From Beat Street to Main Street: Exploring Cultural Landscapes Through Rap Music, 1980-2000

Maxwell A. Gallin

A thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts Department of Sociology Princeton University 2013

Abstract Raps evolution throughout the later decades of the 20th century demonstrates how a subcultural product can integrate into popular culture. This thesis investigates how this happened, developing theories of cultural development, taste formation, cultural production, and institutional relationships to understanding the changing landscape of the rap music industry. To support this theory, I constructed a database of songs and albums on the year-end Billboard charts from 1980-2000 and performed quantitative statistical analysis to correlate the relationships between new artist entry, institutional concentration, and popularity. A qualitative content analysis complemented this study, setting a context for the reception of rap during these years. I conclude that the processes of production and taste development are certainly intertwined, and that the changing institutional form of the rap industry contributed to the mainstream-ification of the cultural product. Key Words: Institutionalization, Cultural Production, Habitus Formation, Taste Migration.

This thesis represents my own work in accordance with University regulations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I NTRODUCTION I: D EVELOPING C ULTURAL T HEORY II: C ULTURAL C OMMODITIES AND C REATIVE M ARKETS Introduction! Marx and The Circulation of Commodities! Methodology! Findings! III: U NDERSTANDING THE P RODUCTION OF C ULTURE Introduction! Theories of Cultural Production! A Hip-Hop History! Effects on the Industry! IV: E XPLORING R AP ' S I NSTITUTIONALIZATION Introduction! Social Construction of Culture! Cultural Productions and Institutions! Institutionalization and Creative Industries! Methodology! Findings! Discussion! V: E VOLVING T HEMES IN THE P ERCEPTION OF R AP Introduction! Methodology! Findings! Bourdieusian Trends! C ONCLUSION R EFERENCES A PPENDIX 5 13 28 !"! !"! !"! !"! 42 !"! !"! !"! !"! 67 !"! !"! !"! !!! !"! !"! !"! 94 !"! !"! !"! !"#! 114 121 126

Thank you Dr. Janet Vertesi for guiding me through this thesis, for challenging me to think profoundly, for motivating me to do more. ! Thank you Professor Clayton Childress for captivating me with theory, for inspiring my sociological imagination, for educating me in cultural studies. ! Thank you friends for helping me get the most out of my college experience, for giving me necessary distractions, for making Princeton an easy place to live and a hard place to leave. ! Thank you Diane and Lawrence Gallin, for your compassion and understanding, for your encouragement, for your words of wisdom. Your reassurance and positivity has provided me sanity and clarity while writing this thesis. You have given me the world and I cannot thank you enough for it. I am thankful to have your wisdom and generosity in my life, and am proud to call you my mother and father.

Introduction
!

When I say 'hip-hop is dead,' basically America is dead. There is no political voice. Music is dead Our way of thinking is dead, our commerce is dead. Everything in this society has been done. It's like a slingshot, where you throw the mutha****a back and it starts losing speed and is about to fall down. That's where we are as a country. I don't wanna lose nobody with this, but what I mean by 'hip-hop is dead' is we're at a vulnerable state. If we don't change, we gonna disappear like Rome Hip-hop is Rome for the 'hood. I think hip-hop could help rebuild America, once hip-hoppers own hip-hop. ... We are our own politicians, our own government, we have something to say. We're warriors. Soldiers.
Nas 1 The rapper Nas quote is neither right nor wrong. His twenty-year career does not qualify him to declare that a music born in the late seventies is now, officially, dead. Sure, todays rap is different than yesterdays, though styles and tastes change. It would be nave to assume that rap music has not evolved in its thirty-year history. But I think I understand what he is trying to get at. What once existed as a racially and culturally defined music now exists as an element of popular culture. Raps political message all but disappeared as it immersed itself in popular culture. Nas, I hear you. This thesis asks, What happened? Let me first clarify what this thesis is not. I am not claiming that rap in the eighties is better than today. I am not engaging in a conversation of authenticity. I do not want to compare the East Coast versus the West Coast. I am no expert on the history of rap. I grew up in a suburb outside of sunny

Reid, Shaheem. 2006. MTV News Exclusive: Nas Previews Hip-Hop Is Dead ... The N. MTV.com. Retrieved March 5, 2013 (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1542740/mtv-news-exclusive-nas-previewsnew-lp.jhtml).

Tampa, Florida - I cannot relate to the streets of Compton, nor the Bronx. I was not even alive when Run-DMC dropped his first album, was too young to listen to N.W.A during their prime. That said - I love rap music. I download mixtapes, hear it on the radio, and can recite the lyrics to entire albums, especially if you give me a beat. Before I started writing this thesis I asked myself, How did this get to me? I cannot relate to Notorious BIGs Ten Crack Commandments, nor a single song on Nas Illmatic. The stories and messages saturated in rap music reached my ears somehow, even though I know nothing about dealing drugs and urban poverty. Still, I love rap music. I am curious about how this shift happened; how something so subculturally defined, so specific to a black, urban youth, ended up as an element of popular culture. I am intrigued about the changing tastes, roles, and relationships that surround rap music. I will ask questions that a hip-hop historian may not be able to answer, but a sociologist can. Looking at the evolving rap industry through a sociological lens, I will investigate three topics: the development of culture, the migration of tastes, and the social relationships that surround a cultural object. I plan to review the history of rap music through a sociological perspective, trying to understand if the social systems ingrained in rap music contributed to this cultural shift. This thesis proposes the research question: to what extent has an evolving social landscape of rap contributed toward to the redefinition of the cultural object and

the migration of tastes? Why rap? Aside from my personal interest in the topic, it seems a viable sociological issue. Rock, jazz, and disco have been investigated sociologically, so why not rap? What makes rap particularly interesting is its evolution out of a subculture, of a social group that shares little in common with the audience it includes today. Raps popularization has increased its visibility and interaction with social groups that are so sociologically and culturally different than its origin, though it has still managed to take root in popular culture. Over time, tastes and relationships integrated in a developing musical genre must change in response to its popularization because of raps cultural situation, these changes may intersect with the processes of cultural development, something not necessarily witnessed in rock and jazz. The sociological literature touching on the topic of cultural development provided excellent direction for this thesis. Richard Petersons Why 1955? Explaining the Advent of Rap Music was one such work. Peterson investigates why 1955 an uneventful and unlikely year for a major aesthetic revolution was the birthdate of rock and roll. (Peterson 1990:98) He conducts a contextual analysis for the historical factors that led up to the emergence of rock, employing his production of culture perspective to determine what helped constrain and stimulate cultural innovation at that time. (Peterson 1990:99) The approach Peterson takes will be replicated later in this thesis, studying the interaction of technology, laws and regulations, industry structure, organizational form,

occupational roles, and the market in the processes of cultural production. By looking at the history of rap music through this framework, I may be able to determine certain points that may have produced a shift in the social and cultural systems encompassing rap music. I began to focus my study on institutional relationships after reading Petersons article and considering his production of culture perspective further, though I did not get a holistic idea of how to tackle this theoretical analysis until I considered Pinch and Bijkers social construction of technology theory. Though the theory deals specifically with the development of a technological artifact, I thought its core meaning could also be applied to my cultural study. Pinch and Bijkers approach to production is less concerned with the contextual and environmental shifts that may disrupt the relationships of production, instead focusing on the nature of the relationships themselves. They suggest that during the development of a technological artifact, multiple relevant social groups shape the design and function of the object in order to best address their problems and needs. (Pinch and Bijker 1984:36) This has motivated me to investigate the social relationships that exist during development of a cultural product, focusing on the hierarchies of power and precedence that emerge in terms of shaping rap music. Additionally, Pinch and Bijkers theory has directed me towards sociological and cultural studies that focused on other relationships that may seem relevant in the production of a cultural product, particularly institutional relations.

With this background, I have decided to pursue my research question from the production side of the equation. I will consider how cultural taste evolves in response to changing processes of production, and vice versa. I hope to understand how social relationships exist within these processes of production, and how they too contribute to the development or transformation of taste. This discussion of how rap music is produced will rely on a wide range of theory, covering topics including commodity circulation and cultural migration to help understand how the popularization of rap music - a cultural commodity manifest changing tastes and processes of cultural production. To support this theory, I will conduct both a quantitative and qualitative analysis. The quantitative study will focus on raps popularization via the elements of popular rap songs, considering factors such as label affiliation, previous successes, and ranking to determine how these changed over time and in relation to one another. Via music anthologies and databases, I created a dataset of every rap song to appear on the weekly popular Billboard charts from 1980 to 2011. This overwhelmingly demonstrated that rap music has popularized over time, though the scope of the data was too large. In response, I focused my attention on Billboard year-end charts, from which I gathered information on artist names, album and song titles, label affiliation, and ranking from ten specific charts: the black and popular charts for albums, album artists, singles, and singles artists, as well as the singles airplay and singles sales charts. Additionally, I cut the date parameters from 1980-2000; this created a

rounded twenty-year period that omitted a significant, industry-revolutionizing event the birth of online music shopping. Still, this provided a massive dataset that will enable me to distinguish the tastes of the popular rap market and the hip-hop-specific rap market, determined by comparison of the aforementioned variables. The singles sales and airplay charts will help distinguish the differences between songs that are broadcast on the radio versus songs that sell well this may be key in understanding the relationship between two major institutions in the rap industry, the record label and broadcast media. The majority of this investigation will rely on statistical analysis, using the software Excel and STATA to dissect these data sets with the intention of procuring correlational relationships between label affiliation and new artist concentration, for example. Chapters 2 and 4 will expand upon this. To complement the quantitative study, I will perform a qualitative content analysis. Via the ProQuest archive, I have assembled a dataset of New York

Times articles from 1980-2000 that discuss some element of rap music; using the
search parameters hip-hop OR rapper OR rapping AND su(music), I selected 100 out of 4,234 relevant articles via a process better explained in Chapter 5. This study will examine predominant themes in the reception of rap music that progress and transform throughout the years, hopefully contributing to my discussion of taste and cultural migration. By separating this set into four fiveyear time periods, I anticipate that I will be able to visualize how themes significantly changed by reading the journalistic responses to raps

10

popularization. The qualitative and quantitative datasets for this thesis will be publicly stored online please refer to the Appendix for more information on how to access this information. The first chapter of this thesis will focus on synthesizing cultural theory and on understanding how taste is developed. Using sociological theory from Bourdieu, Gelder, and Park, I will develop a theoretical background for the discussion of cultural migration. Additionally, I will explain the significance of a cultural object in terms of taste and cultural formation. The second chapter of this thesis will construct a creative market for rap music, using Marxs commodity circulation theory to explain how rap circulates in a creative market. Using quantitative analysis, I will investigate how rap music popularizes over time on the hip-hop and popular charts while observing relationships between the two. Chapter three will employ Petersons production of culture framework while reviewing the history of rap music, discerning major events that may have elicited shifts in taste or the processes of production. The most significant events will be investigated further, looking at their influence on other aspects of the industry in accordance to Petersons theory. Chapter four tackles institutional relationships, using a social construction of culture perspective ( la Pinch and Bijker) to understand how record labels and broadcast media interact and respond to one another. This is supported by quantitative analysis focusing on the correlational relationship

11

between the singles airplay and sales charts, while also investigating the concentration of major labels on the albums market. The fifth and final chapter contextualizes the arguments made in these first four chapters, using qualitative analysis to study the reception and discourse of rap music. This chapter also discusses the evolution and migration of taste in Bourdieusian terms, using this qualitative data to support these claims. Ultimately, this thesis aims to understand the relationship between taste and the processes of production, looking at how particular developments within an industry may explain shifts in cultural innovation and diversity, and what this means for the migration of a cultural object. Rap music experienced a turbulent twenty years following its cultural inception, and is a promising vehicle to facilitate this theoretical sociological discussion.

12

I D EVELOPING C ULTURAL T HEORY

! Before I start throwing words around like culture and subculture and taste, it would be important to gain understanding of the theory and sociological perspective behind this terminology. Though hip-hop music is the modern subject of my investigation, earlier sociological theory can focus attention on certain cultural and social processes that help structure and influence the social groups that consume this music. This study will sometimes treat music as a cultural element, thus bringing into consideration the transfer of social and cultural capital among classes and networks. By synthesizing and critiquing these theories, I will be able to construct my own theoretical framework while proposing a sociological reason for why hip-hop music has undergone a transformation. Pierre Bourdieu's Distinction is a classic work in the sociological study of culture. The book studies how culture manifests itself in different social classes, and how taste develops in relation to the culture of these classes. Bourdieu denounces reductionist answers, proposing that I must acknowledge multiple factors the biological, the psychological, the social when considering a group or individual's social identifications. (1984:107) His theory centers on the concept of class habitus, or the conditions and conditionings that both unify and generate class-specific cultural practices. (1984:101) Social class is defined by one or more

13

homogenous social elements, which typically consist of a set of common, objectified properties. (1984:101-2) These properties contribute to the dispositions of the individuals within the class that is, the objectified commonality, the homogeneity between class members define what Bourdieu calls their field of possibilities for cultural tastes. (1984:110) To avoid a reductionist perspective, Bourdieu acknowledges that factors such as one's occupation, education, or domestic relationships can influence taste it would be too simple to say that one man's taste is solely the product of his social class, that his wife's disposition or his educational upbringing did not play a role in forming the cultural tastes he portrays. (1984:109) A cultural practice can achieve a defined trajectory among a social class due to the homogeneity of the group, as the individuals maintain similar cultural dispositions as other members within their group. (1984:110) Simply, this explains why some cultural practices or phenomena catch on with a particular social group the members of the group all share an objective social similarity, thus their cultural dispositions may lie along the same lines as one another. Yet, Bourdieu notes that a cultural practice may not integrate itself within the social group due to instilled familial dispositions or changing collective dispositions within a group. (1984:111) Further, these trajectories may not have a role in certain social fields, or it may be manifest in a different capacity; hence, this is why a cultural practice may be ignored or reinterpreted by a particular occupation, despite its' existence within a homogenous social group. (1984:112)

14

Bourdieu illustrates the production of taste in a graphic, summarized as such: a habitus is formed by the classification and position of an objectifiable property of a social group, which then continuously structures itself around the homogeneity of its members. (1984:171) Within the habitus, there exist systems of classifiable practices and works and schemes of perception and taste. (1984:171) The perceptions and tastes of the habitus (as well as the perceptions and tastes of other habituses) of these works and practices condition a habitus' members to system of classified cultural practices, or more simply, tastes. (1984:171) For the broader picture of a social group, I can assume that cultural tastes are not only developed by a similar objective property of a social group, but also by the group's cultural dispositions and practices they engage in as well as the perceptions and appreciations they and other habituses give these practices. The meanings to cultural practices given and the tastes developed by a habitus allow it to differentiate itself from other habituses. (1984:172) These practices establish a symbolic and stylistic affinity within the group, which enables habitus members to recognize cultural signs and build relationships that center around these cultural meanings and tastes. (1984:173-5) Additionally, I should consider DiMaggio's cognitive psychological perspective of culture. DiMaggio's theory puts culture at the intersection of sociology and psychology and, like Bourdieu, avoids a simplistic explanation for a complex concept. He asserts that culture is fractured and inconsistent among social classes, that people's tastes and views differ from our own, and

15

may differ even within the same social class. (DiMaggio 1997:265) DiMaggio applies cognitive theory to the organization of culture, asserting that we adopt cultural schemas that act as affirming systems of stability and consistency for physical and social cues. (1997:268) We respond to social cues in accordance with our schemas, which may lead to biased or inconsistent attitudes based on a cultural mental framework. (1997:268) This bias constrains and enables it limits our ability to imagine cultural and social alternatives, but lubricates our interactions and goals within the culture we exist in. (1997:269) Regarding the creation of culture, DiMaggio believes in the role of cultural producers. (1997:268) Culture is portrayed through external symbol systems, consisting of the content of talk, elements of the constructed environment, media messages, and meanings embedded in observable activity patterns. (1997:274) Our schemata rely on these external cues we use and interact with these systems, influencing our own behavior, as well as our understanding of others behavior within the same cultural group. These messages, these cultural cues are broadcast by the social collective, trying to produce explicit messages and symbols that will evoke the group's cultural schemata in order to play into the group's collective interest. (1997:275) The individuals within the social group maintain a collective identity, aligned with the interests and understandings of the other members with whom they share these mental frameworks; however, one's individuality remains proportional to his/her involvement within the group. (1997:275) That is, the less involved with the cultural group, the less

16

reliant on the cultural schemata developed from one's social exposure, the more individuality a person maintains. I can assume that, from DiMaggio's logic, that a member's individuality may open him/her to other cultural possibilities, though it limits his/her progress within the group itself. Using Bourdieu's terminology, it seems developing a homogenous cultural schema is beneficial for the individual, a lubricated social environment incentivizes the individual to develop a mental framework homogenous to his/her social group. Accordingly, I can suggest that this is why cultural practices catch on within a social group to get the most out of one's social and cultural environment, an individual needs to adopt the practices, the attitudes given by the group. Yet, an individual's capacity to maintain his/her individual identity, or to possess multiple cultural schemata, fractures social classes, as members develop interests exterior to the interests of the social group. Looking at Bourdieu and DiMaggio's theory, I can gain a sociological understanding of cultural groups. A cultural group forms around an objective homogeny, a shared characteristic, practice, or interest of a social group, typically among a particular social class. The members of the group have specific dispositions dependent on their individual social origins and upbringing as well as the collective interests of the group. The group, what Bourdieu calls a habitus, classifies and defines the systems of cultural practices and works by integrating their self-perception and the perception of other habituses into the meaning of these practices. Adding meanings to these classified and ever-

17

classifying (the process is continous) practices establishes distinctive tastes for each habitus, while creating a cultural group solidarity built by the shared meanings and relationships surrounding these practices. Culture is not 'imbibed' (to put it in DiMaggio's words) by the members of the social group, but it is implanted in the mental frameworks of its users. The meanings and perceptions given to each cultural practice develop cultural schemas within in each user, which helps lubricate the social environment the group exists in. A member reads external cultural elements media portrayals, jargon, symbolic meanings and interacts with them, adopting them into their individual practices in order to assume a social role within the cultural group. This allows him/her to find interest in the goals of the cultural group, and enables him/her to pursue interests that align with the group or would seem culturally impressive to fellow members. However, it must be remembered that the classes remain fragmented, split by the levels of involvement of social members and their willingness to identify with the collective cultural interests. Alan Lomax's book Folk Music Style and Culture introduces music to a cultural context. Lomax first argues that musical style is a product of the culture in which it is embedded in, that it summarizes the ranges of behavior that are appropriate to one kind of cultural context. (Lomax 1968:6) The style of music adapts to a cultural environment and expresses cultural life, representing the relationships, communication, and symbolic meanings cultivated through culture, and ultimately coming to epitomize a singluar and notable aspect of a

18

culture, by which its members identify themselves and with which they endow any of their activities and their feelings. (1968:3-8) Lomax demonstrates through cantometric (13), choreometric (248), and textual analysis (274) that folk songs are distinct to and reflective of the social and economic nature of a culture; essentially, the forms of expression (dance and singing) can be broken down into particular elements (i.e. pitch, intonation, harmonization, body movement, etc.) which reflect upon the organization of the culture's social life and the personal experience in it. (1968:304) Though this paper will not try to attribute social meanings to the song elements of hip-hop music, it will run off Lomax's assertion that the rap song style is particular to hip-hop culture, and that it serves as a major symbolic and reflective element of the culture in general. As a cultural element, rap music should be an expression of those that align themselves with a hip-hop culture, discussing social issues and cultural styles that are relevant to the group, communicating this in a language that resonates with the members of the culture. Lomax's idea of music as a cultural element appeals to both Bourdieu and DiMaggio's idea of cultural practices. A la Bourdieu, music is influenced by the dispositions of the cultural group, and the elements of a song become a product of the homogeneous preferences and social characteristics of a group. Rap music follows a cultural trajectory and is subject to the dispositions of the habitus, though as it becomes a cultural practice, it assumes special meanings and perceptions given by the habitus. These perceptions and meanings integrate the

19

song as a cultural practice and develop a sense of taste for the habitus, thus becoming part of the culture's identity. Listening to and enjoying music involves the member in the culture, and will increase his/her cultural capital while ingraining him/her further into the culture. For DiMaggio, a song becomes a part of the schemas I develop; it reinforces the meanings and symbols given from our cultural practices by communicating jargon, experiences, and messages that are familiar to the general group. Music is part of the external symbol systems that helps reinforce our cultural understandings and lubricate our social relationships. I could suggest that people listen to or use music for the sake of reinforcing cultural meanings and establishing group solidarity, as it seems to be an efficient way to broadcast social perceptions, experiences, and tastes. The lyrics of cultural music likely stimulate the cultural schemata I develop, resonating with the understandings, practices, and tastes of what Bourdieu calls a cultural habitus. DiMaggio and Bourdieu consider culture as a general, class-wide phenomenon, yet the history of hip-hop suggests it began as an ethnic subcultural movement. Reviewing the works of Gelder, Park and Williams, I will develop an idea of the social structure of subcultures. Knowing the structure of subcultures will be crucial for our understanding of how hip-hop music transformed and integrated itself into the general popular culture. Gelder explains that subcultures can develop either internally, by processes of exclusion and solidarity, or externally, formed by the society around

20

it. (2007:2) The formation of a subculture is typically associated with a narrative, which evokes reactions from external members, and forces them to take positions of perspective against the subculture. (2007:2) The subculture is often considered nonconformist, a group rejecting the existing social order and disavowing class practices and affiliations, that establishes its own cultural order and affiliations to better represent the members' collective interest. (2007:3) Gelder considers the subculture to be non-normative and marginal rejecting popular values and shoved to the side of general society. (2007:1) Under Gelder's perspective, subcultures are marginalized by society because of their nonconformism, because they are not considered societally normal. Williams' believes that this is not necessarily the case. First, Williams asserts that a subculture must be treated as an abstraction, rather than a physical thing. (2011:38) The subculture should be considered a cultural phenomenon rather than a classification system, a social situation running off shared values, beliefs, and practices. (2011:38) Further, the subculture should not be considered homogenous or static, as time and space may shift interpretations, practices, styles, and values. (2011:39) To Williams, subcultures are culturally bounded, but not closed, networks of people who come to share the meaning of specific ideas, material objects, and practices through interaction. (2011:39) This interaction creates a culture that gradually shapes the generation and diffusion of cultural practices and elements. (2011:39) Like Bourdieu, Williams believes that the social processes within a subculture are

21

continuously reinforcing, both created by the subcultural members and enacted by the structure of the subculture itself. (2011:40) A interaction of members provides an information flow about the trends of cultural practices, and allows the members to identify with the elements that build up the practices and values of the group. Looking at Gelder and Williams' subcultural descriptions, I can imagine the role of music within. In Gelder's case, I can assume the music of a subculture will also be nonconformist, rejecting the general social order and popular social values. Subcultural music would be considered abnormal or different from the popular norm, and would help develop the subculture's against the grain narrative. The elements of subcultural music should then discuss and reinforce social experiences that are considered nonconformist or abnormal. Considering music in Williams' perspective, music integrates itself in a way similar to what I described in Bourdieu's condition. Music is a product of the subculture's shared meanings and interests, a form of communication diffuse with subcultural symbols and jargon that reinforce the subculture's social processes. Because the subculture itself is a cultural phenomenon, not an organized, classified group of people, music positions itself as a form of communication that helps convey shared subcultural meanings and symbols. In this sense, I can suggest that music (or any art that shares cultural meanings) plays a significant role in subcultural communication and development, due to the lack of social order of the group. This may position music as having a significant role in the

22

organization and transformation of a subculture, or at least in the representation of such; thus, it will be a good focal point for looking at the transformation of hip-hop culture. Robert E. Park's 1928 essay Migration and the Marginal Man is a classic piece on subcultures and the city. Park considers every great cultural progress to be the product of a physical or abstract migration. (1928:883) In a migration, an invading population or culture breaks down the social order, forcing a fusion of native and alien values. (1928:885) This invading culture can either be assimilated or subjugated when subjugated, I see subcultures arise in the subordinate peoples. (1928:885) Park believes that during this social chaos, man is emancipated, lacking the social constraints that prevent him from going against the cultural grain. (1928:887) Social chaos often breeds innovation and restructuring, formed by the secularization of once sacred cultural relationships. (1928:888) The city is typically the theatre for these cultural restructurings a giant melting pot of ethnicity, culture, and social class where social organization is determined by rational interest and temperamental predilections. (1928:889) Park quotes Georg Simmel's essay The Stranger, considering the stranger (in Park's terminology, the migrating man) to be unbound by conventions or customs, and free practically and theoretically. (1928:888) Here, it would help to refer to Simmel's essay itself, where he writes: The stranger is an element of the group itself, not unlike the poor and sundry 'inner

23

enemies' an element whose membership within the group involves both being outside it and confronting it. (Simmel 1971:144) The rest of his essay investigates the factors of repulsion and distance that effectively define a social group it is the stranger's presence that enables a social group to recognize its intimacy, its exclusivity, its homogeneity. (Simmel 1971:144) Reverting back to Park's essay, I can understand that cultures gain their identity from the fact that they differentiate from other cultural strangers; that is, it takes cultural opposition or difference for a social group to recognize its homogeneity. Further, I can assume that subcultures exist as migrating men or strangers. Not only to subculture help define the cultural identities of the majority, but they serve as broken down versions of social order. Park and Simmel's essays provide two important points for my discussion of music and culture. Park discusses how an invading culture becomes assimilated or subjugated when in the process of cultural migration, and uses the city as an example of a cultural melting pot. Looking at this, I can assume that the origin of rap music is rooted in the hip-hop subculture, an urban stew of mixed ethnicities and no social order for Park, a perfect environment for cultural innovation. As rap music popularized, and hip-hop culture gained social order, the music battled against existing popularized cultural relationships and meanings. From this, I can suggest that rap music is a cultural innovation produced in the order-less urban subculture environment; its popularization and escape from the city have introduced a less hospitable environment with

24

dominating social ideals and relationships that ultimately transformed the musical message. Further, looking at Simmel's perspective, I may postulate that rap music and hip-hop culture served as a stranger that popular culture originally marginalized due to its difference. The homogeneity and resistance of popular culture enabled hip-hop to develop its nonconformist and individual identity it will then be necessary to determine how the stranger culture eventually integrated itself into the homogenous majority, or how the group bridged the factors of repulsion and distance that segregate a culture from the majority. I will refer back to Bourdieu for his field theory, which will come in handy in building my discussion in the next chapter. Bourdieu considers art and literature to exist within a cultural field defined by success and prestige. (Bourdieu 1993:320) The cultural field is a battle between these two principles, as cultural elements tend to gravitate towards either the heteronomous (driven by success) or autonomous (driven by art for arts sake). (1993:321) The definition of the artist is a product of his or her art, but also by a set of people already entrenched in the fields hierarchy, who get to say where this new art or artist fits inside the field. (1993:322) The producers, the art within certain sectors of the field possess certain homologies that enable this definition and produce solidarity, making the heteronomous and autonomous poles mutually exclusive, with relational levels of gradation separating them. (1993:322-7) The other poles in the cultural field are defined by concentration, or how entrenched

25

the cultural producer is within the field. (1993:330) This benefits the old and entrenched within the system, as low concentration within the field is typical of new entrants. It is the relativity of the Bourdieusian field that is appealing, particularly in how a cultural product assumes a position within the field. Considering Bourdieus four poles, I may position rap music in the lower hemisphere, a new entrant with low concentration relative to other musical entries in the field. Additionally, I may think of rap as originating closer to the autonomous pole, especially if I think of early rap as being a cultural element focused on disseminating a social or racial message. If music was produced for cultural sakes, I can assume that the economic element was marginalized; yet, as I witness the popularization of rap music, I can assume that its position shifts from the autonomous to the heteronomous, with cultural producers and the industry seeking economic incentives and reaching a mass audience rather than a smaller audience that appreciates its cultural message. This chapter lays down the theoretical framework I will use throughout the rest of this thesis in the discussion of cultural elements and shifting cultural meanings. Bourdieus theories of taste and fields build understanding of culture and subculture by discussing how these cultural products are organized and organize members of a social group. DiMaggio enables a contemplation of how individuals perceive cultural elements, and how these cultural elements enable members to interact within a homogenous social context. These two theories will

26

also facilitate the discussion of how culture and cultural elements shift meanings and positions within greater society. This will be paramount in the discussion of how the cultural industry surrounding rap music transforms as it popularizes, and what this means in terms of cultural development and integration. The remaining chapters of this thesis will use theoretical and quantitative analysis to investigate shifts in rap music from 1986 to 2000, observing the shifts proposed by this chapter.

27

II C ULTURAL C OMMODITIES AND C REATIVE M ARKETS

!

Introduction
This thesis relies on an impression that rap music and to that point, music in general exists within a creative market. I argue that rappers assume the roles of cultural producers, who cooperate with other actors within the industry (i.e. radio deejays, record labels) to broadcast and sell a cultural product to consumers. Referring back to Bourdieu, I suggest that these consumers engage in these cultural transactions to build social and cultural capital, to identify oneself with a particular culture or ideology, and to elevate ones position within the related population. The purchase of cultural products is a symbolic exchange, a way of transforming economic capital into cultural or social capital while confirming a particular taste or disposition for culture. I understand that one purchases a cultural product in confirmation of his/her taste, though the exchange itself confirms the tastes and dispositions of the greater group or culture. The individual is incentivized and disposed to following the tastes of his/her group as homogeneity increases, the tastes of a cultural group become more defined, reinitiating Bourdieus cycle of habitus formation. Looking at Bourdieu and other competing theories, I discussed how cultural elements play a role in the development of homogenous cultures and tastes. Petersons theory fueled the discussion of cultural production, helping

28

understand how different variables affect the distribution and consumption of cultural products. So far, I have theorized about how cultural products are produced and why consumers purchase them these are essential for understanding the production and consumption aspects of a creative market. However, the discussion in this chapter will focus on the circulation of the cultural products, treating them as symbolic commodities. This chapter will channel theory from Marxs Capital to understand the circulation of commodities, applying his perspective to the creative rap music market to help understand how rap music exists as a cultural symbol and simultaneously circulates within an economic market. For the sake of this thesis, I will consider two creative markets: a segmented music market reflecting hip-hop or black tastes and a popular music market comprised of the nations most popular songs and artists. I hypothesize that rap music originates in a segmented, ethnicallyfocused market as a symbolic cultural product, but gradually migrates toward the popular music market. Rap musics entry into the popular music market may not have necessarily transformed the symbolic meaning or nature of the cultural product, but the rap music market itself may gradually begin to mirror the tastes of the popular market. That is, as rap music becomes more visible within the popular market, the tastes of the hip-hop market will begin to resemble those of the popular.

Marx and The Circulation of Commodities

In Capital, Marx argues that money allows for the circulation of 29

commodities, that money standardizes price and stands as a social incarnation of human labor. (Marx 1977:192) The purchaser perceives the commodity as valuable and plans to integrate the commodity into his/her internal life; the work performed by the seller is then alienated, sent to market, and made external to his/her life. (1977:190) The producers work is only eligible for exchange if there is a consumer that deems it valuable, or worthy of its integration into the consumers life. Money allows commodities to take on a price-form, quantifying labor and value to enable exchange between the producer and consumer. (1977:198) In a market exchange, a commodity undergoes a transformation from its original form to its money form during a sale, then back to its commodity form when purchased. (1977:200) As the exchange takes place, the value of the commodity is manifest in different forms, though the value itself is not lost. Marx writes: Money as the medium of circulation, haunts the sphere of circulation and constantly moves around within it. (1977:213) Money should not be mistaken for a symbol it is a form of the commodity that manifests value as a quantitative and standardized measure. (1977:198) However, money is symbolized in the form of currency, a symbol that represents a weight of gold that corresponds with the value of a commodity. (1977:225) Currency is a physical representation of value that helps us engage in transactions, that turns circulation into a concrete phenomenon instead of an abstraction of changing forms and constant values. In this, the process of exchange exists as a symbolic transaction. Commodities are valued through

30

their processes of production, assume a form that is symbolically represented based on this determined value, and finally revert to the original form when purchased by the consumer. The value of the commodity remains consistent throughout the transaction, though it is manifest in different ways. Marx claims that the meaning of the commodity transfers as it assumes different forms. The alienation of the commodity from its producer occurs when the commodity takes the money, or price-value, form. (1977:190) The purchaser identifies him/herself with the commodity, and assesses the commodity in terms of his/her use-value, or how he/she can incorporate the commodity into his/her life. (1977:190) The use-value of the commodity is defined by the consumer, and may eventually assume a form that is different than the original commodity (i.e. in the case of cloth, which may be purchased then transformed into clothing, or stay in its original form and be used as a cloth). (1977:189) The meanings or uses of commodities change once they shift hands from the producer to the consumer; the original production may not be the final form of the product. Overall, Marx proposes that the circulation of a commodity is facilitated by transformations and representations of the commodity in different forms, and that the social relations surrounding a circulating market give each transaction, each purchased commodity, a definition of usage. Marxs theory provides the foundation of my image of a rap music market. Commodities take the form of songs and albums; exchange takes place between musicians, record labels, stores, and consumers. I can imagine that the exchange

31

of capital is not limited to the economic, but also includes social and cultural exchanges. The commoditys use-value is not purely economic; it brings social and cultural capital that, in Bourdieusian theory, could enhance ones position within his/her social group. However, it may be too simple to qualify the market for rap music under purely Marxian terms. There is a massive amount of uncertainty in the industry, and it is difficult to quantify both the processes of production and the cultural elements produced. Caves notes that the majority of prices in the music industry are fixed consumers tend to pay just as much for a superstars bestselling album as an unknown acts first album, and concert tickets are constrained by both time and space. (Caves 2000:75) Consumers are only economically rational in the sense that they choose to invest their money in what other individuals tend to purchase lacking a metric of quality, or a determining factor that one thing is objectively better than another, consumers tend to buy what other consumers are buying as a justification for quality. (2000:78) The relationship between time spent laboring and quality is arbitrary a cultural commodity is not necessarily better if an artist takes one year to produce it rather than six months. (2000:75) Lucien Karpik continues the discussion on the economics of a creative market with his book on pricing art. He argues that cultural products are evaluated and organized in relative ranking terms, or on levels of gradation. (Karpik 2010:211 ) Karpik suggests that the evaluation of quality is mostly

32

social it relies on the opinions of experts, peer networks, and self-recognition in giving criteria for quality. (2010:213) Additionally pricing is thus an indicator of quality, and lowering price may be an indicator of reduced quality, and thus a knock to a products reputation. (2010:215) This said, in creative markets with massive uncertainty (i.e. the music industry), pricing is removed from aesthetic interpretations of quality, and instead focused on the infrastructure and processes of production, such as genre popularity or retail location. (2010:214) In these markets, the volume of sales determines quality, even if there are no defining aesthetic elements of the product that make it better than other circulating products. (2010:214) Popularity is thus a measure of quality, and pricing is a measure of the economic factors that concern the product. What makes the music market unique is that the prices of cultural commodities are basically constant. Quality is determined by success, and success itself is quite arbitrary. Because quality is virtually immeasurable aside from sales volume, I can anticipate that rational producers will try to replicate others successes in order to reap economic benefits and, because of this, the market will appear homogenous. The inability of this information to fit into the Marxian mold complicates the image of a creative market. I can still assume that consumers will purchase a cultural commodity that possesses a significant use-value. The cultural commodity can still undergo the transformations of circulation that Marx refers to after a song is produced, it circulates in its monetary form until it is

33

purchased by the consumer. Though with price fixed, the value of these cultural commodities would also appear to be arbitrary in Marxian eyes. Because quality is arbitrary, it seems there is little rhyme or reason to the direction of a creative market except for Caves point consumers follow defined paths of consumption when investing in commodities. After contemplating these market perspectives, I understand that the Marxist relationship between buyer and seller still exists, and that the cultural commodity undergoes transitions of form and symbolism as it moves from producer to consumer. The typicality of circulation is compromised by the nature and price of these cultural commodities considering there is no criteria for evaluating quality, price is constant, and the processes of production are diverse and arbitrary, it is difficult to consider a creative market in pure Marxist terms. Looking at these characteristics of the market, I can propose that a maturing market will begin to appear more homogenous, with producers mimicking current successes and a few successful artists having a major concentration of the entire market.

Methodology 2
To determine how the market for rap music functions, I have built a historical representation of the top songs, artists, and albums within the popular and rap music markets. I will construct this image by looking at a variety of

Billboard magazine year-end charts from 1986 to 2000, enabling an image of

2

Please refer to the Appendix for information on how to find the data for this thesis.

34

how the circulation of rap music increased over time in both the hip-hop and popular music markets. Each charted album, song, or artist features a variety of data points that will become focal points of analysis, not limited to chart ranking, number of charted entries, and label / distribution deals. Comparing these variables over time will illustrate how each market has evolved, with certain variables explaining phenomena that may have influenced a particular aspect of the industry. Additionally, comparing the two markets will aid my study of how the consumption of rap music is changing by reflecting the tastes of the general population versus those that side with hip-hop culture. Stemming from Marxs discussion of the circulation of commodities, I will first observe the circulation of rap music within the popular and rap music markets. By looking at the concentration of rap songs on each chart over time, I can monitor how rap becomes popular and how it integrates itself into cultural tastes. I will then try to identify any similarities in the tastes between the two markets, looking at artists, songs, and albums that appear on both charts and their relative positions. The majority of the analysis will rely on basic statistics, comparisons of mean, median, and standard deviation. However, some correlation analysis will be performed relating time and ranking, concentration, and gross number of songs on each chart. Additionally, this analysis will be performed comparing the two charts together, determining if there is a relationship between the increased presence and concentration on one chart versus the other. The data studied in this chapter will envision the progression

35

of rap musics popularity on a yearly basis, while reflecting changing tastes. In this sense, the data I analyze will resonate with my understanding of cultural tastes and dispositions, as well as the Bourdieusian idea of fields.

Findings
The first set of data I am dealing with concerns the number and concentration of rap music within the hip-hop and popular charts. To build a coherent, all-encompassing understanding of how hip-hop rose to popularity, I will observe three different categories for the popular and hip-hop charts: singles, albums, and album artists. Using the data samples for each category, I totaled the number of songs, albums, and artists for each year and each chart. After tallying the numbers for each year and category, I could see a pretty

60
Popular Charts

Popularization of Rap Albums

50 Number of Albums 40 30 20 10 0

Hip-Hop Charts

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year
Fi gure 1 The number of rap albums appearing on the Billboard charts seemed a good metric of popularity. Rap's growth seems to stabilize from 1989 to 1995; from 1996 on, my data suggests that it begins to grow again. This was similar for Billboard singles as well.

36

obvious positive trend regarding the increasing presence of rap music. Though the hip-hop charts had a higher concentration of rap music, the popular charts essentially mirrored its rise in popularity. There exists a strong, positive correlation (r > 0.75) between time and all the categories within each chart that is, as time goes on, more rap music enters the market. Because these correlations are so strong, the relationships between the hip-hop and popular singles and albums are also significantly strong (r > 0.75) for album artists, however, this is not the case. Though the correlation is still positive, I see the correlation lose strength from 1995 to 1996, jumping from 0.80 in 1994 to 0.57 in 1995 and 0.14 in 1996. Following these years, this relationship regained its strength, though its drop in these two years remains statistically significant. The significant drop in the number of album artists in the popular music market from 1994 to 1996 could be attributed to a number of reasons changing tastes, a higher concentration of successful artists, etc. though this will be revisited later. Nevertheless, the first impression I get from looking at my data is that the rap music market is growing on both the popular music and hip-hop culture front. The next point of analysis will focus on the composition of the popular and hip-hop charts, particularly on the artists, songs, and albums that are present on both charts. This data set is significant because it represents a population of cultural commodities that appeal to popular and hip-hop tastes if the number of entries on both charts increases over time, this may represent similarities in

37

taste or an overall reduction of cultural producers. This is certainly the case regarding rap albums, as time goes on, the number of charted albums that make both charts increases (r = 0.85). The correlations for each individual year (hiphop ranking vs. popular ranking) have positive, moderate-to-strong correlations (0.43 < r < 0.75). There are four weak outliers in this sample; the years 1990, 1992, 1995, and 1996 featured correlations of r = 0.29, 0.17, 0.23, and 0.02, respectively. The weakness of the correlations suggest that the rankings for albums in these years moved independently of each other, that the most popular artists on the hip-hop chart are not necessarily the most popular artists on the popular music chart. Let me not get distracted by these low correlations after all, the albums are being recognized for their popularity on both charts, and are thus well-liked by consumers in both markets. However, these years demonstrate that artists that have significant popularity on a particular chart do not necessarily translate into top successes on the other. The singles charts show a similar trend. Before 1991, there is not enough data to consider the relationship between the two variables (n < 2). However, from 1991 to 2000, there is at least a positive moderate correlation between the rankings of hip-hop and popular rap songs (r > 0.45). Yet, I witness significant drops in the correlation in 1992 (-0.03), 1994 (0.25), and 1996 (0.34). This, along with the data looked at for the matched albums, draws attention to 1992 and 1996, with some noted turbulence starting in 1995. Learning this, I then investigated the concentration of matched songs and

38

albums per year, or the percentage of songs and albums per year that appear on both charts. As predicted, the number of songs and albums on the popular charts had a much higher concentration of matched entries than the hip-hop charts for the singles chart, this is becoming more true over time (r = 0.65). The majority of the time, over two-thirds of the popular chart is composed of songs and albums that have also charted on the hip-hop list. The same cannot be said for the hip-hop chart, which (predictably) has a larger amount of rap songs. On the albums chart, the number of albums that also chart on the popular chart ranges from 11% - 35% from 1990 to 2000; more than two-thirds of the songs on the hip-hop chart are not recognized on the popular charts. The singles chart differs quite considerably from 1990 to 1996, the number of hip-hop charted songs that also appeared on the popular list ranged between 58% and 83%. Following 1996, a strong negative correlation (r = -0.98) began to trend, lowering the number of matched singles from 83% in 1996 to 22% in 2000. Where this has been consistent all along for the albums chart, the singles chart becomes more dissimilar from the popular chart directly following 1996. There are two directions for analysis I can take from this; first, I will compare the rankings, labels, and artists for the songs and albums that made both charts to those that only charted on one list. This will assist the idea of what each chart looks like with and without songs that are universal successes, and may give additional information regarding tastes.

39

Additionally, this provides further evidence that there was a significant disruption in 1996, a date I will focus on for the remainder of this thesis. The following chapter will use a sociological production of culture perspective to sift through the history of rap music in order to determine certain contextual or industry shifts that correspond with what visualized in my data analysis. I will pay close attention to 1996, but will also look for any developments from 1986 to 2000 that may explain why the concentration of successful artists increased, and some artists began producing more albums. I will also consider reasons for why the number of songs on both charts began to drop following 1996, or why tastes began to differ between the popular and hip-hop charts in terms of singles. Because this was not the case for albums, I will try to see if there are any

Concentration of Songs Appearing on Both Charts

100% 90% 80% Percentage 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Fi gure 2 This measures concentration of the popular and hip-hop charts in terms of singles that appear on both charts. This was calculated by dividing the number of matched singles by the total number of charted rap singles per year. I notice that, following 1996, the hip-hop charts began to differentiate from the popular charts, resembled by the decreasing concentration of matched singles.
Hip-Hop Concentration Popular Concentration

40

differences in the method of these productions, or if there are any circumstances that would differentiate each groups taste for an album or single.

41

III U NDERSTANDING T HE P RODUCTION OF C ULTURE

! Introduction
This chapter aims to review the history of the rap music in order to determine specific events or trends that may have transformed the creative industry. I have seen rap music mobilize to the popular sphere looking at the

Billboard sample, I witnessed rap music gradually rise in popularity and

concentration on both the hip-hop and popular charts. My data has repeatedly pointed at the year 1996 as a turning point in the industry, with new artist concentration spiraling downwards and multiple album artists rising in the years following. By closely examining the history of rap, I can suggest certain situations or events that may have brought about some change. To do this, I will consider the Petersonian production of culture perspective, which emerged out of the classical Marxist and Weberian theories of how culture is developed. Reviewing the history of rap through the Petersonian lens introduces a sociological element I will be less concerned with the economics of the situation, but the changing social dynamics that exist within the rap industry. Understanding the evolving social networks and relationships that exist between the consumer and producer and inside the institutions will demonstrate how rap music was produced from 1986 to 2000. Changes to the social environment may suggest changing methods of production, which in turn 42

influence the development of the cultural product.

Theories of Cultural Production

Theories of cultural production date back to classic sociology, originally with the base-superstructure relationship as argued by Karl Marx. Marx argues that men enter defined relations during the process of production, and: the sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society the real foundation, on which rise legal and political superstructures and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. (Marx 1904:11) The functions and relationships that constitute the processes of production yield culture, spirituality, and what Marx calls social consciousness. (1904:11-2) Marxs view is not purely economic his emphasis on the relationships that exist within the base, which is built upon the processes of production and the social classes that engage in them, is definitely sociological. Culture is a function of economic society; translating Marxs argument to this thesis, I can assume that cultural producers define the cultural landscape. Where the processes of production in an economy define the superstructure of a society, I can assume that the processes of cultural production the artists work in producing a cultural element, the relationships cultivated as the element is marketed and distributed, and so on develop a cultural superstructure, constituting the characteristics and elements of a culture. Marxs perspective positions culture as a product of the processes of production; in 1905, Max Weber challenged this, arguing the opposite. Webers theory boils down to this: capitalism is rooted in the doctrines of 43

the Protestant work ethic. What particularly stands out to Weber is Calvinism, a school of Protestantism asserting that those destined for salvation are predetermined, or elected, and comprise of individuals that unselfishly work for the benefit of everyone. (Weber 1992:64) The elect is as unknowing of his/her fate as the damned, however any doubt or uncertainty about being part of the elect would dignify that one is not part of the elect. (1992:66) Thus, selfconfidence was often a measure of ones consideration of being part of the elect attaining this self-confidence was manifest through intense worldly activity. (1992:67) Calvinist and Protestant thought emphasize salvation brought about by hard, unselfish, worldly work, which Weber argues to be some of the roots of capitalism. Hard work and making money are the callings, the ends of the means, of a capitalist individual, not the material pleasures or benefits had from them. (1992:18-9) In this sense, the systems and processes of production are shaped by or rooted in the philosophies of the cultural environment. Related to this thesis, this would argue that the processes of cultural production are shaped by hip-hop culture. The cultural environment procures economic and social development, thus the popularization of rap music must not be due to changes within the processes of production, but rather the cultural elements that make up hip-hop culture themselves. Weber and Marxs theories are limited in the sense that they ignore the interaction between culture and cultural production claiming that one is the factor of another is too reductionist, too simple. Weber ignores the nature of

44

social relations within the production process, where Marx marginalizes the impact of the cultural context and environment. This paper will promote a more modern perspective of the production of culture, utilizing theory that complements both the cultural environment and the systems of production. For this, I will refer to Peterson and Anands The Production Of Culture Perspective. Petersons theory of cultural production fills in the blanks that Marx and Weber omit. His perspective investigates the process of cultural production, focusing on the expressive aspects of culture, rather than the social or moral values they stand for. (Peterson and Anand 2004:312) Peterson argues that cultural analysis should not be limited the origins of ones cultural upbringing or social status, rather all variables within the process of production are influential, including the organizational, occupational, network, and community structures that surround cultural producers. (2004:312) He cites six facets of cultural production, six elements that, when tweaked, can influence the entire creative industry: technology, law and regulation, industry structure, organizational structure, occupational careers, and the consumer market. (2004:313) One of the goals of this chapter is to pinpoint how and which of these facets changed throughout the history of rap music, directing attention to particular times and events that may have provided an ideological shift in the production of the music. The first two facets are relatively straightforward (technological changes bring about new capabilities in cultural communication

45

and production innovation; law and regulations shape the rules for the distribution of culture, who can and cannot serve as a cultural producer), though the next four deserve some explanation. Peterson argues that creative industries tend to be structured in three ways: There may be many small competing firms producing a diversity of products, a few vertically integrated oligarchical firms that mass produce a few standardized products, or a more open system of oligarchy composed of niche-market-targeted divisions plus many small specialty service and market development firms where the former produce the most lucrative products and the latter produce the most innovative. (2004:316) It is thus important to distinguish what kind of structure the rap music industry originally assumed, and how this has shifted over time. The consumers and producers that enter the rap music industry will help shape its structure along with technological and regulatory advances, and will continue to contribute to its ever-shifting state. It is likely that the hip-hop industry originated in a small competitive form, though assumes others as it evolves over the years. This will be investigated later in the chapter. Petersons fourth facet is organizational structure, or how the creative institutions that produce cultural systems are themselves constructed. (2004:316) Again, Peterson argues three forms: (a) the bureaucratic form with a clear-cut division of labor and a manylayered authority system committed to organizational continuity, (b) the entrepreneurial form having neither a clear-cut division of labor nor a many-layered hierarchy committed to short-term success, and (c) a variegated form of large firm that tries to take advantage of the potential flexibility of the bureaucratic form without giving up central control by acquiring creative services through short-term contracts. (2004:316) 46

The structure of record labels is a prime point of analysis when looking at organizational structure, particularly in noting how they grew and reorganized over time. Considering the assumption that the industry originated in a small competitive form, I can further guess that record labels began in the entrepreneurial, non-hierarchical form as proposed by Peterson. Technology, laws, and regulations will also play a role in developing organizational structure, and will contribute to their evolution towards the bureaucratic or variegated forms as the music popularizes. This follows the trend that larger organizations tend to exploit commerce and distribution better than smaller firms; that is, as the music becomes more popular, the number of record labels decreases as their size increases. (2004:316) This too will be investigated later. Petersons fifth facet highlights the occupational careers of cultural producers, particularly in how they interact within the creative organizational structure. (2004:317) Peterson suggests an artists career is either influence from the top down, in which social patterns create predictive institutional paths for a career, or bottom up, in which careers are competitive, chaotic and breed cultural innovation. (2004:317) Following my assertions so far, I can assume that rap artists started from the bottom up, birthed in a cultural chaos that facilitates innovation and musical freedom, and then become increasingly more subject to institutional pressures. The final facet of Petersons nexus is the creative market. The creative market is comprised of producers but shaped by consumer taste, where

47

producers try to create, market, and sell creative goods that are most popular with consumers. (2004:317-8) This introduces the idea of imitation, or how producers begin to mimic what is popular and successful in the creative market. (2004:318) Homogeneity results on the producer side, something I assume will increase as the rap music industry market grows and becomes more lucrative to enter. The goal of this chapter is to build a chronology of the rap music industry using Jeff Changs history in Cant Stop Wont Stop, complemented with references from Cheryl Keyes Rap Music and Street Consciousness. After building a comprehensive story, I will use Petersons six facets to discover certain times or events that may have contributed to a cultural shift within the industry. A shift in the process of cultural production will likely influence the lyrical content or message of rap music as the role of the rapper changes. The findings from this chapter will help orient my quantitative analysis towards particular timeframes and variables, and will allow me to apply the theory developed in Chapter 1 for a discussion on cultural transformation.

A Hip-Hop History
The rap artist, as Cornel West has indicated, is a bridge figure who combines the two potent traditions in black culture: preaching and music. The rap artist appeals to the rhetorical practices eloquently honed in African-American religious experiences and the cultural potency of black singing/musical traditions to produce an engaging hybrid. Michael Eric Dyson 3
Hip-hop did not always feature lyrical rappers; however, it is argued that
3

Dyson, Michael Eric. 2004. The Culture of Hip-Hop. Pp. 401-410 in The Michael Eric Dyson Reader. Cambridge, MA: Basic Civitas Books.!

48

lyrics propelled the explosion of hip-hops popularity. Raps lyrical history can date back to institutionalized slavery, where rhyming and spoken poetic word was used in storytelling, in conveying recognition of self-worth or personal attributes. (Keyes 2004:22) The techniques of intonation, humorous storytelling, and poetic rhyming date back to the 1800s, though it still lives on in raps earliest MCs. (Keyes 2004:25) The impression of the rapper as a social and cultural messenger motivates this study, prompting my investigation of the variables that have transformed the rappers role. The rapper is embedded within social and cultural environments that contribute to this role, though when viewing culture from an industry perspective, I must first consider these Petersonian factors.

Technology
Hip-hop originated in Jamaica. Dub reggae music was huge in Kingston in the mid-1970s, and was centered on massive sound systems that organized the party around the DJ. (Chang 2005:29) When the music took flight to New York City, the block party was born an organized street gathering featuring DJs who live-mixed popular funk, dance, and reggae tracks. (2005:78) These DJs emerged after a peace treaty of gang violence, transforming violent confrontations to a symbolic, musical competition in which the best DJs won by having exceptional style, music, and a loud sound system. (2005:80) The sound system blew up the urban music scene, but turntables enabled

49

DJs to cut loops to feature the part of the music the audience loved most the breaks. (2005:112) After DJs like Grandmaster Flash mastered the art, vocal accompaniment surfaced in the form of multiple MCs, who would stir audience energy with short rhymes and quips. (2005:113) The live style of the MC / DJ musical relationship would ride out until 1979, when Rappers Delight became the first hip-hop record ever cut, clocking in at 15 minutes long. (2005:131) The song not only cut a full, three-hour performance down to a 15-minute segment, it transported rap outside the clubs and into the hands of listeners, to consumers outside the heart of the Bronx or Harlem. (2005:132) Fast forward to the mid-1980s the already marginal DJ is again eclipsed by technology with the introduction of the drum machine. (2005:229) The drum machine and other sampling technology robbed the DJ of his duties and created the role of a record producer, shrinking the size of rap groups down to one or two people. (2005:229) The DJ suffered as hip-hop music shifted from the live performance to the record, as the emphasis was now placed on the rappers energetic lyrics over the DJs live-mixing and scratching skills. (2005:133) The EMu Emulator (1986) killed the tinny, sing-songy rap style, allowing rappers to develop the fluid, intricate rhymes that dominated the rest of the century. (2005:256) Here I observe the real birth of consumer rap, with rap music now realized as a marketable product by record executives, with millions of potential consumers and the possibility of record deals. Keyes notes that vocal hip-hop music emerged during the economic

50

constraints in inner city New York during the 70s that limited availability to instruments of popular music of the time. (Keyes 2004:44) Funding cuts to New York Citys public school musical programs reduced the number of instruments in each school, with inner city schools facing the worst of the matter. (Keyes 2004:44) Essentially, limited access to technology bred the young hip-hop generation to utilize their lyrics, their raps, and their rhymes as instruments. Print media and the radio were massive popularity catapults for the industry. In the early 80s, radio shows such as Chuck Ds Super Spectrum Rap Show (1982) appealed to a variety of demographics, extended audience reach, and often promoted local artists to success. (Chang 2005:237) In 1988, hip-hop news publication The Source was born, compiling lists of hot rap songs and artists, while becoming the magazine for hip-hop music, culture, and politics. (2005:413) By 1991, The Source had a circulation of over 40,000, and would take in over a million dollars in revenue by the turn of the millennium, the circulation reached 500,000 readers, pulling in $30 million while outselling even

Rolling Stone. (2005:415) Both forms of media hold testament to the rising
popularity of rap music the radio certainly introduced rap music to wider demographics, where magazines such as The Source created a devout readership and lifestyle around hip-hop. Before the development of the Soundscan data-tracking system, Billboard and other music publications relied on industry and retail-provided numbers, often subject to bribery called payola. (2005:416) The new system counted the

51

number of sales of a record by tracking the barcode, a method that (when

Billboard switched to it) ended up propelling rap artists to the top of the charts.
(2005:416) The Soundscan system appropriately allocated praise to those in the rap game who sold the most records the first Soundscan issue on May 25, 1991 showed that rap music was hitting the top of the charts. (2005:416) Other, more recent technological innovations that Chang and Keyes have not covered are the introduction and popularization of online music stores (napster.com in 1999) and the rise of the mp3 player (late 1990s, early 2000s). There is a potential that these innovations may have enabled a more personal, decentralized source for music, thus playing into consumer preference more than what airs on the radio or is offered by ones neighborhood record store.

Laws and Regulations

Though not exactly a law or regulation, the New York gang peace treaty in 1972 was an influential measure that built an urban solidarity, eliminating the violent black-on-black crime characteristic for the era. (Chang 2005:61) Distinguishing oneself from ones crowd now relied on style, which yielded a competitive cultural environment from which b-boying, graffiti, and hip-hop took its roots. (Chang 2005:64) A similar cultural movement happened with gangsta rap on the West Coast in 1992 where, following a massive gang uprising, the urban scene focused more on cultural and urban development than a fractured gang scene. (2005:382; 2005:400)

52

Hip-hop music faced little regulation as a cultural industry, which likely contributed to its wide, diverse, and rapid expansion in the early years. If anything, the legal opposition rappers faced rooted from was urban police forces, who envisioned rap music (particularly, the gangsta rap music of the West Coast) as the cultural byproduct of dangerous inner city gangs. (2005:320; 2005:328) Gangsta rap music lambasts the urban youth versus police conflict, often telling extreme stories of young black males killing or getting killed by cops, being wrongly persecuted, and being part of dangerous, militant gangs essentially telling a narrative of the different hoods each rapper grew up in. (2005:328) The illegality and persecution of inner city gangs attacked and popularized gangsta rap, the conflict first embodied by Dr. Dre and Eazy-Es 1987 single Boyz-N-The-Hood. In 1994, the industry faced its first opposition in the form of the Tipper Gore-led Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC). (2005:393) The PMRC took issue first with the satanic nature of heavy metal music, and when their movement failed, shifted their focus to rap music. (2005:393) The PMRC successfully banned explicit rap albums such as 2 Live Crews As Nasty As They

Wanna Be and convinced local police forces to crack down on record stores that
sold explicit albums to minors. (2005:393) Though 2 Live Crew eventually won an appeal against this ban, the PMRC was able to get Parental Advisory stickers slapped on potentially obscene albums, and raised awareness to sensitive cultural groups around the nation regarding the obscenity of rap music.

53

(2005:393) Internal regulation by record companies followed this increased awareness of vulgarity in rap music after issues with cop killing and other obscene related lyrics, by 1992 major record labels (e.g. Time Warner) began closely monitoring and sometimes prohibiting the release of some of their artists songs and albums. (2005:398-9) Overall, the outcome was negative for rap artists they either left their lucrative record label deals, or allowed their music to be screened by the company. (2005:399) The 1996 Telecommunications Act significantly influenced the music industry in general, as it allowed for the deregulation of the radio business and removed radio station ownership caps, leading to humungous consolidation efforts. (2005:441) The major players in the radio business (Clear Channel, Cumulus, Citadel, and Viacom) quickly dominated the airwaves, introducing a bureaucracy that standardized radio playlists, cut DJs, and ultimately transformed a local industry into a nationwide phenomenon. (2005:442) Independent, new, and local artists suffered from the legislation, often not making it into radio station rotation circuits, and the role of the radio DJ shifted from tastemaker to corporate dummy. (2005:443) The radio was no longer a discovery source, but instead an engine to flame the hits that had already made it or were approved by the corporate structure.

Industry Structure

54

To investigate the structure of rap music as a creative industry, it is simplest to look at the organization of rap artists and their affiliations with record labels. Hip-hops origination as an urban, independent movement situates its early years in the small, competing firms form. Chang describes the environment after the first recorded rap single success in 1979: Indie labels invested in researching and developing how to make hip-hop music, specifically rap, fit the standards of the music industry, how to rationalize and exploit the new product how to find, capture, package, and sell its essence like a bottle of lightning. (Chang 2005:134) In the early 80s, artists signed with white independent labels like Tommy Boy, Profile, and Sleeping Bag. (2005:184) This was a change from the turn of the decade, when popular acts such as Afrika Bambaataa and Kurtis Blow signed with black independent labels the biggest difference between the two was not in the racial ownership of the labels, but the motivated by money attitude. (2005:132; 2005:184) The shift in record label affiliation did not necessarily compromise the innovation of the musical environment the labels were still small and independent, organized around the artists product and in a setting where an industry standard had yet to be established yet this was the first time hip-hop music was brought to market. (2005:183; 2005:194) Rap music became integrated in wildly popular hip-hop movies, clothing styles, and tour performances, transforming what originally was an urban movement to a global sensation. (2005:194) The economic success of the hip-hop industry did not

55

sacrifice the artistic integrity or innovativeness of rappers, likely because of the independence of the labels and the rappers preeminence within them. Even as Def Jam went major by signing a deal with Columbia Records, the rap game stayed ever-changing and diverse. (2005:204) This may be a product of the fact that the rap industry was not necessarily a cohesive unit. Though New York City generated the majority of the early talent in the game, a very similar hip-hop development was sprouting up on the West Coast, particularly in inner city Los Angeles. The two environments were quite similar, rising out of conflicts with authority, brought to light after a breakthrough success (Rappers Delight in NYC, Boyz-N-The-Hood in LA), dominated by the urban youth, and eventually attracting attention from record labels once its potential was realized. (2005:301-3; 2005:316-7) Nevertheless, the two products were distinctly different in their style and aggressiveness, the West Coast product skipped the dance rhythms and shot straight for the hard hitting drum beats constructed by producers such as Dr. Dre. (2005:318) As rap music popularized over the years, independent record labels were pushed out or bought out. Up until 1996, the indie labels founded by the likes of Eazy-E and Master P were dominating the rap music market overalls, the indie labels owned more of a market share than the major labels. (2005:444) This, along with some of the indie labels financial collapse, prompted the major labels to go on a massive purchasing spree of their smaller competitors. (2005:444) To compensate for these large purchases, the major labels invested in

56

the sort of blockbuster-or-bust mentality gambling big bets on fewer artists for huge payoffs departing from the old phenomena of low investment, big profit luck. (2005:445)

Organizational Structure
Changing laws, regulations, and industry structure contributed to an evolution in the organizational structure of the institutions that constitute the rap music market. As rap music popularizes, I can anticipate growing institutionalization, demonstrated by increased concentration of major labels in the market and the deregulation of broadcast radio. The combination of the 1996 Telecommunications Act and the reaction to 1995-1996s peak market share by independent labels must have introduced a new level of institutionalization within the industry. Previous to this, I can assume that localized radio stations and a considerable portion of the recording industry (represented by independent and small labels) took what Peterson calls a small entrepreneurial form, which promotes new, innovative, and short term successes. (Peterson 2004:316) The domination of broadcast media by the likes of five corporations after the deregulation of radio in 1996 transformed radio to Petersons bureaucratic form, market by multiple layers of authority and hierarchies that aim to economize the process of production. (Peterson 2004:316) The laying off of localized DJs and the incorporation of multiregional (sometimes national) radio shows replaced the decentralized, innovative aspects of the industry with a

57

bureaucratic economic machine focused on perpetuating business, hence suggesting that the content of radio may be subject to the tastes of few members of the corporation rather than the tastes of local DJs. By looking at the Billboard charts, I will be able to observe whether or not this increased level of bureaucracy had an immediate or gradual effect on the number of local, independent labels that received airtime after the passing of this legislation and the bureaucratization of radio broadcast. The shift from independent to major labels may be less significant than the bureaucratization of radio. Though major labels went on a shopping spree of independent labels after they lost their domination of the industry market share in 1996, the independence of production was preserved by the introduction of imprint labels. Dowd visits this phenomenon, noting that the major record firms turned to decentralized production in the form of subsidiary and imprint labels, which shifted responsibilities of only a few A&R (artists and repertoire) executives within the firm to a diverse fleet of executives within the numerous sub-labels and genres owned by the firm. (Dowd 2004:1420) The imprint and sub-label eliminates the competition between major firms and independents; effectively, a major record label can employ its imprints to focus on procuring talent in particular industries, specializing in avenues that were originally too specific for a major label. In Petersonian terms, this assumes the variegated approach, where the firm reaps economic benefits by acting as an umbrella organization and outsourcing creative services to the smaller, more innovative

58

imprint and sub-labels. The combination of the deregulation of the radio and the shift towards a variegated organizational form may weed out independent labels from the rap music market, but because of this organizational form, the diversity and innovativeness of the cultural product may not be affected.

Occupational Careers
The occupational career of rap groups changed as technological developments weeded out the need for DJs and large, live-performance based groups, as explained earlier. The rapper came to rely less and less on live performances after the success of Rappers Delight in 1979, with the main source of revenue and success coming from record deals, off-shoot products (i.e. clothing lines), and endorsements. (Chang 2005:418) By the early 90s, the rap group was becoming abandoned, with artists opting to pursue solo endeavors or small two or three person acts (e.g. Outkast, Salt-N-Pepa). Technology changed the occupational career for hip-hop artists as the importance of the live performance died out with new sampling and drum machines, the role of the DJ was marginalized and eventually transformed into that of the record producer, whos role was more of a behind-the-scenes support function than that of the main appeal, the rap artist. Referring back to Petersons terminology, I can suggest that rap artists started their careers in the bottom up mentality that is, few institutional constraints limited their innovativeness, and artists could generally determine

59

what type of music they wanted to make. With the popularization of rap music came institutional pressures and increased involvement of broadcast media and record labels, thus proposing a shift towards a top down kind of occupational career. This will be compounded by a gradual shift from independent to major labels and firms, which bring with them further bureaucracy and an expected limitation of cultural innovation. Additionally, as I see this cultural industry take its shape, I can hypothesize that it assumes a shape similar to one posited by Sherwin Rosen in The Economics of Superstars. Rosen investigates the idea that in developed cultural industries, the distribution of rewards is heavily skewed towards the benefit of very few talented superstars. (Rosen 1981:856) He thinks consumers are economically rational in the sense that they seek out the highest quality of cultural product that they are willing to pay for, and that there exists a utility function between price paid for cultural goods and the quality of the artists. (1981:848) This not only explains why superstars can command higher prices for tickets and albums than inferior artists it also demonstrates that consumers will evaluate their cultural purchases in terms of quality and price, suggesting that they will choose the highest quality product without sacrificing too much money. Considering the fact that listening to the radio is free, that album prices are relatively equivalent despite levels of talent, it is likely that cultural consumers will opt to purchase the highest quality product at their convenience. Because these superstars possess more talent (even at the most marginal of

60

levels), the entire industry will be dominated by the successes of very few. In this sense, I should expect that as the industry grows, it should feature fewer artists with higher percentages of singles and albums sold. I will measure this by looking at how the distribution of album and singles artists shifts over time.

Market
This paper studies rap music as a creative industry that has a market of consumers and cultural producers. From analyzing charted Billboard artists, albums, and singles, I will be able to construct an image of both the popular and popular hip-hop music markets. I can anticipate that as rap music gains popularity, the creative market surrounding it will become inundated with consumers and producers. Though this paper is also concerned with the consumption of rap music as a cultural product, looking at how rap music is produced will contribute to the understanding of how it is consumed, particularly about how, what, and who consumers choose. The popularization of rap music will certainly yield an expansion of the rap music market, thus I can expect that the numbers of songs and albums on the popular music and hip-hop music charts reflect its popularity in the general population and in hip-hop culture. The influx of rap music on the popular and hip-hop music charts will also denote a transformation in the tastes of its consumers; referring back to Chapter 1, I can assume that the cultural products one purchases, one incorporates into his/her cultural identity or uses as a form of

61

cultural currency. When looking at these songs and albums as cultural elements, the market for rap music begins to reflect the tastes of its consumers. The charted songs, albums, and artists will then be considered as the prominent and popular elements within popular and hip-hop culture the characteristics of these elements will provide insight into how both cultures have evolved and transformed in coordination with the popularization of the music.

Effects on the Industry

I see two major developments in 1996 in the deregulation of the radio and the purchase of independent labels by major recording firms. Thus far, I have noted how the industry structure and organizational form of cultural institutions has responded to these events and legislation, though it would be interesting to see how the other three facets were affected by these two shifts. I can assume that 1996, the Telecommunications Act and the independent label buy-outs simultaneously constrained and helped the rap music industry evolve. I have seen how organizational form and industry structure can shift with a change in one or the other, and (in the case of radio deregulation), how both of these can evolve in response to a significant form of legislation. Rossmans article offers evidence of technological developments that followed the Telecommunications Act. The monopolization by major media firms instituted an effort to economize radio distribution. To cut costs, radio firms adopted voice tracking technology, which enabled radio personalities to prerecord a famous, syndicated announcers show and then broadcast it 62

nationwide. (Rossman 2012) Doing this made general, nationwide shows seem local and personal, and eventually eliminated the need for local DJs and personalities. Eliminating the local talent centralized the decision making processes for what made it to air essentially, the music chosen for each radio show was no longer up to the DJ, but individuals employed by the behemoth corporation itself. (Rossman 2012) The music aired on the radio thus became standardized and resistant to cultural innovation, taking a production route not conducive to small entrepreneurial evolutions, but rather an economically driven bureaucratic model. Though voice tracking technology was a response to legislation that led to the monopolization of radio broadcast, it perpetuated the systems of standardization that are incorporated by a bureaucratic organizational model by centralizing the modes of production. Considering Rossman and Changs discussion together, I can get an idea of how the occupational careers of these cultural producers has changed. The most obvious example provided by Rossman was visited above new technology and increased bureaucratization eliminated the need for local radio announcers, removing the occupational career in its entirety. This had an indirect effect on the occupational careers of rap artists, as the role of a significant cultural gatekeeper was no longer existent. Peterson would consider this an indirect shift from a bottom-up to a top-down career. (Peterson and Anand 2005:316) At first careers were diverse and chaotic, with local radio stations playing nonstandardized playlists, giving a diverse array of artists a chance at receiving

63

airplay; after bureaucratization, these standardized, corporatized radio stations rewarded artists that followed a particular success formula. (Peterson and Anand 2005:317) This said, this should only reflect a change in the occupational careers of cultural producers in terms of broadcast media what needs to be determined is the role of the radio at disseminating taste, or if the music on the radio reflects what is generally successful or popular. The institutional shift brought on by the independent label buyouts should have less of an impact on the occupational careers of cultural producers because the diversity of the organizational field did not transform that significantly. Though the number of independent, small labels dropped significantly, the usage of imprint and subsidiary labels kept a level of chaos and innovation due to decentralized production and the plethora of small imprint firms. The sixth and final facet of Petersons nexus is the creative market. The creative market should be influenced by all of the above factors the limitation of new artist entry and cultural innovation due to the deregulation of radio should raise the disparity between those who are successful and those who are not, something Rossman quotes Rosen as being called the superstar effect. (Rossman 2012) The standardization of playlists will reward those who make it into the playlist rotation, while excluding those who have not, essentially making the rich richer and the poor poorer. The variegated form assumed by record labels was likely insignificant for the market, as innovation and diversity

64

were maintained. Though the major label firms at the top of the economic hierarchy began to reap more capital benefits, the cultural elements of the industry were essentially maintained despite the independent label buyouts. I see how other cultural production processes were influenced by the shifts in the industry structure and organizational form due to legislation. The Telecommunications Act and the independent label buyout should simultaneously be constraining and augmenting cultural innovation because of this, I will need to determine how record labels interact with the radio regarding the dissemination of a cultural product. If the evidence points further in one direction than the other (that is, if I see cultural innovation is restrained by institutionalization rather than facilitated), this may not suggest that one of these events is more significant. Understanding how (or if) these two institutions interact will explain whether or not these processes affect each other. The next chapter will focus on explaining and understanding the sociological interactions in the processes of production, particularly between the record label and broadcast media. The Petersonian perspective has given a framework to look at the processes behind the production of rap music, suggesting certain turning points in its history that may have spurred an evolution or transformation of the cultural product. Looking through this lens will focus this research on two phenomena that may have changed the cultural landscape of hip-hop: the reaction to the independent label peak market share in 1996, and how imprint

65

and sub-labels prevented industry stagnation after the major label buy-outs; and the concentration of rap music due to the passing of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and how bureaucratization has limited the number of successes after the corporate monopolization. Looking at these dates will offer a better idea of how the rap music market functions and how it has evolved, providing evidence and material for my thesis that rap music, as a cultural element, has become commodified as it enters the popular sphere. Chapters 4 and 5 will support this claim with data from the Billboard popular charts, and will attempt to build an image of the popular and rap music markets.

66

IV E XPLORING R AP S I NSTITUTIONALIZATION
!

Introduction
This chapter will focus on understanding the relationships and processes that produce cultural products. The first two chapters of this thesis developed theory about the cultural development and the circulation of cultural commodities, where the third referred to certain historical elements that may have disrupted or evolved the processes of production. This chapter will investigate how individuals interact to produce a cultural product, how these individuals interact within the industrys institutions, and how these institutions organize and make decisions. The social relations that surround cultural production are sure to influence its dissemination and consumption after all, rap music comes through many people and institutions before the consumer holds an album in his/her hands or hears a song on the radio. I will explore these interactions and suggest potential shifts that may have transformed the processes of production.

Social Construction of Culture

To begin the discussion on the production of rap music, I will refer to the sociology of technology. Pinch and Bijker propose the social construction of technology perspective (SCOT) as an explanation for technological innovation

67

and evolution, investigating the social relationships surrounding a technological artifact. I feel the arguments made for technological innovations may be relevant to my understanding of cultural innovation thus I will try to consider Pinch and Bijkers theory from a cultural lens. The SCOT perspective is slightly Darwinist, suggesting that the development of the artifact is subject to a multidirectional model of variation and selection. (Pinch and Bijker 1984:28) During the artifacts development, the social groups that interact with and use the artifact give it meanings and define problems; these relevant social groups include institutions and organizations, organized and unorganized groups of people, all centered on one particular criteria they all share a single meaning for the artifact. (Pinch and Bijker 1984:30) The development of the artifact responds to these problems, creating solutions that appeal to these relevant social groups. In its development, the artifact is first interpreted and designed in reaction to these problems, and then stabilizes once these problems disappear, or if the original problems are redefined. (1984:40-4) The diversity of relevant social groups and the internal conflicts within them results in a number of technical, moral, and competing solutions - considering this, the artifact can transform technologically but also morally, the artifact or its surrounding context and environment can transform. (1984:36-9) These conflicts, and the way these social groups respond to them, result in an early diversity of the product that transforms as a universally acceptable incarnation of the artifact takes shape. This development of a technological artifact is relevant to how cultural

68

products develop. I can assume that a song undergoes the same social processes as an artifact there exist a network of relevant social groups that come together to produce, market, and consume a cultural product. Like Pinch and Bijker suggest, these social groups and institutions regulate the innovation and development of these products. It helps to consider rap music as a cultural artifact its production and design is contingent upon interactions with individuals in the form of consumers, producers, and critics. Additionally, the social systems and institutions the cultural artifact exists within not limited to record labels, radio stations, and regulatory entities play a role in facilitating and managing these interactions between the producer, consumer, and critic, while also constituting their own relevant social group. Each of these social groups may present their own problems, and I can expect the producer and the cultural product to react and respond to these issues. Thinking of rap music as a cultural product, I can assume that it responds to these social conflicts and problems in its search for popularity aside from issues of morality, the cultural product manages conflicting tastes and standards. As it popularizes, I can anticipate that rap music diversifies in response to the large number of social problems it faces. Popularization of the music may be an indicator of the solution of these social problems, and hence may result in a more homogenous, singular product. Pinch and Bijker argue that after these social groups are defined, systems of power and importance arise among these groups, typically benefitting those

69

with the most economic capital. (1984:30) The weight of these individuals and institutions is evidenced in the solution of these products, as their issues and solutions take precedence to other conflicts, and the cultural product assumes a shape more relevant to these groups than others. Thinking along these lines, I can start to imagine possibilities for the popularization of rap music. As the product becomes more culturally visible, more popular, certainly the diversity and number of relevant social groups rises. The sample studied for this thesis may not be the best representation of this issue, considering it studies music having already entered the popular sphere. Music appearing on the Billboard charts has already reached a significant level of popularity, and has likely gone through a number of socially constructed form cycles before its visibility on the popular charts. For rap music specifically, the path taken to reach the popular charts must have included the introduction of a number of previously irrelevant social groups and institutions, including a new group of record labels, critics, and consumers. The relevance of these social groups must have had an affect on the cultural product, as their tastes and conflicts were now added into the equation. Referring back to Pinch and Bijkers point about the weight of interests, I may suggest that the introduction of a wider consumer base and more powerful record labels could have disrupted the entire industry landscape potentially, the economic power of these social groups may have taken precedence in the design and content of rap music, and the solution, the homogenous product I anticipate from these processes of product development may align more with the

70

interests and morality of these social groups rather than the original relevant social groups. Though my data sample is limited to what is available on the popular charts, I can still monitor these processes as the popularity of rap music progresses, as it evolves from something that appeared on popular charts to something that dominated popular culture. The focal points I gathered from Petersons framework may aid this analysis and discussion, as they can demonstrate a re-concentration of relevant social groups. The deregulation of radio and the purchase of independent record labels will certainly introduce different relevant social groups; however, in this case, these social groups possess significant established economic and social power. Adding these media monopolies and major labels into the production equation may disrupt the current product, as their conflicts and issues may begin to dominate the problems posited by the other social groups surrounding rap music. Using the social construction of technology perspective or in this circumstance, the social construction of cultural production I hypothesize that the introduction of these extremely powerful relevant social groups will redefine the systems of power within the processes of cultural production, and thus affect the product itself. As rap music enters a period of institutionalization via radio deregulation and label concentration, I can anticipate that the problems and conflicts faced by less significant social groups will become less relevant. Because of this, rap music will stabilize and adopt a more homogenous form that appeals to the interests of

71

these dominating groups. In Chapter 2, I observed this through the increasing number of multiple album artists, and how the rap music market mobilized in response to its growing popularity. Incorporating consumer taste into this equation (via song and album rankings), I found that even though the market became more concentrated, reflections of success and popularity were not affected by the concentration of previously successful artists. Though fewer new artists entered the market (relative to previously successful artists), some still found ways to be successful that is, new artists were not limited from become significant competitors within the cultural market. What the SCOT perspective proposes, and what I will investigate for the remainder of this thesis, is that institutionalization and the redefinition of relevant social groups can transform the processes of production and, consequentially, the cultural product itself. Introducing media monopolies and bureaucratic record labels may explain the presence of previously successful artists; thus, it would be productive to try and understand how these organizations host and interact with the processes of production. The remainder of this chapter will focus on how cultural products are produced, and how institutionalization affects them. Understanding this will help explain how rap music was affected by the shift in institutional concentration, which will be presented in data analysis in chapter 5.

Cultural Productions and Institutions

So far, I have considered rap music as a cultural artifact, an element affected by the interaction of a diverse array of relevant social groups. From this 72

perspective, I cannot ignore the immense role institutions play in these interactions. Petersons framework highlights record labels and broadcast media as two institutions through which rap music is disseminated and circulated; it is important that I understand how cultural commodities interact and are produced within these institutions in order to postulate why increased institutionalization changed the industry landscape. DiMaggio develops his theory of institutional isomorphism in The Iron Cage Revisited, a perspective that contributes to my understanding of institutions within a cultural field. He argues that the interactions of organizations structure an institutional field, in which systems of hierarchy and common enterprise emerge. (DiMaggio 1983:148) As this field takes shape, these organizations homogenize and resemble one another. (DiMaggio 1983:148) Organizational innovation helps drive performance as the field takes shape, but as the field becomes structured, the aggregate effect of individual change is to lessen the extent of diversity within the field. (DiMaggio 1983:149) DiMaggio is asserting that organizations within an institutional field begin to assume similar (if not identical) shapes as the field develops, via the systems of hierarchy and common enterprise that emerge through their relationships. Understanding this, I can assume that the organizational forms of the institutions reviewed for this thesis begin to homogenize as the cultural field takes shape that is, as record labels and media corporations get involved in raps cultural field, the form of these institutions will begin to resemble one another.

73

Hirsch studies the role of organizations in creative industries in Processing Fads and Fashions, elaborating on how these institutions decide on what creative material these industries decide to market and release to the public, and how these decisions are constrained by society. Hirsch considers record labels to be the managerial actors within the cultural network, as they select the cultural products for sponsorship and production. (Hirsch 1972:644) The creative market is extremely uncertain, the success of a cultural product is often arbitrary, though these institutions need to invest exorbitant marketing and production sums to guarantee that at least some of the songs and albums they produce become major, profitable hits. (Hirsch 1972:647) Hirsch recognizes that to combat this uncertainty, producers rely on existing consumer tastes (demonstrated by sales figures, airplay) in determining what may be successful and even once this is determined, broadcast media acts as the ultimate gatekeeper of what gets presented to the public. (Hirsch 1972:649) Hirschs thesis is to investigate the roles that lead up to the mass media gatekeeper, the interactions that help decide what gets filtered in and out of the record label repertoire. He discusses the role of the contact men, individuals that span the boundary between the institution and the artist community. (Hirsch 1972:650) These contact men function as talent agents, promoters, and advertisers, filtering out the majority of potential cultural products; the institutions reliance on these individuals is predicated on the validation of these cultural successes, thus the careers of these contact men are determined by the actualization of

74

their predicted successes. (Hirsch 1972:651) Record labels maintain surrogate consumers in mass media channels who further filter out this content, enabling these institutions to present material that has been double-checked for tastes that assimilate with the broadcasting institution and the general production, thus allowing the record label to further focus their spend on certain cultural products. (Hirsh 1972:651-2) From this, I can gather that production institutions employ personnel to span the boundaries between the institution, consumers, and the media. This slightly clarifies my understanding of the record label; I can now suggest that the uncertainty of the industry affects these institutions, and that their decisionmaking processes are focused on conforming to institutional conventions as well as consumer tastes. The usage of these boundary men creates a reliance on the individual tastes and reputations of these individuals, as well as an adherence to the conventions of the institution they represent. In this, I can refer to Beckers Art As Collective Action, where he argues that a cultural production is a collaboration between producers and support personnel who conform to creative conventions. (Becker 1974:768) These conventions exist for the technology and artistic standards that encompass the cultural product; for example, artists are limited by the scales and materials available to them, as well as the genres in which they produce their product. (Becker 1974:771) Cultural producers will have difficulty marketing products that depart these conventions, and will have difficulty finding personnel to support their productions if they cannot be

75

confined to existing technologies or processes. Essentially, conventions enable the interaction between support personnel and artists, which facilitates the distribution and marketing of their cultural goods. Because success is contingent on this, adherence to conventions is key for artists seeking economic reward for their product. Thus, referring back to Hirsch, the reliance on the conventions of boundary men and their representative institution becomes a crucial part of the cultural filtering process. I can assume that conventions become more homogenous and established as the diversity of institutions compresses, that records labels become more reliant on genre definitions and previous successes when considering whether or not to push an artist or album. Considering the deregulation of radio, which spawned the birth of few media monopolies, I can estimate that the conventional relationship between record labels and the broadcasting firms (facilitated by boundary men) were at their strongest, relying on a particular, defined criteria. In sum, I can assume that institutionalization bred conventionalism, which in turn limited cultural diversity by enforcing a stricter criteria of the cultural gatekeepers. This discussion also asserts that the relationship between the record label and mass media is largely dictated by the conventions of the mass media firm, that despite the repertoire of the record label, the media firm will determine what passes through to the consumer that, in fact, broadcast media is the cultural gatekeeper, not the record label. The rest of this chapter will study how increased institutionalization may affect

76

broadcast and record firms.

Institutionalization and Creative Industries

Hirsch and Becker gave an idea of how social relations exist in the production of cultural goods, including about how media industries and cultural gatekeepers interact. My historical review of the hip-hop industry revealed two significant events in 1996, the deregulation of broadcast radio and the purchase of independent labels by major record firms. These institutional shifts shuffled the landscape of the industry, and this section aims to understand the organizational and social transformations that occurred. Timothy Dowd studies concentration and diversity within the music industry from 1940 to 1990, though the topics of organizational structure he discusses are certainly relevant for the later part of the 90s. Dowd argues what I have been heralding thus far concentration squelches diversity though he focuses more on the locus of production than concentration itself. Higher concentration of firms may not necessarily limit cultural diversity and innovation if the processes of production are decentralized, in fact, diversity and innovation may increase. (Dowd 2004:1413) If I remember what Peterson and Anand argued about industry structure, this adds an interesting element to the equation. Though the industry is concentrated with major firms, their variegated, decentralized model refuses to constrict cultural innovation. These major firms decentralized production by using imprint and subsidiary labels, reducing the hierarchies and bureaucracies involved in the major label decision77

making processes to a small firm level. (Dowd 2004:1420) This allowed each imprint to operate on their own, to hold their own diverse array of talent, to allocate more time and energy to their talent (especially important in terms of marketing and production), and to devote more resources towards discovering new creative trends and talent. (Dowd 2004:1421) The institutionalization of record labels increased industry concentration but facilitated diversity via decentralized production; yet, this cultural diversity is only significant if I understand the organizational model of the institutionalized radio industry. Gabriel Rossmans book Climbing the Charts investigates the diffusion of innovation in regards to the deregulation of the radio industry. Rossman refers to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, writing that in the following four years, Clear Channel moved from owning 40 stations to over 1,000 and the HerfindahlHirschman Index (measure of concentration, where the higher number reflects higher revenue concentration) moved from 81 in 1993 to 1,046 in 2004. (Rossman 2012) Following the act, telecommunications firms economized by relying on voice-tracking technology that eliminated the need for local DJs they could broadcast a famous, national DJ while still appealing to local needs and tastes, they could have syndication with all the benefits of maintaining locality. (Rossman 2012) Additionally, Rossman suggests that these firms began centralizing the programming of radio shows, that the playlists and songs that make it onto the air are determined in a centralized decision-making process. (Rossman 2012) Rossman proceeds to investigate this with analysis, and agrees

78

that the similarity of aired singles suggests a centralized decision-making process, but the evidence supports some other cause. (Rossman 2012) Rossman blames payola, a system of bribery and persuasion that trades drugs, sex, and money for song airplay, citing cyclical examples of increased concentration around noted payola scandals. (Rossman 2012) Not to detract from Rossmans argument (which I find compelling and well-supported), but this paper will reinvestigate the issue of airplay concentration in the four years following the Telecommunications Act. According to Rossmans history, the closest payola cycle struck its peak in 2001 thus, any earlier changes regarding airwave concentration may not be subject to payola, but rather as reactions to the increasing bureaucracy of radio. Shifts in the airplay concentration, in new artist entries, should not be a factor of payola scandals, but of the bureaucratic constraints as referred to by Peterson and Hirsch. My next point of analysis will be aimed at measuring cultural innovation and diversity in rap music as a response to institutionalization, looking at how the labels on the Billboard singles, albums, and airplay charts transformed.

Methodology 4
Like my analysis in chapter 2, this study builds a historical sample from year-end issues of Billboard magazine. The first part of this analysis will focus on the concentration of labels in the hip-hop and popular albums charts. Each

Please refer to the Appendix for information on how to find the data for this thesis.

! 79

album was categorized into one of the following label types: independent (1), independent with distribution deal (2), or imprint, subsidiary, or major label (3). A label remained under the independent or independent with distribution deal heading until a major label owned more than a 50% stake in the label if more than 50% was owned by a major label, the label was then considered an imprint or major label-owned entity. I then organized each year by label type, recording the number of independent, independent with distribution deals, and imprint / major labels over time, enabling me to tally label concentration for each year. I eventually converged the independent and independent with distribution deal categories considering the fact that the labels decision-making processes were likely not influenced by the distributor, and the processes of production remained largely independent. Aside from concentration, I also compared label type to the ranking of the song, thinking that songs belonging to major labels would have higher rankings relative to independent labels, and that this relationship would become more disparate as institutionalism sets in. After studying label concentration, I investigated how institutionalism affected the airwaves by comparing singles sales versus airplay. My sales and airplay analysis studied new artist versus old artist concentration, label concentration, and average ranking per label type. Additionally, I monitored average rankings and label types for songs that appeared on the sales and airplay charts, as well as the concentration of these songs over time. The statistical analysis relied on correlational analysis between year and the

80

variable studied.

Findings
The first institutional variable I looked at was the concentration of album labels over time. The year-end hip-hop and popular album charts featured the label affiliation for each charted album, including information on distribution deals. The number of albums that appeared on the hip-hop charts is much larger than the number that appeared on the popular charts, though I witness strong positive correlations between year and number of albums for both the hip-hop (r = 0.86) and popular charts (r = 0.73). Additionally, I witness the market share concentration of imprint and major labels experience a similar strong positive correlation for both the hip-hop (r = 0.88) and popular (r = 0.72) charts. These

90% 80% 70% 60% Percentage 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Major Label Concentration on Album Charts

Popular Albums Hip-Hop Albums

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Fi gure 3 My data suggests that major labels constitute a higher percentage of albums on the popular and hip-hop charts over time. Following 1996, the concentration for both charts followed relatively strong positive correlations.

81

correlations predict that as time goes on, the number of albums on each chart will increase, as will the concentration of major labels within the hip-hop album market. To further support this, there exist strong positive correlations between the number of albums on each chart and the concentration of imprint and major labels (r = 0.84, r = 0.77). This trend is even stronger when I condense the parameters to represent this trend of institutionalization from 1995 to 2000, the concentration of imprint and major labels on the hip-hop chart jumped from 46% to 80% (r = 0.87), on the popular chart it jumped from 45% to 76% (r = 0.92). This data represents what the history of the hip-hop industry suggested, that the industry quickly became dominated by major and imprint labels in the late 1990s. Knowing this, I observed how this increased major label concentration affected cultural innovation and diversity, measured by the concentration of new artists on each chart. Relating imprint / major label concentration to new artist concentration, I witness moderate negative correlations on the hip-hop (r = -0.56) and popular charts (r = -0.60) over time. Condensing this to the institutional timeframe, the correlation is made slightly strong, jumping to r = -0.62 for the popular charts and to r = -0.77 for the hip-hop charts. This predicts that as the concentration of major and imprint labels increases, the concentration of new artists on each chart will fall, in some cases more gradually than others. This does not predict that the number of new artists falls with a higher major label concentration; from 1995 to 2000, the correlations between the number of new

82

100% 90% Percentage of New Artists 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

New Artist Concentration on Album Charts

Popular Albums Hip-Hop Albums

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Fi gure 4 In relation to Figure 3, my data suggests that as time goes on and major label concentration increases, the number of new artists relative to the number of previously successful artists decreases.

artists and major label concentration are r = -0.37, 0.14 for the hip-hop and popular charts, respectively. This shows that the number of new artists is not necessarily affected by the presence of more major labels rather, the number of old artists is increasing more and at a faster rate than the number of new artists. In terms of album success, I measured the average ranking per label type over time. Regardless of the time parameters, I do not see any significant correlations between the average ranking per label type and the concentration of major labels, suggesting that the ranking for an album is arbitrary in terms of label affiliation, even after the institutional period following 1996. However, noting the rise of multiple album artists, I investigated what distinguished artists that released multiple albums versus only one album. I separated album artists into groups determined by the number of albums they released, starting

83

at one and ending at five or more. By averaging the rankings for each consecutive album, I learned that the number of albums an artist releases is predicted by the rankings of his/her first two albums. For albums that appear exclusively on the hip-hop chart, artists that release five or more albums have higher average rankings for all of their albums relative to those that release four albums, three albums, and so on. For albums that appeared on both charts (there were not enough albums that charted exclusively on the popular charts to study this), this was mostly the case, but my findings were a bit complicated considering that there were only four artists that released more than four albums. That said, these four artists demonstrated exactly what I saw on the hip-hop charts each album they produced had a higher relative ranking to those that charted three albums, et cetera. The next analysis I performed focused on songs on the Billboard sales and airplay charts. This gives insight into what is aired on the radio versus what people purchase and listen to at home I will investigate how the period of institutionalization affected songs on each chart. First, I looked at how labels were concentrated on each chart immediately, I witness a significantly large disparity between the two. For the airplay charts, I see the concentration of major and imprint labels jump from 43% in 1996 to 83% in 1997, where it gradually climbed to 94% in 2001 (from 1996 to 2001, r = 0.79). Relatively, looking at the sales charts in the same time period, the concentration of major labels tends to fluctuate randomly, assuming a correlation of r = 0.32. This is

84

significant in the sense that I witness how major labels dominate the radio during this period of institutionalization, where the sales chart seems relatively unaffected. This highlights the relationship I visited earlier in this chapter, and is something I will discuss going forward. Learning this, I studied innovation and diversity in terms of new artist concentration relative to time and label concentration. From 1995 to 2001, I witness inverse correlations for the two charts of moderate strength for the airplay chart, there is a negative relationship between the concentration of new artists and time (r = -0.55), for the sales chart, the relationship is positive (r = 0.58). This is particularly interesting, as I see that the concentration of new artists on the airplay charts is declining at essentially the same pace that the sales chart is increasing. Introducing this relationship to label concentration, I

Major Label Concentration on Sales & Airplay Charts

100% 90% 80% 70% Percentage 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Fi gure 5 My data shows that following 1996, the Billboard airplay charts almost exclusively featured major label singles. This was not necessarily the case for single sales, which retained its 50/50 distribution between independents and major labels after a brief peak in 1998.
Airplay Singles Sales Singles

85

see that as the concentration of major labels increases on the airplay chart, the concentration of new artists decreases with a strong negative correlation (r = 0.71). On the other hand, the relationship between label and new artist concentration for the sales chart is insignificant (r = -0.11). Though these correlations certainly do not suggest causation, I can witness how these factors affect each other, giving empirical weight to my theoretical discussion. Looking at the rankings per label type for songs on the sales and airplay charts, I come across a phenomenon similar to what I experienced with the albums charts. Regardless of time parameters, it seems that a songs ranking is arbitrary in terms of label type, even as I near this period of institutionalization.

New Artist Concentration on Sales & Airplay Charts

90% 80% Percentage 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Fi gure 6 Considering the trend in Figure 5, my data suggests that the concentration of new artists on the airplay charts gradually declines after 1996, along with the increasing concentration of major labels.
Airplay Singles Sales Singles

1997 Year

1998

1999

2000

2001

86

Discussion
The analysis section demonstrated how the rap music market institutionalized in terms of major labels after 1996 I visualize the concentration of imprint and major labels increasing significantly for both the popular and hip-hop charts. This wave of institutionalization brought with it the rise of the multiple album artists; in the late nineties, I see artists that release multiple albums becoming commonplace, as they start to comprise a significant share of the hip-hop and popular music charts. While this initially seems to be a mark of innovation restriction, I realize that the actual number of album artists is not necessarily decreasing; rather, it maintains the same insignificant correlation it has had since the early nineties, growing slightly with random yearly fluctuations. Relatively, the number of multiple album artists begins to rise significantly after 1996, coming to make up a significant part of each chart. The usage of imprint labels demonstrates what Dowd and the prophetic Peterson say about organizational form. Peterson argues that large organizations are focused on long-term economic successes, smaller organizations on innovation and short-term success, and the variegated form on some combination of the two. (Peterson and Anand 2004:316) With Dowds information regarding the decentralization of production through imprints, I know that the rise of major labels was not merely a transition from the small to the large rather, imprint and subsidiary labels maintained the independent aspects of a smaller firm, still allowing them to innovate. The rise of these

87

multiple album artists can also be explained through this transformation. Devoted to long-term success, these major labels likely invested in demonstrated successes; my analysis shows that the number of albums an artist charts may be predicted by the height of his/her ranking. Though this is not the only explanation for this phenomenon, I may suggest that the devoted to long term economic success side of the record labels is visible here with increased major label concentration, I see more multiple album artists, who seem to be more popular and better economic investments due to their relationally high rankings. A higher concentration of major labels would lead to more multiple album artists because they prove to be more lucrative, economically rewarding investments than new artists the uncertainty of the industry rewards producers that have already been successful. The comparison between what sells and what airs on the radio is also consistent with theories of bureaucratized institutionalism and centralized organizational form. Witnessing the inverse trends of airplay and sales charts in terms of new artist concentration over time suggests that the two have very different compositions. I know that institutionalization affected both sides of the equation that record labels and broadcast radio came to be dominated by larger firms but here I observe almost opposite effects. The radio appears to be more resistant in terms of cultural innovation, where established artists dominate the field and have longer staying power relative to album sales. I may explain this by referring back to Peterson and Rossman, who discuss the

88

implications of bureaucracy in a cultural organization and industry. Petersons argument of organizational form basically argues that the bigger the organization, the more concentrated it is on perpetuating economic success, and the more likely it is to go with a tested and true product. (Peterson and Anand 2004:316) When these types of organizations dominate an industry, it tends to produce few standardized products rather than a diverse array. (Peterson and Anand 2004:316) If I consider restricted cultural diversity to be a measure of homogeneity or standardization, then I can assume this is radios case. Though not all new artists pitch an innovative or new cultural product, I can assume that a higher concentration of new artists will present a higher opportunity for innovation it seems more unlikely for old, established artists to change their formula and to be the agents of change. The correlation between label and new artist concentration on the airplay chart is particularly interesting. I observed that as major labels came to dominate the airplay market, the number of new artists fell proportionally. The increasing market share of major labels seems to be a good indicator of restricted cultural diversity on the radio, referring back to Hirschs gatekeeping theory. The gatekeeping, boundary-spanning role of contact men must have been influenced by changing industry and organizational structures (in fact, this would fit nicely in Petersons model). Without delving into the payola argument too much, I could suggest that the relationship between the record label and radio, facilitated by the contact men, was now operating in the best

89

interest of the record label. This best interest was having their most lucrative and successful artists continue to have economic success with the industry operates on the blockbuster or bust mentality, they would not mind having their rich get richer while other talent suffered at their expense. I will not go into the payola argument Rossman makes (after all, he wrote an excellent book on the topic that is certainly worth checking out if you truly are interested in this thesis), though I will summarize it as such: payola is a form of bribery used to get a particular song or artist on the radio, using drugs, sex, and money (among other things) as incentives for airplay. (Rossman 2012) What I will argue is that this bribery is facilitated by this increased institutionalization, that as these major firms come into play, their best interests are more recognized on the radio charts. Whether or not payola is the answer to this question is not necessarily important to me; rather, I see that something is happening in the record label-radio relationship that rewards major label artists with more airtime. This is exactly what I expected to get out of the social construction of culture argument the major actors in the industry essentially get to define the solutions to the cultural problem. The standardization of a product (in Petersonian terms) is a developmental process that rewards the most powerful social groups and institutions that comprise a relevant network around a cultural product. Until 1996, independent labels held weight in the power system of relevant social groups as they were absorbed by major labels, their relevance and interests were also absorbed. Under the social construction

90

perspective, I see the landscape of relevant social groups transform as the competition of major labels and independent radio stations are eliminated. Major labels and the media monopolies emerge as the two most significant social groups, thus the cultural product should develop in the best interest of solving their cultural issue. The existence of boundary gatekeepers, of contact men, links the two social groups together, and I learn that the interests of both groups may be the same. Corresponding with Petersons production of culture nexus, I know that large firms are focused on economic success by following the tried-and-true approach, which is certainly the goal of these two actors. Existing artists are ingrained in the success formulas for both actors; record labels profit from their most successful artists, where the radio will play successful artists in order to account for the uncertainty of what actually will be successful. With both organizations prioritizing economic growth or longevity, relying on what is proven to be successful is a way of combating the uncertainty of the industry. The restriction of cultural innovation would then be a byproduct of these shared goals, as neither entity would have incentive to broadcast or reward diversity. This brings me to the role of the contact man, or of cultural gatekeepers in general. If the interests of the two most powerful forces in the production of cultural products are unified, then what is the role of the cultural gatekeeper? The unification of these interests and the reliance on established successes may have eliminated the role of the contact man, as the relationship between the record label and radio itself became the cultural gatekeeper. With similar

91

production interests, I can imagine that the tastes of one closely mirrored the tastes of the other, especially considering the rise of multiple album artists. Tastes began to orient around what was already successful, rather than individual tastes of cultural gatekeepers; payola may have been a way of establishing an artist as successful, hoping that by giving air exposure to an artist, that this would translate to economic success for the record label. Though the locus of production differed between record labels and the radio, I can assume that the economic goals of the two institutions were quite similar. Witnessing the correlation between label and new artist concentration made me question the relationship between the two entities, suggesting that some factor causes radios focus on major label artists. Rossmans payola argument is sound, and may account for this phenomenon (even though he claims payola was not necessarily at its peak from 1996 2000), though this chapter focused on elucidating the nature of the institutional relationship between the two. I argue that as the two institutionalized, institutional goals became more alike, and the means to achieving these goals was found by using already established, successful artists at the expense of cultural diversity. Innovation was not necessarily prevented, though the barrier towards success was erected higher as broadcast media began to favor the already successful. The upcoming chapter will focus on the contexts in which rap music was perceived, using qualitative research to investigate the language that surrounded the cultural product as presented in the New York Times. This will

92

bring light to the perception of institutionalization, helping determine whether or not the image of rap changed along with these institutional shifts.

93

V E VOLVING T HEMES IN THE P ERCEPTION OF R AP

!

Introduction
My investigation thus far has depended on quantitative data to represent a market and institutional shift within the rap industry, from which I have discussed changing tastes of both the consumer and the producer. Though the data tells an interesting story, it seems that the numbers are unconvincing without the context in which they are presented. Quantitative analysis has shown that innovation in the rap music market (measured by songs and albums on the Billboard charts) is restricted after 1996; though the number of new artists does not necessarily decrease, the market becomes more dominated by existing, previously successful artists. This mirrors a trend of institutionalization that occurs around the same time, brought on by the deregulation of broadcast radio and the acquisition of independent firms by major labels. So far I have theorized why and how this has happened, looking into the relationship between the two institutions, as well as any other significant historical developments that may have contributed to a market shift. This chapter aims to provide a context for these shifts, to understand the perception of rap music and the discussion surrounding it. Looking at the language and conversation used to discuss rap music will not explain how the processes of 94

cultural production have shifted or how organizational form influences innovation. It will, however, give insight as for how taste has changed, how rap music was received in the popular media, and how the culture of rap music integrated itself into popular culture. A qualitative content analysis of newspaper articles that discuss hip-hop and rap music will give a historical perception of the cultural product, allowing me to understand the discussion surrounding the artist, the social issues, and the other major elements of rap music. I hypothesize that the discussion of rap music will begin to reflect the changes witnessed in my data; after 1996, news articles will begin to favor stories and mentions of major labels and highly successful artists. Further, I can assume that as rap popularizes, these articles will begin to refer more to stories of stardom, of economic success, and of the popular culture that now surrounds hip-hop. Additionally, I anticipate that major labels will become increasingly visible in the discussions of rap stardom and popularity.

Methodology 5
This investigation will rely on a fairly rough, qualitative content analysis. I will look at the types of articles written about rap music (i.e. album and concert reviews, cultural analyses, news releases), as well as the topics and information discussed in these articles. I will note information that contributes to the understanding of six criteria: references of rap in relation to pop music; rap culture and style; the role of the rapper; references to labels and affiliations;
5

Please refer to the Appendix for information on how to find the data for this thesis.

95

lyrical content; and references to economics or money. These six points will enables the development an idea of what the articles of a particular time are looking like, from which I will develop an overarching perspective of what the discussion of rap music looked like. I will break up the chronology of rap music into four five-year segments 1981-1985, 1986-1990, 1991-1995, and 1996-2000. This will look at the larger themes and trends of the industry, as year-to-year changes may appear insignificant. The articles from each period will be dissected looking for the criteria mentioned above, with the gathered information contributing to a context profile for each period. I anticipate that changes between time periods will be significant, though if there are any significant trends within a time period, these will also be noted.

800 700 Number of Articles 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

Relevant Rap Articles Over Time

Year Fi gure 7 The number of articles covering hip-hop and rap music increases exponentially over time; the most significant trends are witnessed following 1991 and 1996.

96

This study will use articles from The New York Times, chosen for its high historical circulation statistics and accessible historical archive. Using the ProQuest archival service, I were able to access articles dating back to 1980 I used the search parameters hip-hop OR rapper OR rapping AND su(music) for each year, noting the number of articles that fit these parameters. I witnessed a high disparity between the number of relevant articles released on the earlier end of the chronology versus the number released in later years, thus I weighted each time period accordingly. For the 1981-1985 time period I selected 10 articles, the 1986-1990 period I selected 20 articles, the 1991-1995 period I selected 30 articles, and the 1996-2000 period I selected 40 articles, creating a 100-article sample. Each time period was internally weighted according to the percentage concentration of articles that is, the number of articles selected per year was determined by the percentage of total articles per year that contributes to the total number of articles for the time period.6 To determine which articles were selected for analysis, I organized the search results by chronological release order, and then used a random number generator to determine what article was chosen. If the article chosen was irrelevant or insubstantial, another randomly generated number replaced it.

Findings
Relationship With Popular Music
6 E.g. the year 2000 featured 696 relevant articles, contributing to the 2,348 articles of the 19962000 time period. Thus, 29.6% percent of the articles chosen for the time period were taken from the year 2000, or 12 of the 40 chosen for that period.

97

In the early 80s, rap was considered a fresh black genre, considered energetic yet fierce, a scene developed by inner city black youth. Rap was considered underground, though it was recognized for its potential for starting a new trend. (Palmer 1982) Yet, rap was not anticipated to become a genre of its own Before long, one article writes, rap will be just another arrow in many pop musicians quivers. (Palmer 1984) Popular music became influenced by hip-hop, with artists such as Hall and Oates consulting with hip-hop producers before recording their 1984 Big Bam Boom and lyrical styles pervading into folk, rock, and electronic music. (Holden 1984) It seems that rap was recognized for its innovativeness, its musicianship, though few journalists expected its success. Raps potential for popularization was seen in its integration into popular music, not in its individual growth as a genre. Rap was likely going to be absorbed by rock and other forms of music, incorporating the elements of hip-hop into the existing genres, until artists started going platinum on their own accord like Run-DMC did in 1986 (Palmer 1986). The late 80s characterized raps emergence onto the popular scene, with some artists and songs making the Billboard popular charts and getting broadcast on MTV. Raps popular growth was recognized, with writers considering it healthy and thriving, despite its forecasted death since the late 70s. (Watrous 1988) Much of the conversation revolved around its rising popularity and perspectives on censorship and culture this discourse was only being had because rap was now being heard everywhere, that it had now

98

entered the popular sphere. (Palmer 1986) Yet, in the early 90s, rappers entered the conversation of other popular musicians, drawing comparisons to successful bands such as Guns N Roses and U2. (McKenna 1991) Rap is perceived as a topical zone of popular music, addressing concerns of the black community while still reaching the tops of the popular and black Billboard charts. (Pareles 1992) Albums by the likes of Ice Cube and KRS-One received critical acclaim, while gangsta rap songs continued to crossover to the popular charts. Despite its rising popularity and visibility on the Billboard charts, black culture in general work[ed] against some kind of mainstream norm that is, hip-hop culture was still recognized as distinct and not integrated into pop culture. (Cardwell 1993) Rap did not really dominate the popular charts until the mid-to-late nineties. Rap artists such as 2Pac and Bone Thugs N Harmony exploded on the popular charts, performed at the MTV Music Awards, and essentially became popular music stars. There emerged a distinction between underground rap and popular rap, as well as subgenres appealing to conservative and Christian listeners. Rappers such as Rakim were regarded as artistic and commercial (emphasis mine), recognized as having made it to the top of their genre as well as the top of the popular charts. (Ehrlich 1997) It would be aggressive to equivocate popular rap music and general popular music, though the two became quite integrated in the late 90s, with popular artists becoming quite preeminent within the popular music scene. Rappers were discussed as stars at the MTV

99

awards shows, with entourages consisting of everything from bodyguards to makeup artists. (Strauss 1996) Rappers had taken on pop celebrity personas at one of the industrys most visible awards shows, thus assuming that rap artists had assumed a substantial position within popular music.

Culture and Style

Rap music was originally part of the hip-hop cultural trinity of rap, graffiti, and b-boying. The popularization of the hip-hop trinity worked out best for rap music, which continued to rise in popularity as, relatively, graffiti and breakdancing fizzled out. Throughout the 80s, rap stayed a black cultural phenomenon, though it caught the publics attention with movies such as Wild

Style and its emergence onto MTV in 1986. (Palmer 1984) Rap and hip-hop
culture appealed to inner city black youth, though it slowly started catching on with other youth as it gained a sort of counterculture identity. Rap began to develop its own language, and the urban black Northeast (from which rap music emanated) was credited as Americas most vital language factory. (Staples 1988) As the 80s progressed, hip-hop culture began to rely on rap more than bboying and graffiti. By the early 90s, culture seemed to emanate from rap music itself, with rap artists embodying the characters of their lyrics and rap style transforming from a whole new culture to the culture (emphasis mine). (Carmody 1992) Hiphop culture was considered a popular cool, and as rap artists became rap stars,

100

they became visible on magazine covers and in advertisements. One article details the emergence of rap socialites, individuals who navigate the hierarchies of rap and popular culture despite possessing any lyrical or musical talent. (Century 1999) Rappers assumed the characters of their lyrics, and their fans developed what one journalist called style cults cultural groups following the styles of a particular artist or genre. (Cardwell 1993) One article, referring to the creation of a hip-hop hall of fame, summarizes this nicely: Two decades, it seems, is the proper gestation period for a musical form to grow from a streetlevel idea to a museum piece and tourist attraction condoned by politicians and academics. (Strauss 2000) Though the context of this quote refers to the construction of the hall of fame, I feel it is applicable to my understanding of hiphops integration into popular culture. Something that was originally part of the street is now popularly attractive, manifest in the decision to build this hall of fame in essence, rap music has moved from the margins of hip-hop culture to the crosshairs of popular culture.

The Rapper
The rapper was born out of inner city, urban poverty, individuals escaping gang-life by dancing, singing, and rapping. The early 80s rapper was certainly characterized as this, painted as an individual focused on rapping to stay out of trouble, to build community, to promote racial solidarity and unification. The early 80s rapper voiced issues of the black community, and frankly this did not

101

change even with the transition to gangster rap in the late 80s. The rise of West Coast rap introduced the rapper as a gangster image, though the message remained political rappers lambasted authority, talked about violent, povertystricken histories, and articulated the strife of the black community. Rap music embraced gangster iconography though it maintained its political and racial message, manifest through brutal images of shooting and pimping. A 1989 article titled Rap as Public Forum on Matters of Life and Death discussed this specifically, arguing that the gangster image provides not only vivid subject matter but also a means for blacks to approach the difficult issue of black-onblack violence they admit the allure and excitement of belonging to a gang, but then proceed into a discussion of the horrors of that life. (Leland 1989) The hostile message remained socially and politically charged, maintaining its importance to the black urban community. The title of this 1989 article was spot on rap existed as a forum for the issues of black urban youth. Journalists considered the stories of rappers to be reported rather than glorified, more of an articulation of a problem than an adoration of a lifestyle. Rap in the 90s continued gangster storytelling, but slowly shed the political underpinnings. In the early 90s, the rappers role slowly resembled more of an entertainer the message of the music was still important, but becoming more of an afterthought. Rappers like Marky Mark assumed social and cultural identities, their lyrics considered and resonating with their listeners, yet the image of the rapper as a sex or popular icon was becoming increasingly

102

significant. Instead of rap acting as a forum for urban youth issues, journalists were arguing entertainment as an explanation for gangsta raps imagery. By the late 90s they had reached stardom, becoming the faces of consumer brands and clothing lines, with some owning their own imprint labels or record companies. One article suggests that the artist became more important than the music itself, that the reputation of the artist superseded the cultural product he/she produced. (Pareles 1998) Rappers may talk about hardcore gangster lifestyles, but the motivation is no longer oriented on spreading the message of urban plight or racial oppression. Rather, rappers were known for being pampered queens (Finn 2000) and filthy rich (Straus 2000 Trendsetter) real economic champions of the music industry. Further, one article notes the barrier of new artist entry that I witness earlier in this thesis, writing: Gangsta rap has also proven its staying power. Many rappers have multiple albums in the top 1,000 including side projects. (Weisbard 2000) Earlier in the article, the author writes that artists stick around like golfers for rappers, those that have success end up active in the market for a long time, kept alive through multiple album sales and side projects. (Weisbard 2000) This, along with the descriptions of artists as extraordinarily rich, demonstrates the transformation of the rapper to celebrity status.

Reference to Record Labels

The chronology of record label references seems to follow the data trend I

103

witnessed earlier in this thesis. Though I did not calculate this, it was fairly obvious that independent labels were mentioned more than their major label counterparts throughout the 80s in fact, the first reference was not until 1988, where even then it was only mentioned as part of an independent label distribution deal. Independents such as Tommy Boy and Sugar Hill Records were heralded for their diversity, creativity, and flexibility one journalist writes how small, independent record companies can gamble on and revel in eccentricity, novelties, politics, and sexual put-downs. (Watrous 1988) Essentially, the cultural diversity of the early rap game was credited to the existence of these successful record labels. The articles I reviewed for the early 90s started referring more to some of the major label competitors. Articles announced artist new record deals, or in the case of Ice-T, his departure from his major label affiliation with Warner Records. I still see labels like Tommy Boy being recognized for their success, though the discussion beings focusing on the competition between major firms like Warner and Sony. One article in particular investigates the competition between the two, citing rap as the difference between one firms recent successes over the other. (Fabrikant 1995) The same 1995 article notes the institutional phenomenon I investigated in this thesis, discussing why independent firms were beginning to be acquired by major label firms, claiming that these acquisitions created diversity and helped decentralize the image of the label. (Fabrikant 1995)

104

The late 90s continued the discussion of major record labels, with the attention on independent labels shifting towards the new, successful imprint label models. Recording firms such as Universal, No Limit (an imprint), and Sony were among the most frequently mentioned, though some had entire articles dedicated to them, like an article lauding the success of Ruffhouse Records (an imprint of Sony) CEO. (Wadler 1998) Additionally, the conversation surrounding these record labels had less to do with originality or freshness; rather, the discourse focused on hip-hop and record labels as a business. Some artists and producers owned their own imprint labels, and these imprints provided steady economic benefit for the artist and the major labels that partnered with them; one article notes the win-win situation of this, writing that these artists have no powerhouse pretender threatening to usurp their throne. (Reynolds 1999) Though this referred to two artists in particular, I feel it is very relevant to the zeitgeist of records labels. Essentially, major labels and major, imprint-owning artists were in no danger of failure, due to the relationship and mutual support shared between the two. The business model of hip-hop certainly benefitted them both.

Lyrical Content
Though I have touched upon what journalists wrote about concerning the lyrical content in some of the other sections, it would be worth investigating individually. Raps political message was maintained until the mid-nineties,

105

Themes and trends in rap (1981-2000)

1981-1985 References in relation to pop music A scene, the underground 1986-1990 Emerging in the popular scene 1991-1995 Competitive with major rock music, existence of mainstream rap Hip-hop style revolving around rap, existing as a mainstream culture 1996-2000 Popular rap v. underground rap, rap integrated into pop culture Rappers integrated into popular culture; faces of advertisements and clothing brands A celebrity or star, a brand name (name of the artists sells just as much as the music) Competition between major labels; record labels as businesses entities Partying and spending money, braggadocio

Rap culture and style

Part of the hiphop trinity

Appealing to black youth, the counterculture; visible in culturally specific movies A militant political voice, voicing troubles of the community

The rapper is

Escaping gang life, urban strife by rapping

An entertainer and a gangster; seeing the economic reward in rapping Major labels purchasing independents, decentralizing image Gangsta stories reporting problems, not glorifying violence; poverty and plight Advertising for consumer products, birth of trade magazines, marketing and advertising for top artists

References to labels and affiliations

Independents dominate, are flexible and innovative

Independents heralded for diversity

Lyrical Content

Oppression, life on the streets, dancing and having fun

Rap as a forum of the black community; political message

References to econom ics or money

N/A

Referring to album and single sales

Artists and producers as filthy rich; major labels, producers as hit factories; difficulty to make it into rap market without major labels

Table 1 As time progresses, rap music seems to integrate into popular culture. The motivations for making rap seem to change, with major labels, rap stars, and producers assuming celebrity roles and making huge sums for hit records.

106

though it was marked by criticism in its earlier years. The politics and hostile stories spoken in gangster rap songs by Ice Cube and Ice-T were met with heavy resistance by censorship groups and police forces, though most articles defended the stories told by these artists for bringing to light issues of urban poverty and black oppression. The first opposition was noted in 1986, as one article described rap as being under fire from people and organizations like the PMRC. (Palmer 1986) However, the majority of these publications defended the lyrics of rap, arguing that suggestions that rap records encourage and condone drug use and street crime are largely untrue, supported by their assertions that rap lyrics in fact present its listeners with a largely positive message. (Palmer 1986) As rap popularized, authenticity also became a topic of debate surrounding its lyrics. Selling out became an issue in the early nineties; by 1994, artists like Vanilla Ice and MC Hammer were called out for getting too mainstream, for not being gangsta enough. (Dyson 1994) Visibility within the popular sphere of rap music challenged an artists credibility, yet as the 90s rolled on, the image of the rapper as an entertainer changed this. Success became gangsta in itself, especially as artists began rapping about partying and exhibited what some journalists considered braggadocio. This was particularly true in the late 90s segment, in which artists were noted for rapping about money and style instead of black politics. Rappers received publicity for their hits instead of their politically significant songs, with artists like Outkast and Juvenile being celebrated for their booty-shaking dance singles and

107

extravagant stories of riches. (Strauss 2000 Trendsetter)

Rap and Economics

This variable is more of an all-encompassing category for the discussion of the rap music market and the promotional aspects of the industry. In the early 80s, there was virtually no discussion about the economic potential of rap music it was regarded as a cultural movement that was rapidly popularizing within a particular demographic, but there was no expectation for an economic explosion. Articles in the late 80s began mentioning high performing sales of albums and singles, with excerpts describing successes such as LL Cool J, whose debut album Radio has crossed over to the pop charts and has sold 350,000 copies. (Pareles 1986) This language is significant in the sense that it begins to measure the successes of rap, and the conversation is not necessarily focused on the lyrics or cultural content of the song or album, but also on its potential or history of selling large amounts. Marketing campaigns for artists date back to MC Hammers 1989 release, though by the mid-90s, rappers started integrating into consumer brand advertisements. Raps success and appeal to the youth motivated consumer corporations to use the music in their advertisements, to feature artists as the faces of their brand. This also helped rappers it essentially established them as celebrities whose popularity could transform a companys image or market. The late 90s helped this image of the rapper, with many articles discussing the absurd riches of artists. Journalists lauded successful producers

108

for resembling hit factories, while recognizing the role of major labels in churning out stars. One article labels popular rapper and imprint label owner Juvenile as filthy rich, while another discusses the hardship of impoverished black youth trying to break into the rap game (Strauss 2000 Trendsetter; Strauss 1998). The dichotomy of the two is very telling I see the economic reward for being part of a major label, and the impossibility of breaking into the rap game on ones own. The articles do not explicitly suggest that the rap game is driven by money, but I get an idea that popular artists are handsomely rewarded for their success, and the methods for attaining this type of success are random and few-and-far-between.

Bourdieusian Trends
My findings suggest the following trends: (1) rap was originally known for its freshness and innovativeness, and through its popularization, it maintained artistic integrity but its commercial potential was also realized; (2) rap originated as part of the hip-hop cultural trinity of graffiti, b-boying, and rapping, but eventually became hip-hop culture as rappers became more visible and adopted roles as cultural icons; (3) the role of the rapper evolved from political activist to militant rebel to entertainer to celebrity; (4) independent labels once dominated and were celebrated for their creativity and innovativeness, but were then replaced by major labels, who were renowned and discussed in terms of their economic success and business acumen; and (5) the lyrical content of rap music shifted focus from promoting a cultural message to 109

having cultural and economic capital. These five trends promote two Bourdieusian trends in response to the theory I reviewed in chapter 1 habitus formation and field migration. If I consider hip-hop culture as a cultural habitus, I can suggest that in the years 1980-2000, I witness the emergence of a defined culture. Rap music and hip-hop culture became synonymous as it popularized, with graffiti and breakdancing getting marginalized in the process. The rapper adopted different roles as the culture evolved, reacting to changing expectations and dispositions of the social groups surrounding it. In raps earlier years, it was revered for its articulation of political and social issues within the black community. Thus, rap music was recognized for its cultural significance, especially in relation to other popular music; it existed as the voice for a particular demographic, resonating with the black urban youth. Rap became a cultural practice that unified hip-hop culture and homogenized and articulated the discourse of racial oppression, poverty, and other sentiments of its listeners. Yet, as it popularized within the cultural group, it gained universal recognition, and the tastes of its particular habitus became integrated into other habituses that attributed their own dispositions and meanings to the music. The evolution of the lyrical content and the role of the rapper may have been responses to the new plethora of meanings given to the cultural practice. The white, suburban youth that began listening to rap music probably did not identify with the message promoted by early rappers instead, rap music

110

possessed entertainment value (this resonates with the use-values discussed by Marxs commodity circulation). As this meaning gained weight through increased visibility on the popular charts, changes in tastes and the cultural practice followed suit. The changing role of the rapper, the evolving lyrical content of a rap song reflects new cultural meanings and tastes possessed by other habituses. For rap music to exist as a practice that facilitates cultural relationships and establishes homogenous meanings, it must react to the dispositions of these new social groups (think of the social construction of culture argument). The introduction of new habituses introduced new dispositions and cultural meanings, to which the cultural practice responded by accommodating both the new and old social groups. The perceptions and tastes of different habituses shaped rap music; its entertainment form was a product of popular perspectives and meanings as well as the incumbent hip-hop cultural perspectives and meanings. In order to retain relevance, to exist as a cultural practice that facilitates the development of cultural relationships and cultural capital, rappers adopted the role of entertainers and wrote their lyrics to reflect that. Further, these trends demonstrate Bourdieusian field migration. Rap music originated on the autonomous end of the spectrum, though as it popularized, it gravitated towards the heteronomous pole. The conversations I observe in the earlier articles of this study barely refer to the commercial possibility of rap music it is only regarded for its freshness, innovativeness,

111

and creativity. The idea that rap music is recognized for its political message, that rappers pursue rap music as a way to educate the masses about their strife and a way to get off the streets seems autonomously driven. The rapper creates art for arts sake; his music possesses cultural and political significance because it is important for him to tell his story, to articulate issues within the black community. The discourse surrounding the music was cultural, not economic nor commercial. However, the recognition of raps commercial potential initiated its gravitation toward the heteronomous pole. Independent labels once reveled for creativity were replaced by major labels motivated by profit and economically driven. Lyrics no longer concentrated on disseminating a cultural message, but by asserting exorbitant amounts of economic and cultural capital. Rappers were no longer political messengers, but celebrities with endorsements, clothing lines, and their own record label. The virtual disappearance of the cultural message and the rising braggadocio journalistically recognized in rap music suggests that raps position within the cultural field is shifting towards the heteronomous pole. Here I see an intersection of Bourdieus theories. The popularity of rap music within its racially organized habitus resulted in its visibility and recognition as a unique and entertaining art form, which consequently attracted new habituses that have inherently developed their own meanings and dispositions towards the cultural product. The new cultural meanings associated with rap music prompted the adoption of its entertainment form, which in itself

112

may have initiated its gravitation toward the heteronomous pole. The field changes in rap music may be inherent to its popularization; that is, the redefinition of cultural meanings rewarded those who appealed to the most and followed a successful commercial model. The introduction of new habituses required a reassociation of cultural meanings, which in turn brought about raps shift within the cultural field. The trends I witnessed in this chapter are responses to these new meanings and motivations. Major labels rose to the occasion because they could best market and produce their talent. The political message of rap became irrelevant as a diversified consumer base emerged. Successful rappers became icons because they were the producers of cultural capital for an entire population, instead of a specific social group. Overall, rap musics popularization changed its relevant meanings, prompting its packaging as a commercialized cultural product.

113

C ONCLUSION
! The first twenty years of rap music tell an interesting story of an emerging cultural object. Its rise to popularity was meteoric, growing while accommodating changing tastes of the listeners who consumed the cultural product. Writing this thesis, I was not necessarily concerned about finding out if things had changed in rap music I operated under the impression that things

must have changed over the span of twenty years, that todays artists conceive
songs differently than Run-DMC and MC Hammer did in the mid-eighties. Reading articles, listening to nostalgics claiming that hip-hop aint what it used to be motivated me to study the hows and whys of these so-called changes in the industry. I thought about these questions sociologically: How could culture be looked at with a sociological lens? What relationships, systems of social interactions are in play during the production of rap music? How was rap music received? I discovered the cultural production perspective, discussed by sociologists such as Richard Peterson, who investigated the factors that shape a cultural product, and how variations in these factors can transform the nature of the cultural product. Following this perspective, I read further works by Peterson on the birth of rock music in 1955, by Gabriel Rossman on the homogeneity of broadcast radio. These studies gave direction as for how to proceed with this investigation, suggesting frameworks and theories that could also be applied to 114

what I witnessed in the hip-hop industry. The production of culture perspective never really dove deep into the evolution of the hip-hop industry hence, the motive for writing this thesis. Additionally, the majority of the literature reviewed before starting this thesis focused solely on the development of the cultural product, with the role of tastes and the social groups not explicitly involved in production only referred to implicitly or ignored completely. In the process of understanding the hows and whys of the evolving hip-hop industry, I connected theories of cultural migration, taste development, and cultural production. A discussion without these three social phenomena seemed incomplete, thus this thesis aimed to expand upon existing theories surrounding cultural objects. Aside from my personal desire to study hip-hop, the evolving industry surrounding rap music seemed ripe for discussion. What once was an urban, racially-oriented form of music now exists as an element of popular culture. This in itself made rap intriguing how could something so entrenched and reliant on the social issues of urban blacks become a dominant force in mainstream culture? To answer this, I synthesized these theories of cultural migration, taste, and production. I first discussed cultural and subcultural theory, using Bourdieu and DiMaggio to illustrate how cultural objects interact with cultural groups. I then introduced subcultural and cultural migration theory pulling from the likes of Park, Simmel, and Williams to gain a better understanding of how hip-hop culture may have changed on a macrosocial level. Additionally, I reviewed

115

Bourdieus theory of fields to understand how a cultural object may have evolved along with this shifting cultural landscape however, I still needed to understand why these changes were happening. For this, I considered rap music as a cultural commodity, channeling classic Marxist theory on economic circulation. Marxs theory helped me envision the evolving cultural market of rap music and focused my attention on the social relationships that may have influenced the production of the cultural commodity. Richard Petersons six-facet production of culture perspective enabled me to investigate the multiple factors going into the production of rap music, while suggesting focal points for my analytical study. To complement this theory, I performed an extensive quantitative study of rap songs, artists, and albums that appeared on the Billboard charts from the year 1980 to the year 2000. I compiled a database of every rap song and album that was listed on both the popular and black-specific year-end charts, noting the rankings, label affiliations, and concentrations of new artists. Through basic statistical analysis, I witnessed certain trends within the history of rap that would be worth focusing my attention particularly, a significant popularizing shift experienced from 1996-2000. Reverting back to Petersons theory, I noted two significant shifts in 1996 within the organizational and industry structure of record labels and broadcast radio, thus focusing my attention on the label affiliations of artists and differences between the song sales and radio airplay. To explore these shifts, I used the statistical software STATA to compare

116

the label affiliations of charting artists and their rankings on the hip-hop and popular charts. I performed a similar comparison of sales and airplay figures, finding differences in what radio stations aired and what consumers purchased. Further, I performed correlational analysis to study the relationships between label affiliation, time, the concentration of new artists, and the rankings on both charts. To oversimplify the findings of this data, I will state the following: artists became more affiliated with major labels over time, and artists who released multiple albums on major labels were recognized with the highest rankings (and thus are regarded as the most popular). New artists were not denied entry to the rap market, though song and album sales became dominated by previously successful artists this is especially true on the radio, where major label affiliations and previous success became the primary indicators for future success. This data offered firm support for the theory developed throughout this thesis. The popularization of rap music on both charts (and the ebbing and flowing of similarities between the charts) suggested that tastes were changing over time. With rap gravitating toward popular culture, I can suggest that the meanings given to rap as a cultural object evolved over time. The introduction of new relevant social groups, of new habituses, transformed raps meanings and instilled new dispositions and tastes for the groups it interacted with. These new meanings also shifted raps position within the cultural field, as it moved from the autonomous to the heteronomous pole.

117

The redefinition of the social landscape of rap music also affected the processes of production, as witnessed through the deregulation of radio and the independent label buyouts. The major institutional forces within the rap industry responded (intentionally in the case of record labels, circumstantially in the case radio) to the popularization of rap as observed through the concentration of the industrial field. Large, inertial firms took over, with their main interests focused on perpetuating economic profit. The major record labels did not necessarily curb cultural diversity, as a decentralized model of production enabled imprint labels to innovate in a similar capacity to independents. That said, in a creative industry rife with uncertainty, these large record labels relied on and promoted their proven, previously successful artists, who began to own the rap market. This effect was multiplied by the deregulation of radio, in which organizational inertia was certainly experienced. The bureaucracy of the highly centralized radio corporations prioritized the same economic goals as record labels - I suggest a homogenization of interests between the two most powerful agents in the rap music scene. The relationship between these radio corporations and major record labels enabled them to adopt the role of cultural gatekeepers; with this, a barrier was erected for the successes of new artists, whose chances did not fare well within these institutions blockbuster or bust mentality. This institutionalization, this homogenization of interest between these two major players helped shift raps position within the cultural field, helped reestablish the role and voice of the rapper, and developed the

118

cultural object into a popular cultural element. Ultimately, I argue that the processes of cultural production are incredibly relevant in the development of taste, and any significant changes within these processes can elicit the migration of an object within a cultural field, or even of a culture itself. The theoretical development and data analysis performed in this thesis support these claims, yet future studies can improve upon this research. My argument relies heavily on an investigation of the production side of culture; I feel for an intensive, all-encompassing understanding of how tastes and cultural objects develop, there must be some discussion of the processes of consumption. From my research, it appears that work that spans the two subjects is rare, though I believe it would be incredibly fruitful to consider theories of cultural consumption in relation to the arguments made in this thesis. Further, this thesis would be aided by comparisons to other historical musical objects, potentially jazz, disco, rock, and funk. Looking at the development and institutional changes during these time periods may suggest different trends or reasons for the economization of the product. Without referring to previous historical examples, I cannot generalize the findings of this thesis to all institutionalizing creative industries this may be something unique rap music, an occurrence that does not replicate with other cultural products. This thesis does not predict a path for cultural objects similar to rap music, nor does it predict a path for rap music itself. It does, however, illustrate the relationships between cultural taste, production, and migration, manifest

119

through the evolution of rap music. Rap musics institutionalization proved a successful vehicle for the dissection and synthesis of these complex sociological theories though this phenomenon may be isolated, the relationships between these social procedures may not.

120

R EFERENCES
Becker, Howard. 1974. Art As Collective Action. American Sociological Review 39(6): 767-776. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. _____. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production, or; The Economic World Reversed. Pp. 29-77 in The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature, edited by R. Johnson. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Cardwell, Diane. 1993. Rapwear. Soulwear. Hipwear. New York Times, February 14. Retrieved March 25, 2013 via ProQuest. (http://search.proquest.com/docview/428922176?accountid=13314) Caves, Richard. 2000. Artists, Starving and Well-Fed. Pp. 73-84 in Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Century, Douglas. 1999. The Extra V in Very V.I.P. New York Times, November 21. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431281375?accountid=13314). Chang, Jeff. 2005. Cant Stop, Wont Stop: A History of the Hip-Hop Generation. New York, NY: St. Martins Press. DiMaggio, Paul and Walter Powell. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48(2): 147-160. DiMaggio, Paul. 1997. Culture and Cognition. Annual Review of Sociology 23: 263-287. Dowd, Timothy. 2004. Concentration and Diversity Revisited: Production Logics and the U.S. Mainstream Recording Market, 1940-1990. Social Forces 82(4): 1411-1455. Dyson, Michael E. 1994. Two Rappers in Search of Revenge. New York Times, April 17. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/429707671?accountid=13314). Ehrlich, Dimitri. 1997. A Rap Pioneer Defies the Odds. New York Times, December 7. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest 121

(http://search.proquest.com/docview/430896528?accountid=13314). Fabrikant, Geraldine. 1995. History Catches Up With Sony Music. New York Times, July 17. Retrieved April 2, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/430238103?accountid=13314). Finn, Robin. 2000. Around a Pampered Queen, a Busy Buzz. New York Times, September 15. Retrieved April 2, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431543797?accountid=13314). Gallin, Maxwell. 2013. Max Gallin 13: Senior Thesis Data. Retrieved April 9, 2013 (https://sites.google.com/a/princeton.edu/mgallin13-thesisdata/). Gelder, Ken. 2007. Subcultures: Cultural histories and social practice. New York, NY: Routledge Press. Hirsch, Paul. 1972. Processing Fads and Fashions: An Organization-Set Analysis of Cultural Industry Systems. American Journal of Sociology 77(4): 639-659. Holden, Stephen. 1984. Pop Records Turn To Hip-Hop. New York Times, September 23. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/425188141?accountid=13314). Karpik, Lucien. 2010. Prices. Pp. 209-228 in Valuing the Unique: The Economics of Singularities, translated by N. Scott. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Keyes, Cheryl. 2004. Rap Music and Street Consciousness. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Leland, John. 1989. Recordings; Rap as Public Forum on Matters of Life and Death. New York Times, March 12. Retrieved March 28, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/427107388?accountid=13314). Lomax, Alan. 1968. Folk Music Style and Culture. Clinton, MA: The Colonial Press. Marx, Karl. 1904. Preface Pp. 9-15 in A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, translated by N. I. Stone. Chicago, IL: Charles H. Kerr & Company. _____. 1977. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Translated by Ben 122

Fowkes. New York, NY: Vintage Books. McKenna, Kristine. 1991. Up And Coming; Ice Cube Melts in Front of the Camera. New York Times, July 14. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/428137256?accountid=13314). Palmer, Robert. 1982. Pop Musics Establishment Is Ripe For Change. New York Times, September 12. Retrieved March 25, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/424429089?accountid=13314). _____. 1984. The Pop Life; The Audience for Rappers Broadens. New York Times, May 23. Retrieved March 25, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/425068253?accountid=13314). _____. 1986. Rap Music, Despite Adult Fire, Broadens Its Teen-age Base. New York Times, September 21. Retrieved March 25, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/426289710?accountid=13314). Pareles, Jon. 1992. Rap after the Riot: Smoldering Rage and No Apologies. New York Times, December 13. Retrieved March 27, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/428824832?accountid=13314). _____. 1996. The Pop Life: The Threadgill Sextet and Its Narrative Flair. New York Times, February 5. Retrieved April 1, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/425787247?accountid=13314). _____. 1998. Rappers Look More to Fun Than to Crime or Mayhem. New York Times, December 14. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431098069?accountid=13314). Park, Robert. 1928. Human Migration and the Marginal Man. American Journal of Sociology 33(6): 881-893 Peterson, Richard. 1990. Why 1955? Explaining the Advent of Rock Music. Popular Music 9(1): 97-116. Peterson, Richard and N. Anand. 2004. The Production of Culture Perspective. Annual Review of Sociology 30: 311-334. Pinch, Trevor and Wiebe Bijker. 1984. The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How The Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. Pp. 17-48 in The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 123

Reynolds, Simon. 1999. Partners in the Engine Room of Rap. New York Times, August 1. Retrieved March 26, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431213292?accountid=13314). Rosen, Sherwin. 1981. The Economics of Superstars. The American Economic Review 71(5): 845-858. Rossman, Gabriel. 2012. Climbing the Charts: What Radio Airplay Tells Us About the Diffusion of Innovation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Simmel, Georg. 1971. The Stranger Pp. 143-149 in On Individuality and Social Forms, edited by D. N. Levine. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Staples, Brent. 1988. On Language: High on the Five. New York Times, December 18. Retrieved April 1, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/427011914/13D532970F65A85492E/2 ?accountid=13314). Strauss, Neil. 1996. At the MTV Awards, All the Worlds a Stage. New York Times, September 6. Retrieved March 30, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/430653567?accountid=13314). _____. 1998. Rap Dream Is Dashed, But Not Abandoned. New York Times, February 4. Retrieved March 27, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/430929350?accountid=13314). _____. 2000. Dueling Halls Of Hip-Hop. New York Times, April 6. Retrieved March 28, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431423818?accountid=13314). _____. 2000. A Trendsetter On Raps Fringe. New York Times, May 28. Retrieved March 30, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431441871?accountid=13314). Wadler, Joyce. 1998. Hip-Hop Style: Its a Way to Run a Company. New York Times, July 29. Retrieved March 27, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431002916?accountid=13314). Watrous, Peter. 1988. Recordings; Rappers Keep Their Musics Content Fresh. New York Times, January 10. Retrieved March 27, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/426723732?accountid=13314).

124

Weber, Max. 1992. The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by T. Parsons. New York, NY: Routledge Press. Weisbard, Eric. 2000. Pop in the 90s: Everything for Everyone. New York Times, April 30. Retrieved March 29, 2013 via ProQuest (http://search.proquest.com/docview/431412277?accountid=13314). Williams, J. Patrick. 2011. Subcultural Theory: Traditions and Concepts. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

125

A PPENDIX
The data for this thesis can be accessed at the link: https://sites.google.com/a/princeton.edu/mgallin13-thesisdata/ If there is any difficulty accessing this link, please reach out to max.gallin@gmail.com. All of the data referred to in this thesis will be transposed onto this webpage. These datasets were originally located on a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet; my analysis relied on functions not limited to correlational analysis (=correl), standard deviation (=stdev), mean (=average), and median (=median).

126