Before I took this class, and probably only since last weeks class period, I would have been included in the crowd that Schloss categorizes in his introduction as finding b-boying “somewhere between parachute pants and Rubik’s cubes, a Reagan era fad.” Last weeks look at the bonus interviews in Style Wars helped change that perspective some, and Foundation was a nice addition. Here were some of the things I liked from the first part of the book, I’ll finish the rest before class tomorrow.

First, like “Roc the Mic Right” for a few weeks ago, I love the ethnographic approach. Using personal interviews from those who are involved and creating the culture is the best approach I have seen in the works we have read. It gives a since of authenticity that is slightly removed from a simple academic analysis of lyrics or otherwise.

Second, I love Schloss’s overarching theme that hip hop did not just “happen.” Rather he points to specific choices and innovations within the culture that shaped hip hop. One example I particularly like was the connection between deejay and b-boy. “The breaks” being highlighted and used to get the b-boys interested, and the two turn tables to highlight those breaks (p28).

Finally, though I didn’t quite get his argument until the end of the chapter, his focus on the personal relationships and the individual nature of the transfer of culture was interesting. I think we saw that with deejays a few weeks ago, and especially with graffiti last week. I think that also ties into what we have said about call and response, and beyond that fits in with Schloss’s point about the organic and purposeful creation of hip hop I mentioned previously.

Visual Art in Hip Hop

I was admittedly not overly excited about this weeks readings. If you remember my blog a few weeks back I tried to take the position that graffiti owed its place to in the hip hop nation to its influence in the early period, rather than any overwhelming connection. This is not to say I don’t think graffiti is interesting, or that it was not tied to the hip hop movement in general. Its tie just hasn’t been argued in a compelling way in the modern period. However, I feel I boxed myself in a bit.

I did enjoy a number of things from this weeks readings. First, when I was in D.C. for a summer internship in 2008, my office was two blocks from the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery. That gallery contained a collection at that point entitled “Recognize: Hip Hop and Contemporary Portraiture.” That collection contained works from Kehinde Wiley that were discussed in Dr. Schur’s piece. It is from this experience, and this argument that I can see a more compelling argument attaching visual art to the hip hop movement. However, arguments like the one made in “Shaping the New Language of Visual Culture” that see graffiti as hip hop’s Black Arts Movement (BAM), are less persuasive in my mind. Graffiti, at least in my own personal conception fits into hip hop because it is also composed of the same aesthetic elements like irony/parody, call and response, and sampling. Rather than an argument that simply says well when Kool DJ Herc and Flash were starting the deejay and party scene, Lee Quiones was writing on train cars, this perspective says that they are tied because they have similar qualities and background, and fit into a somewhat shared experience.

A few more thoughts just to throw out there.
- I really liked reading about the differing approaches to graffiti around the globe. I especially like the English approach to allowing graffiti to flourish, and the argument that graffiti writers are often the most assertive/healthy in most neighborhoods.
-Is graffiti, like we discussed last week in regards to language, a “limitless” art form?
- Really liked Bando’s quote from “Spraycan Art” p. 25, sums up my thoughts on Graffiti, “You don’t have to understand something for it to be beautiful.”

Here is a link to the National Portrait Gallery's exibition: Recognize.
http://www.npg.si.edu/exhibit/recognize/

Language in Hip Hop

This weeks readings were unlike anything I have ever read. While I have had the opportunity to engage in readings from a variey of disciplines in liberal arts/honors coursework, linguistic studies, analysis of poetry, not really my strong point or area of interest. But, it was good reading, because I'm moving even closer to a coherant understanding of why I like hip hop, which is nice. Heres some points I thought were interesting from the reading.

First, the idea of the limitlessness of HHNL and BL. While I don't see myself ever submitting a paper in graduate school, or even for this course using that language, the argument of the limit of discourse in restrictive rules of proper english, and by extention limiting expressivness, creativity, and personal ownership over language is pursuasive. But, in looking back at that last sentence, its evident I have trouble writing concise sentences, its eaiser for me, and John Locke, to write using lots of commas. So I guess my argument is that for hip hop music and other cultural productions, HHNL and BL is perfectly acceptable and understandable. Its easier to flow if you can say "forsheeze" and not have to say "yes, I concur." But some of the academics in the reading felt it neccesary to add in certain words from this vernacular, and place them in quotations. That was distracting.

Second, I love the approach to evidence in "Roc the Mic Right." In using personal and other unpublished conversational pieces, cuts from stage performances, as well as the usual use of lyrics, is a more useful approach to sourcework. I especially liked Kurupt's interviews that were related to tonal semantics.

Finally, a point I mentioned in the introduction, I know so much more than I ever thought I would about rhymes. Especially when it gets broken down to the styles of partucilar rappers. For instance, if someone asks me why I like BIG, I can always tell them that his blending of both internal and end rhymes extends his ablility to place emphasis (63, Book of Rymes).

Anyway, interesting read, hope to get my mind around some of the arguments a little better in class on Monday.

Inevitable

The readings this week covered a variety of topics related to the art of the Deejay. However, they all came back to some of our foundational questions around myths of origins, the role of certain influences, politics, and aesthetics. In preparation for the paper, I’ve decided to focus on some ideas concerning aesthetics and the myths of origin.

As a history major, we always discuss the importance of a balanced view of history, focusing ideas of continuity. With my love of jazz and blues I’ve always wanted to consider hip hop as a part of the broader scheme of African American Music. However, after reading Joseph Schloss and the Bartlett selection, some questions have been raised. We have talked about some of the strange origin myths that Dr. Schur has uncovered in his studies, Scotland, Kung-Fu, and others, but Bartlett’s contention’s seem to fall somewhere in between the two extremes. References to Ghanaian drumming circles, or the importance of the oral culture of religion in the slave south seem like some broad connections in my mind (395-397). I think one of the most profound points I have read in this class has been Schloss’s assertion that this type of study makes it seem as if Hip Hop was inevitable (26).

However, I think there can be a point of reconciliation, and it comes from the argument about the aesthetic element of sampling in hip hop. Not that sampling is anything revolutionary, many of the chord progressions in Pink Floyd’s “Dark Side of the Moon” album were stolen from the Miles Davis’s album “Kind of Blue.” When Kool Herc DJ talks about loving making people dance to The Monkeys or those music they though they hated, that’s sampling. But, in the broader sense of drawing off other cultures and influences, I think that sampling has to be considered a central element of hip hop. In my mind, you need to have Bambaataa, Kool Herc, and the influence of technology, you need the Bronx, and you need the availability of records to have any trajectory of Hip Hop, so in that sense it was a creation of that snapshot in time. I think the hunt for some sense of “this is where it started” looking at rag time, BAM, jazz could all be justified if the right research was conducted. Those arguments to me sound like someone saying “Isaac Newton is responsible for the first Model T” I mean yeah, he no doubt influenced it, but it took much more than the laws of motion to make a car, and it takes a lot more than Ghanaian drums to make hip hop. Once you accept the argument that sampling is part of the aesthetic foundation, I think this search for origins becomes misguided.

Hip Hop v. Rap Music

Sorry for the slightly late post tonight, I've been making my way back from Memphis today and it took me a bit to get back on track. That being said, it was a really interesting week of readings, and I had one point I wanted to focus on today.

In the selection from Dr. Schur’s book, the point is made, and it’s not a new one in our discussions, that "studies of 'hip-hop' focus almost exclusively on music and musicians (45)." The same point is also made by Murray Forman that "the term hip hop is often incorrectly applied only to the music, the most prominent and lucrative cultural facet (103)." Despite these arguments, when we read Perry's work, it seems that the focus is again nearly exclusively about the music itself.

As we have been working through some the literature and discussing hip hop history, we have touched on a few ideas about these other "elements." Though we have yet to have our units and discussions on graffiti or break that will come later in the course, I still am having trouble fitting these elements in. Is the b-boy anything like his counterpart 30 years ago? After a "war on graffiti," does graffiti still matter, at all as a foundational aspect of hip hop? At this point, and with an admittedly low understanding of these particular elements of hip hop. Dancing and writing on public walls seem remarkably unoriginal in many ways, weren't the Romans dancing and producing graffiti? It seems like we've been trying so hard to get a basic understanding of hip hop and hip hop studies, saying "there are four elements to hip hop, first.." and haven't really asked "why?" are these two elements so important. Is there some sort of path dependency that started with "Wild Style" that has prevented these elements from being downgraded from "elements" to "influences"?

Sex, Bill Cosby, and "Crude Crotch Politics"

First of all, I have to say that this was one of the most informative, and interesting reads I've been assigned while at Drury. The format Dyson choose to use, long interviews, was perfect for working through difficult concepts and arguments. Dyson could have made this a strictly academic work with extensive citations and still made his point, especially for someone trying to give hip hop studies a place in serious academic debate. He chose to make it accessible, and for that I thank him.
Here were some of my favorite points he makes:

Dyson makes the argument, I think successfully, that you can't simply pin the "femiphobia" that exists in hip hop as unique or original to the male emcee, though he is accountable. These artist are "keyed in" to a patriarchal structure that exists in most sectors of American society, the board room, the congress, and in sport. In this way, rap is considered more a projection of society, rather than playing as much of a role in the construction of social structures. (p.22)

Another point I found interesting was Dyson's claim that "I'll take Jay-Z over a Bill Cosby" (p.58). While I'll agree that Cosby has more recently been a "bitter curmudgeon," and he does represent the conservative older generation that Dyson sees as part of the cause of a confused and undereducated younger generation, I have to say Cosby has never seemed to lack "courage" to me. And Jay-Z is no Che Guevara. It seems like this dialog, though thought provoking, tended to point out the conflicting points and not to the potential for compromise and understanding that I think the rest of his work sought to express.

Finally, I love the expression "Crude Crotch Politics" because in many ways, as Dyson points out, that is the nature of the status quo that is in no way unique or new. Dyson calls it a "retrograde" (111). This critique, as the first point I discussed about the societal influence of attitudes about sex, tries to distinguish that what hip hop focuses on is not organic to itself, but often simple societal commentary. This is a compelling point, and it makes it easy to let the modern emcee off the hook for his words. But, as the persistence of "Crude Crotch Politics" demonstrates, what role has Hip Hop culture played in reinforcing an outdated, and violent social structure? And, though it may be commentary, and all based on "real" and "authentic" experiences, the continued expansion and consumption of these attitudes that establish "Crude Crotch Politics" will continue to reinforce the status quo. So though I think Dyson is incredibly on point, but does this perspective allow us to let these guys off the hook?

Hope you all enjoyed the read as much as I did, look forward to discussion tomorrow.

As a student of politics, this weeks readings really grabbed my attention to two central debates that we have scratched the surface of during previous discussions, but are still working on grasping. First, what is the relationship between the Civil Rights movement and the emergence of the Hip Hop Nation? Second, an obviously related question, how has hip hop served as a tool for political action and expression, and is that a facet of hip hop that is in decline?

The relationship between hip hop and the civil rights movement has been approached by many of the authors we have read, and I will not even attempt to venture a theory. Here are some things I have noticed however. First, Mark Anthony Neal asserted in “Postindustrial Soul” that, the “Black Public Sphere of the postindustrial city represented a de facto state of racial segregation that was, arguably, much more insidious than segregated black spaces prior to the Civil Rights movement (366).” If this is indeed true, does that give legitimacy to the emergence of a distinct style of response that focused on expressions of nationalism and hatred towards the establishment? A response to an establishment that included not just police, but members of the black establishment that had failed to deliver on the goals they sought. I don’t know if I could defend that argument fully, but I do think Ice Cube has a right to ask people to do a little introspection.

The question of the politics of hip hop seems to require a greatly nuanced answer to me at this point. I listen to artists that are often cited in the readings as being the promoters of a socially conscious hip hop, so my gut reaction to this question would be that political messages are central. Social activism seems to be alive and well in hip hop, just ask Wyclef and the “We are the World” second generation. I loved Henry Louis Gates (see Beer Summit) appearance in the reading “Rap, Race and Politics” where he pointed to the importance of “signifying” in rap. I think he has a point, but a Harvard professor and students who read about hip hop may see that connection; but, I can see how it gets lost to the consuming audience of hip hop.

I had a favorite quote of the week from the reading, I’ll leave the post with that and some links I wandered to while thinking about these readings.

“In the end, Hip Hop is neither the cultural beast that will destroy black America nor the political panacea that will save it, but it is part of the ongoing African-American struggle constantly reaching for higher and higher modes of liberation” –Clarance Lusane, “Rap, Race, and Politics” (361)

Beer Summit

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/magazine/14fob-q4-t.html

We Are the World 25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glny4jSciVI

Music from the Civil Rights movement, Live at the White House

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZhWttIll_8

Religion in the Hip Hop Nation

As expected, I enjoyed the second half of Toure’s Never Drank the Kool-Aid as much as the selections from the first half of the book. They cover so many ideas and topics, and probably my favorite hip hop personality Ahmir Thompson (?uestlove). Who I have had the opportunity to see play with The Roots many times, but also with his jazz ensemble The Philadelphia Experiment, and as part of Bonnaroo’s super jam with artists John Paul Jones of Led Zeppelin on bass and Ben Harper on the guitar. He had some amazing lines and thoughts that I feel we will have to get to in discussion. But as much as I wanted to write on his piece, I was drawn to a different topic.

Over break I have the opportunity to do leisure reading, something that often gets missed when studying political science and history. One of my short reads was The RZA’s(Wu Tang Clan) recent book The Tao of Wu. In the book he merges auto-biography with his own approach to philosophy and religion that factors in Christianity, the Qur’an, various sects of the Nation of Islam like the five percenters and divine mathematics, as well as Taoist philosophy. Additionally, one of my other honors courses at Drury was African American Religion in the United States, so this is a topic of some interest to me.

The early days of hip hop and the orgin “myths” that we have been discussing feature Bambaataa and the Zulu nation. Pictures of Malcolm X and other Black Nationalist leaders who also had ties to the Nation of Islam all were featured in the videos of Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power.” These religious influences seem to play a roll in the development of hip hop, but to what degree? And, was there a reason that De La Soul, Tribe, KRS-ONE, Rakim, and some of the other most influential figures in hip hop all found themselves attached to these influences.

So how does this fit into this week’s reading? Well Toure’s work encounters religion in a number of interviews. The pieces on Lauryn Hill touch on her relationship with “Brother Anthony” as well as in her relationship with Rohan Marley. But, is it perhaps more revealing that religion does not factor into the discussions that Toure’ has with many of the modern leaders of hip hop? Well, with the exception of Kanye who’s worried about dawning a piece of bling that looks too much like a white Jesus. Were the founding fathers of hip hop and the artist of the “golden age” creating more intellectual and impactful work because of their religious mindset? From these modern artists, it seems that if there is a religious undertone it is usually expressly Christian and not of the variety of the Black Nationalism that marked some earlier artists. I may be over generalizing here, but has hip-hop moved from a movement tied to religion to a nihilist art form?

I hope this was intellectually stimulating, however off topic it may be. Thanks in advance for your comments.

Week Three

I have made an attempt in my last few posts to try to have one overarching theme, maybe a title that reflects that focus, but both my mind currently, and the readings have me a little fragmented. So I’m taking the week off from that and just make some general points, and some questions that I found compelling this week. Disclaimer, I have also not had an opportunity to read the PDF on Eminem yet, and will get to that before comments on other posts.

1. Authenticity was another key theme this week. I feel bad returning to this point, because Matt has already touched on some of this due to his early post, and my post last week dealt with the issue from a personal perspective. However, when we here Griffey talking about being in the “songs business,” Simmons playing the role of the “Dumb N****” to make his way in the business world, Powell and Obama being promising candidates only to the level that they can leave the public “undermoved,” not to mention the many examples of public v. private personas of mainstream rappers, we must confront the fact that much of the “hip hop nation” is constructed artificially from guys who use to be from the streets to an audience that has no perspective on the realities of what they listen to.

2. If we believe that hip hop has been constructed in many ways by artificial influences, what does it say about a culture that wants to purchase this commodity? Proper use of English, respect for women, the importance of political action, these all are topics covered by industry leaders that are featured in Toure’s work. Why are these ideals often replaced by their opposites when these leaders hit the studio? There is actually an argument that 50 cent has seen significant benefits from an incident that could have ended his, and his closest friends, lives. Authenticity, or at least the appearance of authenticity, seems to be a crucial factor in the “songs business.”

I also wanted to throw out some links and cool things I’ve found on the interwebs this week that relate to our class.

For any sports fans out there:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jackson/100126

Here is our apparently “undermovin[ing]” President Barack Obama speaking on hip hop:

I’ll throw this out for reflection purposes, he says: “Hip hop is not just a mirror of what is… it should also be a reflection of what can be.” Is hip hop either?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFSVG7jRp_g

Introspection (Explicit)

The readings for class this week were as interesting as they were diverse. They tell us much about the seventies, and the foundational years of hip hop. They question and explore the dynamic of the influence of greed and monetarism, and reach significant questions about race. But, one reading was potentially shattering for hip hop fans like me.

I’ve been reading the PDF articles throughout the week, and had an opportunity to get through the material from That’s the Joint! just this morning. The order of reading shouldn’t really matter, but as I finished reading the final article “The Rap on Rap: The ‘Black Music’ that Isn’t Either” it occurred to me that I had just been indicted. Samuel’s, I believe, is making the point that I am nothing more than a tourist. My experience with hip hop is akin to “‘buying Navajo blankets at a reservation road stop.” But it gets worse, in my recognition of hip hop, I am a complicit in spreading and reaffirming “racist stereotypes, [and] brutality towards women.” I don’t know if I was ready for this kind of introspection. I have personally been guilty of putting “Fuck the Police” on at a college party with overwhelming Caucasian dominated audience. I sing along to the most obscene of songs on “XL Backspin” radio on XM. If we take Samuel’s point to the most literal extension, we have some significant issues to confront.

So what kind of defense can I make against Samuel’s argument (well the part of his general argument that was the most damaging to me, there is more too it). Do I point to my liberal arts coursework, and the justification that at least I know its offensive material? Do I point to my favorite hip hop artists and demonstrate that A Tribe Called Quest and The Roots are much different than Easy-E and Immortal Technique? I have a Miles Davis T-Shirt, a guy who likes jazz has a right to access hip hop, right?

I'm obviously jesting about some of this, but it is one dynamic that a Drury classroom needs to have some conception of before diving into a semester of hip hop studies. I’ll leave the argument for comments and discussions in class, but this would be my main point, but Light makes it so much better, so I’ll let him.

“[R]ap is unarguably the most culturally significant style in pop, the genre that speaks most directly to and for its audience, full of complications, contradictions, and confusions. But what gets lost in this discussion, tragically, is that rap is also the single most creative, revolutionary approach to music and to music making that this generation has constructed.” Alan Light, “About Salary or Reality?” p. 138 in That’s the Joint!

The Roots

Welcome to Blogs, Rhymes and Life. This is my first blog post I have made ever, and I wonder with the creation of such a medium if I will look back at this posting with any significance. Viewing the event in the way I remember my first bike ride, my first cell phone, the first time I voted in an election, or my introduction to Facebook. But any discussion of "firsts" can be quite revealing about the present. This week’s readings deal with a number of firsts.

I discovered hip-hop by accident, and with the exception of knowing significant tracks and artists from what I have always called "old school" rap, I have very little concept of how it all began. I was attending a concert of the group 311, who I saw at every opportunity when I was in high school. The opening act, which I knew little about, was The Roots, who had a hit single called "The Seed" at the time. Why would I be interested in a "rap" group? I wanted to see drums, guitar, and a nice slapping bass line. To my surprise, that is what they provided, and I was blown away by the performance. Years later I travel to see The Roots, and I missed the last 311 show in Springfield. That was the power of my first hip hop experience.

But the readings describe a much different beginning for hip hop culture than I have ever experienced. The readings from Yes Yes Y’all and the article "Hip Hop’s Founding Fathers Speak the Truth" all describe the beginnings of the scene in almost a desperate sense. Violence, drugs, a radio and club scene that many people could not identify with all led people to begin experimenting with music, art, religion and dance that could be expressive and uniquely original to their experience. Afrika Bambaataa’s recollections in the readings describe this. He started with graffiti, experimented with sound systems, founded the Zulu nation, but his actions proved to have impacts beyond his own development. As Richard Sisco says on p. 53 of Yes Yes Y’all, “Bam gave them good direction and gave them some self respect.” When I think of the song “Apache” my inclination is to think bell-bottoms and a disco era hip hop scene. But the reality seems to be Afrika Bambaataa choosing to bring his message and art form to places like the Bronx River Center, known for its gang violence, to the relief of people like D. J. Breakout and Bom5 who needed the outlet.

So now I am more aware of the history of the D.J., the scratch, graffiti, b-boying, the sound system, and the early days of hip-hop culture. The question still must be asked, what’s the point? How does this qualify for academic study? Michael Eric Dyson answers this in the prelude of Know What I Mean? To oversimplify his argument, and perhaps avoid the academic debate, it’s simply an undeniably “powerful art form,” that has grabbed global attention. My experience with hip hop is a testament to that appeal. There are undoubtedly scholars at top universities whose research and scholarship is on Oscar Wilde or Voltaire. But I submit that The Picture of Dorian Gray or Candide will have less an impact on future generations than NWA’s Straight Outta Compton or A Tribe Called Quest’s The Low End Theory.