-
fromSonja Thomaser
–
conclude
–
Till Lindemann does what he always does: Provoke to process a topic. But that is completely out of place with sexual abuse. A comment.
It has always been the art of the band “Rammstein” and singer till Lindemann been to take something abnormal and describe it benevolently and flowerily to create a break.
The best example of this is the song “Mein Teil”, about the so-called cannibals of Rothenburg. “It is so well seasoned / And so beautifully flambéed / And so lovingly / Served on porcelain / In addition a good wine / And gentle candlelight / Yes, I take my time / A bit of culture must be.” Here is the festive consumption of human flesh described. The depiction of a fine dinner, in which the victim’s penis is eaten, the absurdity and falsehood of the situation become clear.
Till Lindemann: Poem “When you sleep” glosses over a rape
That works in the poem “If you sleep” in Lindemann’s book of poems, published by Kiwi-Verlag, but not. Lindemann only provides a realistic, detailed, lustful, glossy description of a rape. There is no break, no moment when it becomes clear that this is wrong.
Even worse: the lustful description even more arouses a stimulus in a sexual context. Which makes the poem no more than another misogynistic text under the guise of freedom of art.
But: freedom of art is important and must not be curtailed. It exists in order to make hard-formulated criticism possible in the artistic context, in order to draw attention to grievances. Because it is precisely through blatant comparisons and exaggerated wording that attention can be drawn to an unsustainable situation. Drastic circumstances require drastic words. An example that shows this is a line of text from the song “Anti Alles Aktion” by the Antelope Gang, which is a criticism Pegida shows: “There is no need to talk about it, when the masses rise, I throw a fire bomb on Dresden from the plane.”
Till Lindemann does what he always does: provoke
Of course, the space for art that is not critical of the system is not directed against obnoxious attitudes, but even propagates the obnoxious attitude. In general, however, it should rather be talked about a better legal situation against incitement, right-wing extremist and misogynistic content than to question the freedom of art.
Lindemann does what he always does: Provoke to process the topic. But that is completely out of place with sexual abuse.
Rapists draw power and pleasure from the victim’s being at the mercy. The peculiarity of the crime is therefore not shown in a glossy, loving description of the defenseless victim, but only describes the feelings of the rapist. The rape is thus romanticized in Lindemann’s poem.
The Kiwi publishing house should have noticed that – and the poem should not have been published.
–
