Thursday, November 29, 2012
American Juggalos
I had never even heard of the term juggalo or Insane Clown Posse until Rob brought it up in class last week and subsequently did his presentation on it today. It seems like the strangest subculture to me because I have no knowledge base whatsoever for the subculture. I don't know why they do what they do and I don't understand what motivates them to spray cheap soda all over each other. I plan on watching some of the infomercials that Larkin and Rob were talking about in order to learn more about the Insane Clown Posse. I really don't understand why they paint their faces either. Is there some rule that says you must look as scary as possible to join this subculture? Are there any motivating factors to join or is it just that you want to join the subculture. I would love to know how people get into the juggalo culture too. Like who wakes up one day and is like "I want to spray fago everywhere today while listening to scary music!"
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Different Meaning of "Mainstream" Hip-Hop to Black and White People?
I found this video very interesting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62WTAzM3TZQ&feature=g-high-rec), where it essentially says that the target audience for white rappers are college kids, while those of black rappers are anyone but college kids. What do you guys think?
Friday, November 16, 2012
Resistance in Music
I attended a concert the other night which I really enjoyed from one of my favorite artists: Death Grips. They are an indie Hip Hop/electronic group with a lot of punk and violent overtones. What's interesting about the group is their tendency to resist the mainstream.
As an example, they are signed to epic records, a well known record label, even though they are a more independent underground group, with most of their fanbase comprising of young people on the internet. However, they do not enjoy their contract with epic. Their third album release kept getting pushed back further and further even though the album was ready and as a result, released their third album, No Love Deep Web, for free as a digital download. Epic was not contacted about the leak. The album cover was a low res picture of an erect penis with the album title written on it.
The whole thing is interesting because it's easy to wonder what both sides were expecting. Why did Epic sign a group known for fighting the system and expect them to roll over when they wanted to delay their third album? Why did Death Grips sign with Epic only to renege on them in a very childish manner that would put them in costly litigation indefinitely?
At the concert though, it was very clear that Death Grips was not affected by releasing their album for free. They performed a good show and there was an excellent turn out. Death Grips is still touring around the world so clearly, as counterculture figures, they are doing something right. Going against Epic legitimized them in an underground subculture based on resistance.
As an example, they are signed to epic records, a well known record label, even though they are a more independent underground group, with most of their fanbase comprising of young people on the internet. However, they do not enjoy their contract with epic. Their third album release kept getting pushed back further and further even though the album was ready and as a result, released their third album, No Love Deep Web, for free as a digital download. Epic was not contacted about the leak. The album cover was a low res picture of an erect penis with the album title written on it.
The whole thing is interesting because it's easy to wonder what both sides were expecting. Why did Epic sign a group known for fighting the system and expect them to roll over when they wanted to delay their third album? Why did Death Grips sign with Epic only to renege on them in a very childish manner that would put them in costly litigation indefinitely?
At the concert though, it was very clear that Death Grips was not affected by releasing their album for free. They performed a good show and there was an excellent turn out. Death Grips is still touring around the world so clearly, as counterculture figures, they are doing something right. Going against Epic legitimized them in an underground subculture based on resistance.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
2 Ties to Subculture
Hello everyone, I just wanted to mention two encounters with subculture I've had recently that might be worth looking up if you have some free time.
The first is a band that my friend referred to me called The Protomen. The Protomen are a strange blend of two subcultures: Metal and Gaming. They have two full albums that play as a "rock opera" loosely based on the Megaman video game franchise; the entire project could be considered an elaborate fanfic. Their musical style relates closely to metal (though perhaps a little on the "glam" side) and they are an interesting listen for fans of the video game, as it provides (fan-made) depth for otherwise shallow characters. All in all I found them highly enjoyable and would suggest them to anyone who is interested in either subculture (or rock operas I suppose).
The second came while I was reading a book called Heaven Is a Playground by Rick Telander. Heaven is a book about basketball in the inner city in the late 70's. I would recommend this book to anyone, even if they don't particularly like basketball (and especially if they do). A true story, there is a section in which the author goes on a late night graffiti raid. I consider Telander a very good writer and he provides a good account of the motivation behind graffiti as well as what it's participants hope to gain from it. He also provides a first hand account of an actual raid, exhibiting some of it's inherent dangers. The section is too long to quote here but is definitely worth checking out, it is found about two-thirds of the way through the novel.
The first is a band that my friend referred to me called The Protomen. The Protomen are a strange blend of two subcultures: Metal and Gaming. They have two full albums that play as a "rock opera" loosely based on the Megaman video game franchise; the entire project could be considered an elaborate fanfic. Their musical style relates closely to metal (though perhaps a little on the "glam" side) and they are an interesting listen for fans of the video game, as it provides (fan-made) depth for otherwise shallow characters. All in all I found them highly enjoyable and would suggest them to anyone who is interested in either subculture (or rock operas I suppose).
The second came while I was reading a book called Heaven Is a Playground by Rick Telander. Heaven is a book about basketball in the inner city in the late 70's. I would recommend this book to anyone, even if they don't particularly like basketball (and especially if they do). A true story, there is a section in which the author goes on a late night graffiti raid. I consider Telander a very good writer and he provides a good account of the motivation behind graffiti as well as what it's participants hope to gain from it. He also provides a first hand account of an actual raid, exhibiting some of it's inherent dangers. The section is too long to quote here but is definitely worth checking out, it is found about two-thirds of the way through the novel.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Follow Up On Alt. Sports Discussion
I think we definitely had a spirited discussion in class today, but I know for me, it was hard to make ground on most topics because they are generally in the eye of the beholder. What makes one thing more creative or accessible to one person is a limitation to another. The topic that I think was the best to discuss was the role women play in sports. I think that it is incredibly difficult to discuss this because we have so many years of "this is a male sport, this is a female sport" shoved down our throat. I am guilty of this as well, but we tend to view things as a woman competing on or above a man's level. Even "She Rips..." used this thought process a little. One point that I saw was prevalent was the idea that women's sports or competitions are limiting gender wise. By specifying the gender of the competitors it only allows for someone to be good for a girl/boy. In order to not have this mindset, we would have to have sport with no gender regulation. Frankly I believe that at this point the only way that would happen is with the creation of a new sport.
Because we had a focus on skateboarding, I thought that this series of videos was worth posting. In "She Rips," Elissa Steamer's role as a female skater was gone through in some detail. She had the first female video part and was the first female pro. She was in Tony Hawk video games and was an X-Games gold medalist. In 2011, she quit her sponsor, Zero, and as the "godmother" of skateboarding was unable to get a sponsor. This series of 4 videos (about 40 minutes) goes through her entire career and really picks apart what it is like to be the only female in the boys club that is skateboarding.
http://www.vice.com/epicly-later-d/elissa-steamer-part-1
Because we had a focus on skateboarding, I thought that this series of videos was worth posting. In "She Rips," Elissa Steamer's role as a female skater was gone through in some detail. She had the first female video part and was the first female pro. She was in Tony Hawk video games and was an X-Games gold medalist. In 2011, she quit her sponsor, Zero, and as the "godmother" of skateboarding was unable to get a sponsor. This series of 4 videos (about 40 minutes) goes through her entire career and really picks apart what it is like to be the only female in the boys club that is skateboarding.
http://www.vice.com/epicly-later-d/elissa-steamer-part-1
Sunday, November 11, 2012
The Failings of Technology?
I recently saw this article and found it so intriguing that what we thought would exponentially help the candidates (Social media through Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.) would backfire on Romney in such a tight race: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/10/mitt-romney-project-orca-broken-app-cost-thousands-votes_n_2109986.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003.
There were also videos of voters choosing one candidate and the machine would pick another candidate. What do you guys think of technology? Do you think its benefits outweigh its cons? Also note that despite the small cons, they played a HUGE role in this election in the very last moment.
There were also videos of voters choosing one candidate and the machine would pick another candidate. What do you guys think of technology? Do you think its benefits outweigh its cons? Also note that despite the small cons, they played a HUGE role in this election in the very last moment.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Subcultures Becoming a Part of Dominant Culture?
Hey everyone, so I've noticed that throughout our discussions of dominant culture and subculture, we have never really talked about subcultures completely becoming a part of the dominant culture. An example I would give is hip-hop: Despite the countless numbers of examples for hip-hop showing the dominant cultures' characteristics (Having a majority audience of white teenagers, something that's been accepted by even the President of the United States [ Seen when President Obama allowed Jay-Z to introduce him ], etc.), we've always said that hip-hop is a subculture. But as the definitions of dominant cultures and subcultures inevitably change in several years (Whether that be two, a decade, or even 100 years), will we still call hip-hop a subculture? And more importantly, can a subculture ever truly transform into something that is a part of the dominant culture?
Friday, November 9, 2012
(Late) follow up on 11/6 discussion
This should have been posted Tuesday night, sorry for the delay. This is blog will come in two parts: the discussion and my personal opinion on some topics.
On Tuesday we discussed consumerism and subcultures, does it really affect the youths and are big companies really the bad guys. Are they really "exploiting" subcultures? My group did plan to divide the class and make you guys debate on whether consumerism was bad or good for society but we ran out of time. If you guys want to answers the remaining questions we didn't get to, please feel free to. I, however, want to bring up the interesting topic we touched on in class involving Common, Eazy-E, and race relations in commercials.
So I have a theory of why there was more controversy over Common being invited to the White House than Eazy-E. Maybe it's because Eazy-E is an image of what white people see black people as. Maybe he reaffirmed white people's perspective of black people (as "thugs"). Maybe Common was a threat to white people's perspective of black people because he is a conscious rapper and he didn't fit their subconscious views of a black person. Maybe this is also an explanation of why white people bastardized hip-hop's original ideals; because if a marginalized group starts threatening the social hierarchy, their message and ideals are manipulated to portray something the dominate culture would like to see (a reason why white people dominate the hip hop industry). When I asked "Why did hip hop become the initial vessel for cool?" An answer I got was because hip hop already praised consumerism (I am paraphrasing). That is valid of course, but now I think part of it is because black culture in general is already being manipulated in media. Stemming from that idea, let's talk about that Common Gap video and the statement that "Common isn't black" so therefore his representation in the advertisement doesn't really mean anything. I don't want to refute the point that Gap used a light skinned black person because it would be received better by the audience, that's probably a reason Common was used, I want to talk about the problem of saying that light skinned black people aren't black. This raises the question of what you think "black" is. Are you less "black" if you have a lighter skin? Obviously light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people, but that doesn't make them any less black and saying that it does is honestly a bit offensive. To summarize, what I'm trying to say is: Dominant culture frames the media they view to fit their ideals and reaffirm pre-existing perceptions; light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people and therefore used in commercials but it's a problem to claim that light skinned black people are less "black". In fact, here's a video that says it better than I can:
On Tuesday we discussed consumerism and subcultures, does it really affect the youths and are big companies really the bad guys. Are they really "exploiting" subcultures? My group did plan to divide the class and make you guys debate on whether consumerism was bad or good for society but we ran out of time. If you guys want to answers the remaining questions we didn't get to, please feel free to. I, however, want to bring up the interesting topic we touched on in class involving Common, Eazy-E, and race relations in commercials.
So I have a theory of why there was more controversy over Common being invited to the White House than Eazy-E. Maybe it's because Eazy-E is an image of what white people see black people as. Maybe he reaffirmed white people's perspective of black people (as "thugs"). Maybe Common was a threat to white people's perspective of black people because he is a conscious rapper and he didn't fit their subconscious views of a black person. Maybe this is also an explanation of why white people bastardized hip-hop's original ideals; because if a marginalized group starts threatening the social hierarchy, their message and ideals are manipulated to portray something the dominate culture would like to see (a reason why white people dominate the hip hop industry). When I asked "Why did hip hop become the initial vessel for cool?" An answer I got was because hip hop already praised consumerism (I am paraphrasing). That is valid of course, but now I think part of it is because black culture in general is already being manipulated in media. Stemming from that idea, let's talk about that Common Gap video and the statement that "Common isn't black" so therefore his representation in the advertisement doesn't really mean anything. I don't want to refute the point that Gap used a light skinned black person because it would be received better by the audience, that's probably a reason Common was used, I want to talk about the problem of saying that light skinned black people aren't black. This raises the question of what you think "black" is. Are you less "black" if you have a lighter skin? Obviously light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people, but that doesn't make them any less black and saying that it does is honestly a bit offensive. To summarize, what I'm trying to say is: Dominant culture frames the media they view to fit their ideals and reaffirm pre-existing perceptions; light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people and therefore used in commercials but it's a problem to claim that light skinned black people are less "black". In fact, here's a video that says it better than I can:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)