The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I would post this in prime, but obviously cannot, and I can't be bothered waiting for regular-status, so here goes.
I was watching the new N*Sync video on MTV before, it's called 'Girlfriend' and it features Nelly. The video is a departure from their normal work, and they go to some lengths to try and 'street' up the shoot and it's one of those hip-pop songs that chews up the airwaves. There's lots of close dancing and romantic embraces. But that's not really the point. This is the point.
Of the five N*Sync guys, all but one of them has either facial hair, a beanie hat, or both. The one that doesn't is filmed with a white girl in the back of a car, while the four others are dancing with black girls. What I don't like is the way that four of them feel the need to go to these measures to try and make themselves look more underground. From my rudimentary knowledge of N*Sync, no more than two of them normally have facial hair, and none of them regularly sports a beanie. So the thought process has clearly been something along the lines of: Hip-pop video, Nelly's on board, so let's try and make ourselves look less white and more black to try and legitimise it. Not only is it deeply insulting to both white and black people, it's a very crude technique. It is basically a way to and cover up as much skin as possible, by dodgy facial hair and big round hats. The costume designer didn't feel it was necessary for the guy with the white girl in the video, to use facial hair/beanies, but it was so for the others.
It reminds me of someone else actually. A very close friend of Cypress Hill, a famous LA tatooist, really goes to town with tattoos, facial hair, beanie hats, whatever else, to try and mask the fact that he's white.
I just wondered what you thought of this, this attempt by wannabe white boys trying to make themselves look like something they're not. It's really, really offensive to both white and black people, and it does not sit well with me. Just be true to what you are, regardless.
I was watching the new N*Sync video on MTV before, it's called 'Girlfriend' and it features Nelly. The video is a departure from their normal work, and they go to some lengths to try and 'street' up the shoot and it's one of those hip-pop songs that chews up the airwaves. There's lots of close dancing and romantic embraces. But that's not really the point. This is the point.
Of the five N*Sync guys, all but one of them has either facial hair, a beanie hat, or both. The one that doesn't is filmed with a white girl in the back of a car, while the four others are dancing with black girls. What I don't like is the way that four of them feel the need to go to these measures to try and make themselves look more underground. From my rudimentary knowledge of N*Sync, no more than two of them normally have facial hair, and none of them regularly sports a beanie. So the thought process has clearly been something along the lines of: Hip-pop video, Nelly's on board, so let's try and make ourselves look less white and more black to try and legitimise it. Not only is it deeply insulting to both white and black people, it's a very crude technique. It is basically a way to and cover up as much skin as possible, by dodgy facial hair and big round hats. The costume designer didn't feel it was necessary for the guy with the white girl in the video, to use facial hair/beanies, but it was so for the others.
It reminds me of someone else actually. A very close friend of Cypress Hill, a famous LA tatooist, really goes to town with tattoos, facial hair, beanie hats, whatever else, to try and mask the fact that he's white.
I just wondered what you thought of this, this attempt by wannabe white boys trying to make themselves look like something they're not. It's really, really offensive to both white and black people, and it does not sit well with me. Just be true to what you are, regardless.
I'm glad that this has received a mostly intelligent response (fools will be fools I guess), and I'm glad that my message has been understood. I think it's really tacky, but most of all, inauthentic and disingenious. The N*Sync example is just one of a multitude of people trying to buy their way into black culture. It's not that one is any better than another, it's just that they're different and by their nature aren't copied well. Could you imagine a bunch of white boys in a lowered suspension caddilac convertible, ja rule on the stereo, and not have a chuckle?
† Ð㥠Wålké® † wrote:
> Why post this CRAP!
its not cr@p its good, and sod off and come back when you have more mature comments
> Why post this CRAP!
its not cr@p its good, and sod off and come back when you have more mature comments
blahpro wrote:
> I am to stupid to understand that!
True.
> I am to stupid to understand that!
True.
unknown kernel wrote:
> † Ð㥠Wålké® † wrote:
> Why post this CRAP!
>
> Because it's interesting perhaps?
>
> I agree totally about this (the original post not the 'crap' comment),
> but then the repackaging of black culture for a white audience is
> hardly a new phenomenon. It's been going on since the days of jazz
> and r+b: dilute something fantastic, make it a lot safer and more
> pedestrian, then sell it to the audience with the money to spend. It
> isn't overt racism, just another manifestation of the divisions in our
> society and the limits that big business puts on culture.
I am to stupid to understand that!
> † Ð㥠Wålké® † wrote:
> Why post this CRAP!
>
> Because it's interesting perhaps?
>
> I agree totally about this (the original post not the 'crap' comment),
> but then the repackaging of black culture for a white audience is
> hardly a new phenomenon. It's been going on since the days of jazz
> and r+b: dilute something fantastic, make it a lot safer and more
> pedestrian, then sell it to the audience with the money to spend. It
> isn't overt racism, just another manifestation of the divisions in our
> society and the limits that big business puts on culture.
I am to stupid to understand that!
† Ð㥠Wålké® † wrote:
> Why post this CRAP!
Because it's interesting perhaps?
I agree totally about this (the original post not the 'crap' comment), but then the repackaging of black culture for a white audience is hardly a new phenomenon. It's been going on since the days of jazz and r+b: dilute something fantastic, make it a lot safer and more pedestrian, then sell it to the audience with the money to spend. It isn't overt racism, just another manifestation of the divisions in our society and the limits that big business puts on culture.
> Why post this CRAP!
Because it's interesting perhaps?
I agree totally about this (the original post not the 'crap' comment), but then the repackaging of black culture for a white audience is hardly a new phenomenon. It's been going on since the days of jazz and r+b: dilute something fantastic, make it a lot safer and more pedestrian, then sell it to the audience with the money to spend. It isn't overt racism, just another manifestation of the divisions in our society and the limits that big business puts on culture.
I agree with the comments you made there SE, and Day walker sod off you gimp and don't come back until you have some proper comments to make.
I hate it when cheap crappy boy band and other bland pop artists try to make themselves look hip and cool. The N*Synce video is a prime example. I also noticed it ripped off the film The Fast and the Furious, it makes the video seem like a cash in of the film.
Whatever they've done to make themselves appeal to a wider audience, It doesn't work. The band should stick to cheap tacky music viseos
which reflect their whole no exsistent music ability.
I hate it when cheap crappy boy band and other bland pop artists try to make themselves look hip and cool. The N*Synce video is a prime example. I also noticed it ripped off the film The Fast and the Furious, it makes the video seem like a cash in of the film.
Whatever they've done to make themselves appeal to a wider audience, It doesn't work. The band should stick to cheap tacky music viseos
which reflect their whole no exsistent music ability.
Why post this CRAP!
I would post this in prime, but obviously cannot, and I can't be bothered waiting for regular-status, so here goes.
I was watching the new N*Sync video on MTV before, it's called 'Girlfriend' and it features Nelly. The video is a departure from their normal work, and they go to some lengths to try and 'street' up the shoot and it's one of those hip-pop songs that chews up the airwaves. There's lots of close dancing and romantic embraces. But that's not really the point. This is the point.
Of the five N*Sync guys, all but one of them has either facial hair, a beanie hat, or both. The one that doesn't is filmed with a white girl in the back of a car, while the four others are dancing with black girls. What I don't like is the way that four of them feel the need to go to these measures to try and make themselves look more underground. From my rudimentary knowledge of N*Sync, no more than two of them normally have facial hair, and none of them regularly sports a beanie. So the thought process has clearly been something along the lines of: Hip-pop video, Nelly's on board, so let's try and make ourselves look less white and more black to try and legitimise it. Not only is it deeply insulting to both white and black people, it's a very crude technique. It is basically a way to and cover up as much skin as possible, by dodgy facial hair and big round hats. The costume designer didn't feel it was necessary for the guy with the white girl in the video, to use facial hair/beanies, but it was so for the others.
It reminds me of someone else actually. A very close friend of Cypress Hill, a famous LA tatooist, really goes to town with tattoos, facial hair, beanie hats, whatever else, to try and mask the fact that he's white.
I just wondered what you thought of this, this attempt by wannabe white boys trying to make themselves look like something they're not. It's really, really offensive to both white and black people, and it does not sit well with me. Just be true to what you are, regardless.
I was watching the new N*Sync video on MTV before, it's called 'Girlfriend' and it features Nelly. The video is a departure from their normal work, and they go to some lengths to try and 'street' up the shoot and it's one of those hip-pop songs that chews up the airwaves. There's lots of close dancing and romantic embraces. But that's not really the point. This is the point.
Of the five N*Sync guys, all but one of them has either facial hair, a beanie hat, or both. The one that doesn't is filmed with a white girl in the back of a car, while the four others are dancing with black girls. What I don't like is the way that four of them feel the need to go to these measures to try and make themselves look more underground. From my rudimentary knowledge of N*Sync, no more than two of them normally have facial hair, and none of them regularly sports a beanie. So the thought process has clearly been something along the lines of: Hip-pop video, Nelly's on board, so let's try and make ourselves look less white and more black to try and legitimise it. Not only is it deeply insulting to both white and black people, it's a very crude technique. It is basically a way to and cover up as much skin as possible, by dodgy facial hair and big round hats. The costume designer didn't feel it was necessary for the guy with the white girl in the video, to use facial hair/beanies, but it was so for the others.
It reminds me of someone else actually. A very close friend of Cypress Hill, a famous LA tatooist, really goes to town with tattoos, facial hair, beanie hats, whatever else, to try and mask the fact that he's white.
I just wondered what you thought of this, this attempt by wannabe white boys trying to make themselves look like something they're not. It's really, really offensive to both white and black people, and it does not sit well with me. Just be true to what you are, regardless.