Tuesday, July 7, 2009

"Glass fragments 2009"

(Yes, I know the title does not make any sense at first glance, but it will eventually as you read on...)

So, very recently Vikernes was interviewed for Dagbladet (in Norwegian; English translation (Google) here) - and I have to admit that I was quite surprised by that taking Vikernes´ general opinion on journalists into consideration.


"The morally bankrupt propagandists (a.k.a. "journalists" and "reporters") of the mass media has, it seems, made it their mission to spread their malevolent lies about me as much as they can."

(The Lords Of Lies: Part I - Lords Of Lies)


Also, I thought that after being released from jail he wanted to live a life in relative solitude - away from society...and among the first things he did after being released is talking to a newspaper...ah well...

Anyway, emerging from this article Vikernes apparently wrote a book in jail (the article features some excerpts) - his own version on what happened in the Black Metal community of the early 90s... why am I not surprised... since about any account by other people who were involved are "lies", "misinterpretations", "exaggerations" and whatnot in his view... (well, basically what I already wrote about in the Introduction).

Since the article in Dagbladet and the excerpts are in Norwegian - and as for my knowledge of the Norwegian language is very limited and the Google translation feature is not that reliable... I will only concentrate on some statements that stood out the most...the ultimate what-the-fuck moments of this article so to say... I will start with the interview itself and then go over to the excerpts from his book.


- "Do you regret the killing?" (Angrer du på at du drepte?)

"I can´t regret that I took the life of the one who would have killed me." (Jeg kan ikke angre på at jeg tok livet av en som skulle drepe meg.)


...and he probably never will (regret the murder)...so that´s when I started to wonder why he was released on probation...I thought probation is for those who at least realized during their incarceration that they fucked up?


*****


- "Can you kill again?" (Kan du drepe igjen?)

"All people can kill. But there is less chance that I will kill again, because I've been in that situation before [...] Had I been in the same situation today, I had contacted the police first. [...]" (Alle mennesker kan drepe. Men det er mindre sjanse for at jeg vil drepe igjen, fordi jeg har vært i den situasjonen før [...] Hadde jeg vært i samme situasjon i dag, hadde jeg kontaktet politiet først. [...])


And then kill him...?


*****


"I have never been a Nazi, and I am not now" (Jeg har aldri vært nazist, og er det heller ikke nå.)


No, of course not... what about this for example? He adopted this kind of appearance just "for fun" then, I guess...?


*****


"It is nonsense that I have started racist propaganda groups." (Det er bare tull at jeg har startet rasistiske propagandagrupper.)


What about the Norwegian Heathen Front (Norsk Hedenks Front)? It´s kind of odd that he denies having started this organisation - by denying this he denies a part of his past and thus a part of himself...

Sometimes I really wonder if he beliefs in all the bullshit he comes up with himself...


*****


- "Are you racist?" (Er du rasist?)

"Yes. But I hate no one." (Ja. Men jeg hater ingen.)


He has to be one of very few racists who do not hate people of other races...


*****


By the way - the new Burzum album to be released (probably next year) will be Metal...consistency is a virtue...!

The reasons for the development of Burzum away from "Metal" music


*****


Ok, now on to the excerpts from Vikernes´ yet unpublished book. As I said above, the excerpts are in Norwegian, so I can not by any means guarantee for the translation, also I of course don´t know if the excerpts are reproduced correctly in that article. So I will just concentrate on the part that deals with a new account (surprise...) on what happened on the night of the murder...

Also, I will only stick to the sentences that seem most important (as for the translation issue). I will deal with the whole book then once there is an English translation available.


"At the same time I jumped in front of him. I produced a small knife I had in one pocket. It was actually a boot knife, with an about ten cm long blade. The knife was not sharp, but rather pointed, and I stabbed him in the face."

(Samtidig hoppet jeg fram foran ham. Jeg fisket opp en liten kniv jeg hadde i den ene lommen. Det var egentlig en støvelkniv, med et omtrent ti centimeter langt blad. Kniven var ikke skarp, men relativt spiss, og jeg hogg ham i ansiktet.)


Now the first stab was to his face...?


"I jumped out in front of him and managed to stop him before he got his hands on the kitchen knife. At this point he had showed his intentions, so when he ran for the bedroom I figured he was going for another weapon. [...] I gave chase, stabbed him and was a bit surprised when he ran out of the apartment instead.

(A Burzum Story: Part II - Euronymous)


Though Vikernes does not explicitly state it - "I gave chase, stabbed him..." implies that the first stab had to be in the back or shoulder.


"The first stab was in the chest. The whole time he was trying to run away, so I had to stab him in the back."

(Lords of Chaos; page 123)


*****


"Øystein shouted for help and stopped for a fight. I parried his blows with the knife, so that every blow caused a stab in his arm or body."

(Øystein ropte på hjelp og stoppet for å slåss. Jeg parerte slagene hans med kniven, slik at hvert slag ble et knivstikk i hans arm eller kropp.)


What the fuck...seriously... in his various prior accounts on the murder Vikernes couldn´t seem to repeat it often enough that Euronymous fled right away instead of fighting back...oh, let me guess: those stabs that emerged from the fight are a new try to "explain" the 23 stab wounds, replacing the glass fragments...?


"It made no sense to flee and it made me angry to know that he had started the fight, but the moment it didn't go his way he decided to flee instead, instead of fighting like a man. Such is always something I have disliked strongly.

(Some people have claimed I slew a helpless and unarmed man, but first of all he tried to get a knife before I did, and certainly he could have armed himself if he had chosen to stay and fight instead of running away like a coward. There was a number of other things in his apartment he could have used to defend himself with, when he failed to get hold of his kitchen knife.)"

(A Burzum Story: Part II - Euronymous)

No further comment necessary, I guess...


5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Right, I guess the anti-thesis is impending. I actually read this to see your theory and notion on the statements of Varg. I will comment them.

- "Do you regret the killing?" (Angrer du på at du drepte?)

"I can´t regret that I took the life of the one who would have killed me." (Jeg kan ikke angre på at jeg tok livet av en som skulle drepe meg.)

- "Can you kill again?" (Kan du drepe igjen?)

"All people can kill. But there is less chance that I will kill again, because I've been in that situation before [...] Had I been in the same situation today, I had contacted the police first. [...]" (Alle mennesker kan drepe. Men det er mindre sjanse for at jeg vil drepe igjen, fordi jeg har vært i den situasjonen før [...] Hadde jeg vært i samme situasjon i dag, hadde jeg kontaktet politiet først. [...])

You claim that probation is concerned with the notions of the incarcerated, but it is rather a question concerning if the incarcerated will ever commit a similiar or more correctly any crime at all in the future. If Varg did not regret his actions because of his own narrated motives, and yet claims that he is more unlikely to commit a crime than a common norwegian man, then it is not very unintelligible why he was released on probation. He has also argued why his judgement was inadequate according to his actions, and if you would study the prodedure of the court then the prejudices towards him suddenly elucidates, and tell a story of inequitable judgement.

Even according to your story it would be illogical for Varg to kill Euronymous after contacting the police (That is; even if you consider his motives sad, treacherous and full of jeallousy).


"I have never been a Nazi, and I am not now" (Jeg har aldri vært nazist, og er det heller ikke nå.)

He has simplified his belief because of his anti-semitism, his allegiance to the germanic people, and the germanic revolution, which can be considered very alike Nazism, and therefore added that epithet unto himself. Odalism is his self-appointed ideology, which he claims is fitting; especially because of its lack of historical taints (I think it is tainted just because of him using the term though, to be honest, considering his opposition). His appearance, on your enclosed picture, is indeed his old skinhead appearance, which he claimed to use before he grew his long hair in his black metal-period. This is also because of his connections with the nazi ideology, to appeal to likeminded in wait for the germanic revolution. He has though rejected Nazism, because of his disrespect for contemporary authority (non-congregational authority, but simply one of a libertarian welfare state), and because of the fact that he is not a socialist, and doesn't hold materialistic views, but believe more in a spiritual race than a physical one. The appearance is merely identity to him.

"It is nonsense that I have started racist propaganda groups." (Det er bare tull at jeg har startet rasistiske propagandagrupper.)

Why do you claim he has STARTED IT?
He was a part of it, and only parts of the group was xenophobic. The majority and the leaders of the group rejected all those philosophies. He did not start it, and the group was never racistic (surely it was racialistic, but that is more a topic concerning a biologic theory, and rejects all sorts of hate between groups). Vargs statements lean more towards an ethnopluralistic view, which includes respect for others cultures, if they respect yours back.

- "Are you racist?" (Er du rasist?)

"Yes. But I hate no one." (Ja. Men jeg hater ingen.)


He has to be one of very few racists who do not hate people of other races...

He uses the ubiquitous distinction of the term, and racism is as familiar a term with many meanings to different people. I am not surprised over his answer, as he doesn't make the scholastic differentials between racism and racialism. Yet, the answer might look strange in some people's eyes, as he could just as well have replied: No, I am racialist.

Chagrynn said...

What makes you so certain that someone who does not even regret a murder is not capable of doing it again when released from jail? It´s obviously different in Norway but where I live he very probably would have had to serve his full sentence being unwilling to even regret the murder. Also, his attempted escape from jail including firearms is hardly what generally is considered as "ready for society".

Oh, his judgement was inadequate according to his actions? The old "self-defense" bullshit? Even IF the court was prejudiced towards him - he commited a murder in cold blood and deserved to receive the maximum penalty.
-----

Check this interview (done in 1998)

http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_1.jpg
http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_2.jpg
http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_3.jpg
http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_4.jpg
http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_5.jpg
http://www.fmp666.com/magazine/zines/vikernes_6.jpg

Yeah right, he never was a Nazi... You can hardly get any more extreme than this. So - he isn´t a Nazi anymore these days - but he was and he denies it. Obviously he is lying about that in another pathetic attempt to piece himself a past together that is far away from what really happened.

What you say about the picture I provided (which was, by the way from a court session in 1997) - I strongly believe that Vikernes is one of the last persons on earth who would adopt a certain apperance just to appeal to likeminded people. Well, read the interview above (or others from that periond); he was 100% behind this appearance.

-----

I claimed he has started the group because he hinted in this direction several times himself in different interviews (even in the one I provided the links to above). I am sure you have heard about the "Norsk Udemokratisk Hedensk Front" - roughly a precurser of the "Norwegian Heathen Front" - and Vikernes started this group, period. His attempts in downplaying/denying this are rather ridiculous - he should know that his old interviews are still widely available.

-----

Yeah well, he COULD have said he is a racialist rather than to say he is a racist - but he didn´t, so what´s the point? Any discussion in this direction would be based on assumptions and that would lead us nowhere. The interview was even done in his native language, so I think if he wanted to say racialist rather than racist he could have easily done so.

Anonymous said...

while he was hanging with the nazis at prison, he was saying "i was a skinhead back when i was 15 years old". Now, says he has NEVER been a nazi? such a scum. that bitch is rewriting his biography every two or three years to prove consistency. pathological liar.

Chagrynn said...

Exactly!

Anonymous said...

He couldn't have said he was a racialist, the Norwegian language doesn't differentiate between racism and racialism; the best he can do, as long as he's talking Norwegian is: "Yes, I'm a racist, but I don't hate anyone."