Wang Dang Sweet GOPoontang

wakinguptous has a nice take on the National Review‘s hysterical “Top 50 Conservative Rock Songs” over at this morning, and you might want to start there. As you’d expect, the top three songs on the list are from The Who, The Beatles, and The Stones, who are sort of like the Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, and Bill O’Reilly of the music world.

Oddly, there’s not a song on the list from avowed conservative rocker Ted Nugent. Surely there’s some meaningful political subtext in “Wang Dang Sweet Poontang”?

That Nadine, what a teenage queen.
She lookin’ so clean, especi’lly down in between; what I like.

She come to town; she be foolin’ around,
a puttin’ me down as a rock-and-roll clown. It’s all right.

Wang Dang Sweet Poontang

Wang dang, what a sweet poontang,
a shakin’ my thang as a rang-a-dang-dang in the bell.

She’s so sweet when she yanks on my meat.
Down on the street you know she can’t be beat. What the hell.

Wang Dang Sweet Poontang

Hmmm. “Poontang” is clearly a euphemism for supply-side economics, “Nadine” is an obvious reference to Valerie Plame, and there’s no mistaking the valorization of no-bid contracting processes in “yanks on my meat.” How this didn’t make the list is beyond me, frankly.

And where is the Beastie Boys’ “Fight for Your Right (To Party),” which is little more than a subtly shuffled exhortation to fight for the party on the right? Duh. Their liberal parents may have missed this subversive little tidbit, but those kids out on the street laying the groundwork for the door-to-door political canvassing war in the mean precincts of Greenwich, they sure as hell got the message.

This whole effort reminds me of a syndicated radio show that used to air on Sunday mornings here back in the ’80s. Can’t recall the name of it. But what they’d do is take popular rock songs and explain them in a Christian context. One morning I caught them Jesusizing Journey’s “Faithfully.”

I don’t know the guys in Journey, and maybe they intended this and all their other songs as some kind of subtle Christian insurgency in a secular world gone mad. But I doubt it.

What would be fun would be if some enterprising reporter had the time, resources, and access to ring up all the still-living songwriters on this list and get their reactions.

Advertisements

4 comments

  1. Roy Edroso won’t touch it.
    Not that Miller’s list isn’t a comedy goldmine. I would pay good money to see John Lydon onstage at a YAF Rally, leading a rousing chorus of “Bodies” (#7). And previously my readers and I have enjoyed our own alternate con-song suggestions (e.g., “Pray I Don’t Kill You Faggot” by Run Westy Run) and alternate lyrics (here’re some new ones: “While ol’ Neil Young talks down the southland/As he goes in and out of key/Me and my roadies will get fucked up/And drive our plane into a tree — aaah, fuck me”).
    Whence then my reticence? Partly from contempt. Miller’s logic is so extraordinarily sheer that it is almost beneath my dignity to poke holes in it (and I’m wearing a cardboard belt!), and it is certainly beneath yours to watch me do it.

  2. I’ve spent years – decades, by now – arguing with people over the politics of interpretation. Academic politics, that is. Social theory. Deconstructionism. And so on. A point I tried to make, and one that relativist pomo-heads would never accept, is that it is possible, when interpreting something, to be WRONG. Sure, there are texts that are open to multiple readings, and while I believe strongly in the importance of authorial intent, I also understand that sometimes artists do things they aren’t fully aware of. Done it myself, in fact.
    All that said, yes, Virginia, there are wrong answers. It is possible to be stupid, and many “readings” issue not from alternate perspectives but from a basic lack of knowledge. Or, in this case, a basic lack of knowledge combined with the triumph of dogma over intellect.
    When all is said and done, this essay gets an F because the writer is wrong and dumb. Period.

  3. Sorry you didn’t like Roy.
    However, I’m not sure I get you; I didn’t think he was trying to put ANY interpretation on the songs list, correct or incorrect; I read his take as, “The whole idea of this list is so fundamentally stupid that I cannot be bothered to dismantle it.” Only, you know, stated a lot more amusingly.
    I agree that there are definitely wrong answers, though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s