Worst Genre of Music?

Well how about a compromise: 'most of'.

Er no. Very little music has flown into the face of accepted moral behaviour. Usually there is an item of two that is deemed controversial and then it is quickly assimilated Borg like and the best stuff within that genre wins out. Music doesn't often exist at an angle to a culture for long it usually complements it.

Most of the stuff since the sixties that has flown in the face of accepted moral behaviour hasn't been very good. ie "Kop killer" is crap. "Smack my bitch up" which cased an outrage is as much of a crock of shit as is the idea of hitting women.

Indeed from the eighties onwards I think I can make a very strong case that the vast majority of great music,painting, literature and film has not flown in the face of accepted moral behaviour. The few items that have caused moral outrage - exceedingly violent films, death metal droning on about the devil etc have been wank of the first order. (Comedy however did produce some iconclasts of real value.) In the meantime artists not offending the masses from Elvis Costello to Willie Nelson to Dolly Parton to the late great Barry White have produced works that will live on and on.
 
Er no. Very little music has flown into the face of accepted moral behaviour. Usually there is an item of two that is deemed controversial and then it is quickly assimilated Borg like and the best stuff within that genre wins out. Music doesn't often exist at an angle to a culture for long it usually complements it.

Most of the stuff since the sixties that has flown in the face of accepted moral behaviour hasn't been very good. ie "Kop killer" is crap. "Smack my bitch up" which cased an outrage is as much of a crock of shit as is the idea of hitting women.

Indeed from the eighties onwards I think I can make a very strong case that the vast majority of great music,painting, literature and film has not flown in the face of accepted moral behaviour. The few items that have caused moral outrage - exceedingly violent films, death metal droning on about the devil etc have been wank of the first order. (Comedy however did produce some iconclasts of real value.) In the meantime artists not offending the masses from Elvis Costello to Willie Nelson to Dolly Parton to the late great Barry White have produced works that will live on and on.


We're just not going to agree on this one. I'd cite Elvis, the Beatles, Serge Gainsbourg, Punk Rock, Disco, Prince, Rap and so on and on and on as artists and movements which have frightened and confused the moralists. My point is not so much that music has to outrage to stand the test of time (smack my bitch up is indeed attention-seeking crap, but that's an utterly forgettable blip on the radar), but that one of popular music's greatest strengths is its ability to shock. It's worth remembering that the jazz explosion of the 1920s was terrifying to a great deal of people who worried about what was happening to the moral fibre of American youth.

I would agree with you that nothing much has shocked since the 80s, but that fits with what I'm saying about rap. It's really been one of the few truly adventurous, honest and often downright strange movements since punk. Hence it will offend people's taste.
 
I'd also add that people's disgust at and dismissal of hip-hop probably isn't all that dissimilar to people's reactions to punk rock in 1976/7. Before it entered the shopping malls and became standardised and safe.
 
Typical metalhead

Yes indeed, sucka.

I have been a Metalhead sinse 1990 and my faith in the music is stronger than ever before. But then again with you not into Metal, you wouldn't understand about things such as loyalty, devotion and camaraderie between your fellow Metalheads.

Metal music is anti-sissy music. It seperates the men from the girly boys.

*****
one after one by the star dogged moon,
Too quick for groan or sigh
Each turned his face with a ghastly pang
And cursed me with his eye
Four times fifty living men
(and I heard nor sigh nor groan)
With heavy thump, a lifeless lump,
They dropped down one by one.

*****
Metal's king back then and still is to this day.
Others imitate or challenge, but it never goes away.

*****

Fuck the rest, Metal is best.
 
Teachers nationwide are using rap -- the street-savvy, pop-locking, rhyming creations of Shakur, Geto Boys, Run-DMC and others -- to teach history and English. Some colleges are even training future educators to weave rap into high school lessons.

"In order for students to understand anyone else's poetic language, they have to first understand their own," Camangian said.

To some parents and teachers, the idea of mentioning Grandmaster Flash in the same breath as T.S. Eliot is wack. They reject the notion that rap, with its raw language and vivid depictions of violence, has anything in common with literature.


RAP CAN SHED LIGHT
But those who use it to teach say rap can be intellectually provocative, shedding light on the grand themes of love, war and oppression in much the same way as classic fiction. As a teaching tool, they liken rap to the songs of Bob Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel, used by an earlier generation of teachers.

In Camangian's south Los Angeles classroom on a recent afternoon, students read the lyrics from a Shakur song, "Shorty Wanna Be a Thug." The verse describes a man's internal struggle to remain virtuous while a devil-like figure tempts him toward immorality and loose women:

I tell you it's a cold world, stay in school.

You tell me it's a man's world, play the rules

and fade fools, 'n break rules until we major.

Blaze up, gettin' with hos through my pager.

Camangian, 28, asked the class to compare the song to a speech said to have been delivered in Virginia in 1712 by a British slave owner. In the speech, whose authenticity has been questioned, Willie Lynch offers advice on preventing slave rebellions and urges that slaves be pitted against one another -- men versus women, light-skinned versus dark, young versus old.

Toure Eagans, 16, said Shakur's lyrics showed how the "slave mentality" persists in disrespectful language.

Shakur "is reinforcing what Willie Lynch said. He's putting the man against the woman. It's dehumanizing them," he said.

"So it's the same thing they did to the slaves? Take a powerful man and turn him into a slave?" Camangian asked.


WORDS CAN CAUSE PAIN
Another student pointed out that some African American students address one another with racial epithets, without thinking about the pain such words can cause.

"Yes, Willie Lynch said slavery will carry on for hundreds of years, and we still (perpetuate) it everyday in our language," she said.

After class, Elyse Bryant, 16, said studying hip-hop helps students define a role for themselves in their neighborhoods and the wider world.

"We'll sit in class and really think about what (rappers) are saying," she said. "They talk about what's going on in the country, from the government to the streets."

Lisa Moore, 16, said hip-hop speaks directly to young people in a way that classic texts cannot.

"We need to learn about Shakespeare, but hip-hop is history too," she said. "As far as Shakespeare goes, we can't relate to that. We can relate to what's going on now."


FOULMOUTHED RAP LYRICS
Hip-hop has become an object of serious study on college campuses. But in high school and lower grades, hip-hop is a more delicate subject. Crenshaw Principal Isaac Hammond said some parents complained last year that their children had been exposed to foulmouthed rap lyrics in class. Hammond now requires Camangian to edit out the strongest language.

Shelby Steele, a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, said: "I would be outraged to find out my child is being subjected to Tupac Shakur in an academic classroom."

Steele, a political essayist who taught college English for nearly 25 years,

said students learn rap lyrics on their own. In school, he said, "they need to be taught great literature."

Two education professors -- Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade of UCLA and Ernest Morrell of Michigan State University -- say students need both.

The two designed and taught an English course at Oakland High School in which students studied rap lyrics in tandem with classic works. Duncan-Andrade and Morrell reported the results in July in the English Journal, published by the National Council of Teachers of English.


HIP-HOP AS A BRIDGE
"Hip-hop can be used as a bridge linking the seemingly vast span between the streets and the world of academics," they wrote. At the same time, they said, rap is literature, "a worthy subject of study in its own right."

Duncan-Andrade and Morrell say rap lyrics can be used "to teach irony, tone,

diction and point of view" and can be "analyzed for theme, motif, plot and character development."

A sample lesson plan they offer to high school teachers calls for comparing "Kubla Khan," by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, with "If I Ruled the World," by rapper Nas; Eliot's "Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" with "The Message," by Grandmaster Flash; and "Immigrants in Our Own Land," by modern poet Jimmy Santiago Baca, with "The World Is a Ghetto," by Geto Boys.

Their students have noticed parallels between Eliot and Grandmaster Flash, the researchers wrote. Students found that both artists speak of a "wasteland" of physical and moral decay in their societies.

James Dickson, 23, a high school English teacher in Madison, Miss., uses "The Rose That Grew From Concrete," a book of poems that Shakur wrote before he became a rap star. The collection, which is devoid of obscenities, features verses about love, loneliness, his mother, death and the Black Panthers.

Dickson said he often compares Shakur's poem "In the Depths of Solitude" to works by William Blake, the 18th century English poet, because both address how people struggle with internal conflicts.
 
I listen to a bit of almost everything. I even understand people hating on country even though it composes about 30 percent of my collection. Alot of the newer country/pop does suck ass. Rap has been horrible for about 10-15 years for the most part. Most music has suffered from the death of the Album. If it gets on radio it usualy sucks. Most of my favorite songs are old album cuts.
 
We're just not going to agree on this one. I'd cite Elvis, the Beatles, Serge Gainsbourg, Punk Rock, Disco, Prince, Rap and so on and on and on as artists and movements which have frightened and confused the moralists. My point is not so much that music has to outrage to stand the test of time (smack my bitch up is indeed attention-seeking crap, but that's an utterly forgettable blip on the radar), but that one of popular music's greatest strengths is its ability to shock. It's worth remembering that the jazz explosion of the 1920s was terrifying to a great deal of people who worried about what was happening to the moral fibre of American youth.

I would agree with you that nothing much has shocked since the 80s, but that fits with what I'm saying about rap. It's really been one of the few truly adventurous, honest and often downright strange movements since punk. Hence it will offend people's taste.

Why would you cite these artists? Have you listened to, "Meet the Beatles" or "Please Please Me." I'll be dammed if I can see any cause for moral outrage. They seem to be all about kissing and holding hands. Likewise Elvis Presley who, when he wasn't singing gospel, wasn't angling for the overthrow of western civilization via a manifesto knocked out by Lieber and Stoller.

The original point was about flying in the face of accepted moral behaviour. Elvis and the Beatles would never have made it to second base if they were advocating anything but staunchly middle class values. They were conformists of the first order - give or take a haircut or two. Later on they did say one or two things that upset various religiously inclined constituencies (who because they operate from a fixed point ie the bible are always going to be upset) but even in this they were adhering to very popular, well entrenched positions. (Lots of people wanted peace but most couldn't get the week off work to sit in the Amsterdam Hilton.)

There seems to be a confusion between notoriety and moral standards. The outrage around Elvis Presley was more to do with how the audience was reacting. The early "outrageous' Elvis never once uttered a phrase to a journalist that couldn't be repeated in church.

I can't think of any songs by Elvis or the first five or six Beatles albums that would contain anything shocking at all. And that was my point, there really is very little music that is shocking in and of itself and that which uses shock value as part of the effect is usually crap.
 
My favorite genre of music is hip-hop/rap!


The worst genre of music is...........hip-hop/rap! As mush as I love rap, there is so many bad rappers out there, it's killing the image of hip-hop. Some of the worst music I hear these days come from rap, but some of best come rap. One of the best things about rap is that it's really easy to do and sing along to, but it's also it's down fall because you get rappers like Soulja Boy mixed with youtube.

Even with all the crap I hear these days I'll still be a fan, as long guys like Common say in the business. :D
 
Why would you cite these artists? Have you listened to, "Meet the Beatles" or "Please Please Me." I'll be dammed if I can see any cause for moral outrage. They seem to be all about kissing and holding hands. Likewise Elvis Presley who, when he wasn't singing gospel, wasn't angling for the overthrow of western civilization via a manifesto knocked out by Lieber and Stoller.

The original point was about flying in the face of accepted moral behaviour. Elvis and the Beatles would never have made it to second base if they were advocating anything but staunchly middle class values. They were conformists of the first order - give or take a haircut or two. Later on they did say one or two things that upset various religiously inclined constituencies (who because they operate from a fixed point ie the bible are always going to be upset) but even in this they were adhering to very popular, well entrenched positions. (Lots of people wanted peace but most couldn't get the week off work to sit in the Amsterdam Hilton.)

There seems to be a confusion between notoriety and moral standards. The outrage around Elvis Presley was more to do with how the audience was reacting. The early "outrageous' Elvis never once uttered a phrase to a journalist that couldn't be repeated in church.

I can't think of any songs by Elvis or the first five or six Beatles albums that would contain anything shocking at all. And that was my point, there really is very little music that is shocking in and of itself and that which uses shock value as part of the effect is usually crap.


You're right that shock for shock's sake is awful. You're also right about Elvis and the Beatles being, essentially marketable, white, pretty boys (Ringo excepted).

But I'm not talking here about any 'bigger than jesus' quips, or a rich rock star's bloated blatherings. None of that was about the music anyway. I'm talking about the very real sense of shock that, for instance, those early Elvis performances caused to a great deal of people. What might sound quaint and soft about it now is down to the institutionalisation of it, once people became accustomed to it.

We're coming from different angles here, you see. Music which goes out of its way to shock is just puerile and is not gonna age well (Eminem, Slipknot). But the best hip-hop does not fit this mould. It shocks in a different way - merely in its language, its style, its brashness does it seem so confusing to so many people right now.

Perhaps a better example would have been Little Richard. Or Bo Diddley. Or David Bowie. They were alien, new, bizarre, and to many people frightening. They might be canonical now, but that's because taste has finally caught up with them.

When I talk about shock and outrage, it doesn't have to be explicitly spoken. That's just crass and crap. I'm talking about a deeper-rooted shock to people's tastes and sensibilities. And yes, I think it's a question of upsetting morality. So when you say there's very little music that genuinely shocks, you're probably right. But that which does is the stuff that really matters.
 
for me I'm not a big fan of death metal
 
Rap and its other forms--namely Dutch Rap, Rock Rap, Bhangra Rap(get to hear those here in England) and everything associated with lousy big arsed girls and weirdly gold jewellery wearing men
 
I'd also add that people's disgust at and dismissal of hip-hop probably isn't all that dissimilar to people's reactions to punk rock in 1976/7. Before it entered the shopping malls and became standardised and safe.

What Disgust? It's the best selling Music Style on this Planet!
Punk was never this successful - and it was far more influential...

I hate Hip Hop/Rap. I also hate Country,German Folk Music and Techno/House.
 
I hate rnb and I hate Pop Rap and I hate that Hip-Pop shit!!!!

It's sad to see that so many people dislike Hip-Hop in here cuz Hardcore Hip-Hop is in my opinion the best genre of music there is!
 
What Disgust? It's the best selling Music Style on this Planet!
Punk was never this successful - and it was far more influential...

I hate Hip Hop/Rap. I also hate Country,German Folk Music and Techno/House.


Lots of people hate it. Lots of people love it.

Rap's popularity is a testament to its impact. So is the fact that so many people despise it.
 
Top