The Wicked Games You Play: Afghan Whigs, The Weeknd and Drake

 

          xxxo              "your love is a drug to me baby"         xxxo

Everett True is always eloquent, but occasionally wrong:

“The Afghan Whigs write ‘songs for ladies. Cruel, fierce, enflamed swaggering, licentious songs that managed the neet trick of being explicit while still hinting at so much.” In the traditional sense, the hidden heartbreakers of Grunge do not make songs for ladies.

A scentific breakdown of the crowd at this reunion gig would suggest that their audience is made of predominately middle aged men.

 

Rather the Whigs write songs to women. Love songs. Spiteful, nasty and earnest love songs. When I started writing this it was 3am and I was reading True's outstanding grunge memoir "Live Through This." The following extract on the Whigs lead singer Greg Dulli clarified everything.

True discusses Dulli's “paradoxical belief in, and loathing for his own masculinity. He’d frequently flagellate himself inside his songs, and then go out and make the same mistakes all over again. Greg levelled in his sex, even while he tortured himself as to how he could be such a bastard”.

Watching the above clip, where the Whigs incorporate Drake into their live set (an also a brillant cover of Frank Ocean's Love Crimes), my recent obsession with the Whigs are other seemingly unrelated artists, became obvious. 

The Weeknd and Drake, can be lazily grouped as part of the post Kanye 808 ‘anti swag’ collection of singer/rappers. Rather than boasting about ‘moneys’ ‘bitches’ and ‘bling,’ these guys often choose to deal in debauchery, lust and heartbreak.   Just like the Whigs their songs are often gut-wrenchingly honest.

But honesty alone is not enough; how are we meant to relate - or to put up - with an artist such as Drake who simultaneously boasts and cries about having sex four times in a given week? True's analysis of the Whigs provides a solution saying that he (speaking about Whigs lead singer Greg Dulli): “has [the] male strut that sets him apart from his more self-conscious peers”

All of these artists respective songs are not the traditionally teenage love songs, or the indie winning boy wants girls gets rejected/does nothing (a nation whose anthem is the abominable and depressing “Creep"). Rather it's about the wicked games both parties play.

Crucially the characters in these songs usually get the girl. However, getting the girl is not the end of it . In fact, these songs explore romance and relationships as a drug, exploring emotions beyond mere self- loathing. 

Synonyms like addiction, numbness, guilt, power trips, helplessness, victimisation, are among many and are all part of the mix.

The point of this blog is not to make a cliched discussion concerning influences and the musical continum. It's likely that both Drake and the Weekend might have never heard of the Whigs.  Rather, what is important is the paradoxical thematic similarities of masculinity, swagger, helplessness and addiction, that make these artists’ often earnest and heartbreaking tunes so listenable.
 
It makes these songs toxically uplifting.  I will examine why this is so by surveying selected songs of the Whigs, The Weeknd and Drake, and looking at key lyrical components, themes and similarities, leading to an extrapolation of the idea of the "love as a drug." nbsp;

Afghan Whigs

"Ladies, let me tell you about myself I got a dick for a brain And my brain is gonna sell my ass to you now I'm OK, but in time I'll find I'm stuck 'Cause she wants love, and I still want to fuck"

Everett True “Know what was great about Afghan Whigs? The way you wouldn’t have trusted them even if they’d been your closest friends. The suits. The way Greg sounded like he’d kill for whomever he was singing about. The womanising. The compassion. The bellies. The soul. Those goddam bastards….”

I'm Her Slave

What is 'I'm her slave' about? drugs, womanizing or kinky sex? It doesn't really matter, they are one and the same.
 

Dulli's vocals begin strong and sinister; "call and ask your wife" delivered with utter contempt and  dominance.  This song chances.  The brilliance of ‘I'm her slave’ is revealed in its paradoxical chorus.  The power shifts with each repeat of the chorus: "I'm her slave,  But, I don't need no chains,  I'll behave." 

Love is the drug.  Whether or not his addiction to the characters sexual endeavours is satisfying, the narrator realises that the consenting female companion is not the only one being used. By the end, Dulli's vocals almost whimper in his indulgence and he again admits "I'm her slave."

The song explores the idea that whatever the topic, literal drugs or seeking a similar high through romance, the using of something as an object of lust is initially a powerful feeling.  He knows this addiction has a hurtful comedown.  It's the quintessential early 20’s male issue – love not as a teenage fantasy/dream but as an often drunken and regretful outlet: the 4am hookup.

When We Parted

When we parted is beautifully bitter:

 "Baby, I see you've made yourself all sick again, Didn't I do a good job of pretending. You're saying that the victim doesn't want it to end, Good, I get to dress up and play the assassin again."

The song (above live version, fluxed with Drake's ‘Over My Dead Body’) describes a torturous relationship, where both parties are unfaithful and volatile. In this emotionally sadistic relationship, truth of infidelities is used violently as a weapon: "If I inflict the pain, then baby only I can comfort you."  These sadistic elements are very common in the work of  Drake. (cf I Hate Sleeping Alone)

Tonight

(Mark Lanegan's excellent cover)

"Hey baby, there's a vampire moon Scaling the sky. Shine in your room... Your eyes are open. You got nothing to do. Come outside and play with me. Tonight... Follow me down to the bushes dear. No one will know. We'll disappear. I'll hold your hand. We'll never tell - Our private little trip to hell. Tonight... Can I walk you home tonight?"

Tonight” is the Whigs ‘I’m on Fire’. A classic tale of lust. Springsteen’s ‘I'm on Fire’ has often been considered implicitly dangerous and predatory as David Burke explores below:

“You can substitute “dangerous” for “disconsolate” in “I’m on Fire” … Russell Simmons of the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion has lauded it as “one of the best courtship songs ever… just a really sexy song about pursuing a girl and showing her you want to take care of her.” It makes me uneasy. Just as “Working on the Highway” hints at sexual violation of a minor, “I’m On Fire,” brief as it is, breathes heavily and threateningly with a kind of forbidden longing. There’s a sense that this guy could do anything to the “little girl” here."pg115 Hearts of Darkness: Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska (2012)

If the predatory nature of ‘I'm on Fire’ is implicit, then Dullis's questionable intentions slap you right in the face - especially with the repetition of the line "can I walk you home tonight".  Rather than romance, lust drives this courtship, and its outcomes left unresolved appear much more sinister.

The Weeknd

Wicked Games

"Listen ma I'll give you all of me, Give me all of it, I need all of it to myself "

This clip is a must watch. A sinister r'n'b update of Chris Isaak's clip of the same name. Abel Tesfaye (alias for the Weeknd) opens up with the spiteful line "I left my girl back home, I don't Love her no more", predicating that this is no simple love song. Again the narrator's lust for pleasure is insatiable: "Bring your love baby I could bring my shame Bring the drugs baby I could bring my pain."

The demented beat, incredible R-Kellish vocals, and earnest delivery make this song not only sinister but sexy. Again love or lust is equated to a drug, a release an escape and an addiction.  

Althought sad and empty and the core , the narrator's swagger creates an uneasy pertinent danger which making intoxicating and oddly sensual.  

Party and After Party

"I got a brand new girl call it Rudolph She'll probably OD before I show her to mama All these girls tryna tell me she got no love And all these girls never got a blow job Ringtone on silent And if you stop then I might get violent No calls worth stopping So mama please stop calling We could play all night It just takes one night To let me fucking prove this feeling I'ma give to you"

The Party and the After Party is a almost eight minute epic tale of drugs, girls an escape. Tesfaye sounds alluring, over a Beach-House sample, intertwined with breakdowns of truth. No sooner is Tesfaye seducing you with his swagger and sexiness by seducing a "brand new girl called Rudolph" (e.g. red-nosed with consumption), than guilt mixes with "she'll probably OD before I show her to mama."

This cocktail of drugs, guilt and girls bubbles with tension: "All these girls tryna tell me she got no love And all these girls never got a blow job Ringtone on silent And if you stop then I might get violent No calls worth stopping."

Party and the After party is cryptically volatile and seductive at the same time. The ideal of being used, (while doing the same) is apparent. In Tesfaye's words "They don't want my love, they just want my potential" 

Outside

"Oh I'm tellin' you this ain't the same, And I know he's still in your brain, I'm bout to burn that shit into flames, Once I'm in you baby"

The musical beat to Outside is reminiscent to the soundtrack of the 1989 movie adaption of Bret Easton Ellis' ‘Less Than Zero’. Like the movie, the template is blank, predatory and characters just as consumptive.

Against this backdrop the narrator boasts of his prowess, telling his partner to forget about her past lovers because he will "work her like a pro"..." and that "when I finished with you, you won't go outside."

The final stanza suggests that like alcohol or cocaine binge, the sexual encounter it a mere an outlet, an attempt to forgo the flames of past love: "All the pain that you feel you can tell that we ain't making Explain no love, But I'll pretend, Oh girl, I'll pretend, If you pretend then girl I'll pretend, Let's make it seem like we're all we need in the end"

Drake 

Marvins Room

"I've had sex four times this week, I'll explain"

“F-ck that nigga that you love so bad I know you still think about the times we had” I say “f-ck that nigga that you think you found And since you picked up I know he’s not around"

” I don’t think I’m concious of making monsters Outta the women I sponsor til it all goes bad But shit it’s all good We threw a party, yeh we threw a party Bitches came over, yeh, we threw a party

Marvin's room takes an drunken phone to an ex, as the starting point for a frank admission, of the emptiness of Drake's rap star life. The crux of the song is Drake trying to drunken convince an ex, who he is clearly not over to come be with him. His advances come across as desperate, and are ultimately unsuccessful.

Still Drake can't help himself but boast about his exploits ("I've had sex four time this week, I''v explain"/shit we ..."), injecting moments of male ego and pride in amongst an unsuccessful booty call.

Hate Sleeping Alone

"I was in love two years ago and gave the baggage to my ex It’s all for her to carry, bags she deserve to carry I hate that ho,"

"I say I'd rather be with you but you are not around So I'mma call somebody up and see if they be down Cause I hate sleeping alone,"

"If she can't work with all of me then she say she done with me You say that you over me you always end up under me"

"how dare you tell me it's tougher for you Like I don't hear about the niggas you fucking with, too"

Similar to the Whig's "When we parted" the past or "baggage" is seen as weapon here. Also too is the ability to 'cheat on' or sleep with another, his ability to do so, also given him this power to hurt. Drake also taunts his partner, whose apparently insisting of more of his attention"you say you over me but you always end up under me. "

But again, the victim changes, when Drake dwells on her indiscretions "how dare you tell me it's tougher for you, Like i don't hear about the niggas you fucking with too."

The initial confidence of the narrators sexual prowess, and the high it gives him provides him with power, but soon the paradoxical shame imposed leads to double standard accusations, and a wicked come down, just like any drug. 

Love as a drug

"You came to me this morning and you handled me like meat. You’d have to be a man to know how good that feels, how sweet" Leonard Cohen

The songs discussed all examine love as a drug, the consumption of which brings pleasure, pride and pain. These songs characteristically also deal with love as a physical urge or outlet. The masculine swagger of sexual conquest tinges with an alluring toxic confidence.

Once entangled further the lyrics often reveal an underlying catharsis from the male narrators; primarily concerns of guilt, loneliness and addiction.  Maybe only love can break your heart, but sleeping around, and messing with emotions can certainly fuck you up. It's the of paradox of masculine conquest and emotional numbness with make these songs work. This misogynistic paradox creates intresting contrasts of emotion;attraction and repulsion, coldness and sensitivity. Rather than a traditionally boy meets girl/boy wants girls these songs embrace the emotional complexity of tragic relationships, and the different phases and behaviours exhibited. The rawness of such conflict is unsettling, and demands your attention; a romantic high speed train wreck.

Interestingly enough some any popular artists are taking notice of the work of Drake and The Weeknd. Usher, better known these days as Justin Bieber’s daddy, is reportedly following a similar direction on his new album, but I am skeptical whether he can pull it off. Such deeply cathartic, toxic and honest songs can be hard to listen to. Personally I need convincing before I can legitimately enjoy listening to r'n'b stars whining about their sexual conquests. Those that succeed seduce. As The Weekend says: "He's what you want, I'm what you need".

So This Is Why They Call Him "The Boss": Springsteen - The Killers/Arcade Fire/ The National

The influence of Springsteen is worn of the sleeves of many large "indie" bands, in the 2000's, whether it's Arcade Fire trying to replicate the feeling of "No Surrender/Bobby Jean" of Born in the USA era, The Killers imitating Born to Run on the entire album of Sam's Town, or the more subtle acoustic folk of Nebraska which shines through in the work of The National. Such inspirations are worn prouder than a red base-ball cap in Bruce's back-pocket.

However, Springsteen's method is more than dramatic chord changes, and myths about girls and cars - the strength of the Springsteen song is how he uses these worn down rock n roll myths to express, through his characters, an emotional catharsis.

No better example than "Stolen Car"



Here the rock n roll romance of driving down Thunder Road, a signature of Bruce's early work is re-written as a nightmare.

It's starts typically with Bruce's characters meeting a "little girl" and "getting married", but then there romantic young love grows cold in the second stanza. The mythical motor-vehical metaphor is turned on its head:

"And I'm driving down a stolen car, Down on Eldrich Avenue, Each night I wait to get caught, But I never do"

Rather than providing an escape, the car of this characters relationship, no longer feels like its his. It doesn't feel like it belongs to him or that he even wants to drive it, but regardless he continues it hoping all the time to "get caught" -for it to end, but without the courage to do so.

The conversation then becomes two-way, as his character trys to rekindle the ride, alluding to the love letters of their early days. He then paraphrases his wifes repsonse in the cold line "She said last night she read those letters, and they made her feel one hundred years old"

The song's musical back drop is simple, a two chord riff latterly to be joined with piano and drums; it's no "Born to Run" (cf "When you were Young - the Killers"). Even in the climactic final chorus, the back drop is kept to a minimal with a disdainfully mournful ending:

"And I'm driving a stolen car, On a pitch black night, I keep telling myself I'm going to be alright, But a ride by night, and I travel in fear, and in this Darkness I will dispair"

The ending stanza is in stark opposition to Springsteen's other work where such situation might be romatisiced or even violently extinguished (see Nebraska), rather Springsteen taps in into the everyday dread of life of those without courage to stop their journey to nowhere. It crys out to those who accept and pity cirucumstances of their personal relationship but rather to accept it with the emotional and soulful damage with it entails (sounds like a Drake song).

Stolen Car demonstrates one thread to the bow of Springsteen which influences indie rock artists today. Beyond the cosmetic influences of "the optimistic rock opera" (the Killers), the urgent rock n roll Evangelist (
Arcade Fire), this song illustrates the bleak emotional depth with colours some of Springsteen's best songs, and influences in a less obvious ways my third modern day influenced example of the National.

The Killers (Thunder Road)



Arcade Fire (Born in the USA)



The National (Mansion on the Hill)

Five Songs on the Meaning of Christmas

1. Last Christmas

Christmas is about nostaglia and comtemplation - its "Last Christmas" everytime - whether your seriously upset like George is below, or in more jovial mood like these boys on K Road.





2. I Wish It Was Christmas Today

Christmas is about expectation - like that Julian Casablancas will return to his old form and stomp around stage like Joey Ramones cooler rich cousin (who can actually pull off the "sunglasses inside" look without looking like a douche).

I Wish It Was Christmas Today from Just on Vimeo.

3. Merry Christmas (I Don't Want to Fight Tonight)

Christmas is about family - i.e. teasing/annoying and playing nice for the photos.




4. Christmas (Baby please come home)

Christmas - should have something for the old people (that is NOT Feliz Fuckin Navidad...)



5. Christmas Card From a Hooker in Minneplais

Christmas is about telling stories...



BONUS - Christmas in Harlem

Christmas is about Kanye?? Well everything's always about Kanye...

A Must for the Xmas List for All Cricketers - Young & Old!

Product Photo (above)
(c) Alaister Moughan 2011

Box Reads

Philip Hughes - Slip Catching Cradle

Guaranteed to make your slip catching better - just ask GUPPY!

Don't take our word for it - ask the pros: "Same place, every time amazing consistency, great practice even in game conditions; the best" Martin Guptill NZ Cricketer

Price
Low Low Price of $20 or less (all stock must go before Boxing Day!)

Disclaimer
Component "Chris Martin Catching Feeder" - Sold Separetly

The Curious Case Law of Kanye Weset

You may be familiar with the Kanye West on the dance floor, or maybe in the gossip columns, but more recently Mr West has been involved in a different type of spectacle closer to Boston Law than the MTV Awards Show : court room drama.

In Vincent Peters v Kanye West, Roc-A-Fella Records, LLC and UMG Recordings, INC Mr West’s hit song “Stronger” was subject to a claim of copyright infringement. The plaintiff Vincent Peters or “Vince P” as he was known professionally disputed that Mr West had infringed the copyright of his own song also called “Stronger.” Vince P was a songwriter performer, who solicited some interest from Interscope records. As a result of this interest Vince P went out seeking an executive producer getting in contact with John Murphy. Mr Murphy happened to be the executive producer of Kanye West. Vince P alleged that he sent various CDs, which contained his song “Stronger”, and based on this access, on top of the public access to his song available on his MySpace page, alleged that Mr West had copied part’s of his song in writing his own song Stronger. (The facts are disputed between the parties).

Vince P claim had failed at District Court level, and has then became subjected to motion to dismiss at the Court of Appeal. The Honourable Judge Virgina Kendall stated that to succeed in his claim Vince P had to prove that he had:

(1) Ownership of a valid copyright; and

(2) unauthorised copying of constituent elements of the work that are original had ocurred.

In the aspect of originality, Vince P’s claim failed miserably. The concept of originality is a fundamental platform of copyright law. The concept contains two components whether the copyright work was independently produced, and whether the work was born as a result of some degree of labour, skill or judgement. The former component is often described in terms of the ‘sweat of the brow’ metaphor, where an author only needs to input a reasonable amount of labour and skill, rather than any creative innovation to gain copyright protection.

The plaintiff admitted that individually, each constituent element he argued was unoriginal, but that when combined the elements were substantially similar to Kanye West’s song. These constituent elements we are follows:

1. Song Title “Stronger”

2. Reference to “Kate Moss”

3. Selected Lyrics in the “Hook”

Individually the court confirmed that each alone, lacked “a minimum level of creativity and do not qualify for copyright protection.” Citing well settled authority it held that song titles by themselves does not earn copyright protection.

Each song had took the “creative choice of referring to Kate Moss” in their lyrics. Vince P’s song included the line “Trying to get a model chick like Kate Moss”, while Kanye’s name drop was “You could be my black Kate Moss.” The Court quickly declared such creative use of name did not gain any copyright protection, with the Honourable ….taking this point to the extreme in musing that “[i]ndeed, the name Kate Moss would not even be copyrightable by Ms Moss herself.”

The third constituent claim was the most arguable claim, however it also failed. The similar lyrics were as follows:

Vince P Stronger (2006)
What don’t kill me make me stronger
The more I blow up the more you wronger
You coped my CD you can feel my hunger
The wait is over couldn’t wait no longer

Kanye West Stronger (2007)
N- n- now th- that don’t kill me can only make me stronger
I need you to hurry up now cause I can’t wait much longer
I know I got to be right now cause I can’t get much wronger
Man I’ve been waitin’ all night now that’s how long I’ve been on you

One of the main defects of the claim was the fact that both use the 120 year old proverb “what don’t kill me make me stronger” which was no longer under copyright, and subject to the public domain. Moreover the Court, or maybe its officers, seemed to have extensively hip musical tastes to bring up the fact that “variations of this clichéd phrase” had been used by other artists such as Jay Z, 2Pac, Maxim and Megadeath.

The Court strongly rejected the argument raised by the plaintiff, that these unoriginal elements when combined could form the basis of an infringement claim: “Simply put, a plaintiff cannot select a few non-copyrightable elements contained in his song, claim a monopoly of their use, and prevent others from employing similar un-protectable individual words and phrases in their works.” The lack of any musical similarities, made any comparison of substantial similarity of a copyright infringement claim was not necessary (although the courts discussed this issue regarless and found no substantial similarity.)

This case not only provides an entertaining avenue for Honourable Judges to judicially refer to Jay Z, 2Pac and Heezy, but highlights some interesting copyright points. Ignoring any potential value in terms precedent or doctrine (US Copyright Cases are typically not as influential as those from Commonwealth jurisdictions), Vincent does provides three interesting observations.

The discussion of the fundamental platform of originality and the examples given of song titles/names/vague choruses containing common phrases illustrate the important role this concept has. The concept is often provides a way of separating the purpose of copyright law, with other intellectual property law. For example the name Kate Moss is may be able to be trademarked, however it does not gain protection in copyright which illustrates the often overlooked distinct purposes of these two intellectual property regimes: copyright is intended to encourage creativity/authorship rather than protect goodwill and economic interests, the realm of trade marks.

Another interesting observation is how something such as an 800 year old phrase, available in the public domain for use, can inspire such creativity. With copyright cases typically containing possessive language of authorship/ownership in terms of protection, it is often easy to ignore the creativity that existing works, available in the public domain inspire. As easily as one can claim that one artist was “stealing” from another by copying parts of their works, so where both the plaintiff and defendant borrowed from this well-known saying. It illustrates the value of the cultural public domain, which supplies valuable works and more importantly associations on which others can build vastly different creative works.

If also demonstrates that copyright infringement cases are seldom straightforward. Although at first glance, there seems to be cosmetic similarities between the two songs, once analysed legally the plaintiffs case was exposed as lacking any real merit. In the modern era of presumed guilt under Copyright Legislation such as s92A, this raises some real concerns about the effectiveness and fairness of presumed guilt, where the copying which was occurred is simply literal reproduction or “file sharing””. It’s a point that has often been lost in the s92A debate – but I guess “You Can’t Tell Them Nothing”

‘There’s Something In The Water’ – Brooke Frazier v Odd Future

Two days, two seemingly unrelated events posing one question – Why is New Zealand music always so amiable so innocent? As everyone’s favourite singing All Blacks Daughter, Brooke Frazier says, maybe there’s something in the water?

On the first day we had the New Zealand Music Awards, sorry my apologies “the Vodafone New Zealand Music Awards” , several tequila sunrises later, and onto the second day we had the removal of Odd Future at Big Day Out because of complaints from Wellington man Calum Bennachie over alleged homophobic lyrics.

Odd Future are offensive, let’s agree on that. It’s part of their shtick. Their oeuvre is characterised by an “fart in an elevator” vibe – unpleasant to most, but some enjoy the ride. Regards of whether you like your music or not, their lyrics which use homophobic terms , and include fantisised accounts of murdering and raping young women can, and do cause offense.

Despite this potential the group has had widespread mainstream media exposure, even performing on an MTV awards show. In contrast, consider the most provocative scene of the VNZMA’s was Tiki Tane singing “Freedom to Sing” accompanied with dancing (not real) uniformed police officers.



This dancing police are a (cheeky) reference to the singer’s recent incidents with the police. When comparing these two performances the audience reactions from Tiki relative to Odd Future the reaction is a mere whimper. (Better link here)



Tiki is not to blame,regardless of the fact that “Freedom to Sing” sounds like it was written by an3rd form Social Studies student; good on him for flirting with the provocative. In fact, he’s one of the more most interesting intriguing artists in the “Vodafone New Zealand Music Scene.”

What it really demonstrates is that once an artist becomes “successful” in New Zealand they wrapped with a blanket of patriotic support from the media which doesn't generally accept or foster shocking behaviour or expression. To garner such level of support being a shocking, offensive or even angry artists appears to be a huge obstacle. In mainstream New Zealand music such artists are nowhere to be seen.

No doubt the New Zealand music scene has benefited and grown from extensive government funding. Clearly, as a music fan, this is a good thing. However, in this sphere it has birthed of this blanket patriotism.

When an artist joins under the umbrella of “kiwi-music” they become a must-like, “champion” in of New Zealand music. There fan support becomes attune to that of a successful sports team. One who actually benefited from this scheme is Ruben Neilson from the Mint Chicks. Although I’m sure appreciative of the support given to further his artistic endeavours Ruben commented on this phenomena in a blog post on the Mint Chicks Myspace:

“Is the success of an individual artist or an individual song or an individual album the success of the country that individual comes from? When an artist does something which resonates with people, should we shout "another victory for NZ music"? This is how a large proportion of the public has somehow been programmed to react to successes in the music industry here. Which is a good thing initially, because people used to have a certain distain for music made here on principle. However, NZ music is still ghettoised in this era of "Yay NZ Music" as it is still separated from music made "overseas". It's "patronised", in a multi-faceted definition of the term. For some reason, the average New Zealand music fan has been lead to believe that "New Zealand Music" is a genre. This is wrong. Why is it so widely believed? How many people in this country love Pitchshifter but no other Drum n bass? How many love Fat Freddy's Drop but no other dub? Scribe but no other hip hop? How many people would include Shihad, Fat Freddy's Drop, and Savage as their favourite acts? Feeling that somehow they've rattled off a list as obvious as The Sex Pistols, the Clash and the Buzzcocks. Or Eminem, 50 Cent and the Game?”

“Why is it that Musicians who are from this country have to be branded "NZ MUSIC", wherever they go, whatever they do? With a giant black and white target on us so that we can be picked out in the crowd like jews with stars of david on our armbands?

If we look at all the trouble nationalism, jingoism, and patriotism has caused in the history of our species we can see that music and art can be used to consolidate power in the same way a tank or a missile can, if it's used in the wrong way. It's mis-guided to believe that we should rally around music in the way we have around sports in this country. It's just bullshit.

A recent example of this is Hayley Westenra, a “much loved kiwi artists” who received a bad review in a local rag in Christchurch. The media reaction to this bad review was that it was a personal attack (e.g NZ Hearld headline, "I get it, you don't like me: Westenra shrugs off critic"). Some even suggested that the reviewer should leave such a “successful kiwi export” alone. The reviewer was just doing his job; that is, giving his opinion. Another example is the uproar given to by Stuff music reviewing who gave a bad review to local favourites Fat Freddys Drop. These two reviewers clearly broke the rules of blanket patrotism.

This patriotical patriotism and promotion of un-critical attitudes has created an incredibly bland music scene. Considering most those NZ artists who get any reasonable exposure, it is clear that none of them have any major ‘shock value’ within the same realms of Odd Future, and that the environment is unlikely to foster any such upcoming artists.

“Shock value”, even of itself, is desirable. It’s needed in music. Consider the Prince, the Sex Pistols, NWA – these artists that were shocking in their time, they were controversial but have become culturally important. Closer to home, many of New Zealand’s greatest musical label/time, Flying Nun can recount stories of a young Chris Knox “iggying himself” by provoking audiences by cutting himself with broken glass. Odd Future’s offensive lyricism is just another example of shock value.

Additionally one must bear in mind the distinction between the singer and song. As Tyler the Creator of Odd Future elequntly advises elquently "don't do anything that I say in this song, okay? It's fuckin' fiction. If anything happens, don't fuckin' blame me, white America, fuck Bill O'Reilly."

Obviously there has to be a line, regardless of whether a singer is actually a racist/murderer/bigot/homophobe, if their lyrics incite and/or promote hatred or violence, are intended to create a reaction of hate, then mere the value of this (‘shocking’) freedom of expression should be regulated. This is the realm of hate speech. One legal definition of such speech is contains in s61 of the Human Rights Act 1993, which makes it unlawful to publish or distribute:

"threatening, abusive, or insulting...matter or words likely to excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons...on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national or ethnic origins of that group of persons."

Clearly anything near approaching this threshold should be stopped. One example is the performer Beenie Man who was pulled from the 2010 Big Day Out who appears closer to this definition of threatening, abusive, insulting and likely excite hostility against a grouped or persons (here on the grounds of sexual orientation rather than those grounds listed in the Human Rights Act 1993) with lines such as: "I'm dreaming of a new Jamaica, come to execute all the gays.''

In considering whether Odd Future whether cross over the line from offensive to hateful, its relevant to examine the request for the group to be pulled from Mr Bennachie who contacted Sandra Coney, chairwoman of the council's Parks and Heritage Forum. To complete the picture it should be mentioned that Auckland City Council owns Big Day Out venue Mt Smart Stadium.

“It's damaging to people, it's damaging to society. The messages in the songs are that LGBT people are immoral, evil, sick and worthless and therefore violence is an easy step for those who are already disposed towards violence. Too often gay men are targeted as objects of violence or ridicule in the streets and the perpetrators feel safe in targeting them because of the messages contained in hate music like this.''

On the flip side Big Day Out promoter Campbell Smith, seemed to fall onto the offensive rather than hateful line in saying the group was “interesting” and “provocative:”

"I don't really think it's my place or our place to tell people who they can and can't see. We try to present a broad show across all genres. They're certainly a talented act that a lot of people are interested in and want to see,"

Despite these passionate and markendly different opinions, debate around the decision (espeically during) has been very limited. My main concern is not that Odd Future were pulled, it is the lack of debate around the issue, and how the shock value of the music has mainly be ignored, or even looked down upon. As the best music blogger going around, Everett True nicely sums up the issue:

“Shock tactics have their place. It’s good that folk respond, and it’s good that folk don’t let the use of such shock tactics go unquestioned, but it’s good to have shock tactics too”

As a casual listener of Odd Future, I admit that I have enjoyed large parts of Tyler’s and Odd Future’s work.





Across a complete album other tracks become less enjoyable as the juvenile cuss words overtake any lyrical wit (e.g. see "Bitch Suck Dick: and after the beats fall down the stench in the elevator simply becomes too much to handle.

Yet I can’t help feeling that the “New Zealand Music Scene” needs that something toxicity in the water – we need which divides audiences and and changes the direction of current opinion. Whether Odd Future crosses this line of between shock and hate is debateable; but hey! let’s talk!

Shock value in mainstream New Zealand music is few and far between; it’s also very much undervalued. Shocking musical acts get attention; they divide people, they invoke passion (for or against), and, I believe, most importantly, they make being and becoming a fan a more active and rewarding experience. Mainstream music in New Zealand can and should be about more than a summer BBQ soundtrack.

Regardless of whether Odd Future are musically good or not, having groups which cause such reaction and passion could inject more interesting acts into mainstream New Zealand music. Otherwise I guess I can just wait for “The Great New Zealand Song Book Volume Two"; I’ve heard it includes an incredible waita version of Dave Dobbon’s “ Welcome Home…”

Alaister Moughan

*Postscript – Odd Future has announced an Auckland solo show.