Novitas-ROYAL, 2008, Vol.: 2
(1), 13-27.[i]
AFFILIATING
WITH RAP MUSIC: POLITICAL RAP OR GANGSTA RAP?
David L.
CALDWELL·
Abstract
Following
the linguistic theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), for this paper,
I will describe the interpersonal meanings expressed in the lyrics of political
rap and gangsta rap. From SFL, I will
apply Appraisal to a small corpus of 10 rap songs, comparing 5 political rap
songs with 5 gangsta rap songs.
Appraisal is a linguistic analytical framework designed to identify
evaluation in language. Ultimately, I
aim to apply Appraisal so as to describe the ways in which both political rap
and gangsta rap actually 'promote' their respective themes, and in turn,
hypothesise why it is that a white, suburban, middle-class youth audience seeks
to affiliate with gangsta rap rather than political rap.
Keywords: Political
rap, Gangsta rap, Systemic Functional Linguistics, Appraisal, Affiliation
Özet
Bu çalışmada dizgesel işlevsel dilbilimi (SFL)
tanımladıktan sonra politik ve çete rap’inde anlatılan
kişilerarası anlamları tanımlamaya
çalışacağım. dizgesel işlevsel dilbilim’den
Appraisal’ı, 10 kişiden oluşan bir gruba 5 tane politik rep türü
ve 5 tane çete rapi türü şarkıyı
karşılaştırarak uygulayacağım. Appraisal, dilin
değerlendirilmesi için tasarlanmış dilbilimsel analitik bir
yapıdır. Son olarak Appraisal’ı, hem politik rap türünün hem de
çete rap türünün kendine özgü temalarını yüceltme yollarını
tanımlamada ve ardından beyaz, şehirli ve orta
sınıftan oluşan bir genç seyirci kitlesinin politik rep türünden
ziyade çete repiyle ilgilendiğine dair hipotezi açıklamada kullanma
amacındayım.
Anahtar sözcükler: politik rap, gangster rap, dizgesel işlevsel dilbilim,
değerlendirme, bağ
1. INTRODUCTION
As
noted by Riley (2005), rap music and hip hop culture have been the object of
much scholarly attention in recent years (e.g. Rose, 1994; Potter, 1995;
Walser, 1995; Krims, 2000; Keyes, 2002; Pennycook, 2007). Scholars have drawn on a variety of
disciplines to investigate rap music and the hip hop culture from which it
derives. The texts cited above for
example are from ethnomusicology, musicology, post-modern cultural studies and
linguistics. One general observation
about this body of research is that scholars are often divided in their opinion
of rap music. Many see rap as a ‘voice’
for the socially marginalised; a means by which they can “articulate their
place in the world” (e.g. Mitchell, 2006, p. 17). Others however, like Rose (1994) and Best and
Kellner (1999), are highly critical of certain styles of rap music. Generally, positive reactions to rap music
are associated with the style of rap known as political rap, whereas
negative reactions are more likely to be associated with the style known as gangsta
rap. According to Best and Kellner
(1999):
At
its best rap is a powerful indictment of racism, oppression, and violence that
calls our attention to the crises of the inner cities and vividly describes the
plight of African-Americans... At its
worst, G-Rap is itself racist, sexist and glorifies violence, being little but
a money-making vehicle that is part of the problem rather than the solution.
(A Contested Terrain section, para. 8
& 9)
According
to the reference text The All Music Guide to Rap and Hip-Hop (2003),
political rap and gangsta rap are defined as follows:
Looking to move on from the block-party atmosphere of
old school rap and eager to vent their frustrations with the ’80s version of
the inner-city blues, a select few hip-hop groups merged deft rhymes with
political philosophy to create a new style of rap… rappers have addressed a
wide variety of social and political topics – everything from gang violence,
AIDS, drug addiction, racism, domestic violence, and prostitution…
Gangsta
Rap developed in the late ’80s. Evolving
out of hardcore rap, gangsta rap had an edgy, noisy sound. Lyrically, it was just as abrasive, as the
rappers spun profane, gritty tales about urban crime... gangsta rappers rhyme in the first person about the
lives of thugs, felons, gang members, pimps and crack dealers. Gangsta rappers portray the thugs they’re
rapping about…
(pp.
viii-ix, 563-564)
While
these descriptions tell us what the lyrics are about, that is, the topics or
themes they ‘deal with’, they tell us very little about how it is that language
is used interpersonally. In other words,
how is language used in these particular rap styles to enact
relationships? Or in another way, how do
the rappers value or ‘promote’ their respective themes, and what kind of
audience or ‘consumer’ is intended to align with those values?
For
this paper, I aim to address such questions by applying the linguistic theory
of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) (e.g. Halliday, 1978; Martin,
1992). In short, SFL seeks to explain
language by reference to the social context in which it operates. SFL organises language and social context
functionally. Halliday suggests that
language has evolved functional resources to construe three orders of reality
which he terms the ideational, interpersonal and textual metafunctions. Martin (1997) defines Halliday’s original
metafunctions of language as follows: “ideational linguistic resources are
concerned with representation, interpersonal resources with interaction, and
textual resources with information flow” (p. 4).
As
mentioned, this paper will focus on the interpersonal metafunction of
language. Appraisal (e.g. Martin &
Rose, 2003; Martin & White, 2005), from SFL, offers an ideal analytical
framework to systematically identify interpersonal meanings in language. Appraisal is essentially concerned with
evaluation: “the kinds of attitudes that are negotiated in a text, the strength
of the feelings involved and the ways in which values are sourced and readers
aligned” (Martin & Rose, 2003, p. 22).
For this paper, I will focus on the Appraisal system of Attitude. Attitude is concerned with the semantic
resources used to express emotions, judgements and valuations, the polarity of
those evaluations, as well as the target of those evaluations. Both the political and gangsta rap songs will
be characterised according to their expressions of Attitude.
Those
findings will then be used to investigate why a particular youth
audience may be motivated to affiliate with or ‘consume’ these styles of rap
music in terms of the values or ‘Attitude’ expressed. As noted by Riley (2005: 297):
“It
has become increasingly evident, as hip hop culture and rap expand rapidly into
new social spaces and as the theoretical sophistication of rap studies grow,
that serious attention must be paid to the question of how specific youth
audiences bring different reading formations to the culture and therefore find
it meaningful in different ways.”
There is of course no one single social network or
‘hip hop community’ that affiliates with rap music. Following Riley (2005), I have chosen to
focus specifically on one highly influential segment of the hip hop community:
the white, suburban, middle-class youth consumers (abbreviated as ‘white’ youth
audiences/consumers). From cultural
studies, Riley offers a neo-Derkheimian interpretation of the ways in which
these particular youth audiences ‘make sense’ of gangsta rap. While Riley’s (2005) reading of gangsta rap
and ‘white’ consumers is provoking, I am not interested in the specifics of his
thesis. I am however interested in his
more general observations concerning the extent to which this particular youth
audience affiliates with gangsta rap and political rap respectively.
Riley (2005) argues that white, suburban middle-class
consumers have a strong affiliation with the gangsta rap style: “It is no
secret that this audience of predominately white, suburban consumers exists,
and that indeed the explosion in the 1990s of gangsta rap would have been
impossible without it...” (p. 299). In
contrast, Riley (2005) suggests that their is very little affiliation between a
‘white’ youth audience and political rap: “we are here dealing with an audience that to a
significant degree simply is not socially located in such a way as to make such
urban, black, political concerns likely or all that relevant to their own
cultural worlds” (p. 305).
Again, this kind of observation relies exclusively on
ideational meaning: what the political rap songs are about. From this position it is not too difficult to
construct a hypothesis as to the reading formations of ‘white’ youth
audiences. There are many obvious
explanations as to why teenagers, particularly teenage boys, would consume
music that comprises themes of sex, violence and drug use when compared with
themes of government policy, social reform and Western consumerism. And, as Riley (2005) fairly points out,
political rap becomes even less relevant when the political issues discussed
have no immediate relevance to the well-being of the ‘white’ youth
consumer. It is important to note
however that I do not intend to take away from these interpretations. They are valid and clearly a worthwhile
pursuit. What I want to propose however
is an alternative way of characterising these rap songs linguistically, and
perhaps from this, offer an additional hypothesis as to why the white,
suburban, middle-class youth audiences are drawn to gangsta rap more than
political rap.
2. METHODS
2.1. Data
Collection
The
data has been sampled from the All Music Guide to Hip-Hop: The Definitive
Guide to Rap and Hip-Hop (Bogdanov, Woodstra, Erlewine & Bush 2003)
which is essentially an encyclopaedia of rap music. It provides reviews of all the noteworthy rap
artists and recordings from the late-1970s to the early-2000s, as well as
essays, biographies and genealogical maps that trace the history of rap
music. The data set sampled for this
paper has been extracted from The All Music Guide’s list of ‘Essential
Songs’ which is further classified according to various styles of rap music,
such as: political rap, gangsta rap, hardcore rap, old-school rap and party
rap.
In
total, a small corpus of 10 rap songs by African-American artists was sampled. The set was further divided into 2 sub-sets
according to the following styles: political rap and gangsta rap. Table 1 classifies the 10 rap songs according
to style, artist and song title (see Discography for full details):
Table 1: Ten North American Rap Songs:
Political and Gangsta
|
Song
# |
Artist |
Title |
|
1 |
Arrested
Development |
Everyday
People |
|
2 |
The
Disposable Heroes... |
Television,
The Drug of the Nation |
|
3 |
Grandmaster
Flash... |
The
Message |
|
4 |
Public
Enemy (a) |
911
is a Joke |
|
5 |
Public
Enemy (b) |
Fight
the Power |
|
6 |
Ice
Cube |
Steady
Mobbin’ |
|
7 |
Ice
T |
New
Jack Hustler |
|
8 |
The
Notorious B.I.G. |
Ready
to Die |
|
9 |
NWA |
Gangsta
Gangsta |
|
10 |
Snoop
Dogg |
Gin
and Juice |
The
rap lyrics were accessed from the Original Hip-Hop Lyrics Archive <www.ohhla.com>. Those transcriptions were reformatted,
checked for errors and then transcribed to the level of the clause. The Appraisal system network of Attitude was
applied to the data in line with a basic set of Appraisal conventions (see List
of Appraisal Conventions).
2.2.
Method of Analysis
Lead
by Martin (e.g. Martin, 2000; Martin & Rose, 2003; Martin & White,
2005), Appraisal is an analytical
framework designed to identify evaluation in language and comprises three main
sub-systems: Attitude, Graduation and Engagement. The basic overview of the Appraisal system
network is illustrated in Figure 1:
Figure 1: An overview of Appraisal
resources (after Martin & White 2005, p. 38)
Appraisal
is a superordinate term that deals with “the semantic resources used to
negotiate emotions, judgements and valuations, alongside resources for
amplifying and engaging with these evaluations” (Martin, 2000, p. 145). With respect to the Appraisal systems,
Attitude concerns the semantic resources used to negotiate emotions,
judgements, and valuations while Graduation and Engagement concern the
resources that amplify and engage with Attitude. This paper will focus exclusively on the
system of Attitude (circled in Figure 1).
2.2.1.
Attitude
The
system of Attitude comprises three distinct systems which are selected
simultaneously when a person expresses Attitude: the type of Attitude; the
positive or negative value of the Attitude; and the implicit or explicit form
of the Attitude. Attitude is reduced to three basic types: Affect, Judgement
and Appreciation. Martin and White
(2005) summarise the three basic types of Attitude as follows: Affect concerns
the semantic resources used to construe emotional responses; Judgement concerns
resources deployed for construing moral evaluations of behaviour; and
Appreciation construes the ‘aesthetic’ quality of a product or performance (and
natural phenomena).
Affect,
Judgement and Appreciation are simultaneously analysed according to positive or
negative polarity or the ‘good-bad’ parameter (Thompson & Hunston
2000). In other words, does the Affect
express a good feeling or a bad feeling; is the person’s character good or bad
in relation to “norms about how people should or shouldn’t behave”; and are the
products/performances good or bad in relation to “norms about how products and
performances are valued”? (Martin & Rose, 2003, pp. 62-63). Martin and Rose (2003) provide analysts with
a detailed corpus for each type of Attitude and their respective system
networks. Some of that corpus is
replicated below.
2.2.2. Affect
Affect
is classified according to a number of variables. For this paper, Affect is analysed according
to a type of emotion: dis/inclination, un/happiness, in/security,
dis/satisfaction. Affect can also be classified
according to whether it is an emotional disposition or a behavioural surge and
whether it is a mood state or feelings directed from one person to
another. Table 2 illustrates the system
of Affect with examples comprising positive
and negative values. (See the appendix
for the list of appraisal conventions)
Table 2:
System of Affect (after Martin & Rose, 2003, pp. 60-61)
|
type of emotion |
surge |
disposition |
|
disinclination |
shudder |
fearful |
|
|
|
|
|
inclination |
request |
long for |
|
|
|
|
|
unhappiness (mood) |
cry |
sad |
|
|
|
|
|
unhappiness (directed) |
abuse |
hate |
|
|
|
|
|
happiness |
laugh |
happy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
hug |
loving |
|
insecurity |
twitching |
anxious |
|
|
|
|
|
|
cry out |
surprised |
|
|
|
|
|
security |
assert |
confident |
|
|
|
|
|
|
commit |
confident in |
|
dissatisfaction |
yawn |
fed up |
|
|
|
|
|
|
scold |
angry |
|
|
|
|
|
satisfaction |
busy |
absorbed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
compliment |
impressed |
2.2.3. Judgement
Judgement
is divided into two broad categories: social esteem and social sanction and
then into five sub-types within these categories. Judgements of esteem have to do with
normality (how unusual someone is), capacity (how capable they are), and
tenacity (how resolute they are); Judgement by sanction has to do with veracity
(how truthful someone is) and propriety (how ethical someone is). Table 3 illustrates the system of Judgement
with examples comprising positive and negative values.
Table 3
Systems of Judgement (after Martin & Rose, 2003, p. 62)
|
social esteem |
positive (admire) |
negative (criticize) |
|
|
|
|
|
normality |
lucky, fortunate,
charmed |
unfortunate, pitiful,
tragic |
|
|
|
|
|
capacity |
balanced, together,
sane |
flaky, neurotic, insane |
|
|
|
|
|
tenacity |
plucky, brave, heroic |
rash, cowardly,
despondent |
|
|
|
|
|
social sanction |
positive (praise) |
negative (condemn) |
|
|
|
|
|
veracity |
truthful, honest,
credible |
dishonest, deceitful |
|
|
|
|
|
propriety |
good, moral, ethical |
corrupt, unfair, unjust |
2.2.4. Appreciation
Appreciation
is organised around three variables: reaction, composition and valuation. Reaction has to do with the degree to which
the product or performance in question captures our attention (reaction:
impact) and the emotional impact it has on us (reaction: quality). Composition has to do with our perception of
proportionality (composition: balance) and detail (composition: complexity) in
a product or performance. Valuation has
to do with our assessment of the social significance of the product or
performance. Table 4 illustrates the
system of Appreciation with examples comprising positive and negative values.
Table 4: System
of Appreciation (after Martin & Rose, 2003, p. 63)
|
reaction |
positive |
negative |
|
impact |
fascinating, exciting,
moving |
dull, boring, tedious |
|
|
|
|
|
quality |
lovely, beautiful,
splendid |
plain, ugly, repulsive |
|
|
|
|
|
composition |
positive |
negative |
|
balance |
balanced, harmonious |
unbalanced, discordant |
|
|
|
|
|
complexity |
simple, elegant, intricate |
ornamental, extravagant |
|
|
|
|
|
valuation |
positive |
negative |
|
|
challenging, profound |
shallow, insignificant |
2.2.5. Inscribed and Invoked Attitude
Attitude
is simultaneously classified as either inscribed or invoked. All of the examples of Attitude listed above
are inscribed, that is, the Attitude is explicitly presented by a lexical item
carrying a positive or negative value, for example, ‘i was lucky’,
compared with ‘it was ugly’. In contrast,
invoked Attitude is ‘evoked’ rather than inscribed by ‘tokens’ of
Attitude. As such, invoked Attitude
cannot be narrowed down to an individual item.
Compare for example, ‘a kid who reads a
lot’ with ‘a kid who tears the wings
off butterflies’ (Thompson & Hunston, 2000, p. 142). In these examples, there is no particular
word that carries a positive or negative value.
However, neutral ideational meanings such as ‘tears the wings off
butterflies’ have the potential to invoke Attitude, in this case, a negative
judgement of the ‘kid’. In most
circumstances, the phrase ‘a kid who reads a lot’ invokes a positive evaluation
of the ‘kid’ as clever, intelligent or even tenacious.
Analysing
for invoked Attitude can be a difficult task, particularly because coding
invoked Attitude as positive or negative is very much context dependent (see
Martin, 2003, pp. 172-173). Accordingly,
this paper will draw on the analysts knowledge of North American rap music and
hip hop culture more generally to interpret the African American Vernacular
English. Although there is often potential
for multiple coding with invoked Attitude, this paper will limit the invoked
analysis to one classification only.
3.
FINDINGS
The
following set of findings capture the general patterns of Attitude rather than
quantifying every expression from the data set.
In this way, comparisons can be more easily made between the two rap
styles. Each song will be characterised
according to its most frequent type or types of Attitude (Table 5 and 6). Each table is separated into 4 columns: the
song number (see Table 1), the Appraiser (person or persons expressing the
Attitude), the type of Attitude (Affect, Judgement, Appreciation, inscribed or
invoked) and the Appraised (the target of the Attitude). In those cases where a songs comprises a high
frequency of two types of Attitude, both will be included. The most frequent type(s) of Attitude are
further classified according to positive or negative polarity as well as the
more specific classifications.
Table 5: Most Frequent Attitude: Summary
for Political Rap
|
Song |
Appraiser |
Attitude |
Appraised |
|
1 |
Rapper |
negative invoked Judgements (propriety) |
African-American
gang |
|
|
Rapper |
positive inscribed Judgements (propriety) |
Himself |
|
2 |
Rapper |
negative Appreciation (valuation) |
Television
(Western consumerism) |
|
3 |
Rapper |
negative invoked Judgements (normality) |
Himself
and African-Americans |
|
4 |
Rappers |
negative invoked Judgements (propriety) |
911
emergency service |
|
5 |
Rappers |
negative invoked Judgements (propriety) |
‘the
power’ |
|
|
Rappers |
positive inscribed Judgements (capacity) |
Themselves
and African-Americans |
Table
5 shows a number of consistent patterns of Attitude in the political rap
style. The most common types of Attitude
in the political rap songs were expressed by the rapper performing the songs,
usually realised by the singular, first-person pronoun ‘I’. In song 5 (Public Enemy, 1990b) the plural
pronoun ‘we’ was used, most probably because the group Public Enemy comprises
two rappers. It is worth noting that the
use of first-person pronouns as the main Appraiser of Attitude may also have an
important rhetorical function in these rap songs. These exophoric references seem to refer
beyond the rappers themselves to include African-Americans, marginalised
African-Americans, and even more specifically, the actual listener.
Table
5 shows that negative invoked Judgements of propriety was the most frequent
type of Attitude expressed in the political rap style. In varying ways, those negative Judgements
were directed at social groups that have traditionally marginalised and oppressed
African-Americans. In short, the
political rappers evaluated the social sanction of these groups or ‘dominant
forces’ as corrupt, unfair and unjust.
In song 1 (Arrested Development, 1991) for example, the negative invoked
Judgements were directed at a violent African-American gang that threatened the
rapper (performing the song) and his girlfriend. In songs 4 and 5 (Public Enemy, 1990a &
1990b), the Appraised was slightly more general. In song 5, Public Enemy invoked many negative
Judgements directed at ‘the power’.
While this target is open to interpretation, the co-text indicates that
‘the power’ is anyone considered to be oppressing African-Americans, such as
the government, government officials (e.g. the police and teachers), as well as
‘white’ people more generally. In song
4, the target of invoked Judgement was slightly more specific as Public Enemy
critiqued the 911 emergency service, for example:
they don't care
[-Affect: disinclination]
'cause they stay paid anyway [-Judgement: propriety]
they teach ya like an ace [-Judgement: propriety]
they can't be betrayed
[-Judgement: propriety]
i know you stumble with no use
[-Judgement: capacity] people
if your life is on the line
then you're dead today
[-Judgement: propriety]
late comings with the late comin' stretcher [-Judgement: propriety]
that's a body bag in disguise y'all betcha [-Judgement: propriety]
i call 'em body snatchers
[-Judgement: propriety]
(Extract
1: Public Enemy, 1990a, clauses. 7-16)
Extract
1 also comprised several expressions of inscribed negative Attitude directed at
the 911 emergency service. While most of
the political rap songs comprised invoked negative Judgements, Song 2
(Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy, 1992) had a high frequency of inscribed
negative Appreciations. That inscribed
negative Attitude was directed at television and ‘Western consumerism’ more
generally. In this way, the target of
Attitude or ‘Appraised’ was still reasonably consistent with the political data
set, that is, negative evaluations directed at a ‘dominant force’.
Table
5 shows that Song 3 (Grandmaster Flash, 1982) is slightly different to the rest
of the political data set. Instead of
invoked negative Judgements of propriety, the most frequent Attitude was
invoked negative Judgments of normality.
Moreover, the Appraised was the rapper himself (or potentially
African-Americans more generally) and not a ‘dominant force’, for example:
i can’t walk through the park [-Judgement: normality]
’cause its crazy
[-Appreciation: reaction] after the dark
keep my hand on my gun
‘cause they got me on the run [-Judgement: normality]
i feel like an outlaw [-Judgement: normality]
broke my last fast jaw [-Judgement: normality]
hear them say
you want some more [-Judgement: normality]
livin’ on a seesaw [-Judgement: normality]
(Extract
2: Grandmaster Flash, 1982, c. 102-110)
Extract
2 is a good example of the potential for multiple coding. The clauses coded in extract 2 as negative
invoked self-Judgments, that is, the rapper as ‘unfortunate’ given his adverse
circumstances, could also be coded in line with the rest of the data set, that
is, negative invoked Judgements of the propriety of the ‘dominant forces’ given
they contributed to the adverse circumstances.
One distinction between this song however and the rest of the data set
is the frequent use of the first person pronoun ‘I’, invoking a judgement of
the rapper himself rather than those that have marginalised him. In contrast, extract 1 has fewer singular
first person pronouns and makes much more reference to the ‘dominant forces’ or
‘oppressors’, typically realised as ‘they’.
Whether these clauses should be coded as negative judgements of the
‘oppressors’ as unfair and unkind, or negative self-judgements of normality as
a result of the conditions of the ‘oppressors’ seems a minor point in the
context of this paper. What is important
is that the overall rhetoric of marginalisation and oppression of
African-Americans remains consistent throughout the political data set.
While
Table 5 shows that the most frequent type of Attitude in political rap was
negative, Songs 1 (Arrested Development, 1991) and 5 (Public Enemy, 1990b) both
comprised high frequencies of positive Attitude. That positive Attitude was mostly inscribed
Judgements of themselves, either as an individual, as illustrated in extract 3,
or occasionally as the plural ‘we’. As
mentioned, the potential for these pronouns to refer beyond the rappers
themselves is evident in extract 3, where the pronoun ‘I’ seems to refer to
African-American’s more generally and perhaps also the consumer themselves:
elvis was a hero [+Judgement:
normality] to most
but he never meant shit to me [-Judgement: propriety]
you see straight up racist
[-Jugement: propriety]
that sucker [-Judgement:
normality] was simple and plain
mother fuck [-Affect:
dissatisfaction] him and john
‘cause i’m black [+Judgement:
normality]
and i’m proud [+Affect:
satisfaction]
i’m ready [+Judgement:
capacity] and hyped [+Judgement:
capacity]
plus i’m amped [+Judgement:
capacity]
most of my heroes don’t appear on no stamps [-Judgement: normality]
sample a look back
you look and find
nothing but rednecks
[-Judgement: propriety] for four hundred years
(Extract
3: Public Enemy, 1990b, c. 46-58)
While
songs 1 and 5 comprised a high frequency of positive Attitude, as illustrated
in extract 3, that positive Attitude was typically expressed alongside or
countered by negative Attitude to do with the ‘dominant forces’. The rhetoric of marginalisation and
oppression remains a salient feature of the political rap songs despite the
positive Attitude.
Table 6: Most Frequent Attitude: Summary
for Gangsta Rap
|
Song |
Appraiser |
Attitude |
Appraised |
|
6 |
Rapper |
positive invoked and inscribed Judgements
(normality) |
Himself |
|
7 |
Rapper |
positive invoked and inscribed Judgements
(normality) |
Himself |
|
8 |
Rapper |
positive invoked and inscribed Judgements
(tenacity) |
Himself |
|
9 |
Rapper |
positive invoked and inscribed Judgements
(normality) |
Themselves |
|
10 |
Rapper |
positive invoked and inscribed Judgements
(normality) |
Himself |
Table
6 shows that the gangsta rap data set is even more consistent than the
political set in terms of its most frequent expressions of Attitude. As with the political rap style, the
Appraiser was the rapper or rappers actually performing the song. While this may seem a rather obvious finding,
it is not necessarily the case that a narrator is the Appraiser. More ‘objective’ genres such as news
reporting and academic writing are good examples in which a narrator is not
always the Appraiser of Attitude. In
those genres, the narrator refers or ‘attributes’ Attitude to other
persons. In this way, both rap styles
are particularly ‘subjective’ in the sense that the rappers are the
Appraisers. They do not tell ‘other
peoples’ stories. The Attitude is theirs.
There
was very little difference in the gangsta rap data set in terms of the type of
Attitude expressed and the target of that Attitude. Table 6 shows that for all five gangsta rap
songs, the rappers most frequently expressed positive invoked Judgements to do
with their own normality. In other
words, the rappers evaluated themselves as special, or more specifically,
‘cool’ (in the context of African-American, ‘gangsta’ culture). There are differences however in terms of
what ideational tokens actually invoked such positive self-evaluations. One of the most common ways in which gangsta
rappers invoked positive self-Judgements was by referring to their wealth and
physical strength, for example:
what’s
up
you
say ya wanna be down
ease
back
or muthafucka [-Judgement: capacity] get
beat down
out
my face
fool [-Judgement: capacity] i’m the illest [+Judgement: normality]
bulletproof [+Judgement: normality]
i die harder than bruce willis [+Judgement:
normality]
got my crew in effect [+Judgement:
capacity]
i bought ‘em new jags [+Judgement:
normality]
so much cash [+Judgement: normality]
gotta
keep it in hefty bags
(Extract
4: Ice T, 1991, c. 55-64)
Songs
6 (Ice Cube, 1991), 7 (Ice T, 1991) and 9 (NWA, 1988) all frequently invoked
positive self-Judgements through reference to wealth and physical
strength. In a similar way, Song 8
(Notorious B.I.G., 1994) invoked positive self-Judgements, although these had
to do with tenacity rather than normality or ‘coolness’. While Extract 5 comprised many invoked
self-Judgements from all three sub-systems, the overall rhetoric of the song
was one of tenacity, for example:
when
i used to be a crook [+Judgement:
normality]
doin’ whatever it took [+Judgement:
tenacity]
from snatchin’ chains to pocketbooks
[+Judgement: tenacity]
a big
bad
motherfucker [+Judgement: normality] on the wrong road
i got some drugs [+Judgement: tenacity]
tried to get the avenue sold [+Judgement:
tenacity]
i want it all from the rolexes to the lexus
[+Judgement: tenacity]
gettin’ paid is all i expected [+Judgement:
tenacity]
my mother didn't give me what i want
[+Judgement: normality]
what the fuck [-Affect: dissatisfaction]
now i got a glock [+Judgement: normality]
makin’ motherfuckers duck [+Judgement:
capacity]
(Extract
5: Notorious B.I.G., 1994, c. 30-41)
Tenacity
was chosen because the rapper, Notorious B.I.G. (1994), did not explicitly
refer to his physical prowess or wealth as in extract 4. Rather, he recounted the events that helped
him achieve that wealth, strength and ‘coolness’. In this way, Song 8 was more of a personal
narrative in which Notorious B.I.G. gave the audience a sense of his personal
ethos rather than his attributes.
Song
10 (Snoop Dogg, 1993) was slightly different again. In this gangsta rap song, illustrated in
Extract 6, Snoop Dogg invoked positive self-Judgements as he described his
sexual prowess, for example:
i breeze through
[+Judgement: normality]
two in the mornin’ and the party’s still jumpin’
[+Appreciation: composition]
‘cause my momma ain’t home
i got bitches in the living room gettin’ it on [+Judgement: normality]
and they ain’t leavin’ ‘till six in the mornin’ [+Judgement: normality]
so what you wanna do sheeeit
i got a pocket full of rubbers [+Judgement: normality]
and my homeboys do too [+Judgement: normality]
so turn off the lights
and close the doors
but but what we don’t love them hoes yeah [+Judgement: normality]
(Extract
6: Snoop Dogg, 1993, c. 12-22)
This
short extract reveals a high frequency of sexist, negative language directed at
women, for example, ‘bitches’ and ‘hoes’.
However, as illustrated, I have not coded that lexis for Attitude. In this context, that is the African-American
gangsta culture, these terms are commonplace.
Now that is not to say that these terms do not carry negative
Attitude. They clearly do so, especially
in contexts outside the African-American gangsta community. And it should be noted that even in that
context, these terms are not interpersonally neutral. They have been deliberately chosen by that
community for their negative meanings.
However, what was interpersonally salient in this extract was the
positive self-Judgements expressed by the rapper, realised through reference to
his sexual prowess. Unfortunately, in
this community, prowess can be achieved by demeaning and objectifying
women. An investigation into why the
African-American gangsta culture finds the objectification of women (and
violence for that matter) worthy of positive appraisal is of the utmost
importance (see e.g. Best and Kellner, 1999).
However, that is not a primary concern of this paper. Just as I have coded ‘crook’ and ‘bad
motherfucker’ in Extract 5 as positive, when in most contexts it would be
negative, I have coded references to sexual prowess as something positive,
because, in the African-American ‘gangsta’ context, that is precisely what it
means.
3.1. Summary of Attitude Findings
The Attitude findings from the small corpus of gangsta
rap and political rap styles can be generally characterized as follows:
- In
both styles, the Appraiser was the actual rapper(s) performing the song
- Political
rap comprised a high frequency of negative, invoked Judgements (of
propriety) targeted at ‘dominant forces’
- Political
rap also comprised a moderately high frequency of positive, invoked and
inscribed Judgements (of capacity and tenacity) targeted at ‘self’
- Gangsta
rap comprised a high frequency of positive, invoked Judgements (of
normality) targeted at ‘self’
4.
DISCUSSION
Appraisal positions us to feel – and through shared
feelings to belong. In this respect,
Appraisal is a resource for negotiating solidarity (Martin, 2004, p. 326).
Following on from the Attitude analysis, the question
then arises: how do the Attitude meanings expressed in the political and
gangsta rap styles enact relationships?
Or in another way, what social networks or communities share the kinds
of values or Attitudes realised in political and gangsta rap? If we follow Riley (2005), the question is
more specific again: what are the shared Attitudes that motivate white,
suburban, middle-class youth to affiliate with or ‘consume’ gangsta rap over
political rap?
What I intend to put forward here is merely a
hypothesis that would certainly benefit from analysis of a larger corpus as
well as some sound ethnographic work to further ‘get at’ the motivations of
this particular youth audience.
Moreover, I do recognise that this is only one of many explanations and
that other explanations (e.g. Riley 2005) are not in opposition with this
thesis.
The way in which these respective rap styles affiliate
with their consumers is clearly very different.
As mentioned earlier, the themes or ideational meanings for each style
are distinct and provide a platform for sound explanations as to why ‘white’
youth audiences choose to affiliate with gangsta rap when compared with
political rap. It is also clear from the
Attitude analysis of this small corpus that the interpersonal meanings
expressed in each style are distinct.
In short, political rap affiliates through a
rhetorical trope of condemnation.
In other words, a consumer of political rap aligns themselves with the
rap artist and the African-American ‘political’ community more generally
through the ‘shared feeling’ that the ‘dominant forces’ (who have traditionally
oppressed African-Americans) should in turn be condemned or ‘judged’ for their
actions. Some of the political data set
does include affiliation through rallying, albeit at a far lower
frequency. In those examples, the
rappers counter their many negative invoked Judgements of the ‘dominant forces’
with positive self-Judgements. The
consumers build solidarity with the rap artist and his African-American
‘political’ community through the shared feeling that they have the capacity to
overcome the oppression of the ‘dominant forces’ and ultimately control and
improve their adverse circumstances.
The rhetorical trope of gangsta rap is very different
than the political rap. Gangsta rap
affiliates almost exclusively through rallying or affirmations
(for want of a better term). In the case
of gangsta rap, the ‘shared feeling’ between artist and consumer is that the
rapper and his African-American gangsta community are tough, resilient, ‘cool’
characters. I would argue however, that
this shared feeling extends beyond positive Appraisal of African-Americans. It seems that the combination of first-person
singular pronouns with positive Judgements of normality, capacity and tenacity
encourages the consumer to ‘take on’ those propositions, regardless of race. Hence, the term affirmations rather than
rallying. The exophoric nature of
the pronouns enables the consumer to truly ‘share’ these positive
self-Judgements in a way that is not unlike the kind of positive
self-affirmations common in ‘new-age’ spirituality.
Perhaps, it is simply more appealing to a white,
suburban, middle-class youth to consume a style of music with a rhetoric that
reinforces their self-esteem, strength and ‘coolness’, as opposed to a style
that reinforces their unfortunate circumstances, shortcomings and more
generally, the many problems facing the world.
And perhaps, given the relative ‘fortune’ of this audience, feelings of
positive self-esteem can be shared much more easily between performer and
consumer, than feelings of misfortune and loneliness. Again, I do not wish to ignore the fact that
much of this positive rhetoric derives from the marginalisation of others, and
ultimately, encourages a very destructive way of being. In this analysts’ opinion however, this kind
of reading is so consumed with the outrageous, rebellious nature of the themes
expressed in gangsta rap music, it fails to see the most obvious and appealing
feature of this style: it tells the ‘white’ youth consumers how ‘cool’ they
are, or at the very least, how ‘cool’ ‘gangsta’ African-Americans are, and
therefore how cool they can be...
we
don't care
we
don't just say no
we
too busy sayin' yeah
to
drinkin' straight out the eight bottle
do
i look like a mutha fuckin’ role model
to
a kid lookin' up ta me
life
ain't nothin’ but bitches and money
‘cause
i'm tha type o' nigga
that's
built ta last
if
ya fuck wit me
i'll put a foot in ya ass
see
i don't give a fuck
'cause
i keep bailin’
yo
what the fuck are they yellin’
gangsta gangsta
(NWA,
1988, c. 21-35)
REFERENCES
Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1999). Rap,
black rage, and racial difference. Enculturation, 2(2). Retrieved
December 30, 2007, from http://enculturation.gmu.edu/2_2/best-kellner.html
Bogdanov, V.,
Woodstra, C., Erlewine, S.T., & Bush, J. (2003). All music guide
to hip-hop: The
definitive guide to rap and hip hop.
Keyes, C. (2002). Rap
music and street consciousness.
Halliday,
M.A.K. (1978). Language as social semiotic:
The social interpretation of language and meaning.
Krims,
A. (2000). Rap music and the poetics of
identity.
Martin,
J.R. (1992). English text: System and
structure.
Martin,
J.R. (2000). Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English. In S. Hunston,
& G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text (pp. 142-176).
Martin,
J.R. (2003). Introduction. Text,
23(2), 171-181.
Martin,
J.R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with
discourse: Meaning beyond the clause.
Martin, J.R., & White P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in
English.
Mitchell,
T. (2006, April 1). The new corroboree. The Age: A2, p. 17.
Pennycook,
A. (2007). Global Englishes and transcultural flows.
Potter,
R. (1995). Spectacular vernaculars: Hip-Hop and the politics of
postmodernism.
Riley,
A. (2005). The rebirth of tragedy out of the spirit of hip hop: A cultural
sociology of gangsta rap music. Journal of Youth Studies 8(3), 297-311.
Rose, T. (1994). Black
noise: Rap music and black culture in contemporary
Walser, R. (1995). Rhythm, rhyme, and rhetoric in the
music of public enemy. Ethnomusicology,
39(2), 193-218.
Discography
Arrested Development (1991). Everyday people. On 3
years, 5 months & 2 days in the life of.... Chrysalis Records.
The
Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy (1992). Television, the drug of the nation.
On hypocrisy is the greatest luxury. 4th and Broadway.
Grandmaster
Flash and the Furious Five (1982). The Message. On The message.
Sugar Hill Records.
Ice
Cube (1991). Steady mobbin’. On Death certificate. Priority.
Ice
T (1991). New Jack Hustler. On OG: original gangster.
Sire/Warner.
The
Notorious B.I.G. (1994). Ready to Die. On Ready to die. UM3.
NWA (1988). Gangsta Gangsta. On Straight outta
compton. Ruthless/Priority.
Public
Enemya (1990). 911 is a joke. On Fear of a black planet. Def
Jam/Columbia Records.
Public
Enemyb (1990). Fight the power. On Fear of a black planet. Def
Jam/Columbia Records.
Snoop
Dogg (1993). Jin and Juice. On Doggystyle. Death Row.
Appendix
List of Appraisal
Conventions
|
[ ] |
Appraisal |
|
+ |
Positive Attitude |
|
- |
Negative Attitude |
|
+ |
Invoked Attitude |
|
- |
Invoked Attitude |