Metal is an Emotion

Recently the musician Tori Amos issued a challenge to metalheads everywhere, stating something to the effect that no metal band in the world could go head-to-head with her because of the emotion she brings to her music. 

“I don’t think that just because I talk about emotional stuff that it's not motherf---er stuff. I’ll stand next to the hardest f---ing heavy metal band on any stage in the world and take them down, alone, by myself,” she said. “Gauntlet laid down, see who steps up. See who steps up!

“I’ll take them down at 48. And they know I will. Because emotion has power that the metal guys know is just you can’t touch it. Insanity can’t touch the soul. It’s going to win every f---ing time.”

My first thought is this has to be some kind of marketing trick, and if it is, it’s a damn good one.  The prospect of seeing a pianist/singer in a battle of the bands with, let’s say Cannibal Corpse for instance, would be too hilarious to miss out on.  Bring in Simon Cowell and let him judge; let everyone at home call in and vote…and why not?  It would be a pretty amazing spectacle, no matter how pointless it might be. 

But seriously, it’s hard to imagine anyone, let alone an accomplished musician in this day and age, sincerely declaring one style of music is more legitimate than another.  Is it possible she seriously believes metal has no emotional depth?   That’s even harder to imagine considering she’s written a damn fine cover of Slayer’s Raining Blood.   (Check it out for yourself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCpOAXIgF9U )

Whatever her reasons, this gives me an excuse to write about something I’d wanted to do anyway; and that is the fact that metal is truly an emotion unto itself. 

One of my friends once asked me rhetorically: “Isn’t it funny how angry music makes us happy?”  I think on the surface this may seem ironic, but it’s not really accurate to state it this way.  “Metal” isn’t angry.  I almost never recognize the emotion of anger in metal music.  If I did why would I ever listen?  I’m not an angry person, and anger for the sake of anger, is nothing I can relate to in any way whatsoever. 

I wish I could remember the exact quote, but I recall Stephen King writing that as you get older emotions get more tangled and complex to the point to where there aren’t even words for them.  They mix and coagulate into an unrecognizable mass, the way throwing random ingredients into a blender might make a flavor as bizarre as a peanut-butter, basil, and fish milk-shake.

Metal is one of those emotional messes that there really isn’t another word for.  If I had to put my finger on it, I’d describe it as a cross between waking up just before dawn on Christmas morning when you’re five years old, and standing on a snow-covered mountain top and fighting orcs and trolls with a battle axe.  It’s that awesome; somewhere between pure joy and pure adrenaline. 

Is that type of emotional experience not as legitimate as others?  I would be very careful of placing values on emotional states.  An old Taoist proverb states something to the effect that “When you say something is beautiful, something else somewhere in the world immediately becomes ugly without you even knowing it.” 

These types of labels really are arbitrary and pointless. 

Maybe Amos doesn’t relate to that emotion?   Not everyone can relate to every great song.  That’s just the way it goes.  I think some of the problem may be because Amos is a woman, and metal music is mostly a man’s playground.  Even though women are stereotypically more “emotionally intelligent” than men maybe metal is just something men emotionally understand better than women?  Men and women’s minds are physiologically different after all.  I doubt even the most militant feminist still believes that men and women are the “same.”  It’s just not scientifically accurate.

As to her claim that “Insanity can’t touch the soul,” how arrogant would one have to be to say what art touches who?  Some of my most positive and intense spiritual experiences have been at metal shows, not listening to people playing the piano.  But that is me, and the way I connect with the world and how music touches me.  I wouldn’t expect others to all conform to my tastes or experiences; how could they?

It is true that a lot of metal bands lack emotional depth, but that can be true of any music.  That’s not a mechanical quality of music, that is a spiritual quality that art either has or doesn’t have.  There just isn’t any formula for creating that the same way there is an archetypal formula for a metal song or a piano ballad. 

The best metal bands out there reach an intense level of emotional depth.  But someone who doesn’t really understand metal may have to learn how to appreciate them.  It doesn’t sound like Amos would have the patience or desire to understand either their style or their “emotion.”

If Amos is self-promoting, as I hope, then I think it’s a fantastic stunt.  But if she is serious than she has portrayed herself in a most unflattering way. 

Science, Intellect, and Reason as False gods?

"And when he saw the creation which surrounded him and the multi­tude of the angels surrounding him who had came into being from him, he said to them, 'I am a jealous God and no other god exists be­side me.' But his proclamation indicated to the angels who dwell with him that another God does exist. For if there were not another who exists, of whom would he be jealous?" - The Secret Revelation of John

In this text, the god of Genesis is not a benevolent spirit, but in fact an ignorant, spiritually blind, and even malevolent being.  This being who haplessly created our world is known as the demi-urge (which means artisan); what we might commonly know as the devil.

This is, at least at first, a shocking idea, and even one that seems incredibly sacriligious and heretical.  However both Genesis and the Gnostic creation myth establish the "devil" as the ruler of this world, so the ins and outs of the significance of this particular myth are, in my mind at least, largely theological hair-splitting.

Though there are several layers to the idea of a malevolent creator, what I find most useful is the ability to identify the "demi-urge" or false gods. What is a demi-urge?  In this world, everything that is treated as a god but isn't is a demi-urge.   In the text the demi-urge actually believes he is a god, but is blind to the knowledge that there is a real God above him.

I believe there is real importance to this (although I freely admit to others it may just be more hair-splitting).  For instance, we often are told to avoid "false idols" i.e. things like sex, drugs, money, power, fame, etc.  However, it is easy to recognize hedonism as a spiritual dead-end because it don't even begin to masquerade as a god.  They simply are what they are: a good time for the moment, usually with harsh consequences to be suffered somewhere down the road. 

The demi-urge that is harder to recognize may be within our own minds.  Our false psychological projects of what we think god is/should be and what He isn't.  As the Gospel of Philip states: "God created man. [...] men create God. That is the way it is in the world - men make gods and worship their creation. It would be fitting for the gods to worship men!"

And then there are the things we actually look to as gods: intellect, science, and reason.  These appear to me to be the real demi-urge of modern man.  As a long-time student, it seems easy to recognize these things, who masquerade as a real God, within the academic world.

As a child I was led to believe education was the answer to all of man's greatest problems, such as poverty and crime.  However it was the educated elites who sent our financial institutions into collapse in 2008.  Where was our education and our intellect to save us then?  Education has not protected us from crime or poverty; education in these instances only serves to create even more poverty, and to make fools more dangerous. 

In one of my classes a professor told us that people used to "turn to religion because they did not have science to explain the world to them."  However, as far as I am concerned, to treat science as a god is nothing but another spiritual dead-end.   Does science give us a reason for our existence?  Does it give us an identity or purpose?  Absolutely not.  Can science explain what our only our intuition can understand? Can it explain transcendent beauty, or the reasons that a picture or song produce strong emotions within us?  Again no.

Many of my college-text books, even for instance, the sociology text-book that says it has the answers for why we have religions to begin with, automatically assume there is no God and no spiritual world.  I pointed out to my professor in the academic world atheism is considered more intelligent than any sort of faith.  She didn't argue.

So I suppose it is in these things that I recognize the demi-urge.  These dead-ends that actually believe they have all the answers, but in fact do not.

“We should not pretend to understand the world only by the intellect; we apprehend it just as much by feeling. Therefore, the judgment of the intellect is, at best, only the half of truth, and must, if it be honest, also come to an understanding of its inadequacy.”- Carl Jung

80's Slashers and Modern Slashers

My first reaction to watching Final Destination 5 was the thought that: slashers really haven't changed much in 30 years (I suppose maybe 40 years if you want to count giallos).


In the biggest slasher franchises of the 80's Halloween, and Friday the 13th the killers are nearly identical.  For all intents and purposes they are the exact same character; two masked hulking and inescapable brutes who deliver bloody violent death to their hapless victims.

In the two biggest slasher franchises of my generation, the killers are also practically identical.  In Saw, the traps are the real star of the show (sorry Jigsaw, you're just an afterthought).  In Final Destination, there isn't even a symbol to be afraid of; simply invisible, omnipresent, and inescapable death.

Many slasher franchises start out with interesting plots and creative ideas, however as the sequels go on and on, they tend to descend into pure formula.  Ridiculous plot + death scene setup + creative kill = win! 
Rinse and repeat.

It's a formula ingrained into modern culture so so strongly it has to be an archetype.  But what is the archetype?  What is it about slashers that scare people?

All of these movies are similar, in that the fears they dig into are the very real prospect of violent, disgusting, painful, and inescapable death.  Car wrecks, rape, farming and factory accidents, school shootings, serial murderers, riots, war, etc & etc... these are the inescapable and ever present threats people of all walks of life are forced to face on the way out their doors every single day.  And maybe these are the things we are so afraid of when we watch slashers. Michael or Jason may wear blank and expressionless masks over their faces; but maybe those masks aren't covering faces at all.  Maybe those masks represent the very real everyday evil that threatens to destroy and dismember us at any moment. 

Gnosis: from Divine to Mortal

     People use scriptures and religions as a framework to understand the divine.  However these institutions and tools can often become cumbersome and inadequate.  Attempting to understand the incomprehensible can be a frustrating search that leads to multiple dead-ends and disillusion.  Should one be shocked to find the texts we read imperfect and contradictory, the leaders we follow hypocrites, or the theology we ascribe to cruel or ridiculous?
     Personally I think it should be expected that any tool we use to gain knowledge to have a very limited value.  Just consider how difficult it can be to explain a simple viewpoint to another person.  Is it possible to convey an idea perfectly? Now consider the divine conveying a message to 4+ billion people.  Is it possible to use one tool to do so?
     Many people consider The Bible as the be-all-and-end-all of God's voice to us.  But when one considers it's multiple sources, authors, and it's very human editors such as the council of Nicaea and Martin Luther, who decided what texts and messages should be included and excluded, one starts to wonder how perfect this one tool can possibly be.
     Add to the question of legitimacy the question of translation.  One language doesn't translate perfectly to another, so how can could The Bible possibly translate perfectly into English.  Add to this the fact that  language itself is not perfect.  We have complex emotions and ideas, that at times, may have no words adequate enough to express them.
     I have to conclude divine communication can not translate into human language.  I don't believe you can fit something perfect into a flawed system of communication, although I do think God does communicate perfectly, and in a way that doesn't necessarily involve language.

I wrote the this about a year or so ago and felt it may be worth revisiting:

      I don't believe any scripture needs to be perfect to be inspired by God. Obviously the totality of scriptures we have contain many flaws, contradictions, and imperfections.  But I don't think that discounts the influence of God or the movement of his spirit through us.
      In my opinion God's "perfect" will can not be completed through "imperfect" beings without losing a little something. Just like a carpenter can't build a perfect house with crooked tools.  But maybe the carpenter can build a house that is suitable for the people that have to live there.  He might have to use his sawhorse as a level, he might have to use his screwdriver to hammer nails, but he gets the job done adequately enough to provide shelter.
      In my humble opinion, it is not the process that spiritual knowing (or spiritual wisdom/Gnosis) is transferred that is important, but that simply that it is transferred, so that it can be implemented.
      I was talking to my friend at work about how the NAB has more books than the King James.  I told him there are tons of Christian writings that aren't in the Bible. This is a huge system shock to any protestant as I can personally attest.
      But as I told him, just like I would tell anyone else who might be unsettled by this discovery, I think we have many books that are inspired by God in some way, that are written through the influence of the Spirit, and they are there for the people that need them.
      If I felt the need to separate myself from my protestant roots, this might be my biggest theological split: The need to have one perfect "Bible," instead of a vast multitude of inspired books, songs, and stories, people, insights and experiences that get the job done when it really counts.

Rutger Hauer's Hobo: Christ Figure?

I'm guessing finding any sort of depth to the retro-exploitation film Hobo with a Shotgun was far from the minds of any of it's viewers.  I know it wasn't my goal as I simply sat down with my friends expecting to see a hilarious movie with a ridiculous plot and campy violence.  

It delivered on all those things, and on top of that I found something much more curious.  Rutger Hauer's character, the Hobo, was an incredibly bizarre Christ figure throughout the movie, although I'd bet money this was completely unintentional.

In Gnostic-Christian texts, such as The Secret Revelation of John and Hypostasis of the Archons, humanity lives in a completely corrupted world of illusions, which is controlled by demonic rulers (corrupt and wicked leadership a hot topic among the Gnostics).  Christ is sent to be an intermediary, or to protect man from the demonic entities who rule over the world from the shadows.

This worldview, despite how obscure it is, has been purposefully used for the backdrop of many Japanese anime series such as Big O and Ergo Proxy.  These stories are in a way, modern-day Gnostic passion plays.  In the same way the main characters in these series are a Gnostic Christ, the hobo also seems to be a Gnostic Christ.

A man of the humblest beginnings descends into a twisted and dilapidated world where the inhabitants are obsessed with chasing illusions such as drugs, power, and prostitution.  It is a world where the people are constantly oppressed and tortured by the demonic archons of "The Drake," his sons, and their enforcers "The Plague."

The hobo seeks to create his own idealized world (by starting his own business), and quickly becomes enamored with a pure-hearted woman, which could easily be viewed as a Sophia figure (in Gnostic texts Christ's counterpart is Sophia, the embodiment of wisdom/divine female archetype, aka the Holy Spirit). 

In order to protect "Sophia" the hobo seeks to transform the world first through exacting justice on the archons (with his shotgun of course), and then ultimately saves the people of that world by sacrificing himself, saving "Sophia" and defeating the archons.

As he dies he tells the antagonist something to the effect of "We're going straight to Hell, and you're riding shotgun."  After Christ is crucified, according to the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, and the Apostles Creed, He descends into Hell to free all prisoners, defeat death, and basically piss on the devil; a legend known as "The Harrowing of Hell." 

I find it no surprise to see the story of Christ repeated over and over.  Whether or not it is intentional or completely unintentional; that seems to me to be the way truth enters into the world.  After all, the Gnostic text The Gospel of Phillip states:

"Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world will not receive truth in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth."

Ken Park (movie review)

I went over to a friend's house and he wanted me to watch this movie called "Ken Park."  He'd done a google search for "fucked up movies" and watched this by himself and then wanted me to watch it.  He turned off Let Me In, which I'd really wanted to see and said, "I want to watch something 'funny.'"

The movie we watched depicted actual sex, a kid choking himself while he jerks off all the way to completion, murder, incest, child abuse, rape, and so forth.  It wasn't funny at all. 

"Why in the hell did you want me to watch this?"  was my first reaction. His answer is why I'm taking time to write a review for the movie.  "I watched this movie and it was so fucked up; I just wanted someone else to watch it and see."

When your mind is exposed to something traumatic it doesn't know how to interpret it so it keeps going over and over the traumatic event until it finds a way that it can process what it has experienced in a way that it can understand.  This is basically the idea behind why people with post traumatic stress disorder have flashbacks.  The mind is experiencing the trauma over and over and over until it can be processed.  It's not that this movie gave my friend PTSD, but it was upsetting enough that he couldn't process it, so he had to show me to feel better.

I don't like movies like these that rub something awful in the viewers face.  If you are going to do this, there had better be a purpose to it and it better be done well enough to justify something like actual sex and an extended masturbation scene. 

Ken Park, is a movie like Gummo (and I believe written by the same person, but don't quote me) which attempts to show the bizarre and twisted worlds of white suburbanites beneath the surface of their every day lives.  Although the acting in Ken Park was far superior than most of the acting in Gummo, I'd consider it a far inferior film.  It lacks the nightmare/dreamlike quality that made Gummo so endearing and falls far short of reaching the emotional depth that Gummo did.

However my biggest gripe is that if the director/writer is trying to show the very real filth, depravity, loneliness, anger, and sexual frustration that real everyday people try to hide, I have to ask: Why do the majority of the characters in the movie lack any real depth?

In Ken Park a homophobic man is secretly gay, and a super-religious man is secretly a pervert, and so forth.  The majority of these character's have absolutely no depth at all.  These two were especially grating as they were just one dimensional caricatures based on douchey liberal stereotypes of their right-wing counterparts.  

If you are going to put real sex in a movie it had better be a purpose to it, and there had better be real depth to it.  Otherwise it is just pointless exploitation.

I'd rate this movie 1/10

I need a new moniker...

I need a new e-moniker, both for blogs and elsewhere, and one that fits my personality.  I'll never lose my X's, and rabbits have been a constant presence in my life for the last 10 years or so, so I think XrabbitX will be a good fit...

We did an exercise in psychology theories class:  Close your eyes and imagine your home.  Walk inside your house and go to your basement.  Open the door and walk inside; draw what you see.  (I drew a rabbit).  This is your greatest enemy!  (I wasn't so sure about that one, I thought the rabbit was my friend, and I still do).

I'm not sure if I believe in spirit animals but I read somewhere that rabbit's are active at dawn and dusk, when the spiritual realm is closest so rabbits are closely in tune with the spirit world.  I like that...

http://www.shamanicjourney.com/article/6005/rabbit-power-animal-symbol-of-creativity-intution-paradox-and-fear

Rabbits are guides into the shadow world, where our personal fears lie. When the rabbit shows up it is time to examine those deep reflexive fears that hold you back from growing. Do you keep bounding for the safety of your old patterns every time something new or challenging presents itself? If the answer is yes, the rabbit asks you to face your fears with compassion for yourself. You must accept that it is part of human nature to feel fear at times, but also believe that our fears need not paralyze our growth and movement.

Rabbit medicine is also very positive, showing us how to attract love, abundance, health, and a warm, dry burrow. We are guided to move through fear, living by our own wits, receiving hidden teachings and intuitive messages, quick thinking, strengthening intuition, and paradox. Rabbit represents humility, being quiet and soft and not self-asserting. If you see Rabbit or in any way feel attracted to him, this may be a sign for you to wait for the forces of the universe to start moving again, to stop worrying and to get rid of your fears. Rabbit always indicates a need to re-evaluate the process you are undergoing, to rid yourself of any negative feelings or barriers, and to be more humble.