Archive for November, 2007

aids and music

November 30, 2007

yeah, we introduced the topic aids and music already with the post “i’ve got you under my skin”. and today is world aids day. hm, somehow i don’t want to comment on that topic right now.

but i have seen that j d doyle of queer music heritage made in november a radio show (of three hours) to the topic of songs referring to aids. queer music heritage is a fantastic, i repeat fantastic website with a lot to discover on it. i have to admit that i am still discovering a lot of unkown music there. and i have already planned to refer to some of his shows in coming posts.

so if you would like to listen to this show, go here. the general link to his website is www.queermusicheritage.us. just be warned – he makes a show every month since seven years…

then there are two songs he did not play on this show (there are quite a lot of other songs one could have played – but then diamanda galas is not exactly radiofriendly, huh?), but which are for me somehow essential songs dealing with aids – and were at the time important for me also because of this context. the first one is a rather obvious choice, it’s one by u2. not the new version (which i do not like), but the old one. although there has been a strange story not about the song, but about the first video (there are three in total), done by anton corbijn, usually called the berlin-video. soon after its release it has been pulled again – there was some official statement at mtv that the band was worried that showing them in drag would give a wrong idea of the personality of the band members… errr, what? well, i haven’t seen that particular video around for a while, but thanks to youtube we can watch it again. and yes, it is a very fine song. and for me it is about aids…

and now to a lesser known song, a song i already cried to. one of jimmy sommerville finest’s. for a friend from the communards album red. have a – good? bad? mourningful? – aids day…

actualité: world aids day

November 30, 2007

positivity.jpeg

i’ve got you under my skin

November 30, 2007

listening to peggy lee, more precise to the cole porter song i’ve got you under my skin, reminded me of i’ve got you under my skin – but of the version by neneh cherry. and n had to admit that he has never heard her version and has never seen the very beautiful video by jean-baptiste mondino. great stuff. so here it is.

this version by neneh cherry comes from the sampler red hot + blue. the title refers to a cole porter musical and is a record full of cole porter songs by different artists. this sampler – reissued last year with all the videos included – has been the first release of the red hot organisation – an organisation raising awarenes and funds for the fight against aids. they put out an interesting series of compilations, which are from the quality of the music presented way above most benefit samplers. for more information please visit their website here.

then – neneh cherry is making music again – this time with a band called cirKus – their website you’ll find here.

and jean-baptiste mondino’s website is here.

and the here the website of kd lang – this because we conclude this post with another excerpt of the red hot + blue sampler, kd lang’s beautiful version of so in love:

coffee break

November 30, 2007

time for a coffee break. so let’s have some black coffee with peggy lee.

frontsmall5.jpeg

i have to admit that i never really listened to peggy lee – somehow i thought she is lame and tame. must be the name peggy, i guess. stupid me – because this is really nice music. thanks to my recordfinder mastah w who brought me a couple of 10″ i know now that peggy lee is actually cool. just listen to the first song and you will be convinced of the same.

so this is for all coffee drinkers and smokers (and tobacco eaters). yes, these were the days… since i just saw some days ago a movie with humphrey bogart where there is this scene where he gets treated in a medical cabinet for a shot-wound – and he is smoking through the whole procedure… yes, these days are obviously gone.

so as a little trip back here black coffee with peggy lee. ripped@192 from the 10 inch version vinyl from 1954, coverscans included. the tracklist reads as follows:

A1 Black Coffee
A2 I’ve Got You Under My Skin
A3 Easy Living
A4 My Heart Belongs To Daddy
B1 A Woman Alone With The Blues
B2 I Didn’t Know What Time It Was
B3 When The World Was Young
B4 Love Me Or Leave Me

so go make yourself some strong coffee, light a fag and enjoy!

virtually normal

November 30, 2007

yeah, the title is from a book by andrew sullivan. a journalist / blogger, often described as “controversial”. i do not really see where the controversial comes from – thought provoking maybe, but to mee it seems that a liberal-conservative gay bear is quite the norm these days…? but i digress.

this post is not about his book – it is about being normal. being different might has something to do with not being normal, or doesn’t it? it seems somehow a little bit muddier than that. in the tv-series heroes there is this cheerleader that discovers that she is kind of unbreakable. so she has her difficulties of accepting that she is different and just wants to be normal. but is being a cheerleader normal? so there seems to be differences that let you stay normal, and differences that make you…un-normal.

but what exactly is normal? a statistical value? so hardly anybody in society will be normal – there will just be different grades of proximity to a statistic ideal. and where does one draw the line between “close enough to be considered normal”? so this idea of normal is, well, elusive, not really working. there is another way to define normal via statistics: take the difference in question and see if it is statistically relevant, i.e. the difference appears so often in society that it is considered (by statistics people) to be normal. so 10% of homosexuals in society would be normal. this explains the from time to time occuring fights about these statistics – i do not remember where the cut off line lies (statistically) – but the lower that number, the closer we are to not being normal. so statistics do not really help us. beside the fact that statistics are always a tricky thing in social sciences, it only can tell us that not being in the majority of society has not necessarly to do with being normal. but then, in a society full of individuals, how could that be, anyway?

especially concerning homosexuality there are two other strategies to prove that homosexuality is normal. the first one is biology: animals do it, too. true. but then how come we can term that homosexuality? and then in the background there is for me the question if comparing humans and animals is not a little bit more complicated then a lot of people pretend? second there is history. homosexuality has been present in all societies, at all times. most probably true. well, not really, though. we come back to the old problem that homosexuality is actually a rather young invention of the european medical discourse, just a little bit more then a hundred years old. don’t get me wrong: men to men and women to women sex did exist in all societies and at all ages, i believe. but it had different meanings. different restrictions, rules, possibilities – it was defined differently.

so it seems we have two problems – we have problems to define normal, and we have problems to prove that homosexuality is normal. i do suspect that homosexuality is indeed not normal. by the simple reason that it is in our society not constructed to be normal. it is actually the counterpoint to, the contrast to make the normal (i.e. heterosexuality) visible. and here we already see how normal gets defined very often: by defining what is not normal.

so we might not be able to define what is normal, but we might get closer to the function of normal – especially in relation to homosexuals. normal seems to take the function of an imaginary ideal. an ideal that allows to exclude the not normal. tha actually gets defined through this exclusion.

an imaginary ideal for people opposing homosexuality – especially its out and proud visibility. so by opposing homosexuality they use homosexuality in its “old” meaning: as being fundamentally different, as being not normal, being a medical condition. in turn these people become normal. yeah, it seems somewhat cheap but it seems to be a big motivation for opposing homosexuality: opposing it makes you normal.

so normal takes on the function of a disciplinary tool. a lot of people do not want to stand out in society, fear eventual repercussions if they do. they want to appear normal. being normal as protection. even for the price of hating others. well, its the others that pay the price, right? and just to mention it, too: it is of course also a great tool to create a group identity.

and for the homosexuals themselves? obviously there is a great desire in big parts of the gay community to be accepted as normal. to a degree it sometimes strikes me as naïve – homosexuals are by definition not normal. but others work on re-defining the term homosexual and try to eradicate differences through their political work. and here we are back to andrew sullivan, who fights for gay and lesbian marriage and the official acceptance of gays and lesbians in the u.s.-military. reaching this goals would eliminate at least differences on an important level – the level of the citizen. so as citizens we would become normal.

interesting to note is that also andrew sullivan does not think homosexuals and straights are the same – so as i understand it his fight is not really one for being normal, but for equality. which brings him in close proximity to rosa luxemburg and her saying that she does “not want to be the same, but to have the same rights”.

as an interesting note i would like to add that many gays seem to follow rather unkowingly the argumentation of their opponents. somehow many gays seem to believe that the straights are the “normal ones”. not that normal is in this context a good word, it is rather something to sneer at. the really interesting effect here is that therefore there seems to be the belief that because heterosexuals are normal, they are all the same. what i want to get at: we gays know sometimes terribly little about straights, especially the ones we deem normal. why should we care, one might ask? there are a couple of reasons why (straights can be fun, too), but the political reason for me is: because we are the minority. and if we learn something from history, and especially the history of society and its relationships to its minorities i think we learn that we have to know the so-called normal ones, the ones who have also a lot of power to define normal, the ones who define themselves as normal. often for the price of persecution of the not-normals. to put it simple: it is a question of survival.

here some links to additional information on mister sullivan:

if you want to read an interesting interview with andrew sullivan, go here.

and if you do not know it by now, here the link to his very popular blog.

actualité: from music to politics

November 30, 2007

so pm howard lost, rudd is the new kid on the block and presented yesterday his new ministers. and surprise surprise, there is a known face!

petergarrett01.jpg

yeah, there was this record in the eighties everybody seemed to know by heart – an easy one for dj’s, they could just play the whole record and everybody was singing along (i witnessed it, well, sung along, too). the record was called diesel and dust, the band midnight oil. its frontman, peter garrett, has been chosen this week as minister for environment for the australian governement. congratulations! yep, from music to politics – but then their music was always political, too.
so that is a good moment to give you some midnight oil – a live bootleg from 1993 – and it’s an acoustic set – and yes, it includes their big hits. and yes, it’s really good. get it here (link expired)! enjoy!

and if you want to congratulate: peter garrett’s website.

good good technology

November 29, 2007

a informed me that some mp3’s i posted are not really of the best quality – true, there is quite a lot of distortion on it. i looked these days into it, got me some new gear, re-connected some stuff and all that – and it already sounds much better. so if you want something to be re-upped because of its soundquality, let me know.

insert – beda

November 27, 2007

turntable.jpg

i listened and still listen to quite a lot of dj-mixes. these days i see them rather as information: who plays what, in which directions does dance music evolve, and so on. but then, from time to time, or more precise: every couple of months there is a mix that does not leave my player. a mix that re-establishes my faith in electronic dance music.

one of these rare mixes is beda‘s missing filling. a liquid mix. not flashy – elegantly flowing. with an up-mood, but discreetly so. obviously highly recommended. so head over to beda’s site and download this pearl here.

UPDATE: the mixes on his site get regularly changed – so you do get one (or two) newer mixes at the above link.

enjoy!

more fassbinder: lili marleen ost

November 23, 2007

i just found it this week – and i’m quite excited having found it. it’s the soundtrack to the movie lili marleen by r. w. fassbinder. so to share my excitement and to show off my find i decided to put it up here.

frontsmall4.jpeg

the movie tells the story of a popular singer in the second world war – loosely based on the biography of the woman that made the song lili marleen famous, lale andersen. sung by many others in many languages since, with this record you get a german and an english version sung by hanna schygulla. what else do you get? well, have a look at the tracklist:

A1 Lili Marleen (german version)*
A2 Theme Willie – Part I
A3 Smoke Gets In Your Eyes
A4 Got A Bran’ New Suit*
A5 Ouvertüre
A6 English Valse
A7 Theme Willie – Part II
B1&B2 In Einem Polenstädtchen/O Du Schöner Westerwald-Veronika Der Lenz Ist Da
B3 Theme Willie – Part III
B4 Theme Willie – Part IV
B5 Willie’s Valse
B6 Abschiedsmelodie
B7 Theme Willie – Part V
B8 Lili Marleen (english version)*

Peer Raben Orchestra
* sung by Hannah Schygulla

so most are instrumental tracks – short bits, actually. then there is to note that the tracklist (taken from the label) differs from the tracklist on the cover (which has obviously some mistakes). and track B1&B2 segue into each other.

ripped@224 from vinyl – you can get it here.

for more information about the song and its fascinating history you can either visit wikipedia or google it – if you want to have a listen to some other versions you can go here.

for a synopsis of the movie in german, french, english you can visit the fassbinder foundation.

the difference

November 22, 2007

quite a while ago i asked the question what the difference might be – the difference between homosexual and heterosexual. suzie made the point in her comment that this difference is a rather artificial one – why should something (i.e. sex) that you do not even that often define your identity? good question. so far no answers from your side, dear reader. so some of my thoughts on the subject.

first i think there is a difference between homosexual and heterosexual because it makes sense. not because this difference necessarly means anything, but because differentiation makes always sense – on a basic cognitive level. it seems that we humans can only deal with the world and actually experience the world by making a difference. making a difference between things helps us to decide how to deal with it. the moment it has a label, i most probably will have an idea of how to react to it. so the moment i become aware of something in the world, i will try to describe it, to label it, to compare it with something i already know – that will give me an idea how to judge it, how to deal with it. so making a difference seems to be a basic human operation. so in the next step it is interesting to see where we make a difference.

there are many examples where making a difference is necessary – otherwise we would react wrongly or even be in danger. but then there are many differentiations that somehow make no sense: as a very general example i would like to mention gender difference: in a modern working setting it makes no difference if you are a woman or a man. men and women alike have obviously the abilities needed in a modern working environment. but still we make a difference there – and also statistically we see that this difference is clearly visible (different pay, very little women in higher managment etc.). so from the point of abilities to make a good job there is no reason to differentiate between women and men – but we do it still. one explanation might be that making a difference has a very pleasant side effect – which still works, even if the original reason for making this difference has disappeared: it reduces complexity. to put it very simple: it narrows down options. if i think women are not apt at doing the job, then i can already filter out all job-applications by women. of course in this example you can as well insert “foreigners”, “too old”, and so on. additionaly making a difference, creating categories not only reduces complexity, but quite obviously helps some people, rather certain groups of people.

so creating a difference between people not only structures society – which makes it easier to handle (most people will treat monarchy different then a beggar – and monarchy and the beggar will also expect a different treatment), but creates groups within society. it gives us a home. a group we belong to. an identity. so we all kind of profit from being different, somehow…?

that is where it gets to the point of a self-fullfilling prophecy. by accepting – and in certain cases by being forced to accept – the difference we will take up this label, this identity and will also try to fit. society gives us a lot of knowledge about how that difference looks like – how cliché that might be. a good example came up lately: since it is is now something of a general knowledge that women are totally obsessed with shoes (yeah, must be genetic), nobody seems to take note that men are also totally obsessed with it. i remember standing at a bus stop in berlin, waiting for the night bus to arrive, and having these two guys discussing for 20 minutes where to get all these super special limited edition sneakers. their knowledge was simply baffling… and just recently i have seen on mtv cribs (silly little homestories, showing “the crib” of some more or less famous star) the closet of a well known producer, filled with hundreds of sneakers. but it has not being commented upon – by nobody. so the difference “women are obsessed with shoes, men don’t care about shoes” might be totally unfounded – but by existing and being promoted it structures our perception of the world. so if we see the closet of a women with hundreds of shoes we say: yeah, she’s a women. if we see a closet of a man with hundreds of shoes we don’t say anything. we might not even realize it. and men as well as women profit from it: women can buy shoes and just employ that cliché as an excuse. men can do it and it does not even get mentioned – or they don’t care about shoes and it fits even nicer. so suzie might be right – there is no reason to make a difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual. but it is made, and therefore it comes into existence.

so there might be initial differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals (genetic?) – but this remains to be seen and it might also be not that important because the moment the difference is made and is accepted it constitutes itself. any explanations trying to establish an initial difference are therefore just a reasoning afterwards (as with homosexuality is shown so clearly: any reasoning that this difference makes sense because there is a genetic difference already makes the basic mistake that genetics are a lot younger then the term homosexual). so after all that long blabla we come to the rather simple conclusion that yes, there is a difference. because our society makes this difference. that’s it.

well, not really. i do find it interesting to see where and how and why it came into existence. and why it still has such an effect. and who profits from it. and to what extent it should and can be changed. a lot of questions. and no, i will not deliver here any answers. but then this blog kind of circles around these questions anyway – and some answers (even contradicting ones) have already been given.

foucault is certainly to mention researching how in our western culture sexuality in general became so important for making different labels for people, for our identity. most theorists already presented ask the same or similar questions. and yes, quite some music posted lately is as well concerned with these questions. so i guess we have to keep on reading and listening and keep on thinking. sorry about that. well, not really.

but why do it? for one i personally find it interesting. then it seems to me something of a moral obligation – the more one realizes that these categories and differences are not written in stone (although it sometimes seems so) and have its specific histories and strategic reasons to exist, the more one might be more careful to employ these differences and take them for granted. and then it is a strategic necessity as a member of a minority to know as much as possible about these strategies and mechanisms.

so we will keep on asking and trying to answer.

et hop! hiphoprisy

November 22, 2007

we’re still doing music and politics, and we are still at hip hop in the early nineties. so there was for me public enemy, consolidated and then someone working with consolidated: the disposable heroes of hiphoprisy.

booklet01small.jpeg

less industrial then consolidated, so musically somewhat a little bit gentler, but still dense. they incorporated a lot of different influences: i was and am still amazed at how they managed to make a record that sounded so new and at the same time sounded so rooted in music-history (the most obvious names name to drop here are gil scott heron and linton kwesi johnson). and hey, they made a cover of dead kennedy’s california über alles.

i’ve seen them live and i do have really good memories of this concert – performing as a trio, consisting of the original duo michael franti and rono tse plus guitar player charlie hunter. the guitar gave the music a slightly jazzy twist (if i remember correctly he played exclusively an acoustic guitar). rono tse was happily hammering away on metal and assorted objects – even using at one point a chainsaw, which was not a b-horror movie reference as with eminem, but rather a reference to the german band einstürzende neubauten, i believe. and then there was michael franti, a frontman with charisma, a lanky tall man with a smile that makes your heart melt.

and then there is to mention that the disposable heroes of hiphoprisy were the first hip hop act i was sure was at least half gay – naah, it’s not michael franti (i actually “met” once his girlfriend – more precise, she complained about my friend v smoking during a spearhead concert), i am talking about rono tse. gj met him at the web, thanked him for the great show and seemingly tousled his hair – although rono tse had at that time a shaved head. so i wonder up to this day what hair got tousled…hmmm.

so what do you get with hipocrisy is the greatest luxury? you get music and politics. so you get food for brain, heart, and soul.

booklet09small.jpeg

ripped from cd@192 you can get it here (the booklet is included – for the lyrics and the tracklisting).

if you would like some more disposable heroes of hiphoprisy i can point you in the direction of the live music archive of archive.org (anyway a fantastic, well, sometimes overwhelming source for music). they have two shows up – get them here.

unfortunately that was the only record they did under this name. but they did another record, together with william s. burroughs called spare ass annie and other tales. well, it’s burroughs rambling and going on and on and all that… always fun. the record is easy to find (and has been re-editioned in a williams s. burroughs box-set, it think). but i thought it might help to give you here spare ass annie and other tales – the operator’s manual. especially since advice for young people is included – yep, this one is for you gj.

i got this copy from somewhere off the net – thank you to the original uploader! there is some info with it which follows now – just that you know what you get:

William S. Burroughs – The Operator’s Manual – 1993

featuring Burroughs, Hal Wilner, and Michael Franti talking about the making of Spare Ass Annie. This includes selected excerpts from the disc as well as a bunch of commentary.

and obviously it is ripped at a rather high bitrate – get it here (coverscans and tracklisting included).

wsbopcover5rjsmall.jpg

while i do not know what rono tse does these days, i know what michael franti is doing. after the disposable heroes of hiphoprisy he founded a new band: spearhead (or: michael franti & spearhead). leaving hip hop more or less behind, spearhead has a very relaxed reggae / roots sound – but the lyrics are still sharp and controversial. if you would like to have a listen, there are many (and i mean really many) shows up over at the live music archive – for an overview go here.

and i highly recommend to visit one of their shows should they arrive in your town.

in the meantime you can visit their homepage, stayhuman.org.

for more…

November 20, 2007

for more italian folk music i highly recommend…the italian folkmusic blog! mainly posting…italian folk music, you guessed it right. not only limited to italian folk, not only limited to “pure” folk, this blog is a very good source for discovering a great and surprising selection of music. take some time and browse through it…and enjoy!

italian folk music

request – milanese

November 20, 2007

yeah – took me a while…

frontsmall3.jpeg

here some italian folkmusic: nanni svampa – al di d’incoeu from a series of records with lombardian (north-italian) folk-music. if you see the, ähem, rather naïve cover you might would not expect it, but it is actually a very pleasant record. an interesting variety of instrumentation. so you get popular (as: from the people) songs in lombard (an italian dialect) interpreted by nanni svampa. nanni svampa is an italian musician moving between popular songs, cabaret and french chanson, i.e. he made a record with songs by the great george brassens (yep, i guess i will have to post something by him soon, too).

so give it a listen: nanni svampa – al di d’incoeu, milanese – antologia della canzone lombarda parte terza / volume XI ripped@192 as mp3-files, including cover scans with explanatory texts (in italian) and the tracklisting – get it here (link dead).

signor svampa’s website you’ll find here.

enjoy!

et hop! this ain’t cnn

November 15, 2007

cover.jpg

the borders between hip hop and other form of electronic music were indeed not drawn that strict as they are today. i remember seeing consolidated on a hip hop festival. that caused some irritation with the “real hip-hoppers” – but it made definitly sense. although usually classified under industrial, their release play more music was closer to hip hop then to industrial. again we have hard music. and very political music. so there are some parallels to public enemy. but here they already end again. their politcs are radically left-wing – and although i do not agree with their politics all the time, they make it easier for the listener to deal with it – they actually encourage discussion. at the time they actually stopped their liveshows and gave the mic around so that everybody can voice her / his opinion. this did not always work (gj, you might still remember the totally pissed one who told us that heineken is evil?) – but sometimes it did – and it made for great snippets for their record. and then they do have humour. they do not take themselves that seriously. that helps a lot when you get bombarded with hard sounds and hard political messages. i mean – one has to light up from time to time, too.

so i suggest you listen to the record play more music by consolidated. it is an intense trip through their sonic universe. after all these years i still find it a great record – and the lyrics are still kicking, too. oh, there is this funny story about the song you suck (featuring the yeasty girls): it is a kind of sex-education song in the tradition of salt ‘n’ pepas let’s talk about sex. just more explicit. a lot more explicit. and to my amazement at the time it was something of a hit in holland. so you had all that chart-stuff being played on the radio and suddenly you suck came on – that was great fun (and there is to note that the dutch usually understand english very well).

so with play more music you get a lot for your ears – a lot of music, a lot of opinion – oh, and with a day on the green one of the greatest upbeat, hm, funk tunes i know.

you might guessed it – it is another one of my favourite records. so get it here. and play it loud!

and please visit their website.

et hop! fight the power

November 15, 2007

yeah… community and grassroots politcs…

one of the first two hip hop-records i bought was public enemy‘s yo! bum rush the show. cool record. screetchy, noisy and somewhat repetetive – i remember thinking at the time that they had understood kraftwerk better then kraftwerk themselves and were doing it just much better – and what was to me rather important at the time: much more aggressive. yeah, i was listening at the time to a lot of rather hard music – and this new hard and angry sound just fitted very nicely with me. not only with me: public enemy was definitly cool at the time, especially with the people that were already familiar with harder underground sounds. but that gave also way to some misunderstandings. i was used to hard acts also doing a hard image from the industrial and ebm (electronic body music) genres. so somehow i understood public enemy as being like these bands: politically leftist, somehow ironic and playing with a certain imagery. yep, it was a certain cultural misunderstanding: little did i understand of american (internal) politics and mechanisms. that public enemy could not be filed under “another hard, angry band” became then slowly apparent to me.

i also loved their next two records, it takes a nation of millions to hold us back and fear of a black planet. as mentioned everywhere else, the music was quite flabbergasting at the time. the use of such excessive sampling has rarely been heard before (well, the technology was very young) and after (due to then installed legal restrictions – these records would therefore not be possible today alone by legal reasons). public enemy also have been such a slap in the face because they did not do party-tracks or tell about their being the biggest mac on the block. they took up the social commentary of grandmaster flash’s the message and turned it into education, into politics – i think chuck d coined the term “infotainement”. yeah – we’re back on grassroots politics. and thanks to public enemy a whole generation of young europeans suddenly knew about malcolm x, the great martin luther king, but also about louis farrakhan and the nation of islam. that was when it turned to be more complicated then just new, exciting music. there were suddenly rumours of anti-gay and anti-jewish remarks – and the anti-jewish remarks actually caused quite a big controversy (well, rightly so). so somehow public enemy kind of lost their “innocence”. where first i assumed that – since they are political – they fight for the rights of all minorities and all that, i had to find out it was not really the case. at the same time i also saw them live – and i have to admit that it was something of a turning point. a turning slowly away point. not because of their aggressiveness (i have seen harsher shows), not because of their military visuals (after all camouflage was all the rage with the underground gay-scene at the time), but because suddenly it became painfully apparent that their lyrics are mostly about internal american politics and somehow do not work in front of a european audience – especially because it seemed that public enemy themselves did not make any difference in their show – i guess i was just waiting for some sign that they are aware that politics work somehow a little bit different in europe. funny enough there was this one thing which really put me off, although just a detail: at some point, chuck d and flavour flav dissed pm dawn, a pop/hip hop outfit with some hits at the time. they could hardly stop telling us that this is not real hip hop and very bad and all that – besides it being rather an odd choice (why pm dawn? there would have been better “targets”) it was also somehow shocking how ferocious they put them down – i was just thinking: hey, you are public enemy, why do you bother? and well, it just showed me one thing public enemy was missing (and that i missed in this moment): some humour. actually flavour flav was somehow responsible for the humour – and well, did he give us a lot to laugh in his mtv-show the flavour of love…

but more important it was one of the first times i realized that hip hop does have a problem from my point of view: hip hop is very often concerned with fending off – it is not inclusive in the sense of: you like it? join us! there were and are always reasons why someone is “not really hip hop”. and if you are not really hip hop you are the enemy. so hip hop is not inclusive, but exclusive. as seen with public enemy’s diss of pm dawn sometimes to the point of ridiculousness. this was especially at the time rather irritating because i first took hip hop as another new emerging genre of electronic music – and i was not the only one: the borders were not drawn that strict – not yet. as music lover i find it a little bit sad that many artists make their music rather unaccessible – but then this exclusivity seems to be a necessary move to construct authenticity in that genre. we get back to that topic in a later post.

so my interest in public enemy waned – but they still are responsible for opening my ear to different music – and they are responsible for me getting better informed about black politcs in the u.s.a.. so they actually did have quite an influence on me – and i guess not only on me.

so – time for some music! i have for you a live recording of public enemy 1987 in the u.k. – i do not have more detailed information then that. the tracklisting reads as follows:

01 intro
02 extended intro
03 too much posse
04 bring the noise
05 miuzi weighs a ton
06 rightstarter
07 raise the roof
08 sophisticated bitch
09 posse intros
10 peace_power rap
11 rebel without a pause
12 flavors dance
13 you gonna get yours
14 time to get busy
15 posse in effect
16 public enemy no 1

so get your ears some early PE – here. enjoy!