but that does remind me of this haaa:

http://barthel.tumblr.com/post/135469728/stryker-america-where-we-always-think-things

who decides what the ‘type of music timbo makes’ is? i mean, your argument can just be reduced to “knowing stuff is good” then I agree. But that doesnt feel v controversial to me. But I bet you the writer is way less familiar w/ the history of rap, even tho he talks about rap in the piece, than either of us. im just pointing out an example of how a perspective from ‘outside’ can enliven discussion, that insight doesnt require you be steeped in the history. Because the reality of history is that its an infinite playing field & our assumptions of what historical points are ‘important’ is constantly up for debate & analysis.

This isnt excusing bad or lazy writing, where the writer makes assumptions about history; i think what you’re arguing, though, is less “you need to know rap history” than “you need to be a good writer & thinker who has some self-awareness that you should be careful about universalizing your own POV”

Not sure if this is part of the issue anybody else has with this approach, but much of what makes Weiss’ interest sorta of obnoxious is that he can’t only celebrate the rapper he thinks is good, but must indeed devalue the one he doesn’t think is good. Less for valid reasons or even reasons he validates but simply just because. As if why Gucci or Wacka suck is just inherently obvious. It’s not a contrast for reasons or values, not a critical/aesthetic “this one over this one” thing, but “this is more like most other stuff and so it’s better”.

This is also why this post should not be seen as negative or somehow full of “shots”…because it’s Weiss and others who set up these “this guy is the worst, this guy is the best” which is wrongheaded and offensive to anyone who cares about these rappers.

Sure, but the Professor or the Boss aren’t going to be like “hey less knowledgeable person – take charge of the class, make an important executive decision about the future of our company.” Again, this post isn’t an attack on casual fans who don’t have extensive knowledge of the music they listen to and talk about, this is a commentary on professional critics.

David – what about that post makes you think the author doesn’t have a solid historical grasp on the type of music Timbo makes?

And Noz, since your tone, whether you like it or not, is chip-on-the-shoulder, better than everybody–something you’ve rightfully critiqued me for–you come off like a teacher/educator, which is fine. But indeed, the way educators broaden their understanding, complicate their “Teaching” is by paying attention to people who don’t know as much as them. Speak to say, anybody who speaks to an audience–professor, boss, even a like customer service rep–and they’ll tell you much of their insights stems from people less “knowledgeable”. Same with rap. Especially a blog that has an interest in populism.

And in terms of rap and a blog like this, the populist audience is indeed, readers/writers of the New Yorker, etc and not the nerds arguing here or the guys you ride the bus with that know why Wacka Flocka sorta rules and still bump Field Mob or Pastor Troy CDs.

Lastly, I think you could easily counteract the Doc Zeus-es of the comments fray by implicating yourself in this labyrinth. Not calling you out, but you have a bad habit of dropping stuff you once bigged-up maybe because dudes have fallen off but more because everyone else is writing about them–I first read of Charles Hamilton here, Wale became interesting to me here (though not for long)–and it’s very similar to the fleeting hipster love critique you make, just flipped inside out.

Implicating One’s Self in the Labyrinth: I can say that even in my far smaller readership, influence, and chance to write for real publications, I sit down before any pitch and think, “Is what I’m saying here important? How am I adding to the dialogue? How am I counter-acting the norms of the publications, etc.”

im not saying its ‘purer’ — im just saying that insight can come from all kinds of places & a lot of times the internal debates a community has end up becoming an ugly kind of orthodoxy w/out perspective. Not saying ‘outsider criticism’ is purer — but it CAN be. (And, like Time mag, it can be way way shittier).

I mean, there have been plenty of times ive been humbled by the writing of ppl who didnt consider themselves ‘heads’ who wrote about hip hop in a way that made me question my assumptions about the genre. An example is the way ppl talk about Timbaland — I’ve linked you to one of my favorite pieces on him before, which is by a writer who does cover hip-hop occasionally, but primarily discusses other genres. In this case, I found his analysis of timbaland’s work 100x more interesting & informative than a hundred hip hop heads repeating how every timbo beat is “next level” — because he looks at timbo beats as an evolving pop phenomenon, not in the lineage of like dj premier, but of other pop producers: http://getphysical.blogspot.com/2004/06/slight-detour.html

thats just one example … i would have to think on some more.