jick said:
Its Filipino by the way.
Stereotypes are part of life and there are always exceptions to the rule.
U2 would be more appealing to blacks if they use a variation of English many blacks use. It's as simple as that. But they don't.
And the main point of the original poster of the thread is that U2's music may appeal mostly to whites. And I do agree with that premise. And it goes beyond just the variation of English they use. U2's melodies are more centered for the whites and so are their instruments, with the exception of Rattle And Hum of course. U2's lyrics and themes are also more appealing to the whites. Face it, the ratio of white to black people in a U2 concert is much more than in an Eminem (white artist) or Usher (black artist) concert. So the original premise of the original poster is still correct, and my comment about the method of English usage U2 employs is only one of the factors (out of many out there) that makes U2's music more appealing to the whites. So I just point out one small factor and blow it out of proportion and make me look like the racist bully now? Look at the bigger picture rather than nitpicking, sometimes it might just help.
Cheers,
J
--I had heard that it was actually "Pilipino" because the language lacks a "ph" phoenetic.--
The black people you are referring to do not speak that way because they are black. They speak that way because of their social and environmental conditioning. If you put a white, asian, indian, or any other ethnicity in that environment as a child and raised them there, they would speak that way. It has nothing to do with skin color. It has everything to do with social and environmental conditioning.
The reason why so many African-Americans speak this way, is, sadly, because so many of them are socially and economically disenfranchised. This is why they are raised in poor, urban environments without a decent education. If you were to talk to a black kid raised in middle-class suburbia, guess what - he'd sound like a quote-unquote 'white kid.'
You're right, Jick - you don't live in America, and I believe you are sincere when you say you do not understand American culture to the extent that we (people who live here) do. But you can't in one post say:
"I know that not all black people speak this way"
and in another say:
"U2 would be more appealing to
the blacks if they used words like 'ain't."
When you say '
The Blacks' you are referring to all of them. Same if I were to say 'The British' or 'The Brazillians.' You assume the person is referring to the entire group.
It is not the language or slang that is appealing to young kids raised in urban environments. Rap appeals to different people for different reasons. It appeals to the kids raised in urban society because it talks about situations that are applicable to them. They're going to relate more to songs about their own neighborhoods more than they would than music from four Irish guys. Also, you're naturally conditioned to enjoy the music you hear as a child. If you're exposed to hip hop beats from a very young age, your ear is going to develop a taste for it.
Does this mean that it's impossible for urban youth to enjoy U2? No. Like other posters have said - U2 makes music with universal themes of compassion, despair, heartache, and hope. Their messages can appeal to anyone in any environment. Whether or not their musical stylings or rhythms appeal to kids raised to appreciate hip hop beats is anyone's guess. But I'm a white kid raised in suburbia to the sound of rock music, and I can appreciate many rap songs. Some of my peers can't stand the stuff. It all depends on the individual.
Which brings me to my final point:
Generalizations are bad news. They're based on stereotypes which were started many years ago to degrade people who were deemed 'different.' If I were to post some assumption about Pilipinos that was based on some generalziation, wouldn't you be insulted? You would want to be judged on your own merits, as an individual with his own accomplishments and distinctions. Who ever wants to be grouped in with thousands of others, and on a generalization that isn't even accurate?
Judge each person as an individual. That's how you'd want to be judged, right?
-Miggy