Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

That hip hop in its birth illustrates that poor black communities can in fact DEFY market pressures at least when it come to the creation and consumption of art.


First, I explained quite clearly that Hip Hop developed - rose up from the streets - organically, but that it did not evolve that way. HB - perhaps I assume too much here. Please tell me what art form has been created by corporate America? Corporate America creates very little. It has spies everywhere who look for trends and gaps to fill - and then capitalizes on them. That's what it does.

No shit HH grew independently of big business. However we are not in 1980 talking about Rapper's Delight so unless you can understand that that particular point in time has little relevance to the condition of the industry now - then you can't understand anything about the industry and the art form today. It's like you're trying to define African America today by what it was like in 1865. It's a different world.

Furthermore, to be clear - rap did not develop against overwhelming inertia for it NOT to develop. Your characterization of that above is just plain wrong. It developed outside of the mainstream - which is, by defintion, where all discontinuous innovation occurs. But once record companies saw that there was something to this music, they came in with their dollars - to producers, artists, etc. And what did they (producers, artists, etc.) create? What would get them paid. Period.

quote:
I feel that you have never really understood this point I've been making from the very beginning.


I understand it. I disagree with it.

There was no oppressive pressure in place trying to prevent rap from starting. There is extraordinary inertia in the marketplace promoting gangsta rap currently. To try to compare a situation where something grows organically - on its own - without marketing and corpoate influence to an entire industry and the billions of dollars which flow through that industry and promote that industry and sustain it - is just flat wrong. The two cannot be compared.

I said before that there is a fire hydrant's flow of marketing FOR that music and a trickle for anything positive.

quote:
If you had, then the very LEAST you could say is "Marketing strategies are much more sophisticated and intense now than they were then.


OF course, but have you ever thought whyHB? If gangsta wasn't selling do you think the strategies would be more sophisticated and intense? Have you ever asked yourself why there isn't the same degree of "sophisitcation and intensity" invested behind conscious rap than gangsta?

That's the point!!!
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

PPS: Another response that would indicate that you understood what I'm saying would evoke the crack epidemic of the 80's and the subsequent weakening (in terms of vulnerability to external pressure) of our communities.


HELLO. The marketing of images and lyrics which glorify a lifestyle that includes things which make white folks happy to see - drugs, sex, violence, etc. - but which destroys our communities is something that I mentioned from the jump in this conversation and which you should be familiar with. That gangsta fits neatly underneath the over-all platform of white supremacy is something that I've tried to communicate before.
No. You missed again.

Yes. I understand very well the difference between not agreeing with the point ... and plain not seeing it ... I do this for a living, man: evaluating other people's understanding of ideas and concepts!

I don't believe that you see it.

You're right there was no market pressure AGAINST hip hop.

The market pressure was FOR something else.

Why didn't the something else win out? Roll Eyes

That in my view is the central hole in your argument.

It's where the circularity lies.

And you gloss over it again and again with this facile (but, in this context, irrelevant) distinction between organic and artificial development.

Where is the organic development TODAY?

Why is it that we had organic development THEN but are just helpless passive consumers NOW?

Have we lost the will for it?

Why?
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

You're right there was no market pressure AGAINST hip hop.

The market pressure was FOR something else.

Why didn't the something else win out? Roll Eyes

That in my view is the central hole in your argument.


Friend, my argument does not address the inception, genesis, or creation of Hip Hop. Nothing that I have said has any bearing on that/your point.

Beyond that, extending your argument appears to question why and how there is ever any innovation. In general, HB, business seeks to milk the current cow for as long as it can, but when that cow is dead - it searches for another. Believe it or not, companies made LOTS of money on disco. When disco died, the record companies dropped it and moved to the next thing. When gangsta is no longer hot, you can best believe that the companies will drop it too in search of the next big thing that will satisfy its consumers and shareholders.

Anything new develops "from the streets", from the inspiration of the artists who develop it. The artist creates both for the sake of art but also for the sake of financial enrichment. So s/he seeks out ways that the new art can be exposed to people and in so doing s/he can make a buck. If it the new work does well, other companies see that and see that a potential new trend is growing. Wanting not to be left behind (with the old cow) and to capture as much money from something new as possible - they jump on the new trend and create more of it. Companies always look to what other companies are doing in their innovation. No one wants to leave any money on the table or be left behind. Beyind that, as I've said, there is precious little innovation in corporate America. If someone smells something new and hot - they follow the herd to do it too.

Essentially, that's how new industries spring forth. Steve Jobs created the Newton - the first handlheld PDA. Unfortunately, he was even a bit too far ahead of the market and it was not popular. But some other company - namely PALM - saw something in the concept and developed a similar product. And the rest is history.

The development of Hip Hop is no different. The Newton, while conceptually similar, is miles apaprt from the current generation of PDA's. As you ask about Hip Hop, how did the Newton develop? How were consumers solving the problems that the Newton endeavored to solve before it was invented? Before PDA's there was overwhelming market inertia for people to manage their calendar's etc. via paper appointment books. The market pressure - as you put it - was overwhelmingly FOR something else - something other than the PDA. Despite that, someone developed a better mousetrap and voila. Over time, a new industry springs forth. Beyond that, you shouldn't be surprised that the industry looks different many years after its inception and corporatism and competition etc. in PDA's had its effect. Why do you question the impact that corporate America has had on Hip Hop?

No different in music. No different in Hip Hop.

quote:
Where is the organic development TODAY?


Whatever organic development that occurs today in Hip Hop is made invisible/inaudible by the fire hydrant's flow of marketing that is in place today trying to continue to milk the current iteration. As AG said, the evolution of Hip Hop is being artificially suspended by those who are getting fat off of the current stuff. If 75% of all music sales are coming from Hip Hop, then EVERYONE in the music industry has a DEEP investment in making money off of this music.

Why aren't hybrid or other alternative fuel vehicles more popular? (In this instance, there is even considerable consumer demand for it.) Why? Because there is extraordinary financial/economic/corporate inertia behind gas powered vehicles - from the oil companies, from the auto manufacturers, from oil retailers, etc. They have tremendous investment in gas vehicles and so they seek to perpetuate that cash flow for as long as they can.

quote:
Why is it that we had organic development THEN but are just helpless passive consumers NOW?


First of all - in general - consumers (i.e. the masses) do not develop anything. They never do. They are too busy trying to put food on the table and keep the mortgage paid to be thinking about developing new things. They (the masses) certainly did not develop Hip Hop.

Innovators develop things - perhaps by understanding underlying consumer behavior (trends, needs etc.) and psychology and extrapolating their new product etc. to fit that, but innovation - true innovation - discontinuous innovation - comes from mavericks who just see the world differently and create accordingly.

You confuse the creative efforts of innovators with consumer behavior. Those who created Hip Hop were innovators. The 75% of all record sales that come from Hip Hop are consumers. BIG DIFFERENCE.
Those innovators of hip hop had to have an AUDIENCE that was into what they were doing and NOT into whatever was current.

That is precisely what makes a cultural development "organic": You have to "move the crowd" ... there must be audience response.

In that response they become participants in the innovation.

Speaking as an artist, I think we're just permanently on different pages.

I find your view of people as "consumers" vs. "innovators" vulgar - and trite. It is a profound intellectual concession to the definitions and concepts of the very system which you claim to be opposing.

We will never be effective thinking like that. We might as well give up.

Ciao.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

Those innovators of hip hop had to have an AUDIENCE that was into what they were doing and NOT into whatever was current.

That is precisely what makes a cultural development "organic".

Speaking as an artist, I think we're just permanently on different pages.

Ciao.


Again - your comment has nothing to do with my commentary. I discuss that happened AFTER corporate America discovered rap.

Again - your argument infers that NO innovation can occur. We all know that that is absurd.
I disagree.


quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

Those innovators of hip hop had to have an AUDIENCE that was into what they were doing and NOT into whatever was current.

That is precisely what makes a cultural development "organic": You have to "move the crowd" ... there must be audience response.

In that response they become participants in the innovation.

Speaking as an artist, I think we're just permanently on different pages.

I find your view of people as "consumers" vs. "innovators" vulgar - and trite. It is a profound intellectual concession to the definitions and concepts of the very system which you claim to be opposing.

We will never be effective thinking like that. We might as well give up.

Ciao.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

I find your view of people as "consumers" vs. "innovators" vulgar - and trite. It is a profound intellectual concession to the definitions and concepts of the very system which you claim to be opposing.


Please list just one innovation that was created by "the masses".

Just one!
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
You have a fundamental inabilty to either support anything you say or just plain answer a straightforward question.


You haven't supported shit you've said either.

You've just applied the same TRITE reductionist logic to every post you've made.

You've supported or proved nothing.

You've shown yourself to be little more than a marketing major.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

I guess T.D. Jakes is also hot now because, though he's bad for us, he makes mucho dinero for gringos! Big Grin


As I suspected, you either haven't read much of what's in this thread or there's something preventing you from comprehending what's before you.



PROVE IT!


Above you say that TD Jakes is hot BECAUSE he makes money for white folks. You attempted this line of reasoning - creating a dependence upon white folks - a few pages ago and I replied as follows:

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
We consume the image (presumably) because of white dollars. Otherwise the image wouldn't be "damaging".


For the record, you've completetly lost me here. I don't see any connection between these two sentences. White dollars do not necessarily equate to "damaging".


Since you made this accusation before, and since I clearly refuted it, you therefore A) haven't read this before or B) do not comprehend what is in front of you.

PROVEN.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

As I suspected, you either haven't read much of what's in this thread or there's something preventing you from comprehending what's before you.



PROVE IT!


Furthermore, your insistence on referencing the creation of Hip Hop as proof of your point is just plain nonsensical and counter to everything that everyone else has said here. That HH was born outside of corporate America is not noteworthy (because its obvious), nor germane to my argument.

Everything that I discuss is about what occurred to Hip Hop AFTER corporate America got behind it. It is the impact of this corporate influence that I am talking about. The corporate influnce is the problem.

It's like me talking about the slavery and discrimination that African Americans experience in this country and you trying to refute that by saying that we were free in Africa before we came here. No shit. But what does that have to do with our African American history?
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

No. What I intended was: Prove that I haven't read or understood much of what was in this thread.


I just posted examples of that.

quote:
As for Jakes, I'm making the claim that his fat ass is damaging.

Maybe you should try to prove that he is not. Smile


The argument that "Jakes is damaging" is not parallel to my argument about HH. IF you argued that "Jakes is damaging becauase white corporate interests have unduly influenced him to "perform" in stereotypical ways that - while enriching him and corporate America - also do great harm to African America" - then we would be on parallel paths.

IF you argued that BTW - I'd probably agree with you - although IMO the stakes are not nearly the same. HH helps to define how the entire world views African Americans. When I was in Japan not too long ago - their entire youth culture was heavily driven by HH and African American youth. Jakes doesn't have nearly that kind of influence globally - outside of the AA community, so the degree of damage he can do is much less.
MBM:

Are you suggesting that the "in crowd", the "tastemakers" in the Black community have been bought off?

I suscribe to a basketball magazine called DIME ($.99 for a year - I'm a good bargain hunter, but I digress...). Every issue has a section of snapshots just showing what people "on the streets" are wearing. Some of these looks will become popular 12-18 months from now because of these trendsetters. Hip-hop in my experience has been driven the same way. Do you think the streets aren't listening to anything new? Or are you saying that the next big thing gets corrupted by dollars before it's introduced to the mainstream?
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
MBM:

Are you suggesting that the "in crowd", the "tastemakers" in the Black community have been bought off?


In part yes. Yes - the "in crowd" is now complicit in the marketing of "stuff" to the African American community. There are all sorts of companies - marketing agencies down to "street team" groups - who specialize in seeding product to us. When you see "wild postings" on telephone poles and buildings - those are there because someone paid A LOT of money for them to be there. When you go to a bar and a particular brand is being pushed - that's a part of a specific promotion that is bought and paid for. When we see artists wearing certain brands, many times it's because they are being paid to wear those things.

Beyond that, though, the corporate influence comes in where they put their money. First, as we've said, there is overwhelming money in the gangsta part of the industry now. A talented young artist comes up trying to make it and there are no record deals in R&B or conscious rap etc., but if s/he creates something in a more "popular" style - they get a deal. Also, record companies mold artists to fit within the box that they think will sell. It happens all the time - in music, in modeling, in acting etc.

quote:
Every issue has a section of snapshots just showing what people "on the streets" are wearing.


Back in about '95 I was VP marketing at a sports apparel company that was trying to break in more credibly into the "urban" market. What did we do? We sponsored the Rucker basketball tournament in NYC. Why? Because it put our brand and our product in the center of urban life (Harlem) and the basketball culture. All of a sudden some of best amatuer/street and NBA players were wearing our stuff - as well as the celebrities who were a part of the scene. I stood at center court shooting the shit with P.Diddy while his team warmed up and talked about the tournament and how we/he could potentially "push" our product/brand. Think about how Russell Simmons has merged the line between legitimate cultural icon and corporate shill. He pimps all sorts of stuff to us for corporate America. That's the way the game is played now.

quote:
Do you think the streets aren't listening to anything new? Or are you saying that the next big thing gets corrupted by dollars before it's introduced to the mainstream?


Sure - there are new things budding all over the world. In fact every legitimate apparel company large enough to do so sends designers and fashion folks all over the world to visit other cities and track trends and also to see what's up in other apparel shows etc. What I am saying about HH though - is that there is such an overwhelming inertia behind selling that music - because it remains so hot - that there is less of an incentive for companies to go after something that is untried and untested - as opposed to just keep riding the curren HH cash cow.

AND - when something new does surface - once it proves to be a big seller - the money that gets thrown after it can be intoxicating to those in that new area - and it changes things.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

No. What I intended was: Prove that I haven't read or understood much of what was in this thread.


I just posted examples of that.



No ... you most certainly did not.

I've noted below that you've misunderstood my Jakes analogy. I was not running it parallel. And you've wasted a lot of effort in trying to conform that statement to a prior post which you've also badly misconstrued.

So therefore you've shown this only if I buy into your reductionist assumptions which I have explicitly REJECTED.

PROVE THEM. PROVE THEM. PROVE THEM.

Do a better job please.


quote:

quote:
As for Jakes, I'm making the claim that his fat ass is damaging.

Maybe you should try to prove that he is not. Smile


The argument that "Jakes is damaging" is not parallel to my argument about HH. IF you argued that "Jakes is damaging becauase white corporate interests have unduly influenced him to "perform" in stereotypical ways that - while enriching him and corporate America - also do great harm to African America" - then we would be on parallel paths.



The whole point of explicitly noting it as a "side issue" which I am claiming was to note it as a separate issue altogether.

I was speaking tongue in cheek.

Although I do believe he is every bit as damaging hip hop. I simply don't care how others perceive us. So my only concern is how they both effect the community.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

As I suspected, you either haven't read much of what's in this thread or there's something preventing you from comprehending what's before you.



PROVE IT!


Furthermore, your insistence on referencing the creation of Hip Hop as proof of your point is just plain nonsensical and counter to everything that everyone else has said here. That HH was born outside of corporate America is not noteworthy (because its obvious), nor germane to my argument.


No. It contradicts your argument which I suspect is why you won't deal with it.

quote:

Everything that I discuss is about what occurred to Hip Hop AFTER corporate America got behind it. It is the impact of this corporate influence that I am talking about. The corporate influnce is the problem.


And according to you the corporate influence is all powerful. So the discussion is pointless.

quote:

It's like me talking about the slavery and discrimination that African Americans experience in this country and you trying to refute that by saying that we were free in Africa before we came here. No shit. But what does that have to do with our African American history?




The analogy is twisted. Hip hop was not created in Africa.

It was created in America in this consumer driven market economy.

The fact that it was born here is precisely the marvel that I'm pointing to.
quote:
Originally posted by AudioGuy:
The difference is that there is a balance in the white community... for every Tom C. that is negative, there is at least one Tom C. movie that is positive... that is positive... Not the case when it come to Black Cinema...


This is true. There aren't enough positive images of Black men in cinema and music. The same can be said for industries outside of entertainment. I also agree with you and Brother MBM that corporate executives have been more supportive of the more violent, angry, and aggressive expressions of Black music, because these expressions confirm Whites' perceptions of Black men and supports the perceptions that they want the public to have of Black men. HOWEVER, Black male rap artists have become privy to this, and they are and have been responding to it. Many of them have abandoned these parasitic record labels in order to become CEOs of their own record label while novice artists aspire to own their own labels in the near future. This is one solution that should NOT go unrecognized.

Now brother MBM makes the argument that White corporate executives and their interest in attracting and maintainig a predominately White consumer base is what is destructing hip hop. But what about those rappers who own their record labels and continue to create and disperse the same destructive music that was being promoted under the management of the corporate label? Doesn't Jay-Z own his own label, Def Jam Records? Why isn't he taking advantage of his freedom of expression by discussing more positive topics in his lyrics? Have you heard his latest single "Show Me Whatcha Got?" He's rapping about the same topics that he rapped about when he was a pawn for a record label (e.g., money, sex, and swagger). How is the music that he produces different from the music marketed by corporate executives?

quote:
C-rap was systematically eliminated from mass production by the rec. cos... not the artists. Rec. Co. execs chose not to allow c-rap to be produced because it caused young Black kids to question what was being fed to them in the educational system and on the daily news.


Ok, but Brother AG, that is your perspective of what happened to conscious hip hop. There are people participating in this thread who disagree with this version of events. None of us can say we know for certain why this kind of music became unpopular. Whether lack of label support or consumer disinterest is the cause, we can argue about this forever. For whatever reason, people just don't endorse music about being nice, good, and positive. Nowadays, people will laught at you if they hear you playing something about being kind and positive. You have to play something about getting money or hurting someone who disrespects you. Therefore, it takes a very gifted and talented artist to be able to make topics about positivity sound cool and appeals to the masses.

quote:
And for the record, Jay-Z's talent is marketing, not rap...


We definitely agree on this point. I was never feeling Jay-Z's music. However, in order for him to be successful in marketing, he had to build a reputation (a street credibility), which was largely built upon people's interest in his music.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
So let me rephrase my argument in YOUR terms:

Why aren't we producing more "innovators" within the community who run counter to the prevailing market trends?????? Smile


Could be any number of things:

There are few incentives for new creative work outside of the mainstream.

The incentives are so great within the mainstream that it suppresses creativity outside of it.

There are innovators, but they are less visible because of the overwhelming preponderance of mainstream market presence. It's like not being able to see a small star when it's in the halo of the sun.

We are at a natural low - for whatever reason - in music creativity.

Why do you reject the notion that innovation is being suppressed artificially in HH?
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

Furthermore, your insistence on referencing the creation of Hip Hop as proof of your point is just plain nonsensical and counter to everything that everyone else has said here. That HH was born outside of corporate America is not noteworthy (because its obvious), nor germane to my argument.


No. It contradicts your argument which I suspect is why you won't deal with it.


laugh

You're embarassing yourself here HB. Why not just walk away and save a little face? You keep digging yourself deeper and deeper into the abyss.

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

And according to you the corporate influence is all powerful. So the discussion is pointless.


OK Captain Redundant:

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

You just dodged it again ... Roll Eyes

The point: If the business has all the power you say it does to shape culture then hip hop would not exist at all.


Please show me where I said that.

What I have consistently said is that white folks put their money behind what they thought could make them even more money. That particular aspect of Hip Hop just so happened to be the lyrics and style and images that damage us as a community.

Since the money was behind that aspect of the culture - that aspect is what has developed - itself chasing after those white dollars.

PERIOD.


quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

It's like me talking about the slavery and discrimination that African Americans experience in this country and you trying to refute that by saying that we were free in Africa before we came here. No shit. But what does that have to do with our African American history?


The analogy is twisted. Hip hop was not created in Africa.


Oh OK - I get it. You got jokes!! lol
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:

Now brother MBM makes the argument that White corporate executives and their interest in attracting and maintainig a predominately White consumer base is what is destructing hip hop. But what about those rappers who own their record labels and continue to create and disperse the same destructive music that was being promoted under the management of the corporate label? Doesn't Jay-Z own his own label, Def JamRecords? Why isn't he taking advantage of his freedom of expression by discussing more positive topics in his lyrics? Have you heard his latest single "Show Me Whatcha Got"? He's rapping about the same topics that he rapped about when he was a pawn for a record label (e.g., money, sex, and swagger). How is his music different from what the music marketed by the despised corporate executives?


Good question. There might be black labels, producers etc., but corporate America has set the flow of what is popular and where the money is. The black labels just collect some of the crumbs essentially. Again, using the fire hydrant analogy. Corporate America turns the hydrant on - it is the black companies, labels, artists etc. who sit by with cups collecting whatever they can. They aren't driving the industry, IMO.
quote:
Good question. There might be black labels, producers etc., but corporate America has set the flow of what is popular and where the money is. The black labels just collect some of the crumbs essentially. Again, using the fire hydrant analogy. Corporate America turns the hydrant on - it is the black companies, labels, artists etc. who sit by with cups collecting whatever they can. They aren't driving the industry, IMO.


Then they are sellouts.
Are they sellouts Brother Dell, or don't they know any better. Jay-Z is ignorant. That's how I see him. He may be a great business man, or whatever. But he's ignorant. Nas even told him that he was, in so many words (remember the lyrical battle that ensued between the two artists?) According to my observations, there has always been this internal, invisible battle that's been going on between conscious rappers (Nas) and superficial rappers (Jay-Z) in the hip hop game. And there are a number of reasons why the superficial "bling" side is winning favor with the majority of America's music fans. Some of these reasons include, but are certainly not limited to the fact that

1. White people want to see and hear Black people thinking and behaving in ways that are compatible with the images and perceptions they have of us.

2. Most Black artists enter the music industry in order TO MAKE MONEY, and so they are going to produce music that will satisfy the MAJORITY.

3. America is a violent, materialistic, and superficial place in general. In America, negativity is rewarded and promoted. Kindness, consideration, and cautiousness are considered weak, feminine, or "pussy" traits. "Being a man" means to be rude, assertive, bold, arrogant, boastful, and ready to fight.

Eliminating this destructive misconception of manhood is what needs to happen if we want these brothers to stop this madness and stop living up (or living down) to Whites' negative expectations and perceptions of Black men.
And I'll add that we also need to stop excusing, overlooking, and ignoring the flaws that are so evident in White men's character. This culture let's White men get away with committing some of the most heinous acts against humanity, and yet somehow they are able to maintain an image of purity in the eyes of the majority of the American people. That is why superficial hip hop is not really not the source of the problem that we've been discussing. RACISM is at the heart of this problem. And racism is what we need to be focusing on. It seems that no matter what the Black man does (or doesn't do) he can never be trusted, honored, valued, or perceived as doing something positive.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
Oh OK - I get it. You got jokes!! lol



You haven't once dealt directly with a thing I've said.

You've talked around it the whole time.

Again and again you've addressed yourself to distortions and misreadings.

And it's because you don't understand it.

You've repeated the same unoriginal trite thinking again and again and again as if you were profound or said something no one had ever heard before.

At each point I could virtually guess your response because you weren't thinking to arrive at one.

You were repeating the "death of hip hop" myth that everyone who follows the music (including me) knows already.

YOU'VE SAID NOTHING NEW OR ORIGINAL IN THIS WHOLE THREAD.

I swear I've heard every sentiment you've expressed here a hundred times already.

Inlcuding your naive distinction between organic and artificial commercial culture.

You should not pride yourself or take credit for thoughts you did not originate.

So I got your joke alright. Smile

I'm out of this.

Ciao.

That means "bye" in Italian btw
Last edited {1}
laugh

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

You were repeating the "death of hip hop" myth that everyone who follows the music (including me) knows already.


Post where I have said anything about the "death of hip hop".

You live in your own little fantasy world where little voices have little conversations with themselves.

laugh
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:

You were repeating the "death of hip hop" myth that everyone who follows the music (including me) knows already.


Post where I have said anything about the "death of hip hop".

You live in your own little fantasy world where little voices have little conversations with themselves.




The "death of hip hop" myth is, in short, the idea that hip hop was "pure" and organic until corporporations got a hold of it.

You can find variations of this notion from almost every underground source out there. It's all over the internet. I can post at least several articles from other sources that say pretty much the same thing.

This idea has been out there for a LONG time. Almost to the point where it is "mythical" (received wisdom). I've made this argument myself. I've even made it on THIS SITE. But I think there are facts which don't jibe with the received wisdom.

But here is what I've been saying about your apparent "illiteracy" in this thread.

I didn't claim that you LITERALLY said the words "death of hip hop".

I clearly said in words as plain as day (which YOU have quoted yourself) that you've * repeated * the myth which I've explained above.

You've made this confusion in reading me throughout this discussion almost from the beginning. Talking to you has been like talking to a frickin wall. Because you never venture off script.

Again and again you've claimed that I said one thing when I was really (and plainly) saying another. So instead of addressing what I actually said you redirect to some other stupid claim - a product of your own intellectually deficient imagination. Just like in your last comment (speaking of hearing little voices). And then make like the stupidity was my fault when in fact I had nothing to do with your (possibly deliberate) mis-reading.

You've paid half ass attention to most of what I've said.

Dude, it's not funny that YOU can't read or accurately process sentences that are too long or complex ... or thoughts that are original and uncommon.

For someone running an "intelligent" site you sure can be a blockhead ... and a hypocritical black middle class DICK. Smile
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
For someone running an "intelligent" site you sure can be a blockhead ... and a hypocritical black middle class DICK. Smile


Bad

Why don't you just stop it Brother Honest. Cut it out. You all just stop fussing right now. Just what the hell is going on in here??? We're asking for more "positive" and conscious music and we can't even have a positive discussion? Is that irony for your ass or what. You'll need to stop putting each other down like this. I'm surprised by the both of you all's behavior. All this "fuck your Ivy league education" and "fuck your Jack & Jill upbringing" has got to stop it right now. That's why men can't get along in the rap game now, because of these senseless fighting, arguing, killing, and disrespecting one another. We're not going to see any "positive" hip hop until we can have positive interactions with one another out of the studio and from behind the mic.

Both of you need to apologize to one another. You all are suppose to be brothers in AA.org and support one another.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
I totally agree with you sister Rowe. I've tried coming closer to his position (i.e, being conciliatory). I've tried having a real discussion. An actual exchange of ideas.

But this azz is determined to dominate any way he can.

I'm not the only one being "not nice" now.


How did you try to come closer to his side by calling him bad names and cussing at him? Youll need to stop this. I'm surprised by this behavior. Honestbrother and MBM cussing at each other like two drunks on the streets. What is this. I just finished reading some parts of you all's arguments from the other pages, and I didn't know the bickering had gotten this bad. If I had known, I would have said something different in my last response. You'll just as bad as the gangsta rappers that we're complaining about. In fact, if I condensed this thread and added a tight back up beat, it would probably make a great gangsta rap song.

"Fuck you nigga and your Ivy League Education.
Shut the fuck up you middle class dick."

Has a nice ring to it. music

Roll Eyes
Last edited {1}

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×