Flawed Philosophy: KRS ONE and the Weakness of "Being Hip Hop"

Flawed Philosophy: KRS ONE and the Weakness of "Being Hip Hop" by Adissa Banjoko

Blastmaster KRS ONE,

For the last few years I have watched you write or speak about the merits of "being Hip Hop" and alluding to some spiritual core power within Hip Hop itself. While Hip Hop does indeed command more power than any other musical art form before it, too much weight is being put on its true power and potential. I believe that your idea on "being Hip Hop" while sounding and feeling good, is in truth weak. I think it is dangerous for those who truly love Hip Hop culture authentically. Following this concept gives the illusion that Hip Hop can and should be equal to other cultures and faiths like African, Latino, Japanese, Buddhist, Judaic, Islamic, or Christian.

The sub-culture of Hip Hop is not built to support people in the manner that one can "BE" of other dominant cultures or faiths. The richness of the contributions of other faiths and cultures to Hip Hop are what MAKE Hip Hop great. I submit that Hip Hop is a subculture. Being a sub-culture, Hip Hop is not meant to facilitate such things. It is meant to absorb things that exist already and re-frame them in a contemporary urban environment.

To not realize this point, is to mistake the scaffolding of a building for the actual foundation. I love Hip Hop! But I will not pile cultural and spiritual bricks to its structure (especially when I KNOW it was not meant to support such weight).

One of the more disturbing ideas proposed in your philosophy is that in order to BE "Hip Hop" one should consider giving up who they originally claimed themselves to be (African, Jewish, Irish, Japanese, Christian, Native American etc.) . However, almost everything "Hip Hop" now is something else from some other culture, that was deemed "Hip Hop" later.

Think about it. Were Technic 1200's turntables, Adidas shelltoe shoes, and Kung Fu flicks, made with Hip Hop in mind? Or did those who claim the sub-culture of Hip Hop embrace them, thus "making" them "Hip Hop"? From this perspective, what is and is not "Hip Hop" is merely an issue of consumerism.

Further, was the African oral tradition HIP-HOP?, The martial arts fighting system of Capoeria? The African American political ideologies of Malcolm X? Were the Black Panthers created specifically FOR "Hip Hop"? Or, were these movements and ideals MADE "Hip Hop" by the Hip Hop community?

Imagine Hip Hop without the Black nationalistic infusions of Public Enemy and Paris? How different would Hip Hop be minus the Latin flavor of Cypress Hill and the dance movements of Pop Master Fabel? Can you imagine Hip Hop without the eastern philosophical insights from Wu-Tang Clan or Afu-Ra? What would Hip Hop be without the strong beauty of songs like Kanye's "Jesus Walks" or Talib Kewli's "The Proud"? Hip Hop has never and will never stand on its own.

With or without Hip Hop's support, approval or understanding those technological advances, clothing lines, movements and philosophies will continue to exist.

What is and is NOT Hip Hop is usually co-opted by those in the Hip Hop community from an outside source. Very little in Hip Hop has been "invented" by "us". However MUCH has been re-mixed and re-framed to fit the Hip Hop subculture. We must be honest about this fact if we truly wish to see our true selves. To do so does not negate the greatness of Hip Hop.

Also, racially and culturally speaking, a friend of mine in the U.K., Kevin Sekweyama made a very salient point. "Let's say the mother is German and the father is Australian. If the kid's father is a B-boy is the kid supposed to say 'My mother is German, and my Dad is Hip Hop'?" The mere suggestion sounds ridiculous!

KRS, I know you must see how this kind of thinking spirals toward the insane. You must acknowledge the myopic mind state you’ve suggested.

We must not get so emotionally caught up in the moment that we mistake Hip Hop for something that it is not. The music of the civil rights era was soul, and R&B...But no one from that era says "I am soul". We must remember that the MOVEMENT was the source of the music and not the other way around.

Further, to paraphrase Hip Hop children’s book author of "Turntable Timmy" Mike Perry. He noted that Chicano low rider culture is a major force in the community. But no one would ever say, 'I am no longer Chicano, I am a low rider'.

After heard your statements I would like to formally challenge you, KRS ONE, to a debate on this subject in a public forum. Know that this challenge is not intended to be physical or on wax- but rather a purely philosophical one . I further assert that nothing in the so-called "Gospel of Hip Hop" will have new concepts. I submit that everything in the so-called "Gospel" will be a previously "eastern" or "western" concept framed in a Hip Hop context. Rather than do that, why not just give those who seek knowledge the real roots of the paths you expound upon (Buddhism, Rig Vedas, Taoism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism etc.)? Isn't that more honorable than masking other faiths with the veil of Hip Hop? Simply changing the context does not make it new.

Is Hip Hop possibly the world’s greatest sub-culture? No doubt. Has it given many people a new passion for politics, their own sense of self and a new found love for spirituality? No doubt. But it's nothing for us to "be". It is for us to love, nurture, and nourish with truth as we grow. You should also know that these positions are my secondary reasons for denying the "I am Hip Hop" philosophy. I'd rather tell you the rest in person.