Content Warning: Blackface, explicit language and images
Die Antwoord is a South African rap-rave group that has garnered fame for their provocative, aggressive style and unique vocal sound. In 2012, their music video “Fatty Boom Boom” inspired controversy because of their use of blackface bodypaint and shocking content. The reception of the video, and of the group in general, has been bitterly divided.
This article by Aisha Harris directly condemns Die Antwoord’s use of blackface in their music video and raises other concerns about their video. Since blackface minstrelsy is a cultural vestige of slavery in both America and South Africa, this video’s flippant use of blackface imagery is totally unjustified. On the other hand, Harris also mentions that minstrelsy has become a cultural symbol of progress for black people in South Africa after Apartheid. Annually there is a giant festival called “Tweede nuwe jaar” where a multitude of minstrel troupes celebrate together in a colorful display of costumes, body paint, and music.
An article on South African History Online says that: “as one of the longest surviving traditions it has become very evident that the minstrel festival is an important aspect of South Africa’s history and cultural heritage… It is therefore important to maintain the tradition, which has become so deeply entrenched within the popular culture of Cape Town.”
This almost seems like a cogent argument as to why it’s normal that Yo-landi Vi$$er donned a full-body outfit of black paint, until we remember that a group of black South Africans wearing pink and purple, etc, from head to toe and celebrating overcoming slavery and Apartheid is a lot different than a white person dressing in blackface in a music video.
What you-tuber Mayfinder might not realize is that “African” is not homogeneous. In contrast, Adam Haupt argues that Die Antwoord is doing nothing short of culturally appropriating black South African culture. In this article he says: “It is ironic that Jones, the crew’s founding member, is neither coloured nor white Afrikaans working class; rather, he is a well-resourced white, English-speaking South African.” To clarify, the Afrikaans language is associated with poor, uneducated people, while English is the more official and elite language in South Africa. So, we can conclude that their performing persona is not genuine and it is built off an existing culture that they will never be part of.
Okay, now that you’re primed on the racially exploitive elements of the video, let’s take a look and see what you think! Are these artists just being sensationalist and intentionally treading on open wounds? or is there a compelling artistic vision or critique that makes these images powerful and meaningful?
The first minute of the video actually strikes me as a commentary against the mainstream stereotypes and voyeuristic attitudes towards Africa. The tour guide’s monologue and the inclusion of docile safari animals presents an absurd image of an unrealistic place, which is perhaps part of their attack against Lady Gaga, who also embraces sensationalism.
The next three minutes is a fast-paced visual spectacle that enhances the intensity of the music with its quick camera cuts that change the size of the frame and its high energy dance moves. These scenes also rapidly move between color blocks – basically alternating between high contrast bright colors and white body paint to the “voo-doo room” (as they call it in an interview) that is all black and features semi-reflective costumes made of human hair.
Their diss of Gaga in this video – both with the prawn in her vagina and her tragic encounter with the king of the concrete jungle – seems to be a major media-grab. And it bolsters their position as “radically unique” and as a more niche and interesting music than most pop, which they continually drag through the mud in the lyrics of this song.
This video shows a different side of the creative process and explains how they got to the finished product.
While this video succeeds in making the members of Die Antwoord seem more human, engaged, and less sensationalist, I am still skeptical about whether or not this is a continued marketing ploy. Elements of satire in their videos make me question to what extent they are playing an artificial persona or wether their goal is just to embrace the child-like absurdity and freedom that their irregular dancing and graffiti suggests. Whatever cultural impact Die Antwoord’s complicated, racialized, sensational music videos have on the US and South Africa, they’re a hit and here to stay. 






















