"urban:" explain the arguments against it...

I like the term.

Wow, you could do a great Onion type article couldn't you, vis a vis the urban/rural divide- "Countryside Alliance Demands Dedicated Radio For White/Rural Music".

Lol

I don't mind the term. What is good about it is that everyone knows exactly what is being referred to, if a bit loosely.

Bashment on the other hand seems a thouroughly confused term, even if its a much nicer word.

Because it's a euphemism. It means black. If you're going for an urban demo you're aiming at black people. And it allows you to utterly segregate (in the US, I mean) culture along racial lines without saying that's what you're doing.

That's the meat of the objection, I think, although I'm not sure I fully subscribe to it.

demo-geographics

presumably the term "urban" only became possible following the phenomenon of white flight to the suburbs?

after all at one point several decades ago it was white rich people who lived in, say, the centre of Detroit

so would the "suburban" then = metal/alt-rock

or is urban constructed in contrast with 'country'?

for what it's worth, i don't think the term is particularly offensive, it applies cos a/ that's where the bulk of the listenership for the music resides b/ its imagery generally tends to be urban -- if it has any imagery of place that is... the streets, da club etc... not much pastoral imagery in r&b or rap

although i wonder if southern rap has complicated that? i guess not, most of the music comes from urban areas like atlanta or certain wards of houston or new orleans, right

"... but a lot of people really object to the term. any ideas why?"


Perhaps because they consider "urban" a euphemism for ghetto.

Blackdown said:

ok so i know it's been done before - look away now if you're bored of it - but what are the main arguments against the term "urban" ?

Click to expand...

red star wrote a good article about "urban" and the reducing scope of "dance music" to accompany his dancehall mix on my blog. not precisely what you were after, but heres an exerpt:

"Why has ‘dance music’ become an every narrower category, and why is it now so moribund? One reason is the assault of a dominant discourse of multiculturalism that spawned the category of ‘urban’. By stealth, ‘urban’ has stolen a range of genres from the category of ‘dance’. In particular, two-step or UK garage gradually slid out of the post-rave ‘dance’ category and sidled up to American R&B. Ripe for picking, ‘urban’ claimed garage as its own. Equally, UK-based R&B moved out of the pop dance category and into the urban when the term urban went overground and hit the charts. R&B got its cool back. Also, whereas in the 1990s the breakbeat in the UK was seen as belonging to rave, an inherently British phenomenon, by 2000 it was being returned to its rightful owner, namely rap music (and rap’s soul, funk and R&B precursors). The relentless hunger of the ‘urban’ category has meant that those forms of music left within the ‘dance’ category (basically house and techno) have been bleached of all non-white ethnicity – an irony considering their African-American origins."

http://bassnation.uk.net/#109865514997692427

Now in the Washington D.C. area, African-Americans (there's another label for ya) have been moving out of the city and into the suburbs(still segregated suburbs but nonetheless not urban). There may be more go-go in the Prince Georges County region of Maryland than in Washington D.C. itself now. "Urban" is also a term of art in the radio marketing world and will, thus, likely stay in use for awhile.

Simon, I think we had an e-mail discussion awhile back regarding the use of the term "street" and what was the white or rock or country equivalent to it. I think we also discussed how art-school postpunk didn't have to have the same 'street' type rep to reach, uh, middle-class hipsters that uh, African diaspora music does.

i don't like the term, but i do use it. it's a convenient umbrella term just like 'rock' or 'dance' is.

the principal reason i don't like it, though, is that all too often 'urban' is not taken to be a broad umbrella term, but the name of a distinct scene. this enables the mass media [such as radio 1 DJs] to claim that they giving time and money to providing a forum for this 'urban scene', while ACTUALLY largely ignoring stuff like soca and grime and dancehall, because all they really provide a forum for is r n b.

jimet said:

Because it's a euphemism. It means black. If you're going for an urban demo you're aiming at black people. And it allows you to utterly segregate (in the US, I mean) culture along racial lines without saying that's what you're doing.

That's the meat of the objection, I think, although I'm not sure I fully subscribe to it.

Click to expand...

the thing is that the music that falls into the catagory of "urban" is by absolutely no means exclusively black either in terms of artists, producers or consumers.

black country

blissblogger said:

or is urban constructed in contrast with 'country'?

Click to expand...

I think there may be something to this. In the South and elsewhere through the second half of the 20th century, the ghettoization of formerly rural communities and small cities (Virginia Beach, Columbia South Carolina, Decatur Georgia, Indian reservations in the midwest) also brought with it urban culture, music, dress, etc.

It's interesting then that there have been a few recent instances of urban artists from places with a country heritage playing country. The Nelly/Tim McGraw duet was just weird. And the Neptunes have talked about producing country artists. Nelly's from St. Louis and the Neptunes from Virginia Beach. Country may now be the almost exclusive province of whites, but it's interesting to see reminders of a black country heritage... the movie Ray highlighted this as well.

again I stand alone lol but I don't care...

The term 'Urban' is a term generated by music industry exec's and marketing (who are mainly white) to further commodify and sell 'black music' to the 'white masses'. Simple as that. So when Becky goes into HMV she didn't have to whisper "where's the black music section?" she could just say "wheres the urban music section?" without going redfaced lol.

The first retort any white person (and now worryingly even african's/black's but this in england I guess lol) I ever encounter say to this is "hey thats racist! it excludes me!". First of all the music was never supposed to include and satisfy you but who said that it doesn't include you? White people can make black music too - who said you cannot? The problem lies in the term - giving over something to the black/african man - its a simple pride issue. The term is political - the two cannot be seperated - whoever denies this is lying. I'll give an example.

I remember two years ago at the UMS. It was the last panel where Tommi were getting murked and Ms. Dynamite (god bless her) raised the heat. A Asian girl stands up and says "Dynamite why do you keep saying black music? Haven't we all gone past this?" (this despite there being a Asian music industry, black music spinoff genres such as 'Desi' now claimed as Asian all set up with the minimum of fuss and debate of seperatism). Dynamite paused and said "its black music dear - society tries to take everything from else but they won't take our music. They took rock but its all black music". All the brothas and sistas went nuts including myself (lol at Kwame looking nervous - i'll never forget that look). Outside, all the kids were like "its true...think about it how did the term come in?...thiefing man..." THIS IS WHAT TERMS LIKE THIS TRY TO PREVENT.

England seeks to fully smother the african/black community and is very smart and fast at doing it. This is jus another step.

polz said:

When people insist on this stance, they'll have to acknowledge the fact that black music is made on 'white instruments', all according to their own logic (which is not mine).

I think this claiming of kinds of music by certain racial groups is very unhealthy. I know certain types of music are made mostly by certain groups of people, which very often will be dominated by one racial group, but when you call a kind of music your racial groups own, don't complain when other racial or ethnic groups call other things their own and deny you the right to it.

Click to expand...

like a guitar I guess that is actually a descendent of an old african instrument (to try and be region specific...I think West or North Africa)?

your trying to justify racism by a FAAAAAAARR more dominant group over another? what a joke....before you respond read your 2nd paragraph again....

its called black music...white people can also take part..whats not clear about that? black people do not have the power to exclude any white person from anything...partly cos we can't and also a lot of us are too soft hearted lol despite the f***** up situation we live in WORLDWIDE. But people still can't accept a small title tut tut tut....

Music is one of the last places the black/african person can truly have freedom in and 'people' still don't wanna let us have even the title. If that ain't strange I dunno man..........

Black music is a better term for things like hip-hop, rnb, and reggae (grime and dnb are different kettles of fish, I'd say), I think, than 'urban music' because it describes who the music is (mostly) made by, and what sort of communities it (mostly) comes from. I don't see why other people who share my melanin-deficiency find that 'excludes' them from consuming or taking part. You'll happily eat and even make Chinese or Indian food (or ersatz versions of such) without worrying that the fact that they are called 'Chinese' or 'Indian' means you can't take part, won't you?

Urban music is a rubbish term anyways. Surely anything that is being made in a city, that is informed by city life, is urban music?

Pearsall and Tactics OTMFM

I mean why arent the yeah yeah yeahs and interpol "urban"? Its not like they've got the suburbs on lock any more than jadakiss or someone. The answer is of course "urban" = nonwhite.

Tactics said:

The first retort any white person (and now worryingly even african's/black's but this in england I guess lol) I ever encounter say to this is "hey thats racist! it excludes me!". First of all the music was never supposed to include and satisfy you but who said that it doesn't include you? White people can make black music too - who said you cannot? The problem lies in the term - giving over something to the black/african man - its a simple pride issue. The term is political - the two cannot be seperated - whoever denies this is lying.

Click to expand...

i find this an interesting argument. but what about music that has been dragged into the urban category like jungle which was never exclusively black or white in the first place, but proudly multicultural?

jungle owes as much to white brummies like doc scott as it does to black londoners like fabio and grooverider.

when i was growing up in the early nineties and hardcore was going, we grew up in much more of a mixed environment than previous generations. it never occurred to me that the music we were listening to was "black" or "white". i didn't see it in those terms at all. imo its better to let music unite us instead of dividing us. nothing to do with pride, but i can only speak for myself of course.

this issue makes my head hurt. all i know is that there is music that i connect with on a deep level, that makes me happy.