Off the record: "Good" Criminals vs "Bad" Civilians

Today in class, I had several things to say about the Boston Marathon bomber, the way he was perceived by the media, his "fan club," and the way representation works in the media, but honestly, if I had started, I don't know if I could have come off of my soapbox in a timely fashion. Jahar Tsarnaev, or the Boston Marathon bomber, received a cover story in Rolling Stone magazine and county wide sympathy despite the fact that his actions lead to the deaths, injuries, and property damage. Although his guilt is apparent, there was (and possibly still is) a group of people, whom Marcotte referred to as "mostly young women" when referring to the demographic, that believes he is innocent. Jahar Tsarnaev has been treated with the utmost care by the media, maintaining that he committed the crime, but almost appearing to draw sympathy from viewers and readers for this poor, misguided soul. Now you may be asking why exactly this would rile me up, or you already know.

Let's take Michael Brown, a teenager (not an adult as he is often referred to as in the media) that was murdered in Fergueson, Missouri. On the day he was killed, his body was left on the street for hours before it was finally picked up. He didn't get a cover story, we didn't get a sappy slide show of his life (from the media anyway), what we got was a slanderous campaign highlighting all of the mistakes and ill-advised pictures (for a black man anyway) that he had taken over the course of his life. The people of Fergueson were rightfully angry that this young man was shot dead, so how did the police respond? With tanks, tear gas, and assorted military equipment that they shouldn't have in the first place, but that's another topic for another blog post. How was that handled by the media? They focused on the looters and degenerates, not the pain felt by a community that had been mistreated for long enough. The media, run by the hegemonic powers that be, intends to keep the score where it is.

People to this day hesitate to call Jahar Tsarnaev a terrorist, but Michael Brown and so many like him were immediately branded "thugs" by the media. I'll even go so far as to say that "thug" is what people say when they truly wish they could say "nigger." Race and appearance still control so much today, so much so that a convicted terrorist could have a fan club cheering for his release despite the people he hurt, and a young man could lay dead in his coffin, murdered, while people still continue to defame his name and justify his death. I said in class that American society is "shallow," which is true because we all place too much faith on appearances, but very few of us are willing to address the elephant in the room. Black has become associated with violence and crime for as long as this country has stood, but any mention of it and we're playing the race card, or bringing race into things when we shouldn't. Silence and inaction promote the status quo, it promotes cover shots and sob stories for lighter skinned criminals, it promotes the slander and hatred for black civilians, and until the very obvious race problem in the media is addressed, things will stay the same. In the end, that's just the way they want it.

Jeff Colon Blog:2

I do not believe that many are surprised at the notion of the popularity of reality TV.  An early show at the beginning of the recent reality TV boom was Who Want to Be a Millionaire. While, this style of  of reality TV provided drama, it differed in comparison to others that followed. Reality shows such as Fear Factor, Big Brother, and MTV's Real World all present a high level of violent drama. Furthermore, TV stations found that when they added violent and sexual drama that the show's ratings showed significant increases. Naturally, after the stations realized the affect sex and violence had on their ratings, they sought out to follow the trend. This, however, led to many instances of contestants on these shows to become in a substantial amount of physical danger. I find our culture's thirst for violent drama both intriguing and alarming. I am intrigued as what kind of effect this genre of entertainment has on our society as a whole. This type of behavior that is shown in the form of entertainment can directly affect those who choose to view these shows. With instances of direct violent acts from one contestant to another, such as the knife incident in Big Brother 2, the viewer may be normalized to the degree of violence. It has been reported that after two decades of violent crimes being on the decline, in the last three years it has reversed to violent crimes now being on the incline. What I find alarming is the possibility that the violent drama that the consumer views in reality television could be effecting their behavior.

Applying narrative criticism to pop culture texts for children

This past week, we learned what narrations are and how to conduct a narrative analysis. The purpose of conducting this type of analysis is to identify the moral of the story and determine whether it compliments or challenges our own. If we really wanted to, we could try to analyze any pop culture text from a narrative perspective. We could pick a random article from a newspaper or pick a song that we heard on the radio. Narrative is everywhere in pop culture but, like we mentioned in class, just because it can be analyzed doesn't mean it should be.

One reason we should criticize and analyze narratives in popular culture is because of the impact it has on society. The things we see on TV, on the Internet and when we go to the movies shape and reinforce our beliefs, so of course it is important to want to uncover the moral of these stories. It is particularly important, in my opinion, to apply narrative criticism to texts that are exposed to children (books, TV shows, movies, video games, etc.) During this stage in their lives, they are absorbing everything in their surroundings. This is the period where they are gaining the information they will later use to base their beliefs on.

I recently watched a video posted by TED Talks called "The hidden meanings in kids' movies." The speaker Colin Stokes, although in a much broader sense, creates something very close to a narrative analysis of movies for kids such as the ones released by PIXAR. He challenges the popular moral of these stories which is to prove you are a man by defeating the villain to claim the girl as a reward. If you were to watch a movie with these morals and not criticize them from a narrative perspective, you might not be able to uncover the hidden meaning or moral buried in them. You could completely disagree with the message it is delivering but will still show it to your kids because you aren't able to determine the moral being conveyed. This is why narrative criticism is important. It is the tool we can use to decipher morals that we would otherwise be oblivious to. 

Josh Howell 2nd post

Before today I really didn't understand what narrative criticism was. I feel like today after going over it as a class and doing a few examples on the Kanye West stories I now have a better feel of it. Whatever we watch we are always critique it in anyway. What characters we like, don't like, what do we get out of the episode, or is it even telling a story. After the discussion today I will start looking at these reality tv shows, or any show for that matter differently. Being able to try to find out the flat and round characters will be awesome and being able to debate that with other people that enjoy show can really spark up a great conversation.
I believe now that after talking about it today I will have a whole new perspective on anything that I read or watch now on the news, internet etc.. Every story, interview, or anything has a moral to it and what the person is feeling in that situation.

A Criticism on the Narrative Criticism of Kanye West

A Criticism on the Narrative Criticism of Kanye West

By: Denzel Young

Many thoughts come to mind when people think of Kanye West, most relevant to this post is his arrogance that even dances on the edge of hubris. I used to think that he was just another celebrity, drunk on his own power, but after reading the interviews and watching the guest spot he did on Jimmy Kimmel, I found myself feeling a new found respect for him, and I also examined why it is that nearly everyone thought that he was, for lack of a better word, crazy. In the end, I discovered that the culprit, as it is in the perception of all celebrities, peoples, ideas, etc. was the media.

Kanye West is only a musician that is passionate about what he does, but it is the fact that his passion leads him to take steps that a more sensible musician wouldn't take, that causes him to be perceived the way that he is. In his interview, he connected his name to several major people within their given fields, like Steve Jobs and Michael Jordan. This was seen by some as him overstepping his bounds. Here we have a musician whose music is known world wide, he, as a person, is both famous and infamous in the same breath. Why is it necessarily so out of bounds for him to compare himself to those people that he has regarded as his heroes? He wants to be respected and have those that deserve respect to be respected as well. Is that so crazy?

While on the topic of his alleged insanity, I do partially believe that the fact that he is considered to be "cocky" is due to his race. In class, we stated that one of the things that made him a "round" character was his willingness to discuss race directly. Why is it necessarily "uncommon" for a celebrity to directly reference the system in which he lives? No one that has been alive in this country since its founding can say that there is no racial inequality, so what many referred to as him "pulling the race cards" or making excuses as to why he had never won against a white artist, what they, at least in my opinion, are saying is to leave the powers that be alone. Kanye is actively challenging the status quo, calling out things that he feels are wrong and standing up when people he feels deserve their due are over looked. Take the Grammy incident, he walked on stage, grabbed the microphone, and noted that while Taylor Swift had won the award, he felt that Beyonce deserved it. Now while he could have done so differently, many people felt the same way. A lot of people sat at home that day, heard that Taylor Swift had won over Beyonce and sighed in disappointment, powerless to change the outcome. Kanye West wasn't alright with doing that, so he got up and made his opinion known. That is all he is doing, making his opinion, his ideology, his creativity, and his music known. If that's "crazy" for a musician to do, then I think the insane asylum is going to be full, and the recording studios will be empty.

Adrian Peterson and the Corporal Punishment Debate.

               It was been a rough few weeks for the NFL, perhaps the roughest any sport has ever faced.  It got even worse this weekend been reports surfaced that Adrian Peterson, the star Minnesota Vikings running back, was arrested and charged with child abuse.

               Adrian is no average player.  Arguably the best player in the league, he has set the all time record for rushing yards in a game and came within one yard of setting the all time rushing record for one season.  This is relevant because it is very obvious that the NFL does not mind playing favorites.  He was deactivated on Sunday, but is scheduled to suit up this week.

               According to the police report and Peterson himself, he 4 year old son was whipped between 10-15 times with a "switch".  A "switch is a limp tree branch with extended branches ripped off.  Pictures show many bloody bruises on his body included his back, legs, and even his scrotum.  A large majority of people, even people that believe in corporal punishment, believe this situation was complete overkill.  However, it has sparked another national debate because a large number of people believe this is a legitimate way to teach and discipline children.

              I believe that this is a great example different ideologies and hegemony at play.  30 years ago getting "whoopings" was not out of the ordinary.  My parents didn't spank me much, but in extreme situations they did not hesitate.  They didn't hesitate because that is they way they were raised and the dominant ideology of the time said that was acceptable.  Location plays a part in this ideology as well.  Being from the south, it is and was much more acceptabl to use this kind of discipline.  However, just because it was the norm does not make it right.

              Many people coming to Peterson's defense say "that is just how it is in the south" or "that's how I was raised, everyone is just too soft now."  However, times have changed and as our society has evolved hegemonic powers have decided that this is mostly unacceptable.  Certain peoples ideology remains the same however, as shown by the Peterson case.

Ellen Page's Coming Out

I would like to use the Neo-Aristotelian Criticism that I learned in class to analyze the rhetorical impact of a speech which really moved me (I recommend you to watch it there : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hlCEIUATzg). So here is the rhetorical situation: The speaker is the 27 years old actress Ellen Page, known for her roles in Juno, X-Men or Inception. She gave her speech on the 14^th of February 2014 during an LGBT (lesbians, gays, bisexual, transsexual) youth conference in Las Vegas. So most of her audience that day was young homosexuals, or gay-friendly. But Ellen Page also knew that her speech was recorded and was going to be broadcasted on TV and on the internet, so her audience is much larger than only young gay people. The exigence for this speech was for Ellen to come out as a gay woman, to share her experience and to influence the audience by giving them the strength to do the same that she did. The constraints were of course to put herself in a dangerous position since she revealed some very personal information about her in front of an audience and cameras. 

That day, Ellen Page made the announcement that she is gay in a very moving and personal speech. "I'm here today because I am gay, and because maybe I can make a difference, to help others have an easier and more hopeful time” she said, “I am tired of hiding and I am tired of lying by omission”. She stood for struggling against the heterocentrist hegemony that we are living in and to fight against all the norms that the society imposes to us. In that way she seems like a round character because she breaks the socially accepted rules and she even criticizes the industry she is part of.

What we can retain from this speech is the sincerity, and the empathy of the actress. Indeed, even if she tells about her own story, she always includes the others by using “you” and “us”. This is her way to say that every young gay people have to go through the same obstacles and pains. But even then, she still talks about her personal story (storytelling) in order to give some legitimacy to her “advocacy”, and to prove people that she is just like them. Besides, she talks as part of the group, thanks to “us” and “our” and raises some pride to be part of this community: she positions herself as one voice of the suffering gay youth.

Moreover, in order to be coherent she admits that she has integrated the consumer society’s norms and standards (being pretty every day for example) and by saying that, she conveys that struggling against these norms is really difficult and that she may have failed to do so. She also admits that she is making her coming out for a selfish reason: She is tired to have to hide and to suffer from it. That’s a way for her to play the honesty card, as an imperfect woman who can have some weaknesses, whom everybody can relate to, and it makes her a believable speaker.

Her way to deliver her message is, in my opinion, the most effective factor of her speech. We can hear in her voice all the emotions she is going through, and because she doesn’t read any notes it really gives the feeling that she really means what she is saying.

Finally, I think that the overall impact is really effective because her story is moving, and because her speech matches the fidelity factor since she shares the same values than the audience. She conveys a moral which is to accept who you really are and to be proud of it. She puts herself as an example for the youth LGBT community and encourages the others to follow her lead.

Second Post

The narrative criticism of Kanye's "New York Times Article" and "Jimmy Kimmel Talk show" helped to show the proper way to place and decipher the deeper meanings hidden in them. In the New York Times article Kanye's interview was broken down and looked at as a standalone source and not to be judged by other controversial articles. Reading an article and not pulling in unwanted texts from outside sources is a very hard thing to do in today's society; however, it is not an impossible task. Using some of the Technics we learned in class we can with effort present a narrative criticism. The first Technic used for this is "Setting" of the article, the place in which it takes place. Second is "Characters" who the article is talking about mainly, and whether they are "Flat" or "Round" as characters. Third is "Narrative" who is speaking telling the story of the article. Fourth is "Relationship" which is split between "Causal" which is something happening that was caused by a previous event, and "Temporal" which is the reflection on past events that lead to present situations. Lastly is the "Moral" of the story which splits into "Coherence" which is the structural, character, and material, then we have "Fidelity" which is the ideological argument. With these five steps shown it is entirely possible to critically analyze an article without being to heavily influenced by outside views that are related to the current article at hand. Learning these steps is the key to helping maintain an open perspective, and to not be swayed in the opinion that has been reached.

The difference between Big Brother and Walmart advertisements

Because each of our daily experiences "could be considered an element of popular culture" (Sellnow, p. 3), everything could be analyzed. Although, it does not mean everything is worthy of being analyzed. In other words, according to the Sellnow's definition of mediated popular culture, "everyday objects, actions, and events we experience through a media channel that may influence us to believe and behave in certain ways" (p. 2) could warrant criticism. But are those things really interest us in popular culture studies? Of course not!

We study popular culture for many reasons. One of those is to understand people that surround us and the world we live in: popular culture has the power to “brainwash” their audience by showing them examples of values, beliefs, behaviors, and so forth (Sellnow, p. 7-8). Because of these statements, we are interested in studying meaningful texts.

Let me explain. There is a subtle difference between analyzing a very well-known reality-TV show and a basic Walmart advertisement even if both warrant criticism. Indeed, if Michael H. Eaves and Michael Savoie wrote the article Big Brother, it is – partly – because of the omnipresence of this media and of the power that have reality-TV shows to make people identify themselves to the characters, who are real people. It also has a huge impact on values, beliefs, and behaviors of unawareness audiences.

Quite the reverse, a Walmart advertisement – which for sure the first aim is to convince people to shop at Walmart – is more mundane because of it obvious reduced time face to the TV show (30 seconds against many seasons for Big Brother) but also because of this lower impact on people. Of course, with the exception of cult advertisements that are now part of the United States popular culture because publicists did their job pretty well. I can mention here as an example all the derived advertisements result from the initial – and very simple – concept "Got Milk?"

If we follow the logic of narrative criticism, the example of a particular recent Walmart advertisement about ice creams is interesting. We first see a woman eating a freeze pop, which colored the woman's lips with blue. Suddenly, a man arrives and asks her if she wants to share popsicles, but she answered no because she tries to eat healthy. The funny thing is we still see her blue lips so we know and the guy understands that she is lying. Here, the first event is the woman eating, the second the man asking. They follow a chronological organization, are related and talk about the same subject.

David Creech. Blog 2

It's Always Sunny with Narrative Criticism

Why do people love TV shows based around horrible people? So many of TV's best comedies of all time were centered around one person or a group of truly awful people. South Park, Arrested Development, The League, Archer, Community, and Seinfeld are some shows that come to mind. In my opinion, the show with the absolute worst people is It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia. It's one of my favorite shows of all time, and I've seen every episode at least three times, but I've seen most of them at least 6 or 7 times. People love this show and its characters, but why? Not one of the 5 man characters has any sense of morals or virtue. 

The show takes place in Philadelphia, predominately a bar owned by the characters. It is in a really poor part of Philly. And these characters live in a really poor part of Philly.  Because the audience attempts to connect with the characters and their situations, we begin to ignore the intense poverty that the characters endure. We just think that they're weird. They talk about sleeping in piles of garbage. Two male characters with at least a 35 year age gap between them share a fold out couch. 

The characters are also really bad people. Mac lied to an abortion protestor, telling her that he had killed several abortion doctors, just to have sex with her. She told him that she was pregnant, and his reply was "You gotta get an abortion."​ That's one of my favorite examples in the whole show, but there are dozens others. I think people being to realize that these are the most narcissistic people ever thought up, so we begin to look down on them. It's like schadenfreude​ of someone's personality. We are laughing at these destructive people, when they all just need intensive mental care. I don't know what that says about us.

Memes : Self Portrait of the Internet Culture

The memes are phenomena that are repeated and declined massively on the Internet. It can be a sentence, a picture, a word or an idea whose destiny is to spread to blogs, social networking or community sites (ex : 9gag)

They are interesting to analyze because they are artifacts for the entire Internet community. Used at the base to make people laugh, it is possible that the meme is a self-portrait of those who create them.
The humor is based on the same understanding of the image or phrase from other members of the community who share the same language or the same lifestyle. For example, the language used most often in the memes, is unique to the community language. Indeed, the basic language is English, but the grammar and syntax approximate. Thus, instead of saying "Why you no", we'll say " y u no ". As the traditional "What the fuck" was replaced by "dafuq."

 Topics covered by the memes often refer to pop culture (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, video games ..) because it is shared by all members of the community. Without knowing the reference hidden behind the meme, it is difficult for the average person to understand humor.

The meme is the representation of a geek community humor that does not hesitate to make fun of those who are not insiders: The Nerd Girl, Grandma on the Internet etc. ..

But the meme can also be interpreted as a self-portrait of the person who is the author. Many memes purpose humorous depict people who stay in front of their computers all day without going to the toilet or letting himself starve. Although it is ironic self-regard, it is also accompanied by a need for recognition from those who like and broadcast these posts. Through these actions, the author of the meme will be able to reassure his behavior, saying he is not alone in this and that it can continue to live his life as he sees fit.

The most concrete example is the famous meme "Forever Alone". If these representations it is intended to make people laugh, it also demonstrates a form of loneliness on the part of the author. By publishing his story, he will then hope to find a form of support from other Internet users who are distributed and likes his job.

In conclusion, if Internet memes are primarily a form of humorous expression, they can also be a form of anxiety or fears.

Ray Rice’s press conference

The controversial Ray Rice scandal recently appeared in the news and aroused many reactions supporting or opposing Rice’s actions.

This scandal has led the professional football player to confront the press through public speeches in order to justify his actions.

(Link to the video: http://www.baltimoreravens.com/videos/videos/Ray-Rices-Full-Press-Conference/405fea46-d4d4-44c7-b381-33497bf6d12f)

Ray Rice has been filmed by CCTV cameras punching his wife in an elevator and knocking her down. This act went public recently and had for consequence the suspension of the footballer by the NFL. Both the husband and the wife attended a press conference where they explained the situation and where they tried to defend Ray Rice.

This speech includes many elements that we have seen in class. Here are a few that I could notice.

First of all we can observe the use of three modes of persuasion: logos, pathos and ethos. The most prominent one is pathos. Ray Rice’s speech was based on emotion, one of the keys to seduce an audience and a great tool of persuasion. The emotion is conveyed through crying, the repetition of his apologies and the fact that he looks lost and destabilized reading his notes on his phone.

The logos appears in the fact that he recognizes that he has made a mistake and that he his explaining that he is willing to change his behavior in the future. This seems to be the most logical reaction to have regarding the mistake he made.

The ethos intervenes through the fact that his speech is supported by his wife sitting next to him. The ethos is also present through what Ray Rice represents. He is a professional football player, which means that he has won credibility through his career and his achievements.

However, the purpose of this conference is to save this credibility that has been impacted by the beating of his wife.  

Overall, I think that even though Ray Rice delivered a speech that can be regarded as honest and emotionally driven, I am not convinced by this performance and I think that his ethos remains weakened by the mistake he did.

Ray Rice is part of the popular culture. His actions are watched by millions of people and he is part of today’s sport culture, therefore I think that this kind of public speech represents interesting texts to be analyzed.

The Show Big Brother brings reality to the TV

   In todays tv shows we are treading a thin line between reality and the show itself. In the CBS tv serious the "Big Brother" we see this line crossed in so many ways. In this reality tv show the selling of sex. violence, and in-house eviction led to some high popular ratings for the show. Which brings up a bigger question in my head; are the networks put the cast members in danger for better ratings and a better show? In my opinion yes I feel like the networks are setting up problems and situation in which the cast on the reality shows are going to act in an out of control
   
    "Fishers narrative paradigm posits that humans are story tellers and audiences that love to be told stories in all communication processes". Fishes theory seems to be a great way to analyze and study the show "Big Brother". The show has a lot of believability to it and that makes this reality show has a lot of narrative coherence. The audience who watches these reality shows is more likely to find credibility in these narrative reality tv series. For me this raises a lot of questions for me; are the viewers who are watching these shows actually taking this serious and believing the show. This is when that line from reality to real life is closed to being crossed. What if the viewers actually took the violent drama from the reality show and decided to act out that way in real life problems some really could get hurt. I feel it is the networks responsibility to sensor what the reality cast members are able to do while on the show.

Big Brother

I never really put much thought into what goes into making Big Brother until we discussed it in class. I had always assumed it was a little scripted, but mainly reality. I had also never put much thought into all the different aspects of the show such and Julie Chen being involved more and adding the twists and turns. I find it interesting as to what our definition of "reality" tv is. Sure, they're real people having real conflicts and really living in this house. But at the same time, so much of it is set up. But then, being "Big Brother," I feel like that may be the point. The entire show is a reference to the George Orwell classic, where government watches every move and controls people's lives. That is exactly what the producers of this show are doing. Is it really "reality?" I'm not sure. But it makes for good entertainment.

Blog Post 2

One thing that we talked about in class was how we describe a story and what it means to us.  I heard a student say we learn more about what’s going on in the world when we read or watch a story. I agree with this statement because if we don’t read or watch a news story, for example, we will not know what is coming for us and we need to know how to prepare for it.  During the class time that we were talking about this, I sat there thinking what I thought reading for watching a story meant to me.  I finally realized that it really means taking a break from reality.  We all get sucked into these TV shows and movies that we actually imagine our lives inside the story situation.  Binge watching, for example, has a big impact on a lot of people because they get so sucked up into the show that they forget how much time has passed and what reality is really like.  The very first article that we read said that one of the women got so sucked into a reality story TV show that it began affecting her life and marriage.  This can be dangerous if we cannot control our story watching.  It is a good way to take a break from reality but not a long one.  If I am going to watch or read a good story, I want the 3 major elements in my story to be unique and exquisite: character, the plot, and the actions.  I love action shows or movies with good characters involved, but without a good “twisting” plot, it makes the story less interesting to me.  We talked about the show “Lost” which has a twisted plot in the end.  This is a good example of a show that had some good characters, plot, and a lot of action.  Some may have not liked the end because it was so unexpected but that’s what makes a good story and something for everyone to remember!

Blog #2

This past week I thoroughly enjoyed the discussions we have had in class. As a HUGE Big Brother fan, I loved the reading on that show. I have seen every episode of the show and will have to agree that the producers of the show are the real people in control. This is true of many "reality" shows. Although it may seem that the people in the show are controlling their own fate, in reality, the producers are calling all of the shots. This way they can control the conflicts and drama, which in turn, creates great ratings and money. I have also seen this scenario in several movies of the past decade, such as The Hunger Games. The rational-world paradigm also plays a big part in these shows. People want to have a sense that this could happen in our near future or has already occurred. Also, we have seen that if characters were not interesting to the audience then they would be written off or killed. This is certainly true because we as the audience would like to see someone who could represent ourselves, and if we don't, then we will tune out. You notice a lot of reality shows these days tend toward the younger generation. This, in my opinion, is what started this downward spiral of television. I, for one, do not want to watch shows about pregnant teens or self-medicating young people whose only claim to fame is the destruction of their self-worth. Why is it that in today's society it is completely acceptable to be proud of sexual promiscuity and drug use. This really disgusts me. Television and movies are proudly displaying this too much for the younger generation. Why? Because of money. We all know that Hollywood and most of the world thrives on this. If it does not make money, then it will not last. Hopefully, one day this will change. But, in the meantime, we will have to endure the horrible shows like Two and a Half Men and Keeping Up With The Kardashians. This is because we love to watch other people's drama and lives unfold than to have to deal with our own realities. Producers of these shows know this and will continue to profit from this. God Help Us All!!!

Narrative criticism of gangsta rap

When I think of narratives I usually think of stories and in this day age there is no story better told than that of gangsta rap. Although gangsta rap is constantly critiqued it need to be thoroughly examined by someone others than those who do not like it. Other narratives that warrant criticism include gangsta rap. I used to enjoy rap when it was in the beginnings of a new genre of music but now this is not music to me. I can only hear a lot of repeating and remixing from other artists who helped to break the barrier of rap. There was no need to have behind the scene meanings or use of undertones to get your point across. There is also no need to have to scream or yell to make others hear what you have to say. These days depending on when and where you were born you need an interpreter as well as earmuffs to listen to what is considered good music these days. I understand creative processes of artists but do I really need to have my children to listen to music for me to understand just what is said or the message that the artist is trying to speak of?  On that point, does some of the music of today really have a message behind its melody or are the words they speak is just another new language of today’s generation? I can understand why there is now a rating system on some of today’s music because some of the language is not slipped but is actually spoken by those who listen to it and hove no consideration for others around them. Wherever someone sees the video that is made to go along with that particular song, the meaning or message of such song is gone or changed from what the listener thought it was to mean. Rap music became mainstream in the early 1980’s and it has not only grown but also divided into many different forms of rap music. Being from a generation that had music that was basically straight-forward and to the point, gangsta rap may have some good music in its repertoire but many of the artists are not as creative or musically talented. It takes a lot of education and skills to be able to “speak” your message to others in the form of music and song. Many talented artists and songwriters worked hard to pave the way for those coming after them and to me the artists of today have some big shoes to fill. If some will truly criticize instead of being critical about this form of music then maybe some artists will be inclined to record a variety and create other forms of rap.