|
Edited on Fri Sep-28-07 10:08 PM by PDenton
I watched this today. I missed it the first time. Let me preface by saying I am not a big fan of rap, I am not black. But I do believe strongly in the freedom of artists to be true to their calling, even if some people are so philosophically immature they don't "get" that, that not all art is suppossed to give you a feeling of awe and reverence for the State, Oligarchy, or whatevery Deity you are suppossed to worship- that is old-school "classicism" that most of the naive identify as art, and not the only kind of art out there.
It seems to me this hearing was inspired by the Tipper Gore wing of the Democrat party, which is unfortunate. I thought those voices got layed to rest ages ago, didn't they? Haven't we had enough Mortal Combat and Doom bashing? Haven't we already gone over music lyrics enough times? Didn't Joe Lieberman finally decide to leave the Democrats? Is there really an issue with the lyrics in Hip-Hop? Haven't we always had sensationalized art or art with images of violence and/or sexuuality?
I think first and foremost the duty of the artist isn't necessarily to create "eusocial", uplifting art, which alot of white Congresscritters seemed to be suggesting. You know, the "classicist" definition of art. Stuff that is "enobling" to the tastes of elites who run the show, that gives them warm and fuzzy affirmations that their vision for society is good and just. OTOH, I couldn't help but think that the Congressmen (and woman) were overlooking the reality that alot of this stuff is being sold to white kids in suburbia who are craving authenticity in their lives. It is being produced by corporations (with $$$ on their minds) for consumption, out of context, by white kids. They are playing around with stuff they really don't understand but they want an authentic experience, and maybe don't realize the consequences of their actions.
It sort of reminds me of the great Forrest Whitaker monologue in Last King of Scotland. Nicholas Garrigan the naive, idealistic (and horny) doctor goes to Africa in search of authenticity and an escape from the mundane, and befriends Idi Amin (Forrest Whitaker). He treats it all as a big game, even messing around with Amin's wife, he is messing around with force he doesn't understand, and things aren't as they seem (Amin isn't a bubbly idealist but a maniacal crackpot, for instance). In the end, Amin figures it all out, that the disillusioned doctor is trying to kill him and is screwing with his wife (whom he hacked to bits), and he decides to brutally kill Dr. Garrigan. He gives a great monologue about the white man comming to Africa and playing games... but "we are real, Nicholas" and the great line "I think your death will be the first real thing you have experienced in your life".
So much of the white infatuation with "gangsta" rap reminds me of that- dabbling in a culture that most white kids cannot relate to. Their angst is a pimple or not getting a B on their exam - that is about as "real" to them as they are going to get for angst. Alot of those rappers have probably seen their friends dead in a coffin or on the street. That is "real" to them. A reality that you probably can barely grasp from sitting in your McMansion listening to your MP3's- to them it might just be a game with the pain not being existentially real at all. To have a white Congressman or woman lecture the black artists about aesthetics and what they should or shouldn't be rapping about seems to me to smack of that same lack of understanding of what the hell they are really talking about- forcing their own particular idea of aesthetics onto others who have no reason to drink the kool-aid; it certainly isn't in their best interests to do so. It's like the white doctor stepping into Africa, only these Congresscritters are stepping into a realm they really don't know much about and telling people what they should and shouldn't be feeling and expressing.
Having said that, they also had some good counterpoints for people who did not like mass-market "gangsta rap", particularly by the white male psychologist (alot of the others were just preachy, honestly). I do think that certain kinds of rap could feed into negative stereotypes in peoples subconscious minds, especially if it is used out of context. Though frankly I found the arguements still weak on many levels (he totally missed the issue that perhaps African Americans may have some level of internalized racism = lower social expectations, but that's another issue). But it still begs the question, is it really an artists responsibility to do what is "good" for the weak minded masses and a politically designated community, or do they have a duty to speak on a deeper level. I think that point was missed.
The whole thing really missed the main point, whihc I'm getting to: so much of the white perception of "rap music" is dictated by corporate elites who want $$$, and have no sense of corporate responsibility to anybody but shareholders. Context of an artists' speech doesn't mean much to them, if spiritually empty kids will buy it up out of the social context the art was written in. It is very telling that this was frame as an issue of "artists vs. society" rather than "corportations vs. society".
Any feedback is of course welcome.
|