A bunch of stuff that couldn't find its way into the three "essays" but seems interesting and/or worth discussing and a few times, makes more sense than the "Post-Lyrical" entries...1. "Post-lyricism" like all obnoxious terms, comes more out of a pragmatic want/need to discuss something than actually trying to be accurate. Like the apparently on-going fear and concern of "post-Modernism" in culture, within the rap world, what's currently going on in mainstream or even semi-mainstream hip-hop freaks a lot of old fans out and kinda reminds me of reading old or new diatribes against "post-Modernism". Also, like "post-Modernism", "post-lyricism" is sort of a non-sense term that's both all-encompassing and doesn't really refer to anything.
2.Rap is and basically has to be "post-positive". Here's a wikipedia link to
Positivism. Rap, as a "black art" primarily is post-positive because the argument made by most intellectual types that study and discuss black arts is that for so long, the concept of black people even making art was considered absurd and even offensive, that all black arts must oppose and conflict with conventional concepts of art, "beauty", etc. This is fun to bring up because so many of the people that find themselves stuck on "lyrics" or "intelligence" or whatever in terms of determining what kind of rap is "good" and "bad" are kinda playing themselves by applying positivist terms to an art form that's totally beyond such terms.
If we're going to take rap seriously--which all bloggers do, even when they pretend not to--then we are taking popular culture seriously and if we're taking popular culture seriously, then it's sort of dumb to apply one's subjective opinion of what makes something "good" onto it. That's to say, if you're gonna be some fucking aesthete about rap and hip-hop then you're retarded. If something resembling conventional definitions of "quality" or some Platonic ideal of good's what's on your mind, go listen to like, Shostakovich or some shit.
3. As jay eff kay said in the comments section, the current era of rap--which I've selfishly dubbed "post-lyrical"--is still working itself out and gestating. To compare it to past ages which had more time to build and are in effect over, is sort of pointless. In that case, "post-lyricism" is figuring itself out and throwing shit out there and seeing what sticks. This is both exciting and endlessly frustrating. In time, the artist and musicians will figure it all out and keep going with the stuff that isn't totally terrible or silly or has no shelf live and drop the stuff that does. In just the past few years, you can see how auto-tune went from being the thing that wannabe pop-stars did to stream-line their albums, to a goofball production trick, to an R & B staple, to maybe even something that can be meaninful or affecting (certain T-Pain songs, Kanye's "Put On" verse and "Love Lockdown"). Auto-tune is now being used like "reverb" or something. Personally, I'd like to see it go away all together, but its use hasn't been stagnant, even if it has devolved into another musical cliche.
4.On bad lyrics. There's a difference between whatever-ish similies and some of the lyrical turds that Kanye or Lil Wayne drop. One's a kind of place-holder between more poignant and successful lines--and in that case, connects my "rap minimalism" rant in Pt. 3 to an older tradition--and one is an active seeking-out of groan-inducing joke one-liners. There's a sense of fun to these bad one-liners and it can be traced back to the earliest rap and stuff like "and the chicken taste like wood". The bad lyric-dropping too, seems to be something of an extension of what was once called the "bling bling" era and before that, the beginning of rap when wearing crazy chain and looking outrageously fly and all that was a part of the culture. The implicit message of dressing out-there and handling over-sized chains was in part, something about looking absurd and being powerful enough to pull it off or just plain not giving a fuck. Making even your music this absurd and out-there is again, not something I'm too into or excited by, but I think that's what's going on when Kanye jokes "whipped it out I said/Bet you've never seen snakes on a plane".
5. Blame the critics. The internet, file-sharing, and all this other good stuff has made the borders between genre significantly more porous. This has led to musicians, especially rap musicians, to be as exposed to numerous genres and musical ideas as the sophisticated or pseudo-sophisticated critics writing on the music. For many years, rock critics reviewed rock music and rap writers wrote about rap and only the smartest like say Ego-Trip really got how to bridge the two and not come-off as a jerkoff. Not anymore. Now, pretty much every critic listens to everything. So, the same guy who listens to bullshit like Of Montreal or something, is also Google Blog-Searching the new T.I album. In one way, it's wonderful and democratic and all that. In another way, it's horrible because in my opinion, you can't really make any sense or have any kind of refined taste and like
both of those things.
The most hilarious way that this has manifested itself is in rap writers and rap bloggers who often dip their toes into the indie rock pool and so, you have guys who complain about how rap's not like Mobb Deep anymore and then are going to tell me Wolf Parade are the shit. Guys who make fun of Pharrell or Kanye for dressing like homos and then go watch the guy from Of Montreal rip-off David Bowie. Besides the kind of unfortunate racism inherent in these expectations, it's also not a surprise when rappers would respond to taste-making critics and follow through. So, quirk and tween-ness and overall sense of juvenile fun is celebrated and embraced in indie rock--basically a mainstream genre now mind you--it shouldn't be a surprise that rappers would start to employ a similar sense of all-out fun and goofiness in their music. This again, explains jokes and one-liners as being really pervasive in rap.
6.Another point that's been brought up a great deal is how rap is, in some ways, moving back to its original "roots" of facilitating dancing and partying and first and foremost, entertaining. I'm not totally comfortable with the comparison but there's some truth there. The biggest difference of course, is that simply by MC-ing and breaking and all that stuff, even when it wasn't explicitly political or "meaningful", the simple act of doing those things made it political. The same can't be said for Kanye West.
Still, this sense of a return or homage to earlier and
the earliest era of rap is kind of palpable. The same way early rap moved between different areas and art circles, rappers like Kanye or Wayne are collaborating or sampling other genres, working with those artists, and coming up with something newer and different than what's come before. For better and worse, post-lyrical rappers are really open-minded, reaching and grabbing from all different places to forge something new.
Now, let's never speak of this again.
22 comments:
It's just crazy how things go in cycles. People got beaten over the head so much by super lyrical cats between 1988-1996 that the aesthetic was pretty much preventing most artists from the South that didn't fit that same beats and rhymes aesthetic from ever making any headway.
After 1996 and Southern artists started cracking the rotation on BET, MTV and the radio all of a sudden the music slowly changed. By 1998, everyone had a "dirty South flow" in their back pocket and they began cutting back on the syllables, dumbing down their lyrics and sampling less in their beats.
Ten years later, after a new generation of kids grew up on N.O.R.E, Cam'ron, Mase, Diddy and a gang of other rappers that didn't spit with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns here we are. Shit, even former super lyrical cats like Akinyele switched up and started rapping about sex and what not. Welcome to the Swagger Era where Jeezy and Rick Ross are king. Ayyyyyy!
One.
Great series, lots to think about.
1. Only the intellectually lazy think that "post" doesn't refer to anything. Lotta folks who don't want to think, but like to use big words, start to tear down those big words, because they don't immediately grasp the ideas, nor can they easily explain what they are. (see the current financial crisis, and the eagerness to simplify the whole thing into an easily digestible soundbite)
2. Ehh, I don't know about this. Is there any objectivity in judging rap, which would probably an inherently subjective topic?
We get around this problem by focusing on comparisons.
Is Illmatic actually good in an objective sense? Debateable
But within the community, we can compare other records to Illmatic and see how they measure up.
Tacitly we've agreed that Illmatic is good.
This goes to the problem in hip hop discussions - a general lack of agreed upon language and concepts.
3. Too early to judge? If you look @ hip hop on a timeline, then I think you can judge and make arguments.
- when lyrics mattered (88)
- when people paid lip service to lyrics (94)
- when people don't even bother paying lipservice (00)
- when folks prop "bad" rhymes (now)
4. Bad Lines...
If it costs less than 20, it don't look right on me (c) B.G.
^^Genius to me,
Up there with Biggies, "Come come now"
Weird place now, where absurdity has a certain edge to it.
5. Lol @ the swipe @ pitchfork
I'd like to see someone take on the new music cartel.
6. Dancing never left, not down south at least.
Hip Hop continues to become less hip hop, and more like the rest of traditional black music.
- k. orr
5.
k-
As usual, great thoughts.
#5 isn't really a swipe at Pitchfork, although, I could swipe them for other reasons. The thing about Pitchfork is they embrace these new artists, maybe too much...there's not a lot of nostalgia going on at Pitchfork.
you lost me when you said post-modernism doesn' refer to anything. Perhaps the problem is more that people often use the term incorrectly?
I found these posts interesting, but your work has been uncharacteristically sloppy throughout this series, but especially in this one.
Number 2 is so fucking ridiculous I can't believe you could write that with a straight face. It represents the worst of academic post-anything: it's disengenuous, shallow, and it flies in the face of lived reality. This notion that we can't speak of "good" and "bad" in rap based on arguments offered by some asshole who talks about hip hop to blue hairs at sherry hour is just silly.
The rest of it is just excusing mediocrity "oh, Kanye, MUST be doing this on purpose!" Nope. See tray's point about him hyping his wack lines.
To clarify. I should say the term "post modernism" has been rendered useless. It has a meaning. Maybe some of the sloppiness Gorden's referring to?
Gordon-
You're probably, unfortunately onto something here. I simply have way less time to write than I did even a few months ago.
As for #2...my main point with this, is that this is all sort of left-leaning intellectual discourse, so for these same types in rap--or in culture in general--to basically be like "well post-modernism's acceptable TO A POINT" infuriates me.
Post-Modernism allowed pop culture to be taken seriously but only SOME pop-culture. Fuck that.
Plato's "The Good" and Shostakovich? Wtf? I like how every now in the in the middle of an exclusively rap post you'll drop some extremely obscure non rap musical reference in, in this case you went far left field. You seem to have extensive knowledge in many other music areas, it would be interesting to see you post something more on how say Of Montreal is completely bs. Or maybe a take down Wire mag now and then and their horrid perhaps racist rap/hip hop reviews and their conflation of post/mod music.
Great picture.
That said, I don't know what the hell rap has to do with A.J. Ayer. There is no such thing as a postivist morality, aesthetic, or what have you; that's sort of the whole point of Prop 7 in the Tractatus. Just seems like a total misnomer on your part. But putting positivism to the side*, I don't even begin to buy the argument that, because of the West's horribly racist past, all black arts must conflict with conventional concepts of beauty. In the first place, that's never been how rap understood itself. How many millions of songs have you heard where the rapper brags about his DJ's 'exact' scratching and his great flow and disses other producer's 'sloppy' sampling and other rappers' 'wack' lines? There's always been this huge emphasis in rap on fairly objective aesthetic standards of craft. I don't think a Premo really sees himself in starkly different terms than a Shostakovich did. In fact, I think there's all the room in the world for a pretty rigid, formalist, Clement Greenbergesque approach to rap criticism. Granted, such an approach would have a tough time grappling with what makes, say, Jeezy good, but then, the whole "let's take all pop culture seriously, even the dregs" approach you're pushing doesn't really help tell us why Illmatic is that much better than Back To The Trap House. Once you're out there on this "when Kanye succeeds in dropping the five worst lines of the year on one album, he's really flossing on us" limb, anything is defensible. Except, I guess, for Dixiecrats like Asher Roth.
*Although, what's the whole cult of the real in 90s rap if not (what you're calling) a positivist concept? Zizek writes about the desert of the real, but in rap (until recently, anyway), everything is real, as Havoc once said. Though I guess you could argue that rap's just finally catching up with post-modernism.
Damn cuz...I graduated college 4 years ago, read a fair amount of books, and yet I have no fucking clue what 90% of these comments mean.
Good effort overall, Brandon. I'm glad someone decided to break down this climate of bad lyrics.
tray-
Of course there's a focus by the artists themselves on quality and objective "good" and all that, but it doesn't mean it's there. Every MC, be it the one with wack lines or hot lines, will another maybe wack, maybe not wack MC his lines aren't hot. I mean, I won't go into it, but it sort of adds to my post-modern, post-whatever argument in the sense that rappers do and say these things, these judgements of quality whether they mean it or not. Even if faced with a much better rapper, the other rapper might still say his shit is wack.
Also, I'm not advocating this stuff, I'm just throwing it out there. I'm not a big fan of "the West's racist past" type stuff either, but the kind of people who are, when they talk about hip-hop, invoke the golden era and before and talk about how the music's dumber of this or that. My point is simply, "hey, if you're going to be all post-modern about everything and all, then I call bullshit when you bemoan rap as not being good anymore."
I'm not sure we need anyone to discuss why Illmatic's better than Back to the Trap House or vice versa.
Agree with tray on the picture. Amazing.
"I'm not a big fan of "the West's racist past" type stuff either, but the kind of people who are, when they talk about hip-hop, invoke the golden era and before and talk about how the music's dumber of this or that."
Brandon, could you give an example of this? Your follow up point is good, but I'm confused as to who you're debating.
Jordan-
I was talking to Tray. What I basically mean is, there's something of an intellectual tradition, group, etc as of late, that writes about and celebrates older rap, particularly through its politics, and at the same time, persistently dismisses more current rap for not being as radical or "intellectual" or whatever. See a book like "When Rap Music Had a Conscience".
The point is, their celebration of the music, when it goes beyond aesthetic, relates to the politics and message which is indeed, very post-positive. Post-positivism of course, being in part, based on the rejection of long-standing white, European, and Euro-American, Western traditions and so, to now apply some of those ideals to current rap--as a way to show how current rap is bad--seems silly when the study and celebration of rap was inititally based in post-positive thinking.
Simply put: You're an asshole if your brain was open enough to embrace and intellectualize rap, but then not see how you're becoming in one way or the other, the equal of the Western (or whatever) "oppressor" when you talk about how Wayne or this or that sucks.
Past examples would include, hippies who love and celebrate the Beatles but could see nothing of value in punk. Or to be more controversial, hippies who hated al lot of the 70s prog-rock, pop-prog that to this day is laughed off. Rap nostalgics are sort of like hippies.
Nice point about the dovetailing between deconstructing western oppression and then being a part of it by not even bothering to take lil wayne or anything post 90's seriously unless it says something "back in the day!" Though my school's radio station has large professor in rotation, the album sounds pretty good from the one or two times we tucked it in between crime mob and cam'ron.
You know who's pretty great at balancing the west's racist history and intellectually defending new rap? Boots Riley, he did it in that Noz interview. That's pretty much why the coup are the only "concsious" group I have any interest in. That and Pam The Funkstress works a catering job and does music on the side while Boots does local activism, so there's some working class ethos to their politics, not just a pen and a paper and some romantic notion of ideas as the only freedom and a golden age by which present fiat money should be overturned and returned to.
Sorry, some of this is going to sound like a regurgitative and obvious rant, but:
I also think perpetually upholding illmatic as better than 99.9 percent of rap that's released at whatever time an illmatic retrospective is being undertaken is not just rockist, but insanely counterproductive to the dissemination of rap music as an organic, evergrowing culture. And by organic I don't mean granola crunching backpacker stuff, but just rap, it is what it is. Sometimes even if the logic or the theme isn't there, the way words are thrown together really have nothing to do with corporate structures or radio rotation. It's a linguistic aesthetic that can be appreciated without having to throw back.
When Rap Music Had a Conscience sounds obnoxious, because I'm sure a lot of people like to intellectualize N.W.A. when they weren't that intellectual. And De La Soul was just positive, not particularly deep (though I do need to do a de la retrospective, I think I might have unfairly written them off too soon). And Tribe was "afro-centric" but they weren't dropping bell hooks on beats.
If you're judging something by it's intellectual merit you have to judge it consistently, and honestly, not that much of the golden age stuff was consistently thought-provoking, nor was it meant to be, doesn't anyone remember block parties?
"And De La Soul was just positive, not particularly deep."
More like De La Soul was just deep, not particularly positive.
I'd say roughly 75% of the Natives oeuvre is just dick jokes, albeit really complex ones.
I've not read the previous comments on the essays (blame my feed reader) but I think the last point is probably the most salient one, especially with k's addition.
A decent argument can be made for the "lyrical phase" of hip-hop being an essentially paranthetical one. In the background around the (critical) mainstream of lyrics-oriented hip-hop there's a distinct continuity of smaller genres with more dance-and-fun oriented content, many interlocking with each other. Looking back, you've got electro, go-go, a lot of maimi bass and new orleans bounce, hip-house, ghetto-tech, bmore etc. etc. that have continued the dance-based legacy of the old-school and that have influenced much of the new material.
In a bigger perspective of black american music, the "sillier" dance material has dominated from way back in the ragtime era and beyond. What's to say this little offshoot towards lyricality means much of anything at all in the big picture? What's to say it won't be just like roots reggae in twenty years, gripped onto by a small number of fanatical (often white) admirers, while excerting little infuence on the new stuff that comes after?
I think the idea of the post-lyrical phase being a
homage doesn't really gel. The return of rock'n'roll after several years of smoothed-out schlock in the mid-sixties was not a homage to those earlier artists but a re-surfacing of an extant underlying current. Merseybeat, Surf, Folk-rock, Frat rock etc. were already going around 1960, just not on the national radar. A homage type music development would be stuff like punk, which had a real discontinuity... But in hip-hop we're seing a very distinct continuity behind the scenes instead.
"If you're judging something by it's intellectual merit you have to judge it consistently, and honestly, not that much of the golden age stuff was consistently thought-provoking, nor was it meant to be, doesn't anyone remember block parties?"
No doubt. A lot of them cats, Rose, Chang, Mark Anthony Neal, Dyson are totally white-washing hip hop, and have been doing so for decades.
There's a whole lot of revisionism going on with hip hop's history.
I thought it would get better when cats my age started writing books - but for the most part the Bakari's and Adisa's of the world have a political agenda that conflicts a lot with what hip hop actually is and was.
There's a content bias. What are these guys saying that I agree with.
But a lot of what makes hip hop dope, aside from phat beats, is *how* you say it, not *what* you say.
The "how" takes many forms
- delivery
- flow
- charisma (renamed swagger)
Case in point, for my older heads - when Craig Macks' Flava in Ya Ear got Source quotable of the month - I remember reading that verse and thinking, "this is quotable?"
It actually wasn't. No particularly clever similes, no insights into "ghetto life", *insert your typical over-read grad student's favorite hip hop buzz phrase*
But when you heard the record...it totally made sense.
For whatever reason when people intellectualize hip hop, hip hop suddenly becomes the theme music for the Progressive Party.
A lot of GREAT hip hop is very ugly, racist, materialist, violent, misogynist, and all sorts of other objectionable things. Yet folks hem and haw, or slot it in the "other box", or try to rationalize.
Like you'll hear people still quote Chuck D, "Rap Music is black people's CNN"
Makes you wonder if they listened to, "She Watch Channel Zero".
The academic types do it.
The boho's do it.
The underground kids still on that 4 elements do it...
I just don't get it.
How can you be hip hop and not like a fucked up song like "Trife Life" by Mobb Deep (off of a equally unpolitically correct lp, The Infamous)
*steps off soapbox*
Alright Noz, when I get home I'm breaking out my De La Soul Is Dead and 3 Feet High Is Rising. Then going over to my neighbor's for some Buhloone Mindstate and then downloading a stakes is high torrent. I. Can't. Deal.
K - Yeah, picking a certain lexicon or framework within which you can properly enjoy hip hop does seem to be missing the point, both in wordplay and in content. Forget the black CNN thing, just discussing it on literary terms, with albums being first person narratives to an extent (and this is where po-mo can be dropped liberally on it with some gravity's rainbow like weaving between different states of mind) if every track is a manifesto then it's just a succession of ideas with no grounds in the concrete. I think it's more realistic to have an album like the infamous in which pretty much every song is just awful as far as P.C. goes, and then have a head above water moment where the rapper, as his fictional alter-ego (because once you're in the burbs it ceases to be a life story no matter how many hip hop cops are on you, though hopefully prodigy's prison sentence is going alright!) kind of reflects on all the fucked up shit that just happened. Not everyone pulls up and pulls out and gets out of the game, but there are probably late night conversations with their boos or their confidants in which they're like "this is fucked up" and then wake up in the morning and do what they do.
And on the saying front, after the whole big pun pistol whipping his wife affair it was hard to just go back to that and kick it knowing there's more to his words than just misogynistic idioms, but the person I co-host a radio show with threw on Twinz and this line blew me away
"Dead in the middle of Little Italy little did we know
that we riddled some middleman who didn't do diddily"
Some of it is just about how it's said, and there's no shortage of weird and interesting wordplay especially with lil wayne and cam'ron.
This string of comments is making me think of this interview Jay Smooth did with "The Sound Of Young America" radio show the other month.
The one thing that stuck with me was the dude asking him, if he could get one thing across to the white well-meaning left-leaning middle class listeners, about Hiphop, what would that be?
Jay said (and I can't find it now to quote exactly) that while a lot of them are down for HIphop when it's Public Enemy and they can read the message, they need to understand that Public Enemy were great because they SOUNDED great aswell as having a message. He quoted a Chucky line that didn't mean anything but made for good listening and said what a lot of people need to do is appreciate THE MUSIC, and that's what I really think gets missed out in these types of discussions.
The shit isn't 100% about rappers. It's certainly not about "lyrics". It is about language and it is about the language of music. It's very subjective and it it needs a hell of a lot of context, something that, in the past at least is one of the things that made it so different from previous forms of Blackamerican music. Like Kari says, it's losing that distinction. That's not necessarily a bad thing it just is that big, almost too big to be subject to a larger context.
well I just found your blog yesterday thru a link to the first post-lyricism post. Ive now read all 4. just wanted to say thanks, its made me think about some shit I hadnt really considered about lyrics and the new era of rap and hip hop, and its inspired me to write too.
I guess I am a fan of the Nas formula too, tho in recent years ive learnt to like a lot of the work by people referenced in your recent posts as post-lyricists.
One thing I'd like to say, regarding your closing comment about rappers coming up with something newer/different than before thru collaborations and sampling other genres, that to me echoes a lot with the beats of the new school of producers who have recently been 'blowing up' (and i use that term v. loosely) like say Flying Lotus, to take a very obvious example. To me, these dudes are fucking with the traditional idea of beats, and bringing it fwd by melding it with influences from all sorts of places, a lot of time 'electronic music' kind of places, in a very similar way to what i read in your comment about post lyrical rappers forging something new.
To me all of this, whether it be new post lyrical rappers or post boom bap era producers, is an embodiment of one of the core ideas of hip hop. The idea that hip hop is about what you want it to be, which might make me sound like a dick to certain people, but i didnt grow up in America and so i guess hip hop means something different to me in a way. Still i stick to that belief, we're seeing the logical evolution of hip hop from certain producers and rappers, from instrumental beats to post-lyrical lyrics.
And that's good, like you point out. i like some of it, i dont some other and i still find some people, like Jay Electronica, who embody the Nas Formula to an extent and do it well.
But yeah ive rambled... shit. thanks like i said, ill be checking in more regularly for sure so hopefully you dont stop writing just yet and that comic book blog is dope too, migth very well convince me to start buying again (i used to be a serious comic book reader before life got in the way).
Lo
I dunno about one part of #5. As someone who's primarily a rap dude, I listened to and enjoyed both T.I.'s "King" and Of Montreal's "Hissing Fauna" (Bowie-aping or not). I got more out of the former than the latter, but I don't think it's impossible to like both of those and still have a pretty good idea of what you're talking about.
I have to disagree on the Plato thing. I think if adjusted for genre trappings, you can make a decent rubric for any sort of art to better interpret or judge it. Nothing can truly be objective but I, out of my own stubborn faith in the the quality of my own taste) believe you can get pretty close.
Otherwise, great drop on this series.
Post a Comment