Art of Blogging

            On September 3 Lil Wayne’s 4^th installment of his popular mixtape series “The Dedication” was released.  As soon as the tape was released, the twitter world and blogosphere were booming with opinions on this mixtape.  But what caught my eye in the midst of all of the tweets and blog posts about “Dedication 4” was the reaction to Nicki Minaj’s controversial line in “Mercy.” Nick Minaj is arguably the hottest female rapper out and is known for her multiple eccentric personalities.  Minaj raps, “I’m a Republican voting for Mitt Romney, You lazy b*tches is f*cking up the economy.”  There were many thoughts on what Nicki meant when she said this.  There were those who took it literal, as in she is an actual Republican whose voting for Mitt Romney and thinks the Obama administration has ruined the economy.  And there were those who believed the lyrics to be satire, mocking the republicans for blaming the mess they created on Obama.  This group included the President himself who commented on these lyrics during a radio interview.  He talked about how he knows “she likes to play different characters” in her sings. Minaj responded to the president on twitter saying, “Ha! Thank you for understanding my creative humor & sarcasm Mr. President, the smart ones always do… *sends love & support.”  So the President can rest assured knowing that he will probably get her vote.  The president also added that he and Michelle like to stay hip, and have a nice collection of hip hop on their iPods J.

But for me the problem wasn’t trying to figure out what Nicki meant.  I wanted to know why so many people were outraged by the lyric.  Let’s say Nicki really did mean what she said what? She has the right to choose who to vote for like anyone else.  This made me think of the assumptions people have about political parties and their demographics. Must you be a democrat if you are a hip hop artist? Does hip hop and the democratic party go hand in hand?  Well maybe.  Hip Hop is a primarily black genre and nearly 90 percent of blacks vote democrat.  So it’s safe to assume that all hip hop artists are democrats right? Well… no!  The color of someone’s skin does not automatically place him or her into a political box, or any box for that matter.  And let’s not forget the many white and non-black hip hop artists. What about them? Are they democrats by association? No! It angers me that people have to put other people in categories just to deal with them.  And this isn’t solely the fault of other races.  The only people I saw on twitter outraged at the thought that a black woman could be a Republican (Hello, Condoleezza Rice!) were black!  In fact in the black community black republicans are considered traitors.  But there is no rule that says all black people in America have to be Democrats. 

            Black people get offended when people of other races say and assume that they voted for president Obama because he is also black (they seem to always forget the fact that he is half white).  Yet black people became outraged when a black hip hop artist insinuated that she wasn’t voting for Obama.  There is an endless cycle of assumptions and stereotyping in America done by all races. Her lyric was probably intended to show how ridiculous people sound when they express why they aren’t voting for Obama but Nicki Minaj also helped me see that it’s not just the white people making the assumptions, it’s the black people as well.  Just like Nicki’s lyricism helped prove the assumption that all hip hop is meaningless rubbish wrong, she also showed me how negative and harmful assumptions can be. 

When people think about hip hop, one of the first things that comes to mind is naked women running around in music videos or lyrics that refer to women as b*tches and h*es.  Women are an essential part of hip hop as we know it.  With women being both the object of affection and objectification in hip hop comes heterosexuality being the only way of life.  This results in homophobia.  There is no doubt that hip hop is a very homophobic genre of music.  This genre was created and is currently dominated by African American men and above all, African American men are taught to be masculine.  Therefore homosexuality is looked down upon in this community.  Hip hop and homophobia have a long history.  Many rappers have used homophobic slurs in their music but some artists have tried to transcend the trend of homophobia in the genre.  For example the rapper Lil B has entitled his new album “I’m Gay.”  Lil B’s attempt to get the hip hop culture to ease up on the homophobia backfired.  The rapper received death threats and had other rappers attack him online.  Although Lil B isn’t gay, his action caused an uproar showing that homophobia still exists in the hip hop culture.  One of my friends summed up hip hop’s views on homosexuality in one sentence, “you can’t be gay and rap.”

The newest event in the dialogue between Hip Hop and sexuality is Frank Ocean coming out of the closet.  Before the release of his first studio album, the singer took to tumblr to admit that his first love was a man.  If you like Frank Ocean like I do, I can hear you saying this:

“But wait! Isn’t Frank apart of Odd Future Wolf Gang Kill Them All?”

            Why yes he is.

“So that means he’s cool with Tyler, the Creator, right?”

            I would suppose so.

“But isn’t Tyler homophobic?!”

            Hmm let’s see.

For those of you who may not know that much about Frank Ocean he is apart of the LA based hip hop group, Odd Future Wolf Gang Kill Them All, and Tyler, the Creator is kind of like the head honcho. Tyler is known for his constant use of the word “faggot” and other homophobic slurs in his music.

“Blasting ‘You’re a jerk’ in some fucking yellow skinnies

looking like a fucking faggot,”

This lyric taking from the song “Session” is only one of the rappers many uses of the word faggot.  But when Frank’s coming out post went public Tyler tweeted:

“My Big Brother Finally F*cking Did That… Proud Of That N*gga Cause I Know That Shit Is Difficult Or Whatever. Anyway. I’m A Toilet.”

Tyler congratulated Frank, but at the same time dismissed everything that Frank did. But Tyler says he’s not homophobic and he uses the slurs to mean stupid or dumb.

Despite the confusion with Franks hip hop affiliations, he is the first major hip hop artist that I know of to come out as being bisexual.  There were definitely mixed feelings on his action.  Some thought it was a publicity stunt to get more people interested in his album.  Some were very proud and happy for him and the LGBTQI community. And some were disgusted.  But I do think Frank opened the doors to help change the way people think.  A common theme on my twitter news feed was, “Frank may not be straight, but he still makes some bomb music.” In his coming out letter Frank writes “4 summers ago, I met somebody. I was 19. He was too. We spent that summer, and the summer after, together.” He goes on to write a beautiful letter explaining the ups and downs of this love, making you forgot that it’s “weird” that he’s talking about another man.  Frank has a few songs on his album that use he or him instead of she or her, but to be honest, I didn’t even realize this until someone pointed it out to me.  I was too focused on the amazing way he is able to tell his stories of love and hurt.  I’m happy and excited that Frank Ocean is helping hip hop to become not so homophobic. Hopefully because of him and other artists who follow his lead, it won’t matter who you love and write love songs about, as long as it is good hip hop music. 

Progress won’t be made until we discuss something besides it

You asked for it, Vanderbilt fans.

You wanted a real, competitive football team, with real, competitive expectations. You wanted a bowl game, a swarming defense, and a recruiting class that could rival those of the SEC big boys.

You wanted a university committed to academics and athletics, and by extension, an actual department to oversee the latter.

You wanted a little hope that the future might be better than the past.

And guess what? You got it. All of it.

So, now that that your wishes have been fulfilled, it’s time to be disappointed – maybe even upset – at the prospect of opportunity lost. High expectations and historical successes appear to be falling by the wayside, to be replaced with yet another frustrating, sub-.500 season of Commodore football.

Now, allow me to step aside for a second, and give you a chance to meditate on missed opportunities against South Carolina and Northwestern, or on embarrassment in Athens.

Upset yet? Good.

Let’s send all that pent-up negative energy in a positive direction.

Let’s start talking about how to right the ship.

Yes, thank The Commodore Himself – surely smiling down from The Big Mansion in the sky as he watches Jordan Rodgers struggle to convert on third-and-long – that our football team isn’t quite as horrendous as usual.

But now that we’ve put that aside, let’s s discuss the actual product on the field, because we’ve reached a point where being better than the past should no longer be satisfactory, where not being bad – as Vanderbilt football has been for most of its existence – should simply not be good enough.

We can start by asking questions that will help this program reach its potential:

Is the offense running as efficiently as possible? Are the right plays being called? Are the right players on the field at the right times?

Are our student-athletes being put in the best possible position for success?

I’m going to be honest with you: I’m not sure of the answer to any of these questions. But, what I am sure of is that these same questions are asked by football fans of every stripe – amateur or professional – on a weekly basis.

And I am also sure that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Vanderbilt Football will not have taken a definitive step forward until the present becomes of more interest than the past, or until the possibility of progress to come becomes of more import than progress already made. 

When the student body begins to bicker over defensive schemes and third down draws, in much the same way they do about the Titans, and the Giants, and even the Volunteers – that’s when we’ll know: a New Era is finally upon us.

Until then, we’re stuck watching the same old movie, with the all the familiar genre tropes: hope replaced with anguish; expectations continually dashed; and most of all, no matter the circumstance, the can’t-shake-it feeling that a loss is looming.

Until then, we will continue to be satisfied with moral victories and close calls. Until then, we will continue be content dwelling just above the SEC cellar, having recently vacated our long-held spot within it.

I’m not sure there is another program in the country – Alabama probably withstanding – that is so consumed by its history, or that waxes more about happenings outside the lines rather than the action between them.

From here on out, the past needs to stay exactly where it is: Because the fact of the matter is, that with considerable talent on both sides of the ball and more on the way, the chance for a bright future is finally here.

Let’s seize it.

There is no doubt that, over the last year, James Franklin has taken a program stuck in college football’s Bronze Age and turned it into something more worthy of the SEC gold standard than ever before. In the process, Franklin has proved himself to be a great recruiter, maybe a better motivator, and perhaps even – as many a magazine or newspaper profile would have you believe – an exceptional human being.  

But it remains to be seen whether or not Franklin’s coaching prowess extends to the gridiron itself.

Shocker: football isn’t exactly a moral game, and Bobby Knight and Bear Bryant weren’t exactly impeccable human beings. In this respect, James Franklin could be Jesus incarnate or the devil’s spawn and it wouldn’t matter – he has a football team to coach. So it’s about time to start evaluating whether he and his players are doing the jobs they’ve been tasked to do, and doing them successfully.

Am I saying that Franklin is, in actuality, doing a bad job, or that any of his starters should be riding the pine?

Of course not. I’ve barely thought about it yet, mostly because the discourse surrounding Vanderbilt football has kept me content with the status quo.

No longer. It’s time to swing for the fences or – to use a more apt analogy – throw it deep.

It’s time to start talking.

This is just one of many conversations to have, one of many questions that, if answered, can help to keep our football program running in the right direction.

Right now? We just seem to be running in place.

Picture this. It’s Election Day. You wake up bright and early on November 6^th to get to the polls before class. You wait in line, sign your name, and receive that long-awaited ballot. You stare at the names, maybe only recognizing two. (The ones with the words REPUBLICAN and DEMOCRATIC hovering over them.) You haven’t been very involved with recent election developments, aren’t that politically interested in general for that matter…and now, you’re stuck.

In truth, this is pretty unlikely. Even the most politically apathetic person in the country (with some education) usually has at least party identification going for them. The chances of someone in our country not having at least a vague idea of candidate preference, based on either family practices or other forms of socialization, are minute. In fact, at any given point during a presidential election in the U.S., there are only about 6% of voters who don’t know who they are voting for come Election Day. This is true today, just a few weeks before the election, and even a few months ago. But let’s say you’re conflicted, let’s say you don’t know enough to make an informed decision, or even that you don’t know which candidate is Republican and which is Democratic (very, very, unlikely). What’s an undecided to do?

On average, just under a third of the American electorate doesn’t officially subscribe to a major party affiliation. That means that more than two-thirds of the voting age population describe themselves as either Republicans or Democrats – this number is just around 90% in the 21^st century. In the 2008 election, 99% of the popular vote went to either Barack Obama or John McCain. In Italy’s 2008 parliamentary election, the top two political parties (out of seven major ones) received only 70% of the popular vote.

The benefit of having the two-party system we’ve been accustomed to in the U.S. is that we, for all intents and purposes, have two options. You either vote for one of the two major parties, or consign to the fact that your vote will not be for the winner. The disadvantage of having a two-party system is that there are two, and only two, major candidates. It means, arguably, that we are forced to proscribe to one set of beliefs or another. To accept all aspects of an ideology as our own, to call ourselves liberals, or call our selves conservatives, and lastly, to vote accordingly.

The most potent force for party identification in our society is socialization. Mostly by our parents, often by our peers, and sometimes by major political events that occur during our lifetimes. Party ID is a way of simplifying the decision of voting someone into office, to help reduce that number of undecideds. But is that our way out? Should we get a free pass once we choose a side and join the team faithfully?

That kind of blind trust in the system could either be considered courageous, or downright idiotic. To say that both Democrats and Republicans have set ideological platforms is an understatement. But at the same time, it’s up to citizens to keep our President and representatives in line, and to use our voice to shape policy, instead of letting our opinions fall to the wayside.

So the answer to the question of helping undecideds, is, essentially, that there isn’t an answer. To use party identification is reasonable, to only use party alliance is regrettable, and to figure out a compromise between your beliefs and the beliefs of your party is courageous. That middle ground is what differentiates an undecided from an informed and valuable voter, and what makes our political system worthwhile.

Blogging can be an incredibly valuable way of receiving information – and it can also involve of wading through things you aren’t interested in, that aren’t particularly informative, or are just annoyingly opinionated. So how do you filter out the good from the bad? What differentiates an exceptional blog from a rant-filled, overly complicated, uninformative mess? Here’s my guide to recognizing a blog at its best:

They’re credible. They cite sources other than themselves. They do their research and SHOW that they’ve done their research. The use of opinion from like-minded individuals does not diminish the writer’s voice, but enhances it. Andrew Sullivan’s blog on The Daily Beast is stock full of quotes, quotes, and more quotes. While this might not be your style of choice, the approach never disappoints a want for supporting opinions.

They introduce you to the subject of a long piece before they show you the whole post. Howard Fineman’s HuffPost blog provides a title, and a few sentences of text to get you interested. This allows you to browse topics before you decide on your story of choice. Consider this lead-in from September 18^th: “Remember when Mitt Romney said that Palestinians don’t want peace and aren’t as culturally prepared for modernity as Israelis are? If you were surprised, you shouldn’t have been. His well-traveled and savvy chief campaign adviser, Stuart Stevens, did media on Ariel Sharon’s campaigns for prime minister…” Or even this statement from a post on September 19: “Mitt Romney has become the PSY of presidential politics. And that’s bad news for the Republican candidate on the 48^th day before Election day. PSY (Park Jae-sang) is, of course, the South Korean rapper whose “Gangnam Style” dance video has generated an astounding 220 million YouTube views…”

They get to the point. (And stay there.) If it’s off topic, distracted from the subject at hand, or wordy for no particular purpose, why are you reading it? In the time it took to read the wordy, unorganized, messy blog, you could have read maybe 2 or 3 that were direct, informational, and generally more enjoyable. David Roberts, environmental blogger for Grist.org, does this well. He starts off one post: “Pollution is not the only thing wrong with the U.S. power system. It is also governed by inconsistent rules and opaque, unaccountable organizations. The average citizen has little understanding of how it works, who is in charge, or how it might change for the better.” Looks clear and succinct? It is.

They inspire in their readers a desire for conversation. It’s what causes readers to utilize comment sections, share an article by email, Facebook, Twitter, or even share in a more traditional way – through conversation. Gizmodo, a blog devoted to all things tech-y, has mastered their easy to use comment section. Not only are the comments readable and the format aesthetically pleasing, but also the opinionated content of the posts often sparks passionate responses from visitors. It’s inspiring even for a technology novice like myself.

There’s no reason to suffer through an uninteresting, uninformed, and unworthy blog when there are so many out there! The blessing of blogging is the ability to make your own guide to a good blog, and to search the masses for the one that fits your interests and preferences. And maybe to dabble a little bit yourself!

Besides posting the sixth-highest passing total in league history a year ago, Eli Manning is the NFL’s all-time record holder for most fourth quarter comebacks in a single season.

The steady, solid, better-than-Peyton quarterback (at least right now) of the New York Giants also has two Super Bowl rings on his mantle, and two Super Bowl MVP awards to go along with them.

At this point, there is no doubting Eli’s credentials.

But we do it anyway.

There is no questioning Eli Manning’s ability to overcome adversity. Matching – maybe even besting – his mammoth expectations in the country’s most malicious market should have squashed that bug, exterminated it forever.

But still, we doubt.

Still, we don’t believe.

Still, we pounce at the very first chance.

In fact, in this constantly-evolving, instantly-analyzed world of opinions expounded and tweets tweeted, doubt may have become our reaction of choice.

Speaking of doubt – it’s becoming increasingly difficult to do so when considering this unsettling possibility. And the Giants quarterback’s journey from maligned to marveled – and however briefly this Sunday, back again – is a microcosm of it all.

Seven months ago, the Giants won their second Super Bowl in five years, and it seemed that the debate around Eli’s ‘Eliteness’ had finally, mercifully wrapped.

Then, in the ensuing season’s second game, the reality of that debate – and of the increasingly instantaneous and irrational reaction machine that powers it – reared its ugly head once more.

“It’s starting to look like we’re going to see the 2010 Eli Manning this year.”

“HA! Eli is Elite?…three INTs in the first half! Never will be Peyton, Never will be the Man!!”

“The Manning face, forever and ever. Don’t let anyone ever convince you this schlub is a top-notch quarterback.”

I’m paraphrasing, but the above is a pretty accurate representation of the hyper-reactive BS popping up all over on my Twitter timeline at halftime of the Giants v. Buccaneers game on Sunday, minutes after Eli had thrown (what at the time seemed like) a backbreaking third interception, returned for sixty yards and a touchdown by Bucs DB Eric Wright.

But guess what? It wasn’t backbreaking. Eli Manning isn’t, in fact, a ‘schlub.’

And 30 minutes of performance, poor or prolific, should never, ever – no matter the playing field – overrule long-term consensus.

But that’s what happened on Sunday. Right up until Eli and his crop of receivers want H.A.M. on the Tampa secondary. Right up until Eli posted the eighth highest single-game passing total in the history of the National Football League. Right up until the Giants’ back was un-broken – despite Greg Schiano’s best “sneak attack” efforts to the contrary – and Eli reminded everyone, fans and critics, exactly who he is.

That is, exactly who he will always be: a guy who can throw a football damn well, and whose ability to do so doesn’t change because someone else thinks it has.

As a species, we don’t agree on much. Most of all, we have a particularly difficult time coming to a consensus on what is what and whom is whom. But one thing we can agree on is that identity doesn’t shift particularly often, and that it certainly doesn’t change on a minute-by-minute basis. Matter is matter. Five minutes from now, matter will still be matter.

Van Gogh might have brushed a few strokes astray, but he was no less a painter for it.

Surely, even Einstein garbled a few calculations. But these shortcomings make his theory of relativity no less revolutionary.

So, why must we hold our athletes to such an impossible standard?

That’s a tough question, and one that would take many more words than I am willing to give.

(The CliffNotes version, in my opinion, would involve plenty of meditation on the nature of live events as well as the mythology surrounding sports. But again, this is a discussion for a different, longer day.)

Regardless of the motives, the consequences are clear.

There is no crying for Eli Manning, with his abundance of talent and millions accrued.

Certainly, there is no crying for the myriad athletes just like him. LeBron, A-Rod and Tiger come to mind as just a few of the other unfortunate, misperceivedinhabitants of The Spotlight.

But tears can be shed for a culture in which small samples are valued higher than manicured resumes, in which “What Have You Done For Me Lately?” has become the de facto law of the land.

Tears can be shed for a society that may have lost its ability to reason, or its ability to remember what it witnessed a week – let alone months – ago.

If this all sounds apocalyptic – well, apologies, and here’s a pillow to scream into. But with no ability to assess assets, to analyze, to come to a concrete understanding about the world around us, then what are we left with?

Cacophony. Cruelty. Chaos.

A world populated with hydra: dozens of heads and faces attached to each body.

Think you killed one of the heads? That you can turn your back on one of those many faces?

Fool. Check again.

It grew back.