Don’t let an offensive band name get in the way of great music
Viet Cong should consult with Queen, Radiohead or Pearl Jam on the value of changing names
Rock bands should be more careful when choosing their names. Who came up with Clap Your Hands Say Yeah? What is a Chumbawamba? How much regret do the Goo Goo Dolls feel each morning? Or, as the Foo Fighters’ Dave Grohl once told 60 Minutes: “Had I imagined that it would last more than a month and a half, I might have named it something else. It’s the dumbest band name ever.”
That’s debatable. Just glancing at my recent iTunes purchases — Tame Impala, Beach House, Boy & Bear, Other Lives — it’s clear there is no shortage of dumb band names, especially in the indie scene.
Dumb is one thing. Offensive is quite another.
On Monday night, when the Polaris Music Prize is awarded at the Carlu in Toronto, one shortlisted nominee will find itself in a maelstrom that has nothing to do with music and everything to do with an unfortunate name.
Viet Cong is both a Calgary band and the name of its debut album in January.
Viet Cong is also the name of the National Liberation Front army that battled U.S. and South Vietnamese forces while inflicting atrocities upon civilians during the Vietnam War.
In short: “Viet Cong” is a trigger, loaded with horror and trauma for some members of the Vietnamese diaspora. So instead of buzzing about the band’s post-punk genius, the industry is now grappling with non-musical queries. Is the use of “Viet Cong” an act of cultural appropriation? Is it a symbol of structural prejudice? Is it racist and hurtful?
Not helping matters is the way the band keeps shrugging off the controversy. When asked about the name last year, frontman Matt Flegel told Impose magazine: “That comes from our drummer, and from us being teenagers and watching movies. The Viet Cong were always the bad asses in movies.”
I’m sorry, what? So we can blame this on Hollywood and adolescent ignorance? You just liked the sound of it? Now that you know better — “I didn’t really know the history of it,” Flegel says— you’re going to double-down on glib insouciance?
When a concert was cancelled at Oberlin College in March, the organizer Ivan Krasnov explained his decision, including: “Especially troubling is the band’s awareness of their name inflicting offense coupled with a seeming indifference to its effects and implications.”
Equally troubling? This controversy is so unnecessary.
Many bands have changed their names, often for far less. The soft-rock outfit Chicago, you may recall, started as the Chicago Transit Authority until the actual authority took exception. Pearl Jam was “Mookie Blaylock,” the name of an NBA player, which presented a problem for trademark and merchandising.
The lesson here for Viet Cong is that co-opting proper nouns is always fraught with risk. The war on drugs has cost thousands of lives and is considered a “trillion-dollar failure.” But unlike Viet Cong, it is an abstraction, which is why the dazzling band the War on Drugs is not facing any naming protests.
The upside of renaming is you often end up with a better name. Just ask Simon & Garfunkel, who nearly strummed forth as Tom and Jerry. Or Radiohead, which was almost On A Friday. Try to listen to “Bohemian Rhapsody” and imagine it as the work of Smile, the original name of Queen.
What’s most baffling is that Viet Cong is not trying to be provocative or wilfully offensive (see: Aborted Hitler C--k, Anal Blasters, the Suicide Bombers, Gas Chamber, the Rapists, the Child Molesters). Viet Cong isn’t an obscure reference to dark military ops (see: Joy Division, New Order). Viet Cong isn’t making a political or intellectual statement, as is the case with the Slants, a Japanese-American band fighting a legal battle to use a name deemed derogatory by the courts.
The rationale for the Slants: defuse a racial stereotype by taking control of it. This is a compelling argument and if I ever start a band, I may go with the Curry Rickshaw Express. But unlike the Slants, Viet Cong is not offering any compelling arguments. The band is just stewing in a pond of toxic obstinacy, which ultimately will prove self-injurious. Here’s an immensely talented quartet on the verge of breakout success. And they’re willing to fire buckshot at this trajectory by sticking with a name they didn’t realize was offensive, but now do, so what the hell, screw it?
This is textbook insanity. Are there no good managers left in Canadian music? Viet Cong, you have one full album and it’s outstanding. You can keep the momentum set to “high” by doing the right thing, which in this case is also the easiest thing: change the name of your band!
You don’t have to go nuts and start performing as the Happy Funballs. Even a slight tweak, the VC, could work.
It’s no big deal. Honestly. This has nothing to do with freedom of expression. You won’t come across as capitulating to special interests or bowing to forces at odds with your artistic freedom. Not meaning any harm becomes far less meaningful when you continue to harm for no good reason at all.
Letting an offensive name become your story, now that is really dumb. vmenon@thestar.ca