Like an alt-rock extension of a self-satisfied 4chan user, Ariel Pink continues his episodic PR campaign to offend. Between the ageist dig at Madonna, stating that he was "maced by a feminist", and calling Grimes "stupid and retarded", words on the musical content of his new album Pom Pom seem few and far between.
Of course, Ariel Pink means to offend. He clearly relishes it, as it's proven to be an effective promotional campaign for his career. His smug "I won" attitude is a familiar play of those who incite online-rage in the "clickbait"-era. Ariel Pink is cashing in, embracing the role of the troll; he’s playing us, and being rewarded for it.
The thing is, Ariel Pink hasn’t won at all. While he brings himself a lot of headline-grabbing attention, he’s actually bringing a spotlight to the very real and pervasive racism and misogyny that is deeply embedded in indie rock to the surface. All that needs to happen now is that we all recognize this.
Yet, fans readily rush to defend oppressive behaviour as satirical or ironic, rather than admit that they are real problems. Ariel Pink’s defenders look down on his detractors as not understanding his art or not getting the joke. But when art is suddenly made critique-proof by stating that it’s "all just a joke", we enter a dangerous (and incredibly boring) arena. Art that cannot be criticized serves no real purpose. Art, regardless of the artist’s intentions, cannot exist void of context. Pink has time and again attempted to make himself impervious to criticism by hyperbolizing his offensiveness. His "wacky" antics are so outrageous that we’re forced to believe it’s all an act, so we can write it off and still feel okay enjoying his music. Throughout his career he has attempted to cement his status as transgressive, as if we’re supposed to laugh someone calling their album Ku Klux Glam. We’re supposed to smirk and shrug off the beta-male trope as sensitacho damage.
If this is all an act, it’s not a very good one. And if it’s a joke, it isn’t that funny. That artists truly believe that misogyny, racism, anti-Semitism and homophobia are somehow transgressive in 2014 is downright baffling.
Public outrage over Pink is met with playground politics: ignore your bullies and they’ll go away. This is, of course, entirely untrue and simply another way to silence people whose voices are so rarely listened to in the first place. Acts like Ariel Pink know that the culture of violence on the internet actually works in their favour. They get away unscathed while their critics are met with yet more abuse.
However, as any marginalised person could tell you, acts of oppression are not particularly controversial when they’re something you face on a daily basis. What’s edgy about misogyny? It’s happening everywhere, all of the time. I'm not at all shocked by a man’s blatant hatred of women, whether genuine or just as a way of getting attention. If this really is just a media persona, it’s not entirely obvious what its purpose is supposed to serve. Hatred for the sake of attention is hardly art.
Ariel Pink’s attempt at creating controversy is effective, but it’s not particularly innovative: it’s downright predictable at this point. If you hope to find art that crosses social boundaries, that's truly transgressive, Ariel Pink is not the artist you’re looking for. He’s just a troll looking for some action.