Dr. Axel Barcelo Aspeitia -- Investigador wrote:
>If there is such a thing as a Hip Hop culture it should not
>be identified with its ORIGINAL culture, but with its current and evolving
>one: one that covers not only inner city life, but also suburban life, and
>everywhere where people listen tand incorporate hip hop to their life.
do you mean by "current and evolving" that it includes commercial hiphop -- the ones they play on the radio that everybody loves to hate?
i'm just wondering why everyone on the list is so intent on excluding the commercial artists/songs/albums from the discussion (whether it be hiphop, rap or acid jazz). i know, i know, there's not much to glean from the likes of puff daddy when it comes to hardcore trueblue hiphop, but culturally, an analysis of such commercial acts (the "crap" and the "chip-chop") can say a lot. i mean, why the heck do these kinds of commercial stuff pop up out of nowhere and take hold of the audience? what does the audience want anyway, and how come the "classics" as defined by the good people in this list don't quite make it commercially? (actually if you think about it, in practically almost any field this is true, especially film). perhaps the "classics" need a bit more packaging to hook the audience? and are we saying that most radio-and-MTV-saturated people have already damaged ears that cannot appreciate anything but pre-packaged, commercial music?
just shooting out thoughts.
-------
misha d. pallorina
philippines
__________________________________
www.edsamail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jul 12 2001 - 02:11:07 CEST