On February 20, 2018, our HIST 390 continued to talk about the various influences that African culture had on Western music, more specifically this time, minstrel shows and how they may affect the world (or, at the very least, the world of music) today.  To put it simply, minstrel shows were America’s contribution to music as a whole.  Minstrel shows were basically an American form of entertainment in which the infamous concept of black face had its start.  They were shows in which white people would dress up in the attempt to imitate black people, performing skits, playing characters, playing music, dance, etc.  Many songs back in this time were specifically made for minstrel shows, some of them even being popular enough to last throughout the ages (thought admittedly had to be changed to match the sensibilities and tastes of the time), and, for better or for worse, greatly influenced the entertainment industry and were quite common.  To provide a more specific example, the state song of Texas used to be a song sung by white people in black face about leaving mixed colored women behind.  Jim Crow was even originally a character within a minstrel show (his name would later be used for naming the Jim Crow Laws).  That being said, African Americans were eventually able to turn it all around by having lots of actual African Americans perform at minstrel shows themselves.  In a way, they were living out their own degradation, owning it in a way that made it no longer as offensive as minstrel shows originally had made them before.  Eventually, a play called, “Darktown is Out Tonight” was written with every role to be played by black people by Paul Laurence Dunbar, who himself was a black writer.  What made this turnaround even more surreal was that these black performers were still making use of black face, putting on makeup that would darken their skin even more and emphasize their lips, just like how white performers had previous done before.  One could argue that this adds to the humor of the shows, as the uncomfortable feeling that comes with the practice helped to define the minstrel show’s own comedy (as all good comedy is usually somewhat queasy and controversial to begin with) while others could argue that since they were already black people under all of that makeup, it couldn’t possibly still be considered black face anymore.

One of the bigger topics brought up within the class was whether minstrel shows were still technically a component of the entertainment industry today.  As black face has obviously become taboo in today’s day and age, as the professor pointed out, black performers and artists seem to sell and advertise themselves around their “blackness” quite a bit.  Consider many black rappers today.  Many rappers seem to fit to a T or play or dress up as the black stereotypical rapper, which brings up the question of whether they really are who they portray themselves to be or if their bosses force them to or if they choose to take up the personas in an attempt to get an audience.  Is it racism on society’s part?  Did society force these black rappers to take up the persona or else face the less guaranteed uphill climb of trying to be a rapper who wasn’t the usual black rapper stereotype?  Was this the fault of the rappers themselves for agreeing to take up the role in the first place?  After all, the stereotype would not be so prevalent if black performers and rappers would just put their foot down and refuse to perpetuate the stereotype in the first place.  Is this even a bad thing to begin with?  With so many musical performers nowadays (some of them not even needing to sign with major record labels and could easily make a decent living being independent or building their career slowly on the internet), would using your “blackness” to your advantage to help distinguish yourself from the rest really be so bad?  Nowadays, with many singers and rappers simply being hired for their singing and rapping talents and looks without too much consideration for their personalities (if they have an interesting one in the first place), would playing up who you are, whether it be a stereotype created by society or not, or a possibly offensive character really be detrimental in the long run?  There really does seem to be an argument between morals and practicality here.  Personally, I’m more for the practicality side than the moral side.  While the music industry is no doubt rife with controversy and what the media expose as “terrible” people, I’d rather have that over bland singers singing bland and similar sounding songs, with nothing really distinguishing one artist from the other.  Back in the day, even without the controversies surrounding them, Michael Jackson, Freddie Mercury, and Prince had so much more charisma and personality than performers like Justin Bieber, Ed Sheeran, and Drake.  I’ll even give credit where credit is due: whether you like their music or not, at least Katy Perry, Beyonce, Adele, and Psy have definable personalities (being that they are the shallow, cutesy party girl, confidence personified, classy lady, and goofy guy).  If the singers or record labels were creative with the music they were producing and writing, then perhaps I would be less inclined to choose this particular side, but with a majority of songs being thoughtless dribble and the voices behind them (while admittedly talented, God-given gifts) not being distinct enough or charismatic enough to really latch onto the artist that way, I say bring on the terrible stereotypes and terrible people!  At least we’ll have something to talk about then.