Yet Another Hip Hop Is Bad Article: Worth Commenting On?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Street Theater
Gunfire kills another rapper. What an awful image for black America.

By John McWhorter
Wall Street Journal


There goes another one. Last week 21-year-old Savannah-based rapper Camoflauge was shot to death in front of his toddler son. Only two months before, New York rapper Freaky Tah was killed, at age 27, shot while leaving a party. Last fall pioneer rapper Jam Master Jay was murdered in his Queens, N.Y., studio at 37, leaving behind a wife and children.

Such carnage puts in a certain perspective the mantra that black America is so often taught: "Why can't whites see blacks as equals?" Many claim that a big problem is the depiction of blacks in the media, and there is a point here--but no longer the "whitey did it" point that many suppose. Today the biggest image problem for blacks comes from neither the movies nor television but from the rap industry. The most popular music in black America presents a grim, violent, misogynist, sybaritic black male archetype as an urgent symbol of authenticity.

Fans object that there is plenty of hip-hop with constructive messages. True, but it's the "thug" brand that sells best. How many hip-hop magazines would there be if the music delivered only positive messages? Camoflauge, despite his searingly profane, violent lyrics, was regularly invited to speak at Savannah high schools. In the hip-hop world, "keeping it real" is everything, and the gutter is considered the "realest."

And most hip-hop, whatever its "message," is delivered in a cocky, confrontational cadence. The "in your face" element is as essential to the genre as vibrato to opera, reinforced as rappers press their faces close to the camera lens in videos, throwing their arms about in poses suggesting imminent battle. The smug tone expresses a sense that hip-hop is sounding a wake-up call, from below, to a white America too benighted to listen. I can count on hearing about a "hip-hop revolution" from at least one questioner at every talk I give these days.

But unfocused cynicism is not a promising platform for a revolution. The Hip Hop Summit Action Network, for instance--founded by rap impresario Russell Simmons--has attempted to "bridge hip-hop and politics" and does deserve credit for its proposed voter registration drive. But then what does the organization want "the hip-hop generation" to vote for? Mostly the bromides that have disempowered blacks for decades.

Stuck in the idea that urban schools fail because of inadequate funding, the group corralled marchers to support the teachers' union opposed to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's education budget. It also stuck it to President Bush for invading Iraq and has protested advisory labels on rap CDs.

One has to wonder whether the Action Network will ever sponsor "summits" supporting the welfare reform now improving countless black women's lives or urging the Bush administration to give more money to faith-based initiatives. By focusing on the issues that lend themselves to street theater, the organization proposes a "revolution" committed more to the thrills of acting up than to the mundane work of helping people in need.

Of course "hip-hop intellectuals" would disagree, celebrating hip-hop as an expression of inner-city frustration. But frustration does not require music so willfully alienated and nihilistic: None existed during the centuries when all blacks endured injustice much more concrete. In any case, hip-hop elicits identification across classes, having become a kind of "musica franca" for black identity. One often sees well-heeled young black executives get into their new cars and turn on the same spiky rap that the inner-city black man listens to.

Hip-hop, in short, is not a message from the streets but a histrionic pose. Producers coach aspiring artists to glower for photos. "I'm valid when I'm disrespected," an aspiring black rapper told a reporter for the New York Times in 2000, in an article from its "How Race Is Lived in America" series. The piece ended with his recording a CD whose strident vulgarity and sexism chilled the article's writer. The rapper knew the truth--he was indulging in an act that sells, pure and simple.

In the grand view, hip-hop may be seen as a typical American phenomenon--one part the cowboys-and-Indians tradition of heroic conflict and one part the recent "Bobos in Paradise" syndrome of celebrating countercultural gestures as "real." "The Sopranos," in its violence and vulgarity, shares this mixed cultural parentage. But that TV show is not intended as a guide to living for all Italians. Hip-hop, by contrast, is linked to a particular racial identity. Yes, numerically it has more white listeners. But hip-hop's fans would be up in arms against anyone who claimed that the music was rooted in white culture rather than an African-American consciousness.

And what a dismaying symbol of identity for a race just past misery. Rappers slip acrid slams at their rivals into recordings, nurturing "battles" to sell CDs. It was such provocations that likely led to the deaths of Tupac Shakur and "Biggie" Smalls. And that brings us back to "rap and rap sheet," in the artful phrase of the music critic Kelefa Sanneh. Rapper 50 Cent was recently arrested for harboring assault weapons in his car. DJ Funkmaster Flex physically assaulted a female rival DJ in New York last fall. In 2000, a brawl at the Source Hiphop Awards shut the ceremony down--right after a video tribute to slain rappers!

"But white people act up too." Yes, but Garth Brooks does not bring a "piece" to the Grammys, and Martin Scorsese does not get into ugly scuffles on the street. There is a fine line between playing the bad boy and becoming one, and in the "hip-hop community" too often violence jumps out of the quotation marks and becomes a tragic reality.

But calls to combat hip-hop are useless for the moment. As Judith Rich Harris showed us in "The Nurture Assumption," children identify with their peers more than with their parents. Blacks under a certain age feel this music as their poetry, rattling off extended selections as readily as Russians recite Pushkin. It's not going away.

But this is a lowdown, dirty shame. I am just old enough to remember when whites were making the sourest, nastiest pop music while blacks were making the sweetest and truest. White kids listened to hideous screaming while funk and soul were black America's soundtrack. As a kid in the 1970s I was conscious of that contrast and proud of it. The civil-rights protesters a decade before, who made the lives of "the hip-hop generation" possible, would have been appalled to hear the likes of Jay-Z, and we would be hard-pressed to claim that they would have been somehow missing something in that judgment. They accomplished a lot more, too, than any rapper's sideline donations to community efforts ever will.

The staged alienation of the hip-hop scene shows black Americans celebrating attitude over action at best and violence over civility at worst. For 350 years white America told blacks they were beasts. Now a black-generated pop music presents us to whites and ourselves as beasts, while a cadre of black intellectuals celebrate this as "deep" and black impresarios glide by in their limos calling it a "revolution." Revulsion is more like it.

sb, Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:15 (twenty-two years ago)

(I'm not sure there's anything left to say)

sb, Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:17 (twenty-two years ago)

(that hasn't been said a million times already, i mean)

sb, Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:21 (twenty-two years ago)

And I always thought the WSJ was pro-hip-hop. The funny thing is that he's most upset about the "positive" hip hop being fairly liberal. Like, what did he expect? Gang Starr and the NRA getting together to throw a pro-WTO benefit concert? Like the old Onion article about Chinese rockers throwing a pro-oppression concert.

adam (adam), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I love when he suggests that hip hop fans lobby Bush to direct more funding towards faith-based initiatives.

s1utsky (slutsky), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:25 (twenty-two years ago)

'wall st. jrnl editorial page in wtf? non-shockah!'

James Blount (James Blount), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:27 (twenty-two years ago)

In addition to everything else mentioned, I love how he calls '70s whitefolks music "hideous screaming"! Yeah, damn that raucous Todd Rundgren!

Nate Patrin (Nate Patrin), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:28 (twenty-two years ago)

still somehow not as offensive/eyeroll-inducing as the rennie harris 'it'd be hard to write a history of hip-hop, because most of it's innovators are either locked up or were murdered on the streets' quote that gets rehashed without question too often (last week in the new yorker)

James Blount (James Blount), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:33 (twenty-two years ago)

And that brings us back to "rap and rap sheet," in the artful phrase of the music critic Kelefa Sanneh.

:-0

jess (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Rappers make good role models as entrepreneurs. The "you gotta get out there and make it happen" vibe is quite common. So long as you don't decide that means selling drugs and guns you're probably ok.

Other than that one trait, what are other positive threads in the popular vulgar rap McWhorter's talking about? Much of it does present a negative, destructive worldview. Is it worse because rappers portray "themselves" and suggest that their outrageous rap persona represents their real lives much more than most? There are no (or very few) hip hop covers for this reason.

Stuart (Stuart), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:53 (twenty-two years ago)

that's an interesting idea for the reason that there are few covers in rap, stuart, but i don't think it necessarily *is* the reason

mark s (mark s), Saturday, 31 May 2003 15:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Why don't they, then? Besides the "this is me talking, not just some fucking poem" thing, what's different about rap that discourages covers?

Stuart (Stuart), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:09 (twenty-two years ago)

the thing is there ARE hip-hop covers

James Blount (James Blount), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Beyonce - In Da Club

s1utsky (slutsky), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

this is my favorite part of joan acocella's rennie harris thing in the new yorker: "To my knowledge, "Rome & Jewels" was the first full-evening narrative dance produced by the hip-hop world.AND IT TOOK ON STATES OF MIND PREVIOUSLY REMOTE FROM HIP-HOP, NOTABLY LOVE AND GRIEF."

Um, the all-caps-italics-what-the-fuck-year-is-this-dismay is mine.

scott seward, Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:25 (twenty-two years ago)

the most obvious reason is that rap is built up in a different way: its umbilical cord is to fragments of other records and vocal performance cutting contests, NOT to learning music via other people's songs

vocal performance cutting contests => a very strong ethos of "this is MINE so copping it is lame" (but that's not the same as what yr arguing, which is "this is ME so copping it is bogus")

to be honest, though, i don't think the ethos thing is the reason, bcz rock is totally suffused by "this is MINE" *AND* "this is ME", yet covers — while nothing like so acceptable as they are in pop or R&B or soul or jazz — are pretty common, as a specific way of addressing what rock is and what it should be

which is why i tend to think it's more a matter of material procedure than ethos

(also interesting: the question of the money, and who you'd want to be beholden to)

mark s (mark s), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Lines from the article that seriously fuck with me.

1)...rappers press their faces close to the camera lens in videos, throwing their arms about in poses suggesting imminent battle.

2)One often sees well-heeled young black executives get into their new cars and turn on the same spiky rap that the inner-city black man listens to. [the guy does know that white people of different economic standings listen to rap too, right? right?]

3), but Garth Brooks does not bring a "piece" to the Grammys, and Martin Scorsese does not get into ugly scuffles on the street. [but Tim McGraw steals cops' horses and fuck knows Brett Ratner would LOVE to get into an ugly scuffle on the street!]

4)Blacks under a certain age feel this music as their poetry, rattling off extended selections as readily as Russians recite Pushkin. [I'm dying to know under what age blacks do this, and over what age Russians rattle off extended selections of Pushkin]

5)I am just old enough to remember when whites were making the sourest, nastiest pop music while blacks were making the sweetest and truest.

Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:38 (twenty-two years ago)

a thread on way there aren't very many Free Jazz Covers

mark s (mark s), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:54 (twenty-two years ago)

(way = why)

mark s (mark s), Saturday, 31 May 2003 16:54 (twenty-two years ago)

But frustration does not
require music so willfully alienated and nihilistic: None existed during the centuries when all blacks endured injustice much more concrete

This sentence is so mind-bogglingly fucked-up i wouldn't even know where to begin. Honestly, i could dissect and smash every sentence in that article. but like the thread-title asks: is it worth it? a letter to the editor, perhaps? would it matter? i dunno.

scott seward, Saturday, 31 May 2003 17:50 (twenty-two years ago)

A piece I wrote somewhat regarding rap covers, though I didn't have the sleeve art with me at the time and consequently spent the whole article referring to the album as From the Chuuuch to tha Palace when in fact the album is Paid Tha Cost To Be Da Bo$$.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Saturday, 31 May 2003 17:53 (twenty-two years ago)

actually mark I think that there's far less "technical" to the matter in that most rappers say they learned their craft by rapping along with albums & the radio & ppl. bust one another's verses all the time in the small time. haha hell Sugarhill stole mostof their stuff fro the the real deal so the story goes.

what's difft. I think is the sense of relevence and pertinence of embedded history, and most importantly the sense of progress & takin' it to the next level which both the chart and undie stuff play in their own way while both making nods to and claiming the legacy of the old stuff. like i can't think of a way to sonically update old-school etc. without destroying it utterly while the primitives cover of "as tears go by" or the ramones of "needles and pins" (to pick two of my favorites with a big time-gap between song and cover) can accomplish radical transformation while leaving the key elements intact -- wheras any sort of real transformation of a song like "paid in full" (i.e. difft sample, tempo &c) would render it totally difft. Furthermore you have covers bands to etc.etc. but when you want a hip-hop party you just can the band and hire a DJ -- there's something cornier than corny about a hip-hop covers band.

Hence we have the remix to fill that technical role & also the re-sample both of which are used *all the time* (not to mention borrowed lines, verses, reworked choruses) so maybe we might say that the coversong as unit has been decomposed into a more frequent shifting and subtle dialogism.

Which I guess is what you were saying all along, except that the ethos is composed of these technical bits in a way -- and particularly whatever the causality there rilly *is* a stronger association between the performer and lyrics than in rock. Like dudes in the folk revival and whatever can sing murder ballads for fucking YEARS and nobody's like "oh look at these wife-murdering monsters" but Eminem does what's basically just a fucking update and everyone's like "look at this evil evil man" and basically can't get their heads around how a rapper might inhabit a character for aesthetic purposes.

And then we get dudes like the one who wrote the WSJ article who insist "no *all rappers are in character*" like there's something fucking wrong with that. rappers play hard, you play asshole, we all play something. i.e. even more galling than a black man who simply embodies a negative stereotype is one who can somewhat distance himself from it. even more threatening maybe because in its own way it *busts* those stereotypes.

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 1 June 2003 00:59 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.