Eddie

I had not read a single book for my own enjoyment since 2018. Five years ago. As a kid I was a bookworm, devouring multiple books a week, re-reading book series again and again. I really enjoyed reading and it was my escape from the real world. Back in my days (imitating a disgruntled old man) I had no computer, no console and no cable TV. As I grew older, I had access to video games and youtube, however I kept reading, albeit a bit less arduously. As I grew even older, I started having mandated readings in french class that were absolutely atrocious. We were forced to read antiquated theatre pieces, books in old french, and indigestible garbage from the 1800s that are considered “classics”. This, coupled with the fact that I had access to other forms of entertainment, really took its toll on my willingness to read for my own enjoyment. The nail in the coffin was when I reached university and had to read math and physics textbooks and papers. Mix together very high-level science material, english from the late 1900s, and abysmal writing and you get your average physics paper/textbook. From that point on, my vision of reading had completely shifted from a fun activity to something unbearable but unfortunately necessary to acquire knowledge. The only non-mandated books/texts I read from this point on were purely for practical purposes; language textbooks, bass textbooks, reviews of future purchases... Those were for the most part also not enjoyable to read as the act of reading was not their primary purpose, but the conveyance of knowledge. In the year of our Lord 2023, I joined the Printhouse, and apart from being emboldened by everyone's passion for reading, I also wrote my first article here, which made me realize two things. First, even if writing had taken the same path in my mind as reading, I found it fun now. Second, my writing was shit and it took me more than a whole month to produce a passable first article. Since my goal was to write an article or more a month, I had to improve. The most obvious way of improving my writing was to write more, read good writing and try to emulate it. So I started reading again.

I did not want to go down the same path that had led me to give up on reading; I was going to KISS (Keep It Simple Shithead Silly). At first, I was going to choose small books that I had read before and that I remembered liking. I was going to keep it low-pressure by not setting deadlines for myself. I also was going to keep it easy by starting with books in my maternal language, french. Lastly, since I really can't focus on reading ebooks, I was going to stick to paper format. But I'm also filthy poor; books I already had in my possession had to fit the bill. Fortunately, since I stopped reading right during the time I was partially still living in France, the only books I have here in Canada are the ones that fit the bill. I started with a sci-fi classic that I remembered really enjoying: Roadside Picnic (aka Stalker).

Roadside Picnic

One other reason I chose this book first is that I played the first two STALKER games back last December. The games are very loosely based on the concept first introduced in Roadside Picnic. In any case, I was going to start with that novel, written by the Strougatski brothers. Before bed, I opened it up, skipped the preface and got directly to the meat of the book. Here is a very brief synopsis: Aliens have suddenly landed on Earth and left as promptly as they arrived. On their landing sites, things start to act strange: laws of physics don't seem to hold up, and enigmatic artifacts with various reality-defying properties are also left. The book begins years after, in a town where the aliens briefly stopped. Their landing area here is called the Zone. Military and science complexes have been created there to study the Zone and send in expeditions to retrieve artifacts and conduct experiments. They are not the only ones going into the Zone, Stalkers sneak into the Zone to illegally retrieve the artifacts and sell them to the highest bidder. Here we follow the life of Redrick Souhart, a Stalker. It only took me about three reading sessions to finish it, each one being about 30-45min; it is a pretty short book. I really enjoyed it and found it an easy read, especially for an older sci-fi classic. Nothing seems lost in translation in the french version; the original is in russian. I wouldn't call the writing style traditional or basic, it is very far from that, but it was still very engaging in my opinion. A couple of things that could confuse the reader, like the jumps in time and change of POV were handled fairly well, even if what happened in those time jumps is for you to fill in. The style is very authentic and honest, if that makes sense. The book is composed only of snippets of Redrick's life at a point in time; when the next chapter starts, a few years usually have gone by. All chapters but one are through Redrick's POV, which might make it a bit strange, but I think it was necessary for world-building. If that information had been there in his POV, it would have been hard to reconcile it with the character. My favorite part of the book comes during that change of POV, when we follow Richard Nounane and listen in on his conversation with an eminent physicist. It is refreshingly human instead of trying to be science-y. On the content of the novel, as said before the premise is truly original and the way we see it through Redrick's eyes is really interesting and keeps the whole mystery of the Zone intact. The dangers of the Zone are not explained fully, but it is implicit that the Zone is not the antagonist in the novel, it just exists. There is no antagonist in the story, the stalkers are on one side, the military on another, and the scientist and industrial in the middle. None of them have a clear moral high ground, and there is no one to root for. All the characters are extremely flawed and feel very human, which I really liked. The relations between the people are interesting there although they are not always super fleshed out. To come back to the Zone, the passages about it are tense and even if they are always really short, you can feel the excruciatingly slow pace of each expedition through the page. The Zone itself is surrounded by mystery and none of it gets explained, and the way it is described, extremely vaguely, reinforces that. Overall, I would recommend it, especially if you like SF.

Planet of the Apes

Monke. Continuing on my sci-fi binge, I decided to pick up the french classic “La planète des singes” (Planet of the Apes) from Pierre Boulle. I also read this one in french, since it is its original language; there would be no translation approximations here. The story goes as follows: Professor Antelle has designed a ship capable of interstellar travel, and wishes to explore the cosmos. He assembles a crew comprised of himself, Ulysse Merou and Arthur Levain, our protagonist, and they set out to the Betelgeuse star system, on a three-century-long journey in Earth time, but only two years for them (because light-speed, special relativity, time dilations and such). The journey goes without trouble and they even find a habitable planet in that star system, which they investigate. Air is breathable there, there is flora and fauna similar to Earth, and before landing they see cities! Stepping out of the ship, they meet their first humans; although they don't look primitive, they are in their birthing suits and it doesn't seem like they can speak at all. They have no time to ponder on their discovery; they are being hunted, alongside those humans, by apes. This was also a very enjoyable reading. It is also very short, I devoured it in two nights, and it's an easy read, contrary to some SF novels, even easier than Roadside Picnic. The book is divided into two parts, the first half has almost no dialogue but is yet not filled to the brim with descriptions, which I am grateful for. It is very fast-paced and there is a couple of time jumps even during events that one could have been curious about. This however doesn't take away anything from the story, which I found very consistent and coherent. Without revealing too much, I found it interesting to see humans through the eyes of a simian society, and how they flipped the script on human/apes relations, even if sometimes a bit overt, it is done well. There is an overarching mystery that develops pretty naturally, except for one part which I think the author put there for additional background; in my eyes, it could have been omitted. It also solely relies on the concept of genetic memory which has been completely disproven. Another little thing, this is a story within a story type of thing (some people found a manuscript with the main story), and there is a second end plot twist. This could also have been omitted. Nevertheless, I would strongly recommend it.

Dragon teeth

This book, and the little investigation it lead me to will get its own post.

La Passe-Mirroir: Les fiancés de l' hiver & Les Disparus du Clairedelune

Ophélie is a regular young lady in this fantastique world, whose whole routine is about to change; she is getting married to a stranger from another floating island. Upon meeting, this stranger does nothing to gain her heart, quite the contrary, almost as if he is also a victim of that forced marriage. But they have no say in it, it is a deal between the Family Spirits, immortal being that preside over the affairs of their respective floating Arches. The Arch of her future husband is very different from her own, there, the society is organized in a court which head is the Family Spirit. It is a cutthroat world where no blow is low enough to ascertain the power of your family or gain the favors of the Family Spirit. Her presence at the court has to be kept secret; many are the people that would rather see her or her husband dead, than married. Put that shit straight into my veins. It took me only two and a half days to completely annihilate those two books, which are both over 550 pages each. I was completely entranced and every waking moment I had during those two days would be spent longing for a time I could continue my reading. Those are the first two books in a series of four, and if I had the other two on hand, I would have read them too right this second. As you can tell from the title of the books, I've read them in french, but the author (Christelle Dabos) is also french and her writing style is amazing, despite this being her first book. She carefully balances action, descriptions, internal monologue and dialogue in a way that flows so well under the eyes. Content-wise, everything is also great, the characters are great; the hero, Ophélie, is great at her job, smart but has some obvious weaknesses that she will have to overcome, and some emotional growth to do. We love to see a balanced character and not an OP mess. It is interesting to discover the characters through Ophélie; they are at first depicted in a one-dimensional almost caricatural manner, but as she gets to know them, much more nuance is introduced. The dynamics between the character are also similar to that, and go through plenty of development. My favorite one is between Ophélie and her future husband (what can I say I'm a romantic), which is full of twists, turns, and questioning. The setting is really original and described in great detail without being excessive. Seeing it and the world being discovered by the hero at the same time as us really makes it digestible. I can not recommend this series enough, although I can not yet gauge the quality of the english version. Seriously, if you must only read one thing from the books presented in this article, it's those ones. I would recommend reading both at once, treating them as the same book, as they only form a satisfactory story together. Much of the character development (for most characters) only comes together in the second book. Also, don't go on Goodreads; I don't know what book they read but one of the most popular reviews, which is extremely incendiary, is completely ridden with inaccuracies and cherry-picking.

---

I was not expecting to be able to go back into reading that easily; from struggling to read an entire paragraph to devouring a book in a couple of nights. It is a big relief for me, who thought I had become iliterate (yliterate?,hilliterate?); who thought he couldn't read anymore. The trick was to just keep it light and fun, only read things that I wanted to read, wouldn't provoke any thought or teach me anything. This fooled my brain into being able to focus on reading more than a sentence at a time. This activity is now an integral part of my day, away from screens and constant stimuli. The only thing I wasn't able to change is my inability to focus on reading anything on a support other than paper. But I still have a bunch of books in my library, here in Canada, to read, so that's not an issue. I actually had a specific order of books to read and talk to you about, but the third book I read, “Dragon Teeth” by Michael Crichton derailed my plan. Not only was it not what I remembered, but my adult mind could also see something that my 18-year-old self couldn't: it's not that good. This is from the guy who wrote Jurassic Park, which alongside some of his other work, has raving reviews; what could've happened? Stay tuned...

Thank you for reading my logorrhea, Eddie

Contrary to many people, I did not start making bread during the pandemic. I started about three months ago, not because of boredom, but because of dire need. As some of you might know, I am a proud frenchman, and bread is engrained in french culture; we buy and consume great bread daily. This is not an option in Canada for a couple of reasons. Car-centric city planning makes walking down to your local bakery impossible. If you're lucky enough to have a grocery store within walking distance, your only bread option is most likely the typical north-american bread; an ungodly abomination. This abomination will also run you 4$ with taxes and the local bakery's bread is even more expensive.

One day, I decided I had enough and it was time for me to suppress my needs no more; I was gonna make bread, and eat it too. I have limited experience baking bread, pastries and such, so I chose to make a simple french traditional baguette. It can only consist of flour, yeast, salt and water. This is when my first hurdle came; bread needs to be cooked at a certain temperature and with specific-ish moisture in the air to turn out decently. The first is not a problem for most ovens but the latter is, as most consumer ovens do not have moisture control. This can be circumvented by baking your loaf in a dutch oven, which I possess! But this also meant that I would be restricted shape-wise to only round or oval bread (obviously vastly inferior to the chad long stick shape). This was a compromise I was willing to make, but my troubles didn't end there, I still had to find good flour. A quick note on flours in France, we have many variations of buyable flours regrouped under the T-system. Flours are graded from T-45 to T-150. Lower T numbers have less “ash content” (what remains from the wheat after it has been heated up), and higher, well, have more. Great, we can just try to match the ash content of french flour to a canadian one and we should be good, is what I would say if I was naive about us french's deceiving ways. See, ash content/T-number only matters partially, there are other factors that play a role in the taste, stretch, and stickiness of the dough. It means that I don't need to find the one flour used to make baguettes, but I can grab something that roughly matches it. I settled on regular north-american all-purpose non-bleached flour, akin to a T-55/T-65. So, was I finally ready to bake? Well no, I had to grab a recipe somewhere, adapt it to my supplies and needs, and slowly perfect it. This is where I encountered more trouble; I made a loaf daily, but for that first week, they all failed to rise. I experimented with more moisture, less flour, more yeast, more rise time... to no avail, my dough remained flat. I first was defeated, but ultimately determined to succeed. I went back to the drawing board, testing all manners of things, isolating them one by one, which could have caused my demise. I discovered that my yeast was dead, which was not surprising as the expiration date was two years ago. Whoops. Getting some actual live yeast yielded much better results (shocking), and I continued making a loaf a day, each time tweaking my recipe. To this day, there is only one thing that I still have to perfect. The vertical shape of the resulting bread, most likely related to the folding of the dough. I have scaled down my production of bread to two-three times a week due to time constraints, as it takes me around 5h to make the bread, which is too much. I will consider in the future making a big batch of dough on the weekend, taking some of it out and baking it during the week. This should reduce my daily prep time to only 1-2h tops. I will probably have to do some research into how to preserve dough in the fridge without it becoming inert and probably also tweak my recipe, invest in more equipment...

In any case, you are probably not reading this to catch my thinking about breadmaking, but for the bread. So here is the recipe, with relevant photos sprinkled around. This recipe is for two/three people, and incorporates a leaven; a small bit of dough that we prepare in advance. I like to start mine around 12-18h before making the main dough, so it has time to ferment; greatly improving the flavor of the bread. For this leaven you will need: 100g of flour, ~1.5g of yeast, 100ml of cold water. For mine, I also add a pinch of sugar (no more than 0.5g), which aids fermentation. Toss them all in a bowl, and mix them together for a couple of minutes. Cover it with a damp cloth for the duration you want it to ferment, I would advise at least 10h. This is what you should get after this time:

Now, when the leaven is done fermenting, you can start making your main dough, which consists of: 245g of flour, 4g of yeast, 150ml of warm water and 5g of salt. Those are not set in stone; you can adjust them to your needs. I would advise increasing the flour amount if you find your dough a bit too runny, and salt if the bread is not salty enough. You can compensate the yeast amount with more/less rise time. Be careful with the flour amount; too much or too little and your dough will have trouble rising, with too much also producing a very dense bread. This is why my recipe is a bit lower in flour/water ratio, to get an airier inside. Enough chitter chatter, let's get to baking. To start, toss all the ingredients, including the leaven in a bowl and stir vigorously for at least 5min. I like to use a wooden spoon, and it's a real workout on the arms. When you're done stirring, put a damp cloth on the bowl and let it rest for 30-40min.

You are now ready to knead the dough, fun! There are different techniques for kneading, which you can research online. Mine is very simple. After dusting a bit of flour on a big wooden cutting board, wetting my fingers, I simply fold the dough on the board, then merge it back together with my palms and repeat. At this stage, I don't really stretch the dough too hard because it would make it stickier and hard to work with. Make sure not to add too much flour when you are kneading; the dough with be somewhat sticky and it's normal. It took me, a lot of tries to get comfortable kneading.

When it's done, I grab a bigger bowl, toss the dough in it and cover it back up with a damp cloth, for the bulk rising portion of the recipe, which will last a total of three hours. Halfway through, I like to check on my dough and start the folding process; while still in the bowl, stretch the dough out and fold it on itself a couple of times. After three hours, I will fold it more outside of the bowl and give it its final shape (which you will choose). On my part, I do a letter-ish fold, taking a third of the dough and folding it in the middle and doing the same on the other side. Then I take my thumb and fold/roll it on itself lengthwise a couple of times.

Once the bread is shaped, bathe it in flour, toss it in your dutch oven and without covering it wait for until it doubles in size (for me it takes about 40min). This is to have the dough rise and be nice and airy in the end, and have it develop a “skin”. Before the 40min (or whatever it takes for you) are up, preheat the oven to 215C (or 420F). Once it's grown a skin, take a razor blade and score it.

When the oven is ready, dutch oven in your oven with the lid on for ~20min. Then remove the lid and leave it in the oven until the crust is nice and dark golden. You are then ready to take it out of the oven, let it rest for 10-15min and enjoy.

Congratulations, you've made bread! Don't fret it if it's garbage, my first 5-7 attempts, even after fixing the yeast, were not that great. If it turns out bad, just go back to the drawing board.

Result from the recipe

And what's inside

Above is my best-looking bread to date

As I said previously, there is still a couple of stuff that I need to get right. The main one is doing bulk batches preparations, let's say twice a week and enjoy fresh bread all week long. The first experiment with preparing the dough in advance was a success. I only had to shape it again after the dough had gone back to room temperature. This whole process, from taking the dough out of the fridge, waiting until it warmer up, shaping, rising and baking... Only took 2h30min, most of the time being spent waiting, which is way better than 5h. My bread-making journey is only starting; first of all, it is fun so I want to keep doing it, but I also have a ton of stuff to experiment with: I wanna make some garlic bread, some olive focaccia, my fiancée wants me to do sourdough bread... So expect to hear more from me on bread-related matters. In the meantime:

Thank you for reading my logorrhea, Eddie

The second ever CD I bought was from Ghost. As a young metal enjoyer and having never heard of them before, the artwork (disseminated throughout this article), is what drew me to CD. At that time, I had very little knowledge of metal as neither my father, friends, and family in general was involved in the scene and you could definitely not expect to hear anything metal related on the radio or through mainstream media, especially in France. And although online forums existed, the most popular ones were english which I didn't speak at the time. In retrospect, I think it was for the better as it allowed me to form my own, admittedly sometimes weird, music taste.

The ritual I developed due to the aforementioned was the following: go to the metal section of the “Espace Culturel” (big french store with comics, CDs movies, books...) peruse until an album art, band name or album title caught my eye, google the reviews of that particular album and check was subgenre it was. If the ratings were satisfactory, and after comparing a couple of them, I would buy a single one with my allowance. This would not be a regular thing: CDs did cost a lot and I lived far from the Espace Culturel. I would then rip the CD onto my phone and listen to it in one sitting when I had the time. This ritual led me to some amazing discoveries that I immediately fell in love with, others that were more of a slow burner but that definitely shaped my music taste and expanded my horizons, but also catastrophic and regrettable wastes of money (I'm looking at you Battles from In Flames). Ghost's third album Meliora falls in that first category. And deviating from the ritual, I started listening to it on the 30min ride home, mind you my whole family except my father, which might have been the most receptive to the album, was in the car. Needless to say, they were not impressed. I was though, and the car ride not being long enough to listen to the full album, I rushed into my bedroom to finish it, starting of course not where I/we left off, but from the beginning. I was hooked and I had to listen to more. It goes without saying that on the next outing at l'Espace Cuturel, I picked up Ghost's second album (their first wasn't available), without even looking at anything else. That was in 2015, those two albums lasted me until Popestar came out, an EP, released at the end of 2016. Although a very big departure from the two albums I had listened to countless times, I still enjoyed its more fun and pop atmosphere.

However, things seemed to take a turn with their fourth album, Prequelle. I stumbled upon it literally the day of release in 2018 and obviously grabbed it. But this time I didn't immediately love it front to back. The latter half of it (actually just tracks 6, 7 and 8) was not really to my liking, initially, but also after many listens. I didn't really think much of it at the time, and I continued to survive off of those four albums, skipping the end of the fourth one. Things kept turning as when I listened to Impera, their fifth album, when it was released in March last year, I liked none of it.

What happened, why does this blog post exist, and why this title? For the latter question, the answer is simply I like dramatization. As for the second, apart from the fact that my fiancée refused to hear any more rambling from me on that subject, is that I finally have an outlet for all that pent-up rambling. And as for the first question, let's first see what Ghost is.

Ghost is a Swedish “doom” metal band (their specific style is pretty hard to pin down, hence the quotes), whose whole spiel is being a religious ministry controlled by a satanic clergy. Their names are never divulgated, and all members wear masks on stage. The band is composed of The Nameless Ghouls that are led by a Pope-like figure, which changes for each period (which can last one or more albums). Under the masks, the band members change all the time and only the Popes/singer (Papa Emeritus I through IV) remain the same person, who is the creator of the band and most songs (lyrics and instrumentals), while the Nameless Ghouls are the performers. There is a decent amount of lore for the band and each album has its own story surrounding it. They have produced five “sacred psalms” (albums), three “minor psalms” (extended plays) and one “ceremonic ritual” (live recording). Each album has its theme, the first album foreshadows impending doom, and at the end of it the Anti-Christ is born, the second album is about the presence of the Anti-Christ and the Devil on Earth and how men deal with it. The third album is about how God is abandoning men and leaving them without guidance and help, and what fills that void. The Plague is the main theme of the fourth album along with human's mortality and survival. There is no official lore for their last album, but it could be seen as the rise of a golden age after the desolation of the Plague. Fun stuff! As you can gather from this, Ghost has been a fairly underground band when it comes to mainstream attention outside of the metal scene. Within that scene I would say it is now a fairly well-known band. Their music however was never really tailored to appeal to the average metal fan, if such a thing exists, and a pretty significant portion of the more gatekeeping part of the metal community spits on anyone that calls them metal. It is in part for that reason they are not super mainstream even in the metal community, but also because their music focused more on the melodic aspect of songs, and on the voice of the singer, which is usually not a bit focus in metal. So their target audience was understandably never the mainstream audiences, even the metal mainstream audiences.

It now seems appropriate to take a look at their music, going through each of their albums, and some EPs one by one in chronological order, to understand the shift in the target audience. We won't take a look at each of the tracks individually, but rather flow through the album, pointing out the vibe and also noteworthy things along the way.

• Opus Eponymus This is Ghost's first album, and before doing research for this blog post I did not remember why it wasn't in my Ghost album rotation although I had listened to it previously. Well, actually sitting down and listening to it shines a light on that (unconscious?) decision. I will walk you through my thoughts when I listened to the album. It begins with a one-minute-long intro, played only on an organ, seemingly setting the tone for the album. Very dark, slow and atmospheric, my hopes were high. The second track opens with a short intro on the bass, being actually audible, which is a rarity if you a familiar with metal. However, as soon as the rest of the instruments join, all hell breaks loose. The reason for the bass being audible wasn't good mixing, it was poor dynamics; everything is compressed on the same level. The guitar tone is heavily distorted, dark, muddy, and the guitars themselves are way too forward in the mix, worsening everything to a point where it is difficult to focus on any instruments even with decently detailed headphones. It's a mess, and the lack of dynamics makes it sound a bit dull. Despite all of this, with each passing song, you can see more and more of the rough sketch of what Ghost will become. The ethereal voice of the singer, the themes in the songs, the over-the-top (on purpose) satanic lyrics. Some of those are quite catching, which will become a regular thing for Ghost, and I caught myself whistling Rituals. Despite the over-dramatization on my part, this first album is not as atrocious as I made it out to be, and I will probably add it to my rotation, but only listen to it on speakers, where the bad mixing is less jarring. The first album definitely has its identity, and if I wasn't such an audio snob, I could even find the lo-fi nature of the album charming. It was extremely well received at the time, the target audience was as mentioned above, a subset of metal/hard rock fans who care a bit more about the melodic aspect of songs.

• Infestissumam That second album also begins with a one-minute-long intro. A Capella chants in latin, very sober and atmospheric. Then after ten seconds the drums loudly join; alleluia, dynamics! The bass also joins, being actually distinguishable in the mix. Soon after the guitars too and the tone is much improved with a present top end, still distorted but sitting where they should in the mix. The second track begins and all of it wasn't a fluke. Those first few tracks are much more progressive in their approach to music, really contrasting with the musical simplicity of their first album. They go further in their approach to everything, the voice is more ethereal, the texts are even more over-the-top satanic (some of it is sung in latin), the instrumentals sound airy and out of this world. This album for me seems like it is the one that really forged and solidified their identity. They focused on one of the strong points of the first album and of the band; the voice. Incredibly catchy lyrics in this album, it looks like they really paid attention to that. A ton of bangers on this one, track 5 to 9 are incredible, especially 5. Not much else to say, it is just a very solid album overall, and it was also extremely well-received, even better than the last one. I would say the target audience remains more or less the same, but maybe with people who appreciate progressive music more in mind.

• Meliora Meliora is one of the most coherent and consistent albums of Ghost in my opinion. The first two songs are what I feel like Ghost is at its essence; cryptic satanic lyrics, musically interesting and progressive-ish, technically impressive, both on the instrument and production front, and amazing clear vocals performance, different than most bands and not just in metal. The third track is my favorite from this album (it appeals to the lover boy in me). After a brief transition track, the fifth one is a light track, more relaxed; a welcomed break from the heaviness of the previous track. The songs gradually building up in intensity, to launch us into the sixth track, which opens very heavy with a fast tempo. This one is pretty catchy and definitely more experimental, a contrast from the seventh track and onward that are a bit more classic. The last two are catchy as hell. This concludes what is one of the best albums of Ghost and I believe the organic evolution of Ghost from their first album. This album was also extremely well received, and seems more tailored toward their listeners who appreciated the melodic part of the music beforehand, which is still a major overlap with their original target audience.

• Popestar Popestar is a five-track EP from Ghost, wildly different from their previous release, it's more fun, and definitely not as heavy. It is borderline pop and I would say way more approachable for the mainstream audiences. It is almost entirely comprised of covers and as an aside in their discography, I think it's a fun intermission. But it being mostly covers takes away the “Ghost sound”: the voice is different and more nasally, the riffs are simpler, less progressive and there are very few satanic themes in this one, which is one of the pillars of Ghost, and it is overall a pretty weak release. Although the first song of this album was a wild success, the rest of this EP was not well received at all by their fans. Now, this album looks like it is destined for people who are more into pop, and not really into Ghost, which, surprise, appears to be very little of their original audience. However, on my end, this EP being much different than their usual songs was nothing noteworthy since those were covers and not original material.

• Prequelle Prequelle goes back to the tradition of the first track of the album being a one-minute-ish intro track, this one being particularly creepy. The second track is fairly different from Ghost's usual offering, it's more fun, energetic and one of the only tracks from the main albums of Ghost that I would see being radio approved. Thankfully, the next two tracks are pure Ghost, and the fifth one, while being really different, is a pure banger. The next three tracks are not my cup of tea at all, I find they lack depth and are overall a bit bland with the lyrics being also not very inspired, and feel overall “sanitized”. Those three songs are very coherent amongst themselves, it sounds like they come from one same EP, completely separate from the main album. After one big skip, we reach the ninth song, which contains riffs that sound a lot like a slower instrumental version of the seventh, so not ideal in my opinion. But all is forgiven after; track 10 is a very fitting more melodic ending to the album and the two bonus tracks are pretty great. As a whole that is their weakest album release to this point, the lyrics are pretty weak, and the instrumentals seem a bit uninspired. The first half of the album can get pretty heavy (for Ghost), but the latter half is only composed of bland ballads and generic pop-rock songs. We can definitely see a shift in the target audience here, almost as if they are trying to retain the public they attracted with Popestar. It did not bode well for the direction of their next album.

• Impera I'm gonna be honest, I only listened to this album twice before deciding to write this post, and I was not looking forward to listening to it a couple more times to be able to criticize it. But I don't want to be talking out of my ass on something I listened to more than a year ago, so here we go. It starts on the traditional minute-long intro track which is fairly basic. Then the second track plays and my memory did serve me right; it's garbage I still really don't like it and it is very different from Ghost's earlier offering. It sounds like a generic pop band trying to vaguely and clumsily replicate the Ghost's music without their original sound and vibe. It continues on with each track, each time it sounds like a different band trying to copy Ghost. It's almost a parody of Ghost; the instrumentals are very basic, the singing doesn't really resemble anything we're used to, and worst of all it doesn't make for a coherent album. We then reach track 5 which almost sounds like it belongs in their previous album, in the middle of the three horrendous tracks aforementioned. The one after that sounds like it belongs in this album but is wildly different from the earlier tracks. We then reach a minute-ish interlude, which is more than necessary for me to calm down. What comes after is even weirder, it doesn't sound like it belongs anywhere; not in Ghost's earlier work, not in its current one, and honestly it sounds like it comes straight out of a musical – it's fucking bombastic. It is so over the top, with trumpets, a pirate-ish voice rolling Rs, and weird timing, the song is all over the place but at the same time makes sense. And honestly, I'm here for it, it may not sound anything like Ghost, but it fucking slaps. I saw someone describe it as a Disney movie villain song and it is spot-on. Unfortunately, the penultimate song of the album songs like a pop-rock boys' band trying to make Ghost, not only is it not my cup of tea but it is completely dissonant with the first half of the album. The last one sort of follows this, in the (cheesy) lyrics, voice and backing track that take more from the boys band side, while the instrumental comes from a more “traditional” Ghost song. It still doesn't really sound like Ghost. This concludes the main part of the album, as for the two bonus tracks I didn't even realize when one finished and the other started, they are still nothing like old Ghost, but at least the singer sounds like he's having fun. I was genuinely hoping that after re-listening to it, it would just be a case of their stuff being slightly different now and I'm overreacting, but it's not the case. My main gripe with this album is that it doesn't sound like Ghost at all. Everything they had built themselves upon in the first four albums is almost completely gone. It is also super inconsistent, has no clear direction, is completely dissonant with itself, and sounds like listening to a randomly generated playlist on shuffle. This album really lacks its own identity, and despite the little brilliances here and there, most of the songs really don't have a lot of character. The lyrics are pretty bland, cheesy and repetitive. It is definitely more mainstream, more approachable from an outsider's perspective, radio-friendly. To give credit where credit is due, it is one of the most impressive releases from Ghost on the production side of things, mixing and mastering are on fucking point. Not really sure how this album came out to be, but one thing is sure, the target audience has now shifted to something more mainstream. It seems to have completed its transition, as opposed to having one ass cheek on two different chairs like in their previous release. It's meant for a newer more mainstream audience, not metal fans, just people who like pop-rock. Still, this album was well-ish received, being really divisive between the newer/older fans, their newer fans loving it. This concludes our foray into Ghost's discography and the evolution of the target audience.
  
  

Should their music have stayed the same, or should a band inevitably evolve? Who are artists actually writing music for? Who do artists owe their success to? Can I come up with any more generic questions? I could go on all day, but I refuse to answer them, the answer to those is not what I'm interested in. Is Ghost mainstream now? Certainly not, but it seems that their later releases are trying to appeal to a mainstream audience more foreign to the metal scene. A fairly big departure from the underground rocky beginnings of Opus Eponymous and to the perfection of that beginning being Meliora, they are now for the mainstream, fleshed out to the point of sanitization. Which is fine, their new stuff not being my cup of tea does not take away from the enjoyment I continue to receive from their older releases. I'm just hopping off the Ghost train, taking with me four albums and one EP.

Now, if I go by the other (amazing) blog posts on here, it appears that a sign-off is in order, so here you are:

Thank you for reading my logorrhea, Eddie