Final Paper

Lanisha Cole
Dr. Wexler
English 313
13 December 2010
Am I Black Enough for You?: Different Mentalities in the Hip Hop Community
The urban society has an abundance of different types of people. From Latinos
to Asians, urban culture is diverse beyond racial measurement. Many are seen as being apart of
this extraordinary cultural, class-based phenomenon but none argue that the originators of this
widely spread lifestyle was founded, targeted, and represented by the political and economic
aware African American men of the 1970’s. This over populated planet, known as Hip Hop,
has given many Blacks an unwanted identity. Hop culture, which started out as a way to share
view points about the poverty stricken African American community, has somehow evolved into
a beat knocking, pants sagging, booty shaking hypocrisy. According to Todd Boyd’s book, Am I
Black Enough for You? , the Black Hip Hop Community has split into three main categories;
The Race Man, The Nigga, and The New Black Aesthetic. Each of the three constructions of the
“Black” or Hip Hop man, are personalities that survive in the Hip Hop community. Although the
personalities are geared to survival, they also contribute to the misconceptions of the Black Hip
Hop community. Therefore the multiple personalities of the Black Community somehow
contribute to the negative preconceived notions of the outside world.

Todd Boyd’s Am I Black Enough for You?, categorization of the “Black” (Hip Hop) man
begins with the culturally assimilated Race Man of the early 80’s. His dapperness and ability to
see past the racial inequalities of this world has become a direct insult to the current Hip Hip
community. In the Hip Hop mainstream of today, the Nigga mentality dictates the mind set of Hip Hop participants. The loud, in-your-face thought process has captivated the public and is
responsible for the negative outlook on the Hip Hop community. On the other hand, the New
Black Aesthetic, which is a mixture between the two, has been accepted among society and is
responsible for the positive cultural mobility of the Black Community.

The well put together Race Man of the 1980’s is seen as a perfectly assimilated
individual. He appeals to mainstream America and exercises the values and morals that are
looked upon as being a good citizen. He is polite, dapper, well-dressed, determined, and fully
conformed into White America. The Race Man is also educated, a positive thinker, and unaware
of the racial inequalities around him. The Race Man’s mentality disconnects him from a sense of
reality and although he is rather intelligent, he is ignorant to his own culture. He is unable to
fully understand the unpolished thought process of the classes beneath him and can’t empathize
with the issues that affect the poverty stricken people who he views as unfortunate. Therefore,
the Race Man has the ability to fully assimilate into mainstream society, but can’t understand the
majority lifestyle of urban people.

The inability for the Race Man to culturally interact with the Hip Hop (Black) community
relates to the indirect pressure he feels to conform to the majority. He lacks the adaptation
mechanisms of change. In most cases, the Race Man is brought up in a middle class home and is
unexposed to the economic, racial, and political injustices around him. His mentality is passed on
from a previous generation and has become brainwashed into thinking that he isn’t apart of the
African American experience of Hip Hop culture. In Todd Boyd’s, Am I Black Enough For
You? , he says “…many of our society’s gatekeeper’s assume that “the first job of Afro-
American mass culture should be to uplift the race, or to salvage the denigrated image of blacks
in white American imagination.” (Boyd 19) The Race Man exercises this mentality to the fullest.
Instead of upholding the culture of African Americans, they are driven to prove white America’s,which is the majority, assumptions wrong, which in turn rids them of their personal culture. Race
Man’s indirect concern for the culture stripped him of his African American traditions and he is
now consumed with the background and conditions of white America.

The Race Man is ‘the other’ in the spectrum of culture. He can’t stand on his own and
lacks the ability to identify himself without the two cultures he’s torn between. Simone de
Beauvior’s article “Woman as Other” introduces the theory that women are the other to men.
This is also apparent to the Race Man. He is the “other” when held to the other subcategories of
Hip Hop culture. Beauvior states that woman “is defined and differentiated with reference to
man and not she with reference to her; she is incidental, the inessential as opposed to the
essential. He is the Subject, he is the Absolute-she is the Other” (Beauvior 3). Like woman, the
Race Man is defined by the culture he’s trying not to be apart of (Hip Hop) as well as the culture
he is striving to gain expectance from. Both cultures are the subject and he is just the other. Not
able to stand without either because his existence revolves around avoiding one and infiltrating
another. Each culture represents the absolute, while he is just a construction without any
substance. The Race Man is seen as an Uncle Tom, perpetrator in the African American Hip Hop
mainstream, yet the Nigga mentality is easily excepted but highly damaging to the way Hip Hop
is viewed.
The Nigga mentality is one of nonconformity and rebellion. He is consumed with the
wants of materialistic items and is driven by greed and selfishness. The Nigga is seen as vulgar,
uneducated, and violent. He is sexually explicit, misogynistic, and unwilling to compromise. The
Nigga is aware of racial injustices, but doesn’t show concern or interest in fixing them. He also
views fame and fast money as his ultimate goal. The Nigga is the most negative mentality in the
Hip Hop community, but has been catapulted into being adapted by mainstream Hip Hop.
In Hip Hop, the Nigga mentality contributes to society’s negative thoughts behind Hip
Hop. Because the Niggas are extremely concerned with being set apart from white America,
they use a specific persona to show how much they disagree and don’t care with the thoughts and
stereotypes that have been bestowed upon them. In all the efforts of trying to go against the
mainstream, the Nigga has become the mainstream. Boyd writes, “The nigga is not interested in
anything having to do with mainstream, though his cultural products are clearly an integral part
of mainstream popular culture.” (Boyd 33) The effect of the Nigga trying to rebel against
mainstream American has somewhat backfired. The Nigga mentality has become the norm
despite the race of the person. This mentality has hurt the Hip Hop community more then helps
it. Although it encourages independence from mainstream cultural, it doesn’t support a positive
African American culture.

The Nigga mentality has only increased the amount of negative stereotypes and
confirmed the previous stereotypes of Black, and Hip Hop culture. Ferdinand de Saussure’s
article “Course in General Linguistics” explains the theory of Semiotics. Culture (sign) is created
by a signifier (visual) and signified (conception). When a person sees something (signifier) they
remember their experience (signified) which allows them to recognize what they are seeing
(culture). In the case of the Nigga, if society is mostly familiar with this mentality as a signifier
then they’ll associate each and every Black person as a Nigga. If their experience is of
encounters with the Nigga mentality, that’s what they will identify as the norm. The Nigga
mentality is the most dangerous to the uplifting of the Hip Hop (Black) community. Saussure
also relates signifier and signified as a binary relationship. There has to be an opposite for each
to exist. For example if there’s a big then a small must exist. In the case of the Nigga the binary
would be the Race Man. Although the Nigga is seen as an outlet from the oppressive society in
which Blacks live, the New Black Aesthetics’ ability to combine the education of the Race Man
and the rebellion of the Nigga opens new doors for the Hip Hop community.
The New Black Aesthetic is a direct mixture between the Race Man and the Nigga. Very
well educated and race conscious, the NBA dapper and polite, but can be an improvised youth.
The NBA is non-conforming, determined, and mentally strong. He is concerned about positive representation of Blacks and the Hip Hop community. The New Black Aesthetic fits into
mainstream and into the Hip Hop community, yet he doesn’t define himself by the community at
which he fits. He appeals to both the Race Man and the Nigga, yet they are distinctively
different.
The NBA and Race Man have many similarities. They are both well-educated, polite,
dapper, and well-dressed. The Race Man, as well as the NBA can be looked upon as role models
among all economic and social classes. Both are exposed to mainstream America in the colleges
they attend, which gives them the insight to assimilate, understand, and appeal to the White
community. Boyd states, “… defines a cultural “mulatto” as one who is “educated by a multi
racial mix of cultures” and can “navigate easily in the white world”.” (Boyd 25) The NBA and
Race Man are educated and introducing to different types of people, which gives them the ability
to adapt to the world around them. Unfortunately the differences between the NBA and Race
Man outweighs the similarities. Unlike the Race Man, the NBA acknowledges the racial tensions
and injustices being done around him. He tries to educate others and uses his college education
and street savvy to do so. Contrasting to the Race Man, who somewhat ignores his connection to
Black and Hip Hop culture, the NBA accepts both cultures as being his own. Looking down the
spectrum of Hip Hop mentalities is the Nigga. Although he is rough around the edges, the Nigga
possesses some likeness to the New Black Aesthetic.
The Nigga, as well as the NBA, believe in independence from mainstream. They are both
in touch with the “realness” of the culture and see themselves as its representative, but shy away
from being role models. They both appeal to mainstream America and use their street knowledge
to reach their ultimate goals, yet the goals may be completely different. Boyd states, “Malcolm
X’s life in the gangster underworld prior to joining…Islam, indicates that Black gangsters have
always made an easy transition to a position in the political vanguard.” (Boyd 75) In many cases,
the Nigga is change into the NBA like Malcolm X. The NBA and the Nigga have closer
similarities then any of the Hip Hop mentalities, yet they are extremely different.
The NBA strives to uplift his race and culture, yet the Nigga doesn’t care about either.
His only concern is to uplift his self and reach his own personal goals. While the NBA is college
educated, and views education in high esteem, the Nigga doesn’t care and isn’t educated, book
wise, but deems “street knowledge” as being credible. Also the NBA sees no class barriers, yet
the Nigga is defined by which class he is apart of. “…the defining characteristic of the day Nigga
is class, opposed to what used to be exclusively race.” (Boyd 31) The Nigga sees class as the
most important component that separates himself from everyone else, yet the NBA is allowed to
cross class walls, although they are rarely apart if the lower class. Although all the mentalities of
Hip Hop have many differences, they are all directly affected by racism.
Racism has a negative effect on the people who are oppressed. It makes people violent,
irritable, and hatful towards the things around them. In many cases, racism can have a damaging
outcome, not only on individuals but on the community and culture as a whole. Racism is the
direct cause of self hatred or hatred towards ones race and it is evident that it directly influences
all mentalities of the Hip Hop culture.
The Hip Hop culture exercises a lot of self hatred. Within each mentality, there are signs
that racism has been a key component to certain characteristics that each possess. The Race
Man’s unwillingness to acknowledge the racial problems around him and his constant
disconnection from his culture indicates shame. He is constantly trying to fit in with what is seen
as the norm or mainstream and, in trying to do so, becomes unattached from cultural reality. He
begins to adapt mainstream traditions as his own, unknowingly neglecting the culture in which
he is racially apart. The NBA, though culturally and racially conscious, is constantly driven to
educate others about the culture he is one with. Although the NBA is able to cross over
respectively between classes, races, and cultures, he lacks the ability to acknowledge anything
other then the social standing of his culture. Above all, the Nigga exhibits the most self hatred.
Consumed with the want and need to separate himself from mainstream America, he prides
himself on being selfish, violent, vulgar, and untidy. When talking about the film “Boyz in the
Hood”, Boyd writes, “…the self-hating police officer who has been ideologically seduced to
believe that his own personal interest are synonymous with those of the white establishment that
ultimately oppresses him on the same basis of race.” (Boyd 99) The constant pressure of race
forces the oppressed people to except the shortcomings and instead of fighting back against the
wrongdoers, they began to believe what they say and in turn begin to confirm the stereotypes.
Confirming a stereotype, directly or indirectly, is the epitome of self-hatred. The Hip Hop culture
has somewhat introduced new negative stereotypes and let racism influence their thought process
about themselves and the way they view the people around them.
The mentalities of Hip Hop culture define the direction in which Hip Hop goes. The Race
Man, with his well sophisticated persona, has become the direct opposite of what the culture
views as the norm. The NBA is seen as the mediator between the two and has the ability to
“cross over” between the Hip Hop mentalities and the White mainstream mentalities. The Nigga
who has evolved from the Race Man and NBA, lacks any positive direction what-so-ever yet he
is the ruler of the Hip Hop world.



Beauvior, Simone de. “Woman as Other”. 1949
Print
Boyd, Todd. Am I Black Enough for You? Bloomington, Indiana: 1997
Print
Saussure, Ferdinand de. “Course in General Linguistics.”

Not right to Laugh but I found this hilarious

An Example of a New Black Aesthetic

Seinfield Group Response

My favorite assignment all semester had to be the group project! I loved my team members and for the first time EVER, I was included in a group that where everyone carried their own weight. Although I didn't speak much during the presentation (my fear of public speaking is horrible!)I, like the rest of my group, participated in almost every aspect of the project. We all decided to split up the project into several different parts and then split into teams of two to research and study up on each section. My expertise was in the conclusion area. We wanted to present Seinfield as the "other" in a normal/traditional society. In order to do so, we used the bizarro episode, where Elaine finds a different group of friends that seem to except her in the beginning but soon realize that she doesn't truly fit into their group. Here's the clip below:




Bcause Elaine was apart of the "other" she couldn't fit into a regular group, yet she fit comfortably with the "other" group (Jerry, Kramer). Within the closing argument of the presentation I also contributed to located specific passages from the Barker book. We decided to use the section on realism vs. melodrama to try to catgeorize Seinfield in a specifc group. I also had discussion questions for our group to pose to the class.

sex as art

Foucault

Ars erotica-China, Japan, India, Roman Empire

Scientia sexualis- Western Europe, UK, U.S.

Idea of Sex changing over time
economically useful
energy-order-class is everything/power
discourse-discipline b/cuz thats just the way it is/biology says...
discourse of sexuality keeps un in order


East-sex was/is art
West-sex is to be studied/ biology

"Shakespeare in Love"

Derrida

~sign is always unstable. Arbitrary depending on other factors. The sign always depends on another therefore not absolute presence.

Saussure

Semiotics

Signifier<-Sign->Signified
visual thing mental/conception of these things

Saussure argues that the relationship between signifier and signified are arbitrary relationship depending on conext.

Binary relationship
big/small
cat/dog
fat/thin
white/black


no sign exist alone/always has an opposite

Dystopia vs. Utopia...internet

Dystopia
people's privacy being invaded
lack of need to think
advertising-teaching people how to be dissatisfied with themeselves
creation of a false world-people can pretend to be people they arent(predators, pedaphiles)
too much freedom

Utopia
everything on the internet is true
opening eyes to new cultures
global community
social network
spread of democracy

"Television Culture"

~close-ups in television used to emphasize villians
~love of the villian- "Anti-establishement ethos"

pros
revolution
rise of common people

negative
anti-establishment movement becomes the establishment

"Glenngarry, Glen Ross"

~human value is determined by their ability to make profit

self=profit, commodity

human and "thing" are interchangeable

discourse of capitalism=military, sports, fraternity

Post-Modernism

Simulacra
anti-foundationalism
fragmentation
play
intertextuality
multiculturalism
pastiche

Week 5

Today's video starring Dr. Zizek, a Marxist-philosopher, was very different. Throughout the entire film I was wondering when it would be over until he said something that caught and kept my attention for the rest of the class. The idea that we all think we're free because we lack the language to articulate our confinement. This really struck a nerve with me because so many times I find myself unable to find the words to describe exactly what I feel about certain "rights" we (Americans) believe we have. Also Dr. Zizek's question of "What is freedom?" seemed relevant to what he deals the duty of a philosopher. The duty of a philosopher is not to solve issues but to redefine them in order to find the solution.

Response Paper

Response Paper: “The Break-Up” as a “Radical Romance”
“The Break-up” starring Jennifer Aniston and Vince Vaughn centers around a
dysfunctional live in couple that spends the entire movie splitting apart. Forced to live in the
same apartment while their relationship dissolves, the uncomfortable situation constitutes
immense humor and sadness, as each individual wittingly tries to convince the other to move
out. Eventually tiring of the on going emotional games, the couple finally go on with life and
after being apart for a year, have a chance meeting on the streets of New York. This romantic
comedy shatters all the preconceived notions of what a love story should ultimately encompass,
which in turn makes it radical. McDonald’s Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre,
thoroughly discusses the ideology behind this new romantic comedy, now called a “radical
romance.”
Tamar Jeffers McDonald defines a romantic comedy as “a film which has as its central
narrative motor a quest for love, which portrays this quest in a light-hearted way and
almost always to a successful conclusion” (McDonald 9). The blueprint of a romantic comedy
consists of a man and woman meeting, falling in love, breaking up and getting back together at
the end. “The Break-up” is radical in the sense that entire movie is about a couple separating.
There is no happiness in the beginning, middle or end. The audience also never gets to see the
how the couple got together or how life was before they became a couple. The idea of the film
taking place in the ending stages of the relationship ignites a very abstract perspective of what
the relationship consists of. Also the couple is never on a quest for love throughout the movie.
Cole 2
The film lacks the typical love-stricken woman and the womanizer man, making it radical in
a stereotypical sense.
The film, “The Break-up” is also radical in the fact that it doesn’t revolve entirely around
the relationship of the man and woman, but focuses on each individual’s role and niche in life.
The film is “interested in setting up the conventions of this genre rather than upholding them”
(McDonald 62-63) which in turn makes the metaphor or the journey through the relationship
more important than the actual relationship. For example, Jennifer Aniston gave up her career to
be in the relationship with Vince Vaughn, the film focuses on how she wanted her life to be
rather than what it has actually become. The idea that the woman’s main priority isn’t getting or
keeping a man, but being successful in another way is radical in its own right. The characters of
the film are also radical in the sense that the gender rolls are reversed. Traditionally, the man is
wealthy and focused on a career when he meets an average, poor woman who alters his
perspective. In “The Break-up”, the woman is the primary bread winner who contributes to most
of the household expenses.
The idea of a film being “radical” not only consists of it breaking all the rules of a
traditional romance, but also bring something new and fresh to the artistry of film. The radical
romance “is often willing to abandon the emphasis on making sure the couple ends up together,
regardless of likelihood…” (McDonald 59). At the end of the movie, the couple actually
separates and after being apart for about a year they run into each other say hello and continue on
with their lives. They both are successful, single, and happy with the way their lives are going
although they have been apart. Traditionally, the couple would get back together after some
realization of how much they meant to each other, yet this movie presents a different outcome.
The conclusion of this movie presents itself to be more realistic while leaving the what happens
after the brief encounter rather ambiguous.
Although “The Break-up” was outside of the norm for romantic comedies, there were a

Cole 3
few similarities to other genres. According to McDonald, “radical romance comedies are aware
of film history and genre conventions, and are frequently happy to jettison many of the elements
of earlier forms” (McDonald 70). The idea that a radical romantic comedy follows certain rules
of traditional genres speaks volumes for how radical the comedy truly seems. “The Break-up”
ends openly, “reminiscent of the influential moments of Francois Truffaut’s Les Quatre Cents
Coups 1959…” (McDonald 70). The act of leaving the ending unclear is a radical movement
because it doest specify if the couple get back together or not.
Tamar Jeffers McDonald’s Romantic Comedy: Boy Meet Girl Meets Genre introduces
and explains every aspect of the radical romances. The idea of beginning the movie at the end of
the situation, nontraditional characters, and an uncertain ending makes the plot more realistic and
relatable. “The Break-up” fits into every feature of a new romance, yet still hold the values and
conventions of previous works.

Work Cited
McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. London: Wallflower
Press, 2007. Printip H

Week 4

Sexual Revolution (1960)

The movie "10".

Kinsey-Contraception-Playboy

Biology-"Purity"

In class this week, we discussed the idea of the sexual revolution and how it applies to today's world. Is it possible for a woman to be sexually liberated and not face reticual or name calling?? If so why do we have terms like "ho" or "slut"??

Week 3

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

Brick vs. Maggie
Brick vs. Family
Brick vs. Skipper
Brick vs. Brick

Week 2

Simone de Beauvior's article "The Second Sex" really changed my outlook on life. The idea that a women's identity is determined and defined by men is sooooo crazy yet true. I never thought about it in the context of a man constructing what it means to be a woman! What would happen if men had said women were equal???

Jerry McGuire

McGuire is what society believes the typical man to be: afraid of commitment, afraid to be alone, therefore a womanizer.

week 1

What is Love?

Many people had different answers to this question today in class. I thought many were very pessemistic and I wonder what happened to the fairy tale idea of love?? My own personal definition is hard to explain and define. Love is formed by personal experiences and is expressed by devotion, respect and honesty.

Fatal Attraction vs. Anchor Man

The gender roles in both movies are very different. In Fatal Attraction the wife is the "American" woman. She's a devoted wife, mother, and homemaker. She is living in a fairy tale world while her husband, the rich, successful "All-American" man cheats on her. To me the monster in the this movie is sex.

Anchor man's gemder roles are the successful man and the successful female, yet the monster in the movie is sterotypes and sexism. The man doesn't believe the woman can succeed as an anchor woman. The idea of the glass ceiling!!!

Ethnography

Ethnography: Are Women Still the Second Sex?
One Friday night, my fiancé’s best friend convinced us to double date with him and his
girlfriend. While on a double date with the two new lovebirds, I observed a dynamic about
relationships that I had not previously noticed. When we first arrived to
pick up our friends, the male was a complete gentleman. He opened the car door, gave his date a
jacket, and even helped her into the vehicle. When entering the restaurant, he guided her by
hand through the front door, held her jacket when she got warm, and even stood up so she could
have a seat during the long wait. When we were seated at the table, I noticed a very interesting
aspect of their relationship. When the waitress came to the table to take our drink orders, the
male ordered his dates drink without even asking what she wanted. I also noticed that when the
female would try to speak, the male would simply talk over her like was she was saying held no
importance. During appetizers, I tried to address her directly and she just looked down when he
began to answer for her. When I got up to go to the restroom I invited her along and he told her
to hurry back because he would be upset if she wasted her drink.
After ordering and receiving our meals, I noticed that he spoke on behalf of both of them.
Instead of communicating as a couple and deciding on what they wanted to do after dinner, he
respectively stated that they just wanted to go home. When it was time to pay the bill, my fiancé
paid our half, while the female paid theirs. As my fiancé and I walked a bit ahead to get in the
car, we could hear them bickering back in fourth about her embarrassing him for paying in front
of us. While in the car we began a conversation about relationships, love, and sex. I observed the
Cole 2
other couples views as being very different from my fiancé’s and mine. They both viewed
relationships as the male being the dominating force. The female preferred a man who had more
finances and more education, while the man wanted a woman who was completely depended on
him. While talking about infidelity, both had admitted that the male had cheated yet they
remained together because the female loved him so much. When it came to sex both preferred a
male dominating position and agreed that they make love whenever he wants. At the end of the
night I could not stop thinking about the make up of their relationship and its direct connection to
our class and Simone de Beauvior’s article about women.
Beauvior’s article “The Second Sex” introduction chapter entitled, “Woman as Other”
sheds light on a lot of women’s issues of the past and today. While on this double date I could
not help put think about this article. The part that truly sticks in my mind is the idea of a man
standing on his own, while women is defined by what a man is not. Beauvior writes “She is
defined and differentiated with reference to man and not he with reference to her; she is the
incidental, the inessential as opposed to the essential…” (Beauvior 3). This statement
directly relates to the relationship that I observed. The idea of the female standing on her own
is not fathomable. From the beginning of the date, the male fixated on where she stood, how she
sat, and when she entered the room. In today’s world, many women view these acts as chivalry,
when actuality they are a woman existing without a man. Letting him control her every move
and dictating when and how she acts is a prime example a woman as an other.
During the date, I observed the male often spoke over or answered for the female,
indirectly illustrating that he thought her opinion was not of importance.
Beauvior believes that a woman “…cannot think of herself without a man….” (Beauvior 3). The
suggestion that the man has to answer for the woman is demonstrating that he thinks without him
she is unable to form thoughts without him; therefore being unable to exist on her own. When
talking about sex on our date, both the man and woman agreed that male dominating positions
Cole 3
were preferred and while the woman seemed to want a future with the male, he simply was just
interested in the sexual aspect. The idea that he could cheat with various women and still have
her comes to Beauvior’s second point. The idea that a woman is “…simply what man decrees;
thus she is called the sex-absolute sex, no less…He is the Subject, he is the Absolute- she is the
Other” (Beauvior 3). The notion that a woman is just the opposite of a man and not a gender just
an “other” directly relates to the way the male acted towards his date and other woman in
general. He had no respect for their feelings, wants, or needs yet wanted to meet his own wants
and needs.
Simone de Beauvior’s article still relates to today’s male/female dynamic. Although
many woman are independent financially, society and men still see woman as a second class
citizen. Many times the male perspective on the “other” is masked by what many would see as
chivalrous yet in actuality it’s a illustration of the ideology of Man vs. Other.


Work Cited

Beauvior, de Simone. "from The Second Sex: Woman as Other" 1949. Print