American Politics & Pop Culture

During the lecture we discussed Hip-Hop and rap. The initial discussion revolved around what hip hop and rap are. On this topic one of the presenters made a very nice quote that “rap is the literature of Hip-Hop”. This portrays very nicely how the presenters were saying that Hip-Hop was a lifestyle and rap is a part of that.

Another interesting topic that was brought up was that their does not really seem to be any literature of America. I think the presenters were correct in that we could not pick a genera or set of authors who write “American literature”. On this topic I think the presenters were 100% correct in that popular music is the literature of America. It represents the culture and beliefs and attitudes of most Americans as it reflects their beliefs.

I disagree with the statement that modern rap is a dilution of real rap as the presenters put it. Rap is a type of music and thus through it opinions and causes can be represented but that does not make rap a part of those causes. When the music rap was introduced to mainstream culture the music form was adapted to represent the more mainstream beliefs and customs of the majority of America. This does not mean that it was diluted, it means that it changed to represent a different belief system. Also even though rap often ignores social and political issues I do not believe that it is due to a dilution of what rap is, but instead is a reflection of mainstream culture not caring nearly as much as the initial producers of rap about those subjects.

I also disagree with classifying graffiti as art. It is possible that some people consider it so, especially those making it, but I do not believe it makes it art. It is vandalism and should not be looked on in a positive light.

I also think that people who create hip hop define what hip hop is and that is what causes the gap between academics and rappers. Academics try to define something that I believe changes continuously with time. This means that once they have a definition of what Hip Hop is they are placing a constraint upon something that will not be able to be defined by that definition days or years from its conception.

I also believe that a large part of the fall of the popularity of rap as a social tool was caused by the producers of it not adapt to social changes. They sung about important issues but as these issues became unimportant to most America they did not changing what they were singing about, or at least saying it in a different way. This made their music loose its effectiveness.

Posted by andre368 at 11:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I thought this weeks panel discussion on Rap/Hip-Hop was extremely interesting, and I thought Professor Tate and Professor Riviere did an excellent job in thoroughly answering all of the questions which Anthony asked them, many times going above and beyond what was asked. Both of the Professor's showed that they knew a lot about hip-hop culture, and you could tell that they were passionate about it in the way that they answered the questions. I have been listening to "underground" hip-hop almost exclusively for the past six years, and a lot of what intrigues me about the genre is the lyricism, or as Professor Tate likes to call it the "rap poetry", part of the music. I enjoy listening to hip-hop that makes me think. Slug (from the Minneapolis based Atmosphere) is a "rap poet" who intrigues me because his style of lyricism revolves heavily around complex metaphors, and the human psyche. Most of his rhymes cannot simply be taken at face value; they have to be dissected, a lot of the time extensively, if you really want to understand what he is trying to say. I actually LEARN stuff when I listen to Slug; I rarely learn anything listening to KDWB or B96. Because I focus most of my attention on the lyrics in hip-hop songs, I agreed with most of what Professor Tate had to say. I really liked his analogy of radio-rap being the Stephen King novel of the genre. If I want to be entertained without having to do too much thinking, I can pick up a Stephen King, or a Tom Clancy novel. If I want to be entertained, but have to actually think about what I'm reading, I'll read F. Scott Fitzgerald or Toni Morrison. I do listen to mainstream rap, I admit it. The thing is, when I listen to it I am almost always at a party or something similar. That is another point that I think Professor Riviere brought up. She said that conscious hip-hop will never be mainstream because you can't dance to it or bump it in the club. Also because the majority of people are too stupid to understand what conscious rappers are trying to say, but that's a whole other story. Anyway, thanks to this discussion I am going to try to take a class from either Professor Tate or Professor Riviere this summer because they clearly know what they are talking about, and I want to learn more from people who think about the culture similarly to me.

Posted by ruppx051 at 11:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

With hip-hop on the rise it's a troubling subject to really define. I would like to pan off of the quote I had placed in my question by the author Reyhan Harmanci that states, “An urban, youth-oriented culture based on rhyme and color that originated in the black and latino communities in New York during the 70’s.” This quote starts of our definition very broadly. Yes, I believe that hip-hop did start of in the 1970's, but this was also the era of hippies and John Lennon. Could rock possibly put an influence in on hip-hop, instead of stereotyping the black and Hispanic cultures?

We talked about how rock in the mid-1900's could have caused women to become un-pure, which most likely was stemmed from boredom. We talk about how hip-hop is so dangerous to our younger generations that know more than we did at the age of 12, but we never blame this on the music. I believe that by looking at all the beneficial factors that my working definition of hip-hop is..."A teen/youth-oriented culture based on rhyme, rhythm, and movements that could has originated from all types of music, rock, big band, early rap, ect. It is an artist way of expressing oneself and creating a new sound for new listeners (i.e. the new youth generation)."

Posted by carr0445 at 11:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the questions that I submitted was about whether or not hip-hop artists viewed hip-hop as a job or a lifestyle. The discussion of hip-hop in an art form versus hip-hop as a job came up. Alexs was discussing how he feels that hip-hop is his job and he aims to make sure that there are always people that are professional at analyzing the hip-hop scene. He said he thinks it is extremely important to have a strong separation from hip-hop academia and actual hip-hop art. I could tell that he had a high level of respect and knowledge of the hip hop world. He also made it clear that he knows that his expertise is the analytical factor and not the actual performing, and he made it clear that it was not important to him if he was liked by the performers. He mentioned that he has met numerous "stars" if you will and it is not his goal to be liked by them. I thought Melissa's theory about territory was also very interesting because it is completely true that it is a groups duty to defend their turf. So, the answer to the question would probably be that there are many aspects to the hip-hop world and depending on which part you belong to , academics or performing, is the deciding factor as to whether it is viewed as a job or a lifestyle.,

Posted by cloy0004 at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It was interesting to have a lot of the facts and fogginess surrounding rap and hip-hop, and the culture that goes with them explain to me at this week’s discussion with Melissa Rivere and Professor Alex Pate. My questions had to deal with the violence associated with rap music and the venues associated with it. While these questions weren’t overtly answered, there was a lot of good information presented that allow me to better understand and try to answer them.
The violence associated with the music probably has to deal with the popular masculine message being presented; this message being popular to the ‘tough guy’ image which is portrayed by the people who listen to and purchase the music. The evolution of the message of financially successful rap, deemed ‘popular’, leads to the pushing of issues that are seen as profitable without really seeing what the message is that is being presented. This message is absorbed by the listening public and although not immediately shown, is seen as typifying the crowd associated with that music, which makes the people who are listening to that music, themselves being viewed as violent.
My other issue, dealing with the academics and hip-hop, was answered by Pate and Rivere. They felt that much of the academic learning and information being presented took too specifically one issue of rap or hip-hop and tried to explain the entire culture without looking at how the entire culture affects everything inside of it. Pate also felt that rap should continue to push out the message even though if it was unpopular with academics or popular culture, and that the study of rap shouldn’t deal with how the culture affects popular culture, more that it should be viewed upon as modern literature, the poems of today, and the job of academics were to sort through the messages being presented and disseminate and objectively rate them.

Posted by nemme003 at 11:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This was a fairly expansive discussion considering how broad the topics were and a lot of ground was covered, so I will try to touch on all of the issues where I had specific comments. First, I was somewhat bemused by the attempts to place hip-hop music/culture in a box as defined by academia and scholarly work when so much of its counterculture appeal has been about NOT being able to be so easily classified and broken down. The old rhetoric of the "four elements" is one that gets tossed around a lot and is great for talking about a historical discussion of early hip-hop, but it doesn't feel relevant anymore. (When was the last time b-boys been a big deal...'85?) Connected to this framing of hip-hop, I also felt like there was heavy emphasis placed on the artistic/stylistic aspects of rapping, graffiti, and the like, and less discussion about the social causes and effects that contributed to and emerged out of hip-hop as it grew to national prominence. (As this is American Studies I guess there is only so much we can say about international hip-hop and local politics abroad.)

I would have liked to have heard more discussion about the social influence of hip-hop which would have been more in keeping with. Examining hip-hop as an art form is great, but when you get down to nitpicking about who is lyrical, conscious, or worthy of literary attention, I felt like the more important points about WHAT they were actually saying were glossed over.

I was also disappointed by the seeming distate and automatic write-off of anything that didn't meet the particular critical tastes of the panelists. They are all certainly entitled to their preferences, but to dismiss more "mainstream" rappers as being not worthy of scholarly attention seemed odd to me, as these were and are the people who are impacting the largest audience and having the biggest effect on how hip-hop is perceived and reacted to in the country. Therefore, despite the crudeness and lack of poetic of "popular" rap music of then and now, be it NWA 20 years ago or a modern rapper of today, to imply that their music and the social reaction to it is somehow less valid seemed odd to me.

I also liked the points that were made about the decline of "conscious" rap and what accounts for its relative scarcity today as opposed to previous decades. I would have liked to see something more said about "gangsta" rap as kind of filling the void of social critique, for as hard-edged and un-poetic as it sometimes might be, much of it still has a lot to say about urban life, "the struggle," or what have you. Certainly, as Alexs Pate said, there is a lot of "bad rap" out there, but to only acknowledge that super-lyrical, conscious-to-a-fault artists of today Talib Kweli or Mos Def have something genuine to say irritated me, which was what Pate seemingly implied. Overall I enjoyed the discussion but again, I felt that too much time was spent discussing the artistic elements of hip-hop and the panelists' personal stylistic preferences rather than talking about the cultural and societal impact hip-hop has had on the U.S. as a whole.

Posted by woitx002 at 11:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The thing that struck me the most about the discussion was that "hip hop is the carrot" when it comes to academics. A class about hip hop or rap is not necessarily a class solely dedicated to that subject. Hip hop provides the framework to discuss important cultural topics such as censorship and civil rights. Also, the fact that the panel thought it was important to keep academics separate from the hip hop community was interesting. They thought it is good that the teachers and professors stay "objective observers" because it makes it easier for them to comment on the community. When you look in from the outside and your not in the thick of things you can make unbiased commentary and observations. I agree with the fact that the professors need to stay somewhat separated from the culture but they cannot be completely out of touch. They should be respected within the community or they will not hold any credibility.

Posted by fran0723 at 11:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The panel discussion on hip-hop and rap was quite informative and spoke to many of the issues that face rap today. As time has gone on, hip-hop and rap have not necessarily lost all of their ability to artistically express political and societal issues, but it has become more of a rarity. As one of the panelists said, rap in America has started to be made more for entertainment value. Yet, in many other countries hip-hop has truly turned into a form of political expression. Because rap in America is made primarily with the intention of providing entertainment, some of the artistic expression of this music form has been hidden.

Hip-hop and rap both mean different things to different people. As in any form of expression (art, music, film, theater, etc.) there are different stories and morals expressed and all people decipher these messages differently. The mainstream tends to take rap and hip-hop at more of a surface level. If the music and the beat are good it will get listened to. Whereas the minority tend to look at the deeper message conveyed through this type of music and can relate to a lot of what is being said in these songs.

Posted by Martine Schroeder at 11:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Hip-hop is a culture that includes graffiti, break dancing, dj-ing and lyricism. It is a label that also encompasses the myriad aspects of the culture ranging from fashion and social to history and politics. Overall it is meant to be a form of oppositional expression questioning the mainstream. As Melisa said it is an attempt to “reunite marginalized community in a positive way against oppression”. Often attributed to a cluster of artists in the Bronx in the early 70s, hip-hop has expanded to become a mainstream culture itself.
As hip-hop has moved past a localized manifestation confined to a select group it has lost some of its unifying characteristic. Particular regions have their own styles and language that are directed at a specific audience. Furthermore there is an increasing categorization of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ hip-hop that escapes consensus. While most agree that commercial hip-hop and rap is more popular for its head bopping beats and big label backing, therefore ‘bad’; there is less agreement on what qualifies as ‘good’.
Simply being commercially successful is in a way ‘good’ as the message is sent to so many more receivers. However frequently the lyrics are devoid of any oppositional stance and are simply glamorizing questionable elements of the hip-hop life style. The focus on bling bling and misogyny towards women are two examples of this. It reinforces negative viewpoints instead of unifying and oppressed people. At the same time it reconfirms stereotypical expectations of the mainstream.
The current hip-hop debate is especially pronounced in academia as universities try to include this influential way of life in scholarly pursuits. The ever changing culture and general distrust of establishments can further confuse the situation. To be respected in academic circles one needs background in a variety of fields that can simultaneously remove a certain amount of credibility within the street community. It is important for ‘experts’ to have grounding in both worlds yet maintain their objectivity to effectively contribute to a meaningful discussion of hip-hop.

Posted by shaw0139 at 11:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In the discussion panel this week, Alex and Melissa discussed the importance that there is much more to hip-hop and rap than meets the eye. It is much more than just music and the popularity contests of these “iconic” rap artists controlling the industry. For many it is a way of life and a culture. Unlike these “artists” that are producing this mainstream “bad rap” music, Alex and Melissa explained that those that live and breathe true hip-hop and rap are musical poets. These musical poets produce the “good rap” music, but it does not get played on the popular radio stations. It is forced to remain underground because major corporations buy all the air time to ensure their bad rap is played. I found it interesting that hip-hop is considered the culture and rap is the literature. The lyrics of the “good rap” contain information pertaining to the artists, like where they are from and the events that have shaped their life. Hip-hop and rap bring the community together and addresses issues of the society.
This was all really interesting to me. I had previously presumed rap and hip-hop were perhaps rivals. But learning that they are connected and in fact a part of each other was very interesting. I prefer hip-hop over rap, but then again we are only exposed the “bad” stuff on the radio. The panel discussion was interesting and informative this week. It was nice to learn from people involved.

Posted by elmxx014 at 11:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In his article, Foucault’s Turntable: Hip-Hop Scholars Bumrush the Academy, Hua Hsu argues that recent scholars have changed the way in which they approach the study of Hip-Hop. For example, Hsu uses Todd Boyd, a scholar, as an exemplar for this new approach. According to Hsu, Boyd states that, “In [his] mind, a lot of universities have been behind—they wait for something to happen and then they jump on it. To [him], that’s a very old-school model. The academy should anticipate and predict situations so as to inform not only members of the academy, but society at large.” I can go about commenting on this statement in one of two ways. First is the pre-hip-hop rap panel discussion response. Before last week’s forum, I simply would have said that I agree with this comment wholeheartedly. It made complete sense to me that instead of sitting back and letting the curriculum dictate the classroom setting, it is more alive and efficient to predict the next trends of the hip-hop movement in order to learn them as they are happening. With this methodology, Boyd is staying with the movement instead of lagging behind it.

However, after the hip-hop panel discussion, I may not entirely agree with Boyd’s teaching style. Both speakers involved in the discussion stressed the importance of history in hip-hop. The past truly defined hip-hop and made it into what it is today. The new trends that are emerging in hip-hop are not predictable, but fluid, and have deep historical roots. While Boyd may have an advantage in following the many hip-hop movements because of his ability to foresee such trends, staying side-by-side with hip-hop is irrelevant if you don’t know the origins of such a culture. As Melissa Rivieré said in the discussion—“You have to know where you came from before you can get where you want to go.”

Posted by stap0069 at 11:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In this week's reading, Thill argues, “Hip-hop art is way bigger than rap music, and in fact it is probably one of the biggest arts movements in the last few decades.” This statement implies a distinction between rap music and Hip-hop, and raises questions regarding what it is that sets them apart. Before this week’s panel discussion, I would have jumped to the conclusion that these two are one in the same. However, by observing the explanations offered by the expert panelists my original assumption proves to be very wrong. Hip hop is more than just a genre of music; Hip-hop is a culture. This culture, like that of many others, is one that strongly revolves around the idea of expression. This expression is multidimensional and can be observed through fashion, style, language, music, lyrics, graffiti, literature, and various arts. The experts explained this by describing the original dynamics of hip-hop as a combination of various expressions, and rap or lyricism being just one of these pieces that make up a total package of hip-hop.

Instead of limiting our understanding of this rapidly rising culture to stereotypical views such as the violent lyrics found in some “rap” songs, it is important to start thinking critically about this evolving culture, digging deeper than just the surface and finding the roots of this culture and examining it from several dimensions; something that is more commonly being done by academic institutions all over the country. By just one discussion, we are aready forced to think critically and have learned such basic things that might have been previously falsified, such as the distinction between hip-hop and rap music, and are significantly more well aware of the various dimensions that make up this cultural movement and the way it affects various aspects of popular culture, society, and even politics.

Posted by munoz047 at 10:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The panel assembled to discuss hip hop was a real eye opener. Looking back on the discussion questions I submitted, I realized that most of them came from such a narrow point of view. I guess that is the purpose of a class like this, to open eyes and give meaning to many of the things we experience on a day to day basis...To critically think about popular culture.
Professor Pate and Melisa Riviere were so knowledgeable on the topic of hip hop. I guess Melisa addressed my question of women in hip hop culture the most. Although she didn’t’ exactly address the question I had (whether the treatment or the portrayal of women in rap and hip hop was a reflection of street culture and vice versa) but she did explain women’s history in hip hop. Who knew the producer of Rappers Delight was a woman? Sylvia Wright as the owner of Sugar Hill records helped to push “Rappers Delight” into the mainstream culture and into the consciousness of the rest of America outside the Bronx. So I learned that the collaboration of both men and women fostered the growth of hip hop. Melisa also made the point that women who could MC were seen as masculine then, once they gained the respect of their peers, made the jump to sex pot MC. So the equal treatment of men and women MC’s is not perfect, progress is being made. Sex does sell, so sadly I think the change will be slow.
During the discussion someone made a statement to the effect that there is no more political message in rap or hip hop these days. That it is all fluff and groups like Public Enemy have gone the way of the dodo. I believe there are many young, promising artists in our midst. One of which is in our home town. I don’t think anyone brought him up but, what about Brother Ali? His “Uncle Sam Goddamn” has a potent political message and I wish I had brought him up in the conversation. He is definitely one to look out for. I wonder what Professor Pate thinks about him.

Posted by byro0028 at 10:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

First off I just want to say that I really enjoyed the panel discussion and what professor Pate and Melissa Rivere’s ideas on Hip-Hop. Before last weeks class I perceived Rap and Hip-Hop as the same thing, but I soon realized that they are not the same. Professor Pate explained that Hip-Hop is meant to bring people together while Rap on the other hand lyrically talks about murder, policy brutality, and racial tension.
Hip-Hop is growing in popularity it today’s society because it is about bring people closer together rather then promoting violence like rap. Hip-Hop is may not seem to be as popular because each generation change the vibe of the music. In the article Hip-Hop Chaos in Context talks about how Hip-Hop has been considered to be dead, but really it is because “there is a tension between the youth culture and the formerly youth culture” (Thill).
Hip-Hop is more then just a genre music, it brings people together for the great good of society

Posted by white968 at 10:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The rap and hip hop discussion was great. It was obvious that Alexs Pate, his TA, and Melisa Rivere were deeply passionate about the topic at hand. They provided an insight and redefined what I had never given much of a thought to before, rap and hip hop. Although my questions were not specifically answered, what was discussed during the panel opposed one of the things Jeff Change said from the interview with Thill Scott. Scott says that hip hop never really said "I am hip hop, and this is why?” I believe it was Pate who said "Hip hop is a culture guided by its opposition to mainstream." One of the main points of the discussion was to define hip hop and how and why it became what it was. Hip hop does address and define itself with its confrontational style.
There is so much to the hip hop culture that I was unaware of before the panel discussion, most likely because groups like public enemy aren't around to say something of substance today. I agreed whole heartedly with the point the speakers made about mainstream rap and hip hop and how their political messages have disappeared. The rap on the radio is not about defining ourselves or our generation, or really anything. Today music is extremely limited in order to comply with the clear channel bullshit, no on is acting out. I liked how Aleks Rate uses rap poetry and rap poets to define rap lyrics and rap artists. I like it because its how he looks at their work, as meaningful art. That's why he said the rap and hip hop on the radio are not good, you definitely can not call that poetry.

Posted by kolsu002 at 10:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

After listening to some songs written around the time of the LA race riots and listening to some of the rap songs that are popular today, I noticed a stark difference between the songs of then and the songs of now in overall content. This made me wonder why the rap music of the late 80s-early 90s had a very meaningful, and often political message, while the rap music that is widely heard and widely available today has very little meaning. The majority of the songs I have heard recently center around the topics of sex, the nightlife, superiority, and overall stupidity and egocentricity. Although rap music isn't my first genre choice, I respect all GOOD rap; rap with a purpose and a message as an art form. My question came after reading Theresa A. Martinez's "Pop Culture and Oppostitional Culture: Rap as Resistance." Martinez argues that gangsta rap music from the late 80s to the early 90s was a powerful outcry against the racist and injust establishment, and “perhaps, one of the most intriguing examples of…resistance” (Martinez 272). Does rap music today still seem to hold these important values and ideals that it did twenty years ago or has the message of the music completely changed direction? The answer to my question came briefly into the panel discussion, inspired by similar questions from the audience and answered by both Alexs and Melisa. The answer came in parts. First, Alexs referred to the crap you hear on the radio nowadays as "cookie cutter" rap, most likely produced and sold to you by someone who is capitalizing on the "sub-culture" movement and selling your image right back to you. Alexs said that this meaningless noise that fills the airwaves, clubs, and parties nowadays is particularly an American occurrence. He said that "on a global level, hip hop is still very political, and those outside of the US don't even consider the 'rap' coming out of the US rap at all." Good rap exists, it is just hard to find these days. "Conscious hip-hop," as it is called, is a unique art form and is great because it is real and deals with real issues that are a concern to modern people in those circumstances. We can all learn about problems people are dealing with by educating ourselves with this "conscious hip hop." I dig it.

Posted by probe001 at 10:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I can say that the panel discussion did open my eyes to the world of rap and hip-hop. I've never liked rap or hip-hop except for the occasional song, and this may be because I only hear mainstream music in these categories. The mainstream is used to get money and to create a certain environment that everyone is used to. The negative emotions shown in rap and hip-hop can be construed as violence towards those who are not privy to the inner working of the non-mainstream version of this music. I feel that I need to experience this music in its natural environment with it's ultimate message against the mainstream to be able to enjoy rap and hip-hop. Both of these are a culture that can't be disregarded just because many people on hear it on the radio or see it on tv. Cultures must be experienced before they can be praised or written off.

Posted by Chris Lewis at 10:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I really enjoyed the panel discussion this week. It was a very interesting look into today’s culture of hip-hop and rap, along with the challenges, and changes that have occurred. Both Professor Pate and Melissa Riviere’s ideas were very interesting. I was not aware of the major differences between rap and hip-hop, and before this panel just thought they were both regarded as the same genre. Professor Pate claimed that hip-hop is a culture, and rap is the literature of that culture. I further learned that hip-hop is meant to bring people together, while gangster rap looks at police brutality and racial tensions. This was very surprising, as I personally did not separate the two music genres.

It was very interesting to hear about the development of rap and hip-hop genres over the years. Both music genres are much more political than I thought. Melissa Riviere mentioned that on a global level, hip-hop is very political. Rose explained, “ rap’s (or Hip Hop’s) political development sustains that rap music was not always political” (pp. 276). Today, it isn’t used as much as a means for social change, which was the case when it began as an apolitical “party music”. Public Enemy was an example of the emergence of rap as a political cultural form. According to Rose “Public Enemy’s success opened the door too more politically and racially explicit material” (pp. 276). It was clear during the discussion panel that the use of rap and hip-hop is important, and has been used to be politically active. It was great to hear that, in parts of the world rap and hip-hop are still used to fight political power worldwide.

Posted by campb503 at 10:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In this week’s discussion, unfortunately I was not able to have either of my questions answered. However, my question can be related and answered using one of the discussions we had.

Sister Souljah, referring to rap music, states, “When you look at the dances you don’t see it and when you listen to the music and you don’t hear a call, then you missed the jam.” And Rose refers to the music as “volume, looped drum beats and bass frequencies.”

• What type of musical and social power does rap music have?

I refer to Alexs visualization of what rap really is. Rap is a sort of thing that you have on your street corner or in your neighborhood and how true or real the music’s meaning really is, is measured by the extent to which people from outside of the original group can understand and relate to the literature being expressed. An example of a socially weak music is the commercialized rap being broadcasted and force fed from the local, self-proclaimed hip-hop stations. This type of music has a widespread “understanding” and is seemingly applicable to just general scenarios like “In Da Club”. A socially powerful music is that of Mos Def who generally represents his hometown of Brooklyn and upholds that street corner shine. The social power seems to be greater the more unique and confined the music is.

Posted by luli0004 at 10:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

"Blood Brothers" by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is a provocative interview done on Albert and Allen Hughes with regards to "Menace II Society." It follows what happened to the two of them after the release of their box office hit and their fight to get to the top of their drama by showing the difference between "good" violence and "bad" violence. When we were in the discussion someone asked if where you were from or what your educational background was was a big deal within the hip- hop community? When Gates questions them about where they grew up the Hughes brothers get a little up in arms about it. They ask him another question. "You don't ask Spielberg that shit. You don't ask Tim Burton where he grew up." (Gates, 166). In the discussion the speakers believed that it does have to do with where you are from popularity wise. People might not respect you if you are rapping like you are from the ghetto when really you went to school for performing arts or grew up in a predominately white community like Tupac. Pate said that there is a place for intellectuals in hip hop and that it is necessary for someone to have a birds-eye view of the genre. He argues that there needs to be someone watching out, making sure these artists realize what they're putting out there or else they might lose focus of what they are trying to accomplish.

Another thing we focused on in the lecture was the importance of a 'hood or the place where an artist calls home. You hear all the rap artists talk about their different regions like East Coast, West Coast or "The Dirty," but they may not necessarily live there. They move out when they get rich. I thought it was awesome to here these brothers talk about how they still live in Pomona because that's who they are and that's where they shot their movies. They learned to direct from that culture.

Posted by stor0245 at 09:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Hip Hop forum with Alex Pate and Melisa Riviera was an eye opening discussion because I have never studied the history or investigated the subject matter deeply and have a light knowledge of this area. I wasn’t even aware there was a course on Anthropology of Hip-Hop. Or Rap for that matter. Through the media I was used to hearing how Hip-Hop is a degenerated music on the youth culture, but listening to the professors speak about how hip-hop was born from the Bronx of African Americans and Hispanic Americans as a reaction towards oppression of society and frustration changed my opinion about it. I didn’t grow up in America so I’m not aware of the earlier hip hop artists that are truer to the intentions of the art form. Hip Hop these days seem to have lyrics on the most superficial matters or degrading comments on female, which makes the art form even more unfortunate that conscious hip hop has been much less popular than the “popular” ones. Hearing about the politics of getting conscious hip hop music on the “playlist” radio stations was unbelievable for me, and further shows how capitalistic America is and genuine intentions for the best is pushed aside. I was skeptical when I read several articles on how the government distributed alcohol and drugs to control the rebellious groups but hearing it directly from the professors and how major record labels do not support real hiphop artists because of the nature of their content I find that upsetting. The forum definitely changed my perspective on hip hop and sparked my interest in listening to the old school hip-hop artists, and more respect for the art form and music.

Posted by lungx009 at 09:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My series of questions were based on Tricia Rose’s statement, “That a present day African American popular culture expression is yet another form of oppositional culture in the face of perceived institutional discrimination, racial formation and urban decay.” One discussion panel question I derived from this statement was how rap and hip hop artists are perceived by their own culture when they are no longer opposing the dominate mainstream, but instead, are participating in it? I believe that Melisa said it best when she referred to commercial hip hop and rap as “cookie cutter” hip hop and rap and what Professor Pate referred to as “garbage”. I don’t think either of them disagrees with the fact that hip hop still brings people together, but the opposition to the institution is no longer present once that artist is commercialized by the institution itself. My reason for believing this is due to a filter that I think all music goes through before it hits the mainstream and that primary filter would be the commercial potential of the song, not necessarily the political message. That is where the opposition is lost because the raps are no longer raw messages being sent out on the street corner or at a local venue, but instead mass produced and judged not on the content, but the marketability. So, to answer my own question, when rap and hip hop artists that represent the oppositional culture end up conforming to the mainstream then they longer pose a threat to the mainstream and lose their credibility.

Posted by cros0189 at 09:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This discussion really opened my eyes to the hip hop culture. I never really have been into hip hop but it was really cool to get the inside scoop on it. I kind of had always thought that hip hop and rap was almost the same thing. I didn’t realize that “rap was the lyrics to the hip hop culture.”
I also thought it was interesting that they both Alexs and Melissa thought that the music that we hear on the radio is not what true hip hop is. They said that it is all what the corporations want us to hear, that part of what we hear is due to how much money the company has to spend on “air time.” It made me laugh a little to think of my friends that are really into hip hop because technically they don’t know anything about the subject, because they listen to 96.3 and other radio stations like that.
I agreed with the fact that the hip hop revolution resembles the hippie movement. In both situations you have a group of people who are rebelling and starting a revolution. And they both used music as a tool. Alexs made a comment on how their culture wasn’t going to do it the way the republicans did, which is why they wore their pants on their ass and had their hats tilted to the side.
One more thing I thought was interesting was that they said there are no really good hip hop artist any more. How Public Enemy isn’t around anymore. A group that says it like it is. That rebels against the things that are oppressing them not about bitches, money, and cars like you hear today.

Posted by robak003 at 09:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I am not, and never have been, a fan of rap music, so I was a little skeptical coming into Wednesday’s discussion lecture. However, I was pleasantly surprised and captivated by both of the speakers, Alex Pate and Melisa Riviere, and I thought they provided many interesting views on the subject of hip-hop and urban culture. As someone who is almost always disappointed (and borderline disgusted) by the content of rap music, I was comforted when I heard the speakers say that most publicized rap music is not representative of true hip-hop and urban culture. I was impressed by Alex’s seemingly deep analysis of what he calls “rap poetry,” and would really love to take his class and learn more about rap poetry with more literary merit than the contrived disgrace on the radio.

I also found it interesting that the speakers (Melisa in particular) viewed the popularization of rap music and hip-hop culture as a form of suppression of the black community. The idea makes sense, as rap music at its inception was meant to be a protest of the mainstream ideals and culture. As the music becomes popularized and accepted into the “mainstream,” the music tends to lose its significance as a counterculture force. I can see how frustrating of a situation this must be for those who are working hard to fight against popular culture, making it a very powerful strategy for those orchestrating it. I think this strategy is used very frequently to crush minority opposition when it is rooted in a defiant form of expression.

Posted by dunh0037 at 09:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I thought that the hip-hop discussion panel was really intriguing, as it brought real world perspectives on hip-hop from two people who are true experts on the subject. That being said, I thought Alexs’ response to why academia and hip-hop should be separated was especially enlightening. In the article “Foucault’s Turntable” by Hua Hsu, Boyd is quoted as saying “In my mind, a lot of universities have been behind—they wait for something to happen
and then they jump on it…Within this group of people who write about hip-hop, I find that a lot of them have a bit of a moralizing tone to what they say. It should be about the culture—this is what it is, with all its problems, all its warts. Take it for what it is. Deal with it, break it down, chop it up, and leave it for somebody else to do with it what they want, know what I'm sayin'?” The question poised to Alexs involved what validation he saw for the apparent separation between the scholarly world of hip-hop and the streets that hip-hop ultimately originates. His response was that the scholarly world “should be separate” and that academia allows us “to think about it, not what’s the hottest.” Furthermore, he said that “if someone isn’t shepparding it, it will be marketed and fade to fad.” There is a lot of truth to what he said, as academia provides a way to be skeptical and objective about the hip-hop industry, and critique which way hip-hop is heading. I disagree that scholarly thinking alone will prevent rap and hip-hop from being bastardized and marketed, because the evidence is all around us that this is happening already. Take, for instance, what the panelists said about Nelly’s Air Force Ones song, which was ultimately created by Nike to launch its shoe line. Marketing is a necessary evil in our capitalist economy, but it detracts from the art and pure essence of what hip-hop is. By working in cahoots with “the man” to make a buck, the art form loses its anti-establishment edge.

Posted by ande4849 at 09:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Before I read the article on the interview with Jeff Chang, I thought the hip-hop culture was just about rap music. In the interview, Chang said that hiphop culture was designed to "bring people together and to raise the roof." During those days, the racial conflict between the black and the white culture was very bad, which forced the African American culture to produce what we called "hip-hop" these days. The black community attacked the social and political aspects of America by singing or rapping the lyrics. However, I thought that hip-hop culture these days talks more about sex, money and power instead of focusing more on the political and social issues. Chang believed that hip-hop culture is evolving from talking more about deracination, which is eliminating the racial issues. The question that i asked myself was that how the theme of "bringing people together and raising the roof" relates to the hip-hop culture that we have today, which, i think, focuses more on sex, money and power. I think over the last 20-30 years, hip-hop culture became a lot more subtle regarding the racial issues, which made the artists to talk more about what they desire and what they are proud of in today's society. I believe that black community talks about sex, money and power to show what they are capable of doing and i think thats the way they represent their culture - by showing those elements, i think, they bring people together. The racial issues today is a lot more subtle than it was back in the days, so I believe that these elements symbolyzes their culture and that's what they were desiring for the last few decades.

Posted by katay007 at 09:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I thoroughly enjoyed the discussion panel this week in class because it gave us a great inside look on the hip-hop and rap industry. Professor Pate and Melisa Riviere were extremely interesting and it was really cool to see the differences between the hip-hop and rap "spheres." After listening to the panelists I definitely stand by my beliefs in that I do not believe that vulgar lyrics have anything to do with the fact that hip-hop is at the top of the music industry. The hip-hop and rap industry has grown so much in the last 10-15 years and it is not because of the type of language that the artists are using in their songs. The way that children are brought up these days is a lot different than in the past and the music that they are listening to is also. According to Professor Pate, Hip-Hop and rap is a medium that helps to bring people together. The vulgar language has nothing to do with why hip-hop is at the top of the charts rather I believe that it has to do with the greater appreciation that us Americans have of the lyrics and the music that these artists are writing. I really enjoyed both panelists and I believe that they did a great job answering a lot of our questions that we had about the hip-hop and rap industry.

Posted by kapla137 at 09:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The panel discussion this week was very interesting and really put a real person’s perspective on the topic of hip-hop in today’s culture. We got a chance to listen to some different, opinionated, passionate views on the subject at hand. The question that I was most drawn to over the course of the discussion was the issue of what hip-hop does for the community. For example at one point Alex addressed the issue that hip-hop is a type of genre of music that could really bring people together. Hip-hop is produced by a variety of cultures and the enjoyment people get from the music really creates a common bonding ground for many different types of people. I also found it interesting when the panel touched on the issue of commercialism within the production of hip-hop and rap. Alex had some strong views on what he thought of commercialism and how large record labels tend to dominate the radio. Also, the fact that many radio stations plays the “popular” songs of the time, which really doesn’t give other music a chance to become as popular. This action by the record labels and radio stations can be seen as a bias action towards many other types of less “popular” or “radio friendly” music.

Posted by zabor005 at 09:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday’s discussion with Professor Pate and Melisa Riviere was extremely interesting and informative. As someone who does not listen to hip-hop or rap, the panel offered insight into a genre and social/cultural milieu I was not familiar with. Both Professor Pate and Riviere are qualified experts on the topic, as they both are involved in the artistic and academic aspects of hip-hop. This idea of expertise and credibility was discussed in some depth on Wednesday. The difference between hip-hop spheres in academia and the community play an integral role in how hip-hop is understood. Professor Pate said he there should be a separation of these two spheres. In order to have critical interpretation and explanation the divide needs to be kept, otherwise hip-hop turns into nothing more than marketing and commercialism. Riviere called this a divide between practice and theory, yet at the same time hip-hop can be used to entertain and teach. She noted that hip-hop can give insights into the justice system, marginalization and social change.

The sole academic study of hip-hop may lose some experts’ credentials without the aesthetic appreciation as well. Hip-hop is meant to bring people together, and without both aspects this is harder to accomplish. Marginalized people and their product of hip-hop cannot support the exploitation experienced when hip-hop is without academic examination. Gangster rap looks at racial tensions and police brutality. Other forms of hip-hop deal with government and personal empowerment, all of which need academic exploration. These issues are not always understood by those who do not have to deal with racism or inequality. Hip-hop can act as an “excursion into cultures different than your own,” which Professor Pate said is a good thing. Though scholarship focusing on hip-hop is young, it is out there and should be used in framing social and cultural understanding.

Posted by Candice Dehnbostel at 08:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I will admit that rap music and the hip-hop culture is not something that I actively pursue and consume. With that, I was somewhat skeptical that the panel discussion “Hip-Hop Culture and American Politics: Past and Present,” was going to be something that held my attention. Despite my trepidation, though, I found the panelists, Alexs Pate and Melisa Riviere, knowledgeable and informative, and their discussion interesting and thought provoking. They provided a different prospective to the world of hip-hop than that in which I was familiar (i.e. the “gangsta” stereotype) and made me understand the history and motivations behind this music and culture.

In preparation for the panel discussion, I prepared a question to be answered by the panelists. My question was regarding the overwhelming popularity of hip-hop music amongst the white populace. I was curious to find out what the draw was for this demographic, as it concerns issues that might not be relative to most. In addressing this question, Prof. Pate stated that it is harder to trace urban purchasing of hip-hop music and products, because it does not take into account the bootleg copies being produced and other indiscernible ways of consuming this product. For white consumers, with more of an expendable income, information on their purchasing habits are more easy to come by, as their purchases are usually made at large retailers, on the record. This explanation seems to address discrepancies in the product consumption records, but does not explain why there is such an interest in this music, by this demographic.

What both Prof. Pate and Prof. Riviere mentioned that might explain this interest, is the way hip-hop music and culture “brings people together.” They stated that rap and hip-hop is used when people want to resist and that it is essentially a rallying call, a means for people to gather and provide a united front against their oppressor. This explanation shows why not only white audiences, who may be fighting their “oppressor” on a more local or personal scale, but audiences the world over, have been drawn to the powerful medium of hip-hop music.

Posted by palaz012 at 08:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I really enjoyed the evening and particularly enjoyed what Profesor Pate had to say. I liked the way that I learned a lot more about hip-hop and rap rather than just knowing it as music that I listen to on a daily basis. It kind of put it in an new perspective for me.

Question: WireTrap mentions that hip hop is dead. But Jeff Chang disagrees and says that it is a different type of hip hop that was heard 10 to 15 years ago. What is your opinion on the condition of hip hop in today’s age?

Hip-hop has always been associated with the youth culture and not really with the older generations. Therefore, the hip-hop of today is different to the music that was classed as hip-hop 10 to 15 years ago. People of the older generation remember their style of the music, which is now completely different. Because of this they interpret it as being dead, as it is not what it used to be. So from that point of view, you could class hip-hop as being dead because it is not the same as it was a decade ago. However, like everything else in our world; it has evolved. The hip-hop of today's age reflects the youth of today. That is why it is not the same, but that does not mean it is dead. I would say it us very much alive, as it is a huge money making business. I am sure in another decade this same discussion will be taking place because, yet again the hip-hop music will be different from now and from the past, but it is because the people who are making it are putting their mark on o it.

Posted by culve018 at 08:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I enjoyed the panel discussion, but was disappointed when Prof. Pate left early. I was really interested in all he had to say, and felt the discussion was lacking after he departed. I felt in the short time he was there he really had everyone's attention and had many interesting things to say. I was expecting a longer session, and think the length of the evening may have been influenced by Prof. Pate's leaving. I am glad I was there, and it was very informative, just maybe not all that I was expecting.

The topic I took the most from was hip hop and how it translates to academics. Prof. Pate made a point that hip hop and the academic study of hip hip should be seperate from each other. His point was that the academics should be on the outside of the hip hop scene, in the background and listening to the music that is being produced. The academics are the watch dog that keeps the "poetry" real, and out of the mainstream. They are not the experts on the music, but they teach how to think about the music. Prof. Riviere made the point that hip hip is the carrot to get the student to learn other aspects of American history. By having students in her hip hop class, she is able to also teach them about other events in our history, such as the civil right movement.

Hip hop has sort of taken over for folk singers, such as Dylan and others, as the new protest music. Prof. Riviera made a good point about the lack of powerful political hip hop and rap today. She stated that when there is more repression there is greater protestation. Meaning that at this point in our history, there is less to protest about than there was in the past. There are still powerful messages coming out of hip hop, unfortunately, they are not getting mass play on radio stations and are more underground than in the past.

Posted by bela0003 at 08:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Question: How do you feel about the large trend of young white people attempting to adopt the hip hop "lifestyle" when it was born largely out of oppression, poverty, exposure to violence, etc., which many of the young white fans have never experienced?

Answer from Prof. Pate (extremely paraphrased): Any time one culture is actively exposing themselves to another culture, it is a good thing.

Professor Pate and Melisa had a lot of very interesting things to say during the panel discussion Wednesday. As a fan of hip hop, and most all other genres of music, I was excited to hear what they had to say. As a white person growing up in the racially homogenized suburbs of Milwaukee, I never experienced many of the things hip hop poets (to use Prof. Pate's term) spoke of. As I got older, branched out from white suburbia, and started to become "enlightened" to the social inequalities faced by Black individuals and other non-White people, I began to wonder if I had any business or "right" listening to hip hop. Listening to Mos Def's song, Mr. N****, is a prime example of this feeling I had. Mos raps about various experiences he has had with White people stereotyping him because he is Black. "Late night I'm on a first class flight, the only brother in sight, the flight attendant catch fright. I sit down in my seat 2C, she approach officially talkin' 'bout 'Excuse me'. Her lips curl up into a tight space, She don't believe that I'm in the right place. Showed her my boarding pass, and then she sort of gasped, all embarrassed put an extra lime on my water glass. An hour later here she comes by walking past, 'I hate to be a pest but my son would love your autograph', Wowwwww" (Mos Def). So, I'd listen to that song and in the back of my mind I'd wonder: "What if Mos Def was sitting next to me right now as I listen to his song about his experiences of white people oppressing him?" It definitely crossed my mind that he might say: "What the fuck are you listening to this for?", or something to that effect. Instead, reinforced by what Professor Pate had to say, I feel that Mos might be glad I was hearing his words. Even though I can't identify with the experiences Mos tells his listeners, I am learning through his song how racism is still a big problem worldwide. Although it isn't the same "brand" of racism it was 20, 50 or 150 years ago, it is still around. The flight attendant thought he couldn't possibly be sitting in first class because of her own prejudices. Once she realizes it is his seat, she gives him an extra lime to make it all better, then has the nerve to ask for his autograph, apparently not even realizing the gravity of her racist attitude towards him. It was an eye opening experience to listen to what the panelists had to say on Wednesday. I'll definitely continue to be a fan of hip hop, and hopefully the words from the artists I listen to will continue to enlighten me to the problems African Americans and others face in the world.

Posted by smit1989 at 07:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One thing I've never understood before last Wednesday was what the difference between Hip Hop and Rap Music was. Theresa Martinez' article introduced to me the idea that rap was a component of hip hop along with breakdancing and grafitti, but Alexs Pate and Melisa Reviere cleared that up even further. Pate claimed that hip hop is a culture, and rap is the literature of that culture. Moreover they discussed how hip hop was an oppositional culture making comments to the mainstream: low-riding pants, house shoes, and sideways hats being as social commentary more than bad fashion sense. This really blew my mind, personally, because I've always looked at that style of dress as disrespectful and grungy, but when I look at it that way-- it's just like how Muslims wear veils and Hmongs have their own traditional dress they wear sometimes, only those involved in the hip hop culture who dress that way are taking it a step further, using their clothes as a statement which I find very respectable. You kind of have to respect people who do their own thing in a country that encourages conformity and peer pressure.

Posted by bergm150 at 07:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)