Posted by jason on November 5, 2009
……OK
….I’ve had many many conversations with many many of you about this….
I don’t think there’s been a more polarizing song I’ve ever played at this radio station, in the 6 years I’ve been here. At least not one that’s been this popular for this long…….. YES, I am talking about Owl City “Fireflies”…….
…..a guy calls in, talking about the song… I took the opportunity to steer the conversation towards the topic of the exact underlying intent of calling the song (or anything, really) gay…. You HATE some things, other things you call GAY… What’s the difference, you ask?? WHY do you think Owl City is so GAAAAAY????
…..ain’t gonna lie, I think the word is overused, and I think its overuse is in some ways a symptom of a larger disdain for clearer thinking, deeper understanding, and general command of the English language… Click below for the conversation, which was too long for me to actually air……….
I would have to agree but the word, like many slang words, has a different connotation depending on the context of the conversation. Even Homosexual people are using the word gay in a derogatory sense. Lots of words are used by ignorant people to get across their point-of-view, whether or not that afforementioned point-of-view is right or wrong depending on the perspective of the audience of said comment. Opinons are like (you know the rest of it). ADD ME ON FACEBOOK. Love to meet a true thinker ( maybe at AFI or maybe I can get you out to Danny’s on Saturday to see my friends band Half Price Buddha or on next Thursday when I shoot photos for Browntown at Fuel in O.P., KS.
Comment by Riggs (you know me) — November 5, 2009 @ 5:06 pm
Oh and by the way the Owl City song is great!
Comment by Riggs (you know me) — November 5, 2009 @ 5:07 pm
…obviously the word has nothing to do with homosexuality, in terms of its use as a stamp of disapproval… But I do think, generally, its function is to express “Your enthusiasm is horribly misplaced”… But along with that, there is also the sense that the cause of this error is some kind of fundamental lack of awareness or understanding on the part of the gay party…
Consider this………….. An adult is sitting with a 4 year old… The child begins explaining some product of its imagination… Let’s say the child is going on and on about some kind of cat that’s actually a superhero that can meow so loud it deafens the big scary dog… The kid goes on excitedly for about 3 and a half minutes (average pop song length)… And the adult thinks that it’s kind of silly… The adult is in no way shape or form as excited as the child, and is in fact becoming pretty irritated with how noisy the kid is… I don’t think anyone would ever expect any adult to think to themselves, “Oh my fucking GOD, that is SO gay…”
….the kid, of course, is given a hall pass; a 4 year old child is allowed to be childish… The point here is to raise the question: Do people have strong negative reactions to the “gayness” of something because of the perceived lack of something, or is it more because of a perceived presence of something? How can so many people think Owl City is the worst thing we’ve ever played, and yet we NEVER got those kinds of calls for playing The Postal Service?? The answer most would give is “Because Owl City is gay!!!!”… And that would almost certainly be the best they could do…
Don’t get me wrong… The song is catchy, sure, but any half-decently-written pop hook is gonna catch if you hear it at least a dozen times… After that it becomes a chicken-or-egg thing, and is rendered pretty pointless to even think about… But make no mistake…. The song has the emotional depth of your average Disney song that caters to 13-year-olds… I like to give people the benefit of the doubt… But upon hearing the song a zillion times, it’s pretty goddam fucking cloying… It can make you gag it is so saccharine… Put Sweet and Low in the right beverage, and everything’s OK… Pour fifty packets of Sweet and Low in a mug and bottoms-up, and yeah, pretty suffocating… You’d make a face… It’d seem pretty fucking inane and silly to do something like that… Completely misplaced… You’d think the amount of Sweet and Low flavor was downright obnoxious… This would all be very very obvious to you… Right?…. Wouldn’t be obvious to a 4 year old, though…
…the tone most commonly associated with calling something gay is, believe it or not, righteous indignation… Almost always… The same kind of tone people at those town hall meetings had… Like they were being set free by being able to get it off their chests… Like they were being set free by finally being able to speak the truth!!!!…. I’m very curious about the ways people find themselves in a situation where they’ve invested so much of their identity with their deliberation and then verdict upon a piece of pop fluff like “Fireflies”.
Comment by jason — November 5, 2009 @ 6:26 pm
IF I were to say that Fireflies is gay, it would only be because I think that it sounds like a song that would be very popular at a club that caters to gay males. I don’t think that song is gay. (I think most gay males have better taste than that.)
However, I do think that the song is a pretty piece of meaningless fluff. As a poem, the lyrics don’t really say anything new or original. They don’t pique my interest or cause me to think. The words might paint a picture, but the picture is the like the musings of soemone on psychedelic drugs. It’s a trip that can only be truly appreciated by the person having the experience. I can’t relate to this song because it sounds like it could have been written based on a conversation with a kindergartner.
I can’t believe that it’s so popular. Maybe Weezer is right–maybe we are all on drugs. Maybe that is why I don’t get this song at all.
As far as the overuse of the word “Gay,” It’s worn out. I think a certain generation is just waiting for a better word to come along. I just hope that word is not douche. (also on its way to being overused)
Comment by Paula Sayles — November 6, 2009 @ 6:25 am
If I had to drink that amount of sweet and low everyday I’d be ill too, by the way. LOL When I get bored of a song I just choose not to listen.
Comment by riggs — November 6, 2009 @ 10:12 am
those weird town hall reactions and the choice to replace ‘unfortunate’, ’stupid’ or ‘not my cup of tea’ with a derogatory version of the word ‘gay’ is obviously rooted somewhere between blow hard bravado and, um, well…..ignorant disregard….
i will tho, own my own guilt at using that ‘version’ of the word when attempting to put a finer point on sadly ‘unfortunate’ things like year round renfesters, panama hats, and the phrase ‘methinks’……
and….i won’t sound a blow hard barbaric yawp at that Owl City song…. i will just say that the guy’s annunciation seems weird and contrived….
Comment by leese — November 6, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
As far as using the word \gay\ to describe a song – I just don’t think that’s at all necessary. It’s not even the right word(s) to describe Owl City or their song \Fireflies\. How about \unimaginative\, or \shallow\, or \formulaic\, or \Ben Gibbard for children\?
I think saying a song or band is \gay\ is such a broad, uninformed critique that it’s almost maddening. If you can’t even back your argument with something concrete or at least well informed, then why even say anything at all?
I get that using the word \gay\ could be construed as derogatory, but the usage in this context is just as a fill-in for a feeling about the music that this caller either didn’t know how to express, or just didn’t feel like expressing.
Either way, \Fireflies\ is a pop song, like any other pop song. Unoriginal, uninspired, and with the emotional complexity of a tree frog.
Comment by Chris Sauer — November 29, 2009 @ 12:36 pm
I almost never use the word gay to describe anything, especially in a derogatory context, but for some reason this particularly lame emo-tweener song just screams to be described this way. Please do us a favor and pull it from heavy rotation.
Comment by Jennifer — November 29, 2009 @ 8:29 pm