Viking Metal

[Garland]

You two are both right. You both cite credible sources that echo your sentiments. It'd probably be better just to decide that there is no universal code of music classification. There are just a whole bunch of experts, with varying degrees of self proclaimed authority, with varying numbers of followers. Remember that there are no forests without trees. Music classifications are forests and songs are trees. If you spend all your time trying to study forests, you won't be spending any time studying trees. Trees are what we actually enjoy. Forests just make conversation quicker and less wordy.

[The Man]

That's more or less what I've been saying; this stuff is quite subjective, and it's pretty damn pointless to argue about genres.

[Disenchanted_Cynic]

Bands do sometimes (maybe even often) miscategorise their work, but your belief that Viking metal is defined by a particular sound rather than lyrical content is not shared by all metal listeners. Some in the metal press, such as The Metal Observer (linking to Google cache since the site is currently moving servers), share my view of Viking metal being a more ideological grouping of bands than a stylistic one. In summary: your opinion is not law. The sooner you learn this the better for you.

Not all, but most. My opinions are backed up by people who primarily listen to Viking Metal, and logically, they are more credible than more of an occasional listener. Not only that, but my study of music goes far beyond that. The idea that lyrical content defines a MUSICAL genre more than the music itself is completely absurd. Simply talking about Vikings, Norse themes, etc... does not make you a Viking Metal band. If the music does not match up, then it is not. I can understand a statement such as "If it is musically Viking Metal, but not lyrically, then it is not Viking Metal." That is a fair enough opinion. However, stating "The lyrics are the prime trait that defines Viking Metal," is ridiculous. If it is not musically Viking Metal, then it cannot be defined as such. What I would be able to agree with you on, is that it cannot be Viking Metal without both traits. But, according to you, or at least how you have made it seem, you seem to believe that the lyrical themes are what primarily defines Viking Metal, and that is completely wrong, as bands such as Unleashed and Amon Amarth speak of Vikings, yet are not Viking Metal. That applies to more bands than them, but they are great examples.


I must eat my words here, as I had previously announced that I would no longer be posting in this thread.

[The Man]

I know a lot of people who listen mostly to folk and viking metal too, and most of them think viking metal requires lyrics that are actually viking-themed. Like I said, music classification is often largely subjective.

[Garland]

Now you two are arguing just to argue. The Man isn't saying that the music doesn't matter in categorization. Cynic isn't saying that the lyrics don't matter in categorization. It's surely an equal blend of both. Clearly Wagner's Nibelungen opera isn't viking metal because it sings of Norse themes, as the style is important. But, Vintersorg's metaphysical pieces aren't viking metal, even though they sound pretty much the same as all his Nordic themed pieces which are. You two are both right. It's just you both picked a small facet of the same righteousness.

Apples are fruits. Oranges are fruits. I'm a world renowned expert on fruits, and I know that apples are fruits. Wait, I know everything there is to know about fruits, and I'm telling you, oranges are fruits. *Sigh* look at this site. These guys do nothing all day but eat fruits, and THEY say that apples are fruits. Yeah, that's great, but I have THIS site that says oranges are fruits. So, the people on my site are better than the people on your site.

You're both right.

[The Man]

I thought I read something along the lines of "MOST people who listen to viking metal say blah blah blah" but now that I look again I don't see it so maybe I really was arguing just to argue

[DK]

[The Man]

[eestlinc]

hey, that's not on topic!

why do metal threads always devolve into name calling? See, e.g., \/\/\extreme blackness/\/\/.

[Disenchanted_Cynic]

I know a lot of people who listen mostly to folk and viking metal too, and most of them think viking metal requires lyrics that are actually viking-themed. Like I said, music classification is often largely subjective.

You did not read what I posted.

I told you that what I could agree on, is that if it does not have both traits I.E. if it is not both musically and lyrically viking themed, then it cannot be defined as Viking Metal. If it is lyrically, and not musically, then it cannot be defined as such. If it is musically, and not lyrically, then it cannot be defined as such. That definition makes much more sense than anything previously stated.


What a genre is, is set in stone. What bands fit those classifications, are not. However, in knowing what defines certain genres, it is very easy to categorize, if need be.

[The Man]

I know a lot of people who listen mostly to folk and viking metal too, and most of them think viking metal requires lyrics that are actually viking-themed. Like I said, music classification is often largely subjective.

You did not read what I posted.

I told you that what I could agree on, is that if it does not have both traits I.E. if it is not both musically and lyrically viking themed, then it cannot be defined as Viking Metal. If it is lyrically, and not musically, then it cannot be defined as such. If it is musically, and not lyrically, then it cannot be defined as such. That definition makes much more sense than anything previously stated.


What a genre is, is set in stone. What bands fit those classifications, are not. However, in knowing what defines certain genres, it is very easy to categorize, if need be.

Yeah I realised that I misread your post:

I thought I read something along the lines of "MOST people who listen to viking metal say blah blah blah" but now that I look again I don't see it so maybe I really was arguing just to argue

And in that case, yeah far enough, we can agree to disagree on the specifics of what bands fit in what genre. I agree that Amon Amarth et al. don't really have much musically in common with most of the music usually characterised as viking metal, but at the same time I can see why other people consider them that. I'll just say their categorisation as such is hazy at best

[Disenchanted_Cynic]

But personally, you know correct categorization, so I do not understand defense of such things. Let's just agree that most people make very uneducated assumptions.

[The Man]

different people have different opinions on what constitutes correct categorisation. While I'm certainly not going to accept someone who calls a melodic death metal band black metal, for the most part I accept that such things are somewhat subjective.

[Garland]

Is there even a singular authority? I haven't found one. I think the best that can be hoped for is that people get things close. I actually think genres are too specific, and that's why there's so much disagreement. Because of the infinite possible variations on any particular element, the most specific subgenres need to be gotten rid of entirely. It's important to know if a song is metal, rap, pop, rock, country, classical, or jazz, for example, as the overall genre of a song is fairly easy to decide conclusively. Granted, even at this level one can find arguments, especially in transition pieces, say from swing to blues to rock, where the lines were still blurred. This seems to be happening to country as a genre entirely. When I was little, my dad's country music was more folksy and ho-down in nature, and now you'd have a hard time not calling it pop or rock. Bands like Within Temptation, which is has been my favorite group to an insane degree since I discovered them on Youtube a few weeks ago, seem to waver on the border of two or more genres as they ride the line between underground and mainstream. It's just not worth the effort to get too specific, as there are always going to be variations, and the definitions are too easy to break. The KISS rule seems to apply here. The point of genres is to make finding good music easy, not to make it so specific that you have to search through multiple genres because similar music is separated on technicalities you probably don't care about, because when all is said and done, you still had to sift through the same number of bands, but you had to do it in two sessions instead of one.

[Disenchanted_Cynic]

I know there are variations, but you are straying from the topic. The point is that when confusions about genres like "Viking Metal," arise, it is usually because someone who is uneducated decided to blindly categorize a band.