Rapping Minstrels and the Performance of Hip Hop

Introduction

The minstrel show, with the peculiar structure of its performance and its socio-cultural implications, has been identified as a particularly early form of racially complicated entertainment. The appropriation – and distortion – of Black cultural forms was in fact viably exploited by White performers and directed at a White audience. As social critic W.E.B. Du Bois argues that minstrelsy was “organized around the quite explicit ‘borrowing’ of black cultural materials for white dissemination…it arose from a white obsession with black (male) bodies which underlies white racial dread to our own day” (Du Bois 1989: 3). Minstrelsy has therefore been identified as the first in a long, constant line of cultural parasitism affecting Black popular forms of entertainment – passing through the era of rock’n’roll to land in the contemporary cultural space of hip hop. Although the parallelism with hip hop is evident in terms of what commentator Bakari Kitwana labels a white ‘banditry’ of socio-cultural means of expression (Kitwana 2005: 156), some of the fundamental elements of hip hop culture and performance differ substantially from the minstrelsy and blackface performance. The paragon between a minstrel show and a rap performance is supported by similarities that range from structure, construction of characters and figure of speech, to loose social implications in the rapport established cross-culturally between the performers, the ‘performed’, and the audience. However, the minstrel show is essentially rooted in and envisioned for the entertainment of White middle-class culture, whereas hip hop practice and performance finds its core and celebrates Black culture at its purest form – even more some when primarily consumed by White spectators. In this context, what are the points of contact and the aspects of divergence between minstrelsy and hip hop/ rap performance? How do they relate to and feed into each other? Finally, how can the experience of the first trace a pattern of evolution for the latter?
The aim of this research essay is to evaluate correlation between the artistic form of the American minstrel show of the 19th century and modern day hip hop/ rap performance, establishing a pattern of similarities and divergences in terms of format, content as well as socio-cultural meaning and implications. A further aim is to illustrate the relationship between the two forms of popular entertainment through the systematic analysis of sample performances, contextualising the historical development of blackface minstrelsy and hip hop. The objective of the research is to produce a synthetic account of the cultural origins and progressive influence of the minstrel show and the hip hop performance, in order to envision a possible path of evolution for Black-oriented forms of entertainment.
The framework of the research is structured in the synthetic historic accounts of blackface minstrelsy and hip hop culture respectively, in order to highlight the socio-cultural facets of similarity and divergence. The structural characteristics and socio-cultural implications of both forms of popular entertainment are then contextualised within the relevant academic critique – drawing on Lott (1993), Moody (1966), Toll (1974) and Watkins (1994) for the analysis of blackface minstrelsy, referring to Keyes (2002), Kitwana (2005), Potter (1995), Forman and Neal (2004) for insights on hip hop, and eventually engaging with Lahmon Jr. (1998) and Du Bois (1989) for an organic commentary on the correlation of both forms. The methodology of the research is finally completed by a comparative discourse analysis of sample texts and performances of legendary minstrels and notorious rappers, in order to illustrate the theoretical commentary on and emphasise the socio-cultural implications of the two Black-oriented forms of entertainment.

Minstrel Shows and Blackface

The typically American tradition of the minstrel show originates from pre-industrial European traditions of carnivalesque entertainment – a masquerade show synthesising elements of music, dance and satirical comedy performed for the amusement of the royal courts. The American transposition of the minstrel show began towards the end of the 1830’s, when working class white men envisioned the imitation of Black musical and dance forms as a means of entertainment. Dressing up as plantation slaves, the minstrels combined crude parody, indiscriminate appropriation and genuine admiration of African American people and their socio-cultural practices. Although the participation of Black men to minstrel shows was prohibited until the Civil War, African American entertainers were admitted to perform in ‘blackface’ – imitating the White men imitate Black men. ‘Blackface’ makeup – used to affect the countenance of the racist, stereotyped icon of the Black Man – consisted of a layer of shoe polish, greasepaint or charcoal applied to the face to darken the skin tone. The final look was completed by black woolly wigs, tailcoats or ragged clothes worn to achieve a gorgonesque appearance. Blackface minstrels targeted a new, middle-classed North American audience who would appreciate the spectacular quality of grotesque performance as a vulgar yet popular form of entertainment. They travelled the same circuits as opera, theatre and circus artists in the North of the USA, where the audience was able to identify with the caricaturisation and stylisation of the stereotypical Black characters – who were indeed considered an ‘exotic’ phenomenon of the South.
As Richard Moody describes with the precious aid of a collection of sample texts, the basic structure of the average minstrel show – performed by a troupe of blackface minstrels – consisted of three main sections (Moody 1966: 475-500). The initial phase was a collective sung and danced performance called the ‘walkaround’, showcasing an array of stock characters – mediated by a designate host – singing, dancing and exchanging jokes, anecdotes and puns. The second portion of the show revolved around a dialogue between the eloquent ‘host’ and the ‘slave’ characters: in a resemblance of a duet performance, the main stage persona delivered a nonsensical oration in faux Black speech as the sidekick contributed with a range of ‘unintentional’ malapropisms. The third and final section of the performance, the ‘afterpiece’, usually portrayed a burlesque depiction of an idyllic plantation life with slaves singing and dancing and playing tricks to their masters. The interlude to the ‘afterpiece’ gags consisted of slapstick humour tricks such as cream cakes thrown to the face and small fireworks set on-stage. The set of stock characters that defined the structure of the average minstrel show was constituted of five main impersonations, equipped with numerous variables – they are described at length by Robert Toll in his work titled “Blacking Up” (1974). The principal character was the archetypal ‘slave’ – dim-witted, poorly-spoken and named after the instrument he usually played on stage, such as Tambo (short for Tambourine) or Bones (after bone castanets). The ‘slave’ usually engaged in dialectical confrontation with the educated host, personified in the well-spoken ‘interlocutor’: this duet performance allowed for a series of humorous puns to be delivered in the apparent misunderstandings generating between the eloquent ‘interlocutor’ and the illiterate ‘slave’. A minstrel show would not be complete without the appearance of a female character, stylised in the flirtatious character of the ‘wench mulatto’ – a light-skinned girl combining the facial features of a White woman and the sexually promiscuous allure associated with a Black woman. A character moulded as an antithesis to the ‘slave’ was the ‘dandy’ – a Black man aspiring to belong to the White upper-class, and constantly failing. The stage persona who merged the characteristics of the ‘slave’ and the ‘dandy’ was the character of the ‘soldier’, who allowed a space for progression from the plantation life (Toll 1974: 74-78).
The popularity of the minstrel show grew parallel to the audience’s awareness of the issues of slavery. As Eric Lott argues, the characters in the minstrel shows forged on a distorted, stereotyped representation of the Black slaves, provided the audience with a fantasy window to the world of the Southern plantations – one deprived of respect and authenticity (Lott 1993: 90-105). The minstrel show became therefore a vehicle for circulating assumptions about blacks, explains Watkins in his commentary on the social conditions of blackface minstrelsy, while the African American population were expected to uphold these stereotypes in return for ‘tolerance’ (Watkins 1994:100). In such context, the blackface masquerade idealised a socio-cultural convenient image of Black people and, most importantly, it justified the ambivalence of the White audience towards the expansion of racism.

Hip Hop Culture, Music and Performance

Hip hop is a music-based culture originated in the ghettos of the USA in the early 1980’s as a means of expression for the disenfranchised strata of the Black population. As it quickly grew in popularity, hip hop solidified its socio-cultural characteristics and was embraced by an extensive White audience fascinated with its intrinsically Black configuration. Hip hop culture is historically synonymous with four forms of artistic expression defined ‘elements’, which entail four aspects of a music based performance – DJing, rapping, break-dancing, graffiti. Although a hip hop performance can showcase one of more of the ‘elements’, the most common form of popular entertainment associated with it is rapping. The average rap performance in hip hop, like the vast majority of music-based subcultures, builds on a patriarchal construction of a highly gendered and sexual body. The performing body of hip hop – the rapper – is noticeably Black and Male, and constructed on an extremely simplistic, stylised masculinity that is violent, over-sexed, misogynistic, and relies on the dis-empowerment and purposeful objectification of the woman. As Potter clarifies, the rap performance draws from its historical inception on the semiotic practice of Signifying, which in turns relies on the perpetration of spectacular stereotypes, on entertaining “spectacular relations, cultural exchanges along an uneven…racially-inflected social faultline” (Potter 1995: 9). As a culture created by and for the Black (American) population yet imitated and consumed by a White audience, hip hop creatively resists the conventional social context it is placed within by surrendering to and existing in its very own stereotypes.
The contemporary debate on hip-hop culture is characterised by an extensive analytical scope. Scholars acknowledge the specific contexts in which the artistic performances of hip hop flourish and develop and yet problematise the mutual repercussions on the broader socio-cultural spectrum. Such a comprehensive approach, exemplified in Forman’s and Neal’s anthological study “That’s the Joint!”, engages with the strategies of racial inclusiveness and exclusiveness within the wide domain of hip-hop culture – it enunciates a stratum of complex socio-cultural issues termed “the hip hop canon” (Forman and Neal 2004: 5). The hip hop canon alludes predominantly to the determining factors as well as to the socio-cultural ramifications of the hip hop performance, analysed in terms of artistic structure, gendered and racial specifications, and modes of consumption. In this context, Cheryl Keyes offers a structural analysis of hip hop/ rap music performance which pays specific attention to the relationship between the aesthetic value and the artistic content – what she categorises as ‘paramusical-lingual qualities’ (Keyes 2002). As Keyes explains, rappers stage their musical performance by showcasing a designated characterial attitude, enforced by a specific dress code and hairstyle, and possibly aided by dance moves and choreographies. The reiterative nature of a rapper’s performance consolidates the artist’s peculiar artistic identity, which is however regulated by the stereotyped expectations of the consuming audience. Keyes further elaborates on the mutually relevant rapport established between performer and audience, engaging with the socio-cultural complications of the ‘live’ performing format. Hip hop – and rap in particular – derives from and relies heavily on the spontaneity of the performance which generates a direct involvement and tangible appreciation of the artist’s skills. The mediatised development of hip hop as a culture – parallel to the technological advancement of music-based forms of entertainment – marked however a distinct shift towards the actual ‘staging’ of the rap performance, now packaged in the financially rewarding format of the music video. The viability of hip hop/ rap music videos also oriented the performance towards a diffuse consumption by an ‘alien’ White audience – this meant dissecting the essentially Black nature of hip hop culture in order to re-contextualise it in what Kitwana defines a “cultural safari” (Kitwana 2005: 155). The controversy resulting from the racially diversified engagement with hip-hop culture – a topical argument of debate among critics – is approached from various angles. The contemporary debate is in fact saturated by questions of appropriation and exploitation of a Black-originated culture by White audience – as well as practitioners. Kitwana reconciles the question of a passive mainstream exploitation, generally perceived as sold-out compromise with White consumerism, with an active choice of cultural mainstreaming.

A New Era of Rapping Minstrels

The parallelism established between North American minstrel shows and US hip hop/ rap performances relies primarily on the critique of a process of cross-cultural appropriation – the blueprint of the manipulation and re-contextualisation of an essentially Black form of cultural and artistic expression attributed to the Whites (Lahmon Jr. 1998). Although the paragon is founded on the similar socio-cultural implications verified in the two instances, is necessary to note that the number of diverging points also encountered can suggests a rather evolutional approach of analysis. In such context, it is possible to compare the similarities and the differences between blackface minstrelsy and hip hop performances within a perspective based on temporal and social evolution. I intend to argue this in the analysis of two sample texts extracted respectively from a minstrel show and a rap performance.
The growing popularity of the minstrel shows resulted in the collection and publication of many of the popular songs performed at the time in order to satisfy the demand of home entertainment. These original editions are still archived and available to the public for analysis. The titles recorded usually refer to life in the plantation or to the African motherland, thus implying that the performance is a paraphrasing of actual Black music. A closer analysis of the musical structure of these songs reveals, on the contrary, a clear belonging to a typically recognisable European musical tradition – evidenced in rhythmic and melodic approach as well as in the lyrical structure. The verses reportedly narrate the idyllic story of the loyal slave who, when suddenly freed, finds himself missing his master and the life conducted in the plantation. The following extract from a song titled “Old Folks At Home” – part of Richard Jackson’s collection – illustrates the recurrence of the ‘wandering slave’ thematic:
“All up and down the whole creation, Sadly I roam, Still longing for the old plantation, And for the old folks at home” (Jackson 1976: 164)
The stereotype of the ‘wandering slave’ endorsed by the minstrels served in fact the purpose of placating the guilty conscience of White Americans over the atrocities suffered by the slaves and at the same time painted a romanticised picture of their persona and their destiny. Conversely, a common theme of rap performances is found in the stereotyped description of the Black urban male struggling to survive in a racist White world, as exemplified in the following extract from the late rapper 2Pac (Me Against the World, 1995)
“Can you picture my prophecy? Stress in the city, the cops is hot for me The projects is full of bullets, the bodies is droppin There ain’t no stoppin me Constantly movin while makin millions Witnessin killings, leavin dead bodies in abandoned buildings”
It is evident that the average rap performance speaks of Black people, for Black people, to both Black and White people. Describing the hardship of racial conditioning of the Black American population of the hip hop era appears therefore to be a theme opposed to the idealised interpretation en vogue in the minstrel shows. The performance of rap has been however complicated, in its evolution, in terms of agency and exposure. This drastic reading of hip hop musical culture is funded in the implications deriving from the successful emergence of ‘White rappers’, who imitate the musical speech of Black performers, appropriate it, re-define it. The success of rap music – performed by both Black and White artists – is also marked by a disproportioned socio-cultural composition in terms of consumption. Once again in history, White people show fascination with a typically Black form of entertainment – a fascination that is eventually leading to the intentional modification of content aimed at ensuring the attention of the most financially viable audience (Du Bois 1989).

Conclusion

The historic experience of the minstrel show is recorded as the first instance of a process of cultural theft that repeated itself through the course of history and is still identifiable, in the contemporary socio-cultural scene, within the development of hip hop musical performance. Blackface minstrelsy and hip hop culture, analysed in their numerous points of contact and divergence, appear to be at the extremes of a long evolutional process rather than being two facets of the same phenomenon. The development of the two forms of entertainment analysed can therefore be approached to evaluate the emerging socio-cultural patterns that characterise the rapport between Black and White musical cultures – and envision a hypothetical trajectory of future progress.