>hip hop is ONLY studied in a contextual way. There is no
>analysis in the artistic or musical contributions of the
>genre.
>
>I think the OP is hitting on something true here.
>
>Hip hop should also be appreciated for it's contribution to
>how we 'define' music and how music is made. But all the
>intellectual analysis about hip hop focuses on a
>socio-economic perspective.....instead of talking about
>technique and brush strokes.

Problem is, academics don't know shit about rap and
DJing. None have ever made a beat. Some rap, but most of
them are nerds and suck.

So they stay in their lane: comparing Nas to Foucalt and
other laughable dumb shit like that (fyi, that comparison
is as disrespectful to Nas as it is Foucalt)

The dopest shit about hip hop is in the technical details.
Rhyme schemes. Beat drops.

I think the main problem is that hip hop should be studied
by more musicologists than by historians and sociologists
and social commentarians.

The latter two have written an endless stream of boring books
and articles.

----------------------------

Young Broadway Star Urgently Needs a Bone Marrow Donor. Is it you? http://MatchShannon.com/







O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "