Singer Chaka Khan is about to take over role of Sophie in the Broadway production of "A Color Purple." The former lead singer of Rufus is known not only for her singing chops, but also for her attitude. Fans however tend to excuse diva-esque qualities in people who can actually deliver the goods. Chaka Khan does---her first studio album in 10 years, "Funk This Up" has been nominated for two Grammy Awards.
In an interview in the New York Times, Chaka Khan, who also worked for the Black Panthers talks about racism, saying, "Racism is still very much alive, but it has become intellectual. It's practiced in a very high-minded way. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's not blatant outright whupping and lynching like in the past. It's more psychological, and spiritual."
Chaka Khan's "I'm Every Wonder," was fundamental to my development. I hesitate to say that it helped me to become a, "Strong, Black, Woman," that's such a played out and problematic label---let's say, the song helped me to look within for power, to choose my own path, to be supportive in relationship, but most important---be myself.
Here's a Flashback: Rufus and Chaka Khan, "Do You Love What You Feel (1979)
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
Reading More in 2008
Every year I do my New Year's resolutions. I sort of look at it as my outline for the coming year. I am proud to say that most years I did the majority of things on my list---that was until motherhood struck more than 3 years ago. It suffices to say that plans often go awry and things that were meant to be done, remain undone. It took a lot of adjustment---but I have no complaints. The little man in my life is healthy, happy and loved...that's priceless. Until there are more hours in the day, I will have to prioritize my time. That means everything ain't going to get done, or it can only get done after my family and my work are straight.
I am a committing to at least one thing this year...I need to read more. People who know me well are howling at this statement. Yes, I read alot, but not always the things that I want to read. I do research, I read countless newspapers, magazines, books, blogs and web site...and while they are all interesting, it's not the same as that vacation reading. I am not talking about Harold Robbins or Judith Kranz---that's not my style, but I am the reading that you do simply for pleasure.
So I am going to Jamaica for MLK, Jr. weekend and will definitely get in some pleasure reading. For the New Year I am also committed to reading more books from the African diaspora. I get to travel and listening to different music has helped to amplify and explain what I think that I have come to know about other countries. I just think that it's time to step that up a notch. There so much more out there than just Colin Channer or Zadie Smith---although they will stay in the rotation.
One domestic book that is on my reading list is One Drop by Bliss Broyard. Broyard's father was a successful cultural critic at the New York Times. After living a comfortably WASP existence in Connecticut, as an adult she learns that her father was not "White," at least under the "one drop" of Black blood rule. As the story goes, the elder Broyard decided to "pass" as White---perhaps like other members of his family. The author finds out that there are "Black" Broyards and "White" Broyards. Part of my interest has to do with how the author's identity has changed, if at all, after this revelation.
I am interested in the story because it makes us have to examine our thoughts about race. Is race biological, cultural, a malleable social construct or what? It seems like a really dumb question until you go to other countries...or you look at someone in the US whom you presume to be "White" who says she is Black. Or meet a darker skinned person who recites his familial lineage---including slavemasters and undercover lovers, so that you are clear that he are not "Black." Americans have a very fixed notion of race, but that is not the case else where in the world. I am not the lightest light, but abroad there have been times when I was not considered "Black." In these instances the presumption was that one of my parents was White. People will say, "Black people are much darker." It's an odd space, since I never think of myself as anything but Black. My own experiences have made me wonder how a person's world view changes if he has the capacity to inhabit another identity. I wonder whether the burden of "passing" was the secrecy, rather than joining another race. It seem that the paradox about race may that one can be more flexible to define oneselves, the lighter one's skin is.
I am a committing to at least one thing this year...I need to read more. People who know me well are howling at this statement. Yes, I read alot, but not always the things that I want to read. I do research, I read countless newspapers, magazines, books, blogs and web site...and while they are all interesting, it's not the same as that vacation reading. I am not talking about Harold Robbins or Judith Kranz---that's not my style, but I am the reading that you do simply for pleasure.
So I am going to Jamaica for MLK, Jr. weekend and will definitely get in some pleasure reading. For the New Year I am also committed to reading more books from the African diaspora. I get to travel and listening to different music has helped to amplify and explain what I think that I have come to know about other countries. I just think that it's time to step that up a notch. There so much more out there than just Colin Channer or Zadie Smith---although they will stay in the rotation.
One domestic book that is on my reading list is One Drop by Bliss Broyard. Broyard's father was a successful cultural critic at the New York Times. After living a comfortably WASP existence in Connecticut, as an adult she learns that her father was not "White," at least under the "one drop" of Black blood rule. As the story goes, the elder Broyard decided to "pass" as White---perhaps like other members of his family. The author finds out that there are "Black" Broyards and "White" Broyards. Part of my interest has to do with how the author's identity has changed, if at all, after this revelation.
I am interested in the story because it makes us have to examine our thoughts about race. Is race biological, cultural, a malleable social construct or what? It seems like a really dumb question until you go to other countries...or you look at someone in the US whom you presume to be "White" who says she is Black. Or meet a darker skinned person who recites his familial lineage---including slavemasters and undercover lovers, so that you are clear that he are not "Black." Americans have a very fixed notion of race, but that is not the case else where in the world. I am not the lightest light, but abroad there have been times when I was not considered "Black." In these instances the presumption was that one of my parents was White. People will say, "Black people are much darker." It's an odd space, since I never think of myself as anything but Black. My own experiences have made me wonder how a person's world view changes if he has the capacity to inhabit another identity. I wonder whether the burden of "passing" was the secrecy, rather than joining another race. It seem that the paradox about race may that one can be more flexible to define oneselves, the lighter one's skin is.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
What Would James Baldwin Think?
I came across a short essay by Kai Wright in Colorlines that discussed how little has changed since James Baldwin published his first collection, Notes of Native Son in 1955. While Wright is correct that there is little substantive interest in changing conditions in the ghettos of America, I believe that today Black Americans have far more opportunities than James Baldwin could have imagined when he died in 1987.
Whether or not one agrees with the politics of Barack Obama, Colin Powell or Condi Rice----everyone knows that in 1955 they could have never achieved their respective levels of power and influence. Moreover, I know that in 1955 I would not have been able to make the same choices about my life that I have. At that time race rather than ability or finances dictated everything from where someone lived and went to school to who one associated with. I am not suggesting that my life has not been touched by racism, it just has not been the type that curtailed my ambitions or interests. Perhaps that is the rub. Whether or not things for Black Americans has changed depends largely on how much education you have and your economic status.
I would daresay that for families who have not been able to break the cycle of poverty through education or employment, life may look just like 1955. For folks in poor communities dead-end jobs, inadequate housing, failing schools and negative encounters with societal institutions still shapes their daily existence. However for Black Americans who have always been middle class or were able to rise to the ranks of the middle class through school and/or advancement-track jobs, they are now reaping the benefits of expanded opportunities. Race matters---but how much may be determined on how much social capital you have---meaning your ability to navigate the waters of the "mainstream," vis a vis advanced education, money or professional skills/talents.
Wright is correct in saying that it is not enough to tell folks in the 'hood to pull up their pants and get their lives right, particularly if we as a society are not going to instill these communities with hope--- in the form of education, job training, sustainable employment and safe affordable housing. By the same token suggesting that nothing has changed is a slap in the face to the millions of Black Americans who have worked hard, often in hostile environments, to get and keep their deserved piece of the American pie.
Here's Wright's essay:
Twenty Years Later: James Baldwin's America Has Not Changed
[Author and Essayist died twenty years ago on Dec. 1]
Baldwin’s biographer and close friend, David Leeming, called his essays “prophetic,” as they articulated an eerily clear-eyed view of America’s peril at the hands of what, in Baldwin’s day, was politely called the “race problem.”
Perhaps Leeming has it right and Baldwin was a soothsayer. But a more plausible explanation is that Baldwin’s work remains contemporary because America’s racial caste system changed so little over the generations that his writing spans.
Baldwin considered race America’s poison pill. And he deftly portrayed Americans of all colors struggling to concoct their own individual antidotes—solutions that are temporary at best and always crazy-making because, at root, the problem is structural not individual.
Today, we still have not reached Baldwin’s understanding of race and racism. It remains a collective problem that we insist upon dealing with on an individual basis. As a result, even our greatest triumphs—the end of legal segregation, broadened opportunity for the slim black middle class—are undermined by broader forces.
In his first essay collection, 1955’s Notes of a Native Son, Baldwin describes an urban ghetto that since has changed only in aesthetic. “All over Harlem now,” he wrote, “there is felt the same bitter expectancy with which, in my childhood, we awaited winter: it is coming and it will be hard; there is nothing anyone can do about it.”
Then and now, reform efforts have failed to alter that bleak reality because they’ve made no fundamental changes. As Baldwin wrote, “Steps are taken to right the wrong, without, however, expanding or demolishing the ghetto. The idea is to make it less of a social liability, a process about as helpful as make-up to a leper.”
So today Baldwin’s Harlem still lingers atop the list of New York neighborhoods with problems ranging from dilapidated housing stock to communicable disease to food establishments that simply fail to pass health inspection. The same is true for other racially defined ghettos around the country.
What is different today is that few discuss race in Baldwin’s structural terms. Instead, we busy ourselves with word games.
We play gotcha with celebrities who use slurs, rather than noticing the morbid conditions African Americans are disproportionately asked to live within. We eagerly embrace commentators like Bill Cosby when they decry the way individuals have adapted to generations of ghetto life. But we nickel and dime any policy effort to change those conditions. We ban the N-word, and we leave the ghetto intact.
This neglect has the same impact today that it had when Baldwin dissected it in 1955. “All over Harlem, Negro boys and girls are growing into stunted maturity, trying desperately to find a place to stand,” he wrote, “and the wonder is not that so many are ruined but that so many survive.”
Kai Wright, a writer and editor living in Brooklyn, New York. His new book, Drifting Towards Love: Black, Brown, Gay, and Coming Out on the Streets of New York, will be published in January by Beacon Press. He is also publications editor for the Black AIDS Institute and author of two previous books on African American history.
Whether or not one agrees with the politics of Barack Obama, Colin Powell or Condi Rice----everyone knows that in 1955 they could have never achieved their respective levels of power and influence. Moreover, I know that in 1955 I would not have been able to make the same choices about my life that I have. At that time race rather than ability or finances dictated everything from where someone lived and went to school to who one associated with. I am not suggesting that my life has not been touched by racism, it just has not been the type that curtailed my ambitions or interests. Perhaps that is the rub. Whether or not things for Black Americans has changed depends largely on how much education you have and your economic status.
I would daresay that for families who have not been able to break the cycle of poverty through education or employment, life may look just like 1955. For folks in poor communities dead-end jobs, inadequate housing, failing schools and negative encounters with societal institutions still shapes their daily existence. However for Black Americans who have always been middle class or were able to rise to the ranks of the middle class through school and/or advancement-track jobs, they are now reaping the benefits of expanded opportunities. Race matters---but how much may be determined on how much social capital you have---meaning your ability to navigate the waters of the "mainstream," vis a vis advanced education, money or professional skills/talents.
Wright is correct in saying that it is not enough to tell folks in the 'hood to pull up their pants and get their lives right, particularly if we as a society are not going to instill these communities with hope--- in the form of education, job training, sustainable employment and safe affordable housing. By the same token suggesting that nothing has changed is a slap in the face to the millions of Black Americans who have worked hard, often in hostile environments, to get and keep their deserved piece of the American pie.
Here's Wright's essay:
Twenty Years Later: James Baldwin's America Has Not Changed
[Author and Essayist died twenty years ago on Dec. 1]
Baldwin’s biographer and close friend, David Leeming, called his essays “prophetic,” as they articulated an eerily clear-eyed view of America’s peril at the hands of what, in Baldwin’s day, was politely called the “race problem.”
Perhaps Leeming has it right and Baldwin was a soothsayer. But a more plausible explanation is that Baldwin’s work remains contemporary because America’s racial caste system changed so little over the generations that his writing spans.
Baldwin considered race America’s poison pill. And he deftly portrayed Americans of all colors struggling to concoct their own individual antidotes—solutions that are temporary at best and always crazy-making because, at root, the problem is structural not individual.
Today, we still have not reached Baldwin’s understanding of race and racism. It remains a collective problem that we insist upon dealing with on an individual basis. As a result, even our greatest triumphs—the end of legal segregation, broadened opportunity for the slim black middle class—are undermined by broader forces.
In his first essay collection, 1955’s Notes of a Native Son, Baldwin describes an urban ghetto that since has changed only in aesthetic. “All over Harlem now,” he wrote, “there is felt the same bitter expectancy with which, in my childhood, we awaited winter: it is coming and it will be hard; there is nothing anyone can do about it.”
Then and now, reform efforts have failed to alter that bleak reality because they’ve made no fundamental changes. As Baldwin wrote, “Steps are taken to right the wrong, without, however, expanding or demolishing the ghetto. The idea is to make it less of a social liability, a process about as helpful as make-up to a leper.”
So today Baldwin’s Harlem still lingers atop the list of New York neighborhoods with problems ranging from dilapidated housing stock to communicable disease to food establishments that simply fail to pass health inspection. The same is true for other racially defined ghettos around the country.
What is different today is that few discuss race in Baldwin’s structural terms. Instead, we busy ourselves with word games.
We play gotcha with celebrities who use slurs, rather than noticing the morbid conditions African Americans are disproportionately asked to live within. We eagerly embrace commentators like Bill Cosby when they decry the way individuals have adapted to generations of ghetto life. But we nickel and dime any policy effort to change those conditions. We ban the N-word, and we leave the ghetto intact.
This neglect has the same impact today that it had when Baldwin dissected it in 1955. “All over Harlem, Negro boys and girls are growing into stunted maturity, trying desperately to find a place to stand,” he wrote, “and the wonder is not that so many are ruined but that so many survive.”
Kai Wright, a writer and editor living in Brooklyn, New York. His new book, Drifting Towards Love: Black, Brown, Gay, and Coming Out on the Streets of New York, will be published in January by Beacon Press. He is also publications editor for the Black AIDS Institute and author of two previous books on African American history.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Teenage Pregnancy on the Rise
What a difference a day makes. Yesterday one news report says that teen pregnancies were declining, now the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention releases a report that states that teenage birth rates have risen for the first time since 1991.
Unfortunately it is no surprise that the largest increase was among Black teenagers. There however were also increases among Whites, Latinos and American Indians. The only group whose teenage birth rate continues to decline is Asians. According to the report "unmarried childbearing" reached a record high in 2006, accounting for 38.5% of all births.
What study after study shows is that the births among teenage mothers and umarried women tends to have poor outcomes: the families remain mired in poverty and the children are more apt to end up in jail. Yeh, yeh, some women are holding it down, but few will hail it as an ideal situation.
The issue is not marriage---marriage does not cure all ills. If you do the math, two unmarried adults, who are each gainfully employed and who are engaged parents, trumps an immature married couple that is financially unstable and only marginally interested in parenting.
In several Scandanavian countries unwed motherhood is practically the norm. The difference however is that generally these women are well educated and can at least provide financially for their children. Moreover, the children's fathers are usually gainfully employed and active in the children's lives.
In comparison, in our country many of these teenagers and unmarried women are neither emotionally or financially equipped to deal with the daily challenges of parenting. More problematic is that in many cases the mothers have a tenuous relationship with the child's father, who may or may not regularly contribute financially and emotionally to the child's upbringing. Moreover, unlike decades past, the support network(grandmothers, aunts, neighbors) who could help with babysitting or money, if a mother ran low one week, is rapidly dwindling as more women enter the workforce and stay in it longer.
The old people used to say that children are a blessing. I believe that to be true. That being said, innocent children are done a disservice if their parents are not prepared to give them a steady dose of love and attention as well as food, clothing and shelter.
Unfortunately it is no surprise that the largest increase was among Black teenagers. There however were also increases among Whites, Latinos and American Indians. The only group whose teenage birth rate continues to decline is Asians. According to the report "unmarried childbearing" reached a record high in 2006, accounting for 38.5% of all births.
What study after study shows is that the births among teenage mothers and umarried women tends to have poor outcomes: the families remain mired in poverty and the children are more apt to end up in jail. Yeh, yeh, some women are holding it down, but few will hail it as an ideal situation.
The issue is not marriage---marriage does not cure all ills. If you do the math, two unmarried adults, who are each gainfully employed and who are engaged parents, trumps an immature married couple that is financially unstable and only marginally interested in parenting.
In several Scandanavian countries unwed motherhood is practically the norm. The difference however is that generally these women are well educated and can at least provide financially for their children. Moreover, the children's fathers are usually gainfully employed and active in the children's lives.
In comparison, in our country many of these teenagers and unmarried women are neither emotionally or financially equipped to deal with the daily challenges of parenting. More problematic is that in many cases the mothers have a tenuous relationship with the child's father, who may or may not regularly contribute financially and emotionally to the child's upbringing. Moreover, unlike decades past, the support network(grandmothers, aunts, neighbors) who could help with babysitting or money, if a mother ran low one week, is rapidly dwindling as more women enter the workforce and stay in it longer.
The old people used to say that children are a blessing. I believe that to be true. That being said, innocent children are done a disservice if their parents are not prepared to give them a steady dose of love and attention as well as food, clothing and shelter.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
29 Year Old Grandmother
Today I ran across an article from the Quad City Times, which covers Iowa and Illinois about a 29 Year Old Grandmother or rather her 15 year old daughter who had just given birth. The upside of the article was information that teenage pregnancy rates in the area (and across the nation) had fallen in the last ten years. The bad news was that the teens who were getting pregnant may be getting younger. In this instance the new mother was more interested in shopping, rapping and getting back to playing basketball that taking care of her son. It is not that the girl is mean or uncaring, she ia simply a self-centered teenager. By the way, I should add that her mother has three younger children.
This type of story is fodder for ghetto humor, but on the serious side...what will be the fate of both of these single mothers and their children? Is it really blaming the victim to point out that the likelihood that these women, both young and undereducated will be able to develop financially and emotionally stable homes is very slim? Moreover, is it too defeatist to predict that without some major intervention, these children will replicate the lifestyles and choices of their mother and grandmother?
Barack Obama is getting a lukewarm reception from many Black folks. Personally I think that his bi-racial background is irrelevant and is not the cause of the resistance to him. I think that the problem for Obama (and the new vanguard of Black leadership) is that in order to appreciate their success, many Black folks will have to look at their own failures. It is easier to call another Black a sell-out or to say that he/she is not "black enough," or cry about racism rather than admit your own bad choices and short-sided thinking are largely responsible for your situation.
Obama and his peers are not talking about "Black issues" as if Blacks are a separate species from the rest of America. This is disconcerting to folks to believe that without concessions from Whites Blacks can't make it. Whether Obama's universal political message is right for this point in remains to be seen. However even if he does not become our next president, he spells the future of Black politics. With so many Blacks achieving and doing well, it becomes more and more difficult to contend that the majority of our interests and concerns distinct from those of Whites, Asians and Latinos.
A great majority of the new Black middle class have humble roots. Most obtained whatever they have through hard work, luck and a lot of prayer. However many of these same people have friends or relatives who made choices that landed them in jail, poverty, single motherhood or worse in the grave yard. As one kid decided to go to school and get a job after school, his classmate dropped out of school and decided that robbing or hustling was the fast-track to riches---now he's locked up. In another neighborhood, one girl was too invested in going to college to be swayed by her boyfriend's pleas for condom-less sex. Her best friend, not interested in anything but her boyfriend took that bait; gaining a child and lost the boyfriend. A single woman looking for love kept having children, with different men, although each successive child plunged her and the other ones deeper into poverty. While no one is saying the racial discrimination is dead, some have managed to keep moving forward. Unfortunately others make one bad decision after another.
There are no easy answer to stemming generational poverty, but we might start by having some serious talks in communities around the country. Not moralizing, but getting real about how quickly a few bad moves or careless nights can cripple your for life.
This type of story is fodder for ghetto humor, but on the serious side...what will be the fate of both of these single mothers and their children? Is it really blaming the victim to point out that the likelihood that these women, both young and undereducated will be able to develop financially and emotionally stable homes is very slim? Moreover, is it too defeatist to predict that without some major intervention, these children will replicate the lifestyles and choices of their mother and grandmother?
Barack Obama is getting a lukewarm reception from many Black folks. Personally I think that his bi-racial background is irrelevant and is not the cause of the resistance to him. I think that the problem for Obama (and the new vanguard of Black leadership) is that in order to appreciate their success, many Black folks will have to look at their own failures. It is easier to call another Black a sell-out or to say that he/she is not "black enough," or cry about racism rather than admit your own bad choices and short-sided thinking are largely responsible for your situation.
Obama and his peers are not talking about "Black issues" as if Blacks are a separate species from the rest of America. This is disconcerting to folks to believe that without concessions from Whites Blacks can't make it. Whether Obama's universal political message is right for this point in remains to be seen. However even if he does not become our next president, he spells the future of Black politics. With so many Blacks achieving and doing well, it becomes more and more difficult to contend that the majority of our interests and concerns distinct from those of Whites, Asians and Latinos.
A great majority of the new Black middle class have humble roots. Most obtained whatever they have through hard work, luck and a lot of prayer. However many of these same people have friends or relatives who made choices that landed them in jail, poverty, single motherhood or worse in the grave yard. As one kid decided to go to school and get a job after school, his classmate dropped out of school and decided that robbing or hustling was the fast-track to riches---now he's locked up. In another neighborhood, one girl was too invested in going to college to be swayed by her boyfriend's pleas for condom-less sex. Her best friend, not interested in anything but her boyfriend took that bait; gaining a child and lost the boyfriend. A single woman looking for love kept having children, with different men, although each successive child plunged her and the other ones deeper into poverty. While no one is saying the racial discrimination is dead, some have managed to keep moving forward. Unfortunately others make one bad decision after another.
There are no easy answer to stemming generational poverty, but we might start by having some serious talks in communities around the country. Not moralizing, but getting real about how quickly a few bad moves or careless nights can cripple your for life.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Sean Taylor, The Black KKK and Hip Hop
For the past week the Internet world as well as the physical world has been discussing the murder of Redskin's player, Sean Taylor. Where I am in the Washington, DC area, home of the Redskins, the story has been amplified and is a personal loss for many people.
One of the more controversial pieces is Taylor's Death a Grim Reminder For Us All written by sports columnist Jason Whitlock. Whitlock calls Taylor's killers members of the Black KKK and essentially blames rap music not only for Taylor's past misconduct, but also for his death.
Whitlock's comments are too simplistic for my taste. Blaming Hip Hop ignores a host of other factors that contribute to crime and violence, including stupidity, callous disregard for human life and free will. If rap music fell off the earth tomorrow, the crime and violence committed against Black Americans by other Black Americans would not autormatically cease. Moreover, when we point fingers at rap and Hip Hop are we just pointing at rap artists or will we also be pointing at the multi-national entertainment companies and the corporate radio station that disseminate their messages and make the lions' share of the money?
Where I tend to agree with Whitlock is that Black folks need to stop sugarcoating bad choices under some misguided sense of racial unity. Everyone who is poor or who comes from a single family home does not become a criminal. Furthermore, let us not forget that the middle class spawns criminals. More often than not becoming a criminal or hanging with criminals is a personal choice, not a survival tactic. Whether you live in a mansion or in the hood, you can't elevate yourself if you continue to surround yourself with the same ol' people and the same ol' influences. Sometimes in order to grow you have got to make a clean and complete break from the past.
Rap and Hip Hop are not the reasons why there is an academic achievement gap or that Blacks lag behind others in business and home ownership and its coarser elements may be exacerbating existing problems. The truth of the matter is that many rap artists have become millionaires preaching to the masses that in order to get paid you just rob somebody or get your hustle on----the days of talking about being a fool for dropping out of high school are long gone. Ironically, other folks consume rap music and Hip Hop as "entertainment" and keep on stepping into college, careers and nice lives. Unfortunately, too many Black youth have made rap music their life guides and as we used to say back in the day, they "got played." They covet the riches regularly displayed in music videos, yet by remaining "true to the streets" they are getting getting neither the education nor the job skills that could put them on a path to attaining at least some of these luxuries.
I have always thought that too much weight has been placed on Hip Hop to heal "Black America." Frankly I thought that that task should fall to policy makers, scholars, clergy and kinfolk. Hip Hop can aid the cause, but I think that it's nuts to think that performers who ultimately are looking to get a pay check will leading any revolution.
I stumbled on an interview with author and music journalist, Toure in Clutch magazine. I agreed with him on several points concerning Hip Hop, especially how it is being scapegoated. Here is a snippet:
Clutch magazine : Lately, hip-hop and black culture are use simultaneously. How do you feel about hip-hop becoming the current representative of our image and culture worldwide?
Toure: Hiphop has long been the lingua franca of my generation and it’s only right because it truly represents this generation, for better and worse. I think it’s a mistake to think hiphop and black culture are synonymous, they’re not, there’s many places where they don’t overlap at all. Black culture is perhaps more diverse now than it ever has been and hiphop is very racially diverse and it’s also international, repped in Japan, Europe, South America, Africa, all over the world. Hiphop comes from black culture and black culture often seems dominated by hiphop but by no means are they one and the same. There are many points of overlap but many points of disconnect.
Clutch magazine: Recently you and Jeff Johnson (Cousin Jeff) hosted BET’s heated debate “Hip Hop vs. America”. While most hip-hop artist don’t accurately portray the actual image and realities of Black America and does little in helping us kill stereotypes and generalization that are placed on us. Do you think hip-hop has become a scapegoat for the problems and issues in our community?
Toure: Yes, I think the elder generation has become increasingly afraid of the impact hiphop is having on the world which is funny because hiphop is as tame as ever. But they’ve been scared of hiphop consistently for the last 20 years or more. Every generation has to have music that scares their parents but this is insane. I was actually very disappointed in the older generation for turning the Imus controversy into a referendum on hiphop, which really allowed the racists to slip away. Why not a referendum on shock jocks or noose-placers? There’s been a preponderance of nooses this year all over the country, that’s much more dangerous than the preponderance of the words bitch and ho. What was lost in the Imus stampede was that nappy-headed ho was really the least of his comments. What he immediately went on to reference was Spike Lee’s School Daze and the scene where the wanna-bes faced off against the jigagboos. He was calling those girls jiggaboos. That’s not a word that you hear often in hiphop or anywhere in black culture, that’s one of those deep curses that you never hear thrown around because it’s too heavy. That’s where he took it and the massive pile-onto hiphop lost sight of the real enemy. But to the older generation hiphop is the real enemy as was disco before us and rock n roll before that and jazz before that. But none of those musical cultures ruined their generation and hiphop isn’t ruining ours. For God’s sake, heavy metal didn’t come under as great an attack after Columbine where many people died because older white people aren’t afraid of heavy metal.
Read the rest of the article at: Clutch Magazine Online
One of the more controversial pieces is Taylor's Death a Grim Reminder For Us All written by sports columnist Jason Whitlock. Whitlock calls Taylor's killers members of the Black KKK and essentially blames rap music not only for Taylor's past misconduct, but also for his death.
Whitlock's comments are too simplistic for my taste. Blaming Hip Hop ignores a host of other factors that contribute to crime and violence, including stupidity, callous disregard for human life and free will. If rap music fell off the earth tomorrow, the crime and violence committed against Black Americans by other Black Americans would not autormatically cease. Moreover, when we point fingers at rap and Hip Hop are we just pointing at rap artists or will we also be pointing at the multi-national entertainment companies and the corporate radio station that disseminate their messages and make the lions' share of the money?
Where I tend to agree with Whitlock is that Black folks need to stop sugarcoating bad choices under some misguided sense of racial unity. Everyone who is poor or who comes from a single family home does not become a criminal. Furthermore, let us not forget that the middle class spawns criminals. More often than not becoming a criminal or hanging with criminals is a personal choice, not a survival tactic. Whether you live in a mansion or in the hood, you can't elevate yourself if you continue to surround yourself with the same ol' people and the same ol' influences. Sometimes in order to grow you have got to make a clean and complete break from the past.
Rap and Hip Hop are not the reasons why there is an academic achievement gap or that Blacks lag behind others in business and home ownership and its coarser elements may be exacerbating existing problems. The truth of the matter is that many rap artists have become millionaires preaching to the masses that in order to get paid you just rob somebody or get your hustle on----the days of talking about being a fool for dropping out of high school are long gone. Ironically, other folks consume rap music and Hip Hop as "entertainment" and keep on stepping into college, careers and nice lives. Unfortunately, too many Black youth have made rap music their life guides and as we used to say back in the day, they "got played." They covet the riches regularly displayed in music videos, yet by remaining "true to the streets" they are getting getting neither the education nor the job skills that could put them on a path to attaining at least some of these luxuries.
I have always thought that too much weight has been placed on Hip Hop to heal "Black America." Frankly I thought that that task should fall to policy makers, scholars, clergy and kinfolk. Hip Hop can aid the cause, but I think that it's nuts to think that performers who ultimately are looking to get a pay check will leading any revolution.
I stumbled on an interview with author and music journalist, Toure in Clutch magazine. I agreed with him on several points concerning Hip Hop, especially how it is being scapegoated. Here is a snippet:
Clutch magazine : Lately, hip-hop and black culture are use simultaneously. How do you feel about hip-hop becoming the current representative of our image and culture worldwide?
Toure: Hiphop has long been the lingua franca of my generation and it’s only right because it truly represents this generation, for better and worse. I think it’s a mistake to think hiphop and black culture are synonymous, they’re not, there’s many places where they don’t overlap at all. Black culture is perhaps more diverse now than it ever has been and hiphop is very racially diverse and it’s also international, repped in Japan, Europe, South America, Africa, all over the world. Hiphop comes from black culture and black culture often seems dominated by hiphop but by no means are they one and the same. There are many points of overlap but many points of disconnect.
Clutch magazine: Recently you and Jeff Johnson (Cousin Jeff) hosted BET’s heated debate “Hip Hop vs. America”. While most hip-hop artist don’t accurately portray the actual image and realities of Black America and does little in helping us kill stereotypes and generalization that are placed on us. Do you think hip-hop has become a scapegoat for the problems and issues in our community?
Toure: Yes, I think the elder generation has become increasingly afraid of the impact hiphop is having on the world which is funny because hiphop is as tame as ever. But they’ve been scared of hiphop consistently for the last 20 years or more. Every generation has to have music that scares their parents but this is insane. I was actually very disappointed in the older generation for turning the Imus controversy into a referendum on hiphop, which really allowed the racists to slip away. Why not a referendum on shock jocks or noose-placers? There’s been a preponderance of nooses this year all over the country, that’s much more dangerous than the preponderance of the words bitch and ho. What was lost in the Imus stampede was that nappy-headed ho was really the least of his comments. What he immediately went on to reference was Spike Lee’s School Daze and the scene where the wanna-bes faced off against the jigagboos. He was calling those girls jiggaboos. That’s not a word that you hear often in hiphop or anywhere in black culture, that’s one of those deep curses that you never hear thrown around because it’s too heavy. That’s where he took it and the massive pile-onto hiphop lost sight of the real enemy. But to the older generation hiphop is the real enemy as was disco before us and rock n roll before that and jazz before that. But none of those musical cultures ruined their generation and hiphop isn’t ruining ours. For God’s sake, heavy metal didn’t come under as great an attack after Columbine where many people died because older white people aren’t afraid of heavy metal.
Read the rest of the article at: Clutch Magazine Online
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Conference on James Brown at Princeton University
Some may question why the need to have a conference discussing the life and work of James Brown...I say why not. Who was more quintessentially American and simultaneously more Black than him? James Brown's career spanned several decades...a feat within itself. Furthermore, aside from just the music, his life touched the world of politics, the criminal justice system and now estate law---given all the variety of children and ex or not ex wives who seem to be popping up. I would have loved to see this type of discussion closer to the people who were influenced by James Brown's music. However I would rather see this discussion occur at Princeton than not.
" Ain't that a Groove": The Genius of James Brown
A Princeton University Two-Day Symposium
November 29
6:00pm-9:00pm
Richardson Auditorium
"On the ONE" : Thursday Night Keynote Roundtable & Concert Film
6pm-7pm: Welcome by Valerie Smith, Princeton University & Film screening
7pm-9pm: Keynote Roundtable featuring:
Robert Christgau , Rolling Stone Magazine, NPR, Princeton University
Fred Moten, University of Southern California
Alan Leeds, tour manager, journalist, archivist
Farah Griffin, Columbia University
Moderator: Daphne A. Brooks, Princeton University
November 30
9:00am-6:00pm
Richardson Auditorium
9:00am - Opening Remarks -Daphne A. Brooks
9:30am-11:30pm - "It's A Man's Man's Man's World": Black Power, Black Masculinity
and the Politics of Funk
Mark Anthony Neal, Duke University
Jason King, New York University
Thomas F. DeFrantz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Robert Fink, UCLA
Moderator: Tera Hunter, Princeton University
1:00-3:00pm - The Funky Precedent: Revolutionizing Rock, Birthing Hip Hop—
Theorizing James Brown's Musical Innovations
Kandia Crazy Horse, Rip It Up: The Black Experience in Rock 'n Roll
Rickey Vincent, Funk: The Music, The People, and the Rhythm of the One
Ahmir "?uestlove" Thompson, the Roots
Harry Weinger, A&R, Universal Music
Moderator: Joshua B. Guild, Princeton University
3:30-5:30pm - "Mama Don't Take No Mess": Black Feminist Readings of James Brown
Reginald Jackson, Yale University
Imani Perry, Princeton University
Mendi Ob adike, Princeton University
Ernest Hardy, Blood Beats: Vol. 1 Demos, Remixes & Extended Versions
Moderator: Tavia Nyong'o, New York University
5:30-6:00pm - Closing Remarks by Cornel West, Princeton University
Registration is required. Please visit us on the web at https://www.princeton.edu/africanamericanstudies/news/events to register today!
" Ain't that a Groove": The Genius of James BrownA Princeton University Two-Day Symposium
November 29
6:00pm-9:00pm
Richardson Auditorium
"On the ONE" : Thursday Night Keynote Roundtable & Concert Film
6pm-7pm: Welcome by Valerie Smith, Princeton University & Film screening
7pm-9pm: Keynote Roundtable featuring:
Robert Christgau , Rolling Stone Magazine, NPR, Princeton University
Fred Moten, University of Southern California
Alan Leeds, tour manager, journalist, archivist
Farah Griffin, Columbia University
Moderator: Daphne A. Brooks, Princeton University
November 30
9:00am-6:00pm
Richardson Auditorium
9:00am - Opening Remarks -Daphne A. Brooks
9:30am-11:30pm - "It's A Man's Man's Man's World": Black Power, Black Masculinity
and the Politics of Funk
Mark Anthony Neal, Duke University
Jason King, New York University
Thomas F. DeFrantz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Robert Fink, UCLA
Moderator: Tera Hunter, Princeton University
1:00-3:00pm - The Funky Precedent: Revolutionizing Rock, Birthing Hip Hop—
Theorizing James Brown's Musical Innovations
Kandia Crazy Horse, Rip It Up: The Black Experience in Rock 'n Roll
Rickey Vincent, Funk: The Music, The People, and the Rhythm of the One
Ahmir "?uestlove" Thompson, the Roots
Harry Weinger, A&R, Universal Music
Moderator: Joshua B. Guild, Princeton University
3:30-5:30pm - "Mama Don't Take No Mess": Black Feminist Readings of James Brown
Reginald Jackson, Yale University
Imani Perry, Princeton University
Mendi Ob adike, Princeton University
Ernest Hardy, Blood Beats: Vol. 1 Demos, Remixes & Extended Versions
Moderator: Tavia Nyong'o, New York University
5:30-6:00pm - Closing Remarks by Cornel West, Princeton University
Registration is required. Please visit us on the web at https://www.princeton.edu/africanamericanstudies/news/events to register today!
Friday, November 23, 2007
Nooses and Shoving Race Under the Carpet
I saw Rev. James H. Cone on Bill Moyers show this evening. Moyers had invited him to expound on his October, 2006 talk at Harvard titled,Strange Fruit: The Cross and the Lynching Tree. In both the originating speech and the television discussion there were a lot of big ideas thrown about. However the Cliff Notes interpretation is that the United States, a Judeo-Christian nation has to reconcile its religious principles with its historical treatment of Blacks. Cone discussed the lyrics of the song "Strange Fruit" made famous by Billie Holiday and said that we can't understand the full meaning of the Christ's crucifixion until we understand the import of lynching---"black bodies swinging" on our country's conscious.
Nooses may not scare Blacks as they did a century ago, but the fact that they are resurfacing is unsettling. Like the crackers in the Klan who did their dirt at night, the hanging of nooses are the clandestine work of Whites who walk amongst and believe that it is their right to keep Blacks in line. While Whites can shrug off nooses, Blacks are often forced to wonder if their White co-worker or neighbor is someone who feels entitled to hang a noose to signify the need to put an uppity negro in his/her place.
A noose, hung on a tree for Whites at a Jena, LA high school was the impetus for fight that led to the arrests and convictions of Black youth in the Jena Six cases. Subsequently we have seen a rash of copycats noose hangings around the country. Noose sightings include the University of Maryland- College Park, The U.S. Coast Guard Academy and Columbia University. We all know that the noose is a symbol of hatred, but many people are less willing to accept that it is also a symbol of terrorism. The noose was/is a way to express White supremacy---or rather the idea that it was right and just that Whites wield all political and economic power. The purpose of the noose is to instill fear, by the threat of death, in the hearts of Blacks. Whites who conformed to this principle believed that brutality and violence against Blacks was justifiable in the maintenance of the racial/power status quo. The resurgence of the noose is a way to say---you may now be able to get a college education or professorship or a good job, but we White folks are still in charge.
Once again, discussions about race are no where to be found in this presidential election. Even with Barack Obama as a contender, it is easier for Whites to shove aside nooses and other remmants of the past, such as racial slurs a la Don Imus on the extreme back burner. By continuing to downplay the importance and history of racist symbols such as nooses, Whites portray Blacks as merely ultrasensitive. This depiction then allows them to gloss over how racism still has the ability to impact the everyday lives of Black people. Racism is alive and well and can be seen in the inability of a Black man to catch a cab, to the disparities in loans between Blacks and Whites with the same salaries and credit history to a criminal justice system which seems better at arresting and convicting Black youth than Whites.
However as long as hanging a noose is viewed as an isolated incident or a prank, there is never any reason for Whites to look at how racism and racist attitudes affect the institutions that govern our society. Under this fog, Whites are able to comfortably assume that since everyone has equal opportunitites, the Black person who does not make it is simply lazy or stupid. They never have to consider that the Black person may be unduly hindered by institutional racism that equates Blackness with inferiority and thus rewards Whiteness.
After the Civil War, the noose was a way to terrorize Blacks into accepting that their only role in society was as the servants of Whites. The man or woman who dared in action or word to challenge White authority met his or her fate at the noose. While some lynchings were covert affairs, others were public spectacles where throngs of Whites gathered often with their children and perhaps bringing a picnic lunch. Public lynchings were a way of reinforcing for Whites, particularly the poor and uneducated ones, that they were indeed in charge and could not and would not be supplanted by Blacks.
White Americans remain squeemish about the issues of race. Many Whites harbor the concern that given the history of Blacks in this country that not only do they hate Whites but are also waiting for the moment when they can exact the big payback. Moreover, in order to have a frank and meaningful discussion, Whites would have to first acknowledge that they are descendents of lynchers (killers of Blacks) or of the multitude of spectators who watched Blacks die as sport or of those who remained silent as Blacks were cheated, exploited and killed. At the bare minimum, "Whites"---particularly those who claim to be of immigrant stock have to acknowledge that have benefited from this country's social, economic and political system that for 300 odd years exploited Blacks---first as slaves and then through legal segregated Blacks which restricted the ability of Blacks to become educated or to obtain a range of jobs that would have put them on equal footing with Whites.
If a real race dialogue were instituted, Blacks would have the burden of actually listening to Whites articulate their insecurities and prejudices about race. More important after the validation of past injustices and contemporary fears Blacks would have to chart a new course that not only heals their psyches but also builds a foundation for further social, economic and political gains. By continuing to point to the sins of White folks, Blacks are not forced to deal substantively with our collective shortcomings.
While both Hillary and Barack yank about being the change candidate, neither one of them is talking about uniting the country on our most important issue. For different reasons, both candidates are willing to dance around race for fear of offending White voters. Leadership---real leadership would mean that before we run around the world and preach to sovereign countries about human rights and democracy that we would get our own house in order. We are not equipped to deal with any authority with the Israeli-Palenstinian situation or with the Sunnis and Shites because we have not found a way to deal with our own sectarian divisions. If were truly on the road to unifying the United States, we would then have a viable model to export abroad. Unfortunately, all that we are selling to them is the same lies and mythology about equality that we pedal to those at home who believe that we can do better--and thus puch for tangible social justice.
Nooses may not scare Blacks as they did a century ago, but the fact that they are resurfacing is unsettling. Like the crackers in the Klan who did their dirt at night, the hanging of nooses are the clandestine work of Whites who walk amongst and believe that it is their right to keep Blacks in line. While Whites can shrug off nooses, Blacks are often forced to wonder if their White co-worker or neighbor is someone who feels entitled to hang a noose to signify the need to put an uppity negro in his/her place.
A noose, hung on a tree for Whites at a Jena, LA high school was the impetus for fight that led to the arrests and convictions of Black youth in the Jena Six cases. Subsequently we have seen a rash of copycats noose hangings around the country. Noose sightings include the University of Maryland- College Park, The U.S. Coast Guard Academy and Columbia University. We all know that the noose is a symbol of hatred, but many people are less willing to accept that it is also a symbol of terrorism. The noose was/is a way to express White supremacy---or rather the idea that it was right and just that Whites wield all political and economic power. The purpose of the noose is to instill fear, by the threat of death, in the hearts of Blacks. Whites who conformed to this principle believed that brutality and violence against Blacks was justifiable in the maintenance of the racial/power status quo. The resurgence of the noose is a way to say---you may now be able to get a college education or professorship or a good job, but we White folks are still in charge.
Once again, discussions about race are no where to be found in this presidential election. Even with Barack Obama as a contender, it is easier for Whites to shove aside nooses and other remmants of the past, such as racial slurs a la Don Imus on the extreme back burner. By continuing to downplay the importance and history of racist symbols such as nooses, Whites portray Blacks as merely ultrasensitive. This depiction then allows them to gloss over how racism still has the ability to impact the everyday lives of Black people. Racism is alive and well and can be seen in the inability of a Black man to catch a cab, to the disparities in loans between Blacks and Whites with the same salaries and credit history to a criminal justice system which seems better at arresting and convicting Black youth than Whites.
However as long as hanging a noose is viewed as an isolated incident or a prank, there is never any reason for Whites to look at how racism and racist attitudes affect the institutions that govern our society. Under this fog, Whites are able to comfortably assume that since everyone has equal opportunitites, the Black person who does not make it is simply lazy or stupid. They never have to consider that the Black person may be unduly hindered by institutional racism that equates Blackness with inferiority and thus rewards Whiteness.
After the Civil War, the noose was a way to terrorize Blacks into accepting that their only role in society was as the servants of Whites. The man or woman who dared in action or word to challenge White authority met his or her fate at the noose. While some lynchings were covert affairs, others were public spectacles where throngs of Whites gathered often with their children and perhaps bringing a picnic lunch. Public lynchings were a way of reinforcing for Whites, particularly the poor and uneducated ones, that they were indeed in charge and could not and would not be supplanted by Blacks.
White Americans remain squeemish about the issues of race. Many Whites harbor the concern that given the history of Blacks in this country that not only do they hate Whites but are also waiting for the moment when they can exact the big payback. Moreover, in order to have a frank and meaningful discussion, Whites would have to first acknowledge that they are descendents of lynchers (killers of Blacks) or of the multitude of spectators who watched Blacks die as sport or of those who remained silent as Blacks were cheated, exploited and killed. At the bare minimum, "Whites"---particularly those who claim to be of immigrant stock have to acknowledge that have benefited from this country's social, economic and political system that for 300 odd years exploited Blacks---first as slaves and then through legal segregated Blacks which restricted the ability of Blacks to become educated or to obtain a range of jobs that would have put them on equal footing with Whites.
If a real race dialogue were instituted, Blacks would have the burden of actually listening to Whites articulate their insecurities and prejudices about race. More important after the validation of past injustices and contemporary fears Blacks would have to chart a new course that not only heals their psyches but also builds a foundation for further social, economic and political gains. By continuing to point to the sins of White folks, Blacks are not forced to deal substantively with our collective shortcomings.
While both Hillary and Barack yank about being the change candidate, neither one of them is talking about uniting the country on our most important issue. For different reasons, both candidates are willing to dance around race for fear of offending White voters. Leadership---real leadership would mean that before we run around the world and preach to sovereign countries about human rights and democracy that we would get our own house in order. We are not equipped to deal with any authority with the Israeli-Palenstinian situation or with the Sunnis and Shites because we have not found a way to deal with our own sectarian divisions. If were truly on the road to unifying the United States, we would then have a viable model to export abroad. Unfortunately, all that we are selling to them is the same lies and mythology about equality that we pedal to those at home who believe that we can do better--and thus puch for tangible social justice.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Thanking the Black Press
Today is Thanksgiving. For many folks this means family gatherings that help us to remember the blessings and good fortune in our lives. I am appreciative of many things, my loving family (those with me in flesh and those with me in spirit), good friends and generous mentors. I also want to remember and appreciate those fearless people who paved the way for Black folks. One of those people was Frances L. Murphy III, former publisher and chief executive of the Afro-American Newspapers who died yesterday at age 85.
Black newspapers get a bum rap today. In an age of 24 hour news, the weekly cycle of many of these newspapers puts them at a severe disadvantage. By the time that they come out, the news that they are reporting is stale. Moreover, lack of resources often means that they rely heavily on wire services rather than on reported pieces. There are other things to nitpick about---regular typos, a tendency not to rigorously scrutinize Black officials and an advocacy of Democratic rhetoric that leaves no room to consider other, perhaps more viable points of view. The reality is that most Black folks do not bother to read Black newspapers anymore. While some people point to the decline of the Black press as progress---evidence that Blacks are now "mainstream," we should not forget that newspapers such as the Afro-American, Amsterdam News, The Chicago Defender and the Pittsburgh Courier for decades were sources of news for Black citizens who were ignored by the White press. They also transmitted crucial information about what was going on in our communities.
Black newspapers not only reported on events, but also served as catalysts to events by informing their readers how issues impacted their lives and how they could get involved to make change. Black newspapers also had a mandate set the record straight and give an honest and balanced account of what was happening to Black Americans in this country. We know that too often the mainstream media gets stories about Black folks wrong. Today, in many cases the bad reporting is the result of laziness or a lack of understanding---however in prior decades, wrong reporting was frequently intentional the result of racism that could not fathom Blacks as anything but criminal, evil, and ignorant.
Personally, I think that we still need a Black press, but one updated for the 21st century. In the age of the Internet, the most popular Black websites are focused on entertainment and sports. In a time when the world is getting more complex and the need for substantive information is more necessary it is problematic that there are not strong and diverse media voices out that are targeting Black Americans. Granted, there are a few shows on local newspapers and television programs that are still keeping up the fight, but their effectiveness and appeal is stymied because they are underfunded and seem to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, in terms of how they view the world and its relation to Blacks Americans. Most of these show fail to talk about improving our circumstances in a pro-active way that depends mire on our intellect and collective resources and less on making White folks see the error of their ways. For instance, what can Black communities and Black leaders be doing to stem the number of high school drop-out and close the achievement gap? What knowledge do we already have to accomplish this and what networks already exist to disseminate the necessary information? What would be a 10 year "Education Plan," created by a coalition of civil rights organization look like and how could it operate?
So today, I thank people like France L. Murphy III who were about the business of empowering Black folks long before we used terms like "empowering." To France L. Murphy, a member of Delta Sigma Theta and the daughter of Delta Sigma Theta founder Vashti Turley Murphy, I say a heartfelt, "Skee-Oop."
Black newspapers get a bum rap today. In an age of 24 hour news, the weekly cycle of many of these newspapers puts them at a severe disadvantage. By the time that they come out, the news that they are reporting is stale. Moreover, lack of resources often means that they rely heavily on wire services rather than on reported pieces. There are other things to nitpick about---regular typos, a tendency not to rigorously scrutinize Black officials and an advocacy of Democratic rhetoric that leaves no room to consider other, perhaps more viable points of view. The reality is that most Black folks do not bother to read Black newspapers anymore. While some people point to the decline of the Black press as progress---evidence that Blacks are now "mainstream," we should not forget that newspapers such as the Afro-American, Amsterdam News, The Chicago Defender and the Pittsburgh Courier for decades were sources of news for Black citizens who were ignored by the White press. They also transmitted crucial information about what was going on in our communities.
Black newspapers not only reported on events, but also served as catalysts to events by informing their readers how issues impacted their lives and how they could get involved to make change. Black newspapers also had a mandate set the record straight and give an honest and balanced account of what was happening to Black Americans in this country. We know that too often the mainstream media gets stories about Black folks wrong. Today, in many cases the bad reporting is the result of laziness or a lack of understanding---however in prior decades, wrong reporting was frequently intentional the result of racism that could not fathom Blacks as anything but criminal, evil, and ignorant.
Personally, I think that we still need a Black press, but one updated for the 21st century. In the age of the Internet, the most popular Black websites are focused on entertainment and sports. In a time when the world is getting more complex and the need for substantive information is more necessary it is problematic that there are not strong and diverse media voices out that are targeting Black Americans. Granted, there are a few shows on local newspapers and television programs that are still keeping up the fight, but their effectiveness and appeal is stymied because they are underfunded and seem to be stuck in the 1960s and 1970s, in terms of how they view the world and its relation to Blacks Americans. Most of these show fail to talk about improving our circumstances in a pro-active way that depends mire on our intellect and collective resources and less on making White folks see the error of their ways. For instance, what can Black communities and Black leaders be doing to stem the number of high school drop-out and close the achievement gap? What knowledge do we already have to accomplish this and what networks already exist to disseminate the necessary information? What would be a 10 year "Education Plan," created by a coalition of civil rights organization look like and how could it operate?
So today, I thank people like France L. Murphy III who were about the business of empowering Black folks long before we used terms like "empowering." To France L. Murphy, a member of Delta Sigma Theta and the daughter of Delta Sigma Theta founder Vashti Turley Murphy, I say a heartfelt, "Skee-Oop."
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Spoken Word Artist Saul Williams Calls Rap Artists...
Today I was struggling trying to get the spirit to actually put words to screen. I am not the most disciplined writer and usually have to be "moved" by something to write. Well Saul Williams moved me albeit late this day.
On MySpace.com I was forwarded a radio interview that had Saul dropping some serious knowledge about the state of Hip Hop. Ironically it was a morning "wake up show" and he certainly woke a few folks up with his words. He associated much of commercial rap with Republicans for its glorificiation of money. He's on to something---Reagan and his successors said on the same message that everyone should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. In short, do it yourself because the government could care less if you are hungry, homeless or illiterate. Hurricane Katrina was the best example of this type of mentality. The people too broke, sick, or old to leave New Orleans were left to fend for themselves and then were maligned because they became casualties. The prevalent rap message is not too different-- I got mine, you better get your own. The only real difference between the Republicans and rap artists is that Republicans can generate capital, exploit people and wage war under the cover of government and law, while the rap artists do not have that same immunity.
Saul continued lobbing grenades by saying that most rap artists rather than being rebels or threats to society are actually defenders of the status quo. Much of today's rap music, according to Saul has allowed Black folks to build up a tolerance to bullshit and has made them complacent---perhaps unwilling to rock the boat even to seek their own freedom.
Click to hear the entire interview
On MySpace.com I was forwarded a radio interview that had Saul dropping some serious knowledge about the state of Hip Hop. Ironically it was a morning "wake up show" and he certainly woke a few folks up with his words. He associated much of commercial rap with Republicans for its glorificiation of money. He's on to something---Reagan and his successors said on the same message that everyone should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. In short, do it yourself because the government could care less if you are hungry, homeless or illiterate. Hurricane Katrina was the best example of this type of mentality. The people too broke, sick, or old to leave New Orleans were left to fend for themselves and then were maligned because they became casualties. The prevalent rap message is not too different-- I got mine, you better get your own. The only real difference between the Republicans and rap artists is that Republicans can generate capital, exploit people and wage war under the cover of government and law, while the rap artists do not have that same immunity.
Saul continued lobbing grenades by saying that most rap artists rather than being rebels or threats to society are actually defenders of the status quo. Much of today's rap music, according to Saul has allowed Black folks to build up a tolerance to bullshit and has made them complacent---perhaps unwilling to rock the boat even to seek their own freedom.
Click to hear the entire interview
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Let's Put Damon Wayans out to Pasture
For the record, I never thought that Damon Wayans was that funny. Yes, In Living Color was a good show but it was an ensemble cast, it was not solely dependent on Damon Wayans. On the real---if the Wayans family had waited for me to support their subsequent efforts they would be mighty hungry and definitely homeless.
Now Damon Wayans, the same person who tried to copyright the word nigger is defending Don Imus. People of intellect and good faith can disagree, but Damon Wayans, just like D.L. Hughley before him are trying to defend an ad hominem attack on some female college students as defensible humor. Moreover, Wayans is placing himself as the spokesmen for all Black Americans by saying that Black folks thought that the comment was funny---that it is culturally based. I guess that Wayans simply writes off every Black person who does not agree with him as "bourgie."
This Black woman certainly did not think that Imus's statement was funny, nor did I think that D.L. Hughley's comment on David Letterman was funny or Damon Wayans' latest addition. I have already expressed my views on the Imus affair in the essay, "Hip Hop's (Still) Invisible Women," located at http://www.AlterNet.org/story/51933 so I am not going to re-hash all of that. The bottom line is that if slamming some college athletes for not being their idea of glamour girls is the only way that D.L. Hughley and Damon Wayans think that they can get a laugh, it is no wonder that both of their careers have taken a nose dive.
I could care less about Imus or his defenders, because I will not respond as a victim to actions or words of boars and bigots. However I do know that racist and sexist speech should not be used wantonly on our public airwaves.
Read what Wayans said below---I don't think that Cameron Turner agrees with him either:
TURNER'S TWO CENTS:
Wayans disgraces himself by defending Imus"When he called them nappy headed hoes I was like, 'Wow! He's right!" -- Damon Wayans (on The View, 11-7-07)
*Damon Wayans has, evidently, lost his mind. The veteran comedian/actor/writer actually went on national TV (ABC's The View) last week and said that Don Imus was "right" when he called the members of the Rutgers Women's Basketball team "nappy headed hoes."
The former star of My Wife and Kids said he wasn't offended by Imus' comment because, "black people can say that about each other." Wayans grinned and giggled in solitude as The View panelists and audience responded with shocked, nervous laughter, head-shaking and groans of disapproval.
As Sherri Shepherd struggled to get a word in over the uncomfortable cacophony ("Damon! You know what, Damon?"), Joy Behar challenged Wayans directly: "These women are not hoes," she said, "They're highly respected sports (stars)."
Then, as if his original statement wasn't crazy enough, Wayans clarified and expanded position by saying something truly ignorant: "Black people at home are laughing right now. White people are going, 'That's not right!' (But) it's all cultural." No it isn't.
First of all, Damon, I guarantee you that a whole lot of black folks - the majority, in fact -- were not laughing at your pro-Imus statement. Just like we didn't laugh when Imus opened his mouth and ignited this whole controversy.
Under certain circumstances black people who are good friends agree to play around with insults (including the wretched n-word and b-word). But that has to do with individual relationships, not ethnicity. There is no across-the-board acceptance of crude, demeaning language within black culture. I, as a black man, can not just walk up to a sister, call her by the h-word (even in jest) and think she'll be okay with that. Then again, it would never cross my mind to do that because, like most African-Americans, I have home training.
Even if Damon Wayans' false premise was true, it wouldn't excuse Imus. If black folks give one another conditional permission to use inflammatory language that permission stops with us. Sorry, but white folks don't get to do it. Especially a race-bating instigator like Don Imus, who takes pride in behaving like a donkey's rectum.
Imus was not "right." He was malicious, racist and sexist. Damon Wayans disgraced himself and undermined us by defending him. Thanks for listening.
I'm Cameron Turner and that's my two cents. I'd love to hear yours. Holla back at TurnersTwoCents@aol.com. -- "Think! It Ain't Illegal yet!"
Now Damon Wayans, the same person who tried to copyright the word nigger is defending Don Imus. People of intellect and good faith can disagree, but Damon Wayans, just like D.L. Hughley before him are trying to defend an ad hominem attack on some female college students as defensible humor. Moreover, Wayans is placing himself as the spokesmen for all Black Americans by saying that Black folks thought that the comment was funny---that it is culturally based. I guess that Wayans simply writes off every Black person who does not agree with him as "bourgie."
This Black woman certainly did not think that Imus's statement was funny, nor did I think that D.L. Hughley's comment on David Letterman was funny or Damon Wayans' latest addition. I have already expressed my views on the Imus affair in the essay, "Hip Hop's (Still) Invisible Women," located at http://www.AlterNet.org/story/51933 so I am not going to re-hash all of that. The bottom line is that if slamming some college athletes for not being their idea of glamour girls is the only way that D.L. Hughley and Damon Wayans think that they can get a laugh, it is no wonder that both of their careers have taken a nose dive.
I could care less about Imus or his defenders, because I will not respond as a victim to actions or words of boars and bigots. However I do know that racist and sexist speech should not be used wantonly on our public airwaves.
Read what Wayans said below---I don't think that Cameron Turner agrees with him either:
TURNER'S TWO CENTS:
Wayans disgraces himself by defending Imus"When he called them nappy headed hoes I was like, 'Wow! He's right!" -- Damon Wayans (on The View, 11-7-07)
*Damon Wayans has, evidently, lost his mind. The veteran comedian/actor/writer actually went on national TV (ABC's The View) last week and said that Don Imus was "right" when he called the members of the Rutgers Women's Basketball team "nappy headed hoes."
The former star of My Wife and Kids said he wasn't offended by Imus' comment because, "black people can say that about each other." Wayans grinned and giggled in solitude as The View panelists and audience responded with shocked, nervous laughter, head-shaking and groans of disapproval.
As Sherri Shepherd struggled to get a word in over the uncomfortable cacophony ("Damon! You know what, Damon?"), Joy Behar challenged Wayans directly: "These women are not hoes," she said, "They're highly respected sports (stars)."
Then, as if his original statement wasn't crazy enough, Wayans clarified and expanded position by saying something truly ignorant: "Black people at home are laughing right now. White people are going, 'That's not right!' (But) it's all cultural." No it isn't.
First of all, Damon, I guarantee you that a whole lot of black folks - the majority, in fact -- were not laughing at your pro-Imus statement. Just like we didn't laugh when Imus opened his mouth and ignited this whole controversy.
Under certain circumstances black people who are good friends agree to play around with insults (including the wretched n-word and b-word). But that has to do with individual relationships, not ethnicity. There is no across-the-board acceptance of crude, demeaning language within black culture. I, as a black man, can not just walk up to a sister, call her by the h-word (even in jest) and think she'll be okay with that. Then again, it would never cross my mind to do that because, like most African-Americans, I have home training.
Even if Damon Wayans' false premise was true, it wouldn't excuse Imus. If black folks give one another conditional permission to use inflammatory language that permission stops with us. Sorry, but white folks don't get to do it. Especially a race-bating instigator like Don Imus, who takes pride in behaving like a donkey's rectum.
Imus was not "right." He was malicious, racist and sexist. Damon Wayans disgraced himself and undermined us by defending him. Thanks for listening.
I'm Cameron Turner and that's my two cents. I'd love to hear yours. Holla back at TurnersTwoCents@aol.com. -- "Think! It Ain't Illegal yet!"
Monday, November 12, 2007
Are We Raising Leaders or Followers
What is causing and helping to maintain the achievement gap?
There at least two things that we do know: frequently schools in low-income communities fail to teach children and parents are influential in children's academic progress. To expand on these knowns about failing schools; they often have the newest or the the worst teachers; books and teaching materials are scarce and in too many instances the physical plants of these school are in shambles---no heat in the winter, no air conditioning in the summer, no working toilets. We have also been told that children who do well in school usually have parents who read to them regularly and are in school e.g. going to parent-teacher conferences and attending PTA meetings, yadda, yadda, yadda. The key piece however that seems to have been left out the public dialogue is how important parenting styles are to academic success. How you parent your child may trump what's happening in their schools.
First before I go any further, I am in no way saying that reforming public education is not a priority. Public schools should be places of learning that expect the best possible outcomes for all students. To advance that goal public schools have to provide children with teachers ready and willing to teach them, a safe environment and the tools that they need to learn be those books, computers or lab supplies. What seems more and more clear to me however is that how parents go about "developing" their children may be equally or more important to their academic and life success than the school that they attend.
The book, Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race and Family Life by Annette Lareau is an interesting study about the parenting styles of middle class, working class and poor parents. In short-- middle class parents practice "concerted cultivation" which exposes children to an array of enrichment activities and strongly encourages speech and language development. In comparion, working class and poor parent are more apt to have a more hand's off approach known as "natural growth."
Concerted Cultivation
Middle class children, through their activities, learn how to interact with other adults (almost as equals), they learn the importance of discipline and teamwork (and competition) and how to deal with public scrutiny of their performance whether it's a soccer game or a piano recital. Parents also talk to the children in a way that builds their vocabularies and encourages reasoning skills. Rather than giving a child a directive, middle class parents often ask questions or provide the "because" of why something should be done. Perhaps most important, the middle class parent is willing to intervene on behalf of her child with the school or with any institution that has some bearing on her child's life. Middle class parents have no problem going over teachers' heads if they deem a grade unfair or paying for outside consultants to dispute a teacher/school assessment. Middle class children usually are articulate and by watching their parents they learn how to maneuver in the "system" to their benefit.
Natural Growth
According to Lareau (and other researchers) working class and poor parents are more apt to employ the "natural growth" style of parenting. Natural Growth is pretty much, "let a kid be a kid." Working class and poor parents, frequently consumed with how to keep a roof over their kids heads and food on the table, do not get involved in planning or overseeing their children's extracurricular activities. This means kids play outside with neighborhood friends or family members in an unscheduled, informal way. Working class and poor parents tend to use less word and give their children more directives. The net result is that generally working class and poor children do not have robust vocabularies and since they are always being told what to do without an explanantion they may have less developed critical thinking skills. Moreover, working class and poor parents are less likely to be an advocates for their children with the schools. Certainly it is not that these parents do not want the best for their children, it is that they often feel intimidated in the school environment and ill equipped (because their own education) to make education decisions for their children. In general they tend to let the school "professionals" make the decisions about their children's educational needs.
Although Lareau takes great pains not to suggest that the parenting styles of the middle class are superior to those of the poor and working class, she is forced to concede that the lessons and modes of speech and behavior that middle class children learn through "concerted cultivation" are more valued in our society. While some middle class kids can be bratty and whiny, overall they do well on standardized tests and know how to conduct themselves on job interviews and are comfortable socializing with people outside of their family. So while working class and poor children are generally more respectful of adults and have closer family ties, these characteristics are not as highly valued by society and will not help them to navigate societal institutions.
Poor and Middle Class Black Parents
Programs such as Harlem Children's Zone is taking a holistic approach to educating poor children which includes programs like "Baby College" that help their parents be better and more informed parents. The thinking is that many poor parents would implement strategies, such as daily reading, if they were aware of the importance of these activities. I think that the premise is correct and that we need to see more of these type of programs around the country.
However, the achievement gap would be less dramatic if we could say that only low-income Black children are affected, but that is not the reality. What more and more studies are showing is that although there is an increase in the number of middle class Black families (as represented by their incomes), their parenting styles still reflects their working class or poor roots. As a result, middle class Black children, despite their increased socio-economic standing are still not performing on par academically with their White and Asian peers. This means that middle class parents have to also be brought to the realization that they may need to re-consider their parenting style if they want their children to be competitive in this global economy. I think that the organizations that many middle class Black families belong to: fraternities and sororites; churches and civil rights organization need to really step up their involvement in the education and parenting discussion.
Black parenting styles that privilege following orders and being respectful have important historical rationales. There were times when a Black person's life and livelihood literally depended on whether or not they were deferential and compliant. Moreover given the poor treatment that Blacks received and still do receive at the hands of schools and other government institutions, there is no wonder that for some Blacks there is a lingering concern about dealing with them. All that being said, we have to all be willing to move forward, particularly as we prepare our children. We don't want our kids to be the whiny, disrespectful kids that we sometime see in the street, but neither do we want our kids to be consigned to the low-end of the career/life opportunity ladder because they are scared and ill-prepared to deal outside of their immediate community. We need to be preparing our children to lead and give orders, not just follow and keep their heads down.
There at least two things that we do know: frequently schools in low-income communities fail to teach children and parents are influential in children's academic progress. To expand on these knowns about failing schools; they often have the newest or the the worst teachers; books and teaching materials are scarce and in too many instances the physical plants of these school are in shambles---no heat in the winter, no air conditioning in the summer, no working toilets. We have also been told that children who do well in school usually have parents who read to them regularly and are in school e.g. going to parent-teacher conferences and attending PTA meetings, yadda, yadda, yadda. The key piece however that seems to have been left out the public dialogue is how important parenting styles are to academic success. How you parent your child may trump what's happening in their schools.
First before I go any further, I am in no way saying that reforming public education is not a priority. Public schools should be places of learning that expect the best possible outcomes for all students. To advance that goal public schools have to provide children with teachers ready and willing to teach them, a safe environment and the tools that they need to learn be those books, computers or lab supplies. What seems more and more clear to me however is that how parents go about "developing" their children may be equally or more important to their academic and life success than the school that they attend.
The book, Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race and Family Life by Annette Lareau is an interesting study about the parenting styles of middle class, working class and poor parents. In short-- middle class parents practice "concerted cultivation" which exposes children to an array of enrichment activities and strongly encourages speech and language development. In comparion, working class and poor parent are more apt to have a more hand's off approach known as "natural growth."
Concerted Cultivation
Middle class children, through their activities, learn how to interact with other adults (almost as equals), they learn the importance of discipline and teamwork (and competition) and how to deal with public scrutiny of their performance whether it's a soccer game or a piano recital. Parents also talk to the children in a way that builds their vocabularies and encourages reasoning skills. Rather than giving a child a directive, middle class parents often ask questions or provide the "because" of why something should be done. Perhaps most important, the middle class parent is willing to intervene on behalf of her child with the school or with any institution that has some bearing on her child's life. Middle class parents have no problem going over teachers' heads if they deem a grade unfair or paying for outside consultants to dispute a teacher/school assessment. Middle class children usually are articulate and by watching their parents they learn how to maneuver in the "system" to their benefit.
Natural Growth
According to Lareau (and other researchers) working class and poor parents are more apt to employ the "natural growth" style of parenting. Natural Growth is pretty much, "let a kid be a kid." Working class and poor parents, frequently consumed with how to keep a roof over their kids heads and food on the table, do not get involved in planning or overseeing their children's extracurricular activities. This means kids play outside with neighborhood friends or family members in an unscheduled, informal way. Working class and poor parents tend to use less word and give their children more directives. The net result is that generally working class and poor children do not have robust vocabularies and since they are always being told what to do without an explanantion they may have less developed critical thinking skills. Moreover, working class and poor parents are less likely to be an advocates for their children with the schools. Certainly it is not that these parents do not want the best for their children, it is that they often feel intimidated in the school environment and ill equipped (because their own education) to make education decisions for their children. In general they tend to let the school "professionals" make the decisions about their children's educational needs.
Although Lareau takes great pains not to suggest that the parenting styles of the middle class are superior to those of the poor and working class, she is forced to concede that the lessons and modes of speech and behavior that middle class children learn through "concerted cultivation" are more valued in our society. While some middle class kids can be bratty and whiny, overall they do well on standardized tests and know how to conduct themselves on job interviews and are comfortable socializing with people outside of their family. So while working class and poor children are generally more respectful of adults and have closer family ties, these characteristics are not as highly valued by society and will not help them to navigate societal institutions.
Poor and Middle Class Black Parents
Programs such as Harlem Children's Zone is taking a holistic approach to educating poor children which includes programs like "Baby College" that help their parents be better and more informed parents. The thinking is that many poor parents would implement strategies, such as daily reading, if they were aware of the importance of these activities. I think that the premise is correct and that we need to see more of these type of programs around the country.
However, the achievement gap would be less dramatic if we could say that only low-income Black children are affected, but that is not the reality. What more and more studies are showing is that although there is an increase in the number of middle class Black families (as represented by their incomes), their parenting styles still reflects their working class or poor roots. As a result, middle class Black children, despite their increased socio-economic standing are still not performing on par academically with their White and Asian peers. This means that middle class parents have to also be brought to the realization that they may need to re-consider their parenting style if they want their children to be competitive in this global economy. I think that the organizations that many middle class Black families belong to: fraternities and sororites; churches and civil rights organization need to really step up their involvement in the education and parenting discussion.
Black parenting styles that privilege following orders and being respectful have important historical rationales. There were times when a Black person's life and livelihood literally depended on whether or not they were deferential and compliant. Moreover given the poor treatment that Blacks received and still do receive at the hands of schools and other government institutions, there is no wonder that for some Blacks there is a lingering concern about dealing with them. All that being said, we have to all be willing to move forward, particularly as we prepare our children. We don't want our kids to be the whiny, disrespectful kids that we sometime see in the street, but neither do we want our kids to be consigned to the low-end of the career/life opportunity ladder because they are scared and ill-prepared to deal outside of their immediate community. We need to be preparing our children to lead and give orders, not just follow and keep their heads down.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Jay-Z: Man of Contradictions
Before I start, I have to give homage to Nelson George. I lifted the title of his 1992 book, Buppies, B-Boys, Baps and Bohos: Notes on Post-Soul Black Culture for this blog.
I thought that the title summed up my thoughts about the complexity of the "Black America" that I have experienced. So as I embark on this blogging journey, I will be sharing my observations about the various faces of Black Americans that I see regularly. Some of us are poor; some of us are rich; some of us are urbane; some of us are provincial; some of us a well educated; some of us are illiterate. My point is that while public dialogue seems to center on only one sector of "Black America," the other parts are also alive and well and contributing--whether for the good or the bad to our overall society. For my part I want to give every sector equal light.
To start it all off, I am going to talk about Jay-Z:
I saw Jay-Z on Charlie Rose the other night. He was articulate, poised, insightful and funny---everything that a rap artist is not supposed to be. He was talking about his CD "American Gangster" which is inspired by the film of the same name starring Denzel Washington.
This is not a music review, so I am not getting into the merits of the CD, or his body of work. I will say however that in my opinion Reasonable Doubt is a masterpiece.
One of the things that struck me about the interview (his second with Rose-- the first was in 2004) was that here was a guy from Marcy housing projects in Brooklyn who could now hold his own with a world class interviewer on an array of topics. What was apparent to me was that Jay-Z is ambitious and learned early on that learning how to maneuver in a world beyond Brooklyn did not put his"Blackness" in question. Moreover his willingness to learn new things, talk to different people and travel did not make him a sell-out. Even in the face of critics (which included a few White bloggers who felt he had no business on the show), Jay-Z is clear about where he came from and where he wants to go. With that confidence he did not need to shout about "keepin' it real."
Jay-Z obliquely talked about his drug-dealing past but did not dwell on it or glorify it. In the interview his background as a hustler served as the departure point to where he is now, president of Def Jam and multi-millionaire rap artist. Jay-Z, like many other people came to one of the many folks in the road---keep hustling or make music. He chose to get on the entertainment route. To his credit, he continues to work on develop himself, not feeling compelled to maintain the same ideas or lifestyle that he had when he lived in Marcy.
Jay-Z will forever rep Marcy projects, it's his roots, it is his foundation. I think that the Jay-Z can provide an important lesson to people young and old--- you don't have to turn your back on your roots in order to grow and thrive. Recently I was a panelist at the Executive Leadership Committee's Mid-Managers Symposium and got to hear Don Thompson, the youngish president of McDonald's USA. One the most relevant points of his speech was about the importance of being comfortable with your Blackness before you can be comfortable dealing with other folks.
Jay-Z realized that his being Black and from the projects were parts of his biography that were never going to change---the only question for him was whether those were going to be the only entries. Frankly I think that what Jay-Z, Don Thompson and countless other people can teach us is that there is no reason to run away from being Black (poor, minority, woman, old, etc), but don't use it as a crutch either for why you are not looking for and taking advantage of opportunities to get ahead and improve your life, economically, socially and spiritually.
I thought that the title summed up my thoughts about the complexity of the "Black America" that I have experienced. So as I embark on this blogging journey, I will be sharing my observations about the various faces of Black Americans that I see regularly. Some of us are poor; some of us are rich; some of us are urbane; some of us are provincial; some of us a well educated; some of us are illiterate. My point is that while public dialogue seems to center on only one sector of "Black America," the other parts are also alive and well and contributing--whether for the good or the bad to our overall society. For my part I want to give every sector equal light.
To start it all off, I am going to talk about Jay-Z:
I saw Jay-Z on Charlie Rose the other night. He was articulate, poised, insightful and funny---everything that a rap artist is not supposed to be. He was talking about his CD "American Gangster" which is inspired by the film of the same name starring Denzel Washington.
This is not a music review, so I am not getting into the merits of the CD, or his body of work. I will say however that in my opinion Reasonable Doubt is a masterpiece.
One of the things that struck me about the interview (his second with Rose-- the first was in 2004) was that here was a guy from Marcy housing projects in Brooklyn who could now hold his own with a world class interviewer on an array of topics. What was apparent to me was that Jay-Z is ambitious and learned early on that learning how to maneuver in a world beyond Brooklyn did not put his"Blackness" in question. Moreover his willingness to learn new things, talk to different people and travel did not make him a sell-out. Even in the face of critics (which included a few White bloggers who felt he had no business on the show), Jay-Z is clear about where he came from and where he wants to go. With that confidence he did not need to shout about "keepin' it real."
Jay-Z obliquely talked about his drug-dealing past but did not dwell on it or glorify it. In the interview his background as a hustler served as the departure point to where he is now, president of Def Jam and multi-millionaire rap artist. Jay-Z, like many other people came to one of the many folks in the road---keep hustling or make music. He chose to get on the entertainment route. To his credit, he continues to work on develop himself, not feeling compelled to maintain the same ideas or lifestyle that he had when he lived in Marcy.
Jay-Z will forever rep Marcy projects, it's his roots, it is his foundation. I think that the Jay-Z can provide an important lesson to people young and old--- you don't have to turn your back on your roots in order to grow and thrive. Recently I was a panelist at the Executive Leadership Committee's Mid-Managers Symposium and got to hear Don Thompson, the youngish president of McDonald's USA. One the most relevant points of his speech was about the importance of being comfortable with your Blackness before you can be comfortable dealing with other folks.
Jay-Z realized that his being Black and from the projects were parts of his biography that were never going to change---the only question for him was whether those were going to be the only entries. Frankly I think that what Jay-Z, Don Thompson and countless other people can teach us is that there is no reason to run away from being Black (poor, minority, woman, old, etc), but don't use it as a crutch either for why you are not looking for and taking advantage of opportunities to get ahead and improve your life, economically, socially and spiritually.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
