We are sometimes told (and perhaps more often around this particular time of the year), that popular culture is not a political manifesto. And yes, it´s true that its often very hard to discern on the surface what is political about love songs, about ballads, about novelty numbers. And yet one of the most political appointments on the planet, is currently making it his duty to utilise popular culture in his everyday pronouncements. I refer of course to the American President Donald Trump. He has long understood that his message, if it is to be believed, benefits from having a populist seal of approval. And yet popular culture at its broadest level is notoriously fickle and prone to abrupt changes. What is a la mode in one season is strictly outre the next. This may yet prove to be his real undoing.
And yet at a level removed from this is the idea that popular culture broadly represents the beliefs, the bete noirs of a entire generation, western or otherwise. Actually, particularly now as other cultures become more important on a world view. Does popular culture shape our beliefs or do our beliefs shape popular culture? Discuss….
And so, when someone asserts that the Eurovision song contest should be about the song, the talent, the concept, I have always chuckled inwardly and sometimes outwardly, in the right company. I think it has always been the case that the Eurovision contest has been at the forefront of engaging itself with current popular political culture. Simply by its act of representing a country per se, it is shaped by that countries beliefs, creeds and its motivations. We can ascertain something of a country by what it chooses to represent itself with year on year, or in some cases what is chosen for it.
There´s no better case in point than this years sixty ninth Eurovision, which was shaped , underpinned perhaps, by a complex web of beliefs, pressures and -let´s face it- prejudices. For some, acting upon those can be a relatively simple matter, for others it may be very complex. We see people in their countries voting for neighbours, people in countries voting for a concept, and in some cases countries voting as a defence mechanism. In recent years Ukraine has benefited from a wave of popular Eurovision support, partly encapsulated by its song choices, against the idea of an oppressor. In this case Russia. The fact it was less so this year should be something of a warning I suspect. To some extent this is played out right across the voting patterns of the population of Europe as a whole.
However, last night at the 69th Eurovision contest this complex pattern was played out right to the very wire. At the final moment Austria´s Johannes Pietsch, (otherwise known as simply JJ) just triumphed over Israel´s singer Yuval Raphael, by scoring 79 more points . She was a survivor of that grisly day in October in Israel in 2023 and lay under a pile of dead bodies for hours, pretending to be dead, simply to survive, clearly a very traumatic experience. Both songs were profoundly political in different ways, the song she sings, New Day will rise ,a monument to hope (or perhaps, say some, a thinly veiled reference to the representation of its battle to expedite a ´just revenge’ for the October massacre and finally silence the organisation that is Hamas and some would argue, Gaza as a Palestinian homeplace itself). JJ, a 24 year old who is half Austrian, half Filipino and who defines as queer, sang Wasted Love about the body politic, the concept of wasted love, the intensity of being in love with someone who does not love you back. Both were songs born of pain. Perhaps JJ´s was the easier one to understand, in that I suspect it has a wider credence for anyone of any sexuality who has been in that situation. Wisely I think, JJ has not said who exactly it is about, male, female or intersex. Undoubtedly both were striking visually in their presentation, both felt exceptionally strongly about their subject. And both have articulated their passion for the themes strongly.
It is however, in my personal opinion, very difficult to take the political out of both songs, framed as it was as a central narrative to their structure. It is also the case, that many feel Israel should not be participating at the moment in the Eurovision contest, due to its ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and the sanctions now officially placed on the state of Israel by independent jurisdiction. The producers of Eurovision have also faced accusations of having ´double standards´ in relation to the fact that they are currently banning Russia but not Israel from participation. Also, it was revealed on Saturday night by the regular BBC host for the competition, Graham Norton, that during the Israeli song booing from the live audience was replaced by a pre recorded soundtrack only of cheering. This is a clearly a manipulation of the ´Eurovision reality´. Also, of note is that the key sponsor Moroccan Oil is an large Israeli company and this has also drawn criticism. Also problematic, is the fact that the Israeli government last year was shown to have spent millions of shekels promoting the song, as it worked to represent a stronger belief in the Israel nation and its actions and there is widespread evidence that they did the same this year. (They have also allocated at least 150 million dollars in 2025 to change public opinion about the Gaza bombings). So, we should perhaps ask ourselves if this is indeed an acceptable practice. For many though, I think it is fair to say that the real problem is that Israel´s entry in the competition represents symbolically the corruption of Netanyahu’s government, and arguably putting someone in who sings about the October event was somewhat provocative, although many will argue, not entirely wrong. There are clearly strong feelings about her entry and whether it was right or wrong to highlight this event but perhaps they more widely relate to the promotion of the song and country by what many see as a corrupt Israeli government.
If Israel had won we are told, many countries would have been forced to question their own entry next year, and hence people have hailed JJ’s win as having ‘’saved Eurovision’’. Possibly, although the counter argument is that it might have more clearly delineated the whole issue within popular culture and if it ended it, well… it ended it.
I suspect JJ´s song had a wide resonance for people, who perhaps saw him as an underdog they could root for. There is no getting away from the fact that he had a boyish ´cuteness` appeal to some too. The juxtaposition of these complex emotive issues at the end was strong for me, and I suspect for many others too. Notions of being able to live a prejudice free life as you might wish, the idea of acceptance, the representation of hurt, of pain, of suffering, of hope were there in both songs. But the idea of manipulating popular culture for political purposes has for me tainted the Israeli song, as surely as it taints the current American president and his government in its own manipulation, by blurring the distinctions between truth and falsehood. For me Israel crossed that line in its actions, in the same way as Trump has with his ´Truth Social´ nonsense.
For me also however, writing this piece has forced me to confront the reality of the contestants lived experience more strongly. The problem is if we all live to create and expound our own individual reality, who do we allow to say what is our own truth and what is untruth? And if we allow others to repurpose our own realities and re-present them as part of the collective notion of truth, are they valid anymore? In Israel at present for example, it seems to be Netanyahu´s government shaping the truth. When you see a government creating its own nations truth, this almost always leads to tears I´ve found. When your government purports to create ´the truth´ well this to me is the problematic.
Equally here, for me, JJ simply sung about his own truth and how he felt about his truth and in doing so allowed us to experience his pain. So perhaps of both, JJ had the simpler job here, as it is far less difficult a subject to engage with. In recent interviews he has said that he learnt from the experience. Unrequited love allows us to experience and process the complexities and hurt of rejection, makes us understand we cannot always have what we desire and leaves us humbler, wiser beings as a result. And that, I have concluded with much hindsight, is probably no bad thing, as we go forward in our life journey. If it was only Yuval Raphael herself who had skin in the game I´d genuinely feel sorry for her final second place but damn, she was carrying Israel on her back as well and as ever, the political song contest got in the way.
Back to Almerian Writers group site index
Leave a Reply