Hip Hop taken to new levels.

I wasn't going "in circles" with regards to my logic about hip hop.
I wasn't allowing overlap in "some cases," i said that ALL music has cultural overlap - i mean, sample based production SAMPLES music from another culture.

And frankly, I think I have a right to be un-relaxed - or PISSED THE FUCK OFF - when people are searching the internet for my fuckgin PERSONAL FUCKING INFORMATION.
I'm sorry if you disagree.

To be utterly honest, I didn't really get what was going on initially. I will say you can do just the same with me easily enough through my own campus/place of employment:

http://www.uci.edu/cgi-bin/phonebook?raggett

I mean, it's public info -- if this is something you'd rather not have available for review by anyone, get it changed if you can or ask your campus to change it for you. You shouldn't feel obligated to share things you'd rather keep private (and again, I know nothing of Wooster's reputation in general), but the Internet *is* an open resource and you either have to be careful about it or else be aware of the potential compromises. There's a reason many people post here with spam-attack addresses or pseudonyms.

As for whether or not your argument was going in circles or not, you've got people saying it was...so are they wrong or do you want to review your argument to see why people got that impression? Cripes, I'm unclear all the time about things that seem perfectly logical in an argument to me, and sometimes it takes another pair of eyes to say, "Well, you know..."

Well, then I'll ask one last time. How come, then, you attacked James for most of his suggestions, which would clearly imply his vision of overlap, if indeed overlap occurs in ALL music? What was wrong with the overlap he suggested? You never quite explained the heresy in his suggestions, except accusing him of wanting to turn hip-hop more "white" -- which then became "white culture" (as opposed to "white race") which then ended up being defined as "long instrumentals and some such" at one point, which was really bizarre, and sorry to say, created definite loops in your argument, as "long instruemtals" is something quite exclusive from any single music culture, as they exist in practically EVERY musical culture, black and white, etc. I mean, can you not detect the loop and confusion there? I still contend you were arguing in circles. Sorry.

And yes, it does suck when someone looks up your personal info. That's creepy, but it wasn't me doing this, so don't ever fucking mix your emotions regarding that and then take it out on me in the same post, got it?

WAH! Hey, wait!

Well, then I'll ask one last time. How come, then, you attacked James for most of his suggestions, which would clearly imply his vision of overlap, if indeed overlap occurs in ALL music? What was wrong with the overlap he suggested?

I think this question was answered earlier in the thread, near the very beginning: 12 tone based hip-hop with lyrics by W. Whitman would no longer be hip-hop.

You never quite explained the heresy in his suggestions, except accusing him of wanting to turn hip-hop more "white" -- which then became "white culture" (as opposed to "white race") which then ended up being defined as "long instrumentals and some such" at one point, which was really bizarre, and sorry to say, created definite loops in your argument, as "long instruemtals" is something quite exclusive from any single music culture, as they exist in practically EVERY musical culture, black and white, etc. I mean, can you not detect the loop and confusion there? I still contend you were arguing in circles. Sorry.

I can see where there is confusion, but I can explain it to you if you'd like. Certainly I'm not suggesting that all extended instrumental passages are "white culture." (And by the way, "white" always refers to "white culture" unless I'm referring to what I thought most intelligent societies had established was a social construct of "race"). What I meant was that from a ROCK perspective (and there are many "rock" perspectives, but they all are considerably different from hip hop perspectives on music) extended instrumental solos make for interesting art - and that from the beginning, rock was based on instrumental music. I was associating this rockist critique with a specifically culturally WHITE rock perspective - the average music fan of Classic Rock Radio, say. I was arguing that instrumental music does not make hip hop any more groundbreaking, and associating this idea is particularly "white," assuming that the person suggesting it is coming from a rock background - of course if they are coming from say a jazz background, rather than being "white" its being "old." haha.

And yes, it does suck when someone looks up your personal info. That's creepy, but it wasn't me doing this, so don't ever fucking mix your emotions regarding that and then take it out on me in the same post, got it?

I don't think I have done that to you - but you haven't made any personal insults to me that I can remember. UNlike Ned, UNlike the other asshats who were posting before, you argued against my ideas rather than me myself. Thank you.

PS: I don't claim my ideas are faultless, I'm sorry if I've come across that way.

Blount you (and many others) were just as foolish. Somebody needs to lock this shit, it's going in circles (down the toilet).

FIle under: statements that deny themselves. I mean, you have the term hip hop right in there! .....hip hop....would no longer be hip hop. Huh?

PS: I don't claim my ideas are faultless, I'm sorry if I've come across that way.

Like it or not, ddrake, assuming that you were correct in assuming that I had heard no hip-hop and that you had the 'right' idea of what an extremely personal best-of list should be like felt like a pretty damn personal insult to me. You started on the wrong foot and then compounded things as you went, and if you're now realizing that it was a mistake, I'm willing to hear you say as such. Otherwise portraying yourself as the sole wounded victim in this situation is martyrology I'm not interested in.

There's gold in them thar hills!

I have been drunk since August.

haha just because someone says something ISN'T hip hop doesn't make it so!

oooh, someones on the deconstructionist tip.

Ah, where this is where "in my humble opinion" becomes the key phrase. Terms, definitions, values, aesthetics change over time.
Musical history has a nah-sty habit of changing over time (a topic worthy of another thread) Yeah, that concepts sounds really funny NOW.... (Muahaahahahaah)

I was arguing that instrumental music does not make hip hop any more groundbreaking, and associating this idea is particularly "white," assuming that the person suggesting it is coming from a rock background

"in your humble opinion". "in his humble opinion"
"just bringin' it back to the days of IMHO'llin'"

He DID learn! He used the word "asshats"!!!

Of course its "IMHO."

arguable

from the beginning, rock was based on instrumental music

The blues are mainly instrumental?

oooh, someones on the deconstructionist tip.

How so? I fail to see much to do with deconstructionism in the cited comment.

And I appreciate that. It IS personal, however, to assume that you know what someone has or hasn't heard, to assume that you know best what someone honestly likes more or less than something else, and so forth. Those are personal judgments and the net effect is to say, "Well, your opinion is wrong on an objective level, sorry." You couldn't have raised my hackles any more effectively and you couldn't have come across as any more humorless as a result. What I've said before stays just as true now -- don't hang around on a board thinking that you've found something which 'clearly' nobody else knows about or might not have already encountered, and don't draw automatic assumptions from what someone says about themselves or their preferences that somehow 'explains' everything about them. You're only going to get a hell of a lot of grief and most of it will be with damn good reason.

"You're out of yr element donnie."

see ddrake this is the kind of smug *bam* i'm smart me bullshit that gets me pissed. i actuallyhaven't read Blues People. This tells me nothing. This gives me no reason to read it. This is just a pretentious kid dropping names. At least gimme the salient points which have SOMETHING to do with whats being argued here.

You're all up for arguments, supposedly. So John drops you this:

Fine, but that's a very arguable position - not one you can "Bam!" as though revealing the Truth From On High. I'd argue that context limits the capacity for insight, and a fair number of people who think about reading/interpretation would tend to agree.

and what do you reply? what do you reply? you complain about being compared to Geir, instead of responding by arguing your point.

and
But no, I can't really offer pointers any more than anyone else can tell me in frank terms exactly what makes ROCK.
YOU FEEL IT MAN!!!

this was your attempt at a joke...right?

Bam.

Of course its arguable. That's what I'm doing, presenting an argument.

The blues are mainly instrumental?

The beginning of one's conception of the rock aesthetic, i.e. "Rock REALLY began with the beatles!" "Rock began with the Velvet Underground, for me," etc.

How so? I fail to see much to do with deconstructionism in the cited comment.

If he wants to play that way, "hip hop" can mean anything, and this entire thread is pointless. Perhaps "hip hop" refers to all music ever created. In which case my argument is no longer valid. Fuck circles, lets go in a mobius strip.