limits himself to making sure there are no imperfections (such as a drop in sound) then that is a different matter. In some cases, the clarity of the compact disc revealed imperfections from the source tape that weren't as easily noticed on vinyl or cassette, such as Anthrax's Fistful of Metal. If it was possible to go in and remove those imperfections without compromising the integrity of the album, that would be fully acceptable.

There are cases where an album needs to be remastered. Looking at some of the albums that came out of Hellspawn/Unisound, one can't help but feel pity for a few of those bands. In particular, Marduk was completely raped and had the impact of such works as Those of the Unlight and Opus Nocturne reduced to almost nothing. Years later, when they were remastered, it was for the better and only served to bring out the potential that was always there.

That brings up another interesting point. Perhaps this is what some artists feel they are doing. It could be that they were dissatisfied with the results and that the music did not live up to their original vision, whether it be due to errors in the production or the playing itself. However I see a strong difference between cleaning something up and trying to modernize it.

The next step is to actually re-record parts of the song, while retaining the rest. In some cases, someone will go in and re-do the bass lines or the vocals. Ozzy had the bass and drums re-recorded and replaced on his early albums, due to a royalty dispute with former bandmates. The result was more horrible filth that destroyed the feeling of the original albums though, being Ozzy releases, it wasn't nearly the same level of crime as the aforementioned Megadeth trickery. And speaking of Dave Mustaine, he is guilty of re-recording things as well. I don't have all the facts, but it seems that when it came time to remaster and reissue Rust In Peace, it was discovered that some of the original tapes were missing. This lead to the “natural conclusion” of re-recording some parts, and using alternate takes for others. This not only ruined the album, but completely killed it, dead. With the original being out of print, future generations will now have no choice but to accept this trash as the one and only version of this Thrash classic, without even knowing that they are listening to an inferior recording. My question is why they didn't just use an existing CD and make minimal changes (as I'm guessing one cannot do so much without having the separate tracks), but would still be better than altering the album. Of course, in my opinion, the album was fine as it was and didn't need to be tampered with, whatsoever. Then there was the more recent case of The Crown. I'm not terribly familiar with them, but I do remember reading that when their original vocalist returned to the band, they re-released the album that featured Tomas Lindberg, with his vocal tracks replaced.

Finally, we come to the issue of completely re-recording select songs, or even entire albums. In a sense, this is not as bad as the previous crime, since it is fully acknowledged as being a new recording rather than meddling with existing albums and trying to pass them off as the originals. What are the motives for re-recording music that has already been released on a proper studio album? In most cases, it is a matter of the artist not feeling that the material was presented as he intended for it to be.

Look at Burzum's “A Lost Forgotten Sad Spirit”, which was re-recorded a short time later for the Aske E.P. Varg was able to get the song just as he wished, and made this “correction” within a short time of the original release. In a situation such as this, it seems completely understandable. However, other times, it appears to be much more pointless. Take Black Funeral, for example. They released Vampyr – Throne of the Beast in 1996, and then re-recorded 85% of that material for Empire of Blood, in 1997. The arrangements were pretty much the same, with only the production and vocals being altered. Overall, this was rather useless, and a bit deceptive since the songs were all given new titles and no mention being made that they were the same as what appeared on the previous album. Still, it was within a relatively short amount of time and the argument could be made that the band members weren't pleased with the result of their 1996 effort, or simply chose to go in a slightly different direction afterward. Another reason to re-record an old song is for the band to showcase new members, usually for an E.P. Hypocrisy did it, on Inferior Devotees, re-recording a song with Peter on vocals, as a way of introducing the fans to his vocal style and to show that he was competent enough to fill Masse's position. As with the previous examples, this was done a short time after the original, and seemed to serve a specific purpose. However, as much as it pains me to bring this up, Dissection proved that, sometimes, the past needs to be left alone.

When Jon Nödtveidt was released from prison and reformed Dissection, they re-recorded “Unhallowed”, for the Maha Kali E.P. While they succeeded in displaying the skill of the new lineup (which I am sure was the ultimate goal), the song failed to capture the magic of the original. As an obsessed fan, I came to enjoy this rendition as well, but even I would not try to claim that it matched the version found on Storm of the Light's Bane. Still, in the end, it was merely a bonus track on a collector's E.P. And, after an absence of several years, it was important to show that Dissection was still a force to be reckoned with.

A somewhat pointless example would be Sodom, who re-recorded the classic In the Sign of Evil E.P., along with a handful of other songs that were, supposedly, meant to be recorded back in 1984. The sound does hearken back to the old days and maintains a raw, old school feeling. However, the re-recorded songs do not compare, favourably, to the originals and the new songs aren't good enough to justify this project. Since I don't recall these songs appearing on the demos that preceded the E.P. or the albums that followed, part of me wants to say that the guys just felt nostalgic for the past and decided to write some new songs in their old style, and the whole back story was merely a gimmick. I have no proof of that, obviously, but it does seem odd that they would be unable to record all of the songs that they had planned to, and then just tossed them aside and didn't bother to include them on Obsessed By Cruelty, for example. Whatever the case, at least they made an attempt to keep the raw sound and atmosphere when they did this.

If one wants to see just how disgusting re-recording classic material can be, look no further than Testament and Anthrax. On First Strike Still Deadly and The Greater of Two Evils, respectively, each band ripped through several songs from their classic period and raped them, thoroughly. Curiously, neither band had performed at quite the same level for some time, and revisiting these old songs showed that they were still capable of playing with a decent level of energy and precision. Still, trying to give 80s Thrash Metal a modern feeling is a crime beyond all others. In the case of Testament, the thicker production ruins everything and Chuck Billy's 90s vocal style does not fit well with the old songs. As for Anthrax... John Bush should never try to cover the Belladonna-era, or the Turbin-era, for that matter. He really seemed to try his best, but his style is nothing like either of those guys. The modern production ruins the feeling of the songs, as well. If the band wanted to revisit their glory days, they'd be much better off simply returning to their roots, rather than raping the past. A band like Anthrax should stop making trendy groove nonsense and go back to thrashing as they did on Fistful of Metal and Spreading the Disease. Take a cue from Bathory; when Quorthon decided to return to the Viking Metal sound, he didn't re-record Hammerheart, he wrote brand new material in the same vein, and ended up creating two more classic records.

While re-recording a song within a few months or so is one thing, going back a decade or two is rarely justified. Similarly, replacing bass or vocal tracks, or completely remastering the albums to give them a modern feel, thus stripping them of their very spirit, all of these things are crimes against music. Most bands would do well to leave the past alone. Of course, musicians and technology may improve with time, but that doesn't necessitate going back and ruining old records. They represent a moment in time that was captured and preserved and, nine times out of ten, the atmosphere and feeling of the original is not worth sacrificing for any reason.

Venom's Influence on Bathory

In the beginning, there was Venom. This trio represented the birth of Black Metal (or the broader, yet annoying term, 'Extreme Metal'). Evidence of their influence was apparent, within a few years. The spawn of Venom were spread far and wide, from America (Slayer) to Switzerland (Hellhammer) to Germany (Sodom) and, yes, even to Sweden (Bathory). It would not be correct to say that Venom was the sole influence for all of these bands, yet it is easy to see that they laid the foundation that the others built upon and inspired them to do so. Some, such as Hellhammer and Mayhem, were quite vocal about the importance of Venom. While each band went on to make their own mark in the realm of Black Metal, they never denied those that came before them. Yet, for whatever reason, Bathory's founder and main figure, Quorthon, spent a lifetime denying that Venom had any influence on his work, whatsoever. However, this seems impossible.

First off, Bathory is a band that holds significant importance for me. Quorthon's accomplishments are worthy of the utmost respect and admiration. The man was a musical genius and created classics that have stood the test of time. The old Bathory albums, more or less, defined Black Metal for future generations and the Viking-era material created an entirely different sub-genre of Metal. Ultimately, while each band had their share of highs and lows, Bathory reached heights that Venom dared not even attempt. Nonetheless, it is very difficult to believe any claims that Bathory was not influenced by Venom. The question remains, was Venom part of the foundation on which Bathory built its legacy?

Obviously, many noticed the similarities right from the outset. Some derided his work as Venom worship or called Bathory a simple clone band, which was not the case at all. Unfortunately, it would see that the negative criticism led Quorthon to try his best to distance himself from Venom, as much as possible. It is understandable, to some degree, but it does not change the facts. But what are the facts?

In an interview from 1987, Quorthon had this to say, when confronted about the Venom issue:

"I don't think there are any similarities musically between Venom and Bathory at all. But I do think Black Metal - which I heard for the first time 3 months after we formed Bathory - is one of the best albums ever made because it has genuine feeling. At that time there was no speed or thrash around, so Venom were very unique, even though they wimped out later on and spoiled the whole thing. I mean At War With Satan and Possessed are shit compared to Black Metal."

Earlier in the same interview, when asked when the band was formed, he said March 1983. Okay, three months after March 1983 would have been June 1983. So, here, in an interview from 1987, he is saying that he heard Venom for the first time, before recording the first Bathory album. It wasn't until June 1984 until the band entered the studio to record the self-titled debut. This was a full year after hearing Venom for the first time and deciding that Black Metal was one of the best albums ever made.

In this 1988 interview, Quorthon seems to have slipped up and actually admitted the influence, when he was asked directly:

"Well, I listened to Motörhead and Venom. Venom call us dickheads you know, but that doesn't bother us, 'cos we're bigger. The comparison comes from the fact that there are 3 of us, 2 have black hair and one is blond, and we wear leather and chains."

In 1994, another interviewer attempted to call Quorthon out on this matter, citing that the self-titled debut album was a rip-off of Venom. The response given was somewhat vague, yet possibly exposed part of the deeper reason for this denial:

"Not true at all! It was coincidence. I never really listened to Venom before we recorded our debut record. If you speak to true Black Metal fans, they'll cite ourselves and Venom as influences. They don't regard Bathory as having ripped off Venom at all. We are equally as important to the scene."

Quorthon says that he never really listened to Venom before the recording of the album. This could be taken in several ways, the most obvious being that he was aware of Venom and, maybe, was trying to imply that he didn't listen to them all that much. As in, perhaps, he gave the albums a few spins or something to that effect.

But the true motivation may lie in the comment that followed, regarding how the fans see Bathory as equally important to the Black Metal scene. To admit that Venom had a strong influence on Bathory would be to, somehow, limit its importance. Indeed, Bathory was incredibly important for Black Metal. Quorthon took what Venom had done and perfected it. There's no shame in that, just like there's no shame in the fact that Venom, openly, admit to having been influenced by the dark atmosphere of early Black Sabbath, the speed of Motörhead and the attitude of Punk Rock. But, as Quorthon has said in the past, it was only a coincidence that they shared the same influences. He's quick to point out Black Sabbath and Motörhead, as well as Punk bands like GBH and The Exploited, as influencing and inspiring the early Bathory albums. Somehow, though, it would seem that he was unaware of Venom's existence. Yet the timeline for this 'discovery' keeps changing.

In this 1996 interview, when asked about his knowledge of the underground scene in the early days, he had this to say:

"We had no idea there were so many bands. It was us, Sodom and Celtic Frost, previously Hellhammer. So I went to a record store were I knew a guy who worked and he said, "Here's a band who sounds exactly like you". He had been with us in the rehearsal place, and he put on an album and it was Venom. I was like, what the fuck, are there other bands who play that kind of music too?"

This was, supposedly, around the time between the release of Scandinavian Metal Attack and the recording of Bathory's debut album. Again, acknowledgment of Venom's existence prior to writing and recording the first album. Also, in this same interview, he discusses the artwork for the first record, and lets another bit of information slip out:

"It was a week at the most before the cover was due to be printed, [...] they said we had to make a group photo, a nice cover, front and back [...] in a book I had there was this Baphomet pentagram, but Venom had already done that on their first album, so I thought why not copy this and draw a pair of horns to make it look a bit different."

This contradicts what he wrote, a few years later, as he was working on a book that would present the history of Bathory. The material has since been published on the official Bathory website.:

"Both Venom and Bathory independently borrowed the goat and the pentagram from the paraphernalia and symbolism of the Satanic cult and literature."

So, which is it? Quorthon either knew of the Venom cover, prior to the release of the first Bathory record, or he only heard them later on and discovered that they, coincidentally, used similar imagery. In any event, it was already established that Quorthon knew quite a bit about Venom, before the first Bathory record was released. Yet, in 2001, his story changed again:

"The fanzines and magazines back in the early 80's had a field day when reviewing our first album. The only thing that came to their mind was Venom and so we'd be called Venom clones for years, when in fact we couldn't see or hear any resemblance at all once we actually got to hear Venom."

While not coming right out and saying it, this is a strong implication that the members of Bathory (of which there were three, at the time) had never even heard Venom, prior to the release of the first record. It is presented as if, by recording and releasing their first album, only then were they connected with the underground scene and then became aware of all the other bands that were doing similar things:

"It wasn't until we had our first album out in the summer of `84 and fanzines would contact us and ask for an interview, that we all of a sudden realized there were tons of other young bands around the world doing basically the same thing as us."

Throughout the years, those in the Bathory camp were very defensive on this issue. This is from the official website:

"Around the time the second album The Return of the Darkness and Evil was released, a theory frequently referred to as the "Venom-clones" theory began to shape a lot of people's notion of this brand new act from Stockholm. Probably due to the fact there was very little else to compare with at the time, Bathory - along with probably most other extreme metal acts of the early 80's - would be regarded as an act influenced by Venom exclusively."

Notice that last part, "infuenced by Venom exclusively". Again, the author does not deny that there was an influence, yet only goes so far as to say that Venom was not the only influence. The author continued:

"The fact that Bathory had only just heard about this Newcastle act when interviews for the debut album were conducted in late 1984 and early 1985, was a fact that seemed all the more pointless to defend in the maelstrom of disbelief that would begin to shape much of the media climate in the mid 80's."

Of course, it was quite difficult to believe, when the story kept changing. In one interview, Quorthon said that he heard Venom a few months after Bathory was formed, prior to the recording of the first album. Later, he says that he heard them in-between the first and second Bathory records, because a friend came by their rehearsal space and let him check out this similar band. Then, the story became this:

"I know for a fact I heard a Venom album first time just after the release of the first Bathory album. It was because of our debut album released [...] through Tyfon Records, that Neat Records recognized Tyfon to be a potential distributor of Neat albums in Scandinavia. Hence a promotion package was delivered including [...] the first and second Venom album. I picked all of those Neat albums up at the office one day and had a listen. It must have been in early December 1984. I can’t remember what I thought about it. But it certainly didn’t effect the Bathory material at that time, with the exception I might have been encouraged to deepen the Satanic element more than had been the case with our debut."

So, here, we have a vague admission that Venom had some influence on Bathory's lyrics. Yet, still, Quorthon vehemently denied any musical inspiration:

"If you listen to GBH tracks [...], it’s just so obvious where early Bathory came from in terms of rhythm, song construction and energy. [...] the base for early Bathory was primarily Oi-punk and not something that came out of Newcastle. Not that this is an attempt to make an excuse, or trying to turn no back on anything, or re-writing history here, it's a fact: Bathorys roots were closer to Oi-punk than anything else. Mix the sound and style of Motörhead with the gloom and darkness of Black Sabbath, and let that rest on a solid base of GBH. What you get is something that's raw, primitive, noisy and intense early Bathory."

Of course, for any Venom fan (or merely anyone to have ever read or listened to an interview with Cronos, himself), it's obvious that Quorthon has listed off several of the very bands that influenced Venom, right from the start. It could be a brilliant deception, to avoid admitting the influence of a particular band by simply citing their influences as your own and claiming it was all a big coincidence. Now, I am not asserting that this was the case, here. Traces of Motörhead and GBH are very clear in the early work of Bathory, but the fact remains that Quorthon goes out of his way to deny the influence of another important band, Venom.

It would not be entirely impossible to fathom that he had not heard Venom until later on, but his own story changed too many times to be believed. One might say that, as time passed, the memories faded and the story was altered. However, this is not the kind of thing that Quorthon would forget. Any time that it was brought up, he became very passionate about it and spoke of this 'discovery' in detail... It's just that the details were rarely the same.

Early on, the claim was that he first heard Venom a few months after the formation of Bathory, in the summer of 1983, prior to the first record and even before Scandinavian Metal Attack. Later, he claims that a friend brought the album by their rehearsal place and gave him a listen, in late 1984/early 1985, before the recording of The Return... Then, the story changes and states that he came across the first two Venom albums in the offices of Tyfon records, again in-between the first two Bathory records, and gave them a listen then. He insists that he wasn't all that impressed, though may have been inspired to write darker lyrics, based on the lyrics of Venom. More on that later.

While claiming in later years that the Venom albums made no real impression on him, he had earlier stated (in 1987) that Black Metal was one of the best albums ever, following that up by expressing disappointment in At War With Satan and Possessed. So, at different points, he seems unsure about when he first discovered Venom. He's also not clear about whether or not he liked them, though several interviews he would go on to lament the downfall of Venom, among other 80's bands.

So, what has been established at this point? Quorthon's story regarding how and when he discovered Venom is very inconsistent, as is his opinion on the music. Still, does this truly prove that Venom had a strong influence on Bathory? It would seem to imply that there was an effort to downplay, or totally deny, that Venom held any significance for him as a songwriter and musician. The sound was the result of a coincidental sharing of musical influences between the two bands and nothing more, according to Quorthon. The most he would admit was that there may have been some lyrical inspiration, in early 1985. Then how would he explain this?:

"I gasp for air
I scream for sight
and fight against torment and dread
Calling the vengeance
I tear at the lid and
promise to raise from the dead"

- Bathory, 1984

And the original source for this:

"My lungs gasp for air, my eyes scream for sight
I promise the rise of my body this night"

"I tear at the lid, my fingers they bleed"

- Venom, 1982

For someone that, supposedly, didn't hear Venom until '84/'85 (according to one version of the story), he sure had some true connection with the same spirit or force that inspired Cronos when he penned those lyrics two years earlier. Or, it could be that Bathory was inspired by Venom? Are we really to believe that Quorthon didn't lift song titles from Venom, for the first Bathory record? It's a mere coincidence that in 1982, Venom recorded songs titled "Raise the Dead" and "Sacrifice", and then Bathory did the same in 1984, with no knowledge that these titles had already been used? Not one coincidence, but two, so far. But of the third ripped-off song title, there is no question. The first two could be said to be somewhat generic and not completely impossible for each band to have come up with, independently, despite the lyrical plagiarism evident in the Bathory songs. But the most damning evidence is "In Conspiracy With Satan" which was, of course, inspired by Venom's "In League With Satan".

So, in conclusion, the evidence seems to be against Quorthon, in this matter. Now, am I accusing him of completely ripping off Venom and then denying it for years? No. It is plainly obvious that Motörhead, GBH, Black Sabbath, the oi-punk bands and Venom were all influences on the early sound of Bathory, in one way or another. The problem may have been that people automatically assumed that the band was a 100% Venom clone, when that wasn't true. The quick answer to this is to just deny ever hearing Venom until after the first album, thus eliminating any possible influence and trying to rid himself of this tag as being a Venom clone. Bathory was incredibly important for the Black Metal scene and to be labeled as a simple clone band would have been detrimental to the band's legacy, in Quorthon's eyes.

The point of this article is not to cast Quorthon as a liar or to damage his character in any way. First off, he is no longer alive to defend himself, so this would be terribly inappropriate. More often than not, he always proved himself to be very sincere and open when speaking to the media, or addressing the Bathory Hordes. It would appear that he was a very honest and genuine man, but this one 'controversy' always lingered. I would have been very interested to hear an explanation for all of these inconsistencies and coincidences, as there are just too many to fathom.

Is it completely out of the realm of possibility that two separate bands came along, a few years apart, and were both influenced by the same types of music and then mixed these influences together with their own ideas and came up with similar results? The answer is, of course, no. However, the circumstantial evidence at least creates reasonable doubt as to the extent of the similarities, ranging from image, song titles, album art, music, lyrics and vocal approach.

It isn't a bad thing to be inspired by Venom. Countless bands were. Many of them went on to be influential in their own rights, such as Slayer, Hellhammer and so on. Bathory took what Venom created and perfected it, and Quorthon should have been proud of that achievement. In the long run, Bathory was proven to be the more influential of the two bands, shaping the sound of Black Metal and creating sort of a template for those that followed. Whether or not any of the seeds for this came from Venom, it was Quorthon's brilliance that brought it into existence and nothing can ever erase that.

The Silent Conquest

Europe is being invaded and conquered, without a single bullet being fired in its defense.

Each year, more and more immigrants 'invade' Europe, bringing with them only problems for Europeans.

Europe is not a large continent, by any means. To begin with, there simply is not room enough for such an influx of immigrants. Even worse, the majority of them only make matters worse. Europe is welcoming the dregs of society, rather than the cream of the crop. They seek a higher quality of life than that of their home countries, yet all they manage to do is to lower the quality of life for all Europeans. Crime rates rise, political dissension increases and the uneducated and unskilled immigrants become a burden on the social welfare systems that are in place throughout Europe.

And yet no one does anything about it.

In the wake of WWII, no government leader wants to be placed alongside Hitler and Nazi Germany. There is an atmosphere of guilt, largely due to the liberal media; the same media that uses propaganda to push the idea of a multicultural world and the doctrine of race-mixing that will, silently, lead to the genocide of European/white man.

One of the goals of Adolf Hitler's regime was to create a strong homeland for his people and to eliminate the alien influence of the Jews, among others. He was certainly a visionary as he wrote, in Mein Kampf, "What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it... Every thought and every idea, every doctrine and all knowledge, must serve this purpose. And everything must be examined from this point of view and used or rejected according to its utility." Unfortunately, his war was a failure and every idea associated with National Socialism was deemed wicked and evil. From eugenics to the preservation of one's own race and homeland. It all became taboo and led to the creation of a hideous ideology known as political correctness. This is the silent killer.

No one wants to seem racist or hateful, for what others would think of them. Somehow, the idea of being proud of your own race was tied in with hating other races; however, this is only true for Europeans/whites. Others are free to say and do whatever they wish. Furthermore, Europeans are not allowed to defend themselves. It is the same for all of those of European descent, the world over.

If a white man assaults another white man, in self-defense, it is a fairly simple matter. But, if the attacker is a black or Jewish man, then the white man that defended himself would be investigated as a potential criminal, as it is considered a 'hate crime' for someone of European descent to assault someone of another race, for whatever reason. While it is true that Europeans dominated the world for some centuries, often utilizing force and cruelty, this does not justify the current policies that are driving our race to extinction.

Not only are Europeans apathetic with regard to their own dismal fate, but they act as martyrs. They are taught that their ancestors were evil for dominating the world for so long, so now they are timid and weak. They don't want to seem wicked, so they turn into doormats. European states actually tolerate and cater to Muslims, who complain that the freedom of speech enjoyed in the West is against their beliefs; yet they chose to enter lands where they were not wanted. Whether you are a Muslim immigrant in Europe or a New Yorker relocating to China, when you go to a new place it is your responsibility to adapt to the new surroundings, not everyone else's obligation to accommodate you!

The sons of Odin/Wotan are weak and corrupt. Many adhere to the fictional Judeo-Christian mythology, which begins the process of poisoning the mind and indoctrination, thus influencing them at their very core. This is compounded by the propaganda spewed by the media, which is eventually accepted as fact. In truth, most Europeans/whites don't realize that they are on the losing end of a genocidal war that will claim their race and, in time, erase their achievements (some of the greatest achievements of the human race) from history.

The nations of Europe allow the immigrants to pour in and to ruin everything that they touch. Once inside, they begin influencing political opinion, the crime rates rise, and they also out-produce the European population. In time, this will lead to the people of Europe dying out and the continent will, silently, be inherited by the outsiders that were rotting the various nations from the inside.

This grim fate is well known, yet no one will lift a finger to even try to prevent it. How is it that it has become "wrong" to defend your borders against unwanted intruders? What happened to the Europe of old, banishing unwelcome groups from their realms? If the Jews, Muslims and Africans want to call us racists, let them do so from their own lands.

One can look to Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings for a simple analogy. The forces of the west are scattered and unfocused. Our leaders have betrayed us; i.e. Saruman siding with Mordor and gathering swarthy armies to destroy Middle-Earth. The time for dissension is over. Unless the leaders of Europe come together to protect their homeland, we will be eradicated from the face of the earth. Not only that, but the accomplishments of our civilization will be forgotten. The Orcs would no more preserve the beauty of Rivendell than the Muslims will maintain the art, literature, architecture or philosophy of Europe. The invaders have only one thing in mind and that is to eliminate us and our culture, completely. They haven't the military might to do it by force; nonetheless, thanks to decades of pacifism, all they have to do is sit and wait.

The Islamization of Europe is not occurring overnight, but it is happening. The European nations are dying and the populations in them are turning into hostile Muslim populations. The worst thing about this all is that it is being allowed to happen. If we (Europeans and those of European descent) had a more positive relationship to our blood, our race, our culture, our homeland and to our ancient beliefs, we would not be destroying this with modern 'civilization' (id est pacifism, apathy, capitalism, materialism, pollution, multiculturalism/race mixing, Judeo-Christianity, urbanization, globalization, Americanization, et cetera). As Varg Vikernes once stated, "The 'nazi ghost' has scared millions of Europeans from caring about their blood and homeland for sixty years now, and it is about time we banish this ghost and again start to think and care about the things that (whether we like it or not) are important to us." At the current rate, we will be completely forgotten in a matter of a few generations. Our achievements will be attributed to the Muslims, Africans and Asians that seem poised to inherit Europe and we will forever be written out of history. The legacy of our people will be stolen or simply forgotten.

In the words of Odin:
"Cattle die, kindred die,
Every man is mortal:
But I know one thing that never dies,
The glory of the great dead"

But, at the rate things are going, who will be left to remember such glorious deeds?

Whether we want it or not, this war is upon us. Now, we can either take action or die quietly, having the satisfaction of not offending the "poor" invaders that have come to destroy us, our culture and our land. And that is exactly what they intend to do. Many of their forefathers were not able to create a civilization on the same level as that of Europe. Rather than create their own and earn it, they wish to steal what is ours; that which was forged by the blood and tears of our ancestors. The deeds and great works of our people will soon belong to the Dark Menace.

This alien presence should be repelled and banished from Europe. After WWII, the Soviets shifted massive populations of people from one country to another, especially in the case of Germans living in Eastern European countries. A similar process should take place, in the near future. Then, some sort of barrier could be erected to prevent them from returning. Harsh policies should be instituted, banning immigration of all but the very best, and even then in limited numbers. A top scientist from India or China should be welcome, but as a visitor only. Low-level, uneducated criminals from Africa or Islamic extremists have absolutely no place in Europe, period.

And that brings up another significant point. The immigrants are, largely, made up of garbage that was rejected by their own kind. Our homelands become infested with even more simple-minded idiots that spend their days reproducing, committing crimes and leeching off of the government, abusing the social welfare system. Then, of course, the aid is no longer available when hardworking, law-abiding citizens need it. The situation may be a bit different, were it not the lowest scum from each country being cast off and welcomed in by the pacifist governments of Europe and North America.

And it's not a matter of claiming one race to be superior to another. What it boils down to is that the majority (but not the entirety) of all immigrants represent the most inferior members of their particular race. Of course, each race is contaminated with low level gene trash that should have been aborted, and the European/white race is no exception. All races would benefit, greatly, from cleansing their ranks and allowing only high quality individuals to survive and procreate.

Once we eliminate the alien presence and secure our borders, then we can begin the process of cleansing our own kind, for the influence of the Jews, Muslims, Africans, et cetera has long corrupted the minds of weaker individuals. While extermination may be deemed too cruel or barbaric by some, we can at least sterilize them so that when they die, their inferior genes are not passed on. Only through maintaining and preserving only the strongest, most intelligent and most beautiful of our own race can we ensure that future generations will ascend to a higher level of being. And those descendants will need a safe homeland in which to thrive.

That is the most important thing. It has nothing to do with superiority/inferiority, or dominating the world by enslaving or killing off entire populations. It's about each race having the right to a homeland for their people, where they can be among their own kind and not have their culture undermined and corrupted by unwanted outsiders.

Let the Muslims fight over different pieces of their precious desert. Let the Africans have their jungles. Let them all have the United States, for it is nothing but a great toilet, anyway. Europe is our home, and we should defend it with our very lives.

How ironic that the race that once dominated the world will soon fade into oblivion without so much as a feeble whimper.