Billy Haisley took it upon himself to excuse cultural appropriation in Hip-Hop by suggesting a convoluted parallel between Iggy Azalea and Travis Scott. His
Deadspin piece made valid points about Travis stealing flows, sonics, even ad-libs and nicknames, but put itself in “Blacker the Berry” territory with one line: “Azalea taking urban rap music and re-contextualizing it for teenaged suburban white kids is less disconcerting than what Scott does, and who he does it fo—”
Stop right there. In my
Pac voice: fukk THAT.
It doesn’t matter what kind of analysis was taking place to that point or after, the cognitive dissonance of attempting to admonish “the culture” and acknowledge tenets while giving a cultural appropriator a pass is symptomatic of an issue larger than Travis Scott. Is he trying to redefine the tenets? Modern Hip-Hop journalism is so concerned with click-baiting that Haisley’s casual deflection of a systemic scourge may not have been otherwise addressed.
If Haisley was able to thread a narrative that linked “biters” with the entitled, racist SNL skit that is Iggy Azalea without getting checked, it would have been the communities’ failure as much as it is his.
I’m sure everyone knows where this is going, but truth is truth: no matter how many adlibs Travis Scott steals or flows he borrows, “biting” as a Black man is never more dangerous to a Black artform than cultural appropriation.
If so called Hip-Hop heads choose to ignore Travis Scott pulling the wool over their head, that’s their prerogative. That just makes him one of many other modern artists manipulating the apathy of the consumer. That’s not comparable to Iggy, who is being praised for “qualities” Black women have forever been shamed for by the same audience.
Comments section on fire too
.
or whatevs, but what in the entire fukk is a travis scott?
