Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Hip Hop

Rate this topic


FaSheezy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have a suggestion. I haven't heard any of the music mentioned above. So, I went to Amazon to listen to some snippets.

Could posters who mention a particular group/album also give us a link, say, to a relevant album on Amazon, or even to a music clip.

For starters, here's a link to the one FaSheezy mentioned: Eric Benet's : Hurricane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the Eminem album I referred to: Curtain Call

The album has explicit language, but I'm not sure the amazon clips do. Listener beware.

Edit: The clips DO contain explicit language, depending on the song. - RC

Edited by RationalCop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an objectivist hip-hop artist, I've been reading this thread with intense interest. I recently read a quote from Rand where she basically said classical music is the only music, that all modern "music" is unlistenable garbage. This is one point where I would definitely have to part ways with Rand. I understand how classical music in some ways fits in with objectivism- it requires a fierce concentration and focus, an immense amount of planning and discipline and most importantly it is a genre that could be said to have the best track record for passionate sense-of-life aesthetics.

The problem for me is that it doesn't really do it for me. When I listen to classical- and believe me I've tried many different composers, I just don't connect with it the way I connect with more modern styles. I can appreciate it on an intellectual level, but I don't find it as evocative as I do the more creative and passionate examples of hip-hop, dance and rock.

So are certain genres more or less likely to lend themselves to a positive sense-of-life? I would say yes, for example, Punk music was started by a group of people who were basically anarchists, both politically and aesthetically. They made it a point *not* to try to sound good, not to practice, not to sing on key (I think if you're trying to sing, you should sing on key).

Hip-hop is also associated with a somewhat nihilistic group of artists, though I would say most are more Wynandesque in their premises. They want money, power, success- all the things that bands like Radiohead reject, by the way- but they couldn't really tell you why these things are good or signify something morally or spiritually good. Of course, the thug mentality is something that was thrust onto hip-hop in the late eighties by groups like NWA. Before that, the message and the aesthetic of hip-hop was mostly positive if somewhat simplistic (though I think a lot of the artists did quite well considering the brain-mushing they must have been given in inner-city schools back then). If you go back and listen to Sugar Hill Gang, Run-DMC, Kurtis-Blow, and even more recently groups like A Tribe Called Quest and Digable Planets (who were peers or the West Coast 'gangsta rappers', there is nothing in their lyrics that glorifies violence, crime, degrading women, etc.

I believe I share with most posters in this thread a distaste for the thug mentality that is pervasive in 90% of today's rap, as well as the musical aesthetic that favors dumbed-downed minimalist beats that are repeated ad infinitum, often stolen as one poster pointed out, and usually not even given the benefit of any interesting melody, chord structure or rhythmic complexity.

I was inspired to do a hip-hop CD just having grown up with hip-hop and feeling excited about the possibility of trying to create something truly musical and evocative out of it along with my passion for objectivism (though I've made it a point not to be didactic in my rapping and singing- but simply to express the things I love). I'm very happy with the results and am really amped to release the CD, 5x5, next month. I would love to hear some honest feedback from people on this board- here are some links:

Objectivism Online exclusive pre-release :ninja: of 20,000 Volts

Lyrics for the first two tracks

My blog

ad gloriam,

exaltron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an objectivist hip-hop artist, I've been reading this thread with intense interest. I recently read a quote from Rand where she basically said classical music is the only music, that all modern "music" is unlistenable garbage.

You are misinformed. Not only is that not a quote of Ayn Rand, but classical music was not her favorite. Her favorite music, from the sources I have gathered i.e., Peikoff, is not even that technically difficult musically. So please do not make any judgements on what I can tell is not correct information.

Edited by Thoyd Loki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've also considered doing some "Objectivist hip-hop", most people that have read my lyrics consider them to be above average, and when I'm around people I know and in the right mood I can flow, but what has stopped me is being able to do it "on the spot" when everyone is watching. People I don't know, etc. If I can ever get past that I would be all right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are misinformed. Not only is that not a quote of Ayn Rand, but classical music was not her favorite. Her favorite music, from the sources I have gathered i.e., Peikoff, is not even that technically difficult musically. So please do not make any judgements on what I can tell is not correct information.

I'm very aware of Rand's predilection for "tiddlywink" music, and I know better than to attribute anything to Rand that doesn't come from an authoritative source:

Q: "What composers do you recommend today?"

A: "Buy yourself some classical records. I cannot listen to modern music. I can't hear it. It's anything but music." [Ford Hall Forum, 1981]

From Ayn Rand Answers, p. 226, Edited by Robert Mayhew

Great book incidentally- contains some amazing insights into her genius. One questioner asks about a specific choice of a word in Atlas and she shoots back a lengthy and flawlessly reasoned explanation for that choice.

It was lazy of me to paraphrase though, should have known better.

I've also considered doing some "Objectivist hip-hop", most people that have read my lyrics consider them to be above average, and when I'm around people I know and in the right mood I can flow, but what has stopped me is being able to do it "on the spot" when everyone is watching. People I don't know, etc. If I can ever get past that I would be all right.

Are you talking about freestyling "off the dome". I'm amazed at anyone who can do that and still make sense (Eminem is an obvious example), but I think the stuff that's worth listening to is written and refined more than a little to get the right flow, rhythm, phrasing, etc.

So put some lyrics up why don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys want to talk about some good hip hop? Did you ever hear about that judge who included in an opinion a short rap explaining her ruling on Eminem's motion? Here's one story about it. Now that's some hip hop! :ninja:

I'm picking up extra weapons at the next Celtic festival based on that story. I am a wizard at cutting flesh. Damned time I was valuable! Does anyone think that was a positive story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of embarrassing myself, I'm going to have to say that I have no idea what you mean. I did some brief searching to see if that was some song lyric. I also counted syllables to see if you had written us a little haiku. Nope. It's almost four in the morning, and I just can not for the life of me figure out what you mean up there, TL. :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading through this post and I wanted to bring some things up in regard to argumentation. I think some arguments by various parties could have been more clear or better in terms of content.

First off:

In reading this thread, I ran into this quote from StarBuck:

Alot of members of the White upper class take isssue with Hip Hop as it goes against the very grain of high brow poerty and verse - it is non-structured free verse.Hip Hop was/is(?) the music of the non-privilaged racial and economic groups in the US and therefore is seen as carrying "undesirable" values into the privilaged segments of american society (particularly to the young). Also it critiques (or at least used to critique) the values and behaviours of the upper class (such as Tupac being hated for pointing out the rampant police corruption around him, and the fact that Tupac had extensive links to Black seperatist movements).
I have several problems with this on an argumentation level.

1) This is a warrantless assertion more akin to psychologizing than anything else. After all, how do you empirically prove that "A lot" (a relatively vacuous term) of the white upper class (another vacuous term, though it doesn't have to be) hate rap for WHATEVER the reason?

2) Even if you could prove that the "white upper class" hates rap because it doesn't fit what they deem appropriate in terms of structure, what practical/functional use would that serve on THIS forum?

I understand that FaSheezy used anecdotal evidence to suggest that even some Objectivists seem closed minded/prejudiced when it came to rap and that Star Buck at least appears to back that up with his statement.

However Groovenstein (props by the way) correctly points out that anecdotal evidence isn't enough to generalize. By extension, even well documented evidence (of the fact that Race A can be racist towards Group B isn't enough to generalize that just because a person is in the category of Race A that they will NECESSARILY be racist towards someone in Group B.

I guess I'm confused as to why StarBuck posted what he did originally because it doesn't seem to have much use argument-wise or discussion wise. Maybe he can answer that one :ninja:.

After reading StarBuck's original quote, I saw Thales post this:

The phrase "white upper class" is both racist and socialist in the way you use it. It demeans people because they are white and devalues them in the worst way. It's as bad as racism against blacks. It also devalues them because they are achievers ("upper class"). I'm not saying you intended this, but that's what it amounts to.

Now THAT is a really bad approach first off and moreover, it is a bad argument.

First, Rational Cop's approach (asking the question, "What is meant by privileged and how does one become privileged") was much more conducive to good debate and rational because it leaves room for clarity and doesn't force the debate into muddy waters- it at least lets the person that might have muddied the waters to extricate themselves by clarifying.

Second off....since Thales slacked off and didn't define fundamental terms, I will do so.

Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary (www.refdesk.com) defines racist as :

rac·ism

Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi-

Function: noun

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

- rac·ist /-sist also -shist/ noun or adjective

MW's defines socialist as someone who subscribes to socialism which is defined as:

so·cial·ism

Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m

Function: noun

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

With that in mind the term "white upper class" doesn't have to be racist or socialist AT ALL.

The terms "white" and "upper class" are pretty comprehendible.

White simply is a label for skin color. In fact, Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary (www.refdesk.com) says that white is : "2 a : being a member of a group or race characterized by light pigmentation of the skin"

"upper class" is simply a term denoting social standing/economic status.

How in blazes do either of those terms (white or upper class) have racist implications by themselves or when you put them together?

Saying someone belongs to the category "White upper class" is DESCRIPTIVE in nature, not NORMATIVE.

So assuming that someone has normative implications is silly and unwarranted.

If someone says, "Jim is a member of the white upper class" that is falsifiable and empirically provable. We can check to see if Jim is indeed white and if his income falls within a certain range.

That doesn't have ANY racist implications on its own.

Now if someone says, "Jim is a member of the white upper class and because of that fact he is dumb, ugly, stupid, and isn't virtuous" that IS racist.

See the difference?

StarBuck saying "white upper class" does NOT demean people because they are white anymore than me saying, "I'm American" demeans me by putting a descriptive label It certainly doesn't "demean them in the worst way" as Thales claims.

NOW...onto the second claim that StarBuck using the phrase "upper class" is "socialist" in nature.

Once again...StarBuck makes a descriptive claim...that upper class white folk were the ones that had a problem with rap music.

For what it is worth, he is right in the fact that the white upper class was/is the group most active in protesting hip hop politically. That can be inferred by the fact that minorities statistically don't participate politically anywhere near Caucasians nor do people of all races under 65 participate as much as those OVER 65. Tipper Gore and Hillary Clinton are the ones that bitch about violent videogames and rap music (the snafu over Ice-T's Cop Killer was Dan Quayle's baby). You don't see Barrack Obama or Jesse Jackson up in arms about rap music. Currently Barrack is the ONLY black man in the senate.

Moreover, culturally speaking, rap/hip hop was STARTED by black youth FOR black youth. It wasn't trendy in the beginning which is why black people don't tend to be as overtly/publicly against rap/hip hop as white people.

Regardless of the truth or falsehood of StarBuck's original descriptive claim (that upper class white people are the ones that have the biggest problem with rap music), Starbuck's original claim is NOT socialist whatsoever. StarBuck said, "members of the privileged white upper class." He didn't say the white upper class as a whole. Thus, he RESPECTED the individual...the minority of one. That is NOT socialistic at all. It is a descriptive statement that seems more Objectivist in nature than socialist, though his statment has PLENTY wrong with it (I spent the first half of my post talking about why StarBuck's original comment is shoddy and not really useful). Thale's critique isn't any more correct or useful than what StarBuck originally contributed which is why I'm bringing all of this up.

StarBuck's original post had nothing to do with demeaning the white upper class because they are achievers or because of ANYTHING for that matter. Nothing was demeaned to begin with!

Thales needs to be WAY more precise when using words...especially if he is going to go around chucking BIG TIME value leaden words like "racist" and "socialist" around at people accusatorily without explaining HOW they meet the words definitional requirements. Using words inaccurately is a great way to give the appearance (whether correct or not) of throwing around value ladden buzz l words (racist/socialist) out for the purpose of simply inciting negative response without care for accuracy. If this wasn't an Objectivist forum, I would probably assume that Thales was just an uneducated dolt throwing trying to be provocative (trolling/flaming). I hope this isn't the case. Good arguments and good scholarship ensures that you never have to deal with bad impressions like that, however.

It kind of saddens me that nobody brought this up until now.

Ah well.

I guess someone has to do it. Might as well be a former debater ;).

Now...to ANSWER RationalCop's insightful question (since StarBuck seemed to bow out of the discussion)

"How Does one become privileged or non-privileged and what does that mean?"

I think you can easily answer that question without descending into Socialist babble.

First off:

priv·i·lege

Pronunciation: 'priv-lij, 'pri-v&-

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin privilegium law for or against a private person, from privus private + leg-, lex law

: a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : PREROGATIVE; especially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office

I think StarBuck was implying that upper class white people have certain benefits, favors, and advantages to being upper class AND white that people that are NOT upper class OR white do not have that come from simply being born into a certain category.

I think that can be a descriptive statement without having negative normative implications (at least economically speaking).

Being rich DOES have advantages/benefits but only if a person is really worthy of their money. We all know that isn't a BAD thing. It becomes a privilege when you are born into it. We all know about trust fund baby syndrome aka "from rags to riches to rags in three generations." Miss Rand said herself that those that don't understand the nature of money, capitalism, and the role of philosophy in people's lives will most likely end up worthless playboys or destitute because they aren't worthy of their money. Thus it can be argued that simply being born into money isn't necessarily a benefit or advantage...in fact it can be a disadvantage because in the wrong hands it only gives a person MORE rope to hang themselves with and MORE potential ground to disassociate oneself from reality. I think that is the BEST argument against people trying to claim that "economic privilege" is really important in the grand scheme of things.

As far as racial privilege? That is an unfortunate product of racism that manifest itself in things like police corruption, etc. In some places (and sometimes only in certain circumstances) white people DO have special privileges just because they are white. This can equate to unfair treatment in the courts or by the police...or just an overall difficulty in getting respect or a voice due to racism.Perhaps a daycare doesn't accept your kid because he isn't the "right color?" That kind of stuff DOES happen and it DOES get documented every now and then. Is it huge? Probably not.

Statistically speaking, white people are OVERALL better off economically than pretty much any other minority from every statistic I have seen. This translates to political power, better education, and more opportunities (in a lot of cases, more SQUANDERED opportunities...which is something minorities don't often mention...lol). If you are white, chances are you get more starting privileges (better access to education, etc).

Now...the interesting question comes from asking WHY that is.

If the real issue is money, then why are white people better off economically than black people?

I personally believe it all has to do with philosophy and outlook. Much in the same way that Jews have been pretty darn economically successful due to the Hellenistic influence in their culture, White people have been pretty successful due to the Founding Fathers and some good old Western Renaissance/Enlightenment thinking that started America on the right track. That thinking has been pretty badly diluted and poorly defended in the west as Miss Rand explains in her several books. However, THAT is what has allowed America to become successful AT ALL. The philosophy.

Black people were imported from tribal/primitive cultures and were screwed with HARD when it came to slavery. Not only were families split up and black people dehumanized, but their society was fragmented by the Union which said, "You came from primitive culture and adapted to a life where you didn't really have to think for yourself or live as a rational animal working to achieve values. That life is gone. Have fun learning to survive out there on your own!"

Were the results really that surprising? Given the fractured nature of the slave system with family members being sold up the river and families being dependent upon the females (which wasn't ALWAYS "unnatural" as in some cases it was an offshoot of some African matrilineal cultures) , is it a surprise that the freeing of the slaves created a society that has some serious issues of mothers being saddled with kids and deadbeat dads? Is it a surprise that a decent segment of FORCED dependents became willing dependents as soon as they could when it was offered (welfare)? It wasn't like everything changed for the positive in the South for black people right after the Civil War. When FDR introduced welfare, you still had JIM CROW laws for christ's sakes....so it isn't like there were a butt load of opportunities in the south.

Keep in mind, welfare/poverty are NOT unique to black people and I'm not trying to argue that. I think Jesse Jackson made said somewhere that single white moms are the most prolific welfare users (in response to Vicente Fox sticking his foot in his mouth poltically by commenting that Mexicans do jobs that black people won't do). However, there ARE some unique issues that black people have faced and are facing historically and I think that people like EC would do well to keep that in mind when they get annoyed with Tupac going into "black issues."

I know I have sidetracked the discussion into debate/argumentation issues (what constitutes a good or a bad argument) and some other stuff (race/privilege). I think the debate/argumentation post is necessary and proper in ANY forum if arguments aren't being made that you think should be made or BAD arguments are being made that you object to. I felt that discussing the privilege issue was an important thing to do considering Rational Cop brought it up to begin with as a question. Perhaps it belongs in another forum, but I think since the question was brought up here...that it can reasonably stay here.

If a moderator thinks otherwise, c'est la vie.

-Evan

(post edited for clarity)

Edited by Evan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that was... extensive :ninja:

So are certain genres more or less likely to lend themselves to a positive sense-of-life? I would say yes

I'm very happy with the results and am really amped to release the CD, 5x5, next month. I would love to hear some honest feedback from people on this board

I would agree that some genres are more easily positive than others, with the caveat that one person can often get something positive out of what another thinks is unredeemable. To me, it's subject to interpretation whether Barney the dinosaur is positive, or Sin City the movie negative for example.

As for the music, I liked it! For better(esthetics) or worse($$) it's not exactly popular rap, but let me know how I can obtain the CD when you release.

Here's a link to an blog article an Objectivist from Toronto wrote on the website of a national free paper called Dose on the art of free style rapping.
That's an interesting article. I think that freestyling is quite valuable from an esthetic standpoint.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . with the caveat that one person can often get something positive out of what another thinks is unredeemable.

Another thing to consider is for what purpose something is being enjoyed. I'm focusing largely on production right now, so I don't really pay much attention to lyrics. I'm not saying I ignore them completely, just that production gets a lot of the enjoyment weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definition of "music" semantics aside, the "beat" is just frosting on the cake; the lyrics are the real artistry.

(Emphasis added by me.)

The lyrical content and the artist's execution or "delivery" of those lyrics seems to me to be the essential characteristics of Rap & Hip Hop. However, the vast majority of Rap & Hip Hop I have heard contains background info in the form of a "beat", a sampled loop or some auditory object that clearly marks time passage (sometimes even a section of music! :ninja: ). This is the standard by which the artist gauges his execution. Are there many or any "a capella" Rap/Hip Hop recordings? That is to say, spoken lyrics as the only object in the recording?

And it's annoying to me that people get hung up on whether a particular form of art qualifies as music.

Objects in reality should be clearly, consistently & objectively identified. Is it proper concept formation that annoys you or just the fact that music in particular has a specific defintion?

Don't call it music then...

It's not, therefore I don't.

...but I fail to see how viewing it from one side or the other really matters.

Because as I stated before...Objects in reality should be clearly, consistently & objectively identified.

I suppose I could question whether the present usage of "music" is a "proper definition"...

You could if you wanted to. Would you like to call the defintion I have provided into question? If so, how would you amend or reformulate it? Will you please offer your reasoning behind the rejection of my defintion and then explain why the one you will offer is more accurate?

... but once again I doubt this "rap != music" distinction is significant.

I disagree & I respectfully submit that if you thought it was insignificant you wouldn't have replied as you did.

So rap isn't music, it's an "auditory artform?"

It seems more akin to poetry than any other art form. Poetry is meant to be spoken aloud in a specific rhythm/meter after all; but not necessarily to a "beat" (or any other background info).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...What I'm trying to do is figure out where we draw the line at instrument and whether that should be the place where a line is drawn...

I'm also thinking about drums. I would probably include a lot of drumming as "music." Drums have tones, timbres, notes of a certain duration, etc. In fact, with a guy like Terry Bozzio, they have a lot of tones! What are your thoughts on drums as music?

...I think this is something I'd like to pass to Christopher Schlegel if he happens upon this...

Drums by themselves can be music if they contain all the necessary components (i.e. the definition of music, in particular melody! - Please see my post on melody here). Any "auditory object" can be used to create music as long as the object in question is a pure enough tone to be heard by a human ear & understandable to a human mind as pitch specific. (For more on that see this post I did).

So, drums (and other percussion instruments) can of course be used to present a melody or melodic information. But, in a way, this approach to the problem is "putting the cart before the horse". I think it might be better to ask, "What qualifies as a melody?", then, "What is the melody of THIS piece?". Then once you have those answers, you can ask, "Is this musician using drums (or whatever instrument) to play a (or "the") melody?". Hope this helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing to consider is for what purpose something is being enjoyed.
Good point.

It seems more akin to poetry than any other art form. Poetry is meant to be spoken aloud in a specific rhythm/meter after all; but not necessarily to a "beat" (or any other background info).
I don't have great objection to the idea of rap as poetry (though I suspect the argument would hold for any music's lyrical portions,) but I don't think poetry is necessarily "meant to be" spoken aloud, whereas I feel rap is.

Spoken poetry obviously can add nuances to poetry, but I don't think vocalizing is as essential a part of poetry as it is for rap.

Are there many or any "a capella" Rap/Hip Hop recordings? That is to say, spoken lyrics as the only object in the recording?
I don't know of any commercial products, but I've often heard rap sans beat. I agree that the beat often serves a metronomic purpose, if nothing else.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is some a capella rap, Eminem does it for example.

Hmmm.... Lyrics and a beat, sounds like music to me.

Define melody and explain why you think it is integral for musis to be considered music and why you think rap lacks it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is some a capella rap, Eminem does it for example.

Hmmm.... Lyrics and a beat, sounds like music to me.

Define melody and explain why you think it is integral for musis to be considered music and why you think rap lacks it.

Why don't you read the links he provided to his prior posts where he has already answered these questions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of embarrassing myself, I'm going to have to say that I have no idea what you mean. I did some brief searching to see if that was some song lyric. I also counted syllables to see if you had written us a little haiku. Nope. It's almost four in the morning, and I just can not for the life of me figure out what you mean up there, TL. :worry:

I don't know what it means either because I didn't write it. That was my stupid brother-in-law. He thinks he's funny, only I never know what he's talking about, and he's not supposed to use my computer. Thank god he didn't post a picture of some guy's butt or something. I'll sign in manually from now on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
It has been my experience that most Objectivists I have spoken with hold a severe distaste for the genre of music called Hip Hop. Now, I understand your reservations if the only thing you have ever encountered from Hip Hop is, "You's a big fine mutha, won't you back that a$$ up." But come on people, music is just as much a business as anything else. If there is a demand for it, then you will see supply. You cannot judge a category as "good" or "bad"; you have to judge the individuals.

To support my case I submit the lyrics to Eric Benet's "I Know" from his album "Hurricane." I find it particularly beautiful, and the music is a classic example of Hip Hop. I figure maybe I can lure you into actually listening to it if I can get you to appreciate the beauty of its lyrics.

Some say that change won't come

We'll never live as one

They say it can't be done

But I know better

They say there'll be more rain

They say there'll be more pain

But the sun's gonna shine again

And I know for sho'

If you really, really wanna you could touch the sky

Don't let them tell you you can't fly that high

Anything you want you just go out and try

'Cause I know, I know, I know

They say the end is near

And they say it's almost here

But I say to have no fear

I know, it's not so

Some say that love's just a myth

It's a wonderful dream but it doesn't exist

But to look at you you're such a precious gift

That I know, I know

If you really, really wanna you could touch the sky

Don't let them tell you you can't fly that high

Anything you want you just go out and try

'Cause I know, I know, I know

And if you really, really want it, it could be that way

Don't get caught up in what them people say

All your little dreams turn into bigger things

I know, I know

I know, I just know

That I know

Oh

The seeds you sowed determine what you grow

The road you take determines where you're gonna go

And when you feel it deep inside your soul

You'll know, you'll know

If you really, really wanna you could touch the sky

Don't let them tell you you can't fly that high

Anything you want you just go out and try

'Cause I know, I know, I know

That if you really, really want it, it could be that way

Don't get caught up in what them people say

All your little dreams turn into bigger things

I know, I know

(Before I hear anyone say, "What's all this, "I just know stuff? Is this primacy of consciousness?" No! Preceding this song on the album are a bunch of "I've made my mistakes, now I can see my errors, I have to care about myself first" kind of songs. So there. :) )

I am not a fan of hip hop, but in it's defense it is very Honest music. Most hip hop artists are expressing their true pain, feelings, reactions, lifestyle etc. and not flowering themselves up to be tasteful to the publics opinion. If a person doesn't like the fact that some people are so angry they feel like shoving a gun down someones throat, but choose to express it through music, then don't listen. Some of the beats are good too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Just wanted to post a few Hip hop songs that I thought others might like. I'm a pretty big fan of a few hip hop artists, and thought some of it might be of interest to others.

Lupe Fiasco, for example, is generally a great rapper. His song "The Instrumental" is about a complete loss of individuality, somewhat Keating-esque.

Choice lyrics:

He just sits, and watches the people in the boxes

Everything he sees he absorbs and adopts it

He mimics and he mocks it

Really hates the box but he can't remember how to stop, it

Uh, so he continues to watch it

Hoping that it'll give him something that he can box with

Or how the locksmith, see the box as, locked in the box

Ain't got the combination to unlock, it

That's why he watch-es, scared to look away

Cause at that moment, it might show him

What to take off the locks with

So he chained himself to the box, took a lock and then he locked it

Swallowed the combination and then forgot, it

As the doctors jot it all down, with they pens and pencils

The same ones that took away his voice

And just left this instrumental, like that

...

Uh, and you can't tell me just who you are

You buy new clothes just to hide those scars

You built that roof just to hide those stars

Now you can't take it back to the start

And you can't tell me just who you are

You buy new clothes just to hide those scars

You built that roof just to hide those stars

Now you can't take it back to the start

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more good one:

Irreversible by Grieves

Some lyrics:

I remember being too young to spell it

But old enough to know

That when his fingers touched the keys

It lit something up in his soul

But at four years old

It's hard to notice the power

But I sat under that piano for hours.

Learnin' the sound of it

You heard an old mans noise

I heard every tear that he wept

and every crack in his voice.

Heard every fear that he kept

And every passion and joy

As he scrambled across the keys

And I played with my toys

I saw the power that projected from that living room

That man lost his family and everything he ever knew

He played that piano like

it saved him from the hell he flew

Runnin away from the pain that awaited

From bein' raised a Jew.

Some people paint with their music

Stimulate your senses

Enabling you to view it

But, those dogs raise

and train to take a tune with me

Everywhere I go

Makin my home where the music speaks.

...

I can still hear the music

His old box used to play

And I am what I am because of you

And they can't take that away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...