Lord Abortion
11-03-2005, 09:17 AM
Hello. I'm here as a public service announcement.
It has come to my attention that the publication of "the rough guide to Rock" and the "rough guide to heavy metal" has happened.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1843534150/qid=1131030613/sr=8-4/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i4_xgl/026-4686830-5271608
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1843531054/qid=1131030613/sr=8-5/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i5_xgl/026-4686830-5271608
Do not buy these books.
The only use they have could possibly have would be to give you actual facts. You could, I suppose look up the year albums have been released, or band members.
The real problem begins with the classification of genres The rough guide to heavy metal includes Jon Bon Jovi, a man who could not be described as "metal", or indeed "heavy" even in the loosest possible terms, and has no entry for Mayhem or Darkthrone.
If you read the two books (don't, just take my word for it) you realise that the bands that are classified in both books, the entries are exactly the same, so instead of creating new entries for the metal one, to give you more metal information. It's the same review. The whole book is testament to the fact that the mainstream media don't understand and dislike metal, it's essentially a book written about metal by someone who really, really hates it.
Now, here lies the second problem, any opinion given in this book is utter ****. Iron maiden were described as "better without Dickinson " and that No Prayer for the dying was described as "the best album of the Dickinson era" it's enough to make the most hardened bibliophile tear it to shreds and burn it.
Now, these are just bands That I noticed on the quick look through the metal one, I have read the rough guide to rock on numerous occasions, and it's ****ing awful. If you wantr base facts, use the internet. You're here already, right?
And for all you people that love opinions about music, well, you're better off here.
It has come to my attention that the publication of "the rough guide to Rock" and the "rough guide to heavy metal" has happened.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1843534150/qid=1131030613/sr=8-4/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i4_xgl/026-4686830-5271608
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1843531054/qid=1131030613/sr=8-5/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i5_xgl/026-4686830-5271608
Do not buy these books.
The only use they have could possibly have would be to give you actual facts. You could, I suppose look up the year albums have been released, or band members.
The real problem begins with the classification of genres The rough guide to heavy metal includes Jon Bon Jovi, a man who could not be described as "metal", or indeed "heavy" even in the loosest possible terms, and has no entry for Mayhem or Darkthrone.
If you read the two books (don't, just take my word for it) you realise that the bands that are classified in both books, the entries are exactly the same, so instead of creating new entries for the metal one, to give you more metal information. It's the same review. The whole book is testament to the fact that the mainstream media don't understand and dislike metal, it's essentially a book written about metal by someone who really, really hates it.
Now, here lies the second problem, any opinion given in this book is utter ****. Iron maiden were described as "better without Dickinson " and that No Prayer for the dying was described as "the best album of the Dickinson era" it's enough to make the most hardened bibliophile tear it to shreds and burn it.
Now, these are just bands That I noticed on the quick look through the metal one, I have read the rough guide to rock on numerous occasions, and it's ****ing awful. If you wantr base facts, use the internet. You're here already, right?
And for all you people that love opinions about music, well, you're better off here.