Band names: how far is too far?

I thought that Pussy Riot was over the top. But after seeing the names up thread it is quite lite.

Band names have changed a lot since The Beatles, Rolling Stones, Pacemakers, etc. But I enjoy the creativity of today’s band names.

In the early 1980s, there was an all-female punk quartet called the Bush Tetras. Sounds like tropical fish, doesn’t it? :stuck_out_tongue:

As for The Wallets, it’s a reference to female genitalia.

Just before the first band broke wide open, Hootie and the Blowfish performed here in town with Toad The Wet Sprocket. Both bands have said on the record that had they known they would hit the big time, they would have chosen other names.

H&TB’s first record, BTW, was called “Kootchypop” after a late 1980s comedy routine where a black comedienne was talking about those high-cut women’s swimsuits, and said, “If you’re gonna wear one of those things, you’re gonna have to shave yo’ kootchypop!” :smiley:

Several years later, KISS and Alice In Chains played here too. They also toured together in large part because both bands originally had the same name. As Gene Simmons said on the Larry King Show, “It was the four-letter word for sex.” :wink:

Regarding the OP: There was a band some years back called Teasing The Korean that got some regional airplay. Anyone remember them? Yes, the name was controversial, in large part because none of them were of any kind of Asian descent.

Also, in the mid 1990s, some Walmarts refused to sell a Goo Goo Dolls CD because of the cover; it featured a baby covered with blackberry jelly, and someone thought it looked like dried blood. :confused: Meanwhile, some upper Midwestern Walmarts carried an album by a band called Odlid! (the exclamation point was part of the band’s name). If you don’t get it, spell the band’s name backwards.

I have albums by The Crucifucks and Dayglo Abortions. Good stuff, actually.

And then there are album names that many consider offensive. Like Millions of Dead Cops by MDC.

According the legend, Rick Rubin wanted the Black Crowes to have a different name:

Yep - he wanted them to call themselves the KKK. The Black Crowes told him to fuck off.

As did the early 90s rap act Young Black Teenagers, which was all white.
Back to the OP, I’m really surprised there’s been such a controversy about Viet Cong (the band). Heck, one of the 80s premier punk bands was Agent Orange–a far more tasteless band name. I’ve seen ads for bands for AIDS Wolf and Zyklon B in Seattle over the years, and those names IMHO went too far.

Nothing new there. The Beatles’ so-called “Butcher cover”, on the 1966 release of the Yesterday and Today album, featured decapitated dolls and the boys in butcher smocks. Capitol had to recall 750,000 albums and have them reissued. The authentic original versions that sold before the recall are worth quite a bit of money.

Thing is there is a difference between intentionally vulgar as a means of declaring “out there” and knowingly offensive to a minority group as a means to declare the same.

Both appeal to certain demographics and can be part of marketing for the group and both will push away others. Vulgarity’s appeal is broader but sure The Cunt Rapers probably won’t get booked for certain venues and will get looked at for others. You choose that name being aware of that. And you are not shocked if some tell you your name sucks.

Yes sure some punk bands embraced some motifs just for the shock value. “Look how bad we are!” But the name Joy Division for example was not just naively chosen or for shock value even if most had no idea what their name meant and why it was chosen.

In comparison Viet Cong’s rationale? None apparently. Just ignorance.

Gang of Four are also in contrast. They set out to be a political band, a group of pretentious leftist intellectuals (more Marxist than Maoist to be sure) who thought that the political reference both sounded good and was an edgy reference to their very leftist politics. And I do not believe that too many Chinese in the West have seen the name as offensive or hurtful to them.

Both sides are in the right. The band can choose to call themselves whatever they want, and the public can choose whether or not to go to their shows. Either side can use the other’s decisions as one factor in making their own, and either side can change their decision.

Pearl Jam sounds innocent enough until you realize it’s a reference to semen. The band denies this, however.

They credibly claim it’s a basketball reference.

To quote the guy from Spinal Tap, “People forget that it also means ‘a female dog.’”

If KISS had remained FUCK they probably wouldn’t have gotten to team up with Scooby Doo.

Members of Pearl Jam told a few different stories over the years about the origin of the band’s name, but in a 2006 Rolling Stone interview revealed that there was really no meaning or interesting story behind the name. They just needed a name and picked two words:

No cite, but I have read elsewhere that Vedder said the word “pearl” had a lot of positive associations for him (aside from being his grandmother’s name it’s the title of a Janis Joplin album and was the nickname of basketball player Earl Monroe), that it hadn’t occurred to him that it could be taken as a reference to semen, and that if he’d realized the band would soon make it big he might have given more thought to choosing a name.

I’m inclined to believe that “Pearl Jam” truly was not intended to be a smutty joke, because while plenty of bands do have names that are smutty jokes, Pearl Jam isn’t a band that’s ever been known for its ribald sense of humor.

How about NY Niggers or Sharon Tate’s Baby. But those are on par with Dead Kennedys.

Some bands are underground and have think they have little chance of breaking big, so they stick with outrageous names. But once they become commercially successful, the names change.

Not offensive but Simple Minds used to be known as Johnny and the Self Abusers.

I agree there is a difference between saying a bunch of bad words just to be offensive and choosing a name that is offensive to a single group. I think this group was brave to admit that they didn’t really think it through.

I think you have a right to name your band whatever you want, but most people don’t want to inadvertently name their band something that genuinely makes people feel bad (as opposed to just shocking the squares).

I don’t believe it for a second. The explanations are vague and stretched way thin. I agree that they are a humorless group, but it’s not a funny joke.

Too far:

http://iowa.barstoolsports.com/files/2014/01/BeBWqNvIgAARa4q.jpg

NSFW

I quite like Viet Cong. The name fits their sound. But that’s probably because they sound like an 80s post-punk/industrial band and Viet Cong is exactly the type of name one of those bands would’ve given themselves.

As there goal does not appear to be to shock people, I think it’s best they change their name.

I think the difference is the Dead Kennedys makes reference to a couple of dead politicians. Viet Cong refers to a regime that killed million.

And the Dead Kennedys broke up years ago. There’s just a Jello-free tribute band floating around these days.

I’m sure some smartass punk band has named themselves “Child Porn” or “How to construct a shoe bomb” to make typing their name into google risky.

I still don’t get it… I mean, I can think of a lot of possibilities, but none which strike me as obvious.