NAPALM DEATH

Smear This!

by Mark Fields

I've been a diehard Napalm Death fan for over 16 years, ever since my first exposure to those early Earache releases. Although I felt as if the band was kind of losing its way a bit from 1994 to 1997, 1998's Words From the Exit Wound showed the band becoming revitalized; and certainly 2000's Enemy of the Music Business removed any lingering doubt that the band could still deliver some utterly punishing grind.

Since then, in my mind, the band has continued to move from strength to strength with each successive album, and since Enemy... Napalm has served up some of the best material of its 24-year career. Captain Metalbeard knows my appreciation for Napalm Death – he knew me way back when I was discovering them – so his email to me didn't even ask if I wanted to interview outspoken vocalist/lyricist Mark “Barney” Greenway...I was simply instructed to schedule it!

And so it came to pass on August 19th (a month before the release of the new album, Smear Campaign) that Barney and I conversed by telephone about some

                                                                    serious and not-so-serious things...

GASPetc:  Going back a few years to your album Words From the Exit Wound, to me seemed like a turning point back toward a faster, leaner, more aggressive style. And by the time that Enemy of the Music Business was released, certainly all doubts were removed of that...

Barney Greenway:  Okay... [laughs]

GASPetc:  Since then, it seems that with each successive release, you’ve continued to hone the core elements of your sound, with each album more furious than its predecessor and demonstrating an increasing mastery of effectively incorporating the experimental elements that kind of overtook a few of your albums in the mid-to-late `90’s. Can you elaborate on some of the factors that drove your overall sound back into a faster, more pummeling vein?

BG:  Factors...well, I think maybe the best word here to sum it up is focus, really. I think we’ve just become more focused all around, and just the tightness of the songwriting; I think the general atmosphere of the albums – the rawness and looseness, but yet the big sound at the same time – I think we’ve hit the sweet spot with that. There’s actually some external factors that need to be taken into consideration because, being with a record label that actually gives a shit and actually is there on the end of the phone talking about things rather than not being interested whatsoever...it takes a lot of the stress out of the general band situation, and allows you to be more creative and more thoughtful, and apply yourself best to your album. That’s a big factor, actually. You’d be surprised how much the psychology works on that, so since that Earache thing went out the door it’s been just perfect and we’ve moved on and moved on and hit that sweet spot, I think. With that said, when we go in to make albums there’s never a great master plan; we just do what feels right at the time. There is no, “Maybe we should shift ourselves toward that.” We really just do what feels right at that point.

GASPetc:  Good! Well, tying into the previous question, the last few times I’ve seen you guys play it’s been as a 4-piece, and the vibe of these performances seems more spontaneous, stripped-down, and bursting with so much energy that it brings to mind the idea of a runaway freight train that just kind of barely stays on the tracks. That’s not to say you’re falling apart, but there’s just more of an urgency...

BG:  There needs to be a looseness there, because I wouldn’t want the band to be metronomic; and that was always my argument. With all due respect, you hear – certainly on the metal side of things – a lot of these really sort of metronomic albums to a point where a lot of the life is sucked out of them. I wouldn’t want that for Napalm Death. I like that looseness, but don’t forget that we’re heavily influenced by, for one, punk – Discharge, GBH...all that punk’s very, very loose. And then also some of the more confrontational sort of indie stuff...that’s also very loose. I mean, if you like Nirvana, look at their early stuff – I love the fire and spark to it, and I like the looseness of it.

GASPetc:  For about 8 years Napalm was a 4-piece, then a 5-piece for the bulk of your albums. Now that you’re a 4-piece again, has there been any talk of eventually bringing another guitarist into the band, or, since your current sound is less layered and doesn’t necessitate an additional guitar, does that even make it onto your radar screen?

BG:  Well, we always said we’d assess the situation as we went along – and we do, continuously – but we just don’t feel that it needs it. A second guitarist we did think about immediately after Jesse was gone, but not since. I’ve always asked why fix something if it ain’t broken, you know, and we’re doing very nicely, I think, on our own, as a 4-piece. We just don’t want to complicate things. There’s enough complications out there, trying to run the bloody band infrastructure. We don’t want to dig ourselves another hole or whatever.

GASPetc:  It certainly doesn’t seem like anything is missing. I was just more or less curious.

BG:  Yeah, I would hope so, from the perspective of someone who’s been to the gigs...most people say we’ve managed to fill the sound out; and if we’re managing, I think that’s perfect.

GASPetc:  The site’s publisher Mike and I were talking about the first time we saw Napalm Death, and that was when you were touring with Sick Of It All, Sepultura, and Sacred Reich on the “New Titans On The Block” tour back in `91...

BG:  Oh, the memories! [laughs]

GASPetc:  Now at the time I thought it was a pretty good show, but I wasn’t as blown away as I thought I was going to be. BUT, in recent years, as you guys are getting older it seems, almost counterintuitively, your shows are becoming more and more intense. The material you’re bringing out of the studio is more and more boiled down to really good, solid songs, and I was wondering what keeps the creativity flowing and what keeps your motivation up after so many years?

BG:  You know what? When you’re in a band in the early days – and I never experienced this; I mean I was always fucking on a leash, man, ready to break loose (I don’t mean in a violent way, but just a way of putting myself about on stage) – I guess some of the guys, maybe...I mean we were hitting America and it was the first time the band had ever done it; and I think, to a point, even though we’ve always been a bit more free-thinking than most, you do question yourself: “How should I act?” or “How should I be?” “I’m in this kind of band and...do we just fucking thrash out or do we have to be a bit more considered when we play?” I think you do go through that in your early days when you’re touring around. But I think when you reach a point where – especially in a band like this where it’s music taken to the Nth degree – you just go, “Fuck it.” We just play every gig like it’s our last...

GASPetc:  Right, right...

BG:  ...and when you go out and just fucking fly headlong into it, you get the best results. That’s why I rarely get bored at gigs, ever – well, I don’t, ever – because I know I’m just going to out there and I’m going to fucking cut loose every night, because I fucking love it and I do it with a smile on my face. Even if I didn’t want to smile, I would find it difficult not to because I get off on it. I get such an adrenaline rush from just fucking flying around the stage and the intensity of the music. Maybe it would be a little different if it was in a band that didn’t have the tempo and wasn’t as intense, but with Napalm it’s just a pure fucking adrenaline rush. Certainly on a wider basis, the whole of the band...if I was only half into it or a quarter into it I would just not bother because I’m that sort of person. I can’t grit my teeth when I know I’m not fully enjoying something. I have to have real enjoyment in it; I can’t have half measures.

GASPetc:  Turning inward to the creative process, how does the Napalm Death writing process usually work? Does someone bring finished lyrics and put music around them or vice versa? Do finished lyrics written separately get heavily revised for a better “fit” to the music? Is there any rule of thumb or does it work every which way?

BG:  No, no. It’s anarchy. Shane is very prolific when it comes to songwriting; he will put stuff on tape – complete songs – almost as one album’s finished. He’s so prolific; he’s always thinking of stuff, which is great, you know. Mitch is a little different. He’s got ideas but they tend to be a bit more fragmented, and he relies on the rest of us for opinion and insight and to bring them together; so you’ve got two different ways and they both work well in tandem with each other. So they bring it to rehearsals, bring it all together, get the beats in there...then I take 4-track tapes away and I’ll write to them. And that’s the process. The lyrics and the arrangements, generally, are always fine. I write 95% of the lyrics and the other guys don’t have a problem with them. We certainly don’t cut them to bits for the music. If they don’t fit, then we’ll just squeeze them in there. I don’t cut chunks out of lyrics because there’s a thread to my lyrics, usually, and I don’t want to dilute any of the projection of those lyrics. So I try not to cut lines or verses.

GASPetc:  A little more about the lyrics. Even though I come from a somewhat different worldview than Napalm Death, in my mind the lyrics have always been among the band’s stronger assets, and I do often connect with the points you make. Since we’re talking a month before the album comes out, I haven’t yet had the chance to read and consider the lyrics on the new album before “unpacking” the ideas with you this time around; but from the bits I’ve gathered online, and from the titles, I gather that it includes a pretty heavy cross-examination of the major religions. Some titles that jumped out at me are “Puritanical Punishment Beating,” “Freedom Is The Wage Of Sin,” and “Rabid Wolves (For Christ).” Can you elaborate on some of the specific themes of some of these songs or others you wrote?

BG:  Let’s take this song by song. “Puritanical Punishment Beating” is my impression of people who are heavily motivated by religion, who I’ve personally met down the years. I often find that they – I’m not trying to judge them specifically as human beings, flesh and blood – I do find that they find that religion is the only justification that they have for being relevant to how people in society move around. And so, in effect, it’s a “Puritanical Punishment Beating.” It’s like you are offering yourself as a whipping boy or a whipping post for religion, because otherwise you feel that you are irrelevant so you have to take on the very Puritanical message of religion. Then you must concede. And this is the experience I’ve had with people I’ve met; and when you speak to these people, sometimes, they feel that there is no other way – there is no third way; there is no second way; there is no nothing – because you are more or less irrelevant. Even most of the fairly moderate religious thinkers are often shocked by the very notion of questioning morality and certain things. To me, morals and morality are nonsense; and I often got a sharp intake of breath from some people if I even suggested that, even from people who sort of do generally think a little more openly about things. You have to remember that morality is an invention of religion. It’s a set of rules and regulations that were invented hundreds of thousands of years ago for population control. In other words, if you didn’t conform, you would be at best excommunicated; at worst, tortured or killed. And whilst it’s a little more mellow on that score these days – well, not in some countries, probably – there is this reliance on morality; it’s like the judgement process, and the fact that you have to live your life and you must follow the moral code...well, why should I? And when you follow morality based on religion which is unsubstantiated and unproven and part of, admittedly, this whole set of wondrous stories...it’s no basis to run your life on myths. You have to run your life on logic, as far as I’m concerned, and compassion. That is where we’re going to achieve more harmony.

You know, we are flesh and blood. We are solid entities. We can look in the mirror and be fairly proud of ourselves that we’ve evolved into a fairly complex species of machinery. Given that, why can’t we decide for ourselves? We don’t need morality. I don’t need set morals and neither do you or the next person down the road, to live our lives. In fact, we’d be better off without it, because it does nothing but create barriers; it creates hatred; it creates tension; and it has this very, to me, this very sinister feeling of superiority in that just because this person down the road is doing this or that, then that makes them a lesser person because they’re not morally sound. It’s fucking bullshit to me; and people get offended when you question morality. I’m sorry, but that’s the way I view it.

GASPetc:  Going out on a tangent here, it seems that in spite of what you’re saying as far as morality being nonsense, you’re still passionate about the causes you champion, such as animal rights. Is there any kind of objective right and wrong? Where does the notion of right and wrong originate, and what assurance do you have that you’re right about any particular cause you hold dear to your heart?

BG:  That’s the whole thing...it doesn’t come from a judgemental basis that hangs above the earth; it comes from the individual. I think it’s a very logical process that if we start to think for ourselves, and we move forward, we can arrive at our own conclusion that it’s really not a good thing to go and kill someone on the street indiscriminately or whatever. We know that. We’re well aware of that. Of course there are people who are affected in such a way that they would quite happily go and kill someone on the street – because of some kind of thought process in the brain that leads them to that conclusion, or otherwise – but that doesn’t justify a set of moral codes. We can actually think for ourselves, because what makes us happy...when we are relieved of such moral judgements in society, we will naturally be happy. And when we are happy ourselves, we will begin to understand people more, which is where, I believe, harmony will come in. If we’re then not restricted by these severe rules and regulations, everyone can arrive at their own conclusions.

And while I might put an ethos out there about animal rights and sexual equality and all the rest of it – and I believe that; I believe that’s the way forward – it doesn’t mean that I’m going to be someone else’s thought police, or that I’m going to say that they’re morally wrong because they do this or that. But that’s the ethos I choose to espouse and to put across to get people thinking. I don’t actually want to be people’s thought police, but I would encourage them to be aware and to make their own conclusions and move on from there. That’s the important point, and that’s not governed in any way by morality. And I understand why you countered with that question; but again, we come back to the thing that morality is this religion-based set of rules and regulations, and it’s based on moral judgements of other people. It’s a superiority complex in many ways, so why should we be subject to that? And again, especially because it comes from mythology...something that’s entirely unproven.

GASPetc:  My reason for asking was because, on the one hand, I don’t want to use the word “duplicitous”...

BG:  I entirely know what you mean...

GASPetc:  I don’t want you to think I’m coming down with a heavy hand...

BG:  Not at all...not at all...

GASPetc:  ...but it seems that while rejecting morality, and talking about people treating each other better in the absence of morality, you imply that there is some sort of, for lack of a better term, “morality” that is at work independently of religious trappings.

BG:  Yeah, but that isn’t necessarily morality. I think it maybe has something to do with the word and how it’s been derived...

GASPetc:  An issue of semantics...

BG:  Yeah. Just because we arrive at the process, it doesn’t mean that it has to be governed by a “moral code” as such. We can quite happily arrive at that process. Again, you are right in what you say. In a sense there may seem maybe a sense of duplicity in there, but there’s enough thought control and mind control and stuff like that in this world – and half of the reason why that is, is because we have these moral codes and all the rest of it. I’ll try not to be predictable and just jump on the back of this guy, but look at Mr. Bush. This guy believes he has the backing of God; he truly believes he has this divine right; and he truly believes that HE has this divine right to drop thousand-pound bombs in civilian areas, and he will decry the process of that when it comes from another organization that isn’t the state-sponsored organization. That is where the problems come in, because people like that assume the moral high ground.

GASPetc:  It’s interesting that you mentioned George Bush, because it ties into some other important things I’d like to expore with you. Jesus Christ wasn’t a political imperialist or a murderer. While it is true that Bush, as a suitable example, flies the flag of religiosity, do you think he is even a practitioner of the Christianity he professes? Is religion itself more of, or less of, the problem, than its misuse by the ruling class?

BG:  Well, there’s two parts to that, really, and both are fairly negative from my point of view. Yes, of course he uses religion – it’s his interpretation of religion that he’s twisted into this particular form – as have other people, not just him. I don’t just want to single him out...

GASPetc:  It’s okay with me if you single him out.

BG:  Yeah, but we’re talking about quite a wide issue here and just to single him out doesn’t actually answer the question...

GASPetc:  Yes, yes.

BG:  And there are many other people like him around the world, but we still go back to the crux of the matter that religion, in whichever way you treat it, and however you choose to move it onto a society...people still desire for it to be a dominant force in our lives; and even to those who don’t subscribe to it there is a certain motivation for it to still be a controlling factor even amongst nonbelivers.

GASPetc:  Right.

BG:  The whole notion that Jesus represents believers and nonbelievers...well, no he doesn’t, because right down to the wire I do not believe in a guiding force. I believe in a scientific point of view that we evolved from animals. I don’t believe there is any divine intervention there at all. And based on the teachings that have come along, none of it has been substantiated. And we go back to quite an obvious point here, as well: if there was a God or a religious being, or beings, with all the devotion He is given by the people around the world there is NO WAY that this God would put upon them the natural disasters or the types of conflicts we see around the world and stuff like that. You can’t punish people like that, who have given such devotion; it’s ridiculous. If God did it, then I would fully expect people to turn away for Him doing that. You can’t have one without the other...there’s several points there, really.

I purely do not believe in a religious driving force, and even that mythology part of it is perverting into other areas; so we’ve got this rolling ball, almost, that’s gotten completely out of control. And it affects all of our lives. It affects my life as well, on a personal level, because my old high school is currently being targeted by a business that’s run by fundamentalist Christians, and they are trying to get the controlling factor in the school. Now, I know for a fact, based on other examples of what they’ve done here in other places, that they will get into the school; they will sort of wrap faith around most of the lessons within the school; they will choose their admissions policy where, if there are kids there who refuse to go along with the religious teachings and accept and absorb those, then they will be booted from the school. There’s all of these very quite sinister things that I totally object to and I’ve been working alongside an action group to get the whole thing blown out of the water because I just don’t want it – it’s going to exclude a lot of local kids who actually need education. So there’s all kinds of factors where it hits me on the level; and also there’s connected issues like abortion – which is always a hot potato, of course – and euthanasia...

GASPetc:  Let’s talk some more about the ideas you’re getting across in those other 2 songs.

BG:  “Freedom is the Wage of Sin”: well, it goes back to morality again. There are many things that are defined as sins; but if we look at the basis of what is sin, if we just completely discount that and we just live our lives...that is when we achieve freedom. And when I say sin and stuff, you know, obviously killing someone with a fucking gun on the street is just a dumb thing, of course; but sin is a bit more complex than that – there’s a whole raft of things that would be considered as sins and half of them are just fucking ludicrous, to be honest. It’s like you’re not allowed to be a human being; you’re not allowed to experience the joys of being what we are, basically, especially on the sexual side of things, you know? As far as I’m concerned, it’s my body, your body, someone else’s body...we can do what we want. Noone has any right, even in theory, to impress upon us how to model ourselves to be a “model” citizen or whatever. So in a sense, when you break the chains of sin, that’s when you achieve freedom.

GASPetc:  So, to you, “sin” is simply a man-made concept that needs to be broken out of.

BG:  Yes, I think so; yeah.

GASPetc:  What about “Rabid Wolves (For Christ)”?

BG:  Okay, well this is a slightly different twist. What this is about is satanism, really, and how satanism is perceived as a form of rebellion against religion when, frankly, it’s an extension or mirror of Christianity. That’s what it is. And satanists put themselves about a bit as being free-thinkers and all the rest, but it’s the same shit, really; and a lot of satanists, when they attack Christianity, are basically attacking the very thing that’s propping them up. So there’s quite a simple essence to that, really. And then “Rabid Wolves”...because a lot of satanists consider it to be...what’s the word for wolf-like...

GASPetc:  Lycanthropic or something like that?

BG:  Yeah, yeah, that’s it. Yeah, they consider themselves to be kind of like that...you know, “rabid wolves” (for Christ). In other words, you are propping up the very thing that you’re seeking to discredit.

GASPetc:  Things in the world around us seem to be unwinding quickly. Being in a recognized band that pays a lot of attention to world events, how do you see Napalm Death’s role? Are you just reporters? Are you trying to turn things around?

BG:  I have to be a realist, obviously. I mean, I can’t pretend that Napalm Death is going to change the world because it won’t, clearly; but we are a small part of it. I think one of the things we should learn as human beings is that to give up on something is to concede defeat to those that would really make this world an even worse place than possibly it already is, so we just have to keep plugging away. Again, whilst I don’t wish to be people’s thought police, I do want to put my ideas into the ether and the ethos as well, into the arena, and have people run with it – if they disagree with it, then fine; if they totally agree with it, then even better! – and see what happens, because I just feel that I need to. I just feel that we need to...and I guess that’s it in black and white.

GASPetc:  In the sense that you champion the cause of the individual, I personally think that Napalm Death trace some of its lineage back to Bob Dylan or Woodie Guthrie. Do you take an interest in revolutionary lyricists outside of the more extreme musical styles of punk and hardcore?

BG:  Yes, I take an interest in it, but I don’t lift a direct influence from it, no. If you really think about, if you’re trying to write lyrics that are going to blow things wide open, hopefully (in the sense of the written word or spoken word), whilst you will take cues from things that are outside of yourself, you really need to tap into into your own thought patterns to make them work. I could quite easily lift some Bad Religion lyrics. I think Greg Graffin writes some fantastic lyrics; they’re different than mine – they’re a bit more prophesorial and a bit more...quite highbrow, actually, some of them – but I try to write a bit more creatively using simple English because I don’t want to sound elitist or isolate anyone.

I wouldn’t say that I lift directly from anyone, but I’m also influenced by Crass, the anarchist band from England that absolutely challenged everything. If you want to look at a band that wrote truly awesome lyrics, you’ve got to check out some Crass albums. They are something to behold. What they do is they present subjects in a way that sometimes comes off as absurd comedy, and others are presented as fairy tales. There’s always a little framework. And also the Dead Kennedys with Jello, the master of pathos, basically, and humor. Their lyrics were powerful because they were individualists in the way they wrote; and I kind of like to try and do the same thing creatively. So whilst I do concur with a lot of these bands outside, and obviously there will be an influence going in the back of my mind, I always like to write starting from my own fucking blank note pad, you know?

GASPetc:  Now, a little on “lifting directly”; on the tune “Fatalist,” I noticed (and enjoyed) your death grunt reference to Celtic Frost’s “Dethroned Emperor”...

BG:  [laughs] Of course, that’s a different matter!

GASPetc:  [laughs] A few tracks later, on “In Deference,” parts of that song, including Anneke’s guest vocals, reminded me somewhat of “Return to the Eve”...

BG:  [more laughter]

GASPetc:  ...and of course, on previous albums, some of your lyrics, and the timing of some of your “death grunts” are direct references to Celtic Frost, so you’re obviously a fan. At what point do these “Celtic Frost moments” find their way into a song, and what other less obvious vocal influences do you consciously try to bring to your vocal performance?

BG:  They just occur to me. It’s literally like I’ll just go, “Fuck me, that just sounds like the bit there where I’ve got to do this or that!” And that’s the fun part about it, because I’ll do it in the rehearsal studio and I’ll look around to the other guys and wonder if they’ve noticed, because they know exactly what it is, you know? So, as much as we’ve obviously spoken fairly seriously here about some fairly serious issues, there’s a fun side as well. Music is entertainment, as well. It’s there to do things – spark reactions in people and entertain them. So there’s a fun element to it as well.

Less obvious influences? Well, there’s Cal from Discharge who was always a massive influence; Ian MacKaye from Minor Threat, his stuff was always a massive influence as well; people like Tom G. Warrior, and Chuck from Death, in so many ways; the guy from Slaughter (the Canadian band). There’ve been all kinds of people down the years – Michael Gira from SWANS on some of the more depressing songs; Mark E. Smith from The Fall...right across the spectrum.

GASPetc:  With Tom G. Warrior high on your list of influences, do you care to offer any of your impressions of the new Celtic Frost album Monotheist?

BG:  It’s a grower, I think. The first track is fantastic... the second track, as well, actually; but further in, the songs are a little long to me. And whereas on To Mega Therion they had fucking riffs like few other people did, there’s not that many riffs like that on this album. The guitar parts are very basic, but there’s a lot of textured parts on there and the production is fucking amazing.

GASPetc:  On another light note, since this interview is for a website covering horror as well as extreme music, we’d like to know what some of your favorite horror movies are.

BG:  Undead is one particular fave at the moment. It’s Australian, along the lines of another Bad Taste or Braindead [aka Dead Alive]; it’s in that spirit. Horror...you know what? I like really obscure films from Japan and Russia and all over; that’s my big thing and I love all that sort of stuff. And violence...I would say Ichi the Killer and stuff like that.

What else? I like some of the really sinister horror that’s not necessarily like splatter or gore or anything. There’s a film called 13 [aka 13 Tzameti] from France that’s basically about a guy who gets invited to a house where people are betting on a Russian Roulette game; it’s pretty horrific and really good, actually. And there’s a pure splatter film from France that came out about two years ago, and it was a really brutal horror/slasher film...but the title escapes me [High Tension perhaps? -MBB]. I’m a big obscurity nut myself. I can’t be dealing with Hollywood movies; I fucking hate them with the big-budget gloss; it just turns me off. You get better acting in a film on a bloody few thousand dollar budget out in the middle of Romania or something. You get far better, more organic acting than you do in any Hollywood movie, at least to these eyes, anyway!