[catshirt]

I'd downvote you respectfully- but I can't. :)

#1 - You're treating the quoted text as (I quote) "a quote". It's not. It's a small piece of a much larger whole. (I see your point- but it's wrong. I will elaborate in the next bullet).

#2 - Like the first statement- it's a mistake for you to speak factually on something so subjective. We're talking about art here, right? "Period" is especially offensive since clearly so many people disagree. Juvenile and simple are never synonymous. That's not to say they can't live mutually, but that certainly is not "synonymous". Period. Just the fact that people have agreed suggests he is delivering the emotion he intends to with his art. Unless, of course, you can tell me what his true intentions were with the lyric?

#3 - I'm going to make a fair assumption that you've lived a relatively privileged life. By this- I mean I'm pretty sure you didn't grow up in Bedstuy. I certainly don't believe that relieves him of his poor judgement, but I hope it helps invoke some situational empathy. Likewise, do you consider yourself not praiseworthy because of the mistakes you've made?

Edit - I assume a downvote one minute after a post is either accidental or negligent.

[najirama]

Quite frankly - you didn't respond to any of the objectives I raised. But I will respond strictly to the one's you've made up.

#1 - You're treating the quoted text as (I quote) "a quote". It's not. It's a small piece of a much larger whole.

Hmm - last I checked, a small piece of a larger whole IS a quote. Webster's definitively settles this in my favor.

#2 - No - there is no subjectivity involved in the claim that his lyrics are 'juvenile' and 'simple' especially when the man himself has said so on several occasions, both in verse and out. (See the song: Moment Of Clarity) If the artist himself says he 'dumb downed' his lyrics, I think its purely factual to then say his lyrics are 'simple'.

#3 - Pardon me, you don't know a damned thing about me or how I grew up. So no, your assumption is not fair. I've seen the gutter in my life. I've lived in places that I gather you are only familiar with through Jay-z songs. So forgive me if I take a particular offense to this comment.

Situational empathy? Are you kidding me? I suspect this kind of careless, 'there are are few better options' mentality stems from a brutal ignorance of what inner-city life is really like. So let me just help you out by saying there are thousands of kids from these terrible situations, (many of whom I work with weekly), who do not deal drugs, who stay in school, who pursue scholarship, who do not idolize Jay-z and his calling cards, thug-culture, gun violence, promiscuity, drugs, and death. Unfortunately for all of us, these kids are in the vast minority.

[catshirt]

"...there are thousands of kids from these terrible situations, (many of whom I work with weekly), who do not deal drugs, who stay in school, who pursue scholarship, who do not idolize Jay-z..."

My argument stems from my assumption that there are also thousands of kids from terrible situations, who don't deal drugs, who stay in school, and do idolize Jay-Z.

If I'm wrong in the above assumption, then you're entirely right; my argument has no ground. Perhaps my optimism is blinding. If my assumption is correct, then is it not safe to say that there are other more compelling forces than Jay-Z leading youth into drugs or crime? The italicized is the point that I am trying to make entirely.

I don't think we're disagreeing on facts here. By situational empathy I'm not suggesting Jay-Z has no other choices. It's just my personal opinion that I would rather be inspired by Jay-Z's ambition to overcome such an unfortunate situation, rather than to condemn him for his past.