On Kpop Journalism
Yesterday, there was an utterly baffling article published by Rolling Stone India titled, “Masculinity Through the BTS Lens”. Written by Mayukh Majumdar for a special edition of the magazine spearheaded by Blue Check Army Riddhi Chakraborty, the article makes some startling claims. Check out this paragraph from the introduction:
“South Korean boy band BTS have faced brutal amounts of homophobia and xenophobia in every country outside their own. For the West, which so far had only been introduced to Asian men like Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan and Jet Li, seeing BTS take over the Grammy Awards (despite not winning), touring London and the United States, entering the Time 100 list and pulverizing world records, was shocking. The fact that the seven-member team did all this while singing in a language that was not English, made it a bigger stumper.”
Let’s go line by line.
“South Korean boy band BTS have faced brutal amounts of homophobia and xenophobia in every country outside their own.”
Really? That is shocking if true but what is the truth here? BTS did face severe anti-Korean backlash in Japan but it wasn’t because of their “masculinity” or their “Asian” ethnicity but because of an incident where one of the members wore a T-shirt that inflamed the right wing nationalists in Japan. Plenty of other male Korean stars are doing just fine in Japan, to include ex-TVXQ member Jaejoong, one of the most beautiful men in the world, who was trending on Japanese language twitter for a few days last week for no other reason than because he was getting featured in a variety show. Are we really to believe that BTS are uniquely exposed to “brutal amounts of homophobia and xenophobia” for their bog-standard Kpop boy group look while Jaejoong with his dewy fresh skin, smoky eyes, and carefully tousled blond hair singing on a stage bedecked with flowers in front of admiring Japanese women just happily continues on popular and well-liked for… reasons?
Okay, so maybe the author here is referring to non-Asian countries and it is true that I have seen snarky comments from American radio DJs and locals but is that really “brutal”? There’s always going to be some dumbass commenting under a YouTube clip. The nationalist backlash in Japan was so severe BTS was banned from Music Station, the most popular music show on television. You could maybe consider the reaction there brutal. What equivalent backlash exists in “every other country outside their own”? It seems to me that the group (and the fan $$$ they bring with them) has been received with open arms by every media outlet writing in English--to include Rolling Stone India.
Moving on.
“For the West, which so far had only been introduced to Asian men like Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan and Jet Li…”
So the very not-Jet Li-like Psy who dominated pop music in 2012 does not exist. Got it. Neither does singing and dancing superstar Rain, who starred in a major Hollywood film, or the glam guitar hunk Miyavi who worked with Angelina Jolie, or classical musician Yo Yo Ma, not to mention Asian-American men like dreamboat John Cho who have worked really hard to break stereotypes.
“... seeing BTS take over the Grammy Awards (despite not winning), touring London and the United States, entering the Time 100 list and pulverizing world records, was shocking. The fact that the seven-member team did all this while singing in a language that was not English, made it a bigger stumper.”
Here’s the problem. I think quite a few people found it strange that BTS was getting attention at the Grammy Awards but it wasn’t because of a huge outpouring of xenophobia and homophobia but rather because BTS appeared for just a few seconds and only then as part of a novelty act in Lil Nas X’s “Old Town Road.” It would be like if the yodeling kid was being splashed all over the front page of the papers for his appearance. “Why is this group getting all of this attention for a nothing appearance?” is not a xenophobic or homophobic question.
Again, Psy dominated American (and global) pop charts with a non-English song. It’s not a concept people are unfamiliar with. The biggest question I’ve gotten from the locals and normies in my life after they hear a BTS song is: “Why are people freaking out about this group?” Their songs in 2020 are indistinguishable from bubblegum pop produced by other American acts like the Jonas Brothers. Their visuals are pretty tame compared to other idol acts in Japan and Korea (I mean did we all see Taemin’s latest??) This framing being pushed that BTS is somehow breaking barriers and world records with their artistry just feels like gaslighting on a major scale.
Let’s keep going.
“...BTS have faced numerous hurdles during their attempt to establish themselves as world-renowned artists. One of those hurdles is the assumption that their fanbase comprises hysterical pre-teen girls on Twitter. This couldn’t be further from the truth.”
Here’s another bit of “manufactured consent” we see over and over again pushed by Blue Check Armys. The BTS fanbase does have hysterical pre-teen girls in it, sure. But the biggest and loudest group of fans are the Twilight Mom demographic I’ve highlighted over and over again. The big fan accounts on Twitter aren’t (pre)teen girls who enjoy dancing around the living room to “Boy With Luv” and pinning up posters of Jungkook in their locker, it’s grown, adult women doing things like selling e-books about how to spot “fans of loser groups” and encouraging each other to purchase thousands upon thousands of mp3s and albums to boost BTS’s rankings in the charts. The Wall Street Journal also just did a puff piece on BTS and who did they interview as their stand-in for a typical BTS fan? A 47-year old woman in Massachusetts who took the day off of work to stream. That is BTS’s major demographic in the English-speaking world. The only people saying BTS’s audience are just teen girls are the adults who want to rebut it so they can claim victim status.
Here’s the meat of the piece:
“I was introduced to BTS in 2015 and while I wasn’t necessarily a fan of their music at the time, I was stunned by their skincare, their beauty and their attention to detail. I had never seen such polished faces in my life and neither had I ever come across such well-tuned choreography. The fact that BTS have talked about using toner, night cream, sheet masks and going to dermatologists is path-breaking in itself — not because male celebrities don’t do it; they just don’t admit to it and nor are they ever asked about it by mainstream media.” [Emphasis Added]
Okay, leaving aside that apparently the author has never seen a Prabhudeva choreographed film, this is being written for Rolling Stone India. INDIA. You know, the country where in 2005, Shahrukh Khan did a Lux ad where he floated around in a bathtub full of rose petals and where it stirred up a lot of actual backlash because it made people uncomfortable to see a man engaging in something so feminine. I’m on record as not being much of an SRK fan (which remains true) but nobody can deny that Shahrukh and his image of the urbane, gentle, romantic hero was extremely groundbreaking and influential back in the day. A break from the rough and tumble heroes of the 1980s.
Over a decade ago you had chocolate box heroes like Shahid Kapoor talking about their skincare in the press.
I do find it interesting that the debate around skincare and lightness creams (Fair & Handsome, etc.) is not mentioned at all despite it being a huge part of the discussion around these issues in the Indian context.
“And it’s not just about BTS using snail mucin essences, face masks and fermented toners — it is refreshing to see their smoky eyes, popsicle-stained lips and glowing complexion garnering praise (or at least starting a conversation) in worldwide media about makeup and a man’s right to being beautiful.”
Apparently the author of this piece never saw Shahid Kapoor’s dewy skin in the late 2000s.
But here’s the other bit of framing that’s just weird. What does “a man’s right to being beautiful” mean and is it the same across all cultures and traditions? Why is wearing make-up and a feminine look singled out here as “male beauty”?
Idol groups like BTS are consciously styled to appeal to an overwhelmingly female consumer base. The products they advertise are meant to be purchased by women. It’s why Arashi sells washers and dryers in Japan. It’s why we see idols dress in androgynous looks--so their female fans can emulate them. I’m certainly not the only person who has bought and worn something that her favorite idol has worn.
These men are beautiful but it’s in a specific context.
One of the reasons I have loved watching Indian films for the past 20 years is male beauty. The camera just lingers on dazzling eyes and… other beautiful things. Was John Abraham not beautiful emerging from the ocean in a golden speedo in Dostana?
And then there’s the beauty of tragic male youth-- River Phoenix, Viktor Tsoi, Kurt Cobain--figures who live on in imagination. Why specifically does BTS have male beauty but Viktor Tsoi did not? Make-up? Then what about Prince, David Bowie, Sawada Kenji, a million visual kei bands in Japan, the emo years in America, every 70s glam rocker in the UK, heavy metal acts? Did we or did we not all see Velvet Goldmine?
This argument that BTS is doing something literally nobody has done before is just maddening. I have spent the last few years just feeling gaslit by every article on the group in English. I wouldn’t care if it was just the fans stridently pushing this narrative because fans are fans and fans believe their group is the best and only group. Fine. I get it. But the Blue Check Armys who have bent and twisted truth and reality into… this. I can’t let it go. It’s sloppy and ill-informed at best and just irresponsible at worst. This “manufactured consent” gets parroted back and reported back until people start to believe it. Psy didn’t exist; Shakrukh Khan never sat in a tub full of rose petals. It’s just John Seabrook and his shitty “Factory Girls” a decade later. We were always at war with Eastasia.