Imperious Entertainment

...
written by He Said , July 06, 2007

I feel you. But I also feel that within the black community, there is such an emphasis upon not going against the grain (moreso than in other ethnic groups) that it takes a lot more for an individual to step out and do something foreign. Add to that the risk of losing all or part of your cache in being an established brand like the Sean John or Phat Farm, and I can understand (but not necessarily agree with) why they stay within the lines. I mean, how many people really felt Common's "Electric Circus"? Furthermore, an awful lot of "new" ways to present our culture have been done by others. So then you run into the new stigma of being labeled a "biter" or "wannabe" of the other culture...

In all...it's complicated for us, and I'm glad you brought it up.

...
written by wild cowgirl , July 08, 2007

...and the crowd goes wild!
well done

...
written by cuzzo , July 09, 2007

I think this is a very good point and one that has not really been fleshed out in the black community.

I think on a whole-definitely a generalization, we suffer from a conservatism that stems back to the days of our enslavement. Images of us even at HBCU's such as Morehouse, calling ourselves "the black ivy league", and other such comparisons, is a painful reminder that in many ways, we are still trying to emulate our "slave-masters".

I think this has much to do with the cause of our inability to openly and willingly accept new forms of expression in the Black community, and when we do, we are often slow to accept them.

Jimi Hendrix would often be disappointed after seeing only white people at his concerts, yet he has been without doubt voted the best rock guitarist ever lived by all races. Why could the white people accept it so easily and not us?

Simple... White people didn't have 400 years of slavery and racial abuse in this country to deal with...

Self-hatred will cause a people to hide difference, while self-love will cause that same people to celebrate the very thing that they once said they hated.

Good point. Thanks for the plug too!

...
written by cuzzo , July 09, 2007

Oh yeah,

You brought up a good point by bringing up the question of form in terms of the visual aesthetic.

One of the ways that the slave traders further deracinated us from our culture was the mechanical brainwashing and assimilation of us into their visual aesthetic by constantly showing us (and this of course is still done today) images of the european aesthetic, a certain aesthetic, being celebrated.

I say "european aesthetic" here because Beyonce, although Black, could be seen as a component of the european aesthetic. This is not a racial categorization, but a cultural one.

Said another way, traditional African design stresses function over form, while a eurocentric aesthetic will stress form over function.

For example, here in this day and age, if a dress looks good, that's enough to celebrate it and try to sell it. In a traditional African aesthetic, the spiritual significance of the dress is valued over its visual aesthetic. No matter how beautiful it is, if it is deemed useless to the community, it is worthless.

Perhaps this is another source of our hesitation in embracing new forms. Many of us go to church and celebrate religion, but are without a clear spiritual purpose. Meaning, answering the question of "why am I on this planet?" or "what am I here to do?" is a question often left unanswered in our community, yet this was traditionally the centerpiece of our people. It is the spiritual answer to this question that informed the construction of the pyramids at Giza and other African feats of genius.

But without function or a clear defined purpose, our form will continue to be a formless comparison to our former masters.

*note again this is a generalization, we DEFINITELY are a creative people, but again like you said on the whole very conservative in this country and slow to accept aesthetic change when the question of form is brought up...

...
written by Carlin , July 10, 2007

Very nice Monique. Keep linking to your writings, I really enjoyed this. I prob say this everytime

...
written by The Talented 10th AKA The Imperious Jewel , July 10, 2007

I would wonder where the line would be between "creative self reinvention" and an image that is embarrassing to the race. I mean, lets face it, we have to be proactive about the public management of our image, and giving people creative freedom to visualize and represent themselves any type of way leaves the door open to over extension into the realms which, although I can respect for their creativity, i have to oppose on a public image front. Its a difficult line to toe because when one considers the effect that can have on the common man, or even the black young professional trying to make a name for himself so he can open doors for others, is it really worth the "self expression"?

I would ask if people feel that its ok to play to images of success / cleanliness / education in the ruling classes definition in order to achieve enough success to begin defining the image from the top? Is it ok for people to "pass" in the modern sense of the word (ie speaking properly, wearing polo shirts around white folks, talking golf) to be able to get some success and share with people who are searching for a way in? Wasnt that how things were done in the past? Dont you have to play by the rules until you win, then you can start making the rules?