is the prevalence of knee-jerk liberalism toward jamaican (especially dancehall) homophobia almost as problematic as the homophobia itself?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
now i'm not asking this to be provocative, i'm asking because it's an important question and i'd quite like to tease out some kind of answer. anyone who knows me or knows my writing in any way knows that i am not pro any kind of prejudice but the way this is being jumped on now is striking me as, at the very best, extraordinarily counter-productive.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 10:40 (twenty years ago)

Dancehall has become enormously succesfull recently on both sides of the Atlantic. It seems that homophobic views have been a part of the make up of the genre's lyrical lexicon for a very long time, it is only when the music leaves the dancehall underground and enters the mainstream that it becomes an issue. It seemed no one was dicussing 'Boom Bye Bye' all that much before Sean Paul crash landed into our lives.

lukey (Lukey G), Monday, 19 July 2004 10:47 (twenty years ago)

I know what you mean. And just because a dancehall rhymer might be saying homophobic things themselves, doesn't necessarily mean that you endorse those sentiments yourself.

Neil Stewart, Monday, 19 July 2004 10:49 (twenty years ago)

Dave, what would be a productive way to handle the situation? I'm not being facetious here, I sort of agree with what you're saying in a way, but what're the other options?

lukey it might not be a coincidence that Sean Paul is one of the least homophobic DJs around tho, the killing of the chi-chi man still ain't exactly showing up in international summer jam hits.

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 19 July 2004 10:53 (twenty years ago)

that's what i'm thinking. worth considering that the success of sean paul/wayne wonder hasn't exactly made banton, beenie man etc household names, that they got successful precisely because they are not confrontational, homophobic artists and even prefudiced singers like beenie man only ever cross over to uk/us pop success when they ditch these views. plus do things like beenie man's london gigs being cancelled, people like peter tatchell picketing the mobos only provide homophobic artists with
1) notoriety, which is a good thing as far as the cult of personality many dancehall deejays clutivate goes
2) justification of their views (ie that this group of people is a genuine threat to them)
3) plenty of ammunition to say that the liberal white west doesn't know what it's on about...

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 10:54 (twenty years ago)

It seemed no one was dicussing 'Boom Bye Bye' all that much before Sean Paul crash landed into our lives.

i remember it causing quite a stir at the time - reportage on The Word etc., culminating in that Mark Lamarr/Shabba Ranks face-off.

i am inclined to think YES, it is ALMOST as problematic (not ALMOST) - see also hip-hop/gangsta/thug chic and subsequent homophobia cat-calling.

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 10:56 (twenty years ago)

agree with the thrust of your point, Dave. I think it might be a temporary problem. Just something us liberals have to work through same as we had to when (as I think I said on another thread) we were wetting our pants over Chuck D and the Bomb Squad while worrying over Professor Griff and songs like "Meet the G That Killed Me"

zebedee (zebedee), Monday, 19 July 2004 11:04 (twenty years ago)

On one hand I'm quite happy that commercial pressures are forcing Dancehall artists to tone down the homophobia, because, well, homophobia sux0r, and I'm quite happy to "opress" whoever's defending those viewpoints...but on another level, it's quite true that this might actually be making homohpbia *gain* hold in the Dancehall community, especially because of the justification of their views thing Dave alludes to.

What about the voices in the community? Does Cecile get any respect? I can't even think of a female Hip-Hop artist that has endorsed homosexuality, so that girl must have some guts...

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 19 July 2004 11:05 (twenty years ago)

it's all very nice and postmodern to say you're going to play the music anyway cos it's got such a great beat and it goes down well at parties and feels a little bit dangerous but it's just a stance like any other and no one who's listening to it would think those thoughts so isn't it really quite pleasantly ironic....

But, surely you've got to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

But then, what do you do about all the other music which you like whose proceeds go directly or indirectly to nasty people? I'd have to get rid of half my record collection. You get to the point where you're saying something stupid like 'well if they explicitly say that they'd like to kill gay people then we won't buy the records, but if the money goes to someone in the states who funds christian fundamentalist pressure groups, well then there's nothing we can do'

it's all a bit like trying not to eat anything made by nestle. very worthy and correct, but you always trip up eventually.

Jay G (jaybob79), Monday, 19 July 2004 11:08 (twenty years ago)

I think that just forgetting about the homophobic element alltogether is the worst thing that could be done, for what it's worth. Misguided liberal knee-jerk disapproval still beats "just ignore the hatred and listen to the BEATS!" in my book...the problem is possibly that most white, liberal critics (and I include myself here) don't have enough of a grasp of the exact *origins* of homophobia in this specific context to provide anything more productive than self-righteous outrage. Mind you, all social factors aside, there's really no other way to respond to some of the stuff that's being spewed out, but I realise that this isn't a very helpful position.

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 19 July 2004 11:22 (twenty years ago)

hmm, it's not a matter of political correctness, really, it's more about this increased coverage of this problem as being incredibly hamfisted and likely to make matters worse than they already are, possibly even compounding existing prejudice.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:17 (twenty years ago)

Misguided liberal knee-jerk disapproval still beats "just ignore the hatred and listen to the BEATS!" in my book

sadly, that's my point: it doesn't. self-righteous outrage from someone who doesn't have a clue will always come across as exactly that, not to mention really condescending. (not having a go personally, but i really don't agree)

ce'cile is pretty popular but that's because she's a woman and there is a dearth of good female deejays. it was always going to bve a woman who eventually made some mention of homophobia, never a man. also the fact that ce'cile is from a wealthy family, very, very smart and not dependent on dancehall makes it a lot easier for her to take these risks.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:24 (twenty years ago)

also the lamarr/shabba thing was horrible. i sort of agreed with the basics of what lamarr was saying, but it was just that - a VERY basic argument and a classic case of someone mouthing off without knowing enough to really get anything interesting out of the confrontation. the fact that he's such a slimy tosser certainly doesn't help.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:26 (twenty years ago)

are you talking about Shabba or Mark? ;)

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:28 (twenty years ago)

lamarr, obviously.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:29 (twenty years ago)

the danger can be that all the criticized behaviour comes from a poor country, and all the criticizing comes from a rich country, with all the paternalism inherent in that. like when african countries were being criticized for not having ozone friendly fridges or whatever.

T 916 lido, se10, *** 3/30 (home is where the heartcore is) (gareth), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:40 (twenty years ago)

sadly, that's my point: it doesn't. self-righteous outrage from someone who doesn't have a clue will always come across as exactly that, not to mention really condescending. (not having a go personally, but i really don't agree)

I agree that self-righteous outrage isn't the way to go, sure; but whenever discussions about social/moral issues in music come up, there's always gonna be a contigent of people who go "hey, sure, I don't agree with the viewpoint, but the music's nice, and I'm not gonna turn into a despicable human being by listening to it, so why worry?". I find this position even more destructive than self-righteous fervour, which isn't to say that I find self-righteousness *acceptable*. I'm just saying that not adressing the issue at all is even *less* likely to change anything than adressing it in a stupid way.

Does Cecile (and Sean Paul too, right?) coming from wealthy families establish any class tension, tho? I mean, if they view homosexuality as part of the opression, can being approving or indifferent to it be seen as a "sell-out" of sorts, a passage to the other side?

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:53 (twenty years ago)

so Dave, what would be a better way of responding to the homophobia? I'm not sure that all the 'knee-jerk liberal' responses cited here are part of the same thing at all - Tatchell's actions, which always seemed pretty brave to me, are a world away from Lamarr's condescension (though it's not as if Shabba came across any less ignorant). Criticising homophobia != self-righteousness. It'd definitely help to be better informed about the situation but regardless, the homophobia itself remains the worse problem. Self-righteous outrage doesn't actually kill anyone for one thing.

The Lex (The Lex), Monday, 19 July 2004 12:56 (twenty years ago)

there is quite a big schism between uptown and downtown now, (especially as a lot of the artists gaining recognition are uptowners or out-of-towners in ce'cile's case), as to who shouild be repping dancehall now. then again, it's telling that one of the biggest battyboy-bashing hits of recent years was by TOK, who are all actually very well-educated and quite posh.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:00 (twenty years ago)

I really don't think we disagree all that much tho, Dave, unless your position is that we shouldn't criticise at al; as stated previously, I agree that the current way of going about it is very flawed.

Question fer lido: the example you mentioned has to do mainly w/ material wealth tho, doesn't it? While homophobia is diferent, it's not something material, you can't really go "hey, not hating gays is just too expensive, I can't afford that". So the question becomes, can intelectual poverty only be fought by destroying material poverty? On some level I'd agree with that, but I've always thought that it's a battle to be fought on both fronts.

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:00 (twenty years ago)

oh, come on lex, tatchell is a liability to any cause he associates himself with. he is foolhardy and blinkered, not brave.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:02 (twenty years ago)

gareth's point valid but bigotry can't really be excused on account of poverty or some kind of ignorance, not that he is doing that of course

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:04 (twenty years ago)

i dont have an answer,

its just that, even the excusing is the same. isn't there something disquieting about the populations of a rich country criticizing/excusing the behaviour of people in a 3rd world country, while living in a system that directly benefits from this inequality in the first place. ie, why should anyone listen to questions of right and wrong, from such a source?

T 916 lido, se10, *** 3/30 (home is where the heartcore is) (gareth), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:08 (twenty years ago)

i don't know what the answers are and i'm not jamaican, nor do i live in jamaica, nor, for that matter am i gay, so my views on what to do are limited, but i don't think gary younge in the guardian and peter tatchell are going to help. it's much more likely to come slowly and people like ce'cile are a LOT more important in this respect. (also my own writing probably does next to nothing in terms of impact, nor should it) also i'm not saying don't question it. i do it all the time, in person with the people who make this music, actually for real.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:12 (twenty years ago)

Because the critics also criticise that exploitation? perhaps it suffers from it as well - in that a bigotry trend from another culture ends up aligning with a prevalent/inherent one via prolonged immigration wave. the 'size' of Caribbean culture in the UK (at least London) magnifies the issue I suspect.

x-post

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:14 (twenty years ago)

what 'problems' are caused by this liberalism, 'cept for dave's increasing heart-rate?

Enrique (Enrique), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:27 (twenty years ago)

okay i should have known not to have this issue taken i n any way seriously, but for a second, if you read upthread there are at least three major points, possibly more.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:34 (twenty years ago)

I think I'm with Dave to an extent - the change has to come from within. On the other hand, why shouldn't I call out bigotry when I see it any less than I call out third world exploitation? Should the West turn a blind eye to every nasty African dictator because of issues with postcolonialism and hugely unequal trade systems?

But I think the "paternalistic" side of the argument, or indeed any questions of perception in Jamaica, are a bit of a red herring. Who in Jamaica is going to care what Peter Tatchell or Gary Younge said in London, or even notice that anything has been said? The point is they are speaking to an audience HERE, and that audience is probably more impressionable - whether that impression will be made by Guardian journalists is a moot point, but at least it kickstarts a debate.

Is this the left-liberal equivalent of the Sun or the Mail attacking the government for allowing radical Islamic clerics to speak in London?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:35 (twenty years ago)

Also, incredibly unlikely hypothetical situation here - Sean Paul comes out of the closet tomorrow. What is the global reaction?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:37 (twenty years ago)

I understand the idea it's 'none of our business' - but people have a very hard time following that rule (see Iraq and pretty much all the other problems in the world). Difference between active meddling and armchair righteousness tho naturally.

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:39 (twenty years ago)

he's never work in dancehall again.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:43 (twenty years ago)

that was "he'd" and obv in reference to the sean paul question

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 13:44 (twenty years ago)

It's totally absurd to say 'it's none of "our" business' -- the music is here, not just in Jamaica.
Is this the left-liberal equivalent of the Sun or the Mail attacking the government for allowing radical Islamic clerics to speak in London?
Yes, it is like that, but leftists ought to have a problem with radical Islamic clerics too! I was taking your point seriously Dave -- who is affected by liberals calling out homophobia? no-one is getting beaten up or killed, after all. oh no, hang on... (it's so fucking easy to say homophobic lyrics don't 'cause' violence of course, as long as you're okay with other unpleasantness in your lyrics -- anti-semitism, racism, sexism)

Enrique (Enrique), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:04 (twenty years ago)

maybe we should just drop peter tatchell off in one of the garrison towns for a few days, leave him to it and go back when the world has been changed, then.

(of course, this is a facetious comment, but it might well actually highlight the point i'm making - THAT THIS KIND OF PRESSURE DOES NOT WORK!) it's different here, because many people, even at the lowest socio-economic levels actually have the luxury of time to think and sort out these problems, prejudice is always stronger in impoverished areas and jamaica is well ripe for it as i have mentioned so many times before. that's hy i predominantly agree with gareth. at the moment, though, it seems like newspaper coverage of jamaica is so formulaic and ill-considered as to be next to useless.
Jamicans -> homophobes -> must be stopped.
of course we all KNOW this is a bad thing, but i doesn't help anyone. it's just a bit dumb and offers nothing constructive.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:16 (twenty years ago)

Well speaking as a black, gay resident of downtown Kingston... no, just kidding.

Pete Scholtes, Monday, 19 July 2004 14:23 (twenty years ago)

the knee-jerk libealism is about homophobia in dancehall in the UK rather than in Jamaica; the Guardian doesn't much care how bad things are over there; what is *does* care about is the increasing okay-ness of using hate-speech. so making excuses about conditions in Jamaica is, in this argument, immaterial (obv it isn't immaterial in the grander scheme of things...) -- there isn't any excuse here; or, if you're going to say there is, you also have to okay BNP-voters in Burnley on the grounds that as inhabitants of a depressed economic zone they have no responsibility for their views.

Enrique (Enrique), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:26 (twenty years ago)

but then if it's not okay to criticise what's deemed bad behaviour in a foreign land and culture, what's the alternative? other than to try and come at it as informed and empathetic as possible - which ought to be what liberal commentators on the matter should do (don't know how successful they really are). or to accept it's out of their depth - effectively this 'none of my business so can't comment' approach?

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:27 (twenty years ago)

total absolute complete utter bollocks - xpost

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:28 (twenty years ago)

i repeat it's different here, because many people, even at the lowest socio-economic levels actually have the luxury of time to think and sort out these problems

burnley not quite in the same league - you like films enrq,
watch life and debt if you can i it'll quickly put a stop to this argument.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:30 (twenty years ago)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0284262/

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:32 (twenty years ago)

the knee-jerk libealism is about homophobia in dancehall in the UK rather than in Jamaica; the Guardian doesn't much care how bad things are over there; what is *does* care about is the increasing okay-ness of using hate-speech.

it's talking specifically about the murder of brian williamson, buju being wanted for a homophobic attack (specifically jamaican problems) then drags up peter tatchell!!!

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:35 (twenty years ago)

Can someone post a link to the articles under discussion?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:37 (twenty years ago)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1263245,00.html

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:37 (twenty years ago)

and gary younge is writing from chicago!

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:38 (twenty years ago)

Also, Dave, perhaps your case would be more credible if you substantiated your argument with details of what is actually being left out of these 'oversimplified' reports, for the benefit of those of us who don't have a detailed knowledge of Jamaican society?

Wow, that last paragraph looks like such a fantastic show of condescension, but its not really meant to be.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:42 (twenty years ago)

I mean, there's obviously a racial element to this as well that's almost as unpleasant. I can't imagine any dancehall star coming over here and NOT being asked about homosexuality in interviews - the same thing happens to a lesser extent with hip-hop acts. Whereas no one would even think to ask, say, Liam Gallagher what he thinks of gay men, and Shaun Ryder still gets a bit of a free pass to this day.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:45 (twenty years ago)

You're right about Ryder, but when has LG manifested homophobia? He seemed to take it quite well in 'Live Forever' when he was called effeminate.
I still don't see the damage done by calling out homophobia -- well, obviously I do, but compared with the homophobia itself???

Enrique (Enrique), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:49 (twenty years ago)

pecisely, i've been through this a lot, but the main thing is that this stuff is a direct hand-me-down from of missionary christianity is perpetuated by the church, hate floursishes in, impoverished place, the imf has fucked the country... not going to be all peace and love there, is it and we're all complicit.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:51 (twenty years ago)

and in this complicity we have no moral high ground to take...

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:52 (twenty years ago)

i can't speedtype and i'm busy at work - that mainly makes sense tho, i hope

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Monday, 19 July 2004 14:54 (twenty years ago)

Maybe to lower tempers here, let's engage the serious issue we can all agree is an issue: How do first-worlders write critically about the homophobia of third-world acts?

For starters, I would only toss in that irony is our friend, here. Homophobic artists have a gay audience, and these particular third-worlders are very much participating in the first-world commercial pop industry.

Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 20 July 2004 15:49 (twenty years ago)

Or is this too little too late...

Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 20 July 2004 15:51 (twenty years ago)

"How do first-worlders write critically about the homophobia of third-world acts?"

Without resorting to hysteria would be nice.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 15:55 (twenty years ago)

Although the most hysterical person on this thread has somewhat ironicly become Mr. Stelfox.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 15:56 (twenty years ago)

well alex it's somewhat ironic that if you are continually accused of being aggressive when you are not being, then you do tend to get pretty wound up and i'm pissed off with it, so i'd prefer not to post to these boards any more and if it's possible for someone to lock me out, then i'd be glad of it.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 15:59 (twenty years ago)

dave its very easy to stop post to these boards, you juts delete ilxor from yr bookmarks and dont visit them in the first place. this is obvious but you have said the same thing 3/4 times, so it seems as though you genuinely are not sure how to stop posting.

ambrose (ambrose), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 16:16 (twenty years ago)

same thing = "please ban my ip number from here"/" and frankly i can live without it"

ambrose (ambrose), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 16:18 (twenty years ago)

obv the productive solution is fusion glam-dancehall

Sébastien Chikara (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 16:44 (twenty years ago)

dave how is responding to people's posts with things like
"total absolute complete utter bollocks"
not agressive?
this was towards the start of the thread when there was still a bit of discussion going on,before everyone was just told they didnt know what they were talking about and dismissed out of hand

robin (robin), Tuesday, 20 July 2004 17:06 (twenty years ago)

Dave's selling himself short when he says his own writing has no effect. Doesn't he think Jamaicans noticed his interview with Ce'cile?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1120799,00.html

That's one way of avoiding the backlash he's talking about (or imagining): Interviewing Jamaican performers who aren't bigots.

Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 20 July 2004 18:22 (twenty years ago)

In my Elephant Man preview, I made rhetorical solidarity with gay dancehall fans. That's easy, of course, but it's another way of talking to the culture in way that isn't self-righteous.

The point is: Any internationalism worth its salt treats people from other countries as equals enough to disagree with them. Any moral person worth his salt will want to persuade other people to act morally. There are effective and ineffective ways of doing this...

Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 20 July 2004 18:24 (twenty years ago)

Plenty of America drips with not-so-coded homophobia. Its just that its not as cool to dance to fat white dudes sweating and sounding self-righteous. Engaging with the problems in dancehall means engaging with the problematic of rastafari means really grasping the contradictory nature of anti-imperial sentiment deflected into religion and nationalism, and transforming in the process. Which is to say if the locus isn't first on the problems *outside* of Jamaica and how they're grappled with internally, if there isn't that empathic bridge, difficult as it sometimes is to forge, then you just become Bill fuggin Cosby.

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 01:44 (twenty years ago)

djdee surely the conditions that are influencing Crunk and Kompakt are so different from those influencing Dancehall that it's near useless to bring them up in this context? I mean, it's not like the title of this thread is "DANCEHALL URRGH: IT IS THE ONLY SOCIALLY REPREHENSIBLE MUSIC ON THE PLANET". Of course music reflects society; as such, dealing with a type of music also means interacting with the society that it was spawned from to some degree; figuring out how this is best done is I think one of the main discussion points of this thread.

Well, obviously, and I agree. My point is more that if the guardian is going to take the moral high ground on jamaican dancehall's homophobia, where is it when it comes to issues related to largely European-derived forms of music?

I certainly don't think it's wrong to criticize homophobia in any context but i think it's funny that some conservative above accused liberals of NOT talking about homophobia bcuz they are afraid of being seen as racist whereas in reality, it is black jamaicans who are much more likely to be accused of moral societal problems when those problems are prevalant throughout the world.


xpost also sterling otm

djdee2005, Wednesday, 21 July 2004 01:49 (twenty years ago)

see also: pym fortune

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:05 (twenty years ago)

i'm inclined to say the homophobia in dancehall is not particularly problematic for listeners in our context. if i am reading pete right then i'm in agreement with him.

the part i don't follow you on dave is whether or not cancelling a concert in london is going to have any effect on an artists' popularity or credibility in jamaica. i hardly think the international attitude towards dancehall artists affects their standing in jamaica (does vybz kartel have a large int'l following? outside, say, london? the way elephant man does? does anybody in the US care what the french or british or japanese think of toby keith?)

vahid (vahid), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:06 (twenty years ago)

I imagine that artists like Vybz must dream of crossing over in the U.S. and this isn't my nationalist ego or something, but so many heroes to dancehall artists are hip-hop cats from the U.S.

djdee2005, Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:08 (twenty years ago)

x-post here

and i do worry about homophobia in southern california, it's just that i think that it's much more relevant for me to worry about why just about everybody dismisses microhouse and detroit techno and daft punk and basement jaxx and clubbing in general out of hand (and the nasty homophobic and racist subtexts there) than worry about why people listen to rap and dancehall uncritically (maybe because it's no less nasty than most rock is?? and it's always playing out of car radios and in the background of commercials and on mtv and so on like rock is??)

vahid (vahid), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:11 (twenty years ago)

x-post: oh i'm sure vybz wants to cross over, i just wonder if it'd do much to enhance or hurt his credibility in jamaica one way or the other.

vahid (vahid), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:12 (twenty years ago)

for the not-so-knowledgable-about-dancehall (aka me), can somebody inform me as to how dancehall ties in with rastafari? It doesn't seem to have as obvious linkages (in imagery - both visual and lyrical, for starters) as reggae does/did, but admittedly that's just from what little I know of it (ie. watching videos, perusing the predominantly dancehall store and hearing it in my neighborhood, etc.). There's a sort of materialism very similar to that in hip-hop that doesn't reconcile so well with what my (probably outdated) notions of what rastafari is. Some help?

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 02:14 (twenty years ago)

can somebody inform me as to how dancehall ties in with rastafari?

listen to a couple of sizzla/capleton/spragga benz records

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 08:12 (twenty years ago)

vybz has already supported 50 cent, recorded with pharrell and kardinal offishall, shouts out to jay-z, fiddy and tons of other rappers on his records - i don't think crossing over would hurt his credibility in jamaica.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 08:22 (twenty years ago)

and sterling is making a lot of sense here - what i'm getting at is that i belive that there a right and wrong ways of addressing this issue and the tatchell/guradian/predominant approach on this thread is the wrong one as it leads to hysteria, the cancellation of gigs, censorship and all kinds of other things that could just exacerbate the problem and make the artists in question feel an even greater sense of (misguided) "righteous" indignation. the thing i've really objected to on this thread is the snarky "oh so what do you propose we do, brush it under the carpet?" responses. if i felt that i'd never have asked the question anyway, never have used the qualification "almost" and ceretainly not written the things i have. i simply consider that a bit of pragmatism is in order to deal with this tricky situation and genuinely change minds and outlooks (will only ever be gradual), rather than resorting to what amounts to cultural imperialist dictation of how to behave. better to effect real change slowly than castigate people and add fuel to the fire as far as i'm concerned.

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 08:29 (twenty years ago)

More kneejerk liberal do-goodery from the Guardian here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1253107,00.html

no, wait…

Bidfurd, Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:13 (twenty years ago)

I was in Jamaica last year, and I heard 50 Cent being played more than anybody else....

The other music I heard a lot of, oddly enough, was Cat Stevens. He's popular there.

Crazy place, Jamaica. Not only is every other person trying to sell you coke, weed, and prostitutes, the hotel my brother and I were staying at asked us if we were queer, because it wasn't their policy to rent rooms to same sex couples.

The word that comes to my mind when I think of Jamaica is "tragic," because it's so beautiful but so ruined by 500+ years of exploitation, violence, and murder.

shookout (shookout), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:46 (twenty years ago)

listen to a couple of sizzla/capleton/spragga benz records

Dave, what I guess I mean is how is rastafari practiced by dancehall types? The more common view of it (at least, to me) is (probably horribly) stereotypical dope-smokin', Bob Marley peace-and-justice to the poor, non flashiness (but keep your woman at home or at least she only gets to sing back-up). How does this reconcile with the materialism and flash of dancehall? Almost every recent dancehall video I've seen is almost indistinguishable from a hip-hop video: flashy SUVs with big rims, sexy backup dancers, basketball jerseys, champagne, etc. How did "justice for the poor man" become "SUV for the poor man?" (That's not a value judgement, just noticing a difference.)

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 13:01 (twenty years ago)

I mean even 80s dancehall, while flashy, still has a certain something that separates it from American hip-hop, at least if only in ephemeral style stuff (clothing, hairdos, etc.).

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 13:03 (twenty years ago)

I'm already out of my delth, but the content of the vids is surely follow-the-money; given how much the dancehall invasion of the states has been via MTV and via hip-hop collabs (eg 'Grindin') it's natural that dancehall vids shd follow the dominant style for hip-hops vids.

Enrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 13:52 (twenty years ago)

true, although most of the ones I'm talking about can only be seen on late-night Brooklyn public access cable TV. But sure, they definitely follow the more well-known crossover stuff.

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 13:58 (twenty years ago)

Sizzla/Capleton/et all don't sing about SUVs, they sing about well mostly religious stuff, hstencil. Their lyrical concerns do make them kind of separate though from Elephant Man, Beenie Man and what not who are definitely less publicly religious.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 15:04 (twenty years ago)

in what Sizzla stuff I heard, the lyrics seemed sorta incomprehensible to me (tho a lot of dancehall is like that - I don't exactly listen for the lyrics), so that's why I was asking about image-type stuff.

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 15:12 (twenty years ago)

He's a bobo rasta, I believe, a subsect of rastafarianism which I know little to nothing about, but a simple glance at my Best of Sizzla disc 1 reveals his focus:

1. No White God
2. Explain to the Almighty
3. I Wonder
4. Love Is Always There
5. No Other Like Jah
6. Praise Ye Jah
7. Do You Ever?
8. Like Mountain
9. Dem Ah Wonder
10. Kings of the Earth
11. Holding Firm
12. Mek Dem Secure
13. Dem Ah Gaze
14. One Away
15. Give Dem Ah Ride

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 15:20 (twenty years ago)

Its just that its not as cool to dance to fat white dudes sweating and sounding self-righteous.

Ha, I was just thinking about D. Boon.

Pete Scholtes, Wednesday, 21 July 2004 21:21 (twenty years ago)

minutemen are danceable!

M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 22:01 (twenty years ago)

That Guardian piece is interesting.

It reminds me of this excerpt from Per Nilsen's Dance Music Sex Romance - Prince: The First Decade:

Prince met Bob Marley backstage at the Roxy Theater after the concert. The meeting was arranged by Don Taylor, who was toying with the idea of having Prince and Marley record a track together. "What the result of this might have been, however, I will never know," Taylor later said. "When we called on Prince he met us in this skimpy leopard g-string undergarment, which immediately aroused Bob's Jamaican macho feelings and so our stay was as brief as Prince's g-string and Bob's discomfort was shown all over his face."

Pete Scholtes, Wednesday, 21 July 2004 22:22 (twenty years ago)

dancehall isn't really dominated by rasta the way other phases of reggae were though.... IMO

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 22:26 (twenty years ago)

re Boon - Bad Brains vs Big Boys

dave q, Thursday, 22 July 2004 04:11 (twenty years ago)

Oh lord now that's a story.

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:36 (twenty years ago)

From Virgin Records:

In recent months there have been a few stories in the press about the homophobic lyrical content of songs by a handful of Jamaican artists, most notably Buju Banton, Elephant Man and Beenie Man.

In light of these stories Beenie Man, a Virgin Records recording artist, has released the following statement....

STATEMENT FROM RECORDING ARTIST BEENIE MAN

"It has come to my attention that certain lyrics and recordings I have made in the past may have caused distress and outrage among people whose identities and lifestyles are different from my own. While my lyrics are very personal, I do not write them with the intent of purposefully hurting or maligning others, and I offer my sincerest apologies to those who might have been offended, threatened or hurt by my songs. As a human being, I renounce violence towards other human beings in every way, and pledge henceforth to uphold these values as I move forward in my career as an artist."

Anna (Anna), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 10:20 (twenty years ago)

then it's pretty likely that absolutely disenfranchised people, especially men, are going to look to such traditional hetero male power trope. This article ties in with Dave's important point http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1274067,00.html

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Tuesday, 3 August 2004 11:28 (twenty years ago)

cut and paste excerpt from Beenie Man profile in Sun. Aug. 1st Washington Post by writer Alona Wortofsky

When "Who Am I" became a huge hit for Beenie Man, Bounty Killer raised a stink about the song's lyrics, seemingly just wordplay about a BMW: "Zim zimma, who got the keys to my bimma / Who am I, the girls dem sugar /How can I make love to a fella/ In a rush, pass mi da keys to my truck." At issue was the ambiguous line "How can I make love to a fella." It all came down to punctuation -- did "in a rush" modify "make love to a fella" or the request for the keys? No big deal anywhere but in Jamaica, where homosexuality is illegal and performers often record and perform songs with homophobic lyrics.

"That was started by player haters tryin' to be haters," Beenie says now. "How can I make love to a fella in a rush? I don't make love to fellas, whether in a rush or take time or outside or nuttin'. You know, I'm 'de girls dem sugar,' that's what I do."

Several years later, it was Beenie Man's turn to take the low road when Bounty Killer appeared on No Doubt's "Hey Baby." In the song's video, drummer Adrian Young appears naked, anathema for hard-core dancehall fans. Bounty Killer "gave me a hard time -- for nuttin' . . . for nuttin' whatsoever," says Beenie Man. "For all the years this man be cussing me, calling me all different type of names, callin' me a gay, everyt'ing in the world that he think would hurt me. And then -- boom! Here you come with a naked man in your video. That's crazy, yunno. The hard-core bad boy Bounty Killer with a naked man in his video. That's funny."
Americans unfamiliar with the island's institutionalized and often virulent homophobia may be puzzled by this kind of back-and-forth, but in Jamaica, it makes headlines.

"I think Jamaica is not a world dat open to the rest of the world, it's enclosed. It's not like me that go out in the world and know that, okay, gay people are born to be gay. . . . This is their ways; you cannot change it. There's nothing they can do to help themselves, yunno. Just like a man love woman, you got man love man," he says.

"But Jamaica is a spiritual country, like I explain it to you how my grandfather explain it to me. My grandfather said, 'If a man make love to a man, the life that we know cease to exist because man cannot have kids. And if a woman make love to a woman, a woman cannot get a woman pregnant, so life as we know cease to exist. There'd be no life."

Perhaps this emphasis on the creation of life is an outgrowth of the extreme poverty endured by so many Jamaicans. "So many people are dying, too," says Beenie. "I think that's a big part of it."

sk, Wednesday, 4 August 2004 03:12 (twenty years ago)

try again beenie

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 4 August 2004 04:36 (twenty years ago)

what kind of editor would allow quotes in dialect? Yeesh.

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 4 August 2004 13:39 (twenty years ago)

what kind of editor would allow quotes in dialect?

especially when we know that beenie is so elogquent with the written word:
"It has come to my attention that certain lyrics and recordings I have made in the past may have caused distress and outrage among people whose identities and lifestyles are different from my own."

Ha!

frankE (frankE), Wednesday, 4 August 2004 13:46 (twenty years ago)

three weeks pass...
This seems relevant.

frankE (frankE), Thursday, 26 August 2004 02:02 (twenty years ago)

yeah when i went scanning thru the freepers looking for swiftvet stuff i saw a few things on this, outrage - Outrage! - over the 'censorship', "so much for free speech", etc. maybe momus can show up and do it for everybody for reals.

cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 26 August 2004 02:08 (twenty years ago)

two months pass...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/14429861

Speechless.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 2 November 2004 13:44 (twenty years ago)

So was that murder actually linked to dancehall at all, or are the vague hints at links in that article just lazy hackery? If it was, well, kneejerk liberalism is far too fucking kind to those homophobic cunts.

I was going to be at Heaven that night, too.

The Lex (The Lex), Tuesday, 2 November 2004 13:56 (twenty years ago)

Recently I saw some young guy shouting and swearing all that "batty boy" rubbish at two guys who'd just come out of a shop, who probably weren't even gay - I think he was saying it to impress the girl he was with but she just told him to shut up

Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 2 November 2004 14:00 (twenty years ago)

two months pass...
hmmm...interesting. I was in Ethiopia when this thread was alive. Anyhow, I thought folks might be interested in my response to this issue (which I'm thinking about a whole hell of a lot since I started writing a paper tentatively entitled “That crap won't be tolerated over here�: Homophobia, Dancehall, and Globalization)

I got a rather angry letter written to me at the paper I wirte for...it was extremely upsetting to me and I felt terrible. Anyhow, here's the letter and my reponse:

.Once more, the Mirror proves that its progressive credentials are nothing but trendy posturing. In her Aug. 12 review of Beenie Man's latest offering [Back to Basics, Discs], your reggae critic waxes lyrical about the Jamaican's "eloquent… ghetto suffering," but fails to make any mention of the suffering incited by his lyrics - and inflicted on some of those who hear them - on Jamaica's queer population.

In what might be one of the most overtly homophobic societies on the planet, queer people face not only legal censure, but also frequent violent harassment and murder, to such an extent that asylum applications by gay Jamaican men in the U.S., Canada and Britain have become commonplace. Judging by his lyrics, Beenie Man must be ecstatic.

I am not arguing that a critic put her object's politics before its artistic appeal, rather that the job carries responsibility as well as authority. By recommending to readers that they buy Beenie Man's output, she encourages the bankrolling of bigotry, persecution and killing, and the smallest mention of this in her review might just show a little sensitivity to the plight of queer Jamaicans, as well as to those elsewhere who haven't forgotten them in our zeal to fetishize the displaced barbarity of a culture less cozy and two-faced than our own. Queer Shame on you!

» Adrian T.A. Varney

[Reply: Although I am relieved to see the renewed attention being given to the appalling homophobia that I am aware exists in Jamaican music and society, this is an extremely complex issue that cannot be properly addressed in a short article - much less in a 100-word album review. When Shabba Ranks and Buju Banton faced a boycott of their music and concert cancellations 10 years ago due to their virulent homophobia, I hoped that this would be a positive development. But boycotts and bans only helped to drive dancehall off the international radar. Attacks - both verbal and physical - on queer Jamaicans continued unabated. In order to first understand and then address this issue, we need to see dancehall as a powerful cultural form that speaks about the horrible violence, poverty, oppression and homophobic attitudes that exist in Jamaica. Rather than either fetishizing or outlawing the displaced barbarity of Jamaican performers I would hope that my role as a critic of this music should be to encourage people to listen and thereby attempt to understand the people and the society through which it is created. Dancehall is exceptional in that it gives an international voice to some of the world's poorest, most oppressed peoples. It is important that we continue to listen - even if, occasionally, we are distressed by what we hear.]

cybele (cybele), Monday, 17 January 2005 15:55 (twenty years ago)

Damn. You only got 100 words for such a potentially loaded artist/album? Pretty difficult situation.

Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Monday, 17 January 2005 17:02 (twenty years ago)


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