Why White Kids Love Hip - Essay Example

Essay Prompt #2: Why White Kids Love Hip: Wanstas, Wiggers, Wannabes, and the New Reality of Race In America Hip hop has revolutionized the way of life of teen-agers globally. For youngsters who have noted that hip hop became a means of salvation to becoming an enigmatic source of lucrative ventures (Chang), the fact indicates that its controversial roots and purpose provided the impetus for continued debates and philosophical discussions that apparently became the “subject of study at Harvard and the London School of Economics” (Chang 60). In Kiwana’s chapter from Why White Kids Love Hip-Hop entitled “Erasing Blackness” the author aimed to dispute the established knowledge that the originators of the hip-hop, and even the rap, were the African Americans. Other research studies on the subject revealed diverse perspectives noting the popularity that hip hop has gained from the time it originated and spanning a global audience. In this regard, using the two discourse: Chang’s It’s a Hip Hop World and Kiwana’s Erasing Blackness, the current essay hereby aims to present a comparative analysis of these literary works through a closer examination of the following elements, to wit: point of view, character, theme and experiences. There are similarities in terms of presenting both literary works from the third person point of view. Both Chang and Kiwana used the formal essay structure by using narrative and descriptive format and style with examples noted from actual life experiences. The disparities lie in presentation of the literary work, as Chang’s presentation could be deemed more effective in enticing pathos or emotional appeal through the use of carefully selected photographs the break the monotony of a long line of discourse (“Asian art: Graffiti is one of the original elements of American-style hip-hop that Chinas urban youth have made their own” (Chang 60); “Cant stop: A South Korean b-boy tears up Seoul with his acrobatic moves” (Chang 61); “Revisiting roots: Senegalese hip-hop artists tackle themes of poverty and oppression” (Chang 62)). Kiwana relied solely on narrative and descriptive prose with only very minimal sub-headings that assist the readers in defining a well-crafted enumeration on the arguments supposedly supporting white kids as hip-hop’s primary audience. Thereby, it could be deduced that Kiwana used logos as the rhetorical appeal through persuading the readers using logical reasoning. The theme is obviously unified as both focused on the subject of hip-hop. The contrast lies in thrust or focus of discussion. As brief noted, Kiwana’s discussion on the chapter aimed at persuading the audience that the Whites are the target audience, as well as the primary perpetuators of hip hop. As revealed, the seven carefully enumerated arguments support that White suburban kids are the primary audience of hip hop through the provision of examples, statistics, and noting famous personalities associated with the socio-cultural musical endeavor. Therefore, Kiwana touched on the controversial subject of racial identity aiming to provide rebuttal to the cultural norm that allegedly typecast hip hop to Blacks, without question. The author effectively presented justifications through research, music sales, demographic profiles in population, historical timeline, and support from secondary sources of information from reputable references. On the other hand, Chang’s discourse focused on persuading the audience that hip-hop is a global phenomenon. His presentation was lighter and more straightforward since it did not need intricate and logical reasoning to prove his point. The use of a feature article written by Watkins entitled “Why Hip-Hop Is Like No Other” complemented his contentions and confirmed the assertions that hip-hop is more than just a popular musical craze, but, as noted: “it’s also attitude and culture… it has been an equally astonishing source of youth expression and empowerment” (Watkins 63). It is commendable though, that both authors used fairly comprehensible language that could be easily understood by a wide range of audience from diverse educational backgrounds and professions. The characters in Chang and Kiwana’s literary works are diverse and noted sporadically through the examples provided to support their contentions. In Chang’s article, he mentioned the following characters: Dana Burton, a native from Detroit who was reportedly instrumental in making hip hop famous in China; American rapper, 50 Cent; Shawn Carter or Jay-Z; Cindy and Clive Campbell; Tony Tone; Afrika Bambaataa; McSolaar; and Public Enemy; among others. In contrast, the characters noted by Kiwana included: writer David Samuel; Beastie Boys; Michael Shalett and Michael Fine of Soundscan; Malcolm X; Nielson, who allegedly bought Soundscan; mention of artists such as DMX , 50 Cent, Eminem; Todd Boyd; and even deejays such as Green Lantern and Kayslay; to name a few. From the list, it could be viewed that only one name was noted by both writers: 50 Cent as prominently iconic of hip hop. Effective choice of noting these characters were contributory to supporting the respective themes and arguments asserted by both authors. Chang’s article, which aimed to justify the increasing role that hip hop plays in various cultural and social endeavors through empowering the youth for self-expression and productive pursuit of a more constructive way to communicate struggles from oppression and poverty, need to use characters who the target audience could easily identify. In contrast, since Kiwana was disputing the contention that hip hop was initially targeted for the Blacks and were originated and popularized by them, the author had to use characters that are identified to possess credibility to validly support logical reasoning, in conjunction with statistical figures and facts from other related surveys and research studies. To reiterate, the two literary works authored by Chang and Kiwana contained points of similarities in terms of points of view and themes, as well as mentioning a sole character, 50 Cent, in their presented discourses. The disparities were evident from their focus of discussion, the use of rhetorical appeal (where Kiwana utilized logos and Chang used pathos), and the selection of supporting arguments to strengthen their respective assertions. Kiwana’s presentation was more in-depth and required authoritative and reputable examples and sources to support his main argument; thereby, it was more challenging to comprehend. Chang’s writing style was lighter and more straightforward, and was appropriately enhanced with photographs and a featured article also of the same subject. In sum, it is initially commendable that both authors effectively achieved the goals they initially intended to relay. Both discourses provided illuminating insights on the subject matter using diverse literary styles and rhetorical elements that cater to different audiences. These articles have proven that hip hop continues to evolve and would continue to influence contemporary and future generations’ lives. Works Cited Chang, Jeff. "Its a Hip-Hop World." Foreign Policy (2007): No. 163, 58-65. Print. Kiwana, Bakari. "Erasing Blackness." Kiwana, Bakari. Why White Kids Love Hip Hop. Publisher. Date. Print. Watkins, S. Craig. "Why Hip Hop Is Like No Other." Foreign Policy (2007): 63. Print.  Read More