M M·08

The HNW Manifesto.

Vomir · Romain Perrot · Decimation Sociale, Paris · c. 2007 · Five negations on a label website. A longer paragraph beneath them setting out the political mode. The closing manifesto of the M-series and the document that has, in the eighteen years since its first posting, served as the form filed at F·20's position. The Bureau files it as the ninety-fourth-year extension of the arc Russolo opened in 1913.

filed under
Manifesto · M·08 · the closing entry · M-series final filing
Vomir · Romain Perrot · founded c. 2006, Paris · Decimation Sociale · Perrot's own label · the HNW centre

§ 01

Editorial.

Closing the M-series with the form that exists to close everything.

The Bureau files M·08 as the closing entry of the Manifestos department. The choice is editorial rather than structural: the curated index that has stood in place across the Bureau's career of the catalogue ran M·01 through M·07, with the arc closing at M·07 (Gerogerigegege, 1985) and a seventy-two-year arc from Russolo. The Bureau has now added M·08, posting the manifesto's date at about 2007, the year following Vomir's first dedicated harsh noise wall release and extending the arc to ninety-four years. The decision rests on a simple operational position: the catalogue has filed F·20 Harsh Noise Wall as a Tier 2 form with a method, an vein and a documented succession of practitioners and the form has a single, widely-cited, author-attributed manifesto that articulates its position. The form has a manifesto. The Bureau files the manifesto. The arc extends as far as the artefacts require.

The author is Romain Perrot, born 1973 in the Paris suburbs, currently based in Montpellier. The project name Vomir is French for the infinitive to vomit or to regurgitate, which the Bureau notes as a position statement in the project's title rather than an aesthetic gesture. Perrot's musical biography, in the Bureau's reconstruction from the available interview material (mainly the 2014 Russell Williams interview in the Quietus, and Perrot's contributions to academic noise-music conferences at the Sorbonne, University College Cork and the University of Paris 8 across 2014–2018), runs as follows: a childhood listening to Pink Floyd, a teenage interest in industrial-and-experimental records discovered through specialist Paris shops (the Bureau notes Bimbo Tower on rue de Charonne and U-Bahn on rue Quincampoix as the specific stops on the standard documented account), an introduction to Japanese noise through Merzbow and Keiji Haino in the mid-1990s and a long apprenticeship as a noise guitarist under several pseudonyms (Under Your Come Hand, others) before the Vomir project's founding in about 2006.

The Vomir project's catalysing artefact is the split CDR Adoration of the Faceless Woman, issued in 2006 by The Rita's Militant Walls label, with Vomir on one side and Paranoid Time on the other. The Bureau notes The Rita (Sam McKinlay, Vancouver) as the project that had, by 2006, established the harsh noise wall method most explicitly (the form's harsh noise purity position, as Perrot later acknowledged on the record, was developed by The Rita first), and the Vomir-Paranoid Time split as the Vomir project's first dedicated harsh noise wall release. The method ran forward from the split: monolithic static-noise slabs of consistent texture and intensity, without dynamic variation, without compositional development, without the structural devices of conventional music or even of conventional noise. The form is the form filed at F·20. The artefacts that establish it run from 2006 onward and now number, by Perrot's own later count in interview, about 380 across cassette, CDR, vinyl and digital editions.

The manifesto itself, the document the Bureau files as M·08, was posted to the website of Perrot's record label Decimation Sociale (founded 2012, the year after Vomir's first label-curated programme had stabilised) and has been the long-form statement of the form's position since. The manifesto exists in two modes: a five-line aphoristic core, which the Bureau reproduces in §03 below and which is the document's most-cited element and a longer paragraph of political argument beneath, which sets out the position the five lines are an abbreviation of. The Bureau notes that the longer paragraph is the manifesto's structural argument; the five lines are the manifesto's working summary. The form is articulated at two scales and the catalogue files both.

The performance practice the manifesto generates is documented at length in §04 below. The most-photographed element of the practice is the plastic-bag-over-head stance that Perrot adopted in the early Vomir sets and that became, in later reception, the project's most recognisable visual signature; the Bureau notes Perrot's own later ambivalence about the gimmick (the 2014 Quietus interview is explicit that the bag is not, in Perrot's view, "a successful marketing gimmick" and that face-covering at noise performances predates Vomir by about three decades) while filing the practice as part of the documented record. The plastic bags were also offered to audience members with an explanatory note. The Bureau finds the audience-offering gesture more editorially interesting than the on-stage gesture and notes the distinction.

The academic interlocution the manifesto has generated is the element of the file the Bureau finds most editorially distinctive. Perrot has participated, across 2014–2018, in three documented university programmes: the 2014 international conference Bruit at the ACTE Institute (Sorbonne Paris 1 / CNRS / ENS Louis-Lumière), the 2017 Paul Hegarty research seminar at University College Cork on Blanchot and the performance of harsh noise wall and the 2018 exhibition The Constraints of the Place at the University of Paris 8. The Bureau notes the academic interlocution as a distinguishing feature of the M·08 file relative to the earlier M-series files: where M·01-M·07 generated their secondary literature retrospectively, M·08 has generated it concurrently and the manifesto has been read in seminar rooms by people who have also read it on Decimation Sociale's homepage. The form is, in the academic idiom, the form filed at F·20. The Bureau holds this concurrent reception as one of the file's distinguishing features.

The Bureau notes, before closing the editorial section, the question that the 2014 Quietus interview puts to Perrot directly and that the Bureau wishes to put on the record at the head of the M-series's closing entry. The interviewer, Russell Williams, asked Perrot whether the rejection-of-society manner of the manifesto risked being read as a reactionary or radical-right political position. Perrot's response was explicit: the rules in the manifesto were initially designed to apply to himself and his own approach to making noise; the political position the manifesto articulates is an extreme one but is "neither totalitarian nor aggressive in any way." The Bureau files Perrot's answer on the record at the head of the M-series's closing entry because the M-series contains one Difficult Legacy entry (M·06 Whitehouse) and the Bureau notes Perrot's distinction from that palette as deliberate, articulated and on the public record. The closing manifesto is not a Difficult Legacy entry. The Bureau files it as such.

Filed by Bureau editor · VAGO · c. the Carolingian era · last revised c. the Carolingian era

§ 03

The Manifesto, Reproduced.

The HNW Manifesto · five negations · as posted
No
ideas.·01·
No
change.·02·
No
development.·03·
No
entertainment.·04·
No
remorse.·05·
The longer paragraph · Bureau's paraphrase

The longer text beneath the five-line core sets out the position the five lines are an abbreviation of. The Bureau reproduces the argument in paraphrase, noting that Perrot's wording on the Decimation Sociale website remains the primary source and that the paraphrase below preserves the argument while editing the cadence into the Bureau's voice.

The argument runs as follows. Contemporary life as it is promoted and preached leaves the individual with no remaining alternative; the conventional modes of contemporary life (entertainment, socialisation, the implicit ideological commitments that come with both) are continuous with the manipulation they are presented as relief from; the only available free behaviour, given this condition, is the behaviour of refusal. Refusal takes the form of noise; refusal takes the form of withdrawal; refusal takes the form of declining to participate in the structures of entertainment, socialisation and ideological coercion that the contemporary world offers as if they were neutral. The position is articulated as personal rather than universal: the rules apply, in the manifesto's own framing, to Perrot's own approach to making noise. The position is held with the caveat that the political extremity it amounts to is non-violent and non-totalitarian.

The manifesto's most-cited adjectival construction, additional to the five-line core, is the claim that the harsh noise wall is militantly pure in its non-representation. The Bureau holds this construction as the form's working aesthetic claim and notes it as the editorial mode that has carried the form forward through the eighteen years since the manifesto's first posting.

Decimation Sociale · Paris · c. 2007 · revised 2012 & 2014 · still hosted

§ 04

The Performance Practice.

The bag.

Perrot performs Vomir sets with his head covered. The covering, across the 2006–2021 period, was a plain black plastic bag of household-rubbish-sack dimensions, drawn down over the head and held in place by the noise emerging from below it. The bag is the project's most-photographed element and is, on Perrot's own later account, not the element he is most editorially attached to. The Bureau notes Perrot's 2014 Quietus interview position that face-covering at noise performances has a long pre-Vomir history (Hijokaidan, Incapacitants and various Japanese-scene precedents from the 1980s onward) and that the bag is not, in Perrot's view, the project's contribution.

From 2022 onward Perrot has performed with a black leather bag rather than plastic, citing wear, environmental considerations and a preference for the heavier object's relationship to the head. The leather bag is the same gesture in a different material vein.

Plastic bags were placed at the front of the audience at the start of each Vomir set, accompanied by an explanatory note inviting audience members to place the bag over their own heads for the duration of the performance, to separate themselves from anything other than the noise. Source: Vomir live-set documentation, c. 2008–2014 · widely photographed

The anti-concert.

Set lengths run from one hour minimum to eight hours maximum, with the practice settling, by Perrot's stated preference, at three to four hours. The position is that the listener's experience of the form is constituted by duration: the wall must be inhabited rather than encountered, and the inhabiting requires time the conventional concert format does not offer.

The setting Perrot has cited most consistently as the appropriate context for Vomir performance is Les Instants Chavirés in Montreuil (a suburb in eastern Paris), a venue programmed by Quentin Rollet and his colleagues for experimental and noise-adjacent practice since the early 1990s. The HNW Festival has been periodically programmed at Les Instants Chavirés since the late 2000s and has functioned, in Perrot's account, as the form's gathering.

Vomir performances are described in the project's own promotional material as anti-concerts. The Bureau holds the term as a working description rather than a marketing position: the form refuses the structural conventions (intro, build, peak, resolution) that the concert format generates, and a Vomir set is, by deliberate design, the form's negation of those conventions. Source: Decimation Sociale promotional material · 2012-onward

§ 05

Cross-references.

Cross-Reference.

M-INDEX Manifestos · Department index · M·08 filed as the closing entry · extends the M-series arc to ninety-four years Russolo → Perrot
F-20 ◆ F·20 · Harsh Noise Wall · direct attribution · the form the manifesto reads · the M·08 document articulates the position the F·20 form filed in the catalogue operates within
F-08 F·08 · Japanoise · Perrot's documented entry point to noise music · Merzbow and Keiji Haino cited as the touchstones across the project's interview corpus
F-07 F·07 · Power Electronics · adjacent upstream form · F·20 inherits idiom from F·07 while stripping out the shouted vocal and the explicit textual-political content
F-06 F·06 · Drone Minimalism · structural cousin · F·20's stasis-as-composition manner has clear formal resonance with the locked-groove drone tradition
M-07 M·07 · Art Is Over · the predecessor closing-manifesto · The Gerogerigegege 1985 · twenty-two years prior · the five-line refusal that M·08 echoes structurally and extends temporally
M-06 M·06 · Whitehouse · Right to Kill · Difficult Legacy adjacent · the F·20 form filed by HNW reads its own position as a deliberate stripping-out of the F·07 palette Whitehouse codified
M-02 M·02 · Prostitution at the ICA 1976 · the catalysing first-wave manifesto · COUM's gallery-as-provocation mode reads forward, through the form's arc, into the academy-as-interlocutor vein the M·08 manifesto inhabits
M-01 M·01 · L'Arte dei Rumori · the M-series opening · ninety-four years prior · the arc's origin point · Russolo's six families of noise stripped, over the intervening period, to a single undifferentiated band
ART The Rita · Sam McKinlay, Vancouver · the harsh-noise-wall practitioner Perrot has cited as the form's primary developer · Militant Walls label · the 2006 split CDR that catalysed Vomir
H-01 H·01 · The Long Prelude · the prehistory essay frames the M·08 five-negation manifesto as the Fluxus event-score tradition's asymptotic limit; the genealogy runs Maciunas 1963 → Yamanouchi M·07 1985 → Perrot M·08 c. 2007

A Coda · on closing
the M-series at ninety-four years.

The Bureau has now filed all eight manifesto entries. The arc runs from Russolo at M·01 in 1913 to Perrot at M·08 in 2007, across ninety-four years, six countries (Italy, the United Kingdom, the United States in two locations, Japan, France), and three language groups (Italian, English, French). The catalogue's view is that the eight files together constitute, by intentional selection rather than by exhaustive survey, the form's documentary idiom of itself: the moments at which the genre articulated, on the record, a stated position. The Bureau does not claim the eight files are the only manifestos the form has produced. The Bureau claims that the eight files are the eight the Bureau holds as the form's stated positions, and that the arc through them traces the form's working argument with itself across the period.

The shape of the arc is worth noting in closing. Russolo at M·01 wrote a long manifesto in 1913 advocating six families of noise. COUM at M·02 staged a retrospective at the ICA in 1976. The Industrial Records prospectus at M·03 typed up a corporate parody in late 1976. The Throbbing Gristle communiqué at M·05 in 1981 was a single sentence on a postcard. Whitehouse at M·06 in 1983 pressed an album dedicated to a serial killer in three hundred copies. The Gerogerigegege at M·07 in 1985 wrote five lines and stopped. Vomir at M·08 in 2007 wrote five different lines and continues, after eighteen years, to write them. The arc is one of progressive compression and progressive refusal and the compression has not finished compressing. M·07 and M·08 are both five-line statements; the twenty-two-year gap between them is the gap during which the form filed at F·20 emerged and required a manifesto of its own.

The Bureau closes the department with the following observation. Of the eight manifestos, one is filed under a Difficult Legacy notice (M·06 Whitehouse). One is filed as a deliberately-confrontational provocation that the cultural moment later rewarded (M·02 COUM Prostitution). One is filed as a document the form's primary movement produced for itself (M·03 IR Prospectus). One is filed as a single-sentence dissolution-and-renewal communiqué (M·05 The Mission Is Terminated). Two are filed as closing manifestos at twenty-two years' distance from each other (M·07 Art Is Over; M·08 HNW Manifesto). One is filed as the arc's foundational origin point (M·01 Russolo). The Bureau holds the eight together as the form's documentary self-account and notes, in closing, that the catalogue's filing of them is now complete. Later additions will be filed in supplementary modes; the M-series itself, as the arc, is closed at eight.

The Bureau also notes, finally, that the catalogue's Corrections welcomed; arguments ignored position on the colophon is operational across the closing of the M-series as it is operational elsewhere. The Bureau has filed what the Bureau holds. Readers who hold the arc differently are invited to write in. The Bureau will read what is sent. The Bureau will not, on the standard form of the response, change the filing on the basis of the response unless the response carries documentation the Bureau did not previously have. That is the standard. The standard applies to this entry as it applies to the others.

Bureau filing footer

Department · Manifestos
Position · M·08 · the closing entry · M-series final filing
Date catalogued · 9 May 2026
Last revision · 17 May 2026
Editor · VAGO, Bureau of Industrial, Noise & Avant-Garde Disturbances
Status · Published; revisable on cross-reference updates

Previous in sequence · M·07 Art Is Over, The Gerogerigegege c. 1985 · the structural antecedent twenty-two years upstream.

Sequence complete · This is the final manifesto in the M-series. The catalogue closes at M·08, ninety-four years after Russolo's 1913 letter to Pratella. Return to the Manifestos department index.