Zen Trickster: A Talk with Brad Warner

BradWarner_Bigger.jpg

 

 

With bare-knuckle book titles like Hardcore Zen and Sit Down and Shut Up, author Brad Warner is not your hippie aunt's idea of a tranquil, exotic spiritual master. With a pedigree in punk rock and garage-psychedelia, and a two-decade stint in the trenches of Japanese monster movie marketing, the 47-year-old native of Ohio is nevertheless a certifiable Zen master, part of a tightly-held Soto lineage that stretches back to Master Dogen Zenji in the 13th century. In fact, Warner's teacher, the well-known Gudo Nishijima, with whom he studied for 12 years in Japan, is one of the chief translators and curators of Dogen's writings. Nishijima not only transmitted his lineage to Warner, but appointed him President of the organization Dogen Sangha International, which he founded, in 2007.

Warner's latest book, with the provocative title Sex, Sin & Zen: A Buddhist Exploration of Sex from Celibacy to Polyamory and Everything in Between, attempts to bridge the divergent terrain of contemporary sexuality to Zen's often misunderstood -- and perhaps equally unpredictable -- approaches to morality and sexual relationships. That Warner succeeds in creating a funny, generally balanced, and nevertheless potentially controversial work should be no surprise: Warner has already come to be known as the "Porno Buddhist" by some of his detractors, largely by virtue of his plain-spoken column on the indie-goth porn site Suicide Girls. Sex, Sin and Zen, which includes an interview with surprisingly Zen-versed porn star Nina Hartley, will do nothing to tamp down Warner's reputation for pushing the envelope, nor will his brand new eBook, Death To All Monsters!, a digital-only pulp novel whose Godzilla-esque plot sounds eerily similar to Warner's own life, as refracted through the fantastical lens of a Robert Anton Wilson or a young Thomas Pynchon.

Nevertheless, Warner remains in many ways a strict adherent to Zen morays and maxims. Despite his forays into psychedelic music, for example, Warner is decidedly unimpressed by the spiritual claims of medicine workers and ethno-botanical seekers, likening the shamanic drug experience to a kind of "controlled trauma." A relentlessly independent thinker who still retains an edgy punk rock bite in many of his pronouncements, Warner remains a renegade both in the Buddhist circles within which he travels, and the cutting-edge culture to which he aims his books. Sitting in the crossfire of post-millennial sexuality and ages-old religious tradition was never going to be easy, but judging from the effortless way Warner drops into an otherwise painful-looking full lotus position, the easy path doesn't seem to be part of his Dharma.

 

JR: True to its subtitle, Sex, Sin & Zen discusses polyamory, as well as celibacy, in light of Zen teachings on"misuse of sexuality." This could be touchy stuff. What kind of reactions are you getting?

BW: A certain number of the polyamory people have gotten on my case about it. I don't hear from them directly, but I made the huge mistake of reading my Amazon customer reviews recently, and there was someone there who complained that I'd completely misconstrued the philosophy of polyamory -- so there's that contingent. Then you've got a certain number of the more traditional Buddhist crowd, who've never even heard of polyamory, who think I take a much too positive view of it. I feel that if I'm somewhere in the middle of those two sets of opinions, I must be doing something right.

And look, my feelings about polyamory are not entirely negative by any means -- I've met some people who seem to be able to make it work. But I first heard of polyamory because people had written to me in some distress asking, essentially, "How can I find calmness and centeredness in my polyamorous lifestyle?" My response to them was that perhaps the lifestyle itself was contributing to their mental distress. Now, I'm not even saying that they need to give up polyamory, but at least acknowledge that they've chosen a lifestyle that is going to be inherently stressful for certain kinds of people. Okay, it doesn't seem to be inherently stressful for everyone who practices it, but it causes a great many people a great deal of stress trying to juggle multiple lovers, which is not easy even if everyone, in theory, agrees to it.

I think what they're trying to do is take away that stigma of "sneaking around" and so forth; they think that the problem isn't the fact that "I have multiple lovers"; the problem is that "I'm sneaking around" or pretending to only have one lover. If we were just to open that up and everyone was "okay" with it, then all the problems would go away, right? I just think that's a fairly simplistic view of things. There may be deeper issues at work. I mean, you've been culturally programmed to respond to things a certain way, and you can't expect to simply override your cultural programming. That's one thing Zen has shown me, on so many levels. It's not something that works on an intellectual level; yes, you can work on your cultural programming, and eventually even successfully overcome it, but it's very deeply ingrained, and you don't simply override it just by deciding that you will.

I speak from a certain degree of experience here, though I decided to leave my personal life largely out of Sex, Sin and Zen, since I'd already discussed that quite a bit in my previous book, Zen Wrapped in Karma Dipped in Chocolate. Honestly, that has been my experience with attempting anything like a polyamorous relationship. I was perfectly ready to justify it intellectually, but I was not okay with it. So you have to accept, I'm not okay, so what do I do about it? You can work on being okay with it, but it's a serious thing; you can't just will yourself to be okay with it. That's something I try to bring out in general in the book, regarding any kind of sexual relationship -- you have to acknowledge what your real feelings are in a situation. It's very easy to deny them and stomp them down and intellectualize them away. In principle, I could very easily go along with the"whatever makes you happy" approach; if my girlfriend wants to see some other guy, and she still loves me, why shouldn't I just let her? But if you're home absolutely steaming when she's out with that other guy, you have to acknowledge that. I don't know . . . clearly, this is not my area of expertise!

 

Some people might be surprised to learn that Japanese Zen monks do not take a vow of celibacy.

Well, during the Meiji Restoration, when there was a huge push in Japan to Westernize, the Japanese Buddhists got rid of the rules of celibacy for the Buddhist clergy. Up until then, these types of rules had been matters of law; it was literally a crime to have sex if you were a Buddhist monk, or to eat meat. I'm simplifying here, of course, but that's the idea. So, after the restoration, the clergy had a choice: Did they want to uphold these old rules even though they were no longer legal matters, or did they want to abandon them? What they did was abandon them. So these days, the Japanese Buddhist clergy doesn't have a vow of celibacy, and this makes them unusual among other Buddhists throughout Asia, who generally have a strong belief that monastics should be celibate.

Complicating that matter further is the fact that the Japanese style of Buddhism has been perhaps the most successful in the West, perhaps because it does not require a vow of celibacy. Honestly, I don't think I would have taken the vows if there had been a celibacy inclusion in there. Look, the basic way to not misuse sexuality is to be honest in your sex life, and balanced, and sure, a monogamous relationship is probably the best way to do that. Although, I have to say that since being divorced, I have been neither monogamous nor celibate, so I have had to figure out a way to make that work, with varying degrees of success and failure!

 

Many readers of this site will be very familiar with the idea of using psychedelics and other drugs to access so-called spiritual realms that might remain cut off from normal consciousness. Your books suggest that you're unimpressed by that idea.

Well, the problem with that for me goes directly to the heart of what Zen is about, and what makes the Zen approach different from almost every other spiritual approach. Most approaches to spirituality posit that the normal, everyday state of mind -- what you experience at the grocery store or at work -- is somehow inadequate, and that what we want to do is alter our state of mind towards something better, purer, more profound; that's the approach a lot of spiritual paths take, and not just drug-related spirituality. Zen takes a completely different approach.

I was talking to my first teacher the other day, Tim McCarthy, and he gave a perfect example. He was talking to someone about forms of Indian mysticism apart from Buddhism, andthey used the analogy that the mind is like water, and that you have all these waves on top of the water, and the goal of the practice is to calm those waves down so that you have calm, serene water. Zen takes the approach that the waves are also a manifestation of water, so there's no real need to force them to calm down; you're trying instead to experience the real nature of those waves. So, sort of ironically what happens during Zen practice, is that by trying to truly and deeply experience the nature of that sort of wavy, turbulent mind, the mind has a tendency to settle itself anyway. But it's not that the goal is to settle the mind; the goal is to fully experience whatever mind it is that you have at this moment.

I certainly don't think that everyone who uses drugs for a spiritual reason is insincere and just wants to get stoned. I think there are people who are very sincere, although I think they are in the vast minority, and that there is a majority who simply pretend to be serious about it, but really just want to get fucked up. The other problem with anything that alters the consciousness is this: Sure, a lot of people have had very profound spiritual experiences because of a car accident or a traumatic blow to the head. There's a well-known story about an Englishman during WWII who was walking down the street when a German bomb fell next to him and he realized he was going to die -- except the German bomb doesn't blow up. And that experience so shatters his mindset that it changes his life.

There are all sorts of traumatic experiences that can give you some kind of deep insight. For me, drugs seem like a way to introduce a kind of controlled trauma, safer than a car accident, but which nonetheless knocks your head around in a fairly violent way. And because you've been violently knocked sideways, everything looks different. Personally, I don't want to knock my brain around like that; I feel that it's kind of dangerous and I don't want to take those kinds of risks.

 

What's the most frequent question you get as a Zen teacher?

Probably the most frequently asked question I get is, "I've been meditating for a while, but my mind is still jumpy and crazy -- what am I doing wrong?" And the answer is, you're not doing anything wrong. And it's a myth to think that there are people out there for whom it's not like that. There's this kind of myth out there that the ancient Indians and Chinese were able to calm their minds much easier, and we're at such a huge disadvantage compared to them, so we need to find an easier way to practice. Which is just nonsense, because if you look at the ancient literature, it's full of people describing how difficult the meditation practice is for them, and they're not saying it's difficult because of getting your legs into a particular position. They're having the very same difficulties anyone today is having, which is that your mind is going all over the place. I‘ve been doing this for over twenty years, but I still have days like that, where it's just a huge, huge struggle just to sit still for five lousy minutes. Those days become less frequent as you continue the practice, but they still come up sometimes, and I'm sure they have for everybody who's ever done this.

 

Why do people approach you to teach them? What do you think brings people to Zen?

Look, It's not an easy practice, so you have to have a certain degree of -- I don't want to say desperation, because that sounds too bleak -- but a recognition that something is really wrong, and needs to be fixed. Nobody comes to Zen who is a sort of a happy-go-lucky person who thinks everything is beautiful. A lot of people progress through Zen and become more like that, which I think is interesting, but generally, you have to have a kind of sense that something is wrong and needs to be done. Usually when someone comes to me and is interested in studying, I ask them where they came from and why they're there. It's hard to find a pattern to it. But there's a general sense that society as it exists today is not doing its job of making people happy, either on the global level, or on the individual level. So people have the sense that they've been misled by society and want to find something truer and more direct.

 

You are a proponent of studying Zen with a teacher, at least at some point in your development.

It's fine to keep your independence, and not join an organization. But the reason for having a teacher comes up later in the practice. There are a lot of problems with people who claim to have what they call "enlightenment experiences," without having a teacher to bounce those experiences off or discuss them with. Those people have turned out to be uniformly dangerous. The best example being Shoko Asahara, the guy who poisoned the Tokyo subway system with Sarin gas in March of 1995. There are all kinds of examples like that. So I feel like at some point in your practice, you need someone who's been doing the practice a little longer, and can talk you through certain aspects of it. It's not like I think you should never do Zazen without a teacher; it's just that, at some point, you have to bea little bit careful. Y'know, you can bullshit yourself on a very, very deep level, and you can bullshit yourself so thoroughly you can think you've become enlightened. And that can be dangerous.                          

 

Image by Fred Ojardias, courtesy of Creative Commons license. 

Comments

I usually avoid posting

I usually avoid posting negative comments.... But I just can't help myself in this case. This man is not worth listening to. He seems fake, through and through...

I agree with the shallow

I agree with the shallow doppelgänger.

Yah he has nothing to offer.

Yah he has nothing to offer.

pregnant tigress or bloated tabby?

I would say that the response to brad and people like him depends on how much you treasure the masks you wear, and how deeply enmeshed you are in popular culture and society at large. It depends on how much you get off on saying "zen master".

It also might surprise readers of this website to discover how fiercely ANTI-PSYCHEDELICS mr warner actually is. In fact, one can discover very enlightening things about his character by investigating his statements about such matters, and other visionary experiences... especially concerning his own singular encounter with these sacred substances.

We are all just human beings

We are all just human beings with the same potentials, 10,000 paths to the same place; death. So we should put into life with the knowledge that it is impermanent and not fester too much on the inane details that are whirled up in the samsaric mind (the mind of modern culture, the mind of thoughts, the mind that is other than awareness)

Zen natural, that is why it is filled with cleverness and paradoxical rhetoric, illustrations for realization. If everything is direct. And well anyone who knows some history of Zen knows that what results is student being asked a question, when he answer incorrectly (which is most of the time) he is hit with a stick. Wow how profound. Zen is the grey area of buddhism, its like nihilism in European philosophy. What is your disposition towards the emptiness? thats really the only question worth asking. If you fear this, then you are not practicing zen, then you are a samsaric resident like everything else you see around you, everything thoughts, and percieved.

Zen masters are just people, and they have egos, they want to be right like anyone. They want to believe they and their masters have figured it out, they take silent pride in this; and spend allot of time denying that pride. Zen is one way of understanding, of seeing with pure awareness, but there are other methods to the same place. Zen has been around for 1500 years or so. Seems irrelevant because it is.

I wonder what Brad Warner thinks about vajrayana? Im sure its all masks and costumes, visualization techniques, humming and esoteric symbolism; but what character of attainment does it produce different from this lineage? or is grey the colour we aspire too? Sitting quietly doing nothing, the seasons change. *Yawn* Vitality is excess its better to let things run their course, their will be other earths and other people in other times, they will do something then. Those fools who believe they are enlightened, ha! now let us watch traffic on television.

Zen practitioner traditionally would draw circles to display their apprehension of understanding, the circle representing a single minded understanding without deviation, a shape of infinite character and tangent; which if perfectly drawn reflects the unfettered mind of the practitioner. I think psychedelics are much the same way. Cutting corners, making spheres in space. Zen is timeless, and yet the humans who practice it live in space and inhabit bodies which decay. What do they have to offer? nothing. Its just a grey cloud tinged with pollution *Yawn* another time, another place, some other day. Zen is the opium of religion.

It is good practice to unite the mind and the breath, to unite the body and the breath, to unite these things with the changes of the seasons, and the flux of the stars and planets. Zen is complacent and somewhat hypocritical-which differs from being paradoxical. It is not a radical vehicle, indeed it is nothing, its just awareness of what one is doing wherever one is, and realization of presence there. Great I realize I live on the earth at the beginning of the 21st century.

So realizing that I ponder if psychedelics will make me 'enlightened' hmm probably not. Not in any conservative dogmatic sense, indeed psychedelics can be deviant and dangerous. However someone with yogic, zen, or other training, then possibly further realizations may occur that they could not previously have fathomed. Of course these 'Zen masters' will spend their whole trip psychoanalyzing and figuring out how 'this is not zen' and of course relinquishing their position of master, but that makes sense, I mean drinking alcohol is the same, in the sense of altered awareness and perception.

Zen is as is. In the moment, whatever the context and mental state is, stay sharp, stay aware, and understand. Clinging to the idea of doing zen and being enlightened isn't so much 'dangerous' as it is stupid. Psychedelics are something else, they don't need the approval of the grey masters, the experience is what it is, if you are aware and present thats what you are, down to the level of ionic channels in your motor nerves and the 'kundalini' spinal resonance of oscillating nervous energy up the spine. The audible hum, in the center of the brain reminding you that you are a being of great energy and potential, that you inhabit the earth in human form, in this time.

Any percieved intellectual schism between buddhism and other religions relativ to do with psychedelics is not relevant except as a historical curiousity-that being how we came to make these things taboo and allow for the separation of ourselves from the earth. As though we are superior to it, or somehow apart, but no that is the grandest delusion. We are made of it and we die and go back to it, the plants are not satans evil tools, nor are they deviations from the masterful zen state of passionless passive acceptance of whatever one happens do be doing that moment. Zen is not about the evolution of our species over the next 7 generations, its not about radical realizations of the bioelectromagnetic properties of living organisms, and the nascent abilities of our species to harness and use these abilities to reach new plateus of understanding and integration, in terms of technology civilization culture and religion. Zen is my fingers hitting keys. One is not exclusive to the other, paradoxical logic is the map of the invisible landscape. People are masters of psychedelic experiences like they are masters of life and death; That is to say no one. Chaos swirls around the empty center. A mind like nature is more parts truth than illusion. This aint no game, this is life.

The Zen of Psychedelia ... the Tao of Entheogenic Experience

  So, so many of us have had viable realizations, at every level conceivable, of virtually any/every possible mystic path while in the very midst of the psychedelic/entheogenic experience itself ... not as a bypass for the practical day-to-day Dharma, but as a highly synergistic glimpse based on true time cosmic awareness ... 

How are any of these organic-to-cosmic natural experiences outside of the very practice of Zen/Tao/Yoga ... any more than the ritual tea drinking{caffeine} and other associated rituals of such traditions.

If there was ever indeed "mastership" it would not be deterred, possibly even enhanced by such highly interactive experiences.   

Yet it is certainly understandable that if true mastership has not yet been attained that fear and loathing in relation to such powerful experiences would and do prevail.

Like the mystic guru {Neem Karoli Baba} of Ram Das, formerly Richard Alpert, who gulped down a triple dose of very strong and pure LSD, with no fear, no disturbance to his already fulfilled state of being.  

That being said I think it is part of Zen's charm, along with most forms of monk-hood,  to embrace sheer sobriety, not just from "drugs" {not that plants are limited to just being drugs} but sobered from fashion, lust, greed, virtually any type of aggrandizement, which many who take drugs are just not free from ... carrying this overly romanticized view with them wherever thy go.  

Yet, like fasting. such sober reflection is not meant to be all inclusive .. not a goal in and of itself, just a helpful tool to gain the appropriate context on many states of being.

We could all do with some very sober reflection .. and we could all do with more interactive cosmic synergy ... but no one needs the polar duality associated from these various virtues of purpose as if they were not complimentary.

Just see the "maya" {illusion} from both sides of the coin. 

 

 

"Wonder is what Mystery would do if it was conscious" ...

"Wandering is for every other possibility"

Pippalayana Muni 

Brad Warner's Paradox

Thanks so much for the thoughtful, and deeply felt, comments; I especially like Daruma's thought: "Paradoxical logic is the map of the invisible landscape. . . " Burroughs would like, I think. But perhaps Pippalyana says it best with, ". . . no one needs the polar duality associated from these various virtues of purpose. . . " Sure, there's little need to categorize or pin down an absolute good/bad designation for psychedelics OR Zen, and clearly part of the Zen ethos is "avoiding preferences," or being careful not to create too many good/bad dualities. Mr. Warner is certainly firm about his Zen practice (he's uncompromising about the need for proper lotus posture, for example) but on issues like sexuality and mysticism he is anything but ideological, and I don't think any of his thoughts here suggest someone who is hidebound to a fast and hard rule about how anyone else should live their life, or what their path should be. If anything, I find his remarks generally steeped in good common sense; hardly a Zen-only practice. Besides, anyone who has journeyed on psychedelics can certainly attest to occasionally feeling like they've experienced a kind of "controlled trauma"; even if you come back with deep insights, you've often had to journey to some pretty scary places to retrieve them. . . .

We should all be able to

We should all be able to agree that real and valid wisdom needs no apologists, and also that it isn't necessarily invalidated by personality. There are no disagreements between wisdom and wisdom, just disagreements between lifestyles and personalities.

I dont consider brad warner as a representative of zen anymore than I would consider hakuin ekaku a representative of zen. I dont consider any one person as  representative of a tradition in general. There is just too much material involved.

However any given person may certainly regard themselves as representatives of one thing or another, and they may identify themselves in a particular way according to the methods in which they live their life, and the lenses they use to make sense of the impressions they receive from the world around them.

and I don't think any of his thoughts here suggest someone who is hidebound to a fast and hard rule about how anyone else should live their life, or what their path should be.

That certainly sounds good, it sounds politically correct of course. But does it actually match up to what brad himself has said?

Lets see:

" I also talked about another experience. In that one I saw my whole body and being spread throughout the cosmos. My mind was the mind of God. All of time was my creation. I was the Biggest, Baddest Thing That Ever Existed.

That one fucked me up but good. And just like the anonymi who post comments to this blog, I was terribly upset when Gudo Nishijima dared — DARED — to question me — ME!!! — about the reality of this.

And then I thought, "Why would God His Bad Ass Self be worried what some little old man thought of him?" And then I ate a tangerine and got over it. Which was also a very big deal. I did not get over it easily. I'll leave it at that. I got over it screaming and kicking and cursing.

The former is not something you can bottle and sell. The latter is what guys like Genpo are tricking their followers into believing is "Enlightenment."

It's fucking them up big time.

But I digress.

If you experience even something like the former too soon and without proper grounding, it's exactly like psychosis. It will make you crazy. It is not a good thing. I suspect maybe Charles Manson had an experience of something like real awakening but he had it when he was not ready to understand what it meant.

Even with 20 or so years of Zen behind me, that experience by the river has had some seriously weird effects in my life. The song 108 Sacred Stages I posted here a while back is about some of that. Something like that happens and you're cool for a while. But then you're all like, (whiny voice) "How come it's not like that anymore?" "How can I make it happen again?"

Kensho is bunk. Satori is bullshit."

So what would you say about that? For a true apologist, there will never be conflict or hypocrisy in the idealized image they have - so we can probably guess the response.  The hairs can be split endlessly.  In that same way, we can certainly say these statements above actually do indicate he has thoughts about how someone should live their life, and what their path should be.  The proof is in the pudding.  I could say "Im not racist", but then next week say "Someone broke into my car last night, it was probably some stupid nigger."  But since Im not racist, thats ok, right?

People who tend not to give voice to the attitude or bent of nature that expresses certain socially shocking statements may find such novelty entrancing, enchanting or "refreshing" as it may be. Yet that does not mean that the content of such socially shocking statements is automatically accurate or beneficial from an evolutionary standpoint.  Most people in general dont want the kind of personal shock that actually makes their situation uncomfortable.  They say they want a trickster, but what they really want is a treat.

interesting voice

As someone who's been interested in shamanic journeying for healing, I suspect I'm one of those people Brad Warner would describe as sincere in the pursuit of drug use for spiritual ends. But it's also not hard to understand why someone with a dedicated Buddhist practice might not want to "intoxicate" their brains to that extent. It's refreshing to have a voice like Warner's entering the post new age spirutual arena.

the true apologist?

To respond to rajajuju's comment that somehow this quote from Brad suggests that he does have what I called "hard and fast" ideas about how other people should live their lives, I don't find this a convincing example. Sure, he has very strong opinions, but certainly anyone with a nose for bullshit finds the whole marketed premise of the Kensho instant enlightenment workshops to be pretty sketchy at the very least (even if, in practice, they may prove beneficial in some ways), and as far as the statement "satori is bullshit," it's actually pretty akin to traditional Buddhist maxims such as "Kill the Buddha"; basically, not getting caught up in abstracted ideas about what being a Buddhist means, or even what the Buddha is. Nowhere in Sex, Sin & Zen does Warner tell the reader how to lead their sex lives; it's part of the book's strength. Does he have strong stances on Zen practice? Is he outspoken about the selling of spiritual shortcuts? Sure; does that make him a moralist? As for your suggestion that anyone who considers balancing your rather aggressive stance on Warner with another view (or finds his perspective and language refreshing, given how polite so much Buddhist discourse is) must be a "true apologist," please: save me (and everyone else) the condescension, man. This isn't my first rodeo.

if the shoe fits

I never said "balancing my aggressive stance with another view" equates to being a "true apologist".  I already described how they would act, specifically, IMO.  If you claim brad is beyond hypocrisy, then yeh, I certainly disagree - wholeheartedly.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, so you can regard him and/or me in any way you want.  I would say that you sound like an apologist in the way you split hairs in favor of mr warner.  If I sound condescending because you dont like that perspective, then so be it.

cool insights

Hostility is the opposite of spirit and the reason there is so much hostility in the comments is because of the worst and deepest kind of egotism: spiritual egotism. Plant-based shamanism is something that a lot of people invest with a sense of self, often a grandiose sense of self, which provides a kind of "high" that seems uplifting. The problem with the ego is that when anything oversteps its boundaries, for example if someone suggests that plant-based shamanism is an inauthentic spiritual practice, then the ego reacts with rage (fear). "In zen they say don't seek truth. Instead cease to cherish opinions. What does that mean? It means let go of identification with your mind. Who you are beyond the mind then emerges by itself." ~Eckhart Tolle (A New Earth)

Hello William, that sucks

Hello William, that sucks though I enjoyed Sex, Sin & Zen it very interesting book indeed. I kinda agree with Aishte. He is right to say that Hostility is a bad thing . Hope you skip it at any cost mate! :) Werbeagentur

Oh no! I salute you for

Oh no! I salute you for being so fantastic though kinda surprised that you are a hostile I guess. surveillance camera Miami Hope it would be harmful for your carrier. Thanks!

The album did receive some

The album did receive some negative criticism. Apar pointed out that Three Days Grace is "hardly innovative" in their approach to writing music and that further distinctive qualities would help the band separate itself from their alt metal peers. shipserv resources