A Blog-like Entity

08 dec 06

Gats in holsters, girls on shoulders.

it was my birthday two days ago.

i guess this is some line from a hip-hop "song" that you like -- keep your guns and your girls close by, essentially, as possessions. reminds me of that line by biggie smalls in his anthemic "true playa":

money, hoes and clothes: all a nigga knows

biggie doesn't mention violence, which is to his credit, and which is also ironic considering that he was shot to death. "selling out" is percieved in hip-hop culture as being admirable, whereas in, say, punk rock, it's unconscionable (the sex pistols signing to a corporate record label, which i believe they did). let's find a verse from an EPMD (90s rap group) "song":

But the rest are getting Brand Nubian
Change up their style from jeans to suits and
Thinking about a pop record
Something made for the stations
For a whole new relationship
Or a new type of scene
To go platinum and clock mad greens
AKA a sell-out
The rap definition.

also worth noting is that EPMD stands for (stood for -- they're defunct now, i believe) "Eric and Parrish Makin' Dollars". the song from which i grabbed those few lines is titled "Crossover", and is about precicely that -- altering style to fit a money-making audience, and doing so without artistic compromise, simply because making money is part of, and might even be the most important part of, the artistry.

hip-hop is all about the benjamins (the man on the hun'ed dolla bill).

so we have rappers embracing materialism openly, while other artists might do it covertly. but rest assured that they all do it, unless they're vincent van gogh or someone similarly schizophrenic. even the most "culturally correct" east village contemporary sculptor has an ipod.

when snoop and dre were around and putting out albums like "the chronic", they'd release two versions of songs: one with "you know we're 'bout to tear it up" vs. "you know we're 'bout to wreck shit up". the intent, from the beginning, was to make money from the records. and furthermore, this was part of the artistic process, rather than an affront to it. "selling out" was a desirable thing. of course, i don't know what was going on in dr. dre's mind when he wrote those lyrics and then made a second version for the pop radio stations, and there might very well have been a bit of eye-rolling or head-shaking going on there, but i'm sure it was decidedly minor.

but part of rapper culture is to embrace the aforementioned "sellout" as part of the game, and indeed as part of the artistry. hip-hop, perhaps not always, but recently (last 15 years?) has been tied in so closely with big producer money that the big producer money has become an integral part of the artistry, and part of the mythos. consider: suge knight. ain't he dope? he makin money.

so yes -- violence, sex and money. it's no big secret that these are the main things we, homo sapiens, are interested in. but rap music comes right out and says it -- taps us on the shoulder and says "um...who do you think you're fooling there, with your cocktail parties and 19th century lithographs of bugs on the wall?". we're all the same -- and what we all want is gats in holsters, and girls on shoulders.

the disparity in attitudes towards money and its relationship with artistry comes from differing backgrounds. a lot of black hip-hop artists don't come from money (lil john excepted), whereas white artists tend to have grown up relatively priviledged, and like to renounce what they see as their materialistic roots, which for some reason they see as encumbering "real" expression. black artists simply don't see any conflict there.