#i cant speak to at the time interpration beyond some vague 'this is nice and tongue in cheek' comments from billboard

[bookofmac]

the idea that if satire isnt obvious enough it'll go over people heads is not incorrect, some people are not good at writing satire or social commentary, that's the nature of writing. However, we need to not act like people arent dodging and missing really easy points of interpritation in very obvious

i'm using a pop music example here because i think its the most accessable form of short form media that people have access to that they also miss a lot of meaning in

The song Down Under by Men at Work is seen by many to be a short hand for 'Aussiness', largely due to people with aussie accents in the chorus extoling the virtues of living in a land down under. It's fun and up beat rock song, and has a flute in it. It was the number one song on the US charts for 4 weeks

The song largely is about the exploitation of Australia and how it in the 70's and 80's it was being marketed overseas. Everyone in the song talking about Australia in the song is actually not in aus while talking it up, and the one Australian talking about it fondly recalls our long history of binge drinking. It's about perceptions of Australia, expecially a very white Australia with the 'men plundering' line especially, and what we are doing to the land with out massive and hugely invasive mining industry. it's a deeply satirical take of aussieness and hits on several points that were and are parts of the ongoing cultural critique in Australia (americanisation, alcohol consumption, mining, culural exports ect)

now, i understand if not everyone get it. the music and key allow it to be really up beat and there is no direct comment about then PM Malcom Fraiser selling us out to the US, the way that contemporaries like Red Gum or Midnight Oil might. However the mix of hyperspecific things (vegemite, certain slang) and general things (women glow and men plunder) it allows people to have it be persived as a flag waving anthem when theres a lot of that counter to that in the song itself, even in the surface level of the lyrics.

This is not a failure of the song, and it's not nessisarlly the failure of listener eithe, In the 40 years since the song came out the aussie new wave came and went and context was lost, especially for non australian audiances. This is fine as that is the case with lots of art, the immediate cultural context doesnt make or break a piece of arts worth or importance. However this often leads to complacensy and thus a homogenisation of opinion.

so now, a lot of people will hear the song in the context of 'funny aussie character' ala junkrat overwatch and be content in associating both with Australia. you listen and enjoy, but you dont engage. which sucks because there IS a conversation in the interplay of how non australians depict us and how the song Down Under is interprated abroad. but that requires us to engage with that coversation, and not have it spoon feed by this 'clarity of purpose' because the context will change and the purpose will be LOST, you can not rely on it to maintain the message you want to send.

i hate that man in the 'satire requires clarity' muscle shirt so much, he is my mortal enemy