||[Jun. 13th, 2011|02:02 pm]
I've been having a debate, sort of, with a "friend" who just does not get things. It is actually getting to be quite annoying, and I feel like a fool for still debating with this guy. He clearly does not know what he is talking about, and he refuses to open himself up to an idea that is different from his own.|
This all started as a conversation about music. To be more specific, it was about hip hop. Personally, I do not consider most of the rap music out there to be what real hip hop was about. To me, what is being put out now is a sub-genre to hip hop. I conceded and allowed that rap can fall under hip hop, but it is not hip hop on its own. This is where all the fun began.
This guy "explained" to me what I already knew. Hip hop is a culture that brings in some other arts. It incorporates MCs, grafitti artists, break dancers, and DJs. To me, each individual part is not really hip hop on its own. There are so many DJs out there who are not hip hop DJs. There's a lot of dance and electronic stuff out there. Not all people who do grafitti are into hip hop either. Some are just artists who use that as an outlet. So, it's the same thing with Mcs. Not everyone who raps is hip hop. There are bands out there who use rap in their music, but it's a different genre. Linkin Park had an album, Reanimation I think it was called, where there was more rapping, but it was still under the rock genre. Same thing with Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock when he first came out. So, that was my argument. My friend decided that I was wrong. He's entitled to his opinion, but he was annoying about it.
My friend kept saying that rap was hip hop no matter what, and that anyone who rhymed in song was actually hip hop. Taylor Swift rhymes, and he actually agreed that she was hip hop in that regard, just to try to prove his point. Then the argument got even more stupid.
I asked him what basic ingredients were needed to bake a cake. He said water, flour, oil, eggs, milk. So I asked him if any of those ingredients started out as cake on their own. He said no. I said that in order to bake a cake you need to mix those ingredients together. He agreed. Then I said that without those ingredients you can't have a cake. It takes them all coming together in the right way to make a cake. Each piece alone is not a cake. He saw where I was going, and in order to not be proved wrong, he insisted that once you know those ingredients are going into the cake, and they become a part of the cake, then each ingredient is cake. For the rest of the night he kept saying that an egg was cake. How do you argue with that. I gave up, and he thinks he won the argument.
Then, on another occassion, he brought it up again. I tried using a different example. Hip hop uses a lot of other genres. There is a lot of sampling, too. I said that just because hip hop samples a rock song, or a jaxx song, it doesn't mean that jazz or rock are now hip hop. He said that they were, and actually said that they would be more hip hop because they're used in hip hop music. I said that rock and jazz were around way before hip hop was and so hip hop was more rock or jazz, and not the other way around. He again said I was wrong and was saying that jazz is hip hop. Then he tried to prove his point by going to Wikipedia. Seriously? He found an article on there that says that MC-ing was around in the early jazz days, before hip hop was invented. Right there, I think he was proved wrong. According to the article that he found, MC-ing is a part of jazz music, and hip hop took it from jazz. Therefore, if anything, I think hip hop falls under jazz. My friend still thinks jazz should fall under hip hop. Again, how can you argue with that? I just let it go again, and he thinks he won.
I know this is all dumb, and I do apologize to anyone who actually read this.