Ukraine UKRAINE 2016 - Jamala - 1944

[lavieenrose]

Anything containing political barbs against another country or group of people

So no "A Million Voices," which presented the message of "aren't we just the most innocent people? How could those Ukrainians say such awful things about us like how we want war with them?"

You said they were equal with this anti-Russian song. Who did Russia target in that song? No one. They weren't bringing up past politics either, instead talking about hopes for the future.

He didn't, actually, but I'm happy to. Just because "A Million Voices" was couched in images of purity and kindness doesn't mean it's less of a belligerent song that framed a current conflict as being entirely the fault of the party not presenting themselves as doe-eyed innocents who love peace. Yes, "1944" has a similar message. But it's far more honest with how it approaches that message, bringing the subtext of "A Million Voices" into the text. I suppose I understand why that's a problem for a lot of people, but it doesn't mean that one song is political and the other isn't. And if "talking about hopes for the future" disqualifies it from being political, then let's talk about how the second verse of "1944" goes "we could build a future where people are free to live and love."

EDIT: if this post is too political, I'm happy to move this discussion to the politics sub-forum and/or delete the post.

 

[RainyWoods]

You said they were equal with this anti-Russian song. Who did Russia target in that song? No one. They weren't bringing up past politics either, instead talking about hopes for the future.

I didn't say they were equal. Whiteshoes wrote that "1944" would provoke, and I agreed, but stated that other songs have also been provocative and have been given the all clear. I would say more about the two Russian entries I highlighted, but it's a difficult, unpleasant area to dig into. One that's been explored enough on the forum already and never usually ends pretty, so I won't even dare.

"1944" is gonna upset some people? Sure. The past three Russian entries have upset some people. I'll leave it at that.

 

[i anixi]

If there isn't a message, then it's about nothing basically. Meaningful songs aren't all dealing with topics that are labelled as political though, if that's what you mean.

That's simply not right. How can something be meaningful if it is about nothing? It can be meaningful AND not intend to message anyone in particular though.

Anyway, that's not really important. It doesn't matter to me if you are singing about the latest war or the sun rising every morning, as long as you do it well and as yet I haven't really connected with this Jamala business.

 

[LalehForWD]

Telling a true story isn't political, how uncomfortable it may be to hear it. If the Russians are offended it's just because they're unable dealing with their own 0-50-100 year old shit. Even admitting that the many genocides and ethnic cleansing carried out during the Soviet era is in anyway sensitive would be a defeat. Ukraine chose Jamala and I think the message was a large part of it. To cripple the song due to Russian concerns would be cowardly.

 

[tuorem]

That's simply not right. How can something be meaningful if it is about nothing? It can be meaningful AND not intend to message anyone in particular though.

That's what I said, meaningful songs have a message (politics-related or not), the rest is just there to fill the lyrics department as often in Eurovision. That's why when we have a song that actually says something, it would be a shame to punish it for that matter.

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

I didn't say they were equal. Whiteshoes wrote that "1944" would provoke, and I agreed, but stated that other songs have also been provocative and have been given the all clear. I would say more about the two Russian entries I highlighted, but it's a difficult, unpleasant area to dig into. One that's been explored enough on the forum already and never usually ends pretty, so I won't even dare.

"1944" is gonna upset some people? Sure. The past three Russian entries have upset some people. I'll leave it at that.

There has been zero wrong with the Russian entries, you can only possibly view them as being "controversial" if you bring outside political thinking into the equation, something I have no intention of doing.

Those in support of 1944 are in support of breaking the Eurovision rules. Thankfully the target of this slight is Russia, a country that won't let this go easily. Therefore I expect and hope the EBU will take measures against this entry. If it takes Russian bullying to ensure the Eurovision rules are adhered to then so be it.

 

[WhoKnows]

There has been zero wrong with the Russian entries, you can only possibly view them as being "controversial" if you bring outside political thinking into the equation, something I have no intention of doing.

Those in support of 1944 are in support of breaking the Eurovision rules. Thankfully the target of this slight is Russia, a country that won't let this go easily. Therefore I expect and hope the EBU will take measures against this entry. If it takes Russian bullying to ensure the Eurovision rules are adhered to then so be it.

Lol. Oh you. There is literally ZERO in the song that targets Russia. Show me one line, one word in the song that proves otherwise. You're only viewing it as controversial because you're bringing your outside political thinking into the equation.

Say no more, your agenda is leaking.

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

It's nothing to do politics, it's to do with principle. I care 0% for the Russia/Ukraine dispute when Im watching Eurovision. My view would be the same if Russia came up with an entry called "1941" about the terrible things that happened to them that year.

If you want to argue politics go to the UN. If you want to talk war make a history documentary.

 

[WhoKnows]

It's nothing to do politics, it's to do with principle. I care 0% for the Russia/Ukraine dispute when Im watching Eurovision. My view would be the same if Russia came up with an entry called "1941" about the terrible things that happened to them that year.

If you want to argue politics go to the UN. If you want to talk war make a history documentary.

If you want to talk peace, if you want to talk about burying guns, go talk to the UN or make a documentary.

 

[theCONWEL]

Lol. Oh you. There is literally ZERO in the song that targets Russia. Show me one line, one word in the song that proves otherwise.

THIS! '1944' doesn't mock or make fun of Russia, it tells a true story, something that actually has affected Jamala and something which has been siphoned into her art. I can see why it's controversial, but art is controversial, and if you're gonna censor the artistic intentions of an individual, you're hindering the artistic integrity of the contest.... as if there ever was any in the first place. As I see it, banning Jamala would be a tragedy for ESC.

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

If you want to talk peace, if you want to talk about burying guns, go talk to the UN or make a documentary.

So wanting to rid the world of war and weaponry is "politically controversial", but talking about an actual real life horror story and putting a political spin on it is acceptable for Eurovision? Please...

I wonder how everybody would feel if Israel suddenly sent such an entry. They have more reason to than any Eurovision nation. Hmm, somehow I think people would be less supportive of them.

 

[WhoKnows]

Lol. I'm done. You're running in circles. You haven't answered any questions. Your mental gymnastics are tiring.

 

[QwaarJet]

So wanting to rid the world of war and weaponry is "politically controversial", but talking about an actual real life horror story and putting a political spin on it is acceptable for Eurovision? Please...

I wonder how everybody would feel if Israel suddenly sent such an entry. They have more reason to than any Eurovision nation. Hmm, somehow I think people would be less supportive of them.

I'm not fully convinced one way or the other on this, but I'm inclined to agree with what you say here. Lots of double standards happening here.

 

[Mrm]

Let's QUIT this ugly topic!!

WOOOOHOOOO let's hold each others hands and sing all together:

"WE'RE ON THE ROLLERCOASTER
WE'RE ON THE ROLLERCOASTER
WE'RE ON THE ROLLERCOASTER"

xsing xsing xsing

Spread love, joy and humanity ppl!!

 

[John1]

Jamala is the best singer whom I've ever heard...

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

I'm not fully convinced one way or the other on this, but I'm inclined to agree with what you say here. Lots of double standards happening here.

Because a song is popular some seem to think it's above the rules. Somehow it is thought that it isn't politics if it is the victim's point of view in a political dispute.

Utterly ridiculous. And when it's a country like Ukraine who has sent some brilliant entries to Eurovision, I think its just sad. I don't care about whether its a good or bad song but I do care about whether a song respects the rules and the spirit of Eurovision.

If they don't trust my so called "motives", then this has also been reported as a top story on the likes of BBC News, hardly what I'd call a source of pro-Russian bias!

It's also interesting the condemnation of peace songs if they come from Russia. I wonder whether they've attacked so passionately the likes of "Peace Will Come" from Georgia. Me thinks not

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

Anyway I don't want to fill up this topic with arguing so I will leave it at this: Ukraine is one of my favourite Eurovision countries and I hope for their sake if not anyone else's that they will stick with the ethos of Eurovision being about music and music only.

It only does a country which has sent the likes of Ruslana and Ani Lorak a disservice to be throwing dirt at other competitors no matter what they think of them.

 

[Chorizo]

After listening to this song again, I decided to upgrade it from 10 to 12 points.
I think it has a very unique appeal but I'm not sure what casual viewers that hear it for the first time will think.

For me Ukraine and Iceland are the only countries so far that would deserve to win and both of these songs have a very different appeal

 

[John1]

After listening to this song again, I decided to upgrade it from 10 to 12 points.
I think it has a very unique appeal but I'm not sure what casual viewers that hear it for the first time will think.

For me Ukraine and Iceland are the only countries so far that would deserve to win and both of these songs have a very different appeal

What about the Cypriot song?
Moreover, I'd rather see the (the least favourite from my top) Austrian song winning than the Icelandic one...

 

[Chorizo]

There has been zero wrong with the Russian entries, you can only possibly view them as being "controversial" if you bring outside political thinking into the equation, something I have no intention of doing.

Those in support of 1944 are in support of breaking the Eurovision rules. Thankfully the target of this slight is Russia, a country that won't let this go easily. Therefore I expect and hope the EBU will take measures against this entry. If it takes Russian bullying to ensure the Eurovision rules are adhered to then so be it.

So you are willing to completely ignore Russia's propaganda songs because their songs are all about peace and what not?

You think there's a problem when a singer addresses a historic event in a song but trying to distract from nasty contemporary politics by sending propaganda songs is fine because these nasty things happen in the real world and not in Eurovision land?

Did you also argue against the French song last season?
Since the French song and the Armenian song were allowed last year and similar songs before and since Russia is allowed to send propaganda songs every year, the Ukrainian entry is certainly fine too. It's no different than many other songs before.

If the French song didn't break the rules, neither does this one.

You would probably love it, if Russia put a few rainbows on the LED wall this year while Sergey is dancing underneath them.