How did we get from Black Sabbath (inventors of “doom metal”) to Khanate?
Doom is at this point nearly as wide-open as metal itself. The label encompasses everything from outright Sab clones like Saint Vitus to bad-trip soundscapers like Esoteric and Electric Wizard, from Southern-rock-infused purveyors of filthy noise like Eyehategod and Sourvein to the Japanese experimentalists Boris, who’ve done everything from semi-ambient drone pieces to rifftastic monoliths of roar. But Khanate is the band doing the most with the doom concept, or anyway, the most doomed-sounding band ever.
Sure, Khanate steals from Sabbath. But their brilliance is in what they choose to steal. Khanate are all about space. Each huge chord, each snare crack or cymbal crash, is allowed to decay into silence before the next arrives. They’ve heard the word “riff,” but don’t believe it applies to what they’re doing, and they’re right. Guitarist Stephen O’Malley can’t be bothered with Iommi-esque crunch; he’s imitating the church bells that opened Sabbath’s debut, while drummer Tim Wyskida’s cymbals recall the ominous rainfall. Vocalist Alan Dubin doesn’t sound like Ozzy as much as what that creepy woman on the Black Sabbath album cover might sound like, in your worst nightmares. Bassist Jim Plotkin isn’t nearly as nimble-fingered as Geezer Butler, but he looks like a 19th century serial killer in band photos; Butler just looks like an old hippy. So, points to Plotkin.
Khanate’s new single (never mind the 43-minute running time, two songs isn’t an EP) is the best thing they’ve released yet. Awash in echo, “Capture” and “Release” find Dubin portraying some combination of Gollum and The Silence Of The Lambs’ Buffalo Bill. “Who says I can’t have?/closer come closer/…strapped and tied/sing with me/…someone’s treasure crush,” he screeches. “Release” is even more disturbing, if that’s possible. Dubin, or the character he’s playing, doesn’t mean “release” in the sense that the victim captured in the first song will be freed; he means releasing blood from veins, releasing soul from body. The music perfectly supports the lyrics and vocals, too; some of the pauses between chords are so long that when the guitar does return, you’ll jump like the ceiling just fell in. This, more than any half-assed indie “noise” crap (fuck a bunch of Wolf Eyes and Black Dice), is the sound not of music itself, but of music’s death. Khanate have created a truly hopeless diptych, taking their sound, and doom as a genre, to what seems right now like its ultimate extreme. Hard to imagine a more desolate record being released this year, or anytime soon. I can’t wait to see them live again. (The last time I saw them, Plotkin fried a bass head, so they stopped after just over a half hour. I’m hoping he's upgraded his equipment, and can play a longer set this time.)
How does Khanate compare to OLD, Plotkin's and Dubin's erstwhile band?
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at September 1, 2005 9:17 AMNo comparison applies. OLD were spazzy and at least partly intended in jest. Khanate are dead slow and not kidding around about anything.
Posted by: Phil at September 1, 2005 2:49 PMI listened to OLD's "Lo Flux Tube" a couple months back and pretty much enjoyed it (didn't know it was partly a joke--you sure about that?) and did a little web-searching, finding intriguing references to Khanate in the process. Will try to check them out.
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at September 1, 2005 6:04 PM>(didn't know it was partly a joke--you sure about that?)
Yeah, they used to be friends of friends of mine back in the late 80s; they started life as the joke-grindcore outfit Old Lady Drivers before one too many bonghits turned 'em all serious and "experimental." Plotkin's ambient stuff (particularly the collabs with Null and Mick Harris) were always more interesting to me than the OLD stuff.
The only band I'd compare to Khanate would be Swans circa 1983-84 (pre-Jarboe, pre-melody).
Posted by: Phil at September 1, 2005 6:19 PMCan you explain the use of the word "indie" in this record review you posted above, Phil? Is Khanate on a major label or does Wolf Eyes sound like Pavement? I'm not joking, I want to know your meaning.
For me, Plotkin = Phantomsmasher/Atomsmasher and anything else is background music for epistemically underpriviledged youth, but OLD falls under my aesthetic axiom "fast = good" and subaxiom "crazy = better".
Posted by: Michael Anton Parker at September 1, 2005 8:47 PM>Can you explain the use of the word "indie" in this record review you posted above, Phil?
Wolf Eyes don't sound like Pavement (neither do Black Dice), but all three share an attitude. Beavis and Butthead (two of the greatest cultural critics ever to stalk the mediasphere) once said of Pavement, "The Jesus Lizard suck, but at least they're trying. These guys aren't even trying." I find Wolf Eyes and Black Dice to be doing exactly the same thing - attempting to make not-trying into an aesthetic, out of some kind of smug contempt for a) the art-making process; b) the audience that comes to a musical performance with expectations; and/or c) everyone who's not on their Friendster lists. When I say "indie," I'm talking about smarmy college kids (mostly white, if we wanna throw race as well as class into the blender) making fashion out of staged nihilism. It's an attitude that emerged sometime in the early 1990s, rooted in white privilege and directly antithetical to everything good about punk (a music indie kidz nonetheless rush to claim as their own when they're feeling cred-starved).
I liked the Atomsmasher album, but when he changed the name to Phantomsmasher for the second disc, something crucial was lost; it just didn't have the same fervor as the first one. (As far as the rest of his music - presumably the more metallic stuff - being "background music for epistemically underprivileged youth," Plotkin's very existence is a good argument for the seriousness - artistic, philosophical, intellectual - of metal.)
Posted by: Phil at September 2, 2005 7:37 AM"Beavis and Butthead (two of the greatest cultural critics ever to stalk the mediasphere)"
AMEN!
Perhaps you'd consider restricting your private meanings for words to your private doings and use publicly shared meanings in public? I roughly understand the two vague meanings of "indie" in English, and neither have any relationship to what you're talking about, nor any inherently negative connotations. To the contrary, both seem eminently positive to me. I can think of many saintly artists on indie labels, like Joe McPhee, Derek Bailey, Melt-Banana, Roy Campbell, Tipographica, Carcass, and Henry Cow, to cite a few personal favorites among the bazillion of ready examples. Likewise, I can think of many magnificent examples of what's counterproductively called "indie rock", like TFUL282, A Minor Forest, Silkworm, Polvo, Brainiac, and surely hundreds of others, but I must admit I have little knowledge of this area of music. Further, the descriptions of "not trying" and "staged nihilism" are not remotely accurate applied to these examples.
Regardless of what word is attached to it, that is a ridiculous concept you've outlined. It sounds like one of those moronic anti-"eai" rants we've suffered through in the past. Nevermind. You seem trapped in the sociology of music at the expense of music itself, constantly concerned with matters of image, reputation, attitude, commerce, identity, etc. A classic victim of media culture. I can't begin to explain how objectionable I find phrases like "everything good about punk". It makes me feel like I'm reading a rock magazine.
By the way, I saw a Black Dice gig once and even though I felt it was mediocre, it was clear they were very earnestly trying to make interesting music with a lot of attention to craft. If anything, they were desperately trying to sound 10% as good as Mouse on Mars.
[Phil] Plotkin's very existence is a good argument for the seriousness - artistic, philosophical, intellectual - of metal.
[MikeP] Anyone who believes in the artistic, philosophical, and intellectual seriousness of metal (e.g. me*) could easily cite dozens of artists preceding Plotkin to make an even better argument. Besides, I'm not an expert here, but as far as I know his work is largely non-metal. Most any grand claims for metal don't need any better evidence than Sabbath, Priest, or Slayer.
(Don't misread me here; I think Plotkin is wonderful, but the fact is much of his fanbase would wilt if they had a broader exposure to the options available for an experimental music listener. Like Patton, he lucked out and got the teen market.)
Phantomsmasher is fucking amazing! A masterpiece. Genius. I can't recommend this highly enough to avant-rock listeners.
*However, I do find those adjectives too vacuous for my tastes. Serious art is serious art. Forget all the hot air. That is typical of people in the metal community, trying to defend their intellectualism or whatever. That is peripheral fluff. Let the melodies, rhythms, timbres, etc speak for themselves.
Posted by: Michael Anton Parker at September 2, 2005 10:06 AM>Perhaps you'd consider restricting your private meanings for words to your private doings and use publicly shared meanings in public?
Still smarting from the Maneri thread (where your own word usage was rather thoroughly tossed back in your face), I see.
>You seem trapped in the sociology of music at the expense of music itself, constantly concerned with matters of image, reputation, attitude, commerce, identity, etc. A classic victim of media culture.
Media culture is not a thing that victimizes anyone. One day you'll grow up and realize that.
>I can't begin to explain how objectionable I find phrases like "everything good about punk".
Because you have no idea what I'm talking about (hint: it has a lot to do with what you claim to admire in Bailey, McPhee, et al.), and you don't bother to ask.
>It makes me feel like I'm reading a rock magazine.
How awful for you. Now who's too concerned with image, commerce, etc. (albeit in a knee-jerk negative way)?
Posted by: Phil at September 2, 2005 11:24 AMPhil Freeman (aka International Authority on Punk Rock and Related Topics), is there any hope for me to ever scale your heights of knowledge, analytical depth, and knack for relevant rebuttals? I wish you would write a book that people like me could keep under our pillows, you know, like a Music Bible, with an appendix on The Art and Craft of Writing. It would be great if you could also set up an "Ask Dr. Phil" website where people like me could pay a modest fee per question and get little glimpses into your labyrinthine thoughts. Modest—heck, I'd pay as much as you'd require!
Christ, Bags has morphed into...Jazz Corner!!!
Posted by: Jesse at September 2, 2005 11:21 PMmichael and phil......you guys realise that you two have both outed yourselves as indie fags don't you ?
just on a little statement - music is music dudes...people like what they like to hear...so like plotkin's ambient stuff (the kranky album with gutzeit for example...) but i like black dice too...and then there's my thing for kylie minogue as well...some people will like certain things while others won't...it's pointless naming dropping and mention media generated genre titles when all you really want is to see who's more of a psuedo-intellectual fag handle...indie meant independent...not lazy...remember - hard-working,not lazy...it's people like you two who ruin music for listeners...
Dude or Dudette, please actually read and comprehend my clearly-worded and completely unambiguous criticism of Phil above, because your remarks here simply don't apply to me at all, at least to the extent I actually understand them in their vaguely-worded and error-riddled form.
I have no idea what you mean by "indie fag". Please explain that term for me.
The one good morsel in your post is "media generated genre titles". You'll have a hard time finding a fiercer enemy of such than me, and that relates to my above criticism of Phil as a media-slave. I'm not going any further into any public clashes with Phil here, though; it's bad for the site and a relatively unproductive use of time. What I wrote above speaks for itself if you care to properly read it.
Posted by: Michael Anton Parker at September 21, 2005 12:36 PMSometimes you guys are silly. Anywho, Khanate are absolutely wonderful. I find them being labeled "art metal" absolutely ridiculous, however. I suppose a lot of it is because many critics have never consciously listened to metal (unless it was Naked City or Black Sabbath who they have to like). The Wire's sudden interest in this "new" metal is hiliarious. Black metal is finally safe for Evan Parker fans to like! Oh well. I really do enjoy the Wire, and I don't mean to single them out, but I find this whole new genre naming to not only be wrong headed but insulting to the fans who have been into this stuff for years. Before you were just meat-heads, now if you listen to Abigor or Leviathan or Khanate your finger is on the pulse of underground music. Oh well.
Posted by: Tanner at September 30, 2005 6:34 PM.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................