LaVeyan Satanism

LaVeyan Satanism is presented as a codified philosophy that differs sharply from the crude Devil worship often associated with Black Metal. The distinction is not simply between a milder and a more extreme form of rebellion: it concerns what Satanism means, how it is lived, and whether its imagery is joined to a coherent philosophy. Ihsahn’s account shows how a musician could be drawn first to that imagery, then move through the scene’s extremes toward an independent position; the accompanying discussion and interview with Anton LaVey and Blanche Barton set that development against the Church of Satan’s account of its own doctrine.

A philosophy distinct from Devil worship

The book describes two broad currents within Black Metal. One is a popular, readily accessible version of Satanism built from Devil worship, black magic, and occult caricature. Bands such as Venom and Bathory helped establish that register, and the account says it continued among less sophisticated groups and fans. Media attention to Satanic cults and ritual sacrifice, arriving alongside the early Norwegian Black Metal scene, may have reinforced this picture, even when the musicians themselves had not developed a considered philosophy.

The other current is represented by figures such as Ihsahn and members of Ulver. The book allows that some may have begun with the Devil-worship approach, but argues that they had moved beyond it. Their expressed ideas, it says, bear a strong resemblance to the doctrines associated with Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan. Ihsahn, singer in Emperor, is singled out as an influential musician whose understanding of the scene’s different Satanic tendencies had developed beyond that of many contemporaries. The contrast is therefore also one of change: involvement in Black Metal did not necessarily mean remaining fixed in its earliest provocations.

Ihsahn’s development and practice

Ihsahn recalls that early bands such as Venom expressed primitive, hateful views and that their music was intensely Satanic. He also describes an anti-LaVey reaction in the scene: musicians wanted Satanism to be more extreme and resisted what they regarded as LaVey’s humane outlook. In his view, some took the subject seriously but misunderstood what that seriousness demanded. Making oneself miserable, he argued, was not evidence of a deeper Satanism; he rejected the assumption that the philosophy belonged to losers or required the abandonment of enjoyment.

He understood why LaVey’s ideas provoked resistance. If a philosophy could be followed by an ordinary person, rather than reserved for an exceptional or transgressive minority, it might seem to deprive young participants of the special status they sought. Ihsahn also describes the scene’s earlier preoccupation with whether a band was true to Black Metal. He recalls that the argument had become tiresome: authenticity could not be settled by repeated declarations, and the weak, he believed, would fall away on their own. His comments place the dispute over LaVey within a broader contest over who could claim authenticity and extremity.

Ihsahn says that he bought and read The Satanic Bible, finding it easy to agree with and compelling in its use of Satanic imagery. That encounter was a beginning, not a final allegiance. Black Metal and more extreme material shaped him afterward; as he matured, he moved back and forth among influences and formed his own thoughts. By the time of the interview, he said he agreed with no one and shared no one else’s views in the scene. He nevertheless described Satanism as central to his life and way of thinking, and felt that he could not have become anything else even if raised in a different environment.

For Ihsahn, Satanism involved little ritual. He described it principally as a philosophy that offered logical explanations for anti-Christian behavior, while insisting that doctrine alone could not account for it. The ordinary reactions discussed in The Satanic Bible—such as striking back when struck—were not automatically Satanic simply because they were human responses. Emotion mattered as well: Ihsahn gave much of himself and his feelings to the music he created, and considered that creative investment as important as philosophical reasoning. He also described the spiritual dimension as strengthening with deeper knowledge. His account thus joins thought, feeling, music, and personal commitment without reducing the practice to ritual observance.

LaVey’s account of doctrine

In the interview, LaVey says that The Satanic Bible was a primer that codified contemporary Satanism, and advises interested readers to obtain it or consult a Church of Satan spokesperson. He argues that some Black Metal musicians who call themselves Satanists are still defining Satanism by Christian standards. Barton makes a related point: in her view, they accept a Christian definition that LaVey had challenged. LaVey presents the Church’s formation as a decisive change, claiming that earlier writers, including Twain and Nietzsche, had acted as Devil’s advocates without codifying Satanism as a religion or belief system.

LaVey describes the Nine Satanic Statements as a remarkably quick piece of writing: he says that he wrote them in twenty minutes while listening to Chopin in another room, using a pad of paper nearby. He identifies the Satanic Rules of the Earth, Pentagonal Revisionism, and the Nine Satanic Sins as central to the philosophy, and names stupidity as the foremost sin, followed closely by pretentiousness. His criticism of people who reflexively distance themselves from the Church of Satan turns the question of independence back on the self-styled independent thinker: opposition to an institution does not, by itself, demonstrate independent judgment.

The doctrine LaVey describes emphasizes selecting what suits one and attending to what matters in one’s own life. He calls Satanism concerned above all with earthly indulgence, and contrasts that orientation with Black Metal musicians who, in his view, concentrate on death and self-destruction. Barton similarly distinguishes those who make Satanism a fetish from those who apply it to what they enjoy. When asked whether the Black Metal crowd simply represented another kind of Satanism, LaVey accepts that its members are entitled to their opinions, but rejects any claim that their version is the right one: making such a claim, he says, resembles Christian certainty.

The scene, the Church, and public recognition

The disagreement was also a dispute over access and reputation. Ihsahn credits LaVey with making the word Satanism widely recognizable, while observing that Black Metal had made the term familiar in Norway. The book notes that only a handful of Metal groups had direct ties to the Church of Satan, with King Diamond among the more outspoken, although those ties had begun to change in more recent years. LaVey had been a musician, specializing in lost or obscure songs from earlier periods, but often expressed a personal dislike of Rock and other modern music. That distance may have discouraged musicians whose outlook otherwise resembled his from publicly affiliating with the Church. The account nevertheless suggests that LaVey understood why Black Metal attracted young people, even if he had little interest in the music’s sound.

LaVey interprets some young people’s attraction to Satanic names and imagery as an effect of inadequate communication: they may be drawn to the word Satan just as they might be drawn to a swastika or the colors red and black, without knowing what the Church of Satan teaches. He says that some change their position after learning about it and ally themselves with the Church. His explanation does not erase the scene’s philosophical disagreements; it locates some of them in ignorance and in the absence of a reliable route to information. Read alongside Ihsahn’s account, it also clarifies the difference between adopting an image, entering a movement, and gradually forming a personal philosophy.