« In Defense of the Freak Show | Main | Obama, Abortion, and 95/10 »

Jazz And Gangsta Rap (II)

21 Apr 2008 03:37 pm

In addition to ensuring that I'll be labeled forever as "rap scold Douthat", I think these three posts from last week about Bill Cosby, rap and jazz ended up conflating several intertwined but arguably distinct issues - the moral content of rap versus jazz, the artistic content of rap versus jazz, gangsta rap versus the broader universe of rap and hip-hop, non-ironic versus ironic approaches to exploitative entertainment, and probably a few others as well. Rather than trying to untangle them, though, I'll just cop out and suggest you go read Peter Suderman and Michael Brendan Dougherty on these and related subjects.

Comments (15)

Isn't a better comparison rap vs the Blues? There are a lot of suburban Blues festivals, and there are probably as many middle aged white Blues fans as black. Yes, people take their kids to these concerts and yes Douthat The Scold would heartily disapprove of the lyrics of most Blues (see Lee, Stagger).

After all, Stagger Lee, subject of many a traditional Blues, is worthy of any modern gangster rap tune...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagger_Lee

"Rap scold Douthat" is okay, but I prefer Ross Douthat: Hater.

There is a strong continuity between the two.

In jazz, you have varying degrees of playful goofs on "established" rules of a language (Western harmonies and scales). The meta-joke is that the language of Western music is never really established, it's always in flux and always porous at the edges. The offensiveness is connected to the imagined misuse of the instruments as proper tools of communicating language. The feeling of danger is in the attitudes expressed, attitudes that don't fit in certain social situations.

In rap (including gangsta rap), you have varying degrees of playful goofs on "established" language rules of a language (English). The meta-joke is that the English language (especially conversational English) has never really been established, it's always in flux and always porous at the edges. Again, the offensiveness is connected to the supposed misuse of the instruments as proper tools. The feeling of danger is in the attitudes expressed, attitudes that don't fit in certain social situations.

The one surface difference between the two is how a large proportion of hip hop and gangsta rap go for the overtly obscene, even staking their career on this element.

But even here the underlying game is the same with jazz: to be an audience you have to adopt an attitude by proving how much of the sour flavor you can find palatable as part of the package. In the case of jazz, it was all those sour and unconventional notes. For hip hop and gangsta rap, it's the loose and nonchalant deployment of the obscene part of English (to the point of inventing new English), almost for its own sake, when "established" language isn't enough to advertise a juvenile strutting.

j

Joe Brancaleone, I don't think you know how commenting here works. We all have political precommitments, and we try to view everything in the world through that prism. Black people tend to vote Democratic, so Ross has to criticize their art. And liberals have to defend it.

Seriously, though, great comment. Thanks for your insight.

Drugs = altering one's current state of mind through a chemical experience, including the euphoria of God.

Sex = desire for or the experience of the opposite sex.

Hymns = drugs + sex
Baroque = drugs + sex
Classical = drugs + sex
Ragtime = drugs + sex
Folk = drugs + sex
Jazz = drugs + sex
Country & Western = drugs + sex
Bluegrass = drugs + sex
Rock and Roll = drugs + sex
Hip Hop = drugs + sex

Hymns = Baroque = Classical = Ragtime = Folk = Jazz = C&W = Bluegrass = R&R = Hip Hop

It's all drugs + sex. Get over yourselves.

Thanks,

Hank Porter

Ross's internal monologue: "How can I show myself to be an even more out of touch prematurely old fogey? By linking to an article on rap in the American Conservative!"

Ross Douthat's thoughts about rap! What's next - Henry Kissinger talking about his past life as a Moroccan goatherder? Dick Cheney's account of his early ballet lessons?

And Ross's repeated invocation of Cosby is an embarrassment to the entire Douthat family tree. He might as well take out ads on Fox News proclaiming himself the whitest man alive.

"Hymns = Baroque = Classical = Ragtime = Folk = Jazz = C&W = Bluegrass = R&R = Hip Hop" Hank Porter

TR: This is one of the most nonsensical posts I've ever read. It requires both "sex" and "drugs" be defined very broadly. Besides that it implies that these genres are merely the some of two parts. By a similar logic.

Respiration - An exchange of gases needed for survival.
Eating - Consuming caloric items to replenish energy.

Fire = Respiration + Eating
Lichen = Respiration + Eating
Salamanders = Respiration + Eating
Chickens = Respiration + Eating
Dolphins = Respiration + Eating
Humans = Respiration + Eating

Fire = Lichen = Salamanders = Chickens = Dolphins = Humans

Thomas R,

I actually agree with your point. It's as stupid for someone to argue that dolphins are better (or more real or more valid) than salamanders as it is to argue that jazz is a higher form of art than hip hop.

The point is that music is about experience and transcendence. Its rooted in the culture of the people who make it, and may seem weird or harmful to an outsider, which Ross is by his own admission.

I would suggest that music, across the ages, has more similarities than differences and fills a few basic roles in people's lives.

To speak of music by genre is a flawed exercise in and of itself. Leaving that aside however because of widespread norms that we all must rely on, to elevate whole genres over others (without an awareness of the nuances within a genre) is the epitome of narrowminded thinking. That, Thomas, was my point and, one, I believe, we agree on.

Hank

You're not a rap scold; you're a young curmudgeon. When you're 50, you'll be John Derbyshire.

J

That was an interesting post. I see what you're saying, but I think that critical interpretation from outside paints an inacurate picture of what's going on. What you are talking about, the goofing of the traditional structures and the pleasure or horror people take in hearing takes place, but that was not the intent in jazz (rap, I don't know) with the exception of early beb-bop. The intent was to play this kind of music that was being played in the neighborhood and build on what others did before them. And looked at that way, the goofs were not subversion--although that is how some people heard them, but adaptation. The early jazz players were trained in school bands and the adapted what they were given. It's not a big point, but a change in perspective. I think you have to take the intent of the artist into consideration.

I prefer "beautifully-coiffed rap scold Douthat."

I remain
Ross Douthat's Hair

Okay I think I see now Hank.

On another matter I am a young kermudgeon and am okay with that. I don't own any rap, or hard rock, but I have two CDs by Dave Brubeck.

Still even if I don't really like most rap I don't think it's necessary to throw stones. It's not my kind of thing, but I think some of it is culturally significant and requires talent.

In response to Doughtery ending his editorial speculating as to the likelihood of hip-hop snobs: they are hiding under every rock, myself included. In fact, fans of progressively less popular or intelligent (in the minds of the fan, of course) look down upon the fans of more popular or less intelligent artists.

Fans of 50 Cent look down on those who are fans of 'nothing realer than' Soulja Boy.

Fans of Kanye West look down on those who are fans of 'nothing better than' 50 Cent.

Fans of Talib Kweli look down on those who are fans of 'nothing more intellectual' than Kanye West.

Fans of the 40,000 obscure and thoughtful acts who have never really been able to quit their day jobs look down on those who are fans of nothing more obscure than Talib Kweli.

Of course, it's completely acceptable to enjoy lesser acts as well, and it does not affect one's position on the snobbery totem ploe - it's like Bill Clinton enjoying McDonald's

If people take themselves or something they admire seriously, they are likely to become snobs.

As a side note, I put myself in the last category. It's human nature to think themselves to have flawless taste in music. If someone had better taste than you, wouldn't you just start listening immediately to the rappers, bands, composers, or whatever that that person likes?