Don’t Wanna Be an American Idiot - Anti-Americanism in American Popular Music

Don't wanna be an American idiot

Don't want a nation under the new media
And can you hear the sound of hysteria
The subliminal mind fuck America

Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
Now everybody do the propaganda
And sing along in the age of paranoia

Welcome to a new kind of tension
All across the alien nation
Everything isn't meant to be okay
Television dreams of tomorrow
We're not the ones who're meant to follow
Well then that's enough to argue

                                 

  -Green Day, “American Idiot”-[i]

Don’t Wanna Be an American Idiot

Anti-Americanism in American Popular Music

With these lyrics the Californian pop/punk band Green Day opens its 2004 “rock opera” album American Idiot. The similar titled song was the first hit single from the multi million selling album, that skyrocketed to the charts in both Europe and the United States and marked a return to mainstream popularity for the band. Ten years earlier Green Day first rose to fame and rock stardom with their album Dookie. In the ten years that passed, however, something seemed to have changed in the band’s attitude. Whereas Dookie dealt with typical teenage topics like angst, boredom and rebellion against parents, American Idiot is an outright politically themed album and not a positive one at that. Not only is American Idiot an attack on president Bush and his politics, it also seems to be an accusation of American life in general. Both the lyrics and the artwork lead the listener to no other conclusion that we are dealing with a very angry and disillusioned American band in 2004. Green Day displays a form of anti-Americanism, which is noticeable all the more because of the fact that something obviously triggered this in both the previously a-political and very American band and its audience.  

            The term anti-Americanism itself is much debated and has been featured prominently in the media over the last years. Both 9/11 and the presidency of George W. Bush seem to have elicited feelings of anti-Americanism in Europe, which became especially obvious after the recent outburst of ecstasy following the election of president Obama. But the emergence of the term anti-Americanism can be traced back to the very beginnings of the United States and is also not limited to the European side of the ocean. Americans themselves have been highly critical of their own country and its place in the world. So when looking for anti-Americanism, America itself is definitely a source to consider. One medium where anti-Americanism can be observed very clearly is popular music, as pop music and pop culture in general have the ability to adept very quickly to its surroundings. In this paper I will investigate the phenomenon of anti-Americanism in general and in American popular music specifically. In doing this, I will focus on pop music produced during the Bush presidency, and try to compare it to the situation during he Vietnam War.  

The first order of business would be to determine what exactly anti-Americanism entails; a question that does not have a clear-cut answer. Rob Kroes considers it an “ism,” or, as he explains, “a set of attitudes that help people to structure their world view and to guide their actions.” Also he feels that it implies “a measure of exaggeration, a feverish over concentration on one particular object of attention and action.”[ii] Kroes suggests that the term can be used in two distinct ways. The first way is to see anti-Americanism as a school of thought against “all things American” in general. The second point of view is to consider it a form of resistance to the phenomenon of “Americanism.” Especially the latter line of thought has been very present in European writings on the topic of the United States. When focusing on the topic on popular culture especially the second notion of the term seems relevant, as to be against “all things American” per se seems to be a somewhat simplistic statement. To be against “Americanism,” on the other hand, appears to be more in line with something considered as “Americanizing” as popular culture.[iii]

Richard Pells delves deeper into the roots of European anti-Americanism, focusing especially on the period after the Second World War. In the wake of WWII the anti-Americanism that was growing in Western-Europe, may have very well been more about reasserting Europe itself as a power than about “hating” America per se. Europe was very much in the shadow of its dominant overseas neighbor. The continent had just been saved by the United States, and the US had an “overwhelming economic, military and cultural presence in Britain and on the Continent.”[iv] European anti-Americanism was therefore steeped in ambivalence. The help offered by the United States was appreciated, the economic assistance was seen as invaluable and the American power used to liberate Europe from the Nazi’s was respected. On the other hand there was always a distrust of America’s true motives, a fear of interference in domestic affairs and a form of envy of its preeminence. “Much of the time,” Pells notes, “(the European) feelings ranged widely from awe to disdain, attraction to repulsion.”[v] It is indeed predominantly in the aftermath of the Second World War that many authors trace the anti-American sentiment that has been present in Europe. The French novelist Pascal Bruckner wrote: “Western Europe knew that, without the help of the Marines, they would purely and simply have been wiped of the map. But some forms of generosity are insulting.” The hostility aimed against America focused mostly on “what America was,” a product of its own perverted nature.[vi] The postwar “anti-Americanism” was probably most notable in European literature and commonly accepted in intellectual circles. In 1963, novelist Henry de Montherlant wrote: “One nation that manages to lower intelligence, morality, human quality on nearly all surface of the earth, such a thing has never been seen before in the existence of the planet. I accuse the United States of being in a permanent state of crime against humankind.”[vii] The quote symbolizes the fear and anger of the European intellectual. It is a fear of “Americanization” of Europe. It is a fear not so much of territorial colonization but of “colonization of the mind,” via Hollywood and later McDonald’s, Disney and Microsoft.[viii] And Americanization was and is taking place successfully. American techniques of mass production were in one way debasing culture, but were, on the other hand, “the greatest tools ever to spreading its benefits.” It was the combination of America’s technological advancement and its ethically primitiveness that made the Europeans intellectuals fear for the survival of their own culture. America seemed to be the future super power of the world, and many believed this power would come at the expense of the European countries that used to be in control.[ix]

Paul Hollander adds a second division to the term anti-Americanism. In his view anti-Americanism can be separated in two distinct versions: a domestic and foreign form. Or, in this case, simply an American and European form. The foreign form of anti-Americanism, according to Hollander, “tends to concentrate, more often than not, on tangible and widely shared grievances such as American economic policies, unfair trade practices, overbearing political dominance, American military presence, insults to national pride, the subversion of cultural traditions by American mass entertainment, rapacious energy policies, and so forth.”[x] A description that is very much in accordance with the aforementioned European anti-Americanism that Pells and others discussed. The domestic version is more focused on the idea or feeling that the social order in America is responsible for a widespread feeling of discontent and many problem in society.[xi] Another difference, according to Hollander, between the domestic and foreign versions is the fact that “American anti-Americanism often seems to be more anguished and animated by a peculiarly intense bitterness and the conviction that the entity rejected is a unique incarnation of unspeakable evil.” The author believes that the reason for this can usually be found in disappointment over unrealized and unrealistically high expectations of the American society.[xii] 

The post-war anti-American attitude in Europe seemed to also reflect in the American form of anti-Americanism. During the 1950s and 1960s the idea of America as an evil and corrupt empire had become standard amongst European intellectuals, but also was taken up and duplicated by American authors. Mostly this criticism focused on the idea of America as a barbaric or perverted society. Susan Sontag wrote of America as an “inorganic, dead, coercive, authoritarian” society. “America is a cancerous society with a runaway rate of productivity that inundates the country with increasingly unnecessary commodities, services, gadgets, images, information.”[xiii] The Vietnam War is often described as being a catalyst for anti-American sentiments in America itself. Michael Lind described that the Vietnam had “uncovered, but did not create, deep divisions in the American body politic.”[xiv] While the protests were aimed mainly at the conflict in Vietnam, the war itself is often described as a rallying point for people who were critical of the “American way of life.” This indeed seems to coincide with the previously mentioned description of American anti-Americanism primarily focusing on social injustices and equalities.

The step from the Vietnam War to Anti-Americanism in popular music is a relatively easy one to make. Few eras have, in the collective mind of the public, a more well known “soundtrack” to it. The Vietnam War had an enormous impact on the American music industry. Both pro- and anti-war songs were produced in large quantities, with the pro-war voices coming mostly from the country western genre and the anti-war sentiment solidly in the camp of the folksingers and rockers (a division of “right-wing” and “left-wing” musicians that still exists to this day). The lyrics to pop music also changed significantly during this period. During the 1950’s almost ninety percent of “top ten music” was about love, romance and courtships. In the 1960’s this was reduced to less than seventy percent and this decade marks the first time that social protest and antiwar lyrics were featured in the American music charts.[xv] Terry H. Anderson gives the example of Bob Dylan’s “Masters of War” from 1964:

“You fasten the triggers for the others to fire,

Then you sit back and watch, while the death count gets higher.

You hide in your mansions as the young people’s blood,

Flows out o’their bodies and is buried in the mud.”[xvi]

As opposed to, for example, Pat Boone’s “Wish you were here, buddy” from 1966:

            “Well, you just stay home and leave the fighting to us,

                and when the whole damn mess is through,

                I’ll put away my rifle and my uniform,

 and I’ll come lookin’ for you.”[xvii] [xviii]

There is a definite connection to pop music’s reaction to the Vietnam War in the sixties and seventies, and to the American situation in the current decade. There are two major events that heavily influenced contemporary pop music in the United States, namely the election of George W. Bush in 1999 and the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001. The initial reaction to the 9/11 tragedy was an immense outpouring of sympathy directed toward the United States and the first musical efforts in its wake were mostly tributes to the victims. Over time though, more critical voices started to sound in.[xix] In the article “Requiems for a City: Popular Music’s Response to 9/11” Christine Lee Genaro uses Bruce Spingsteen’s The Rising (2002) and the Beastie Boys’ To The Five Boroughs (2004) as examples to illustrate the difference in reactions over time. Springsteen was very much in the public eye right after 9/11, for example by performing at the Tribute to Heroes benefit on September 21, and The Rising was created in the direct aftermath of the attacks. The album focuses very much on themes of grief and sadness, heroism and the power of the United States to “rise up” after the events.[xx] The album is a tribute to the city of New York and is not political, but emotional.

“It was dark, too dark to see, you held me in the light you gave
You lay your hand on me, then walked into the darkness of your smoky grave
Up the stairs, into the fire. Up the stairs, into the fire
I need your kiss, but love and duty called you someplace higher
Somewhere up the stairs, into the fire”[xxi]    

                                    

The Beastie Boys album, also a tribute to NYC, was created three full years after 9/11 and clearly represents the attitude adjustment that had taken place in the meantime. Next to celebrating the city To the Five Boroughs also took an obvious stand against President Bush and urges the listener to work towards politic change.

“So step up to the window and place your bets. Is the US gonna keep breaking necks
Maybe it's time that we impeach Tex. And the military muscle that he wants to flex
By the time Bush is done what will be left. Selling votes like E-pills at the discotheque.
Environmental destruction and the national dept. But plenty of dollars left in the fat war chest
What the real deal why you can't connect. Why you hating people that you never met
Didn't your mama teach you to show some respect? Why not open your mind for a sec?

It takes a second to wreck it, It takes time to build”[xxii]

The differences between two albums show how America experienced 9/11 and changed in the wake of it. After the sadness and grieving, people started to look beyond the initial shock for the reasons behind the attacks. It is no coincidence that President Bush’s popularity rose and plummeted in the same period.

            Next to inspiring artists, 9/11 had another influence on the music industry. Within mere hours after the attack several radio stations put a ban certain songs and artist. The Clear Channel made a list song titles that could possibly offend their listeners of maybe traumatize them. Songs on the list included “Fly Away” (Lenny Kravitz), “Sabotage” (Beastie Boys), “Spirits in the Sky” (Norman Greenbaum), “New York, New York” (Frank Sinatra) and “Disco Inferno” (Trammps). Next to that the station banned songs that were associated with anti-war protest (“Blowin’ in the Wind” by Bob Dylan), peace movement anthems (“Image” by John Lennon) and songs associated in the public’s mind with the Vietnam War (“We Gotta Get Out Of This Place” by The Animals and “The End” by The Doors). Several bands with an outspoken anti-Bush opinion, such as Rage Against the Machine and System of a Down, were boycotted entirely. [xxiii] On top of that, there was Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly labelling the artists that had participated in the aforementioned Tribute to Heroes, such as Springsteen, Sting, Neil Young and Eddie Vedder, as “phonies” and “selfish people.”[xxiv] One of the most striking examples, however, of the rightwing media lashing out at perceived anti-Americanism by artist was the situation the Dixie Chicks found themselves in. After an offhand comment made by the group, that they were ashamed to hail from the same state as George W. Bush, the Dixie Chicks became the target of “reactionary hate mail, death threats, residential vandalism, retails boycotts, and right-wing talk-radio fatwa’s.”[xxv]

What is very remarkable about the banishment of the Dixie Chicks is that is goes against the general musical divide took place at the time of 9/11. Just like during the Vietnam War, country and western represented the right-wing, pro-establishment part of the country and rock and folk music was the music of protest. Country star Toby Keith produced “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue (The Angry American)”, which contained the lyrics:

“You’ll be sorry that you messed with the U.S. of A.

’cause we’ll put a boot in your ass.

It’s the American way”[xxvi]

This is just one example in an endless line of macho, pro-war country songs, one of the very things the Dixie Chicks were responding to when they made their fateful comments.[xxvii] Where during the Vietnam War, the most anti-American and anti-war/government sound came from the folk musicians, during the Bush presidency it was especially the punk rock genre that lashed out at the political state of affairs. Green Day’s American Idiot, as mentioned in the introduction, was an outright attack on Bush’s politics and marked a large shift in topics for the band itself. The song “Holliday” evens goes as far as to draw parallels to Nazi Germany:

"The representative from California has the floor:

Sieg Heil to the president Gasman, Bombs away is your punishment
Pulverize the Eiffel towers, Who criticize your government
Bang bang goes the broken glass and, Kill all the fags that don't agree
Trials by fire, setting fire, Is not a way that's meant for me
Just cause, just cause, because we're outlaws yeah!”[xxviii]

Green Day was arguably the most popular band with an clear cut anti-American, message, as they sold over fourteen million copies worldwide (five million sold in the United States), and reached the number one chart position in nineteen countries They were, however, hardly the only band in the genre that attacked “America.” The American punk band NOFX, released its album The War on Errorism in 2003, with the subtitle "Somewhere in Texas there is a village without its idiot.” The website Amazon.com shows an enormous selection of anti-Bush music from around the same period, such as Machine Gun in the Clowns Hands by Jello Biafra, Rock Against Bush and The Last Sucker, by Ministry.[xxix]

The “War on Terrorism” conducted by President Bush met so much resistance in society that bands that had never before taken interest in poltics or spreading a certain message to its listeners suddenly decided that they could stand idle no longer. In many ways it seems that the events of 9/11, and the subsequent bannishment tactics from certain media outlets, have served as a catalyst for social anger in much the same way that the Vietnam War did, decades before. Both events had an enormous influence on contemporary music and led to a division in the music industry between pro- and anti-war and pro and antigovernment camps. In both situations there was a war going on, that was met with groing resistance in society, in both situations their was a Republican president that grew highly unpopular as time went by. It seems that the Anti-American sentiment in pop music, or at least what is perceived by many Americans to Anti-American, is a response that rears its head in certain situations in American society. Bruce S. Thornthon puts forth the idea that the Anti-Americanism in popular culture is actually something typically “American.” He argues that it is a historically phenomenon, that “amidst of the greatest freedom, leisure and material prosperity (…) significant segments of American society have become chronically dissatiefied with the United States and its institutions.” He refers to the very American value of individualism and the romantized idea of rebbelion against opressors as big factors in this process.[xxx] He quotes New York Times collumnist Frank Rich: “the most telling American fables don’t come in the blacks and whites of our current strident political and cultural discourse, which so often devides Americans into either flag-draped heroes and abject traitors. The great American stories, from Huckleberry Finn’s to the Dixie Chicks, have always been nuanced; they can have poetry and the can have darks shadows. They can combine a love of country with an implicit criticism of it.”[xxxi]

In the end then, it seems that both the distinction that were made in forms of anti-Americanism seem to be correct to a certain extend. The negative feelings toward “Americanism” were very much present in postwar Europe, and focused mostly on America’s dominance over the European countries and its perceived lacking of cultural standards. The idea that American anti-Americanism focused more on feelings of social discontent in American society itself, also seems to coincide with the way many musicians expressed themselves and against what they were aiming their music.  In both instances, the Vietnam War and 9/11, this does seem to be the case. Both events served as a catalyst for feelings of social unrest and discontent, and popular music was one way in which these feelings could be displayed. The classic division of country/western as patriotic, right-wing and pro-war has survived the test of time, just as the representation of folk and rock music as left-wing and anti-war. Both during the Vietnam War and the Bush presidency music with an anti-American message took enormous flight, both in quantity and popularity. This anti-American label on certain music, however, also appears to be, in part, constructed by those opposed to the partical type of songs. To be critical of the president’s policy or of the reason to go to war, is anti-American in the eyes of right-wing media. On the other hand, there is a convincing argument to be made for the idea that this anti-Americanism is in fact “American” to its core. To be critical of one’s own society is an American tradition, and by displaying a certain ammount of anti-Americanism pop musicians actually proofs to be as American as apple pie.

Bibliography

                               

Anderson, Terry H. “American Popular Music and the War in Vietnam” in Peace and Change. 11: 1986, 51-65.

Blecha, Peter. Taboo Tunes: a History of Banned Bands & Censored Songs. Backbeat Books: San Francisco, 2004.

Gengaro, Christine Lee. “Requiems for a City: Popular Music’s Response to 9/11” in Popular Music and Society, Vol. 32, No.1, February 2009. p. 25-36.

Hollander, Paul (ed.). Understanding Anti-Americanism: its Origins and Impact at Home and Abroad.. Ivan R. Dee: Chicago, 2004.

Kroes, Rob. “Anti-Americanism: A Revisit,” in Contemporary Conflicts. March 26, 2004.

“Music Against George W. Bush” on Amazon.com. http://www.amazon.com/Music-against-George-W-Bush/lm/R23ZZIMVZE3PHP.

Pells, Richard. “From Modernism to the Movies” in European Journal of American Culture, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2004. p. 143-155.

Pells, Richard. Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture Since World War II. Basic Books: New York, 1997.

Rubin, Barry and Judith Colp Rubin. Hating America: a History. Oxford University Press: New York, 2004.

Discography

Beastie Boys. To The Five Boroughs. Capitol Records, 2004.

Boone, Pat. “Wish You Were Here Buddy.” Spoone Music Corporation, 1966.

Dylan, Bob. Freewheelin’. Bob Dylan. Columbia Records, 1963.

Green Day. American Idiot. Reprise Record. September 2004.

Keith, Toby. Unleashed. Dreamworks Nashville, 2002.

Springsteen, Bruce. The Rising, Columbia 2002.

             

---

[i] Green Day, “American Idiot” on American Idiot, (Reprise Record, September 2004).

[ii] Kroes, Rob. “Anti-Americanism: A Revisit,” in Contemporary Conflicts (March 26 2004).

[iii] Ibid.

[iv]Richard Pells. Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture Since World War II ( Basic Books, New York 1997), p. 156

[v] Ibid. p. 157.

[vi] Roger Kimbal, “Anti-Americanism Then and Now” in Understanding Anti-Americanism: its Origins and Impact at Home and Abroad, (Ivan R. Dee, Chicago 2004) p. 240-241.

[vii] James Ceaser, “The Philosophical Origins of Anti-Americanism” in Understanding Anti-Americanism, p 48.

[viii] Ibid. p. 48-49.

[ix]Barry Rubin and Judith Colp Rubin, Hating America: a History, (Oxford University Press, New York 2004) p. 59-60.

[x] Paul Hollander, “Introduction: The New Virulence and Popularity” in Understanding Anti-Americanism, p. 5-7.

[xi] Ibid. p. 6.

[xii] Ibid. p. 7.

[xiii] Kimbal, “Anti-Americanism Then and Now,” p. 241.

[xiv] Kimbal, “Anti-Americanism Then and Now,” p. 242.

[xv] Terry H. Anderson, “American Popular Music and the War in Vietnam” in Peace and Change, (11: 1986) p. 51.

[xvi] Bob Dylan, “Master of War” on Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan (Columbia Records, 1963).

[xvii] Pat Boone, “Wish You Were Here buddy” (Spoone Music Corporation, 1966).

[xviii] Anderson, “American Popular Music and the War in Vietnam,” p. 53 – 58.

[xix] Richard Pells, “From Modernism to the Movies” in European Journal of American Culture, (Vol. 23, No. 2, p. 143-155), p. 143-144.

[xx]Christine Lee Gengaro, “Requiems for a City: Popular Music’s Response to 9/11” in Popular Music and Society, (Vol. 32, No.1, February 2009, p. 25-36) p. 25-26.

[xxi] Bruce Springsteen, “Into the Fires” on The Rising (Columbia 2002).

[xxii]Beastie Boys, “It Takes Time To Build” on To The Five Boroughs ( Capitol Records, 2004).

[xxiii]Peter Blecha, Taboo Tunes: a History of Banned Bands & Censored Songs, (Backbeat Books, San Francisco 2004) p. 175-176.

[xxiv] Ibid. p. 178-180.

[xxv] Ibid. p. 181.

[xxvi] Toby Keith, “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue (The Angry American),” on Unleashed. (Dreamworks Nashville, 2002).

[xxvii] Blecha, Taboo Tunes: a History of Banned Bands & Censored Songs, p. 181.

[xxviii] Green Day, “Holliday” on American Idiot.

[xxix] “Music Against George W. Bush” on Amazon.com. ( http://www.amazon.com/Music-against-George-W-Bush/lm/R23ZZIMVZE3PHP).

[xxx] Bruce S. Thornton, “Anti-Americanism and Popular Culture” in Understanding Anti-Americanism, p. 347-348.

[xxxi] Thornton, “Anti-Americanism and Popular Culture,” p. 349.

Wrestling with Reality - The Simulation of Professional Wrestling in American Society

“It’s a sport without rules where nobody keeps score. There are no clear winners or losers, yet nobody seems to care. It’s a soap opera with a referee. A melodrama of mayhem, a controlled riot that pauses for commercials. They call it professional wrestling, but any resemblance to the sport is purely coincidental.”[i]

-Chris Mortensen (ESPN reporter)-

Wrestling with Reality

The Simulation of Professional Wrestling in American  Society

March 30^th 2008, Citrus Bowl, Orlando, Florida: WrestleMania 24. 74,635 screaming fans (and millions watching around the world) get up from their seats in unison. The Undertaker (“The Dead Man”, 7 foot, 305 pounds, hailing from Death Valley) slits his thumb down his heavily tattooed throat and every single fan in the building knows what is coming next: the “Tombstone Pile Driver.” He picks up his adversary, Edge (“The Rated R Superstar,” 6 foot 5, 240 pounds), and prepares to hit his “finishing move.” Undertaker hoists Edge on his shoulders, locks his hands around his back and crashes him head first into canvas, as the arena explodes. Announcer Michael Cole’s voice can be heard in the background: “No one has ever gotten up from that move!” The pin fall is academic, 1, 2, 3. “The Undertaker has done it again! 16-0 at WrestleMania, and once again Heavyweight Champion of the world!” Undertaker’s music plays, fireworks go off and the 74,635 spectators give a standing ovation. Their hero has beaten his nemesis, on the biggest show of the year, and all is well in the world. Until next week of course. Unfortunately, most European viewers will never experience this excitement. Most likely, they changed the channel after a few seconds, dismissing the spectacle while proclaiming: “it’s fake, you know. They already know who’s going to win.”

One issue immediately arises when observing professional wrestling (pro wrestling): do people, or more specifically, Americans, not feel that there is a problem with this situation? Pro-wrestling is a simulated sporting event that is treated as a real sporting event, that sells out enormous arenas, attracts millions of viewers and generates millions of dollars. Nowadays, everybody is in on the joke and yet the American wrestling fan chooses to suspend his disbelief anyway. Pro wrestling has shaped a situation for itself in which it balances between being “real” and being “fake:” It exists in a paradox of reality. The European observer is confused and perhaps even aggravated by the American indulgence in something so obviously “low brow” and “fake.” How can a scripted “sport” still fill arenas with millions of screaming fans and why do the American fans cheer the glaring stereotypes that the wrestlers portray? To the European, however, the answers to these questions might reveal that his feelings of superiority may have been unwarranted. This essay will seek to establish that, instead of a somewhat childish and primitive form of violent entertainment, professional wrestling is actually an extremely evolved simulation and that the “reality paradox” pro wrestling seems to pose to its European observers is a byproduct of the highly sophisticated state, dubbed “hyperreality” by cultural theorist Jean Baudrillard, that American society finds itself in.  

The key to Baudrillard’s theory on hyperreality is the concept of simulation. Central in his theory is the idea that our social reality is construction: a “simulacrum,” or a symbolic order of value.[ii] In a traditional society words have a referential function in reality. “The signifier” refers to something in material reality, to “the signified.” According to Baudrillard, in an advanced society such as the United States, this system has collapsed, under pressure of, amongst other things, advertising. A “loss of referentials” has occurred. Signs get detached from their original meaning and start referring to created images that have no root in reality, but that are accepted as reality nonetheless. Advertisements are self-referential and traditional Marxist ideas, like “use value” and “production value,” are no longer relevant in this system. Brands have created a new kind of value for themselves, known as “sign value.” No longer is the value of a can of Coca Cola measured in the labor that was used to produce it, but the “sign value” it represents is what counts. It projects the image of a cool lifestyle, a way of life that you as a consumer want to be part of. It is defined by what is signified. In the United States this simulation has reached its highest form and Baudrillard described the country as “lacking any grounding in a “real” economy of value.”[iii] America has become the perfect simulacrum, a system of signs referring to signs, and has therefore become “beyond the real”. 

In America this situation has evolved to its highest possible form, it is a society in the “most advanced state of simulation.”[iv] America, Baudrillard mentions, is “the desert of the real … (one is) delivered from all depth there- a brilliant, mobile, superficial neutrality, a challenge to meaning and profundity, a challenge to nature and culture, an outer hyperspace, with no origin, no reference-points.”[v] The country has become a world made of signs and the meaning of these signs all depend on each other. This hyperreality, as Baudrillard calls it, “has no relation to any reality whatsoever: it is its own pure simulacrum."[vi] The concept of simulation goes a long way to explain the aforementioned question of why many American do not feel the phenomenon of pro wrestling is problematic. All one looks for in hyperreality is simulation; there no longer is a “reality.” “The real is hyperrealized. Neither realized, nor idealized: but hyperealized. The hyperreal is abolition of the real not by violent destruction, but by its assumption.”[vii] 

In Fabricating the Absolute Fake Jaap Kooijman expands on this notion by explaining that “Baudrillard’s hyperreality is not the opposite of reality but a continuous simulation that creates the real as just another sign in a chain of signs which endlessly refer to each other.”[viii] In this line of thought pro wrestling can be seen as the ultimate sign that has lost its relation to the signified. It is a series of actions that might refer to the idea of an actual wrestling match, but that has nothing to do with what these matches used to be. A punch thrown by a pro wrestler refers to the action of actually hitting someone. The blood that flows is real, but the injury causing it is not. Just like a photograph in a newspaper, wrestling creates an image that has “all its attributes intact except for a fixed relation to what it represents.”[ix]

This paradoxical nature of the phenomenon of  pro wrestling, that poses the problem for the European viewers, stems from the very form the sport presents itself in. Over the course of a century wrestling experienced such a transformation, from the original classical sport into its current incarnation, perhaps best identified as “sports entertainment,” making current pro wrestling almost completely unrecognizable from its original form.[x] Sharon Mazer explains that “at its most elemental, professional wrestling is simply two men engaged in a spectacle of violent  conflict. A series of challenges communicate the histories of the combatants and legitimize or delegitimize each individual’s position in relation to the other’s. The wrestlers present themselves as larger-than-life figures from a comic-book like world.”[xi] Matches are fought out in the ring, and are highly choreographed affairs and the storylines are often a simplistic representation of social situations.[xii] When discussing pro wrestling it is obviously the clash between what is real and fake that creates the controversy surrounding the topic. 

In the essay “ “Real” Wrestling/ “Real” Life” Sharon Mazer describes this interaction and claims that “the pleasure for wrestlers and spectators alike may be found in the expressive tension between the spontaneous and the rehearsed, in the anticipation of , and acute desire for, the moment when the real breaks through the pretended.” Mazer compares the viewing of a pro wrestling match to watching a theatrical or musical performance, in that “spectator and performer alike are in a position to enjoy the distancing effect that comes with knowing the formal aspects of the performance at the same time as they look for the moment when knowledge (or consciousness) is suspended, penetrated by the rush of something far more urgent and demanding that artifice.”[xiii] In this respect pro wrestling seems to fit into the same category as watching a play or movie, where often suspending disbelief is a key factor in the enjoyment of the spectator. Yet, in pro wrestling, there is real danger involved as Mazer argues that “the line between demonstrated violence and actual physical harm is strongly marked in the performance.”[xiv] “At its worst,” Mazer claims, “a wrestling performance is an over simplistic display of male bravado and vulgar social clichés. But at its best, wrestling is a sophisticated theatricalized representation of the violent urges repressed by social code, of the transgressive impulses present in the most civilized of people.”[xv] Pro wrestling, she concludes, is not accepted as a legitimate sport, nor can it be considered legitimate theatre. It “intersects, exploits, and, finally, parodies both forms of entertainment.”[xvi]

            Pro wrestling’s refusal to be identified, combined with the aforementioned notion that pro wrestling is in fact the ultimate sign that lost its signifier, opens up the way to accepting the “so called sport” as an extremely evolved simulation in hyperreality. For pro wrestling is, on every level, a simulated affair. At a first glance, one would have a hard time spotting the “fake” nature of pro wrestling,  as  World Wrestling Entertainment’s (WWE) programming and live shows mimic a real sports broadcast in every way. In no way is it acknowledged that the fighting is scripted. There is no stepping outside of the fiction. Story segments are told in breaking news formats or in interview segments. The commentators are as shocked and surprised as the viewer is by latest heinous act by the “bad guys” and are constantly interrupted by seemingly unplanned occurrences.[xvii] A wrestling match in itself is evidently a simulation in its very core, with every punch, kick, “suplex” or  submission referring to the “idea” the viewer has of these moves.

            The simulated nature of the wrestling matches, however, does not merely stop at the choreography of the moves. It can also be observed in the back stories provided to the wrestlers. Besides the fictional character they portray, they also get awarded fictional achievements. A wrestler can be a first time world champion, enjoying an year long undefeated streak, despite being a loser the month before, or be a marketed as a successful “blue chipper,” even though being under contract for WWE for years under a different moniker. All accomplishments are fabricated, but marketed and accepted as a real “accomplishment” nonetheless, thus creating a simulation of an accomplished athlete. Like America itself, pro wrestling has “all the signs of culture, history and identity. Yet if one looks closely, these qualities are nowhere to be found.”[xviii] Furthermore, there is an entire entourage present at ringside who only seem to have jobs in the context of the simulated match. There is a timekeeper, keeping no time, an enforcer, to keep rowdy situations under fictional control, and of course, the main suspect: the referee, who admonishes the rules of the fictional contest, conveniently missing the cheating tactics of the bad guy and getting knocked out by the merest accidental blow to the back. 

            And, finally, the largest part of the simulation are the enormous crowds of spectators themselves. For while they may realize they are observing a choreographed contest, their responses to the signs that are presented to them are completely genuine. They cheer when the crowd favorite wins, they boo the referee when he makes a bad call and will buy another ticket to see the bad guys finally get his comeuppance. The public is as much a part of the simulation as the wrestling show itself is. There is actually no dividing line between the two. In America, we learned from Baudrillard, “cinema is true because it is the whole of space, the whole way of life that are cinematic. The break between the two…does not exist: life is cinema.”[xix] Pro wrestling is merely another “continuous simulation that creates the real as just another sign in a chain of signs which endlessly refer to each other.”[xx]  

            We see now that the paradox a European might observe in pro wrestling is actually present in the very fabric of American society. Kooijman, delving into Baudrillard’s theory again, points out the paradoxical ways of the United States, in the fact that America is ‘Utopia Achieved.” In America, the impossible is made possible, because of the fictional nature of the country.[xxi] In his book America Baudrillard explains: “(America) is a hyperreality because it is a utopia which has behaved from the very beginning as though it were already achieved. Everything here is real and pragmatic, and yet it is all the stuff of dreams too.”[xxii] It is therefore that America is “beyond the real.” In America this situation has evolved to its highest possible form, it is a society in the “most advanced state of simulation.”[xxiii] And it is in this situation that we find the break between the European and the American point of view. “It may be that the truth of America can only be seen by a European, since he alone will discover here the perfect simulacrum- that of the immanence and material transcription of all values..”[xxiv] 

            Since America itself is the “perfect simulacrum,” it does not matter that wrestling is “fake.” It is merely a simulation in another simulation. And Americans do not find fault in this as they, Baudrillard argues, “have no sense of simulation” because they are “themselves simulations in its most developed state.”[xxv] It is this rift between America’s modernity and Europe that creates our different approaches to something such as pro wrestling. “There isn’t just a gap between us,” says Baudrillard, “but a whole chasm of modernity. You are born modern, you do not become so.”[xxvi] Europe simply lacks the sophistication needed to accept a simulation of American proportions and will therefore be forever unable to see why the “reality paradox” of pro wrestling is simply nonexistent for an American. We, Baudrillard notes, “merely imitate them, parody them with a fifty-year time lag, and we are not even successful at that. We do not have either the spirit or the audacity for what might be called the zero degree of culture, the power of unculture.”[xxvii]

In the end we can see that the paradox that pro wrestling creates for us Europeans is legitimized by the theory of hyperreality. Pro wrestling refuses to commit to one genre, but continues to balance between several genres and denies its viewers a definitive answer to its nature. In a society that is a “perfect simulacrum,” pro wrestling is another sign in a chain of signs which endlessly refer to each other.”[xxviii] It is a simulation in its most extreme form, from the wrestler to the commentators to the entire audience watching. America, Baudrillard argues, has attained a state in which the questions of “real” and “fake” is not relevant, as is the case in pro wrestling. It simply is an extreme simulation in a simulated world. It is neither a sport, nor entertainment, but that does not matter. To Americans, the wrestling ring is not a dubious, paradoxical place, but rather a venue where “all participants are actively present and ultimately victorious in claiming a visible place in an otherwise complex and confusing world.”[xxix] And we, as Europeans will be forever unable to accept this, living outside of the American simulation and lacking “the power of unculture” [xxx] needed to lose oneself in the spectacle that is the simulated world of professional wrestling.

---

[i] Patrice A. Oppliger, Wrestling and Hypermasculinity (Jefferson: McFarland & Co Inc, 2003), 1.

[ii] Andrew M Koch, and Rick Elmore, “Simulation and Symbolic Exchange: Jean Baudrillard’s Augmentation of Marx’s Theory of Value,” Politics & Policy 34.3 (2006), 558.

[iii] Koch, and Elmore, “Simulation and Symbolic Exchange,” 568.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Jean Baudrillard, America (London: Verso, 1988), 124.

[vi] Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation (University of Michigan Press, 1995), 6.

[vii] Jean Baudrillard, In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities, or The End of the Social and Other Essays (New York: Semiotexte, 1983), 84.

[viii] Jaap Kooijman, Fabricating the Absolute Fake: America in Contemporary Pop Culture (Amsterdam University Press, 2008), 70-71.

[ix] Benjamin Woolley, Virtual Worlds: A Journey in Hype and Hyperreality (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992), 209.

[x] Oppliger, Wrestling and Hypermasculinity, 9.

[xi] Sharon Mazer, “The Doggie Doggie World of Professional Wrestling,” TDR: The Drama Review, vol. 34, no. 4 (Winter 1990), 97.

[xii] Jeffrey J. Mondak, “The Politics of Professional Wrestling,” Journal of Popular Culture, vol. 23 (1989), 139-149.

[xiii] Sharon Mazer, “ “Real” Wrestling / “Real” Life” in Steel Chair to the Head: The Pleasure and Pain of Professional Wrestling, ed. Nicolas Sammond  (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005), 68.

[xiv] Mazer, “The Doggie Doggie World of Professional Wrestling,” 108.

[xv] Ibid., 97.

[xvi] Ibid., 98.

[xvii]Nicholas Sammond, “Squaring the Family Circle: WWF Smackdown Assaults the Social Body,” in Steel Chair to the Head: The Pleasure and Pain of Professional Wrestling, ed. Nicolas Sammond, (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005), 134-136.

[xviii] Koch, and Elmore, “Simulation and Symbolic Exchange,” 568

[xix] Baudrillard, America, 101.

[xx] Kooijman, Fabricating the Absolute Fake, 70-71.

[xxi] Ibid., 71.

[xxii] Baudrillard, America, 28.

[xxiii] Koch and Elmore, “Simulation and Symbolic Exchange,” 568.

[xxiv] Baudrillard, America, 28-29.

[xxv] Ibid., 28-29.

[xxvi] Ibid., 73.

[xxvii] Ibid., 78.

[xxviii] Jaap Kooijman, Fabricating the Absolute Fake, 70-71.

[xxix] Mazer, “The Doggie Doggie World of Professional Wrestling,” 120.

[xxx] Baudrillard, America, 78.

Bibliography

• Baudrillard, Jean. America. London: Verso, 1988.
• Baudrillard,  Jean. In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities, or The End of the Social and Other Essays. New York: Semiotexte, 1983.
• Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press, 1995.
• Koch, Andrew M, and Rick Elmore. “Simulation and Symbolic Exchange: Jean Baudrillard’s Augmentation of Marx’s Theory of Value.” Politics & Policy. 34.3 (2006): 556-575.
• Kooijman, Jaap. Fabricating the Absolute Fake: America in Contemporary Pop Culture. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2008.
• Mazer, Sharon. “The Doggie Doggie World of Professional Wrestling.” TDR: The Drama Review. Vol. 34, No. 4 (Winter 1990): 96-122.
• Mazer, Sharon. “ “Real” Wrestling / “Real” Life.” In Steel Chair to the Head: The Pleasure and Pain of Professional Wrestling, edited by Nicolas Sammond, 67-87. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005.
• Mondak, Jeffrey J. “The Politics of Professional Wrestling.” Journal of Popular Culture. Vol. 23 (1989): 139-149.
• Oppliger, Patrice A. Wrestling and Hypermasculinity. Jefferson: McFarland & Co Inc, 2003.
• Sammond, Nicholas. “Squaring the Family Circle: WWF Smackdown Assaults the Social Body.” In Steel Chair to the Head: The Pleasure and Pain of Professional Wrestling. Edited by Nicolas Sammond, 132-166.  Durham: Duke University Press, 2005.
• Woolley, Benjamin. Virtual Worlds: A Journey in Hype and Hyperreality. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992.