Art and “isms”

I shared some tweets yesterday…critiquing music and culture a bit. The tweets started with Jay-Z but spiraled into a greater topic.

Some people were upset that I pointed out Jay-Z’s command of literary devices. To them, noticing a metaphor, for example, now means that I can’t hear his mentions of sexism, violence, consumption and capitalism. Nope. I can clearly see both.

I don’t think any art is above recognition of the genius or the grotesque. I don’t have to pretend one does not exist to see the other. (I previously discussed this on my photography blog in a post called All Art Is Not Good…All Artists Are Not Noble. I don’t think art is “inherently good,” so to say that anything with “isms” is no longer art or that it must exclude human ills to be art, excludes most art then. Art imitates life.) I don’t have to say something that includes a negative ideology isn’t art becuase I make no presumption that art/artists is/are without ills. By not constraining myself to a false definition of art that implies only goodness and purity, I can see the full picture of what art is, how it is created, how society impacts artists, and how their art impacts society—both the good and the bad.

(When I said this, I was not implying that this particular line uses all of those mentioned devices. I was thinking of all of his music since Reasonable Doubt.)

Related Post: 25 Of My Favorite Albums Created (In The Last 25 Years) By Black Women