[almost_usual]

Downvoted for stating the obvious? Did anyone read the article?

> On Saturday morning, Tan apologized about the death wish in a subsequent post, saying he was simply referencing a lyric in Tupac’s “Hit ‘Em Up,” but that it “wasn’t a good call” regardless. The notorious diss track famously added fuel to the fire of East Coast-West Coast rap rivalry, leading to Tupac’s murder in a drive-by shooting just three months after its release.

[jballer]

The article is tragically revisionist and completely ignores the context:

People tried to kill Tupac, then Tupac went off on them, then people killed Tupac.

The article summarizes this as “Tupac said mean things and it got someone killed.”

[dragonwriter]

The distinction you make would be significant if that article was about Tupac and his justification or lack thereof in writing the lyrics, but it is completely immaterial to an article where what is relevant is Tan and his reference to the lyrics.

[jballer]

The article’s central claim is that to quote these lyrics is to “wish death” on the people you’re naming. The context leads me to the exact opposite interpretation: it’s a righteous condemnation of others for wishing death on you.

[dragonwriter]

> The article’s central claim is that to quote these lyrics is to “wish death” on the people you’re naming. The context leads me to the exact opposite interpretation:

It leads me to the conclusion that the wish in the original lyrics was understandable and provoked, not that it wasn't literally what it says. Which certainly affects the view of Tupac writing and performing it, but not so much that of Tan referencing it.

[CPLX]

Dunno man I’m going to go with the idea that telling someone to “die slow” means you want them to die.

[jballer]

I'm don't mean to defend Tan here, he already apologized. I'm simply reiterating that the article doesn't come close to saying what I said: Tann was obviously quoting Tupac, and wasn't just using that as a post-hoc excuse for the choice of words.