Tricia Rose breaks down the argument that hip hop hurts black people into three sections. Unfair generalizations, a tone of disdain, and omitted / ignored reasonings compromise the faulty argument that hip hop hurts black people.
The most obvious is unfair generalizations. Critics tend to group every aspect of hip hop into one giant cluster. They make no distinction between the commercial hip hop played on corporate radio and the progressive hip hop spread by local emcees. The gangster-pimp-ho trio is the only image in heavy rotation in the media, so it appears that hip hop has only one image (Rose 78).
These critics tend to use hip hop as a scapegoat for problems that are created by other institutions. They blame hip hop's "cool pose" for keeping the youth from valuing education (79). Though Rose does admit that hip hop does create a "cool pose," she argues that this blame game overlooks real concerns like school improvement, job training and rehabilitation over punishment. Because these aspects of black education are suffering, Rose believes that the "cool pose" could be a response to such a harsh and racist environment. She supports this idea with a study that proved those who do focus on school and excel academically are only half as likely to be hired for the same job as a white man (80). These are the types of problems where Rose says we should focus our efforts. Instead of alienating our youth, we need to love and invest in them.
Rose then shifts focus to those critics who speak out against hip hop with a disdainful tongue. She deems criticism appropriate, but not when it's done in a degrading sense. She specifically mentions Bill Cosby, who is known for being outspoken against the younger generation. In one speech, Cosby called black kids leaving school for the day as dirty laundry (82). Rose says, and rightly so, that this is no way to address a problem. She also writes about a situation that occurred at a KFC. John McWhorter, another hip hop critic, vehemently chastised a couple of loud, obnoxious teens (83). This wouldn't have been a problem had McWhorter not considered the teens to be an accurate sample of the hip hop community. Both of these cases tie into the aforementioned unfair generalizations.
Rose then touches on the critical information that is commonly left out of hip hop criticism. First and foremost, she acknowledges that commercialized hip hop is distributed mainly to a white audience. Corporations sell stereotypical gansta-pimp-ho images to white consumers who do not question them (85).
Adding to the commercial rap flood is the fact that many record labels also own radio stations. This ensures the major singles constant circulation and a practical monopoly of the airwaves for rappers like Lil' This and Young That (86). Rose mentions that no one considers this corporate control as damaging as the "cool pose." Even worse, no one seems to discuss the structural racism with housing projects and a lack of child care (89).
Rose concludes saying that those who publicly attack the most vulnerables in society, while ignoring the institutional racism previously mentioned, are serving a larger agenda. Profit is more of a concern than people (92). We as citizens need to make the changes because the bottom-line corporations won't.
By Craig Reck and Chanae Reed
No comments:
Post a Comment