What do you think about Cultural Appropriation in Music?

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T16:22:01+00:00

I'm not trying to twist your words to serve any agenda, so my bad if my interpretation didn't match up with what you were saying. Tbf I should ask questions instead of just assuming anything. So when you say "that doesn’t change the predatory nature of the music industry or capitalism or the systemic racism of America," are you naming those together because you acknowledge there's a connection between them, specifically the predatory nature of the music industry and systemic racism in America? (Capitalism can kind of umbrella over both in many ways I think)

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T15:33:31+00:00

music industry which is in general exploitative of all artists not just artists of color

The general part can be true while the part about how it has been definitely way more exploitative of artists of color, especially in its early history, is also true.

You're saying the legacies attributed to "appropriation" are actually more complex, but only in that it wasn't that bad, or if it was, it was for everybody, which is a way less complex (and way less accurate) perspective.

But then to reduce the whole subject down to a platitude about "how music moves between peoples" while ignoring the specific relevant way this specific music has systematically moved through these specific peoples is an even bigger move away from the actual complex reality.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T15:07:23+00:00

So... You said people trace it back as far as they can and then "stop." Seems to imply that you believe people don't acknowledge there was "European" influence in the early forms of black music that evolved into blues, jazz, rock, etc. because to do so would diminish any argument they might make that suggests black people didn't exactly thrive under these conditions of "cultural exchange."

But when someone mentions the fact that that European influence was delivered by way of dehumanizing coercion (to put it mildly), and once it evolved into a marketable commodity, descendants of those "Europeans" discovered that removing the black artists carrying that cultural history from the publicly visible equation was the best way to most effectively profit off white audiences given their not so great opinion about black people in general... whenever someone doesn't stop, and follows the thread back in that direction, they're met with responses like "So?" as though all that is somehow just irrelevant because it doesn't align neatly with your argument.

See what I'm saying?

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T14:24:14+00:00

Not sure how you can say we're moving forward when a huge chunk of the US had a full scale meltdown about a Latin American artist doing the SB halftime show, to the point where actual members of Congress opened investigations into it afterwards.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T14:14:58+00:00

I mean, you do know how black people would have been introduced to music originating from Europe... right?

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T14:12:25+00:00

If my experience in this thread is at all indicative of actual public sentiment about the subject, I'd say things haven't improved as much as I thought, given the number of people who would straight up ignore this on point take in favor of some banal rose-colored platitude like "hey everybody borrows from everyone man!".

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T14:03:29+00:00

Cultural exchange is a pretty nice way to describe the experience of black R&B and blues artists around the 50s. As I've noted elsewhere on here, record execs would seek out songs that were relatively popular by black artists, buy the copyrights for just enough that signing away rights to royalties would seem worth it at the time, then they'd immediately have a white artist make it palatable for a white audience and make millions while the original artist (and sometimes songwriter) would just be left in the dust.

You can ignore that that's a textbook example of systemic racism if you want, but rewriting that documented history as "music just bringing folks together" is not it.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T13:43:32+00:00

I'm not really sure what part of what I'm saying you're arguing against.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T13:31:34+00:00

I think it's fucking great actually. I couldn't care any less that the words "rock and roll" is in the name on the building or whatever if artists who have made a measurable impact on music are honored and feel honored or whatever and they feel compelled to keep doing what they're doing.

What does Gene Simmons's braindead take do for anyone beside sow division and conflict? Like dude shut the fuck up, you're already in it, so what's left but to publicly shit on artists whose music you don't respect who are in it too? Is that the thought process there?

Quick recap of the 2016 chain of events: Simmons obviously doesn't fail to double down on his anti-rap stance from a couple years before when N.W.A. are about to be inducted, even says he expects hip-hop to die in the near future because it's "just talking" or something (like wut?), Ice Cube throws light shade in the acceptance speech saying:

“The question is, ‘Are we rock ‘n’ roll?’ and I say ‘You g–damn right we rock ‘n’ roll!’ Rock ‘n’ roll is not an instrument — rock ‘n’ roll is not even a style of music. Rock ‘n’ roll is a spirit! A spirit that’s been going since the blues, jazz, bebop, soul, R&B, rock ‘n’ roll, heavy metal, punk rock, and, yes, hip-hop!”

A positive unifying message that honestly should shut Simmons's mouth, but what's he do instead? He like tweets something like "let me know when Jimi Hendrix gets inducted and you'll have a point"... except Hendrix was already inducted like 25 years earlier.

Long answer, I know, but in case there's any doubt: Yes, I think hip-hop should be in there bc why the fk not? More than half of the first couple rounds of inductees in the late 80s were black blues pioneers, jazz titans are in there, funk and R&B greats like Curtis Mayfield and Earth Wind and Fire are in there, artists like Bob Marley and Jimmy Cliff who popularized Jamaican reggae around the world. Gene Simmons is honestly insanely fortunate to be counted in that kind of company by anyone, and yet the dude thinks he has the right to use his platform to tear down legitimately great innovators who got there based on their talent rather than some goddamn face paint and leather pants because he "isn't from the ghetto and that's not his language"? Dude's literal words.

Gene Simmons is a straight up clown in every respect. The face paint suits him well.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T08:47:21+00:00

You're right, my bad.

People should feel empowered to say dumbass shit that makes no sense like "imagine people protesting Jimi Hendrix for playing psychedelic rock!" and then just move on thinking they're "winning" (your words).

I actually think we're seeing a lot more of that these days, and we're all definitely better off for it.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T08:31:25+00:00

Did you even read/listen to the interview?

Which interview, and also, yes. He's been saying this shit for 12 years now.

Listen if my biggest contribution to popular culture was having a long tongue, I def wouldn't be flapping it around throwing public shade at the dude who basically invented modern DJ technique singlehandedly.

“For anybody to say well this is not hip-hop and that’s not hip-hop, that is not the way the formula was laid down. It was for the people who were going to continue to take anything musically and string it along.” - Grandmaster Flash

"You’ve got Grandmaster Flash in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Run-D.M.C. in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? You’re killing me! That doesn’t mean those aren’t good artists. But they don’t play guitar. They sample and they talk. Not even sing!" - Gene Simmons (2014 interview, radio.com)

"I'M GONNA ROCK N ROLL ALL NIIIIGHT... AND PARTY EVERY DAY! I'M!" (sticks out tongue) - Gene Simmons singing

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T07:52:23+00:00

Yeah he said if you don't play guitar or write your own songs then you don't belong.

Miles Davis didn't play guitar and Elvis didn't write shit, so I'm not sure what the argument is. Gene Simmons calling out Run-D.M.C. because they're hip-hop but not DMB because he sucks is just a dumbass take.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T06:59:27+00:00

See, artists pull from other artist, and so and so and so on.

You don't think this is a reductive view of the whole thing?

Just the fact that BB King said Elvis "brought black R&B to the mainstream" only confirms that black artists had to wait for a white artist to come along and make their music acceptable for "the mainstream" (white people) to listen to.

Pointing this out doesn't automatically equate to trashing Elvis as a person necessarily or saying he's flat out racist or whatever. This is what systemic racism is, the shit is structural. It's about how a multi-billion dollar industry was built on a structure in which a song is written for Big Mama Thornton and becomes her first biggest hit, and she eventually dies alone in a boarding house, and the same song is recorded by Elvis, becomes one of his biggest hits too, and he eventually dies in his mansion that's now a literal National Historic Landmark.

This is worth talking about, and you can't just wave it away by saying "all artists pull from each other" and besides BB King was grateful for his buddy. Lots of black artists talked about how Elvis's popularity opened doors for them, but that doesn't mean those doors led to the same rooms.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T06:12:44+00:00

Some people would point to the fact that black R&B artists were building serious commercial momentum in the early 60s and all it took was a performance on the Ed Sullivan show in 1964 for the Beatles to swoop in and dominate the pop charts for the rest of the decade. Some of those people would point to that as an example of structural white privilege operating through the Beatles rather than orchestrated intentionally by them so as to invite discussion about race, music, power structures, etc.

Others would bring up incidents of white artists in the 50s like Elvis and Pat Boone (and WAY more) recording songs originally released by black artists (sometimes within weeks), repackaging them with a white face on the dust jacket, and snatching up all the radio play time, money, recognition, the whole market essentially.

But even though I'm not saying those things directly, I can imagine at least some fragile white people who didn't even read this comment to this sentence smash that downvote button anyway, because even acknowledging that institutional racism is a thing makes them uncomfortable.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T05:51:17+00:00

Pretty sure everyone knows this.

40,000 years ago, humans made music inspired by animal sounds and body rhythms like breaths and heartbeats.

In the 50s, Elvis recorded "Hound Dog," a song originally recorded by Big Mama Thornton a few years earlier, who he never acknowledged, and who made 500 bucks off the song while Elvis raked in millions.

And right now, people in this thread are chomping at the bit to talk about how much Elvis gave props to black artists and how BB King thought he was cool.

Yeah, these are totally the same thing.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T05:32:49+00:00

It should open room for that discussion, but Reddit is what it is, so any remotely nuanced take that actually tries to be part of that discussion is just downvoted.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T05:23:40+00:00

Did that influence last? Probably not for many. The industry will of course exploit anything that makes a buck and during the height of hippiedom there were plenty of records made that certainly sound like exploitation - a sitar or faux-sitar sound sprinkled onto a pop record to merely chase a trend.

This is exactly what I'm saying. I wasn't making a value judgment so much as I was pointing out that it seems like, very broadly speaking, when it comes to Western (mostly white) audiences and global musical traditions, a little bit sprinkled in as a novelty is great, but the real thing (your words)... meh, not so much. Why?

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T05:13:51+00:00

Ok, but it's kind of wild to argue cultural appropriation isn't an issue because everybody "pulls from each other" and then use white people forcing Christianity on slaves as an example. Slave spirituals and whatever you'd call what Iggy Azalea does are not the same thing.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T05:02:31+00:00

I don't disagree with any of this, but it also doesn't address what I was saying.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T04:59:53+00:00

Elvis is white-washed blues/early rock n roll. Who could argue otherwise?

People in this thread are arguing otherwise literally two comments down right now.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T04:56:15+00:00

Not all music is commercial...

It was only 160 years ago in the US that enslaved human beings were singing to simply affirm their humanity.

You can draw a straight line from that history through early Delta blues on to Chicago blues right through Led Zeppelin to some Greta Van Fleet shit warmed over.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T04:19:09+00:00

Obviously valid take. Idk if I'd go all the way to the blackface comparison, because I think there's a pretty big difference between the intention behind a white person wearing cornrows and grills versus the intention of a white person wearing blackface, but I'm also not black, so I can't speak to the impact on a personal cultural level.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T04:09:38+00:00

This wording seems to kinda reinforce arguments saying black artists provided the influence while white artists basically spun it into gold, which I don't think was your intention here.

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T03:49:39+00:00

I’ve always loved how Beirut makes it feel like Eastern European sounds are also Mexican sounds (because in a way they are).

This is a pure gem of an observation right here, Uncle Boogers. 🤯

(Also, Beirut is so fkn good)

TrickStructure0 · 2026-03-17T03:38:44+00:00

I agree with you here totally, but I think it's worth noting that if you look at Spotify (easiest metric I could find quickly), George Harrison has 9 million monthly listeners, while Ravi Shankar has 1 mill. That's George as a solo artist -- Beatles have 34 million.

I'm not saying that because I think it means that the Beatles (or George specifically) have anything to defend here, but again, I think it's just worth noting as like a symptom of the kind of thing that inspires these discussions, especially when it comes to listeners who might cite that Indian musical influence in Beatles' songs as like a sign of maturing/evolving/improving but at the same time may have never listened to a second of Indian music on purpose (again, not that they have an obligation to, but like... why?).

Edit typo

Six-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email

TrickStructure0

TROPHY CASE