The year (and the world) is coming to an end, so it's time for me to reflect on my activities in 2018 a bit.
There were definitely two high points for me this year.
The release of "Malfunction" on Praxis which were tracks I started in 2002 and finished in 2004 for a vinyl and CD album on Praxis that were never released due to some unfortunate events on my part, until this year, digitally; and I got some good feedback for them, and it was a pleasure to return to Praxis of course.
Second was the release of "To the Emerald Planet And Beyond", remixes of my track from 2005 by some legendary, classic artists and newer, upcoming artists that I both respect a lot such as Darius G, Kevin Vega, Murmuur, Maniak-47 and many others. This release took a lot of time and effort, and I was happy when it was finally out.
Doomcore Records also went strong this year with countless releases, and some that I consider "Auteur Doomcore", next level Doomcore Stuff, for example by Darkblack XIII or Plucessit. In 2018, the "music press" also continued their interest in Doomcore Records with plenty of mentions.
I produced around 30-40 new tracks this year, a bit meager compared with for example the ca. 100 tracks I produced in 2014. They were mostly in a Doomcore style, either what I call "Klimperdoom" and / or "Arenacore" (don't ask).
My main output this year was definitely the Tribute mixes, of which I did more than ever. I also tried to focus on some more obscure artists / labels / genres this time, such as Tranceform records or Psytrance Speedcore. I think I did most of the Tributes I wanted by now, so I might do much less in the future.
I also wrote many texts for my blog, giving more details on my struggle with "Mental Health" and being a Christian cult survivor. But also on the topic of combining music with politics; the possibility of pushing social change by doing art. Apart from the politics, I wrote various articles, including two for The Hard Data, for example on the history of tracker music.
Did I like 2018? It was a crazy ride. Definitely an improvement from 2017, and I feel I get slowly closer to where I want to be.
Plans for 2019? Shhh, they're secret. And if nuclear war and or economical breakdown don't get in their way...
We'll see. Stay tuned for more entropy.
The Advent Of Acid
One of the techniques for meditation is to repeat a word or a sentence on and on in your mind, until you get into trance (and beyond).
I like to use a similar technique in my tracks by repeating vocal samples on and on.
There is one thing I find most fascinating, which is that after a while you will begin to find several meanings attached to a single word or sentence. A multitude of meanings.
I'll use my track "The Advent Of Acid" as an example, even though it's not the most fitting example, as it is a fragment of speech, not just a single sentence.
But when you listen to the track you will hear that Ken Kesey makes pauses during this speech, which sort of breaks it up into shorter sentences again.
So let's start.
"I believe..."
a good way to start what is to follow. I believe. You can believe in God. or maybe in Atheism. Or something more profane, you believe there will be good weather on Sunday. It can be used as a meta-meaning. I believe. I'm a believer. I stand for what i believe and will defend it. "It" could be many things.
Or it could mean you believe in the sentences that follow.
"... With the advent of acid..."
It's an acid track. So the advent of acid could be the rise of Acid House. Or it could refer to when the acid sounds start to twirl in the track. Acid rain was a big topic a few years ago. The advent of acid rain. Of course Ken Kesey means acid the drug, LSD.
The sentence can be further broken down.
"...the Advent..."
The advent. Of what? The advent of the future. The advent of a new society. Or the advent of something personal. Or maybe the advent of "Jesus Christ". In Germany, the time before Christmas is called "Adventszeit" for that reason. Or the advent of something entirely different.
"...of Acid..."
Something made of acid. Tracks that come from the genre of Acid. We as humans are made of acid, of DNA.
"... We discovered a new way to think..."
This is interesting. Think in a new way. Think boldly. Think out of the box. What is a new way to think? Think in numbers. Or symbols. Or pictures. Or maybe a new way to think on and about a certain topic. History. Sociology. Religion.
"...and it has to do with piecing together new thoughts in your mind..."
Piece together new thoughts. Thoughts you did not have before. What could a new thought be? Maybe a discovery. Or something more banal, yet still new. Or thoughts that did not exist before. Yet every time i thought I had a new thought I discovered it with some author or thinker later in my life. It had already been thought.
When listening to this quote I often hear "piercing" instead of piecing. Piercing thoughts. Thoughts that don't leave you cold. That invade your mind.
So this is just a look at the first four sentences. I only wrote down some possible meanings. There are hundreds, or maybe unlimited, more meanings that could be found.
With this multitude of meanings the sampled speech helps the listener to reach a state of trance. And an outburst of creativity.
It is really something very interesting, and something that techno music seems to be made for. It is something to be further explored.
I like to use a similar technique in my tracks by repeating vocal samples on and on.
There is one thing I find most fascinating, which is that after a while you will begin to find several meanings attached to a single word or sentence. A multitude of meanings.
I'll use my track "The Advent Of Acid" as an example, even though it's not the most fitting example, as it is a fragment of speech, not just a single sentence.
But when you listen to the track you will hear that Ken Kesey makes pauses during this speech, which sort of breaks it up into shorter sentences again.
So let's start.
"I believe..."
a good way to start what is to follow. I believe. You can believe in God. or maybe in Atheism. Or something more profane, you believe there will be good weather on Sunday. It can be used as a meta-meaning. I believe. I'm a believer. I stand for what i believe and will defend it. "It" could be many things.
Or it could mean you believe in the sentences that follow.
"... With the advent of acid..."
It's an acid track. So the advent of acid could be the rise of Acid House. Or it could refer to when the acid sounds start to twirl in the track. Acid rain was a big topic a few years ago. The advent of acid rain. Of course Ken Kesey means acid the drug, LSD.
The sentence can be further broken down.
"...the Advent..."
The advent. Of what? The advent of the future. The advent of a new society. Or the advent of something personal. Or maybe the advent of "Jesus Christ". In Germany, the time before Christmas is called "Adventszeit" for that reason. Or the advent of something entirely different.
"...of Acid..."
Something made of acid. Tracks that come from the genre of Acid. We as humans are made of acid, of DNA.
"... We discovered a new way to think..."
This is interesting. Think in a new way. Think boldly. Think out of the box. What is a new way to think? Think in numbers. Or symbols. Or pictures. Or maybe a new way to think on and about a certain topic. History. Sociology. Religion.
"...and it has to do with piecing together new thoughts in your mind..."
Piece together new thoughts. Thoughts you did not have before. What could a new thought be? Maybe a discovery. Or something more banal, yet still new. Or thoughts that did not exist before. Yet every time i thought I had a new thought I discovered it with some author or thinker later in my life. It had already been thought.
When listening to this quote I often hear "piercing" instead of piecing. Piercing thoughts. Thoughts that don't leave you cold. That invade your mind.
So this is just a look at the first four sentences. I only wrote down some possible meanings. There are hundreds, or maybe unlimited, more meanings that could be found.
With this multitude of meanings the sampled speech helps the listener to reach a state of trance. And an outburst of creativity.
It is really something very interesting, and something that techno music seems to be made for. It is something to be further explored.
The End Of The "Sex Craze"
I think 2018 is the year in which the "sex craze" in the Western world turned sour, or maybe some years earlier already. On the one side there are the feminists and leftists to whom a smile or mild flirting is already "sexual harassment" (I recently heard that being polite to women is "that chivalry shit"). On the other side are the right-wingers and machos who try to justify real sexual harassment or even rape! "No Sex" or "Rape Culture" - this seems to be where we are headed. There is no natural, healthy view on sexuality and sexual topics anymore.
On My Music 2
My intention in my music is to have a psychedelic effect. All other aspects of my music are subjugated to this. If I need to run a bassdrum straight for 8 minutes to have this effect I'll do it. If I need to make a 30 seconds only track for the effect, I'll make it. Some people feel this effect in my music, and others don't. I noticed that mostly people who use a similar psychedelic effect in their own productions "feel it" too. Of course I'm aware that psychedelics are a wide field and even those who are inclined like this might not "click" to my particular way of getting there. But I imagine to someone who is not interested in psychedelics at all, my music must sound quite dull.
Mental Health And Music
This year I talked about my mental health problems, which might not be directly related to my music. But I think it's important issues like these come to the public and it does not remain taboo to talk about them.
And, on the other hand, they are indeed very much connected to my music. I'm influenced by the anti-psychiatry movements that gained momentum in the 60s decade of the last century; especially the idea that "mental health" is not a black and white thing; that there is no clear line between sane and insane; between society and an individual's problems; that mental illness is not 100% bad or 100% good, but something inbetween.
To be more exact, what happened is this; my problems with anxiety that started as a kid sent me into what is called "altered states" once in a while; some enter these states by drugs; I entered them by fear and trauma. And from these states, I took all the ideas for my music. My mental health problems sent me to that place, like others would have used drugs to get there, again. I'm sure some people think is a fucked up way, using this to get inspired for art. But to me it made sense. It was the best I could do; and at the same time, my music helped me to get a grip on my mental health problems.
And, on the other hand, they are indeed very much connected to my music. I'm influenced by the anti-psychiatry movements that gained momentum in the 60s decade of the last century; especially the idea that "mental health" is not a black and white thing; that there is no clear line between sane and insane; between society and an individual's problems; that mental illness is not 100% bad or 100% good, but something inbetween.
To be more exact, what happened is this; my problems with anxiety that started as a kid sent me into what is called "altered states" once in a while; some enter these states by drugs; I entered them by fear and trauma. And from these states, I took all the ideas for my music. My mental health problems sent me to that place, like others would have used drugs to get there, again. I'm sure some people think is a fucked up way, using this to get inspired for art. But to me it made sense. It was the best I could do; and at the same time, my music helped me to get a grip on my mental health problems.
The Future Of The World
In the future, there will be no more inequality, no oppression, no hierarchies, no war in human society. Most people would say this idea is insane; that it could not be this way; but it is the truth; and it is only rational.
For inequality - to take an example - is an idea; a human idea; and how could an idea last forever?
Take the idea that the catholic church should be the main political power in Europe; this was indeed a, let's call it "powerful", idea; it lasted for a millennium; but eventually that idea was crushed and it faded away. Not to mention even lesser ideas. There are not much supporters of "Attila-ism" these days, are there? That want to recreat the "glory" or power of the days of Attila The Hun and turn society into how it was like then. Or Cleopatra-ism, or any other example like this. Yet these people had powerful empires in their time, but this is all part of history now. And so, inequality will only be part of history one day.
Now you may say, ideas like this never totally go away, and in the future there might be some attempts to revive the Ottoman Empire or Austro-Hungarian reign and so on. Yes, it could be. But let's put it this way, in the next 10,000 years the future for Attilaism doesn't look too bright.
I could imagine somewhere in the world a small group of persons sitting for a meeting that are plotting for the "second coming" of Attila The Hun. Maybe, in the same way, in our future society a small group is longing for the return of social inequality. But that's about it then.
But, you might say, there is a misunderstanding. Inequality is not just an idea. It's a part of human order, of social order. Well, in the past gathering fruit and hunting game were the very center of human order. Or the majority of the population being busy with farming or cutting wood to build their homes. This changed. The human order changed. The habit of gathering fruits changed, so the habit of having inequality in society will change too. Nothing really lasts in the human realm. (Again, if you say, on the fringes of the world people still gather fruit to live, let's keep with my amendment of the initial claim; yeah maybe in the future, on the fringes people will still long for inequality.).
Now you might say, there are things that can't be avoided in human life, like diseases and illness, and inequality is like that. But inequality *can* be avoided. When looking at the world today it's obvious that wealth and power and is distributed in an (extremely) unequal way and it's easy to come to the conclusion that wealth and power could be redistributed. In meager efforts it has been done already, like the distributing of the sole power of the king to democratically elected officials (not the end solution we want, but maybe a step in the right direction).
No no no, you might now say, the point is inequality is not an idea, a thought. It is something real, it's part of nature. Well, trees or plants are part of nature. Can you point me to this "real" inequality like you could point to a tree? Is it growing somewhere out of the ground like a tree? Or does it physically exist in some else way? Can you cut this inequality with a knife, does it have inequality particles, inequality atoms?
Of course inequality is not something real. It's an abstract concept, an idea, a thought, something in your head, in your brain. And ideas will be forgotten one day or at least lose their power. Even if it takes a long time.
The point is that those who believe that inequality will last are more or less - insane. They confuse an idea, that is thought, with something real, that physically exists. They think inequality as an idea, but just not "an" idea, it's a *real* idea! An idea existing in nature, in the real world, and like this world, it will last! A real part of human nature that will stay with human nature as long as humans exist. And this is insane.
Inequality is just an idea, an idea that can't last forever, that won't be "believed" forever, and when this believe withers away, and thus when it withers away, there will be no more inequality in human society, and that is the rational way to see it, and the same goes for oppression and hierarchy and wars and so on - the future will see a world that is free of these.
For inequality - to take an example - is an idea; a human idea; and how could an idea last forever?
Take the idea that the catholic church should be the main political power in Europe; this was indeed a, let's call it "powerful", idea; it lasted for a millennium; but eventually that idea was crushed and it faded away. Not to mention even lesser ideas. There are not much supporters of "Attila-ism" these days, are there? That want to recreat the "glory" or power of the days of Attila The Hun and turn society into how it was like then. Or Cleopatra-ism, or any other example like this. Yet these people had powerful empires in their time, but this is all part of history now. And so, inequality will only be part of history one day.
Now you may say, ideas like this never totally go away, and in the future there might be some attempts to revive the Ottoman Empire or Austro-Hungarian reign and so on. Yes, it could be. But let's put it this way, in the next 10,000 years the future for Attilaism doesn't look too bright.
I could imagine somewhere in the world a small group of persons sitting for a meeting that are plotting for the "second coming" of Attila The Hun. Maybe, in the same way, in our future society a small group is longing for the return of social inequality. But that's about it then.
But, you might say, there is a misunderstanding. Inequality is not just an idea. It's a part of human order, of social order. Well, in the past gathering fruit and hunting game were the very center of human order. Or the majority of the population being busy with farming or cutting wood to build their homes. This changed. The human order changed. The habit of gathering fruits changed, so the habit of having inequality in society will change too. Nothing really lasts in the human realm. (Again, if you say, on the fringes of the world people still gather fruit to live, let's keep with my amendment of the initial claim; yeah maybe in the future, on the fringes people will still long for inequality.).
Now you might say, there are things that can't be avoided in human life, like diseases and illness, and inequality is like that. But inequality *can* be avoided. When looking at the world today it's obvious that wealth and power and is distributed in an (extremely) unequal way and it's easy to come to the conclusion that wealth and power could be redistributed. In meager efforts it has been done already, like the distributing of the sole power of the king to democratically elected officials (not the end solution we want, but maybe a step in the right direction).
No no no, you might now say, the point is inequality is not an idea, a thought. It is something real, it's part of nature. Well, trees or plants are part of nature. Can you point me to this "real" inequality like you could point to a tree? Is it growing somewhere out of the ground like a tree? Or does it physically exist in some else way? Can you cut this inequality with a knife, does it have inequality particles, inequality atoms?
Of course inequality is not something real. It's an abstract concept, an idea, a thought, something in your head, in your brain. And ideas will be forgotten one day or at least lose their power. Even if it takes a long time.
The point is that those who believe that inequality will last are more or less - insane. They confuse an idea, that is thought, with something real, that physically exists. They think inequality as an idea, but just not "an" idea, it's a *real* idea! An idea existing in nature, in the real world, and like this world, it will last! A real part of human nature that will stay with human nature as long as humans exist. And this is insane.
Inequality is just an idea, an idea that can't last forever, that won't be "believed" forever, and when this believe withers away, and thus when it withers away, there will be no more inequality in human society, and that is the rational way to see it, and the same goes for oppression and hierarchy and wars and so on - the future will see a world that is free of these.
Art And Social Change - Again
I've been asked why and how art could change the world, could change society.
The problem here is what I call the "Western Art Anomaly"; because in other cultures, both in different times and different locations, people were and are aware that art could change society - it could change a lot (for example kings that arrested artists; because they know their art could cost them their crown. Priests that persecuted artists; because they knew their art could cost them their power).
But in contemporary western society, it is is no longer understood what art is. They think, art, music, movies, that is something you "consume" in your pastime and you have fun with it and maybe dance to it or chill-out or whatever, and you pay money for it and it gives you a good time, and maybe, just maybe, some deep thoughts too!
The common western person behaves like cavemen who discovered a working spaceship; but they don't understand how to fly it, so they just use it to climb on it and jump down from it and think, hey this is a good time.
So what is art exactly? Art is "it". It's the thing. It's the holy grail, it could take you to the stars - metaphorically speaking. Art is where the sky and earth meet. It's the base of society, of politics, and civilization, but it goes beyond them. It is a cultural code that programs society. If you change this code, you can change society.
It's no wonder "culture" both is a word for art, as well as for organized human society. Culture as art leads the "culture", the society. Art sets the model of politics, of society, of everything, and society and politics follow this model.
Just think about it. The Rock'n'Roll singers had more impact on western society in the 20th century than any single politician. If a politician calls for a political rally, or movement, or action, or a pop star calls for it, who will have more followers in most of cases?
Art is the very source of society and philosophy and language and virtually everything. It is the one thing. The main thing.
Because of this, art *has* the power to change society. And it will change society. How do you use art this way? Easy. Just give art an edge that other art doesn't. Make it big, make it good. But most importantly, don't fall for money and fame, not even "underground fame". Make it true. And be true.
And change will follow.
The problem here is what I call the "Western Art Anomaly"; because in other cultures, both in different times and different locations, people were and are aware that art could change society - it could change a lot (for example kings that arrested artists; because they know their art could cost them their crown. Priests that persecuted artists; because they knew their art could cost them their power).
But in contemporary western society, it is is no longer understood what art is. They think, art, music, movies, that is something you "consume" in your pastime and you have fun with it and maybe dance to it or chill-out or whatever, and you pay money for it and it gives you a good time, and maybe, just maybe, some deep thoughts too!
The common western person behaves like cavemen who discovered a working spaceship; but they don't understand how to fly it, so they just use it to climb on it and jump down from it and think, hey this is a good time.
So what is art exactly? Art is "it". It's the thing. It's the holy grail, it could take you to the stars - metaphorically speaking. Art is where the sky and earth meet. It's the base of society, of politics, and civilization, but it goes beyond them. It is a cultural code that programs society. If you change this code, you can change society.
It's no wonder "culture" both is a word for art, as well as for organized human society. Culture as art leads the "culture", the society. Art sets the model of politics, of society, of everything, and society and politics follow this model.
Just think about it. The Rock'n'Roll singers had more impact on western society in the 20th century than any single politician. If a politician calls for a political rally, or movement, or action, or a pop star calls for it, who will have more followers in most of cases?
Art is the very source of society and philosophy and language and virtually everything. It is the one thing. The main thing.
Because of this, art *has* the power to change society. And it will change society. How do you use art this way? Easy. Just give art an edge that other art doesn't. Make it big, make it good. But most importantly, don't fall for money and fame, not even "underground fame". Make it true. And be true.
And change will follow.
Reversal Of Facts
the reversal of facts in our "modern times" can be seen in how time is truncated into certain "eras". for example: the era of the 60s was full of rebellion and social change, and this let certain authors and musicians thrive and they did the best work in that era. the truth is the other way round: before and in the 60s authors and artists created politically radical content and this led to the rebellion and uprising of the 60s.
this is an important point, because right now there are a lot of anarchists and revolutionaries who think we live in times that are not rebellious at all, and hope for a "change of times" and wonder if that change ever comes; when they could incite this change by themselves! if a dozen artists get together, and they're clever enough, they could not only incite another 60s era, but a full scale utopian anarchist revolution without any problem.
this is an important point, because right now there are a lot of anarchists and revolutionaries who think we live in times that are not rebellious at all, and hope for a "change of times" and wonder if that change ever comes; when they could incite this change by themselves! if a dozen artists get together, and they're clever enough, they could not only incite another 60s era, but a full scale utopian anarchist revolution without any problem.
Reach
Some people say social media makes it easier to reach people as an artist. But this is not true. To talk from my own experience. Before the days of social media and youtube etc. When I had my first vinyl out on Blut Records. That already put me on the map in the scene. A few weeks later I had my first gig at the Fuckparade, and was already approached by people who had heard it and asked me about it. I played it to Scud and Society Suckers and lots of other people. I don't say this to boast, but to make a point: would a first release by an artist on a netlabel posted on Facebook put him or her "on the map" in the Hardcore scene? It could happen. But it is very unlikely... It might just get ignored, or seen as just another release and passed by.
The truth about social networks is that it works for artists that build their position *outside* the social networks. There are two major groups for this: artists who had a "career" before the social media hype, and even better, before the internet spread. All those 80s and early 90s artists, maybe even 70s and 50s. These people *can* reach a lot of people with the social media. And artists that have the backing of big music industry, once again something that exists outside of Facebook and Instagram etc., all the Lady Gagas and Adeles etc.
To this day, half the feedback I get to my sound is based on my vinyl releases I did over 15 years ago, before the rise of social media. Even though I had hundreds of digital releases since then!
And I avoided Facebook for a long time. People told me I could spread my music on Facebook more easily. But the truth is that by spreading it outside of Facebook, I made it clear I'm not a "Facebook Artist" and that gave a boost to my output, so I reached much more people when I finally came onto Facebook than if I'd already been earlier. And the longer I'm on Facebook the less feedback positive and negative (and interest?) I get to my sound. Again, not to boast, but to make this point.
Social Media is a very two-edged sword especially for artists and it can be hard to walk this edge successfully.
The truth about social networks is that it works for artists that build their position *outside* the social networks. There are two major groups for this: artists who had a "career" before the social media hype, and even better, before the internet spread. All those 80s and early 90s artists, maybe even 70s and 50s. These people *can* reach a lot of people with the social media. And artists that have the backing of big music industry, once again something that exists outside of Facebook and Instagram etc., all the Lady Gagas and Adeles etc.
To this day, half the feedback I get to my sound is based on my vinyl releases I did over 15 years ago, before the rise of social media. Even though I had hundreds of digital releases since then!
And I avoided Facebook for a long time. People told me I could spread my music on Facebook more easily. But the truth is that by spreading it outside of Facebook, I made it clear I'm not a "Facebook Artist" and that gave a boost to my output, so I reached much more people when I finally came onto Facebook than if I'd already been earlier. And the longer I'm on Facebook the less feedback positive and negative (and interest?) I get to my sound. Again, not to boast, but to make this point.
Social Media is a very two-edged sword especially for artists and it can be hard to walk this edge successfully.
The Power Of Imagination
You can imagine that you are rich, or traveling the universe, or be the president of the world, or have a secret room full of gold, or whatever you wish and choose and desire. You can do this regardless of your life situation, at night, in prison, maybe even in daydreaming. So why should you ever be sad about something? No matter if you're sick or poor or lonely or in whatever trouble you are in, you can always imagine something wonderful and great, imagine yourself to experience something wonderful and great. Why ever complain, why ever feel not satisfied? You could imagine the perfect life.
The answer by many will be: 'because something that is imagined is not as strong, as powerful, as intense, has not the same impact on the mind and the senses, as something that is very much real'. 'Imagining yourself to be married to a pop idol is not the same as this being really the case'.
But this is not true. It's like giving a child a bicycle and saying, if you ride this bicycle, you can get farther and easier ahead to destinations you might hardly reach by foot, and the child tries to ride the bicycle but falls down after a few meters and is hurt, and says, 'this is much worse than going by foot'. But this only happened because the kid did not know yet how to properly use a bicycle. It has to learn it.
And the same way goes for human imagination. You have to learn how to use your imagination. If you managed to do so, imagining yourself to be married to a pop star or being rich or a galactic traveler will not only feel as powerful and intense as wonderful as if this would really be the case, it will feel *better*, much much better and more intense than the real thing. So exercise your imagination, learn how to use it, spend time on it, a lot of time, and you will slowly get to this point. And then you will be free of whatever situation you are in in real life and you can always escape to your imagination wherever you are, however you feel, no matter what problems you are in.
Of course, the first step in learning how to imagine things properly is to believe that this is true, that human imagination is really stronger than any real world experience you could be in.
Artist of all ages, consciously or subconsciously always knew this. Do not songs, movies, books touch you in more profound and deeper ways that your everyday experience? This is because they aim at your imagination, not at your "real world". Is not a song about heartbreak much more pleasurable than real heartbreak? Can not a love song be more faithful and true than a romantic affair you experienced in real life? Of course this is so. And this is the power of imagination.
So who cares about sadness and trouble. Train your imagination, learn to imagine properly.
And you will become free.
The answer by many will be: 'because something that is imagined is not as strong, as powerful, as intense, has not the same impact on the mind and the senses, as something that is very much real'. 'Imagining yourself to be married to a pop idol is not the same as this being really the case'.
But this is not true. It's like giving a child a bicycle and saying, if you ride this bicycle, you can get farther and easier ahead to destinations you might hardly reach by foot, and the child tries to ride the bicycle but falls down after a few meters and is hurt, and says, 'this is much worse than going by foot'. But this only happened because the kid did not know yet how to properly use a bicycle. It has to learn it.
And the same way goes for human imagination. You have to learn how to use your imagination. If you managed to do so, imagining yourself to be married to a pop star or being rich or a galactic traveler will not only feel as powerful and intense as wonderful as if this would really be the case, it will feel *better*, much much better and more intense than the real thing. So exercise your imagination, learn how to use it, spend time on it, a lot of time, and you will slowly get to this point. And then you will be free of whatever situation you are in in real life and you can always escape to your imagination wherever you are, however you feel, no matter what problems you are in.
Of course, the first step in learning how to imagine things properly is to believe that this is true, that human imagination is really stronger than any real world experience you could be in.
Artist of all ages, consciously or subconsciously always knew this. Do not songs, movies, books touch you in more profound and deeper ways that your everyday experience? This is because they aim at your imagination, not at your "real world". Is not a song about heartbreak much more pleasurable than real heartbreak? Can not a love song be more faithful and true than a romantic affair you experienced in real life? Of course this is so. And this is the power of imagination.
So who cares about sadness and trouble. Train your imagination, learn to imagine properly.
And you will become free.
On Sharing
One of the reasons I give most of my music away for free is that this is one of the very few "basic and simple" things you can do against Capitalism. Sharing something for free - instead of selling something for money. Not making an economical calculation out of what you do, not "thinking economically" at all - just going with the flow. Of course some will say, 'but artists have to make a living', but seriously, which artist in Doomcore or Speedcore or Breakcore can make a living out of his meager "sales"? Maybe 5, maybe 6 persons.
While this is indeed a very simple tactic, it is nevertheless very effective. Because the outcry against any Anti-Capitalist tactics will always be: It won't work, you will end up helping the enemy or joining his force etc. And this is true. Say, an artist wants to spread a "riot image". And he succeeds with it! Then Capitalism can still very quickly hijack and use this for its own ends. Cash in on the riot image, make "riot wear clothes", sell "riot" music, make more TV shows about riots!
Capitalism still works even if everyone on Earth would wear "riot wear clothes".
But Capitalism will no longer exist if everyone shared for free.
While this is indeed a very simple tactic, it is nevertheless very effective. Because the outcry against any Anti-Capitalist tactics will always be: It won't work, you will end up helping the enemy or joining his force etc. And this is true. Say, an artist wants to spread a "riot image". And he succeeds with it! Then Capitalism can still very quickly hijack and use this for its own ends. Cash in on the riot image, make "riot wear clothes", sell "riot" music, make more TV shows about riots!
Capitalism still works even if everyone on Earth would wear "riot wear clothes".
But Capitalism will no longer exist if everyone shared for free.
Social Isolation
Due to my mental health problems, I lived some time in near total social isolation (minus internet and the online world). On the other hand, during the time I played gigs at Tresor etc. I lived a very tangible social life with plenty of friends and meetings and parties.
But looking back, the lenghty time alone was much better for me. It's when I did my best tracks and music. The social is just not "it".
But looking back, the lenghty time alone was much better for me. It's when I did my best tracks and music. The social is just not "it".
The End Of Sexual Liberation
The "Sexual-Political Organization (SexPol)" was an organization by Wilhelm Reich that tried to combine sexual liberation and generally topics of sexuality with political activism. This was long before Reich got "mad" and tried to shoot "orgone rays" with metal pipes up into the sky to dissolve thunderclouds - and to wane off UFOs that were threatening peace on earth - in his mind.
With SexPol, he was not alone. Sexual liberation was for a long time part of the radical left and Anarchism. Even in the 19th century they already championed "free love" and other issues. With the 1960s movements, sexual liberation often became the major focus of leftist and countercultural movements.
But I think we totally lost in this regard. Sexual liberation no longer seems possible. There are two reasons for this. Capitalism, especially by using its media (including its porn industry), has seized total control of human sexuality, and controls it in each and every regard. The new, "modern" sexual archetype is the 'rich and powerful (young or old) politically conservative or fascist man'. No longer the rebel, or the anarchist, or the hippie with unwashed hair. But there was also a threat from inside. Did the hippies or the Anarchists really bring sexual liberation to the people? Was there not a divide between noble talk and the real actions (talking about sex and having sex are obviously not the same)? And worse than that. There was for example a pedophile problem in both the American and European post-60s left, that the left decided to close its eyes to. Even Wilhelm Reich himself once stated he dissolved "SexPol" because of sexual misconduct that happened in these organizations.
I feel this in the end totally discredited the sexual liberation movements in the eye of the public.
So, we lost this battle - likely for quite some time. In the political struggle, it might be wiser to focus on other things (that might be more important) than sexuality in the moment. Will this ever be different? Maybe. But maybe not.
With SexPol, he was not alone. Sexual liberation was for a long time part of the radical left and Anarchism. Even in the 19th century they already championed "free love" and other issues. With the 1960s movements, sexual liberation often became the major focus of leftist and countercultural movements.
But I think we totally lost in this regard. Sexual liberation no longer seems possible. There are two reasons for this. Capitalism, especially by using its media (including its porn industry), has seized total control of human sexuality, and controls it in each and every regard. The new, "modern" sexual archetype is the 'rich and powerful (young or old) politically conservative or fascist man'. No longer the rebel, or the anarchist, or the hippie with unwashed hair. But there was also a threat from inside. Did the hippies or the Anarchists really bring sexual liberation to the people? Was there not a divide between noble talk and the real actions (talking about sex and having sex are obviously not the same)? And worse than that. There was for example a pedophile problem in both the American and European post-60s left, that the left decided to close its eyes to. Even Wilhelm Reich himself once stated he dissolved "SexPol" because of sexual misconduct that happened in these organizations.
I feel this in the end totally discredited the sexual liberation movements in the eye of the public.
So, we lost this battle - likely for quite some time. In the political struggle, it might be wiser to focus on other things (that might be more important) than sexuality in the moment. Will this ever be different? Maybe. But maybe not.
On The Social
I said I was influenced by Hakim Bey. He always championed the social. He wrote it was no accident that there was an attack on the social with the likes of Thatcher - "There is no such thing as society" - at the same time as the rise of computers and electronic networks in the 80s - both leading way to a painful "individualism".
He wrote that if you managed to meet every week with a group of people that are "not your family or 'the people you know at work'", you already have attained the revolution - because you have fought the prime anti-social force of organized power that splits communities and the world in small peaces. Workplace and family were excluded as they were already "self-alienated" groups that were no harm to power, instead complicit with it.
Nowadays a lot more groups could be added to this category. And we have reached a situation were indeed many, many people spent their lives almost entirely at the workplace and their family - is the victory of "power" total?
So what I tried to do with my activities in the Hardcore scene was to give room to the social. That's why I was involved in the AuditivSex fanzine, the Hamburg Hardcore Radio, the All-Out Demolition! parties and so on - to give room for people to meet each other. For freaks to meet other freaks. To create a free community.
Now, I quickly realized this was no easy task. Because the people I met in Hardcore, especially end of the 90s and early 2000s, weren't exactly "social butterflies". They were loner types, often socially anxious or just liked to keep to themselves.
But, maybe paradoxically, at the same time, they were not uninterested in the social. So with the radio, or with parties, I indeed met weekly with people that were not "the people I know at work or my family". And, was it the revolution?
Yes, it was. I never felt so magical in my life. There was a true community of freaks that exchanged ideas and debates and just partying, and of course most of all, great music. There was a free exchange of emotions and thoughts that was not based on a community that stifled, but instead embraced each others individualism.
I don't say this to "boast", but to show that it was really possible.
Nowadays, I feel the rise of social media "paradoxically" is an even more severe attack on the social, and it gave rise to a very toxic all-encompassing false "individualism". False individualism is now marketed as a kind of "salvation" - people longing to be lonely. But in my opinion this is because of the toxic "herd mentality" - a false social - that is existing in society and the media now, that really makes it seem better to be "alone".
Is it still possible to fight this? What way should one choose? With the radio station, for example, real people met at a real location in space and time and a real contact was there. Could the same achieved by creating a Facebook group, for example? Likely not.
With my own activity in the Hardcore scene, I feel I'm part of a community again - again a very magic community. But it was years of struggling, is almost invisible, more fragile than how it was in 2000.
But, there must be a way. Even if we have to find new methods. The fight will continue.
He wrote that if you managed to meet every week with a group of people that are "not your family or 'the people you know at work'", you already have attained the revolution - because you have fought the prime anti-social force of organized power that splits communities and the world in small peaces. Workplace and family were excluded as they were already "self-alienated" groups that were no harm to power, instead complicit with it.
Nowadays a lot more groups could be added to this category. And we have reached a situation were indeed many, many people spent their lives almost entirely at the workplace and their family - is the victory of "power" total?
So what I tried to do with my activities in the Hardcore scene was to give room to the social. That's why I was involved in the AuditivSex fanzine, the Hamburg Hardcore Radio, the All-Out Demolition! parties and so on - to give room for people to meet each other. For freaks to meet other freaks. To create a free community.
Now, I quickly realized this was no easy task. Because the people I met in Hardcore, especially end of the 90s and early 2000s, weren't exactly "social butterflies". They were loner types, often socially anxious or just liked to keep to themselves.
But, maybe paradoxically, at the same time, they were not uninterested in the social. So with the radio, or with parties, I indeed met weekly with people that were not "the people I know at work or my family". And, was it the revolution?
Yes, it was. I never felt so magical in my life. There was a true community of freaks that exchanged ideas and debates and just partying, and of course most of all, great music. There was a free exchange of emotions and thoughts that was not based on a community that stifled, but instead embraced each others individualism.
I don't say this to "boast", but to show that it was really possible.
Nowadays, I feel the rise of social media "paradoxically" is an even more severe attack on the social, and it gave rise to a very toxic all-encompassing false "individualism". False individualism is now marketed as a kind of "salvation" - people longing to be lonely. But in my opinion this is because of the toxic "herd mentality" - a false social - that is existing in society and the media now, that really makes it seem better to be "alone".
Is it still possible to fight this? What way should one choose? With the radio station, for example, real people met at a real location in space and time and a real contact was there. Could the same achieved by creating a Facebook group, for example? Likely not.
With my own activity in the Hardcore scene, I feel I'm part of a community again - again a very magic community. But it was years of struggling, is almost invisible, more fragile than how it was in 2000.
But, there must be a way. Even if we have to find new methods. The fight will continue.
On My Music - Part 2
I've sometimes been asked why I don't make (much) music in the style of my early period of music (1996-2004) anymore, like my LP on Widerstand or my digital release on Praxis for example. The reason for this is the following. My first period was fueled by vile opposition to the western world of music - from pop music to "classical" western music. I hated its ruled and codes and commands and limitations and tried to get as far away from it as possible. That's why I made Breakcore with weird sounds and otherwordly rhythms (or was it the other way round?). But in the end I realized I was fighting a losing battle. I used odd time signatures, but my tracks still had beats and drums and percussion. I used atonal scales but my tracks still had notes and "melody". So I still was close to western music, and still followed the ruled and commands and codes even if I didn't want to. The only way out for me was to banish music as a whole. My Breakcore and Industrial sounds were - still music, and for me, music has to be rejected - total. But what to do now? In a train of thought that I wrote down elsewhere, I made the choice to express ideas that can not expressed in music by using music. Techno, Doomcore and Speedcore were just the right template for this. The focus is not on the drum or the percussion, not even the melody, but the idea that is expressed by them. And the same idea could be expressed by Doomcore, or Folk Guitars, or Rapping, or Baroque Music - so the music itself, the genre, the sounds, faded into the background and only the idea keeps going on. It's like a cook who one day becomes a poet but doesn't publish them in a book, instead puts them (edible?) into the cakes at his restaurant. The music and all it's rules and mistakes and fallacies is negated to become only a tool for the communication of ideas. Now, I must admit, my hatred for music is not total. I do adore Doomcore and Techno and so on. But the important part is the idea.
The West And Islam
Regarding Islam, the west makes the same error it always does when regarding culture different to its own. There are two views; either different cultures are seen as generally good or generally bad. There is a lack of differentiation. I'm sure that most cultures, both in history as well as those that exist right now, are better - much better - than western society. But that does not mean that there are not some very bad things in *some* cultures - the oppression of women, prosecution of homosexuals and transgender persons, and so on, that can not be tolerated.
Likewise, the "World Of Islam" is seen as one monolith block - you're either for or against it, tolerate it or - not tolerate it. Of course this is far from the truth. There is not one Islamic culture. In Islamic nations there are atheists, Christians, anarchists, feminists, liberals, nihilists... In fact I'd say there is a much more serious force of anarchism within the territories of Islam composed of people who are real activists and ready to go to prison - or into worse fates - for their anarchist belief, while in the western world the anarchist movement more often or not is a "play house" for middle class boys and girls, safe, perfumed and secure.
Rather than condemning the Islamic world and culture as a whole, it'd be much more sensible to encourage these anarchist and nihilist radical forces within that realm. Of course the western mainstream will never do this; they'd rather side with the oppressors than these unruly rebels; just like the later allied forces rather let Franco and his falangists win the Spanish civil war instead of helping the anarchists in that era. Because authority likes authority and "democratic" authority rather sides with fascists or in our case with fanatical Islamic maniacs than side with people who fight for a free and just society.
But we, outside of this power spectrum, should show our sympathy and respect for these forces inside the territory of Islam fighting the good fight.
Likewise, the "World Of Islam" is seen as one monolith block - you're either for or against it, tolerate it or - not tolerate it. Of course this is far from the truth. There is not one Islamic culture. In Islamic nations there are atheists, Christians, anarchists, feminists, liberals, nihilists... In fact I'd say there is a much more serious force of anarchism within the territories of Islam composed of people who are real activists and ready to go to prison - or into worse fates - for their anarchist belief, while in the western world the anarchist movement more often or not is a "play house" for middle class boys and girls, safe, perfumed and secure.
Rather than condemning the Islamic world and culture as a whole, it'd be much more sensible to encourage these anarchist and nihilist radical forces within that realm. Of course the western mainstream will never do this; they'd rather side with the oppressors than these unruly rebels; just like the later allied forces rather let Franco and his falangists win the Spanish civil war instead of helping the anarchists in that era. Because authority likes authority and "democratic" authority rather sides with fascists or in our case with fanatical Islamic maniacs than side with people who fight for a free and just society.
But we, outside of this power spectrum, should show our sympathy and respect for these forces inside the territory of Islam fighting the good fight.
Music And Success
Others who came after me had much more "success" in music. Maybe I never had the chance at that, or lack of talent. But the truth is I took a lot of effort to not make this happen.
When I started doing music, the "Underground" attitude was in full effect. Making music for a larger audience? Heresy! Already playing at a party with more than 50 people in the crowd smelled of "treason" to the underground spirit. So when I later played my first gigs at Tresor, my former friends answered with ridicule. Playing at a Techno club! A big club! How could you dare!
The second reason was my mental health problems. If the little "success" I enjoyed in 2002-2003 already wrecked my mind, what would happen if this went to a larger scale?
But the most important reason was something different. I intent to have a specific effect with my music. To simplify it, let's call it a "psychedelic" effect. Music to feed your head, to break established concepts and notions you have in your mind, to wreck your notion of reality and go into ecstasy and beyond. Now, the things is that these techniques are not without risk. The effect might not be predictable. What if it has a negative effect on people, a "bad trip" or worse?
My excuse for spreading my music regardless was always that the people who find my music are likely experienced with these things; they're psychonauts or used to subversive and deviant music so they can handle this amount of "psychedelia". It's not likely that some EDM-dolly or Pop-head with no experience in these realms will suddenly be hit with this type of music.
So I thought it is much more safe if I limit the audience of my music to this, let's call it, "inner circle" of psychedelic Hardcore, and only rarely release it on bigger labels or get it to a larger audience.
For example in 2011 one of the biggest labels in "Industrial Hardcore" asked me for a release; and only in 2014 I felt it was safe to have some tracks released on that label, because my music had changed from negative content to more positive vibes.
There also seemed to be a kind of automatism to this effect; when I indeed did this "neg vibe" music, my audience was very limited indeed; and in 2014 when I tried for the most positive aspects, I reached way more people than before.
Still I had my phases of regret when I thought that, because of what I mentioned above, I should have not spread my music at all.
I'm not alone with this motion; Throbbing Gristle mentioned that when this type of music or art or concept enters the "social realm", things can get out of hand very quickly; that's why they aimed for doing music and collaborations etc. rather on an individual, than social level.
Still even with doing, or aiming at, purely "positive" music I feel this "Psycore" is not without danger; so it's important to use a lot of care with it. But I think, if one stays true to ones aim, maybe doing all this, doing this kind of music, is still the "right thing".
When I started doing music, the "Underground" attitude was in full effect. Making music for a larger audience? Heresy! Already playing at a party with more than 50 people in the crowd smelled of "treason" to the underground spirit. So when I later played my first gigs at Tresor, my former friends answered with ridicule. Playing at a Techno club! A big club! How could you dare!
The second reason was my mental health problems. If the little "success" I enjoyed in 2002-2003 already wrecked my mind, what would happen if this went to a larger scale?
But the most important reason was something different. I intent to have a specific effect with my music. To simplify it, let's call it a "psychedelic" effect. Music to feed your head, to break established concepts and notions you have in your mind, to wreck your notion of reality and go into ecstasy and beyond. Now, the things is that these techniques are not without risk. The effect might not be predictable. What if it has a negative effect on people, a "bad trip" or worse?
My excuse for spreading my music regardless was always that the people who find my music are likely experienced with these things; they're psychonauts or used to subversive and deviant music so they can handle this amount of "psychedelia". It's not likely that some EDM-dolly or Pop-head with no experience in these realms will suddenly be hit with this type of music.
So I thought it is much more safe if I limit the audience of my music to this, let's call it, "inner circle" of psychedelic Hardcore, and only rarely release it on bigger labels or get it to a larger audience.
For example in 2011 one of the biggest labels in "Industrial Hardcore" asked me for a release; and only in 2014 I felt it was safe to have some tracks released on that label, because my music had changed from negative content to more positive vibes.
There also seemed to be a kind of automatism to this effect; when I indeed did this "neg vibe" music, my audience was very limited indeed; and in 2014 when I tried for the most positive aspects, I reached way more people than before.
Still I had my phases of regret when I thought that, because of what I mentioned above, I should have not spread my music at all.
I'm not alone with this motion; Throbbing Gristle mentioned that when this type of music or art or concept enters the "social realm", things can get out of hand very quickly; that's why they aimed for doing music and collaborations etc. rather on an individual, than social level.
Still even with doing, or aiming at, purely "positive" music I feel this "Psycore" is not without danger; so it's important to use a lot of care with it. But I think, if one stays true to ones aim, maybe doing all this, doing this kind of music, is still the "right thing".
What is art? What is music?
We as humans live in a tangible, solid, very real world. But we also have the ability of abstract thoughts, and can think up ideas and ideals that have no real physical representation like the idea of "freedom" or mathematic formulas.
Now the problem is. Most people have not a very true, real connection to these ideals, even if they understand them and use them. They might know that 4/4=1 is correct. They might understand it. But they don't see the infinity beauty in it, the glamour, the splendor, the wonder, the amazement of this mathematic statement.
This is where art and music comes in. Techno has a 4/4 beat, and when listening to this beat they can feel some of the power and wonder that the to them otherwise banal statement 4/4=1 incorporates.
Art, music, books, movies essentially form an intermediary realm between the real world and abstract thinking, ideas and ideal. It makes ideals accessible to people. Take the ideal of "freedom". It was an ideal that inflamed millions, but to the normal westerner these days it often doesn't hold much glamour anymore. They don't fight for a revolution or other forms of large scale freedom anymore. But when they see a movie about a man or woman with a rebel spirit, a road movie for example, they can sense some of the power and magic the ideal "freedom" does possess.
Art and forms of art are something that is physical and can be touched, seen, recorded or listened, but at the same time it is rooted in the abstract and purely intellectual. It builds a bridge between these two things.
In a sense it is even preferable to purely ideal and abstract thinking; as it gives shape and forms to ideals and abstraction. But the ideal roots must not be forgotten.
More and more people are aware of this intermediary nature of art, as they try with cosplay, fan fiction, millions of other fan activities, movie binging, or creating art themselves, to put their "everyday life" closer to the world of art. And art is really in a world of its own.
Now the problem is. Most people have not a very true, real connection to these ideals, even if they understand them and use them. They might know that 4/4=1 is correct. They might understand it. But they don't see the infinity beauty in it, the glamour, the splendor, the wonder, the amazement of this mathematic statement.
This is where art and music comes in. Techno has a 4/4 beat, and when listening to this beat they can feel some of the power and wonder that the to them otherwise banal statement 4/4=1 incorporates.
Art, music, books, movies essentially form an intermediary realm between the real world and abstract thinking, ideas and ideal. It makes ideals accessible to people. Take the ideal of "freedom". It was an ideal that inflamed millions, but to the normal westerner these days it often doesn't hold much glamour anymore. They don't fight for a revolution or other forms of large scale freedom anymore. But when they see a movie about a man or woman with a rebel spirit, a road movie for example, they can sense some of the power and magic the ideal "freedom" does possess.
Art and forms of art are something that is physical and can be touched, seen, recorded or listened, but at the same time it is rooted in the abstract and purely intellectual. It builds a bridge between these two things.
In a sense it is even preferable to purely ideal and abstract thinking; as it gives shape and forms to ideals and abstraction. But the ideal roots must not be forgotten.
More and more people are aware of this intermediary nature of art, as they try with cosplay, fan fiction, millions of other fan activities, movie binging, or creating art themselves, to put their "everyday life" closer to the world of art. And art is really in a world of its own.
No One Needs Sex
The modern sex craze has reached it's high. If you turn on the television - modern sex. If you open the newspaper - modern sex. If you go to the web - modern sex. If there is a new music video, regardless of rap, rock, pop or dance you can be almost certain it's full of almost nude women swinging their "bits". If you read about celebrities it's quite likely it's about a new sex scandal. I followed some "high brow" radio or TV documentaries about famous artists and even there the narrator seemed to focus on the question - who did the artist have sex with? When Kafka's "porn collection" was discovered, this was news. Since then: his stories were not.
Modern sex is everywhere all all encompassing. And everyone is supposed to have modern sex - everyone needs his or her FWB or gets banged by his boss or prof. or have lovers on the side, and so on.
The underlying idea here is: you *need* to have sex. But no. You don't.
It's just a belief with extreme social pressure at its base. Just as medieval people thought they could not live without "god", so the modern westerner thinks he could not go without sex. But in both cases - they would not perish without their object of desire.
The media brainwash plays a huge role there - as you really cannot escape the media sex, people assume they could not escape sex at all.
This idea, that everyone needs sex, creates three problems:
Some people have it easy to get sex. Some "normally complicated". And for some it's hard.
For the latter group, to assume they depend on sex while it's unattainable will generate a lot of trouble. Low self-worth, anger, depression, even suicide. These people could have it so much easier if they just forget about their sex drive for a while.
Second, in the light of #MeToo, the idea that you *need* sex leads to a lot of dangerous ideas. The idea that man have an incontrollable sex drive so if they meet a beautiful model or celeb they are essentially bound to abuse her. What bullshit! And that the victim secretly wanted it too because all humans secretly want sex. Even worse bullshit.
The third problem is; if you're ruled by sex this is like being ruled by alcohol, by cocaine, by gambling and everything else. If you can't get free of your sex drive, you are not a free man.
A lot of people think you can't get free of sexual desires; first, who said "all free" is the starting point; curbing them a bit would already be worthwhile. Second, "modern sex" is to a large part an illusion, a mass media product. People stick to it because they believe in it like a religion; and they behave like it then because they believe it, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. But like any religion, you won"t get hit by lightning if you leave that religion.
It's possible to overcome your sex drive and the sex craze. It can be done. No one needs sex.
But the point is not to be anti-sex. Have as much sex as you want. But don't be frustrated when you have none for a while.
And don't let yourself be controlled by your desires. Learn to control your desires.
I will also add that almost spiritual paths involve curbing your sex life a bit. Maybe they got something right?
Modern sex is everywhere all all encompassing. And everyone is supposed to have modern sex - everyone needs his or her FWB or gets banged by his boss or prof. or have lovers on the side, and so on.
The underlying idea here is: you *need* to have sex. But no. You don't.
It's just a belief with extreme social pressure at its base. Just as medieval people thought they could not live without "god", so the modern westerner thinks he could not go without sex. But in both cases - they would not perish without their object of desire.
The media brainwash plays a huge role there - as you really cannot escape the media sex, people assume they could not escape sex at all.
This idea, that everyone needs sex, creates three problems:
Some people have it easy to get sex. Some "normally complicated". And for some it's hard.
For the latter group, to assume they depend on sex while it's unattainable will generate a lot of trouble. Low self-worth, anger, depression, even suicide. These people could have it so much easier if they just forget about their sex drive for a while.
Second, in the light of #MeToo, the idea that you *need* sex leads to a lot of dangerous ideas. The idea that man have an incontrollable sex drive so if they meet a beautiful model or celeb they are essentially bound to abuse her. What bullshit! And that the victim secretly wanted it too because all humans secretly want sex. Even worse bullshit.
The third problem is; if you're ruled by sex this is like being ruled by alcohol, by cocaine, by gambling and everything else. If you can't get free of your sex drive, you are not a free man.
A lot of people think you can't get free of sexual desires; first, who said "all free" is the starting point; curbing them a bit would already be worthwhile. Second, "modern sex" is to a large part an illusion, a mass media product. People stick to it because they believe in it like a religion; and they behave like it then because they believe it, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. But like any religion, you won"t get hit by lightning if you leave that religion.
It's possible to overcome your sex drive and the sex craze. It can be done. No one needs sex.
But the point is not to be anti-sex. Have as much sex as you want. But don't be frustrated when you have none for a while.
And don't let yourself be controlled by your desires. Learn to control your desires.
I will also add that almost spiritual paths involve curbing your sex life a bit. Maybe they got something right?
Rising Above The Everyday World
the everyday world is an illusion. i don't mean this in a metaphysical sense; the atoms and walls are "really there". what i mean is that the ideology of the everyday world is illusionary. for example, people strive for money and buy things and think that would make them happy; but it won't. or they think if they would be famous, like a rockstar, they would be happy; but they won't. so people in this society live a life fueled by illusion from the cradle to the grave.
a lot of groups in the 20th century realized this; the surrealists, the hippies, the punks, a lot of ravers... they realized how shallow and empty the everyday world is. but the more sophisticated amongst them all made the same error: they thought in order to escape the everyday misery, they needed to go *below* the illusion; towards bare reality without the societial ideology. and this was the deadest dead end one could imagine; and a lot of them quit these efforts very fast and rotated back to the illusions of the everyday society; if they not found a worse fate and wrecked their lifes in this quest for "reality".
the truth is that this attempt can be compared to a person living in prison, who is fed by the dream of being again free some day in the future; if he quits that dream, all he has is the everyday prison experience; horrible. if you believe in societies lies while being stuck in them, at least you have some solace; if you're disillusioned but still have to face society each day, this is worse.
so what is the solution? not going below the illusion, but *above* it. to free yourself from the limits of everyday society; to became an idealist. to dream, to believe in adventure, in freedom, in justice, in liberty, in hope and truth; and sticking to these dreams and ideals. this way you can truly rise above everyday society, forget about the boredom and dread of the so-called "real world", and truly be free.
a lot of groups in the 20th century realized this; the surrealists, the hippies, the punks, a lot of ravers... they realized how shallow and empty the everyday world is. but the more sophisticated amongst them all made the same error: they thought in order to escape the everyday misery, they needed to go *below* the illusion; towards bare reality without the societial ideology. and this was the deadest dead end one could imagine; and a lot of them quit these efforts very fast and rotated back to the illusions of the everyday society; if they not found a worse fate and wrecked their lifes in this quest for "reality".
the truth is that this attempt can be compared to a person living in prison, who is fed by the dream of being again free some day in the future; if he quits that dream, all he has is the everyday prison experience; horrible. if you believe in societies lies while being stuck in them, at least you have some solace; if you're disillusioned but still have to face society each day, this is worse.
so what is the solution? not going below the illusion, but *above* it. to free yourself from the limits of everyday society; to became an idealist. to dream, to believe in adventure, in freedom, in justice, in liberty, in hope and truth; and sticking to these dreams and ideals. this way you can truly rise above everyday society, forget about the boredom and dread of the so-called "real world", and truly be free.
Idealism And Art
Some people are in the art or music scene to take more than they give. There are a lot of them; these guys and girls are leeches parasite.
Now, a lot of people would think it should be a balance: to get around the same amount that you give; i.e. if you use creativity, time, mental strain and so on on your art or music, you should get something in return: recognition, money, whatever.
But that's not true. If you want to be an artist, you have to be willing to give more than you get back; or to give and get nothing in return. Because if you're a creative person you're likely an idealist; and idealists get only punishment in this world. But it's still worth doing it - exactly, and purely for the idealism.
It's complicated to talk about myself, because in such a context it's close to an ego thing. But I want to give an example of what i try to "give". I know one thing: that the society we live in right now can be abolished, and we can instead create an anarchist society based on pure freedom, pure justice, pure rightiousness and equality. Now, in the 1990s knowing this meant nothing. A million girls and boys around the world believed the same thing in the various subcultures. But I noticed, now, in 2018, and the years before, a lot of people have a hard time believing this thing. They either think that they're stuck with capitalism, or IF a revolution or breakdown of society happens, the society that would replace it would be much worse. But this is of course not true.
On a personal level, there is a similar thing. People have shitty jobs or are outsiders or have mental health problems or are in another shitty life situation. And again, they think they're stuck. But that's not the truth. You can change your life and rise above this. Again, there are not many people left who knows actually rather simple, banal but exact and imporant truth.
So these are the two thoughts I want to share with my music.
To get back to the beginning point; if you're an idealist, even if you gain nothing (and very likely, you indeed will gain nothing), and even though it's worth doing it purely for idealism; by being an idealist you will gain much more than money or fans or wealth or power or whatever your ego craves. Money and fame are a trap. They will disappear over night. It's an illusion. Look at what happens to rockstars; they commit suicide. Not despite their wealth, not despite being adored. But exactly because of that. Because money and fame are a burden that is almost impossible to stem for a human mind. It will drive you insane.
Being an idealist will give you peace of mind, happiness, rest, stability, everything you can wish for basically. So choose wisely.
Now, a lot of people would think it should be a balance: to get around the same amount that you give; i.e. if you use creativity, time, mental strain and so on on your art or music, you should get something in return: recognition, money, whatever.
But that's not true. If you want to be an artist, you have to be willing to give more than you get back; or to give and get nothing in return. Because if you're a creative person you're likely an idealist; and idealists get only punishment in this world. But it's still worth doing it - exactly, and purely for the idealism.
It's complicated to talk about myself, because in such a context it's close to an ego thing. But I want to give an example of what i try to "give". I know one thing: that the society we live in right now can be abolished, and we can instead create an anarchist society based on pure freedom, pure justice, pure rightiousness and equality. Now, in the 1990s knowing this meant nothing. A million girls and boys around the world believed the same thing in the various subcultures. But I noticed, now, in 2018, and the years before, a lot of people have a hard time believing this thing. They either think that they're stuck with capitalism, or IF a revolution or breakdown of society happens, the society that would replace it would be much worse. But this is of course not true.
On a personal level, there is a similar thing. People have shitty jobs or are outsiders or have mental health problems or are in another shitty life situation. And again, they think they're stuck. But that's not the truth. You can change your life and rise above this. Again, there are not many people left who knows actually rather simple, banal but exact and imporant truth.
So these are the two thoughts I want to share with my music.
To get back to the beginning point; if you're an idealist, even if you gain nothing (and very likely, you indeed will gain nothing), and even though it's worth doing it purely for idealism; by being an idealist you will gain much more than money or fans or wealth or power or whatever your ego craves. Money and fame are a trap. They will disappear over night. It's an illusion. Look at what happens to rockstars; they commit suicide. Not despite their wealth, not despite being adored. But exactly because of that. Because money and fame are a burden that is almost impossible to stem for a human mind. It will drive you insane.
Being an idealist will give you peace of mind, happiness, rest, stability, everything you can wish for basically. So choose wisely.
What Is To Be Done?
I'm often asked: what can the individual do to change the world, to create a different society, a peaceful anarchy?
I think the answer to this is very simple. It's just obfuscated by a concept that is burned so deeply into the western mind and western society: that "talk" is less powerful than "action", that "thoughts" are weaker than "tangible activity".
Activism is always seen through that lens; there are politicians, there is big business, oppressing us. How can "we" attack them on the direct level?
Or: How is a peaceful egalitarian society possible? How can I act towards creating it in my everyday life?
This way of viewing things is useless. If you directly attack power, you will get arrested or worse. If you try to create an anarchist society on your own or with limited people "right now" you won't get far.
So what is the answer?
I believe thoughts, ideals and rationality are the root of human existence and human society. They shape human life, human personality and society. Society is run according to its ideology. A human's life is defined by the ideals he has got.
There are so many ideas in this world that spell oppression, injustice, violence, misery.
We just need to spread ideas that counter these. Ideas of freedom, of rebellion, of equality and exploration and ecstasy.
The tangible world will follow the ideas of that world. If enough people truly believe in the possibility of organized anarchy, they will - almost automatically - eventually sit down and create these societies. While if only a minority believes in these ideas, all "individual" attempts to create such societies will fail.
But even if "worldwide change" is a far away goal - if we spread ideas of rebellion and freedom and exploration, of courage and intellect, we will make an impact and start to change people; to the better.
And you will see, out of this "idealistic activism" - regardless how much people doubt this - a lot of tangible possibilities, projects, changes, communities will arise - almost automatically.
So how to go on with this?
You know the direction your ideas and ideals should be - anarchist, free, utopian, rebellious, creative. Make sure they are as pure, perfect and positive as possible - just like ideals should be. You can spread them simply by talking to people; or feature them in art, music stories. Use your mind! You will find a way.
The most powerful ideal is "truth"; you might doubt it, but even simply by telling the truth; about the government, capitalist lies, the world we live in; you can make an impact. And if others would follow you, you can change the world.
I think the answer to this is very simple. It's just obfuscated by a concept that is burned so deeply into the western mind and western society: that "talk" is less powerful than "action", that "thoughts" are weaker than "tangible activity".
Activism is always seen through that lens; there are politicians, there is big business, oppressing us. How can "we" attack them on the direct level?
Or: How is a peaceful egalitarian society possible? How can I act towards creating it in my everyday life?
This way of viewing things is useless. If you directly attack power, you will get arrested or worse. If you try to create an anarchist society on your own or with limited people "right now" you won't get far.
So what is the answer?
I believe thoughts, ideals and rationality are the root of human existence and human society. They shape human life, human personality and society. Society is run according to its ideology. A human's life is defined by the ideals he has got.
There are so many ideas in this world that spell oppression, injustice, violence, misery.
We just need to spread ideas that counter these. Ideas of freedom, of rebellion, of equality and exploration and ecstasy.
The tangible world will follow the ideas of that world. If enough people truly believe in the possibility of organized anarchy, they will - almost automatically - eventually sit down and create these societies. While if only a minority believes in these ideas, all "individual" attempts to create such societies will fail.
But even if "worldwide change" is a far away goal - if we spread ideas of rebellion and freedom and exploration, of courage and intellect, we will make an impact and start to change people; to the better.
And you will see, out of this "idealistic activism" - regardless how much people doubt this - a lot of tangible possibilities, projects, changes, communities will arise - almost automatically.
So how to go on with this?
You know the direction your ideas and ideals should be - anarchist, free, utopian, rebellious, creative. Make sure they are as pure, perfect and positive as possible - just like ideals should be. You can spread them simply by talking to people; or feature them in art, music stories. Use your mind! You will find a way.
The most powerful ideal is "truth"; you might doubt it, but even simply by telling the truth; about the government, capitalist lies, the world we live in; you can make an impact. And if others would follow you, you can change the world.
Human Idealism
I talked about Idealism. Historically, philosophical Idealism is usually associated with enlightenment era Idealism. This was mostly metaphysical Idealism; to give a simplified description, the idea that ideas and thoughts are the root of the universe and existence, not physical matter and energy. Regardless, the word Idealism generally means a worldview in which ideas are seen as the root.
When I talk about Idealism, it's maybe better to call it Human Idealism. I believe that rationality is the driving force of human existence and personality, and therefore of human society. Ideas and ideals appeal to rationality and are its most powerful agents. Therefore, Ideals are the root of human existence and society.
This clashes with two theories that are widespread.
One, the materialistic view of society. The idea that economic or political structures define society. The king, the prime minister, big business. I rather believe a society's ideology totally defines it's structure. Its ideas, its concepts, its thoughts. There were kings until the idea of monarchy died. There will be the power of big business until the idea of Capitalism dies.
Second, the psychoanalytical idea of the subconsciousness. The idea that humans are ruled by unconscious, hidden, lower urges and desires. I think on the contrary that humans are ruled by rationality, by the very conscious ideals and ideas they have. Rationality is always a much stronger force in human personality than the most powerful desire. If this is not the case for some humans, it is because their rationality is not very developed yet.
This is the idea of Idealism. Ideals and rationality are the true roots of being in this human world.
When I talk about Idealism, it's maybe better to call it Human Idealism. I believe that rationality is the driving force of human existence and personality, and therefore of human society. Ideas and ideals appeal to rationality and are its most powerful agents. Therefore, Ideals are the root of human existence and society.
This clashes with two theories that are widespread.
One, the materialistic view of society. The idea that economic or political structures define society. The king, the prime minister, big business. I rather believe a society's ideology totally defines it's structure. Its ideas, its concepts, its thoughts. There were kings until the idea of monarchy died. There will be the power of big business until the idea of Capitalism dies.
Second, the psychoanalytical idea of the subconsciousness. The idea that humans are ruled by unconscious, hidden, lower urges and desires. I think on the contrary that humans are ruled by rationality, by the very conscious ideals and ideas they have. Rationality is always a much stronger force in human personality than the most powerful desire. If this is not the case for some humans, it is because their rationality is not very developed yet.
This is the idea of Idealism. Ideals and rationality are the true roots of being in this human world.
Bullies And Rebellion
I wasn't exactly a rebel as a child. Well, in a sense I was maybe. I hated cops and the government and authority and shocked my parents with my talk about anarchism. But apart from that... I tried with extreme force to fit in. Follow all the rules. Be a good boy. Do what the teacher says. What the adults demand. I was worried very much that somehow I would fail at fitting in to society.
This all changed when the bullying started (I wrote more about this elsewhere). My bullies threatened to kill me, and I thought they would (and still think they could have). I realized three things out of this. First, my good grades and good behavior won't help me here. They were worthless. Second, the whole system makes no sense. You go to school to get a good job, for the chance to be successful in life. But at the very schools you might get killed or traumatized for life by schoolyard bullies, teacher sexual abuse and so on. How paradox!
And the most important thing, "fitting in" in my situation could mean death. This was a red line I couldn't cross.
At first I tried to reason with myself to find some other way out of this. But the first sparks of rebellion were awakened in me. So I became a rebel. This, for example gave me the inner strength to get a school degree after all. I never could have gone through with it in another way. What was funny was that the everyday adults, who I hated now, like my neighbors, suddenly respected me more. "He seems so to have so much more self esteem now!". If they only knew what I thought about them.
Much later, at one of the All-Out Demolition! parties I met one of my further bullies again, and even he was pleased by the way I had become.
So rebellion does not only work, sometimes it is necessary path of life and you can't do without it.
This all changed when the bullying started (I wrote more about this elsewhere). My bullies threatened to kill me, and I thought they would (and still think they could have). I realized three things out of this. First, my good grades and good behavior won't help me here. They were worthless. Second, the whole system makes no sense. You go to school to get a good job, for the chance to be successful in life. But at the very schools you might get killed or traumatized for life by schoolyard bullies, teacher sexual abuse and so on. How paradox!
And the most important thing, "fitting in" in my situation could mean death. This was a red line I couldn't cross.
At first I tried to reason with myself to find some other way out of this. But the first sparks of rebellion were awakened in me. So I became a rebel. This, for example gave me the inner strength to get a school degree after all. I never could have gone through with it in another way. What was funny was that the everyday adults, who I hated now, like my neighbors, suddenly respected me more. "He seems so to have so much more self esteem now!". If they only knew what I thought about them.
Much later, at one of the All-Out Demolition! parties I met one of my further bullies again, and even he was pleased by the way I had become.
So rebellion does not only work, sometimes it is necessary path of life and you can't do without it.
Spaced Out Producing
I don't do drugs, but a variety of things can get me high; one of them is music (and one of them is pain for some odd reason). And more than that, producing music can get me high. This is how I done music in 2009-2015. I tried to create sounds that started to trip me out, then go along with the trip while building the track. I would start to space out and my fingers where moving almost automatically while producing. And I got on some really good trips and reached some really good highs that way.
This is an understatement. I reached highs of a cosmic quality this way.
Coming down after this was not always easy as I often was a bit disoriented and had trouble speaking clearly or thinking. My tracks also confused me when I listened to them "sober" again; 'did I create this?' 'and how did I create this?'
The tracks were my personal trip diaries.
Because of this, I assumed they would be of little interest to the outside world, but to the contrary, these were often the tracks I got the best feedback on. "The advent of acid" was produced this way, and "Really into this space stuff" and "Fourth Uprising" and countless of others.
Definitely an interesting experience, and probably a safer high then when doing real psychedelics.
This is an understatement. I reached highs of a cosmic quality this way.
Coming down after this was not always easy as I often was a bit disoriented and had trouble speaking clearly or thinking. My tracks also confused me when I listened to them "sober" again; 'did I create this?' 'and how did I create this?'
The tracks were my personal trip diaries.
Because of this, I assumed they would be of little interest to the outside world, but to the contrary, these were often the tracks I got the best feedback on. "The advent of acid" was produced this way, and "Really into this space stuff" and "Fourth Uprising" and countless of others.
Definitely an interesting experience, and probably a safer high then when doing real psychedelics.
Post Rational Blur
I read an article on "Critical Whiteness Studies", which tries to expose and analyze white privileged, especially on terrains such as culture and language. The interesting part was the section of criticism of the whiteness studies. Avoiding "white" language could generate the problem of discriminating against people with less access to academic "education" and these studies, that use normal everyday language that could be seen as "white" without being aware of it or having evil intent.
Now I don't want to talk about "whiteness" or political correctness. But what we see here is the problem the western world faces right now. Concepts are deconstructed, rationally analyzed, criticized. But the criticism, the deconstruction, the analysis itself gets in the focus of rational deconstruction. And so on. Leading to total nihilism and chaos, a state where you can trust or believe in nothing anymore.
And this is the appeal of fascism. The fascists don't follow this path. They don't question their belief-system all the time. They don't use their rationality on it. Imagine a fictional Joe McBob from Texas; he was raised with racist views by his father. His friends believed in racism. He stays racist all his life because he never really sat down and rationally questioned his belief.
People admire racist, fascist and rightwing ideas because they're dumb. There is nothing rational about them. You don't have to be smart to believe them. These concepts avoid the "post-rational blur" that I mentioned. Rational critique can not touch them, because they are not rational.
The non-fascists on the other hand will for example criticize capitalism. So, they follow socialism instead. But then socialism gets criticized too. So they choose a "third way" position or maybe anarchism. But this gets criticized too. And so on. But our racists believe that whites are superior but never criticize that belief. That's how they can keep this belief.
What is the solution to this problem then? There are two problems with the "post-rational blur" of the leftists and cultural critics; or rather with the whole of western intellectualism. Which is that it is anti-idealist.
Ideals like freedom, justice, equality, rebellion or anarchy are perfect, spotless, eternal. These are things you can believe in, and you can keep that belief. They are in many senses above critique. Because they are perfect, critique can not touch them. But our westerners will think things like "real equality is impossible" or "there is no true freedom", "anarchy is impossible" or even - the worst of all - "there is no real goodness". If they only knew how wrong they are! This is the very problem.
The second thing that this wayward "rationalism" is anti-rational. It tempts people to stop rational thinking. Say you build a prototype and it doesn't work. On this experience you build a better one but there are still problems. What do you do now? You continue. Even if you have to come up with ten prototypes and "fixes". The same should be done with rational criticism. If there are problems with the criticism of "whiteness"; fix them. If there are still problems, fix these too. But continue to use your rational mind; even if it includes not over-analyzing some things.
These are the problems, and this is what we ought to do; keep rationalism idealistic, and, above all, rational.
Now I don't want to talk about "whiteness" or political correctness. But what we see here is the problem the western world faces right now. Concepts are deconstructed, rationally analyzed, criticized. But the criticism, the deconstruction, the analysis itself gets in the focus of rational deconstruction. And so on. Leading to total nihilism and chaos, a state where you can trust or believe in nothing anymore.
And this is the appeal of fascism. The fascists don't follow this path. They don't question their belief-system all the time. They don't use their rationality on it. Imagine a fictional Joe McBob from Texas; he was raised with racist views by his father. His friends believed in racism. He stays racist all his life because he never really sat down and rationally questioned his belief.
People admire racist, fascist and rightwing ideas because they're dumb. There is nothing rational about them. You don't have to be smart to believe them. These concepts avoid the "post-rational blur" that I mentioned. Rational critique can not touch them, because they are not rational.
The non-fascists on the other hand will for example criticize capitalism. So, they follow socialism instead. But then socialism gets criticized too. So they choose a "third way" position or maybe anarchism. But this gets criticized too. And so on. But our racists believe that whites are superior but never criticize that belief. That's how they can keep this belief.
What is the solution to this problem then? There are two problems with the "post-rational blur" of the leftists and cultural critics; or rather with the whole of western intellectualism. Which is that it is anti-idealist.
Ideals like freedom, justice, equality, rebellion or anarchy are perfect, spotless, eternal. These are things you can believe in, and you can keep that belief. They are in many senses above critique. Because they are perfect, critique can not touch them. But our westerners will think things like "real equality is impossible" or "there is no true freedom", "anarchy is impossible" or even - the worst of all - "there is no real goodness". If they only knew how wrong they are! This is the very problem.
The second thing that this wayward "rationalism" is anti-rational. It tempts people to stop rational thinking. Say you build a prototype and it doesn't work. On this experience you build a better one but there are still problems. What do you do now? You continue. Even if you have to come up with ten prototypes and "fixes". The same should be done with rational criticism. If there are problems with the criticism of "whiteness"; fix them. If there are still problems, fix these too. But continue to use your rational mind; even if it includes not over-analyzing some things.
These are the problems, and this is what we ought to do; keep rationalism idealistic, and, above all, rational.
Change And Responsibility
Art changes the world and people's lives. In the past, only very few people - the "stars" - could reach a larger audience, and often only with a select output (cue all the unreleased demos, jams and b-sides).
Nowadays someone coming from nowhere can reach 100,000s, even millions of people.
That means his art has an influence on and possibly change thousands of lives and many more, and has a large impact on the world.
With great power comes great responsibility.
What if you change peoples life to the worse? Not even by intent?
How do artists deal with this responsibility? What would you suggest?
Nowadays someone coming from nowhere can reach 100,000s, even millions of people.
That means his art has an influence on and possibly change thousands of lives and many more, and has a large impact on the world.
With great power comes great responsibility.
What if you change peoples life to the worse? Not even by intent?
How do artists deal with this responsibility? What would you suggest?
Art And Responsibility
In the beginning, I always tried to steer clear of big labels, big parties, large audiences. At first this was because I was a follower of the theorist Hakim Bey; and he urgently warned against these things. When I advanced beyond the ideas of Hakim Bey, I finally started to play gigs regularly, even at places like Tresor in Berlin, something I would have never done in my first years. Yet at the core I still was sceptical of any "larger" approach so I kept it at that.
I got into other ideas and other theorists later in my life.
I tried to keep my profile still low. It was no longer a question of tactics, but of responsibility. Art changes the world and people's life. Should an artist really have and / or use that power?
Throbbing Gristle for example warned against any approach to art that goes beyond the "output is shared between individuals" level, because, as they said, if art enters the social or even political level, things get dangerous very quickly (I don't remember the exact quote but you get the point).
I posted my music on a lot of forums but tried to make my releases unappealing, for example by using cryptic titles like "Doomcore 2", "Futuristic 3" or lack of cover pictures and lack of decriptions, so that only "individuals" who saw beyond this would listen to my music.
This all changed when I became an idealist. Ideals cannot be tainted or corrupted and are always positive. So I thought, if someone makes art based on ideals, only positive change can come from such an art.
Now it became imperative to spread such art as far as possible, and I reached numbers such as 100,000 plays with some of my tracks.
Still something told me to steer away from most of the bigger labels and organisations.
Recently, it came to my knowledge that such a way of thought might be a bit naive.
Yes, Ideals are perfect. But if you create art or a track, this is no longer idealism, it might become corrupted. If you put it into the world, it might become corrupted.
And then art can have a very negative effect on people and the world.
I don't know if my first idealistic theory was right, or the latter theory.
Since I got these doubts, I essentially stopped producing original tracks, with very few exceptions.
What would be the solution? I think only time will tell. One way might be something that I had detested the most in the past: to leave the political level, to make unpolitical art. The other, to leave the social level in art, to make music for select individuals again who can handle the content.
But there most be a better way!
I got into other ideas and other theorists later in my life.
I tried to keep my profile still low. It was no longer a question of tactics, but of responsibility. Art changes the world and people's life. Should an artist really have and / or use that power?
Throbbing Gristle for example warned against any approach to art that goes beyond the "output is shared between individuals" level, because, as they said, if art enters the social or even political level, things get dangerous very quickly (I don't remember the exact quote but you get the point).
I posted my music on a lot of forums but tried to make my releases unappealing, for example by using cryptic titles like "Doomcore 2", "Futuristic 3" or lack of cover pictures and lack of decriptions, so that only "individuals" who saw beyond this would listen to my music.
This all changed when I became an idealist. Ideals cannot be tainted or corrupted and are always positive. So I thought, if someone makes art based on ideals, only positive change can come from such an art.
Now it became imperative to spread such art as far as possible, and I reached numbers such as 100,000 plays with some of my tracks.
Still something told me to steer away from most of the bigger labels and organisations.
Recently, it came to my knowledge that such a way of thought might be a bit naive.
Yes, Ideals are perfect. But if you create art or a track, this is no longer idealism, it might become corrupted. If you put it into the world, it might become corrupted.
And then art can have a very negative effect on people and the world.
I don't know if my first idealistic theory was right, or the latter theory.
Since I got these doubts, I essentially stopped producing original tracks, with very few exceptions.
What would be the solution? I think only time will tell. One way might be something that I had detested the most in the past: to leave the political level, to make unpolitical art. The other, to leave the social level in art, to make music for select individuals again who can handle the content.
But there most be a better way!
Hypernormalisation
Hypernormalisation is a documentary by Adam Curtis that was recommended to me. It is definitely worth watching. He makes a lot of valid and interesting points, of which I found these four the most interesting:
1. The capitalistic world order is collapsing and it's getting worse each year. Wholeheartedly agree with that one.
2. The mass media and social media creates an illusionary reality that is fake in which this collapse is not mentioned e.g. there is no capitalist crisis in the 'adventures' of the Kardashians or in Geordie Shore, life is just fun and party etc etc. Again, I agree.
3. Not mentioned, but implied is that a way out would be to leave this fake reality and face the complexity of the real world below it again. Can't agree here.
Instead of going "below" to the everyday reality, we need to go "above" to the realm of ideals, ideas, theories, ideology, abstract thinking. In a sense, the general citizen is right to escape into this fake safe reality provided by the media; anyone who would face the dire everyday world 24 hours a day would go insane within a few days as "everyday reality" is so corrupting to the mind.
But that behavior is not the right solution; we need to go above this illusion.
4. But what was really interesting, and completely new to me, was that there is a method to the madness of phenomenas like Trump etc: that method is creating a world which is total chaos, where nothing is true or right or persistant or safe. He threatens North Korea with nukes; then the threat is off; then it's on again; then a meeting for peace is announced; then it's called off; then it's on again, and so on. It's a new political strategy aimed at total confusion. Similar things make their way to Europe and the rest of the world.
1. The capitalistic world order is collapsing and it's getting worse each year. Wholeheartedly agree with that one.
2. The mass media and social media creates an illusionary reality that is fake in which this collapse is not mentioned e.g. there is no capitalist crisis in the 'adventures' of the Kardashians or in Geordie Shore, life is just fun and party etc etc. Again, I agree.
3. Not mentioned, but implied is that a way out would be to leave this fake reality and face the complexity of the real world below it again. Can't agree here.
Instead of going "below" to the everyday reality, we need to go "above" to the realm of ideals, ideas, theories, ideology, abstract thinking. In a sense, the general citizen is right to escape into this fake safe reality provided by the media; anyone who would face the dire everyday world 24 hours a day would go insane within a few days as "everyday reality" is so corrupting to the mind.
But that behavior is not the right solution; we need to go above this illusion.
4. But what was really interesting, and completely new to me, was that there is a method to the madness of phenomenas like Trump etc: that method is creating a world which is total chaos, where nothing is true or right or persistant or safe. He threatens North Korea with nukes; then the threat is off; then it's on again; then a meeting for peace is announced; then it's called off; then it's on again, and so on. It's a new political strategy aimed at total confusion. Similar things make their way to Europe and the rest of the world.
My Dilemma
There are many reasons why I don't play live gigs in the moment. One is the following. When I discovered Hardcore in 1996 until 2000, I went to the record stores, parties, parades, I produced music on my own. But I was not really part of the scene. I didn't organise parties. I didn't play live or as a DJ. Me and very few friends heard the music I produced on my own every weekend night. It was not put out on vinyl EPs or LPs.
Then, in 2000, I ventured straight into the scene. The first 12" was released, I played gigs, did a radio show, zine, tapes, CD-R label, I played Nordcore, and Tresor and and and... and I can't deny this gave me great pleasure - the happiest I've been in my life. But it also destroyed me. It ate me up from the inside. Was pulling on my heart, soul and mind. The truth is my life was better when I was still "alone".
The years when I discovered Hardcore, before I ventured out into the scene, everything in my life was going uphill. Afterwards, everything went downhill. And it nearly destroyed me for good and for real and almost ended my life - I wrote about that chain of events in other posts already.
So, for my own protection, I need to draw the line somewhere, to cut things off a bit. And this is why I don't play at parties physically in the moment.
Of course, I realise I can't hide forever. Eventually I have to venture out into the "real world" with my music again... maybe sometime soon...
Then, in 2000, I ventured straight into the scene. The first 12" was released, I played gigs, did a radio show, zine, tapes, CD-R label, I played Nordcore, and Tresor and and and... and I can't deny this gave me great pleasure - the happiest I've been in my life. But it also destroyed me. It ate me up from the inside. Was pulling on my heart, soul and mind. The truth is my life was better when I was still "alone".
The years when I discovered Hardcore, before I ventured out into the scene, everything in my life was going uphill. Afterwards, everything went downhill. And it nearly destroyed me for good and for real and almost ended my life - I wrote about that chain of events in other posts already.
So, for my own protection, I need to draw the line somewhere, to cut things off a bit. And this is why I don't play at parties physically in the moment.
Of course, I realise I can't hide forever. Eventually I have to venture out into the "real world" with my music again... maybe sometime soon...
Ideologies
All ideologies of the 19th and 20th century; communism, fascism, capitalism, democracy, liberalism, socialism were based on the same lethal fallacy, that did not exist in this way for example in medievel times or outside western society: that you should realise your ideals, that you should put your theories into reality; that the word "true" has the same meaning as the word "real".
Marx And The Ideal
Marx turned 200 a few days ago. The relationship of us anarchists and Marx is quite complicated; some anarchist thinkers embraced Marx economic analysis of capitalism and rejected his statism; others rejected all of Marx.
With Idealist Anarchism, it is even more extreme: Marx work is a virulent and dangerous form of materialism that leaves not much room for any kind of idealism, and his work influenced and empowered anti-idealist and materialist movements in society often to a high degree.
But there is something to be said about Marx, IN regard of idealism.
Marx' work changed the world in the 19th and 20th century, maybe more than any other person's effort did. He took half the world away from capitalism and half the world followed him.
How did he manage to do this? Not by commandeering an army; not by being a president; or taking up a gun or a bomb or any other form of tangible activity in the real world; but by pickin up a pen and writing a book. This is the effect of doing something rational, intellectual, ideal on the world. The true power of the rational and the idealistic.
It is possible to change the face of the world forever; all you need to do is to sit down and write a book. And we set out to change the world.
With Idealist Anarchism, it is even more extreme: Marx work is a virulent and dangerous form of materialism that leaves not much room for any kind of idealism, and his work influenced and empowered anti-idealist and materialist movements in society often to a high degree.
But there is something to be said about Marx, IN regard of idealism.
Marx' work changed the world in the 19th and 20th century, maybe more than any other person's effort did. He took half the world away from capitalism and half the world followed him.
How did he manage to do this? Not by commandeering an army; not by being a president; or taking up a gun or a bomb or any other form of tangible activity in the real world; but by pickin up a pen and writing a book. This is the effect of doing something rational, intellectual, ideal on the world. The true power of the rational and the idealistic.
It is possible to change the face of the world forever; all you need to do is to sit down and write a book. And we set out to change the world.
Chemtrails, Satan, Exorcism - What Happened To Me
I talked about my mental health problems that made me temporarily quit Hardcore before. But I want to get into more detail.
When the Experimental Hardcore scene collapsed somewhen after the year 2000, I fell into a deep hole of depression. The thing that I spent most of my energy, creativity, thoughts on was no longer there. And I felt no hope or chance to escape this hole. At the same time I discovered the writings of Wilhelm Reich. He talked about the futility of the human world and how it's impossible for humans to attain something true and meaningful because of their "nature". I felt connected to that. Wasn't this the very reason the Experimental and political Hardcore scene collapsed? Maybe, if I got more into the teachings of Reich, I could find a solution after all... That's what I thought. But Reich also had esoteric, spiritual, occult ideas. At first I rejected them. I was always a rationalist after all. But eventually they started to grow on me. Remember that I was in a depressed and pretty desperate state of mind. These ideas at least provided some (false) truth and solace... That's what I felt. Eventually I became a convert to Reich. I started to believe in the esoteric and occult. I started to read more and about related topics. Satanism interested me. I put the 13 statements of Satanist faith of the Satanic Bible on the wall of my bedroom. I tried to conjure up demons.
In his later life, Reich claimed he invented a "Cloudbuster" that would communicate with atmospheric energy. I got to know there was a movement related to this, that claimed they would fight "Chemtrails" with Reichian "Chembusters". It's strange to look back at it, but I really believed that back then. Remember my frail state of mind in that time. So I joined this group and built a "Chembuster" and set up Chembusters for friends too. This was the time my mind deteriorated way more, and I felt myself threatened by negative forces and demons. I was doing "astral projection" where you imagine yourself to travel out of your body, and in one of these imagined sequences a creature ripped me out of my body and sent me straight to hell, where I was burned by black fire. Now I know this was just imagined but in that moment I believed it to be real! I never was so scared in my life. The problem with the feeling of being followed got out of hand. This was fucked up, but actually just a tiny part of the disaster that followed.
I searched for help online - but not for therapists, but spiritual help. I eventually got into contact with a Christian sect that called itself the Lorberians - after their prophet, Jakob Lorber. The guy I was in contact with tried to convince me what was happening with me was not just my imagination but very real and that I was going straight to hell - unless I did an exorcism they he and apparently Jakob Lorber had laid out. He told me about a book he had written which was exactly for "cases" like mine. Basically it was about doing strange ritualistic prayers all day and all week, and staying away from anything "satanic" which to him included most music, TV, books and other media. It's strange to write that I really followed this, but, as I said, I was "out of mind". I prayed and prayed and did what I was told. In the beginning, I indeed felt better - but then much worse. I started to neglect all other things in life to focus on "my exorcism". This got to the point where I even neglected eating, drinking and sleeping. I started to lose weight, and the situation slowly became life-threatening. This was when my family intervened and saved me, and I finally got into therapy.
It is indeed weird to write all this down. That I believed all these strange things. The only explanation I might provide is that I was in a fragile situation where I was open to such ideas - and that it at first happened "step by step" before I really got pulled in.
This is what happened to me. It wrecked up my life for good, and I still struggle to live a "normal" life. But I hope one day I can say that I left all this behind.
When the Experimental Hardcore scene collapsed somewhen after the year 2000, I fell into a deep hole of depression. The thing that I spent most of my energy, creativity, thoughts on was no longer there. And I felt no hope or chance to escape this hole. At the same time I discovered the writings of Wilhelm Reich. He talked about the futility of the human world and how it's impossible for humans to attain something true and meaningful because of their "nature". I felt connected to that. Wasn't this the very reason the Experimental and political Hardcore scene collapsed? Maybe, if I got more into the teachings of Reich, I could find a solution after all... That's what I thought. But Reich also had esoteric, spiritual, occult ideas. At first I rejected them. I was always a rationalist after all. But eventually they started to grow on me. Remember that I was in a depressed and pretty desperate state of mind. These ideas at least provided some (false) truth and solace... That's what I felt. Eventually I became a convert to Reich. I started to believe in the esoteric and occult. I started to read more and about related topics. Satanism interested me. I put the 13 statements of Satanist faith of the Satanic Bible on the wall of my bedroom. I tried to conjure up demons.
In his later life, Reich claimed he invented a "Cloudbuster" that would communicate with atmospheric energy. I got to know there was a movement related to this, that claimed they would fight "Chemtrails" with Reichian "Chembusters". It's strange to look back at it, but I really believed that back then. Remember my frail state of mind in that time. So I joined this group and built a "Chembuster" and set up Chembusters for friends too. This was the time my mind deteriorated way more, and I felt myself threatened by negative forces and demons. I was doing "astral projection" where you imagine yourself to travel out of your body, and in one of these imagined sequences a creature ripped me out of my body and sent me straight to hell, where I was burned by black fire. Now I know this was just imagined but in that moment I believed it to be real! I never was so scared in my life. The problem with the feeling of being followed got out of hand. This was fucked up, but actually just a tiny part of the disaster that followed.
I searched for help online - but not for therapists, but spiritual help. I eventually got into contact with a Christian sect that called itself the Lorberians - after their prophet, Jakob Lorber. The guy I was in contact with tried to convince me what was happening with me was not just my imagination but very real and that I was going straight to hell - unless I did an exorcism they he and apparently Jakob Lorber had laid out. He told me about a book he had written which was exactly for "cases" like mine. Basically it was about doing strange ritualistic prayers all day and all week, and staying away from anything "satanic" which to him included most music, TV, books and other media. It's strange to write that I really followed this, but, as I said, I was "out of mind". I prayed and prayed and did what I was told. In the beginning, I indeed felt better - but then much worse. I started to neglect all other things in life to focus on "my exorcism". This got to the point where I even neglected eating, drinking and sleeping. I started to lose weight, and the situation slowly became life-threatening. This was when my family intervened and saved me, and I finally got into therapy.
It is indeed weird to write all this down. That I believed all these strange things. The only explanation I might provide is that I was in a fragile situation where I was open to such ideas - and that it at first happened "step by step" before I really got pulled in.
This is what happened to me. It wrecked up my life for good, and I still struggle to live a "normal" life. But I hope one day I can say that I left all this behind.
The Death Zone
I talked about how, when I was in school, the other kids would "play" fake executions with me, using knives, or the threat of beating me to death. This gave me anxiety and mortal fear. But there was more to it. I not only experienced the fear of death, in these situations I felt as I was really dying. As I would die and the world around me too, and I was watching what was happening to me from the outside. But yet I was still alive. Think of it a bit like going to the "Upside Down" in Stranger Things without the monsters but with the fear. But yet, I was still breathing and alive and being there. I will call this sensation the "Death Zone" from now on. At first I was only in the Death Zone when these events happened. But eventually it spilled over in other areas of life as well. And believe me, it's hard to do everyday things like going on a train to the inner city and go shopping when you feel as you would die for real. But eventually, I really managed to do so. What helped me was Hardcore Techno. When I first heard this music, the sounds, the screams, the atmosphere felt so familiar - like they would come straight from the Death Zone. This gave me a way to control these feelings; I could listen to Hardcore and when the feelings got too much for me, I could just turn off the sound. Eventually, I mastered these transitions. When I started doing music myself, the direction of transfer was the other way round: I tried to get as many sounds as possible out of this sensation into my tracks. As I said, I always felt that gave my music an edge over some other producers, as it was based on all too real feelings of real terror. When I got to know other people in the Hardcore scene, a lot of them told me they had similar or comparable experiences in their life.
Later in my life I read some psychological studies that birth and death are the most extreme and powerful and 'advanced' states a human can experience. By putting this 'pseudo' death state into music, maybe I really managed to do something powerful and interesting regarding art (or maybe I failed? I'm not to judge). So this is the root of my art. Sometimes I thought that this thing was maybe too negative and twisted, and tried to get into a more positive foundation; but trying so always had very adverse effects. So I got back to it. Maybe one day I will find a different way to this and indeed a more positive way.
Later in my life I read some psychological studies that birth and death are the most extreme and powerful and 'advanced' states a human can experience. By putting this 'pseudo' death state into music, maybe I really managed to do something powerful and interesting regarding art (or maybe I failed? I'm not to judge). So this is the root of my art. Sometimes I thought that this thing was maybe too negative and twisted, and tried to get into a more positive foundation; but trying so always had very adverse effects. So I got back to it. Maybe one day I will find a different way to this and indeed a more positive way.
Hardcore In The 90s And Anarchism - A Critique
I talked about how somewhen after 2000 the Breakcore and Experimental Hardcore scene jettisoned its formerly Anarchist, radical and left-wing politics and eagerly embraced an oldfashioned breed of purist Capitalist politics, best exemplified by artists that yearned for "underground fame" - or even money - instead of starting a social revolution.
It's easy to blame outside forces for this. Maybe it's even more easier to blame ourselves. But the truth is more complex. Which is that the breed of politics we embraced was toxic and poisonous itself; basically, the Capitalist politics that replaced it were evil too, but slightly less evil; so in some twisted circumstances it was to the better that this happened, in some way - maybe.
What was so toxic about our politics? The Anarchism and Communism that fueled the scene was not some old fashioned Anarchism in Style of Kropotkin, or Bakunin, or Proudhon. It was a strain of new anarchism and left-wing ideologies that came into place somewhen in and after the 60s, and was later put forward and intensified by authors like Hakim Bey, John Zerzan, Bob Black. The "Temporary Autonomous Zone" concept by Hakim Bey for example was a major influence on the free party scene, and labels and artists.
What was problematic about this form of anarchism? It had a very anti-intellectual, anti-rational core. This 'movement' was very critical of culture, of civilization, of intellectualism, of ideals, of logic, of rational thinking, symbols, even language and mathematics itself (one of the zines of this movement was actually called "Killing King Abacus" to show its anti-mathematic sentiments). I'll give you one Hakim Bey quote to exemplify this: "The Church’s idea of a list of damnable books probably didn’t go far enough—for in a sense, all books are damned.". Books, language, words, talk, speech; all highly suspicious to them.
I give you another example, the critic of ideals; a traditional Anarchist criticism of the state would be; the state says it protects the common good; but it doesn't; therefore the state is dangerous and should be overcome. Now, these new Anarchists said, the state is only a secondary problem, the problem is the dichotomy of good and evil itself; the state or the church or the philosophers put forth an ideal of "goodness" that no one can reach, and suggests punishment to those that can't reach it; therefore creating perpetual judgment, both by outside institutions and 'the cop inside your head' to all humans, as they can't attain this detached ideal of "goodness". Thus, the idea of good and evil itself should be criticized and possibly dropped.
To get back to Hardcore; of course not everyone embraced this anti-intellectualism, not even those who directly tried to put Hakim Bey's etc. ideas into reality; but this dangerous strain of anti-intellectualism was there and grew more dangerous. The capitalist ideology that replaced it was not very idealistic or intellectual either, but it had at least some last reference to idealism inside; even if just the empty and sickening ideal of "enjoying" money and fame. But this is not a solution either.
Both should be rejected; the anti-intellectual anarchism and the empty, old fashioned capitalism.
So what is to be done? To create anarchism and communism that is intellectual and rational; that embraces logic and thinking and language and culture and ideals... books, art, philosophy, maybe even science...
And to put this into our art, and activities, and communication...
It's the only way to escape this deadlock of nihilistic anti-idealism vs. diseased consumerism.
And this was we can create something truly good; and we can change society; and we can fight for reason and rationality.
It's easy to blame outside forces for this. Maybe it's even more easier to blame ourselves. But the truth is more complex. Which is that the breed of politics we embraced was toxic and poisonous itself; basically, the Capitalist politics that replaced it were evil too, but slightly less evil; so in some twisted circumstances it was to the better that this happened, in some way - maybe.
What was so toxic about our politics? The Anarchism and Communism that fueled the scene was not some old fashioned Anarchism in Style of Kropotkin, or Bakunin, or Proudhon. It was a strain of new anarchism and left-wing ideologies that came into place somewhen in and after the 60s, and was later put forward and intensified by authors like Hakim Bey, John Zerzan, Bob Black. The "Temporary Autonomous Zone" concept by Hakim Bey for example was a major influence on the free party scene, and labels and artists.
What was problematic about this form of anarchism? It had a very anti-intellectual, anti-rational core. This 'movement' was very critical of culture, of civilization, of intellectualism, of ideals, of logic, of rational thinking, symbols, even language and mathematics itself (one of the zines of this movement was actually called "Killing King Abacus" to show its anti-mathematic sentiments). I'll give you one Hakim Bey quote to exemplify this: "The Church’s idea of a list of damnable books probably didn’t go far enough—for in a sense, all books are damned.". Books, language, words, talk, speech; all highly suspicious to them.
I give you another example, the critic of ideals; a traditional Anarchist criticism of the state would be; the state says it protects the common good; but it doesn't; therefore the state is dangerous and should be overcome. Now, these new Anarchists said, the state is only a secondary problem, the problem is the dichotomy of good and evil itself; the state or the church or the philosophers put forth an ideal of "goodness" that no one can reach, and suggests punishment to those that can't reach it; therefore creating perpetual judgment, both by outside institutions and 'the cop inside your head' to all humans, as they can't attain this detached ideal of "goodness". Thus, the idea of good and evil itself should be criticized and possibly dropped.
To get back to Hardcore; of course not everyone embraced this anti-intellectualism, not even those who directly tried to put Hakim Bey's etc. ideas into reality; but this dangerous strain of anti-intellectualism was there and grew more dangerous. The capitalist ideology that replaced it was not very idealistic or intellectual either, but it had at least some last reference to idealism inside; even if just the empty and sickening ideal of "enjoying" money and fame. But this is not a solution either.
Both should be rejected; the anti-intellectual anarchism and the empty, old fashioned capitalism.
So what is to be done? To create anarchism and communism that is intellectual and rational; that embraces logic and thinking and language and culture and ideals... books, art, philosophy, maybe even science...
And to put this into our art, and activities, and communication...
It's the only way to escape this deadlock of nihilistic anti-idealism vs. diseased consumerism.
And this was we can create something truly good; and we can change society; and we can fight for reason and rationality.
On Resistance
In the 90s, we knew how the world was gonna turn out in the next 20-30 years, with fascism, capitalism, censorship, police oppression, violence, surveillance, crisis... but we thought there was also going to be resistance, and we were supposed to be part of this resistance... where is the resistance now?
The truth is, most of us gave up somewhen after 2000... but this was such a nonsensical thing to do. From a rational point of view, you cannot give up the fight against fascism... because when the fascists get in power, they will send you to a camp, regardless if you are fighting or not, so better put up a good fight before that happens...
What we need to do is to get back to resistance, because there is still a chance to do this, and we can change the world... now!
The truth is, most of us gave up somewhen after 2000... but this was such a nonsensical thing to do. From a rational point of view, you cannot give up the fight against fascism... because when the fascists get in power, they will send you to a camp, regardless if you are fighting or not, so better put up a good fight before that happens...
What we need to do is to get back to resistance, because there is still a chance to do this, and we can change the world... now!
Hardcore And Anxiety
I wrote that Hardcore Techno helped me dealing with my anxiety problems as a teenager. But it also worked the other way round. As I said, tracks like Extreme Terror or Cunt Face evoked similar feelings in me as my anxiety attacks. So when producing music myself I tried to put similar emotions in it. Because I knew very well how it feels to have extreme fright and to fear for one's life, to be scared to death. This artistic expression helped me cope with my problems even better. But I also felt it gave me an "edge" over other productions. I built a whole "Hardcore Career" on top of my mental health problems.
To this day, I have the opinion that you can hear in speedcore and terror productions whether there is a real troubled individual at work or the "Hardcore" is just gimmicky, but maybe I am wrong with that.
When playing these tracks live, and seeing the dancefloor going mad to them, I always had a feeling of communication and the impression I'm not the only one with "these" feelings, and I'm thankful for this knowledge.
To this day, I have the opinion that you can hear in speedcore and terror productions whether there is a real troubled individual at work or the "Hardcore" is just gimmicky, but maybe I am wrong with that.
When playing these tracks live, and seeing the dancefloor going mad to them, I always had a feeling of communication and the impression I'm not the only one with "these" feelings, and I'm thankful for this knowledge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)