You've said before that you want your music to be "magical". For my taste, "Umskiptar" is the most successful attempt yet, as it really transports you to some trance-like state. Do you agree with this, or do you believe "Umskiptar" is simply a different approach (which happens to resonates more with me)?
Well, music and how we process or perceive music is very individual, so my guess would be that the album is – like each and every Burzum album has been from the beginning – a new approach and that this particular album happens to resonate more with you. I do believe also that "Umskiptar"
is more accessible, so to speak, than the others, because of the slower pace and the strong influence from European classical and traditional music.
It is also one of the least "evil" sounding pieces I've heard from Burzum. Was there any specific reason behind this?
In case you didn't know I revolted
against this ludicrous "evil" Black Metal image as early as in 1992, when I made the "Filosofem"
album (recorded in March 1993) as an anti-Black Metal album. If any
music by Burzum sounds "evil" to you I think you need to get your ears – or perhaps your mind – checked. Try "desperate" instead, or "melancholic".
Maybe Burzum sounds less "evil" to you because I have the last few years been able to fight and counter the lie-propaganda you and others have been fed with since 1993 by the mass media and it's useful and often unknowing helpers in the metal scene, so now that the truth I provide manages to banish the lies like light banishes darkness you finally see that perhaps Burzum doesn't sound "evil" after all?
What was it about the poem Völuspá specifically, that you wanted to dedicate an entire album on it?
First of all I wanted to make an album dedicated to the propagation and cultivation of our own European (i.e. Pagan) culture, and Völuspá is a very important part of this culture. The language – it is written in Old Norwegian – is also very poetic, powerful and beautiful, and the contents of the poem is very interesting and has been interpreted in so many different ways by so many.
You've said that you try to change all the time, but you fail most of the time. Do you see "Umskiptar" as one of the times where you've succeeded in changing?
Yes, I guess you could say that. I may add that I feel that every Burzum album has been different from the others, and that I am – after all – going through a slow metamorphosis myself too, on many levels. I fail to change only to some extent, and even if I fail most of the time I don't necessarily fail most of the time in all contexts – and I have no idea which context you might refer to in this particular matter.
It appears to me that with Burzum, you create something fluid, harmonious and maybe even benevolent, while the views you share with the world (for instance on your site) are more cold, abrasive and at times maybe even harsh. Do you agree with this contrast and, if so, why do you think that is?
There are no contradictions in any of this; in what I say, do or am. On one side I talk about this revolting cesspool that we call Europe (and the rest of the world is of course no better), and on the other side I do something to improve (or rather restore) Europe by making it more harmonious.
Reading your articles, much of the start of Burzum had to do with escapism (such as the RPG's, the "forest fights", the driving in your car listening to music). Now that you've aged a few years, spent some time in prison and got a wife and kids, I can imagine that your feeling towards everyday life in general and your everyday life specific has shifted. Do you still need or want Burzum to be an alternative to everyday life?
Sorry if I seem to go off topic here, but just about everything
you do is escapism. Whether you watch Hollywood made soap operas and films on TV, play computer games, listen to music, try to build a career, play card games, knit cute little napkins in the evening, go to a ball game, dance, go to church, jog or whatever you do. Just about everything we do we do to cope with the realities of life. Some call this vertigo
, and we fear this vertigo
not because we are afraid to fall, but because we fear that we might actually jump
I still want Burzum to be a distraction from the despair we all suffer from because we are able to understand
life and the world we live in, but not truly fathom
Do you feel the need for more simple pleasures, apart from writing "heavy" and "serious" books and music?
Are you a happy and/or content man?
You're adhering to environmentalism and you've written about "the rape of mother earth", and you rightly see overpopulation as the root of this. At the same time you have several children and I guess you'll agree that the wish to protect them is stronger than any fear you might have for the environment. How do you balance these ideas?
Well, environmentalism is also about making sure threatened species and races do not become extinct, and right now the European race faces this threat. Even in Europe the blonde and blue-eyed man, who used to make up 100% of the population everywhere in Europe in ancient times, is becoming rarer and rarer to find – and half the blondes you see today are even false blondes. I contribute to the survival of my race by producing European children, the more the merrier, and this contribution is far more important than anything else I could do, in a world where Jews are allowed to spread their hateful gospel of "anti-racism", and where their media propagates and advocates the mongrelization (and thus the destruction) of the European race.
There is no overpopulation of blue-eyed, blonde, white skinned, intelligent, good, honest and courageous human beings. We only have too many Negroes, Asians (including Jews) and other non-Europeans. Both in Europe and elsewhere.
You've also warned against the rise of the "third world" to our standard of living (and the results on the environment). But isn't it true that "we" (Europe) became rich and mighty (and reached our current standard of living) by polluting some 50 years ago. Is it then fair to deny them the same chance?
Sorry, but no, it is not true that "we" became rich and mighty by polluting some 50 years ago. That is, with all due respect, nonsense
"We" became rich and mighty again
(like we had been in Antiquity) from anno
1350 onwards because we from then on more and more freed our minds from the Jewish plague known as "Christianity" and replaced this Asian regurgitation with classical European (i.e. Pagan) ideas and ideals. Hence the name "The Renaissance", which translates as "the rebirth" (of Classical Pagan ideas and ideals). We returned to our European roots and became more European again, so to speak, and therefore became more powerful.
We do not "deny" them the same "chance" as we had. They don't stand a chance of doing what we did. What ideas and ideals are for example Negroes going to revive to make them greater "again"? They were never
great! A "Renaissance" in Africa would be a return to cannibalism and other savagery! (Well, why not? At least that would provide them with enough food for themselves...) (And I can add that recent DNA research prove that the Egyptian ruling class in ancient times were also ethnic Europeans
They are different
from us and they live in countries with different opportunities and limitations. Only Europeans could do what Europe did, because
they were Europeans!
The only "chance" they have, if they make the same mistakes we made when we industrialized our countries (not 50, but starting some 250 years ago), is to ruin their countries (and the rest of the world) even more, and we should not help them do this – and besides this will only give them another bad excuse to flee their even more broken homelands and settle down in our crowded Europe. Crowded because of mass immigration, I may add. Crowded even by "humans" who used to eat each other only 50 years ago (e.g. in Belgian Congo).
The industrialization of Europe has been a disaster
to us. Our wealth has attracted all the most destructive and dangerous parasites on this planet, and they are destroying Europe from within, in all ways imaginable. I truly wish Africa and all of Asia had been filthy rich, so that all the parasites would leave us alone and go there instead.
If you want to learn something true
about the climate changes
, which of course is something else than environmentalism
, you can see this film on YouTube
[by the way, on a "personal note", since I work as a civil servant on climate change, (and so not really part of the interview): the climate change is not the result of a natural phenomenon, but actively caused by human actions. You've written about how "big money" can lie to the general public, the notion that there is still any true scientific discussion about this proven fact is a prime example about this.]
Both on the internet as in my own circle of friends, people discuss whether or not to listen or to "like" your music or even interview you, because they don't agree with your ideas and/ or actions. In how far do you think (your) music should be experienced separate from (your) person?
I think that should be up to each and every listener to decide. They can all think for themselves.
How would you feel if you heard that a devout Christian or Muslims or perhaps a very left wing squatter feeling empowered by "Umskiptar" (or one of your other albums)?
I couldn't care less.
And the other way around; can you enjoy art (music or otherwise) from people whose political, philosophical or religious points of view differ greatly from yours?
Well, I enjoy The Cure and Dead Can Dance, and I am pretty sure they are miles away from me in these respects. Not that I have checked; I just make a wild guess...
What, if any, are your thoughts about the actions of Anders Behring Breivik?
He is a symptom of a sick society, just like all the others who revolt violently.
You rebel against the influence Judeo-Christianity has on Europe, but I think that a far larger problem is more the ever expanding gray mass that only consume and enjoy the most simple and base entertainment. In other worlds, I have more respect for a person who tries to better himself through the Bible or the Koran, or... than some (stereotypical) schmuck who likes to watch football, watch "romantic comedies", lie in the sun for his holiday, etc. Couldn't it be that "white" and "black" are busy fighting each other, while the gray middle envelopes them both?
Sorry, but you are very ignorant if you think that I only revolt against Judeo-Christianity. The world is not "black" and "white", and there is no "gray" mass in between. Everything is in shades of all the colours you can imagine. Nobody just tries to better themselves through the Bible or the Koran. Nobody just likes to watch football or "romantic comedies". Human beings are not as depicted in Hollywood films. We are not one-dimensional creatures. We all have flaws and qualities, and we are all both useful (for something) and useless (for something else).
The "gray" mass is not my worry. My worry is the small elite of bankers who control almost everything and who all go to the same synagogues and read the same old testament. Christianity and Islams are just tools for these malevolent creatures.
You should watch some videos by (the Christian!) Dr. David Duke. You could start with this
Which would you prefer, a world where all religion and spirituality were banned, or one where Paganism would be one of the four big international religions?
I don't care about the world. I only care about Europe, and the Paganism I embrace is a set of values and ideals, a culture and tradition, not a religion. The rest of the world can do as they please.
Recently, you wrote and released a book called "Sorcery And Religion In Ancient Scandinavia". During your years of imprisonment, you had plenty of time to study the subject. I know that you already had more than just sympathy for the Norse heathendom before, but did it develop further by expanding your knowledge?
Yes and no. Yes
in the sense that my respect for and fascination for our European ideals and values, culture and traditions grew stronger. No
in the sense that I am still not religious; I am not stupid or ignorant enough to be religious.
Was it also helpful to cope with everyday life? It seems as if "forced contemplation" in prison turns some people into being more spiritual (although unfortunately they usually cling more onto the Bible or Koran), so I was wondering if there's a connection...
Well, sorry to disappoint you, but your comparison is very far off the mark. Studying ancient languages and traditions, archeology and myths, and comparing different European myths is very different from reading the Bible or the Koran because of personal shortcomings. I studied the subject first and foremost because I wanted to make sure our
cultural heritage survived
in the sea of Jewish lies we all drown slowly in today. I wanted to show that all the "Christian" traditions are in fact Christianized Pagan
traditions, and that they are because even the "Christian" Europeans refused to stop celebrating their old high festivals. Our culture survived, as part of Christianity. This is also what I demonstrate with "Sorcery And Religion In Ancient Scandinavia"
You partly wrote the book as an answer to the books that were already written, but in some ways seem to embrace different conclusions. Can you give some examples of which statements by archeologists or ethnologists are blatantly wrong in your eyes, and which are the correct views upon these topics?
The book is full of examples, but I guess you need to know the "established truths" to know when I unveil them as lies in that book. Most of what I write about is not even mentioned
by other writers, because they – pardon my arrogance – haven't understood very much at all in a mythological context. Some examples:
- I provide evidence in support of Sir James Frazers hypotheses regarding the origin of the conception of spirits and the evolution of sorcery into religion. His hypotheses has been discredited by just about every scholar in modern times, but I prove that they are still very much valid.
- I unveil the true meaning of the myth about Baldur's death, in contrast to the generally accepted version.
- I explain the true reason behind the Olympic games and the three other Greek contests in Antiquity (one every year).
- Norwegian researchers at UIO (Univeristetet i Oslo) have found that Skaði was indeed a male deity, but have failed to understand this and find the logical spelling of the reconstructed proto-Nordic version of his name or to understand the implications of this. I do this in my book.
- I provide a very reasonable explanation to the origin to the myth about King Arthur of the Britons pulling a sword from a stone to become King.
- I unveil the origin to the myth about "the holy grail", and prove that it is not a Christian, but a Pagan myth.
- I explain why the fairy tales have a male hero and why the "daughters" of the Kings inherited "half" the kingdom when the hero defeated some "troll" or "dragon".
- I use the rock carvings showing a woman found in Bohuslän in Sweden to recreate the ancient Scandinavian calendar, and manage to explain this in a mythical context.
- I explain all the high festivals most of us still celebrate today, believing they are Christian. They are really Pagan and I prove this in my book.
- "Santa Claus" is not based on a Turkish saint, but not on Þorr or Oðinn either (as many scholars claim). It is based on the image of another Scandinavian deity, Heimdallr.
- I provide a reasonable explanation to why the Bronze lures of ancient Scandinavia could be dismantled and why they were buried in the ground.
- I take Sir James Frazer's myth of eternal return and show that it is true by putting everything, myths, rock carvings, runes, fairy tales and old songs, into context. His hypothesis has been discredited by just about all the scholars of today, because he only found a "bone", so to speak, and I put both meat and skin on that bone.
- I link each rune sign to a deity and unveil a deeper meaning to them, and use them to explain the esoteric message of the Völuspá.
Now, these are some examples, but I assume this suffice to prove my point.
Do you think that some aspects of these ancient heathen cultures were left aside in literature, as they don't match with the Judeo-Christian dogma's? For instance, in these ancient cultures, be it Germanic or Celtic, women had equal rights to men and seem to have had a higher position in society than women have since patriarchal monotheism invaded Europe. You'll never read in the books though that the queen used to have the superior position until she got "worn out", and that she would marry another king if the newcomer seemed to be stronger and smarter...
Well, I think most women today have been brainwashed too much by Jewish feminist propaganda.
The women did not have equal rights to men, and the men did not have equal rights to women. Men and women are
different, and our forefathers (unlike us) were wise enough to appreciate
Patriarchal monotheism didn't invade Europe. Europe became patriarchal when our forefathers understood that women become pregnant because of the sexual intercourse, and not because of rain falling on them, Sunshine warming them or because they touched fertile plants in nature, transferring fertility to them. From then on the men inherited their titles from their fathers, and not the daughters from their mothers.
In the matriarchal times the Queen was elected because of her beauty, and the men competed to win the right to marry her and become King and ruler of the realm. Both of them
needed to win the next year's contest to keep their titles. Eventually the Queen would lose her beauty and the King would lose his strength (because of age), and they would then be replaced by a more beautiful Queen and a stronger and wiser King.
If you actually read my book you would know this already. It is thoroughly explained there...
Monotheism didn't invade
Europe either. It was spread by means of deceit, treachery, terror and lies over the course of around 1400 years (when finally all of Europe, even the Lithuanians, had been officially Christianized). By that time the largest peoples of Europe were already having a Renaissance of the European/Pagan ideals and ideas.
The first chapters were by far the most interesting ones in the book. The chapter on the Völuspá though took nearly half of the book, yet doesn't give that much new insight except for your personal "translation". When I consider this in combination with the fact has a lot of illustrations, it seems as if not that much remains to be read. Isn't this a bit poor, considering that people have to pay 12 pounds sterling for the paperback and 20 for the hard cover? I was personally a bit disappointed by it and wouldn't have spend such an amount on it.
Well, my books are like mirrors. You see yourself in them. If you know much already you will be able to appreciate the contents. If you are ignorant you will learn nothing.
This book isn't for the novices out there, but for those who are able to appreciate the contents. I even write in the foreword that I expect the reader to know the Scandinavian mythology already before they read my book.
It is short because I always write with multa paucis
("say much with few words") in mind, and because I leave out the obvious, like I don't bother telling
that "Santa Claus" is based on Heimdallr. It is obvious
from my book that he is.
If you are not able to appreciate the contents of this book I suggest you sell it to someone who will. If you sell it for 6 pounds Sterling you will only have paid 6 pounds for wasting your time on my book.
On top of that, you seem to have written more interesting (and sometimes more controversial) columns on your webpage, which were carrying a stronger message. Have you never thought of bundling those into a book, or don't you know whether you'll be writing more books in the future?
The articles on burzum.org have already been released as a book, in Russia and in Russian, as "Vargsmål II".
Authors: Maarten Van Leest and Morbid Geert (© 2012 "RockTribune" Belgium)