adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Kanye West and the New Politics of Shock – POLITICO

Published

 on


.cms-textAlign-lefttext-align:left;.cms-textAlign-centertext-align:center;.cms-textAlign-righttext-align:right;.cms-magazineStyles-smallCapsfont-variant:small-caps;

The scene would have been surreal even absent its plentiful cultural baggage: Three men clad head to toe in black, donning ski masks and face paint, lurking on the front steps of a nondescript mid-century home that just happened to have been dropped into the middle of an NFL stadium, surrounded by 40,000 rapt fans.

The maestro of this spectacle was Kanye West, arguably the modern era’s most accomplished provocateur. And although he was at the head of the porch-loitering troika as they premiered West’s long-awaited new album “Donda,” it was the other two who invited his most recent in an unbroken decade-plus of controversies: West flanked himself with collaborators DaBaby, the chart-topping rapper currently doing a penance tour for making flagrantly homophobic public comments, and Marilyn Manson, the Y2K-era shock rocker who was dropped by his record label this year after multiple women accused him of sexual assault and abuse.

Over the course of his nearly 20 years at the forefront of the popular culture, West has pushed buttons and earned the opprobrium of everyone from George W. Bush to Taylor Swift. He’s remade himself as a fashion designer, and dabbled in presidential politics both as a candidate himself and as a supporter of Donald Trump. His ability — or maybe just his willingness — to court controversy is a key part of his business model.

In this, the “Donda” event earned him yet another banner week. The Daily Beast’s blunt-force headline was representative: “Kanye West Brings Out a Homophobe and an Accused Rapist at DONDA Chicago Show.” Some critics called for Apple Music, which livestreamed the event, to be held “accountable.” British outlet the Independent refused to rate the record due to Manson’s involvement. (None of which, of course, prevented the album from racking up astounding streaming numbersfor its debut on August 29.)

In 2021, “Kanye West courts backlash” might be uncomfortably close to “dog bites man.” But this round of censure was telling not just of the man himself, but American cultural politics writ large. For West’s critics, the sins of DaBaby and Manson, serious as they might be, become almost secondary to West’s giving them — quite literally, in this case — a “platform.” By refusing to shun such figures, West has re-invented himself as a sort of impresario for the cancelled. And in placing himself next to Manson particularly, once the bête noire of mainstream American morality in his own right, West has illustrated exactly how much our cultural conversation about it has changed.

As maybe heavy metal’s last iconic public figure in the late 1990s, Manson’s combination of adolescent rage, provocative androgyny and Satanic shadowboxing earned him widespread protest from religious groups, the wary prohibition of concerned parents across middle America and even blame for the Columbine massacre. Today, such things register as kitsch — if they register at all. In 2021, the quickest way to gin up outrage isn’t to invoke taboo spiritual forces; it’s to flout liberal social norms in the manner in which West has become so skilled — whether through these most recent antics or his embrace of Donald Trump, whom he reportedly also invited to the event. (No word on whether the former president was asked to lay down a verse himself.)

To be “transgressive” in today’s mainstream pop culture — or at least to be perceived as such — is not to do something cancel-worthy, but to willingly align oneself with the cancelled. West’s bromance with Trump was a telling prelude to his current iteration. For all their differences, the quality that brought the two men together is a profound belief in the value of provocation for provocation’s sake. The substance of what is actually said is almost secondary to the reaction it earns.

That kind of trolling, and its attendant shaming, have been used to enforce cultural norms since antiquity. But West, once again, has produced a cultural innovation. By purposely stoking a controversy-by-proxy that almost obscures his accomplices’ original sins, he’s revealed the matryoshka-like nature of mainstream American cultural discourse — which in turn feeds an endless stream of tabloid, cable, and inevitably political controversies.

The Trump-West principle of controversy as an inherent good transfers to the company the latter now keeps. Whatever one thinks of him, it strains credulity to imagine West’s inclusion of Manson, for example, as an explicit endorsement of sexual violence. The intended message, rather, is one of defiance: West (or Trump) will not be proscribed in the company he keeps (or his speech) by the offense it might cause to a wider audience.

The gravity of that offense has grown much stronger in the nearly two decades since West launched his career, just as Manson’s mainstream popularity was waning. Homophobia, once endemic to mainstream rap music, is now largely taboo; one of the genre’s biggest stars is an out gay man. (West himself has been sharply critical of homophobia in rap culture; he removed another recent collaboration with DaBaby from streaming services in the wake of the latter rapper’s comments, which he himself addresses on “Donda” in a neat ouroboros of controversy.)

In Manson’s case, allegations of sexual assault are treated far more seriously today than in the era where Harvey Weinstein’s predations were whispered about as a morbid inside joke. But more relevant to West’s success as a provocateur than Americans’ decreasing tolerance for such speech and behavior is the ongoing debate over whether or not to shun the achievements of those who take part in it. As Armin Rosen wrote in The Bulwark of the musical collaboration between the three men in question, West has “gathered unto himself the cancelled in order to force people to reconcile artistic achievement with their own discomfort.” (One gets the sense that, given the opportunity, West would return the films of Woody Allen to wide release as well, simply in protest of anything being placed beyond the cultural pale.)

In that sense, his one-man campaign against “cancel culture” is reminiscent of that from one of the few equally famous avatars of unreformed masculinity: Joe Rogan, the podcaster whose interviews with decidedly canceled figures such as Alex Jones, Roseanne Barr and West himself have earned him a massively loyal fanbase that shares his unwillingness to publicly shun (or, alternatively, to hold accountable) such figures for their transgressions.

Ironically, this debate over how to deal with such transgressors is very much alive in the one thing about West’s album rollout that’s been somewhat obscured by the attendant controversy: the actual music. “Donda,” recorded amid West’s divorce from his mega-famous ex-wife Kim Kardashian, is a sprawling opus in which West acknowledges, yet still yearns for, the impossibly difficult path to redemption for his inner flaws and ill-thought-out actions alike. Messy as it may be, it’s West’s most fully realized and creative music in nearly a decade.

And it’s not just Manson and DaBaby who appear as musical props in West’s passion play. Buju Banton, a Jamaican reggae and dancehall star who gay rights groups have protested for homophobic lyrical content, appears on a track. Jay Electronica, who’s long engaged in a coy anti-Semitism in both his music and on social media, gets in a verse. West’s overall subtext is characteristically messianic: all have been canceled, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Yeezus.

To many (perhaps most) Americans, such absolution is not West’s to give. Hence the controversy: To those like the Independent reviewer who placed “Donda” beyond critical evaluation, the hard-won gains of the past two decades in holding figures like Manson accountable are too precious to risk “normalizing” their offenses by sharing one’s cultural platform with them, much less as part of one of the year’s biggest pop-cultural events. That places West on a nearly equal moral footing to his band of canceled men: He is, in the eyes of his critics, complicit — which makes him the modern successor to Manson’s circa-2001 public-enemy status.

West stands beyond the bounds of polite society, at least as it’s defined by many Americans, helplessly, painfully — and, yes, still occasionally transcendently — himself. He is the habitual line-stepper of our time par excellence, and that line has shifted undeniably, and in most cases admirably, when it comes to our behavioral and speech taboos.

But even more so, the American cultural conversation has shifted largely beyond consideration of unacceptable behavior per se to a debate over who might or might not condone it, the words we use to speak about it, and what to do with the work of those who commit it. By diving head-first into that conversation’s farthest deep end, Kanye has once again revealed the combination of cultural intuition and sheer recklessness that’s allowed him to largely own it for now nearly two decades.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Beyoncé, whose ‘Freedom’ is Harris’ campaign anthem, is expected at Democrat’s Texas rally on Friday

Published

 on

 

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Beyoncé is expected to appear Friday in her hometown of Houston at a rally for Vice President Kamala Harris, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Harris’ presidential campaign has taken on Beyonce’s 2016 track “Freedom” as its anthem, and the singer’s planned appearance brings a high-level of star power to what has become a key theme of the Democratic nominee’s bid: freedom.

Harris will head to the reliably Republican state just 10 days before Election Day in an effort to refocus her campaign against former President Donald Trump on reproductive care, which Democrats see as a make-or-break issue this year.

The three people were not authorized to publicly discuss the matter and spoke on condition of anonymity. The Harris campaign did not immediately comment.

Beyoncé‘s appearance was expected to draw even more attention to the event — and to Harris’ closing message.

Harris’ Houston trip is set to feature women who have been affected by Texas’ restrictive abortion laws, which took effect after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. She has campaigned in other states with restrictive abortion laws, including Georgia, among the seven most closely contested states.

Harris has centered her campaign around the idea that Trump is a threat to American freedoms, from reproductive and LGBTQ rights to the freedom to be safe from gun violence.

Beyonce gave Harris permission early in her campaign to use “Freedom,” a soulful track from her 2016 landmark album “Lemonade,” in her debut ad. Harris has used its thumping chorus as a walk-out song at rallies ever since.

Beyoncé’s alignment with Harris isn’t the first time that the Grammy winner has aligned with a Democratic politician. Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, danced as Beyoncé performed at a presidential inaugural ball in 2009.

In 2013, she sang the national anthem at Obama’s second inauguration. Three years later, she and her husband Jay-Z performed at a pre-election concert for Democrat Hillary Clinton in Cleveland.

“Look how far we’ve come from having no voice to being on the brink of history — again,” Beyoncé said at the time. “But we have to vote.”

A January poll by Ipsos for the anti-polarization nonprofit With Honor found that 64% of Democrats had a favorable view of Beyonce compared with just 32% of Republicans. Overall, Americans were more likely to have a favorable opinion than an unfavorable one, 48% to 33%.

Speculation over whether the superstar would appear at this summer’s Democratic National Convention in Chicago reached a fever pitch on the gathering’s final night, with online rumors swirling after celebrity news site TMZ posted a story that said: “Beyoncé is in Chicago, and getting ready to pop out for Kamala Harris on the final night of the Democratic convention.” The site attributed it to “multiple sources in the know,” none of them named.

About an hour after Harris ended her speech, TMZ updated its story to say, “To quote the great Beyoncé: We gotta lay our cards down, down, down … we got this one wrong.” In the end, Harris took the stage to star’s song, but that was its only appearance.

Last year, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, attended Beyoncé’s Renaissance World Tour in Maryland after getting tickets from Beyonce herself. “Thanks for a fun date night, @Beyonce,” Harris wrote on Instagram.

___

Long and Kinnard reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report. Kinnard can be reached at

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Saskatchewan NDP promises to work with Ottawa on homeless supports if elected

Published

 on

 

PRINCE ALBERT, Sask. – Saskatchewan NDP Leader Carla Beck says her party would collaborate with the federal government to work out the best deal for solving homelessness if elected on Monday.

Federal Housing Minister Sean Fraser has said he sent a letter last month to provinces and territories asking them to work with Ottawa to find shelter for those experiencing homelessness.

The minister has said the government plans to directly hand out funding to Regina and Saskatoon since the province hadn’t responded to the offer before entering an election period.

Beck says it’s important to have a provincial leader who would sit down with federal officials to work out proper deals for Saskatchewan residents.

She says Saskatchewan should be working with municipalities and the federal government to ensure they can provide services for homeless populations.

Beck has said an NDP government would introduce rent caps, make vacant provincial housing units available to families and increase the supply of rental units.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 24, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

NDP plan motion to push back against anti-abortion ‘creep’ from Conservatives

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – The NDP is taking aim at the Conservatives on abortion by putting forward a motion to push back against what it calls a “creep” of legislation, petitions and threats aimed at reducing access to abortion.

Leader Jagmeet Singh says his party will use its next opposition day to force the House of Commons to debate and vote on a motion calling for urgent action to improve abortion access.

Singh claimed that anti-choice Conservative MPs are “often calling the shots” in the Official Opposition, and that leader Pierre Poilievre has “let his MPs bring in anti-choice laws, anti-choice motions.”

“There is a real threat from the Conservatives,” he said, speaking to the media at a news conference in Montreal.

A spokesperson for Poilievre did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The NDP in its press release cited several examples of what it called “anti-choice” moves from the Tories, including a petition presented earlier this year by a Conservative MP that claimed more than 98 per cent of abortions “are for reasons of social or personal convenience.”

Poilievre said at the time he disagreed with the petition.

He has previously called himself “pro-choice” and said he would not pass laws that restrict reproductive choices if he is elected.

“When I am prime minister, no laws or rules will be passed that restrict women’s reproductive choices. Period,” Poilievre said in a statement in June addressing the petition.

Conservative MP Cathy Wagantall introduced a private member’s bill last year to encourage judges to consider a victim’s pregnancy as an aggravating factor in sentencing.

The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada urged MPs to vote against the bill on the grounds that it promoted fetal rights, even though the bill’s text didn’t mention fetal rights.

Liberal ministers called the bill an effort to reopen the abortion debate in Canada.

Wagantall, who has been clear that she opposes abortion, said Bill C-311 had nothing to do with abortion.

At the time, a spokesperson for Poilievre said he planned to vote in favour of the bill.

Speaking in Montreal on Thursday, Singh also called out the governing Liberals, saying they haven’t done enough to improve abortion access in Canada.

“This vote is very important, but it’s also important that the vote on this motion is about not just the Conservative threat, but the lack of action of the Liberals,” said Singh, adding that access to abortion in Canada is “getting worse, not better.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 24, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending