Talk:Hip-hop

KevinR1990, it's ironic that Ready to Die was released 20 years ago yesterday, yet you mention Sean Combs (derisively) as among the new generation of rappers in the "sellout years" reacting to "gangsta" rappers after Biggie and Tupak's deaths. He was a producer on Biggie's first record (along with DJ Premier, who is so important it's strange not to see Gang Starr mentioned). Combs' first successful single was on the charts at the same time as Biggie tracks from the second record, on which Combs also had production credits. Combs wasn't a gangsta (he came from a middle class family), but he also has never been a sellout or poppy. If you've ever listened to a gangsta or mafioso record, you'd know that they're basically all about street life, partying, sex, drugs, crime, family, etc., yet you're saying "lyrics about partying and getting rich" are somehow part of a reactionary sellout genre that you apparently don't like. I guess if you'd say what you did about Combs and Jay Z, you'd say it about Raekwon the Chef, Ghostface Killah, the GZA, and WuTang, for example, who are credited with making some of the most important records in the history of hip hop. Good on you if you're going to continue working on this. If not, it belongs in your userspace. I don't know enough about hip hop to contribute anything of value that isn't covered better by Wikipedia, Vibe, the Source, etc., and I doubt anyone else does either. I also doubt anyone in the world is interested in reading about hip hop on RW, except perhaps about the political (and religious) responses you do refer to. I think discussing it in that context would be of great interest here, and you seem to have something to say about it. My 2 cents. But let's wait for one of the deletionists to tell us how it is. Good stuff. Nutty Roux (talk) 19:48, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointers. I've actually heard it suggested that Biggie himself marked the beginning of the "glam" wave in rap music, and you're right — there definitely is a good deal of continuity between gangsta rap and party rap. I tried to allude to that when I mentioned how, even at the height of the "gangsta" era, there were people accusing many of them of giving a whitewashed image of "the streets" as being about the Scarface ideal (money, power, women, respect, machismo) rather than about actual struggles. That said, you're also absolutely correct that a lot of great music came out of the "gangsta" era, warts and all. I do believe that a good RW article about hip-hop could cover a lot of ground on racial and class issues as well as censorship, so I do intend to keep working on this. KevinR1990 (talk) 04:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

No mention of the tape recorders in schools (and prisons)? Anyone could use a tape with pre-made music and sing over it, record it, etc. It was music piracy, technically, but considering that the piracy ended up giving the record companies solid gold jets, it's kind of ironic. CorruptUser (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Missionality?
How missional is this, really? I mean, I know there's a lot of citable misogyny, homophobia and conspiracy theory mongering in hihop — but that could be covered in the articles on those things (e.g. "In popular culture"). Just having a stand-alone article on Hip Hop seems almost encyclopedic per definition. And we're not an encyclopedia. Thoughts? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:56, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The same could be said for punk. I don't think either is missional. Christopher (talk) 16:59, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Or maybe we need to cover dubstep and classical music too and embrace the beat. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 17:56, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * We have heavy metal, but that might make sense since fundies freak out over it. Disco could fit pretty damn well considering its backlash. Oh, and rock-and-roll. 18:01, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hip Hop is perhaps more known than other music genres for sexism/violence themes, as well as leading certain people to exhibit moral panics and/or racism about it, etc. so it is justifiable to have an article on it. However it might be reasonable to trim the article to provide a clearer focus on these missional things. And I am only using this line of reasoning because that's the line of reasoning I would use to justify the heavy metal article (except replace sexism with satanism and add excessive genre pedantism to the mix of things covered). 171.33.193.245 (talk) 18:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * . that's the way to go! 18:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm still not sure about our music articles at all... I think that the themes they cover should be cited in the articles on those themes. LFG mentioned music which freaks out fundies. Well, gangsta rap qualifies on that list too. But my point is, these reactions to music should be cited in an article on moral panic (or the likes) — the missional aspect here is the fundie reaction, not the music itself. As such, controversies in music still don't make "general music genre articles" the least bit missional to me. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:53, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * One could argue that there are certain misconceptions cleared up about Hip Hop in a Hip Hop article or misconceptions cleared up about Heavy Metal in a Heavy Metal article that perhaps would look out of place in a misconceptions article and would be done more justice in an article about the genre itself (once again, if we were to trim the article, that would stand out better). 94.174.77.41 (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2017 (UTC)