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 In using personal and other unpublished conversational pieces, cuts from stage performances, as well as the usual use of lyrics, is a more useful approach to sourcework.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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good point in that last paragraph, Tom. I had never really considered the variation and differences between different styles of rhyming. It's something that you hear and intuitively enjoy, but when it's written out, you can actually see how the structure is set up. But still, it's all about hearing it at the end of the day. I could read some of those flows of songs I hadn't heard, and get a sense of it, but you can't really be sure of how fresh it is until you hear it. Definitely good stuff, looking forward to Monday!
ReplyDeleteTom,
ReplyDeleteI would also feel slightly uncomfortable submitting a professional paper that used the language we have explored through this weeks readings. But at the same time, I like how Alim alternated between the two dialects in his article. It helped to reiterate his points on owning one's own culture, rather than conforming to someone else's.
I found the fact that HHNL and BL are not included in academic writing to be a puzzling matter. It seems like it would be difficult to start integrating such language into academics or other literary genres, due to the fact that it may lose some of its audience. But at the same time, some may say, “Who cares?” and begin to incorporate HHNL and BL anyways. With increased exposure, perhaps in time, the academic field would accept broader terms of language.
ReplyDelete