Posts
The Shondes: Queer, Pro-Palestinian Jewish Punk Rock
By Matthue Roth / January 31, 2008
The Shondes are the newest product of Brooklyn’s cross-section of Jewish and hipster culture, merging punk sensibilities with queer identity, radical politics and—most importantly—flapper flamboyance. Their just-released debut album, The Red Sea, is noisy enough to be punk, but complex enough to rank with bands like Arcade Fire and Architecture in Helsinki. It’s a dazzling, velvety blend of half-shouted, half-harmonized three-part vocals, and a fierce and fragile balance between lead guitar and lead violin. The latter is played by Elijah Oberman, formerly of the Syndicate, and one of the foremost violinists in the punk scene today—admittedly not a huge pool to choose from, but still impressive.
Borrowing their name from the Yiddish word for disgrace, the Shondes—three of its four members are Jewish—have become known as much for their politics as their music, espousing groups like Jews Against the Occupation and Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism. In their short existence, they’ve played with Amy Ray of the Indigo Girls, Joe Lally of Fugazi, and Erase Errata, among others.
Their record, The Red Sea, is available at shows, or on Insound.
Okay, so why "The Red Sea"?
One of my favorite moments at Passover is the part of the Exodus story right before the parting of the Red Sea. Nachshon jumps into the water and only after he’s gone as far he could on his own does the Red Sea part.
That sums up where we're coming from as a band. It's very personal, it's very political, pushing ourselves and living intensely, and making music.
Is your violin background classical?
Yeah, I studied classical for years. I realized that path wasn't for me, though at this point I wish for more of those kinds of skills. I definitely think I'm a rock violinist, but that's a major tradition that I come from.
I spent a whole lot of my childhood obsessed with R.E.M., and classical music is definitely an obvious one (especially the Romantics). I also really love punk rock and feminist punk, but that came a little later for me.
How did you manage to star in a Poison video [their recent remake of “What I Like about You”]?
We were at a photo shoot for Curve, and they were shooting the Poison video in the studio down the hall. This guy came in and was like, we're shooting a Poison video next door, no I'm not joking, yes Poison still exists, and we need extras. We were all cracking up, of course, and it was too hilarious an opportunity to pass up.
Do you ever write songs about each other?
Only silly ones that we make up in the van. One favorite is "What's Goin’ on with Eli" to make fun of me and sound like an after-school special. A lot of our songs are about relationships—romantic, familial, relationship to the world.
What's the story of "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?" [video below] Clearly, it's not a Carole King cover…
No, though we all like that song, and it's an obvious inspiration to ours. It's about what's hard for people in relationships. The more you've been hurt, the harder it is to let someone see you and know you, even if you love them and really want to let them. There's always that fear that they might love you now, but if you let them know you, will they still love you? Louisa wrote the words, so obviously she says it in a way that's particular to her experience, but it's a feeling that's pretty easy to relate to.
It's hugely cute that you all thank your families first on the record. Is your queerness still an issue for them (or, has it ever been)? Is your being punk-rock stars an issue?
I think all of us have been lucky enough to get support by our families. Personally, my family has been really supportive of me, which isn't to say that we haven't processed or had difficulties in our relationships (like most people do), but that's not the main thing. My mom came up to New York for our record release show, which was really wonderful.
I know at least some of you have jobs in the organized Jewish community. Has anyone said to you at your desk job, "Hey, aren't you the chyck/dude/other who I saw onstage going crazy last night?"
Actually, a bunch of my co-workers came to our record release party here in New York a couple weeks ago, which was really sweet!
About the politics of the record: it seems a little strange for a band with members who are queer and trans-identified to espouse the Palestinian cause, when the Palestinian government's been so resolutely anti-queer and even sentenced gay couples to death. What's your take?
We are social justice activists who oppose oppression of all kinds. This means fighting for queer rights, an end to the occupation of Palestine and justice for all people. As Jews (3 of us are Jewish), it is particularly important to stand with other people of conscience around the world and represent our opposition to Israeli state terror and the demonization of Palestinian culture.
Is "Your Monster" a concealed reference to the Muppets?
No, but we do love the Muppets! Temim really does an excellent Animal.
POST A COMMENT
nice
They’re one of my favorite bands. Â So excited to hear "My Dear One." Â The most fearless band in America!
Drop them in Gaza and see if they die first of an STD or a stone to the head.
I think it's important to stress the difference between a people and its government. I certainly hope the rest of the world is able to do this in the case of the U.S., and it should apply to Israelis and Palestinians as well. A critique of U.S. policy in Iraq, for example, cannnot simply blame "the American people" for the war of aggression without recognizing the limits on democracy in the U.S. To then make even those limitations the fault of "the people" is to ignore the most evident workings of power. Certainly people have ethical responsibilities in relation to their society; but to make "the people" the cause of the actions of the state is to miss how the state acts in its own interest at the expense of the people, claiming to have the people's support even as it represses dissent.Â
This is much more the case in Palestine, where a series of weak governments without any of the civil and military infrastructure of other nations –without even a nominal State– have engaged in untenable compromises to hold onto power. To then say it is senseless to support the Palestinian people in their struggle under military occupation because their government is inadequately democratic seems completely contradictory to me. It takes a very narrow view of politics.
 The Shondes seem much more interested in what can be done among people, rather than among (less than ideal) governments. I don't see support for the Palestinian government on their album, I see a reaching out to Palestinian people who are suffering.Â
Ismail,
Sadly I must be brief, I do promise to approach your points one-by-one when I get a chance. I just want to make one point abundantly clear; never at once did I question the very nature of the position vis-a-vis the band. All my original-original point was that I felt the question that Matthue rightly posed was evaded. From there I speculated that it is precisely because there is no easy answer. I realize that this is a fundamental product of our quite different readings/views of the causes of the conflict. And that is fine. But again, I do raise the metaphor of patriotic African-Americans in the north 1920s or 30s. Certainly it was done…I am interested as to how that thought process actually functioned. Much the same way that I wonder when I see signs that read "Queers for Palestine" given the very de facto oppression (which if Hamas continues to imose shaaria, I would imagine will go beyond de facto) that occurs in that area. I don't think this is an outrageous question by any means. In the same way that you quite validly question any number of my own motivations and points of view. Clearly none of us are pure in this sense.
I do, in fact, raise my eyebrow at the Free Tibet crowd…but perhaps out of a general distrust of unshowered hippies.
1. "And isn't Palestinian nationalism itself a form of identity politics? And often a form of hyper-identity politics?"
Only in the very trivial sense that, say, Americans upset by the events of 9/11 are trafficking in identity politics. Any political sentiment expressed by a particular polity may be so construed, but only at the expense of diluting the concept to Lilliputian proportions. And what would you make of Palestinian nationalism expressed by non-Palestinians? Surely not an instance of identity politics.Â
2. You make lots of assertions here, so let me be brief: yes, the Palestinians have worn the albatross of feckless leadership around their necks for years, with the current quisling Abbas being a perfect example. I also note that this is no reason to withhold support for their liberation from external aggressors.
Yes, we could all do with a little self-analysis. I just think that prioritizing this while the Israeli boot continues to press down on the Palestinian neck is, well, missing the point. Look, is it true that there were failures in the responses of European Jewish leadership to the rise of the Nazis? Sure. Does this fact have anything more than marginal utility in explaining the Nazi holocaust? Nope, and it's churlish to even bring it up when the overwhelming (i.e., total) blame for the attempted destruction of European Jews is correctly placed at the hooves of the Nazis. (And no, I'm not saying that Israelis are equivalent to Nazis. This is an analogy, and these are well-known to be imprecise comparisons, in no way meant to suggest a complete correspondence.)Â
No, I don't agree that a Jewish state in Israel is some sort of historical inevitability. I look forward to the day when Jews, Muslims, Christians, Wiccans, Scientologists …..OK, maybe not Scientologists…..et al enjoy a lovely secular state in the Levant.
Oh, and fuck the Saudis and their kleptotheocracy, too. Happy?Â
3. Why do people pay so much attention to Palestine/Israel in the face of other, arguably worse infamies? Â
Like belief in astrology or the benign intentions of politicians, this odd trope survives challenge by common sense and elementary logic. I've made this point a billion times before, but what the hell, I'll have another go; there is no hierarchy of evil to which political activists refer before acting. We each choose our battles for a congeries of reasons-personal identification with a issue, calculation of where one's energies will be most economically deployed, areas of long-term interest or expertise-the list is endless. No one raises an eyebrow at the "Free Tibet" protester because there are other, more acute and bloody conflicts going on, nor does anyone assume that, since there other "worse" injustices, he must be motivated by anti-Chinese racism.
Just extend the logic of your claim to any other political cause, and we'd all be paralyzed. No one would escape suspicion unless they could demonstrate that they'd first exhausted their efforts on behalf of every other "worse" cause before going after the scoundrel they planned to target initially.
This complaint about anti-Zionists is a transparently ad hoc attempt to silence criticism of Israel, nothing more, as the simple observation that it appears in no other conflict shows.
Self-analysis? Ask yourself why you cling to this off-the-point bit of misdirection instead of sticking to the particulars of the argument. Ask yourself why it's so natural to turn your attention to the character of your opponent instead of the specifics of his position.Â
Adam, I love ya, babe, but you're making me crazy with this shit.Â
Ismail,
Your Darfuri example is certainly a valid one and opens an important question. Let me get back to that though, and address your concerns/questions in order. Overall your analysis of my points is spot on, at least in boiling down my arguments. Now…
1. While I do have a certain level of discomfort in the idea of identity politics, there are also limitations to this discomfort (I mean, really, could I ever really be uncomfortable and still proclaim myself ot be a Zionist?). From a personalized standpoint I do understand one's dedication to larger ideals of "social justice" (an amorphous term if there ever has been one, but we can leave that alone for now as a generalized dedication to human rights). But, again, as artists the moment that issue becomes centralized, whether fairly or not, that becomes an identity in and of itself. And isn't Palestinian nationalism itself a form of identity politics? And often a form of hyper-identity politics?
2. My point re: narratives is merely that there is much more going on here historically, culturally, religiously, etc…than most people understand. While we obviously diverge significantly on our opinions of this very issue, Ismail, you are also atypical in your knowledge of affairs in the region. But, for many it is easy to try to categorize the issue within an oversimplified narrative of colonizer/colonized. There is far more nuance there. Now, again, I wouldn't expect you to concede this point precisely because you are unabashedly anti-Zionistic. But that said, even if one is, from a purely realist standpoint you must accept that there is/always will be a Jewish state of Israel…and as such rather than shouting about the liberation of Palestine from the mountains to the sea, would it not be wiser to work on ways to improve conditions on the ground? To build schools rather than Qassams? Because let's face it, who really cares about these people? The Jordanians? Umm, clearly not. The Lebanese? Ummm…The Kuwaitis? The Egyptians? Maybe they would have given them Gaza in the 1950s if that was the case. My point is this; the Palestinians have pretty much gotten a raw deal from everyone, not the least of which from their own leadership who has gotten rich while the population suffers. Isn't there a small level of self-analysis that has to occur here? And if so, doesn't that expand the narrative?
3. And lastly, re: you point on the Darfuris (and Afghanis)…again there is a larger question here, one that I certainly struggle with. How does one deal with the population without propping up the very institutions oppressing those people. Of course the Palestinians deserve material support, simply because they are, well, people–no matter if there is mysogynistic or homophobic tendencies within a population. Heck if the contrapositive was true I think that I would need to get out of the Midwest and run back east really quickly because the coffee supplies would dry up pretty quickly. So I do not question that for a moment. Again, though, the question does have to be asked as why this conflict is given so much more credence and importance over all others in the world?  Because it's popular to wear skinny jeans and a kaffiyeh? Perhaps. In fact, Ismail, bringing up the Sudan is a great example here. Where is the visceral outrage amongst protesters regarding the Sudan? Where was it about Rwanda? And if it doesn't exist, or isn't as "popular" does that not say something?
Adam-
As near as I can tell, you're making 3 points:
1. You're suspicious if GLBT folks don't make GLBT issues their primary concern, suspicious in the sense that you seem to think this behavior requires some sort of explanation. You rightly realize that this perspective makes you a supporter of identity politics.
I am not. This is a huge conversation, of course, but here's why: I think that humanity expresses itself most fully precisely in the embrace of the other. When you feel the injustice being performed on another not from a sense of cultural/racial/religious similarity, but instead in the absence of such similarity, you've achieved a more perfect understanding of what it is to be human (if I am only for myself, what am I?).
2. Embracing narratives of oppressor/oppressed does little to foster reconciliation.
Funny how this trope and its cognates (a complex situation with no clear answers, both peoples suffering equally, et al) rears its head almost exclusively in reference to the Palestinians. Remarkable. Of all the world's conflicts, across time and in all places, somehow the Israel/Palestine dispute is refractory to the ordinary operations of assigning blame.
3. You wonder about the psychology of, e.g., GLBT folks who support freedom for Palestinians, among whom may be found some who oppose GLBT rights. Again, this only becomes a question from an identity politics perspective, and is kind of reductionist to boot. You seem to think that the presence of some fundamentalist and/or cultural allegiance to illiberal norms among some Palestinians ought to trump Israel's 40 yr occupation in the minds of GLBT people. Why, unless you think that their GLBT identity should overshadow their billions of other beliefs/loves/passions?
To repeat a comment I made elsewhere, I don't recall hearing too many women saying, "Fuck the Afghanis. Let the Taliban take them over, they're a pretty anti-feminist culture anyway so why should I care about them"? Â Similarly, do you find yourself perplexed at those Western women who work towards an end to the suffering in Darfur, where attitudes towards women wouldn't pass muster even in the most conservative precincts of this country?
Didn't think so. Â
I gave them an open midned chance, but I was unimpressed with the interview and then I watched the video… they just arent good…at all!
…but that's beside the point.
 No one is free while others are oppressed. Some Palestinians are oppressed because they are queer. All Palestinians are oppressed because they are Palestinians.
 And the poster of the first anonymous comment doesn't even know how to spell "dyke".
Umm, fostering debate is NOT an effort to erase dissent, last time I checked. To suggest as much is an easy cannard to try to avoid debating the real issues being raised (umm, ignoring all of the wackos who posted above).
There's no self-hatred in standing up and speaking out. The Shondes are making music and taking a stand for justice — both for queer folks and the people of Palestine AND Israel. There's not a contradiction in fighting for multiple liberations — and the oppression of Palestinians can't be excused by sanctimony about being generally less oppressive towards other types of folks. (And Israel's Rabbis, Priests and Imams sure did all line up quickly together to oppose World Pride in Jerusalem in particularly virulent homophobic terms.)
Thank goodness for the Shondes — for openly claiming all the parts of their identity and for refusing to be silenced by hateful slurs and efforts to erase dissent from the Jewish community. (Oh – and for those who gleefully predict their doom visiting Palestine, don't assume that they haven't already been there and been welcomed in the struggle there…)
A bunch of self-hating wannabes. Rock on with your terrorist friends.Â
Their not only damn ugly but very ignorant too. Palestine doesn't exist and neither does a Palestinian culture. It's a fraud created by terrorist Arafat. These fakestinians are just Arabs from the Gulf who were "created" to murder Jews and steal the Jewish homeland. The ugly dikes should go to occupied Israel and see what happens when they show up in their queer glory to support a bunch of barbaric, racist, homphobic killers. They wouldn't come out alive which would be poetic justice to a bunch of Nazi queers.
Hey Ismail do you have anything else to do but obssess about Jews? It's that what gets you off? LOSER!
Apologies, but I have one more point…
In a way I realize that maybe I am making an argument for identity politics, to an extent. And I suppose I am ok with that?
Ok, to expand a little on my point (which, admittedly was somewhat short)…
It's also true that GLBT people are not only interested in our own freedoms and rights. Contrary to popular portrayals of us as the fashion czars of Homolandia, many of us actually care deeply about other issues as well. And we take different stances on them depending on our own particular ethical perspectives. Framing the question as if it should be expected that queer people would only support the rights of those who are pro-queer reveals more about the questioner than it does about the respondent.
Adam, I'm not sure I see the point of the queer/Palestine question (unless, of course, it is just another instance of that reflexive cataloguing of some unsavory aspect or another of Palestinian culture that apologists for Zionism find so irresistible). Should we temper our support for liberating people from occupation depending on how closely their politics resemble ours? Do you imagine that the oppressed people in Darfur are paragons of Western enlightenment in terms of their sexual/gender practices and beliefs? Should this affect whether or not we support their deliverance from persecution?
Among the nations of the world, how many of the candidates for democratic liberation embody values liberal Westerners endorse?
So, are GLBT folks more able to pursue their lives freely in Israel than in Palestine? Yup. Should this have any bearing whatsoever on whether or not one supports having Israel's boot lifted from the collective Palestinian neck? Nope.Â
There should be no ideological means test for freedom.Â
It's true there is no easy answer, not one that fits into a single question of a music interview, anyway.
It disappoints me that the question regarding queer identity/Palestine was entirely evaded. But, it seems to me that perhaps it is because no easy answer is actually readily available. Perhaps they should go interview some of the GLBT youth in Tel Aviv who have crossed the borders into Israel and then they would actually have an answer.
They look as punk rock as Mickey Mouse…………….what a pack of attention seeking morons and a complete waste of time.
Wanna post your own comments? Gotta log in first!