I’m continuing the conversation from last week where I evaluated the use of Black gospel choirs to elevate the songs of non-Black artists. I haven’t decided whether it’s an all-out appropriation, some appreciation or callous apathy on their part but I suspect it’s a tradition that will continue. It will continue because some of us don’t have any cultural or racial pride and think of ourselves less than. Except when we’re validated by others (esp. whites). Even if that means we abdicate our musical heritage to anybody who shows an appreciation for early Aretha Franklin. We forget it’s the use of a music borne from pain, suffering and survival from experiences unique to African-Americans and part of our never-ending (but lax on acknowledging) contributions to the good ol’ USA.

Which brings me to the second conversation in this series about white artists who appropriate their version of the Black (American) experience and sell it back to us. Now the question that needs to be asked is why are those artists given a blanket credibility and support when we won’t even support actual Black artists who aren’t putting out what I’m calling XXX Porn & Warfare set to a beat? I think I already answered my question but I’m putting it out there for consideration anyway…..

I recall when Amy Winehouse’s 2nd CD “Back to Black” was released and people were falling all over themselves to declare it the best thing since sliced bread. Now bear in mind that I actually like Winehouse – as well as her 1st CD “Frank”. I lived in the UK when “Frank” was released so I was already familiar with her as an artist, but hardly anyone knew who she was Stateside. The 2nd CD got this huge push by her label and suddenly she was on every trendy/cool/buzz list.

Back to Amy – who was very cleverly packaged and being foreign added to the exotic nature of her music –  which is a retooling of Black music from the ’60s. As clever as it may be considered it’s still a devoid of the heart and soul of what made the original music so great. Any approximation is but a copy no matter how nicely it’s been packaged. I was also troubled by her chaotic personal life being made fodder for the press, one for her own safety, but secondly because I felt it was being used to sell more units. There were underhanded jokes tying her to Whitney Houston and her own struggles with drugs as if the dysfunction was appropriate. Note the requisite use of Black backing musicians and guests to add that credibility factor – but only in contrast to when it pertains to white artists.

Justin Timberfakelake is another artist who was benefited greatly from his Black alliances. With him there’s an added twist in that Black males in the industry wanted to work with him and sought him out to expand their own influence as tastemakers. He’s used Black male choreographers, songwriters, producers, et al to craft his sound and image. It’s when you evaluate his relations with Black female artists in the music biz that you see the advantages afforded him as a white male.

I have two words for you: Janet Jackson. Her career has NOT been the same since that Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction while he’s gotten off scott free. I’m still pissed off about it and I’m not even that big a Jackson fan. I can easily spot the hypocrisy though and know that if it had been Madonna and Kayne West for example she would’ve gotten flack for her association with a Black man but her career wouldn’t have been so negatively impacted. As I featured the “Like A Prayer” song in my first post, that video was considered controversial for many reasons but there was never any question about who was in charge. When Pepsi got complaints about her frolicking with a Black male saint she laughed all the way the bank.

Now I could go into more history of soul music, the discrimination, the way it was derogatorily called “race” music, the emergence of Motown and “blue-eyed” soul but that would require several detailed posts and there are numerous books that lay it all out if you take a Music History course. Suffice it to say this “going Black” wasn’t invented in the past few years by a handful of 20-something artists.

Back in the day you had the Righteous Brothers, Buddy Holly and Elvis were castigated for singing Ni**er music and radio was very segregated. Of course if you paid attention to the movies Dreamgirls (itself an appropriation of the Motown history with the Supremes) or even Cadillac Records it touches on the practice of white artists who remade the soul records of the day and not credit the artists or pay the writers. That’s the tip of the iceberg by the way.

Even the all-hallowed Beach Boys ripped off Chuck Berry. Sing along to Surfin’ USA and realize it sounds just like Sweet Little Sixteen – and why. It was outright thievery that they had to be sued and years later forced to pay the man for his work. Led Zeppelin liberally borrowed from blues artists…as did the Stones and even the Beatles. So why are these white (male) groups held in the highest regard and paid handsomely when so many of the musicians they “gave tribute to” died broke and forgotten? Things that make you go hmmm.

I’ll wrap this up with an aside that there are white artists whom I believe have the appropriate knowledge, respect and musical chops to stand on their own merits. They just happen to make soulful music. Hall & Oates, Teena Marie, Michael McDonald and even Robin Thicke. This list isn’t meant to be all-encompassing. These artists are not trying to spray on a fake tan and claim to be “one of us” – nor should they.

I have just been troubled by this most recent emergence of white artists, particularly from the UK who are young and have the benefit of skilled marketers at their disposal. Cough **Duffy** Cough. The Police was retooling reggae to an international audience 20+ years ago and are still widely respected. I may listen to these newer artists’ music but with an awareness of the struggles of the actual Black artists who may be trying to compete in the same genre but are NOT getting the full court press roll-out. I have to be selective in who I decide to financially support by purchasing their products or seeing them live.

You know for every Adele there’s an Estelle who had to move to the US and get her name attached to US rappers like Kanye West to get adequate label interest. At some point even she lamented about it. She was justified because Winehouse had been nominated for a Music of Black Origin Award against other artists who were in fact of Black origin. Like who you will because music is subjective, but be aware of where it came from and who’s reaping the rewards of previous generations’ sacrifices. It’s why rock and jazz aren’t considered “Black” anymore and why some idiot frat boy wannabe like Asher Roth can rap about how cool it is being white and lazy and get away with it. Once we’ve given away our heritage and legacy and what will we have left?

Ok, I wasn’t trying to make this post a full-on charge of cultural appropriation. Though the question begs to be asked: When non-Black artists use Black gospel choirs in popular music does it convey levity to their songs? Or as Dave Chapelle would say, “When Keeping It Real Goes Wrong.” Is it blatant swiping of “Black cred” or something else? I also think we should consider the borrowing of “spirituality” by employing a choir.

I want to specify that’s it’s African-Americans who are descendants of slaves that created this music. That’s why listening to other Black artists of different ethnicities and cultures and who hail from other countries aren’t quite able to capture that sound unless they’re trying to imitate it. Why isn’t it considered “cool” and “different” i.e. as VALID when Blacks of different ethnicities collaborate on projects? We’re not all coming from the same place or perspective even if our skin shade is similar.

So I’m going to post some videos because examples are sometimes more effective in conveying a point than mere words. I also thought Paul Simon’s and Peter Gabriel’s use of African musicians on their biggest hit albums as well as Sting adding Cheb Mami for that “exotic” flavor are applicable examples. Actually we can look at Sting’s earlier solo work with his use of Black jazz musicians as if a Marsalis could be considered a mere “sideman”. This conversation should continue as we deconstruct the history of Black musicians not being paid for their work and having copyrights stolen.

What we’re really talking about is an imbalance in power, tilted toward the “white musical genius”. Who’s aiding and abetting these artists? It’s not all racism but also a refusal by many Blacks (in the US) to expand their musical repertoire. The formatting of R&B stations typically excluded numerous Black artists like Lenny Kravitz, Tracy Chapman, Joan Armatrading and others. Why was this tolerated by listeners when they had artists like Teena Marie, Hall & Oates, Queen and others on heavy rotation?

Now there’s one cultural exchange I would not put in this category. There was a genuine collaboration between Shakira and Wyclef for the song “Hips Don’t Lie”, but I wonder if that’s because it was a “woman’s” project and not the other way around?

Our primer will be contrasting/comparing Alvin Ailey’s seminal piece Revelations which uses three songs for each section: Fix Me Jesus, Rock-A-My-Soul and Wade In the Water.

Then we move into the use of that energy/spirit into these songs. Which are good by the way.

Then things start to get a little questionable. Skip to 2:25 for the Bedingfield track.

Now he’s giving credit here but I seem to recall some legal action by the musicians against Paul Simon. I am also aware of the extensive charity work of Gabriel. I also would love to be a fly on the wall at Rosanna Arquette’s house to have two songs that are considered classics written about her! The other being by the group Toto, fyi.

I was almost done but had to add Madonna. We could deconstruct her trip through the rainbow tribe as an entirely separate post. Including her African Baby Rescue Plan. But do we really want to go there? Nothing says post-racial like a white woman dancing in front of burning crosses and catching the Holy Spirit!

******

I think this might be a good idea for a series of conversations. This is all coming to me via stream of consciousness right now. Stay Tuned for Part 2: When White Artists Go Black and Part 3: When Black Artists Flip the Script Part 4: Black Female Artists of Substance Being Ignored Part 5: The Responsibility of the (Sometimes) Buying Public. Ok, I think the well needs replenishing now.

Ok, I am pissed off but should I be? Nichelle Gainer first posted a link on Twitter a few days ago to alert her followers about the New York Times article featuring the Mrs. O blog.  It’s a creation by ad agency Bartel Bogle & Hagerty not a personal blog created by Michelle Obama supporters. Since it’s a business venture it should be listed as a .com NOT a .org! I read Clutch, Pop Sugar, Glam, Daily Candy and other blogs providing Michelle Obama coverage that are part of a media or publishing group. They weren’t trying to pretend to be a small individual blog though. 

Mrs. O was able to quickly saturate itself across the blogosphere when it was published following DNC week and the interest for all things Obama ran 24/7. It immediately stood out as there are few outlets of simple reporting on Michelle Obama and her style choices in a respectful manner (no talk of her body or her hair or her trails and tribulations). It seemed like a nice addition to Michelle Obama Watch and Black Snob as well as 55 Secret Street and others, but it did come long after these other blogs had started and after Barack Obama won the nomination. 

Those blogs are the creative endeavors of Black female professionals and their coverage of Michelle specifically was to ensure a counterbalance to the initial media attacks by the white-controlled media at the beginning of the primary. The ‘official’ Black press had also been slow to respond and many of us felt personally protective of Michelle due to the historical attacks on the image of all Black women. Even Iceberg Slim’s political blog, This Week With Barack Obama took up the cause. We had to when the “liberal” media and so-called progressives with their never-ending satires (that only reused the same racist imagery they claimed to be opposed to) compelled us to respond.  If not for the efforts of these bloggers, the Mrs. O blog would not be as successful as it’s been.

Zag got into the fashion blogging business in September, after Mary Tomer, a 27-year-old account planner at Bartle Bogle in New York, hatched the idea for the blog. She noticed Mrs. Obama’s style during the Democratic convention, yet could not find information on what she wore.

She decided to create a Web site, which she described as “a central resource for tracking her style and providing as much designer information and commentary as possible.”

It’s not about the blog per se. It’s about the support and traffic they’ve received from us while not clarifying themselves. Surely Ms. Tomer read Danielle Belton’s site, Black Snob which had been doing this for months. Way before the President-Elect had won the nomination. Must it ALWAYS be about MONETIZING and MONOPOLIZING REVENUE? It’s a slap in the face of all the bloggers who’ve been doing similar work at cost (if that) in addition to their other career endeavors.

A few advertising dollars does not equal a full-blown career with benefits. They have a deal with Sugar Inc., will be selling merchandise and have a book deal as well! They have the Black female blogs listed on their blog roll – and vice versa! Surely no one is going to dispute it was Black women championing Michelle Obama long before it became ‘safe’ and ‘popular’ for everybody else to do so!  B B & H doesn’t want to be part of the pack it wants to lead the pack. 

The site’s creators will have to tread lightly as they try to make money on the site, because audiences want blogs and social networks to be conversation tools, not marketing vessels. “Particularly with the Obama mystique, anything that smacks of commercialism will blow up,” 

There was a definite intention by the agency to make it appear like a small individual effort and not part of a larger media entity. Had they just been clear about that in the first place I wouldn’t be writing about this. I think this is a larger issue that deserves discussion here. A company that capitalizes on the uniqueness of having our first Black First Family for their profit should be examined. Especially when independent bloggers made it amenable for them to do so.

This has historical connotations. If anyone has read the Cadillac Records film script it mentions but glosses over how the owners of the real-life Chess Records owners bilked money from their artists. How the Beach Boys stole Chuck Berry’s music and had to be sued to give proper credit and funds. It’s the continuation of cultural misappropriation by outsiders for their own profit. Like with music and everything else we do that’s great but either stolen, maligned or ignored. 

Is this just business as usual, where the person with the most contacts wins? Are we supposed to be okay with the obvious advantages a large ad agency has and the subterfuge involved? The historic head start those that continue to benefit from systematic racism have? 

Are people just slow on the uptake and failed to build adequate relationships and strategies? I am certain any number of the bloggers I listed above would take the time to write a Michelle Obama fashion book with a deal in place. Was it the responsibility of individuals to go after one and some people are just a day late and a dollar short? That’s assuming they even wanted to. It’s not as if there can’t be numerous books, but I also can’t help but wonder how many submissions would’ve been dismissed. It feels as if the rug’s been pulled out from underneath.

Perhaps I’m taking this personally, but as a Black woman how can I not? Many of us use the blogosphere to reach out to each other and build networks and relationships. It was a way to bypass gatekeepers who aren’t interested in equality and diversity. Look at your nightly news shows, your Sunday morning political shows and who do you see in front of the camera? A quick search who are in the towers, holding the keys will reveal people who don’t always have our best interests in mind. 

Barack got my support early on due to his stance against the Iraq war but my vote was largely based on his choice of wife. We were there defending Michelle in public at times when he lapsed big time! Although we still have to see what Michelle does to benefit the lives of Black women and children in tangible ways, symbolically she has done wonders to elevate the status of many of us. Now the continuation of that is up to us, but it was a huge and welcome boost all the same. 

This website was a johnny come lately to the efforts of many of us who created or contributed to blogs and in the media throughout the entire campaign on our own. The content is not that impressive – in fact I’ve noticed a decrease in quality and the tone is somewhat detached and clinical in its precision. That’s where the purpose reveals itself and its limitations are exposed. It’s the difference between writing a story you love and writing a story based on an agency pitch for market share. It’s not a labor of love or excellent but a cheap approximation. 

There are some of us more than ready to create avenues for ourselves and build partnerships given access to the right situations. The good thing is now that this has been revealed those of us who have ideas had better bust a move, get an agent, submit that 1st draft and toot our horns because that ship has pulled anchor.