While I am fashionably late responding to the beef between MJ and Eminem over his latest video, Just Lose It, I did not hear about it late. I went as far as to seek out a copy of the transcript but my sleuthing skills fell short.
Nevertheless, Ambra Nykol, whose blog I have admittedly fallen short on reading/commenting, said just about all there was to say. I do happen to like Eminem, because he is one thing people are squeamish about admitting: entertaining. Call him what you want, the man knows what he is doing. He knows that this whole farce of a sham is going to increase his fanbase and sales, no matter what. He's been the media's "epitome" of controversy since 1999.
That all said, I am befuddled by this whole nonsense, because I don't understand why Michael Jackson is such a precious icon that we must ignore his shortcomings and just plain ole 'not-rightness' just because he's black. In the words of Star, don't patronize me with your silly tribalism. What, am I supposed to support (dry heaves) R. Kelly even though he is a friggin pedophile, because he's black and so am I? Give me a break, really. So BET has decided to keep airing UnCut (read: the porno versions of videos) but has pulled Em's video just for the MJ satire. How predictable. And, since I mentioned R.Kelly, how many of his videos have been pulled at BET, you know the ones with barely legal girls clad in handkerchiefs and liquor a-flowin?
I just don't understand the whole logic behind this. So, Chris Rock can joke about Michael ("I'm handing in my glove!"), Saturday Night Live can satirize him, and newspapers can even call him "Jacko" but for whatever reason Eminem is a no-no? And...whatabout the other people he mocks in the video? Hammer? Pee-wee Herman? Paris Hilton? Madonna? Who hasn't the man mocked? Why is this even an issue? Because, he's white, and it's always a race issue if a white person happens to have commentary on something that a black person may have done.
I'm torn between what is worse here: that we are expected to ignore the obvious failings of our "icons" simply to promote and unite the "black race," thereby skirting the core issue (eg. these men need help); or that it is unrighteous for folks who are not black to chirp one critical word about our people, lest they be deemed racist.
And, as a journalist, I question the merit behind Steve Harvey's interview(s) with Michael on the Los Angeles' The Beat station in the first place. Since when can you even interview your "friends" anyway? Ahem, ethics anyone?
Friday, October 22, 2004
Couldn't have said it better....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't think anyone (credible) is saying that we hafta support creeps just cuz they're Black. I think it's just a deal over WHO is allowed to bash (former) icons from our community. I think a lot of people think it should be left to Black folk. There's a certain heebie-jeebyness in a whoever-wants-to pile-on.
Would you feel the same way if Eminem made fun of MLK cuz of his known adultery?
Anyway, nobody but nobody claims Hammer. He's free for the bashin.
I hear what you are saying in terms of credibility, but I really can't give anyone (celebrity, media..) the torch as the "voice" of the black community. I think it annoys me most that black people are seen as this homogenous group of people who should all think, speak and act one way. I personally don't give a rats what people say about someone in the public light, because being a public figure opens a person to all criticism.
For me, as long as it's something based on an action or statement, and not something like a person's race, income or social status, then I have no time for the nonsense concerning who can say what. If you go on dateline and with a straight face say that you say it's okay for young boys to sleep in the same bed as a grown man, you're fair game.
Post a Comment