so this again is kind of converging with the electro thread. there are two types of industrial aren't there? one the industrial as transgression, an image, an artworld (supposedly in opposition to the blindspots of a consumer society or conservatism - although more inverted) and the other the sonification of industry and the industrial management of daily life. I am not too bothered about shock tactics, i know democracy when push comes to shove is basically stalinism, which the subverting totalitarians don't ever seem to understand, and if they critique totalitarianism from the right it's organicism and individualism.

So, for obvious reasons I'm interested in the sonification of industry. but last night i was criticising the new dominic ferno berghain mix and some people were like well it's a tribute to the spirit of the industrial culture, which included 90s techno and rave mixtapes. except it was basically a merzbow/jk flesh/genesis p-oridge mix pretty much with one or two modern techno tracks from his mates regis and ancient methods or something. no 90s techno, and someone was like well you're attacking a strawman just to show off how much you know. but that's not it is it?

But yet, if this industrial is so anti-music, if it claims to reject the values of modern pop music or at least challenge them, then why do so many people in the more visible end of the scene adopt the exact trapping points of rockist ideology? the extraordinary individual and that. I mean I know the answer, commodification, subcultural belonging, money making, blah blah blah.

But then why? Why be into such an uneventful myopia of the canon with outdated concepts of 40 years? maybe my approach is wrong but at least I feel like the stuff I am into is more faceless, it doesn't need explaining to do, because isn't that what all transgressive shtick is? ultimately you have to explain the transgression which defeats the point of the transgression in the first place.