BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Is Stephin Merritt a racist? Race, rock and rap: rock, suck or rule?

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:26 / 10.05.06
I sort of hate myself for doing this, but war has just broken out after this article in Slate took Sasha Frere-Jones, music critic for The New Yorker, to task for describing Stephin Merritt as a "cracker". Frere-Jones responded, and called for the defence Simon Reynolds, perhaps one of the most talented young British "urban" writers working today. I'm still waiting for the conclusive proof that James Baldwin was a racist and a homophobe due to a failure to apppreciate Rob Halford's contribution to heavy metal, but apparently it's in the works.

So, is it racist not to like hip-hop, or is it racist more precisely to like hip-hop for reasons that appear unjustified to the reader, or is racist to list only 11 songs produced or performed by black people in your top 100 songs? Is Merritt a racist, or a holder off "unexamined and wack ideas", or a career curmudgeon and contrarian who has/has not gone too far?

I have problems with this on a number of levels. I'm aware that I suspect I would be far less willing to give someone who was not Stephin Merritt the benefit of the doubt here (and I'd have more faith in Frere-Jones studies in the field if he had read enough to spell Merritt's name right, but anyway). I'm also aware that Merritt is a man whose intensity of musical focus possibly precludes sensitivity or an awareness of the social implications of his statements - or possibly rather that contrarianism is part of the presentation package of Stephin Merritt. I'm also aware that my contempt for the way some of the arguments have been expressed may be affecting my judgement. See here in particular for some of the most comically graceless recantations of accusations of racism ever recorded outside Barbelith.

So, more measured voices. What's up with this whole business?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:08 / 10.05.06
Well...

I don't have anywhere near the time this deserves, but in summary I basically think that SFJ and Hopper (both of whom I have time for as music writers a good deal of the time) fucked up in that "you just overloaded your argument which might have had good points in it" way - and don't even get me started on Reynolds - but that John Cook's Slate piece is in turn an attempt to shut down any possibility that there might be "questionable shit" going on, i.e. that existing racist structures/patterns in society and culture might have an effect when anyone listens to music. A lot of the rhetoric of his piece is very familiar it's loaded with all that defensive "how dare anyone suggest race affects how I listen to music!", "would you like me to meet a QUOTA?" outrage.

An extract from an online chat about this, which I hope nobody minds me posting here - saves me and Haus going through the same opening moves again:

Haus: Actually, yeah - I'm giving SFJ a degree of guilt by association here - Hopper and Reynolds in particular have muddied the water - although I haven't heard anything by Ui, and I think "cracker" was a bloody stupid insult for one urban white new yorker to address to another.

me: Yeah, there's a whole issue of blogs as a forum here.

me: I doubt he'd use that term in the New Yorker. But there's an argument obv that he shouldn't have used it at all... There's also a slightly pompous argument that says "a professional (as opposed to just anybody) should be careful what he says on his blog!"

Haus: Oh, sure. The Cook piece is a masterpiece of "I suppose that makes me a racist". On the other hand, SFJ does say at first that it is significant that almost none of Merritt's 100 songs of the year are by black artists, and then when Merritt responds that 11 of them are produced, written or performed by black artists, thus about matching current levels of population and exceeding previous, that 11% is still underrepresentative given the disproportionate blackness of popular music... which feels icky as well... I'm conflicted.

Haus: Well, there's an argument that you should own your words - like Shadowsax saying that although he is a capital-W writer, he doesn't worry about punctuation or capitals on Barbelith because it's only Barbelith - I think that gets harder again when the same name is used for both online identites.

me: Of course the big question is is Merritt a ROCKIST! The word that is now perhaps even more taboo than racist. (I half-joke.)

Haus: A showtunist?

me: He's just a crotchety old man in many ways, isn't he?

Haus: Well, yeah. He fought in a war for the likes of Outkast.

me: Ha. The other thing is I think SFJ didn't bother to do the work to unpick what bothered him about Merritt's taste in music. Which leaves him open to Cook's accusations of sophistry. I.e. I do think there's something going on when people react badly to popular music that often involves race, class, sex, etc. And I don't think saying that's the same as "calling someone a racist".

Haus: Agreed - and I think Hopper's sheer stupidity has muddied the water further by giving Cook an easy target.

me: But I think SFJ has been sloppy about it - it's that whole "there's a small audience who'll probably get the gist so why bother explicating everything" thing.

Haus: Although I also think that you can dislike things simply because they're shit - a cigar can be a cigar.
But you need to give it a damn good sniff to determine that. (Check for beats, science, socialist voodoo etc)

me: Hopper is very angry.

me: I often find myself defending Hopper because she is a bete noir for some awful people for some occasions on which she had been righteously angry. But she does tend to fire before taking aim sometimes...
 
 
Jack Fear
11:03 / 10.05.06
Damn, you guys beat me to it...

Accusations of crackerdom re: one's musical tastes get thrown around the Internet a lot—sometimes "hilariously," as with the LJ community Fuck You Crew, and sometimes with serious purpose. That Slate piece scratches at some of the things that have always bothered me about such formulations.

Obviously, John Cook's piece has its problems, including a certain overdefensiveness of tone. But I sympathize—because I'm probably a little overdefensive myself.

Let's muddy the waters even further, shall we? I mean, I don't listen to much hip-hop myself. I listen to a bit of old soul, some classic jazz, scratchy old blues 78s, and rather a lot of Afropop.


Now the question: Does this stuff "count"?

Do you guys find anything... slightly disturbing in SFJ's (seeming) reduction of "black music" to hip-hop?

Let me stress that I have no way of reading SFJ's mind, here. But I have a feeling that Marijata and the Soul Brothers would cut no ice with him.

Listen, if my time on Barbelith has taught me one thing it's that my record collection is a joke. But is it a racist joke? Does "black music" necessarily equal African American music? Is Kanye West somehow quantifiably "blacker" than, say, Tuku Mtukudzi—or, for that matter, Charles Mingus? Or is Kanye black in a different, more relevant way?

I'm still too sleepy to formulate this properly, and perhaps it's a side issue, but it bugs me.






(Also—although you'd think I'd learn my lesson after that Shelby Steele debacle—I'm pretty sure Sasha Frere-Jones is white. Unless that thread abstract is meant to be ironic.)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:18 / 10.05.06
(Not only white, but _bearded_.)
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:57 / 10.05.06
Personally Jack, my take on it these days is that if someone doesn't listen to modern (say, last 15 years) hip hop, or any hip hop even, or modern r&b, then that in itself is no harm, no foul. I might believe them to be missing out, but hey, they probably think I'm doing the same thing, just in a different area. The truth is that we're probably both missing out: there's almost certainly more than a lifetime's worth of good music out there.

What complicates things is when the person in question writes or comments about music - those who try to formulate a reason for their lack of liking for more modern black pop which goes beyond "it just doesn't do it for me" often, in my experience/opinion, run into a minefield of problematic theories, bad readings (or rather 'listenings') and flawed logic.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:26 / 10.05.06
Strong truth. Perhaps there's a worry about being ignorant, or even, ironically, a fear of appearing dismissive of quote-unquote balck music. So "it just doesn't do it for me" is dismissive, whereas "it portrays African-Americans in an unfavourable light with its obsession with bling and violence" sounds as if one is taking a principled stance against unhelpful representations of African-American society, seems progressive, engaged and concerned - but is often said by people who have actually not got the information at their fingertips to support the decision that it is thus obsessed...
 
 
matthew.
12:54 / 10.05.06
those who try to formulate a reason for their lack of liking for more modern black pop which goes beyond "it just doesn't do it for me" often, in my experience/opinion, run into a minefield of problematic theories, bad readings (or rather 'listenings') and flawed logic.

I have a question about this. Well, actually two. First, is it possible to say "It just doesn't do it for me" and leave it at that? Or is that also problematic, considering that hip-hop is greatly associated with issues of race and class and politics.
Secondly, can other genres of music get these writers in the minefield of bad theories? For example, if I were to write about "emo" and go beyond the "it doesn't do it for me," would I also end up in the bad territory.
(Disclaimer: non-sarcasm question. Perfectly innocent!)
 
 
matthew.
12:58 / 10.05.06
Hmm. When I say "considering that hip-hop is greatly associated with issues of race and class and politics," that is supposed to lead in with the second question, asking whether all genres of music are political and does the same argument hold up for the first question, but with a different genre.
 
 
Jack Fear
12:59 / 10.05.06
How about "I'm old, and therefore not the target market?" Remember, I'm ten or more years older than you. And if I don't listen to much hip-hop, neither do I listen to a lot of "white" chart pop.

Seriously, I suspect that the divide between hip-hop fans and non- is less a function of race than of age.

(Or maybe not, since Wikipedia informs me that SFJ and Stephin Merritt are not only about the same age, but both about my age. Crikey!)

I've more to say on this—and about how, on a personal level and as an Old Person, I feel alienated and betrayed by the racial polarization of pop music and the attendant accusations of racism—about, in short, the way hip-hop is used as a wedge—with a long and probably boring set of personal reminiscences to back it all up—but frankly I haven't the heart to inflict it upon you just yet...
 
 
Spaniel
13:50 / 10.05.06
Awwww, go on...
 
 
Jack Fear
13:56 / 10.05.06
Later.
 
 
illmatic
13:59 / 10.05.06
Just read this SFJ piece about the New Yorker's single reviews, which is where he makes the "cracker" comment. I find it pretty nauesating. I can imagine if say, Usher did happen to be in there, SFJ accusing them of tokenism or some such.

There's something about the accusatory nature of his tone that I don't like. "I am less racist than thou..."
 
 
Jack Fear
15:57 / 10.05.06
Okay, here goes.

See, I came of age in the mid-1980s, in a predominantly-white cowtown in Massachusetts. And a lot of the way I relate to music comes back to that time and that place. I don’t think I’m unique in that—as regards taste, ages 16-20 or thereabouts are really the formative years for just about everybody.

Now, I’m not here to argue for the superiority of the music in that time (although I still love much of it), but to talk about an overall cultural vibe. It may just be the poison of nostalgia clouding my perception, but it seems that the worlds of black and white music were more fluid, once upon a time. In 1983-1988, everybody listened to Michael Jackson, rock kids and pop kids alike, just as everybody listened to Prince (and it was not lost on us that The Revolution was mixed-race and mixed-sex). Pop was the Pointer Sisters and Anita Baker and Peabo & Roberta. Philip Bailey was making records with Phil Collins. There was a black guy in the Thompson Twins, there was a black guy in Big Country. Half the Talking Heads touring band was black. Sting was fronting an all-black band. Graceland came out the same year that Peter Gabriel was bringing Youssou N’Dour to US arenas. Living Colour’s first record came out a year after that. The stoners were listening to the holy trinity of Zeppelin, The Doors, and Jimi—and I was listening to Sugar Hill Gang 12-inches and Billy Idol. We danced to Rick James and Billy Squier, to the Clash and Cameo.

During the summer of 1984, I worked in a warehouse in Boston, and the secretary kept her radio tuned to an “urban” station—a tiny, dawn-to-dusk AM outfit. And except for the ads, I heard nothing on that station I wasn’t hearing on pop radio. David Bowie was being played on black radio, for chrissakes. So was Teena Marie. So was Madonna.

And I don’t remember people thinking or talking in terms of “crossover” or “tokenism.” This was just the way things were. This was the future. It seemed like the beginnings of a pop music landscape that was post-racial.

There were only a handful of black kids in my hometown, in those days, and one of them was my best friend. Prez was a guitarist, and we played in half-a-dozen bands together—always him and me, and a rotating cast of others. I played bass, and I liked R-n-B and funk and U2: Prez played a Gibson Flying V, polka-dotted like Randy Rhoades’s, and he dug heavy metal. We played Police covers and Prince covers and Rush and Curtis Mayfield. His father hated the music, but not because it was “white” music: he thought all pop was a waste of time, and that Prez should’ve been a classical violinist.

Everybody has a rough time in high school, but Prez went through the fucking wringer—mainly for personal reasons: the normal parental conflicts (and his father’s domineering nature) were horrendously exacerbated by his mother’s protracted dying of cancer, halfway through his senior year. We kept playing—playing through it. I would’ve gone to Hell and back for that kid, if I thought it would’ve helped.

After graduation he went off to school—to Howard, a historically black university; his father was an alumnus, and there had never been any serious discussion of his going anywhere else. He was gone for a long time, with only brief visits home. And that’s when we began to drift apart.

In retrospect, I can only imagine the shit he must have gone through in those first months away at school, the culture shock, the black kid from a white town with his Night Ranger records at the back of the milk crate. But on those occasions when we got back together, we were no longer speaking the same language. The thin end of the wedge had been driven. And I felt betrayed and angry—though not at Prez. Outside cultural pressures had fucked us over. Both of us.

And as below, so above. The culture began to change again: white music got whiter, losing its soul inflections (and its bottom end) as hair-metal and grunge ascended (as did country, which surged in tandem with, and in reaction against, hip-hop). Radio station formats grew polarized. Playlists tightened. Bonnie Raitt made her return and Anita Baker was no longer getting played on white pop radio; she was no longer necessary to White America. Black critics started to wonder aloud if Prince and Michael Jackson were still “relevant,” because of their “failure” to properly “embrace” hip-hop. (Wondering! if Prince! was still fucking relevant!) And Prince withdrew, and Michael went crazy, and black and white music charted parallel courses as they hadn’t since the 1950s, before Motown became “the sound of Young America,” and through most of the 90s I couldn’t find anything on the radio that I wanted to listen to.

And I wonder if it had to be this way, and why it seems we were doomed to blow it: like the song says, Didn’t we almost have it all?
 
 
Alex's Grandma
16:01 / 10.05.06
I suppose, looking at my record collection, that I'm basically a misogynist (Patti Smith, Throwing Muses and that's it) a racist (Tricky, Love, Jimi Hendrix, NWA, various drum'n'bass characters, but again, people from a different ethnic background to mine are somewhat under-represented,) and a homophobe (apart from Rufus Wainwright, and unless we're including Morrissey, there's basically no one.)

The book collection's probably even worse.

I like to think though, that what this says about me is essentially nothing, except that I've possibly got slightly limited tastes. If based on all that I am in fact an angry, right wing, Mail-reading old bat, I'll stand up and be counted, but I'm still not sure if it necessarily means I'd vote that way.

The idea that finding contemporary hip-hop a somewhat unengaging prospect in some way suggests that you're a racist is a marketing tool, and not much else.

All those guilty white yuppies (who should be kicked in the shins,) queuing up at HMV with the new 'Fiddy,' just to show that they, you know, aren't...
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:40 / 10.05.06
It may just be the poison of nostalgia clouding my perception, but it seems that the worlds of black and white music were more fluid, once upon a time.

I'm not convinced, sorry. Justin Timberlake, Beyonce, Outkast, Eminem - they're all popular with both black and white audiences, and working with and across musical forms more or less culturally racialised.
 
 
Jack Fear
18:03 / 10.05.06
...working with and across musical forms more or less culturally racialised.

Well, they're all working within hip-hop and R&B, yeah? There's a porous border for white artists working in "black" genres, as before. But does it go the other way? And from whence comes the cultural racialization of those forms, anyway? Who writes the manifestio saying "This music is black, that music is white"? Where did the center go, is what I guess I'm asking.
 
 
illmatic
19:12 / 10.05.06
Ignore my post above. I may try and articulate what ticked me off so much about SFJ's post, but a lot of it is personal to me. Have to think about it.

Interesting post, Jack. Not sure I agree at least from this side of the Atlantic. In my formative years, black music in its own terms was chronically under-represented on the radio here, so we had a huge number of pirate stations at least in the inner cities, because this music just wasn't being heard. In recent years (last 5-10) following the "DanceDanceRevloution" much of the pirates talent has been snapped up by national stations like Radio 1, and there's just a huge amount more awareness of black music at least. I'd say the situation is better than it used to be.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:32 / 10.05.06
But does it go the other way?

Well, we have drippy balladeers like Seal and David Gray, Shouty rock ladies like Skin from Skunk Anansie, Lenny cocking Kravitz... then you get into interesting things like grime - is grime a white musical form or a black musical form? Neither? Either? Both?
 
 
illmatic
19:41 / 10.05.06
And from whence comes the cultural racialization of those forms, anyway? Who writes the manifestio saying "This music is black, that music is white"?

Well, in this country at least, I believe the racialisation of music reflects class/race seperations. If you have distinct racial groups that are seperated by econmic circumstances, geographical spread as well as culture/heritage it stands to reasons that they will make music that reflects these differences. This will always be appropriated across cultural boundaries, to a degree - well, it'll flow one at least - because "the other" is always cool.

I may be talking at cross purposes to you here, because I'm talking about black music in it's own terms. By black people for black audiences, rather than the kind of collabative projects you seem to be refering to.
 
 
illmatic
19:50 / 10.05.06
Haus, I think a possible way of understanding grime is to ask who it's aimed at? So with grime in it's hardcore form, the MC session on a pirate station, it's aimed at a mix of black and white, working class, inner city kids. That's who these sessions seem to be FOR. The picture gets a bit more complex when you look at something like the Roll Deep LP, which has obvious chart crossover elements in it.

I'd furher say I'd imagine that this music would be "claimed" as black music - or at least "music of black origin" by the black music press, awards bodies etc which takes into account the cultural mix it's appealing to.
 
 
illmatic
09:23 / 11.05.06
I thought I’d have a go at articulating why SFJ comments above annoyed me so much – it was basically the same thing that irritated me about the N-Word thread – white people in white spaces engaging in discourses about racism. What really set me off was some of the accusations and particularly the word” cracker” – which to me evokes the racism experienced by black in the south US and trivialises it. I accept this is entirely subjective and largely bollocks but it does bring up a couple of interesting questions for me.

One being – with regards to media coverage of black music – SFJ seems to be arguing that the New Yorker should have more representative coverage of black music. Now, an alternative reaction to this to me might be simply to note that there's already quite a bit of black/urban focused media, some of which also has the advantage of being black-owned, rather than pushing for “assimilation” or equal representation. I’d argue that this is what we have in the UK - the pirate radio network, a small amount of black owned papers and magazinesa aimed at a black audience which arguably provide more "authentic" coverage. I’m not sure what the situation is in he ‘states and I’m certainly not clear on ownership issues but I’m thinking of magazines like The Source and XXl, black college radio etc. What do people think are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?
 
 
illmatic
05:45 / 12.05.06
So I completely killed this thread, I guess?
 
 
Jack Fear
11:20 / 12.05.06
No, I think I did. You just threw dirt on the body.
 
 
illmatic
08:29 / 14.05.06
Well, personally, I find that really disappointing.

I wonder sometimes if the only way Barbelith can handle talking about race is simply to call other posters racist. This is not to say I think people don't need challenging about their attitudes and so on at times, it's just that there's a lot more interesting/subtle/nunaced conversations to be had about race, which don't ever seem to occur here. Oh well.

See here and here for some previous attempts which have garnered almost no reaction whatsoever.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:49 / 15.05.06
Sorry - I will come back to this, as soon as head unmelted.
 
 
SteppersFan
18:19 / 15.05.06
Some music - I think the most interesting British music - crosses over the race lines. Principally the ardkore continuum - jungle, UK Garage, now dubstep. Look at the producers and the crowds - all mixed, all from backgrounds where mixed race groups making music was the norm.

Not sure I'd describe Reynolds as "young" but he's a good bloke and a bang on critic.

W.r.t the specifics of the case, it is a fact that some of the accusations against Merrit were baseless and were retracted at least in part by at least one of the accusers. I'm not sure either side are making a particularly good show of themselves in this argument, though I suspect Merritt is aggressively prosecuting his right to be subtle and waspish, while SFJ leaves himself open to the accusation of positing liberal cultural norms from which one must not deviate.

In terms of ethics I don't think one's appreciation or lack thereof for particular sets of cultural artefacts is any kind of barometer for racism. While SFJ and Hopper's critique is more complex than that, it still largely falls into that category, and I don't think they were ever likely to make the charge stick when working in that area.

Especially since Merritt does, as a matter of fact, like hip hop - just not much of it.
 
 
SteppersFan
18:26 / 15.05.06
As an addendum, Reynolds has done a couple of posts on this subject, first one here: http://blissout.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_blissout_archive.html#114668681783360454

Key comment: "my head aches"!!!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:53 / 17.05.06
Hmmm. In that piece Reynolds manages to misspell both Merritt's name and the name of one of his bands, and throw in "political correctness" for good measure. I'm largely unconvinced by the idea that black musical culture is centred almost entirely around authenticity, or indeed that Merritt's critique as quoted is based around ideas of authenticity or around the privileging of black music by rock. In fact, I'm pretty uncertain that rock privileges black music so much as occludes it.

Having said which, I had a look at Merritt's top 100, and I think it's significant that the last 5 years' best songs were all on the Pannzerfaust label...
 
 
illmatic
11:03 / 17.05.06
black musical culture is centred almost entirely around authenticity

I'd love to know what he means by this. Certainly, I'd say that white people who set themselves up as the gatekeepers/popularisers of black music often get obsessed with authenticity, but I don't think this is what he means.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:05 / 17.05.06
I don't know how or why anyone takes Simon Reynolds seriously anymore (in general, but specifically) on the subject of race or authenticity after the M.I.A. fiasco, in which he advised readers "Don't let M.I.A.'s brown skin throw you off", and disparaged her for being a middle class dilletante making a record influenced by real ghetto music etc. - obviously white Oxford graduates are the best gatekeepers of what is real and what isn't, eh?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:06 / 17.05.06
Incidentally, 2step, that URL you provide is the same one linked to in the first post of this thread.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:00 / 17.05.06
Certainly, I'd say that white people who set themselves up as the gatekeepers/popularisers of black music often get obsessed with authenticity, but I don't think this is what he means.

I think that the idea is that black music/black music celebrated by "rockism" (dubious overlap here - inasmuch as there is actually not a huge amount of talking about only rockist-favoured music produced by black people, as presumably this excludes almost all hip-hop) is centred around the authentic description of the producer of the music. That is, it is tied to an authentic description of character and an authentic representation of emotion.

Now, I have enormous problems with this, as it essentially seems to provide white artists with a tool black artists do not have - distancing - and makes black music out to be naive (or naive in the eyes of "rockism"). He then goes on to say that almost all black poopular music is "tied up in" the idea of authenticity, but doesn't really explain what he means by this - whether it is able to manipulate the notion of authenticity, or whether it is fixated on "authenticity" or if it is, itself, "authentic". So, it's very hard to work out what he's trying to say. One on level, we're talking about the idea (fallcious?) that Slim Shady is a _role_ played by Eminem, who is a _role_ played by Marshall Mathers, whereas 50 Cent is a _name_ adopted by Curtis James Johnson III, but who represents the same bundle of experiences and perceptions as Curtis James Johnson III - what a rockist might describe a being "4 Real". So, Merritt is portrayed as recoiling either from this perceived tyrrany of the self, or from the representation by rockists of black music as having this tyrrany of the self as a desirable characteristic to emulate.

Couple of issues here. First up, I'm not sure where in the discourse "black music feted by rockists" and "almost all black popular music" tie up - as I understand it, the discourses identified as rckist tend to dismiss modern black popular music, either because of a perceived lack of craft or because it advances socially undesirable elements - violence, bling, misogyny and all that stuff you never encounter in rock. So, is the set of rockist-apppreciated/appropriated black music talking about early blues and R'n'B, sort of thing? If so, I still see the idea of authenticity as complex - siimply put, if you believe that Robert Johnson actually met the Devil at the crossroads, for example, there is a very real posibility that you are either factually incorrect or on the verge of making some sort of Julian James argument that is liable to get you a well-deserved kicking.

So, I think that Reynolds is saying that Merritt, thorugh his white, metropolitan, gay (but not necessarily homosexual) musical approach - ironic, detached, persona-based - is reacting against a rockist ideology - that is, he is actually reacting against an uncritical apppropriation of the idea of authenticity from black popular music by white rock musicians. However, he goes on, actually almost al black popular music is also uncritically caught up in this concept of authenticity (and perhaps this is where MIA falls down - she is not being authentic to her roots - it's OK, by extension, for David Bowie to flirt with Nazism, because he is adopting a guise unfettered by the cooncerns of authenticity, whereas MIA's use of her father's status as a member of the Tamil Tigers is dishonest, because it does not precisely represent the authentic experience of the political situation in Sri Lanka), and as such Merritt is also (unintentionally?) coming into ideological conflict through his opposition to the rockist obsession with authenticity with the broader obsession with authenticity common to almost all black popular music.

I think that's about right, anyway. A bit more cult-studs jargon might have made this clearer.
 
 
SteppersFan
08:49 / 18.05.06
I think Haus is pretty much getting there in teasing out what Reynolds means.

BTW, I like Reynolds, he's a great critic and usually ahead of the game, though obviously I don't always agree with him. I looked to see what Wayne and Wax had to say about this but couldn't find anything - he's usually quite interesting on this sort of issue. I don't think MIA is very good really, what with all that terrorism chic, though I still think Galang's alright.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:12 / 18.05.06
what with all that terrorism chic

Off topic, but I suppose if you take a consistent view that one should not listen to music that has a net negative political and/or moral content, and have reached the position that M.I.A.'s music falls into that category after listening to it closely, that's fair enough.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:12 / 18.05.06
I should probably mention that in this case I think that Reynolds' analysis is not only questionable in its conclusions, but actually in itself tending towards a generalisation about the constraints of "almost all black popular music" that has some - what was the term? - some rather "wack" foundations.
 
  
Add Your Reply