“What do you do
when your mom is a skinhead? You write a song about her,” Thurston Moore’s
introduction to Sonic Youth’s “The Bedroom”
Big thanks to
Akashic Books and NetGalley for the advanced copy of Daniel Rachel’s urgent and
critical new book This Ain’t Rock ‘n’ Roll: Pop Music, the Swastika, and the Third Reich.
Towards the end of the book, I thought about Thurston Moore’s intro to
“The Bedroom,” a song from the early 90s that probably preceded “Youth Against
Fascism,” but still emphasized the bands commitment to upholding their values
yet also being provocative in their lyrics. I don’t think anyone would accuse
SY of holding Nazi sympathies, yet Thurston’s ambivalent delivery leads
listeners to wonder whether he’s angry, sad, or maybe even questioning the
mother’s skinhead membership. If anything, it’s a kind of absurd premise, but
still emphasizes the shock value that permeates the punk ethos from the early
days of SY. This song intro nor any of SY’s music made it into this book, but
it would have been interesting to read Rachel’s thoughts and questions about SY’s
skinhead reference or another reference to Jews in their song “My Arena.” It
would have been interesting to see how bands in the 80s, grappling with Reagan,
racism, and other inequalities in the US have responded to issues like the
resurgence of white supremacy (I’m looking at you Ice-T and Body Count).
If anything, I
wonder how much context matters in these kinds of references and whether bands or
musicians that referred to Nazi imagery from the UK had a different impact or
intent than bands or musicians from the US. I think most people understand that
the band Blondie, referenced in the book for some potential Nazi references,
are not sympathizers with Nazis, but should we also question other bands from
the 1970s like Joy Division or The Fall? Nevertheless, British music is more of
the focus of Rachel’s book, and I learned so much from reading this book, both
from the bands and the music, as well as the history and details that were
relevant to many of the songs, albums, and artwork referenced throughout the
book. While I knew about plenty of the bands and the Nazi references that these
bands made, I never really considered the deeper implications, especially in
how it may have impacted survivors and families who were impacted by the
Holocaust. The book covers a lot of obvious candidates from the heyday of
British punk like the Sex Pistols (especially Sid Vicious) and Siouxie Sioux,
to Factory Records bands like Joy Division and New Order, whose names derive
from Nazi references, to some American bands like The Stooges, whose lead
guitarist Ron Asheton frequently dressed in SS uniforms and was deeply
interested in German war history, and The Ramones, whose logo may have borrowed
from the Nazi era eagle. Although The Ramones’ song “Today your love, Tomorrow
the world,” referenced Ava Braun’s and Hitler’s love, The Ramones also referred
to themselves as “Nazis” in the song, even though Joey Ramone was Jewish.
Rachel notes in the end of the book that he is just presenting the facts as
they are and making historical references to WWII and Holocaust history to
identify possible references and allusions that the bands make. However, I’m
not sure that anyone listening to this song took The Ramones to be Nazis, since
they never really seemed serious about the subjects in any of their songs. They
also sang about sniffing glue, wanting to get shock treatment, and claiming to
be victims of a teenage lobotomy. In fact, Rachel later references The Ramones’
song “Bonzo goes to Bitburg” released shortly after Reagan’s shameful visit to
an SS cemetery where he advocated for forgetting the past atrocities. If
anything, this example shows how The Ramones used this imagery and references
not lightly, but rather in a critical if not sarcastic manner to lessen the
power and allure of the Nazis. It was interesting to consider other case
studies and musicians like Sid Vicious (if you could even call him a musician
or artist) who used Nazi imagery to shock and incite the older generation. I
don’t agree with that approach, and I think Rachel makes a good case in noting
that art should be provocative, but the “atrocities of the Third Reich are not
to be used lightly as creative inspiration.” I think that the latter sections
really helped me understand this argument much more, especially when we think
about more modern examples of shock rock and how some artists demonstrate their
ignorance in the use of Nazi imagery. He cites examples of Marilyn Manson and
Ye to show how current attempts by musicians to shock are problematic and in
many ways lazy. For Manson, the analogy between current politics and Nazis
didn’t add up, especially in a country that allowed his music to thrive and be
accessible, if not criticized, by many. I don’t really understand why Ye expressed
his love for Hitler, but he clearly seems like someone who needs a lot of
attention, but he has recently attempted to apologize for his Nazi era. In
fact, it makes less sense when you read about Hitler’s thoughts about Black
athletes like Jesse Owens who competed in the 1936 Olympics. I’m sure that
Hitler would not have been a fan of Ye’s at all.
It’s interesting to
see Rachel’s theory that the increasing education and introduction of Holocaust
studies into curricula in Europe and America in the 1980s and 1990s as well as
popular representations of Holocaust stories ranging from The Diary of Anne Frank to Art Spiegelman’s Maus to Elie Wiesel’s Night to films like Schindler’s List all
helped to raise consciousness about the Holocaust and the evils of the Third
Reich, which is a possible reason why the use of Nazi imagery and themes today
has taken on a different tone, and where we are quick to either question or
condemn its use. If anything, it’s important to remember the consequences of
this kind of damaged nationalism and dangerous pull of the crowd since in the
US we have seen an uptick in using Nazi-type propaganda in government social
media messages where the Department of Homeland Security has posted “We’ll have
our home again” and the Department of Labor posted “One Homeland. One People.
One Heritage,” slogans that have a nearly literal German translation from Nazi
slogans. As Rachel seems to argue,
raising awareness is the first step, but it is also important to question and
challenge, and not merely accept the repurposing of these phrases, images, and
slogans.
In addition to
these examples, I was really surprised to learn about some of the earlier Nazi
examples Rachel cites from classic rock. In particular, there are stories about
John Lennon’s fascination with Nazis, and how members of bands ranging from the
Rolling Stones, the Who and Led Zeppelin would dress up in Nazi uniforms,
sometimes for performances. I was aware of Bowie’s flirtations with fascism, as
well as the explicit racism of Eric Clapton, who made continued racist comments
in concert in the 1970s, even after scoring a hit from a Bob Marley cover song
(once again appropriating Black art). This book was filled with various
examples of artists who used fascism and especially Nazi imagery and ideas in
their music. The book traces these examples from classic rock through punk and
post-punk up until more modern examples and provides instances of other
representations of Nazism in popular culture. Some of the most unbelievable
examples are in the nazisploitation films like Isla, She Wolf of the SS,
where Rachel provides the chilling real life Ilse Koch as the basis for this
story. Other films like Salon
Kitty and The Night Porter, which was especially celebrated and copied by artists ranging from Siouxsie
Sioux to Madonna, were referenced, but also questioned as to the purpose of
these films. Was it to shock? To excite? Or were there questions about the
nature of power and violence? Rachel raises important questions as to the
nature of these films and their impact on punk rock, popular music, and
fashion, questioning whether they introduced a kind of Nazi-chic that remains
relevant today as people rightly scrutinize the fashy fashion choices of ICE
thug Gregory Bovino.
I was drawn to this
book since it is a book about music, and the striking cover, featuring what
looks like a Hitler youth banging a drum, really grabbed my attention as well.
It’s a familiar picture, looking like something from either Joy Division album artwork
or a recent Turning Point for Elementary School recruitment poster. While the
book sometimes goes down a historical Hitler hole, deeply researching
connections between history and the music Rachel discusses, it’s still a deeply
important and timely book. Rachel’s research and connections made me question
the music I consumed, and while I will still listen to the Ramones, Joy
Division, The Stooges, Slayer, and Motorhead, I think it’s important to
consider how the images they use are possibly pushing aside the horrors and
atrocities of the Third Reich. I’m glad that in the last section of the book,
Rachel references the infamous Dead Kennedy’s song about Nazi punks, and how
they used that song to promote anti-racism, selling arm bands with crossed-out
swastikas. For me, in a lot of ways, punk and metal was more about questioning
this kind of overbearing authority and finding ways to assert your own voice,
be your own person, amidst a society that will sometimes brutally push individuals
towards conformity. Furthermore, the actions of education, awareness, and
remembrance are even more important as US government officials like Elon Musk
are given passes and grace for Nazi salutes, only to make Nazi-themed jokes on
his social media account. I just kept thinking about the absurdity of this
situation, where some of the most powerful people in the world were seemingly
endorsing these policies, and remembered to the events in VA in 2017, where
Trump celebrated, in his words, some “very fine people, on both sides,” and his
continued refusal to disavow racism and bigotry from followers like the Proud
Boys and David Duke. Rachel’s book is an important read, not only for music
fans, but for anyone who consumes media today. It’s important to be aware of
the kinds of messages that are swirling around, and how powerful groups can use
images, propaganda, and catchy slogans to win over hearts and minds, attempting
to sway our beliefs. Furthermore, Rachel’s research in this book is an
important reminder about how powerful and successful the Nazis were in manipulation-
in using images, slogans, and misinformation to sway so many people or to cover
up their atrocities in the guise of nationalism, patriotism, duty, and honor. This
book is important to remember those lessons from history because as Jello Biafra
sang in the Dead Kennedy’s famous song “You’ll be the first to go, unless you
think.” Highly recommended!
PS-
As I was reading this, I was thinking about how contextual a lot of these references to swastikas can be. I visited Hong Kong about 10 years ago, and I had the opportunity to go to the Lantau Buddha, which is a giant statue of Buddha, over 34 meters tall. It's an amazing monument that was initiated by monks from a nearby temple.
The Buddha sits high atop mountains, holding up a hand in a display of peace and equanimity. All around the monument are various reminders of the tenets of Buddhism, about suffering and compassion, and with thousands of visitors there to pay respect and homage, it's also a reminder of our interconnectedness. Nevertheless, it was jarring for me to see swastikas along the fence of this monument.
However, as Rachel noted in the book, the swastika is an ancient symbol used by many cultures before it was hijacked by the Nazis. In the later section of the book, Rachel calls out a k-pop artist who wore a shirt with Sid Vicious wearing the swastika shirt. I was thinking about how in other cultures, particularly Asian cultures, the idea of a swastika has a much different meaning. Furthermore, schools in these cultures present history and learning in much different ways. What they emphasize might be different, and I would imagine that Korea, a nation that was occupied by Japan for many years, where people experienced the cruelty and violence of Japan's imperialism, might emphasize other lessons from WWII than Nazism. I'm not making any excuses, but I do think that in these other contexts, especially in different cultures, the swastika takes on a different meaning, and the emphasis on the atrocities from WWII might lean more on the Japanese than the Germans. I would imagine that you probably wouldn't find her wearing a Japan (the band) shirt or any images of the rising sun. It just reminded me of the contextual differences of the use of the swastika throughout the book, and how so many different factors from historical context, cultural influences and norms, among other influences all impact our reception to these symbols.
