Marilyn Manson On Religion, Jesus, And Scooby Doo.

[QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Trent took Marilyn Manson under his wing. He must have liked their sound. IndigoSunrise

I liked those early albums... but still, as much as I hold anything Trent says in high regard, he does like some crap music. Unless you have heard every band that was on Nothing then saying that is meaningless, because some of them were appalling.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] The burlesque imagry and 20's club asthetic of Golden Age was awesome. What are you talking about. Samwel_X

Image over sound.

Doll-Dagga-Buzz-Buzz-Ziggidy-Zagg or whatever it was called was a terrible song. Along with some other shockingly bad songs.

Again, for shock during that period see the (S)aint video.

Image over substance.

No but he really liked Manson. They were almost sister acts and you cannot deny that.IndigoSunrise

At the same time, Trent had Kevin McMahon's Prick under his wing, they didn't take off so the "sisteract" you are talking about isn't as well known.

Trent really liked all the artists they signed, otherwise, he wouldn't have signed them. The idea of Nothing record was to give artists he liked full artistic control of their music.

At the same time, the personal bond between Trent and Brian was important in making them "sisteracts", just like the one between Trent and Kevin, or Trent and Rob, or Trent and to some extent Bowie.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"][QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

I liked those early albums... but still, as much as I hold anything Trent says in high regard, he does like some crap music. Unless you have heard every band that was on Nothing then saying that is meaningless, because some of them were appalling.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] No but he really liked Manson. They were almost sister acts and you cannot deny that.IndigoSunrise

it was catchy and had a good sound. Many of the lyrics were quite clever if not borderline vuglar. The albums weakest point however and the bands weakest point is when manson breaks character to sing about himself or the band. Such as the song Vodevil. In an objective manner what was wrong with tracks just as "This Is The New ****" "Golden Age Of Grotesque" "Noir" and "Mobscene" IndigoSunrise

"This is the new **** was just lyrically very juvenile, carried little intelligence, and had little point to it. That os the same for much of the album. Again, musically, just dull, it just didn't tread any new or interesting ground.

I found the album to be very boring indeed, it was the last Manson album I ever bought. Like the one trick pony was out of tricks because he now relied too heavily on his image rather than music.

Someone please tell me what is wrong with songs like

1.Dope Hat

2.Get Your Gunn

3.Dogma

4.The Beautifull People

5.Deformography

6.Man That You Fear

7.Rock Is Dead

8.The Dope Show

9.Coma White

10.The Fight Song

11.Golden Age Of Grotesque

12.Apple Of Sodom

13.I Put A Spell On You.

14.Sweet Dreams

15.Mobscene

16.Lunchbox

17.The Reflecting God

18.The Nobodies

19.President Dead

20.I Don't Like The Drugs But The Drugs Like Me

Please someone tell me.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] it was catchy and had a good sound. Many of the lyrics were quite clever if not borderline vuglar. The albums weakest point however and the bands weakest point is when manson breaks character to sing about himself or the band. Such as the song Vodevil. In an objective manner what was wrong with tracks just as "This Is The New ****" "Golden Age Of Grotesque" "Noir" and "Mobscene" Samwel_X

"This is the new **** was just lyrically very juvenile, carried little intelligence, and had little point to it. That os the same for much of the album. Again, musically, just dull, it just didn't tread any new or interesting ground.

I found the album to be very boring indeed, it was the last Manson album I ever bought. Like the one trick pony was out of tricks because he now relied too heavily on his image rather than music.

From Rolling Stone....

Nine Inch Nails frontman Trent Reznor has spoken out against his former protégé Marilyn Manson, calling the shock rocker "a dopey clown" in a new interview with Mojo. According to Spinner, Reznor had some harsh words for the Antichrist Superstar, saying, "He is a malicious guy and will step on anybody's face to succeed and cross any line of decency. Seeing him now, drugs and alcohol now rule his life and he's become a dopey clown."

Then you missed the point of This Is The New **** it was mocking the music industry at the time and the themes and values presented by it. The delivery of the lyrics made the song better in that regard by driving the point home harder. IndigoSunrise

Dude he also liked the sound. Trent recognized a band with talent and wished to produce it.IndigoSunrise

Trent recognised a band he liked. This doesn't necessarily equate to talent. He saw a band, he thought he could bring into the mainstream, and he thought he could sell records for. He did that. He liked the band. He liked what they were doing, and in a sense his disillusionment with the record industry at that point, and his desire for his own label meant he found an act would would be a real **** you to the major label execs. He found a band who he could market in a particular way to show that artistic control was important. He found a band who he thought could have cultural influence.

Not all of these things are neccessarily talent. Trent didn't think his touring band in 1994 were talented, what makes you think he thought Manson was talented... see talent is thrown around all too much. Marilyn Manson as a band isn't really about talent, rather it was about writing songs with an agenda. Yes song writing was at that stage (or more lyricism) a talent. But the talent disappeared, as I have said before, when the image took over.

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

Cmon. Trent Barely avoids making a bad album. Even though With Teeth was a awesome album it was only a few mistakes away from being total suck. Same with Year Zero.

From Rolling Stone....

Nine Inch Nails frontman Trent Reznor has spoken out against his former protégé Marilyn Manson, calling the shock rocker "a dopey clown" in a new interview with Mojo. According to Spinner, Reznor had some harsh words for the Antichrist Superstar, saying, "He is a malicious guy and will step on anybody's face to succeed and cross any line of decency. Seeing him now, drugs and alcohol now rule his life and he's become a dopey clown."

From Rolling Stone....

Nine Inch Nails frontman Trent Reznor has spoken out against his former protégé Marilyn Manson, calling the shock rocker "a dopey clown" in a new interview with Mojo. According to Spinner, Reznor had some harsh words for the Antichrist Superstar, saying, "He is a malicious guy and will step on anybody's face to succeed and cross any line of decency. Seeing him now, drugs and alcohol now rule his life and he's become a dopey clown."

LJS9502_basic

Manson's retort was painful... here is another classic from the Trent cannon of mocking:

Take from that what you will as Trent's belief of Manson's lasting talent.

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

Cmon. Trent Barely avoids making a bad album. Even though With Teeth was a awesome album it was only a few mistakes away from being total suck. Same with Year Zero.

IndigoSunrise

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Then you missed the point of This Is The New **** it was mocking the music industry at the time and the themes and values presented by it. The delivery of the lyrics made the song better in that regard by driving the point home harder. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Then you missed the point of This Is The New **** it was mocking the music industry at the time and the themes and values presented by it. The delivery of the lyrics made the song better in that regard by driving the point home harder. IndigoSunrise

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

Cmon. Trent Barely avoids making a bad album. Even though With Teeth was a awesome album it was only a few mistakes away from being total suck. Same with Year Zero.

IndigoSunrise

Year Zero was far far better than With_Teeth (which is I'll admit an album I underrated for a very long time, it took me until the last year to realise how good it actually is).

Year Zero for one came with the entire ARG which was a master stroke, mixed with a concept that was well carried out, and cleverly done, with a sound that reflected what he was getting at perfectly.

With_Teeth, without going into too much detail, was a recovery record. It is still musically very good, even if not as exciting as others. Lyrically, again, good. What it lacks is the interesting twists and turns of old. But still, good none the less, despite its lack of concept meaning it was kind of amorphous blob of songs.

Samwell's critique of the lyrics is very subjective. IndigoSunrise

Critique is by its very nature subjective.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

Cmon. Trent Barely avoids making a bad album. Even though With Teeth was a awesome album it was only a few mistakes away from being total suck. Same with Year Zero.

People act like image is some negative thing. Image is just as important as theme lyrics and sound. NEVER has Manson placed one in front of the other. Out of all of those what will you notice first? Can you honestly say that Mechanical Animals would have been better had Manson not adopted the role of the gender bending alien Omega? It all blends together. Image is style its not a sign of weakness. Its supposed to be very outlandish. Its part of the performance. I really cannot understand this critisism of Manson regarding his image. He puts just as much effort into every other aspect of the albums. IndigoSunrise

I agree with what manson said. I'm not going to get into this "who's the better artist" discussion. Why does that even matter by the way?

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You can mock and still make interesting well done music. The concept is not the problem....the execution is.

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

IndigoSunrise

It's not though. Marilyn Manson as a band, I can agree with you, I personally found the early work to be clever, subversive and provocative. Lyrically, it has the intelligence to back it up. Even Holywood which I thought was very hit and miss was in tune with society... after that, all of that is gone. He does become a parody of what he was. His lyrics do become immature. His lyrics do lack any meaning.

Subjectively of course.

Which is hillarious because Manson, NIN and The Cure take up 75% of my i-pod right now. No i'm not making this up. Hell the first song I listened to today was Friday I'm In Loved followed by Rock Is Dead. Its funny isn't it? Lets agree to disagree. I cannot understand how someone can say Manson sucks objectivly. I can more than understand why they don't like him. Hell I used to hate him. IndigoSunrise

I agree with what manson said. I'm not going to get into this "who's the better artist" discussion. Why does that even matter by the way?

11Marcel

It has gone fairly off topic, but does derive from the comments of Manson's overall intelligence. Which I believe has become neutered through his addiction, note that is an old interview, probably around 2000... although I can't pin point eras after 1998.

Ultimately, it doesn;'t matter who is better. It is a subjective and personal choice. In some respects though the argument holds some sentimental value for myself. Like being 15 again.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] People act like image is some negative thing. Image is just as important as theme lyrics and sound. NEVER has Manson placed one in front of the other. Out of all of those what will you notice first? Can you honestly say that Mechanical Animals would have been better had Manson not adopted the role of the gender bending alien Omega? It all blends together. Image is style its not a sign of weakness. Its supposed to be very outlandish. Its part of the performance. I really cannot understand this critisism of Manson regarding his image. He puts just as much effort into every other aspect of the albums. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Which is hillarious because Manson, NIN and The Cure take up 75% of my i-pod right now. No i'm not making this up. Hell the first song I listened to today was Friday I'm In Loved followed by Rock Is Dead. Its funny isn't it? Lets agree to disagree. I cannot understand how someone can say Manson sucks objectivly. I can more than understand why they don't like him. Hell I used to hate him. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] People act like image is some negative thing. Image is just as important as theme lyrics and sound. NEVER has Manson placed one in front of the other. Out of all of those what will you notice first? Can you honestly say that Mechanical Animals would have been better had Manson not adopted the role of the gender bending alien Omega? It all blends together. Image is style its not a sign of weakness. Its supposed to be very outlandish. Its part of the performance. I really cannot understand this critisism of Manson regarding his image. He puts just as much effort into every other aspect of the albums. IndigoSunrise

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]

Saying Marilyn Manson is immature lyrically is like saying that South Park doesn't have a point because its a cartoon.

It's not though. Marilyn Manson as a band, I can agree with you, I personally found the early work to be clever, subversive and provocative. Lyrically, it has the intelligence to back it up. Even Holywood which I thought was very hit and miss was in tune with society... after that, all of that is gone. He does become a parody of what he was. His lyrics do become immature. His lyrics do lack any meaning.

Subjectively of course.

Um....music is for listening. Of course it matters more than image. I'd rather have a talented band to listen to that interests me musically than to listen to music I don't like and look at an image.:|

LJS9502_basic

I've never even seen the artists of some of the music on my Ipod and much less care. :P It's all about the music for me baby.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]When talking about a band/artist the most important thing is the music. Image should not be the main draw. If image is the main draw then you can bet it's because the music isn't good enought to stand on it's own. Period.

LJS9502_basic

Critique isn't limited to complete subjectivity. Reviewers have to try to be as objective as possible. Thats not to say personal taste doesn't have a influence. IndigoSunrise

Critique isn't limited to complete subjectivity. Reviewers have to try to be as objective as possible. Thats not to say personal taste doesn't have a influence. IndigoSunrise

Are you saying a rock music magazine will have the same opinion of Manson as say a board sheet newspaper? Reviewers cater to the subjectivity of their audience.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Critique isn't limited to complete subjectivity. Reviewers have to try to be as objective as possible. Thats not to say personal taste doesn't have a influence. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Critique isn't limited to complete subjectivity. Reviewers have to try to be as objective as possible. Thats not to say personal taste doesn't have a influence. Samwel_X

Are you saying a rock music magazine will have the same opinion of Manson as say a board sheet newspaper? Reviewers cater to the subjectivity of their audience.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Critique isn't limited to complete subjectivity. Reviewers have to try to be as objective as possible. Thats not to say personal taste doesn't have a influence. IndigoSunrise

When did I say that? The wider an audiance however the more objective somethign is likely to be. I said a good reviewer must be as objective as possible. How does a rock magazine play into that? IndigoSunrise

Because all media caters to an audience. Objectivity is a veil for subjectivity of reviewers. For example, the rock magazine is more likely to be favorable of Manson's music because that is the sort of music the person reading the magazine is interested in. It is all in the audience. Everything has one.

Even a more widespread music site, like pitchfork for example have different departments and specialists to wrote articles, mainly because their knowledge of the genre is bigger and thus they can provide better reference. A review who dislikes rock music is unlikely to want to be in that department.

In a perfect world perhaps all media would be objective, but it isn't.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] When did I say that? The wider an audiance however the more objective somethign is likely to be. I said a good reviewer must be as objective as possible. How does a rock magazine play into that? Samwel_X

Because all media caters to an audience. Objectivity is a veil for subjectivity of reviewers. For example, the rock magazine is more likely to be favorable of Manson's music because that is the sort of music the person reading the magazine is interested in. It is all in the audience. Everything has one.

Even a more widespread music site, like pitchfork for example have different departments and specialists to wrote articles, mainly because their knowledge of the genre is bigger and thus they can provide better reference. A review who dislikes rock music is unlikely to want to be in that department.

In a perfect world perhaps all media would be objective, but it isn't.

While i dont like MM (weird), what he says is true, and those people at the start of the video where LOL worthy

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]No a critique is basically just an opinion. Which is subjective.

Once again that is not what I said. Taking from what you said a good reviewer can seperate how they feel about a band and still have a positve opinon i.e. being objective. The majority of Mansons work has been well receieved by critics with the exception of Eat Me Drink Me. IndigoSunrise

Trent collaborated with David Bowie...so he's cool in my book:)

Well hate him or love him Manson isn't going anywhere anytime soon. His latest album made the top 40. While that doesn't necessarily indicate quality he is far from done.

Manson's style has constantly evolved and his message while always having similar themes has always been different. Sometimes funny sometimes miserable the king of shock rock has secured his place and will be a cult hit for likely some time to come.

History will most likely treat Manson in mixed ways a vicious bi polar combination of both harsh dismissal and enthusaistic praise. However Manson's story is still writing itself and as long as the final chapter awaits being written I will always put down some money put on the headphones and be transported to whatever world Manson wished to transport his listeners to.

I'm done here. There is nothing more to say. There is no accounting for taste in the end.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Trent took Marilyn Manson under his wing. He must have liked their sound. Samwel_X

I liked those early albums... but still, as much as I hold anything Trent says in high regard, he does like some crap music.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Manson didn't die. NIN has had its fair share of suck as well. Eat Me Drink Me Sucked though. The main problem with Marilyn Manson is the fact that the band couldn't keep its lineup toghether. Samwel_X

Unless we are talking "The Purest Feeling" and "Kinda I want to" this is wrong.

And Golden Age is ****

I like NIN a lot, but the dude is right. About half of The Fragile sucked, Broken was pretty lame, and With Teeth was pretty boring as well.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Manson rocks, and those people at the beginning were idiots. If there's one thing I can't stand it's the, "we'll pray for you," Christians who try to act like just because they try to mask their arrogance under a thin veil of humility they're not being judgemental. Well, kiss my heathen ass.

GIJames248

Hurrah for not being judgmental like all those bigoted, lying, hypocritical Christians who are all wrong in the exact same way!

Edit: Shoot, too much too fast.

How is being pissed off at people who are overly judgmental being judgmental in itself? I'm not the one who goes around like ajerk offering commentary on everyone else's way of life and acting like I'm some divine scholar for doing so. That kind of behavior is arrogant, self-serving, self-righteous crap and expressing displeasure at being on the receiving end of it is not judgmental.

Isnt he the guy who had some of his ribs surgically removed so he could pleasure himself? (trying to say it in a way that doesnt anger anybody)

Isnt he the guy who had some of his ribs surgically removed so he could pleasure himself? (trying to say it in a way that doesnt anger anybody)

magnax1

All rumors.

The man is extremely well-spoken, and very intelligent. It's a shame that some people write him off because of his music. In my opinion, his last two albums are huge let-downs. He should shift gears to writing essays or speaking publicly so his talent doesn't go to waste.