Tag Archives: Chris Dowber

Griots And A Strong Sense Of What Hip-Hop Means

Mos def has a strong sense of what hip-hop means

Hip-hop is not rap, although rap is part of hip-hop. Hip-hop is a culture and style that was born in the American city, growing out of the minds and experiences of predominantly African-American communities in late ’70’s New York. But by now it is everywhere. They love hip-hop in India and South America and here where I live in Norfolk, most farmers may not listen to hip-hop, but their kids certainly do.

Hip-hop is also a beat: the beat of rap music, the beat of the city beating here in the country, over the airwaves and out of car windows, vibrating through headphones in the air-conditioned cabs of tractors. It is a beat originally created by isolating the percussion breaks of jazz and funk records and remixing them live for dancing and block party revelry, and later to accompany the flowing, groove poetry of a whole new kind of poet: the rapper, Master of Ceremonies or MC—often poor and disenfranchised, but still creative, soulful and strong. Hip-hop, in its original form, could be considered a kind of technological, urban folk music, in the sense that its early practitioners did not record their sounds, and even resisted recording. Hip-hop was something that happened live.

But was rapping really a new form? There is another part of this story that has always interested me. In many of the African tribes from which slaves were stolen, the griot (pr. gree-oh) was a cultural fixture. Griots were to West-Africa what the bards or troubadours were to Europe: mobile repositories of history in the form of oral tradition; cultural history sung and chanted to the beat of drums. Except in the case of the griot, that beat was African.

Griots were also expected to improvise poetry based on the current social and political scene, and were known for their sharp wit and verbal mastery. In many parts of West-Africa, a party still isn’t a party without a griot.

It is a testimony to the resilience of slaves that, denied the right to speak their own languages, they found other ways to speak, and sing, their true voices. There were the work songs of course,   documented before they disappeared in the field recordings of Alan Lomax. But consider other examples. As blacks embraced Christianity, they injected the forms of church with Africanness. Black preaching became famous for its emotional power, spontaneity and, you guessed it, verbal mastery. Black gospel, blues and then jazz took the existing forms of American church music, folk and brass military music and made them African. Jazz and blues again incorporated the principle of the masterful voice, not spoken this time, but sung through the instrument itself, giving us the improvised instrumental solo. And rock and roll is a whole other subject…

Given this history, hip-hop is seen as an urban innovation on an old theme and a turn, perhaps full circle, back to the centrality of The Word. Rap is not merely poetry to a beat: these words flow with and around beats to create layers of syncopation, tickling the mind while they move the body. They are polyrhythms with verbal content.

At this level hip-hop is an art form, and while we may not always like the content of an artist’s message, if we care about art we can still engage with it on the basis of its merits. And we may consider its context. Some people, even creative people, will respond to poverty and systemic oppression with anger and violence. Some will focus their desire on all the trappings of money and fame formerly denied them. It’s not so hard to fathom.

But there are some, a few, who go another direction for justice. These are the warrior-poets who seek from pain the gifts of understanding, even wisdom. Even love. Hip-hop is known to borrow motifs from kung-fu movies, because there, too,  you find the archetype of the warrior-artist, skills honed to razor sharpness, delivering beat-downs with fists if necessary, but just as often with the mind itself.

Granted, you will not find much of this style of writing on the radio. But it’s out there. To dig deeper, Google “conscious hip-hop” or “underground hip-hop” and see where that takes you. Word.  For the Silo, Chris Dowber.

Window Fishing Or The Night We Caught Beatlemania

Window Fishing

A Silo Canuck Book Review

I’ve never particularly been a Beatle’s fan. I like some of their songs. I like a number of them very much, but if I was asked the now proverbial question, “The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?” I would probably say, Oh, I don’t know, maybe The Who? The body of work of Mark Knopfler. Massive Attack were massive for me.

But I was not a child of the sixties, “an age of assassins,” John B. Lee writes in his poignant and powerfully executed preface, when “[o]ur childhood martyred almost all the heroes that we’d had.” John F. Kennedy. Robert F. Kennedy. Martin Luther King (Malcolm X, not mentioned but later, yes). “The list is overlong,” Lee says. “It will not end.” I understand more fully than ever these life-shattering moments, for Americans and Canadians alike; for so many  Across the Universe . Into this near death of hope came The Beatles. The Beatles came to America, came on a Sunday night in January 1964 to The Ed Sullivan show and, and as Lee exclaims with no exclamation mark, “sang my life awake.”

It’s not a perfect looking book. Yet as I read, the grainy cover photo (by an unknown photographer) of four dapper mop-tops fishing out the window of their Seattle hotel—they literally weren’t allowed to leave—starts to resonate. It’s imperfection could be viewed as integral, evoking a time in music when moments of “perfect imperfection,” as Michael Shatte calls them in his essay, were more common in pop; “happy accidents” which would not be tolerated in this era of hyper-produced top-forty songs, when singers voices are routinely, digitally “auto-tuned” in the studio, and we get used to being disappointed when we hear them live. Then there’s lip-synching. I don’t need to go on. There is great music being made by great musicians right now. But that’s not what we’re here to talk about. This is about a particular moment in pop-music history, in cultural history, and many of the moments that followed.

PaulMcCartneyBlur

The book is selected and edited by John B. Lee, a Canadian poet and writer who has published more than fifty books and received over 70 prestigious awards for his work. If you haven’t heard of him don’t feel too bad. He tells me openly there is little money in poetry, reminding me it’s not about that anyway. If it was it probably wouldn’t be poetry.

If you haven’t read him it might be time to start: his verse and prose catch the beauty of rural life, farm life, family life, hockey, human sexuality—life. Just Google him. He’s from home, you know. Right around here, right around me, the Poet Laureate of Brantford, Ontario and Norfolk County, home as well to Alexander Graham Bell and Wayne Gretzky, a poet of sport. Like McEnroe was one of the poets of my youth, making tennis beautiful, thrilling, creative; revolutionary. How I tried to emulate him…

Window Fishing Cover

Window Fishing is about a time of Revolution, evolutions in culture, and about growing up in the thick of it all. I wasn’t here yet, but as I read this book I learn. It is a literary volume. The cover photo and torn ticket stub on the back page are its only images. Or are they? Because black words on white paper are also images. And the book’s words, artistically rendered, conjure images as well as ideas. It is poetry, and prose poetry, and personal essays; fine writing by a collection of fine writers.

I learn that for most of the men, who were boys then, pubescent, the Beatles were all about music: musical discovery, even ecstasy. And style too. There was style.

For the women who write about the phenomenon of Beatlemania, there was music too. Absolutely. But there was something else. Something profound: the awakening of sexuality. Even a kind of love. Suddenly I understand all the screaming and crying, the fainting. For emerging, young (straight) women, the Beatles were more than musical. They were also beautiful. Sexy. As Susan Whelehan puts it in her essay: “John. He was mine and I was his…I was going to be his FOREVER. And I am.”

While many parents of the day may have dismissed The Fab Four at first as a silly “boy-band,” we might say now, shaking their longish (for the time), round hair-cuts—singing “Ooooo!” and “Yeah Yeah Yeah!”—fact is from the beginning The Beatles were always at the very least competent, and obviously compelling, musicians. Writes Honey Novick in her probing, poetic essay: “You could actually dance to their music.” And we know they became more and more sophisticated as they progressed through their careers, eventually making challenging, often satisfying real art-music, the way Radiohead did for me in my 20’s.

All this beautiful literature about The Beatles and the 1960’s has inspired me to listen, finally, seriously, to the music. Even if you thought, at the time, “Yeah Yeah Yeah” was just bubblegum for kids, consider the lyrics. One friend to another: “You think you lost your love/Well I saw her yesterday. She says it’s you she’s thinkin’ of/And she told me what to say: She says she loves you.” She loves you man. Yeah! (Yeah! Yeah!). What more is there to celebrate? Ecstatically.

If you were there, or if you want to learn, or if you care about music or culture or the 1960’s or just literature, embrace the “perfect imperfection” of this unique and potent book. Some of the poems made me close my eyes and shut the pages. To savour, digest. Bruce Meyer made me cry. I was 8 years old when Lennon was shot. Assassinated. It made no impact on me then. I wasn’t really there yet. The book put me there, as close as I can ever come.  For the Silo, Alan Gibson.

The Social Network Movie Blows My Mind

Movie expectations are a dangerous bag. We savor anticipation, but envisioning a positive experience before you’ve actually had the experience can warp perception and lead to anti-climax: the proverbial let down.

Hype is another form of expectation, one that is projected from external sources. And how many times have we heard the phrase: “It just doesn’t live up to the hype.” We get suckered by marketing and take solace in acerbic criticism. We love to hate the let down.

I went to my local video store a couple of weeks ago on a mission. It was time, I decided, to watch The Social Network, the much acclaimed film by director David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club) about the founding of Facebook.

Rarely do my trips to Super-A Video feel like such an event. First of all, Columbia Pictures has gone all out on a gorgeous, deluxe box for this film. I felt like I was in a record store again, holding in my hands, for the first time, a new album I had been waiting for. Some of you will remember what that was like…

On the cover, a host of superlatives from the likes of The New York Times, New Yorker, and Rolling Stone Magazine. “Stupendous!” “Exhilarating!” “Absolutely emblematic of its time and place!” The list of ecstatic declamations was exhilarating in itself. But it also made me nervous. Will it live up to the hype[rbole]?

So this was my Friday night. I dimmed the lights and sank into my couch, prepared for what was, in the educated opinion of many, a defining cinematic event. This is my substitute for romance, I guess. And in this case: no anticlimax.

The film starts at a blistering pace with a scene of two people sitting relatively still. The momentum is in the dialogue, in the intellectual animation of two brains on fire. I watched the movie again on Saturday, this time with a friend, and he was literally on the edge of his seat, concentrating to following the rapid-fire repartee which is the opening salvo of Fincher’s film. And then he said, “Wow. What a way to start a movie.” Certainly makes you pay attention.

Screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, TV’s The West Wing), who is known for his dense, tightly scripted approach to writing, has already won the Golden Globe for this piece of work and the Oscar seems likely. But don’t let my description of the opening scene scare you off. The Social Network is not an exhausting experience. It chronicles a moment of great creative outpouring in the lives of brilliant people who think very quickly, and it finds a way to carry you along, and in, to the tale of their accomplishments and relationships.

The DVD extras illuminate what can happen when a great director, writer and actors work collaboratively on a project like this, providing a rare glimpse into the artistic process of an incredible team. Fincher (Golden Globe, Best Director), comes off as an affable perfectionist, admired in spite of the fact that he will do 99 takes of a scene—ie: that electric opening. And the newly feted Jesse Eisenberg, with a host of Best Actor nominations for his role as principle Facebook architect Mark Zuckerberg, seems almost as smart as the genius he portrays.

The other star of this film is Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’ original soundtrack. At times haunting, at times propulsive, these long-time musical partners (Nine Inch Nails) have created a techno film score that will make your home theatre sing. Never obtrusive, always complimentary, it adds tone and depth, feeling and movement to this film. And it is cool. This is important. Zuckerberg knew that, with Facebook, he was on to something cool. He also knew that there is no more precious commodity—aside from sex—when it comes to marketing to young adults.

The Social Network, too, is that rare constellation of co-factors: it is a document, and example, of pop-culture that is blisteringly smart, sophisticated, exciting, funny, sexy, and cool. It is also a work of art, and for all of these reasons it is, truly, an emblem and anthem of our time.  For the Silo, Chris Dowber.