lrn36 said:

deebee said:

Is it all that unequivocal? I'm not opposed to the idea that it's somewhat ironic or even cynical, but couldn't it be that he's critiquing both the real things that are happening and their easy incorporation into a media cycle that distracts more than it enlightens? And that he's both standing back commenting on that mediatisation and recognising the way he's implicated in it?

I'm struggling to see how it's doing no more than "using black suffering for his own financial gain", and somehow eye-rolling at any section of the audience that thinks it's doing more. I see that he's 'getting his money', but, yet and still, it all ends with him running in terror.

Happy to read a different take on it, though.

Well, he is making money off of it. He specifically timed all of this to line up with the Solo movie. It's all for maximum esposure. And everyone is talking about how brillant Glover and the video is and not talking about the issues raised. That's why I think the meta aspect of the work is more powerful than the work itself. He is critiqing everyone including himself in their failure to address the issues raised in the video. It's basically Spike Lee's Bamboozled in music video form.

But what is it that leads you to the conclusion that the ironic message is part of the intention of piece itself, rather than simply being a way we could choose to 'read' it? I mean, making money off art is the norm, rather than something unusually shady. The authors of 'Blowin' In The Wind' or 'Fight The Power' are also making money, but we tend not to say that Chuck D was 'profiting from black suffering', or think that he was making a performative point about media spectacle and the futility of social critique in art. I think it's an interesting take; I'm just not seeing where it is in the piece itself.

deebee said:

lrn36 said:

Well, he is making money off of it. He specifically timed all of this to line up with the Solo movie. It's all for maximum esposure. And everyone is talking about how brillant Glover and the video is and not talking about the issues raised. That's why I think the meta aspect of the work is more powerful than the work itself. He is critiqing everyone including himself in their failure to address the issues raised in the video. It's basically Spike Lee's Bamboozled in music video form.

But what is it that leads you to the conclusion that the ironic message is part of the intention of piece itself, rather than simply being a way we could choose to 'read' it? I mean, making money off art is the norm, rather than something unusually shady. The authors of 'Blowin' In The Wind' or 'Fight The Power' are also making money, but we tend not to say that Chuck D was 'profiting from black suffering', or think that he was making a performative point about media spectacle and the futility of social critique in art. I think it's an interesting take; I'm just not seeing where it is in the piece itself.

It's in the song itself. He's says get that money at all costs along with the image of him distracting everyone's attention by dancing. The video is literally the equivalent of the dance. It's a distraction because this is America. We distract overselves from the problems of the world while others make a profit of the suffering.

[Edited 5/9/18 9:59am]

Graycap23 said:

deebee said:

lrn36 said:

Well, he is making money off of it. He specifically timed all of this to line up with the Solo movie. It's all for maximum esposure. And everyone is talking about how brillant Glover and the video is and not talking about the issues raised. That's why I think the meta aspect of the work is more powerful than the work itself. He is critiqing everyone including himself in their failure to address the issues raised in the video. It's basically Spike Lee's Bamboozled in music video form.

But what is it that leads you to the conclusion that the ironic message is part of the intention of piece itself, rather than simply being a way we could choose to 'read' it? I mean, making money off art is the norm, rather than something unusually shady. The authors of 'Blowin' In The Wind' or 'Fight The Power' are also making money, but we tend not to say that Chuck D was 'profiting from black suffering', or think that he was making a performative point about media spectacle and the futility of social critique in art. I think it's an interesting take; I'm just not seeing where it is in the piece itself.

Spot on as usual.

I thought the "profitting from black suffering" comment was uncalled for because it implies that the artist doesn't actually care about their subject matter. That is why I said I don't know enough about him to question his motives. I doubt any of us do.

You could apply that logic to any artist who discusses social issues in their art, but is it fair? For example, Janelle Monae's album drops in the midst of the "me too" movement but it does not mean she's only concerned about profitting off of it.

ChocolateBox3121 said:

Graycap23 said:

This dude has MAJOR talent..........MAJOR.

Donald Glover is a triple threat. He has it all covered. That's a rarity.

I saw an episode of Atlanta and he is a decent actor. A lot of people think he will pretty much carry the film Solo.

babynoz said:

ChocolateBox3121 said:

Donald Glover is a triple threat. He has it all covered. That's a rarity.

I saw an episode of Atlanta and he is a decent actor. A lot of people think he will pretty much carry the film Solo.

Some people are destined to be superstars through devine intervention. Prince's transitioning has open the door for Donald to enter a stardom that will transform him into the universe.

Childish Gambino's Record-Breaking 'This Is America' Video Hits 50 Million Views in Mere Days

The artist has smashed all of his previous YouTube records.

There's a lot to unpack in Childish Gambino's powerful "This Is America" video, which has been the talk of the Twitterverse since he unleashed the new song and accompanying visual on Saturday night (May 5), shortly after he took over Saturday Night Live.

In the days since its release, the "This Is America" video has amassed over 50 million views on YouTube, breaking all of Gambino's previous records of the video platform.

For starters, Gambino's new video garnered close to one million views in the first hour and soared to an estimated 12.9 million views in the first 24 hours, a rep from the platform confirmed to Billboard. What's more, the "This Is America" video has become one of this year's biggest music video debuts and was the most watched video on YouTube from Sunday (May 6) to Tuesday (May 8).

https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/hip-hop/8455253/childish-gambino-breaks-his-youtube-record-this-is-america-video

babynoz said:

deebee said:

But what is it that leads you to the conclusion that the ironic message is part of the intention of piece itself, rather than simply being a way we could choose to 'read' it? I mean, making money off art is the norm, rather than something unusually shady. The authors of 'Blowin' In The Wind' or 'Fight The Power' are also making money, but we tend not to say that Chuck D was 'profiting from black suffering', or think that he was making a performative point about media spectacle and the futility of social critique in art. I think it's an interesting take; I'm just not seeing where it is in the piece itself.

Spot on as usual.

I thought the "profitting from black suffering" comment was uncalled for because it implies that the artist doesn't actually care about their subject matter. That is why I said I don't know enough about him to question his motives. I doubt any of us do.

You could apply that logic to any artist who discusses social issues in their art, but is it fair? For example, Janelle Monae's album drops in the midst of the "me too" movement but it does not mean she's only concerned about profitting off of it.

That comment wasn't a critique on him. It's what he is literally saying about himself and other artists and America itself. Make that money is the main theme of the song over laid with the death of black people. The video is not about gun violence. It's about our unending desire to distract ourselves from the problems we face and those who profit off the distraction. It's like a palindrome. The more you get drawn into the video and its symbolism the more you distract yourself. It's an unending loop until you find the next distraction or break the distraction to work on what's important.

lrn36 said:

babynoz said:

Spot on as usual.

I thought the "profitting from black suffering" comment was uncalled for because it implies that the artist doesn't actually care about their subject matter. That is why I said I don't know enough about him to question his motives. I doubt any of us do.

You could apply that logic to any artist who discusses social issues in their art, but is it fair? For example, Janelle Monae's album drops in the midst of the "me too" movement but it does not mean she's only concerned about profitting off of it.

That comment wasn't a critique on him. It's what he is literally saying about himself and other artists and America itself. Make that money is the main theme of the song over laid with the death of black people. The video is not about gun violence. It's about our unending desire to distract ourselves from the problems we face and those who profit off the distraction. It's like a palindrome. The more you get drawn into the video and its symbolism the more you distract yourself. It's an unending loop until you find the next distraction or break the distraction to work on what's important.

We understand what the video is about but thanks.

What I and I think Deebs were trying to understand was the "profitting from black suffering" comment because you pretty much framed it as just a marketing ploy on his part.

You seem to be low key accusing him of being "fake woke"?

babynoz said:

lrn36 said:

That comment wasn't a critique on him. It's what he is literally saying about himself and other artists and America itself. Make that money is the main theme of the song over laid with the death of black people. The video is not about gun violence. It's about our unending desire to distract ourselves from the problems we face and those who profit off the distraction. It's like a palindrome. The more you get drawn into the video and its symbolism the more you distract yourself. It's an unending loop until you find the next distraction or break the distraction to work on what's important.

We understand what the video is about but thanks.

What I and I think Deebs were trying to understand was the "profitting from black suffering" comment because you pretty much framed it as just a marketing ploy on his part.

You seem to be low key accusing him of being "fake woke"?

In the lyrics, he says "We just wanna party, Party just for you, We just want the money" He's critiquing hip hop, the record labels, the gun industry, America , and himself for profiting off of black suffering. He's not excluding himself because he is playing the game. How is that accusing him of being fake woke?

Have you read his New Yorker interview?

“In a weird way, I feel bad for white people. You guys have put yourselves in the adult position, but you refuse to see it—you’re so lazy. Paying reparations is realistic, but you just don’t want to do it, so you don’t let yourself see how things are. So, yeah, I can’t help you anymore.”

"As a black person, you have to sell the black culture to succeed. So I’d try to trust Black Tad, but it’s really up to him whether he’d sell us out.”

Loved Awaken My Love, great album ... not sure on this. The track needed alot more music and melody, too repetitive for my tastes.

I don't at all understand why this guy's music, which ranges from OK to complete crap (see his first album Camp) gets so much praise. Isolating the song from the music video, it's not very good. Nothing really interesting going on here and a very tiresome lyric. He has no charisma and isn't an interesting stage performer. His voice in live performances is consistently shaky and poor.
Has he ever shown any actual musical ability? I know he has a very talented producer, the former composer for his show Community, that writes his music and is very competent at recreating some lite-funk and R&B sounds like on his last record, although it was lacking in the soul or grit of really great funk music.
Does he play any instruments? Much of his music is extremely misogynistic and obnoxious. He may have some talent as an actor and writer, but, sorry, let's not act like he's some sort of music genius.

lrn36 said:

babynoz said:

We understand what the video is about but thanks.

What I and I think Deebs were trying to understand was the "profitting from black suffering" comment because you pretty much framed it as just a marketing ploy on his part.

You seem to be low key accusing him of being "fake woke"?

In the lyrics, he says "We just wanna party, Party just for you, We just want the money" He's critiquing hip hop, the record labels, the gun industry, America , and himself for profiting off of black suffering. He's not excluding himself because he is playing the game. How is that accusing him of being fake woke?

Have you read his New Yorker interview?

“In a weird way, I feel bad for white people. You guys have put yourselves in the adult position, but you refuse to see it—you’re so lazy. Paying reparations is realistic, but you just don’t want to do it, so you don’t let yourself see how things are. So, yeah, I can’t help you anymore.”

"As a black person, you have to sell the black culture to succeed. So I’d try to trust Black Tad, but it’s really up to him whether he’d sell us out.”

*sigh*, Let me rephrase...

Do YOU believe that Glover is a fake woke dude who ONLY cares about profitting from black culture simply because he is being paid for his work? Is there any validity/value to this artistic statement's social commentary or are we just being pimped by him IN YOUR OPINION?

To clarify, we all understand that he is including himself as a participant in the game. I am asking if YOU are judging his credibilty based on that?

babynoz said:

lrn36 said:

In the lyrics, he says "We just wanna party, Party just for you, We just want the money" He's critiquing hip hop, the record labels, the gun industry, America , and himself for profiting off of black suffering. He's not excluding himself because he is playing the game. How is that accusing him of being fake woke?

Have you read his New Yorker interview?

“In a weird way, I feel bad for white people. You guys have put yourselves in the adult position, but you refuse to see it—you’re so lazy. Paying reparations is realistic, but you just don’t want to do it, so you don’t let yourself see how things are. So, yeah, I can’t help you anymore.”

"As a black person, you have to sell the black culture to succeed. So I’d try to trust Black Tad, but it’s really up to him whether he’d sell us out.”

*sigh*, Let me rephrase...

Do YOU believe that Glover is a fake woke dude who ONLY cares about profitting from black culture simply because he is being paid for his work? Is there any validity/value to this artistic statement's social commentary or are we just being pimped by him IN YOUR OPINION?

To clarify, we all understand that he is including himself as a participant in the game. I am asking if YOU are judging his credibilty based on that?

No, I'm not judging his credibility. I don't know if he is fake woke or not. I don't know what's really in his head. I'm complimenting him on the meta aspect of this particular piece of work. That's all.

lrn36 said:

babynoz said:

*sigh*, Let me rephrase...

Do YOU believe that Glover is a fake woke dude who ONLY cares about profitting from black culture simply because he is being paid for his work? Is there any validity/value to this artistic statement's social commentary or are we just being pimped by him IN YOUR OPINION?

To clarify, we all understand that he is including himself as a participant in the game. I am asking if YOU are judging his credibilty based on that?

No, I'm not judging his credibility. I don't know if he is fake woke or not. I don't know what's really in his head. I'm complimenting him on the meta aspect of this particular piece of work. That's all.

deebee said:

lrn36 said:

His video literally says he is using black suffering for his own financial gain and people take it as being "woke."

[...]

Yeah, most people seem to be so caught up in the cryptic images of the video that they are not discussing the issues it actually addresses which is pretty much what the video is critiquing. That people can be so easily distracted from what's important. It's showing the power and limitations of art to move people to change.

Is it all that unequivocal? I'm not opposed to the idea that it's somewhat ironic or even cynical, but couldn't it be that he's critiquing both the real things that are happening and their easy incorporation into a media cycle that distracts more than it enlightens? And that he's both standing back commenting on that mediatisation and recognising the way he's implicated in it?

I'm struggling to see how it's doing no more than "using black suffering for his own financial gain", and somehow eye-rolling at any section of the audience that thinks it's doing more. I see that he's 'getting his money', but, yet and still, it all ends with him running in terror.

Happy to read a different take on it, though.

Thank you, again, deebee, for being the voice of reason.

Neversin said:

lrn36 said:

My only critique is the song can't really stand on its own. It actually doen't say much. But placed with the video, it works. Maybe that's intentional, but to me a song should be just a riveting by itself. I'm not a big Donald Glover fan, but kudos to him and director Hiro Murai. Very impressive

I tried listening to the song without the video and then it's just the usual empty crap "music" he makes...
But together with the video it becomes a complete and very interesting piece of work and I love the irony of it...

Neversin.

You're both right. Outside the context of the video, "This Is America" is not one of CG's distinctive tracks.

lrn36 said:

deebee said:

But what is it that leads you to the conclusion that the ironic message is part of the intention of piece itself, rather than simply being a way we could choose to 'read' it? I mean, making money off art is the norm, rather than something unusually shady. The authors of 'Blowin' In The Wind' or 'Fight The Power' are also making money, but we tend not to say that Chuck D was 'profiting from black suffering', or think that he was making a performative point about media spectacle and the futility of social critique in art. I think it's an interesting take; I'm just not seeing where it is in the piece itself.

It's in the song itself. He's says get that money at all costs along with the image of him distracting everyone's attention by dancing. The video is literally the equivalent of the dance. It's a distraction because this is America. We distract overselves from the problems of the world while others make a profit of the suffering.

[Edited 5/9/18 9:59am]

Is he really saying that for his own sake, or is he basically mimicking the modern rapper?

I'm tired of this kind of shit. Back to Camp Lo.

namepeace said:

lrn36 said:

It's in the song itself. He's says get that money at all costs along with the image of him distracting everyone's attention by dancing. The video is literally the equivalent of the dance. It's a distraction because this is America. We distract overselves from the problems of the world while others make a profit of the suffering.

[Edited 5/9/18 9:59am]

Is he really saying that for his own sake, or is he basically mimicking the modern rapper?

I think he is. Here's a quote from his New Yorker interview.

“Everyone’s been trying to turn me into their woke bae”—millennial slang for an enlightened boyfriend. “But that’s not what I am. I’m fucked up, too—and that’s where the good shit comes from.”

The point is either we play the game and always lose or don't play the game at all and die. No one has gotten to the point where they want to change the game and no one wants to die so these are the only options.

scratch said:

I don't at all understand why this guy's music, which ranges from OK to complete crap (see his first album Camp) gets so much praise. Isolating the song from the music video, it's not very good. Nothing really interesting going on here and a very tiresome lyric. He has no charisma and isn't an interesting stage performer. His voice in live performances is consistently shaky and poor.
Has he ever shown any actual musical ability? I know he has a very talented producer, the former composer for his show Community, that writes his music and is very competent at recreating some lite-funk and R&B sounds like on his last record, although it was lacking in the soul or grit of really great funk music.
Does he play any instruments? Much of his music is extremely misogynistic and obnoxious. He may have some talent as an actor and writer, but, sorry, let's not act like he's some sort of music genius.

I don't completely agree with your assessment. But that aside, who said he's a genius? You're the first person to use the g-word in this thread.

A ingenious video does not make an artist a genius. He makes music that's entertaining to a lot of people, and although his music is heavily derivative, he's still interesting to listen to.

Can't that be enough? Why run the cat down?

I like it. The video's very good. I'd almost call it "a modern classic".

Maybe it should be considered more of an art piece than a piece of music. The song needs the video at least, otherwise it just jumps too swiftly from one section to another for the listener to be able to fully appreciate it.

Childish Gambino's 'This Is America' Leads Hot 100, & All-Rap Top Four, For Second Week In A Roll

novabrkr said:

I like it. The video's very good. I'd almost call it "a modern classic".

Maybe it should be considered more of an art piece than a piece of music. The song needs the video at least, otherwise it just jumps too swiftly from one section to another for the listener to be able to fully appreciate it.

True.

namepeace said:

scratch said:

namepeace said:

I don't completely agree with your assessment. But that aside, who said he's a genius? You're the first person to use the g-word in this thread.

A ingenious video does not make an artist a genius. He makes music that's entertaining to a lot of people, and although his music is heavily derivative, he's still interesting to listen to.

Can't that be enough? Why run the cat down?

I have seen a lot of people refer to him as a genius. Maybe less so on this board but I think we lean more skeptical on his stuff with a few big fans. I'm not trying to run him down. If I thought he was great I would say so. I'm just giving my opinion. And my honest opinion is that his music isn't that good. That's all. Not everything has to be a love-in

I may have read your comments about "complete crap" as running him down. And similar to your experience with the "genius" camp I have seen a lot of folks here and elsewhere in full on hateration-holleration mode.

Not everything has to be a "love-in" -- even though I enjoy his music, I find it highly derivative, and I think his last album is a bit overpraised by a lot of people who don't really know his references.

That said, he's done a lot with the talents he has, and with some help, he built a piece of work that will likely be his signature. He's doing more with what he has than other far more talented musical acts.