What the ?? (1 Viewer)

[Shorty]

burn all your feral house books. actually, i think willy has some feral house stuff in stock, someone should trash that place

andrew

Yeah! Torch lit procession followed by book burnings, oh wait ...

 

[stephenoblunt]

What is offended exactly??

 

[snap-apple]

What is offended exactly??

of·fend Audio pronunciation of "offended" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-fnd)
v. of·fend·ed, of·fend·ing, of·fends
v. tr.

1. To cause displeasure, anger, resentment, or wounded feelings in.
2. To be displeasing or disagreeable to: Onions offend my sense of smell.
3.
1. To transgress; violate: offend all laws of humanity.
2. To cause to sin.

v. intr.

1. To result in displeasure: Bad manners may offend.
2.
1. To violate a moral or divine law; sin.
2. To violate a rule or law: offended against the curfew.

 

[mackle]

fuck sake why has no-one mentioned that YAKUZA are a shite band and no wonder they have to do ridiculous things like wear swastika's on stage, to be honest i don't give two fucks if everyone is 'too cool to care' wearing a swastika in this day and age is fuckin stupid. I understand the reasoning people had dfor doing it back in 77, just to get a reaction like, chaos n' all. But when a middle of the road band like YAKUZA does it in 2004 it's a bit pathetic.

I'm in work right now with a girl who is from the former east germany and she found it extremely distasteful. a swastika isn't a fuckin fashion statement its bollox

What the fuck is wrong with you people. Its a fucking joke. Nothing more nothing less. Stop over reacting about it. Its not like Yakuza were saying that they agreed with Nazi policies. Wise up all of ye.

And as for calling Yakuza middle of the road, I laugh in your face cause Yakuza are an amazing band. One of the best in Ireland in fact. I cant think of one thing I hate about them. Plus they are all a great bunch of people as well.

 

[Phil]

Shut up, Ciaran.

As far as the Nazi thing goes: edgy.

 

[mackle]

I give up

 

[Blackenedflag]

I give up

Rightly so.

 

[taubstumm]

Shut up, Ciaran.

Rightly so.

pricks.

 

[niallmc]

10 pages later and the debate continues. I commend you ronan for saying your piece, I also think Ed is right (in parts) to talk about what it symbolises. Sounds to me if you had the choice to do it again you wouldn't. The context argument is the most important about it. I can't see people (did you call\ them randomers?) stumbling across the basement of the Lower Deck and paying in to a gig full of people in fancy dress not putting it in the right context. It is good to debate these things though - better than in jokes and messages to see whose band is best.

 

[snap-apple]

I cant think of one thing I hate about them. Plus they are all a great bunch of people as well.

Aye, as nice a bunch o lads as you'll meet.

 

[Cormcolash]

Expanding on my original monster post, I'd just like to point out that I generally take the view that stuff like this shouldn't be joked about casually. However, I do recognise that satire can be effective in bringing issues such as this to people's attention, just look at this thread, and because of this I'm not going to completely shout it out of existence. I guess people should just be a bit more careful about how they go about things, but then who hasn't done something stupid before? They can cast the first stone anyway. That's a good idea, think I'll put Ensign on.

 

[spuded]

oh yeah - just incase anyone doesn't know who boyd rice is, he's buds/musical collaborator with michael moynahan who wrote 'lords of chaos'
one of those feral house peeps
MM is really sketch too.
burn all your feral house books. actually, i think willy has some feral house stuff in stock, someone should trash that place

andrew

hey i know this thread should have and has died a death but i just wanted to say that i in no shape or form condone or desire censorship. I've read plenty of Boyd Rice and I like feral house books. I don't believe that nazi literature should be censored and i think everyone has the right to listen to whatever the hell they want and have access to right wing or whatever their buzz is music wise. As much as they have the right to follow their pursuits and beliefs i have the right to disagree and think it's stupid. This obviously isn't in reference to YAKUZA cause as people on this site have pointed out they know em and they aren't anyway dodgy like that, and all round seem to be nice people. It's just matters of opinion, people are allowed to believe what they want, and i'm allowed to disagree. Anyway..

 

[jmlcomp]

just to re-iterate i think the wearing of the swastika no matter what the context is insensitve...
i don't however think that yer man from yakuzza was deliberately trying to be offensive....he comes across as a very reasonable and honest bloke in his posts so i would hold no grudge whatsoever.....
and i think his costume was just the catalyst for this debate.....
i still believe the swastika, as in the nazi german elbem which is geometrically more rigid than the older asian one, should be used as a symbol of persecution and therefore it shouldn't be used in a context that lightens it's meaning......
my two cents........

 

[1000smurfs]

i don't. i think it would be far more positive for the whole world if the swastika could regain it's original meanings so that when someone saw it they thought of something positive instead of something negative. it's not like anyone's ever going to forget what happened in ww2.

They forgot about ww1 pretty quickly. I agree with jmlcomp and the germans it should retain its nazi context. Relaxing about it is not even an option on the mainland with the rise of neo nazism.
Nazis need all the stigmatization in the eyes of society they can get.
Although they also need to be ridiculed and this makes for a grey area , satire or tasteless joke? etc...

if the swastika topic has run its course how about a debate on 'preaching' at gigs
I think it's often necessasry to summarize your song at the beginning becuase I haven't a fucking clue what you're screaming about half the time.

 

[taubstumm]

if the swastika topic has run its course how about a debate on 'preaching' at gigs
I think it's often necessasry to summarize your song at the beginning becuase I haven't a fucking clue what you're screaming about half the time.

it usually really annoys me, especially if it's done for every song.

i remember seeing drop dead years ago and i thought it was hilarious; they were standing there going 'this one is about liberating squirrels' or whatever, and then they'd just go 'waaaaaaaaaarrrrggghhhh!'

also, it implies that all songs only have one possible interpretation, and makes for very one-dimensional music. for example: i really love that giveamanakick song where they stop in the middle and start shouting 'people don't look eachother in the eye anymore!' - mainly because the lyric is the kind of thing that gets under your skin, and that you end up thinking of in other situations. if they had started the song by going 'this song is about how the government are bad', it would ruin the effect that the lyrical ambiguity has.

that said, sometimes a bit of an intro can be good, but when it strays into sanctimonious rubbish it just irritates me.

 

[Phil]

Do you not think a person has the right to say what the song they wrote is about? You can easily still take your own interpretation from it, but they did write a song about something specific.

 

[billygannon]

Can you imagine what would have happened if they wore Rangers jerseys?

 

[LamStock]

yeah but its fucking annoying when they have long winded intro/discussions before a song, just play the goddamn thing, i used to run an open mic night and this dude would get up EVERY week and tell us that the song was about how his parents split up and he's da shacked up with the woman across the street for at least 5 minutes

the next song was about his brother being/heroin addict/criminal/all round psycho and that nearly brought tears to his eyes

emotional stuff, yes, do we need to hear it every week...NO

 

[oh shit]

Do you not think a person has the right to say what the song they wrote is about? You can easily still take your own interpretation from it, but they did write a song about something specific.

of course they have the right,
but i think tom's opinion demonstrates how a lot of people react to it. if your music is a vehicle for spreading your own ideas about the world you will probably want to take the opportunity to talk about it before songs. but if a lot of people are put off by that you gotta wonder how effective it is.
but yeah, people can says whatevers they like, and people will react to it however they feel. meh.

personally i think passive influence works better when it comes to disseminating ideas - i personally don't react well to polemics, newsletters, lectures, being talked down to, etc. not saying that's what bands do when they talk about stuff, it's a natural reaction. probably best to say briefly what you're about and invite discussion about it after the show, rather than explaining your thesis to people who are primarily there to be entertained.

 

[Phil]

I just found the whole "it implies that all songs only have one possible interpretation" thing really weird.