“Blackface” or “I get why Spike Lee has a problem with Hip-Hop now, and I think don’t think he’s right.”

I remember a time when I could simply enjoy something without thoughts of racial inequality, cultural appropriation, homoerotic sub-texts and such coming in and forcing me to think. I remember those times, those were good times. I guess those lofty days are gone, huh?

The first thing I have to question now about hip-hop is this: Can I like hip-hop? Am I allowed? Am I allowed to enjoy it without having to know about the historical appropriation of black music? Would I seem like a jerk to someone who does knows? Would Spike Lee invite me to his next movie premiere? I suppose I could, they would and that Spike still would, but what if I decided I wanted to be a hip-hop super star [(live large, drive phat cars…) I had to throw in that Cyprus Hill lyric]? Would I then be contributing to the cultural theft that Blacks have been subjected to since the dawn of the pop-culture/music era?

I was in another class and we were talking about Hip-Hop and appropriation of voice (yes, I brought it up because I’m still trying to get this.) I said something to the tone of hip-hop being great because it brings people together; there are kids in China right now doing Headspins to Kanye west beats, there are native teens rockin’ roccawear and listening to Jay-Z, there are white kids in various Ontario suburbs veggin’ out in front of the tube watching BET. The cultural and racial gap is closing. Hip-Hop is great. Then someone said this, “But I don’t see it that way. It’s not great that everyone is listening to Hip-Hop, it’s for a specific people.” I told her I felt sorry she felt that way, and the prof, seeing where the debate was headed, quickly changed the subject. But it haunts me, the idea that Hip-Hop is for a certain people. I don’t buy that shit, but is it? Even its history, its genesis in the “predominantly African-American and Puerto Rican South Bronx” breaks away from that idea of Hip-Hop being solely for Blacks.

The fact remains that Hip-Hop is enticing, there is something about it reaches so many people and connects them in ways that Disco never could. *Shiver* Disco. Tate writes, “The aura and global appeal of hip-hop lie in both its perceived Blackness (hip, stylish, youthful, alienated, rebellious, sensual) and its perceived fast access to global markets through digital technology.” While I don’t really get the technical-jargony bit about “markets through digital technology” the idea that being hip, stylish, youthful, alienated, rebellious, and sensual are traits exclusively black angers me. Why is Tate building up these walls? Hip-hop reaches so many people, it transforms lives. I can understand how the appropriation of Jazz and Rock and Roll can piss people off because it pisses me off, but hip-hop is different. Its different in that we live in a period of time where equality is at the forefront, while yes, it might just be veneer, still there is a sense that equality it is important. Back when Rock and Roll and Jazz were big it wasn’t like how things are now. I’m not saying that things are perfect, but I am saying that things are different. No one would ever say that hip-hop was done by white people first, no one is stealing hip-hop, no one is changing hip-hop, hip-hop is changing the landscape and not the other way around.

Isn’t there a bigger issue though? While history is important we can’t simply live looking backwards. Things progress and while hip-hop was created in a predominantly black cultural vacuum, it made its way out and is touching down all over the globe. Why can’t hip-hop be the cultural forum where there is a universally shared culture? Why can’t hip-hop BE that universally shared culture? We aren’t dealing with the white/black binary here anymore. People all over the world are feelin’ hip-hop. If it were up to me, I wouldn’t mind that my people were responsible for creating something that united more people than anything else in the entirety of human history.

Back-tracking a bit I wanted to touch on the Robert Christgau piece “In Search of Jim Crow”. I don’t know if I just didn’t “get” it, but was he saying that there was a silver lining to minstrelsy in that white people that performed these shows and those that attended the shows were enticed by black culture and in some twist of logic by Christgau that means that they some how accepted black people? I don’t buy that shit. Even if I did get Christgau wrong I know that I am in fact detecting something in his writing that attempts to paint an understanding of how one could accept minstrelsy. As I said before, I don’t buy it.

The whole bit about the veracity of the Jim Crow story being called into question sets up something else in my mind. Christgau writes of the Jim Crow story, “it has a ring, doesn’t it? In fact, it’s such a hell of a metaphor that one understands why few historian of minstrelsy have resisted it, and why it shows up frequently in less specialized accounts of race relations and popular music.” For those of you that don’t know the myth/legend of Jim Crow here’s the condensed version:

White man named Rice happens upon a Black slave who is handicapped in some way. The various retellings of the Jim Crow story give and take away various impairments to the black slave, but basically he can’t walk very well because he either has some sort of leg problem (at the least) or is partially paralyzed on one side of his body (at the worst). Anyway, when Rice sees the Black slave, the black slave is “dancing” as best he can while singing “Every time I turn about I jump Jim Crow.” Rice, seeing this as entertaining, starts a minstrel act sometime after. Rice steals both the clothes the Black man was wearing as well as his song, his dance, and even his crippled features.

Whether or not there is any truth to this tale we’ll never know, but regardless of whether it is truth or fiction, either way it present equally fascinating metaphors. On the one hand the literal stealing of culture and identity plays well if the tale is true, on the other hand if Rice’s actions of stealing from the Black slave are made up it up all together the story is built on hatefulness, conjecture, and stereotype. And, surprise, surprise, so is minstrelsy. There is no silver-lining in minstrelsy, it is lined with hatefulness and stereotypes that lead away from understanding anything about anyone.

Hip-hop by Whites, Hispanics, and Asians is nothing like minstrelsy. Hip-hop is a medium from where people of any cultural heritage can find a way to express themselves. Hip-hop isn’t about stealing from Blacks and trying to be black, it’s about expressing yourself in a common forum that has conventions and rules that anyone can follow.

“Yes, Yes Y’all. Oral History of Hip-Hop’s First Decade” OR “Herc, Flash, and Bam: The Tripartite Soul of Hip-Hop’s Origin”

In Plato’s Republic Plato is transfixed on the number 3. Plato Republic, the actual city in text that he wishes to create is tripartite; it consists of three classes of citizens: Guardian Rulers, Auxiliary Guardians, Producers. In book 4 of Plato’s Republic Plato asserts that not only should the city in text consist of a tripartite class structure, he posits that the human soul itself is tripartite consisting of Desire, Reason, and something classified as “Spiritedness”. This spiritedness is, to my understanding, what happens when the human body does something that is against Reason. It’s that part of you that allows you have that “one more drink” when you’re at the bar when you know you should be home reading your assigned reading.

Hip-hop, the genesis of it anyway, is also tripartite. On page 46 of "Yes, Yes Y’all. Oral History of Hip-Hop’s First Decade” we have Afrika Islam putting down some science for us: “My allegiance was definitely to the music and the record. The techniques, the more technical style came from Flash, and as far as sound systems, that came from Herc. That’s the way it was.” We’re given the first two pieces of hip-hop’s tripartite soul in this. Grand Master Flash was all about the technique. Herc was about the system, the sound, the bass. Afrika Bambaataa was about the incorporation of other elements outside what people in his following considered to be “their music”. So to fit these dudes into the form of Plato’s Tripartite soul, I’d probably put Herc in the Desire slot, Flash in the Reason slot, and Bam in the Spirited slot. Yea… that looks nice.

I love Hip-Hop music, but until I read this excerpt, to tell you the truth, I knew nothing of Hip-Hop’s history. I grew up listening to Tupac, Biggie, and Wu-Tang— Later I started rockin’ acts like Nas, Common Sense, Mos Def and Talib Kweli in my ipod. I went through my phase when I loved the “gangsta rap” sound, but as a grow older I realized that there was an image being portrayed there that was, to say the least, incongruent with reality. The scary thing is though that that warped simulacra of how life is is being consumed and emulated and lived by the younger generations. That shit scares me. While I love the beats that Dr. Dre puts out, while I love the rhymes that Eminem drops, I can listen to 50 cent, but I doubt I’d ever go to a concert or even buy an album by them. I love their music, but I am not a G-Unit Nut-Hugger.

A lot of Hip-Hop is about image and the problem with image is that it is a façade, it’s a mask, and it’s not necessarily real. But many people, teens and young adults alike, just don’t get that. That’s what makes it scary. I was listening to talk radio AM 640 just before the break and they had a panel of debaters on. I can’t remember from which organization each person, there were three of them, were from, but it was something like one of them was “for” hip-hop, one was “semi-against” hip-hop, and another was some politician. The guy that was for hip-hop just about lost it when the guy who was semi-against hip-hop said that, “violence is a part of hip-hop culture.” The guy who was for hip-hop said, “No it’s not, violence isn’t a part of hip-hop culture. Talib Kweli says that the violence that comes into hip-hop isn’t about the culture, it’s about the Blackman’s life and it bleeds into hip-hop because hip-hop is predominantly black.” Then the guy who was against it said, “I thought it wasn’t a racial thing, you said it wasn’t.” I guess I missed that because I’d just tuned in. “The guy who was for hip-hop said, it’s not a racial thing, it’s cultural thing. Violence is not a part of hip-hop culture.” The politician chimed in and said, “Well, you don’t see Garth Brooks waving a gun around in any of his music videos.” I don’t think I ever heard a politician say anything that ever made any sense — that was a rare moment. That conversation on the radio and reading this article really makes the question “what is hip-hop?” problematic for me. Are there two camps in hip-hop? Or is that what we as hip-hop lovers want to believe, and that the violence in hip-hop is a part of hip-hop even if try to deny it. Maybe its dependant upon the listener, maybe what they choose to listen to determines what hip-hop is for them.

In closing of this post, I wanted to say one more thing. If hip-hop is about image then what do the clothes say? Walk by a high school, preferably a public high school because of the whole uniform thing in catholic high school, as the students are being let out for the day. Spot the hip-hop listeners. It’s easy. This is what you’ll see: The guys clothes are all about concealing — Baggy pants, over-sized sweaters, large-puffy coats. The girls clothes are all about revealing — exposed mid-riffs, tight-ass jeans, itty-bitty jackets.

I don’t know what this means or signifies. I’m just throwing it out there.

Vannet - Starry Ombrelle

Vannet - Starry Ombrelle