So both the TMT, Consequence of Sound and Quietus reviews mention the Grimm vs. Gira case, the Quietus even dedicating four paragraphs of its review to discuss it
How is it even relevant to the album?
The accusation is from an incident 8 years ago, I understand context, but it's not even in context to say that the accusation has anything to do with the album's content
sweet sweet clicks bro. It'll pop up on a googlel search for swans rape or gira rape.
>>65729512
>both
>lists 3 reviews
are swans fans retarded like their rapist rolemodel gira?
>>65729512
We're getting closer and closer to the moment when this pressure to out-holy all the holier-than-thou PC fucks around you will just crush all libtards altogether.
Music journalists in general are the scum of the earth, the absolute lowest of the low. Not TMZ camera crews, not video game journalists (although I understand they could use some ethical indoctrination), not Gawker smear artists, not Buzzfeed listicle aggregators.
Music journalism is by far the scourge of timeline spam and content for the sake of content. Just ask Ryan Schreiber.
Every single major publication review is a waste of time.
>>65729610
Dude, you're a retard. My favorite liberal funny man said that liberal idealism is rooted in reality so you sound like a total dumbass right now.
>>65729664
There's more than just a subtle difference between being a liberal and a libtard, dude.
>>65729689
>[joke]
>>65729704
I know that you were joking, but I'm quite serious as I actually still mostly identify as a liberal.
>>65729704
If you aren't willing to engage political opposition and have an open and rational discourse, you are basically a right wing libtard.
>>65729731
>OH NO! HE TOLD A JOKE!
>if you're not prepared to engage every single opinion that differs from your own on a public forum I can comfortably dismiss you
This is why people don't take the modern left seriously.
>>65729731
>If you aren't willing to engage political opposition and have an open and rational discourse-
Stop right there, anon.
You dropped your hat.
>>65729798
ok yeah that went over my head, but still the point stands even against your lazy ad hom.
Im not even a lefty btw.
>>65729512
>but it's not even in context to say that the accusation has anything to do with the album's content
You're living in the age of the celebrity. 90% of the reason people listen, or don't listen, to a certain artist is because of their media presence or image. Album reviews must focus on these things.
And they have to write about it especially when rape allegations are in play. It would be dumb for them to ignore it because that's what everyone (everyone) is talking about. If they ignored it, people would complain they're ignoring and trivializing sexual violence.
>>65729898
epic!!!one(1)!!!!
>>65729798
>This is why people don't take the modern left seriously.
you mean, in your experience of life on a cantonese book burning enthusiast imageboard
>>65729512
>consequence of sound
they gave that piece of shit album Camp an A- so I cannot take anything they say seriously
>>65729905
Of course it went over your head; you're a total fucking moron.
This isn't what discourse looks like. I'm not obligated to engage every single hot opinion just to fulfill your criteria of what an upstanding party fetishist should look like. What the fuck is wrong with you?
>>65729936
No, I mean this tripfaggot is representative of an entire zeitgeist of campus liberalism and people that grew up in daycare centers and were taught that screaming the loudest / being the most obnoxious gets you what you want.
>>65729512
The TMT review handles it well in that it brings the accusations up with regards to the absolution that might come with the predominant theme of transcendence, but the reviewer doesn't let the publicity of the issue really influence the score or overall view of the album. However, I do find it odd that they gave it a 6/10 given that the review was mostly praising the album. I'm not quite sure why they spend time complimenting the band's ability to let go of the self and reach some sort of higher plane of being, letting the music and repetition flow in a sort of sonic determinism, only to criticize it for its de-individualized qualities and no wave influence that guts it of a lot of the melodies/hooks on prior modern-Swans projects. Ultimately, I doubt the allegations factored into the score that much—they just seem to find it a bit bland. Of course it would be much more obvious in terms of the rape allegations if Pitchfork gave it a 6/10...
>>65729971
why are you so angry
be honest, have you had sex even once in your life
>>65729971
You are just a rude poster and I want nothing to do with you. Your engaging my ill informed opinion on your post tho, so that's good enof 4 me.
SEE YA NERD!
>>65729989
the album could be literally fart noises and then the songs When Will I Return and The Glowing Man and it would still be higher than a 6
>>65729991
>virgin meme
Lowbrow backpedaling, cowboy.
You shout ad hom, I am engage, and you commit ad hom. Based retard.
>>65729994
BASED RETARD TRIPFAG.
>>65730017
Only on TMT. Wait until you start checking out their film reviews.
>>65730033
so you are definitely a virgin then
>>65730155
So you definitely don't fill >>65729731 criteria for not being a libtard.
This is why you don't engage here.
Apply pressure to any of you skinny nu-male faggots and all you can do is spout Internet meme.
Tip top tip.
>>65729991
>>65730155
>
>quietus
who
>2016
>STILL caring about reviews
A review doesn't make an album good or bad, the music does. If you care about reviews that badly, you're a mindless drone. Fact.
>>65730376
>thinking a significant number of people here legitimately care about a review score
Reviews are part of the dialogue surrounding art. Being interested in them and refuting them does not mean you're a mindless drone whose taste is dictated by music critics. Do you seriously think most people here give precedence to review scores over the actual music?
I'm the anon who (half) jokingly predicted that Pitchfork would give it a 1.8 and spend most of the review whining about "male entitlement" and "rape culture"
Looks like I predicted it for the wrong zine. Though Pitchfork still hasn't reviewed it yet, so there's still time...
It's interesting that Swans was not mentioned in the headline of the "new releases you should know"
http://pitchfork.com/news/66159-8-albums-out-today-you-should-listen-to-now-disclosure-yg-mitski-and-more/
It's almost as if they're trying to hide it. Or no longer think it's some kind of big thing. Three no name rappers/pop artists got mentioned before it.
>>65729624
Damn Straight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpG0fw1A6Cs
>>65730554
>Do you seriously think most people here give precedence to review scores over the actual music?
Yes. Yes i do. I have no reason to believe that the people on here AREN'T that easily influenced.
When you're a journalist, this kind of bs is your bread and butter.
It's weird but I'm praying for Fantano right now. The man likes MDE and interviewed men's rights guys so I doubt he'd bring this shit up.
>>65729989
TMT gave Titus Andronicus' TMLT a 5/5 and omitted it from their end of the year list. They're often fickle, oft pretentious people.
>>65729512
Would you rather you ended up paying for an album not knowing the guy who made it was a rapist?
>>65731485
i don't give a shit, i bought it to listen to music, not ponder the musician's personal affairs
>>65731485
Why would anybody care?
>>65729624
I barely think of these people as journalists. Journalists are people who take real risks with their craft, do some digging and real reporting.
Some of them even put themselves in war zones and risk being harmed, or blackmailed, or jailed by authoritarian regimes.
The type of person that writes lazy clickbait for an internet rag isn't a journalist.
Regardless of your opinion on the case, it's a really fucking important thing to mention in the review. It's not like with Sun Kil Moon where sure, it was a dickish thing to say...but nothing necessarily "evil" or otherwise deeply morally questionable. Rape is a big fucking deal.
And if you read the TMT review, you would realize that they FOCUSED upon the musical content of the record. But you didn't. You just lept to a conclusion because you're a butthurt teenager who's angry that people don't like your shitty record.
Go back to /r/ you fucking activist loser.
>>65731630
Music journalist is not real journalist
>>65730554
Historically this is only the case for reviews which in themselves are of some kind of artistic worth. With no musical criticism has ever been ever. Maybe Scruffy.
>>65731485
I'm a 'libtard' and I wouldn't give a shit
>>65731630
This
The average Vice nu-male with late nineteenth-century facial hair and suspenders will put more on the line than these faggots.
>>65729731
who would have thought nobody wants to talk politics with you on the music board huh
>>65731647
the requests board?
>>65729624
Preach, brotha!
>>65731839
R E K T
E
K
T
>>65731839
Spam filter.
>>65731873
How old are you?
It's amazing, more than I could have expected. Swans have done it again.
This board is full of summer at the moment who have ruined the reputation of this album. I don't even take anything this board says about music seriously anymore, let alone what this board says about Swans.
>>65731603
Because someone who raped someone else now has more money thanks in part to you? I guess if that doesn't put you in a moral quandary then there's nothing more I can really say.
>>65731894
older than ur mom t b h
>>65732095
>It's amazing, more than I could have expected. Swans have done it again.
they literally do the same thing over and over
listen to real music like burt bacharach
Why does anyone give a damn about these types of reviews to begin with?
>>65731332
this is the exact opposite of "interesting"
>>65732146
Giving somebody who may be an awful person money for their art is not an issue, it's paying for something you want from the person who created it. Of course some people might not feel comfortable doing this, but personally it doesn't really bother me at all and I think assuming that it SHOULD put you in a moral quandary is just flat out wrong.
How many things have you bought that were made off of impoverished children in sweatshops who are going to die young and in poverty?
>>65730155
woah that's a pretty pathetic response.
As arguments all you got are 2005 memes?
>>65731647
>Regardless of your opinion on the case
dropped
>it's a really fucking important thing to mention in the review
nope, try again. it's a personal choice. if I were reviewing it I'd talk purely about the music, same with anything or anybody. somebody else might do it differently, that's their right.
>>65731839
kek
>>65731647
spotted the newfag
Michael Gira didn't rape Larkin Grimm.
The statements from Margaret Morris discredits her with ~95% certainty. Then you see how Larkin immediately used the publicity to push her new releases & shows... and with so much giddiness.
It really creeps me out, and offends me as someone who suffered from sexual assault myself.
>>65731647
>Regardless of your opinion on the case, it's a really fucking important thing to mention in the review.
Absolutely incorrect. The review should focus on the context that spawned the creative ideology and concept of the band at the time of the creation of the piece, hence, the creative ideology and concept of the piece itself.
A review tries to grasp all the ideas of the album, and measures the quality of its execution paired with the concept, or any other aspect of the piece that's worth mentioning, according to the critic (personal enjoyment, feelings transmitted, etc.).
The review should NOT include a personal situation that happened years ago, even one with such a blurry background and impact. The Grimm-Gira incident did not affect the creations of the tracks, as we know most of them were already being played live before the whole fiasco broke out.
If you mention and consider this incident as a serious factor that affected the music, then it'd be hypocritical of you not to mention it as well as defining factors in the creation of TBK, The Seer, and any work created after the alleged rape.
>Rape is a big fucking deal.
I'd say it is more important to focus on the music than on the social and moral impact of alleged actions of the artist, don't you?
>And if you read the TMT review, you would realize that they FOCUSED upon the musical content of the record.
Didn't read the reviews, but the mention of it should only be superficial and brief. I hope that's what happened here; otherwise, read my first paragraph again.
>But you didn't. You just lept to a conclusion because you're a butthurt teenager who's angry that people don't like your shitty record.
You're the one who sounds angry. Speaking of which, what makes you think your opinion over this record has any impact on the feelings of OP?
>Go back to /r/ you fucking activist loser.
So much underage in one sentence! Bravo.
>>65732981
it's boldfaure, he makes a living out of being an unbearable cunt on a daily basis, just ignore him
>>65732726
>>65732981
Do you think an essay/analysis of Wagner's Ring Cycle should not mention his nationalistic, racist views?
>>65732828
Continuing this, I'd say the publicity is really what makes her stand out as ingenuine.
There's no pride in being victim... Obviously you need to come to terms with it... and one way of doing that is opening up. But making it a key part of your public identity? That screams faker.
You can get over the feelings of shame and disgust on some level... but I don't believe anyone fully removes it. Especially when they re-tell/re-experience the abuse. At some point you want to be stronger... You come to terms with what happened. You stop blaming yourself. You acknowledge that there's far more to your personality. Then finally, you drop the identity of a victim.
Larkin does not seem interested at all in moving on. She's reveling in victimhood. She gets an outpouring of <3s and her music career is at an all-time high.
If she truly was a victim of abuse... some 8 years ago, mind you... I just can't fathom the desire to keep carrying the weight. Everywhere you go, you're "that girl who was raped" and you're allowing those feelings of inadequacy & shame to follow you.
Don't get me wrong, if she truly was a victim, I would understand her speaking out. But your first goal after that is to transcend... to separate yourself, your career, and your personality from the incident. Not to wear it like a fucking badge.
> tfw you wanna like Swans to be edgy and contrarian because of this controversy but you know it's just noise pollution trash
Michael Gira is the Jeff Koons of music.
>>65733914
Unless some of the themes of the piece were directly involved and/or developed from that point of view, no.
>>65734452
>Unless some of the themes of the piece were directly involved and/or developed from that point of view
They were. So you're confirmed to not know anything about Wagner at least.
You could very easily make an argument that Swans' music about masculine power and energy carry similar baggage.
>>65733914
Should it? I don't know, I think if it informs somebody's feelings on the piece it should be mentioned, unless it's an "objective" analysis of the musical content on its own. I don't think it's a requirement unless it's a central theme to the music, in which case ignoring it would not allow a proper view of it. I'm not saying DON'T mention or acknowledge the allegations, I'm saying that it isn't a requirement to evaluate the art.
In what universe did Gira actually commit this rape? I thought it was all decided that she freaked out because she had been accusing previous people of shit. Grimm is mentally unstable, just look at the shit she says its mindless
>>65734520
>You could very easily make an argument that Swans' music about masculine power and energy carry similar baggage
Not the OP, but If you're going to honestly make this statement about Swans, you have a very elementary understanding of their music.
First off, Swans can't really be tied down to a single gendered identity.... I could just as easily argue that an album like Children Of God alternates b/w two extremes (masculine & feminine)... as evident by tracks like In My Garden with Jarobe on the vox.
Secondly, Gira's approach is clearly not celebrating power & force... but acknowledging it, poking fun at it, and fucking with it. Just consider they have an album called Public Castration is a Good Idea...
>>65734566
He didn't. She already admitted that she lied. God forbid shit tier music journo SJWs do their fucking research.
>>65734734
source?
>>65734734
She didn't admit anywhere that she lied m8
>>65734676
If you don't think their early era (fucking Flex Your Muscles) isn't masculine then just straight fuck off.
It colors their history.
>>65734937
Umm, that's not what I said m8.
>>65734791
But why would anybody take her allegations seriously?
>>65729913
But this just shows that all of these review sites don't care about the music and just care about forcing their ideology and looking cool.
>>65734937
>If you don't think their early era (fucking Flex Your Muscles) isn't masculine then just straight fuck off.
They weren't. So you're confirmed to not know anything about Swans at least.
You could very easily make an argument that Flex Your Muscles is about satirizing masculine power and energy, and doesn't carry similar baggage.
>>65735276
How old are you?
>>65729555
HAHAHAHAHA I know riiiiggghhhtt
Checkmate swans fans :PP
How about that new radiohead album?
>>65735310
>Point is emphatically refuted and made to look like a retarded asshole with his own words
>H-how old are you?? Haha r-r-right guize???
>>65735310
>be strong
>be hard
>resist temptation
>stick your hand in your eye
>close your fist
>resist
>flex your muscles
>walk on this line
>look straight ahead
>flex your muscles
>be hard
>come back for more
How in the actual fuck do you think this isn't satirizing masculinity?
>>65735310
kys
>>65735440
>immaturely just copy pastes response in "I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I" way
>expects to be thought of as an adult.
Don't worry, it's very obvious you're a teenager.
>>65735560
Can you post an article/testimonial expressing that it is satirized?
From YGR: I wanted Swans to be “heavier” though – I wanted the music to obliterate - why, I don’t remember! I think it just felt good. Live, we used two basses (playing utterly unmusical chords that were stabbed and left to sustain or sometimes hit in staccato or opposing rhythms), drums, a “percussionist” that slammed down on a metal table with a metal strap, crude cassette loops of various sounds/noises (usually some kind of undefined ROAR), and Norman Westberg’s glorious sustained and screaming guitar chords. It was pretty elating to play live – for us. If 100 people showed up (which would have been a huge audience at the time – 20 was more the average), 80 were guaranteed to leave by the second song. Somehow that tension – contempt or indifference from the audience – was nourishing, so we kept going. “
>>65735629
1 - The snippet you just posted says literally nothing as to whether or not it's satirized, so I'm not sure what you're alluding to.
2 - It's clearly an over-the-top satirization of hyper-masculinity; do you think he's seriously saying BE HARD RAAAWWW FLEEX UR MUSCLES completely po-faced? He obviously fucking isn't, and he's on numerous occasions written lyrics at length detailing, negatively, the abuse that powerful figures of authority subject others to, such as in the song Cop. I mean, it's not even slightly ambiguous or open to interpretation what the lyrical intent here is. He's done a spoken-word piece that is a detailed story of emasculation, he's said on record that he likes employing female members in the band to balance out the testosterone, etc. C'mon dude.
Daily reminder to NEVER reply to a post from a trip under ANY circumstances.
>>65735629
nope, I just used your own condescending bullshit in the exact way you did, though you seem kind of triggered when it's done to you, lol. stay dumb.
>>65735629
"His lyrics focused on flesh and its various mutilations, mutual humiliation, the debasement of the human being who is enslaved to the vicious circle of power and domination and the complete destruction of the culture."
>From Detroit Metro Times, 1995
i.e. definitely NOT a celebration of power structures. Rather, a protest or mockery.
>>65735629
“Just a Little Boy” however, finds Swans wrestling with concepts of perceived masculinity more than simply adhering to them. Simultaneously conflating and confounding our expectations of the modern male, Gira is found helplessly bellowing that he needs love, followed by a torturous, nasal repetition of the lyrics “I’m just a little boy” which is then mocked by a nasty horde of chattering laughter. Gira’s vocals are manic, they scream for empathy with the full acknowledgement that none shall be delivered. The situation is desperate.
>The Essential, 2014
>>65735804
"While he’s never shied away from his scene’s hyper-masculinity, Gira has long worked with women—Jarboe for a majority of Swans’ first phase (from 1984 to 1997), and in their newest incarnation, Gira has asked St. Vincent, Karen O, Cold Specks and many other female musicians to guest on Swans records, providing a much-needed balance to the brute force of his work."
>>65735804
No proof in there.
>>65736009
Not from Gira.
>>65736044
Not from Gira.
>>65729512
>How is the artist's life relevant to the art?
gee idk
>>65736164
>Not from Gira
Doesn't matter. The vast majority of artists do not publicly reveal intention. If art criticism was limited to primary sources, there would be literally no such thing as art criticism.
>>65736291
That's because most people don't bother asking, and resolve to rely on lazy methods and not put any work into music criticism.
>>65736325
This.
>>65736325
>>65736361
Your writing style is so obviously yours, stop samefagging
>>65736428
You're pathetic.
>>65736325
True, case in point: "Oh there's heavy guitars? It's called 'Flex Your Muscles'? MASCULINE OPPRESSION."
>>65736450
Case in point:
http://younggodrecords.com/collections/swans/products/filth-remastered-2014
>>65736442
>claims I'm pathetic after using two different computers to samefag
L M A O
>>65736487
No proof in there.
>>65736442
No proof in there.
>>65736508
It's funny how Swansfags always get tired of arguing so they decide to meme instead.
>>65736508
Out of arguments I see
>>65736487
>Posts something that has no relation to his point
>GOTCHA case in point
are you blind? can you read?
>>65736515
How old are you?
>>65736521
LMAO is a meme?
>>65736521
>>65736526
I'm not arguing against anything I have no problem whatsoever if somebody brings up the allegations, it's perfectly valid, I just think boldfaure is insufferable
>>65736536
Are you saying Gira's wrong about his own art?
>It's funny how Swansfags always get tired of arguing so they decide to meme instead.
Responds with
>>65736542
Niceeee. You're making my day.
>>65736586
If you reply with memes, I'm just going to meme back.
If you want to argue, we can argue.
Not my fault you're immature.
Ehh, listened to it today. Sounded good. No complaints really.
>>65736569
oh, so you can't read
get your glasses, read it again, and cite something out of that entire text that says the music is an expression of masculinity please.
>>65736567
So you should act like an idiot because you don't like someone?
Notice him and I replied within 10 seconds of eachother. We couldn't be the same person. I don't know who he is, and I don't care. But you are acting like a spoiled child and you got called out on it.
someone give me a link pls
>>65735310
Knowing when to fuck off after proven wrong is half the battle, tripfuck.
>>65736622
The original claim is that the music was intended as parody of masculinity and aggression.
>>65736569
There's literally nothing in your quote that implies Gira was creating sincere hyper-masculine music.
He can want "the music to obliterate" while still employing sarcasm, protest or mockery.
>>65736610
>If you don't think their early era (fucking Flex Your Muscles) isn't masculine then just straight fuck off.
people argued with you on this point without resorting to jokes, like here >>65735804
then cited interpretations from critics here >>65736044
>>65736009
>>65736117
that all give a clear and obvious idea of how this music is satirizing masculinity, then you responded with
>no proof in there
without actually saying anything substantial whatsoever or countering any point made in any of these posts, then
>It's funny how Swansfags always get tired of arguing so they decide to meme instead.
after
>>65736610
memes
just stfu
>>65736610
You did it first though? Are you retarded or just expert and baiting?
>>65736631
fair enough, i'm probably being a dick. guess i'll stop then.
>>65736610
>If you reply with memes, I'm just going to meme back.
Yeah, real mature there buddy.
>>65736674
See >>65736661
The only thing he was satirizing was the FALSE-aggression and the FALSE-masculinity of 3-chord punk music.
He inherently was producing aggressive music.
>>65736703
Kid, if you think I'm going to read your jumbled mess of a post, you need to grow up.
Meanwhile, Freddie Gibbs was arrested for RAPE and Pitchfork didn't even put it in their headline and quickly buried story
>>65736740
>gets proven wrong, with evidence
>lol u a kid im adoolt so i wont read i wiiiin
>>65736740
>Gets inconcistencies pointed out and called out on bullshit
>"I'm going to ignore what you have to say because I can't actually refute it"
hahaha
>>65736740
> FALSE-aggression and the FALSE-masculinity of 3-chord punk music.
Am I missing something? Or did you just prove our point. He's mocking the bravado and chauvinism of 80s dude-punk bands.
>Kid, if you think I'm going to read your jumbled mess of a post, you need to grow up.
/mu/ is hard for you, isn't it?
>>65736740
>The only thing he was satirizing was the FALSE-aggression and the FALSE-masculinity of 3-chord punk music.
>“This is all slabs of sound, rhythm and screaming/testifying. What more do you need? In a way, it was a reaction against Punk (and just about any other music you can think of), and the conservative notion that 3 chords were somehow necessary. I used to deny it vehemently at the time, but No Wave (I “hated” that scene too, for some reason I can’t remember now) played a big role as the germ from which this music grew, along with The Stooges and Throbbing Gristle, of course. I wanted Swans to be “heavier” though – I wanted the music to obliterate - why, I don’t remember! I think it just felt good. Live, we used two basses (playing utterly unmusical chords that were stabbed and left to sustain or sometimes hit in staccato or opposing rhythms), drums, a “percussionist” that slammed down on a metal table with a metal strap, crude cassette loops of various sounds/noises (usually some kind of undefined ROAR), and Norman Westberg’s glorious sustained and screaming guitar chords. It was pretty elating to play live – for us. If 100 people showed up (which would have been a huge audience at the time – 20 was more the average), 80 were guaranteed to leave by the second song. Somehow that tension – contempt or indifference from the audience – was nourishing, so we kept going.
No proof in there.
>>65736803
>>65736804
How did you "prove me wrong?"
You have proven nothing about the album being a negation of aggression and masculinity.
I have proven, through Gira's own testimony and the lyrics themselves, that the message is aggressive music with a masculine edge.
Unless you can prove that the message itself is entirely false in its meaning, that Gira intentionally meant a NEGATION of his message and his words, then there's nothing you can do.
>>65736861
see
>>65736842
You dug yourself in a hole, kiddo.
>>65736861
>I have proven, through Gira's own testimony and the lyrics themselves, that the message is aggressive music with a masculine edge.
" I wanted Swans to be “heavier” though – I wanted the music to obliterate - why, I don’t remember! I think it just felt good."
topkek
>>65731388
POtT
>>65736908
He was saying that their music wasn't aggressive, and was making music that he thought is masculine and aggressive.
How is this hard for you to understand
>>65729512
someone post the pic of Gira's friends and family's post concerning the incident
>>65736740
>>65736569
>>65736542
>>65736521
>>65736487
>>65736442
>>65736361
>>65736164
I find unbelievable how pathetic you are. And I actually mean it. Not as a buzzword, not as an exaggeration. You've got proven wrong many times already (see >>65736703, if you dare to read it), and you still can't give up.
How insecure do you have to be to go THIS far in trying to prove your point, tying to seem like a smartass in this anonymous website (see: >>65734520 and >>65735310) while failing so spectacularly at doing so (see:
>>65736908
>>65736842
>>65736804
>>65736803
and the cherry on top:
>>65736703)
You're literally pathetic. We can all see through your façade. Stop, please.
>inb4 "h-how old a-are you xd"
meme
>inb4 "s-swan fans ha! memes!"
pathetic
>inb4 "u m-mad?"
about having to deal with you? Yes.
>>65736953
point out where in your epic post gira said masculine? >>65735804 "i wanted it to be loud and scary and people left shows" is all he says there
>>65737047
meme
pathetic
>>65737060
In his lyrics.
Which you have yet to prove are parody.
>>65736953
I never said there music wasn't sonically aggressive you absolute dipshit
>>65736953
Here's something you should read. It's written about Slavoj Zizek and it's about Rammstein's connection to Nazism: http://www.allreadable.com/50cd9uGZ
Basically, we could draw a parallel to your interpretation of Swan's material as hypermasculine, and Rammstein's material being interpreted as a pro-fascist.
A lot of their lyrics (and their live show) is outright brutal and fascist. As Zizek explains, this is a way to "Undermine nazism from within... It allows us to enjoy them in their pre-ideological state... suspending the nazi horizon of meaning."
>>65737153
>As Zizek explains
Can you give a citation from Rammstein themselves?
>>65737153
Here's the thing:
I am fulling willing to accept that Swans was intending the aggression and masculinity of Filth and Cop and etc. to be a parody of its own aesthetics. I am totally willing to accept this.
But I'm not willing to accept critical reviews/op-eds and other baseless conjectures as a counter.
>>65737196
They've been quoted all over the place as being vehemently anti-fascist, but as far as I'm aware they've never outright explained their methodology.
Thing is, you can't really expect them to. For one, b/c it's like a musician revealing their tricks. If you come out and admit your show is a mockery, it kinda ruins the effect Zizek is describing. It literally defeats the purpose.
>>65737212
>>65737196
So art should be taken literally and every single interpretation (even obvious ones, such as Filth's mocking of masculinity) are automatically false?
Do you really need to see a literal, flat quote in order to believe any message art may convey? Because if you do, you'r only proving your superficial approach at this whole situation.
What is this smpleton bullshit?
>>65737323
>They've been quoted all over the place
Then it should be easy for you to find a citation.
>it's like a musician revealing their trick
Is the meaning behind a lyric a trick? or is the act of composing, arranging, producing and performing more like the "trick"?
>It literally defeats the purpose.
But if the audience already knows, the same effect is had and it equally defeats the performance.
>>65737212
>I am fulling willing to accept that Swans was intending the aggression and masculinity of Filth and Cop and etc. to be a parody of its own aesthetics. I am totally willing to accept this.
So we're done here. Good show.
>But I'm not willing to accept critical reviews/op-eds and other baseless conjectures as a counter.
That's the world of art criticism buddy. Would've been much easier if Van Gogh wrote an article about his sexuality, wouldn't it?
>>65737381
This.
/thread, really.
>>65737347
>So art should be taken literally
Unless not intended to by the artist
>and every single interpretation (even obvious ones, such as Filth's mocking of masculinity) are automatically false?
Only if it contradicts the artist's intentions
>Do you really need to see a literal, flat quote in order to believe any message art may convey?
Well, diagrams are also fine.
>Because if you do, you'r only proving your superficial approach at this whole situation
Wouldn't just taking what you see for granted and making claims from YOUR opinion (while not digging deeper into context and motivation) be superficial?
>it's another "boldfaure gets BTFO" thread
>>65737381
>>65737399
>That's the world of art criticism buddy.
In case you didn't know, the tradition is for artists to explain their art.
Beethoven, Wagner, Debussy, etc.
>>65736773
Rappers will always get a pass in pitchfork-land, because of "Muh Ferguson"
>>65737353
not that anon but
>The truth is that despite their “on the edge” stage shows and provocative material, Rammstein have always unequivocally denied that they are nazis or have fascist sympathies. The use of Leni Riefenstahl’s works in “Stripped” caused the media to publicly question Rammstein’s political allegiances. Angered by the claims by the press, Rammstein wrote and recorded “Links 2 3 4”, designed as a riposte towards the insinuations of fascist ideology. Kruspe-Bernstein states that the song means, "'my heart beats on the left, two, three, four.' It's simple. If you want to put us in a political category, we're on the left side, and that's the reason we made the song."
not a direct quote but immediately I read this on this website
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/70014
>>65737426
How did I get BTFO? Go on kid.
>>65737457
>waah i need to be spoonfed art meaning and not derive it through context clues waaah
>>65737457
Except Rammstein are making music centuries after fucking Beethoven and are not subject to the same "traditions."
>>65737498
You seem mad that I proved you wrong.
>>65737525
ahahahahah oh man, he really thinks art is a math equation
>>65737400
>"Well, diagrams are also fine."
>I can't see between the lines in something as complex as art
>"while not digging deeper into context and motivation"
That's exactly what are critics and we are doing right now?
>>65737476
Cool thanks I don't listen to/like this artist but it is important to fact-check.
Now I hope anons can show some citations for Gira....
>>65737516
Why not? Do some artists get a handicap?
>>65737548
>what is music theory
>>65737553
>That's exactly what are critics and we are doing right now?
By not researching context/intentions? That's not digging at all.
>>65737574
hahahahahahahahahaahaha so autism = BTFO?
Makes sense coming from you.
>>65737579
>music theory = math
Let me know when you have anything from Gira or the band that directly contradicts the entire message(s) put forward through his lyrics and the Young God Records page.
>>65737579
nigga what does music theory have to do with anything anyone said
Christ, is there a way to block tripfags posts from showing up? This boldfailure guy is too much.
>>65737353
>Then it should be easy for you to find a citation
From NY Rock "I think it would have been fair if the press would have asked us about it instead of spreading rumors that we are fascists, Nazis and God knows what. I think that is a terrible way of abusing the power of the media. Blackballing somebody, spreading vicious and unfounded rumors and then wondering why the band reacts less than pleased."
>Is the meaning behind a lyric a trick? or is the act of composing, arranging, producing and performing more like the "trick"?
I don't understand what you're asking
>But if the audience already knows, the same effect is had and it equally defeats the performance.
True, people know whey go to a swans or rammstein show, they aren't going to fascist rally.
However, it does still have the allure of being a hyperreal experience of masculinity and power.
Zizek's point is that you experience this "power" free of ideology... thus, it breaks down any oppressive purpose that type of power could have. By experiencing it, we stop fearing it. We come to recognize it, giggle at it, transcend it.
If Gira or Rammstein opened their show with "hey guys, this is going to be a mock experience of power so that we can all become better people and beat oppression..." it would 100% ruin the experience. We wouldn't take them seriously. We wouldn't see it as raw power, disconnected from ideology. The art would be devitalized.
>>65737631
>If Gira or Rammstein opened their show with "hey guys, this is going to be a mock experience of power so that we can all become better people and beat oppression..." it would 100% ruin the experience. We wouldn't take them seriously. We wouldn't see it as raw power, disconnected from ideology. The art would be devitalized.
This is a strawman and you know it.
>>65737639
If you want to engage my argument, I'm here to listen. But otherwise it sounds like you've run out of things to say.
>>65737604
I don't know what music theory is: The Post
>>65737631
>I don't understand what you're asking
Oh you must not be a musician
>they aren't going to fascist rally.
But you just described it as one, that has an unsaid "win wink" to it. If it's unsaid, how do you know?
>Zizek's point
Oh this again? Not relevant.
>it would 100% ruin the experience
Then it was poor art to begin with.
>We wouldn't take them seriously
So you only take them seriously because they are pretending?
>>65737624
Appchan-X
>>65737668
Saying to a critic who asks you about your work "It's a parody of masculinity" is not opening a concert with "Don't take any of this seriously." Don't be a fool.
I got into Swans a long time ago. Before there was any sort of meme culture around them. All I knew going in was that they had a reputation for being depressing. With that mindset, I never interpreted the masculinity in their lyrics as anything other than satire. I always took it as a volatile response to a world that they felt beaten down and abused by.
I'm not saying that proves anything. Just that the people who interpret them as pro-masculine are often just people who want to justify hating them for some deeper reason than the music not being their thing.
Personally I view the early Swans aesthetic not so much a parody or satire of violence, aggression, masculinity etc, but primarily an uncompromised acknowledgement of these aspects existence and destructivity in human interactions, and a reductionist critique of these things, as well as humanity's general approval or indifference to these things, especially in contexts where it offers them the opportunity to exercise power over others.
But listen to a song like Freak, the vocal performance ("I'm not scared, I'll take what I want/Something for nothing/I want what's mine) if you LISTEN to the song, is obviously ridiculing the 'narrator' or the song.
Here's a couple of Gira quotes from a Rolling Stone interview:
>Why are so many songs on Filth about power?
>I was preoccupied very much with how the work that one does constitutes usually at least a third if not more of your life and what a tragedy it is to spend your life doing work which doesn't fulfill you or is debasing or in some way that you're controlled by some kind of corporate or other entity. And I was also very preoccupied with media control of people's identities and thoughts, which has gotten even worse since then. I was pretty obsessed with those subjects so they turned up on the records.
>And then on "Freak," you sing, "You're gonna murder somebody weak."
>Yeah, well, in my post-adolescent fury, I reduced everything to its most basic components.
>How often did the volume become too much for you at those shows?
>Quite often. But you just work through it. It's not meant to be an aggression towards people or any kind of silly macho statement. Some of the guitar sounds wouldn't exist unless it was heavily amplified. You can almost see the sustain hanging in the air, and you can feel it with your body as well. What I live for is when everything reaches that state. It's like being right inside a symphony that's kind of lifting you up to. It's addictive.
Still waiting for something from Gira.
>>65737586
>calling out on your shit = autism
epic meme'd!
>>65737612
keep ignoring our points buddy. You sure showed us!
>>65737719
>I got into Swans a long time ago. Before there was any sort of meme culture around them.
When was that?
>>65737693
I played the guitar in a concert once and now I'm Bach: The Post.
>>65737719
I don't get why masculinity is so bad anyway.
>>65737753
I never stated what instrument I played or how many times I've went on tour
Nice strawman though.
>>65737586
at least two posts have been made detailing exactly why you're full of shit that you just flat-out refused to even respond to because you know you can't actually refute any of the points made, also
>I give you money
>You're superior
>I don't exist
>You control me
>You're corrupt
>You deform me
>You own me
>You own me
>I worship your authority
>I worship your authority
>You're deformed
>You're corrupt
>You own me
>You own me
these lyrics should not have to be qualified by a direct quote from the guy who wrote them to be seen as OBVIOUSLY being against authority and masculinity, it's not a puzzle, it's incredibly obvious you're just being obtuse
>>65737723
Interesting. Though it seems to confirm and deny the original theory.
>>65737764
Masculinity is fine. But rape is not.
>>65737776
I don't know which posts you're talking about?
How old are you?
>>65737731
Keep waiting man, you got proven wrong like 20 posts ago already. Keep memeing though, it's funny.
>"How did I get proven wrong?"
lurk ITT
>>65737764
Who Killed The World?
>>65737731
here you go
>>65737723
Gira: " It's not meant to be an aggression towards people or any kind of silly macho statement."
>>65737769
Not reading in between the lines again, I see?
2dense4me.
>>65737808
you have said "how old are you" a record amount of three whole times now lol
>>65737740
Around 1999. At least, as far as I can recall they didn't have the same reputation they do now.
>>65737816
You burn it, then eat it
>>65737830
But if you read the first part of that, the first quote, he admits it's about power.
>>65737845
kek and you haven't answered.
>>65737808
old enough to read lmao
>>65737808
>how old are you meme again
that worked wonderfully last time!
>>65737836
If you were, you'd know what music theory was and how it's related to math.
>>65737853
not him i've just been vaguely reading and thought that was interesting
>>65737868
I know, and I agree. But you literally are incapable of not getting information that's not explicit. Read my old posts to see what I mean, I'm done spoonfeeding you.
>>65737723
ding ding ding.
>>65737853
Yes it's ABOUT power, but it's not fucking endorsing it you complete and utter mongoloid, what the fuck is wrong with you?
>kek and you haven't answered.
You're not just talking to one person, you've said that once to me and a couple of times to other people, you're using it as a crutch to avoid acknowledging you're making a complete arsehole out of yourself.
>>65737868
yeah, and serial music sucks so have fun w your math
In sum, perhaps it isn't about masculinity necessarily; however, there is certainly a focus upon power and supremacy and a utilization of power in order to create a sonic effect.
This is quite incontestable.
Now, if you want to respectfully argue, I'll stick around.
Otherwise, this thread is 100 posts too long.
cause they want to get more traffic on their website
>>65737723
Usless anyway. The tipfuck will continue to dismiss this SOMEHOW.
wait, he did it again! And the age meme again! He's on a rampage!
>>65737853
>>65737913
>my opinion on ____ is...
Not relevant
>>65737900
>backing up my argument?
>I'm not gonna spoonfeed you!
Yikes!
>>65737929
>damage control this blatantly hard
Absolutely fucking pathetic.
>>65737969
Lol
>>65737929
>In sum, perhaps it isn't about masculinity necessarily; however, there is certainly a focus upon power and supremacy and a utilization of power in order to create a sonic effect.
YES, power and supremacy is often a central lyrical theme, nobody is arguing that, they're arguing the assumption that Swans were ENDORSING this because you brought it up with the rape allegations, like are you fucking braindead?
Also thought I should note that the only reason you are contesting this is because you don't like the rape thing being considered.
>>65737848
Are you a cutter?
>>65731474
Ever thought that the year end list might consider the opinions of all of their writers?
>>65737969
3dense5me is this a joke?
>>65737997
hahaha "you" there's several people ITT that have told you to shut the fuck up and tried to reason with you, I personally do not give a shit if it's considered, you're just an utter quack, it's got nothing to do with gira.
>>65729624
The Wire is cool.
>>65737929
I still can't fathom why you think an artist needs to explain their art in order for an interpretation of said art to be valid, and I think that's the main reason this thread keeps going (assuming you're not baiting the fuck out of everyone).
>>65738061
Because critics quite often get it wrong.
See the critic created theory that Tchaikovsky wrote his 6th Symphony while suicidal.
>>65738061
If this whole thread was boldfaure just baiting I'd never be mean to him again because the ability to convincingly act like an idiot this well would be a superpower.
>>65737929
>>65737993
I think a certain ambivalence comes from the fact that Swans never (to my knowledge) explicitly assert themselves as morally superior to their subject material. In doing this they acknowledge that the capacity to destroy, abuse and hurt exists in all of us, regardless of how much we ourselves would like to reject this capacity and are disadvantaged by the structures which support this.
>>65738046
The Wire mentioned the allegations in their review as well and it sort of became the central focus - though their reception to the actual music was actually pretty positive. They do great features and interviews though, I agree.
>>65738035
Nice non argument.
Stop posting anytime.
>>65738084
You can't go through life searching for objective truth in everything, especially when there are artists out there who will never reveal their true intention, wanting people to derive meaning for themselves.
>>65738165
The objective truth is in their art, unless they say otherwise.
>>65738107
this is a pretty good post and one i agree with
1st of all, he didn't do it. It's painfully obvious.
2nd, the album is amazing and the fact some Grimm had to accuse Gira of raping her is unfortunate because nobody is going to be able to see that album as its own thing. Nobody's going to separate the album from the event. So I don't expect The Glowing Man to get many positive reviews, let alone reviews that don't mention Grimm.
>>65738165
>there are artists out there who will never reveal their true intention
Did you ask them?
>>65738135
>nice non argument
ok I chuckled
>>65738185
>1st of all, he didn't do it. It's painfully obvious.
Oh were you there?
Hmm, just read that Quietus review and while it's lame that they brought up Grimm, the rest of the review is actually really fantastic desu.
>>65738194
pls get a trip so I can filter you
>not an argument xd
Not arguing with you
>>65738194
Plenty of artists don't explain their art when asked. For example, I've seen interviews with Charlie Kaufman where he is confronted with a fan's interpretation, and he neither confirms nor denies their theory.
>>65737997
would you just stop man
you clearly don't want to have an actual discussion, outright refusing to read shit
just stop
>>65738243
>Not arguing with you
pls get a trip so I can filter you
>>65738244
So thus all art's intentions should be ignored because a few don't reveal it?
>>65738273
>So thus all art's intentions should be ignored because a few don't reveal it?
nice loaded question
>>65738214
Didn't say I was. Didn't even imply it.
>>65738273
All I'm saying is that an artist does not need to back up a critic's theory in order for it to be considered plausible or valid. Art, in my eyes, is not supposed to have one singular meaning. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as the saying goes.
>>65738341
You made the define case that Gira was innocent, so you did.
>>65738329
Calling it as I see it. If you can't/won't answer the question, maybe you know the problem with your logic in the firstplace?
>>65738385
>All I'm saying is that an artist does not need to back up a critic's theory
Sure, but if it does, it's more valid than if it doesn't.
But let's look at something:
>For example, I've seen interviews with Charlie Kaufman where he is confronted with a fan's interpretation, and he neither confirms nor denies their theory.
This is a good point, but it's cherry picking. Kaufman has explained some of his intentions, depending on the film. Looking at Adaptation specifically.
But I am not sure if you are intentionally twisting the argument or not... The argument was should we discuss an artist's intentions or not. People here aren't saying "I think Gira's *intentions* are..." they are just saying "I think ____ about the art". The second is lazy critique.
>>65737999
Hahaha, what?
Maybe.
>>65738535
It's just my observation about Swansfans, that they often need therapy but never get it.
So I guess you should ask yourself: "Would a rapist make the type of music cutters listen to?"
>>65738428
>Calling it as I see it.
No, you're just asking loaded questions and being a fallacious cunt. Not even the same guy you were addressing. You're just being a fucking pretentious idiot.
What would you cunts rate The Glowing Man out of 10? CAST YOUR VOTE BEFORE PITCHCOCK/THE MELON DOES!
STRAW POLL
http://www.strawpoll.me/10511548
STRAW POLL
http://www.strawpoll.me/10511548
STRAW POLL
http://www.strawpoll.me/10511548
>>65738428
>Sure, but if it does, it's more valid than if it doesn't.
Of course. I agree with this.
>This is a good point, but it's cherry picking.
It is cherry picking. The guy I was replying to wanted an example, and I gave him one.
I'm not trying to twist the argument, I was just bothered by the idea that an artist HAS to explain their art. Boldfaure seemed unwilling to accept an interpretation of Swans' art without direct proof from Gira himself, even though there were decent arguments to support the thesis.
>>65738565
Cutters can listen to whatever they want. I'm sure there's some girl out there who cuts herself while listening to j-pop.
>>65738570
Art criticism is not your forte apparently.
>>65738630
>I was just bothered by the idea that an artist HAS to explain their art
This is just misdirection by people like this >>65738570 who are afraid of critical evaluation, that let the fact that some artists are illusive enable them to not view art properly.
>Boldfaure seemed unwilling to accept an interpretation of Swans' art without direct proof from Gira himself
I'm not him, I don't know who he is (other than I was already accused of being him twice by people who ran out of arguments apparently) and I didn't read his argument. but perhaps that was in response to people claiming what art meant to them rather than claiming what the artists' intentions were?
>>65738701
Sure and rapfags are not more likely to commit crimes as compared to classicalfags
>>65738743
Possibly. Those are statistics that I know nothing about.
>>65738719
>that let the fact that some artists are illusive enable them to not view art properly
So, you're implying that there is a proper way in which to view art? I can't say I agree with that.
I don't think that having your own interpretation of art makes you immune from 'critical evaluation' because one should be able to back up why their interpretation is valid.
>>65738232
they're a pretty good publication, love their year-end lists.
>>65738869
>because one should be able to back up why their interpretation is valid.
Note that structuralists are more likely to do this than post-structuralists.
>>65738991
I'll have to read more into those theories
"Most rock journalism is people who can't write, interviewing people who can't talk, for people who can't read." the original mother
What's the song that supposedly evolved from Bring The Sun?
>>65739448
title track which is why it has part of bring the sun in it...
>>65729731
>>65729905
>>65729916
drop your trip
