>But if we ask that question aren't we involved in the
>academic pursuit of defining, quantifying, or at the very
>least studying hip hop, and if so, why not in schools as
>well?

In a practical sense
- who do you get to ask that question?
- how do you facillitate that discussion
- what do you have the students read
- what could the students possibly write
- how do you design research to ask essential questions like that, when your subjects are always trying to "game" you.

As for the question the way you asked it
- it's not the rigor that I am concerned with.

I'm not saying the logic/scientific method/do things stand up to scrutiny - in and of itself - is harmful. It may be, but I'm not taking that path.

What I am saying is that no one has or will think to ask those questions. If they were already doing it, you'd see it show up in the scholarship, in the blogs, in the newspaper reviews, in the media. (to some extent, not like Mtv news is announcing everytime someone has a hip hop thesis)

>I don't know. I don't see any difference between studying "The
>Passionate Shepherd" and the "Nymph's Reply," to studying the
>Takeover and the Ether. Each pair is incendiary poetry, it
>just so happens that the second pair is set to music.

Poetry? You think Takeover is poetry?

You're not even going to accept hip hop on its own terms, for what it is. It's not poetry. Just cause it rhymes and may on occassion use poetical elements does not make it poetry.

And using poetical style analysis to understand... "incendiary?" c'mon man - you're not even understanding what i'm saying.

one
k. orr