Touré vs. Stanley Crouch…And the Winner is!
After last years overflow of televised debates about rap (BET’s Hip Hop vs. America series and Oprah’s townhall meeting, etc.) I can say I’m pretty tired of the back-and-forth about rap’s pros and , uhem, cons… Though I’m always drawn back in by a little jousting via the pen. So, last week, I was definitely sucked into the essay battle over at The Daily Beast between writers Touré and Stanley Crouch about the merits—or lack thereof—of rap music. Crouch, hearing about Jay-Z and other hip-hoppers possibly being a part of Barack’s inauguration, rehashed his almost 20 year argument that the music is nothing but minstrelsy and a criminal influence that needs to be done away with, going so far as to give his own statement that “hip-hop is dead” saying:
“We are approaching a time of no mo hos. No mo bitches. No mo black nigger motherfuckers. The denigrated appear to be losing a taste for the hatred, the pornography, the violence.”
While Touré, in response, made the argument that, once again, black boomers, in their one-sized criticism of hip-hop music and it generation, refuse to see the more constructive and complex hip-hop music that is out there saying:
"It’s easy to point at a segment of any culture, especially the basest part, and represent all young white women any more than the buffoons Crouch points at represent all of hip-hop.”
Between the two arguments, I would have to say Touré won (if there were a winner to pick). His point that, while rap is filled with ill behavior and lyrics, there is currently—I’d even say more so than in a long time— a lot of “mature and classy” hip-hop not being observed by hip-hop hatin’ boomers like Crouch. Though Touré’s final point that hip-hop and its generation is a certain way because the older generation wasn’t there is kind of a cop out, an argument I’ve heard numerous times before and have taken with a grain salt. On the one hand, I do believe certain dysfunctional behavior, especially when it comes to violence and treatment of the opposite sex, is a result of no guidance from the elders. Black music that celebrates violence and misogyny is only the result of ignorance, laziness, greed, and no will to bite the hand that feeds. And that’s not a lack of common sense. That’s just a denial of it.
Anarchist of the Month: The Lockers
Inspired by my video post for Thelonious Monk, I had to bring my choice for December’s “Anarchist of the Month” a little closer to the age of, well, pre-hip-hop. And so I chose the pioneering street dance troupe the Lockers, who innovated and popularized locking. The group’s founder, Don Campbell, invented the dance in 1970 while trying to overcome a shyness for dancing, locking his body into various poses in between moves. In the process, he created a new street dance revolution that—especially after he formed his crew—became the boogie emblem of post-black power urban America, stylin’ and on the move. I know I’m not the only one who sat stiff and glued to the TV watching the Lockers on Soul Train or What’s Happening (Rerun was a member) and feeling an immense sense of pride. Here was a ghetto dance posse who, more than doing the latest dance, rocked a new dance vocabulary, one that supremely showcased the confidence of young people of color. And, moreover, had impacted everyone from the Jackson 5 to Dick Van Dyke, and influenced future street dance movements from electric boogaloo to voguing. Not to mention the stars the Lockers became (appearances on Saturday Night Live and the Grammys) and the superstars some of its members (Fred Berry, Toni Basil, and Shabba-Doo) would become. Below is a video of the Lockers rocking the Train. Enjoy.
Governor Paterson and Saturday Night Live: Ya Blind Baby! Ya Blind to the Fact…
In the world of TV comedy there are a few signs of desperation (and a time to pack it in), one of them being an extremely poor joke. Recently, Saturday Night Live’s came in the form of that ill-scripted and ill-executed skit making fun of New York Governor David Paterson. SNL player Fred Armisen, playing Paterson, made the governor appear as if he was a blind, bumbling fool, incapable of running the state. Then came the flack from the Gov and the blind community. But my problem with the skit wasn’t with it’s skewering of blind people or the handicapped (though Governor’s Paterson’s point about making blind people look incapable of doing important jobs was valid). God knows pop culture has produced too many honest chuckles at their expense; one of them being Damon Wayan’s character Handi-Man.
My problem with the SNL bit was how much it proves that this 33-year-old sketch comedy institution is over and should be laid to rest. For the weeks leading up to the presidential election, Saturday Night Live heavily relied on it’s players doing impressions of the candidates, most of which have been sorry one or two-note jokes (much like the Gov. Paterson skit). They briefly hit pay dirt—and scored some ratings—by bringing Tina Fey back to do Sarah Palin and adding a special Thursday night political special before the election. I give them credit, 33 years is a long wait before “jumping the shark.” But when your show has not been must-see, late-night funny TV for six years, which SNL hasn’t been, really, since Will Ferrell left in 2002, it’s time to, maybe, think about calling it quits.
As a fan of SNL, like so many, I’ve heard people sound the death knell a few times before. There was the brief period in 1980 before the arrival of Eddie Murphy and after Eddie left in 1984. The ’85-’86 year was a particularly dry season. Some even sounded Taps with the ascension of Chris Farley and his fat frat boy humor. Only, those comedic droughts, at most, lasted a year or two. Following the departure of SNL’s last breakout star, Will Ferrell, the show has not been able to find that one anchor to make the cast gel or shine. Nor has it been able to fully recover with consistent breakout material, save for the few film shorts/videos like “Chronicles of Narnia” and “Dick in a Box.” And the only ticket they have to stay relevant are the politicians. But, even with our political figures, they seem unable to push the envelope for any real, gut-busting humor (say, a Gov. Paterson not being too blind to see America’s greatest city about to sink into a fiscal toilet). So SNL, in my eyes, continues to look like the bumbling fool, stumbling on like a blind man looking for the joke it lost some time ago.
My problem with the SNL bit was how much it proves that this 33-year-old sketch comedy institution is over and should be laid to rest. For the weeks leading up to the presidential election, Saturday Night Live heavily relied on it’s players doing impressions of the candidates, most of which have been sorry one or two-note jokes (much like the Gov. Paterson skit). They briefly hit pay dirt—and scored some ratings—by bringing Tina Fey back to do Sarah Palin and adding a special Thursday night political special before the election. I give them credit, 33 years is a long wait before “jumping the shark.” But when your show has not been must-see, late-night funny TV for six years, which SNL hasn’t been, really, since Will Ferrell left in 2002, it’s time to, maybe, think about calling it quits.
As a fan of SNL, like so many, I’ve heard people sound the death knell a few times before. There was the brief period in 1980 before the arrival of Eddie Murphy and after Eddie left in 1984. The ’85-’86 year was a particularly dry season. Some even sounded Taps with the ascension of Chris Farley and his fat frat boy humor. Only, those comedic droughts, at most, lasted a year or two. Following the departure of SNL’s last breakout star, Will Ferrell, the show has not been able to find that one anchor to make the cast gel or shine. Nor has it been able to fully recover with consistent breakout material, save for the few film shorts/videos like “Chronicles of Narnia” and “Dick in a Box.” And the only ticket they have to stay relevant are the politicians. But, even with our political figures, they seem unable to push the envelope for any real, gut-busting humor (say, a Gov. Paterson not being too blind to see America’s greatest city about to sink into a fiscal toilet). So SNL, in my eyes, continues to look like the bumbling fool, stumbling on like a blind man looking for the joke it lost some time ago.
Jamie Foxx Callin' Out Terrence Howard
Oh, I had to post Jamie Foxx on Big Boy's radio show responding to Terrence Howard dissing his music. Hilarious! I've often wondered if movie stardom would slow Foxx's comedic skill. Nope. In fact, he says he's going on the road.
Funny Warning on the Obama Name Craze:
Below is a hilarious email I received warning, well, creative-name-loving black people to, ah shoot, just read...
*MEMORANDUM* *
TO: * ALL BLACK PEOPLE *
FROM:* YOU KNOW!! *
RE: * NAMING YOUR CHILDR EN *
DATE: * EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Please don't start naming your children after the President…Obamanesha , Obamalaya, Obamaria, Barakesha, Barakyah, etc. Don't start that mess! PLEASE!!
YOU HAVE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED THE MEMO AND HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!!! *
*MEMORANDUM* *
TO: * ALL BLACK PEOPLE *
FROM:* YOU KNOW!! *
RE: * NAMING YOUR CHILDR EN *
DATE: * EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Please don't start naming your children after the President…Obamanesha , Obamalaya, Obamaria, Barakesha, Barakyah, etc. Don't start that mess! PLEASE!!
YOU HAVE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED THE MEMO AND HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!!! *
Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop
Wow, I don’t think a louder political statement has been made with clothing items since feminists supposedly burned bras in Atlantic City. Of all the insults and expletives hurdled at President Bush, especially over his war in Iraq, I’m sure none hit home like the shoes being hurdled at him by that Iraqi journalist. By now Bush knows the cultural insult implied by the attempted assault with footwear (the same ending Saddam’s statue met when it fell). It means you are the lowest of the low. But I wonder if it dawned on him, finally, how despised and vulnerable, he has become. And, when I say vulnerable, I don’t just mean the 7 seconds or so it took for Secret Service to respond (guess they were also distracted reading My Pet Goat), but how REALLY much of a prisoner to bad history and global ill-will he’s going to become. Well, since we can’t ascertain this from what he says—joking afterwards—let’s see if he gets it from the look on his face during and after the shoes whizzed by….
The Cure For Black Youth: Raise Them Like Sasha and Malia! Stop the "Magic Negro" Ride (Finale)
For my final thought on the faith we’re putting into the Obama example, I’d like to discuss the children (cue Marvin Gaye’s “Save the Children”). This one was inspired by Juleyka Lantigua’s essay “Let’s Raise More Healthy and Happy Black Girls, like the Obama Daughters” in The Progressive.
Using the wholesome and well-nurtured models of Sasha and Malia, Lantigua pleads the case for improving the lives of black children who are poor, come from broken homes, and are over weight. Her solution for such problems—“providing a stable and nurturing home”—is an obvious one. Though what black families may achieve—“then we may relish seeing more adorable kids like Malia and Sasha Obama”—is a bit overstated. Like you’ll create a master race of clean black children who’ll all exemplify the supreme examples. Now don’t get me wrong. I totally understand advocating on behalf of African-American child locked in the cycle of poverty and lack of stability. And Lantigua does acknowledge that many black children don’t have the resources of the first family. But why should folks get stuck on Malia and Sasha as the ones to be like. Is there only one way to look or be a black Beaver kid? What? Kids who are poor and from single parent or foster homes can’t be adorable, well-mannered, and in shape?
In the end, I know——as a journalist myself—-stories have to be written and timely subjects have to make them relevant. Only, looking to the Obama phenomenon as the cure for what ails Black America, just keeps folks in the pathological cycle of wishful thinking that only yields, well, no damn results.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
