12 Mar The Eurovision Song Contest Just Keeps Getting Better
Last month, I wrote a post about the upcoming Eurovision song competition and European politics. I wanted to point out that the competition will be hosted by (and televised from) Moscow and that the Georgian entry was going to sing a disco song that teases Vladimir Putin called, ahem, “We Don’t Wanna Put In.” See it performed here.
Anyway, in the final paragraph I asked who “would have expected Georgians finding a way to make fun of Putin on a TV show being broadcast from Moscow?” I had spoken too soon.
The Contest’s Reference Group ruled that the Georgians had to change the lyrics because the existing lyrics broke the contest rules by being political. The rule in question states:
4.9 The lyrics and/or performance of the songs shall not bring the Shows or the Eurovision Song Contest as such into disrepute. No lyrics, speeches, gestures of a political or similar nature shall be permitted during the Eurovision Song Contest. No swearing or other unacceptable language shall be allowed in the lyrics or in the performances of the songs. No commercial messages of any kind shall be allowed. A breach of this rule may result in disqualification.
While this ruling came from a board that includes representatives from more than one state, I’ll leave it to you to decide whether anyone would have called Georgia on this if Russia had not been upset.
Anyway, Georgia refused to change the lyric and chose to withdraw instead. The Telegraph reports:
“There really is nothing negative about this song,” lead singer Stephane said. “In any democratic country it would be taken as a harmless joke.”
…
In a letter sent to the EBU, the producers of the song said that they had their suspicions that the decision to ask Georgia to revise its entry came about as a result of pressure from Russia, where this year’s contest is to be held.
In case you are interested, MSNBC reports that the chorus of the song is
“We don’t wanna put in,
Cuz negative move,
It’s killin’ the groove,
I’m gonna try to shoot in,
Some disco tonight,
Boogie with you.”
Regardless as to whether you think this song is “political” (or even just “sensical”) or not, did Russia really need to go to the mats on this (assuming that they pushed the issue)? As my previous post had mentioned, there are some interesting synergies between politics and the Eurovision song competition, and it seems that those linkages are especially pronounced for Russians. A reporter for the BBC wrote that:
Russia’s main TV evening news ran a report the other day in which it praised the staging of the final as sign that “after decades of isolation, our country is finally returning to Europe and reclaiming the status of a superpower in politics and culture, including popular music, that rightfully belongs to it“.
[Emphasis added.]
Wow. Russia a pop music superpower? Really? That is a particularly tough claim to make since the Russian entrant in this year’s Eurovision song competition is actually Ukrainian. (Here’s her performance.) Wait… it gets better. The music was actually written by… a Georgian. And the lyric? Half was written by an Estonian. The BBC provides the context:
In the last 12 months, Russia has had a gas war with Ukraine, and a real war with Georgia. Two years ago, it had a bitter row with Estonia when that country moved a Soviet-era war memorial.
It would be hard to pick three former Soviet republics that have worse relations with their one-time masters in Moscow.
Maybe we should chalk this up to Russia wanting to kiss and make-up (well, besides possibly throwing the Georgian entry under the bus). Maybe not. The BBC continues:
The producer of one of the rival acts in the contest to represent Russia has exploded in patriotic outrage.
“Let’s get Ukrainian footballers to represent the Russian national team at the European football championships – Dynamo Kiev, for example, and a coach from Georgia,” Iosif Prigozhin told Ekho Moskvy radio. “It is all a bluff. It is all a farce.”
Some of the Moscow rush hour crowds seemed to agree.
“It’s not right that Russia will be represented with a song in the Ukrainian language. It’s just not right,” said Anna.
“Yes, it’s no good – after all, the Russian language is mighty and much nicer than Ukrainian,” agreed her friend.
Some may see in Russia’s multilingual, multinational effort an attempt to recreate a communist-era idea of “friendship of the peoples”.
Others sense a sophisticated scheme to draw the sting from any organised anti-Russian voting.
OK, who else smiled when the guy on the street said “the Russian language is mighty and much nicer than Ukrainian.” Yeah, dude, you tell ’em!
So, what have we learned? Institutional membership, such as who gets to sit on the Eurovision Contest Board (or even institutions that receive less attention, such as the UN Security Council) can provide structural power. Eurodisco and punnery do not innoculate a song from being “political,” but they can be used to make your opponents seem like they have no sense of humor and are taking a song competition way, way, too seriously. We’ve also learned that Russia believes it has returned to its pop music superpowerdom. (See, that soft power stuff is pretty important after all. Take that, realists.) And it seems that Russian sounds much nicer than Ukrainian. Which, seriously, I never knew.
For me, the Eurovision Song Contest is like a gift that just keeps on giving.
This is so, so much fun!
Professor Borgen, I hope that one day you will become objective in your posts concerning Russia, start approaching critically what the current Georgian and Ukranian governments do and stop seeing Russia as the “bad guy.” Let me explain why I think you are biased. Let us talk about the Georgian Eurovision entry first. You offer no evidence for your contention that, in your words, Russia went “into the mats on this.” The Geneva-based European Broadcasting Union (“EBU”) rejected, according its rules, a song that insults a leader of a country, what is wrong with that? You offer nothing to challenge to the EBU’s integrity and independence. Do you seriously think that Europeans are not concerned with insults to leaders of foreign countries? You may have fun with the lyrics of the Georgian entry, but recent events in Georgia, such as numerous protests of the opposition (e.g., http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE52C5S420090313), indicate that the choices of the Georgian rule do not necessarily represent the will of the Georgians to whom you are imputing this “disco” insult. Georgian singer Diana Gurtskaya, who represented Georgia at Eurovision 2008, declined to pass the baton to “Stephane and 3G” (the band that was hoping to perform the song… Read more »
Reader: You make some interesting points but overall, I think you take my post much too seriously and overstate what I am actually saying… In particular, you seem to think I note the multinational aspect of Russia’ entry to argue that Russia has no talent. No, of course not. Rather, I found the multinational aspect somewhat ironic (a) in light of the rather nationalistic veneer that this year’s Eurovision competion has taken on and (b) that the nationalities involved were those of countries that have been on the business-end of Russian power projection over the past couple of years. Moreover, regarding the Russian entry, you wrote that “it only shows that Russia is a country where people, regardless of their ethnicity, have a fighting chance to prove their talent.” This implies that she is an ethnic Ukrainian but a Russian citizen (and that I had a problem with an ethnic Ukrainian representiung Russia). Once again, you have taken the wrong implication: my point was not that she was an ethnic Ukrainian representing Russia but that, as far as I understand from reports, she is a Ukrainian citizen, who was disqualified on a time technicality in the Ukrainian competition, and was brought into the Russian competition… Read more »
Professor Borgen, We agree on many issues, but I would like to clarify two points. First, with regards to the distinction between ethnicity and nationality in the former USSR space. Generally, as the ICJ Nottebohm case explains, nationality under international law is not established by a mere formal grant of citizenship. “Nationality is a legal bond having as its basis a social fact of attachment, a genuine connection of existence, interests and sentiments, together with the existence of reciprocal rights and duties.” Nottebohm Case (Liech. v. Guat.), 1955 I.C.J. 4, 23 (Apr. 6). Here, Russia’s entrant, Ms. Prihodko, was born in the USSR. Russia is a legal successor of the USSR, and thus, under international law, Ms. Prihodko has a significant nexus with Russia. After the collapse of the USSR, Ms. Prihodko had to get a Ukrainian passport (in order to continue to reside in the Ukraine), but she travels to Russia, she chose to represent Russia in an international competition and sing a song “Mamo” (“mother”) in Russian and Ukrainian. So at a minimum, Ms. Prihodko’s Ukrainian travel papers, under international law, do not preclude her from claiming allegiance to Russia. More importantly, Russia and Ukraine (and other former… Read more »
[…] puttin’ out Publicerade mars 18, 2009 Uncategorized Ett uttryck för den enda intressanta funktion ESC och schlager i allmänhet kan bära i sitt sköte. Väl […]