Brooks wrote:Am probably just more sensitive to images, including the written word, than speech.
Brooks wrote:Meanwhile I heard an Action Bronson number for the first time today. I had him down as a probable goofball/novelty rapper. Actually he's a 90s boombap preservationist, which I suppose is a gimmick of its own. Sounds so identical to Ghostface it's sort of unsettling.
Loving Hail.three1ne wrote:Kano's new singles are fucking full yes!
Hail
New Banger
They've done a couple of tracks together, and when you hear them on the same joint, they really don't, but yeah, that's what I thought when I first heard him. He's tight, yo.Brooks wrote:Meanwhile I heard an Action Bronson number for the first time today. I had him down as a probable goofball/novelty rapper. Actually he's a 90s boombap preservationist, which I suppose is a gimmick of its own.
Sounds so identical to Ghostface it's sort of unsettling.
Facewon wrote:Someone needs to explain drake to me.
I recall some stuff with Jay when he was coming up where I could see the talent. Now I'm just confused. I know I'm old, but I reckon I can understand the popularity of other new school dudes. J Cole is talented enough and has his moments, not my bag but can see why he works. Kendrick is a lyrical monster and his voice is money. Haven't liked his full length, but there's heaps of good stuff amongst the mix tapes.
Drake just seems like a boring Canadian 808s and heartbreak on repeat.
Yet he's gangbusters. Huh?
Gremill wrote:Thanks to whomever mentioned Action Bronson, listening to Mr Wonderful atm and it's fantastic. The production is right up my street.
The trouble isn't so much that Lamar is appearing in commercials — it's that he's selling his revolutionary agenda to a shoe company. Corporations have been co-opting "revolutionary" language for years to sell products. It's a brilliant stratagem on the corporations' part, as it uses active language and taps into fundamental youthful drives for rebellion and liberation. But the outcome is selling things — not changing things. As political scholar Thomas Frank wrote in his 1997 book The Conquest of Cool, consuming is "redefined as 'rebellion'" in order to "transform the myriad petty tyrannies of economic life — all the complaints about conformity, oppression, bureaucracy, meaninglessness ... into rationales for consuming."
Facewon wrote:kendrick selling ReebokCould have gone in the ills thread too.The trouble isn't so much that Lamar is appearing in commercials — it's that he's selling his revolutionary agenda to a shoe company. Corporations have been co-opting "revolutionary" language for years to sell products. It's a brilliant stratagem on the corporations' part, as it uses active language and taps into fundamental youthful drives for rebellion and liberation. But the outcome is selling things — not changing things. As political scholar Thomas Frank wrote in his 1997 book The Conquest of Cool, consuming is "redefined as 'rebellion'" in order to "transform the myriad petty tyrannies of economic life — all the complaints about conformity, oppression, bureaucracy, meaninglessness ... into rationales for consuming."
MattyJ wrote:I guess because he went in a different direction subject matter wise to others at the time, talking about his feelings on relationships etc, as well as constructing great rhymes. He didn't pretend to be someone he isn't, was open about shit and didn't have some thug/tough guy persona. It was refreshing to me... Plus I like the mixture of rapping and singing. I can see why some don't get it but I like him a lot.Facewon wrote:Someone needs to explain drake to me. I recall some stuff with Jay when he was coming up where I could see the talent. Now I'm just confused. I know I'm old, but I reckon I can understand the popularity of other new school dudes. J Cole is talented enough and has his moments, not my bag but can see why he works. Kendrick is a lyrical monster and his voice is money. Haven't liked his full length, but there's heaps of good stuff amongst the mix tapes. Drake just seems like a boring Canadian 808s and heartbreak on repeat. Yet he's gangbusters. Huh?
"We can no longer sit idly by while the powers that be tell us how to live, how to think, how to act, all the while writing about so-and-so not caring about us," Lamar says in the commercial. They're solid lines, well-aligned with the message of the record. But in speaking them, Lamar becomes the voice of one of those "powers that be" telling us "how to act" — buy expensive sneakers, that's how you communicate your personality and vision of the world. After a record concerned largely with how he should use his celebrity influence, this seems a wrong turn.
It's a message antithetical to the one on To Pimp a Butterfly. So many songs on To Pimp a Butterfly are dedicated to downplaying the importance of material goods. On "Wesley's Theory" a satirical and sinister embodiment of Uncle Sam encourages Lamar to buy more material goods because he "deserves it." On "For Sale?" Lucifer himself (embodied by "Lucy") offers Lamar millions in material goods, effectively in exchange for his soul. The record, though, is meant to show that none of those things bring Lamar any sense of fulfillment.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!