Eurovision is behind us and as these things go, it was about politics a LOT this year as well (try our British competitor, with the song that should be titled, yet again, “It’s not about Brexit… but it really is”). I’m not much of a Eurovision freak. For me, it’s about finding out about new songs that might be interesting, but may never make it anywhere I otherwise usually come across music. That, and a fun event with friends – even though we are miles, even continents apart, many of us sit down on the Finals evening and run a joking commentary on Facebook (thank you for existing, Facebook… I’m fresh out of owls, snailmail is too slow or on strike and my messenger is off duty, the pony express isn’t working any longer and my Apparating skills suck 😉 ). So, that and a few snacks and drinks, and you have a lovely evening, albeit a very long one.
This year, it wasn’t bad on new songs that might be worth your attention. While there was definitely a theme running with a lot of “fuck war” messages (and when doesn’t it), it was interesting to see that some people were original about it, passionate (like Italy with its rather amazing song), while others fell flat, including already in semi-finals, for literally being a book case of PC with all the right phrases but no passion.
Love, lust and romance are the next (or possibly first?) most popular thematic, for me culminating with Spain’s duet, but there were some other lovely tunes (such as Ireland’s or Lithuania’s songs). My personal favourite was Denmark, with the song that was not only brilliantly performed but really got into my system, and that so badly I’ve been playing it a LOT since.
It helps to have a varied taste in music if you are watching the Eurovision, as it becomes a smorgasbord rather than a disappointment.
And then, of course, there is the spectacle, and the aforementioned politics, and the songs we like but did not understand (like Albanian entry, or the Greek and Azerbaijani entries in the semi-finals, though I can follow some Greek due to my overly stuffy classical education, and an OH who did what would loosely qualify as Ancient Studies).
As for the politics, it was a nice surprise to see that China was cut out of watching after censoring the Irish song due to the LGBT theme. For Ireland, this is a big theme and a big shift, and a move towards greater respect for human rights. For China, this would have been informative on how the West feels, as well as hugely supportive to the LGBT in China who are often subject to discrimination (cf. here). It was good to see the marginalised theme taken seriously, and penalties imposed upon the country that went against the human rights (cf. here) with its censorship… yet again, I might add, as China frequently violates human rights, at home and in its dealings with the West and other countries (cf. here).
It came as a surprise that Hungary was involved, give the political shift to the yet more extreme right (cf. here), and it was sadly not at all surprising to not see Turkey competing, for the same reasons. If anything, Eurovision is often informative on this – much like Israel thought they were competing for the last time for however long last year (cf. here), the ominous governmental interruption of Turkey’s potential entry (cf. here) comes as a reminder that not all is well in many countries around the world.
What did come as a surprise was Israel winning. Perhaps it should not have been a surprise. Regardless of how anyone feels about the politically and humanitarianly problematic actions of the current Israeli government (cf. here, here, here), regardless of a political division in the West that either strongly supports or condemns it (cf. here, here, here), regardless of the burdens of both the horrors of the WW2 and the holocaust and the perils of the neo-Nazi antisemitism, regardless of Zionist factions, regardless of everything that often influences the political choice in Eurovision (even though it would be far more honest and fair to vote for the song and the artist, and ban a country from performing in case they have been acting badly in the international political and human rights sphere), the song had a powerful message. No, not the actual attempted message – but the backing of the pressure groups.
It was a poor song, sang badly (Netta’s strong points are the vocal effects rather than singing… the effects were quite good), and it very much fell under hate speech. Compared to what Israel had managed to produce before, this was terrible (cf. here, here & here); but it was very clever at the same time.
If a man sang half the things that Netta sang in that song, he would have been burnt in effigy the very hour he opened his mouth. Eurovision would be facing a showdown with feminists. People would be demanding some kind of action against misogyny.
But apparently, it’s ok to do this the other way around.
I beg to differ. As an egalitarian, I cannot and will not support any song that celebrates, proposes or promotes a message of hate… whether it is by a white supremacist, a black man, a woman or whoever. If human rights is what we live by, then equality is our motto… and this year, I definitely think that this motto has been slighted.
What also surprised me was Netta’s constant claims about how people were choosing different.
How?
The song was not very original; there are two types of this kind of theme, one based on a relationship (fictional or real) of the singer or the person they portray (like J-Lo’s “Ain’t your mama”) and an overall speech of this kind, filled with all the right phrases and aimed to gather support not only through the actual fans and people who think alike, but also through everyone who feels worried that they may be deemed an enemy of a specific cause if they decide otherwise.
As a woman, egalitarian, and much more still, I renounce this. We do not need to switch who is kicking whom. We need to ensure that no one is kicking anybody. We need to overcome gender differences, often exaggerated by feminists as much as misogynists, and work past them to a place where this no longer matters. This is growing. Everything else is just a form of warfare between sexes.
Often enough, this type of song also promotes the message of prudishness and asexuality. As OH pointed out, what does she even mean about not being someone’s toy? Are we talking about an assault, which should not be marginalised as being a toy? Or are we talking about bad choice in relationships? Or are we simply prudish, drumming in the “good girls don’t have sex/don’t have sex in specific ways” message?
Whatever happened to comprehending that a woman can and will have sexual desires, will be sexually active and can be enthusiastic about it? Wasn’t that the whole point of the emancipation, working hard to make sure that we had the right to decide about our bodies and our sexual wishes? Songs like these undermine this far more than a couple of cavemen and their mothers’ teachings.
Was different about her outfit? If so, why? The Anime inspired costume and make up have been done. A lot. Was this to show her as a toy? Because it most certainly did not show her as anything else she may have wished to be shown as. Even if the costume itself could have been dismissed (as some of the Anime characters seem to turn out to be surprisingly strong independent women), or even used to illustrate the difference between the perspective and the fact (which would have been great!), her entire performance was so absolutely based on ridiculous that it was impossible to see things that way, even if it would have been intended for us to come to that conclusion.
Was it about her weight? “Different” often stands for anything from fat to morbidly obese. While no one should be body shamed, certain factual health issues are invariably attached to specific body shapes… but they can be countered by healthy food habits and exercise to a pretty good extent (cf. here).
While Netta’s size certainly doesn’t fall under the worst possible, and while it would have given her a glorious chance to actually personify a cause, actually sing about different, by perhaps choosing or writing a song that fitted to that, that pointed out that we were all the same, no matter what we were like or who we were, she chose differently, banking on the backing of the politicised, pressure groups backed issue that is too serious to banter about this way.
Beside that is Netta seriously not the only big person in the world. Queen Latifah, the undisputed ruler of big and beautiful, has been on the scene for ages. Adele is not exactly petite, but her voice and her performance make her a leading artist. In the classical world, Montserrat Caballe embodies a big diva with a well-known voice. And there have been and will be others; among men, Joe Cocker and Pavarotti both bear mention.
What about this was so different? Or was different yet another catch phrase?
What about a song written by two men (cf. here & here) and performed as a feminist item while posing in a costume of another nation was different, or positive? And while I have previously discussed the notions of cultural appropriation, this is no longer the case when a costume is being used, as it seems to have been, by someone to illustrate a negative trait (such as being a toy).
To end this, Netta didn’t do well by quoting Jerusalem as the next year’s hosting city. While Jerusalem has definitely hosted in the past, Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel. And while Jerusalem boasts a history of commonalities as well as strife between many nations, it is quite problematic to use it (without any further comment or explanation) as a default would-be capital, especially after all the painful controversy attached to it of late.
It’s a really sad, somewhat shameful climax of the Eurovision. If the spirit of Eurovision, like of the Olympics, should be about friendly international cooperation, and about setting aside differences to embrace art, then it’s about time we actually grow into that idea… something that is sorely lacking, and was lacking even more visibly this year. It can’t have been a coincidence that all the presenters, and practically all the correspondents, were female. At the same time, the way they behaved towards men was objectifying, sexually and personally degrading and utterly unacceptable. Again – is this the best we can do? If a man behaved this way, wouldn’t he be in a lot of trouble for it? Can we only have fun if it is at someone else’s expense?
What we should take away from this year’s Eurovision (apart from the memory of many great songs and performers) is that there must be an end to this. The issue of hate speech should be considered problematic on equal grounds, no matter who is spreading the hate.