Hip Hop and Academia pt 2: Fetishizing "black authenticity" (special appearance by poetry slams!!)

so after reading a few articles today, i realized that some academics would say that i listen to hip hop, participate in poetry slams, and have a non-white girlfriend because i have a fetish for black masculinity. in fact, Susan Somers-Willet, a poet who i have seen perform before, claims in her article that black males win all the poetry slams because a predominantly white audience is fetishizing the 'authentic' black experience. really? your going to reduce not only any black male poets to this presentation of authenticity, but reduce the audience to an over-generalized homogeneous group masturbating at the thought of hearing about the black male struggle?

let's ignore the fact that the most successful slam poets, regardless of style, gender, race or what have you are TALENTED WRITERS, lets ignore their ability to convey a point to an audience and leave them with a euphoric feeling of teleportation to places other than the performance space. lets just say that it's all a fetish. at least i have an excuse for not winning poetry slams all the time. it's not because i lose to better writers and performers, its because my black experience isnt authentic enough for the audience.

Another author, Ward Keeler, who i actually like and agree with on many levels, does say some more or less boneheaded things about hip hop. The reason young males love hip hop (regardless of race) is impotence. or fear of impotence, or percieved impotence. wow. ok, now lets use the reflexive methodology that permeated the social sciences in the 70's and 80's by trying to address the implicit biases of the author...... by using the word 'impotence' 20 times in your article, what does that say about you? could this article be a way of justifying some form of your impotence? hmmmm. i wont go so far as to make that claim. Things are usually much more complex than a one to one cause to effect ratio (especially for a large cultural entity like hip hop).

now, i do believe that there are elements of validity in both the statements i just railed against. however, when you allow it to become the spotlight, or downright ignore other elements, you sound dogmatic, pedantic, and generally ingnorant. At least give some greater understanding of the other systems, views, and ideas that help generate the greater whole. Then i wont have to spend time writing shit like this so i dont explode.