OK, I’m getting tired of listening to the white kiddoes driving up and down the street blasting rap music at 3 in the morning (wow! I’m not too sure if I like the way that makes me sound). But I’ve figured out a proactive way to counter it. I’m going to start listening to rap! Wait until they find out that some fifty-one year old white guy is down wi’ the posse, and formin’ like Voltron! What! Wu Tang Clan might not be nothing to fuck with, but wait until they find out I’m listening to them. That’ll suck all the cool out of ‘em. I’m the Ice Man in reverse, aight!
Anyway, I started thinking about Wu Tang, etc. after I heard this segment on the Jon Stewart Show where he’s talking to Bernard Goldberg who just published a book called I’m a Complete Idiot . . . no, wait, it’s called the 100 most dangerous people in America or something like that. It turns out that the most dangerous people are 97% from the left side of the political spectrum (bet you couldn’t see that coming).
Stewart makes a couple of good points. The first is why pick on Barbara Streisand and not Charlie Daniels? They’re both singers who have relatively high political profiles. But somehow Charlie Daniels isn’t a problem, and Barbara is? Goldberg seems completely flummoxed by that one (and he’s already kind of flummoxed anyway).
Stewart also wonders why Goldberg focuses on cultural stuff like singers, people in
I’ve got to admit that I think the Wu Tang Clan’s language is fouler than I’m really comfortable with, and I wish Quentin Tarantino wouldn’t drench his movies in blood sprays, but is that really the worst thing that’s going on in our culture?
And I’m now starting to wonder if the foul language isn’t exactly what we need. Here are the murder stats from the last fifty years. There were plenty of rappers before 1993 who were decrying the horrible state of life in the ‘hood, but things just kept getting worse and worse, as evidenced by the murder rate. Then the 36 chambers of death came out and the murder rate starts to decline.
Well, of course it's not as neat as that. But I remember Bill Clinton going after Sister Souljah as a way to show he wasn't too beholden to the Jesse Jackson wing of the party. The young rapper had been quoted as saying in explanation of black rage, after the LA riots in 1992, ""If black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?" (Her whole statement in context is here.) Clinton argued that if we changed "black" to "white" (and vice-versa) in Sister's statement we'd think we were listening to David Duke. It's one of those facile little lines good politicians can pull off that seem so true and are actually complete gibberish.
Try it out: "If white people kill white people every day, why not have a week and kill black people." See how that makes Sister look like a Nazi? Or how 'bout "If white people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill brown people." Oh, wait, that's what's going on right now.
But really, she left herself wide open to Clinton's attack by being comprehensible in his terms. She made a statement that followed the rules of his discourse. I'd luv to see what Clinton could have done with Ol' Dirty Bastard, who has obviously read his Rabelais. What if you substitute "wigger" for every instance of . . . well, let's just try it out:
Shame on a wigger who try to run game on a wigger
Wu buck wild with the trigger!
What's Bill gonna do with that?
0 comments:
Post a Comment