animated GIF posted by Huntermadeit on 9/6/11
Jennifer Chan has struck again. First, forty five pages on the commodification of net art and now the non-topic of the supposed affinity of net artists for hiphop.
Still no definition of net art -- does someone get a degree in that? Is a YouTube video net art?
No definition of hiphop -- are we still talking about the music of rapping over beats that's been around since the late '70s? (Chan doesn't actually talk about music at all; to her hiphop is words, images and lifestyle.)
Without meaningful stats on (i) number of net artists (ii) number of net artists who specialize in hiphop, (iii) ratios of ironic to actual hiphop artists putting material up on the net, (iv) demographic trends that would make this an issue worth considering, the reader asks: why this topic? Why now? Doesn't everyone, including Dad, have an affinity for hiphop at this point?
The examples Chan gives of "emerging" artists rapping and video-making are pretty dreadful. (One exception is Will Neibergall, a "fly" beatmaker and sample-wrangler who she trashes for concert trappings mostly beyond his control.) Some artists mentioned have only tangential connections to the rap game. Flaunting a superior ethical tone, Chan makes commenters feel they have to declare their bona fides ("I'm not racist or sexist, but..."). Politics over music? BORING.
