From Clinton, Hip-Hop Hypocrisy (Colbert I King)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/20/AR2007042001589.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Put me in the camp of those who implore Sen. Hillary Clinton to give it back -- "it" being the reported $800,000 that's sitting in her presidential campaign coffers thanks to a fundraiser hosted in her honor March 31 in the Pinecrest, Fla., home of a huge Clinton fan who refers to himself as Timbaland.

In response to my questions, Clinton campaign spokesman Blake Zeff said in an e-mail this week that it cost $1,000 just to get into Timbaland's fundraiser, that about 200 guests were on hand and that the senator was accompanied by former president Bill Clinton.

You would not be reading about Clinton or about Timbaland -- who entered this vale of tears 36 years ago in Norfolk under the name Timothy Mosley -- were it not for the fact that he is a well-heeled hip-hop producer and noted performer of the kind of misogynistic and denigrating lyrics that informed Don Imus's derogatory comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team.

<snip>

Here are lyrics from the track "Come and Get Me":

"Nigga Your Time Is Up, I Aint Come To Kid You
I Knew You Niggas Was Dumb, But How Dumb Is You . . .
I'm A Ride Or Die Nigga, I Be Tearing Up
We Aint Like Them Other Fools, Who Don't Compare To Us
All The Hoes Love A Nigga, They be Backing It Up
But Me I Love Money I Be Stacking It Up . . .
I'm Rich I Can Pay To Have You Six Feet Deep (Nigga)"

Colbert King makes a very good point here IMHO.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Pay To Play!

These are the Clintons that we're talking about, after all.

[jobycom]

2. I don't completely agree, but here is Colbert King's opinion on Imus

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/13/AR2007041301872.html?hpid=opinionsbox2

Standing Up to Imus

By Colbert I. King
Saturday, April 14, 2007; Page A19

But Imus is not the only disturbing figure in this sickening story.

I heard callers to radio stations say that they failed to see the harm caused by Imus's slurs. Others said that even if Imus did go overboard, people on the receiving end of his insults should grow up and get over it.

Besides, as some Imus sympathizers said, his offensive language originated with black rap and hip-hop artists and is commonly heard in the inner city -- as if that absolves the 66-year-old broadcaster of marking the young collegians with a despicable label.

----------------------

King makes a strong argument, and as his previous article shows, he didn't fall into the "If you attack Imus you have to attack rap" fallacy, so to me he still has credibility on the issue. And he doesn't use Imus to condemn the lyrics of the songs he quotes, he uses only the lyrics. It still doesn't convince me, though.

Rap is an art form, whether or not it always achieves the level we would like to think of as art. While the lyrics may offend, they are not a personal, direct attack on anyone. Collectively, they do degrade and dehumanize women, but they are, like all art, a reflection of a mindset, and a fantasy. Music and arts are always attacked--jazz, rock, even the Waltz. Not just music--the first reaction after VT by many journalists was to launch an attack on violent movies and blame them for the killings.

Art is an easy target because it often tries to challenge society's mores. Someone always objects, but that's the job of art. It is a reflection of the society that produces and that buys it. Criticizing art is like shooting the messenger. The message still remains, and without a messenger, it may remain unread. Lenny Bruce once said "If you take away my right to say "fuck," you take away my right to say "fuck the government."

None of that really destroys King's argument. He isn't, after all, calling for Hillary to censor anything. He is just asking her not to associate her name and her campaign with a producer and artist whose lyrics, King says, "praise violence, perpetuate racist stereotypes and demean black women." I wouldn't be heartbroken or feel that she had caved if she takes his message to heart. But I still wouldn't like it. While it's not censorship, it is criticism, and not just of an art form, but of an art form specifically associated with one segment of society--young African Americans. It seems to me that this further alienates that segment, makes them feel less connected to system they live in. That closes the dialogue. And it alienates. And it alienates largely along racial lines.

And, not everything Timbaland does carries that same message.

This reminds me of the other Clinton, and his surprise attack on Sista Soulja in 1992. I didn't like that, either. But it was popular with the white crowd and much of the older black crowd. It embarrassed Jesse Jackson, too, which made a lot of white people happy, while, as always, not being so horrible that it alienated the African American block. Because, as always, where would they go? So, it was a good political move. But I think it was a bad social move. I think the same thing would be true if Hillary repeated the gesture.

Just my thoughts. I feel like they are incomplete, but good grief, I've written too much already. Sorry, if anyone is still reading. :)

[silverojo]

3. It's not a "fallacy"

I'm glad Imus is gone, but in terms of sheer scope of influence, rap artists do a LOT more damage than Imus ever did. Kids don't watch MTV, see Imus, and emulate him, hanging onto his every word. They do for rappers, though.

For art's sake, go ahead and let them rap...but make it "adult entertainment", just as we do for the Playboy Channel. Misogyny has no business being so easily accessible, whether it's on radio (Imus) or basic cable (Imus and MTV). Put that crap on adult pay-per-view where it belongs.

[jobycom]

7. I hear you, but that's not what I meant.

The fallacy were the attempts to equate Imus with the worst of rap music to excuse Imus, or to say that people were hypocritical for attacking Imus but not rap. One can attack rap for its own issues, but what Imus did was of a completely different essence. Imus's attack on the Rutger players was racist--a white guy attacking African American students on their race. One can argue Imus isn't a racist--I don't know his heart, and that's not really relevant--but his attack certainly was.

The lyrics people are criticizing about SOME rap music (and that needs to be emphasized, that not all rap music does this) are violent, hurl the N word around, hurl other profanities, and consider women as the lowliest of objects there to be used for pleasure, or worse, as sex slaves. Certainly distasteful to many. But they are not racist attacks--the N word when used by one African American about another, while maybe confusing to white people, is not the same as when used by one race to denigrate and dehumanize another race. It's different in essense.

As for making it adult only, I think they've gone far enough in terms of government restrictions. Warning labels, closely edited versions for mainstream radio... That's far enough. The lyrics aren't the problem, the attitudes behind them are the problem, and that's a social and cultural issue which needs to be addressed through social and cultural pressures, not more government regulations.

And this can't be repeated enough. Every generation believes that the music the "kids" listen to is horrible, degrading, culturally destructive, and everything the grown-ups think about rap now. Rock and roll was attacked constantly from the 50s until it faded in cultural importance. I remember a preacher of mine calling it "music from the Pit" in the 80s. It was considered dehumanizing, immoral, overly sexual, and degrading to women (the attitude being that women were degraded more than men by having sex). Jazz was considered evil in its heyday. So was Swing. So was Mozart. Supposedly Casanova himself complained that the Waltz--trendy in his later years--was degrading, and led to promiscuity.

I can't muster the motivation to attack art for portraying society.

[Blue_Tires]

4. kind of a slippery slope

musicians, artists, writers, filmmakers, etc. give to the candidate of their choice...Do the Colbert Kings of the world honestly want to scrutinize EVERY single work of art, word of a novel, scene from a film, and song lyric from the donators? (which is protected speech, which we all know)...Call me crazy, but isn't time and moral outrage better spent by spotlighting shady criminals, hate groups, special interest grifters, and corporate mafiosos that also donate to campaigns? (and in much greater sums?)...Of course we will hear no more from King, since many of the latter group are buddy-buddy with the Editors, Publisher, the corporate parent an all of her partners, which need the lifeblood of ad revenues....

[magnolia]

5. You may not like hip hop...but....

....understand that it is an art form. The lyrics to a song...like a poem, book, painting, movie, etc...tell a story. The lyrics of rap music aren't pretty, but "Schindler's List" wasn't pretty either. Hip hop artist have a right to tell their story just like any other artist. To try to stop them would be in the catagory of censorship. It is not the same as Imus, Mel Gibson, etc...spouting off.

[wyldwolf]

6. Quick! Who is your guy in the primaries so we can express fake outrage over his donations