steakfinger said:

namepeace said:

Wow. I know you qualified it, but if I polled 10 random black people within my age group, based on past experience, the results would be as follows:

2 out of 10 would tell me they grew up fans of Prince's early work, then he lost them after Purple Rain or ATWIAD.

3 out of 10 would claim to adore much or most, if not all, of his work.

2 would tell me they respect him and think he's had a few jams (or slow jams) that will keep the party going.

3 will tell me what every single black person, bar none, told you.

And those are conservative estimates.

The whites made up much of Prince's "platinum firewall" in the 80's when most everything he made went platinum (at or after year of release) regardless of how it was received by the larger audiences. But loyal black fans were a bigger part of that firewall too. I wouldn't underestimate his black following over time if I were you.

No one can sell as many records as Prince did without strong "majority" support, but still.

[Edited 8/11/10 12:54pm]

I don't underestimate his black audience at all, I was being facetious towards the knucklehead who started this thread. I qualified it jokingly in response to his qualifying remark of "At the risk of stereotyping...". Rhythm and the enjoyment thereof has absolutely NOTHING to do with race and it's extremely offensive to suggest otherwise. It's about culture and where/when you grew up. I was using sarcasm to illustrate the totally idiocy of the original poster's claim. What I said is as silly as his, except I was aware of my remarks sounding ignorant. White people don't like rhythm. Good lord, man. Really?

Incidentally, I wouldn't presume I'm white.

Bullhockey. Where you grew up? Culture? Nuh - uh. Spoken as the WHITEST MF from the whitest town in america. BTDT at MANY a live funk throwdown.

And as such.....and I don't like to preach much in here...BUT......

To Minne & Blaque...points taken on both sides of this discussion, but I fear you have missed one essential point about the genre I love...........

It's universal appeal. It trascends age, experience, culture....you name it. Funk appeals to the essential ANIMAL in us all. I love the fact that the OP could BE HERE diggin it all (in whatever form) & still FEEL some of what all of us older folks dug so many years ago. That's the power & purpose to ME...the universality of the groove.

Like Maurice White said on the live version of "That's The Way Of The World"........"get up on yer feet....let's party TOGETHER".

Amen to THAT.

steakfinger said:

I don't underestimate his black audience at all, I was being facetious towards the knucklehead who started this thread. I qualified it jokingly in response to his qualifying remark of "At the risk of stereotyping...".

Vainandy didn't start this thread

steakfinger said:

namepeace said:

Wow. I know you qualified it, but if I polled 10 random black people within my age group, based on past experience, the results would be as follows:

2 out of 10 would tell me they grew up fans of Prince's early work, then he lost them after Purple Rain or ATWIAD.

3 out of 10 would claim to adore much or most, if not all, of his work.

2 would tell me they respect him and think he's had a few jams (or slow jams) that will keep the party going.

3 will tell me what every single black person, bar none, told you.

And those are conservative estimates.

The whites made up much of Prince's "platinum firewall" in the 80's when most everything he made went platinum (at or after year of release) regardless of how it was received by the larger audiences. But loyal black fans were a bigger part of that firewall too. I wouldn't underestimate his black following over time if I were you.

No one can sell as many records as Prince did without strong "majority" support, but still.

[Edited 8/11/10 12:54pm]

I don't underestimate his black audience at all, I was being facetious towards the knucklehead who started this thread. I qualified it jokingly in response to his qualifying remark of "At the risk of stereotyping...". Rhythm and the enjoyment thereof has absolutely NOTHING to do with race and it's extremely offensive to suggest otherwise. It's about culture and where/when you grew up. I was using sarcasm to illustrate the totally idiocy of the original poster's claim. What I said is as silly as his, except I was aware of my remarks sounding ignorant. White people don't like rhythm. Good lord, man. Really?

Incidentally, I wouldn't presume I'm white.

Just so you know, I never did presume your racial background in my response.

I don't think appreciation of art has much to do with race either, although I do think background and environment can influence one's personal tastes. I don't think that it's entirely true that there are no correlations between "rhythms" and race. I say "rhythms" plural because all music has one, but the types of rhythms vary with the cultures that originated them.

As we've become a more blended society, these things bleed over, and I think there are several trends that prove your point. Many types of "black" music, and many black artists, keep on keepin' on because of dedicated white fans determined to keep them alive. Public Enemy couldn't sell out a venue if it had to depend on its black fanbase. Ditto that for a lot of black artists.

I know this is a thread on "Funk," which I don't believe can retirn to prominence unless audiences kick their hip-hop habit, but this is my .

I don't think it is a matter of the audience you recruite, it is a matter of finding (at least) one record executive who would be willing to promote funk to be the next hot thing. Think about it, folks. These guys would sell solariums in the Sahara desert. They managed to make people believe shit hop was great music and made them buy it, they could easily sell funky stuff if they wanted to. It is all a matter of promotion and the money you are willing to spend on that.

So, is this going to happen? I don't know. It's probably rather unlikely that any record exec would dig out a genre which died in the opinions of many people sometime in the 70s (most people don't even know there is something like 80s funk, and when they hear "Superfreak", they'll say Rick James has covered that from MC Hammer ) and make this genre big again. On the other hand, we have had a revival (to a certain extent) of some 80s sounds and even visuals, and what else is Lady Gaga if not a poor retreat of 80s Madonna? Maybe there is a bit of hope for funk to come back, but people will really need to be schooled again on proper music - or to say it according to Vainandy: They need dark hair on their dicks again!

EmancipationLover said:

I don't think it is a matter of the audience you recruite, it is a matter of finding (at least) one record executive who would be willing to promote funk to be the next hot thing. Think about it, folks. These guys would sell solariums in the Sahara desert. They managed to make people believe shit hop was great music and made them buy it, they could easily sell funky stuff if they wanted to. It is all a matter of promotion and the money you are willing to spend on that.

So, is this going to happen? I don't know. It's probably rather unlikely that any record exec would dig out a genre which died in the opinions of many people sometime in the 70s (most people don't even know there is something like 80s funk, and when they hear "Superfreak", they'll say Rick James has covered that from MC Hammer ) and make this genre big again. On the other hand, we have had a revival (to a certain extent) of some 80s sounds and even visuals, and what else is Lady Gaga if not a poor retreat of 80s Madonna? Maybe there is a bit of hope for funk to come back, but people will really need to be schooled again on proper music - or to say it according to Vainandy: They need dark hair on their dicks again!

You've put your finger on the problem.

Let's suppose the target audience for the pop music industry is somewhere between 15 and 30. That means the older end of their audience was born in 1980. Many of these folks born in the 80's and 90's likely have no frame of reference for funk, or in some cases, rhythm & blues or soul music. The airwaves and record charts have been dominated by hip-hop/new jack/rap and b acts their entire lives.

To paraphrase KRS-ONE said in "I'm Still No. 1," rap as a whole is nearly 40 years old (depending on who's counting) and now has an "old school." Many of them may view funk the way a child of the 70's like me may have viewed acts like Chuck Berry or Louis Jordan. Other than knowing a few songs, He'd have to explore them to know and appreciate them given the time he came up. Hell, we may forget that a lot of the mass music audience wasn't even born/aware when Prince hit it big, and look at him the way children born in the 70's may have looked at Jimi Hendrix or Sly Stone or James Brown as teens/young adults.

I say all that to say, EL, I think what's promoted is important, but frame of reference is too and it's hard to promote around that.

steakfinger said:

vainandy said:

Funk was a genre full of rhythm. At the risk of stereotyping, most white people have not liked music that was extremely rhythmic. Some do, but most don't. That's why a genre like shit hop could do so well in the pop market.

.

.

.

[Edited 8/4/10 14:38pm]

Total nonsense. You are on this message board so you clearly think Prince has something to do with funk. Let me axe you this: Who exactly do you think bought Prince records in overwhelming numbers back when he actually sold albums, blacks? Hardly. Every single black person I know, bar none, thinks Prince is weird and they don't like his music. Of course that's not the case with everyone, but if you make a general statement you'll get a general rebuttal.

Apparently, you must be young because who the hell do you think was buying all those Prince records before "Purple Rain" made it big? It was black folks. Most white people didn't even know who the hell Prince was until "Little Red Corvette". Just go over to the "Prince: Music and More" section and look at the majority of the responses when people are asked when they first got into Prince. The majority of them respond either 1982 or 1984. And just look at all the old bootleg concert footage of Prince before "Purple Rain". You'd be lucky to find eight white people in the entire audience. And Prince was also all in the "Right On", "Black Beat", and "Rock and Soul" magazines during those years. If black folks weren't into Prince, then what the hell were all those folks in the audiences of his shows and who the hell was buying all those records when he was on black radio only and on the R&B charts only?

Sure, if you ask these little young black folks about Prince, yeah, they hate his music and think he's weird. They are the shit hop generation, what the hell do you expect?

White people don't like rhythmic music? What is "Shit Hop" to you? It's nothing but rhythm. There's nothing to it but drums and talking. You can't get any closer to rhythmic music than that.

Well, I guess it IS rhythm if you're into shit that barely taps and taps to the rhythm of a damn grandfather clock ticking.

And as far as white people go, apparently you didn't see where I said "most" white people haven't liked rhythmic music. There are always exceptions and I am THE number one exception to that rule. I'm the white bitch that got all the rhythm that God didn't give Whiteny...uh, Shitney Houston.

Every group of people have their exceptions just like the old saying "all black men have big dicks". Well, being the experienced whore that I am, it is usually true. However, I have had one or two of them motherfuckers that was so small you could put the entire dick and BOTH balls in your mouth and get razor burn from your cheek scrubbing against the motherfucker's stomach.

Funk is shit. It's time for something new. Funk is rhythmically exciting and harmonically bland. It's about a repeating vamp and a beat. It doesn't get any more basic than that. It feels good, but it's old news. We need rhythm AND harmony. I'm not talking about singing, either. I'm talking about melody and chords. Africa gave us rhythm, Europe gave us harmony. Put the 2 together and let's fucking think AND feel at the same time.

Children...

Oh honey, the statement of yours that I put in bold disqualifies you from this discussion altogether. There's NEVER a time that funk should step aside and let something else take over. Sure, it has stepped aside but anyone who has any taste would not want it to.

namepeace said:

steakfinger said:

I don't underestimate his black audience at all, I was being facetious towards the knucklehead who started this thread. I qualified it jokingly in response to his qualifying remark of "At the risk of stereotyping...". Rhythm and the enjoyment thereof has absolutely NOTHING to do with race and it's extremely offensive to suggest otherwise. It's about culture and where/when you grew up. I was using sarcasm to illustrate the totally idiocy of the original poster's claim. What I said is as silly as his, except I was aware of my remarks sounding ignorant. White people don't like rhythm. Good lord, man. Really?

Incidentally, I wouldn't presume I'm white.

Just so you know, I never did presume your racial background in my response.

I don't think appreciation of art has much to do with race either, although I do think background and environment can influence one's personal tastes. I don't think that it's entirely true that there are no correlations between "rhythms" and race. I say "rhythms" plural because all music has one, but the types of rhythms vary with the cultures that originated them.

As we've become a more blended society, these things bleed over, and I think there are several trends that prove your point. Many types of "black" music, and many black artists, keep on keepin' on because of dedicated white fans determined to keep them alive. Public Enemy couldn't sell out a venue if it had to depend on its black fanbase. Ditto that for a lot of black artists.

I know this is a thread on "Funk," which I don't believe can retirn to prominence unless audiences kick their hip-hop habit, but this is my .

Firstly, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE SAID. Let's be clear.

Secondly, part of the problem that "old men" like me and others born in the 70s or earlier have is with culture bandits. Re-tellers of history. The facts are, as Vainandy has stated many times in the past, is that there weren't crowds and crowds of "mainstreamers" into the music back then. There were always a few white people partying at the clubs and hitting the record stores and what have you, but by and large funk was consumed mainly by black folk. Most of the artists discussed here were never huge mega-stars like Prince and MJ because they DIDN'T have mainstream support. Even in the 80s where there were much more integrated music scenes, most of these artists still had a predominantly black audience. Now in the late 80s and very early 90s, some these artists began to have a predominantly white audience of retro-ers buying re-issued CDs and going to the "old school" concerts but rest assured, I could put together a roster of funk artists that would probably have an 80% black turnout to this day because their music just never "crossed over".
While the listening to and enjoyment of funk certainly has no racial ties, the creation of it was VERY cultural. For some reason, it seems that white mainstreamers have decided to do with funk what they did with jazz. The liberties that many American whites take with the truth would never occur when referring to other cultures of music. Mainstreamers would never try to re-write their way into Latin, African or Native cultures like they have with what is primarily black American culture and I believe part of it stems from racism and the deep-seeded denial of rights. A lot of "Americans" feel that this is their country and they own everything in it and have domain over everything created here, so they deserve to be written into it.
You can't have a realistic conversation about funk in its roots and bring up more than a couple of white artists. The same can be said for R&B in its initial stages. The thing is, funk - like jazz - has a unique quality to it that operated outside of the norm, so some feel that they should have dibs or at least a dog in the race when in truth, at the time, funk was written mostly by black people and written mostly FOR black people because within the country, cultures were still divided.
If you can't be truthful about the state of society at the time, you can't be truthful about the cultural impact and you can't be honest about the music.
Now that we live in a society where political correctness seems to reign supreme, many have a hard time communicating the truth because they walk on eggshells, ignoring the big pink elephant in the room. Well, you have to know where you came from to know where you're going and you can't do that by lying about it.
Radio was very segregated and most music consumers got their music exposure first and foremost by radio. A lot of what some on here refer to as "funk" in the 80s was simply R&B. It was funky R&B but it was R&B nonetheless.
Call a spade a spade, damnit.
As to the future of funk, I have to agree with Namepeace. Its not going to resurge until America kicks its hip-hop habit. But, the truth is, as Mr. Soulpower stated, funk was NEVER mainstream and that was part of the beauty of it - it was that something extra that made R&B/Soul more diverse.

namepeace said:

EmancipationLover said:

I don't think it is a matter of the audience you recruite, it is a matter of finding (at least) one record executive who would be willing to promote funk to be the next hot thing. Think about it, folks. These guys would sell solariums in the Sahara desert. They managed to make people believe shit hop was great music and made them buy it, they could easily sell funky stuff if they wanted to. It is all a matter of promotion and the money you are willing to spend on that.

So, is this going to happen? I don't know. It's probably rather unlikely that any record exec would dig out a genre which died in the opinions of many people sometime in the 70s (most people don't even know there is something like 80s funk, and when they hear "Superfreak", they'll say Rick James has covered that from MC Hammer ) and make this genre big again. On the other hand, we have had a revival (to a certain extent) of some 80s sounds and even visuals, and what else is Lady Gaga if not a poor retreat of 80s Madonna? Maybe there is a bit of hope for funk to come back, but people will really need to be schooled again on proper music - or to say it according to Vainandy: They need dark hair on their dicks again!

You've put your finger on the problem.

Let's suppose the target audience for the pop music industry is somewhere between 15 and 30. That means the older end of their audience was born in 1980. Many of these folks born in the 80's and 90's likely have no frame of reference for funk, or in some cases, rhythm & blues or soul music. The airwaves and record charts have been dominated by hip-hop/new jack/rap and b acts their entire lives.

To paraphrase KRS-ONE said in "I'm Still No. 1," rap as a whole is nearly 40 years old (depending on who's counting) and now has an "old school." Many of them may view funk the way a child of the 70's like me may have viewed acts like Chuck Berry or Louis Jordan. Other than knowing a few songs, He'd have to explore them to know and appreciate them given the time he came up. Hell, we may forget that a lot of the mass music audience wasn't even born/aware when Prince hit it big, and look at him the way children born in the 70's may have looked at Jimi Hendrix or Sly Stone or James Brown as teens/young adults.

I say all that to say, EL, I think what's promoted is important, but frame of reference is too and it's hard to promote around that.

I'm afraid you've got a point here, because the potential funk audience is so small (to start with) that the attempt of a major funk revival would probably be seen as a very risky move. In other words: if it works, some people in the industry will simply see it as another trend, if it fails, you're the idiot of the year in the music business for the sheer attempt.

Another important point is that it will be hard to communicate that this particular musical style from the 70s or 80s you would like to revive is actually harder and much more extreme than today's sounds. This is not old folks' music we're talking about, this is music that makes most of today's stuff sound like some chill out shit. But try to tell a 20-year old guy that he has been raised on bullshit music and needs to reset his brain when it comes to pop...

EmancipationLover said:

or to say it according to Vainandy: They need dark hair on their dicks again!

Damn right! The only other generation I know of that listened to all slow music and absolutely nothing fast whatsoever have gray hair on their dicks. A lot of these youngsters must have a bush full of premature gray because they sure as hell like to shave away what makes a dick sexy.

EmancipationLover said:

namepeace said:

You've put your finger on the problem.

Let's suppose the target audience for the pop music industry is somewhere between 15 and 30. That means the older end of their audience was born in 1980. Many of these folks born in the 80's and 90's likely have no frame of reference for funk, or in some cases, rhythm & blues or soul music. The airwaves and record charts have been dominated by hip-hop/new jack/rap and b acts their entire lives.

To paraphrase KRS-ONE said in "I'm Still No. 1," rap as a whole is nearly 40 years old (depending on who's counting) and now has an "old school." Many of them may view funk the way a child of the 70's like me may have viewed acts like Chuck Berry or Louis Jordan. Other than knowing a few songs, He'd have to explore them to know and appreciate them given the time he came up. Hell, we may forget that a lot of the mass music audience wasn't even born/aware when Prince hit it big, and look at him the way children born in the 70's may have looked at Jimi Hendrix or Sly Stone or James Brown as teens/young adults.

I say all that to say, EL, I think what's promoted is important, but frame of reference is too and it's hard to promote around that.

I'm afraid you've got a point here, because the potential funk audience is so small (to start with) that the attempt of a major funk revival would probably be seen as a very risky move. In other words: if it works, some people in the industry will simply see it as another trend, if it fails, you're the idiot of the year in the music business for the sheer attempt.

Another important point is that it will be hard to communicate that this particular musical style from the 70s or 80s you would like to revive is actually harder and much more extreme than today's sounds. This is not old folks' music we're talking about, this is music that makes most of today's stuff sound like some chill out shit. But try to tell a 20-year old guy that he has been raised on bullshit music and needs to reset his brain when it comes to pop...

Exactly! I could put a classical record on one turntable and a shit hop record on another turntable and I would have to slow down the pitch control on the classical record in order for it to blend. That right there says a lot. It shows that we are moving backwards rather than forwards. Trying mixing a classical record or even a shit hop record with a funk record. That damn record would be so speeded up it would sound like Alvin and The Chipmunks.

vainandy said:

EmancipationLover said:

I'm afraid you've got a point here, because the potential funk audience is so small (to start with) that the attempt of a major funk revival would probably be seen as a very risky move. In other words: if it works, some people in the industry will simply see it as another trend, if it fails, you're the idiot of the year in the music business for the sheer attempt.

Another important point is that it will be hard to communicate that this particular musical style from the 70s or 80s you would like to revive is actually harder and much more extreme than today's sounds. This is not old folks' music we're talking about, this is music that makes most of today's stuff sound like some chill out shit. But try to tell a 20-year old guy that he has been raised on bullshit music and needs to reset his brain when it comes to pop...

Exactly! I could put a classical record on one turntable and a shit hop record on another turntable and I would have to slow down the pitch control on the classical record in order for it to blend. That right there says a lot. It shows that we are moving backwards rather than forwards. Trying mixing a classical record or even a shit hop record with a funk record. That damn record would be so speeded up it would sound like Alvin and The Chipmunks.

EL and Vain: I agree with you, but there are folks 20 and 30 years older than me that would tell me that swing or bebop makes funk sound it's on downers.

And unfortunately, it is only a minor exaggeration to say that to some of these kids The Funk might as well be swing or bebop. It's ancient to them. To them, they love it as an ingredient or a side but not a main course. Unless The Funk can be served as an entree again, it won't "return to prominence." And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

namepeace said:

vainandy said:

Exactly! I could put a classical record on one turntable and a shit hop record on another turntable and I would have to slow down the pitch control on the classical record in order for it to blend. That right there says a lot. It shows that we are moving backwards rather than forwards. Trying mixing a classical record or even a shit hop record with a funk record. That damn record would be so speeded up it would sound like Alvin and The Chipmunks.

EL and Vain: I agree with you, but there are folks 20 and 30 years older than me that would tell me that swing or bebop makes funk sound it's on downers.

And unfortunately, it is only a minor exaggeration to say that to some of these kids The Funk might as well be swing or bebop. It's ancient to them. To them, they love it as an ingredient or a side but not a main course. Unless The Funk can be served as an entree again, it won't "return to prominence." And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Well hey, that's the hip oldsters comparing funk to swing and bebop. God love 'em and more power to 'em. I wish my generation was that full of spunk and had started bitching instead of tolerating folks like Shitney Houston coming in and ruining things.

I'd love to see swing or bebop make a big comeback. When shit hop completely took over everything and I became desperate for music I hadn't heard before, I started noticing that that old swing type music sounded really great. If funk can't make a comeback, at least something with rhythm needs to make a comeback.

BlaqueKnight said:

Firstly, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE SAID. Let's be clear.

Secondly, part of the problem that "old men" like me and others born in the 70s or earlier have is with culture bandits. Re-tellers of history. The facts are, as Vainandy has stated many times in the past, is that there weren't crowds and crowds of "mainstreamers" into the music back then. There were always a few white people partying at the clubs and hitting the record stores and what have you, but by and large funk was consumed mainly by black folk. Most of the artists discussed here were never huge mega-stars like Prince and MJ because they DIDN'T have mainstream support. Even in the 80s where there were much more integrated music scenes, most of these artists still had a predominantly black audience. Now in the late 80s and very early 90s, some these artists began to have a predominantly white audience of retro-ers buying re-issued CDs and going to the "old school" concerts but rest assured, I could put together a roster of funk artists that would probably have an 80% black turnout to this day because their music just never "crossed over".
While the listening to and enjoyment of funk certainly has no racial ties, the creation of it was VERY cultural. For some reason, it seems that white mainstreamers have decided to do with funk what they did with jazz. The liberties that many American whites take with the truth would never occur when referring to other cultures of music. Mainstreamers would never try to re-write their way into Latin, African or Native cultures like they have with what is primarily black American culture and I believe part of it stems from racism and the deep-seeded denial of rights. A lot of "Americans" feel that this is their country and they own everything in it and have domain over everything created here, so they deserve to be written into it.
You can't have a realistic conversation about funk in its roots and bring up more than a couple of white artists. The same can be said for R&B in its initial stages. The thing is, funk - like jazz - has a unique quality to it that operated outside of the norm, so some feel that they should have dibs or at least a dog in the race when in truth, at the time, funk was written mostly by black people and written mostly FOR black people because within the country, cultures were still divided.
If you can't be truthful about the state of society at the time, you can't be truthful about the cultural impact and you can't be honest about the music.
Now that we live in a society where political correctness seems to reign supreme, many have a hard time communicating the truth because they walk on eggshells, ignoring the big pink elephant in the room. Well, you have to know where you came from to know where you're going and you can't do that by lying about it.
Radio was very segregated and most music consumers got their music exposure first and foremost by radio. A lot of what some on here refer to as "funk" in the 80s was simply R&B. It was funky R&B but it was R&B nonetheless.
Call a spade a spade, damnit.
As to the future of funk, I have to agree with Namepeace. Its not going to resurge until America kicks its hip-hop habit. But, the truth is, as Mr. Soulpower stated, funk was NEVER mainstream and that was part of the beauty of it - it was that something extra that made R&B/Soul more diverse.

As a child of the 70's, I'd definitely agree. Other than hearing the occasional Parliament/Funkadelic or Rick James track on the radio, The Funk wasn't a staple in my house growing up. I think many other black kids raised in the 70's might say the same. The Funk seems mlore avant garde than mainstream, almost like r&b's answer to free jazz. And I'd highly doubt that it had a lot of "mainstream" fans, who I'd think were more into the prog rock, arena rock and/or disco of the day.

But as any piece of art appreciates with time, it is re-evaluated by the mainstream audience, and invariably, the history changes as well. The Funk is unique because the second generation of hip-hop re-introduced it to larger audiences. Which leads to what you've described. Race and 20th Century American Music have walked side-by-side (if not hand-in-hand).

I think the dilemma for Black American forms of music is always the same. The mainstream appropriates it but play a "curator" role. But for the white audiences that purchase the funk and jazz re-issues, and attend funk and jazz concerts, those genres would have a very hard time surviving.

The same is happening with hip-hop. Go to any De La Soul or Public Enemy show and it's packed with white kids who weren't even born when Nation of Millions or Three Feet High dropped. There's a reason the Q-Tips of the world tour with rock bands now.

But. as Bleek said in Mo"Better Blues. Black folk often leave behind the great music they create for the next thing. It was jazz and blues, then it was r&b, then funk, and now, it's happening to hip-hop. The changes have unexpected results, good and bad, but history repeats itself before our very eyes.

I bet if you ask any '70s cat about bebop and swing, they'd their eyes too like the hip-hop generation is about funk.

I bet y'all didn't think they would look confused when you mention funk music to them.

Timmy84 said:

I bet if you ask any '70s cat about bebop and swing, they'd their eyes too like the hip-hop generation is about funk.

I bet y'all didn't think they would look confused when you mention funk music to them.

Exactly.

Hell, I can' even open my mouth about De La, Gang Starr, BDP or PE around younger folks, I'll get rolled eyes or blank stares in response.

Timmy84 said:

I bet if you ask any '70s cat about bebop and swing, they'd their eyes too like the hip-hop generation is about funk.

I bet y'all didn't think they would look confused when you mention funk music to them.

The one thing that has changed just within the course of a generation is that along with the so-called intergration of music scenes, an almost outright contempt and dsisrespect for all that is "old" seems to be embedded in a generation. We knew our parents' music. We knew some of our grandparents' music. We related much more to ours but we had a basic understanding of what they listened to because their music told their struggle. Back when you had to actually know how to play an instrument, you learned that music in schools. You picked up on it at home because it challenged you. Some adapted what they learned and synthesized it into something new. When nobody else other than the community was listening, the music spoke to its listeners because it had a message for its listeners. Now that everyone is listening, the music sends a universal message of nothingness to appease, lull and not to offend as many as possible.

The current generation is for the most part, musically illiterate. Cats like MN Funq are rarer because they take an interest in the music that was happening before them. Because you have a generation that for the most part, hasn't learned the music - they don't have an appreciation for it. They don't respect it. Instead they respect the machines that capture it, so they feel they have no need to respect the music itself. Hip-hop culture started out like funk and jazz but at some point (when corporate America took interest in it) turned into a characiture of itself. Now we have what is pretty much a joke today - a vast, vapid wasteland of snippets of other peoples riffs thrown together over beats and played for an audience who treats music like its muzak; playing it as background noise while they do whatever they do in life. I remember when listening to music was an event - something you did. Now its just something that plays in the background - some "soundtrack of my life" bullshit.

[Edited 8/12/10 17:17pm]

BlaqueKnight said:

Timmy84 said:

I bet if you ask any '70s cat about bebop and swing, they'd their eyes too like the hip-hop generation is about funk.

I bet y'all didn't think they would look confused when you mention funk music to them.

The one thing that has changed just within the course of a generation is that along with the so-called intergration of music scenes, an almost outright contempt and dsisrespect for all that is "old" seems to be embedded in a generation. We knew our parents' music. We knew some of our grandparents' music. We related much more to ours but we had a basic understanding of what they listened to because their music told their struggle. Back when you had to actually know how to play an instrument, you learned that music in schools. You picked up on it at home because it challenged you. Some adapted what they learned and synthesized it into something new. When nobody else other than the community was listening, the music spoke to its listeners because it had a message for its listeners. Now that everyone is listening, the music sends a universal message of nothingness to appease, lull and not to offend as many as possible.

The current generation is for the most part, musically illiterate. Cats like MN Funq are rarer because they take an interest in the music that was happening before them. Because you have a generation that for the most part, hasn't learned the music - they don't have an appreciation for it. They don't respect it. Instead they respect the machines that capture it, so they feel they have no need to respect the music itself. Hip-hop culture started out like funk and jazz but at some point (when corporate America took interest in it) turned into a characiture of itself. Now we have what is pretty much a joke today - a vast, vapid wasteland of snippets of other peoples riffs thrown together over beats and played for an audience who treats music like its muzak; playing it as background noise while they do whatever they do in life. I remember when listening to music was an event - something you did. Now its just something that plays in the background - some "soundtrack of my life" bullshit.

[Edited 8/12/10 17:17pm]

Yeah I see what you mean. I guess I'm not of this generation because I LOVE music from my father's generation (doo-wop) and my mother's (early rock, R&B, soul music, Motown, '60s pop, etc.)

[Edited 8/12/10 17:21pm]

More subliminal references.

Technically all Funk music could be classified as R&B/Soul.

As I stated in my original post, Funk was never truly accepted in the mainstream so I think it has potential to do so in the future.

I wanted 2 know what people thought could be done in order 4 this 2 happen but everyone seems to be avoiding the question.

^ That's just the point. It can't. Not with this industry.

I know this generation has some respect for musical legends like Stevie, MJ, Isleys, Chaka, George, James and 'em but it's not for their funky music. For some like MJ and James, it's their stage presence and vocal tricks, for Stevie and the Isleys, it's the ballads (especially the Isleys), for Chaka, the voice. For George, the originator of songs that hip-hop songs sampled. Never due to what they brought to the table in funk music. You think this generation know anything about '80s funk artists like Cameo or Ebonee Webb (oh yeah watch them get the eyebrow on that group), Brass Construction, any of Zapp's proteges, Sugarfoot, or anyone like that? The only reason they dig Rick James is because he was the laughingstock of Dave Chappelle's E True Hollywood Stories via Charlie Murphy's memories of a coke-addicted Rick slapping him upside the head.

you can still throw some ideas out there just for the threads sake.

There has 2 be someone who is willing to introduce Funk to the new generation

I think Funk would have relevance in todays world if it had more exposure in the past.

Whether it sparks a resurgence in the genre or if its just a one artist show, there will be a funked out pop hit in the future.

Other than Dam Funk I don't know man. But not all dig Dam Funk (I know Andy doesn't that much but he likes the music lol).

Timmy84 said:

Other than Dam Funk I don't know man. But not all dig Dam Funk (I know Andy doesn't that much but he likes the music lol).

I don't really like his stuff either

But atleast someone is still doing it for the love of the music.