gimmick
Syllabification: (gim·mick)
Pronunciation: /ˈgimik/
noun
Sweden's Ghost, over the past few years, have exploded into the forefront of popularity. With the identities of all six members still a closely guarded secret, the "satanic" metal act has enjoyed an unprecedented amount of publicity for a band that's only four or five years old. Advocates call it a return to the metal of the 1970s, while critics dismiss the band as satanic pop rock putting stock in an aesthetic. Whatever your stance on the matter, Ghost are here to stay, especially after their sophomore album Infestissumam was met with glowing praise from several review aggregates.
As for my stance on the matter, I staunchly and unquestionably fall into the latter category. I've listened to both of Ghost's albums several times, and I definitely see the appeal - catchy instrumentals and a talented vocalist make them both pretty solid releases - there's definitely some fun to be had with singing along to 'Secular Haze'. However, are they the resurrection of old school metal? Absolutely not. In my opinion, Ghost ride on a tired aesthetic, the marketability of their style of music, and nothing else. When you peel back both, this isn't really a metal act, so how are they supposed to bring back the old school?
When you look at the picture I supplied (created by yours truly), the first thing that comes to mind, besides the inane shibe text, is that this is another black metal act who fantasize about burning churches. The band members do adopt stage names (vocalist 'Papa Emeritus II' and his court of 'Nameless Ghouls') and feature satanic themes en masse, but that's where the resemblance ends.
Clean vocals reign unopposed on all of Ghost's music, and you'll be hard pressed to find any blast beats or other features of stereotypical black metal. Instead, organs, synths, and generic Halloween sounds abound - 'Ghuleh/Zombie Queen' is the farthest thing from any form of metal you can think of. Now, the instrumentals are the band's own in that they aren't black metal, but the aesthetic of a skull-faced pope and his hooded followers? Inverted crosses? Satan everywhere? C'mon.
Metalheads have been contending with this type of look since the early 90s. It's not a novel idea by any stretch of the imagination, but for some reason, when Ghost does it, they're hailed as unique. That by itself is already a bit silly, since we've had King Diamond doing the exact same thing Ghost is in the midst of 'creating' since the mid-80s.
Why? Is it because Ghost have appropriated black metal tropes when they themselves have nothing to do with it? Or is it because, unlike King Diamond, the band is born into a scene that has already seen the rise of BM, and is refreshed by this band's familiar look but unfamiliar approachability?
In this way, the praise Ghost receives for their 'unique' aesthetic is bizarre. When a black metal act wears corpse paint in 2013, they're spurned as 'silly' and 'has-beens' (modern BM bands like Woe or Anaal Nathrakh have done away with corpse paint entirely, and classics like Satyricon were done with it by the late 90s). Hell, Watain's live show (which is complete with pig's blood) has been getting more and more flak as the years go by. If the aesthetic of dressing up like a demon or a 'satanist' is passé, then Ghost should be racking up condemnation for it.
Therefore, it must be the music that gives the band a pass from such criticism. Strangely enough, this is not the case. Most of Ghost's music is barely 'metal' in that there's very little in the way of heaviness - and yes, they did cover 'Here Comes the Sun'. I like the Beatles too, but c'mon! The plethora of Halloween sounds furthers this departure from metal. They're not even 'experimental' in the vein of Om or Neurosis in that Ghost as a band rely entirely on well-worn and safe rock tropes - catchy instrumentals, clean, mid-range vocals (in this case eschewing King Diamond's operatic-style falsetto), and never too much distortion.
What this culminates in is a band and musical sound that are in no way original, in no way progressive, and in no way even remotely metal. The insistence that they play old school metal isn't even close - you really want to compare the neutered riffs of 'Body and Blood' to Iommi's challenging riffwork on Sabotage? For me, Ghost as a sound are closer to the Doors or the Beach Boys - again, nothing wrong with that. I particularly like the Doors - but with a satanic streak to most of their music.
Does that make them 'metal'? That's a question that's not up to me to answer, but I personally think Ghost shouldn't be considered metal, because they don't play metal. They play pop rock and avoid criticism as such because of their aesthetic. Since most metalheads have never heard a metal act playing songs the way Ghost does, everyone's impressed and thinks they're reinventing the genre, when instead Ghost is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes by mixing the music of one genre with the aesthetic of another.
No comments:
Post a Comment