Fear And Neo-Orientalism in Cyberpunk
By Chris
Casting aside, for the moment, such works as Appleseed and Ghost in the Shell, I think we should address the new Orientalism that is so apparent in cyberpunk*, both in film (Blade Runner having seemingly set the archetype) and literature (Neuromancer guilty of the same). It seems that, for authors of speculative science fiction, South-East Asia is a haven of exoticism that can be produced at any point to provide a contrast with our contemporary age.
However, I question why? Is it demonstrative of a fear of the growing economic power and political intent of South-East Asian nations? Or is it merely new Orientalism, fetishising the East as some remote and exotic land much as the aristocracy did in centuries past?
Unless Japan takes over half the world or large amounts of people escape from China before some new genocidal plot from the government begins, the amount of Asian immigrants we see in cyberpunk works is inexplicable. In Europe, countries such as Germany and the Ukraine (if it is not annexed by Russia) would doubtless corner the market in cybernetic and genetic advances. Likewise, fearful North American corporations would produce their own enhancements in reaction to East-Asian competition (Japan, as with Mobile phones, fax machines and computers, would doubtlessly be one of the first countries to encounter mass-demand for emergent technologies). Therefore, to me at least, it seems inconceivable that this Orientalism controls so much of the cyberpunk visual. Yes, it looks good, but it seems unrealistic, and cyberpunk is a decidedly realistic genre.
As a comparison, we might look at Ghost in the Shell as a comparative product of fear. Instead of South-East Asian being a dominant world power, S.A.C.* depicts the 'American Empire' as a major threat to the fledgling post-war state. Running alongside this are fears of Communist China (expressed in an episode in which a Communist Chinese assassin attempts to kill a rich Japanese stock broker) and Russia (the Northern Territories of the GitS universe presumably relate to disputed territory that sparked the Russo-Japanese war of the early 20th Century).
Therefore we can see a fear, not just individually for a dystopian future, but fear and continuing conflict between East and West, Communism and Capitalism. This reading of cyberpunk is not one I find particularly rewarding, but the visuals infer the struggle which seems increasingly likely to become a reality.
*S.A.C- Stand Alone Complex
*Cyberpunk- a science fiction genre noted for its focus on "high tech and low life." The name is derived from cybernetics and punk and was originally coined by Bruce Bethke as the title of his short story "Cyberpunk," published in 1983. It features advanced science, such as information technology and cybernetics, coupled with a degree of breakdown or radical change in the social order.
Monday, December 15, 2008
New Article / Red Sky at Night
Red Sky At Night
By Chris
Money is like muck, not good except it be spread
- Francis Bacon, Essays, 15, ‘Of seditions and Troubles’
A great industrial Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world ~ no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men.
- Woodrow Wilson, 28th US President
Something is wrong with the world economy, and it is because, not for the first and probably not the last time, we have been betrayed by our politicians. Capitalism, which has been consistently praised as a system of total economic freedom, has resulted in vast monopolies run by small, unelected groups of men (and I say men because that is the truth, this system promotes and encourages few, and those few tend to be male). Money, we are all aware, is power, and that power sits in the hands of these oligarchs, who can control and manipulate governments, not for some bizarre occult purposes or because they are space lizards, but merely for the fact that they want to preserve their awesome wealth. In 2006, the UN released a report stating that the richest 2% of the world's population control over half of the household wealth of the world. In contrast, the poorest 50% own less than 1%.
Obviously something is wrong here, when the manipulators of capital who have not lifted a finger in their lives control the world. Their policies are egocentric, anti-human and greedy, and have contributed to this economic crisis that dominates our news. What have the governments done about it, our elected representatives? They have, on multiple occasions, thrown money at the elite bankers, who have used the influx to buy out smaller banks, give themselves pay raises and generally continue the policies that have led to this crash. However, what do we care if our chocolate bars cost a little more? The majority of people are too ill-informed to realize that this system itself is the reason for the meltdown, and certainly they do not care for those who are hit worst: third world workers, those responsible for bearing the brunt of our economic cruelty throughout the latter half of the twentieth century.
What is the alternative, though? Communism? Derision floats around that system like flies around shit, or perhaps more topically, bankers around money. However, the sharing of wealth, and the granting of the means of production to the workers seems a positive boon in this dark economic age. Why should African farmers toil to produce cocoa and then be sent increasingly small pay packages by the corporate fat cats that buy their crop? Negative climates demand positive action, and the unionizing of these workers could prevent exploitation, or at least lessen it. At home, the sharing of wealth seems a greater idea, too. Health care that all can afford, state-sponsored, and a chance for children of all backgrounds to attain the highest education. Surely such a thing is possible, and perhaps it would have been within the U.S.S.R. had it not been for the corrupt policies of the U.S.A. and its allies drawing states away with the temptation of money, using greed as a weapon against a system which seeks to destroy the self-same principle.
Communism and Socialism demands an international approach, though, and it is this where the U.S.S.R. faltered. In an unfriendly world, the Socialist Republics were besieged, forced to spend ridiculous amounts on defense and policing, leading to paranoia within the government, who famously brutalized the populace. However, Cuba has avoided this mostly, and Vietnam too. Indeed, most of the states used as examples of Communism's failure seem to be corrupt anti-Socialist states that collapse inward due to outside, usually American pressure. Perhaps a world in which the U.S.A. leads a Socialist renewal, or at least adopts some more left-leaning policies we might all get along better?
By Chris
Money is like muck, not good except it be spread
- Francis Bacon, Essays, 15, ‘Of seditions and Troubles’
A great industrial Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world ~ no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men.
- Woodrow Wilson, 28th US President
Something is wrong with the world economy, and it is because, not for the first and probably not the last time, we have been betrayed by our politicians. Capitalism, which has been consistently praised as a system of total economic freedom, has resulted in vast monopolies run by small, unelected groups of men (and I say men because that is the truth, this system promotes and encourages few, and those few tend to be male). Money, we are all aware, is power, and that power sits in the hands of these oligarchs, who can control and manipulate governments, not for some bizarre occult purposes or because they are space lizards, but merely for the fact that they want to preserve their awesome wealth. In 2006, the UN released a report stating that the richest 2% of the world's population control over half of the household wealth of the world. In contrast, the poorest 50% own less than 1%.
Obviously something is wrong here, when the manipulators of capital who have not lifted a finger in their lives control the world. Their policies are egocentric, anti-human and greedy, and have contributed to this economic crisis that dominates our news. What have the governments done about it, our elected representatives? They have, on multiple occasions, thrown money at the elite bankers, who have used the influx to buy out smaller banks, give themselves pay raises and generally continue the policies that have led to this crash. However, what do we care if our chocolate bars cost a little more? The majority of people are too ill-informed to realize that this system itself is the reason for the meltdown, and certainly they do not care for those who are hit worst: third world workers, those responsible for bearing the brunt of our economic cruelty throughout the latter half of the twentieth century.
What is the alternative, though? Communism? Derision floats around that system like flies around shit, or perhaps more topically, bankers around money. However, the sharing of wealth, and the granting of the means of production to the workers seems a positive boon in this dark economic age. Why should African farmers toil to produce cocoa and then be sent increasingly small pay packages by the corporate fat cats that buy their crop? Negative climates demand positive action, and the unionizing of these workers could prevent exploitation, or at least lessen it. At home, the sharing of wealth seems a greater idea, too. Health care that all can afford, state-sponsored, and a chance for children of all backgrounds to attain the highest education. Surely such a thing is possible, and perhaps it would have been within the U.S.S.R. had it not been for the corrupt policies of the U.S.A. and its allies drawing states away with the temptation of money, using greed as a weapon against a system which seeks to destroy the self-same principle.
Communism and Socialism demands an international approach, though, and it is this where the U.S.S.R. faltered. In an unfriendly world, the Socialist Republics were besieged, forced to spend ridiculous amounts on defense and policing, leading to paranoia within the government, who famously brutalized the populace. However, Cuba has avoided this mostly, and Vietnam too. Indeed, most of the states used as examples of Communism's failure seem to be corrupt anti-Socialist states that collapse inward due to outside, usually American pressure. Perhaps a world in which the U.S.A. leads a Socialist renewal, or at least adopts some more left-leaning policies we might all get along better?
Saturday, December 13, 2008
First Issue Published!
Here is a picture of the 2 copies of the first publication of Outrage! These are the last 2 copies that I've saved. I made 10 copies in all, and I distributed them to surprising satisfaction. Issue 2 is in the works, I'll be printing 50 copies. I'm pleased with how my test went over, it had good reactions from all but one person (who refused to read it).
Cheers!
-The Outrage! Team
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
New Article/We Are Daming Our Society
We Are Damning Our Society
Paul
What exactly is the purpose behind the gross amount of money we as human beings spend on entertainment? Why do these entertainment stars make so much money? And perhaps the most important question is this - why do these entertainers make more money than our teachers?
American football players make an average of roughly $1,400,000 US each year. British soccer players make an average of $1,177,000 US. Even high school coaches manage to make an average of $73,000 US. The average high school teacher, on the other hand, makes only $42,000 US each year.
Am I the only one who sees a problem with this?
Something about this isn’t right. Teachers are the people who give up their own time and money (since teachers are grossly undersupplied and are often forced to buy supplies with their own money) to educate our children. These people are raising the next generation of scientists, geneticists, mathematicians, writers, authors, composers, and playwrights. The children these teachers raise will go on to find the cure for cancer and AIDS, achieve heights of technology never before imagined, and will eventually discover a way to help us as a race transcend our own existence.
And yet you people would rather toss your money at people who are willing to entertain you for 30 minutes at a time.
Without teachers, we would have hardly any way to pass on information (for without teachers, who would have instructed us on how to use the internet?) Without teachers, we would all still be sitting in caves, scavenging for our lives (for without teachers, who would have instructed us on how to settle, to grow and harvest food instead of roaming?) A world without our teachers would be a world very different from the one we live in today.
Yet when money becomes tight in a city, where do those in power turn to for the first budget cuts? School systems. Every year, more and more teachers are losing their jobs due to budget costs, cramming more children into each classroom and reducing the amount of time and energy a teacher can spend with each child. Certain activities are often cut out entirely, with fine arts programs being the first to go (God forbid we lose our physical education classes before our fine arts classes!) Teacher pay is often sacrificed before politicians will even dare to think about cutting their own paychecks. And people wonder why teachers hate their jobs.
Despite all this, these teachers come to class every day - to classes where they are ridiculed relentlessly by youths, where they are under appreciated by the head faculty, where they are bombarded with complaints and compromises by parents - to pass along the knowledge to children that will one day mold them into greatness.
So why do we still pay these people so little, barely beans, to put up with all this crap, while sports stars and actors live the high life for doing nothing more than being able to play a game?
I think it’s time we get our priorities in order. If we don’t our society will be forever damned to mediocrity, and we will never become what we truly have the potential to be.
Paul
What exactly is the purpose behind the gross amount of money we as human beings spend on entertainment? Why do these entertainment stars make so much money? And perhaps the most important question is this - why do these entertainers make more money than our teachers?
American football players make an average of roughly $1,400,000 US each year. British soccer players make an average of $1,177,000 US. Even high school coaches manage to make an average of $73,000 US. The average high school teacher, on the other hand, makes only $42,000 US each year.
Am I the only one who sees a problem with this?
Something about this isn’t right. Teachers are the people who give up their own time and money (since teachers are grossly undersupplied and are often forced to buy supplies with their own money) to educate our children. These people are raising the next generation of scientists, geneticists, mathematicians, writers, authors, composers, and playwrights. The children these teachers raise will go on to find the cure for cancer and AIDS, achieve heights of technology never before imagined, and will eventually discover a way to help us as a race transcend our own existence.
And yet you people would rather toss your money at people who are willing to entertain you for 30 minutes at a time.
Without teachers, we would have hardly any way to pass on information (for without teachers, who would have instructed us on how to use the internet?) Without teachers, we would all still be sitting in caves, scavenging for our lives (for without teachers, who would have instructed us on how to settle, to grow and harvest food instead of roaming?) A world without our teachers would be a world very different from the one we live in today.
Yet when money becomes tight in a city, where do those in power turn to for the first budget cuts? School systems. Every year, more and more teachers are losing their jobs due to budget costs, cramming more children into each classroom and reducing the amount of time and energy a teacher can spend with each child. Certain activities are often cut out entirely, with fine arts programs being the first to go (God forbid we lose our physical education classes before our fine arts classes!) Teacher pay is often sacrificed before politicians will even dare to think about cutting their own paychecks. And people wonder why teachers hate their jobs.
Despite all this, these teachers come to class every day - to classes where they are ridiculed relentlessly by youths, where they are under appreciated by the head faculty, where they are bombarded with complaints and compromises by parents - to pass along the knowledge to children that will one day mold them into greatness.
So why do we still pay these people so little, barely beans, to put up with all this crap, while sports stars and actors live the high life for doing nothing more than being able to play a game?
I think it’s time we get our priorities in order. If we don’t our society will be forever damned to mediocrity, and we will never become what we truly have the potential to be.
New Article/Help! The Ice Is Falling!
Help! The Ice Is Falling!
By Morgan
According to major news sources, Al Gore, and National Geographic the world is warming to a point that is very beyond the norm, and this is causing enormous amounts of ice to break off from the main parts of the antarctic shelf, which in turn causes the ice on the mainland to melt as well. This is interesting considering the fact that rising water temperatures (largely caused by volcanic activity) are causing ice to melt from the bottom up, not rising atmospheric temperatures, what's also interesting to note is that, while it is reported to the average citizen that very large chunks are coming off the Antarctic peninsula, but what they don't report is the fact that the ice chunks that fall off very rarely only account for roughly 2% of all total ice on the continent, as well that it won't cause anything significant because the ice has already displaced all the water it is going to, melted or not. They also fail to note that in recent years we've had some of the coldest winters ever (people are still reeling from the heating bills!), and the falling snow easily replaces what is lost at the sea on the main land mass. Ice has been cooling and accumulating since the early 1970s. According to Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D, only 2.67% of the Wilkin's ice shelf and only .01% of the entire Antarctic continent, despite the media coverage of it using such powerful words as "collapse", and "explosion". Joseph D'Aleo former director of meteorology at the Weather Channel, and executive director of Icecap.us compared it to "an icicle falling from a snow and ice covered roof".
What else is interesting to note is that for every scientist that favored the IPCC conclusions in any way 792 scientists signed the petition saying that there is not any conclusive evidence for catastrophic man-made global warming. And for every Ph.D who believed it there were 1,800 who signed the petition.
By Morgan
According to major news sources, Al Gore, and National Geographic the world is warming to a point that is very beyond the norm, and this is causing enormous amounts of ice to break off from the main parts of the antarctic shelf, which in turn causes the ice on the mainland to melt as well. This is interesting considering the fact that rising water temperatures (largely caused by volcanic activity) are causing ice to melt from the bottom up, not rising atmospheric temperatures, what's also interesting to note is that, while it is reported to the average citizen that very large chunks are coming off the Antarctic peninsula, but what they don't report is the fact that the ice chunks that fall off very rarely only account for roughly 2% of all total ice on the continent, as well that it won't cause anything significant because the ice has already displaced all the water it is going to, melted or not. They also fail to note that in recent years we've had some of the coldest winters ever (people are still reeling from the heating bills!), and the falling snow easily replaces what is lost at the sea on the main land mass. Ice has been cooling and accumulating since the early 1970s. According to Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D, only 2.67% of the Wilkin's ice shelf and only .01% of the entire Antarctic continent, despite the media coverage of it using such powerful words as "collapse", and "explosion". Joseph D'Aleo former director of meteorology at the Weather Channel, and executive director of Icecap.us compared it to "an icicle falling from a snow and ice covered roof".
What else is interesting to note is that for every scientist that favored the IPCC conclusions in any way 792 scientists signed the petition saying that there is not any conclusive evidence for catastrophic man-made global warming. And for every Ph.D who believed it there were 1,800 who signed the petition.
New Article/Scratching The Surface
Scratching The Surface
By Eric
Trivium, Korn, Slipknot, Killswitch Engage, Bullet For My Valentine. Each is a band that has achieved Immense commercial success as a "Heavy Metal" act. We've all heard them. And for all of you who liked them, it was probably your first introduction to Metal too. I'm willing to guess you went out and bought a bunch of their CDs, probably a good bit of their merchandise, and maybe even went to a show.
I'm also willing to guess the first time you told another "Metalhead" about it, they called you something along the lines of a poser. Want to know why? Because, those bands aren't really Metal. They're all Mainstream bands who only have a very vague Metal influence. (Unless we're talking about Trivium, Killswitch Engage, or Bullet For My Valentine, but more on them later) This means that they aren't Metal. Take Korn or Slipknot for example. Both are "Nu-Metal", which takes influence from Metal, Alternative Rock, and Rap. But you don't see Rap fans running around praising Korn for being a good rap act. That's because having an influence of something (and in the case of the Metal aspect, a small one) isn't just enough to classify you as that genre of music.
"But Eric, what about Trivium, their like super hardcore Thrash!?!?!?" No, not by a long shot. Trivium, Killswitch Engage, Bullet for My Valentine, and many other bands like Job For A Cowboy are what is called "Metalcore." Basically, it means that what we have is a Punk band doing a horrible impersonation of their Favorite Metal bands, and Trivium is a perfect example. Their song "Anthem" uses a riff that seems a bit too similar to Meagadeth's "Skin O' My Teeth" to be a coincidence. You might say "You Fag, they grew up Listening to Metallica/Meagadeth/whoever, of course they'll sound like them." Well you know what? Metallica grew up listening to Diamond Head, but when I listen to them I don't hear something that sounds exactly like what Diamond Head has written. There is a difference from taking influence and blatantly copying the riff that someone else wrote. Taking influence would imply that you liked what say, Metallica had done, so your wrote something that, although Fast and Heavy, was still distinctly your own music.
At this point, you probably think All this article is about is bashing these bands. Well, it's actually to encourage you to go check out the bands other than just the ones MTV thinks are good looking enough to put on the air. You know why Trivium steals riffs from bands like Metallica and Megadeth and At The Gates? (Other than having no creative ability) Because those bands are Good. (Or great, depending on who you ask) Maybe instead of being annoyed by everyone making fun of you for liking Trivium, why not try looking up At The Gates, and see why Trivium thought they were so cool. Or look up Metallica and other Thrash bands. There is so much more to Heavy Metal than a bunch of Sell outs ripping off better bands. If you have trouble finding a New band to look at, as a friend or Relative who knows more about the Genre. No Metal friends? Ask me or any other internet people with a legitimate Grasp on the Genre. If you'll stop bothering us about bands we don't like, we'd be more than happy to give you some recommendations. No internet? Then try some of the CDs we review. I'm sure you'll find something you like, since Metal is one of the most varied forms of music there is. But above all, I want to encourage you to go out and think for yourself musically. If after you've listened to many underground bands
and you still like Korn or Trivium, that's perfectly alright, and if you don't that's fine too. It's only annoying because so many people choose to simply to believe whatever MTV or VH1 throws at them and call anyone else wrong, whether they are or not. (Metal isn't the only Genre victim to this,
sadly. My sympathies to Punk Fans,) don’t let the media tell you who to like. Think for yourself, form your own opinions. Most of all, don't just lie back and let yourself be another poser when you could just as easily be more educated, and probably find more music you like too.
By Eric
Trivium, Korn, Slipknot, Killswitch Engage, Bullet For My Valentine. Each is a band that has achieved Immense commercial success as a "Heavy Metal" act. We've all heard them. And for all of you who liked them, it was probably your first introduction to Metal too. I'm willing to guess you went out and bought a bunch of their CDs, probably a good bit of their merchandise, and maybe even went to a show.
I'm also willing to guess the first time you told another "Metalhead" about it, they called you something along the lines of a poser. Want to know why? Because, those bands aren't really Metal. They're all Mainstream bands who only have a very vague Metal influence. (Unless we're talking about Trivium, Killswitch Engage, or Bullet For My Valentine, but more on them later) This means that they aren't Metal. Take Korn or Slipknot for example. Both are "Nu-Metal", which takes influence from Metal, Alternative Rock, and Rap. But you don't see Rap fans running around praising Korn for being a good rap act. That's because having an influence of something (and in the case of the Metal aspect, a small one) isn't just enough to classify you as that genre of music.
"But Eric, what about Trivium, their like super hardcore Thrash!?!?!?" No, not by a long shot. Trivium, Killswitch Engage, Bullet for My Valentine, and many other bands like Job For A Cowboy are what is called "Metalcore." Basically, it means that what we have is a Punk band doing a horrible impersonation of their Favorite Metal bands, and Trivium is a perfect example. Their song "Anthem" uses a riff that seems a bit too similar to Meagadeth's "Skin O' My Teeth" to be a coincidence. You might say "You Fag, they grew up Listening to Metallica/Meagadeth/whoever, of course they'll sound like them." Well you know what? Metallica grew up listening to Diamond Head, but when I listen to them I don't hear something that sounds exactly like what Diamond Head has written. There is a difference from taking influence and blatantly copying the riff that someone else wrote. Taking influence would imply that you liked what say, Metallica had done, so your wrote something that, although Fast and Heavy, was still distinctly your own music.
At this point, you probably think All this article is about is bashing these bands. Well, it's actually to encourage you to go check out the bands other than just the ones MTV thinks are good looking enough to put on the air. You know why Trivium steals riffs from bands like Metallica and Megadeth and At The Gates? (Other than having no creative ability) Because those bands are Good. (Or great, depending on who you ask) Maybe instead of being annoyed by everyone making fun of you for liking Trivium, why not try looking up At The Gates, and see why Trivium thought they were so cool. Or look up Metallica and other Thrash bands. There is so much more to Heavy Metal than a bunch of Sell outs ripping off better bands. If you have trouble finding a New band to look at, as a friend or Relative who knows more about the Genre. No Metal friends? Ask me or any other internet people with a legitimate Grasp on the Genre. If you'll stop bothering us about bands we don't like, we'd be more than happy to give you some recommendations. No internet? Then try some of the CDs we review. I'm sure you'll find something you like, since Metal is one of the most varied forms of music there is. But above all, I want to encourage you to go out and think for yourself musically. If after you've listened to many underground bands
and you still like Korn or Trivium, that's perfectly alright, and if you don't that's fine too. It's only annoying because so many people choose to simply to believe whatever MTV or VH1 throws at them and call anyone else wrong, whether they are or not. (Metal isn't the only Genre victim to this,
sadly. My sympathies to Punk Fans,) don’t let the media tell you who to like. Think for yourself, form your own opinions. Most of all, don't just lie back and let yourself be another poser when you could just as easily be more educated, and probably find more music you like too.
New Article/Death to False Metal
Death to False Metal
By David
What is nu-metal? Why does every one who listens to nu-metal get hated for it? Ok well today I am going to be teaching you precisely what Nu-metal is and to why so many people who listen to heavy metal hate it.
Before we begin I am going to describe what nu-metal is. Now the meaning of this genre of music; this musical genre that has come to the scene in the mid 1990s, it was influenced by grunge and alt. rock with funk, hip hop and various heavy metal genres, such as groove metal and industrial metal. Now most of the time nu-metal songs use rhythmic, syncopated riffs played on distorted electric guitars with strings detuned to lower pitches to create dark and “scary” sounds. In Nu-metal you will usually never find I a guitar solo, as well the nu-metal genre is known for its repetition.
You can thank Korn, who are more or less the band that started the whole dark sound with the repetitive beat. You may also thank Producer Ross Robinson the so called Godfather of nu-metal. In the genre you will hear aggressive vocals that range from melodic melody to shouting and screaming to rapping much of the time combining the styles. Distortion and other post-production effects are often added to vocals in the nu-metal genre. Unlike real metal the guitar goes with the mood of the song as if it was on its period (editor’s note: haha, holy crap). Speed is all nu-metal really brings to the table if you’re going to talk about it metal-wise. With in most nu-metal bands there is a turn table, for additional rhythmic instrumentation. As a personal observation, I sometimes get confused when I listen to certain nu-metal. I swear, it says it’s a new song!
What is it about this music? Well for one thing it has to be noted that “Nu-Metal” literally translates to “not metal”; think “Nu-salt” which is a special salt for people who cannot have sodium, looks, smells, tastes just like salt but is sodium free. Same principle. In truth Nu-Metal can be described as alt. rock with metal influences (alt. metal is not a genre, children). Just because something has metal influences does not make it metal, funny enough people never describe Nu-metal as rap, funk, or grunge. What is it about this music that is so despised in metal circles? For one thing it’s not metal, and therefore should not be called metal; for another thing most people who seriously listen to metal think it as mediocre. This is really for you to decide, as the listener it is your job to find a style of music that speaks to you. If Nu-Metal happens to be that music then listen to it.
Nu-Metal Bands (trust me; there are more, like ¾ of the bands on myspace):
KoRn
P.O.D
Limp Bizkit
Linkin Park
Disturbed
Drowning Pool
Mudvayne
System of a Down
Mushroomhead
By David
What is nu-metal? Why does every one who listens to nu-metal get hated for it? Ok well today I am going to be teaching you precisely what Nu-metal is and to why so many people who listen to heavy metal hate it.
Before we begin I am going to describe what nu-metal is. Now the meaning of this genre of music; this musical genre that has come to the scene in the mid 1990s, it was influenced by grunge and alt. rock with funk, hip hop and various heavy metal genres, such as groove metal and industrial metal. Now most of the time nu-metal songs use rhythmic, syncopated riffs played on distorted electric guitars with strings detuned to lower pitches to create dark and “scary” sounds. In Nu-metal you will usually never find I a guitar solo, as well the nu-metal genre is known for its repetition.
You can thank Korn, who are more or less the band that started the whole dark sound with the repetitive beat. You may also thank Producer Ross Robinson the so called Godfather of nu-metal. In the genre you will hear aggressive vocals that range from melodic melody to shouting and screaming to rapping much of the time combining the styles. Distortion and other post-production effects are often added to vocals in the nu-metal genre. Unlike real metal the guitar goes with the mood of the song as if it was on its period (editor’s note: haha, holy crap). Speed is all nu-metal really brings to the table if you’re going to talk about it metal-wise. With in most nu-metal bands there is a turn table, for additional rhythmic instrumentation. As a personal observation, I sometimes get confused when I listen to certain nu-metal. I swear, it says it’s a new song!
What is it about this music? Well for one thing it has to be noted that “Nu-Metal” literally translates to “not metal”; think “Nu-salt” which is a special salt for people who cannot have sodium, looks, smells, tastes just like salt but is sodium free. Same principle. In truth Nu-Metal can be described as alt. rock with metal influences (alt. metal is not a genre, children). Just because something has metal influences does not make it metal, funny enough people never describe Nu-metal as rap, funk, or grunge. What is it about this music that is so despised in metal circles? For one thing it’s not metal, and therefore should not be called metal; for another thing most people who seriously listen to metal think it as mediocre. This is really for you to decide, as the listener it is your job to find a style of music that speaks to you. If Nu-Metal happens to be that music then listen to it.
Nu-Metal Bands (trust me; there are more, like ¾ of the bands on myspace):
KoRn
P.O.D
Limp Bizkit
Linkin Park
Disturbed
Drowning Pool
Mudvayne
System of a Down
Mushroomhead
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
