Music/ Politics/ reprehensible opinions
 

Inspired by these posts in another thread:




So, I'm sure there are plenty of us who have Black Metal, Power Electronics, Nazi-noise and perhaps even some Prussian Blue in our collections. What's the general feeling on musicians with frankly risible opinions, or even political (in the sense of actually funding political groups which are appaling in their views) motivations. What's the difference between listening to Whitehouse or Non and listening to Skrewdriver or Prussian Blue [except that Skrewdriver are unmitigated shite, obviously]?

I don't necessarily want to refer to 'obscure' groups either - there are some huge figures in music with black marks against their names - Elton John is clearly a prick, Bowie's flirtation with the Nazis, Nico's rabid racism, various well-known anti-semites, the widespread homophobia of hip-hop and especially dancehall, perhaps even slightly less black-and-white political issues such as Zorn's Zionism. Not that Zionism is per se a bad thing, of course, but it is a politically contentious issue.

i'm listening to dead reptile shrine right now over breakfast and i had no idea of their political leanings.

now that i know . . . yeah, i feel slightly dirtied. the food has lost some of it's taste.

but this music is good.

i would make sure the artwork was not on display. that's all.

Yeah, I think i love Arghoslent, who has one of the best guitar players I've ever heard.. this dude was playing the album for me for the first time and I realized the guy just growled, "NIGGER SWEATING IN JUNGLES!" And I was like "..." and then I saw the album was called "irreconciable bigotry". I mean, it's a totally awesome band, I don't even know what kind of genre you'd classify it as (it's kinda like Mastodon's brand of metal, musically, but with black metal-ish vocals). But yeah. Even though they're good, I have a difficult time listening, because I usually can't get into music if I don't like the people making it...

Daniel Johnston's tasteless joke at SXSW springs to mind.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GCBbmHJnSg0

but I doubt this reflects any serious political beliefs

I will get back on this because I haven't got the time to articulate myself properly and I'm still recovering from one of those heavy weekends, but for now I'll say that this is an interesting thread for many reasons. The whole debate about politics in music seems like it's generally swept under the carpet like a particularly nasty can of worms, because so many other factors go into it other than the music itself, and the fact that many of the dubious political leanings of those musicians who feel like they want to throw them in for shocking effect or for more serious reasons, can be put to bed with less words than you're reading on this post or on a whole book about it. The Nazi sympathies in Black Metal, to name one whole genre that engages itself in such activity, I generally see more as the need to shock attached to the actual desire for grotesque suffering that the music itself expresses, often with comedic results.

Oh, and I didn't know about Bowie's brush with nazism and I found this Q&A article explaining it well.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Bowie-Dav...BOWIE-JEWS.htm

I particularly like the quote "There were bowls at the house which were never empty of cocaine."

You'd be even more surprised to find out that Nico had Turkish blood in her, could speak nearly 6 languages and had a Jewish manager, later on in her career. Even more surprising was her attitude towards Germany as a whole, and the disgust she'd feel at the song Deutschland, Deutschland über alles, while at the same time she would go on to claim that the nastiness she'd get from Lou Reed was possibly caused because of what 'my people did to his people'*. With that sort of permanent state of confusion inside a person's head, it's really hard to think of someone like they are a racist as such, rather than someone who might be using the race card when it becomes an easy instrument to gain some sort of attention. See Bowie too.

*Nico's own words

hah.

Let me get this straight. The one minute you say this is a music forum where we shouldn't discuss politics, and the next minute... this thread combining the two. Do me a favor, make up your minds or drown in your own vomit.

I like Agnostic Front, even though their shows are visited by herds of rightwing skinheads from all over the place.

Alternatively we could stomp our nazi boots all over you, but that would only cause you pleasure, wouldn't it Tokolosh?

Yes.

Ps: Didn't your mother ever teach you that being a gay nazi is contradictive? Carry on.

Nope, too busy teaching me to have a sense of humour, which you seem to lack in spades. Spades, you know, like in that song that's called 'Ace Of Spades' by that band called Motorhead, and who have a singer called Lemmy who, you know, collects nazi paraphernalia.

Fuck Lemmy and his moles.

Are you feeling a bit shit now?

Au contraire! Motorhead kick serious ass, and I couldn't care less about Lemmy's possible dodgy views because, you know Tokolosh, they are dodgy views.

ps: yep, feeling a bit like the inside of a gay anus.

I felt bad when I read about that, but it's not really Daniel in there anymore so whatever

Coffee enemas kick serious ass.
I like you, but I think you know that already.

Interesting thread topic. Most people, regardless of race creed or colour, have a certain fascistic side to them and certain types of music, art, whatever can easily stir that impulse. It's the same as spirituality. I'm not a christian but I can listen to gospel music and feel something, whatever it is.

Fortunately, on my part, I can listen to, enjoy and at times be moved by Burzum without becoming a national socialist, just as I can listen to, enjoy and at times be moved by Mahalia Jackson without becoming a christian.

On the gospel side of things, the London Community Gospel Choir, who, you may remember, are on every record that needs a bit of tacked-on 'soul' and perhaps one decent record (that Spiritualised one) are also avowed homophobic religious zealots. It wouldn't surprise me if they're on one of the militant anti-homophobic websites' 'bands to watch' list.

I think ultimately, the conclusion I'd draw would be 'I don't really care about their personal opinions' - however, I'd like a few more militant PC types to make a few points, and I do still feel slightly queasy when it comes to certain bands. Interestingly, people whose explicit lyrical politics are similar to mine I find deeply offensive in their banality.

I've been fascinated by music that operates at 'extremities' [useless word] for a while now - has anyone ever heard Dr Philip Randall/ Pauline Malign and the Eugenics Council? I'm usually more inclined to laugh at 'offensive for offensive's sake' type music [especially if it's in the noise idiom - Whitehouse are an exceptionally funny band] but there's something about these, especially Randall, that really gets under my skin. Which is at once fascinating and abhorrent. Should I let this music disturb me? Does that not engender the lyrics with a certain power that I'd rather not be giving it?

"Message Music" and "Identity art" are generally annoying, but if people don't use their art form as a soapbox I really couldn't care less what their personal opinions are as long as the art/music/literature is of quality.

That's quite the question that you're asking, there. If the music in any way disturbs you to the extent that you feel like it affects your mind the wrong way, it's obvious that there is something wrong there to begin with and you are being attracted to it for other reasons that would be there anyway. If, instead, you dive into it and still come out with your brain intact because you happen to have a strong personality and can make up your mind or already have before you put the record on, then there's joy to be had through sheer aural pain.

Spot on, mister.

I feel it is possible to enjoy listening to music whilst feeling less than thrilled with the politics/beliefs of the musos involved (hello Varg Vikernes and Chuck D). I personally can't stand the homophobic lyrics of some hip-hop, dancehall etc, but draw the line at asking for this stuff to be censored.

I increasingly find extremities quite dull, if that's all they are. That whole association of extremes with some kind of 'truth' when in fact the 'truth' is usually a lot greyer, more subtle, and as such FAR more interesting.

I find Burzum interesting in this respect because while the music is this quite bombastic Wagnerian stomp, Varg's vocals have this weak, wounded, defeated, almost pathetic sense to them. The genius is found somewhere in the grey area of that conflict/contradiction.

Does anyone want my Westboro Baptist Church mp3s?

well your mother is totally wrong, gays and nazis go hand in hand, just like Republicans and nazis. Of course it is unhealthy repressed sexuality which is easily expressed as physical violence. all those big strong men bonding with each other in the precise uniforms and fetishizing 'strength and will' certainly have a repressed agenda. And sublimate the love of a man for the love of one's Party.

but these days the aryan brotherhood, with its ethic of jailhouse male-on-male sex and willingness to do anything to make money like indulge in pedophilia and work with russian mobsters in human slavery and other trafficking is unnatural and pathological.

I agree with this a lot. It was always the thing that fascinated me about metal - while the rhetoric surrounding it always talks about extremities and anti-isms, the actual music is incredibly formulaic and often very rigid. Even worse with anarcho-punk, which often follows exactly the same musical format. This isn't a criticism - there are good and bad in both (I expect, can't stand punk myself) - but the rhetoric never lives up to the music.

Burzum are just a good band, I doubt there are many who would be genuinely disturbed by it. There are a few records that, usually musically, are really difficult to listen to, and incredibly harrowing. I adore Schnitkke, but there's records of his that are so bleak I can't listen to them too often. But that's different to finding something genuinely challenging to step away from lyrically - I don't/ can't hear Burzum's lyrics, and I expect he's pretty bad at them, but I'll stick with my first example and say Randall, I find, is exceptionally difficult to step away from, to intellectually distance myself from. It's entirely incidental, non-important music that is in many ways shite, but the content is so wrong, or worse, so effective in its aims of being wrong, I can't even laugh at it any more. Which is what I find more worrying.

Extreme political imagery or ideas in music have to be some of the most stupid, obvious things that I can think of. Is it possible to not be offended by the use of a swastika by a 'bright' artist who decided to throw it into their creative cauldron because part of you can't help but feel utter contempt for them and their own methods of self-expression? Personally that's my attitude towards these things now. Extremism in music works only when there is a seriously talented person at work, and said extreme music/imagery isn't of the kind that is ultimately only employed to offend and aggravate. Whitehouse can be funny, but a lot of the time leave me cold and rather bored of their antics.

Precisely. It seems from the recent Wire interview that Whitehouse are quite bright chaps, but that doesn't make their aesthetic any less defunct. Now, someone like Non is interesting because I think he challenges a lot of things without coming across like a puerile twat. Which is, potentially, a lot more dangerous, but certainly a great deal more valuable.

What I don't always understand, on the other hand, is why sometimes a musician can be an engaging and stimulating interviewee but that doesn't reflect on their music at all. I swear I read a Bono interview where I've even found myself liking him and agreeing with what he said.

Terris, remember them? Brilliant, utterly brilliant interviewees. Rubbish music. J&MC since about 1995. Manic Street Preachers. Mike Patton. All great interviewees, all rubbish music.

Articulating myself a bit more (so, obviating the cathartic element to this thread) the problem I find is that music is nearly always better when it leaves you feeling a bit dirty, or ecstatic, or like you've been raped, or like you've had the best blow-job ever (etc) but it can be incredibly confusing when these effects actually happen to you.

I like Wagner.

ditto henry rollins, jarvis cocker & latley, thurston moore

The problem with so much of alt. rock's use of fascism as some kind of shock tactic is actually how safe it is. We live in a liberal society where such gestures are ultimately tolerated (albeit reluctantly and at times with some opposition) There are now far greater social taboos than National Socialism, which has become little more than a distant symbol of evil or 'wrongness' in most parts of the world - at least those parts of the world where this type of music tends to be created (America, Britain and Central Europe, Japan, etc.). You only have to look at the current moral outrage in Britain surrounding the whole 'Madelaine' saga to see that the swastika is, by comparison, a fairly minor source of anxiety in most people's lives.

Wow, yes, Terris were another one of those bands that could be entertaining interviewees but whose music to be perfectly honest with you I can't remember at all. I think I had one or possibly two of their singles but I must have given them away to someone or sold them. This kind of brings us to another side of this topic, which is that of regular mouthy people making music but lacking the talent for it, and therefore using anything under the sun to get noticed.

I never looked at it that way. :confused: Go figure.

I often think that some bands should be given interview, rather than recording, contracts. You can imagine it. Morrissey being signed by Rolling Stone magazine to do three interviews a year. He could even do a 'metal machine music' style contract breaker and do his final interview with them in latin.

the truth is most people who dabble in that shit are idiots and/or looking for shock value; sometimes, they grow up and realize what they did was stupid (example: throbbing gristle) or wear their shit out until it's no longer shocking and have to move somewhere else (bowie and his illegitimate son, marilyn manson).

there's bands who dabble in that shit but are so clueless you have to laugh (like slayer). it was a bit scary watching them in new jersey and have a few skinhead neo nazis sieg heiling, although i doubt they knew they were giving the aryan approval to two latinos.

i feel more sorry for daniel johnston than anything, he's just a mentally unstable person, would you really take him seriously?

then there's the people who are immerse in that shit for life, where they are like spokespersons for such "movements" and do believe that stuff, and just as i wouldn't join a party or an ideology, i don't buy their records. still, not listening to what they have to say makes you ignorant to what you are opposing.

as i see it, there's so many stupid persons doing ace music that not supporting them just because they are morons would be dumb, if the music is good. it's just a different way in which their stupidity shows. i mean, if you don't like drugs, would you stop listening to people who do music, even though their music is right up your alley, because they do drugs?

also, many of these people are pathetic figures who hate themselves, have awful addictions, are miserable and have tried to kill themselves; would you really hold what they say as some threat?

there's this need for rock n' roll since the hippies started, to give music a "message" and a "meaning" but, really, it doesn't, at least not directly; but when people force these meanings and messages, they usually end up with some retarded.

still, good music is good music regardless, and you can enjoy music without supporting assholes.

that's what I was going to post.

I love both hip-hop and dancehall, however it's hard for me to buy into the one-love concept when there's an exclusion list.

in my mind, I like to attribute it to cultural ignorance, although that's no real excuse.

i'm not tolerant with xenophobia, racism etc. etc.
no one should.

Well, what I don't really see is the point in labeling yourself as a racist band; making it part of your imagery or whatever.. I'm sure 80% of musicians have strong beliefs in things we wholeheartedly disagree with, but they don't have to make it the focal point in their music.

Even if it's something considered "okay" by popular opinion -- a "christian" band for example. There are a shitload of bands who are Christian, but bands that separate themselves from the pact and conform to the idea and advertise themselves as a "Christian band" are ridiculous.

It all comes down to how far they drive their message into their music; Axl Rose went on a homophobic, racist rant in one of his songs, but the rest of Guns N Roses's imagery/songs had nothing to do with homophobia or racism... I don't think any lyrics or art or anything should be censored, but I agree that it seems most bands just put out this kind of stuff to "shock" people anyway.

But as I said earlier, it's hard for me to even give a band a chance if I hate the people involved... though it takes a lot for me to HATE someone.. I can always admit if a band is GOOD, but I don't enjoy listening to people I hate, so yeah.

You can be racist without being in a "racist band" and letting your racism shine through in everything you do... we all have sides of us that no one sees and beliefs that we may not completely advertise, so yeah.. just don't make it the focal point of the band. It should be about the music, anyway.. that's what should be important.. I can't really think of any bands I listen to for the lyrics.. but when I DO hear a band go , "FUCKIN KILL ALL THE NIGGERS!!!!!! FUCKING DIE NIGGERSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS" I honestly think the band is morons and their retarded 'message' makes the music a lot less enjoyable to me.