It's more the bloggers and critics who fall for the rouse and then pat themselves on the back publicly.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
james said:
HarveyCanal said:
we're seeing a resurgence in artists going ahead and being themselves in full, doing and saying whatever they want through their music. And that should not only be recognized by current fans of rap, but celebrated
But even if that is worth recognizing and celebrating and whatever else (honestly, "being yourself" seems like a pretty low bar for this day and age, but I'll play along), I think the point--or one point, anyway--is that "being themselves" and "doing and saying whatever they want" is not worth being called "revolutionary," and that the ever-increasing mass of artists doing just/only that is not necessarily gonna move shit forward.
Now, whether one thinks that "being revolutionary" or "moving shit forward" is the job of music (I myself do not) is of course a whole other question, but just as it rankles me to hear someone refer to some fucking television commercial or whatever as "poetry," it rankles me to hear baseline expression of personal experience characterized as "revolutionary." Expressing fully and being yourself and all that, that shit is Art 101--dudes do not get extra points for that, especially in 2011. And using that kind of puffery to let Things You Like off the hook while at the same time taking Bambouche to task for an overinflated argument strikes me as hypocritical.
You gotta take it a step further though to enter the realm of revolutionary. I'm not saying dudes merely being forthcoming that they are on planks every day is revolutionary. I'm saying that dudes saying they are willing to give up their lives/souls just to put some presents under the Christmas tree is revolutionary in both its honesty and its insurgency...especially as compared to dudes a few years ago lying about how much money they're making just to be comparable to industry kingpins like Jay-Z. Maybe not to everyone's ears/eyes but to mine at least, said change in perspective has definitely occured.
James, to extend your excellent analogy, imagine if said panhandler (who is favored by the passerby) was really a plant - not really homeless just particularly good at playing ones perceived image of worthy homeless dude - and on salary from a bigger corp who takes a cut.
That pretty much explains the current music industry.
That may be accurate, but just to clarify: I wasn't trying to point out a flaw in the music industry, which everyone knows is kind of a shitpile, but rather a flaw in the music/record-dude sensibility, which is generally thought to be righteous.
It's more the bloggers and critics who fall for the rouse and then pay themselves on the back publicly.
I think you meant "ruse" and "pat," but the funny thing is that it also kinda works just as it's as written.
Lol... Yeah iPhone posting related.
Yes, it's a flaw in the relationship between those "tastemakers" and art/artists.
At best it catapults tylers, at it's worst we get disconnected heart of darkness-esque pseudo academic ramblings.
Either way it's funny how disconnected that makes them. The assumption that any of this critical masterbation dictates what's what, relevance, etc is laughable. Especially when a piece has to tell is what rap "was, so we can be explained now what it "isn't". IMO, once that happens, it's already irrelevant.
For 99.99% of artists today, it's a create your own industry situation. The structure within rap operates, at least how we used to understand it, no longer exists. Artists give away their music for free in hopes of having it land them paying gigs, including shows and licensing arrangements. But whereas there used to be set short cuts to these ends, it's now more than ever up to personal hustle. Therefore with that now being the state of things, we're seeing a resurgence in artists going ahead and being themselves in full, doing and saying whatever they want through their music. And that should not only be recognized by current fans of rap, but celebrated and surely not denigrated by running it through some antiquated, inapplicable Marxist analysis.
I don't disagree with your main point. Yet you seem to imply that these "new industry" models sprang up from out of nowhere. 100% of artists working today are, up to a point, children of the major label (i.e. capitalist) system.
In other words, if aliens landed here, reset our brains and introduced some truly new business models, then, perhaps, the Marxist (or whatever kind of) analysis would be inapplicable.
For 99.99% of artists today, it's a create your own industry situation. The structure within rap operates, at least how we used to understand it, no longer exists. Artists give away their music for free in hopes of having it land them paying gigs, including shows and licensing arrangements. But whereas there used to be set short cuts to these ends, it's now more than ever up to personal hustle. Therefore with that now being the state of things, we're seeing a resurgence in artists going ahead and being themselves in full, doing and saying whatever they want through their music. And that should not only be recognized by current fans of rap, but celebrated and surely not denigrated by running it through some antiquated, inapplicable Marxist analysis.
I don't disagree with your main point. Yet you seem to imply that these "new industry" models sprang up from out of nowhere. 100% of artists working today are, up to a point, children of the major label (i.e. capitalist) system.
In other words, if aliens landed here, reset our brains and introduced some truly new business models, then, perhaps, the Marxist (or whatever kind of) analysis would be inapplicable.
what about the cats who never got on a major label and just sold their shit hand to hand?
even when the industry was alive there were alot of dudes who circulated their shit w/ out a major labels help.
Hustlin has always been around this game before the industry collapsed. Bad art or not.
Even if those cats aspired to get on def jam someday you have to take that hustle into account when discussing the game.
the artform is not just the industry.
i dont agree that every artist workin today shaped his game from the major label system.
i still see bad stickers of local dudes from time to time trying make name for themselves.
The assumption that any of this critical masterbation dictates what's what, relevance, etc is laughable. Especially when a piece has to tell is what rap "was, so we can be explained now what it "isn't". IMO, once that happens, it's already irrelevant.
Is there such an assumption? That piece actually made me realize how hard (impossible?) it is not being complicit in the system... Ideally, there is a dialogue between criticism and art that helps both move forward. I don't know if it's healthy for any artist to take up this "I Am Hip Hop" stance (no Anticon/Lil Wayne), and close their ears to "outside" opinion. And critical masturbation doesn't really begin to hold a candle to the artistic masturbation that is rap:
Yes, it's a flaw in the relationship between those "tastemakers" and art/artists.
At best it catapults tylers, at it's worst we get disconnected heart of darkness-esque pseudo academic ramblings.
Either way it's funny how disconnected that makes them. The assumption that any of this critical masterbation dictates what's what, relevance, etc is laughable. Especially when a piece has to tell is what rap "was, so we can be explained now what it "isn't". IMO, once that happens, it's already irrelevant.
I see.
Am I remembering correctly that you're the dude who, a little while back, said that all music writing/criticism was rendered irrelevant as soon as the internet made it possible to hear whole songs?
what about the cats who never got on a major label and just sold their shit hand to hand?
even when the industry was alive there were alot of dudes who circulated their shit w/ out a major labels help.
Hustlin has always been around this game before the industry collapsed. Bad art or not.
Even if those cats aspired to get on def jam someday you have to take that hustle into account when discussing the game.
the artform is not just the industry.
i dont agree that every artist workin today shaped his game from the major label system.
i still see bad stickers of local dudes from time to time trying make name for themselves.
No doubt, I do "take that hustle into account," but for most people selling tapes out of a trunk is a stepping stone, not a statement. Once that hustle becomes bigger, i.e. organized, it is organized according to existing business models--even if that business model looks "new" on the surface. All of the successful independents, too, are indirectly tied to some part of the system. You sell your shit on Itunes? You're linked to a "new" feature of the same old industry, even if you're not on a major label per se.
Yes, it's a flaw in the relationship between those "tastemakers" and art/artists.
At best it catapults tylers, at it's worst we get disconnected heart of darkness-esque pseudo academic ramblings.
Either way it's funny how disconnected that makes them. The assumption that any of this critical masterbation dictates what's what, relevance, etc is laughable. Especially when a piece has to tell is what rap "was, so we can be explained now what it "isn't". IMO, once that happens, it's already irrelevant.
I see.
Am I remembering correctly that you're the dude who, a little while back, said that all music writing/criticism was rendered irrelevant as soon as the internet made it possible to hear whole songs?
Correct, I am the person who stated that (though that's a broad paraphrasing) - and assuming your statement was being facetious I don't see how my previous statement on critics and the analogy laid out here contradict. If anything two sides of the same coin:
1) Now that everyone can hear music instantly as opposed to writers getting advanced copies of records to review or critique the role of said review or critique doesn't hold nearly as much weight (i would argue it holds none). That old system helped give criticism the illusion of being in the moment when in fact writers needed that time to listen, write and publish - and their opinions would often be the fans first exposure to an album. I bought countless rap albums in the early 90's the day they came out based solely upon Source reviews - some lived up to the critical review, some didn't. To contrast, when the new Jay-Z/Kanye track dropped me, my neighbor, every damn one pretty much heard it within the same 24 hour span. And we all formed our own opinion. Some liked it but most I talked to - a broad range of people into different genres didn't enjoy it or found it disappointing etc. I go on soulstrut and that sentiment is echoed. Then a week later complex roundtables tastemakers on Otis. And most review it glowingly. but really, what's the point then? Everyone's already heard it and no opinion is going to get swayed, especially by laughably inaccurate representations of the music ("the most skillful chopping and reconstruction we???ve seen" - ORLY?). So yes, I find that a striking example of how irrelevant modern tastemaking and crit is.
More importantly, the idea that (as some have stated here) Critics are somehow engaged in a dialogue with artists to help advance hip hop is wrong. It's simply not whats happening, ask O-dub. We had a laugh about a few horses he picked in the early 2000's as a rap critic. They are all gone now. The reality is the majority of non-megastar artists are in the streets creating and are engaged in their own context. And they didn't give a damn what anyone says about anything, let alone academia (or acedemic criticism for sport). That context, once a critic or academic tries to pin it down, analyze or catalog it or heart of darkness it or whatever it shifts again - inadvertently making the criticism irrelevant.
So as an academic paper i think its great, and a nice mind workout. But it has no bearing on the actual art or artists and will not, guaranteed.
"From a broad socio-economic perspective, we can look back at the history of rap and see that, for decades, it???s been on the career path of conservative co-opting and commercial interests where it finds shelter today. "
only if it is what he says it is!
:post_modern:
this has been fun and i've tried to help 10 page it, but i think we're losing steam and i'm prolly coming off like a troll so im audi. No ill will yall. I got to go party.
I don't see how my previous statement on critics and the analogy laid out here contradict
I'll bet you don't.
No ill will here, either. Enjoy your party.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
To me. this is actually the most disturbing sentence on that whole blog page...
Once I got it home and listened to it, I was immediately disappointed.
b/w
Bam got Salmade in the comments section!
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
FrankieMeltzer said:
When's the last time there was a thread this long here about an actual rap record?
b/w
I laughed a few times about the article's Greil Marcus Jr. approach. Were the French Situationists mentioned? I might have missed that part when I fell asleep.
I still warmly recall that 23-pager around the time the second Clipse album came out. Ah, those were the days.
And yeah, Guy Debord got a shoutout. I guess that's a full house.
More importantly, the idea that (as some have stated here) Critics are somehow engaged in a dialogue with artists to help advance hip hop is wrong. It's simply not whats happening, ask O-dub. We had a laugh about a few horses he picked in the early 2000's as a rap critic. They are all gone now. The reality is the majority of non-megastar artists are in the streets creating and are engaged in their own context. And they didn't give a damn what anyone says about anything, let alone academia (or acedemic criticism for sport). That context, once a critic or academic tries to pin it down, analyze or catalog it or heart of darkness it or whatever it shifts again - inadvertently making the criticism irrelevant.
So as an academic paper i think its great, and a nice mind workout. But it has no bearing on the actual art or artists and will not, guaranteed.
"From a broad socio-economic perspective, we can look back at the history of rap and see that, for decades, it???s been on the career path of conservative co-opting and commercial interests where it finds shelter today. "
only if it is what he says it is!
:post_modern:
I find it funny that you speak of critics helping or not helping "hip hop advance" and then equate that process with "picking horses." Artists as commodities indeed.
You seem to make no distinction between Ebert type of reviews (buy this record/leave it on the shelf) and criticism that potentially increases your understanding and enjoyment of the art. If music is nothing but a commodity, and the bottom line is "should I get this or not," then sure, "criticism," as we have grown to know it, has become irrelevant to a degree.
You suggest this maverick mentality that artists should create, and are creating, art in a vacuum, not "giving a damn what anyone says about anything." That's a romantic notion, and brought to its logical conclusion, you will soon not only be irrelevant, but engaged in the worst kind of artistic masturbation. The fact is that even the most radical artists share their values with someone, otherwise they would be solo artists in the truest sense.
And from another perspective, these artists engaged in their "own context," out in the streets, don't give a damn about criticism and academia and what not, yet they are immune to society at large? The same society that treats music (and people) as a commodity, a means to an end?
"only if it is what he says it is!" That's the worst kind of relativism to me. "Life is what you make it, son!"
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
HarveyCanal said:
To me. this is actually the most disturbing sentence on that whole blog page...
Once I got it home and listened to it, I was immediately disappointed.
b/w
Bam got Salmade in the comments section!
Indeed he did. Boots seemed to take it with good humour, though. Glad to read how well he's doing, too.
...rappers such as Ice-T, Jay-Z, Too Short, 50 Cent, Ice Cube, Gucci Mane, Tupac, and so on, are made celebrities and criminals simultaneously. Their cultural weight as a celebrity is voided by their criminality. Conversely, their criminal record taints their integrity.
who's wearing the the little-boy shoe in this list?
I wonder if this oversight is related to the general "wacky clothing/crazy 70s slang" pimp image that has pervaded pop culture. On some "man, those pimps sure do dress funny!" shit, as opposed to "man, that pimp sure knows how to psychologically and physically abuse women!"
Comments
You gotta take it a step further though to enter the realm of revolutionary. I'm not saying dudes merely being forthcoming that they are on planks every day is revolutionary. I'm saying that dudes saying they are willing to give up their lives/souls just to put some presents under the Christmas tree is revolutionary in both its honesty and its insurgency...especially as compared to dudes a few years ago lying about how much money they're making just to be comparable to industry kingpins like Jay-Z. Maybe not to everyone's ears/eyes but to mine at least, said change in perspective has definitely occured.
I think you meant "ruse" and "pat," but the funny thing is that it also kinda works just as it's as written.
Yes, it's a flaw in the relationship between those "tastemakers" and art/artists.
At best it catapults tylers, at it's worst we get disconnected heart of darkness-esque pseudo academic ramblings.
Either way it's funny how disconnected that makes them. The assumption that any of this critical masterbation dictates what's what, relevance, etc is laughable. Especially when a piece has to tell is what rap "was, so we can be explained now what it "isn't". IMO, once that happens, it's already irrelevant.
I don't disagree with your main point. Yet you seem to imply that these "new industry" models sprang up from out of nowhere. 100% of artists working today are, up to a point, children of the major label (i.e. capitalist) system.
In other words, if aliens landed here, reset our brains and introduced some truly new business models, then, perhaps, the Marxist (or whatever kind of) analysis would be inapplicable.
what about the cats who never got on a major label and just sold their shit hand to hand?
even when the industry was alive there were alot of dudes who circulated their shit w/ out a major labels help.
Hustlin has always been around this game before the industry collapsed. Bad art or not.
Even if those cats aspired to get on def jam someday you have to take that hustle into account when discussing the game.
the artform is not just the industry.
i dont agree that every artist workin today shaped his game from the major label system.
i still see bad stickers of local dudes from time to time trying make name for themselves.
Is there such an assumption? That piece actually made me realize how hard (impossible?) it is not being complicit in the system... Ideally, there is a dialogue between criticism and art that helps both move forward. I don't know if it's healthy for any artist to take up this "I Am Hip Hop" stance (no Anticon/Lil Wayne), and close their ears to "outside" opinion. And critical masturbation doesn't really begin to hold a candle to the artistic masturbation that is rap:
Am I remembering correctly that you're the dude who, a little while back, said that all music writing/criticism was rendered irrelevant as soon as the internet made it possible to hear whole songs?
No doubt, I do "take that hustle into account," but for most people selling tapes out of a trunk is a stepping stone, not a statement. Once that hustle becomes bigger, i.e. organized, it is organized according to existing business models--even if that business model looks "new" on the surface. All of the successful independents, too, are indirectly tied to some part of the system. You sell your shit on Itunes? You're linked to a "new" feature of the same old industry, even if you're not on a major label per se.
Correct, I am the person who stated that (though that's a broad paraphrasing) - and assuming your statement was being facetious I don't see how my previous statement on critics and the analogy laid out here contradict. If anything two sides of the same coin:
1) Now that everyone can hear music instantly as opposed to writers getting advanced copies of records to review or critique the role of said review or critique doesn't hold nearly as much weight (i would argue it holds none). That old system helped give criticism the illusion of being in the moment when in fact writers needed that time to listen, write and publish - and their opinions would often be the fans first exposure to an album. I bought countless rap albums in the early 90's the day they came out based solely upon Source reviews - some lived up to the critical review, some didn't. To contrast, when the new Jay-Z/Kanye track dropped me, my neighbor, every damn one pretty much heard it within the same 24 hour span. And we all formed our own opinion. Some liked it but most I talked to - a broad range of people into different genres didn't enjoy it or found it disappointing etc. I go on soulstrut and that sentiment is echoed. Then a week later complex roundtables tastemakers on Otis. And most review it glowingly. but really, what's the point then? Everyone's already heard it and no opinion is going to get swayed, especially by laughably inaccurate representations of the music ("the most skillful chopping and reconstruction we???ve seen" - ORLY?). So yes, I find that a striking example of how irrelevant modern tastemaking and crit is.
More importantly, the idea that (as some have stated here) Critics are somehow engaged in a dialogue with artists to help advance hip hop is wrong. It's simply not whats happening, ask O-dub. We had a laugh about a few horses he picked in the early 2000's as a rap critic. They are all gone now. The reality is the majority of non-megastar artists are in the streets creating and are engaged in their own context. And they didn't give a damn what anyone says about anything, let alone academia (or acedemic criticism for sport). That context, once a critic or academic tries to pin it down, analyze or catalog it or heart of darkness it or whatever it shifts again - inadvertently making the criticism irrelevant.
So as an academic paper i think its great, and a nice mind workout. But it has no bearing on the actual art or artists and will not, guaranteed.
"From a broad socio-economic perspective, we can look back at the history of rap and see that, for decades, it???s been on the career path of conservative co-opting and commercial interests where it finds shelter today. "
only if it is what he says it is!
:post_modern:
this has been fun and i've tried to help 10 page it, but i think we're losing steam and i'm prolly coming off like a troll so im audi. No ill will yall. I got to go party.
best part of this thread so far.
No ill will here, either. Enjoy your party.
b/w
Bam got Salmade in the comments section!
I still warmly recall that 23-pager around the time the second Clipse album came out. Ah, those were the days.
And yeah, Guy Debord got a shoutout. I guess that's a full house.
I find it funny that you speak of critics helping or not helping "hip hop advance" and then equate that process with "picking horses." Artists as commodities indeed.
You seem to make no distinction between Ebert type of reviews (buy this record/leave it on the shelf) and criticism that potentially increases your understanding and enjoyment of the art. If music is nothing but a commodity, and the bottom line is "should I get this or not," then sure, "criticism," as we have grown to know it, has become irrelevant to a degree.
You suggest this maverick mentality that artists should create, and are creating, art in a vacuum, not "giving a damn what anyone says about anything." That's a romantic notion, and brought to its logical conclusion, you will soon not only be irrelevant, but engaged in the worst kind of artistic masturbation. The fact is that even the most radical artists share their values with someone, otherwise they would be solo artists in the truest sense.
And from another perspective, these artists engaged in their "own context," out in the streets, don't give a damn about criticism and academia and what not, yet they are immune to society at large? The same society that treats music (and people) as a commodity, a means to an end?
"only if it is what he says it is!" That's the worst kind of relativism to me. "Life is what you make it, son!"
Indeed he did. Boots seemed to take it with good humour, though. Glad to read how well he's doing, too.
I think that means one thing...I'm rich, beeyatch!
or at least white,
JRoot
who's wearing the the little-boy shoe in this list?
As all the others have faced criminal charges/gone to a correctional facility
he never pursued that criminal image, did he?
Pimpin' is legal?
I wonder if this oversight is related to the general "wacky clothing/crazy 70s slang" pimp image that has pervaded pop culture. On some "man, those pimps sure do dress funny!" shit, as opposed to "man, that pimp sure knows how to psychologically and physically abuse women!"
awfully different from the rest of the dudes referenced, no?