New Die Antwoord

Jack-Flash-Jr · 2012-01-17T23:47:06+00:00

I fink I fink too much... http://pitchfork.com/news/45095-new-die-antwoord-i-fink-u-freeky/

New Die Antwoord

deefstes

Viccy wrote:When I look at Die Antwoord I see people supporting themselves, adding to the economy and ultimately doing what feels right to them and without causing harm. I wish the same could be said about other people who really should be role models.

Are they not causing harm? I think on this we disagree. I'm curious to know who the supposed role models are that you consider to be causing harm but for kids to be listening to "I'll f**k you til you love me. You won't last two minutes in my world b*tch" seems very harmful to me.

X-rated Bob wrote: I'm puzzled by what is going on this thread. What's the objection? It can't be the foul language because we've had some of that in this thread and nobody's raised an eyebrow. I've heard a bit of Die Antwoord. I don't think they're giving Wordsworth or Tennyson sleepless nights, but they also don't seem to be preaching the misogynistic message that is all too common in rap, nor are they advocating violence - there's none of the sort of "gangsta" attitude and platitudes about icing pigs and slapping da bitch.

I can't say that I've heard a great deal of their music either but what I have heard certainly was offensive. Like Hammeron says, it's downright pornographic.
"Jou ma se p**s is a fishpaste jar" - I cringe when I hear this and it disturbs me that people are listening to it, enjoying it and defending it.

Bob, I'm sorry to have to disagree with you vehemently on this point but if we were to use the kind of language on this forum that Die Antwoord uses in their songs then I have no doubt that you yourself will moderate it and issue a stern warning. So I don't quite buy your argument that the lyrics can't be objectionable because we have had foul language in this thread.

Speaking of moderation, I mention that Justin Bieber dresses like a pansy, for which I receive a very stern reprimand. How would the response have looked like if I had typed something like this?
"Jesus Christ you should see how these boys stalk me.
Follow my every move like a Sea Point moffie , F*CK YOU."

So I can't agree with you Bob, other than that I hope people are applying their standards even-handedly.

X-rated Bob wrote: I also notice that there's been a thread about a metal band (Puscifier) who apparently have a lot of gratuitous profanity in their songs. Nobody's calling them freaks or the downfall of western civilisation.

I don't know Puscifier, their music or their lyrics but this thread is not about Puscifier. If it was and if it is indeed true what you're saying about their lyrics then you can be very sure that I would have objected to that as well. The fact that I haven't is not a tacid approval of their music.

Bob-Dubery

Tamla Kahn 'Hammeron' McMahon wrote: What makes my jaw drop is that upstanding, experienced, knowledgable and extremely talented guitarists such as yourselves,

Well in my case you're being too kind. But it makes no difference. People aren't better or worse judges of these kinds of issues just because they have some skill on a musical instrument.

would stand up for this reprehensible garbage.

You know, there's a greater general point here. It is possible to support that general point without specifically endorsing a particular artist. As somebody who loves and plays a form of music that is regularly under fire for being a bad influence on kids etc etc you perhaps need to give this some thought.

It's the old censorship slippery slope thing. Say we decide that Die Antwoord are undesirable because they're foul mouthed. OK. Fine, so they get banned from the airwaves, get age limit stickers on their CDs, there's a law that says that CD stores can't rack Die Antwoord CDs where young kids can reach them (as is done with porno mags in newsagents in the UK). Fine.

Except what comes into the censorial sights next? Where does it stop? Where else is their gratuitous use of profanity in media that is easily accessible by the public? What else might be an affront to the morals of the nation (whatever those are and whoever decides) or be a negative influence for impressionable young people?

See how it goes?

Now I'm not saying that everything is fair game and anybody can print or publish or say whatever they want. But you have to be careful where you draw the line and you have to be careful to have your line placing underpinned by firm principles, not personal distaste or something not properly thought out.

deefstes

ez wrote: Its exactly as Bob and Jack says. Die Antwoord isn't any worse than most rap and even mainstream metal bands. Most metal bands have at least a tinge of Satanic overtones and some others have downright nasty lyrics.

Don't believe me? Metallica, most famous of all metal bands today covered So What. Lyrics here: http://www.plyrics.com/lyrics/antinowhereleague/sowhat.html.

Sabbath, ACDC, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Megadeth, SLAYER etc etc. The list goes on. They didn't sing about family picnics and easter bunnies and fishing by the river with your best friend. If they did, we would not know their names today.

Then maybe we should start a new thread to discuss those bands. For the record, I find some of those just as offensive (if not more) as Die Antwoord which is the very reason I don't listen to them.

But that's just me, I know there are plenty of folk around these forums who love that music and I can't speak for them. But there are two arguments here. One is around the issue of profanity, the other is that ACDC, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest and the likes built their fame on their music and at the same time maintained a very "offensive" image. Die Antwoord, in contradistinction, is building their "fame" on their offensive image and it's something that will not last.

The fact that Die Antwoord is now being compared to bands that made a name 40 years ago is perhaps rather telling. Do you think that 40 years from now other bands will be compared against Die Antwoord? I don't think so - because they have nothing more to offer than offensive lyrics and videos, not exactly something with a lot of staying power.

majestikc

For me the main point of this thread is that Die Antwoord is shit, they don't deserve the credit they get, plain and simple.

Each to his/her own though.

IceCreamMan

5 pages, one things for sure , die antwoord got us debating ...and that is a great thing. ?

and if they kark then we can drag em down ....... then its ok....... ☹

Hammeron

Jack Flash Jr wrote: +1 to Bob.

It's a different style of music, we could probably leave it at that. There's a rap/dance board somewhere lauding Die Antwoord and vilifying the new Megadeth.
This may ring a bell:

His evil Highness born from disaster
To dominate and to kill
A glistening murder machine
False majesty standing perfectly still
A blitzkrieg raining down evil
On a mountain of black ice
Like a good old fashioned beating within
Inches of your life

Meh. At least it's got a solo in there somewhere ?

These are cartoon lyrics.
And as people keep pointing out, when it comes to Metal you can't hear them anyhow.
I am a 17 year old school girl, so take it from my day to day experience that blatant pornographic overtones are more detrimental to the young mind than a lyric alluding to some fantastical apocolyptic mission to destroy mankind.

And ez, the Metallica cover of 'So what' is nasty and pathetic I agree, but it is in NO way representational of a Hetfield lyric. Rather link to Metallicas 'Wherever I may Roam'. Hetfield is brilliantly deep and meaningfull.
Sorry, but BAD example.

Jack-Flash-Jr

@ Deeftes... it most certainly is music, and better that most in its genre... it might be a terrible genre but so be it.
I suspect people are more offended because the "message" is delivered in a genre that they're not used to hearing it... Afrikaans rap dance.

With regard to having kids... let me make something clear... Die Antwoord is not responsible for raising my children, I am. They do not watch most Disney because I think it's too crass (the new tv shows) or scary (most of their movies).
What is a pre-teen doing watching Die Antwoord as a matter of course? By the time a child is old enough to get past your attempts to shield them from media they will be exposed to a lot worse than a transgressive art/music project.

ezietsman

deefstes wrote:
ez wrote: Its exactly as Bob and Jack says. Die Antwoord isn't any worse than most rap and even mainstream metal bands. Most metal bands have at least a tinge of Satanic overtones and some others have downright nasty lyrics.

Don't believe me? Metallica, most famous of all metal bands today covered So What. Lyrics here: http://www.plyrics.com/lyrics/antinowhereleague/sowhat.html.

Sabbath, ACDC, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Megadeth, SLAYER etc etc. The list goes on. They didn't sing about family picnics and easter bunnies and fishing by the river with your best friend. If they did, we would not know their names today.

Then maybe we should start a new thread to discuss those bands. For the record, I find some of those just as offensive (if not more) as Die Antwoord which is the very reason I don't listen to them.

But that's just me, I know there are plenty of folk around these forums who love that music and I can't speak for them. But there are two arguments here. One is around the issue of profanity, the other is that ACDC, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest and the likes built their fame on their music and at the same time maintained a very "offensive" image. Die Antwoord, in contradistinction, is building their "fame" on their offensive image and it's something that will not last.

The fact that Die Antwoord is now being compared to bands that made a name 40 years ago is perhaps rather telling. Do you think that 40 years from now other bands will be compared against Die Antwoord? I don't think so - because they have nothing more to offer than offensive lyrics and videos, not exactly something with a lot of staying power.

The point here is that Die Antwoord isn't doing anything strange. They just positioned themselves in a niche corner of the market through sheer genius, and people who like their music / message / image loves that fact and some people find that fact incomprehensible.

Other genres have used the vulgar, satanic, shock etc tactics before in order to make people listen. The fact that the music or message do not resonate well with you probably means that it was never meant for you, just like Bieber's music was probably never meant for you (unless you're a 12 year old girl).

I think there's a storm in a teacup here. Why do we not complain about Slipknot or Kitty or Slayer? Maybe because those bands do not represent something this close to home? Or is it maybe because some of the more well known acts in this country is far removed from your favourite genre?

deefstes

X-rated Bob wrote: You know, there's a greater general point here. It is possible to support that general point without specifically endorsing a particular artist. As somebody who loves and plays a form of music that is regularly under fire for being a bad influence on kids etc etc you perhaps need to give this some thought.

Bob, it pains me that I have to disagree with you because I generally find your opinions very balanced and generally in agreement with my own. In this case, however, not so.

The above is a rather scathing accusation on Hammeron (I'm sure not intended though). What exactly is it about the music that Hammeron plays that is under fire for being a bad influence on kids? Is it the fuzz effects on the guitar or the 190bpm double kick drums? Surely not? Or is it the lyrics of hatred and anger that a lot of metal (but not all) has? So what exactly is the form of music that Hammeron plays? Is there something offensive about her lyrics? I have not heard a lot of her music but I can't say that any particularly offensive lyrics come to mind. Yes, her music uses a lot of heavily overdriven guitar and hectic drum patterns which is not exactly my style but I can't fault her for that.

X-rated Bob wrote: It's the old censorship slippery slope thing. Say we decide that Die Antwoord are undesirable because they're foul mouthed. OK. Fine, so they get banned from the airwaves, get age limit stickers on their CDs, there's a law that says that CD stores can't rack Die Antwoord CDs where young kids can reach them (as is done with porno mags in newsagents in the UK). Fine.

I don't think we're talking about cencorship. That's a whole different topic on which I have fairly strong opinions as well but that's not what this is about. I know that unsavoury material is always going to be available. You don't have to look hard if you want to find pornographic material but the fact that it isn't cencored does not make it good. That's the point that I am making in this thread (and I think Hammeron and Averatu as well). Die Antwoord is not virtuous just because they're pushing the envelope.

Personally, I applaud Hammeron for taking a strong stance on this matter. That is, as far as I'm concerned, the most effective way of weeding out sick material - people taking a stance, not through cencorship. The fact that a lot of people have taken a stance on pornography is the reason that we're not seeing more of it on television and on magazine shelves. Shops who sell pornographic material is relegated to the seedy back streets. You won't find many sex shops in Sandton shopping centre or Rosbank Mall. It's not because of cencorship, it's because the majority of people don't want that and have taught their kids not to want it, hence no real appetite for it.

I am frankly a little disappointed too that people are not willing to take that stance on Die Antwoord as well, at least not in this thread.

deefstes

OK OK, Jack and EZ make some good points. I still think Die Antwoord is sick and not something I like seeing in society but I realise that I might be having a knee jerk reaction because it is a little closer to home.

I also realise that we're not going to agree on this topic and I think I'd rather bow out of the discussion as I can tell that it's getting me hot under the collar which means it's only a matter of time before I infuriate someone (if I haven't already).

Carry on. ?

ezietsman

deefstes wrote: OK OK, Jack and EZ make some good points. I still think Die Antwoord is sick and not something I like seeing in society but I realise that I might be having a knee jerk reaction because it is a little closer to home.

I also realise that we're not going to agree on this topic and I think I'd rather bow out of the discussion as I can tell that it's getting me hot under the collar which means it's only a matter of time before I infuriate someone (if I haven't already).

Carry on. ?

To make it clear, I don't listen to them either. But they are in fact musos just like some of us tries to be. I also don't think they are trying to be evil and dump society into chaos and mayhem. I find the candy coated form of blues I mostly hear in Cape Town a lot more offensive than 'Die Antwoord', not because of offensive lyrics or imagery, but because the way blues is being portrayed is not true to its roots. And that makes the blues sh1tty to listen to. ?

Jack-Flash-Jr

It's all Mika's fault, he dropped a terrible remix into the thread and then watched it explode. The original is far more palatable........ nope

Edit: Ez, if you don't like our blues, stop giving Singe your amp to play it on....

?

AlanRatcliffe

DA have found a different niche that works for them and it's making them money. I'm convinced there is more than a little tongue in cheek there too. I'm happy for it because it will open doors for other local acts, but don't see it as having much staying power.

Lyrics? Influence? Damaging young minds? Hogwash! Let 'em experience everything on their own terms and they'll learn to make their own decisions and probably learn to laugh at/disregard the silly stuff (regardless of genre). Try and keep them from it (or it from them) and they'll take to it as a matter of principle.
"There are more love songs than anything else. If songs could make you do something we'd all love one another." - Frank Zappa

LFH

Die Antwoord has 5 pages on GuitarForum.co.za dedicated to them.
They must be doing something right.

Or wrong.

Jack-Flash-Jr

LFH wrote: Die Antwoord has 5 pages on GuitarForum.co.za dedicated to them.
They must be doing something right.

Or wrong.

Seventhson has dozens of pages on GFSA dedicatd to his lovelife. He must be doing something right.

Or wrong.

?

LFH

Jack Flash Jr wrote:
LFH wrote: Die Antwoord has 5 pages on GuitarForum.co.za dedicated to them.
They must be doing something right.

Or wrong.
Seventhson has dozens of pages on GFSA dedicatd to his lovelife. He must be doing something right.

Or wrong.

?

I thought this is a music forum, damn it!

LFH

Die Antwoord is probably the most original act out of South Africa at the moment. Sure, it's an embellishment of the Afrikaans culture (predominantly) but we all know some peeps that do speak like that and who are, well, zef.

America doesn't want another American-sounding rock band. They have enough of those. Same with Australia, etc.
The reason why Max Normal never got anywhere is because another act was already there. And I'm saying this as a big Max Normal fan.

So they saw a gap in the market and took it. Good for them.

As far as kids being influenced by them negatively, well, that's just stupid. If kids are raised right with a good moral code then things like these wouldn't have an effect on them. There's way worse stuff in the world than this act - music, movies, news, tv shows, books, paintings, etc, etc.

And they might not be shredding like Guthrie, but they are obviously musical and talented in their own way.

Just my 2c.

But as someone said, haters gonna hate.

majestikc

Die Antwoord, McDonalds, Keeping Up With The Kardashians, all these thing's make money and are pretty popular but that doesn't make them good.

In fact, if you look at it from a certain perspective, these days the things that are most popular seem to be the most retarded...........Idiocracy.

singemonkey

LFH wrote: Die Antwoord is probably the most original act out of South Africa at the moment. Sure, it's an embellishment of the Afrikaans culture (predominantly) but we all know some peeps that do speak like that and who are, well, zef.

America doesn't want another American-sounding rock band. They have enough of those. Same with Australia, etc.
The reason why Max Normal never got anywhere is because another act was already there. And I'm saying this as a big Max Normal fan.

So they saw a gap in the market and took it. Good for them.

As far as kids being influenced by them negatively, well, that's just stupid. If kids are raised right with a good moral code then things like these wouldn't have an effect on them. There's way worse stuff in the world than this act - music, movies, news, tv shows, books, paintings, etc, etc.

And they might not be shredding like Guthrie, but they are obviously musical and talented in their own way.

Just my 2c.

But as someone said, haters gonna hate.

Another big +1.

Bewildered that: (a) people think what they do is simple. These guys honed their skills to a razor's edge. Maybe people are blinded by the zef stuff and should listen to Max Normal to really feel how good these guys are. It couldn't possibly be because people don't think hip-hop requires any skill. Because for that you'd have had to be put on a time machine in 1988.

(b) People think this is a commercial prospect. "We need something that's a sure fire international hit. Well, if we really are prepared to sell out, it couldn't possibly be more obvious. What the USA is begging for is low-class, crass, Afrikaans hip-hop. In the USA you can't turn on a radio station without hearing a DJ say, 'If only we had some low-brow hip-hop in a language no one understands.' It just cannot fail."

Anyone see the problem here? Die Antwoord succeeded because they are extraordinary performers and artists, despite their content having slightly less of a commercial niche than Indonesion Xmas carols sung by parrots.

Bob-Dubery

LFH wrote: America doesn't want another American-sounding rock band. They have enough of those. Same with Australia, etc.
The reason why Max Normal never got anywhere is because another act was already there. And I'm saying this as a big Max Normal fan.

So they saw a gap in the market and took it. Good for them

I don't think so. What sells, here, in the USA, in the UK, is stylistically watered down stuff with a nice, radio-friendly sheen to it. That's why Mumford and Sons sold for a while (they may be back, I'm betting not but I have been wrong before). That's not "folk", it's regular radio-friendly pop with just enough folk posturing to look and sound a teensy bit different from everything else out there and to allow the audience to think they've discovered some kind of authentic roots music (which has been done before - see Dexy's Midnight Runners).

So whatever else Die Antwoord have done, they haven't chosen the commercially easy path. Indeed they announced that they'd parted companies with their record label precisely because said label wanted them to water everything down so that they could be more radio friendly.