An interesting piece in The Atlantic this week from Erik Nielson, discussing the decrease of sampling in hip-hop and the what he argues is the resulting decrease of social commentary in hip-hop. I'll give a brief summary of his findings and a few thoughts from both sides, but make sure you check out the original story.
Brief history if you're not familiar with the genesis of hip-hop: Sampling is not used as frequently as it once was. Why? Because it's expensive. Nielson cites a figure that estimates the average sample costs $10,000 to clear. So that's why Kanye West is still big on sampling and say, El-P makes his own beats. So how does this affect the commentary of a track?
Nielson claimed, and provided examples, that hip-hop artists often used their samples as a point of reference when crafting raps. "Can't Truss It" by Public Enemy opens with spoken word clips, such as from "Roots" and speech from Malcom X, and continues with clever references that out-of-the-loop listeners might not even get, such as a bass line from the band Slave, and a sample of James Brown's "Get Up, Get Into It, Get Involved." Of course, Nielson also clarifies that some of the most sample-happy works, such as the Beastie Boys' "Paul's Boutique," don't pack any political punch.
Compare that with today's artists, who Fields suggests have lost touch with the struggle. The obvious example he lists is when Lil Wayne references Emmett Till regarding the rapper's sexual prowess. Till's mother put his body on display to shame the nation into moving toward Civil Rights. Wayne put the body on display for an edgy reference.
On the other hand, West uses samples and not usually toward commentary. His new album "Yeezus" is packed with political tracks such as "New Slaves," yet he used the sample of Billie Holiday's "Strange Fruit," a song describing lynchings in the South, during "Blood on The Leaves," a song that, despite its title, is about a failed relationship.
Your thoughts? Again, make sure to read the whole article linked above!
