I was actually a bit surprised that he changed the title of the album (some time back he probably wouldn't even have thought about doing something like this) - so either he is very desperate as to not piss off too many people with the original album title in order to sell as many copies as possible once it's released or maybe his parole officer "suggested" this move to him.
Anyway, I would now like to deal with this article:
While I personally think that this movie is about the last thing I want to be made, Vikernes is the last person on earth who should have a right to complain about this. Why do I actually think so? Well, short and simple - if he hadn't murdered Euronymous there wouldn't have been a media uproar this massive (and anything that followed due to it) and very probably a book like "Lords of Chaos" wouldn't even exist. So he should blame himself in the first place and then those who are trying to make a quick cash-in out of it. (Those are certainly to be blamed as well, though. But what is to be expected from people who are slaves to a society that is mainly about money, "fame", sensationalism, etc...?)
Now some quotes from the article itself.
"Unfortunately the Lords of Chaos story is not only nonsense; incoherent and utterly contradictive..."
As if his own accounts are not contradictory...
---
"If I want to I can always tell the true story myself, later on, ..."
So, he actually admits that his prior accounts are not the "true story"...? Interesting...
---
"Now, I really don't like it when others spread lies about me, and I can tell my truth well enough without their movie promoting my name..."
MY truth. Well, which isn't necessarily the truth, now is it...?
---
"...so if the movie is a complete failure I will only be happy. If it is a success I will also be happy because that will increase my market value even more. So; good luck, guys, or don't... I really don't care. It's a win-win situation for me."
So if he really doesn't care either way why did he bother to write this?
---
"They never asked Euronymous' family for permission to use his tragic story."
How would he know? I somehow can't imagine they would talk to him about this (or talk to him at all). Vikernes was probably rather thinking along this lines - hey, they didn't ask me so they probably didn't ask anyone else - but this doesn't necessarily need to be the case. Anyway.
The part which really made my jaw drop onto the keyboard was "tragic story" - I really don't know what to think of this. Is this a try to pretend something along the lines of "regretting" the murder? I doubt that. Though I can imagine that there are some people who would read something like that into this statement, something like - oh look he actually seems to care in a way - or whatever. It's very subtle and basically people can read into that whatever they feel like. Which was probably what Vikernes was aiming for.
Also, this "tragic story" statement somehow sounds as if he was only a noninvolved bystander to this and not the CAUSE.
*****
Next is about this article:
"[...] so I don't have the time to translate "Vargr í Véum" ("wolf in the temple", meaning "outlaw"), the book mentioned in "Dagbladet". Not sure when or even if I will translate "VíV" either, because, frankly, I am not very interested in the subject (Black Metal anno 1991-1993) anymore."
And I wonder why he doesn't at least publish the Norwegian version of the book (judging from the article/interview in Dagbladet it seemed to be finished)...? I supppose there are plenty of Norwegian-speaking Burzum fans and/or people who are generally interested in reading this. Somehow this only makes some "sense" when taking a look at the following sentence:
"I am more likely to simply rewrite the whole book in English instead - some time in the future."
So, I am pretty certain this won't come to happen before his probation is over and if it's actually going to happen I wonder if he will come up with something completely new (by the way, I am only referring to the part which deals with the murder) - which would be kind of difficult since he is slowy running out of "possibilities" to come up with something completely new. Let's see, as of now, for example, he already came up with the following (just as a quick reminder - check my other articles for in-depth analyses):
- The blade of the knife was 8cm / 10 cm / undefined length (but definitely long)
- It was sharp / not sharp but pointed
- He inflicted about 3 or 4 stabs / about 14 - 15 (in contrast to the 23 stabs stated in the official reports)
- He wore gloves / he didn't
- The first stab was to Euronymous' face / chest / shoulder or back
- Euronymous fought back / he didn't but fled right away
Hm...so my guess is rather that Vikernes will "adjust" the part of the book that deals with the murder to be more in accordance with his prior accounts (the parts dealing with the first stab now being to the face and the statement that Euronymous actually fought back before running are taken from the excerpts of the book reproduced in the Dagbladet-article) - or more likely he won't write a new version of the book at all. But there has to be a reason why he won't at least publish the Norwegian version...
*****
Next thing that made me wonder is this contact email-address now available at his homepage - there is of course no way to tell if he maintains it himself but if not it's probably done by someone close to him. What actually made me wonder is that this address is hosted at Gmail - if I remember correctly Vikernes has a strong dislike for U.S. Americans and their culture, etc. but it doesn't seem to bother him to have a contact email with an U.S. American hoster while he just as easily could have one with a Norwegian, for example.
