Firtan interview

 Hi there! The album is called Helios, but the idea of light here doesn't seem particularly comforting. Light is something to be seized, forged, burned into existence, even weaponized. When did "enlightenment" become something aggressive in Firtan's worldview?

Hello, thank you for having us. I would need to politely push back on this. Aggression was always a part of religious language usually hidden under softer expressions, sugar-coated if you will, for example the word “enlightenment” itself. Transformation requires to live through all emotions, sadness, anger, fear but also joy and happiness. It is not meant to be peaceful and without aggression. It will hurt, it will feel hopeless at times to push back on illusions and killing off who you thought to be. Even giving live comes with unbelievable pain, ask any mother. If you want to become you need be reborn in a way. We refuse to use the same sugar-coating as others might do, because this process cannot be achieved in a gentle way. But it is  also not drenched with pure aggression, it is a medley of emotions and states of being. I have the idea that enlightenment cannot be found in the outside only on the inside. Self-authored enlightenment is something you fight to produce. The aggression is not aimed at anyone actually, it targets ones own illusion: ignorance, false comfort and inherited doctrine.  Even the solar mythology was never very comforting either, think of Icarus or Prometheus. They had to go through some things themselves. Its a comfortable lie to think enlightenment is gentle. So if light is not given to you, you need to take it, and this has a cost.

In "Himsa", you describe a world of decay, hypocrisy, "demoncracy", famine and darkness, but the narrator also admits to taking pride in his own ignominy. Is the album ultimately criticizing the world around us, or the part of ourselves that willingly participates in its decay?

I assume you are referring to "Kalika's Tongue", but its is in conjunction to "Himsa" of course. The lyrical theme here is not about choosing between condemning the world or condemning the self. More so, it manifests that these are the same accusations from two different viewpoints. All the decay is real and needs to be talked about. However, the aspect of taking pride in it, the ignominy that is, makes the song not a simple lamentation but an outright confession. Music that points towards the outside has been written to many times before, but "Kalika's Tongue" refuses to comfort the listener in that way. The protagonist is not a victim by any means, he describes the wrongdoings in his world from a distance and has found satisfaction in his complicity with it, shamelessly admitting it. It's like he is saying: The world is in shambles and I enjoy being in shambles with it. Only a god-like figure can turn the world - in this case Kalika and her tongue that represent containment of chaos - to a better place, so he believes, to prevail over the demonic entity Kali, the personification of sin and the lord of the dark Yuga; as people are to corrupted and lethargic to overcome themselves and the state of the current world. This also aligns with Nietzschean thinking, which is a philosophical anchor throughout the record. Enlightenment, or reaching Nirvana, or whatever you want to call it, is neither gentle or redeeming, it can be an Odyssey at times and requires a lot of self-reflection and honesty towards yourself. This might be the most brutal aspect, to accept and admit the inner degeneration, as well as, the appetite for decay, contrasting the believe to be above it, that many people have . Regarding "Himsa", it means something like violence/harm. This violence is not only done to the narrator but also carried out by him. Innocence therefore is a lie, even if you are pointing out that the world is going to go to shit, you are still complicit in it. Everything is connected and you have your part in good and evil, this is why you cannot really separate from this reality.

There is a recurring rejection of inherited or externally granted light throughout the lyrics. In "Helios", for example, the narrator rejects the idea of light being something "poured from higher hands". Is Helios ultimately about refusing salvation from outside yourself?

This album is not by any means about rejecting light but it rejects the believe that this light can simply be gifted. “Poured from higher hands” implies that there is a hierarchical system in play, something or someone that is dispensing the grace of light downward. But this would indicate complete arbitrariness and leaves no room for human nature to become a true source of light itself; a way of thinking we refuse. Of course, there is always the big debate about free will and all that, and indeed, some things cannot be influenced or changed. But you are not even trying? Come on! The sun itself, which actually receives its fire from no external source but generates it, serves as an inspiration. Salvation cannot be granted, it cannot be inherited you have to find it yourself. The Helios concept ties the larger idea of enlightenment together, describing it as a relentless and self-driven process that is maybe even unreachable. If you get to close to the sun you might get burned. There is no one to blame, no external savior or entity to help in forging through your own struggles. “Helios” is actually a reflection of “Kalika’s Tongue”, the song at the beginning of the journey. One song is already indicating self-awareness in the participation of degenerate behavior, while the other one portrays the realization that you are the main participant in your own illumination. No hierarchy left, just you, taking all the responsibility for all the enlightened torches you manage to carry.This is not nihilism it is self-responsibility.

"Strife for the will to power" appears in "Helios", while "The Form Revealed" ends with "I am in total control". Is personal transformation here inseparable from power - and if so, where does that desire for power become dangerous?

Power is required and needs to be maintained for transformation of any kind. Through passivity there will be no change, especially in the context of personal transformation. Force is needed to overcome resistance from external factors or your own inertia. The Nietzschean principle of “Will to Power” describes this.  Domination over others for the sake of oneself or your people only, as it is interpreted by many including the Nazis, is a perverted view of “Will to Power” and can make it appear dangerous. Instead it describes a fundamental, dynamic force that can be found in every life form to develop and overcoming oneself. The phrase “I am in total control” is on a similar track as it describes the endpoint of the inner struggle and not control over others. In general the concept of the album is solely presented on an individual basis. Maybe in the future it would be interesting to make a follow up record that discusses the beyond of enlightenment (if there is one) and its influence on a non-individual level. I agree, once the “Will to Power” concept is misunderstood it can be misused to overreach the individual inward layer and becomes dangerous. Self-mastery and being dominant can appear similar, but the motivation is different, as one is turned inward and the other outward. Being in total control also contains a more subtle risk. Control can become rigid. What I mean by this is that control can be used as a defense mechanism rather than a tool for growth. You get stuck in the shape you tried to become and you from there on stop to transform, but real transformation can never stop. There is no end goal, it’s an ongoing process. Control can also be performative, where you only chase the appearance of power, status or dominance, which is different from overcoming something within yourself. The self-honesty of the protagonist throughout the record portrays this clearly, in my opinion. The self-admitting reflectiveness in “Kalika’s Tongue” shows this already, where  pride in your own degeneration is reflected on, while also questioning it and not being pretentious about it. The destructive nature of power is only unleashed when you stop to examine it.

The album repeatedly moves between ancient religious language, occult terminology, philosophical ideas and very personal declarations. Are these traditions being treated as sources of actual spiritual knowledge, as symbolic tools, or simply as different languages for describing the same inner struggle?

The underlying spiritual message is what matters to us. These traditions and myths are tools and not to be understood literal, otherwise the concept would collapse under its own contradictions. Mythology, occultism and Nietzsches philosophy are not in agreement when it comes to their intrinsic belief systems. They cannot all be simultaneously “true” as a doctrine. Instead, we use syncretism as a methodological approach here. Each myth, each tradition is a source for what it describes best in our opinion. Occult vocabulary has something enchanting and mysterious, like forbidden transgressive knowledge. The Sanskrit terminology is great in naming cyclical transformation. Greek mythology lays the fundamental archetypal structure, which are hubris, fire symbolism, descent and return. Nietzsche lets us tie this to the real world, providing an interpretive connection between these traditions. While none of them provides a final answer, they are different tools that can be broken down to the same thing. This approach is not random, its intentional. The song “Helios” rejects light from any source but the light within. If this is taken into account, the refusal of kneeling to any inherited tradition manifests and the same is applied to belief itself. Choosing one particular belief system would therefore contradict everything else we want to communicate on the record. We use these traditions, we are not owned by them. The meaning comes from this struggle itself and is not borrowing legitimacy from any of these systems. We use them as languages and not as spiritual truths. This is the cost of becoming yourself, in my opinion, being brave enough to not ask permission from anything above you.

“Wide Open Eye" directly invokes The Kybalion and ideas such as "As above, so below" and "As within, so without". What attracted Firtan to that particular body of occult philosophy, and how does it connect with the rest of the album?

These lyrics were written by Chris and I actually have not read the Kybalion. But what I can say is that analogue to the Kybalion the lyrics aim to portray the collapse of hierarchy instead of reinforcing it. High and low statuses are mirrors of each other and cannot be seen as a ladder, this is described by “As above, so below”. This fits the album as it refuses authority handed down from above. No source outside the self is required to find your within, as everything reflects everything else. Occult language, unlike philosophy, offers a very precise way of describing lived experience rather than pure argumentation. “Wide open eye” allows you to see only what you are willing to see with your own eyes open.

There is a fascinating contradiction between dissolution and self-creation in the lyrics: "Dissolve and become", followed by "Become and bring light". Does transformation require destroying the previous self first, or is the idea to uncover something that was already there?

The order is the key here. It says “dissolve and become” not “or”. Dissolution is no alternative but a precondition. You have to make room for some something to exist in its place instead. But we do not mean destruction, its a cleansing of false believes. Stripping away the older self to manifest something real are not competing, they are just looking at the same process from two angles. The light in this case is forged and constructed not received.  It does not dig up pre-existing “truths”, there is no blueprint of what you are creating from what remains. Nietzsches self-overcoming comes to mind here not a “find your true self” narrative. Dissolving is not the opposite of creating here, it is the cost for what you are willing to build.

"Ascension" begins with the narrator trapped inside a cold, constricting tomb and eventually reaches "Reconnect­ing to my essence". Is that tomb meant literally as a metaphor for the ordinary self - the identity, habits and limitations that have to be broken before transformation can happen?

This is another lyric of Chris and uses Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” as inspiration. With that in mind, the tomb becomes false perception. The prisoner is not only trapped but they also face the wrong way, thinking of shadows as their only reality. It is indeed cold and constricting as it represents stasis and not just enclosure. Of course in Platos original allegory the prisoners do not become a new form of being once they escape the cave, they only see what was already there. “Reconnecting to my essence” describes this way towards reality. Only in the song “Helios” the transformation really starts to happen. Building and discovering are not contradictions. “Ascension” is describing the climb towards the sunlight. By escaping the prisoner sees the true sunlight, as opposed to its false sun, the fire in the cave. He rejects the illusion here again. The tomb is the cave. But “Ascension” is building a new self from nothing. It is the first encounter with reality, the sun that was always there.

The word "Helios" obviously carries the image of the sun, but your lyrics repeatedly distinguish between borrowed light and light generated from within. What is the difference between illumination and actual transformation for you?

When you are being shown something, you did not see it is illuminated. Transformation is becoming what has been illuminated by you. But simple illumination, be it knowledge or realization, does not mean that it really affects or changes you, it simply means you know about it now. This is the line between borrowed and inner light. The borrowed light is the fire in the cave or the light poured from higher hands that is able to show you something. It even comes completely without a perceived cost, but if it does not cost anything it will also not change anything. Inner light needs to be forged, which is the transformation. Illumination is epistemic but transformation is ontological. Real transformation requires light passing through you, which is the cost, leaving you changed.

Firtan have accumulated quite a collection of unusual colours here - acoustic and electric violin, ritual chants, analogue synths, soprano saxophone and guest vocals. Were these sounds chosen because the songs demanded them, or did experimenting with these instruments actually change the songs themselves?

Absolutely, it changed the character of the original demos quite a bit. And actually the incorporation of new soundscapes are often very spontaneous. This is the thrill in the studio actually. Playing around with something that is supposed to be finished makes us often realize that it actually has not been finished at all.

The violin in particular seems capable of changing the emotional temperature of a passage without making it any less extreme. How do you prevent an instrument like that from becoming merely decorative inside extreme metal?

The violin’s range of expression is abundant. It’s not only beautiful and calm, it can also be screaming of rage and despair, very similar to a human voice. That it is not mere embellishment also depends on the vision of the person playing it. Our violinist shares this vision in songwriting. The goal is to convey the intended emotion, not to show-off flashy skills. That’s why most of the violin lines are atmospheric layers, weaving through the riffing without competing with it. Often the violin takes the roll of a dynamic synthesizer or another effect-heavy guitar. Only in selected moments solos break the heaviness of the songs. Using this rather sparingly, helps to create emotional depth and tension and it creates a ambivalence, which also beautifully underlines the album concept.

You recorded with Markus Stock at Klangschmiede Studio E. Given how many layers and contrasting textures are involved, was the biggest challenge making the album sound enormous, or knowing when to stop adding things?

This time it was actually pretty easy. The song were already so thought through that we actually knew exactly what is required. But there were some spontaneous additions and surprises that I felt weird about when talking about it but they turned out to sound great, like the saxophone on the closing track.

You've been active for more than a decade, and Helios is already your fifth album. At this point, do you still think of Firtan as a black-metal band that experiments with other forms, or has the "black metal" label become too narrow to describe what you've actually become?

This is exactly the question I was hoping for, thank you. You actually nailed it. Yes, this absolutely how it is. I think we are playing Metal (and maybe even some other things), this is the only label i can really identify with. But I really dislike these labels in general, especially when they are as asphyxiating as “Black Metal”. We simply use it for pragmatic reasons, as we draw most inspiration from Black Metal, and people really anticipate to put you in a box. But in my opinion we play “Firtan”, nothing more and nothing less.

There are repeated images of fire, light, awakening, ascension and becoming something stronger. But there is also darkness, decay, shame, doubt and the possibility of dissolution. Is Helios ultimately an album about conquering darkness, or about learning that darkness is part of the transformation itself?

Conquering darkness would be contradicting. It is not a story of defeating darkness, like you would find in a dragon slayer story, instead it is inviting the listener to realize that darkness needs to be faced and is even the fuel of this process. This is the difference between conquering and the transformation process described on Helios. Conquering implies darkness comes from an external source. But just as light, it comes from within (at least in this context). This is why also the darkness and aggressiveness (as you mentioned in your entry question) are part of the transformation. Fire is a nice example here: it consumes something to produce light, even here is something dark in it. Dissolving and illuminating are one. This not a battle between darkness and light, good and evil; darkness and light, as they go hand in hand and cannot be defeated. They are both essential. Darkness is the fuel, it is metabolized. No fire on this album burns without something dark it can consume.

If Helios is the story of becoming "the strongest, clearest version of oneself", what happens after you reach that point? Is enlightenment the destination, or does the moment you believe you've reached it become the beginning of another struggle?

As already mentioned there is no destination to be reached. It will be different for everyone. If the light is forged it does not ignite pre-finished and if control can calcify you an arrival somewhere is not something worth achieving. If you believe you arrived you nourish from borrowed-light again. You start resting on a fixed image of yourself when you stop forging – you start believing in an inherited doctrine again, even if its self-granted. “The strongest, clearest version” is not fixed. The becoming keeps changing as a result of becoming. Fire is the example here again: without fuel it stops to burn. Believing you arrived is maybe even more dangerous than starting the whole journey. Enlightenment is not a destination, the believe you have reached is just more fuel you have to burn to keep the fire going.

https://www.facebook.com/Firtanofficial/