It's what Hell was invented for. To use as a threat where a simple threat of violence or imprisonment or no pocket money would be ineffective, you naughty wicked bad evil sinners you. God is Love, and if you don't fall into line, expect to be smothered in fire and brimstone and forcibly fed on rats and toads. For ever. I wonder how many confessions priests get on a weekly basis about 'illegal' up/downloading.
It's not that I'm not sympathetic with the issue because it really does impact how much you're able to commit to invest in making your music, and I, like indeed I imagine Tibet does, rely on music for my living. Still, times change, and there's no use in crying and running off to mummy about it. Or some dodgy smelly priest in a varnished upright box.
These days the Holy Noncedom would have you fry in eternal damnation not just for masturbation, sodomy, homosexuality, using a condom, extramarital sex or any other sluttish behaviour - let alone vile witchery and sorcery - but also for not recycling your plastic bags. Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti, for example, proclaims that the traditional 6th century seven deadly sins (for your reference, conveniently listed below with their exciting range of adjoining punishments) are those of 'yesteryear'. I'm not sure what the bearded sandal'd one up at Hallucinatory Mountain would say about that.
And silly me always thought the seven deadly sins were a qualification for entry to the church. You wonder if they'll ever include arbitrary hypocrisy. Which proves the original point.
pride: broken on the wheel
envy: put in freezing water
gluttony: forced to eat rats, toads, and snakes
lust: smothered in fire and brimstone
anger: dismembered alive
greed: put in cauldrons of boiling oil
sloth: thrown in snake pits
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
I always found the downloading dynamic to be an odd one. Personally, I have admittedly illegally downloaded music, but usually with the caveat that either if I'm sampling something new that I've never heard, I go out and purchase the full album, or it is something that I simply cannot own without having to skip a month's rent. For example, I'll admit to having a mp3 rip of Psychopathia Sexualis kicking around my computer, but if a legitimate reissue ever came to past, I'd be buying it post haste.
The other is that when an established artist I like has a new release out that gets leaked, I intentionally go out of my way to avoid it until I have a legitimate version in my hands. Personally, I do not have the full appreciation of something if I do not have the full "package" of art and intended-quality audio. Many of the younger people do not seem to grasp that concept, which I think has officially put me in "grumpy old man" territory. Which I'm ok with.
The other problem that I've dealt with is that, as a music "critic" (I use that term very loosely), a few of the promotional albums I receive now have tracks intentionally deleted for that reason. Unlike some other outlets perhaps, I receive no compensation for my writing other than a steady stream of free music, which I then ramble on about for a few hundred words. For that I at least appreciate being paid for my work with a legitimate full album release I can add to my collection.
I usually defend Tibet, but after reading that article it almost makes me regret being one of the subscribers to the last C93 album. Considering how many ultra-expensive limited edition collector products Dutro releases on such a basis, it's a wonder how his hardcore fans even have any money left at all.
Illegal filesharing is okay so long as it's not on Susan Lawley. :D
I'd been mulling over that file-sharing article as well. I realise Tibet's comments may have been made (at least partly) in jest, but it's been a depressing reminder of the simplistic view of morality and causality peddled by the mainstream religions. Ironic to think that C93's early material and influences played an important role in helping me de-program myself from a Christian mindset.
As for the filesharing, I agree with Creaig's view. It's a complex issue and hard to summarise succinctly; it's certainly not as simple as filesharing = bad, physical product purchasing = good.
I've downloaded a fair amount of music over the last few years, but most has been material that I already legally own (on vinyl or cassette) but wanted in mp3 format as well. I still buy as much 'legal' music (new and old) as I ever did.
By the way, I forgot to add that I absolutely love the Cut Hands track. Can't wait to buy the album!
You really need to get your Whitehouse albums out as payable mp3 downloads, through Susan Lawly or another provider such as my current favourite, Boomkat.
I openly admit to downloading copies of quite a few Whitehouse albums. I also openly admit that through these albums, I have gone out my way to pay money for physical copies.
However, if it wasn't for illegal copies, I most probably would never have heard, or been interested in, Whitehouse in the first place.
But obviously, I am not saying that illegal downloading should be commended. It is simply the current means of distribution of music that is most convenient for a lot of people. This dynamic will eventually change, but it's taking a damn long time for the market to catch up to a place that the consumer wants it to be.
As I move houses and get older I have no further use for physical CD's; they always end up getting immediately ripped to my mp3 collection and placed on a shelf anyway, not even as a trophy anymore, as I don't have much room to parade them.
Digital distribution has been the way of the future for years now, I still find it incredible how slow it is progressing in our culture. There is a chance to completely cut out all the middlemen and for artists to distribute directly from their own homepages. From the money of the listener directly into the Paypal account of the performer.
What I'm saying is, dammit Susan Lawly, get those Whitehouse albums up as V0 mp3's with cover art and I'll buy them all!
Post a Comment