Comments

"If there's someone you'd like to die, ask me / I won't say no, how could I?"

Thanks for responding. I've spoken my mind a lot in this thread, so I don't want to eat up any more space by debating you on this. You've clearly done your homework and your opinion is not baseless. This difference between us is you take Jones at his word, and I think he's a bullshitter. Only he knows which one of us is right. As a Stereogum reader, though, I would hope that the standard for promoting a questionable song would be a little more rigorous than, "Well, it's not as bad as that song that glorifies Mengele!"

Here are the opening lyrics to "Entranced by the Wolfshook": "His tongue conjured up fire / In hearts of hope that did smolder / With words as clear as the wind / Blades sprang from ashes again." OK, pretty boilerplate vague metal lyrics, though it seems pretty likely to me that these words would remind someone who is "entranced by the wolfshook" of Hitler. But the next part makes it bloody obvious: "Sermon of the crooked cross / The pulpits rock with death." The swastika is fairly commonly referred to as the crooked cross; you can find this information on the wiki page even if you aren't aware of the history. Look, Michael, I truly appreciate you giving the editorial point of view on this, and I see where you're coming from. I'm happy at least to see that your POV is more conflicted than the one presented by the author of this piece. I can see how you arrived at your conclusion, but I respectfully disagree with it. I could see if this was a huge band like Mastodon and you were just reporting on a subject of widespread interest. But you're playing an active role in hyping a relatively unknown band with (what is most readily interpreted as) fascist symbolism in virtually every aspect of their image, from their logo to their song titles to their lyrics to their actual bodies. I just think you're playing this one all wrong.

//Nobody asks the dude with the American flag chest tat about the Trail of Tears, nor the Zionist bro, who missed the memo, with the Star of David tattoo if he feels okay about that symbol considering all the Palestinian civilians who have perished by a nation-state that uses such a symbol.// Sorry, but you're way off base here. This is the classic method of deflecting serious conversation by reducing the opposing view to "political correctness". If your opponent is just another PC whiner, then you don't need to engage him; so much the better if he's an Arcade Fire fan (I'm not), because then he doesn't "get" metal and can truly be disregarded. Have you noticed that indie rock types endlessly mock and interrogate jingoistic American imagery? If Stereogum featured a metal band whose singer had a big American flag chest tat (which they wouldn't, unless it was clearly ironic) you can bet that American imperialism would be raised as a topic. I don't know of any bands featuring "Zionist bros" but if one ever does come around, we will see very quickly that most Stereogum readers are pro-Palestine, as evidenced by the Eddie Vedder story that ran a week or two ago. In the end, your very verbose response boils down to, "It's OK for metal bands to flirt with fascist imagery because it's metal and you don't get metal so fuck you THIS BAND SLAYS." It's a rationalization I've heard before, and I guess I really don't "get" metal because it still sounds completely incoherent to me.

You're trying to draw symbolic equivalency between the Buddha and the swastika, and I'm the one with flawed logic. Have a nice day.

So it's the second option, then: clueless and arrogant. At least that's better than being a bigot. Plus, you're young, and there's still time for you to grow out of it. Unfortunately, your shitty fascist tattoos are for life. In the meantime, have fun while you can. The hype cycle for a blog band only lasts about six months.

I'm not your buddy, and I've read lots of books. I've even read a few that describe what symbols like the swastika and the wolfangel mean to a reasonable 21st century observer whose head isn't firmly lodged in his own ass. Your band has a symbol associated with Nazism in its logo. You have a "well loved" song that mentions that symbol in its title. You have swastikas on your body. Your justifications for these things are weak and the people who believe them are weak-minded. Unless you're going to try to convince me you're an actual sun worshiper, there are only two explanations for your use of this imagery: either you're a closeted bigot, or you're so clueless and arrogant that you think you can recontextualize fascist symbols without people thinking you're a fascist.

Y'ALL GON' MAKE ME LOSE MY LUNCH UP IN HERE UP IN HERE

It's cool. I don't mind being the bad guy in a thread where the "good guy" uses Nazi imagery in his logo, song titles, and tattoos. I guess this really is the age of ironic detachment, when people will jump on board for anything if it has enough hype behind it. You'd think Stereogum might have a little more sense than to promote this band so heavily without asking more than a few softball fanboy questions.

I know for sure that "his own culture" doesn't involve positive use of swastikas because, again, he is a white dude in the West in the 21st century. It's certainly possible that he has a bloodline to people who used the symbol centuries ago but that can hardly be described as a deeper cultural tie than the society he actually currently lives in. A white person wearing a swastika on his body in the 21st century is thoughtless (at best) or racist (at worse). I won't keep taking up space with my opinions here, but I do just want to point out that I didn't "drag" anything off-topic. Swastikas are mentioned in the headline, and they are discussed at length in the article, albeit in the context of the interviewer making excuses for Jones before he could make them for himself. It's kind of fascinating that there are so many swastika apologists hanging around, though.

Stereogum: where you get downvotes for judging people who proudly display permanent swastikas on their bodies despite a "sobering awareness" of how people will surely interpret them. Yes, what he says about the swastika is true: in several cultures (not his own), it has been a positive symbol. But he is a white dude in the West who plays in a genre of music that is uncomfortably willing to associate itself with fascism and racism, and he knows what that symbol means to his audience. So even if I bought his explanation, it would be a pisspoor excuse for wearing the symbol on his body. But I don't buy his explanation. "Swastikas aren't NECESSARILY for Nazis" and "How can I be racist?! I love individualism!" are the rationalizations always used by dirtbag crypto-fascists in the metal scene and beyond. That's my point.

P.S.: "Swastikas existed before the Nazis" is also the standard 8th grade line. This guy seems like a total knob.

I don't know anything about this guy, but "I can't be racist because I hate collectivism" is the standard right-wing line. If his goal is not being "misunderstood", he might want to consider a more refined pro-swastika-tattoo argument.

http://cdn.meme.li/instances/500x/53066224.jpg

Give it a rest. This is what rappers do, particularly when they freestyle. It's only news because critics and bloggers need clickbait. No rapper has ever gone on stage and said, "I'm top 15, easy! Probably even top 12! I dunno, it depends on what you're into, this stuff is subjective!"

I guess that's a solid counterargument, but Hartford is completely right. This would be unlikely to hold up in court (not that El-P would be dumb enough to even attempt out-lawyering Apple) but the image is clearly a RTJ reference. I could see if people were saying "RTJ are too obscure for Apple to use" but the fact that the same ad also references Stones Throw makes it obvious that whoever made the ad is a fan. Now, whether it's worth getting mad about is a different question. I would think that a dude like El has an appreciation for the types of referencing and reappropriation that are a cornerstone of hip hop -- but it's a pretty different story when it's some massive megacorp using other people's indie cred to sell $1000 laptops. It's actually kind of amazing that people are calling it a coincidence. People on this site really like to pick one POV and pile on with it, regardless of what is obviously true.

Krist seems like a sweet, smart dude, but when he talks politics he talks in unhelpful platitudes. Yes, of course, in literally every conflict there are always "knuckleheads" on "both sides" who need to "set aside their differences" and "reach across the aisle". There's virtually no situation about which these niceties can't be said. But if that's all you're gonna say, why say anything?

I haven't enjoyed much of Weezer's post-Pinkerton output but I've also never cared enough to rage against it. They were good, now they're not -- it's a pretty standard rock story. But I personally find the whole "MEMBA DIS?!" nostalgia-pushing vibe of this song (and "Memories") to be really cynical and off-putting. It's sad to think that people in their 30s are already falling into the self-congratulatory nostalgia trap that has always made baby boomers so insufferable. '94 wasn't that long ago, and I don't need to be jerked off by some guy on the radio assuring me how much cooler my teenage years were than everybody else's. It's just such an obvious bit of targeted marketing and it's a drag that it was written by the dude who wrote "El Scorcho".

Gotta respect that this dude has more money than God but still reps the trailer park by still only owning one baggy, outdated wedding/funeral/subpoena suit.

Do you realize that you, too, are an anonymous poster on a music site? What gives you more authority to speak than anyone else? I don't recall seeing any Foreign Policy articles published under the "drummer729" byline.

Stephen -- the majority of black metal bands aren't trying to appeal to the "broadest possible audience" but they are trying to appeal to THEIR audience. Black metal is a market with very specific expectations and artists are under a lot of pressure to meet them. In fact, I'd say black metal is a more restrictive, conservative marketplace than pop music by a mile. At least pop music sounds different than it did 20 years ago. Anyway, I think we're maybe getting lost going down chutes and ladders here. I'm just saying that pop music can be as transcendent and wonderful as any other genre. If enormous (and weird) pop hits like "Somebody That I Used To Know", "Single Ladies", and "Hey Ya" are "pinning the tail on the donkey" then I'm on board. I didn't mind suffering through a few hundred shitty, forgettable tunes to get to those, particularly since I've already forgotten them all. I think pop music is at its worst when it strives for "legitimacy". Personally, I find serious dudes like Sam Smith and Ed Sheeran completely fucking insufferable. Give me the unabashed goofiness of Katy Perry over those clowns any day of the week. Diff'rent strokes, I guess.

The majority of everything in every genre and every art form is bad. Most black metal bands are also doing what's been done a million times before and pinning the tail on that donkey. The key difference is that black metal isn't being played on the radio, so people in general are less apt to be annoyed by the fact that most of it is garbage. I find the best solution to this is to never, ever listen to the radio. It's mostly advertisements for insurance, anyway.

I never understand why the only two positions anyone ever takes on pop music are: (1) it's all sugary trash, acceptable only for idiots or children except as an occasional diversion, or (2) the "poptimist" view that pop music is the beating pulse of our culture and must be treated with deep reverence and interest. Pop music is not a monolith. They're just songs -- some are great, some are awful, some are timeless, some are forgettable. When people take a broad position one way or the other on "pop music", I don't see it as a cotton candy/foie gras conversation -- it's more like trying to have an argument about the merits of food *in general*.

in the *same art form

Right. Jay has never been the loudest dude in the room. That's not his approach. No matter how big Kanye's personality is, it doesn't change that Jay rhymes circles around him on every single Watch the Throne track. And as far as Beyonce is concerned, she's a pop star... I don't think Jay even thinks they're in the art form. And this image of an exhausted 44-year-old man who needs to slouch in his armchair to catch his breath between 3-minute rap songs is just a little bit insulting, don't you think? I get that you're pushing an angle here, but come on now. I don't see you writing that kind of thing about David Byrne.

I'd say it's a combination of them being young, black, successfully busking on the street in the biggest city on earth, and generally seeming like cool, smart kids (based on the one interview I saw). They are reasonably talented for their age but definitely not contract-worthy. There's no way Sony can possibly hope to sell 250,000 copies of this album unless there is also a reality TV show in the works, or something similar that specifically capitalizes on the viral video factor. None of this band's songs are going to be played on the radio so we have to assume the label has a larger marketing plan in mind. Either that, or they figure $60k is a very tiny investment, particularly if they plan to recoup it later.

I dunno... not every rhyme is the basis for a viable parody. This one feels like a stretch to me.

Filing a false police report is already a crime. Thing is, this woman didn't file a false report. She said something false in public, which makes it a civil issue rather than a criminal one. Oberst has already filed a libel suit. Not sure what else people expect to see done.

Forever crushing on Kristen Schaal.

I apologize -- you're absolutely right. I (mistakenly) remembered reading about it here first.

He wasn't dropped from the label, just for the record. That seems to have been some kind of misunderstanding. Apparently his sales have not been great lately, but in 2014 I'm not sure that can be blamed squarely on this. In any case, I don't care about the financial implications. It's an awful thing to be tarred with this type of accusation, particularly in the age of the global internet rumor mill. I put happy in scare quotes, obviously, because this story can't have a happy ending. I just meant it's a good thing the accuser decided to retract instead of letting the question linger forever. I'm assuming she did so as part of a settlement agreement, which means this woman probably won't be going to the poorhouse in a libel suit. You may think she deserves to lose the money, but she has a kid whose life must be pretty difficult as it is, and I really don't think removing his livelihood would fix anything.

I guess this is a "happy" ending to this story, all things considered. Personally, I'd prefer it if the media (Stereogum included) hadn't taken it upon themselves to report anonymous internet chatter as news in the first place. At least two people's lives would be significantly less miserable today.

If you had asked me five years ago, I'd have said there's no way a band with an unwieldy name like UNLOCKING THE TRUTH could ever get signed. Then came Foster the People....

More importantly, is that $60k recoupable? i.e. if the label backs a tour, tons of marketing, and merch, and the album still only sells 20,000 copies, are these kids in debt for years like so many others before them?

That's cool. I'm just wondering why we're getting a track-by-track rollout of the entire EP. Just seems a tad over the top.

Is there a reason Stereogum pushing this extremely un-noteworthy covers EP so hard? Does the bassist intern for you guys or something?

When I first heard 212 I thought, "I hope she doesn't go the way of Kid Sister." Looks like that's more or less what happened, only she made a little more noise along the way.

... and with that, we can just agree to disagree because I'm getting tired of seeing my avatar all over this comments page.

Sorry for the upthread response but for some reason Stereogum won't let me respond to your last post. You say: "I’m still on the side that as a group they merit monitoring because its a clear link between ICP fans and those that become Juggalo gang members, not that all become gang members but for some the ICP lifestyle/mentality is the spark." Therefore: I’m still on the side that as a group all Latinos merit monitoring because its a clear link between Latinos and those that become Latin Kings gang members, not that all become gang members but for some the Latino lifestyle/mentality is the spark. Or: I’m still on the side that as a group all Muslims merit monitoring because its a clear link between Islam and those that become Islamic terrorists, not that all become terrorists but for some the Muslim lifestyle/mentality is the spark. Or: I’m still on the side that as a group all motorcyclists merit monitoring because its a clear link between riding a motorcycle and those that become Hell's Angels, not that all become Hell's Angels but for some the motorcycle lifestyle/mentality is the spark. I mean, I'm not trying to say that the Juggalo struggle (the struggalo?) is equivalent to systemic racism or Islamophobia. I'm just saying that the logic you're employing is not an appropriate basis for categorizing criminals. You're taking one non-criminal aspect of a criminal's identity (e.g. his favorite band) and extrapolating that as a basis for profiling several million citizens. It's just not a responsible or sustainable way to fight crime.

This almost has a pop punk feel in places. That's not a bad thing.